or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple tablet speculation: high-end graphics, several models
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple tablet speculation: high-end graphics, several models - Page 4

post #121 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post

Like the iphone it does so much more than just the internet, not having flash isn't going to be a problem in my opinion. Especially if it supports HTML5 and things like LP's. We're really talking about shaping perceptions and I'm not so sure the users first instinct is going to be "how am I getting short changed in my web experience".

The rumours suggest the iTab is likely to be launched early in 2010. Whatever the merits of HTML5 over Flash, the reality is that the Internet will be scarcely any different then, than it is now.

The iTab will have to face the web of today, when it launches, not that envisioned for tomorrow. Today it has flash and Java.

Let me put it another way; If the new iMacs and Macbook Pros didn't have Flash or Java - of which SJ said "Java's not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It's this big heavyweight ball and chain." - how well would they be accepted do you think?

Quote:
Regarding the medical market... I agree 100%. Every nurse and doctor I know carries an iphone. When they can get a tablet it seems a no brainer. I'm sure the traditional corporate world would be a bigger challenge than specifically the medical field.

The medical market worldwide is quite big enough that I doubt Apple would have to worry about much else for a while. The main problem would be making enough of them.

Quote:
What can't the iphone OS do exactly? When it's got a better CPU and GFX chip it will be cutting edge for sure.

Stuff you need access to a file system for, run all your legacy OSX apps? The model of having to go through an Apple store to put software onto your device will not work for a larger more general purpose device, IMO.

Quote:
I don't think having flash will "cripple" the tablet as some have said nor do I think Flash or web surfing are the "raisons d'être" to own the tablet.

Really? The one killer functionality that put the iPhone ahead of the pack prior to the App Store was it's superior Web surfing experience, hence all the hullabaloo over statistics showing what a huge proportion of mobile device internet access was being done via iPhones.

And before you turn that around and say that was all done without Flash too, I think the crucial difference would be that people will forgive the lack with a tiny device that is limited by a small screen, whereas they wouldn't for something bigger, where full functionality would be expected, as it is with an iMac or Macbook.

Quote:
Apple is going to look to differentiate themselves and while web surfing is key, yes but if I were the salesman I would be confident I could make the pitch and sale even if the browser didn't support flash.

Oh no, I hope Apple never again try to B*shit users with nonsense like they did when touting the superiority of Power PC based Macs over those with Intel architchture.
post #122 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Do any CE companies offer insurance for their products? Isnt this usually done through the carrier when you subside the device?

I don't believe that it is typically done, nor would I expect it to be done by Apple. It would be interesting though.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #123 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by siromega View Post

Sounds to me like it just might be Tegra 2 inside - an ARMv8 dual core CPU and a GPU that can decode 1080p video and render graphics with a GPU core equivalent to a GF GT220. I blogged a few days ago after that whole Nvidia picture thing, and maybe thats what Nvidia was hinting at (as much as it could hint w/o pissing Apple off).

The Tegra 2 is supposed to have a GPU 2-4 times as powerful as the current Tegra in the same power usage envelope, and the current GPU is a GF-6 generation 30 GFLOP unit. Nvidia also has the capability to provide a daughterboard-based GPU like they did for Audi - so you can put a GF GT220M on the inside and get amazing performance for a tablet (and even CUDA/OpenCL).

I don't think Apple's going to wait to release a tablet until Nvidia get's a first-run GPU ready.
post #124 of 173
Remember 3 years ago when iPhone rumors were reaching fever pitch? Remember all those "iPod with a dial" Photoshop mockups that now seem ridiculous in hindsight? A few details were predicted but nobody saw the final product coming, not even close. Steve's first iPhone demo left the audience gasping in awe.

Tablets have been around for ages, but mostly in the form of hobbled, keyboardless, pen-mandatory notebooks for niche markets. Apple's been working on tablets for years internally (that's where Mobile Safari came from) but the results were never exciting enough to release as a product. If they're getting ready to release one now, then I'm anxious to see the innovations that prompted them to believe it could be a commercial success.
post #125 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I guess I wasn't clear.

By "full on" I mean that people seem to expect it will be like a laptop and run all the same programs a laptop will, when IMO it will almost certainly be similar to the iPhone and sync it's content with your "main" computer instead of replacing your main computer.

One would sync books, movies and music to it like an iPod and whatever documents you are working on. But it wouldn't be designed as a stand alone computer although it could be used that way. At least that's what I expect.

As for writing and drawing, I already do it on paper, the idea was I want a computer that can do it. Right now the drawing part is only possible on a desktop, so I have to do it at home (and the writing part as well unless I want to use a laptop, which is too cumbersome for my needs).

I want a portable device that I can write and draw on. I've only been waiting 30 years or so, and I'm kinda hoping this is it.

