Of course, we have no idea as to whether Apple really intends to come out with a "touch-less" device.
But, I'm wondering if Apple was able to overcome the problems all such devices have had in the past. That is, none of these things have been accurate. The method only allows large areas to be selected. Meaning that if you need to put a cursor between two letters so as to delete one, you couldn't do it. Hitting one pixel to draw or select has been impossible, as the electrical, or magnetic, field gets too large at any appreciable distance from the screen. The lines of force follow curved paths. The further the path, the larger the circle. That's why HD heads have been getting ever closer to the surface. And why tape heads have to literally scrape the surface. Only lasers can work with very small dots.
I know that a pixel is much larger than that, but it can still be less than one hundredth of an inch in diameter. without actually having a stylus with a small tip touch a spot, I just don't see how this would be useful for anything other than selecting large areas.
Can't tell if he is *actually* touching the screen?
He's caressing a reflection of himself in the glossy display and he seems to be liking it. What kid do they get to draw these things anyway?
I'd quite like to see a Mac tablet without a keyboard to keep the size down. Then just have a virtual keyboard. It would be great for painting in Photoshop. Drawing using a mouse just doesn't work and a tablet like a Wacom doesn't give you the right feel because you're sketching on a separate device from the image.
Even if it was the size of a 12"/13" laptop, it would still be much thinner because there would be no trackpad or keyboard so the display can go there and you could maybe have a very thin aluminium cover to protect the screen that folded behind the machine.
It would be better for viewing A4 documents too. Widescreen is great for movies but bad for pretty much everything else. Documents are usually A4 or thereabouts, images are the same. I can't turn my CRT on it's side but I could turn a tablet round. Of course, Apple will still likely make them 1024x768.
1st) It seems like quite a few threads are popping up asking or talking about Ultra Portables.
2nd) With the latest news with Flash memory and other products that Intel and Apple are planning in cahoots, I think its a safe bet that an Ultra Portable notebook must be one of those products.
I would love a 10" or 11" Ultra Portable under 3 pounds with Flash Memory and over 8 hrs of battery life with the GMA 3000 or X3000 for about $1599 = Happy me when going on trips
I would love a 10" or 11" Ultra Portable under 3 pounds with Flash Memory and over 8 hrs of battery life with the GMA 3000 or X3000 for about $1599 = Happy me when going on trips
I'd like that too but not at that price. I know that's what the competition is doing but I'm not sure if people will see a more powerful Macbook at $1000 and just give up the form factor to svae $500.
If the managed a sub-$1000 machine in that form factor then I think it would be great. The extra expense would only be justified IMO if it was also a tablet.
If the managed a sub-$1000 machine in that form factor then I think it would be great. The extra expense would only be justified IMO if it was also a tablet.
Unfortunately, what you want is not possible. Those small screens are actually more expensive than the larger ones, and the ULV Intel chips are middling-price (i.e. more expensive than the bottom-of-the-range "standard" Core (2) Duo).
I would hope they'd be able to bring in the ultra-portable at less than $1599 though.
I read somewhere (I can't seem to find the darn site!) that Apple had been looking into making an Apple UMPC, but that in order to make it successful they would have to set the price point to between $500-$700. This would allow people who need greater mobility to have greater functionality without cannibalizing the iBook/MacBook market, which was their main concern. An Apple UMPC for that pricing point would be absolutely amazing, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Here's why:
iLife: Apple's built-in suite of applications would work wonderfully on such a device. I use and maintain a website using iWeb, store all my photos in iPhoto, dink around in iMovie a bit, and plink out a tune or two for fun in garage band often enough. I've found that a lot of my time away from my iMac is "free" time. Between classes/meetings, breaks, travelling, etc... But I don't need the full functionality of a laptop, or the space required to lug one around. I would love to go on a road trip and be able to take photos with my Canon EOS put the photos into iPhoto, drop them into iWeb, and upload a blog page, or even narrate the whole thing with video integrating iWeb, iMovie, iPhoto, and garageband in one iLife extravaganza, all while in my car!
iTunes Store: It would be wonderful to be on a plane, or just out and about and think, "ya know, I'd really like to watch las night's episode of Lost that I missed. Flip on your UMPC pop open iTunes and download and watch it right there, wherever you are. It would be the ultimate iTS impulse buying machine!
