Why not? I thought this was all about giving the customer the option. If they don't play games, today's integrated graphics chips are more than powerful enough. Why should someone have to pay for a dedicated graphics chip that they don't want just to get a 17" screen?
I don't even know if 17" notebooks with integrated graphic cards are available by any company, and at the end of the day if you're not a gamer, or a professional web designer you wouldn't want a 17" screen on a notebook in the first place.
if you're not a gamer, or a professional web designer you wouldn't want a 17" screen on a notebook in the first place.
Many people, including but not limited to lawyers and accountants, need to have three or more text documents or spreadsheets open at the same time. They have no need for accelerated graphics.
Many people, including but not limited to lawyers and accountants, need to have three or more text documents or spreadsheets open at the same time. They have no need for accelerated graphics.
but also people that want to look at the pictures created by these proffesional artists and dont need graphics accelerated. there are many reasons why to have a 17" screen but why not have a 13" with a graphics card all these are possible. and as the above post suggested. all the user choose everything down to the core.
for example
2.0Ghz
1GB RAM
17" screen
200GB 5400rpm
no gfx card.
just for word processing. watching movies on the go low power usage config
or 15.4"
2.6Ghz
2GB RAM
15.4" Screen
200GB 5400rpm HDD
and a graphics card with 256MB VRAM
basicly it comes down to what the user wants. but there also should be preconfigered laptops for people that want to hassle with the hardware config.
There are plenty of resons for "For total config" and others for "Against"
The MacBook Pro is an amazing laptop but it does have one limitation. People use them outside and often times expose them to less than friendly conditions. I spent two years in the Middle East and sand was a constant problem. I dropped the laptop twice because my fingers were dusty and the metal enclosure just slid out of my hand. Luckily it still worked but the lid never closed right after that, nor was it flat bottomed.
We need Apple to recognize that people will be taking their laptops outdoors and they need at least one model that'll handle dust, sand, rain, and drops. I realize that it would make the model thicker and heavier, but to the people needing the protection, it's well worth it.
I know it's a niche market that most people wouldn't use, but there currently exists no Mac ruggedized to handle that kind of abuse, at any price that I'm aware of. Considering that so many production companies use MacBook Pro's in the field, one would think that the added protection would be welcomed.
You'd think third party company's would make protective shells or something for such users. I'm not being sarcastic, I know such things exist, but the models I've seen were hardly what I'd call armor. I'm referring to more industrial oriented designs that might not be as aesthetically pleasing but would survive in rugged terrain.
You'd think third party company's would make protective shells or something for such users. I'm not being sarcastic, I know such things exist, but the models I've seen were hardly what I'd call armor. I'm referring to more industrial oriented designs that might not be as aesthetically pleasing but would survive in rugged terrain.
You are correct. The fact that there is no one doing it is likely a good indicator of the market for said product. This is a niche market in the PC world, so it would be an ultra-niche market for Apple. Until Apple gets into more businesses, this likely wouldn't be cost effective.
I'm just not convinced with the aluminium silver look. Using the present MacBook Pro sends shivers down my spine every time I touch it. The feel of it positively puts my teeth on edge. I think the best way forward is to go back to black with aluminium trim a la the new iPhone/iPod touch and the iMac. Silver to me is an old 'new millennium' marketing colour like all the silver cars that where bought around that time.
On a positive note. I love the idea of dropping the 'pro' moniker and going with choice when it comes to fire power. Just hold off on the silver already.
I'm just not convinced with the aluminium silver look. Using the present MacBook Pro sends shivers down my spine every time I touch it. The feel of it positively puts my teeth on edge. I think the best way forward is to go back to black with aluminium trim a la the new iPhone/iPod touch and the iMac.
I can't say that "shivers" thing is a common irrational fear, I've never heard it before. As for you view on the best way forward, I've news for you, the iMac and iPhone are actually silver, aluminum-silver, just like the MacBook Pro. The only parts that are not are silver are their screens, just like the way this design is.
