IDK, the idea of an expanded iOS running, with kb/touchpad, on a somewhat more powerful device than an iPad intrigues me.
There are several no-man's-lands separating iOS and OSX -- the file system and multiple, overlapping windows. The touch UI on the iPad could handle these -- but I think a mouse/touchpad would provide a superior experience.
Consider a device with 4-8GB RAM 128-256GB SSD.
Aside: My iMac 27" is awaiting service and I am typing this on a Mac Mini -- 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 320GB HDD ... It is pure agony compared to using a iPad 4 -- even though the Mini has a BT KB/Mouse and a 23" Cinema Display.
1) I'm not opposed to that option but it's been done before with awful results. But so had the tablet until Apple came along.
2) I'd still think it would be very close if not the same as the Aqua UI with the proper frameworks as an option for that type of setup, not unlike CarPlay being a separate UI that gets called, albeit a much larger one.
The ~$500 laptop price point is the largest part of the traditional PC segment and although post-pc devices are selling in huge amounts, over 300 million PCs are sold per year. It doesn't require iOS to target this though. Apple's entry Macbook Air uses a $315 processor. They could use one of those Atom or Celeron processors around $100. That would easily shave off $200 from the retail price to hit $799. It might even be possible to hit $699.
Although these processors are lower powered, computers hit an acceptable level of performance for basic use years ago and SSDs and larger amounts of RAM have boosted overall performance. That allows them to target 16% of the laptop sales they aren't right now, which would be around 30m units per year. Say they take 1/5th of that, that's 6m per year or 1.5m units per quarter on top of their ~5m Mac units already. The Mac makes up 12.5% of their revenue ($21b) so 6m x $799 = ~$5b increase (under 3% overall).
That's just revenue too and there's the effect of people buying cheaper models than before rather than just new buyers. I think it would help boost the Mac userbase but it's not going to do much for Apple's profits. Still, someone buying a Mac laptop might then be inclined to buy an iPhone and iPad. 1.5m per quarter is hardly anything though.
It is a shame that Apple sells 150m iPhones per year but only 16m Macs. Macs are upgraded less often now but even if a Mac user upgrades their iPhone 3 times as much, more than 2/3 of their iPhones are being sold to Windows users. That's no good at all. Given that the Mac side isn't making much money anyway, I reckon a lower laptop entry price would be the best route to go. Just as long as they keep the performance reasonable.
IDK, the idea of an expanded iOS running, with kb/touchpad, on a somewhat more powerful device than an iPad intrigues me.
There are several no-man's-lands separating iOS and OSX -- the file system and multiple, overlapping windows. The touch UI on the iPad could handle these -- but I think a mouse/touchpad would provide a superior experience.
Consider a device with 4-8GB RAM 128-256GB SSD.
Aside: My iMac 27" is awaiting service and I am typing this on a Mac Mini -- 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 320GB HDD ... It is pure agony compared to using a iPad 4 -- even though the Mini has a BT KB/Mouse and a 23" Cinema Display.
1) I'm not opposed to that option but it's been done before with awful results. But so had the tablet until Apple came along.
2) I'd still think it would be very close if not the same as the Aqua UI with the proper frameworks as an option for that type of setup, not unlike CarPlay being a separate UI that gets called, albeit a much larger one.
Ha! The potential is kind of piquing your interest too.
Imagine iCloud with a special format/access, like dropbox, for these crossover devices and Macs.
If PCs are trucks and iPads are cars -- then these devices would be SUVs.
I don't know that Apple needs to make a lot of money with this device but it certainly needs something between OS X and iOS.
The ~$500 laptop price point is the largest part of the traditional PC segment and although post-pc devices are selling in huge amounts, over 300 million PCs are sold per year. It doesn't require iOS to target this though. Apple's entry Macbook Air uses a $315 processor. They could use one of those Atom or Celeron processors around $100. That would easily shave off $200 from the retail price to hit $799. It might even be possible to hit $699.
Although these processors are lower powered, computers hit an acceptable level of performance for basic use years ago and SSDs and larger amounts of RAM have boosted overall performance. That allows them to target 16% of the laptop sales they aren't right now, which would be around 30m units per year. Say they take 1/5th of that, that's 6m per year or 1.5m units per quarter on top of their ~5m Mac units already. The Mac makes up 12.5% of their revenue ($21b) so 6m x $799 = ~$5b increase (under 3% overall).
