Talk:IBook

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Apple Inc. (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Macintosh, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

www.iBook-Clamshell.com link removed[edit]

Some weeks ago, i added an external link to my website www.iBook-Clamshell.com, which provides the most comprehensive information for the first colored iBook generation on the internet. It was removed by someone without explanatory statement. If someone someday wants to relist the information.......--Waldohreule (talk) 08:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)



Minor suggestion[edit]

On the HD spec, I would specify ATA (vs. SATA), and 2.5" or 1.8". it is a PATA 2.5", formerly known as an IDE 2.5"141.109.108.119 (talk) 03:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Picture[edit]

The picture of the iBook G4 shows actually a PowerBook G4. I don't know how to fix this, but perhaps someone does. Thx.

Anon, I moved the photo to PowerBook with an updated blurb. -- iHoshie 04:48, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)


I don't think the paragraph about the iBook repair program belongs in the article. In the long term it's of no importance in an encyclopedia article, and those affected by it will either already know about it, or can easily find out from a wide range of far more appropriate sources. By analogy, you would not expect an article on say, the Ford Maverick to list every factory recall the model ever had, which model numbers it affected, what part was replaced and so forth. There are better sources for that sort of information. I think the para should be removed. Graham 23:08, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It is not ordinary problem but a case that made some damage on the reputation of Apple. I read a lot about this on OSNews and there was even a Wired article about the case. I think this is rather a matter of balance. Currently, the problem is rather highlighted at the opening section. If there are a lot more besides this issue, it shoudln't stand out much. -- Taku 06:25, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)



( Afer me adding a picture of the iBook G3 v2 )

"User:GRAHAMUK (rm superfluous image (please do not add images that add nothing useful to article), and superfluous comment about spelling of iBook - titling capitalization of article is a well known WP limitation)"

What do you mean adds nothing useful to the article? it it had a picture of the iBook G3v1 & iBook G4, this added a picture of iBook G3v2 therefore adding pictures of all major models of the iBook, i think that adds some value.

See: What i changed: [1] The page after my change: [2]

I'm not going to go into some edit war over this, but i would have liked to have a picture of all three models to go with the timeline of all three releases. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:18, 2004 Apr 7 (UTC)

The G3 and G4 iBooks are physically indistinguishable. Therefore a photo of the two conveys no more useful information to a reader of the article. In addition, there is a tendency for people to add extra photos to articles simply because they have one - it makes the page a heftier download than it needs to be and for slow and expensive dial-up connections that's important. It's easy to lose sight of what WP is all about; anyone interested in seeing more pictures (of anything, but in this case iBooks) can easily find them on more appropriate external sites - like Apple.com, for example. Graham 00:30, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
They are not physically indistinguishable, similar, but not indistinguishable. anyway, i think you should stop the edit war and we should get a third party opinion on this before this gets too heated. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 10:28, 2004 Apr 8 (UTC)
Hmmm, well I'm not getting heated, I just like to make articles as good as they can be within my limited powers of perception. No axe to grind here ;-) The models may be distinguishable if you had them in front of you, but not in the pictures added. It's nice to be able to add one's own pictures to WP articles - it's nice warm fuzzy feeling to see your work published, but it's all too easy to lose sight of whether it's truly enhancing an article. Sorry to harp on, but this is a bit of a sore point with me since I have a low bandwidth connection that costs a fortune once my download allowance is used up - I'd change ISPs but living in rural Australia means I don't have a choice. That's why I gripe when pages wind up with too many unnecessary pictures. Recently, the Boeing 747 page ended up with 6 separate images, all showing nearly identical planes all form the same angle! Luckily after some gentle persuasion, sense prevailed and the extra images got linked via alternate pages. I'm just trying to avoid other pages going the same way. I mean, we could all add our own pictures of iBooks - I'm typing this on an iBook, so it's not as if I have a problem with iBook users or anything - but despite having the means to take many lovely pics of my own iBook, I have refrained simply because it wouldn't add anything. The argument that it's a picture of MY iBook rather than some generic image wouldn't wash, just as the G4/G3 argument doesn't really wash. But anyway, I agree, if others want to comment then if there is a consensus for adding the image then I'll back down gracefully. Graham 05:57, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Since i've been so long on a internet connection that i dont have to pay bandwidth on i had forgotten that particular point. My reasons for this were never to get my stuff out there, i simply wanted to enhance the article, and i now agree with your point. However there is still one thing that bothers me and that is we have one picture of that machine under public domain and another under the GFDL, and finally we have one that appears to be taken directly from the apple website. Why did you, given the choice of keeping a public domain picture instead of one whos copyright status is uncertain, and later the same picture only this time up against one that is under the GFDL choose to use this one.
I agree now that we dont need so many pictures, however i think you chose the wrong one to keep. Sure, it looks better but i think that given the choice of one under a free licence and one whos licence is uncertain one should choose the former.
However i do not reccomend the picture i took for this since it's too dark and taken at such a perspective that there isnt much that can bee seen on it, i suggest that User:Hoshie's picture be cropped and put in. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 09:18, 2004 Apr 9 (UTC)
It's just simple that pictures in wikipedia are presented only for the sake of complement. Having two identical pictures are just unnecessary. But can we allow some people to put pictures at this talk page? I guess if you have one, you want to upload it somewhere. -- Taku 00:36, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)