What are the benefits of writing on paper as opposed to a computer though... despite the entry costs? Apple will have to tackle issues such as document standards, collaboration (iWork.com perhaps), user input (will it have a stylus/use an onscreen keyboard etc), and best cases of use. I don't think they would slap these features on top of iWork as it is - however, switching between a stylus/finger input may be as "inelegant" as turning your phone sideways to use a slide out keyboard (in Apple's eyes at least).

Whatever happens should be interesting. There's a space between the macbook and iPhone for a new product line. If there does happen to be some nifty touch technology, it would be cool if you could connect the tablet to your existing computer using it as a touch pad (think the Wacom Bamboo). Your guess is as good as mine, which is as good as that of an analyst. One thing I know for a fact, is that this tablet will be thin!
post #126 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

That would be cool, but bear in mind that it could also simply be another case of Apple's unnerving habit of throwing cool tech out there and seemingly losing interest.

I think the general feeling about iWork.com in its present state is that it's half-baked. But what if it were to develop into a suite of internet-based productivity applications tied directly into the tablet? Since I don't suppose that Apple created iWork.com just to walk away from it, and since we haven't heard anything new about the service since it appeared (about a year ago now) suggests to me that something might be coming in tandem with the slate that makes the entire package more compelling. It's possible. With Apple, sometimes you need to listen for the dog that doesn't bark.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #127 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

What are the benefits of writing on paper as opposed to a computer though... despite the entry costs? Apple will have to tackle issues such as document standards, collaboration (iWork.com perhaps), user input (will it have a stylus/use an onscreen keyboard etc), and best cases of use. I don't think they would slap these features on top of iWork as it is - however, switching between a stylus/finger input may be as "inelegant" as turning your phone sideways to use a slide out keyboard (in Apple's eyes at least)...

I'm not sure what side of this you are arguing but for me I would rather do everything digitally. It is the 21st century after all. The advantages are pretty obvious in that I can draw in a restaurant or on the train, or I can continuously work on multiple drawings that I carry with me.

You are right that it all depends on the implementation though.

The one thing that tablets do rather well, probably better than any other computer device invented, is draw, but the rest of the paradigm is useless. The challenge for Apple would be to make a useable, portable computer in tablet format that allows for drawing either with a stylus or by some other unknown magical means.

I'm hoping they can do it, but as I said I've been waiting a long time and no one has been able to get this right yet, so who knows.

I think we can expect that Apple will solve the document creation part of the problem with a mobile version of iWork and a small file space accessed through a Documents stack on the bottom of the screen. So the tablet will likely be a great little writing device.

If we still have to finger paint though, it will never be a serious drawing device so I'm still hoping they can solve that problem also.
post #128 of 173
All I know is I'm buying one the second I can! I have been waiting for this for agggggesssssss now. Assuming it has a 9400m graphics chip and plus a dual core 2GHz+ CPU in it. (Yes I knowim hopeful!)
post #129 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by baredd View Post

All I know is I'm buying one the second I can! I have been waiting for this for agggggesssssss now. Assuming it has a 9400m graphics chip and plus a dual core 2GHz+ CPU in it. (Yes I knowim hopeful!)

So a dual-core Pentium is okay?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #130 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

... 10" hi-rez touchscreen (multi-touch with fingers & stylus capable), Tegra 2 inside, [/I]'Touch-ified' Mac OS X (and all of the accompanying apps; Mail, Address Book, Safari, Preview, iTunes, QuickTime X, etc. ...), iLife, iWork, mobile video iChat capable, iTunes-centric App Store, Apple Remote Desktop[/I]; I would SO buy one of these...!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

This is so not going to happen. You need to dial down your expectations a bit.

It will be either the same OS as the iPhone or a version of the same thing. in other words we will be lucky if it sports a file system. It will not run apps in Windows, or run OS X desktop class apps and will be more of a synced device than a "full on" computer.

I'd be happy if it costs under a $1000 and lets me write and draw on it. Anything more is gravy.

Sorry, I really think you are wrong...

[rant]

The Apple/Mac consumer experience IS Mac OS X & it's accompanying apps (Mail, Safari, iTunes, iChat, etc. ...), it IS iLife & iWork... People want to organize/manipulate/share their photos & their video clips, either by print or the Internet... People want to have easy to use word processors/page layout/spreadsheets/presentation apps available, but many feel M$ Office is bloated overkill...

I am expecting this new device to be the average consumers digital life in an easy to use slate format. It may not actually run the 'full' Mac OS X Snow Leopard; but, much as the iPhone currently does, it will run a derivative of Mac OS X. Taking the time & effort to include the complimentary apps within Mac OS X proper, and to include iLife & iWork will make the forthcoming device a more rounded offering.

