I mean the discussion part where people are adamant it won't be "a real Mac". Without a keyboard it won't be a Mac etc. I think that's all bullshit. Then others say it will need to run "brand new software", therefore it won't be a Mac.
When people buy software, is has a sticker on the box. Made for Macintosh. Mac compatible.
The Macintosh brand does not mean "any computer made by Apple". It means a specific line of hardware that is compatible with Mac OS and able to run Mac OS Applications.
Now it's possible that Apple will produce a tablet that is a Mac. It would run un-modified desktop applications, and have a thin layer of tablet glue to hold it together, Just like Microsoft did with the Origami Project.
I happen to think that is unlikely.
Because it has been done, and delivers a computing experience right from the zone of suck,
Too small and crippled to run desktop apps - too large to go in a pocket.
So it's my belief that if Apple are working on 10" touchscreen hardware, it will end in a new line of consumer products. Not an iPod, not a Mac, but something new.
So Ireland, we know you think this is bullshit, and that is bullshit, but it would be good for you to say why.
Do you think it will run un-modified desktop Apps?
Do you think it will have a DVD drive?
Do you think it will even have an Intel processor?
And if the answer to these things is no, then how can it be possibly called a Mac?
Let me preface this by saying I know next to nothing about Apple products and software. All I own is an iPod. But if Apple does make a great tablet that meets my needs I will be in.
But my superficial view of the situation, from what I have read, is that this tablet WILL run full fledged Mac apps. BUT, like the iPhone I believe it will only run apps one at a time. I believe they will do this in order to allow the performance to approach a full fledged laptop even at this budget laptop price. Is this possible?
It will be a new type of "Mac". Deal with it. The fact that it won't fit in your narrow term of what a "Mac" is is your problem. It will be a Mac, it will run something like Mac OS X touch, but all software that runs on this device will need to be made from scratch, as the UI will be completely touch-based and finger sized. It won't be able to run "old" Mac software, just like my iMac cannot run Mac OS 9 software, but it "will" be able to run "new Mac software", i.e. Mac touch software / Mac touch apps. It will be a Mac.
The fact that it won't fit in your narrow term of what a "Mac" is is your problem. It will be a Mac
It will run something like Mac OS X touch, but all software that runs on this device will need to be made from scratch, as the UI will be completely touch-based and finger sized. It won't be able to run "old" Mac software, just like my iMac cannot run Mac OS 9 software,
It won't be my problem. I personally don't care what they call it.
But it would be Apple's problem. They'd have to explain to consumers that this software runs on one kind of Mac, but not that kind of Mac. Whereas this software runs on both kinds of Mac. Such confusion is normally left to Microsoft with its 64 bit and 32 bit versions of Vista.
Look, all I am saying is that if this computer is fundamentally unable to run existing Mac software, they are going to confuse they heck out of buyers if they call it Mac anything.
In my opinion, choosing a name which would mislead or confuse the consumer would do more harm than good.
A less confusing name might be iBook. or even iTouch.
Does anyone know if it might be feasible to design the "Mac touch tablet" in such a way that users could buy a cheap eInk add on display to work with the mac tablet so you could have an extended battery life and read books in a fashion that is easy on the eyes?
I read that an eInk display alone could possibly cost as little as 30 to 60 dollars. So if people like the NY Times and magazines would subsidize full on eIink readers for their users why wouldn't they subsidize a modular type display that could be easily added to this Mac tablet as well? And much cheaper than a full fledged eInk reader.
I imagine a plastic book cover shell-like add-on to the mac tablet that could incorporate a keyboard and an E-ink display. The Mac tablet could run in low power mode when being used as an eInk reader as well.
Does anyone know if it might be feasible to design the "Mac touch tablet" in such a way that users could buy a cheap eInk add on display to work with the mac tablet so you could have an extended battery life and read books in a fashion that is easy on the eyes?
I read that an eInk display alone could possibly cost as little as 30 to 60 dollars. So if people like the NY Times and magazines would subsidize full on eIink readers for their users why wouldn't they subsidize a modular type display that could be easily added to this Mac tablet as well? And much cheaper than a full fledged eInk reader.
