I figure it's unlikely, and I haven't seen a single rumor that supports it. Just something that dawned on me, and would definitely be an interesting and welcome feature.
Interesting yes, welcomed I'm not to sure about that.
The problem is inductive charging requires inductors/transformers and associated magnetics. Gone would be the convenience of a thin low profile cord to carry around with your iPhone to recharge as the opportunities arise. I just don't see the huge advantage to the average user that many seem to think exists.
Interesting yes, welcomed I'm not to sure about that.
The problem is inductive charging requires inductors/transformers and associated magnetics. Gone would be the convenience of a thin low profile cord to carry around with your iPhone to recharge as the opportunities arise. I just don't see the huge advantage to the average user that many seem to think exists.
Dave
Additionally, unlike most wireless technologies, cables-free charging actually restricts your freedom of movement, rendering the device almost completly useless while charging. Making a phone call with or texting on the charging phone would be very inconvinient because one can't move the phone around. A charging cable would give you half a foot.
I can see Apple moving Apple TV to the ARM/Mobile OS platform. They would do so for a number of reasons.
1.
It would eliminate the need to develops a whole new SDK.
2.
Apple TV is currently one product but imagine if you would a tablet that is also an Apple TV. If Apple wants to drive the features of Apple TV outside the current box the OS needs to be more flexible. Mobile / iPhone OS provides a well designed platform for such limited capacity devices.
3.
Games! One word really says it all here in my mind, being able to run the same games across platforms would be huge.
4.
A nice but limited set of apps that work well with limited keyboard input. It is enough to justify an Apple TV as an alternative network portal.
5.
ARM means low power and likely very high integration.
Quote:
For crying out loud, surely Apple wants users to be able read their email/news feeds and check their stocks/local weather on the big screen, right?
I don't know what Apple thinks or wants but I could see the utility of having such if I had cable or other high speed networking at home. The biggest obstruction to such devices isn't Apple or it's tech but rather the service providers and their high rates for connections.
Frankly I would rather see GM and Chrysler go under and have the government clean up the mess caused by the Internet service providers. One thing that would help is to eliminate exclusivity policies and to allow real competition. It is pathetic that in most cases people have one provider to choose from.
In the end Apple TVs success is out of Apples hands. The only real alternative they have would be the take over of a major high speed Internet provider.
It's funny that Apple concentrated on lowering the sticker prices of the laptop line, because of the economy.
I would have thought that if lower prices were deemed necessary, the first place to start would have been the Mac Pro line.
Why? The Mac Pro is bought almost exclusively by corporations (and occasionally people) who use it to make money. Mac Pros pay for themselves in a matter of weeks, tops.
The laptops and the iMac are not workhorses in the same way. Students and hobbyists buy them as well as professionals, so that's where you target the price cuts.
More than a little of the price padding on the Mac Pro is to make up for their low volume.
Why? The Mac Pro is bought almost exclusively by corporations (and occasionally people) who use it to make money. Mac Pros pay for themselves in a matter of weeks, tops.
The laptops and the iMac are not workhorses in the same way. Students and hobbyists buy them as well as professionals, so that's where you target the price cuts.
More than a little of the price padding on the Mac Pro is to make up for their low volume.
I understand that, but corporations are pulling back even more furiously than consumers.
Big markets for the Pro machines are the Print Media and Advertising industries, which are almost as messed up as the automakers right now.
Comments
Wow!
iPhone video???? iPhone nano??? iTablet??? Steve Jobs???????
.............
I figure it's unlikely, and I haven't seen a single rumor that supports it. Just something that dawned on me, and would definitely be an interesting and welcome feature.
Interesting yes, welcomed I'm not to sure about that.
The problem is inductive charging requires inductors/transformers and associated magnetics. Gone would be the convenience of a thin low profile cord to carry around with your iPhone to recharge as the opportunities arise. I just don't see the huge advantage to the average user that many seem to think exists.
Dave
Interesting yes, welcomed I'm not to sure about that.
The problem is inductive charging requires inductors/transformers and associated magnetics. Gone would be the convenience of a thin low profile cord to carry around with your iPhone to recharge as the opportunities arise. I just don't see the huge advantage to the average user that many seem to think exists.
Dave
Additionally, unlike most wireless technologies, cables-free charging actually restricts your freedom of movement, rendering the device almost completly useless while charging. Making a phone call with or texting on the charging phone would be very inconvinient because one can't move the phone around. A charging cable would give you half a foot.
And hopefully they terminate that aweful G9400M/9600M GT and replace it with
some of these:
GeForce GTX 280M
GeForce GTX 260M
GeForce GTS 160M
GeForce GTS 150M
I can see this happening.
I can see Apple moving Apple TV to the ARM/Mobile OS platform. They would do so for a number of reasons.
1.
It would eliminate the need to develops a whole new SDK.
2.
Apple TV is currently one product but imagine if you would a tablet that is also an Apple TV. If Apple wants to drive the features of Apple TV outside the current box the OS needs to be more flexible. Mobile / iPhone OS provides a well designed platform for such limited capacity devices.
3.
Games! One word really says it all here in my mind, being able to run the same games across platforms would be huge.
4.
A nice but limited set of apps that work well with limited keyboard input. It is enough to justify an Apple TV as an alternative network portal.
5.
ARM means low power and likely very high integration.
For crying out loud, surely Apple wants users to be able read their email/news feeds and check their stocks/local weather on the big screen, right?
I don't know what Apple thinks or wants but I could see the utility of having such if I had cable or other high speed networking at home. The biggest obstruction to such devices isn't Apple or it's tech but rather the service providers and their high rates for connections.
Frankly I would rather see GM and Chrysler go under and have the government clean up the mess caused by the Internet service providers. One thing that would help is to eliminate exclusivity policies and to allow real competition. It is pathetic that in most cases people have one provider to choose from.
In the end Apple TVs success is out of Apples hands. The only real alternative they have would be the take over of a major high speed Internet provider.
Dave
And I was pleasantly surprised they were able to announce the new iPhone hardware, too.
I would have thought that if lower prices were deemed necessary, the first place to start would have been the Mac Pro line.
It's funny that Apple concentrated on lowering the sticker prices of the laptop line, because of the economy.
I would have thought that if lower prices were deemed necessary, the first place to start would have been the Mac Pro line.
Why? The Mac Pro is bought almost exclusively by corporations (and occasionally people) who use it to make money. Mac Pros pay for themselves in a matter of weeks, tops.
The laptops and the iMac are not workhorses in the same way. Students and hobbyists buy them as well as professionals, so that's where you target the price cuts.
More than a little of the price padding on the Mac Pro is to make up for their low volume.
Why? The Mac Pro is bought almost exclusively by corporations (and occasionally people) who use it to make money. Mac Pros pay for themselves in a matter of weeks, tops.
The laptops and the iMac are not workhorses in the same way. Students and hobbyists buy them as well as professionals, so that's where you target the price cuts.
More than a little of the price padding on the Mac Pro is to make up for their low volume.
I understand that, but corporations are pulling back even more furiously than consumers.
Big markets for the Pro machines are the Print Media and Advertising industries, which are almost as messed up as the automakers right now.