croissantking
Well-known member
Maybe because those who have a PPC upgrade in their 500 series feel fortunate to do so?
But looking at it retrospectively, the 1400 is effectively the same thing done better... So you get a PB1400?I do feel like people undersell the 5300's performance because of how underwhelming it was on launch though. Doom is a laggy mess on my 540c, but the 5300 plays it smooth. Neither feel fast in the OS, but the improvements are there and obvious once you start running programs.
Well yeah, as a rare 5300 fan, I'd kill to have one of those upgrades in my 540c. I just find it curious how the perception is so different.Maybe because those who have a PPC upgrade in their 500 series feel fortunate to do so?
The 1400 is another funny case to me. The 133MHz 1400c with L2 didn't launch until February of 1997 - on launch in August of 96', it was the same performance that was underwhelming in 1995, only a year later. Shows what a good design can do for the reputation of a product. They essentially released the 5300ce again with a much better case and CD-ROM support, and it did well.But looking at it retrospectively, the 1400 is effectively the same thing done better... So you get a PB1400?
Everymac says Nov 1996, but I have to admit I don't trust any of the Launch dates online.The 133MHz 1400c with L2 didn't launch until February of 1997
My PB5300 takes forever to boot, between the slow disk interface and the slow CPU.For the avoidance of doubt, the 117MHz PB1400 is painfully slow.
Dates I mentioned are pulled directly from the 1400 Series Service Source, so they *should* be correct. I wouldn't put it past 90s Apple to get it wrong though.Everymac says Nov 1996, but I have to admit I don't trust any of the Launch dates online.
What was wrong performance wise with a G3 Kanga or a Wallstreet? (As far as I've been able to tell, Mainstreet is more of a nickname for the Wallstreet than an official codename. From Apple, it went Kanga > Wallstreet > PDQ > Lombard > Pismo). I do know that the slowest Wallstreets had no L2 (and passive matrix displays for that matter), so those are likely glacial, but the Kanga and higher end ones should be pretty fast, no? My PDQ feels pretty zippy.It was a bad period for laptops. Apple's machines went from very similar performance to desktops, to the 603 based machines through to the Main Street, then back to making good machines again.
5300 uses a soldered QFP CPU, so no upgrades. Definitely a negative.My PB5300 takes forever to boot, between the slow disk interface and the slow CPU.
My PB1400 has a CPU upgrade so it feels much more responsive. That's another thing - there weren't CPU upgrades for the 5300 were there?
I wasn't much of a fan of my 5300, but that was primarily because it had an awful mono display & a small, not amazingly reliable HD. It was, however fast enough for my needs and the second video card went a long way to addressing the internal display problem. It's quite possible that if the HD had been much bigger (≥3GB would have been OK) I would probably have kept it from about 1998.7 to 2002.3.<snip>How come when you're talking about a 5300, someone always brings up how they're slow and therefor not desirable
It's good to see a 5300x fan, it was a pioneering laptop!Well yeah, as a rare 5300 fan, I'd kill to have one of those upgrades in my 540c. I just find it curious how the perception is so different.
The 1400x has been appealing to me, I admit, because it has a better reputation. The shape looks like a better design and whereas the 5300 looks chunky, the way the 1400x is wider at the front gives a kind of wide-angled lens effect which makes it look cool and 'sleek'. At 117MHz, again that was fine for me as it gave me a similar performance experience to my 5300 (the ambling nature of Mac OS 8.1 paradoxically appeals), and at 166MHz it's close to my PM4400/160 (which with no L2 cache is about 19% faster).The 1400 is another funny case to me. The 133MHz 1400c with L2 didn't launch until February of 1997 - on launch in August of 96', it was the same performance that was underwhelming in 1995, only a year later. Shows what a good design can do for the reputation of a product. They essentially released the 5300ce again with a much better case and CD-ROM support, and it did well.
For the avoidance of doubt, the 117MHz PB1400 is painfully slow.
I have a good summary of the most common faults on my website. I have a page finished for the 5300cs variant specifically, but I don't have it online yet.I didn't mean this thread to be an attack on the 5300, I'm only thinking about being potentially helpful when I meet up with my friend & his 5300 in February!
Kangas are rare, I don't know much about them.What was wrong performance wise with a G3 Kanga or a Wallstreet? (As far as I've been able to tell, Mainstreet is more of a nickname for the Wallstreet than an official codename
I suspect they were going for battery life.It was probably all just a question of heat and power consumption.
Mine ended up with a disk from a 10 year newer machine - the disk interface was a huge bottleneck on them sadly.It's quite possible that if the HD had been much bigger (≥3GB would have been OK) I would probably have kept it from about 1998.7 to 2002.3
Mostly my fault sorry. Genuinely the only Mac I really actually dislike. I was trying to keep one running while it crumbled in front of me and I got "had" buying a "better" replacement on eBay that turned out to be worse than mine. I basically couldn't afford to keep it running at the time (student) and had no other Classic Mac OS macs with me at university. I ended up using emulators instead.I didn't mean this thread to be an attack on the 5300, I'm only thinking about being potentially helpful when I meet up with my friend & his 5300 in February!
The second generation Wallstreet (aka PDQ - PDQ is also not their real name, they were second generation Wallstreet)
Officially, they were all "Powerbook G3" because Apple decided we couldn't be trusted with unique names that could be used to quickly identify what machine you were talking about.Here says it's just Wallstreet for the 1st gen and PDQ for the second gen. I thought Wallstreet II was the nickname? I can absolutely believe that Wikipedia is wrong here, but I'm pretty sure it's right here. Either way, I'd like to see a reference from a more official source on the matter. There's a lot of codename confusion online about those two with conflicting sources everywhere.List of Apple codenames - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
They gave us very totally unique and easy to understand names, totally (sarcasm).unique names
This sums it up pretty well honestly.I actually quite liked my 5300c. It was my first PowerBook, and I bought it for £7 from my friend’s Mum’s office during stock liquidation.
Nah, that's a G4yikes
I mean it was still, objectively, a piece of junk in ~2000. But I was 14-15 and I just liked the novelty of owning it. I think I remember taking it on holiday to Turkey and playing Hellcats on the flight there/back. It was early enough that the battery still held a decent charge, and there were no leaked caps.This sums it up pretty well honestly.
$7 - not a bad deal. Pretty decent laptop.
$3,900 - yikes
No worries!Mostly my fault sorry.
I was trying to keep one running while it crumbled in front of me <snip> at the time (student) and had no other Classic Mac OS Macs <snip>
I also had mine as a student (postgrad in this case). I think a common theme is developing here & if @3lectr1cPPC also had a 5300 as a student, we're several steps towards a half-brained theory on their second-hand target audienceI actually quite liked my 5300c. It was my first PowerBook<snip> I was 14-15 and I just liked the novelty of owning it..
Another thing I just thought of - how come no one complains about performance on a PPC-upgraded PowerBook 500 Series? I mean, yes, there are some EXTREMELY rare high clocked ones, but the majority you'll find are ones that are running at similar speeds to the 5300, still with no L2. How come when you're talking about a 5300, someone always brings up how they're slow and therefor not desirable, yet people are typically way more positive when talking about the upgrades for the 500 series.