I imagine a plastic book cover shell-like add-on to the mac tablet that could incorporate a keyboard and an E-ink display. The Mac tablet could run in low power mode when being used as an eInk reader as well.
If the device has some kind of video out, then a 3rd party can probably make such an eInk display, but Apple won't do it.
E-Ink is no replacement for a regular computer screen, because it can't handle moving images. Fine for a book, but not so for a GUI.
then a 3rd party can probably make such an eInk display, but Apple won't do it.
Hi synp. Yeah, I didn't mean as a replacement for the normal display but as an add-on. Like an additional and alternate display just for reading text and not doing actual computing. Mainly just to access all that storage space you will likely have on a Mac Tablet so you have the best of both worlds. The iPhone color display and a book reading display in one package.
Though, Oled displays probably aren't far off anyway. When the Mac Tablets gets those the battery and eye strain issues will be eliminated anyway.
Speaking of e-Ink. I personally think e-ink won't become ubiquitous in the marketplace until someone out there develops a display that can incorporate both e-ink and LCD (or even better, OLED) into the same display. This display would be able to drop into e-ink mode. Not just black and white monochrome, but something that equals the quality of actual e-ink. This hasn't been invented yet, which is my point. We need some innovation, because e-ink on its own is not good enough, and LCD on its own has terrible battery life and is bad on the eyes for extended periods. So this Mac touch will be LCD, and maybe in 4 or 5 years will have this new-type of display.
I am really really shocked wearable monitors haven't come further than they are by this point.
Imagine if we had a Mac tablet with no display.. it's just a touch interface. You wear some normal looking reading glasses that overlay your display image on your tablet surface in your glasses in an augmented reality fashion.
I thought we would be there by now. But it seems to me wearable monitors haven't progressed much at all in the last 10 years. Makes me wonder if the "powers that be" might be choosing not to develop that product because it makes them obsolete. Imagine if the tech giants had no giant TVs to sell.....
I am really really shocked wearable monitors haven't come further than they are by this point.
Imagine if we had a Mac tablet with no display.. it's just a touch interface. You wear some normal looking reading glasses that overlay your display image on your tablet surface in your glasses in an augmented reality fashion.
I thought we would be there by now. But it seems to me wearable monitors haven't progressed much at all in the last 10 years. Makes me wonder if the "powers that be" might be choosing not to develop that product because it makes them obsolete. Imagine if the tech giants had no giant TVs to sell.....
I'm not buying that. Evolution in technology is not always that clear. People still make abacuses.
Another reason is that the user experience didn't pan out. I bought one once but haven't used it for a very long time. It just wasn't practicable, it completely dominated the view and there was no way to look away and rest your eyes.
One thing I am curious about is the possibility that this new tablet WON'T have a completely minimal design. I think this is where there are some fascinating design possibilities. I would like to see a lot of different ideas exploring that possibility.
I am really really shocked wearable monitors haven't come further than they are by this point.
Imagine if we had a Mac tablet with no display.. it's just a touch interface. You wear some normal looking reading glasses that overlay your display image on your tablet surface in your glasses in an augmented reality fashion.
I thought we would be there by now. But it seems to me wearable monitors haven't progressed much at all in the last 10 years. Makes me wonder if the "powers that be" might be choosing not to develop that product because it makes them obsolete. Imagine if the tech giants had no giant TVs to sell.....
Expensive and low resolution is why they don't exist outside of a few novelty items...which are expensive and low resolution or really really expensive and high resolution.
It will be a new type of "Mac". Deal with it. The fact that it won't fit in your narrow term of what a "Mac" is is your problem. It will be a Mac, it will run something like Mac OS X touch, but all software that runs on this device will need to be made from scratch, as the UI will be completely touch-based and finger sized. It won't be able to run "old" Mac software, just like my iMac cannot run Mac OS 9 software, but it "will" be able to run "new Mac software", i.e. Mac touch software / Mac touch apps. It will be a Mac.
