This sounds like Obamanomics to me. The dang thing is not even officially going to happen and analysts are already predicting it's success! What will really happen is, the thing will be announced, it will have everything everyone wants, they will completely sell out and Apple's stock will fall because of some obscure reason.
isn't that about or slightly above what the percentage break-down is for mac/pc users? Seems like Apple hit the nail on the gullible target.
37% ? Apple wished. Less than half that at about 15% years ago it was about 4 or 5 %. They've mad great strides.
[QUOTE=Gazoobee;1554760]I didn't realise it came across as "personal." I try my best not to anthropomorphise corporate entities.
I do think I have a right to be a bit ticked off however, when a device is launched in my country, but in reality all supplies are diverted elsewhere. I waited for six months for the privilege of buying a 3Gs even though Apple said it was available from day one.
I had to call my cell phone provider every day at first and then eventually weekly. It made me a bit angry at first and I think it's worth talking about, but it didn't' stop me buying one eventually anyway.[/QUOTE
Gazoobee, you complain allot. Why do you pick so many fights? & Why do you have such a relentless ego?
The last thing Appleinsider needs is Wall Street taking its articles seriously. Appleinsider is more about rumors, wishful thinking, forums and some reportage of press releases. It is not the place to go for an indepth researched business report.
Dave
Nobody has suggested that AI should be a business report or that Wall Street should take them seriously. Indeed, it would be silly to expect either.
But it is a Forum that has global reach today. AI often shows up among the top handful of Google News headlines related to Apple. It is taken seriously. If all that can be made consonant with improved writing, especially when it is low-cost (or even no-cost) to do so, it is all to the good, regardless of topic.
Why would anyone not want that? I can't imagine that you think that good writing and proper use of the English language (esp. when it comes to tech and financial writing) are of no consequence?
As an aside, I do congratulate AI on the generally vastly improved quality of writing compared to a couple of years ago. They have most definitely worked at it, and it shows. (And, I am not, in the least bit, trying to be condescending here).
So Apple can either bring out a 10-inch tablet retailing for in excess of $700 to make a small, insignificant profit, or Apple can release a tablet with let's say a 7-inch screen, priced more in the range of $500 in base form, to make billions.
So Apple can either bring out a 10-inch tablet retailing for in excess of $700 to make a small, insignificant profit, or Apple can release a tablet with let's say a 7-inch screen, priced more in the range of $500 in base form, to make billions.
Decisions, decisions.
Or Apple can make a desirable 10" tablet computer than can replace your MacBook portable computer, and in certain ways will not only be more versitle, but will surprisingly do more. Furthermore they give it an OLED display and NAND Flash memory of 128GB. They charge $1,399 and offer an additional subsidized model for $999 and still sell millions and a larger profit margin. But even more importantly they change how consumers look at their laptops. This is the future of the personal computer. And people always pay a premium to get their hands on the future.
Imagination is more important than "decisions" here.
Or Apple can make a desirable 10" tablet computer than can replace your MacBook portable computer, and in certain ways will not only be more versitle, but will surprisingly do more. Furthermore they give it an OLED display and NAND Flash memory of 128GB. They charge $1,399 and offer an additional subsidized model for $999 and still sell millions and a larger profit margin. But even more importantly they change how consumers look at their laptops. This is the future of the personal computer. And people always pay a premium to get their hands on the future.
Imagination is more important than "decisions" here.
Maybe but not likely. Steve Jobs is not Moses bringing the commandments down from the mountain and contrary to what some might imagine parting the Red Sea isn't going to happen.
Keep in mind that for many consumers, laptops have evolved into a desktop replacement and now, it would seem, there is this idea that you can replace that desktop replacement with a tablet device. There are problems with that that are simply a function of physics. For openers a tablet is a handheld unit and that means you have to tie up atleast one hand to hold the thing. This is inherently bad news if you want to do typing of a more advanced sort than the one-finger approach. Next is the fact that you can't use even laptop CPUs, GPUs, and the like. In other words, you have to take quite a few steps back in performance. Try editing HD video with an ARM processor. Heck try running any number of more demanding software apps on such a unit and watch as that shinny new tablet takes you back to what computers were like to use quite a few years ago.
If Apple could come up with a tablet able to serve as one's main computer, yes, you're right, for such a device they could easily charge in excess of $1,000. But based on what we know about the state of today's technology, such a device simply is incapable of being assembled by any company. Keep in mind that in many respects Apple does very little in the way of developing technology. The company is great at doing software and in bringing together components provided by outside sources to put out devices that are usually quite a lot of fun to use. But they don't do a lot in terms of developing CPUs and the like. As such, as secretive as Apple might be, their suppliers are less so and we can more or less know a lot about the bits and pieces that are at Apple's disposal.
A tablet that is a companion to a good desktop or decent-calibre laptop is likely but a tablet that is a replacement for those devices seems to me, at this time, based on what we know about Apple's suppliers, pretty much an impossibility.
Maybe but not likely. Steve Jobs is not Moses bringing the commandments down from the mountain and contrary to what some might imagine parting the Red Sea isn't going to happen.
