I'd heard some people suggesting that Apple buy AMD using up some of that $15 billion in cash. However some sort of exclusive partnership with Intel makes more sense. I'm hoping that Apple doesn't do anything to piss-off Intel. Those two companies seem like a match made in heaven. If Apple has made Intel re-think their computing goals, that is a wonderful thing for consumers. The hand-held computer market may just explode. The power of a desktop in the palm of your hand. Sounds sweet to me.
Oh no! Not AMD. Let those three letters be banned from these threads.
But, a useful investment would be Nvidia. Apple doesn't have to buy the company, which is worth about $19 billion, but a good sized investment might be a good idea.
I can't find any information that says that AppleTV uses a ULV chip. The model number of the chip and the fact it's codenamed Crofton doesn't seem to appear anywhere except in AppleTV articles. It seems unlikely though, I thought ULV chips cost more.
It's a standard Intel x86 "M", which is run at a lower speed.
That's an impressive range for power consumption. With Intel's clout, ARM might have cause for some serious concern once those hit the market.
This is my thought. I'm also wondering if the arrival of the SDK for Touch devices is timed with the arrival of Intel based devices. That is will they simply skip support of ARM based devices and present a SDK for these new chips.
Frankly I'm more concerned about Apple putting its spin on a tablet computer, be it ARM based or Intel based. I'm really hoping for something that effectively replaces the Newton and gives very good connectivity. By replace I don't mean an old newton OS but rather Apple expands on Touch to th point that we really end up with a hand held computing platform that is unrestricted.
A clean demarcation might be seen at anything visual that depends on Core Graphics GPU support. None of that eye candy is going to happen nicely on a machine like this. I believe most of OS X itself could make the transition unscathed. Something graphically between the iPhone and full desktop/laptop functionalities. And those well designed apps can have alternate appropriately scoped functionality sets which honor the restrictions without a ground up rewrite of the entire app.
As for overall CPU computing power, the second generation Pentium M's don't suck for standard email/office/academic work. I wouldn't foresee a need to downgrade app functionality just for CPU cycles, but on the same hand apps won't be able to keep up with all the latest effort desktop/laptop bells and whistles. It will be necessary to give them enough DRAM though or it will get slow fast for having to hit a flash drive a lot.
We're so used to large screens, and are always crying out for higher resolutions on even MacBooks, that I question just how many people will enjoy using devices with 768 x 480 screens. There's an interface problem at the least.
Core support is less needed because of these same low resolutions. The graphics can easily be handled by simpler hardware without needing these tricks. Though, for compatibility, and since it will likely be in the OS delivered in these machines, it might end up getting used, as even the weak GPU's in them might be able to do useful work. It's hard to say at this point.
If this is a medium sized device, with a screen comfortably smaller than what Ireland wants (I know you're hiding here somewhere!), then that would be small enough to carry around almost everywhere without thinking about it.
We'll see. The disagreement was whether Silverthorn would be in the iPhone in 2008 and your mistaken assertion that preemptive multitasking was unimportant for the ARM in the iPhone or even older PDAs.
I don't think anyone disagreed that the Silverthorn was cool and could appear in a larger Apple product than a phone that needs better battery life than even an ultraportable or UMPC. The Intel Menlow based UMPC has a 4-6 hour battery life. If I remember right the power consumption of Silverthorn is nearly an order of magnitude higher than the ARM.
Without user replaceable batteries that simply wont fly in a phone. Even with user replaceable batteries it's annoying. A smart phone has to at least be a competent phone to start with.
A Mac Nano based on Menlow would be killer and fits between a phone and a laptop. Big enough to take notes on comfortably, small enough to take everywhere, powerful enough to be useful even standalone. I'd want a stylus though in addition to multi-touch. And a user replaceable battery so I can carry a spare on the airplane.
No, that wasn't it at all.
The argument against this was the feeling that the power/performance ratio wouldn't beat the ARM until at least the 2009 timeframe, if at all. That was the argument. It doesn't look to be true.
The history of slate/pen only devices has been terrible. That is what the UMPC's did with their 7" versions which only sold 350,000 units worldwide! Same goes for the tablet pc, etc.
A device that is just small enough to fit in a large coat pocket yet is as large as possible given those restraints so that an easy touch type keybord input can be incorporated is what will really sell like hot cakes. That would be the first ever pocket laptop and if ran full windows programs, even MS fans like me would be an Apple convert.