Amateur [anything]: With the web and iLife, integration into your life would be easy. Amateur photographer? Imagine taking a computer with you out into the field, without lugging around a laptop, edit your images in Photoshop, or Aperture right there, show the photos to people, touch them up on your flight/drive home. Same thing for audio, if you're a podcaster/journalist, having soundtrack prop or garageband in your hands attach your mics and start an interview with someone anywhere, instead of waiting till you can both sit down in a study. Then edit, adjust the recordings out there in the field.
Connectivity: No one can doubt that such a device would make communication amazingly easy. Use Skype from anywhere you have internet. Play Warcraft with some friends and talk over Teamspeak. EMail anywhere, check websites, news, blogs, this forum... from anywhere.
In short, I think that UMPCs will be the future in mobile computer technology. I don't think that "laptops" are the way to go. If you have to look something up you have to find somewhere to sit down, wait for it to startup, move so the sun doesn't glare your screen, plugin after an hour or two, it's just not as convenient for simple/semi-complex uses. A laptop is great for carrying your office with you, but not enough for daily use imo.
You really think a you will be able to happily play Warcraft and edit in Photoshop on a $500 UMPC type sub portable Mac? Good luck .
Probably old versions of said software. The ultraportable notebooks are generally $1000 and up. I don't know how the same set of components can be put into a $500 UMPC, or anything cheaper than the notebook based on the same components. I dout a mobile Mac is going to to cost that little. Even $800 is low.
You really think a you will be able to happily play Warcraft and edit in Photoshop on a $500 UMPC type sub portable Mac? Good luck .
My 12" Powerbook played WoW pretty well actually. With a 4 year old graphics card (64 meg) and 1gig of RAM. Those same components wouldn't cost much these days, and with the core duo processor at the heart of it photoshop would not be bad at all.
Basically what it would be is a 2 year old powerbook with a much smaller footpad and $500-$700 pricetag. That wouldn't be too difficult at all, but then again I'm not an engineer.
Why not run photoshop? It doesn't need that much power. And even WOW runs pretty well even on a mini.
It's all relative. My first Mac was a 950, early 1992, and an unsharp mask would take almost 20 MINUTES on a 10MB image. We were so impressed that it would finish over a coffee break! The Macs I bought for my company in the second half of the '80's were far worse. But, of course, PS didn't exist then. I used Studio 8, and later Studio 24, as well as others.
But as things get faster, we expect more. If it takes 5 seconds today, we simply can't go back to 10 seconds.
This UMPC won't run PS in any useful way. PS DOES take a fair amount of power, unless you are still running 10MB images on it.
It's all relative. My first Mac was a 950, early 1992, and an unsharp mask would take almost 20 MINUTES on a 10MB image. We were so impressed that it would finish over a coffee break! The Macs I bought for my company in the second half of the '80's were far worse. But, of course, PS didn't exist then. I used Studio 8, and later Studio 24, as well as others.
But as things get faster, we expect more. If it takes 5 seconds today, we simply can't go back to 10 seconds.
This UMPC won't run PS in any useful way. PS DOES take a fair amount of power, unless you are still running 10MB images on it.
Ah, the good old days; we do forget so quickly. In ten years time we'll be griping about rendering a tetrabyte file in a millisecond. "A millisecond! Jeez! Can't Apple do better than that? Come on!"
Thanks for taking me down memory lane. Now I'm starting to think about the very first screenplay I ever wrote; it was on an old Apple II. Good times, good times....
This UMPC won't run PS in any useful way. PS DOES take a fair amount of power, unless you are still running 10MB images on it.
I disagree. You could easily adjust colors, do some simple filters and such on the fly. Simple things. Of course you wouldn't expect a $500 machine to provide the same speed/functionality of a full blown Mac. But I think a stripped down version with some additional upgrade options (RAM/Graphics) available would be powerful enough to fit itself into my life. I would love to be able to type an essay on a bus, do some research, etc... without having to whip out my laptop and find a place to sit down. This would be a great addition for people who own an iMac or Mac Pro at home, who need some portability, but still want the power of a desktop when they get back to their house.
I disagree. You could easily adjust colors, do some simple filters and such on the fly. Simple things. Of course you wouldn't expect a $500 machine to provide the same speed/functionality of a full blown Mac. But I think a stripped down version with some additional upgrade options (RAM/Graphics) available would be powerful enough to fit itself into my life. I would love to be able to type an essay on a bus, do some research, etc... without having to whip out my laptop and find a place to sit down. This would be a great addition for people who own an iMac or Mac Pro at home, who need some portability, but still want the power of a desktop when they get back to their house.
Consider a smartphone if you can type an essay standing in the bus.
