What I am saying is Apple is going to further advance the simpler UI of the iPhone OS into the iTablet and possibly future devices at the expense of OS X UI on Mac's.
As iTablets get more powerful with the cooler and more powerful processors Intel has coming down the pipeline, the iPhone OS UI will become more powerful and feature rich.
As more people buy the iTablet and other similar iPhone OS UI based hardware, Mac OS X UI as we know it will cease to exist.
The transition will be gradual and eventual.
Yes, and they will all be abandoned for the iBrain the direct-to-brain interface.
Seriously, man, WTF? A computer is different than a tablet, and a tablet is different than a phone. It's not only the CPU power, it's the form factor.
One does not replace the other --except in those situations where its preferable to have it.
On my desktop, for serious work, I want a computer.
On the road and in the lounge, a tablet.
For everyday small stuff, a smart phone.
(And in the living room, a huge kick ass monster TV).
Damn straight. I have half a dozen friends who never considered a Mac getting one in the next few months because of their love affairs with their iPhones...
This another point in my argument.
If you got iPhone users used to that UI coming over to a Mac UI for the first time, wouldn't you want to make it familiar for them with the similar Apps on the iPhone? Syncing and working together?
Why keep them separate? Wouldn't it be a nice "Get a Mac" selling point that one can run their same iPhone Apps on OS X?
The only reason I can think of, and it's getting more confirmed with this latest Tablet rumor, is that with the iTablet Apple is going to gradually switch over to a iPhone OS UI for all their newest hardware releases.
The iTablet/iPhone OS UI will get larger and replace everything but OS X on MacPro's and X-Servers.
Nearly all Apps and applications will be sold and monitored through the App Store. You want to run third party apps and use BlueRay drives, get a MacPro.
A computer is different than a tablet, and a tablet is different than a phone. It's not only the CPU power, it's the form factor.
One does not replace the other --except in those situations where its preferable to have it.
On my desktop, for serious work, I want a computer.
On the road and in the lounge, a tablet.
For everyday small stuff, a smart phone.
(And in the living room, a huge kick ass monster TV).
You don't see to understand, hardware and software can morph.
A iTablet can have a wireless bt keyboard (like Mac comes with now) and a kickstand and with the more cooler and powerful multi-core processors coming (80 core prototype is cooler and uses less power than current duo cores!) it can become everything but a server or a pro-expandable desktop.
The iPhone OS UI can become much more powerful and become the standard consumer use OS over the traditional OS X UI we know now.
Once the iTablet comes out, you'll see what I mean as people consider it serving their needs better than a complicated OS X.
I agree. There was an A&E produced series of movies I wanted to see recently. iTunes had them, but at a total cost of $80. No way I would pay that much for a few DRM movies locked to my computer that weren't likely to get more than one viewing. There was no rental option on iTunes. NetFlix had the DVDs, so they went into the queue; then I torrented the movies anyways.
Here's the moral: I was willing to pay for the movies if the price was reasonable. I was willing to rent in digital format if they were available that way. Neither option existed, so A&E loses out on both sales and/or rental revenue because they're greedy. Make your digital content available at fair costs and you'll make more money in the end then ripping off the few who'll actually pay your exorbitant prices.
We love our Netflix, they recently released a PS3 disk that allows streaming directly to the HDTV. However only a small portion is available as a stream to computers or certain devices. But it makes up time while we are waiting for the 2 DVD's to come in the mails.
We never watched more content for such a great price.
I won't torrent or rip the content, for the fact that I want to reward this business model, not punish it.
Plus it takes up so much room, takes too much time and effort and costs lots to store and is a evidence laying around for the FBI to bust over. For what? Movies you only watch once and forget?
It's so hard finding a free high bandwidth anonymous internet connection to upload for a bunch of freebirds anyway. Plus I sleep soundly at night, conscious is free.
oh, look guys, the iPhone and Macs (and AppleTV too) all are running OS X. the iPhone has a simplified version of 10.5, AppleTV still uses a version of 10.4, and of course Mac laptops/desktops now run the full 10.6. OS X is not going to die, etc. anytime soon. if Apple adds the support to Leopard/Snow Leopard, iPhone apps could certainly run on the Mac desktop, just like widgets do.
