What direction do you think Apple's portables will go?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
So what of them? Will the PB get a new case, or just a speed bump? Is the 12" iBook doomed, or will both make way for 13'? Will the iBook go to a G4 or Sahara (provided the rest of Apple's products go to 200MHz+ busses)? Will the PB get a G5 soon after the PM? Lets go to say, 2004 here.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    macgregormacgregor Posts: 1,434member
    Hey Spart: Anyone who implies that the iBook 12" is doomed sure isn't interested in being taken seriously!



    Portables will go the direction of desktops as ALWAYS. Cinema displays first, PB widescreens soon after. Combo drives in desktops first, in books soon after. This isn't rocket science and it isn't all that interesting to speculate because most of the "new" direction is in form factor not capability.



    Thus iBooks will continue to evolve as mobile iMacs and TiBooks will evolve like mobile PowerMac video studios. The only thing I see that would be interesting is if Apple went to subnotebooks.



    Now as to "new" design, I would like to see more variety of metals or transparency in the iBook, but not until Apple percieves that iBooks are getting old....something that is still awhile off.



    As for capability there is only the obvious, resolution and speed in the TiBook. These are mostly mobo design questions and hopefully the people who designed the mobo for the ibook are working on portables now.
  • Reply 2 of 26
    ppc8500ppc8500 Posts: 14member
    [quote]Originally posted by MacGregor:

    <strong>

    Portables will go the direction of desktops as ALWAYS. Cinema displays first, PB widescreens soon after. Combo drives in desktops first, in books soon after. This isn't rocket science and it isn't all that interesting to speculate because most of the "new" direction is in form factor not capability.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>

    <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />



    Check your info there, buddy. The first Mac to ship witht he combo drive was none other than the iBook (ice).



    [ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: PPC8500 ]</p>
  • Reply 3 of 26
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    The iBook also ushered in AirPort, and also (IIRC) AGP graphics.



    Apple will introduce innovations when and where they make sense.



    [ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
  • Reply 4 of 26
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    [quote]Originally posted by PPC8500:

    <strong>

    <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />



    Check your info there, buddy. The first Mac to ship witht he combo drive was none other than the iBook (ice).



    [ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: PPC8500 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Suprised to find that this is correct, the original Dual USB iBook shipped with a combo drive, then a little more than 2 months later the PM got it...AppleSpec seems to verify this but does not say whether the 667, 533, or 467MHz PM's shipped with a combo drive...nor the 400, 500, or 600MHz iMacs. Can someone verify this.
  • Reply 5 of 26
    warpdwarpd Posts: 204member
    The man's right!! iBook came first!!
  • Reply 6 of 26
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    [quote]Originally posted by Spart:

    <strong>



    Suprised to find that this is correct, the original Dual USB iBook shipped with a combo drive, then a little more than 2 months later the PM got it...AppleSpec seems to verify this but does not say whether the 667, 533, or 467MHz PM's shipped with a combo drive...nor the 400, 500, or 600MHz iMacs. Can someone verify this.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Time of combodrive inclusion:

    Spring 2001: iceBook

    Summer 2001: PM QS

    Fall 2001: TiBook G4

    Winter 2002: Infected Mushroom G4
  • Reply 7 of 26
    cubitcubit Posts: 846member
    The portables need clear, sharp screens with fantastic resolution, something like the iBook now! The TiBook has the problem of being a shade too large to really carry about, and has a screen which is sorely in need of an update, It needs something like an ADC to use Apple's own screens when parked at the desk.



    The iBook is perfect for note-taking, back-packing, and the like, but needs the G4 to make OSX real.



    So, what will Apple do? Zoom the processor on the TiBook to the fastest G4 they can get into the current box (I wish that was curved like th Pismo) and make the screen as good as on the iBook or new iMac at the HTV proportions it now has. That will not make it smaller, or easier to use, but it will preserve it as a portable PowerMac that does not need a basestation to be a professional machine for the video and/or editing crowd who really need all that stuff--dual processors anyone?



    What about the rest of us? Take the iBook in its 12" configuation and give it a G4, perhaps the same one as in the present PowerBooks before they go up. The styling and ease of use are grand (though I might throw in a plug-in port cover to keep the dust out on the road) and it will be a fully integrated part of the iMac/iBook family running OSX.



    I have yet to get real life out of OSX on my 500 MgHz iBook or my PowerBook G3 pismo under the G3. Some claim more. Wish I could <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 8 of 26
    jasonppjasonpp Posts: 308member
    I'm a huge advocate of high resolution screens.