Allowing said device to operate as a stand-alone, not depending on a 'host' machine (be it Mac OS X based or Windows XP/Vista/7 based) will allow consumers to truly have the 'Mac experience' from the first moment they start their new device; not having to sync with another machine, not having to set-up the link between device & host first...

[/rant]
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #131 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

So a dual-core Pentium is okay?

Dude, that is just so WRONG...!

You are EVIL...!

Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #132 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm not sure what side of this you are arguing but for me I would rather do everything digitally. It is the 21st century after all. The advantages are pretty obvious in that I can draw in a restaurant or on the train, or I can continuously work on multiple drawings that I carry with me.

You are right that it all depends on the implementation though.

The one thing that tablets do rather well, probably better than any other computer device invented, is draw, but the rest of the paradigm is useless. The challenge for Apple would be to make a useable, portable computer in tablet format that allows for drawing either with a stylus or by some other unknown magical means.

I'm hoping they can do it, but as I said I've been waiting a long time and no one has been able to get this right yet, so who knows.

I think we can expect that Apple will solve the document creation part of the problem with a mobile version of iWork and a small file space accessed through a Documents stack on the bottom of the screen. So the tablet will likely be a great little writing device.

If we still have to finger paint though, it will never be a serious drawing device so I'm still hoping they can solve that problem also.

I'm not arguing from any side per se, but there are definitely things that are easier and more convenient to do with pen and paper - especially when collaboration is required. A big issue with digital document creation I find, are in areas of collaboration and organisation. I liked the whole 'notebook' layout included in one version of Office, quite true to life. I do agree with the more optimistic guys here though, Apple will likely establish a new paradigm for this market once their device is announced.

You do have to wonder how big of an aspect the drawing and writing functions of the device would be. Especially since Apple wants revenue from iTunes store content (I imagine the iTunes store will become a hub for just about all types of digital content in the future). It's hard to tell where they are going to go with this device.
post #133 of 173
Right... "several different models". What does THAT mean?

First - Apple rarely does "several different models" to achieve economies of scale.

Second - If 'several' means 2 or 3, then perhaps. But, my guess is that much like the MacBookAir, there will be only one at first.

Third - I've been wrong once before. Ask your mom, she knows. :0)
post #134 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

I'm not arguing from any side per se, but there are definitely things that are easier and more convenient to do with pen and paper - especially when collaboration is required. A big issue with digital document creation I find, are in areas of collaboration and organisation. I liked the whole 'notebook' layout included in one version of Office, quite true to life. I do agree with the more optimistic guys here though, Apple will likely establish a new paradigm for this market once their device is announced.

You do have to wonder how big of an aspect the drawing and writing functions of the device would be. Especially since Apple wants revenue from iTunes store content (I imagine the iTunes store will become a hub for just about all types of digital content in the future). It's hard to tell where they are going to go with this device.

I don't really understand how paper is better for collaboration, or organization for that matter. When I was in school I wished all my notes were digital because they would be easier to find and organize, and I wouldn't have a storage problem now.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #135 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Is there not a physical layer that can interpret multi-touch or is that purely in software? Is Display Port signaling not pushing the envelope on the next standard is computer display capabilities?

This wonderful display port thingy, would that be anything like the one I have on my Unibody Macbook that doesn't allow you to connect it to anything else without buying a bag full of adapters?

Quote:
Were they not the first to move all their new machines to LED backlights?

Would that be after Toshiba LED the way and showed them the light? Glossy screens anyone - oh what an innovation, a screen that has to be angled to a perfectly sub-optimal angle because the optimal viewing angle and that at which most reflection occurs is coincident. Well done Apple.

Quote:
Were they not the first to embrace USB across the board?
How about FW400 and FW800?

They sold us on Firewire, even making it the interface of choice on iPods like my 3rd generation, then they left it out of the Unibody Macbook I bought. So I have two Apple products that can't be used together and am not impressed with you waving Firewire and USB at me as they are a bit of sore point with regard to Apple.

Quote:
What about the keyboard feel being better than anything else Ive ever used?

Have you used the keyboard on a G5 iMac? If there is a worse keyboard in the world I would be very surprised

Quote:
What about their iPods not requiring an army of AA batteries to be useful?

Does that make up for them lying outright about the battery capacity and woeful longevity of the 3rd and other generations of iPod, such that they settled a class action lawsuit over the matter? Of course they only settled in the US, those of us in other countries got no compensation. Have you personally installed a new battery in an iPod? Sorry, I don't consider Apple's approach to internal batteries anything to brag about. You do have a remarkable talent for bringing up sore points.

Quote:
What about Apple replacing the unused PF keys with things that control the basic HW without having to hold down the function key? There seems to be a lot of little things over the years that have added up a more consumer friendly machine. But wait, your argument is that they use the same Intel CPUs that other PC vendors can use so they are exactly the same. Is that right?

