And finally, I think an apple ultra-portable would hurt the apple name with students. As a student, I have one computer, so it needs to be good. I cannot imagine owning this as my only computer. It's not meant for that anyways. Apple could really break the market with a happy medium.
So if Apple wants to break into the market of people who are rich as $h!t and fly around the world every day, be my guest. But please don't even think of selling this to a student or a processing power-hungry photographer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iDave
Exactly. A MacBook that is a pound or so lighter and an inch or so smaller is all that's needed. Ultra portables are for a niche market and I doubt very many would sell, except to those who can afford a different computer for every need.
I really don't understand either of you. You're talking as if this is going to be the one and only laptop Apple will offer. You need a good laptop? Fine. Buy an MBP. Nobody said you couldn't. But don't go saying an ultraportable is worthless. And what's this "different computer for every need" baloney? There's no one computer that fits every need. The MBs and MBPs are all compromises, not powerful enough for power-hungry professionals but not really light enough to carry with you all day. The MBs aren't even really desktop replacements. You'd be surprised how many people actually have both a laptop and a desktop just because they don't want to compromise at home/work or on the go. You need to stop thinking just within the very limited confines of your own needs and desires.
You need to stop thinking just within the very limited confines of your own needs and desires.
Are you reading between the lines and think you know my thoughts as well? I'm not sure.
What I'm saying is that a micro-notebook like you want would likely sell to a limited number of people and would probably not be worth the R&D required to develop it. Much like the Mac Cube, it would then (likely) be discontinued after being a dismal failure. Something along the lines of a 12" PowerBook that is lighter, relatively compact and powerful, with all of the features that you expect in a Mac including a full-size keyboard and optical drive would sell very well IMHO.
Hey, I understand your wanting a micro portable. That's apparently what you need. I've wanted Apple to make a mid-range tower or desktop (headless) Mac ever since such Macs went out of fashion when Jobs came back. It just ain't happening. \
And when are the 15 and 17 inch MacBook Pros getting the magnetic display latch and user replaceable hard drive?
Yeah. I'm sure if it will be after the user replaceable wifi card. Perhaps we will see the batteries on the next revisions TIG welded to the aluminum frame so we cannot change those either. At least that will be safer.
I've heard/read more pining for a replacement for the 12" PowerBook than I have for a sub-notebook. My suggestion in the post above would satisfy the former and maybe partially satisfy the later without having to have two models.
If Apple could make dozens of models and keep profits up without wasting R&D money, I'm sure they would. Since Steve Jobs returned, it seems the goal is to minimize the number of models on the market.
It isn't the idea of Apple making dozens of computer models, but realizing that there are people who want models that they don't offer.
All to often, Apple has the attitude of telling potential customers that either they get what Apple thinks they should have, or get a PC instead.
This isn't a healthy marketing attitude.
The idea is always to see what the customer wants, and then to figure out a way to give it to them.
What I'm saying is that a micro-notebook like you want would likely sell to a limited number of people and would probably not be worth the R&D required to develop it. Much like the Mac Cube, it would then (likely) be discontinued after being a dismal failure.
The Cube was a failure for three basic reasons.
The first was that there was no customer base for the machine that had been defined before the machine itself came out.
The second was that it was expensive, and cut into Apple's other machines in price, after the monitor was added, resulting in no economic differenciation.
Three was that Apple didn't market the machine effectively. This was before Apple's new marketing understanding came to the fore, led by the success of the iPod.
A solution to the first problem wasn't really possible. Apple would have to create the customer base for that product. They didn't.
Two was an error by Apple that they could have corrected, if they wanted to. At the time, the G4 was an expensive chip. Apple could have used the still effective G3 which was much less expensive. Apple was selling about 50 thousand machines per quarter. Too little to sustain. If they had a less expensive model, they had a chance of selling double that number, which would have been ok.
The solution to three would have been to proclaim the upgradability of the machine loud and clear, which Apple didn't. While they showed that it was upgradable, they almost seemed to be embarrassed about it. Job's inclination to not have people opening up his machines was obvious.