For every other use: buy a MacBook (Pro) and sit down.
Consider a smartphone if you can type an essay standing in the bus.
For every other use: buy a MacBook (Pro) and sit down.
Again, I don't like carrying around a 15" or bigger laptop when I already have a desktop back home, I can't bring myself to spend the $1000+ for a laptop I'll use only when I'm not at home. I own a Treo 650, and hate typing on it with my thumbs. I do use it to browse the web, but the tiny screen makes real browsing a pain. I want something a step up from a "smart" phone and a step down from a laptop.
I disagree. You could easily adjust colors, do some simple filters and such on the fly. Simple things. Of course you wouldn't expect a $500 machine to provide the same speed/functionality of a full blown Mac. But I think a stripped down version with some additional upgrade options (RAM/Graphics) available would be powerful enough to fit itself into my life. I would love to be able to type an essay on a bus, do some research, etc... without having to whip out my laptop and find a place to sit down. This would be a great addition for people who own an iMac or Mac Pro at home, who need some portability, but still want the power of a desktop when they get back to their house.
You can disagree, but you have never done it, so you can't say.
Once you think it out, you will think differently.
Find out what class of processor is usable in such a machine. How much, and what speed RAM. What about fixed storage?.
What will the REZ of the screen be? How many colors? How big? What kind of graphics chip?
Will the progran even run?
Etc.
These machines won't be miniaturized $500 desktop machines. They will have a fraction of the power.
Again, I don't like carrying around a 15" or bigger laptop when I already have a desktop back home, I can't bring myself to spend the $1000+ for a laptop I'll use only when I'm not at home. I own a Treo 650, and hate typing on it with my thumbs. I do use it to browse the web, but the tiny screen makes real browsing a pain. I want something a step up from a "smart" phone and a step down from a laptop.
My Treo 700p ius far better than the older 650, and I don't like several things about it either. But you don't have to use the keyboard. I use Mobile Write 3.5 from Inkmark Software.
That lets me write on the screen. the top is used for numbers, the bottom two thirds for letters. You type over the program. It works very well.
But, these small machines won't allow you to do much photo editing. they won't be that much better than the Treo in terms of power, for what they will do.
Hmm, looks like the opinions of apple UMPC are significantly negative these days. If this is the consensus of most computer users I guess I'll just put my hopes of a UMPC in my desk drawer and think up something else to anticipate!
Comments
But, I'm wondering if Apple was able to overcome the problems all such devices have had in the past. That is, none of these things have been accurate. The method only allows large areas to be selected. Meaning that if you need to put a cursor between two letters so as to delete one, you couldn't do it. Hitting one pixel to draw or select has been impossible, as the electrical, or magnetic, field gets too large at any appreciable distance from the screen. The lines of force follow curved paths. The further the path, the larger the circle. That's why HD heads have been getting ever closer to the surface. And why tape heads have to literally scrape the surface. Only lasers can work with very small dots.
I know that a pixel is much larger than that, but it can still be less than one hundredth of an inch in diameter. without actually having a stylus with a small tip touch a spot, I just don't see how this would be useful for anything other than selecting large areas.
Originally posted by userone
Can't tell if he is *actually* touching the screen?
He's caressing a reflection of himself in the glossy display and he seems to be liking it. What kid do they get to draw these things anyway?
I'd quite like to see a Mac tablet without a keyboard to keep the size down. Then just have a virtual keyboard. It would be great for painting in Photoshop. Drawing using a mouse just doesn't work and a tablet like a Wacom doesn't give you the right feel because you're sketching on a separate device from the image.
Even if it was the size of a 12"/13" laptop, it would still be much thinner because there would be no trackpad or keyboard so the display can go there and you could maybe have a very thin aluminium cover to protect the screen that folded behind the machine.
It would be better for viewing A4 documents too. Widescreen is great for movies but bad for pretty much everything else. Documents are usually A4 or thereabouts, images are the same. I can't turn my CRT on it's side but I could turn a tablet round. Of course, Apple will still likely make them 1024x768.
Originally posted by userone
Can't tell if he is *actually* touching the screen?
I know what you mean.
Originally posted by Marvin
He's caressing a reflection of himself in the glossy display and he seems to be liking it.
1st) It seems like quite a few threads are popping up asking or talking about Ultra Portables.
2nd) With the latest news with Flash memory and other products that Intel and Apple are planning in cahoots, I think its a safe bet that an Ultra Portable notebook must be one of those products.