Because you say so it must be true and must be dealt with. Not.
There's no reason that the prototype seen is just another prototype that doesn't see the light of day.
There's no reason that the 10" displays can't be for something else and frankly, that rumor was for a 10" netbook. Which I can believe with a keyboard running normal OSX apps and iPhone apps as well in touch mode. There's no reason it couldn't be a docking slate like the Always Innovating Touch Book.
Me, I'll be happy if it runs iLife and iWork, has mini-DP out and handles a bluetooth keyboard natively without hacking. I prefer Atom to ARM to be able to bootcamp but it's okay if its ARM for battery life.
Expensive and low resolution is why they don't exist outside of a few novelty items...which are expensive and low resolution or really really expensive and high resolution.
I wasn't saying that wearable displays were ready for the mainstream if only the tech giants would let them be used. My point was that they haven't been developed much at all for the last 10 years from what I have seen. But I haven't done a ton of research either. But you would think if they are developing we would hear about it.
My point was that these tech companies have no reason to pursue developing this tech because it would ruin their business. How much money do you think these tech giants have allocated towards developing wearable monitors versus OLED? Probably not 1/1,000,000. And yet their technology is the most closely related, and really this kind of display would be the killer display if perfected. The problem is it would be TOO killer.
But anyway.. I don't want to sidetrack the tablet discussion. I was just babbling.
I wasn't saying that wearable displays were ready for the mainstream if only the tech giants would let them be used. My point was that they haven't been developed much at all for the last 10 years from what I have seen. But I haven't done a ton of research either. But you would think if they are developing we would hear about it.
My point was that these tech companies have no reason to pursue developing this tech because it would ruin their business. How much money do you think these tech giants have allocated towards developing wearable monitors versus OLED? Probably not 1/1,000,000. And yet their technology is the most closely related, and really this kind of display would be the killer display if perfected. The problem is it would be TOO killer.
But anyway.. I don't want to sidetrack the tablet discussion. I was just babbling.
Mmm...they do develop them..in as much as a high resolution OLED would make a nifty wearable display. Plus the big military tech companies invest in them for obvious uses.
I think it's kind of strange that everyone and their brother seems to have a really really good idea of what the Apple tablet will be.. yet no one has made it already...
Or have they?
What is the closest thing to an Apple tablet we could find out there right now?
I think it's kind of strange that everyone and their brother seems to have a really really good idea of what the Apple tablet will be.. yet no one has made it already...
Or have they?
What is the closest thing to an Apple tablet we could find out there right now?
Nothing yet. From what I heard, other copycats are waiting for Apple to release the "tablet" so they will follow suit.
Comments
I mean the discussion part where people are adamant it won't be "a real Mac". Without a keyboard it won't be a Mac etc. I think that's all bullshit. Then others say it will need to run "brand new software", therefore it won't be a Mac.
When people buy software, is has a sticker on the box. Made for Macintosh. Mac compatible.
The Macintosh brand does not mean "any computer made by Apple". It means a specific line of hardware that is compatible with Mac OS and able to run Mac OS Applications.
Now it's possible that Apple will produce a tablet that is a Mac. It would run un-modified desktop applications, and have a thin layer of tablet glue to hold it together, Just like Microsoft did with the Origami Project.
I happen to think that is unlikely.
Because it has been done, and delivers a computing experience right from the zone of suck,
Too small and crippled to run desktop apps - too large to go in a pocket.
So it's my belief that if Apple are working on 10" touchscreen hardware, it will end in a new line of consumer products. Not an iPod, not a Mac, but something new.
So Ireland, we know you think this is bullshit, and that is bullshit, but it would be good for you to say why.
Do you think it will run un-modified desktop Apps?
Do you think it will have a DVD drive?
Do you think it will even have an Intel processor?
And if the answer to these things is no, then how can it be possibly called a Mac?
It would need another name. Pad, Book, Note.
C.