(I'd like that. Apple never really allowed widgets to show their full potential, marginalizing them instead in Dashboard. iPhone apps have finally showed us the possibilities of small single purpose programs linked to custom web services.)
what you're trying to say i think is that after 25 years of evolution consumer desktop OS's have matured to the point where there are no more big leaps ahead for their capabilities. just a lot of tweaks and speed bumps. real innovation has now shifted to the web (the "cloud"), merged devices (smart TV's, etc), and portable devices like the iPhone and soon, the iTab.
Jobs/Apple foresaw this coming early this decade and purposefully refocused Apple as a consumer product company (including the name change in 2007). the essence of it is not OS X, it is the renowned Apple "ecosystem" that is knitting all aspects of consumer digital life together via Apple hardware and tightly integrated software/home network/cloud services.
and the most important piece of software for this Apple ecosystem is not OS X, but instead cross-platform iTunes. because of course it opens the much larger PC owner market to Apple products, starting with the iPod back then. that is one very good reason why the iTab will NOT run the Mac desktop OS, but rather the iPhone OS administered like the iPhone via iTunes. so PC owners can buy and easily use it too. millions will.
but whether they know it or not, they're still buying a piece a piece of hardware running OS X.
My girlfriend's brother goes to the University of Michigan. He said he plans on buying a 27" iMac soon. I asked him why doesn't he buy a laptop like most of the rest of college students. He said he doesn't need a laptop because his iPod Touch satisfies all of the things he'd need a laptop for. I think this device may have that effect on other users. Desktop at home, tablet for the road.
Completely disagree. I graduated in May '08, so I didn't have my iPhone 3G yet, but I can't see where it would come anywhere close to replacing a laptop. Lots of people used laptops (mostly Macs) to grab notes during lectures. Also it's very hard not to have a laptop when doing research as, at least at my school, a lot of books could not be removed from the library and using the copier wastes precious beer money.
My girlfriend's brother goes to the University of Michigan. He said he plans on buying a 27" iMac soon. I asked him why doesn't he buy a laptop like most of the rest of college students. He said he doesn't need a laptop because his iPod Touch satisfies all of the things he'd need a laptop for. I think this device may have that effect on other users. Desktop at home, tablet for the road.
I was playing Duke Nuken on the iPhone the other day. Sweet game. I was thinking the only thing that would make it better was some more screen real estate.
I think you will be correct. Using the iPhone OS will quickly m
That pretty much echoes my situation. I recently sold my MacBook since it was getting very little use once I got the iPhone. I've been drooling over a i7 iMac and will be purchasing one after the first of the year. For me that's the best of both worlds. Huge screened, smoking fast desktop and a small mobile device for everything else.
Now if the tablet is reality I'm a bit more confused. I'll still be getting the iMac but I'm not sure where or if the tablet will fit in. It would certainly have to offer something the iPhone/iPod Touch doesn't (other than a larger screen).
...the rumored iTablet device needs to be a device that SOLVES A NEED and NOT JUST A FAD DEVICE!
If it's a fad device, short on features and dependent upon consumers and media content solely, it's not going to fly far.
If it's a device that everyone can use, it saves businesses time and money, it's going to be a raving success.
The object this time is not to piddle on features over time, but to make a device that has a lot of good hardware features and let the software developers run mad with it. In fact perhaps there should be two or three levels of features, so people can save money not buying the features they are going to need or businesses don't want for security reasons.
The iTablet NEEDS a video camera on the screen side so people can use a iChat device, also a video camera on the reverse side. A GPS, wifi etc like the iPhone.
However there should be two versions, like the iPod Touch and iPhone, one can be on cell networks and another not. Perhaps one device that a 3G or better can be added or removed by Apple later for a fee.
It's obvious with the iTablet that Mac's/OS X are headed towards the graveyard.
It's very sad that the App Store has a lot of third party development, but OS X is rapidly being forgotten.
It's also sad the security and privacy on the iPhone/iPod Touch is terrible, at least with OS X, the many years of Unix goes into it.
First, Apple did not get to its enviably profitable position by catering to business markets per se. Their products can certainly be adapted to those purposes but there is much more attention to detail and perfectionist touches (resulting in higher prices) to appeal most directly to a manager choosing equipment for employees. I hope they do not lose that focus and try to design a "business" machine.