swapping photos[edit]

Graham and Ævar have very good points.

I have swapped the iBook G4 photo due to the simple fact that the iBook G4 photo looks like something I've seen on the Apple site. We do want to keep Wikipedia "clean", right? -- iHoshie 12:52, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)

I never even looked at the copyrights issue for the images - Ævar makes a very good point in that respect. The main image did look very "apple-ish" but I didn't check up whether it was a copyvio - it might not be under "fair use", but in any case I think the change by Hoshie is fine - it avoids any possibility of a copyvio, and adds a decent pic. Graham 02:35, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

video out ports - photos could be helpful[edit]

I found this page while looking at info on video out from iBooks. "White" ibooks have had three different video out configurations:

  • iBooks with an external reset button (next to the headphone jack) have a Mini-DVI jack that supports Mini-DVI to VGA only.
  • iBooks with an external reset button can have a headphone jack (symbol is a set of headphones) or an A/V jack (symbol is a rounded rectangle with double parentheses). The A/V jack supports composite video out using an Apple A/V Cable
  • iBooks without an external reset button have a Mini-DVI jack that supports VGA or Composite/S-video, with different adaptors for each.

(The reset button is a small button near the headphone jack.) These are fairly significant differences that would be visible, based on the presence or absence of the reset button and the symbol on the headphone or A/V jack. Here are examples of three different configurations:

  • iBook G3 600 with CD only drive - MiniDVI to VGA video out, using included adapter; 1/8" audio out (headphone) jack
  • iBook G3 600 with Cd/DVD drive - MiniDVI to VGA video out, using included adapter; 1/8" A/V out jack
  • iBooks without an external reset button- Mini-DVi to VGA video out, using included adapter; Mini-DVI to composite (RCA jack) or S-Video out, using optonal adapter, 1/8" audio out (headphone) jack

Apple's adaptor names:

  • Mini-DVI to VGA: Apple VGA Display Adapter (included with iBooks that have a Mini-DVI jack)
  • Mini-DVI to Composite and S-video: Apple Video Adapter
  • A/V ("headphone") jack to Composite video: Apple AV Cable

This information is not obvious nor easy to find (no one seems to have it in one place, including Apple). Specific adaptor names found by searching for "video adapter" and "a/v cable" at Apple's online store. This site has a reasonable description and photos, but leaves out that only non-external reset button iMacs can use the Apple Video Adapter: http://www.eusd4kids.org/edtech/ibookconnect.html Also, the "clamshell" iBooks apparently use the Apple A/V Cable too.- Winston