One of the reasons the machine didn't sell was that most people thought that the machine couldn't be upgraded, which was far from the truth.
Things are different with ultra portables. There is a clear market for these machines. They are fairly expensive already. Apple would be selling into the same price range.
There are little upgradability problems for portables. It's pretty simple, they aren't very upgradable.
Apple's portables are already popular, and seem to be getting more so.
I think that an Apple imprimatur on an ultra-portable would give that market even more viability, as these days, unlike when the Cube came out, Apple is a desired, can I even say, luxury brand. Even the Mac Books are luxury devices, as are all of Apple's products. Even the $79 Shuffle looks like jewelry.
I think that an Apple imprimatur on an ultra-portable would give that market even more viability, as these days, unlike when the Cube came out, Apple is a desired, can I even say, luxury brand. Even the Mac Books are luxury devices, as are all of Apple's products. Even the $79 Shuffle looks like jewelry.
I was with you until your last paragraph.
Apple's principal mistake with the Cube was thinking people would pay top (shall I say excessive) dollar for something that would look cool on their desk but wouldn't do anything more than a more practical Mac.
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook. (It might do less if there's no optical drive or hard disk.) Therefore, the only people who will buy one are the ones who'll pay a premium for a tiny notebook that will fit handily on their coach class tray table. How many people like that are there?
Apple's principal mistake with the Cube was thinking people would pay top (shall I say excessive) dollar for something that would look cool on their desk but wouldn't do anything more than a more practical Mac.
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook. (It might do less if there's no optical drive or hard disk.) Therefore, the only people who will buy one are the ones who'll pay a premium for a tiny notebook that will fit handily on their coach class tray table. How many people like that are there?
Well, you missed some of what I said about it then.
The Cube was a full computer. Apple didn't promote it as such. That was a major mistake.
Because people didn't know it was a full fledged, upgradable computer, they saw this small box selling for a high price for a small box.
As I said, there is a market for an ultra-portable, which wasn't the case for the Cube when it came out.
Ironically, If Apple came out with the cube today, it would sell like hotcakes!
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook.
That's not quite true. An ultraportable would likely last three times as long on a battery as a MacBook at half the weight. I hope they don't ditch the conventional drives, I think it's too soon for that. Speculating is probably a bad idea, but I really don't think they would ditch the optical drive or the mechanical hard drive.
That's not quite true. An ultraportable would likely last three times as long on a battery as a MacBook at half the weight. I hope they don't ditch the conventional drives, I think it's too soon for that. Speculating is probably a bad idea, but I really don't think they would ditch the optical drive or the mechanical hard drive.
How is an ultra-portable going to run three times longer? Wouldn't the battery be miniaturized too? I might expect slightly longer life due to a small (LED) screen but that's about it.
I agree and don't think Apple will ditch the optical drive or hard drive in any new portable either. That's partly why I don't think any new portable will be excessively small. I do think Apple will replace the 12" PowerBook with something new eventually. They might even market it as being the "ultra-portable MacBook mini" or something like that. I just don't think it will have a 10 inch screen or be any less than the width of a standard keyboard.
How is an ultra-portable going to run three times longer? Wouldn't the battery be miniaturized too? I might expect slightly longer life due to a small (LED) screen but that's about it.
I agree and don't think Apple will ditch the optical drive or hard drive in any new portable either. That's partly why I don't think any new portable will be excessively small. I do think Apple will replace the 12" PowerBook with something new eventually. They might even market it as being the "ultra-portable MacBook mini" or something like that. I just don't think it will have a 10 inch screen or be any less than the width of a standard keyboard.
Ultra portables often last 10 hours, and I think Sony has one that lasts 12 hours.
It would depend on usage though, like everything else.
How is an ultra-portable going to run three times longer? Wouldn't the battery be miniaturized too? I might expect slightly longer life due to a small (LED) screen but that's about it.
The chips used in them have very low power consumption numbers, they use the ULV chips which consume a third the power as standard mobile chips and the clock is slower. The usual run times I see run from 8 to 11 hours, depending on model and battery.