    I'd like to see the 12.1" iBook go to 1280x1024 (but 1024x768 is really great on it now) and the 14.1" book to 1280x1024 or 1400x1080. My wife's 14.1" Dell has this rez and it's amazing!! I use Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash and Illustrator + a few browsers and Word and I stil have lots of room!



    The TiPB needs as close to 1600x1024 as they can get, and 1920x1080 (or whatever HD is) would be forward thinking.



    Fot those of you who think these are too fine, try it for a week. Try running OS X at 1600x1200 for a week and try yot go back... no way man.



    Text can scale.
  • Reply 9 of 26
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    the Best formula would be to make them 20% better and 10-20% cheaper.



    All models about 20% faster (one or two full clocks of the PPC) 20% bigger HDD. And a 10-20% price drop on different models. Maybe not on each model exactly, but say if the current 667PB dropped into the 55PB's price slot, and a 800+ G4 moved into the top two slots (about 10% cheaper than current faster and fastest models)



    More Graphics memory on all notebooks. 256MB base (one slot) on the top two iBooks. 512MB base on all powerbooks -- 2x 256 on the bottom end, and 1x 512 on the mid, 1GB for Ultimate (or whatever they call it) 30GB base HDD on top two iBooks. 40GB base on all powerbooks, 48GB and 60GB as options. Increased educational discount on iBooks.



    And DVI-I (or whatever the analogue and digital DVI port is called) on all laptops. Need VGA, use VGA plug. Need DVI, use DVI plug. One port, two outputs. You choose, everybody's happy.



    The strength of Apple's laptops was the relative value. You realy had to make excuses for the towers in many cases. The laptops were competitive with any PC offering. But, as PC laptops have made great improvements in battery life and power in recent months, unless Apple starts making great improvements in their laptop offerings power and price, you will soon need to make excuses for their portables as well.



    Oh yeah, and bundle a firewire superdrive with the 'ultimate' TiBook.
  • Reply 10 of 26
    jasonppjasonpp Posts: 308member
    I know! I was sold on a new TiPB (once they get the resolution up to par) but now there's this toshiba with 1600x1200 display, Geforce 4 card, tons and tons of desktop level performance components, and the coolest trackpad around.



    The trackpad is a little 160x160 lcd screen!!! It changes to whatever you want. Things like numeric keypad, page scrolling areas, calculator + + + are available.



    Now with only 1.5 hours of mobile use and close to 9 pounds with accesories it's not really a portable system, but it's a fantastic desktop replacement and perfect for tight spots.



    Oh, and it's $1999.



    Just wish it ran OS X ... XP scares me...
  • Reply 11 of 26
    ybotybot Posts: 329member
    [quote]Originally posted by JasonPP:

    <strong>I know! I was sold on a new TiPB (once they get the resolution up to par) but now there's this toshiba with 1600x1200 display, Geforce 4 card, tons and tons of desktop level performance components, and the coolest trackpad around.



    The trackpad is a little 160x160 lcd screen!!! It changes to whatever you want. Things like numeric keypad, page scrolling areas, calculator + + + are available.



    Now with only 1.5 hours of mobile use and close to 9 pounds with accesories it's not really a portable system, but it's a fantastic desktop replacement and perfect for tight spots.



    Oh, and it's $1999.



    Just wish it ran OS X ... XP scares me...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    That sounds interesting using a teeny LCD as the trackpad. Impractical, but cool. Got a link to the product on Toshiba's site?
  • Reply 12 of 26
    [quote]Originally posted by Ybot:

    <strong>



    That sounds interesting using a teeny LCD as the trackpad. Impractical, but cool. Got a link to the product on Toshiba's site?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    congrats Ybot, your post was the 30,000th post in Future Hardeware!!!



    you win...nothing.
  • Reply 13 of 26
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by Ybot:

    <strong>



    That sounds interesting using a teeny LCD as the trackpad. Impractical, but cool. Got a link to the product on Toshiba's site?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    why would you need a link? well anyway, here it is for all you lazy folks:



    <a href="http://www.csd.toshiba.com/cgi-bin/tais/pc/[email protected]@@@1873857810.1015 [email protected]@@@&BV_EngineID=cadcdhflefhjbfekcghcfmfdglk .0&comm=CS&plin=Portable%20Computers&pfam=Satellit e&poid=207513&Adoid=164618" target="_blank">Toshiba laptop</a>



    [edited URL for length. - Amorph]



    [ 03-06-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
  • Reply 14 of 26
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by JasonPP:

    <strong>

    Text can scale.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    palletes and basic UI elements can't
  • Reply 15 of 26
    jasonppjasonpp Posts: 308member
    Good. OS X has very a child like interface and I feel like it's made of crayons (translucent ones!) half the time. The more we can hide it the better since Apple is pulling a Microsoft and forbiding any OS skins.