Less metaphor and more examples. I never said he was going to part the red sea. Every touchscreen phone nowadays is automatically compared to the iPhone, even unconsciously. If done right this tablet could have a similar impact on mindshare. It will be priced just out of reach, so it will even be more appealing, because its harder to get. Then when they lower it by $200 after a year or so people will think it's a bargain at the new price, and some people will save. More importunely though, if done right it would end up being a laptop replacement for people, which would further justify the higher price. If they market and design this device, hardware-wise and software-wise as a "replacement portable computer" (as opposed to merely an entertainment/media device) I see this device being more important than the iPhone. There, I said it.
Keep in mind that for many consumers, laptops have evolved into a desktop replacement and now, it would seem, there is this idea that you can replace that desktop replacement with a tablet device. There are problems with that that are simply a function of physics. For openers a tablet is a handheld unit and that means you have to tie up atleast one hand to hold the thing. This is inherently bad news if you want to do typing of a more advanced sort than the one-finger approach.
I think you're wrong. Not that its not a handheld device per se, but that it's only a handheld device. No, I see this tablet being additionally and lap and table device. This is how it replaces a laptop, because you can use it in the same way also. How? By having a cleverly design built-in stand of sorts. I like to call this -- and I have banging on and on and on about this part (as I think it's not only important, but crucial to the tablet's success -- a "push-stand". When pressed the push-stand would reveal itself from the back of the tablet, it would run across the full upper rear of the device, and in the open position it would allow the tablet to rest on and flat surface, like a tray, table or desk at such and angle as to be a nice balance between typing and viewing the screen. Sure, I reckon if you really type a lot you'll probably be faster typing on a laptop with a hardware keyboard, but most computer users do not type a lot. Also important, when in the closed position the stand would be hidden and flush with the rear. Like the software keyboard, it would be there when you want it, but gone when you don't.
This stand is the thing that scares me the most, as I feel "it is the most important hardware design feature the tablet will need to have".
Imagine this: The stand pops out 2", and holds the tablet at a resting position of 18º, so you can place the tablet on a table and type and a pretty decent pace. Now imagine you turn the tablet upside-down and use the same stand to hold the device 80º. You see the angle and design of this stand could be cleverly designed in such a way, so you won't need to third-party dock or gadget to watch movies on a plane, or type that essay on a train. This is why the design of this stand scares me, cause I can see the design it needs, and I'm afraid Apple might not see it. I hope they design the stand this way, so it works in both orientations, and I don't mean portrait, I mean almost flat for typing and almost upright, i.e. movie mode.
With the iPhone, for example, Apple went against every shred of conventional wisdom out there, and ended up proving that they knew the market better than the market knows itself. Apple did this with Macs as well, in a recession.
It's quite possible the tablet will make a huge splash at the Jan 27th event and that everyone will want one. This is Apple, after all.
I think you're wrong. Not that its not a handheld device per se, but that it's only a handheld device. No, I see this tablet being additionally and lap and table device. This is how it replaces a laptop, because you can use it in the same way also. How? By having a cleverly design built-in stand of sorts. I like to call this -- and I have banging on and on and on about this part (as I think it's not only important, but crucial to the tablet's success -- a "push-stand". When pressed the push-stand would reveal itself from the back of the tablet, it would run across the full upper rear of the device, and in the open position it would allow the tablet to rest on and flat surface, like a tray, table or desk at such and angle as to be a nice balance between typing and viewing the screen. Sure, I reckon if you really type a lot you'll probably be faster typing on a laptop with a hardware keyboard, but most computer users do not type a lot. Also important, when in the closed position the stand would be hidden and flush with the rear. Like the software keyboard, it would be there when you want it, but gone when you don't.
This stand is the thing that scares me the most, as I feel "it is the most important hardware design feature the tablet will need to have".
Imagine this: The stand pops out 2", and holds the tablet at a resting position of 18º, so you can place the tablet on a table and type and a pretty decent pace. Now imagine you turn the tablet upside-down and use the same stand to hold the device 80º. You see the angle and design of this stand could be cleverly designed in such a way, so you won't need to third-party dock or gadget to watch movies on a plane, or type that essay on a train. This is why the design of this stand scares me, cause I can see the design it needs, and I'm afraid Apple might not see it. I hope they design the stand this way, so it works in both orientations, and I don't mean portrait, I mean almost flat for typing and almost upright, i.e. movie mode.
That still doesn't fix other failings of a design like the tablet would have on account of it is limited by today's ultraportable technology, the most significant of which is a shortage of raw horsepower. There simply isn't a high-powered CPU available to work in such a confined, portable device. And what about graphics horsepower?
If we're talking about a laptop that is primarily being used as a compliment to a proper desktop, well now, that's another matter entirely. For some functions performed away from a good desktop, the tablet could conceivably be a good alternative to a more cumbersome laptop. If you want a portable solution for browsing, media playback, reading, sharing photos, basic organizing, some basic, though entertaining, gaming and so on and so on, the tablet would get it done. And if Apple can overcome some significant interface hurdles, as you suggest they could, such a device would be a handy machine to have with you when taking notes at a college lecture, etc.
What I question is the suggestion that the tablet could, at this time, be able to entirely replace a proper laptop or desktop unit. Not a chance.
As such, Apple can't sell this thing if they are thinking $1,000. It's about as likely to work as the Cube before it. Think of it as the Cube of portables. A cool device nobody wants because there are simply better alternatives in terms of bang for the buck. For instance, if your budget for all things computer is let's say $1,500 and you want to go Mac, if you buy a $1,000 tablet, you can't afford even the cheapest Apple laptop to go with it. If video editing, for instance, is part of what you want to do, kiss that goodbye. Wouldn't you, instead, buy a laptop, even one costing a little more than $1,000 and compliment that with maybe a Touch? You could do that with $1,500, maybe even with room to spare.