That's just revenue too and there's the effect of people buying cheaper models than before rather than just new buyers. I think it would help boost the Mac userbase but it's not going to do much for Apple's profits. Still, someone buying a Mac laptop might then be inclined to buy an iPhone and iPad. 1.5m per quarter is hardly anything though.
It is a shame that Apple sells 150m iPhones per year but only 16m Macs. Macs are upgraded less often now but even if a Mac user upgrades their iPhone 3 times as much, more than 2/3 of their iPhones are being sold to Windows users. That's no good at all. Given that the Mac side isn't making much money anyway, I reckon a lower laptop entry price would be the best route to go. Just as long as they keep the performance reasonable.
Apple doesn't cater to the lowest common denominator. If the customer doesn't care about performance and would settle for a underpowered laptop, perhaps they actually need an iPad. Apple makes those.
In Steve own words : We dont ship junk / We don't offer stripped down lousy products
Amazing, that absolutely nothing has changed. The same morons, cynics, trolls, opportunists, liars, and douchebags are still drumming on "marketshare", and the same answer applies 100% today. Back in 2008, Apple had a sliver of the marketshare it had today- yet, it is still doomed today because of "marketshare", as if Apple hasn't proven itself yet. Unbelievable.
The ~$500 laptop price point is the largest part of the traditional PC segment and although post-pc devices are selling in huge amounts, over 300 million PCs are sold per year. It doesn't require iOS to target this though. Apple's entry Macbook Air uses a $315 processor. They could use one of those Atom or Celeron processors around $100. That would easily shave off $200 from the retail price to hit $799. It might even be possible to hit $699.
Mmm... A while back,on researching Intel, I discovered that Intel takes the CISC instructions of the x86 and through a proprietary process, real-tine converts them to RISC instructions which are executed.
Starting with Pentium 4, Intel redesigned it's microprocessors and used internal RISC core under the old CISC instructions. Since Pentium 4 all CISC instructions are divided into smaller parts and then executed by mentioned RISC core.
At the beginning it was clear for me that Intel decided to hide new internal architecture and force programmers to use "CISC shell". Thanks to this decision Intel could fully redesign microprocessors architecture without breaking compatibility, it's reasonable.
However I don't understand one thing, why Intel still keeps an internal RISC instructions set hidden for so many years? Why wouldn't they let programmers use RISC instructions like the use old x86 CISC instructions set?
If Intel keeps backward compatibility for so long (we still have virtual 8086 mode next to 64 bit mode), Why don't they allow us compile programs so they will bypass CISC instructions and use RISC core directly? This will open natural way to slowly abandon x86 instructions set, which is deprecated nowadays (this is the main reason why Intel decided to use RISC core inside, right?).
Ha! The potential is kind of piquing your interest too.
Imagine iCloud with a special format/access, like dropbox, for these crossover devices and Macs.
If PCs are trucks and iPads are cars -- then these devices would be SUVs.
I don't know that Apple needs to make a lot of money with this device but it certainly needs something between OS X and iOS.
Elegantly typed and dictated on my iPad 4.
If Apple can't even allow a guest account on the iPad or work/play environment, like on BBX, I wonder if they would seriously consider such a thing.
I had thought we discussed this back with the Motorola Atrix came on the market and again when the Asus PadFone arrived. It's one of those "no compromise" ideas that seems to be nothing but a compromise but with ARM and Apple's advancements in SoCs, and Apple controlling the OS if anyone can pull it off I think it's Apple.
Recently I talked about how I think Mac OS X (or something like it) on an A-series chip could work for Apple on an inexpensive notebook but that was just a single desktop OS on ARM. That seems more plausible to me than Apple making a dual-UI system because of the potential issues of getting the user to comprehend the difference.
We have no problem with that and oft it seems Apple says 'no' to something I think wouldn't have been an issue but we need to think about what Apple would likely do. For that reason I think Apple is more likely to grow and streamline their Cloud so that discreet devices can better interact with each other. I find Apple's documents in the cloud to be a great start.
A virtual semi transparent keyboard will solve the iPad screen real estate problem. Make the iPad 12 to 13 inch and it can be used as a full fledged computer. Arm CPU/GPU power isn't a problem, that's already equivalent to the best supercomputers of 1993. Adapting iOS shouldn't be a problem for Apple.
Ha! The potential is kind of piquing your interest too.
Imagine iCloud with a special format/access, like dropbox, for these crossover devices and Macs.
If PCs are trucks and iPads are cars -- then these devices would be SUVs.
I don't know that Apple needs to make a lot of money with this device but it certainly needs something between OS X and iOS.