This is the size I've been pushing for this device. for those who don't remember, the Newton was just about this size, though the old technology required that it be too thick, and too heavy.
But, it was fine on a belt. This could be slimmer, and lighter.
Of course, you could also keep it in your pocket, as you suggest, or throw it into an attache case.
This is my thought. I'm also wondering if the arrival of the SDK for Touch devices is timed with the arrival of Intel based devices. That is will they simply skip support of ARM based devices and present a SDK for these new chips.
Frankly I'm more concerned about Apple putting its spin on a tablet computer, be it ARM based or Intel based. I'm really hoping for something that effectively replaces the Newton and gives very good connectivity. By replace I don't mean an old newton OS but rather Apple expands on Touch to th point that we really end up with a hand held computing platform that is unrestricted.
Dave
I have a feeling that it could be the case. That's why I earlier said that while the new programs for the SDK would likely have to be written to the ARM, they might not.
How about power savings enough to just reduce power consumption for its own sake.
That is all well and good.
Quote:
While I think there is (and always will be) need for bulked-up desktops and maybe laptops for a few heavy computational needs, I see the same (sadly, American) demand for 'bigger and better' rather than 'smaller and just as good'.
Now you seem to be engaged in self loathing or hate of America. Do realize if it wasn't for the American attitude and spirit you would not be seeing the dramatic strides in computing capabilities that we see these days. Including the ability to dramatically lower power demand.
Quote:
With all of the attention paid to energy waste/pollution due to transportatio, the fact is that 1/3 of power usage in this country is devoted to architectural waste. And a huge amount of that energy waste is devoted to cooling buildings now being heated by superfluous computing power.
That depends on your perspective now doesn't it. Up north here I see the PC as a space heater to keep one room just a bit warmer than the rest.
I do have to wonder if you are the sort of guy that likes working with the smell of sweaty people? If so tell us because frankly most of us are not into such things.
Quote:
How 'bout we accept that for 90% of our computing needs, we're using Mack Trucks to drive to the grocery store? Mail and browsing and entertainment don't require Ferraris.
See now is where you inspire me to suggest that you go to hell. I really don't need somebody telling me what sort of car I drive or what sort of PC I need. Oh by the way I do most of my eating in restaurants, that probably offends you in some way too.
Quote:
I think the lower power of these new chips is terrific, and we should eschew using that savings as an excuse to feel entitled to our current waste levels.
</endEnviroRant>
It is not an issue of entitlement or other leftist wishfulness. It is the simple realization that technology and society built around it moves ahead at its own pace.
That would be the first ever pocket laptop and if ran full windows programs, even MS fans like me would be an Apple convert.
You know I like your perspective on the devices physical size. Nothing you've suggested is out of line with what I expect or want. But then you really loose me with the obsession with Windows software.
This issue with software is this. It will be 2009 before there is a significant number of devices on the market and we will be moving into 2010. We can do better than to be running tired old MS applications. Especially applications that have never transfered to a pocket platform well.
Iphone has clearly demonstrated that there is a demand for fresh perspectives with respect to software and user interaction. I'm not saying that we don't want to be able to handle old file formats but rather want to point out that living in the past is a bit like tying an anchor around your neck and jumping overboard.
The argument against this was the feeling that the power/performance ratio wouldn't beat the ARM until at least the 2009 timeframe, if at all. That was the argument. It doesn't look to be true.
The power draw of the Silverthorn is far higher than that of an ARM. Power/performance is not as critical as just power for long duration mobile devices. Intel isn't aiming at ARM's core phone market with Silverthorn except perhaps at the "more UMPC than Phone" market...aka MID.
Intel made a run with XScale and it didn't play out for them. Silverthorn is not their attempt at direct competition with ARM in ARM's own space (low power CPU for phones and other apps) where it dominates but to deny ARM the ability to move upscale into low end UMPCs arena.
ARM used to be a desktop processor in the Archimedes. Foleo sucked and the Nokia N810 'tablet" is so-so but both uses ARM so Intel isn't unaware of which way ARM intends to grow...right smack into that MID market Intel wants to flourish and, of course, dominate. The last thing they want is to share that space with ARM. My read is still that Intel will use Silverthorn to dominate that product space and defend the UMPC/Ultraportable markets for a real push against ARM's core product space with Moorestown with its 10x power reduction.
Personally, I think Intel will win and I think Apple is the strategic partner to help them win. An Eee PC with Silverthorn will be pretty nice too.