In short, there's no market for a $1,000 tablet because for very little more you can have a full-function laptop that is more commonplace but also way more powerful.
What I question is the suggestion that the tablet could, at this time, be able to entirely replace a proper laptop or desktop unit. Not a chance.
I have to take issue with your use of the term "proper laptop." Since it is undefined (and I think resistant to definition) I think you've used it as a term of convenience to describe how you use a laptop. Hence, it is really only meaningful only to you and not a basis for an argument.
Quote:
As such, Apple can't sell this thing if they are thinking $1,000. It's about as likely to work as the Cube before it. Think of it as the Cube of portables. A cool device nobody wants because there are simply better alternatives in terms of bang for the buck. For instance, if your budget for all things computer is let's say $1,500 and you want to go Mac, if you buy a $1,000 tablet, you can't afford even the cheapest Apple laptop to go with it. If video editing, for instance, is part of what you want to do, kiss that goodbye. Wouldn't you, instead, buy a laptop, even one costing a little more than $1,000 and compliment that with maybe a Touch? You could do that with $1,500, maybe even with room to spare.
In short, there's no market for a $1,000 tablet because for very little more you can have a full-function laptop that is more commonplace but also way more powerful.
Your comparison to the Cube is really a reach. The Cube was a PowerMac in a snazzy form factor -- nothing more. Functionally it was no different than any other Mac, so the sale needed to be made on the basis of the form factor alone. I think the smart money is on the slate device not being a Mac shoehorned into a small form factor, or the iPhone expanded to a large one. The best betting, I think, is on it being something with is neither of these things. I don't see how we can make any intelligent guesses as to its worth until we know what it is and what it does.
The "news" is a good read, too. A select quote: "You made a "product" to compete with their "product," tastefully arranging your regiment, only to discover that they hadn't made a product at all - they made a narrative. A statement about how technology should interface with a life."
I have to take issue with your use of the term "proper laptop." Since it is undefined (and I think resistant to definition) I think you've used it as a term of convenience to describe how you use a laptop. Hence, it is really only meaningful only to you and not a basis for an argument.
Your comparison to the Cube is really a reach. The Cube was a PowerMac in a snazzy form factor -- nothing more. Functionally it was no different than any other Mac, so the sale needed to be made on the basis of the form factor alone. I think the smart money is on the slate device not being a Mac shoehorned into a small form factor, or the iPhone expanded to a large one. The best betting, I think, is on it being something with is neither of these things. I don't see how we can make any intelligent guesses as to its worth until we know what it is and what it does.
By proper laptop I mean a device that can do what we now expect a legitimate personal computer to do and that includes video editing (including HD), convenient multi-tasking, photo manipulation, effectively running demanding gaming applications, and so on and so on.
There simply doesn't exist at this time CPUs and GPUs with the required low power consumption and low heat output needed for a handheld like the tablet as it is being projected which at the same time have the horsepower to, among other things, handle editing HD video files. This is a reality that simply cannot be ignored.
I can't understand how questions of user interface even enter into this discussion. I mean what does it matter if Apple has figured out how to solve the tablet form factor's numerous interface flaws if once you get your data into the device, CPU and GPU performance more akin to pre-G4 days awaits you. This is a recipe for a lot of very disappointed consumers who have, for the most part, grown accustomed to performance levels far in advance of what handheld hardware offers at this time.
The comparison to the Cube is very appropriate. The Cube was a device with a clever form factor but with performance that was very poor relative to the device's cost. A $1.000 tablet would be pretty much the same. $1,000 today buys very good performance but the tablet would be significantly underpowered for more demanding actitivities. This is not something that is negotiable, that can be fixed with clever design tricks. Apple tweaked OS X for it's handheld devices like the Touch and iPhone because the full OS would run poorly on those devices. Handheld hardware is what it is and Apple is in the same boat as every other electronics manufacturer, namely having to develop products that are designed to work with current hardware.
If anyone wants to predict that Apple at this time is capable of bringing out a $1,000 tablet with the horsepower of a MacBook, well good luck with that. I don't doubt that eventually this will be possible. When that happens a tablet serving as someone's only computer might well be plausible. But right now, I'd say expecting such an amazing accomplishment being unveiled on Wednesay is significanly worse than amusingly naive.
By proper laptop I mean a device that can do what we now expect a legitimate personal computer to do and that includes video editing (including HD), convenient multi-tasking, photo manipulation, effectively running demanding gaming applications, and so on and so on.
There simply doesn't exist at this time CPUs and GPUs with the required low power consumption and low heat output needed for a handheld like the tablet as it is being projected which at the same time have the horsepower to, among other things, handle editing HD video files. This is a reality that simply cannot be ignored.
I can't understand how questions of user interface even enter into this discussion. I mean what does it matter if Apple has figured out how to solve the tablet form factor's numerous interface flaws if once you get your data into the device, CPU and GPU performance more akin to pre-G4 days awaits you. This is a recipe for a lot of very disappointed consumers who have, for the most part, grown accustomed to performance levels far in advance of what handheld hardware offers at this time.
