Size of the device. Keyboards are big, lasers are not.
Well, if it's stationary and therefore the power consuming doesn't matter much you can save place on your desk. But when it's mobile and using BT the battery life is about several hours (450 mAh).
"The keyboard is fed by a built-in battery. According to the manufacturer, the battery life amounts to 2 hours at continuous typing, in real tests we got even higher results. If we compare the virtual keyboard with the ordinary Bluetooth-keyboards, the i.Tech product has poor results (2 hours against 60 hours)."
And the most important thing is that the QWERTY keyboard is effective because of a ten-finger touch typing.
"You won't feel the sense of touch, as the keys are virtual. There might be a sound feedback to compensate for it (however you can switch it off). So, forget about a touch method with ten fingers, you'll have to look at the keyboard often."
Size of the device. Keyboards are big, lasers are not.
Have you had the chance to use a laser keyboard?
I've tried to order one from several companies over the years who were developing them. I even pre-ordered. But, none of them came to market.
I tried a couple at technology showings, but they didn't work well. They were prone to errors, felt very bad (no feedback at all!), and the lasers were sometimes blocked by the very act of typing.
Sometimes, if you swiped your hand across the field of the laser, the keyboard would output randomly. A lot!
While I take such market predictions with a large grain of salt it is certainly one growth area that Apple has the potential of domininating. I wonder how well TPCs did in 2006.
Vinea
Seriously. If Apple markets it as a device and not a computer, and if the price isn't so bad, then bang. They already have oodles of street cred in the electronic device market.
That Fujitsu P1500 seems to be outdated. The P1610 seems to be the current model, and goes for only $1600 for the basic version, which blows away the contention that ultraportables must be ultraexpensive. It does come with a ULV Core Solo and every port my 12" PB has. Memory and hard drive is a little skimpy, but that's upgradable. It even has a higher resolution display, a staggering 1280x768 8.9" widescreen LCD compared to my 1024x768 12" LCD, again shooting down the myth that small, high-res displays necessarily mean very high price. We're probably talking eyestrain city here. I'd gladly settle for the same resolution in a widescreen 11" display. But Apple had better hurry up with that resolution independence in Leopard!
goes for only $1600 for the basic version, which blows away the contention that ultraportables must be ultraexpensive. … It even has a higher resolution display, a staggering 1280x768 8.9" widescreen LCD … again shooting down the myth that small, high-res displays necessarily mean very high price.
I'm not sure anyone was saying that ultra-portables have to be "ulrtaexpensive" or that small hi-res screens have a "very high price". It's just that earlier in the thread, people were talking about an Apple ultra-portable coming in in price under the MacBook - and that's just not realistic.
I'm not sure anyone was saying that ultra-portables have to be "ulrtaexpensive" or that small hi-res screens have a "very high price". It's just that earlier in the thread, people were talking about an Apple ultra-portable coming in in price under the MacBook - and that's just not realistic.
Right. Just expensive compared to the low end Mac Book.
I'm not sure anyone was saying that ultra-portables have to be "ulrtaexpensive" or that small hi-res screens have a "very high price".
jwsmiths was. He has written earlier in this thread that "if you add make an 11" ultra-portable laptop you're going to HAVE to charge out the ass." That doesn't sound like a reasonable price to me. He also wrote, "it would probably cost about as much as your 17" (since those ultra small laptops tend to fetch a premium already)..." A 17" MBP costs $2800. I'd say somebody was definitely saying ultraportables are ultraexpensive, a point the Lifebooks completely debunk.
jwsmiths was. He has written earlier in this thread that "if you add make an 11" ultra-portable laptop you're going to HAVE to charge out the ass." That doesn't sound like a reasonable price to me. He also wrote, "it would probably cost about as much as your 17" (since those ultra small laptops tend to fetch a premium already)..." A 17" MBP costs $2800. I'd say somebody was definitely saying ultraportables are ultraexpensive, a point the Lifebooks completely debunk.
I agree, I don't think it would be too hard to make an Apple respin of something like the Lattitude D420 for less than $2k US. The D420 is 3lb and runs for $1199.
I agree, I don't think it would be too hard to make an Apple respin of something like the Lattitude D420 for less than $2k US. The D420 is 3lb and runs for $1199.
I don't need it that cheap, although I wouldn't mind. But if it were the same price as the old 12", I'd still buy. Anywhere from $1500 to 1800 with Macbook-level performance (sacrificing a couple of things like the iSight) would be fine by me.