I can't say that "shivers" thing is a common irrational fear, I've never heard it before. As for you view on the best way forward, I've news for you, the iMac and iPhone are actually silver, aluminum-silver, just like the MacBook Pro. The only parts that are not are silver are their screens, just like the way this design is.
Lol, bummer! I'll just have to spend 2008 with my hair standing on end.
I would love to see them drop the differentiation between the MB and MBP lines - let me get a base configuration 17" or a superpower 13".
One other thing to consider: from patents like this it's obvious that Apple will be coming out with a multitouch keyboard (they took out another patent that allows the screen to differentiate between contact and pressure and another one that allows for a hidden tactile factor so that you could "feel" the keys) screen for some kind of application. "Unprecedented integration of typing, resting, pointing, scrolling, 3D manipulation, and handwriting." So do you think that the new unified MB line will keep conventional keyboards or have an option for a multitouch dual screen (DS) configuration or what? Will the multitouch keyboard be only for the ultraportable? I would love to see a 17" DS.
I would love to see them drop the differentiation between the MB and MBP lines - let me get a base configuration 17" or a superpower 13".
One other thing to consider: from patents like this it's obvious that Apple will be coming out with a multitouch keyboard (they took out another patent that allows the screen to differentiate between contact and pressure and another one that allows for a hidden tactile factor so that you could "feel" the keys) screen for some kind of application. "Unprecedented integration of typing, resting, pointing, scrolling, 3D manipulation, and handwriting." So do you think that the new unified MB line will keep conventional keyboards or have an option for a multitouch dual screen (DS) configuration or what? Will the multitouch keyboard be only for the ultraportable? I would love to see a 17" DS.
A dual-screen device will never be released by Apple. There, I said it.
A desktop with a 12º flat MT keyboard maybe (think 11" X 4.5" high-resolution screen lying almost-flat on desk, capable of displaying anything on it, and when you launch an app you can set it to change to display buttons and present a UI tailored specifically for that app), but when we are talking about a MT portable, I think the writing's on the wall for a single screen MT Mac device, as in a tablet. The whole advantage of MT it that you can get rid of the keyboard, not replace it with a screen. There's a few reasons for this. One, battery life with two screens goes way down, a very bad idea in that regard. Two, if you are going to have a surface separate from the screen most people would simply rather have a physical keyboard.
The whole point of MT is that you can interact with the actual screen itself, and pop-up a keyboard which takes up zero physical space "only" when needed. A space saver, one of the primary importances of a portable, and a new portable personal computer paradigm. Sure on-screen keyboards have been done before, but they weren't done well enough to be taken seriously. The iPhone shows that Apple can pull it off, and on an 11" wide-screen they'll make it even better.
The reasons people (including myself) still buy desktop computers is one, power, and two, screen size. MT on a desktop screen doesn't work because the screen is both too big, and vertical. Touching a big, vertical desktop screen for 5 minutes is tiring, not to mention for a day of work. The separate MT keyboard is an evolution in that regard. The "revolution" is coming on the portable side, even if a MT desktop keyboard may seem like a revolution to some people, and actually would if Apple can find a way to make it also work as a mouse too, thus leap-frogging the mouse problem they have yet to overcome, perhaps by telling it to move the vertical screens' cursor when only one finger rests on it and moves across it? Though I'm not quite sure that would be worth replacing the mouse for, or if it would be near as efficient as the mouse is in the real world.
How would a Mac touch (11" tablet) work in the real world? Well it would be a MT screen with the computer built behind it, it would have SSD internal storage, it "wouldn't" have an optical disk drive, it would be very light, very thin, sweet looking, and it would IMO have a "flip-stand" on that rear, which when "in" would be flush and out of the way, and when flipped out would hold the "Mac touch" at a certain angle when resting upon a tray, a desk or a table that would make it pretty easy to type and look at the screen at the same time, when not using it on your lap, walking around, or sitting on the ground etc.