The comparison to the Cube is very appropriate. The Cube was a device with a clever form factor but with performance that was very poor relative to the device's cost. A $1.000 tablet would be pretty much the same. $1,000 today buys very good performance but the tablet would be significantly underpowered for more demanding actitivities. This is not something that is negotiable, that can be fixed with clever design tricks. Apple tweaked OS X for it's handheld devices like the Touch and iPhone because the full OS would run poorly on those devices. Handheld hardware is what it is and Apple is in the same boat as every other electronics manufacturer, namely having to develop products that are designed to work with current hardware.
If anyone wants to predict that Apple at this time is capable of bringing out a $1,000 tablet with the horsepower of a MacBook, well good luck with that. I don't doubt that eventually this will be possible. When that happens a tablet serving as someone's only computer might well be plausible. But right now, I'd say expecting such an amazing accomplishment being unveiled on Wednesay is significanly worse than amusingly naive.
You see, there you go again. What does "legitimate" mean? Only what you've already decided that it means. You might as well say that a surf board is not a legitimate car. This device, whatever it turns out to be, deserves to be judged on its own merits, meaning by its functionality, not by some arbitrary method of comparison to some other device that is designed for an entirely different purpose.
Of course the user interface is important. Is the iPhone all about "horsepower," or is about how the use interacts with it? If you say the former, then I don't think we have much further to discuss on that subject.
And you are wrong about the Cube. Its performance was hardly "very poor" relative to the cost. In fact, it used exactly the same CPU, system bus, and graphics cards as the tower G4 sold at the very same time. It was even less expensive than a PowerMac with the same specs. It was a PowerMac G4 in a different form factor. That was its only distinction.
You see, there you go again. What does "legitimate" mean? Only what you've already decided that it means. You might as well say that a surf board is not a legitimate car. This device, whatever it turns out to be, deserves to be judged on its own merits, meaning by its functionality, not by some arbitrary method of comparison to some other device that is designed for an entirely different purpose.
Of course the user interface is important. Is the iPhone all about "horsepower," or is about how the use interacts with it? If you say the former, then I don't think we have much further to discuss on that subject.
And you are wrong about the Cube. Its performance was hardly "very poor" relative to the cost. In fact, it used exactly the same CPU, system bus, and graphics cards as the tower G4 sold at the very same time. It was even less expensive than a PowerMac with the same specs. It was a PowerMac G4 in a different form factor. That was its only distinction.
The Cube was expensive relative to its specs because its form factor was expensive to produce at the time.
As for the tablet being judged on what it can do, my point quite simply is that we don't need to wait for Wednesday to determine if this device will be powerful enough to edit HD video. Clearly it will not be. In fact it will not be powerful enough for a lot of functions that the latest Apple computers handle with ease. So, my original point stands, namely that this device will not serve as a laptop replacement.
The bottom line is that it will be a laptop/desktop compliment and must be priced accordingly in order to succeed. The average consumer is not prepared under current economic conditions to pay at least $1,000 for a computer, be it laptop or desktop and then turn around and spend similar money on a less powerful, portable complimentary unit. To my way of thinking, if Apple comes up with a range of $500 to $700 for the unit, they will have little trouble selling them by the millions. If Apple is considering a costlier, bigger unit to this device, they need to position it as a niche product with a very limited production run. They make the Air, for example, which isn't a big seller and that's OK because they get their volume out of other MacBook units. But if the Air had been the unit that Apple had started off with, it likely would have been perceived as a failure.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the idea of a 10-inch tablet. I just don't expect that Apple could, at this time, pull off a 10-inch unit costing in around $500, not considering the grade of hardware they like to employ. Besides, you need to have something to move up to for an encore. Start off with a 7-inch tablet to follow up the Touch and then follow up the 7-inch Touch with a 10-inch Touch, all the while maintaining the same price point. This is how Apple has operated in recent years and it makes sense. By the way, I'm not saying that simply moving up from a 7-inch screen to a 10-inch unit will alone push the price of the unit too far. But you don't simply go with a bigger screen. A bigger case, a more robust battery, more storage (to accommodate larger files needed to feed a bigger screen), and so on and so on. Simply by settling for a smaller screen it becomes easier to meet a particular price point without compromising quality or performance. In addition, files made for the current Touch would look a lot better on a 7-inch screen than they would on a 10-inch unit. This is no small thing because it's going to take time for software developers to bring out products that are designed for the larger unit. Bringing out a device that hits the ground running in the sense that there is a large body of content already available for it, now that's a product that is going to be perceived by early adopters as valuable.
I don't care what Apple comes up with regarding interface. If they bring out a $1,000 unit with a 10-inch screen, it will not sell well for quite some time. Keep in mind, too, that the price of laptops, even Apple's, are trending down, which would make such a unit seem even less like something you'd be prepared to drop $1.000 on. My hope is that Jobs and Co. learned a valuable lesson with the Cube which, by the way, had flop written all over it right from the start. The instant they unveiled it, my reaction was something like, "Those specs for that price? What are they thinking?" If a $1.000 tablet is unveiled on Wednesday my reaction will be, "Those specs for that price? What are they thinking?"
Comments
isn't that about or slightly above what the percentage break-down is for mac/pc users? Seems like Apple hit the nail on the gullible target.
