Subnotebooks are profitable for Sony, a company that probably sells considerably less in laptops then Apple, and shows it by all the engineering they always invest in them?LED backlights, X505 tiny size, carbon fiber casings, integrated graphics card that switches to full size graphics card if you want it to?
If frickin' Sony makes enough off subnotebooks to make it worthwhile I cannot see how Apple would fail to make money.
How much profit do they make? How certain are you that Sony is making alot of money from subnotebooks? I am in no way saying that they are losing money by any means. But companies like Sony count on brand loyalty. You must consider the scope of products that Sony manufactures and compare it to the scope of what Apple does if you are going to make any sort of fair comparison. Sony has thier hands in so many more things than Apple. Even if you compare computers and hand-held-digi's like MP3 players to try and get an objective view, you still cannot compare the two companies because of the number of products Sony offers that Apple does not. TV's, DVD players, digital camera's, digital video cameras, gaming console(s), and the list goes on. And it is because of this that Sony can produce products for such niche markets. They are making so much money in other places, that making small margins or breaking even is not going to effect them nearly as much as it would Apple. Again, brand loyalty. The theory is that if you buy one of thier subnotebooks and love it, you will be more likely to purchase things that they stand to make ALOT more money off of like TV's and DVD players and digital cameras.
It's not that Apple couldn't make money from an even smaller niche, it's that they couldn't afford to continue to produce a product that will appeal to the niche that is generally dominated by companies like Sony and Dell. Going toe to toe with giants doesn't always end with David walking away from the fight.
The Macbook replaced both ibooks and the 12" Powerbook. It's actually close to a tenth of an inch thinner than the Powerbook.
YES! Thank you!
This is what I'm talking about!
And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner. But they're a heck of a lot wider than the 12" PB. Not to mention they're still pretty heavy. Haven't you noticed that people have been mentioning 3 lb. weights in previous posts, a weight no Mac laptop has never come close to, not even with the Powerbook 2400c? Thinness isn't everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opnsource
Sony has thier hands in so many more things than Apple. Even if you compare computers and hand-held-digi's like MP3 players to try and get an objective view, you still cannot compare the two companies because of the number of products Sony offers that Apple does not. TV's, DVD players, digital camera's, digital video cameras, gaming console(s), and the list goes on. And it is because of this that Sony can produce products for such niche markets. They are making so much money in other places, that making small margins or breaking even is not going to effect them nearly as much as it would Apple. Again, brand loyalty. The theory is that if you buy one of thier subnotebooks and love it, you will be more likely to purchase things that they stand to make ALOT more money off of like TV's and DVD players and digital cameras.
Wait, is this the same Sony that so many people are saying is on the skids, that desperately needs Blu-ray and PS3 to be a hit to save the company? That "making so much money in other places" Sony?
And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner. But they're a heck of a lot wider than the 12" PB. Not to mention they're still pretty heavy. Haven't you noticed that people have been mentioning 3 lb. weights in previous posts, a weight no Mac laptop has never come close to, not even with the Powerbook 2400c? Thinness isn't everything.
Wait, is this the same Sony that so many people are saying is on the skids, that desperately needs Blu-ray and PS3 to be a hit to save the company? That "making so much money in other places" Sony?
1st. Weight isn't everything either, but we are talking about a 2lb. difference. And I know that the MacBook is larger and heavier than the PB 12". Man up and carry your fricken' computer. I'm not saying buy a boat anchor, either. Just quit acting like 2lbs is THE deciding factor in what machine you buy.
2nd. Sony does need BluRay and the PS3 to be a hit, not because they are "on the skids" but because some of thier most recent projects, not the least of which the PS3, have cost the company millions of dollars. There have been reports saying that Sony loses over $240.00 on each PS3 they sell. And that's not even taking into account the amount spent on research and development of the cell processor.
So yes, this is the same Sony we are talking about. Just because they are making money in other markets does not mean that they will sit idle by while certain products continue to lose them money.
And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner. But they're a heck of a lot wider than the 12" PB. Not to mention they're still pretty heavy. Haven't you noticed that people have been mentioning 3 lb. weights in previous posts, a weight no Mac laptop has never come close to, not even with the Powerbook 2400c? Thinness isn't everything.
If Apple were to resurrect a sub-notebook MBP, I would like to see them make it with an 11" screen remove the optical drive and use an ULV core 2 chip. Bring the weight down to 3 lbs or less and battery life up to 9 hours or more. Apple doesn't make anything like this and it would appeal to users that are currently ignored by Apple. With the iphone however, maybe apple sees that filling that niche.