The chips used in them have very low power consumption numbers, they use the ULV chips which consume a third the power as standard mobile chips and the clock is slower. The usual run times I see run from 8 to 11 hours, depending on model and battery.
If that's the case, maybe they would also be much cooler! I might buy one so I could actually use it on my lap, unlike a MacBook.
Ironically, If Apple came out with the cube today, it would sell like hotcakes!
I still doubt that this would be the case. It seems people ask for something more voluminous than a Cube, for easy access and use of standard desktop components, but less humongous than a Mac Pro for obvious reasons.
If it keeps a 13" screen (LED) but loses the optical drive and has flash instead of a hard drive, then the MacBook mini WILL have
longer battery life (no moving part drives)
run cooler (less heat from the flash than a HD, no optical drive)
be quieter (no moving part drives, less need for fans)
And for people saying 'but if they did that they would have to redesign the Macbook'. Well this isn't replacing the Macbook, its a different model and a new design anyway, so the bezel thickness and overall size can be smaller than a MacBook.
Another confirmation from TS for an update today, sadly, in alignment with the AI info regarding the Macbook. So I am curious to see what the update will be about. Unless it rains eggs on someone's head.
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook. (It might do less if there's no optical drive or hard disk.) Therefore, the only people who will buy one are the ones who'll pay a premium for a tiny notebook that will fit handily on their coach class tray table. How many people like that are there?
It's not just airplane flights. I used to have to cart around an iBook around trade shows in a courier bag as part of my job as a journalist. Trust me, an ultraportable is a godsend if you've got to cart around a laptop and a DSLR and lenses for 3 days of trade show. I've still got the hump on my shoulder.
These days, I use an iMac 90% of the time but for the occasional trips out where I don't need a huge screen, Apple's current laptops aren't even as small as the old iBook G3 I still use. I've seen no reason to upgrade yet because of that.
I wonder if the idea of upgrading the Pro line is to accelerate buys among the those who who use Creative Suite and want to exit the desktop form factor. Laptops are gaining share across all types of users so at a minimum this might get the true professional users to finally start buying intel macs.
Now this makes sense to me. I got a new MBP just before the jump to core2duo so I was feeling a bit cheated already when the news on the new airport standard came out, but I have CS2 loaded on it and have been looking forward to the new standard. Carrying the MBP and the Pismo ang G4 PowerBook before it around the world has been a VERY pleasant experience, but one always wants more. THe 17"er always seemed just a little too hard to type on despite the excellent price factor. Despite, or perhaps because of, being one of those Cube folks, I have never been willing to spring for the MacPro towers-- just too much, but I've always gone with the largest desktop screen I could get (no 30" yet). I find the laptops are doing everything, but I've been looking for a platform for serious web work along with Japanese language storage space.
The MBs and MBPs are all compromises, not powerful enough for power-hungry professionals but not really light enough to carry with you all day. The MBs aren't even really desktop replacements. You'd be surprised how many people actually have both a laptop and a desktop just because they don't want to compromise at home/work or on the go. You need to stop thinking just within the very limited confines of your own needs and desires.
There are very few things that a MBP can't do these days. The difference between my Mac Pro and MBP are small enough that there are days that I don't bother booting the Mac Pro and just run a little slower on my MBP because all my current work files are on there. There are days I need every cycle I can find but most days I don't.
That said, if I had an ultra portable I'd probably need my Mac Pro a lot more often but it sure would be lighter to lug about.
That's not quite true. An ultraportable would likely last three times as long on a battery as a MacBook at half the weight. I hope they don't ditch the conventional drives, I think it's too soon for that. Speculating is probably a bad idea, but I really don't think they would ditch the optical drive or the mechanical hard drive.
32GB of solid state drives is likely "good enough" size wise for most ultra-portable users IMHO for the trade off of faster boot times, lower power usage and persistent storage that is a little more rugged than a HDD.