37% ? Apple wished. Less than half that at about 15% years ago it was about 4 or 5 %. They've mad great strides.
[QUOTE=Gazoobee;1554760]I didn't realise it came across as "personal." I try my best not to anthropomorphise corporate entities.
I do think I have a right to be a bit ticked off however, when a device is launched in my country, but in reality all supplies are diverted elsewhere. I waited for six months for the privilege of buying a 3Gs even though Apple said it was available from day one.
I had to call my cell phone provider every day at first and then eventually weekly. It made me a bit angry at first and I think it's worth talking about, but it didn't' stop me buying one eventually anyway.[/QUOTE
Gazoobee, you complain allot. Why do you pick so many fights? & Why do you have such a relentless ego?
No?
Just more idiots trying to create buzz about a non-existent product?
That's what I thought lol.
(jk)
Can't wait to see this thing in all honesty.
The last thing Appleinsider needs is Wall Street taking its articles seriously. Appleinsider is more about rumors, wishful thinking, forums and some reportage of press releases. It is not the place to go for an indepth researched business report.
Dave
Nobody has suggested that AI should be a business report or that Wall Street should take them seriously. Indeed, it would be silly to expect either.
But it is a Forum that has global reach today. AI often shows up among the top handful of Google News headlines related to Apple. It is taken seriously. If all that can be made consonant with improved writing, especially when it is low-cost (or even no-cost) to do so, it is all to the good, regardless of topic.
Why would anyone not want that? I can't imagine that you think that good writing and proper use of the English language (esp. when it comes to tech and financial writing) are of no consequence?
As an aside, I do congratulate AI on the generally vastly improved quality of writing compared to a couple of years ago. They have most definitely worked at it, and it shows. (And, I am not, in the least bit, trying to be condescending here).
Apple announced a tablet?
No?
Just more idiots trying to create buzz about a non-existent product?
That's what I thought lol.
(jk)
Can't wait to see this thing in all honesty.
Maybe even the market is tired of the rumors based on the stock results today
Decisions, decisions.
So Apple can either bring out a 10-inch tablet retailing for in excess of $700 to make a small, insignificant profit, or Apple can release a tablet with let's say a 7-inch screen, priced more in the range of $500 in base form, to make billions.
Decisions, decisions.
Or Apple can make a desirable 10" tablet computer than can replace your MacBook portable computer, and in certain ways will not only be more versitle, but will surprisingly do more. Furthermore they give it an OLED display and NAND Flash memory of 128GB. They charge $1,399 and offer an additional subsidized model for $999 and still sell millions and a larger profit margin. But even more importantly they change how consumers look at their laptops. This is the future of the personal computer. And people always pay a premium to get their hands on the future.
Imagination is more important than "decisions" here.
Yeah what a bunch of assumtions...
- We hear Apple is introducing a new product soon.
- What is it? How much will it cost? Who is the target?
- We have not the slightest idea, but they're gonna make $3 billion the first year.
Well said, haha!
OF NOTE I REGRET THE USE OF AN OFFENSIVE TERM HERE
FORGIVE ME
Maybe even the market is tired of the rumors based on the stock results today
bad apple day
Or Apple can make a desirable 10" tablet computer than can replace your MacBook portable computer, and in certain ways will not only be more versitle, but will surprisingly do more. Furthermore they give it an OLED display and NAND Flash memory of 128GB. They charge $1,399 and offer an additional subsidized model for $999 and still sell millions and a larger profit margin. But even more importantly they change how consumers look at their laptops. This is the future of the personal computer. And people always pay a premium to get their hands on the future.
Imagination is more important than "decisions" here.
Maybe but not likely. Steve Jobs is not Moses bringing the commandments down from the mountain and contrary to what some might imagine parting the Red Sea isn't going to happen.
Keep in mind that for many consumers, laptops have evolved into a desktop replacement and now, it would seem, there is this idea that you can replace that desktop replacement with a tablet device. There are problems with that that are simply a function of physics. For openers a tablet is a handheld unit and that means you have to tie up atleast one hand to hold the thing. This is inherently bad news if you want to do typing of a more advanced sort than the one-finger approach. Next is the fact that you can't use even laptop CPUs, GPUs, and the like. In other words, you have to take quite a few steps back in performance. Try editing HD video with an ARM processor. Heck try running any number of more demanding software apps on such a unit and watch as that shinny new tablet takes you back to what computers were like to use quite a few years ago.
If Apple could come up with a tablet able to serve as one's main computer, yes, you're right, for such a device they could easily charge in excess of $1,000. But based on what we know about the state of today's technology, such a device simply is incapable of being assembled by any company. Keep in mind that in many respects Apple does very little in the way of developing technology. The company is great at doing software and in bringing together components provided by outside sources to put out devices that are usually quite a lot of fun to use. But they don't do a lot in terms of developing CPUs and the like. As such, as secretive as Apple might be, their suppliers are less so and we can more or less know a lot about the bits and pieces that are at Apple's disposal.
A tablet that is a companion to a good desktop or decent-calibre laptop is likely but a tablet that is a replacement for those devices seems to me, at this time, based on what we know about Apple's suppliers, pretty much an impossibility.
Maybe but not likely. Steve Jobs is not Moses bringing the commandments down from the mountain and contrary to what some might imagine parting the Red Sea isn't going to happen.