But my superficial view of the situation, from what I have read, is that this tablet WILL run full fledged Mac apps. BUT, like the iPhone I believe it will only run apps one at a time. I believe they will do this in order to allow the performance to approach a full fledged laptop even at this budget laptop price. Is this possible?
The fact that it won't fit in your narrow term of what a "Mac" is is your problem. It will be a Mac
It will run something like Mac OS X touch, but all software that runs on this device will need to be made from scratch, as the UI will be completely touch-based and finger sized. It won't be able to run "old" Mac software, just like my iMac cannot run Mac OS 9 software,
It won't be my problem. I personally don't care what they call it.
But it would be Apple's problem. They'd have to explain to consumers that this software runs on one kind of Mac, but not that kind of Mac. Whereas this software runs on both kinds of Mac. Such confusion is normally left to Microsoft with its 64 bit and 32 bit versions of Vista.
Look, all I am saying is that if this computer is fundamentally unable to run existing Mac software, they are going to confuse they heck out of buyers if they call it Mac anything.
In my opinion, choosing a name which would mislead or confuse the consumer would do more harm than good.
A less confusing name might be iBook. or even iTouch.
C.
A less confusing name might be iBook. or even iTouch.
By less confusing you mean more confusing right?
I read that an eInk display alone could possibly cost as little as 30 to 60 dollars. So if people like the NY Times and magazines would subsidize full on eIink readers for their users why wouldn't they subsidize a modular type display that could be easily added to this Mac tablet as well? And much cheaper than a full fledged eInk reader.
I imagine a plastic book cover shell-like add-on to the mac tablet that could incorporate a keyboard and an E-ink display. The Mac tablet could run in low power mode when being used as an eInk reader as well.
Does anyone know if it might be feasible to design the "Mac touch tablet" in such a way that users could buy a cheap eInk add on display to work with the mac tablet so you could have an extended battery life and read books in a fashion that is easy on the eyes?
I read that an eInk display alone could possibly cost as little as 30 to 60 dollars. So if people like the NY Times and magazines would subsidize full on eIink readers for their users why wouldn't they subsidize a modular type display that could be easily added to this Mac tablet as well? And much cheaper than a full fledged eInk reader.
I imagine a plastic book cover shell-like add-on to the mac tablet that could incorporate a keyboard and an E-ink display. The Mac tablet could run in low power mode when being used as an eInk reader as well.
If the device has some kind of video out, then a 3rd party can probably make such an eInk display, but Apple won't do it.
E-Ink is no replacement for a regular computer screen, because it can't handle moving images. Fine for a book, but not so for a GUI.
Nice idea, though.
then a 3rd party can probably make such an eInk display, but Apple won't do it.
Hi synp. Yeah, I didn't mean as a replacement for the normal display but as an add-on. Like an additional and alternate display just for reading text and not doing actual computing. Mainly just to access all that storage space you will likely have on a Mac Tablet so you have the best of both worlds. The iPhone color display and a book reading display in one package.
Though, Oled displays probably aren't far off anyway. When the Mac Tablets gets those the battery and eye strain issues will be eliminated anyway.
Imagine if we had a Mac tablet with no display.. it's just a touch interface. You wear some normal looking reading glasses that overlay your display image on your tablet surface in your glasses in an augmented reality fashion.
I thought we would be there by now. But it seems to me wearable monitors haven't progressed much at all in the last 10 years. Makes me wonder if the "powers that be" might be choosing not to develop that product because it makes them obsolete. Imagine if the tech giants had no giant TVs to sell.....
I am really really shocked wearable monitors haven't come further than they are by this point.
Imagine if we had a Mac tablet with no display.. it's just a touch interface. You wear some normal looking reading glasses that overlay your display image on your tablet surface in your glasses in an augmented reality fashion.
I thought we would be there by now. But it seems to me wearable monitors haven't progressed much at all in the last 10 years. Makes me wonder if the "powers that be" might be choosing not to develop that product because it makes them obsolete. Imagine if the tech giants had no giant TVs to sell.....