Second, I assume by OS X you mean software that uses windows, menus, and pointer device rather than multitouch for user interaction. Because the OS for both the Mac and iPhone/iPod touch is OS X. Unlike many other mobile devices (including earlier versions of the iPod) which use what might be termed a toy OS or more generously an embedded OS, Apple managed to squeeze in OS X. That is the most significant aspect of the iPhone phenomenon which caught their competitors flat footed. Others were concerned with click wheels and pretty but dumb displays (ie no multitouch input) for limited devices but Apple used the names iPod and iPhone for new members of the OS X family. OS X (and almost all of its API's) is not going away even if the Mac were to disappear. It is evolving. The tablet is the next member of the OS X family.
Seriously, you really don't know what you're talking about
You are saying that apple is going to kill Mac OS X. And your reason?? Macs don't run iPhone apps? Have you lost your mind?? ...
This quote is taken out of context so I apologize but there is the implication of something that is simply not true. Macs certainly do run iPhone apps. Any iPhone developer knows a project can be compiled to run on intel or arm. The intel version runs on the iPhone simulator while the arm version runs on the actual device. There are issues about sensors (shake your Mac?) and many other factors, but the Mac and iPhone are tightly bound.
My overriding question is about the app environment on the potentially new device. Will it continue the walled garden, cryptographically signed binaries of the iPhone or return to the open world of the Mac apps? I would be happy if Apple adopted a hybrid model. Apple "approved", signed apps which are available from the app store and no permission needed apps available from other sources (like Mac apps have always been). I think that issue is more significant than any other I've heard about a tablet from Apple.
Of course we have this situation, sort of, right now. The no permission needed apps run on iPhones that have been jailbroken. But other platforms, particularly Android, don't have an explicit attempt by the platform owner to discourage unapproved apps. A danger is that developers will grow weary of the frustrations of dwelling in the walled garden (arbitrary rejections, inexplicable waiting periods, etc) and defect to just developing for a platform like Android. Apple's hardware and software lead makes such a speculation seem far fetched but the peril is real.
"I agree. There was an A&E produced series of movies I wanted to see recently. iTunes had them, but at a total cost of $80. No way I would pay that much for a few DRM movies locked to my computer that weren't likely to get more than one viewing. There was no rental option on iTunes. NetFlix had the DVDs, so they went into the queue; then I torrented the movies anyways."
"Here's the moral: I was willing to pay for the movies if the price was reasonable. I was willing to rent in digital format if they were available that way. Neither option existed, so A&E loses out on both sales and/or rental revenue because they're greedy. Make your digital content available at fair costs and you'll make more money in the end then ripping off the few who'll actually pay your exorbitant prices."
Here is a possibly useful hint. If you are interested in something that appeared on A&E but was produced in the UK (probably for the BBC) don't look for the DVD from A&E. The prices they offer are absurd. Go to amazon.co.uk. You will often find the original version (without annoying edits that cut content to make room for commercials?) for a fraction of the cost even after paying to ship from the UK.
Apple has been pushing bluetooth keyboards as standard on Macs, no doubt one could easily wire up a bluetooth to a iTablet or future iPhone. Perhaps this is another key point in my argument.
If wired bluetooth devices are key to your argument you may have a problem gathering followers.
Here is a possibly useful hint. If you are interested in something that appeared on A&E but was produced in the UK (probably for the BBC) don't look for the DVD from A&E. The prices they offer are absurd. Go to amazon.co.uk. You will often find the original version (without annoying edits that cut content to make room for commercials?) for a fraction of the cost even after paying to ship from the UK.
Good tip. It actually was UK produced content.
The particular content I wanted was available to me, essentially free, via DVD from NetFlix, so I felt no guilt torrenting it to get started while waiting for the DVDs to arrive, but the original point was to agree with someone else's comment that the cost of content will make or break this device, and Apple has already shown that for many of us, their pricing model for movies is a weak point.
People will find a way to get content they want at the price we want, which isn't always free. I'll gladly pay if its available in the format I want and at a fair price. (I define fair as a price a willing unpressured seller and a willing unpressured buyer can agree upon.)
If you got iPhone users used to that UI coming over to a Mac UI for the first time, wouldn't you want to make it familiar for them with the similar Apps on the iPhone? Syncing and working together?
Why keep them separate? Wouldn't it be a nice "Get a Mac" selling point that one can run their same iPhone Apps on OS X?