Less metaphor and more examples. I never said he was going to part the red sea. Every touchscreen phone nowadays is automatically compared to the iPhone, even unconsciously. If done right this tablet could have a similar impact on mindshare. It will be priced just out of reach, so it will even be more appealing, because its harder to get. Then when they lower it by $200 after a year or so people will think it's a bargain at the new price, and some people will save. More importunely though, if done right it would end up being a laptop replacement for people, which would further justify the higher price. If they market and design this device, hardware-wise and software-wise as a "replacement portable computer" (as opposed to merely an entertainment/media device) I see this device being more important than the iPhone. There, I said it.
Keep in mind that for many consumers, laptops have evolved into a desktop replacement and now, it would seem, there is this idea that you can replace that desktop replacement with a tablet device. There are problems with that that are simply a function of physics. For openers a tablet is a handheld unit and that means you have to tie up atleast one hand to hold the thing. This is inherently bad news if you want to do typing of a more advanced sort than the one-finger approach.
I think you're wrong. Not that its not a handheld device per se, but that it's only a handheld device. No, I see this tablet being additionally and lap and table device. This is how it replaces a laptop, because you can use it in the same way also. How? By having a cleverly design built-in stand of sorts. I like to call this -- and I have banging on and on and on about this part (as I think it's not only important, but crucial to the tablet's success -- a "push-stand". When pressed the push-stand would reveal itself from the back of the tablet, it would run across the full upper rear of the device, and in the open position it would allow the tablet to rest on and flat surface, like a tray, table or desk at such and angle as to be a nice balance between typing and viewing the screen. Sure, I reckon if you really type a lot you'll probably be faster typing on a laptop with a hardware keyboard, but most computer users do not type a lot. Also important, when in the closed position the stand would be hidden and flush with the rear. Like the software keyboard, it would be there when you want it, but gone when you don't.
This stand is the thing that scares me the most, as I feel "it is the most important hardware design feature the tablet will need to have".
Imagine this: The stand pops out 2", and holds the tablet at a resting position of 18º, so you can place the tablet on a table and type and a pretty decent pace. Now imagine you turn the tablet upside-down and use the same stand to hold the device 80º. You see the angle and design of this stand could be cleverly designed in such a way, so you won't need to third-party dock or gadget to watch movies on a plane, or type that essay on a train. This is why the design of this stand scares me, cause I can see the design it needs, and I'm afraid Apple might not see it. I hope they design the stand this way, so it works in both orientations, and I don't mean portrait, I mean almost flat for typing and almost upright, i.e. movie mode.
With the iPhone, for example, Apple went against every shred of conventional wisdom out there, and ended up proving that they knew the market better than the market knows itself. Apple did this with Macs as well, in a recession.
It's quite possible the tablet will make a huge splash at the Jan 27th event and that everyone will want one. This is Apple, after all.
I think you're wrong. Not that its not a handheld device per se, but that it's only a handheld device. No, I see this tablet being additionally and lap and table device. This is how it replaces a laptop, because you can use it in the same way also. How? By having a cleverly design built-in stand of sorts. I like to call this -- and I have banging on and on and on about this part (as I think it's not only important, but crucial to the tablet's success -- a "push-stand". When pressed the push-stand would reveal itself from the back of the tablet, it would run across the full upper rear of the device, and in the open position it would allow the tablet to rest on and flat surface, like a tray, table or desk at such and angle as to be a nice balance between typing and viewing the screen. Sure, I reckon if you really type a lot you'll probably be faster typing on a laptop with a hardware keyboard, but most computer users do not type a lot. Also important, when in the closed position the stand would be hidden and flush with the rear. Like the software keyboard, it would be there when you want it, but gone when you don't.
This stand is the thing that scares me the most, as I feel "it is the most important hardware design feature the tablet will need to have".
Imagine this: The stand pops out 2", and holds the tablet at a resting position of 18º, so you can place the tablet on a table and type and a pretty decent pace. Now imagine you turn the tablet upside-down and use the same stand to hold the device 80º. You see the angle and design of this stand could be cleverly designed in such a way, so you won't need to third-party dock or gadget to watch movies on a plane, or type that essay on a train. This is why the design of this stand scares me, cause I can see the design it needs, and I'm afraid Apple might not see it. I hope they design the stand this way, so it works in both orientations, and I don't mean portrait, I mean almost flat for typing and almost upright, i.e. movie mode.
That still doesn't fix other failings of a design like the tablet would have on account of it is limited by today's ultraportable technology, the most significant of which is a shortage of raw horsepower. There simply isn't a high-powered CPU available to work in such a confined, portable device. And what about graphics horsepower?
If we're talking about a laptop that is primarily being used as a compliment to a proper desktop, well now, that's another matter entirely. For some functions performed away from a good desktop, the tablet could conceivably be a good alternative to a more cumbersome laptop. If you want a portable solution for browsing, media playback, reading, sharing photos, basic organizing, some basic, though entertaining, gaming and so on and so on, the tablet would get it done. And if Apple can overcome some significant interface hurdles, as you suggest they could, such a device would be a handy machine to have with you when taking notes at a college lecture, etc.
What I question is the suggestion that the tablet could, at this time, be able to entirely replace a proper laptop or desktop unit. Not a chance.