You seem to be over reacting to what I said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui:
Apple traditionally does leading edge software, not hardware.
post #136 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post

Right... "several different models". What does THAT mean?

First - Apple rarely does "several different models" to achieve economies of scale.

Second - If 'several' means 2 or 3, then perhaps. But, my guess is that much like the MacBookAir, there will be only one at first.

Third - I've been wrong once before. Ask your mom, she knows. :0)

Two hard drive sizes, a 3G and 3Gless model. That would make 4 possible configurations, which could be misconstrued as several different models. I wouldn't expect different processor speeds, screen sizes or feature lists.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #137 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

You seem to be over reacting to what I said.

At least his post didn't come off as whiny complaining about largely insignificant points. Had Apple "told the truth" about battery life, would you have made a different purchasing decision? I doubt it. I don't know anything about the case or what "lies" were told though. Apple settles cases that aren't worth their time, and being sued doesn't mean they did anything wrong, just that they are a frequent target that has money.

I would also disagree with your statement. Apple hardware is top notch. Pull apart an Apple laptop and an HP and compare, they simply don't. The iPhone is a success of hardware and software, the amount of hardware they throw into that tiny package is quite amazing.

Apple software may get most of the recognition, but that is only because the hardware is taken for granted.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #138 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post

... If 'several' means 2 or 3, then perhaps. ...

I think there will only be one also, but for the record, "several" means three or more. It never means two.
post #139 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

At least his post didn't come off as whiny complaining about largely insignificant points. Had Apple "told the truth" about battery life, would you have made a different purchasing decision? I doubt it. I don't know anything about the case or what "lies" were told though. Apple settles cases that aren't worth their time, and being sued doesn't mean they did anything wrong, just that they are a frequent target that has money and occasionally settles out of court.

I would also disagree with your statement. Apple hardware is top notch. Pull apart an Apple laptop and an HP and compare, they simply don't. The iPhone is a success of hardware and software, the amount of hardware they throw into that tiny package is quite amazing.

Apple software may get most of the recognition, but that is only because the hardware is taken for granted.

The 3rd generation ipod came out 6.5 years ago. Apple has been using a better rating method than everyone for battery times for years now. Except for Sony, who started using that same method last year.

Their devices have been meeting or exceeding battery ratings in independent tests for so long now that complaining about Apple HW not leading the industry doesn’t make much sense when using an iPod from 2003 as a reference. On top of that, their stated usage not matching what theire spec sheets state has nothing to do with the HW itself (unless it’s a faulty battery which gets you are replacement).
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #140 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

DiDo may be simply repeating what others have said but that does not imply that the tech isn't available for some of the feature sets described.

First it is pretty much a given that through PA Semi Apple will have a custom SoC in the tablet. Given publically available information from the likes of ARM and Imagination we can see the potential for a huge performance boost over the current iPhone/Touch implementations. With Cortex and Imaginations new graphic cores I have little doubt that the performance would be anything less than impressive. Consider that Imaginations latest IP allows an implemented to tailor the number of cores the GPU will use and that each core is more powerful than the current iPhones. Imagin 8 of these cores on the SoC.

Now that number of cores guess above comes out of thin Air. What Apple has to do is to tailor the maximum power draw of the system board to some arrbitrary level that meets certain design goals. What ultimately makes it onto the SoC will be controlled by the maximum power allowed. The iPhone can max out at 2.5 watts running everything hard. I'm going to suggest that Apple will want to keep total power under 7 watts. That is a lot but much of that would go to back lighting a large screen. So maybe the SoC and main board are allocated five watts. That effectively doubles iPhone max power draw. Given the latest semiconductor technology that is going to be one nice tablet.

If the rumors about a ten inch tablet are true that provides a lot of room for a battery. I won't guess at run times but it won't be bad. Consider that the logic board won't be much larger than what is in the Touch or iPhone. A big battery plus an ARM SoC using a low power tech will equal long run times.

As to the screen there is a reasonable possibility that it will support 720P. I'm not down with super high resolutions though. 1080P would be nice but extremely small pixels require aGgressive back lighting. Supper high pixel density works against long battery life, a good portion of that due to driving the back light.

Of course that is LCD screen related but new tech like OLED and TMOS are nice. Even here there are bad trade offs. For example black text on a white background is very expensive power wise. No matter which way Apple goes a large display implies high power usage. It is also where innovation is possible, it will be interesting to see if Apple moves some of the more interesting tech out of a lab onto a tablet.

As to multiple size devices it would be a very wise move on Apples part to have two different sizes at launch. Mainly because, as we all know size matters, of the dramatically different needs in the market place

The OS will be derived from or a superset of iPhone OS. It will though take on many of Mac OSes features such as the Dock. The Dock will provide access to multitasking even on a device with one app per screen. While at a low level there is little difference between iPhone OS and Mac OS a tablet needs an interface much closer to iPhones that a Mac.