The whole point of MT is that you can interact with the actual screen itself, and pop-up a keyboard which takes up zero physical space "only" when needed. A space saver, one of the primary importances of a portable, and a new portable personal computer paradigm. Sure on-screen keyboards have been done before, but they weren't done well enough to be taken seriously.
The reason for having a full-size virtual keyboard is for touch typing; otherwise it's not a whole lot easier than the iPhone's thumb keyboard. But can you touch type on a keyboard that's on the same 2D plane as your screen?
The reason for having a full-size virtual keyboard is for touch typing; otherwise it's not a whole lot easier than the iPhone's thumb keyboard. But can you touch type on a keyboard that's on the same 2D plane as your screen?
I believe so, and I know several people who can type on the iPhone just fine.
I believe so, and I know several people who can type on the iPhone just fine.
I know that; I can type on the iPhone at 35 wpm in landscape mode. But I meant touch typing; where you type without looking at the keys (the only way to get much faster than 35 wpm) and all of your fingers rest on the keyboard.
The question is, can you type with both hands (all fingers) on a virtual keyboard that is in the same plane as your screen? Would it be just like a giant iPhone with better multitouch? I'm thinking of something as simple as editing a book report while I'm sitting on the subway. If I can't touch type and still see the screen, then it's no better than an iPhone with MS Word - which will come with the SDK. I'd be happy to edit a book report on my iPhone, but I'd rather do it with a slightly more powerful keyboard.
Honestly, I'm not particularly fond of a Nintendo DS-style dual screen thing either, but a full-power virtual keyboard isn't much use in the same plane as the main screen. I'm sure they can think of a good way to have the keyboard separate from the screen - perhaps a roll-out polychrome epaper display to show what is happening while you are typing on the virtual keyboard? Or maybe (like I suggested in this thread), a dual screen that opens up to form a tablet? You've probably got more ideas than me. I'm just looking at functionality here.
I don't see a problem having an onscreen keyboard. Just have it transparant enough to see what's beneath it. I've already practiced typing like that. I'm more than ok with it.
I don't see a problem having an onscreen keyboard. Just have it transparant enough to see what's beneath it. I've already practiced typing like that. I'm more than ok with it.
You've already had a chance to touch type on a virtual keyboard? When? Where? On what? That's awesome!
How does it do any good to have transparent keys appear if your fingers are going to be on top of them?
You've already had a chance to touch type on a virtual keyboard? When? Where? On what? That's awesome!
How does it do any good to have transparent keys appear if your fingers are going to be on top of them?
There was this technology fair here, and there was a multitouch display section. I got some good practice in.
Put your fingers on a glass table, or any table for that matter. You can still pretty much see what is going on beneath. I just want the general layout itself to be transparent so that you can still see what's going on beneath.
There was this technology fair here, and there was a multitouch display section. I got some good practice in.
Put your fingers on a glass table, or any table for that matter. You can still pretty much see what is going on beneath. I just want the general layout itself to be transparent so that you can still see what's going on beneath.
Naturally the general layout would be transparent.
I don't know for sure - I always find the concept of typing on a keyboard with my fingers covering the text entry field a little difficult. I'd have to see.
I would love to see them drop the differentiation between the MB and MBP lines - let me get a base configuration 17" or a superpower 13".
I think the aluminum iMac is an indication that Apple may no longer use color/materials to differentiate "consumer" and "pro" computers. An aluminum Macbook, like in the mockup at the top of this thread, would be the next step.
Comments
Why not? I thought this was all about giving the customer the option. If they don't play games, today's integrated graphics chips are more than powerful enough. Why should someone have to pay for a dedicated graphics chip that they don't want just to get a 17" screen?
I don't even know if 17" notebooks with integrated graphic cards are available by any company, and at the end of the day if you're not a gamer, or a professional web designer you wouldn't want a 17" screen on a notebook in the first place.