Elegantly typed and dictated on my iPad 4.
If Apple can't even allow a guest account on the iPad or work/play environment, like on BBX, I wonder if they would seriously consider such a thing.
I had thought we discussed this back with the Motorola Atrix came on the market and again when the Asus PadFone arrived. It's one of those "no compromise" ideas that seems to be nothing but a compromise but with ARM and Apple's advancements in SoCs, and Apple controlling the OS if anyone can pull it off I think it's Apple.
Recently I talked about how I think Mac OS X (or something like it) on an A-series chip could work for Apple on an inexpensive notebook but that was just a single desktop OS on ARM. That seems more plausible to me than Apple making a dual-UI system because of the potential issues of getting the user to comprehend the difference.
We have no problem with that and oft it seems Apple says 'no' to something I think wouldn't have been an issue but we need to think about what Apple would likely do. For that reason I think Apple is more likely to grow and streamline their Cloud so that discreet devices can better interact with each other. I find Apple's documents in the cloud to be a great start.
I agree with everything you say.
FWIW, the SUV device I was discussing would not have a dual UI. It would be an unique, non-touch UI -- more similar to the desktop.
Seriously ?!? How much does this firm and this consultant make.... This has to be the most retarded piece of research yet ! Lets make a netbook... lol Are they familiar with the iPad ?
I don't see how this guy's solution makes Apple any money at all...
The costs involved with "creating" a notebook of this type, plus all of the programming required to get iOS to be "full featured" and work optimally with mice and keyboards is astronomical.
And whats the benefit? To sell a notebook for a little less than the macbook air and a little more than the iPad?!
Which only leads to Apple cannibalizing its own products for incredibly low profit margins...
This guy really needs to be fired.
His iAnywhere concept is even more stupid considering that many Apple executives clearly stated that they will not be doing this.
Sounds like a bunch of old timers who know absolutely nothing about tech, like people who were on the board of Apple when they were about to go bankrupt.
Google/Android are going to force Apple prices down. Not down to their levels, but down.
Do you know how many people would be perfectly fine with a $300 Chromebook? LOTS. So these days when a Dad can outfit a wife and two kids with Chromebook under the price of one MacBook Pro, that has to be tempting.
My wife doesn't need a MacBook Air. She needs a Mac 'Chrome' Book. An iOS laptop in the $500 range would make her very happy, with auto iCloud Time Machine backup.
Oh, and iCloud needs to be about $25 a year per terabyte. As YouTube demonstrates, that's an easy price to manage.
This is where things are going, whether we OS X purists like it or not.
Apple has said numerous times it was not going to put a touch screen on a traditional computer.
Which doesn't rule out a non traditional approach. Nor does it eliminate other product categories.
I can see Apple offering an expanded range of iOS devices such as a larger iPad, an Apple TV and the like. I can also see something somewhat laptop like. However there is little incentive for Apple to make iOS into another Mac OS.
As for an ARM based laptop, I'm all for it if it runs real Mac OS and doesn't skimp on support hardware (RAM and flash storage). ARM, especially in an upgraded A8 chip, could be very interesting for the type of laptop use I usually engage in.
Comments
One could say it was put through the Shredder.
1) I'm not opposed to that option but it's been done before with awful results. But so had the tablet until Apple came along.
2) I'd still think it would be very close if not the same as the Aqua UI with the proper frameworks as an option for that type of setup, not unlike CarPlay being a separate UI that gets called, albeit a much larger one.
Although these processors are lower powered, computers hit an acceptable level of performance for basic use years ago and SSDs and larger amounts of RAM have boosted overall performance. That allows them to target 16% of the laptop sales they aren't right now, which would be around 30m units per year. Say they take 1/5th of that, that's 6m per year or 1.5m units per quarter on top of their ~5m Mac units already. The Mac makes up 12.5% of their revenue ($21b) so 6m x $799 = ~$5b increase (under 3% overall).
That's just revenue too and there's the effect of people buying cheaper models than before rather than just new buyers. I think it would help boost the Mac userbase but it's not going to do much for Apple's profits. Still, someone buying a Mac laptop might then be inclined to buy an iPhone and iPad. 1.5m per quarter is hardly anything though.
It is a shame that Apple sells 150m iPhones per year but only 16m Macs. Macs are upgraded less often now but even if a Mac user upgrades their iPhone 3 times as much, more than 2/3 of their iPhones are being sold to Windows users. That's no good at all. Given that the Mac side isn't making much money anyway, I reckon a lower laptop entry price would be the best route to go. Just as long as they keep the performance reasonable.