2009/2010 is not all that far away. With Intel moving to 32nm in 2009 and using 45nm fabs for Moorestown, ARM11/Cortex A8 better be killer. Unfortunately for ARM, danged few folks are going 32nm so if Intel really really wants to win it can always do a process shrink for Moorestown which ARM will be hard pressed to answer if Intel can actually make the 32nm jump on schedule.
I've asked 50 business people what they wanted and all but one said they would love to have a modern version of my HP Jornada if it could run Windows.
I have never understood the UMPC makers. A modern HP Journada or NEC MobilePro 900c running full windows would have done MUCH better than the UMPC that actually got made.
The NEC is a tad bigger than your Journada but the keyboard is IMHO much better. I dunno that you could get much less wide/tall than the NEC and have a QWERTY keyboard that worked well. Thinner I can see even though those things are only 3-4 years old and running real Windows.
Or real OSX with iWork or Office. Keynote presentations from a Journada or MobilePro sized device would be handy. And if it can Bootcamp...even better.
Dude, seriously, AMD has a pretty good chance of ceasing as an independent business in 2008, bought out be some Asian conglomerate (be East Asian or Southwest Asian). Never mind that the chance of them producing a 45 nm chip in 2008 is vanishingly small, smaller than the chance of them being bought. The writing was on the wall after AMD bought out ATI. They wasted $5G on that while they should have poured it into their fabs (the 2 that they had). Now the cost of entry for 32 nm is totally out of their hands and they must rely on someone else, who will undoubtedly be at least a year behind Intel in microprocessor logic circuits at those sizes.
You're right that it's more likely to be Mac Touch than iTouch since they'll want to associate it with their Mac line instead of their iPod/iPhone line (although the iBook was definitely Mac-line).
But it is 11". The physical device is 9" wide, 6.5" high, and <0.75" thick for a diagonal of 11.1". The screen size, though, is 9" diagonal (7.63" wide, 4.77" high) in Apple's 16:10 aspect ratio. That is about the smallest comfortable width for a virtual keyboard.
I meant 11" diagonal screen size, not an 11" device. A 9" desktop would be just lame.
An 11" diagonal screen size would actually make the horizontal width of a device like I have in this image about 11" wide. Corner to corner it would be over 12" but who's counting. A last resort to make this thing very small I'd say would be 10", but no way 9". I still hope, say and think 11", but I would still purchase one @ 10" - no smaller though, I have an iPhone after all.
I'm liking this, my newly imagined methodology:
20" - 30" screen, power-house desktop for getting "work" done
11" Mac touch "to take some work with you"
3.5" iPhone to always stay connected, via email, the web, text and phone
You know I like your perspective on the devices physical size. Nothing you've suggested is out of line with what I expect or want. But then you really loose me with the obsession with Windows software.
This issue with software is this. It will be 2009 before there is a significant number of devices on the market and we will be moving into 2010. We can do better than to be running tired old MS applications. Especially applications that have never transfered to a pocket platform well.
Iphone has clearly demonstrated that there is a demand for fresh perspectives with respect to software and user interaction. I'm not saying that we don't want to be able to handle old file formats but rather want to point out that living in the past is a bit like tying an anchor around your neck and jumping overboard.
dave
There are a bunch of business apps out there written in .NET and even more written in old VB and MFC C/C++. Most of these can run well enough in a small form factor to be "usable enough" for business folks on the move.
There will also be a good number of modern Rich Internet Applications that will depend on a .NET stack that will likely work better in Windows (even Vista) than on Windows Mobile.
Plus Microsoft's Surface SDK using WPF/XAML will be very cool.
Still trying to become a surface partner but everybody and their brother wants to be one. While XAML can be a tad odd, C# is still at lot more approachable than Objective C 2.0.
I meant 11" diagonal screen size, not an 11" device. A 9" desktop would be just lame.
An 11" diagonal screen size would actually make the horizontal width of a device like I have in this image about 11" wide. Corner to corner it would be over 12" but who's counting. A last resort to make this thing very small I'd say would be 10", but no way 9". I still hope, say and think 11", but I would still purchase one @ 10" - no smaller though, I have an iPhone after all.