As such, Apple can't sell this thing if they are thinking $1,000. It's about as likely to work as the Cube before it. Think of it as the Cube of portables. A cool device nobody wants because there are simply better alternatives in terms of bang for the buck. For instance, if your budget for all things computer is let's say $1,500 and you want to go Mac, if you buy a $1,000 tablet, you can't afford even the cheapest Apple laptop to go with it. If video editing, for instance, is part of what you want to do, kiss that goodbye. Wouldn't you, instead, buy a laptop, even one costing a little more than $1,000 and compliment that with maybe a Touch? You could do that with $1,500, maybe even with room to spare.
In short, there's no market for a $1,000 tablet because for very little more you can have a full-function laptop that is more commonplace but also way more powerful.
What I question is the suggestion that the tablet could, at this time, be able to entirely replace a proper laptop or desktop unit. Not a chance.
I have to take issue with your use of the term "proper laptop." Since it is undefined (and I think resistant to definition) I think you've used it as a term of convenience to describe how you use a laptop. Hence, it is really only meaningful only to you and not a basis for an argument.
As such, Apple can't sell this thing if they are thinking $1,000. It's about as likely to work as the Cube before it. Think of it as the Cube of portables. A cool device nobody wants because there are simply better alternatives in terms of bang for the buck. For instance, if your budget for all things computer is let's say $1,500 and you want to go Mac, if you buy a $1,000 tablet, you can't afford even the cheapest Apple laptop to go with it. If video editing, for instance, is part of what you want to do, kiss that goodbye. Wouldn't you, instead, buy a laptop, even one costing a little more than $1,000 and compliment that with maybe a Touch? You could do that with $1,500, maybe even with room to spare.
In short, there's no market for a $1,000 tablet because for very little more you can have a full-function laptop that is more commonplace but also way more powerful.
Your comparison to the Cube is really a reach. The Cube was a PowerMac in a snazzy form factor -- nothing more. Functionally it was no different than any other Mac, so the sale needed to be made on the basis of the form factor alone. I think the smart money is on the slate device not being a Mac shoehorned into a small form factor, or the iPhone expanded to a large one. The best betting, I think, is on it being something with is neither of these things. I don't see how we can make any intelligent guesses as to its worth until we know what it is and what it does.
The "news" is a good read, too. A select quote: "You made a "product" to compete with their "product," tastefully arranging your regiment, only to discover that they hadn't made a product at all - they made a narrative. A statement about how technology should interface with a life."
- Jasen.
I have to take issue with your use of the term "proper laptop." Since it is undefined (and I think resistant to definition) I think you've used it as a term of convenience to describe how you use a laptop. Hence, it is really only meaningful only to you and not a basis for an argument.
Your comparison to the Cube is really a reach. The Cube was a PowerMac in a snazzy form factor -- nothing more. Functionally it was no different than any other Mac, so the sale needed to be made on the basis of the form factor alone. I think the smart money is on the slate device not being a Mac shoehorned into a small form factor, or the iPhone expanded to a large one. The best betting, I think, is on it being something with is neither of these things. I don't see how we can make any intelligent guesses as to its worth until we know what it is and what it does.
By proper laptop I mean a device that can do what we now expect a legitimate personal computer to do and that includes video editing (including HD), convenient multi-tasking, photo manipulation, effectively running demanding gaming applications, and so on and so on.
There simply doesn't exist at this time CPUs and GPUs with the required low power consumption and low heat output needed for a handheld like the tablet as it is being projected which at the same time have the horsepower to, among other things, handle editing HD video files. This is a reality that simply cannot be ignored.
I can't understand how questions of user interface even enter into this discussion. I mean what does it matter if Apple has figured out how to solve the tablet form factor's numerous interface flaws if once you get your data into the device, CPU and GPU performance more akin to pre-G4 days awaits you. This is a recipe for a lot of very disappointed consumers who have, for the most part, grown accustomed to performance levels far in advance of what handheld hardware offers at this time.
The comparison to the Cube is very appropriate. The Cube was a device with a clever form factor but with performance that was very poor relative to the device's cost. A $1.000 tablet would be pretty much the same. $1,000 today buys very good performance but the tablet would be significantly underpowered for more demanding actitivities. This is not something that is negotiable, that can be fixed with clever design tricks. Apple tweaked OS X for it's handheld devices like the Touch and iPhone because the full OS would run poorly on those devices. Handheld hardware is what it is and Apple is in the same boat as every other electronics manufacturer, namely having to develop products that are designed to work with current hardware.
If anyone wants to predict that Apple at this time is capable of bringing out a $1,000 tablet with the horsepower of a MacBook, well good luck with that. I don't doubt that eventually this will be possible. When that happens a tablet serving as someone's only computer might well be plausible. But right now, I'd say expecting such an amazing accomplishment being unveiled on Wednesay is significanly worse than amusingly naive.
By proper laptop I mean a device that can do what we now expect a legitimate personal computer to do and that includes video editing (including HD), convenient multi-tasking, photo manipulation, effectively running demanding gaming applications, and so on and so on.
There simply doesn't exist at this time CPUs and GPUs with the required low power consumption and low heat output needed for a handheld like the tablet as it is being projected which at the same time have the horsepower to, among other things, handle editing HD video files. This is a reality that simply cannot be ignored.