I don't even know if 17" notebooks with integrated graphic cards are available by any company
There's the Fujitsu Siemens L1818, for sale from PC world in the U.K. for £382 ($764 relative to the MacBook Pro's $2800 price tag) excluding V.A.T.
There's the Toshiba P200-178 (£451 ex. VAT)
There's the Dell Inspiron 1720 ($849)
And I'm sure many others too.
, and at the end of the day if you're not a gamer, or a professional web designer you wouldn't want a 17" screen on a notebook in the first place.
You might want a 17" screen to watch DVDs on. Watching a DVD does not require a dedicated GPU.
if you're not a gamer, or a professional web designer you wouldn't want a 17" screen on a notebook in the first place.
Many people, including but not limited to lawyers and accountants, need to have three or more text documents or spreadsheets open at the same time. They have no need for accelerated graphics.
Many people, including but not limited to lawyers and accountants, need to have three or more text documents or spreadsheets open at the same time. They have no need for accelerated graphics.
but also people that want to look at the pictures created by these proffesional artists and dont need graphics accelerated. there are many reasons why to have a 17" screen but why not have a 13" with a graphics card all these are possible. and as the above post suggested. all the user choose everything down to the core.
for example
2.0Ghz
1GB RAM
17" screen
200GB 5400rpm
no gfx card.
just for word processing. watching movies on the go low power usage config
or 15.4"
2.6Ghz
2GB RAM
15.4" Screen
200GB 5400rpm HDD
and a graphics card with 256MB VRAM
basicly it comes down to what the user wants. but there also should be preconfigered laptops for people that want to hassle with the hardware config.
There are plenty of resons for "For total config" and others for "Against"
but this is just my opinion.
~Regards
Name101
-------------
13.3"
2.0 Ghz
120 GB HDD
1 GB RAM
$1099
15.4"
1 GB RAM
2.2 GHz
160 GB Hdd
$1399
17"
2 GB RAM
2.4GHz
200GB HDD
$1699
--integrated graphics, super drive, all black version, others BTO
MacBook Pro
---------------
15.4"
2 GB RAM
2.4 GHz
200 GB Hdd
$1799
17"
2 GB RAM
2.6 GHz
250GB HDD
$1999
--dedicated graphics, alu, some additional features to differentiate between MB & MBP others BTO
i can only wish
The MacBook Pro is an amazing laptop but it does have one limitation. People use them outside and often times expose them to less than friendly conditions. I spent two years in the Middle East and sand was a constant problem. I dropped the laptop twice because my fingers were dusty and the metal enclosure just slid out of my hand. Luckily it still worked but the lid never closed right after that, nor was it flat bottomed.
We need Apple to recognize that people will be taking their laptops outdoors and they need at least one model that'll handle dust, sand, rain, and drops. I realize that it would make the model thicker and heavier, but to the people needing the protection, it's well worth it.
I know it's a niche market that most people wouldn't use, but there currently exists no Mac ruggedized to handle that kind of abuse, at any price that I'm aware of. Considering that so many production companies use MacBook Pro's in the field, one would think that the added protection would be welcomed.
You'd think third party company's would make protective shells or something for such users. I'm not being sarcastic, I know such things exist, but the models I've seen were hardly what I'd call armor. I'm referring to more industrial oriented designs that might not be as aesthetically pleasing but would survive in rugged terrain.
You'd think third party company's would make protective shells or something for such users. I'm not being sarcastic, I know such things exist, but the models I've seen were hardly what I'd call armor. I'm referring to more industrial oriented designs that might not be as aesthetically pleasing but would survive in rugged terrain.
You are correct. The fact that there is no one doing it is likely a good indicator of the market for said product. This is a niche market in the PC world, so it would be an ultra-niche market for Apple. Until Apple gets into more businesses, this likely wouldn't be cost effective.