The only reason I can think of, and it's getting more confirmed with this latest Tablet rumor, is that with the iTablet Apple is going to gradually switch over to a iPhone OS UI for all their newest hardware releases.
The iTablet/iPhone OS UI will get larger and replace everything but OS X on MacPro's and X-Servers.
Nearly all Apps and applications will be sold and monitored through the App Store. You want to run third party apps and use BlueRay drives, get a MacPro.
you want the data to sync, not the apps. And already have
contacts sycing
bookmarks syncing
email accounts syncing
notes syncing
calendars syncing
etc.
Note that in each of these cases, the app on the Mac are more full functional than their iPhone equivalents. They take advantage of large screens, multiple windows, etc.
As we all know, you have to have an Intel based Mac to write iPhone apps. My prediction is that you'll be able to write both Tablet and iPhone apps using the new Tablet as your development platform.
Who are these noobs coming here to these latest threads acting like they've been here all along?
It's been me, Ireland, spamsandwich, wizard, and a few others who have been here from the very beginning talking about the tablet while the rest of you guys were calling us idiots and it would never happen. Heck, we were talking about this back even before you naysayers even had a twinkling in your eye about the tablet.
Now it's "omg I can't wait to buy one"...."omg do you think it will match my purse...teehee....derrrrrrr!"
You guys should be bowing before us begging our forgiveness for being so doubtful and foolish. And furthermore, the admins should give our little group like...I dunno....rewards or something. Make our forums names red or something with shiny stars and logos that say "forum prophet"!
Will all due respect to everyone's powers of prognostication, there are reasonable statutes of limitation on tech predictions. This particular bit of soothsaying has been going on for 5 years plus now, which sort of diminishes the impact. I don't think anyone didn't expect some kind of tablet/slate/pad thing at some point, just not at THE NEXT MACWORLD!, or the one after that, or the one after that...... It was bound to show up eventually.
I say that speech will be the dominate form of text input on the Macs of tomorrow. If you give me an unlimited window, I'm pretty sure to be right, although not particularly gifted with precognition.
Comments
Netbooks are seriously cannibalizing laptop sales on the PC side, the iTablet will also do the same to MacBooks.
They most certainly are not. Notebooks are replacing desktops, netbooks do not replace desktops in any shape or form.
Netbooks sales have increased but are still a small percentage of over all computer sales.
Touchscreens and a stylus will replace the mouse. I see a more powerful iPhone OS for the iTablet.
No they won't. A lot of people don't like touchscreen phones and absolutely require a hard keyboard.
Play chess enough, you begin to see 20 or 30 moves ahead.
Drink enough liquor and your vision is blurred.
What I am saying is Apple is going to further advance the simpler UI of the iPhone OS into the iTablet and possibly future devices at the expense of OS X UI on Mac's.
As iTablets get more powerful with the cooler and more powerful processors Intel has coming down the pipeline, the iPhone OS UI will become more powerful and feature rich.
As more people buy the iTablet and other similar iPhone OS UI based hardware, Mac OS X UI as we know it will cease to exist.
The transition will be gradual and eventual.
Yes, and they will all be abandoned for the iBrain the direct-to-brain interface.
Seriously, man, WTF? A computer is different than a tablet, and a tablet is different than a phone. It's not only the CPU power, it's the form factor.
One does not replace the other --except in those situations where its preferable to have it.
On my desktop, for serious work, I want a computer.
On the road and in the lounge, a tablet.
For everyday small stuff, a smart phone.
(And in the living room, a huge kick ass monster TV).
Damn straight. I have half a dozen friends who never considered a Mac getting one in the next few months because of their love affairs with their iPhones...
This another point in my argument.
If you got iPhone users used to that UI coming over to a Mac UI for the first time, wouldn't you want to make it familiar for them with the similar Apps on the iPhone? Syncing and working together?
Why keep them separate? Wouldn't it be a nice "Get a Mac" selling point that one can run their same iPhone Apps on OS X?
The only reason I can think of, and it's getting more confirmed with this latest Tablet rumor, is that with the iTablet Apple is going to gradually switch over to a iPhone OS UI for all their newest hardware releases.
The iTablet/iPhone OS UI will get larger and replace everything but OS X on MacPro's and X-Servers.
Nearly all Apps and applications will be sold and monitored through the App Store. You want to run third party apps and use BlueRay drives, get a MacPro.
A computer is different than a tablet, and a tablet is different than a phone. It's not only the CPU power, it's the form factor.