I would love a 10" or 11" Ultra Portable under 3 pounds with Flash Memory and over 8 hrs of battery life with the GMA 3000 or X3000 for about $1599 = Happy me when going on trips
I would love a 10" or 11" Ultra Portable under 3 pounds with Flash Memory and over 8 hrs of battery life with the GMA 3000 or X3000 for about $1599 = Happy me when going on trips
I'd like that too but not at that price. I know that's what the competition is doing but I'm not sure if people will see a more powerful Macbook at $1000 and just give up the form factor to svae $500.
If the managed a sub-$1000 machine in that form factor then I think it would be great. The extra expense would only be justified IMO if it was also a tablet.
If the managed a sub-$1000 machine in that form factor then I think it would be great. The extra expense would only be justified IMO if it was also a tablet.
Unfortunately, what you want is not possible. Those small screens are actually more expensive than the larger ones, and the ULV Intel chips are middling-price (i.e. more expensive than the bottom-of-the-range "standard" Core (2) Duo).
I would hope they'd be able to bring in the ultra-portable at less than $1599 though.
- iLife: Apple's built-in suite of applications would work wonderfully on such a device. I use and maintain a website using iWeb, store all my photos in iPhoto, dink around in iMovie a bit, and plink out a tune or two for fun in garage band often enough. I've found that a lot of my time away from my iMac is "free" time. Between classes/meetings, breaks, travelling, etc... But I don't need the full functionality of a laptop, or the space required to lug one around. I would love to go on a road trip and be able to take photos with my Canon EOS put the photos into iPhoto, drop them into iWeb, and upload a blog page, or even narrate the whole thing with video integrating iWeb, iMovie, iPhoto, and garageband in one iLife extravaganza, all while in my car!
- iTunes Store: It would be wonderful to be on a plane, or just out and about and think, "ya know, I'd really like to watch las night's episode of Lost that I missed. Flip on your UMPC pop open iTunes and download and watch it right there, wherever you are. It would be the ultimate iTS impulse buying machine!
- Amateur [anything]: With the web and iLife, integration into your life would be easy. Amateur photographer? Imagine taking a computer with you out into the field, without lugging around a laptop, edit your images in Photoshop, or Aperture right there, show the photos to people, touch them up on your flight/drive home. Same thing for audio, if you're a podcaster/journalist, having soundtrack prop or garageband in your hands attach your mics and start an interview with someone anywhere, instead of waiting till you can both sit down in a study. Then edit, adjust the recordings out there in the field.
- Connectivity: No one can doubt that such a device would make communication amazingly easy. Use Skype from anywhere you have internet. Play Warcraft with some friends and talk over Teamspeak. EMail anywhere, check websites, news, blogs, this forum... from anywhere.
In short, I think that UMPCs will be the future in mobile computer technology. I don't think that "laptops" are the way to go. If you have to look something up you have to find somewhere to sit down, wait for it to startup, move so the sun doesn't glare your screen, plugin after an hour or two, it's just not as convenient for simple/semi-complex uses. A laptop is great for carrying your office with you, but not enough for daily use imo.You really think a you will be able to happily play Warcraft and edit in Photoshop on a $500 UMPC type sub portable Mac? Good luck
Probably old versions of said software. The ultraportable notebooks are generally $1000 and up. I don't know how the same set of components can be put into a $500 UMPC, or anything cheaper than the notebook based on the same components. I dout a mobile Mac is going to to cost that little. Even $800 is low.
You really think a you will be able to happily play Warcraft and edit in Photoshop on a $500 UMPC type sub portable Mac? Good luck
Why not run photoshop? It doesn't need that much power. And even WOW runs pretty well even on a mini.
You really think a you will be able to happily play Warcraft and edit in Photoshop on a $500 UMPC type sub portable Mac? Good luck
My 12" Powerbook played WoW pretty well actually. With a 4 year old graphics card (64 meg) and 1gig of RAM. Those same components wouldn't cost much these days, and with the core duo processor at the heart of it photoshop would not be bad at all.
Basically what it would be is a 2 year old powerbook with a much smaller footpad and $500-$700 pricetag. That wouldn't be too difficult at all, but then again I'm not an engineer.
Why not run photoshop? It doesn't need that much power. And even WOW runs pretty well even on a mini.
It's all relative. My first Mac was a 950, early 1992, and an unsharp mask would take almost 20 MINUTES on a 10MB image. We were so impressed that it would finish over a coffee break! The Macs I bought for my company in the second half of the '80's were far worse. But, of course, PS didn't exist then. I used Studio 8, and later Studio 24, as well as others.