Running Powerpoint or other presentation programs on this device would be a waste of time in my mind. I just don't get the point!

I actually wonder if this will be a tablet in the traditional sense. The one thing that is bad about a tablet is that big exposed screen. Fracture city if you ask me. I could see Apple addressing this in a number of different ways. One would be the holly Grail of the folding screen. Another would be via a transparent material other than glass. The cheap approach is pecan with a hardener applied. We could get something along the lines of transparent Aluminum. This is however another place for Apple to innovate and solve the problem of the breakable screen.

What is interesting isthat every body here seems to poo poo what is possible with respect to electronics and performance yet misses the far more demanding challeges. The electronics isn't the problem between ARM, PA Semi and Imagination there shouldn't be a problem at all.


Dave



Dave

Thanks, I brushed up on the technical side of things. Whew.
post #141 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The 3rd generation ipod came out 6.5 years ago. Apple has been using a better rating method than everyone for battery times for years now. Except for Sony, who started using that same method last year.

A few years at best. The fifth generation iPod introduced in 2005 and in production till late 2007 also did not meet it's stated battery longevity.

Quote:
For example, the fifth generation 30 GB iPod is advertised as having up to 14 hours of music playback. An MP3.com report stated that this was virtually unachievable under real-life usage conditions, with a writer for MP3.com getting on average less than 8 hours from an iPod.

Quote:
Their devices have been meeting or exceeding battery ratings in independent tests for so long now

How many decades would that be, or are you exagerating slightly?

In the last couple of years, I will grant you, Apple's claims of battery life have been very good to the point of being understated, and I commend them for that, but let's not whitewash the past.

Quote:
complaining about Apple HW not leading the industry doesnt make much sense when using an iPod from 2003 as a reference. On top of that, their stated usage not matching what theire spec sheets state has nothing to do with the HW itself (unless its a faulty battery which gets you are replacement).

Batteries which are built in are about as integral a part of the overall HW as you can get, so their stated uasge not matching the specs IS a HW fault.

You brought up Apple's batteries as a sign of their leading edge tech, not me. My point, which you seem to be working very hard not to 'get' was that false claims of battery longevity, coupled with them being designed to not be user replaceable, meant that many users experienced a cost of ownership that was far higher than they expected and which was utterly unreasonable, given Apple's original policy that users should just buy a refurbished unit - costing a significant proportion of the original purchase price - when their battery died.
post #142 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

A few years at best. The fifth generation iPod introduced in 2005 and in production till late 2007 also did not meet it's stated battery longevity.





How many decades would that be, or are you exagerating slightly?

In the last couple of years, I will grant you, Apple's claims of battery life have been very good to the point of being understated, and I commend them for that, but let's not whitewash the past.



Batteries which are built in are about as integral a part of the overall HW as you can get, so their stated uasge not matching the specs IS a HW fault.

You brought up Apple's batteries as a sign of their leading edge tech, not me. My point, which you seem to be working very hard not to 'get' was that false claims of battery longevity, coupled with them being designed to not be user replaceable, meant that many users experienced a cost of ownership that was far higher than they expected and which was utterly unreasonable, given Apple's original policy that users should just buy a refurbished unit - costing a significant proportion of the original purchase price - when their battery died.

In my experience, battery life is never as advertised.
post #143 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Really? The one killer functionality that put the iPhone ahead of the pack prior to the App Store was it's superior Web surfing experience, hence all the hullabaloo over statistics showing what a huge proportion of mobile device internet access was being done via iPhones.

And before you turn that around and say that was all done without Flash too, I think the crucial difference would be that people will forgive the lack with a tiny device that is limited by a small screen, whereas they wouldn't for something bigger, where full functionality would be expected, as it is with an iMac or Macbook.

you said it yourself. THX

I understand the point, so fine let's say we can use flash. I hear ya, but I can think of a many other reasons other than surfing the web that the tablet will be better used for.

A tablet with pen, a touch interface for pro software like Protools, Color or Final Cut or a game controller for the Apple TV or your computers, "Cloud Computing" (where we might see online versions of I work etc) , an e-reader or plug in a microphone or camera and record sound or picture, download and sort photos, a medical tablet for either doctors or patients and of course traditional uses like consuming media, email, word processing and including web surfing.

All of which the iphone OS can already do, so why the tablet has to be "desktop or laptop" class I don't know. It's just like in any audio mix, every instrument has it's place and when they overlap everywhere it sounds like poo.