One does not replace the other --except in those situations where its preferable to have it.
On my desktop, for serious work, I want a computer.
On the road and in the lounge, a tablet.
For everyday small stuff, a smart phone.
(And in the living room, a huge kick ass monster TV).
You don't see to understand, hardware and software can morph.
A iTablet can have a wireless bt keyboard (like Mac comes with now) and a kickstand and with the more cooler and powerful multi-core processors coming (80 core prototype is cooler and uses less power than current duo cores!) it can become everything but a server or a pro-expandable desktop.
The iPhone OS UI can become much more powerful and become the standard consumer use OS over the traditional OS X UI we know now.
Once the iTablet comes out, you'll see what I mean as people consider it serving their needs better than a complicated OS X.
I agree. There was an A&E produced series of movies I wanted to see recently. iTunes had them, but at a total cost of $80. No way I would pay that much for a few DRM movies locked to my computer that weren't likely to get more than one viewing. There was no rental option on iTunes. NetFlix had the DVDs, so they went into the queue; then I torrented the movies anyways.
Here's the moral: I was willing to pay for the movies if the price was reasonable. I was willing to rent in digital format if they were available that way. Neither option existed, so A&E loses out on both sales and/or rental revenue because they're greedy. Make your digital content available at fair costs and you'll make more money in the end then ripping off the few who'll actually pay your exorbitant prices.
We love our Netflix, they recently released a PS3 disk that allows streaming directly to the HDTV. However only a small portion is available as a stream to computers or certain devices. But it makes up time while we are waiting for the 2 DVD's to come in the mails.
We never watched more content for such a great price.
I won't torrent or rip the content, for the fact that I want to reward this business model, not punish it.
Plus it takes up so much room, takes too much time and effort and costs lots to store and is a evidence laying around for the FBI to bust over. For what? Movies you only watch once and forget?
It's so hard finding a free high bandwidth anonymous internet connection to upload for a bunch of freebirds anyway. Plus I sleep soundly at night, conscious is free.
(I'd like that. Apple never really allowed widgets to show their full potential, marginalizing them instead in Dashboard. iPhone apps have finally showed us the possibilities of small single purpose programs linked to custom web services.)
what you're trying to say i think is that after 25 years of evolution consumer desktop OS's have matured to the point where there are no more big leaps ahead for their capabilities. just a lot of tweaks and speed bumps. real innovation has now shifted to the web (the "cloud"), merged devices (smart TV's, etc), and portable devices like the iPhone and soon, the iTab.
Jobs/Apple foresaw this coming early this decade and purposefully refocused Apple as a consumer product company (including the name change in 2007). the essence of it is not OS X, it is the renowned Apple "ecosystem" that is knitting all aspects of consumer digital life together via Apple hardware and tightly integrated software/home network/cloud services.
and the most important piece of software for this Apple ecosystem is not OS X, but instead cross-platform iTunes. because of course it opens the much larger PC owner market to Apple products, starting with the iPod back then. that is one very good reason why the iTab will NOT run the Mac desktop OS, but rather the iPhone OS administered like the iPhone via iTunes. so PC owners can buy and easily use it too. millions will.
but whether they know it or not, they're still buying a piece a piece of hardware running OS X.
My girlfriend's brother goes to the University of Michigan. He said he plans on buying a 27" iMac soon. I asked him why doesn't he buy a laptop like most of the rest of college students. He said he doesn't need a laptop because his iPod Touch satisfies all of the things he'd need a laptop for. I think this device may have that effect on other users. Desktop at home, tablet for the road.
Completely disagree. I graduated in May '08, so I didn't have my iPhone 3G yet, but I can't see where it would come anywhere close to replacing a laptop. Lots of people used laptops (mostly Macs) to grab notes during lectures. Also it's very hard not to have a laptop when doing research as, at least at my school, a lot of books could not be removed from the library and using the copier wastes precious beer money.
My girlfriend's brother goes to the University of Michigan. He said he plans on buying a 27" iMac soon. I asked him why doesn't he buy a laptop like most of the rest of college students. He said he doesn't need a laptop because his iPod Touch satisfies all of the things he'd need a laptop for. I think this device may have that effect on other users. Desktop at home, tablet for the road.
I was playing Duke Nuken on the iPhone the other day. Sweet game. I was thinking the only thing that would make it better was some more screen real estate.
