Article Mentioning an Apple PDA? (Fran?)
<a href="http://www.nikkeibp.asiabiztech.com/wcs/leaf?CID=onair/asabt/moren/192188"; target="_blank">Here's the Article in Question.</a>
(This article was linked to by MacRumors.)
The paragraph in question reads:
[quote]Separately, Apple is seeking production of personal digital assistants (PDAs) and some computer peripherals, such as its wireless communications access points, namely airports, in Taiwan......<hr></blockquote>
What do you all make of this? The last couple of times that rumors like this have percolated around, they have generally borne fruit.
Hope springs eternal.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: Mandricard ]</p>
(This article was linked to by MacRumors.)
The paragraph in question reads:
[quote]Separately, Apple is seeking production of personal digital assistants (PDAs) and some computer peripherals, such as its wireless communications access points, namely airports, in Taiwan......<hr></blockquote>
What do you all make of this? The last couple of times that rumors like this have percolated around, they have generally borne fruit.
Hope springs eternal.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: Mandricard ]</p>
Comments
D
[QB]It's really funny that the first thing that I think of now whenever an Apple PDA is mentioned is Fran.<hr></blockquote>
Fran and I have a long history of clamoring for a PDA or Tablet.
I am not sure what to make of this story. There was a murmur like this about the iBook, and a murmur like this about the LCD iMac.
I hope this murmur follows the pattern...
Hope springs eternal,
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
<strong>Fran and I have a long history of clamoring for a PDA or Tablet.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You can add my name to that list as well!
[quote]Originally posted by Mandricard:
<strong>Hope springs eternal</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes it does!
D
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
<strong>
Fran and I have a long history of clamoring for a PDA or Tablet.
I am not sure what to make of this story. There was a murmur like this about the iBook, and a murmur like this about the LCD iMac.
I hope this murmur follows the pattern...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me join you in your clamouring!
I need a PDA but none of the current crop seem worth $500, and having gone Mac why would I want a
PocketPC?
Apple could do this right. Portable email, iTunes, Quicktime, web, address book and mini applications all in an attractive usable form factor.
Fake or not, iWalk pretty much visualised what I'd like. A 128Mb PDA running on a 10 or 20Gb iPod drive with a 640x480 touch screen (16bit) is quite doable - BSD runs happily in 16meg off a floppy (people forget that) so 128mb/20mb is plenty.
I'm sure it is a matter of when, not if...
If it's built along the lines of the iPod then I say "bully". I had a chance to help a Mac neophyte set up and use their iPod this past Saturday and was really impressed with the product and its integration with the MacOS. It really IS about the size of a deck of playing cards! Adding a touchscreen, a mini-mobo and some peripheral slots couldn't make it that much bigger.
Fran? hehe
There are many independent mentions of an Apple PDA in Taiwanese trade mags, just like there were for a larger screen iBook and LCD iMac.
Suddenly we get these ridiculous iFrame rumors all over which point out specs that could very well sync with an Apple iPad based on existing tech in the iPod and rumored desktop hardware (AirPort 2).
An LCD sized similar to a "photograph" would be nearly as large as the Newton screen, hard drive and FireWire to connect it to a Mac to update/sync is on target. InkWell handwriting recognition is a solution in need of a problem on a desktop Mac, but not a touch screen handheld device. AirPort to link to a TCP network is great (there is a single-chip AirPort IC that is 1/4 the size of the current AirPort card).
All the pieces are there, but can Apple commit to such a move right now? Is there real demand for a portable Mac OS X device about the size of a Newton that would potentially cost around $699-799?
Is it finally time for a Newton X? Or is all this a diversion from something else (water-resistant digital camera?)?
Hypothetical: Imagine having a handheld OS X device the size of a newton w/AirPort remotely linking to a rack of Xserves with the Admin app, just walk by and check on em all with a horitzontally oriented screen filled with the Xserve admin app tapping away with a stylus.
Mac OS X has really become "tap" friendly, look at all the toolbars, the Dock menus, and menu items we have now. System prefs are contained in one window, the Finder is fully contained in a window now.
Are we really heading to a handheld/touch screen Mac OS X computer and didn't even realize it?
Regardless, you don't think that the resurfacing of 'Ink' was just for the heck of it, do you?
[QB]...An LCD sized similar to a "photograph" would be nearly as large as the Newton screen...
...Is there real demand for a portable Mac OS X device about the size of a Newton ...
... Imagine having a handheld OS X device the size of a newton w/AirPort ...
QB]<hr></blockquote>
ANSWER:
Hardly anyone is interested in a PDA the size of the Newton.
This, in my opinion, is why Palm took off and the Newton failed. You MUST have it small enough to fit into a shirt pocket and easily slip into a side pocket of a purse.