I'm liking this, my newly imagined methodology:
20" - 30" screen, power-house desktop for getting "work" done
11" Mac touch "to take some work with you"
3.5" iPhone to always stay connected, via email, the web, text and phone
Make the outside dimension 10.8" diagonal, same as a steno pad. That's a critical size to maintain, to avoid feelings of bloat. Several generations of business people and students accept steno pads as very conveniently sized. There is a significant industry in planners/planner folios and a steno sized entry is custom made to fit the comfort feel of every user of that form factor. Going bigger and you might as well go to a 13" tablet and those will be a much harder sell.
The history of slate/pen only devices has been terrible. That is what the UMPC's did with their 7" versions which only sold 350,000 units worldwide! Same goes for the tablet pc, etc.
no offense, but this is pretty much what every naysayer says about new apple products until apple releases them.
Remember this is apple. they dont do anything the way everybody else does, and thats why they're succeeding.
I hereby predict that a tablet mac will sell at least one million units in its first year.
The power draw of the Silverthorn is far higher than that of an ARM.
It all depends on the MHz. Silverthorne's targeted TDP is 0.55 Watts. If that is at 600 MHz clock rate, it'll be within 600 MHz ARM implementations. I wouldn't expect ARM processors of equivalent performance per Hz to be much lower power consumption than Intel's attempt, and as noted, Intel has a process advantage to provide parity if they are off by a factor of 2 to their competitors. If that's a 1 GHz clock rate, I don't think ARM will be competing very well as Intel's process advantage would be too much.
Having a competitive SoC on the other hand may prove to be trouble for Intel. They're going to have 2 chip solution (Moorestown). That may be one chip too many. They got a really nice Apple-ish concept device though:
Intel made a run with XScale and it didn't play out for them. Silverthorn is not their attempt at direct competition with ARM in ARM's own space (low power CPU for phones and other apps) where it dominates but to deny ARM the ability to move upscale into low end UMPCs arena.
ARM used to be a desktop processor in the Archimedes. Foleo sucked and the Nokia N810 'tablet" is so-so but both uses ARM so Intel isn't unaware of which way ARM intends to grow...right smack into that MID market Intel wants to flourish and, of course, dominate. The last thing they want is to share that space with ARM. My read is still that Intel will use Silverthorn to dominate that product space and defend the UMPC/Ultraportable markets for a real push against ARM's core product space with Moorestown with its 10x power reduction.
Comments
I'd heard some people suggesting that Apple buy AMD using up some of that $15 billion in cash.
Oh no! Not AMD. Let those three letters be banned from these threads.
But, a useful investment would be Nvidia. Apple doesn't have to buy the company, which is worth about $19 billion, but a good sized investment might be a good idea.
I can't find any information that says that AppleTV uses a ULV chip. The model number of the chip and the fact it's codenamed Crofton doesn't seem to appear anywhere except in AppleTV articles. It seems unlikely though, I thought ULV chips cost more.
It's a standard Intel x86 "M", which is run at a lower speed.
Of course some argued with you, you're you!
But I've been with you on this one, as hard as that might be to believe.
Hey, we shouldn't mind arguments. Otherwise these boards would quickly become boring.
As long as it doesn't get out of hand, as it sometimes does.
That's an impressive range for power consumption. With Intel's clout, ARM might have cause for some serious concern once those hit the market.
This is my thought. I'm also wondering if the arrival of the SDK for Touch devices is timed with the arrival of Intel based devices. That is will they simply skip support of ARM based devices and present a SDK for these new chips.
Frankly I'm more concerned about Apple putting its spin on a tablet computer, be it ARM based or Intel based. I'm really hoping for something that effectively replaces the Newton and gives very good connectivity. By replace I don't mean an old newton OS but rather Apple expands on Touch to th point that we really end up with a hand held computing platform that is unrestricted.
Dave
A clean demarcation might be seen at anything visual that depends on Core Graphics GPU support. None of that eye candy is going to happen nicely on a machine like this. I believe most of OS X itself could make the transition unscathed. Something graphically between the iPhone and full desktop/laptop functionalities. And those well designed apps can have alternate appropriately scoped functionality sets which honor the restrictions without a ground up rewrite of the entire app.
As for overall CPU computing power, the second generation Pentium M's don't suck for standard email/office/academic work. I wouldn't foresee a need to downgrade app functionality just for CPU cycles, but on the same hand apps won't be able to keep up with all the latest effort desktop/laptop bells and whistles. It will be necessary to give them enough DRAM though or it will get slow fast for having to hit a flash drive a lot.
We're so used to large screens, and are always crying out for higher resolutions on even MacBooks, that I question just how many people will enjoy using devices with 768 x 480 screens. There's an interface problem at the least.