I think you will be correct. Using the iPhone OS will quickly m
That pretty much echoes my situation. I recently sold my MacBook since it was getting very little use once I got the iPhone. I've been drooling over a i7 iMac and will be purchasing one after the first of the year. For me that's the best of both worlds. Huge screened, smoking fast desktop and a small mobile device for everything else.
Now if the tablet is reality I'm a bit more confused. I'll still be getting the iMac but I'm not sure where or if the tablet will fit in. It would certainly have to offer something the iPhone/iPod Touch doesn't (other than a larger screen).
In these tough times...
...the rumored iTablet device needs to be a device that SOLVES A NEED and NOT JUST A FAD DEVICE!
If it's a fad device, short on features and dependent upon consumers and media content solely, it's not going to fly far.
If it's a device that everyone can use, it saves businesses time and money, it's going to be a raving success.
The object this time is not to piddle on features over time, but to make a device that has a lot of good hardware features and let the software developers run mad with it. In fact perhaps there should be two or three levels of features, so people can save money not buying the features they are going to need or businesses don't want for security reasons.
The iTablet NEEDS a video camera on the screen side so people can use a iChat device, also a video camera on the reverse side. A GPS, wifi etc like the iPhone.
However there should be two versions, like the iPod Touch and iPhone, one can be on cell networks and another not. Perhaps one device that a 3G or better can be added or removed by Apple later for a fee.
It's obvious with the iTablet that Mac's/OS X are headed towards the graveyard.
It's very sad that the App Store has a lot of third party development, but OS X is rapidly being forgotten.
It's also sad the security and privacy on the iPhone/iPod Touch is terrible, at least with OS X, the many years of Unix goes into it.
First, Apple did not get to its enviably profitable position by catering to business markets per se. Their products can certainly be adapted to those purposes but there is much more attention to detail and perfectionist touches (resulting in higher prices) to appeal most directly to a manager choosing equipment for employees. I hope they do not lose that focus and try to design a "business" machine.
Second, I assume by OS X you mean software that uses windows, menus, and pointer device rather than multitouch for user interaction. Because the OS for both the Mac and iPhone/iPod touch is OS X. Unlike many other mobile devices (including earlier versions of the iPod) which use what might be termed a toy OS or more generously an embedded OS, Apple managed to squeeze in OS X. That is the most significant aspect of the iPhone phenomenon which caught their competitors flat footed. Others were concerned with click wheels and pretty but dumb displays (ie no multitouch input) for limited devices but Apple used the names iPod and iPhone for new members of the OS X family. OS X (and almost all of its API's) is not going away even if the Mac were to disappear. It is evolving. The tablet is the next member of the OS X family.
Seriously, you really don't know what you're talking about
You are saying that apple is going to kill Mac OS X. And your reason?? Macs don't run iPhone apps? Have you lost your mind?? ...
This quote is taken out of context so I apologize but there is the implication of something that is simply not true. Macs certainly do run iPhone apps. Any iPhone developer knows a project can be compiled to run on intel or arm. The intel version runs on the iPhone simulator while the arm version runs on the actual device. There are issues about sensors (shake your Mac?) and many other factors, but the Mac and iPhone are tightly bound.
My overriding question is about the app environment on the potentially new device. Will it continue the walled garden, cryptographically signed binaries of the iPhone or return to the open world of the Mac apps? I would be happy if Apple adopted a hybrid model. Apple "approved", signed apps which are available from the app store and no permission needed apps available from other sources (like Mac apps have always been). I think that issue is more significant than any other I've heard about a tablet from Apple.
Of course we have this situation, sort of, right now. The no permission needed apps run on iPhones that have been jailbroken. But other platforms, particularly Android, don't have an explicit attempt by the platform owner to discourage unapproved apps. A danger is that developers will grow weary of the frustrations of dwelling in the walled garden (arbitrary rejections, inexplicable waiting periods, etc) and defect to just developing for a platform like Android. Apple's hardware and software lead makes such a speculation seem far fetched but the peril is real.
"I agree. There was an A&E produced series of movies I wanted to see recently. iTunes had them, but at a total cost of $80. No way I would pay that much for a few DRM movies locked to my computer that weren't likely to get more than one viewing. There was no rental option on iTunes. NetFlix had the DVDs, so they went into the queue; then I torrented the movies anyways."