I am sure that Apple realizes this and IF they do release a PDA it won't be the same size as the Newton.
<a href="http://theregister.co.uk/content/39/25541.html"; target="_blank">http://theregister.co.uk/content/39/25541.html</a>;
i found the article at the register. end}
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: Da sinister ]</p>
<strong>
ANSWER:
Hardly anyone is interested in a PDA the size of the Newton.
This, in my opinion, is why Palm took off and the Newton failed. You MUST have it small enough to fit into a shirt pocket and easily slip into a side pocket of a purse.
I am sure that Apple realizes this and IF they do release a PDA it won't be the same size as the Newton.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But consider how big a modern Newton would be if it had no new features at all - think Palm M505 or less.
Newton actually didn't fail, it was canned for childish tantrum reasons. Had it continued to be developed it would have been colour 4 years ago and a Visor/Treo killer by now.
This, in my opinion, is why Palm took off and the Newton failed.
<hr></blockquote>
Yes, the Newton does not fit into your pocket, but shave an inch or two off, and it's fine. In fact, if you were to simply make a PDA without a rugged border case (ie, a centimeter around the screen), it would fit fine. A new PDA would not have to lose a lot of screen real estate to be easily portable. On the same note, it cannot have any of the foolish 'features' such as a 'built in keyboard' that takes up valuable space.
The size of the Newton was also not the reason for it's failure. It was a matter of money, plain and simple. In fact, if the Newton had been around another 2 months, Texas would have purchased 3,000,000 eMates! That's a lot of orders. But on the same note, Jobs did not want to support the Newton OS at all, and supporting those schools would have been a big job. Plus, he felt the Newton/eMate in that regard would take away iBook sales when the machine was released a year later.
The reason Palms took off was not because of their size either, but because they were the only game in town. To this day when people show me their new Palm Pilot at work with all of it's 'bells and whistles', I take out my Messagepad. They say, "Wow. That's old. Is that the first Palm Pilot?" I then plug it in, fire up my NPDS, write notes on it, take screenshots from the web, and fire up the more functional web browser.
The Palms are finally on the edge of where the Newton was in 1996. The ARM processors will allow people to do so much more, but in the same regard, it's the perfect time for Apple to blow them out of the water. It's time to show off a PDA that really is a true portable computing experience. If Apple, at Macworld, can release a PDA with even half of the features I'm looking for, people will be very, very pleased.
<strong>But on the same note, Jobs did not want to support the Newton OS at all</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fran,
You just said what I have been trying to say for a while now! What killed the Newton was the fact that it didn't and couldn't run 'Mac OS X' I'm willing to bet on it.
As it was when Steve came on board...
Newton wasn't a success but it wasn't a total flop either.
Newton was about to be rolled out as a business unit of it's own. (sink or swim time)
Problem is *if* Newton had taken off (post Newton Inc.) that would have been one more thing for Steve to deal with once X was read for that space. As it was Steve knew he had an uphill battle with developers and getting them to move to OS X but then had Newton been a success how could Apple roll out (when ready) a device that ran OS X in the 'palm sized' space when Newton was doing well as a non-x product.
My bet is Steve said lets kill it now (and piss off a few) rather than in the future (and piss off a lot more people) and then when we do release product in that space we wont have to try and convert Mac users already loyal to Newton.
To many Apple users. A choice between Palm OS and an Apple Solution (running X) is easy... Apple will win with just about everyone unless Apple really messed things up.
Now lets add a Newton to the mix (as if it wasn't killed)... Newton would be used by many Apple users (by now) and maybe some would be using Palm... Now Apple rolls out another device (running X)... The choice MOST Apple users gets a little (a lot) harder to predict.
So given the above.... Steve figured with Newton not being a big deal to the bottom line right now why should we allow it to grow since it will only make our X plans all that much harder in the future when we (with X) want to enter that space... So let's kill it now while we still can.
For those who don't think I'm right you can continue to believe that Steve did it to spite Scully or whatever but this makes a lot more sense to me.
Dave
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
<strong>
But consider how big a modern Newton would be if it had no new features at all - think Palm M505 or less.
Newton actually didn't fail, it was canned for childish tantrum reasons. Had it continued to be developed it would have been colour 4 years ago and a Visor/Treo killer by now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, while the Newton was still being produced, the US Robotics "Palm" came out and VERY quickly took more market share than the Newton and continued to grow share. This is what I meant by "failed". I think more people were choosing the USRobotics/Palm because it was a very convenient size.
The Newton was too big. You couldn't easily carry it around.
I'm not saying that Apple couldn't release a smaller Newton, or a smaller PDA which is like the Newton. I'm just saying it would be a huge HUGE mistake to release a PDA that couldn't fit in a shirt pocket or easily slip into a purse pocket.