I have a 12" Powerbook and bought it after returning a MacBook. The higher screen resolution and bright (too bright) glossy screen were not for me. I see the need for Apple to have a small, lightweight, powerful laptop. In the current lineup, there is none.
I agree with you in that I want a small, lightweight, powerful laptop, and that in the current lineup there isn't one. If they would make a 12" MBP, I'd be thrilled, but unfortunately they probably don't know I exist. I'd probably be satisfied with an option to add a graphics card to the current Macbooks, but I'd still prefer the Pro for the extra ports and speed. So, yes, there is a need for it, but whether or not the need is great enough for them to invest it is yet to be seen.
Oh, now I have a question. I haven't actually used a 13.3" Macbook, but I wondered about the screen. There aren't any Apple stores in the whole of Mississippi, so I can't exactly go check out all the new toys. Anyway...
A lot of the laptops released lately have gotten away from Anti-Glare and gone to super bright, glossy screens that are like glare magnets. I bought a Dell XPS M1210, since Apple doesn't have a small laptop with the specs I want, but returned it because of the glare-y screen. Otherwise it would have been great.
I think that laptops that are specifically designed to be portable/light/small and carried around should at least have an anti-glare option. After all, if you literally can't SEE the screen to use it effectively in 90% of the places you want to use it, what's the point of it being so portable? I don't want to sacrifice most of the visibility for a 10% improvement in sharpness or color vibrance that I won't notice unless I'm in a room with no lights on.
How bad is the Macbook screen?
Cheers,
CT
Note: I've just realised that this is a bad topic for this. I'll re-post later in the correct place if no one answers. Sorries.
The 12.1" PowerBook was a great machine but in reality it was essentially a glorified iBook. The price premium was high for limited product differentiation.
If Apple wants to do this product right they would need to develop a smallish MacBook Pro that is perceived to be much better than the MacBook. No doubt they have more resources now than a few years ago to do so. I imagine they will do their sums and make up their minds as a function of their assessment how big and profitable this niche is.
The 12.1" PowerBook was a great machine but in reality it was essentially a glorified iBook. The price premium was high for limited product differentiation.
The 12" PowerBook is still a great machine. Where did you get that that the PB12" is a
glorified iBook? For the time being there was enough product differentiation
to sell off. As there are: small form factor, faster procs, bigger HDs, better Grafics,
metal case, what else?
Quote:
...
If Apple wants to do this product right they would need to develop a smallish MacBook Pro that is perceived to be much better than the MacBook. No doubt they have more resources now than a few years ago to do so. I imagine they will do their sums and make up their minds as a function of their assessment how big and profitable this niche is.
The niche and therefore the need is there already. Well, Apple released the 12"
very late, iirc a year after they introduced the PowerBooks 15". So, maybe soon they
If Apple were to resurrect a sub-notebook MBP, I would like to see them make it with an 11" screen remove the optical drive and use an ULV core 2 chip. Bring the weight down to 3 lbs or less and battery life up to 9 hours or more. Apple doesn't make anything like this and it would appeal to users that are currently ignored by Apple. With the iphone however, maybe apple sees that filling that niche.
That's exactly what a lot of people in this thread have been begging for. Well, at least us "girlie men" who've been criticized for complaining about having to lug around a couple of extra pounds.
The iPhone isn't anything close to a full computer. It has very limited functionality, even if you don't take its closed OS into account. Even if it ran full OS X, it's not something you'd want to do serious word processing, long emails or even a tiny bit of spreadsheets on. That's what I liked about my old Mobilepro, even if it ran WinCE. It had a 90% scale keyboard that I could touchtype on as well as limited versions of Word, Excel and Outlook in ROM. Long battery life in particular would be a big attraction. I really liked that the Mobilepro could give me a full day's use on a charge so I wouldn't have to worry about rationing my off-grid use throughout a workday.
If Apple were to resurrect a sub-notebook MBP, I would like to see them make it with an 11" screen remove the optical drive and use an ULV core 2 chip. Bring the weight down to 3 lbs or less and battery life up to 9 hours or more. Apple doesn't make anything like this and it would appeal to users that are currently ignored by Apple. With the iphone however, maybe apple sees that filling that niche.