"Here's the moral: I was willing to pay for the movies if the price was reasonable. I was willing to rent in digital format if they were available that way. Neither option existed, so A&E loses out on both sales and/or rental revenue because they're greedy. Make your digital content available at fair costs and you'll make more money in the end then ripping off the few who'll actually pay your exorbitant prices."
Here is a possibly useful hint. If you are interested in something that appeared on A&E but was produced in the UK (probably for the BBC) don't look for the DVD from A&E. The prices they offer are absurd. Go to amazon.co.uk. You will often find the original version (without annoying edits that cut content to make room for commercials?) for a fraction of the cost even after paying to ship from the UK.
Apple has been pushing bluetooth keyboards as standard on Macs, no doubt one could easily wire up a bluetooth to a iTablet or future iPhone. Perhaps this is another key point in my argument.
If wired bluetooth devices are key to your argument you may have a problem gathering followers.
Here is a possibly useful hint. If you are interested in something that appeared on A&E but was produced in the UK (probably for the BBC) don't look for the DVD from A&E. The prices they offer are absurd. Go to amazon.co.uk. You will often find the original version (without annoying edits that cut content to make room for commercials?) for a fraction of the cost even after paying to ship from the UK.
Good tip. It actually was UK produced content.
The particular content I wanted was available to me, essentially free, via DVD from NetFlix, so I felt no guilt torrenting it to get started while waiting for the DVDs to arrive, but the original point was to agree with someone else's comment that the cost of content will make or break this device, and Apple has already shown that for many of us, their pricing model for movies is a weak point.
People will find a way to get content they want at the price we want, which isn't always free. I'll gladly pay if its available in the format I want and at a fair price. (I define fair as a price a willing unpressured seller and a willing unpressured buyer can agree upon.)
This another point in my argument.
If you got iPhone users used to that UI coming over to a Mac UI for the first time, wouldn't you want to make it familiar for them with the similar Apps on the iPhone? Syncing and working together?
Why keep them separate? Wouldn't it be a nice "Get a Mac" selling point that one can run their same iPhone Apps on OS X?
The only reason I can think of, and it's getting more confirmed with this latest Tablet rumor, is that with the iTablet Apple is going to gradually switch over to a iPhone OS UI for all their newest hardware releases.
The iTablet/iPhone OS UI will get larger and replace everything but OS X on MacPro's and X-Servers.
Nearly all Apps and applications will be sold and monitored through the App Store. You want to run third party apps and use BlueRay drives, get a MacPro.
you want the data to sync, not the apps. And already have
contacts sycing
bookmarks syncing
email accounts syncing
notes syncing
calendars syncing
etc.
Note that in each of these cases, the app on the Mac are more full functional than their iPhone equivalents. They take advantage of large screens, multiple windows, etc.
They most certainly are not. Notebooks are replacing desktops, netbooks do not replace desktops in any shape or form.
Netbooks sales have increased but are still a small percentage of over all computer sales.
No they won't. A lot of people don't like touchscreen phones and absolutely require a hard keyboard.
Netbooks are cannibalizing manufacturers own profit margins.
Ireland, who are these people????
Who are these noobs coming here to these latest threads acting like they've been here all along?
It's been me, Ireland, spamsandwich, wizard, and a few others who have been here from the very beginning talking about the tablet while the rest of you guys were calling us idiots and it would never happen. Heck, we were talking about this back even before you naysayers even had a twinkling in your eye about the tablet.
Now it's "omg I can't wait to buy one"...."omg do you think it will match my purse...teehee....derrrrrrr!"
You guys should be bowing before us begging our forgiveness for being so doubtful and foolish. And furthermore, the admins should give our little group like...I dunno....rewards or something. Make our forums names red or something with shiny stars and logos that say "forum prophet"!
Will all due respect to everyone's powers of prognostication, there are reasonable statutes of limitation on tech predictions. This particular bit of soothsaying has been going on for 5 years plus now, which sort of diminishes the impact. I don't think anyone didn't expect some kind of tablet/slate/pad thing at some point, just not at THE NEXT MACWORLD!, or the one after that, or the one after that...... It was bound to show up eventually.
I say that speech will be the dominate form of text input on the Macs of tomorrow. If you give me an unlimited window, I'm pretty sure to be right, although not particularly gifted with precognition.