Not sure where you got that information, but it's wrong. I suggest you should look at better sources before you make any changes. --Ctachme 20:25, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
And how did you know it's wrong? I mean if you have a good source, tell us. -- Taku 23:26, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
Ctachme is right, this information is very incorrect. No iBook has *ever* come with DVI out, only VGA, in the form of a mini-VGA connector, so says http://www.apple.com/ibook/specs.html. All Dual USB iBooks have had a mini-VGA output connector, along with an included Mini-VGA to VGA adapter. Later "early" models did have the A/V jack, which allowed composite video out of the headphone jack. When the reset button was removed from the port-side of the unit (Around the time the 700MHz models were introduced), the A/V jack went back to being a headphone jack, and the Mini-VGA port now doubled as a composite/S-Video out port with a seperate Mini-VGA to Video adapter. -- mgahs 05:00, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)


RAM[edit]

I changed mention of the maximum RAM that an ibook could have - mine has 1.5GHz, as it is the final version that came out mid-2006 with 512GHz pre-installed RAM, and 1GHz SD expansion. --Starseeker shkm 15:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Airport[edit]

Which was the first ibook to have a slot for the airport card? which was the first to be compatible with Airport Extreme? Which was the first to have it built-in?

As the article states, the original iBook had an airport slot, and was thus the first commercially available laptop with built-in wireless capability. The iBook G4 was the first iBook with an Extreme slot. jamiemcc 22:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Lack of iBook G4 line-in jack[edit]

I have removed a block of text about the iBook G4's lack of microphone jack from the iBook G3 Clamshell section. I'm not sure if it should be merged into the iBook G4 section.

iBook G4s lack a line-in or microphone jack, commonly found on PC Laptops, even though the iBook G4 has internal circuitry for an electric microphone mounted in the display lid of the case. Apple recommends an external USB audio device such as the Griffin iMic, or a different model of laptop (such as the PowerBook) to get an audio input socket. G4 Mac Minis also lacked an audio input jack, but it was introduced to Intel Mac Mini, fixing this problem.

Lavenderbunny 17:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Need help[edit]

I'm using AppleWorks 6's paint program, and I don't exactly know how to put the pictures I drew onto the internet. I usualy use microsoft, so I'm not used to this. thanks! I use apple ibook more than pc because unlike pc apple has ilife 09, and the graphics are better. --Bentendo24 18:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Bad feeling about the recent edit of the Quality issues section.[edit]

On 16 August 2007 02:57, Tony Sidaway removed a lot in the Quality issues section of the iBook lemma.
According to his comment, it is cruft, and WP:OR.
I will not revert his change, because maybe it makes sense. But still I have a bad feeling about this change.
Calling it cruft, and writing that he had fun with removing it (as he does in his comment), is at least not nice and friendly to wikipedians who try to contribute something. Now there is always the risk that some other wikipedian will revert this section.
If you remove something, do it in a nicer, and better commented manner. I have no time to go into the details now, but when I have time I might come back on this (or not). Fact is, that there are severe quality issues with the iBook, and the section looks rather small now, smaller than I consider as realistic.
Yvolution 19:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The Quality Issues section mentions that users started having issues with the displays in 2005, but then says that a class-action lawsuit was filed in December of 2003. I take it the first reference should be 2003 also? (Just wanted to make sure before I changed anything.) eleraama 70.59.172.173 (talk) 22:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

@ elraama, the year 2005 is not correct indeed. I checked in older versions of this article and there we see the correct date "2003". Apart from this, still I think the quality issue section should be more extensive. Yvolution 12:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that the Quality issue is probably the number one problem with these laptops. I don't think its far off to say that its one of the worst engineering disasters in recent IT manufacturing. Failure rates are documented up to 50% in some cases, anecdotally 75%. I think its very important to mention these, however I won't edit unless everyone agrees. Also they start with the very first iBook Dual USB back in 2001, and continue right through the full iBook G3 line. Here is an overview (we could include this link, I don't see it in the article):

http://www.macintouch.com/reliability/laptops.html

From the article: "The white 12" iBook G3 series became much less reliable through its first five revisions, reaching a 73% failure percentage! The last revision dropped to a 49% failure percentage — much improved over the previous model, but still unconscionably high."