Comments
And finally, I think an apple ultra-portable would hurt the apple name with students. As a student, I have one computer, so it needs to be good. I cannot imagine owning this as my only computer. It's not meant for that anyways. Apple could really break the market with a happy medium.
So if Apple wants to break into the market of people who are rich as $h!t and fly around the world every day, be my guest. But please don't even think of selling this to a student or a processing power-hungry photographer.
Exactly. A MacBook that is a pound or so lighter and an inch or so smaller is all that's needed. Ultra portables are for a niche market and I doubt very many would sell, except to those who can afford a different computer for every need.
I really don't understand either of you. You're talking as if this is going to be the one and only laptop Apple will offer. You need a good laptop? Fine. Buy an MBP. Nobody said you couldn't. But don't go saying an ultraportable is worthless. And what's this "different computer for every need" baloney? There's no one computer that fits every need. The MBs and MBPs are all compromises, not powerful enough for power-hungry professionals but not really light enough to carry with you all day. The MBs aren't even really desktop replacements. You'd be surprised how many people actually have both a laptop and a desktop just because they don't want to compromise at home/work or on the go. You need to stop thinking just within the very limited confines of your own needs and desires.
You need to stop thinking just within the very limited confines of your own needs and desires.
Are you reading between the lines and think you know my thoughts as well? I'm not sure.
What I'm saying is that a micro-notebook like you want would likely sell to a limited number of people and would probably not be worth the R&D required to develop it. Much like the Mac Cube, it would then (likely) be discontinued after being a dismal failure. Something along the lines of a 12" PowerBook that is lighter, relatively compact and powerful, with all of the features that you expect in a Mac including a full-size keyboard and optical drive would sell very well IMHO.
Hey, I understand your wanting a micro portable. That's apparently what you need. I've wanted Apple to make a mid-range tower or desktop (headless) Mac ever since such Macs went out of fashion when Jobs came back. It just ain't happening.
And when are the 15 and 17 inch MacBook Pros getting the magnetic display latch and user replaceable hard drive?
Yeah.
I've heard/read more pining for a replacement for the 12" PowerBook than I have for a sub-notebook. My suggestion in the post above would satisfy the former and maybe partially satisfy the later without having to have two models.
If Apple could make dozens of models and keep profits up without wasting R&D money, I'm sure they would. Since Steve Jobs returned, it seems the goal is to minimize the number of models on the market.
It isn't the idea of Apple making dozens of computer models, but realizing that there are people who want models that they don't offer.
All to often, Apple has the attitude of telling potential customers that either they get what Apple thinks they should have, or get a PC instead.
This isn't a healthy marketing attitude.
The idea is always to see what the customer wants, and then to figure out a way to give it to them.
What I'm saying is that a micro-notebook like you want would likely sell to a limited number of people and would probably not be worth the R&D required to develop it. Much like the Mac Cube, it would then (likely) be discontinued after being a dismal failure.
The Cube was a failure for three basic reasons.
The first was that there was no customer base for the machine that had been defined before the machine itself came out.
The second was that it was expensive, and cut into Apple's other machines in price, after the monitor was added, resulting in no economic differenciation.
Three was that Apple didn't market the machine effectively. This was before Apple's new marketing understanding came to the fore, led by the success of the iPod.
A solution to the first problem wasn't really possible. Apple would have to create the customer base for that product. They didn't.
Two was an error by Apple that they could have corrected, if they wanted to. At the time, the G4 was an expensive chip. Apple could have used the still effective G3 which was much less expensive. Apple was selling about 50 thousand machines per quarter. Too little to sustain. If they had a less expensive model, they had a chance of selling double that number, which would have been ok.
The solution to three would have been to proclaim the upgradability of the machine loud and clear, which Apple didn't. While they showed that it was upgradable, they almost seemed to be embarrassed about it. Job's inclination to not have people opening up his machines was obvious.
One of the reasons the machine didn't sell was that most people thought that the machine couldn't be upgraded, which was far from the truth.
Things are different with ultra portables. There is a clear market for these machines. They are fairly expensive already. Apple would be selling into the same price range.