On a positive note. I love the idea of dropping the 'pro' moniker and going with choice when it comes to fire power. Just hold off on the silver already.
I'm just not convinced with the aluminium silver look. Using the present MacBook Pro sends shivers down my spine every time I touch it. The feel of it positively puts my teeth on edge. I think the best way forward is to go back to black with aluminium trim a la the new iPhone/iPod touch and the iMac.
I can't say that "shivers" thing is a common irrational fear, I've never heard it before. As for you view on the best way forward, I've news for you, the iMac and iPhone are actually silver, aluminum-silver, just like the MacBook Pro. The only parts that are not are silver are their screens, just like the way this design is.
I can't say that "shivers" thing is a common irrational fear, I've never heard it before. As for you view on the best way forward, I've news for you, the iMac and iPhone are actually silver, aluminum-silver, just like the MacBook Pro. The only parts that are not are silver are their screens, just like the way this design is.
Lol, bummer! I'll just have to spend 2008 with my hair standing on end.
One other thing to consider: from patents like this it's obvious that Apple will be coming out with a multitouch keyboard (they took out another patent that allows the screen to differentiate between contact and pressure and another one that allows for a hidden tactile factor so that you could "feel" the keys) screen for some kind of application. "Unprecedented integration of typing, resting, pointing, scrolling, 3D manipulation, and handwriting." So do you think that the new unified MB line will keep conventional keyboards or have an option for a multitouch dual screen (DS) configuration or what? Will the multitouch keyboard be only for the ultraportable? I would love to see a 17" DS.
I would love to see them drop the differentiation between the MB and MBP lines - let me get a base configuration 17" or a superpower 13".
One other thing to consider: from patents like this it's obvious that Apple will be coming out with a multitouch keyboard (they took out another patent that allows the screen to differentiate between contact and pressure and another one that allows for a hidden tactile factor so that you could "feel" the keys) screen for some kind of application. "Unprecedented integration of typing, resting, pointing, scrolling, 3D manipulation, and handwriting." So do you think that the new unified MB line will keep conventional keyboards or have an option for a multitouch dual screen (DS) configuration or what? Will the multitouch keyboard be only for the ultraportable? I would love to see a 17" DS.
A dual-screen device will never be released by Apple. There, I said it.
A desktop with a 12º flat MT keyboard maybe (think 11" X 4.5" high-resolution screen lying almost-flat on desk, capable of displaying anything on it, and when you launch an app you can set it to change to display buttons and present a UI tailored specifically for that app), but when we are talking about a MT portable, I think the writing's on the wall for a single screen MT Mac device, as in a tablet. The whole advantage of MT it that you can get rid of the keyboard, not replace it with a screen. There's a few reasons for this. One, battery life with two screens goes way down, a very bad idea in that regard. Two, if you are going to have a surface separate from the screen most people would simply rather have a physical keyboard.
The whole point of MT is that you can interact with the actual screen itself, and pop-up a keyboard which takes up zero physical space "only" when needed. A space saver, one of the primary importances of a portable, and a new portable personal computer paradigm. Sure on-screen keyboards have been done before, but they weren't done well enough to be taken seriously. The iPhone shows that Apple can pull it off, and on an 11" wide-screen they'll make it even better.
The reasons people (including myself) still buy desktop computers is one, power, and two, screen size. MT on a desktop screen doesn't work because the screen is both too big, and vertical. Touching a big, vertical desktop screen for 5 minutes is tiring, not to mention for a day of work. The separate MT keyboard is an evolution in that regard. The "revolution" is coming on the portable side, even if a MT desktop keyboard may seem like a revolution to some people, and actually would if Apple can find a way to make it also work as a mouse too, thus leap-frogging the mouse problem they have yet to overcome, perhaps by telling it to move the vertical screens' cursor when only one finger rests on it and moves across it? Though I'm not quite sure that would be worth replacing the mouse for, or if it would be near as efficient as the mouse is in the real world.