I'm not buying that. Evolution in technology is not always that clear. People still make abacuses.
I am really really shocked wearable monitors haven't come further than they are by this point.
Imagine if we had a Mac tablet with no display.. it's just a touch interface. You wear some normal looking reading glasses that overlay your display image on your tablet surface in your glasses in an augmented reality fashion.
I thought we would be there by now. But it seems to me wearable monitors haven't progressed much at all in the last 10 years. Makes me wonder if the "powers that be" might be choosing not to develop that product because it makes them obsolete. Imagine if the tech giants had no giant TVs to sell.....
Expensive and low resolution is why they don't exist outside of a few novelty items...which are expensive and low resolution or really really expensive and high resolution.
It will be a new type of "Mac". Deal with it. The fact that it won't fit in your narrow term of what a "Mac" is is your problem. It will be a Mac, it will run something like Mac OS X touch, but all software that runs on this device will need to be made from scratch, as the UI will be completely touch-based and finger sized. It won't be able to run "old" Mac software, just like my iMac cannot run Mac OS 9 software, but it "will" be able to run "new Mac software", i.e. Mac touch software / Mac touch apps. It will be a Mac.
Because you say so it must be true and must be dealt with.
There's no reason that the prototype seen is just another prototype that doesn't see the light of day.
There's no reason that the 10" displays can't be for something else and frankly, that rumor was for a 10" netbook. Which I can believe with a keyboard running normal OSX apps and iPhone apps as well in touch mode. There's no reason it couldn't be a docking slate like the Always Innovating Touch Book.
Me, I'll be happy if it runs iLife and iWork, has mini-DP out and handles a bluetooth keyboard natively without hacking. I prefer Atom to ARM to be able to bootcamp but it's okay if its ARM for battery life.
Expensive and low resolution is why they don't exist outside of a few novelty items...which are expensive and low resolution or really really expensive and high resolution.
I wasn't saying that wearable displays were ready for the mainstream if only the tech giants would let them be used. My point was that they haven't been developed much at all for the last 10 years from what I have seen. But I haven't done a ton of research either. But you would think if they are developing we would hear about it.
My point was that these tech companies have no reason to pursue developing this tech because it would ruin their business. How much money do you think these tech giants have allocated towards developing wearable monitors versus OLED? Probably not 1/1,000,000. And yet their technology is the most closely related, and really this kind of display would be the killer display if perfected. The problem is it would be TOO killer.
But anyway.. I don't want to sidetrack the tablet discussion. I was just babbling.
there will be no Apple Tablet device.
SNIP
the end.
Steve?!?!
Is that you??
Or are you just putting forth your SPECULATION as if was based on FACTS that you're privy to?
Hey I could do that to watch!
there will be an Apple Tablet device.
__insert random speculative comments but make them sound like sold facts that actually support your position__
the end.
Neat huh!
I wasn't saying that wearable displays were ready for the mainstream if only the tech giants would let them be used. My point was that they haven't been developed much at all for the last 10 years from what I have seen. But I haven't done a ton of research either. But you would think if they are developing we would hear about it.
My point was that these tech companies have no reason to pursue developing this tech because it would ruin their business. How much money do you think these tech giants have allocated towards developing wearable monitors versus OLED? Probably not 1/1,000,000. And yet their technology is the most closely related, and really this kind of display would be the killer display if perfected. The problem is it would be TOO killer.
But anyway.. I don't want to sidetrack the tablet discussion. I was just babbling.
Mmm...they do develop them..in as much as a high resolution OLED would make a nifty wearable display. Plus the big military tech companies invest in them for obvious uses.
It's a fairly tough problem.
Or have they?
What is the closest thing to an Apple tablet we could find out there right now?
I think it's kind of strange that everyone and their brother seems to have a really really good idea of what the Apple tablet will be.. yet no one has made it already...
Or have they?
What is the closest thing to an Apple tablet we could find out there right now?
Nothing yet. From what I heard, other copycats are waiting for Apple to release the "tablet" so they will follow suit.