There are little upgradability problems for portables. It's pretty simple, they aren't very upgradable.
Apple's portables are already popular, and seem to be getting more so.
I think that an Apple imprimatur on an ultra-portable would give that market even more viability, as these days, unlike when the Cube came out, Apple is a desired, can I even say, luxury brand. Even the Mac Books are luxury devices, as are all of Apple's products. Even the $79 Shuffle looks like jewelry.
I think that an Apple imprimatur on an ultra-portable would give that market even more viability, as these days, unlike when the Cube came out, Apple is a desired, can I even say, luxury brand. Even the Mac Books are luxury devices, as are all of Apple's products. Even the $79 Shuffle looks like jewelry.
I was with you until your last paragraph.
Apple's principal mistake with the Cube was thinking people would pay top (shall I say excessive) dollar for something that would look cool on their desk but wouldn't do anything more than a more practical Mac.
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook. (It might do less if there's no optical drive or hard disk.) Therefore, the only people who will buy one are the ones who'll pay a premium for a tiny notebook that will fit handily on their coach class tray table. How many people like that are there?
I was with you until your last paragraph.
Apple's principal mistake with the Cube was thinking people would pay top (shall I say excessive) dollar for something that would look cool on their desk but wouldn't do anything more than a more practical Mac.
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook. (It might do less if there's no optical drive or hard disk.) Therefore, the only people who will buy one are the ones who'll pay a premium for a tiny notebook that will fit handily on their coach class tray table. How many people like that are there?
Well, you missed some of what I said about it then.
The Cube was a full computer. Apple didn't promote it as such. That was a major mistake.
Because people didn't know it was a full fledged, upgradable computer, they saw this small box selling for a high price for a small box.
As I said, there is a market for an ultra-portable, which wasn't the case for the Cube when it came out.
Ironically, If Apple came out with the cube today, it would sell like hotcakes!
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook.
That's not quite true. An ultraportable would likely last three times as long on a battery as a MacBook at half the weight. I hope they don't ditch the conventional drives, I think it's too soon for that. Speculating is probably a bad idea, but I really don't think they would ditch the optical drive or the mechanical hard drive.
That's not quite true. An ultraportable would likely last three times as long on a battery as a MacBook at half the weight. I hope they don't ditch the conventional drives, I think it's too soon for that. Speculating is probably a bad idea, but I really don't think they would ditch the optical drive or the mechanical hard drive.
How is an ultra-portable going to run three times longer? Wouldn't the battery be miniaturized too? I might expect slightly longer life due to a small (LED) screen but that's about it.
I agree and don't think Apple will ditch the optical drive or hard drive in any new portable either. That's partly why I don't think any new portable will be excessively small. I do think Apple will replace the 12" PowerBook with something new eventually. They might even market it as being the "ultra-portable MacBook mini" or something like that. I just don't think it will have a 10 inch screen or be any less than the width of a standard keyboard.
How is an ultra-portable going to run three times longer? Wouldn't the battery be miniaturized too? I might expect slightly longer life due to a small (LED) screen but that's about it.
I agree and don't think Apple will ditch the optical drive or hard drive in any new portable either. That's partly why I don't think any new portable will be excessively small. I do think Apple will replace the 12" PowerBook with something new eventually. They might even market it as being the "ultra-portable MacBook mini" or something like that. I just don't think it will have a 10 inch screen or be any less than the width of a standard keyboard.
Ultra portables often last 10 hours, and I think Sony has one that lasts 12 hours.
It would depend on usage though, like everything else.
How is an ultra-portable going to run three times longer? Wouldn't the battery be miniaturized too? I might expect slightly longer life due to a small (LED) screen but that's about it.
The chips used in them have very low power consumption numbers, they use the ULV chips which consume a third the power as standard mobile chips and the clock is slower. The usual run times I see run from 8 to 11 hours, depending on model and battery.
The chips used in them have very low power consumption numbers, they use the ULV chips which consume a third the power as standard mobile chips and the clock is slower. The usual run times I see run from 8 to 11 hours, depending on model and battery.