How would a Mac touch (11" tablet) work in the real world? Well it would be a MT screen with the computer built behind it, it would have SSD internal storage, it "wouldn't" have an optical disk drive, it would be very light, very thin, sweet looking, and it would IMO have a "flip-stand" on that rear, which when "in" would be flush and out of the way, and when flipped out would hold the "Mac touch" at a certain angle when resting upon a tray, a desk or a table that would make it pretty easy to type and look at the screen at the same time, when not using it on your lap, walking around, or sitting on the ground etc.
The whole point of MT is that you can interact with the actual screen itself, and pop-up a keyboard which takes up zero physical space "only" when needed. A space saver, one of the primary importances of a portable, and a new portable personal computer paradigm. Sure on-screen keyboards have been done before, but they weren't done well enough to be taken seriously.
The reason for having a full-size virtual keyboard is for touch typing; otherwise it's not a whole lot easier than the iPhone's thumb keyboard. But can you touch type on a keyboard that's on the same 2D plane as your screen?
The reason for having a full-size virtual keyboard is for touch typing; otherwise it's not a whole lot easier than the iPhone's thumb keyboard. But can you touch type on a keyboard that's on the same 2D plane as your screen?
I believe so, and I know several people who can type on the iPhone just fine.
I believe so, and I know several people who can type on the iPhone just fine.
I know that; I can type on the iPhone at 35 wpm in landscape mode. But I meant touch typing; where you type without looking at the keys (the only way to get much faster than 35 wpm) and all of your fingers rest on the keyboard.
The question is, can you type with both hands (all fingers) on a virtual keyboard that is in the same plane as your screen? Would it be just like a giant iPhone with better multitouch? I'm thinking of something as simple as editing a book report while I'm sitting on the subway. If I can't touch type and still see the screen, then it's no better than an iPhone with MS Word - which will come with the SDK. I'd be happy to edit a book report on my iPhone, but I'd rather do it with a slightly more powerful keyboard.
Honestly, I'm not particularly fond of a Nintendo DS-style dual screen thing either, but a full-power virtual keyboard isn't much use in the same plane as the main screen. I'm sure they can think of a good way to have the keyboard separate from the screen - perhaps a roll-out polychrome epaper display to show what is happening while you are typing on the virtual keyboard? Or maybe (like I suggested in this thread), a dual screen that opens up to form a tablet? You've probably got more ideas than me. I'm just looking at functionality here.
I don't see a problem having an onscreen keyboard. Just have it transparant enough to see what's beneath it. I've already practiced typing like that. I'm more than ok with it.
You've already had a chance to touch type on a virtual keyboard? When? Where? On what? That's awesome!
How does it do any good to have transparent keys appear if your fingers are going to be on top of them?
You've already had a chance to touch type on a virtual keyboard? When? Where? On what? That's awesome!
How does it do any good to have transparent keys appear if your fingers are going to be on top of them?
There was this technology fair here, and there was a multitouch display section. I got some good practice in.
Put your fingers on a glass table, or any table for that matter. You can still pretty much see what is going on beneath. I just want the general layout itself to be transparent so that you can still see what's going on beneath.
There was this technology fair here, and there was a multitouch display section. I got some good practice in.
Put your fingers on a glass table, or any table for that matter. You can still pretty much see what is going on beneath. I just want the general layout itself to be transparent so that you can still see what's going on beneath.
Naturally the general layout would be transparent.
I don't know for sure - I always find the concept of typing on a keyboard with my fingers covering the text entry field a little difficult. I'd have to see.
I would love to see them drop the differentiation between the MB and MBP lines - let me get a base configuration 17" or a superpower 13".
I think the aluminum iMac is an indication that Apple may no longer use color/materials to differentiate "consumer" and "pro" computers. An aluminum Macbook, like in the mockup at the top of this thread, would be the next step.