The D420 is light, but not very compact. It's 1" thick. Apple can do better, since their laptops have always been thinner than Dell's.
Comments
Size of the device. Keyboards are big, lasers are not.
Well, if it's stationary and therefore the power consuming doesn't matter much you can save place on your desk. But when it's mobile and using BT the battery life is about several hours (450 mAh).
"The keyboard is fed by a built-in battery. According to the manufacturer, the battery life amounts to 2 hours at continuous typing, in real tests we got even higher results. If we compare the virtual keyboard with the ordinary Bluetooth-keyboards, the i.Tech product has poor results (2 hours against 60 hours)."
And the most important thing is that the QWERTY keyboard is effective because of a ten-finger touch typing.
"You won't feel the sense of touch, as the keys are virtual. There might be a sound feedback to compensate for it (however you can switch it off). So, forget about a touch method with ten fingers, you'll have to look at the keyboard often."
http://www.mobile-review.com/pda/review/bt-vkb-en.shtml
Size of the device. Keyboards are big, lasers are not.
Have you had the chance to use a laser keyboard?
I've tried to order one from several companies over the years who were developing them. I even pre-ordered. But, none of them came to market.
I tried a couple at technology showings, but they didn't work well. They were prone to errors, felt very bad (no feedback at all!), and the lasers were sometimes blocked by the very act of typing.
Sometimes, if you swiped your hand across the field of the laser, the keyboard would output randomly. A lot!
$1.2B market in 2004.
http://www.instat.com/press.asp?ID=1413&sku=IN0501830ID
While I take such market predictions with a large grain of salt it is certainly one growth area that Apple has the potential of domininating. I wonder how well TPCs did in 2006.
Vinea
Seriously. If Apple markets it as a device and not a computer, and if the price isn't so bad, then bang. They already have oodles of street cred in the electronic device market.
Something like this?
Yes, but Fujitsu costs only half as much as this will likely cost. Where's the fun in that.=?
goes for only $1600 for the basic version, which blows away the contention that ultraportables must be ultraexpensive. … It even has a higher resolution display, a staggering 1280x768 8.9" widescreen LCD … again shooting down the myth that small, high-res displays necessarily mean very high price.
I'm not sure anyone was saying that ultra-portables have to be "ulrtaexpensive" or that small hi-res screens have a "very high price". It's just that earlier in the thread, people were talking about an Apple ultra-portable coming in in price under the MacBook - and that's just not realistic.
I'm not sure anyone was saying that ultra-portables have to be "ulrtaexpensive" or that small hi-res screens have a "very high price". It's just that earlier in the thread, people were talking about an Apple ultra-portable coming in in price under the MacBook - and that's just not realistic.
Right. Just expensive compared to the low end Mac Book.
I'm not sure anyone was saying that ultra-portables have to be "ulrtaexpensive" or that small hi-res screens have a "very high price".
jwsmiths was. He has written earlier in this thread that "if you add make an 11" ultra-portable laptop you're going to HAVE to charge out the ass." That doesn't sound like a reasonable price to me. He also wrote, "it would probably cost about as much as your 17" (since those ultra small laptops tend to fetch a premium already)..." A 17" MBP costs $2800. I'd say somebody was definitely saying ultraportables are ultraexpensive, a point the Lifebooks completely debunk.
jwsmiths was. He has written earlier in this thread that "if you add make an 11" ultra-portable laptop you're going to HAVE to charge out the ass." That doesn't sound like a reasonable price to me. He also wrote, "it would probably cost about as much as your 17" (since those ultra small laptops tend to fetch a premium already)..." A 17" MBP costs $2800. I'd say somebody was definitely saying ultraportables are ultraexpensive, a point the Lifebooks completely debunk.
I agree, I don't think it would be too hard to make an Apple respin of something like the Lattitude D420 for less than $2k US. The D420 is 3lb and runs for $1199.
I agree, I don't think it would be too hard to make an Apple respin of something like the Lattitude D420 for less than $2k US. The D420 is 3lb and runs for $1199.
I don't need it that cheap, although I wouldn't mind. But if it were the same price as the old 12", I'd still buy. Anywhere from $1500 to 1800 with Macbook-level performance (sacrificing a couple of things like the iSight) would be fine by me.
The D420 is light, but not very compact. It's 1" thick. Apple can do better, since their laptops have always been thinner than Dell's.