    The more you can eliminate any interface, the better. Take the iPod for example, perfect case of doing the most with the smallest interface possible.
  • Reply 16 of 26
    warpdwarpd Posts: 204member
    [quote]The more we can hide it the better since Apple is pulling a Microsoft and forbiding any OS skins. <hr></blockquote>

    I hate to say this, believe me, but Microsoft has been realy open to allowing developers to customize the UI. There are a ton of commercially available "skinning" applications for windows, that make it look like anything you want. Sure, it is in part because it suits MS to allow others to cover their deficiencies, however in the really real world, nobody tries to control the user experience as much as Apple. This has it's up side; "the whole widget" things just work mentality, but also it's downside. Robin.
  • Reply 17 of 26
    clonenodeclonenode Posts: 392member
    The look and feel of MacOS X is tied in tightly with Apple's branding efforts. Skins would dilute the entire message.
  • Reply 18 of 26
    gambitgambit Posts: 475member
    I think Apple did a good job with OS X's interface, and, in retrospect, it was actually a really good idea for them to make Aqua a little bit larger than Platinum. It didn't make sense seeing it on a 800x600 iBook, but seeing it on high-res monitors (ie, where monitors are going) made tons of sense. Right now I'm using OS X at 1280x960 on a 19 inch screen, and going back to my Ti when I get home sometimes makes me check the res to make sure it's really at 1024x768. I love X and I like where Aqua is and where it's going, and it DEFINITELY looks better at higher resolutions. Because Apple designed the interface, I'm sure they knew why they made Aqua bigger, and I'm sure that reason is because they have higher res monitors coming out. If not soon than.... uh, soon.
  • Reply 19 of 26
    eric d.v.heric d.v.h Posts: 134member
    What direction do I think they'll go in? probably more of the same except faster. maybe a roll-up LEP(Light Emitting Polymer) display in a while.



    What direction would I like them to go in? I want a wearable! with CPUs as fast as they are at voice recognition. and HMDs as <a href="http://www.microopticalcorp.com/Products/EG7.html"; target="_blank">light and comfy</a> as they are. I think the time of the wearable has come. just ditch the keyboard for voice recognition. chuck the trackpad for eyeball/hand tracking and lose the bulky fold up display for a wrist/head mounted one. the computer would reside in a little belt-mounted (Curvy looking. remember. this _would_ be from Apple)box about the size and shape of a half-height brick.



    As for OS X's interface. Apple made a MAJOR blunder. instead of just requiring all graphics to be stored as resolution independant EPS/PDF graphics(And you know they could. we've all seen the 500 pixel wide blow-up of OS X's signature candy button). thus allowing me to have my 20" monitor's interface elements be the same size in meatspace inchs as on the original Macintosh's 9" display. Apple only made text and icons scaleable. and used bitmaps for the icons. instead of any kind of Quartz compatible content the author desired. thus resulting in users of small. high resolution displays not being much better off in OS X than any other OS. I won't even mention how Apple missed their big opportunity to make a speech based user interface that would be as big in OS X as the mouse was in &lt;=OS 9.





    Eric,



    [ 03-09-2002: Message edited by: Eric D.V.H ]</p>
  • Reply 20 of 26
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    Yeah the laptops need greater pixels/inch badly. The only Apple laptop with a decent LCD is the 12" ibook, it has the nicest pixel density. But the Titanium display is actually not very competitive, it needs much greater resolution. I'm surprised Apple hasn't bumped it up yet.



    It is bad news for Apple indeed that LCD prices are going up again. Apple needs to bump up the resolution on ALL of their LCD displays, and axe the 15" in favor of a 19" LCD.



    Currently comparing Apple displays to Wintel displays is a joke, the Wintels all have better resolution and such.



    [quote]

    Just wish it ran OS X ... XP scares me...

    <hr></blockquote>



    XP is crap. A friend of mine got a Compaq recently and she hates XP, says it tries to do everything for you, with hundreds of "Wizards" and all. It assumes the user is a dumbass. I tried convincing her to get a Mac but she didn't want to spend the money. Damn that sucks.
Sign In or Register to comment.