I think there are 2 issues confounding the discussion on this forum. The first relates to the demographics of the individuals who post here, i.e. mostly younger, own only 1, maybe 2, computers and not yet firmly entrenched in a career or profession. This is an inference on my part based on what I've read here. I am not a 33 yo, currently have 3 computers, and have worked in my profession for 25 years. I never think in terms of having only 1 computer because I need different tools for what I do. I know that my demograhic profile is different here but I feel compelled to express my point of view nonetheless. Although terms like "cool","consumer" and "creative pro" have been used loosely without definition on this thread, I consider myself all of the above (come on, I play video games and have a 4Gig Nano which makes me cool, right?) . And, I consider myself a target for Apple products, the posts on this thread notwithstanding. Why? Because they make great computers and other devices which I need when appropriate.
The second confounding issue is the misunderstnding about computer size. The 2 unwritten equations here are big computer equals "powerful" computer and, a big computer equals what I need all the time. By my definition, power, as it relates to computers, equals capability to perform a task(s) effectively and competely. I have a 3D molecular modeling app and a genome sequence searching app which require great horsepower when I'm at home engaged in such work. For that, I use a desktop unit with a lot of horsepower. When I travel to places where I need to discuss the outputs of these programs, I don't need my desktop monster. I need something portable and capable of displaying what I need to my audience/drug company/FDA.
The 3lb ultralight computers with ULV processor, ~11" screen, ODD and 2GB of ram made by manufacturers like Sony, Fujitsu, Lenovo, DELL, Asus and others are extremely powerful, flexible, portable tools for the many types of jobs that I engage in specifically when I'm not at home. I have also worked with engineers and architectural designers who also use such tools (as well as tablet PCs) in the field using apps like AutoCad and Photoshop, not in full creation mode but in a display mode. A key point is that all of us use only a subset of what we need while so engagaed out of the office on he road. (I aslo don't load my Nano with every song I own).
You folks live in a closed little world here with a myopic view of "coolness" and "creative pro-ness" dancing in you heads. There is another big part of your universe out there. And sooner rather later Apple will start making products for my demographic . Hey, they already have, It's called the iPhone.
The 2 unwritten equations here are big computer equals "powerful" computer and, a big computer equals what I need all the time.
This is a good point, as well as what you said about the demographics. When I was an undergraduate, I could only afford to buy one computer and I knew that I would be using it for a while before I could upgrade. Therefore I bought a big, powerful, desktop-replacement laptop. That was what I needed at the time, because I needed a computer that could perform like a desktop, but still be portable for classes if need be.
That's not what I need anymore. Granted, I'm not quite in my 30s and I haven't had much of a career, but I'm in Grad School now; in my case that's basically like working full-time. I can afford two computers, so the best thing is for me to have a powerful desktop at home and a small, portable laptop to take around with me all day/on trips/for presentations/etc.
I can certainly see how I would enjoy having a laptop that weighed 3 lbs., had an 11" screen, and go for 9+ hours without recharging. This is the optimal laptop for what the previous post said.
On the other hand, I'd also like a small laptop, perhaps 4.5 lbs, with a 12 or 13" screen, that was more powerful than that one could be (I.e. Core 2 Duo, Optical Drive, and a graphics card, with perhaps 6+ hours battery life). Not quite as good for the road, but most of the time when I'm away I can use my laptop while it's charging, and the extra power would be nice for both working and entertainment.
I think that, of the two, the Ultralight with ULV processor is the most likely to appear because there is a specific niche for that sort of laptop. What I described is essentially the 12.1" MBP, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple felt that anyone who wanted one like that would be happy with either the Macbook or the 15.4" MBP. I personally think there is a market for it, but there may not be enough profit in it for Apple to invest.
I'd be thrilled to see Apple offer the option to put a proper graphics card in the 13.3" Macbook. I'd probably be happy with that. I'd prefer to see a 12.1" MBP, but that's looking less and less likely. If Apple releases an ultralight, but not the others, then I'd buy that and be happy. Let's all just cross our fingers shall we? I'd say there's about a 70% chance that we'll get to see at least ONE of those things.
I think there are 2 issues confounding the discussion on this forum. The first relates to the demographics of the individuals who post here, i.e. mostly younger, own only 1, maybe 2, computers and not yet firmly entrenched in a career or profession. This is an inference on my part based on what I've read here. I am not a 33 yo, currently have 3 computers, and have worked in my profession for 25 years. I never think in terms of having only 1 computer because I need different tools for what I do. I know that my demograhic profile is different here but I feel compelled to express my point of view nonetheless. Although terms like "cool","consumer" and "creative pro" have been used loosely without definition on this thread, I consider myself all of the above (come on, I play video games and have a 4Gig Nano which makes me cool, right?) . And, I consider myself a target for Apple products, the posts on this thread notwithstanding. Why? Because they make great computers and other devices which I need when appropriate.