I can't understand how questions of user interface even enter into this discussion. I mean what does it matter if Apple has figured out how to solve the tablet form factor's numerous interface flaws if once you get your data into the device, CPU and GPU performance more akin to pre-G4 days awaits you. This is a recipe for a lot of very disappointed consumers who have, for the most part, grown accustomed to performance levels far in advance of what handheld hardware offers at this time.
The comparison to the Cube is very appropriate. The Cube was a device with a clever form factor but with performance that was very poor relative to the device's cost. A $1.000 tablet would be pretty much the same. $1,000 today buys very good performance but the tablet would be significantly underpowered for more demanding actitivities. This is not something that is negotiable, that can be fixed with clever design tricks. Apple tweaked OS X for it's handheld devices like the Touch and iPhone because the full OS would run poorly on those devices. Handheld hardware is what it is and Apple is in the same boat as every other electronics manufacturer, namely having to develop products that are designed to work with current hardware.
If anyone wants to predict that Apple at this time is capable of bringing out a $1,000 tablet with the horsepower of a MacBook, well good luck with that. I don't doubt that eventually this will be possible. When that happens a tablet serving as someone's only computer might well be plausible. But right now, I'd say expecting such an amazing accomplishment being unveiled on Wednesay is significanly worse than amusingly naive.
You see, there you go again. What does "legitimate" mean? Only what you've already decided that it means. You might as well say that a surf board is not a legitimate car. This device, whatever it turns out to be, deserves to be judged on its own merits, meaning by its functionality, not by some arbitrary method of comparison to some other device that is designed for an entirely different purpose.
Of course the user interface is important. Is the iPhone all about "horsepower," or is about how the use interacts with it? If you say the former, then I don't think we have much further to discuss on that subject.
And you are wrong about the Cube. Its performance was hardly "very poor" relative to the cost. In fact, it used exactly the same CPU, system bus, and graphics cards as the tower G4 sold at the very same time. It was even less expensive than a PowerMac with the same specs. It was a PowerMac G4 in a different form factor. That was its only distinction.
You see, there you go again. What does "legitimate" mean? Only what you've already decided that it means. You might as well say that a surf board is not a legitimate car. This device, whatever it turns out to be, deserves to be judged on its own merits, meaning by its functionality, not by some arbitrary method of comparison to some other device that is designed for an entirely different purpose.
Of course the user interface is important. Is the iPhone all about "horsepower," or is about how the use interacts with it? If you say the former, then I don't think we have much further to discuss on that subject.
And you are wrong about the Cube. Its performance was hardly "very poor" relative to the cost. In fact, it used exactly the same CPU, system bus, and graphics cards as the tower G4 sold at the very same time. It was even less expensive than a PowerMac with the same specs. It was a PowerMac G4 in a different form factor. That was its only distinction.
The Cube was expensive relative to its specs because its form factor was expensive to produce at the time.
As for the tablet being judged on what it can do, my point quite simply is that we don't need to wait for Wednesday to determine if this device will be powerful enough to edit HD video. Clearly it will not be. In fact it will not be powerful enough for a lot of functions that the latest Apple computers handle with ease. So, my original point stands, namely that this device will not serve as a laptop replacement.
The bottom line is that it will be a laptop/desktop compliment and must be priced accordingly in order to succeed. The average consumer is not prepared under current economic conditions to pay at least $1,000 for a computer, be it laptop or desktop and then turn around and spend similar money on a less powerful, portable complimentary unit. To my way of thinking, if Apple comes up with a range of $500 to $700 for the unit, they will have little trouble selling them by the millions. If Apple is considering a costlier, bigger unit to this device, they need to position it as a niche product with a very limited production run. They make the Air, for example, which isn't a big seller and that's OK because they get their volume out of other MacBook units. But if the Air had been the unit that Apple had started off with, it likely would have been perceived as a failure.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the idea of a 10-inch tablet. I just don't expect that Apple could, at this time, pull off a 10-inch unit costing in around $500, not considering the grade of hardware they like to employ. Besides, you need to have something to move up to for an encore. Start off with a 7-inch tablet to follow up the Touch and then follow up the 7-inch Touch with a 10-inch Touch, all the while maintaining the same price point. This is how Apple has operated in recent years and it makes sense. By the way, I'm not saying that simply moving up from a 7-inch screen to a 10-inch unit will alone push the price of the unit too far. But you don't simply go with a bigger screen. A bigger case, a more robust battery, more storage (to accommodate larger files needed to feed a bigger screen), and so on and so on. Simply by settling for a smaller screen it becomes easier to meet a particular price point without compromising quality or performance. In addition, files made for the current Touch would look a lot better on a 7-inch screen than they would on a 10-inch unit. This is no small thing because it's going to take time for software developers to bring out products that are designed for the larger unit. Bringing out a device that hits the ground running in the sense that there is a large body of content already available for it, now that's a product that is going to be perceived by early adopters as valuable.
I don't care what Apple comes up with regarding interface. If they bring out a $1,000 unit with a 10-inch screen, it will not sell well for quite some time. Keep in mind, too, that the price of laptops, even Apple's, are trending down, which would make such a unit seem even less like something you'd be prepared to drop $1.000 on. My hope is that Jobs and Co. learned a valuable lesson with the Cube which, by the way, had flop written all over it right from the start. The instant they unveiled it, my reaction was something like, "Those specs for that price? What are they thinking?" If a $1.000 tablet is unveiled on Wednesday my reaction will be, "Those specs for that price? What are they thinking?"