If that's the case, maybe they would also be much cooler! I might buy one so I could actually use it on my lap, unlike a MacBook.
..but not if it doesn't have a standard keyboard.
Ironically, If Apple came out with the cube today, it would sell like hotcakes!
I still doubt that this would be the case. It seems people ask for something more voluminous than a Cube, for easy access and use of standard desktop components, but less humongous than a Mac Pro for obvious reasons.
longer battery life (no moving part drives)
run cooler (less heat from the flash than a HD, no optical drive)
be quieter (no moving part drives, less need for fans)
And for people saying 'but if they did that they would have to redesign the Macbook'. Well this isn't replacing the Macbook, its a different model and a new design anyway, so the bezel thickness and overall size can be smaller than a MacBook.
Same goes for a micro-portable. It would be expensive due to miniaturization and wouldn't do anything more than a cheaper MacBook. (It might do less if there's no optical drive or hard disk.) Therefore, the only people who will buy one are the ones who'll pay a premium for a tiny notebook that will fit handily on their coach class tray table. How many people like that are there?
It's not just airplane flights. I used to have to cart around an iBook around trade shows in a courier bag as part of my job as a journalist. Trust me, an ultraportable is a godsend if you've got to cart around a laptop and a DSLR and lenses for 3 days of trade show. I've still got the hump on my shoulder.
These days, I use an iMac 90% of the time but for the occasional trips out where I don't need a huge screen, Apple's current laptops aren't even as small as the old iBook G3 I still use. I've seen no reason to upgrade yet because of that.
I wonder if the idea of upgrading the Pro line is to accelerate buys among the those who who use Creative Suite and want to exit the desktop form factor. Laptops are gaining share across all types of users so at a minimum this might get the true professional users to finally start buying intel macs.
Now this makes sense to me. I got a new MBP just before the jump to core2duo so I was feeling a bit cheated already when the news on the new airport standard came out, but I have CS2 loaded on it and have been looking forward to the new standard. Carrying the MBP and the Pismo ang G4 PowerBook before it around the world has been a VERY pleasant experience, but one always wants more. THe 17"er always seemed just a little too hard to type on despite the excellent price factor. Despite, or perhaps because of, being one of those Cube folks, I have never been willing to spring for the MacPro towers-- just too much, but I've always gone with the largest desktop screen I could get (no 30" yet). I find the laptops are doing everything, but I've been looking for a platform for serious web work along with Japanese language storage space.
If that's the case, maybe they would also be much cooler! I might buy one so I could actually use it on my lap, unlike a MacBook.
..but not if it doesn't have a standard keyboard.
They would run cooler, though a short-term solution would be to try one of the fan control programs to up the fan speed a notch.
I can't say it works for a MacBook, but my MacBook Pro is very useable as a result, in my case without altering the sound output noticeably.
The MBs and MBPs are all compromises, not powerful enough for power-hungry professionals but not really light enough to carry with you all day. The MBs aren't even really desktop replacements. You'd be surprised how many people actually have both a laptop and a desktop just because they don't want to compromise at home/work or on the go. You need to stop thinking just within the very limited confines of your own needs and desires.
There are very few things that a MBP can't do these days. The difference between my Mac Pro and MBP are small enough that there are days that I don't bother booting the Mac Pro and just run a little slower on my MBP because all my current work files are on there. There are days I need every cycle I can find but most days I don't.
That said, if I had an ultra portable I'd probably need my Mac Pro a lot more often but it sure would be lighter to lug about.
Vinea
That's not quite true. An ultraportable would likely last three times as long on a battery as a MacBook at half the weight. I hope they don't ditch the conventional drives, I think it's too soon for that. Speculating is probably a bad idea, but I really don't think they would ditch the optical drive or the mechanical hard drive.
32GB of solid state drives is likely "good enough" size wise for most ultra-portable users IMHO for the trade off of faster boot times, lower power usage and persistent storage that is a little more rugged than a HDD.
Vinea