But as things get faster, we expect more. If it takes 5 seconds today, we simply can't go back to 10 seconds.
This UMPC won't run PS in any useful way. PS DOES take a fair amount of power, unless you are still running 10MB images on it.
It's all relative. My first Mac was a 950, early 1992, and an unsharp mask would take almost 20 MINUTES on a 10MB image. We were so impressed that it would finish over a coffee break! The Macs I bought for my company in the second half of the '80's were far worse. But, of course, PS didn't exist then. I used Studio 8, and later Studio 24, as well as others.
But as things get faster, we expect more. If it takes 5 seconds today, we simply can't go back to 10 seconds.
This UMPC won't run PS in any useful way. PS DOES take a fair amount of power, unless you are still running 10MB images on it.
Ah, the good old days; we do forget so quickly. In ten years time we'll be griping about rendering a tetrabyte file in a millisecond. "A millisecond! Jeez! Can't Apple do better than that? Come on!"
Thanks for taking me down memory lane. Now I'm starting to think about the very first screenplay I ever wrote; it was on an old Apple II. Good times, good times....
This UMPC won't run PS in any useful way. PS DOES take a fair amount of power, unless you are still running 10MB images on it.
I disagree. You could easily adjust colors, do some simple filters and such on the fly. Simple things. Of course you wouldn't expect a $500 machine to provide the same speed/functionality of a full blown Mac. But I think a stripped down version with some additional upgrade options (RAM/Graphics) available would be powerful enough to fit itself into my life. I would love to be able to type an essay on a bus, do some research, etc... without having to whip out my laptop and find a place to sit down. This would be a great addition for people who own an iMac or Mac Pro at home, who need some portability, but still want the power of a desktop when they get back to their house.
I disagree. You could easily adjust colors, do some simple filters and such on the fly. Simple things. Of course you wouldn't expect a $500 machine to provide the same speed/functionality of a full blown Mac. But I think a stripped down version with some additional upgrade options (RAM/Graphics) available would be powerful enough to fit itself into my life. I would love to be able to type an essay on a bus, do some research, etc... without having to whip out my laptop and find a place to sit down. This would be a great addition for people who own an iMac or Mac Pro at home, who need some portability, but still want the power of a desktop when they get back to their house.
Consider a smartphone if you can type an essay standing in the bus.
For every other use: buy a MacBook (Pro) and sit down.
Consider a smartphone if you can type an essay standing in the bus.
For every other use: buy a MacBook (Pro) and sit down.
Again, I don't like carrying around a 15" or bigger laptop when I already have a desktop back home, I can't bring myself to spend the $1000+ for a laptop I'll use only when I'm not at home. I own a Treo 650, and hate typing on it with my thumbs. I do use it to browse the web, but the tiny screen makes real browsing a pain. I want something a step up from a "smart" phone and a step down from a laptop.
I disagree. You could easily adjust colors, do some simple filters and such on the fly. Simple things. Of course you wouldn't expect a $500 machine to provide the same speed/functionality of a full blown Mac. But I think a stripped down version with some additional upgrade options (RAM/Graphics) available would be powerful enough to fit itself into my life. I would love to be able to type an essay on a bus, do some research, etc... without having to whip out my laptop and find a place to sit down. This would be a great addition for people who own an iMac or Mac Pro at home, who need some portability, but still want the power of a desktop when they get back to their house.
You can disagree, but you have never done it, so you can't say.
Once you think it out, you will think differently.
Find out what class of processor is usable in such a machine. How much, and what speed RAM. What about fixed storage?.
What will the REZ of the screen be? How many colors? How big? What kind of graphics chip?
Will the progran even run?
Etc.
These machines won't be miniaturized $500 desktop machines. They will have a fraction of the power.
Again, I don't like carrying around a 15" or bigger laptop when I already have a desktop back home, I can't bring myself to spend the $1000+ for a laptop I'll use only when I'm not at home. I own a Treo 650, and hate typing on it with my thumbs. I do use it to browse the web, but the tiny screen makes real browsing a pain. I want something a step up from a "smart" phone and a step down from a laptop.
My Treo 700p ius far better than the older 650, and I don't like several things about it either. But you don't have to use the keyboard. I use Mobile Write 3.5 from Inkmark Software.
That lets me write on the screen. the top is used for numbers, the bottom two thirds for letters. You type over the program. It works very well.
But, these small machines won't allow you to do much photo editing. they won't be that much better than the Treo in terms of power, for what they will do.