Core support is less needed because of these same low resolutions. The graphics can easily be handled by simpler hardware without needing these tricks. Though, for compatibility, and since it will likely be in the OS delivered in these machines, it might end up getting used, as even the weak GPU's in them might be able to do useful work. It's hard to say at this point.
If this is a medium sized device, with a screen comfortably smaller than what Ireland wants (I know you're hiding here somewhere!), then that would be small enough to carry around almost everywhere without thinking about it.
It's showing pretty exciting possibilities already.
We'll see. The disagreement was whether Silverthorn would be in the iPhone in 2008 and your mistaken assertion that preemptive multitasking was unimportant for the ARM in the iPhone or even older PDAs.
I don't think anyone disagreed that the Silverthorn was cool and could appear in a larger Apple product than a phone that needs better battery life than even an ultraportable or UMPC. The Intel Menlow based UMPC has a 4-6 hour battery life. If I remember right the power consumption of Silverthorn is nearly an order of magnitude higher than the ARM.
Without user replaceable batteries that simply wont fly in a phone. Even with user replaceable batteries it's annoying. A smart phone has to at least be a competent phone to start with.
A Mac Nano based on Menlow would be killer and fits between a phone and a laptop. Big enough to take notes on comfortably, small enough to take everywhere, powerful enough to be useful even standalone. I'd want a stylus though in addition to multi-touch. And a user replaceable battery so I can carry a spare on the airplane.
No, that wasn't it at all.
The argument against this was the feeling that the power/performance ratio wouldn't beat the ARM until at least the 2009 timeframe, if at all. That was the argument. It doesn't look to be true.
The history of slate/pen only devices has been terrible. That is what the UMPC's did with their 7" versions which only sold 350,000 units worldwide! Same goes for the tablet pc, etc.
A device that is just small enough to fit in a large coat pocket yet is as large as possible given those restraints so that an easy touch type keybord input can be incorporated is what will really sell like hot cakes. That would be the first ever pocket laptop and if ran full windows programs, even MS fans like me would be an Apple convert.
This is the size I've been pushing for this device. for those who don't remember, the Newton was just about this size, though the old technology required that it be too thick, and too heavy.
But, it was fine on a belt. This could be slimmer, and lighter.
Of course, you could also keep it in your pocket, as you suggest, or throw it into an attache case.
This is my thought. I'm also wondering if the arrival of the SDK for Touch devices is timed with the arrival of Intel based devices. That is will they simply skip support of ARM based devices and present a SDK for these new chips.
Frankly I'm more concerned about Apple putting its spin on a tablet computer, be it ARM based or Intel based. I'm really hoping for something that effectively replaces the Newton and gives very good connectivity. By replace I don't mean an old newton OS but rather Apple expands on Touch to th point that we really end up with a hand held computing platform that is unrestricted.
Dave
I have a feeling that it could be the case. That's why I earlier said that while the new programs for the SDK would likely have to be written to the ARM, they might not.
This will be a good guessing game.
How about power savings enough to just reduce power consumption for its own sake.
That is all well and good.
While I think there is (and always will be) need for bulked-up desktops and maybe laptops for a few heavy computational needs, I see the same (sadly, American) demand for 'bigger and better' rather than 'smaller and just as good'.
Now you seem to be engaged in self loathing or hate of America. Do realize if it wasn't for the American attitude and spirit you would not be seeing the dramatic strides in computing capabilities that we see these days. Including the ability to dramatically lower power demand.
With all of the attention paid to energy waste/pollution due to transportatio, the fact is that 1/3 of power usage in this country is devoted to architectural waste. And a huge amount of that energy waste is devoted to cooling buildings now being heated by superfluous computing power.
That depends on your perspective now doesn't it. Up north here I see the PC as a space heater to keep one room just a bit warmer than the rest.
I do have to wonder if you are the sort of guy that likes working with the smell of sweaty people? If so tell us because frankly most of us are not into such things.
How 'bout we accept that for 90% of our computing needs, we're using Mack Trucks to drive to the grocery store? Mail and browsing and entertainment don't require Ferraris.
See now is where you inspire me to suggest that you go to hell. I really don't need somebody telling me what sort of car I drive or what sort of PC I need. Oh by the way I do most of my eating in restaurants, that probably offends you in some way too.