Particularly note this analysis under the logic board column:

http://www.macintouch.com/graphics/laptopcomponents.png

oblivionboy 18:23, 27th May, 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Mention a Mod?[edit]

I'm not entirely sure if it's applicable, but I've been following an interesting mod for the Clamshell (466 and possibly 366) on MacNN forums; it's the installation of an XGA screen in the CS. There's more information on its LiveJournal page: http://community.livejournal.com/ibookmod/
Skky 03:17, 02 January 2008 (GMT)

Magnesium chassis[edit]

I believe the iBook G4 does have a magnesium chassis. Although not a good source, I read it at http://www2.shopping.com/xPO-Apple-APPLE-M9418LL-A-14-1-iBook . When I remove the battery of my iBook G4, I am able to see part of the chassis. Although I am not sure, I believe it is magnesium.

Yes, it is magnesium. 141.109.108.119 (talk) 03:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


82.171.102.118 (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Bulky Casing[edit]

I am perplexed by this line:

"Its rounded case design provided good impact protection, but made the computer bulkier at a time when other laptops such as the original PowerBook G4 were getting drastically more compact. "

The original Clamshell iBook was launched in 1999, and by the time they switched to the translucent casing of the iBook Dual USB, it was the same year as the G4s came out - 2001. The 1999 - 2000 Clamshells coincided almost perfectly with the Powerbook G3s (Wallstreet, Lombard, Pismo) and Apple obviously started both lines again with the iBook G3 translucents, and the G4 Powerbooks. Both share the same radical departure in design of the "modern" macs we're so used to now. It sounds like maybe someone has a grudge against the venerable old Clamshells? :) Seriously though, I think we should rework the sentence so it removes this last part oblivionboy 07:54, June 3rd, 2008 (UTC)


The Chip underneath the logic board shim affects the 1.2GHz iBook G4 as well... Thats how I'm posting this.[edit]

Also, it is not physically possible to place a shim between the case and the GPU, as there is a Heat sink between them already. It would make more sense to tighten the screws holding down the heat sink, as they are springloaded. Someone might want to confirm this information, as I can only cite experience, not sources.

1.0 GB RAM in a G3 Clamshell iBook ?[edit]

It is not recommended to do so but has been upgraded to 1.0 GB of RAM.

IMHO the Clamshell iBook RAM is 576MB max (64MB internal+512MB SO-DIMM). If there is a way to upgrade the internal RAM a reference is needed, otherwise this statementent should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waldohreule (talkcontribs) 09:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Newton included in the timeline of portable macintoshes?[edit]

The newton is included in the timeline, but its not a macintosh. It doesnt run MacOS or OSX. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.87.149.23 (talk) 12:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Added External Link to iFixit[edit]

I work for iFixit, and I just added an external link to iFixit's series of repair manuals for the iBook. The repair manuals have hundreds of Creative Commons-licensed, step-by-step repair photos and in-depth troubleshooting information. iFixit is the most respected online resource for Apple troubleshooting and repair, but don't take my word for it. The following article was published on the front page of the LA Times Business section on June 23rd 2010. iFixit has also received numerous other online reviews from the press and media which can be viewed here:

I feel that this page is incomplete without a link to the most comprehensive online resource for iBook repair, but I want to make sure to disclose my bias in adding the link. Please remove it if you think it is not useful.

Straife (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Removed as COI spam. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 21:23, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

a little caotic[edit]

I think this artical could use some tirming. Lex Martin (talk) 00:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Model (known by Apple as) in tables[edit]

Thanks Applist for the effort, but the upperrow in the tables with 'Model (known by Apple as)' and the official modelnames as referred by Apple are essential to identify a Mac to supporting information by Apple. Sometimes other will refer to a Mac with this modelname as well. There are not (I agree) very nice modelnames thosen by Apple but that's just that way it is. Here some supportpages by Apple where to see the modelnames:

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP70?viewlocale=en_US

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP61?viewlocale=en_US

http://support.apple.com/kb/sp100

Maarten Rail (talk) 21:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)