Do you think hospitals will say... "oh no way, our nurses can't live without flash? Do you think NASA cares? Do you think schools will be heart broken because kids can't play flash games in class? How much research is ever done on flash sites? As far as multimedia goes, I think Apple is pretty confident they've got that taken care of, what with all of the Music, Movies, TV and soon possibly "Print" you could ever want. (ok the movies need help but you get my point)

I'll be the first to say I am always wrong especially when I say something stupid like "Never", but I would be surprised if all Apple thought of the tablet, is that it's a web browser for the couch, bed and toilet.

Despite what you you've said, my point is that it doesn't NEED (capitals) NEED flash to be a success. I already use click to flash on my computers but I guess that's just me. Someone already made that decision for the iphone (oh yeah that was pretty much SJ wasn't it? )
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #144 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Batteries which are built in are about as integral a part of the overall HW as you can get, so their stated uasge not matching the specs IS a HW fault.

You really dont see how the measuring method is the issue, not the HW itself.

I say this again: Apples stated battery times for their products are because of the method they use to measure them. Nothing else.

I brought up Apple not requiring the user to continually replace their PMP with AA batteries and I brought up their new notebooks with having a 1000 charge cycle. The first was not common and the second still isnt common. So yes, they have pushed the envelope with HW even with batteries. You may not like what theyve done because you still want to use a 6 year old iPod that is well past its battery life expectancy and dont want to get a new battery, but that is your personal issue, not an issue with Apple doing the things I stated in regards to HW. If you think they are following leader with all their HW choices, then so be it, but you are wrong.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #145 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

I do not see why that is so far off the mark.

I guarantee everyone I know (within reason) will be buying one. Thats half way to the target already.

Got 1 million friends do you? I'd hate to be signing all those christmas cards...
post #146 of 173
Funny thing. I was thinking, "Um, maybe I'll head over to the Appleinsider site. They're due to post another Apple Tablet piece." Sure enough, there it was.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Apple is working on developing products based around their cool touch-screen technology. Something released in the first quarter of 2010 would not be a big stretch.

Who knows, maybe it will be exactly a tablet with a 10-inch screen.

But this is getting very repetitive and very pointless. What's left to say, really. I mean you pretty much hit rock bottom when you make a big fuss over the notion of a portable device with screen resolution far in advance of the Touch or iPhone. It's not like anyone has ever tried that before in a portable unit. Right?

Oh well, not much longer to wait now. Christmas is fast approaching and before you know it'll be 2010. Then instead of pointless, if not inane speculation, we'll have an actual product to discuss.
post #147 of 173
my only humple requirements,

-smart way to sync with a new portable apple product physical keyboard
-no plastic backings. (CF is ok)

yah.
post #148 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMWintoxication View Post

my only humple requirements,

-smart way to sync with a new portable apple product physical keyboard
-no plastic backings. (CF is ok)

yah.

Carbon Fiber won’t work. It absorbs RF. There are some nice plastics out there if they want to make the back completely plastic. It does have some inherent durability properties to it.

Personally, I’d like to see an aluminum backing with a small area—say, top left in landscape mode, top right in portrait mode—that has a plastic covering for the radios. It could be a very discreet area near the edge of this assumed 10” device.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #149 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecking View Post

There is no guarantee this device is even going to exist. Why are there "lofty exectations" at all? And since when has apple been the company to offer "high end graphics cards"?

I believe it will be high end relative to mobile phones. Whole story sounds more like Apple's PR statement than real stuff.
post #150 of 173
Well,

I would probably get one....

I bought my wife a Kindel DX early this year and she tried it for a couple of weeks. She was very dissapointed in how it worked and how limited it's feature set was. While the E Ink is easy to read, it is very slow to update and not having a touch screen made it diffifult to operate. She returned it within the 30 day grace period for a refund.

At one time I owned a company that built industrial computers with near field effect touch screens. We built a model ( about 12 years ago ) that had a 10.4" 800x600 LCD active matrix screen a early wireless card and a built in bar code scanner. It worked great for inventory control. A user could scan a bin and it would show them a document ( with pics ) of what should be there. We sold a small number to large warehouses and they loved them. My wife even commented that the old clunker I built years ago was easier to use than the Kindel. ( Although it was significantly larger and quite heavy ) I did think the compact design of the Kindel was impressive.

At the time, wet NiCads were about the only battery technology that would hold up to industrial use They would only last about 1-2 hours, but it seemed to get the job done. We did not sell enough to call the product a success. The components, at the time, were way too expensive ( The units sold for over $10,000 ) and consumed too much power. However, having designed and built this old relic, I can see why people might like a product like the rumored Apple Tablet. A well designed touch screen interface makes a computer interface quite intutive....

I think it would have a real chance in the market today.... It will be fun to see what, if anything, Apple releases next year....
post #151 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by sranger View Post

At the time, wet NiCads were about the only battery technology that would hold up to industrial use They would only last about 1-2 hours, but it seemed to get the job done. We did not sell enough to call the product a success. The components, at the time, were way too expensive ( The units sold for over $10,000 ) and consumed too much power.