I think the lower power of these new chips is terrific, and we should eschew using that savings as an excuse to feel entitled to our current waste levels.
</endEnviroRant>
It is not an issue of entitlement or other leftist wishfulness. It is the simple realization that technology and society built around it moves ahead at its own pace.
Dave
That would be the first ever pocket laptop and if ran full windows programs, even MS fans like me would be an Apple convert.
You know I like your perspective on the devices physical size. Nothing you've suggested is out of line with what I expect or want. But then you really loose me with the obsession with Windows software.
This issue with software is this. It will be 2009 before there is a significant number of devices on the market and we will be moving into 2010. We can do better than to be running tired old MS applications. Especially applications that have never transfered to a pocket platform well.
Iphone has clearly demonstrated that there is a demand for fresh perspectives with respect to software and user interaction. I'm not saying that we don't want to be able to handle old file formats but rather want to point out that living in the past is a bit like tying an anchor around your neck and jumping overboard.
dave
No, that wasn't it at all.
The argument against this was the feeling that the power/performance ratio wouldn't beat the ARM until at least the 2009 timeframe, if at all. That was the argument. It doesn't look to be true.
The power draw of the Silverthorn is far higher than that of an ARM. Power/performance is not as critical as just power for long duration mobile devices. Intel isn't aiming at ARM's core phone market with Silverthorn except perhaps at the "more UMPC than Phone" market...aka MID.
Intel made a run with XScale and it didn't play out for them. Silverthorn is not their attempt at direct competition with ARM in ARM's own space (low power CPU for phones and other apps) where it dominates but to deny ARM the ability to move upscale into low end UMPCs arena.
ARM used to be a desktop processor in the Archimedes. Foleo sucked and the Nokia N810 'tablet" is so-so but both uses ARM so Intel isn't unaware of which way ARM intends to grow...right smack into that MID market Intel wants to flourish and, of course, dominate. The last thing they want is to share that space with ARM. My read is still that Intel will use Silverthorn to dominate that product space and defend the UMPC/Ultraportable markets for a real push against ARM's core product space with Moorestown with its 10x power reduction.
Personally, I think Intel will win and I think Apple is the strategic partner to help them win. An Eee PC with Silverthorn will be pretty nice too.
2009/2010 is not all that far away. With Intel moving to 32nm in 2009 and using 45nm fabs for Moorestown, ARM11/Cortex A8 better be killer. Unfortunately for ARM, danged few folks are going 32nm so if Intel really really wants to win it can always do a process shrink for Moorestown which ARM will be hard pressed to answer if Intel can actually make the 32nm jump on schedule.
I've asked 50 business people what they wanted and all but one said they would love to have a modern version of my HP Jornada if it could run Windows.
I have never understood the UMPC makers. A modern HP Journada or NEC MobilePro 900c running full windows would have done MUCH better than the UMPC that actually got made.
The NEC is a tad bigger than your Journada but the keyboard is IMHO much better. I dunno that you could get much less wide/tall than the NEC and have a QWERTY keyboard that worked well. Thinner I can see even though those things are only 3-4 years old and running real Windows.
Or real OSX with iWork or Office. Keynote presentations from a Journada or MobilePro sized device would be handy. And if it can Bootcamp...even better.
maybe apple should work AMD not Intel
Dude, seriously, AMD has a pretty good chance of ceasing as an independent business in 2008, bought out be some Asian conglomerate (be East Asian or Southwest Asian). Never mind that the chance of them producing a 45 nm chip in 2008 is vanishingly small, smaller than the chance of them being bought. The writing was on the wall after AMD bought out ATI. They wasted $5G on that while they should have poured it into their fabs (the 2 that they had). Now the cost of entry for 32 nm is totally out of their hands and they must rely on someone else, who will undoubtedly be at least a year behind Intel in microprocessor logic circuits at those sizes.
They wasted $5G on that...
Is that $5Grand
or
is it $5Gazillion
?
You're right that it's more likely to be Mac Touch than iTouch since they'll want to associate it with their Mac line instead of their iPod/iPhone line (although the iBook was definitely Mac-line).
But it is 11". The physical device is 9" wide, 6.5" high, and <0.75" thick for a diagonal of 11.1". The screen size, though, is 9" diagonal (7.63" wide, 4.77" high) in Apple's 16:10 aspect ratio. That is about the smallest comfortable width for a virtual keyboard.
I meant 11" diagonal screen size, not an 11" device. A 9" desktop would be just lame.