The second confounding issue is the misunderstnding about computer size. The 2 unwritten equations here are big computer equals "powerful" computer and, a big computer equals what I need all the time. By my definition, power, as it relates to computers, equals capability to perform a task(s) effectively and competely. I have a 3D molecular modeling app and a genome sequence searching app which require great horsepower when I'm at home engaged in such work. For that, I use a desktop unit with a lot of horsepower. When I travel to places where I need to discuss the outputs of these programs, I don't need my desktop monster. I need something portable and capable of displaying what I need to my audience/drug company/FDA.
The 3lb ultralight computers with ULV processor, ~11" screen, ODD and 2GB of ram made by manufacturers like Sony, Fujitsu, Lenovo, DELL, Asus and others are extremely powerful, flexible, portable tools for the many types of jobs that I engage in specifically when I'm not at home. I have also worked with engineers and architectural designers who also use such tools (as well as tablet PCs) in the field using apps like AutoCad and Photoshop, not in full creation mode but in a display mode. A key point is that all of us use only a subset of what we need while so engagaed out of the office on he road. (I aslo don't load my Nano with every song I own).
You folks live in a closed little world here with a myopic view of "coolness" and "creative pro-ness" dancing in you heads. There is another big part of your universe out there. And sooner rather later Apple will start making products for my demographic . Hey, they already have, It's called the iPhone.
You're preaching to the chior. I agree with everything you've said. I will say that I understand 'creative pros' to be those who work with digital media (audio, video, and photo) and those in design/DTP. The MBP was made to meet the needs of those users. Consumers are everyone else. IMO, that's the problem with Apple's marketing strategy because everyone else is pretty diverse group.
The iPhone isn't anything close to a full computer.
I'm not so sure about that. Obviously I've yet to get my hands on one but the iPhone looks like something that may do 75% of what most users actually do with their computers. Maybe Apple sees the iPhone as a UMPC. Time will tell. Apple is so worried about product overlap that when they don't make a sub-notebook you wonder if it is bumping into something already in Apple's lineup or in the case of the iPhone something on the way.
I'm not so sure about that. Obviously I've yet to get my hands on one but the iPhone looks like something that may do 75% of what most users actually do with their computers. Maybe Apple sees the iPhone as a UMPC. Time will tell. Apple is so worried about product overlap that when they don't make a sub-notebook you wonder if it is bumping into something already in Apple's lineup or in the case of the iPhone something on the way.
Well, maybe the iPhone could do 75% of what most people would do with an ultraportable laptop, but I doubt it will do it well enough to take over that market. One of the main uses of a computer, whether it's an ultraportable or a desktop, is word processing. I don't see how the iPhone could be really good in that regard as there won't be a proper keyboard.
The iPhone might be good for viewing work, but I doubt it will be great for doing it. I could see looking over a presentation with it before presenting and maybe making a few changes, or proof-reading a document, or surfing the internet... but I can't see creating a presentation, composing a lengthy document, publishing serious updates to webpages, or even doing much serious reading (a screen that size will eventually become irritating if you have to look at it for a few hours, even if you can zoom in on words).
Granted I'm only comparing the iPhone here to what most people would use an ultraportable laptop with an ULV processor for (like the 11.1" computers from Sony, the TX series I think). Comparing it to a more powerful laptop, like the Macbook Pro, would probably be pointless.
I think the iPhone will be quite nice, and I'm considering buying one, but I also think that the people who want small, lightweight computers are still going to want laptops instead of an iPhone. Probably they'll want both, as will the people who have more powerful laptops. I think the iPhone will be very useful with it's limited OS and other capabilities, but I can't really see it taking the place of a computer.
First let me say that I have a 12" Powerbook and a company 14" IBM Thinkpad. I spend at least 8 hours a week on train journeys between work and home (2 x 4 hours) and most of the time I take the Powerbook with my work on a USB key. The size really matters when you are actually working on a tray table (not mentioning the benefits of using Mac OS X instead of XP). At home I can then add a larger monitor if I want to, as fortunately l can access my work e-mail over the internet.
Many of the people I work with (more senior) do 50-60% of their work on a Blackberry, which you can say could be substituted by an iPhone. But for the real workers (like me, ahem) we need a machine on which we can write, do graphics and Powerpoints, and read pdfs, and work in Excel.
A sub-12" notebook would be ideal for this, especially if as suggested, the optical drive is sacrificed for more battery life. Sure I sometimes watch movies on the train, but they are loaded on the hard drive, and who needs a bigger screen in those circumstances? - check out the size of a portable DVD player.
For me the 15" is a desktop replacement (yes I have an old 550 version), and the 12" is THE portable Mac, the 13" MacBook is a compromise between the two.