<strong>
Yes, the Newton does not fit into your pocket, but shave an inch or two off, and it's fine....
...The size of the Newton was also not the reason for it's failure. It was a matter of money, plain and simple...</strong><hr></blockquote>
An inch or two!!! Well, yeah, but then it wouldn't be the size of a Newton. It would be the size of a palm. Which is exactly my point!
The Newton quickly lost PDA market share when USRobotics (I believe) released their PDA. People quickly purchased it. It wasn't only smaller, but it was small enough to carry around all the time without trouble. It was also less expensive. But I think people would have paid the extra money for Newton features IF it was smaller.
I really feel like size was the biggest drawback for the Newton. I loved the Newton. Two of my friends had them. But they didn't carry them around because they were too bulky.
Mark
<strong>
Problem is *if* Newton had taken off (post Newton Inc.) that would have been one more thing for Steve to deal with once X was read for that space. As it was Steve knew he had an uphill battle with developers and getting them to move to OS X but then had Newton been a success how could Apple roll out (when ready) a device that ran OS X in the 'palm sized' space when Newton was doing well as a non-x product.
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is an aspect of the Newton story I hadn't considered before, but it makes enormous sense. Thanks for bringing it out. A lot of things that didn't make sense have suddenly fallen into place. So, some seat-of-the-pants analysis that is probably chock full of holes, but it seems quite plausible, IMO:
As I try to imagine myself in Jobs' shoes in 1996 wrt the Newton, I can see his dilemma. The Newton was a showcase of lots of really cool, forward technology that made Apple look really good. Unfortunately, a lot of that technology was radically different from the desktop environment and the two platforms would not be converging any time soon. So what to do?
If the Newton had continued and evolved into the market dominator it may have become, there would have been a split at Apple along the OS lines. A crucial factor may have been Jobs' desire to keep everything at Apple under the MacOS "umbrella". Thus the real problem may not have been the Newton itself, but the Newton OS. Despite its great strengths, it was growing independently of the MacOS and was complicating the company at a time when Jobs was trying to streamline and simplify operations. It was a "weed" - not because it was a bad plant, but because it was growing in the wrong place.
With his OS X project just getting going (and the future of the company being bet on it), a developmental nightmare was brewing. Look at how much hassle Apple is having with the transition from OS 9 -> OS X. It is taxing the company's resources to the limit to pull that off. Now throw in the Newton. You've got all the headaches of the desktop OS transition, but also have to keep developing apps for the Newton OS that will have to maintain interoperability with both OS 9 and OS X. Looking to the future in 1996, I suspect Jobs saw that maintaining the Newton was going to be too much complication and hassle than its bottom line was worth. Thus it was killed not because it was an unworthy product, but because it was going to get in the way of bigger and better things.
About the time the Newton was killed, IBM had succeeded in porting Linux to a wristwatch computer. Although that project failed, it showed that Unix was going to be able to be scaled to fit virtually any environment, from a PDA to a multiprocessor behemoth. A reasonable plan would be to mothball the Newton until the new NextStep-based MacOS was ready, then run a stripped down version of it on the PDA. As I recall, Jobs said something to the effect of, "We'll bring the Newton back when the time is right" when he announced its demise. Now that the transition from OS9 to OS X is nearing completion, it may very well be the right time to bring back the Newton, but with OS X Lite running it instead of Newton OS.
And, on the other hand, Jobs may have killed the Newton in a hissy fit with Scully. I personally doubt that scenario, but CEOs have done vastly more childish things elsewhere. It seems contrary to Jobs' management style, however. Despite the amount of pure speculation there is in the above scenario, I find it much more likely.
My $0.02, as always YMMV.
The Newton was(is) too big. A personal portable device either has to fit into a pocket or clip to a belt. The Newton requires a really big pocket or a another "device" to carry it in. The eMate is even worse in that it takes up as much space as a laptop.
The Newton is a Tablet device and tablets just do not have the same market as PDA devices because of the Not-really-portable factor.
If Apple had made a 30% smaller Newton, the PDA market would be years ahead of were PALM has gotten it be. And if they had a better designed eMate or a full page Newton, the Tablet market would be years ahead of were it is now too.
Apple just didn't know what the market wanted, and didn't have the resources to keep it alive long enough to fine tune thier product to it.
Kenny must live... to die
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: apple.otaku ]</p>
So, if anybody can think of a better use for Ink other than a new PDA, let me know. If not, I'll assume we're gonna see one soon, or that Apple is releasing this just because it had nothing better to do with the technology that's been sitting around so long. Again, I have no inside info, but I am trying to use a bit of reasoning to figure this out.
Matthew