An 11" diagonal screen size would actually make the horizontal width of a device like I have in this image about 11" wide. Corner to corner it would be over 12" but who's counting. A last resort to make this thing very small I'd say would be 10", but no way 9". I still hope, say and think 11", but I would still purchase one @ 10" - no smaller though, I have an iPhone after all.
I'm liking this, my newly imagined methodology:
You know I like your perspective on the devices physical size. Nothing you've suggested is out of line with what I expect or want. But then you really loose me with the obsession with Windows software.
This issue with software is this. It will be 2009 before there is a significant number of devices on the market and we will be moving into 2010. We can do better than to be running tired old MS applications. Especially applications that have never transfered to a pocket platform well.
Iphone has clearly demonstrated that there is a demand for fresh perspectives with respect to software and user interaction. I'm not saying that we don't want to be able to handle old file formats but rather want to point out that living in the past is a bit like tying an anchor around your neck and jumping overboard.
dave
There are a bunch of business apps out there written in .NET and even more written in old VB and MFC C/C++. Most of these can run well enough in a small form factor to be "usable enough" for business folks on the move.
There will also be a good number of modern Rich Internet Applications that will depend on a .NET stack that will likely work better in Windows (even Vista) than on Windows Mobile.
Plus Microsoft's Surface SDK using WPF/XAML will be very cool.
http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=...0-679356c5ce79
Still trying to become a surface partner but everybody and their brother wants to be one. While XAML can be a tad odd, C# is still at lot more approachable than Objective C 2.0.
I meant 11" diagonal screen size, not an 11" device. A 9" desktop would be just lame.
An 11" diagonal screen size would actually make the horizontal width of a device like I have in this image about 11" wide. Corner to corner it would be over 12" but who's counting. A last resort to make this thing very small I'd say would be 10", but no way 9". I still hope, say and think 11", but I would still purchase one @ 10" - no smaller though, I have an iPhone after all.
I'm liking this, my newly imagined methodology:
Make the outside dimension 10.8" diagonal, same as a steno pad. That's a critical size to maintain, to avoid feelings of bloat. Several generations of business people and students accept steno pads as very conveniently sized. There is a significant industry in planners/planner folios and a steno sized entry is custom made to fit the comfort feel of every user of that form factor. Going bigger and you might as well go to a 13" tablet and those will be a much harder sell.
The history of slate/pen only devices has been terrible. That is what the UMPC's did with their 7" versions which only sold 350,000 units worldwide! Same goes for the tablet pc, etc.
no offense, but this is pretty much what every naysayer says about new apple products until apple releases them.
Remember this is apple. they dont do anything the way everybody else does, and thats why they're succeeding.
I hereby predict that a tablet mac will sell at least one million units in its first year.
The power draw of the Silverthorn is far higher than that of an ARM.
It all depends on the MHz. Silverthorne's targeted TDP is 0.55 Watts. If that is at 600 MHz clock rate, it'll be within 600 MHz ARM implementations. I wouldn't expect ARM processors of equivalent performance per Hz to be much lower power consumption than Intel's attempt, and as noted, Intel has a process advantage to provide parity if they are off by a factor of 2 to their competitors. If that's a 1 GHz clock rate, I don't think ARM will be competing very well as Intel's process advantage would be too much.
Having a competitive SoC on the other hand may prove to be trouble for Intel. They're going to have 2 chip solution (Moorestown). That may be one chip too many. They got a really nice Apple-ish concept device though:
image1
image2
Intel made a run with XScale and it didn't play out for them. Silverthorn is not their attempt at direct competition with ARM in ARM's own space (low power CPU for phones and other apps) where it dominates but to deny ARM the ability to move upscale into low end UMPCs arena.
ARM used to be a desktop processor in the Archimedes. Foleo sucked and the Nokia N810 'tablet" is so-so but both uses ARM so Intel isn't unaware of which way ARM intends to grow...right smack into that MID market Intel wants to flourish and, of course, dominate. The last thing they want is to share that space with ARM. My read is still that Intel will use Silverthorn to dominate that product space and defend the UMPC/Ultraportable markets for a real push against ARM's core product space with Moorestown with its 10x power reduction.
I think this is a good read:
Menlow (Silverthorne + Poulsbo) UMPC-ish device
menlow UMPC
But like everyone else is saying, where's the market? UMPC vendors are providing solutions searching for a problem.
Edit: Well, Anandtech won't show the images