Using your post as a segue, I wonder if Silver-zinc batteries will be viable for CE soon?

Quote:
The ZPowerTM battery offers up to 40 percent more run time than traditional lithium-ion batteries. **

Quote:
Intel's venture arm, Intel Capital, has provided [ZPower] with financial backing. ZPower claimed in 2008 that an undisclosed "major manufacturer" of laptop computers will introduce its silver-zinc battery in a new line of laptops in 2009. †

I’m under the impression that the number of charge cycles is still very low, making them unfeasible regardless of price.

**

http://www.zpowerbattery.com/pdf/IDF...0-%20Final.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver-oxide_battery
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #152 of 173
I really don't see why anyone continues to compare the "Apple Tablet" to netbooks... there really is no crossover.

The Tablet is sounding more and more like a media device (iPod/iPhone) and less and less like a computing device (MacBook). No one out there is buying netbooks to read the paper, or look at recipes in the kitchen, or read eBooks. Netbooks are computing devices, they have keyboards for a reason. Granted some are glorified DVD players for certain frequent flyers, but they are also email writers/readers for those same people, where as I don't see the Tablet being a highly functional email device.

Yes, the tablet will likely impact the Kindle/eBook market, although I suspect less than many believe because the content for the Tablet will be purchased through iTunes and have Apple premium pricing. Many will choose a platform with lower content cost (Kindle/Sony) elsewhere.
post #153 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

The iTablet must run Mac OS X applications (full Mac OS X inside - Tablet version). Must be as light and small as possible. Must have video-out and USB 2 ports for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.

If the iTablet runs MacOSX applications, it will certainly FAIL.

The main reason is a simple one, but to many people a strange one....
.... if it can do it, then people will actually run MacOSX applications on it.

As such... they'll find that the apps are built to expect fine control with a mouse as well as keyboard entry as a standard. So the tablet will feel clunky and the apps will be harder to use. AND if a regular Mac app works on the tablet, then developers won't bother retooling their app to work well on the touch interface and within any other restrictions of the device.

It would require all the power of a current MacBook (plus touch screen, lighter, etc), and thus would have to be a similar price to a MacBook (or cost more if they try to make it thinner etc, closer to a MacBook Air).
post #154 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

If the iTablet runs MacOSX applications, it will certainly FAIL.

The main reason is a simple one, but to many people a strange one....
.... if it can do it, then people will actually run MacOSX applications on it.

As such... they'll find that the apps are built to expect fine control with a mouse as well as keyboard entry as a standard. So the tablet will feel clunky and the apps will be harder to use. AND if a regular Mac app works on the tablet, then developers won't bother retooling their app to work well on the touch interface and within any other restrictions of the device.

It would require all the power of a current MacBook (plus touch screen, lighter, etc), and thus would have to be a similar price to a MacBook (or cost more if they try to make it thinner etc, closer to a MacBook Air).

You make an excellent point.

Then at least it should be more open than the iPhone. I should be able to get apps for it from nearly anywhere.

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
post #155 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

I'm not arguing from any side per se, but there are definitely things that are easier and more convenient to do with pen and paper - especially when collaboration is required. A big issue with digital document creation I find, are in areas of collaboration and organisation. I liked the whole 'notebook' layout included in one version of Office, quite true to life. I do agree with the more optimistic guys here though, Apple will likely establish a new paradigm for this market once their device is announced.

You do have to wonder how big of an aspect the drawing and writing functions of the device would be. Especially since Apple wants revenue from iTunes store content (I imagine the iTunes store will become a hub for just about all types of digital content in the future). It's hard to tell where they are going to go with this device.

I don't think we are thinking too far different, but when I said drawing, I mean actual detailed drawing and sketching, which is not collaborative. I think you are meaning sketching or white boarding or whatever which can have a collaborative element to it.

I would think that whatever characteristics it has, they would be minimal at first so collaboration on documents seems a bit of a stretch to me also. Something like an Office suite for instance would be a big mistake in my view and probably not sell that well even if it was available. MS Office is really too much, and mostly unnecessary for most desktops, let alone a mobile tablet.

I still mostly expect some basic file system action, but very simplified compared to the desktop OS, and document creation via a mobile version of Pages. I'm not sure there will be much more as it seems aimed at consumers not office workers.

There will of course be a "finger painting" app given the popularity of the same thing on the iPhone and the bigger screen available, but my hope is that they have found a way to introduce true ink to the project and something that would allow for a finer control and proper drawing tools.

It seems to me that such a device really would need it and might be considered something of a failure in many quarters if all you can do is draw with a finger, but my expectations may be a bit over-wrought.