She's probably the only good thing in the movie.
Ha! The potential is kind of piquing your interest too.
Imagine iCloud with a special format/access, like dropbox, for these crossover devices and Macs.
If PCs are trucks and iPads are cars -- then these devices would be SUVs.
I don't know that Apple needs to make a lot of money with this device but it certainly needs something between OS X and iOS.
Elegantly typed and dictated on my iPad 4.
Apple doesn't cater to the lowest common denominator. If the customer doesn't care about performance and would settle for a underpowered laptop, perhaps they actually need an iPad. Apple makes those.
In Steve own words : We dont ship junk / We don't offer stripped down lousy products
Amazing, that absolutely nothing has changed. The same morons, cynics, trolls, opportunists, liars, and douchebags are still drumming on "marketshare", and the same answer applies 100% today. Back in 2008, Apple had a sliver of the marketshare it had today- yet, it is still doomed today because of "marketshare", as if Apple hasn't proven itself yet. Unbelievable.
Mmm... A while back,on researching Intel, I discovered that Intel takes the CISC instructions of the x86 and through a proprietary process, real-tine converts them to RISC instructions which are executed.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5806589/why-does-intel-hide-internal-risc-core-in-their-processors
If Apple can't even allow a guest account on the iPad or work/play environment, like on BBX, I wonder if they would seriously consider such a thing.
I had thought we discussed this back with the Motorola Atrix came on the market and again when the Asus PadFone arrived. It's one of those "no compromise" ideas that seems to be nothing but a compromise but with ARM and Apple's advancements in SoCs, and Apple controlling the OS if anyone can pull it off I think it's Apple.
Recently I talked about how I think Mac OS X (or something like it) on an A-series chip could work for Apple on an inexpensive notebook but that was just a single desktop OS on ARM. That seems more plausible to me than Apple making a dual-UI system because of the potential issues of getting the user to comprehend the difference.
We have no problem with that and oft it seems Apple says 'no' to something I think wouldn't have been an issue but we need to think about what Apple would likely do. For that reason I think Apple is more likely to grow and streamline their Cloud so that discreet devices can better interact with each other. I find Apple's documents in the cloud to be a great start.
Make the iPad 12 to 13 inch and it can be used as a full fledged computer.
Arm CPU/GPU power isn't a problem, that's already equivalent to the best supercomputers of 1993.
Adapting iOS shouldn't be a problem for Apple.
I agree with everything you say.
FWIW, the SUV device I was discussing would not have a dual UI. It would be an unique, non-touch UI -- more similar to the desktop.
Seriously ?!? How much does this firm and this consultant make.... This has to be the most retarded piece of research yet ! Lets make a netbook... lol Are they familiar with the iPad ?
Obviously they JUST DONT GET IT.
I don't see how this guy's solution makes Apple any money at all...
The costs involved with "creating" a notebook of this type, plus all of the programming required to get iOS to be "full featured" and work optimally with mice and keyboards is astronomical.
And whats the benefit? To sell a notebook for a little less than the macbook air and a little more than the iPad?!
Which only leads to Apple cannibalizing its own products for incredibly low profit margins...
This guy really needs to be fired.
His iAnywhere concept is even more stupid considering that many Apple executives clearly stated that they will not be doing this.
Exactly!
Do you know how many people would be perfectly fine with a $300 Chromebook? LOTS. So these days when a Dad can outfit a wife and two kids with Chromebook under the price of one MacBook Pro, that has to be tempting.
My wife doesn't need a MacBook Air. She needs a Mac 'Chrome' Book. An iOS laptop in the $500 range would make her very happy, with auto iCloud Time Machine backup.
Oh, and iCloud needs to be about $25 a year per terabyte. As YouTube demonstrates, that's an easy price to manage.
This is where things are going, whether we OS X purists like it or not.
Which doesn't rule out a non traditional approach. Nor does it eliminate other product categories.
I can see Apple offering an expanded range of iOS devices such as a larger iPad, an Apple TV and the like. I can also see something somewhat laptop like. However there is little incentive for Apple to make iOS into another Mac OS.
As for an ARM based laptop, I'm all for it if it runs real Mac OS and doesn't skimp on support hardware (RAM and flash storage). ARM, especially in an upgraded A8 chip, could be very interesting for the type of laptop use I usually engage in.
Well no, Surface and even Windows 8 suck hard.