1,492
edits
Difference between revisions of "Apple Ibook G3 500"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Review
Andrei.boiu (talk | contribs) m |
Andrei.boiu (talk | contribs) m (→Review) |
||
| Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
The LCD TFT screen is alright, using a reasonably modern technology that offers relatively good contrast and response times. High resolution screens are pointless with such a weak video chipset, that struggles even at 1024x768 resolutions. Expectations should be according to the laptop's timeline with added odd failures on some models such as fluorescent lamps that absorb mercury and run pink for a few moments on startup. | The LCD TFT screen is alright, using a reasonably modern technology that offers relatively good contrast and response times. High resolution screens are pointless with such a weak video chipset, that struggles even at 1024x768 resolutions. Expectations should be according to the laptop's timeline with added odd failures on some models such as fluorescent lamps that absorb mercury and run pink for a few moments on startup. | ||
The typical CPU implementation is one of compromises that Apple had to make. With a strong competition presented by Intel Pentium IIIs of that time, the PowerPC was already having many issues. Intel successfully created mobile versions with good energy saving features for laptops. Apple had to compromise on performance as the PowerPC consortium was not able to design optimized CPUs for laptops. Lower performance had to be accepted to keep cooling and power use in check. The newer operating system of Apple, such as OSX, was demanding, which meant that the only reasonable reason to choose Apple was if older operating systems and their software was attractive. | The typical CPU implementation is one of compromises that Apple had to make. With a strong competition presented by Intel Pentium IIIs of that time, the PowerPC was already having many issues. Intel successfully created mobile versions with good energy saving features for laptops. Apple had to compromise on performance as the PowerPC consortium was not able to design optimized CPUs for laptops. Lower performance had to be accepted to keep cooling and power use in check. The newer operating system of Apple, such as OSX, was demanding, which meant that the only reasonable reason to choose Apple was if older operating systems and their software was attractive. | ||