I also hope they don't give it the unwieldy name of "iTablet," because aside from being hard to say and too long, that just makes it seem like any other tablet that went before, which i'm hoping it's not. I see it more as an "iBook" (which is still up for grabs I believe) or "Folio" (if it wasn't already taken), or something totally different. Perhaps if they have solved the pen input part, it might even be called Newton.
post #156 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

iDon't have a need for a tablet.

iDon't understand why a mass market needs a tablet.

iDon't personally know any Mac user who wants one.

I am curious of the price point though.


I don't understand why you exerted yourself to write this crap.http://forums.appleinsider.com/image.../1rolleyes.gif
post #157 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

You make an excellent point.

Then at least it should be more open than the iPhone. I should be able to get apps for it from nearly anywhere.

if by anywhere you mean the iTunes App Store, i'd say you'd be on the money.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #158 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb510 View Post

I really don't see why anyone continues to compare the "Apple Tablet" to netbooks... there really is no crossover.

The Tablet is sounding more and more like a media device (iPod/iPhone) and less and less like a computing device (MacBook). No one out there is buying netbooks to read the paper, or look at recipes in the kitchen, or read eBooks. Netbooks are computing devices, they have keyboards for a reason. Granted some are glorified DVD players for certain frequent flyers, but they are also email writers/readers for those same people, where as I don't see the Tablet being a highly functional email device.

Yes, the tablet will likely impact the Kindle/eBook market, although I suspect less than many believe because the content for the Tablet will be purchased through iTunes and have Apple premium pricing. Many will choose a platform with lower content cost (Kindle/Sony) elsewhere.

Browsing the internet is a pretty big crossover point, as is video that you suggested, and short emails would probably be very easy on a tablet anyway. I would think people spend more time on a netbook surfing the web than they do typing emails, but who knows...

Many will choose a kindle because of lower content costs? You have that backwards, Amazon takes a huge cut out of content sales.... much larger than the anticipated 30% cut Apple would take.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #159 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

If the iTablet runs MacOSX applications, it will certainly FAIL.

Exactly!

Apple has some good engineers. But a tablet computer that can magically re-write every existing Mac application in the world is beyond even them.

C.
post #160 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post

you said it yourself. THX

I understand the point, so fine let's say we can use flash. I hear ya, but I can think of a many other reasons other than surfing the web that the tablet will be better used for.

Despite what you you've said, my point is that it doesn't NEED (capitals) NEED flash to be a success. I already use click to flash on my computers but I guess that's just me. Someone already made that decision for the iphone (oh yeah that was pretty much SJ wasn't it? )

We are actually about 85% in agreement. My only point with Flash, and Java even more so, was that "I" think the netbook market is a very significant one that I think Apple would want to address with a tablet device, since they have nothing else at the moment.

To address that market I think you need full internet capabilities. I agree, the tablet would have to be a multi-purpose device with a myriad of possible uses to succeed. Most of those wouldn't need F&J, as you pointed out, but a certain set of possible uses would. A Swiss Army knife has multiple features, you don't usually need them all for each task, but that doesn't mean you would want them to have left a couple out.

One use I might have for a Tablet would be to get the kids off Runescape on the iMac, so if such a device were to exist but lacked, say Java and a reasonable graphics capability. It wouldn't be able to fulfill one of my possible uses. That might be enough to dissuade me from getting one.

No amount of BS marketing hype from Apple would be able to convince me a missing feature was a 'feature', though past experience tells me they certainly wouldn't be shy at giving it a shot.

Quote:
GregAlexander wrote:
Quote:

If the iTablet runs MacOSX applications, it will certainly FAIL.

The main reason is a simple one, but to many people a strange one....
.... if it can do it, then people will actually run MacOSX applications on it.

As such... they'll find that the apps are built to expect fine control with a mouse as well as keyboard entry as a standard. So the tablet will feel clunky and the apps will be harder to use. AND if a regular Mac app works on the tablet, then developers won't bother retooling their app to work well on the touch interface and within any other restrictions of the device.

As a person who uses a touch interface with desktop OSX exclusively, I continue to be astonished by people who think a mouse is the only possible input device for fine control. Multi-touch via the trackpad anyone?

I manage fine control via the touchpad on my Macbook perfectly well. I don't see why I couldn't continue to do so were the touchpad functionality transferred directly to the screen. Then we have graphics tablets, which for decades have been the premier input device for fine control. Surely it doesn't take much imagination to see that a touch screen with graphic tablet like input would be perfectly usable.

A modified OSX that itself delivered enhanced touch interaction to all applications running under it might be one possibility. The browser on my phone presents web pages in a way that allows for touch interface with them and mechanisms for slick text entry in otherwise tiny fields.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple tablet speculation: high-end graphics, several models