When it is said that business people don't want Macs, remember that they do want Blackerry's and Palms, which are not Windows machines. Their secret is compatibility. I am sure that a smaller version of the 12", with the cachet of Apple's superior design, and the ability to easily integrate with Windows machines, a la Palm, Blackberry, etc, would open a window for Apple into the corporate market - attracting the attention of the people who make the decisions of what they want to buy irrespective of what their IT people say.
Hear, hear. I still get compliments from bystanders on my original model 12" PB, then disbelief when I tell them it's a four-year-old laptop. Apple's design remains ahead of the curve, even four years later.
The niche and therefore the need is there already. Well, Apple released the 12"
very late, iirc a year after they introduced the PowerBooks 15". So, maybe soon they
will surprise us one more time.
They introduced the 12" long after the 15", yes; but if you remember, the 12" debuted THE SAME DAY as the 17". If Apple was going to keep it, they would have carried it over just like they did the 17inch.
I think that, of the two, the Ultralight with ULV processor is the most likely to appear because there is a specific niche for that sort of laptop. What I described is essentially the 12.1" MBP, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple felt that anyone who wanted one like that would be happy with either the Macbook or the 15.4" MBP. I personally think there is a market for it, but there may not be enough profit in it for Apple to invest.
I'd be thrilled to see Apple offer the option to put a proper graphics card in the 13.3" Macbook. I'd probably be happy with that. I'd prefer to see a 12.1" MBP, but that's looking less and less likely. If Apple releases an ultralight, but not the others, then I'd buy that and be happy. Let's all just cross our fingers shall we? I'd say there's about a 70% chance that we'll get to see at least ONE of those things.
Cheers,
CT
Right on the nose. If Apple would just give the MacBook a proper graphics card, then most people would be happy with them as thier mobile machine, end of story. It may be a little larger and/or heavier than thier ideal, but most folks would be happy to make due, just as you said.
Right on the nose. If Apple would just give the MacBook a proper graphics card, then most people would be happy with them as their mobile machine, end of story. It may be a little larger and/or heavier than their ideal, but most folks would be happy to make due, just as you said.
I don't mean to argue just for the sake of arguing but the Macbook has integrated graphics because it's a consumer product not a pro product. The integrated graphics gets a bad rap but they actually provide reasonable performance while keeping costs down give better battery life. The Macbook will henceforth have integrated graphics as it is a consumer product. You will be disappointed if you expect otherwise.
Comments
Subnotebooks are profitable for Sony, a company that probably sells considerably less in laptops then Apple, and shows it by all the engineering they always invest in them?LED backlights, X505 tiny size, carbon fiber casings, integrated graphics card that switches to full size graphics card if you want it to?
If frickin' Sony makes enough off subnotebooks to make it worthwhile I cannot see how Apple would fail to make money.
How much profit do they make? How certain are you that Sony is making alot of money from subnotebooks? I am in no way saying that they are losing money by any means. But companies like Sony count on brand loyalty. You must consider the scope of products that Sony manufactures and compare it to the scope of what Apple does if you are going to make any sort of fair comparison. Sony has thier hands in so many more things than Apple. Even if you compare computers and hand-held-digi's like MP3 players to try and get an objective view, you still cannot compare the two companies because of the number of products Sony offers that Apple does not. TV's, DVD players, digital camera's, digital video cameras, gaming console(s), and the list goes on. And it is because of this that Sony can produce products for such niche markets. They are making so much money in other places, that making small margins or breaking even is not going to effect them nearly as much as it would Apple. Again, brand loyalty. The theory is that if you buy one of thier subnotebooks and love it, you will be more likely to purchase things that they stand to make ALOT more money off of like TV's and DVD players and digital cameras.
It's not that Apple couldn't make money from an even smaller niche, it's that they couldn't afford to continue to produce a product that will appeal to the niche that is generally dominated by companies like Sony and Dell. Going toe to toe with giants doesn't always end with David walking away from the fight.
The Macbook replaced both ibooks and the 12" Powerbook. It's actually close to a tenth of an inch thinner than the Powerbook.
YES! Thank you!
This is what I'm talking about!
And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner. But they're a heck of a lot wider than the 12" PB. Not to mention they're still pretty heavy. Haven't you noticed that people have been mentioning 3 lb. weights in previous posts, a weight no Mac laptop has never come close to, not even with the Powerbook 2400c? Thinness isn't everything.
Sony has thier hands in so many more things than Apple. Even if you compare computers and hand-held-digi's like MP3 players to try and get an objective view, you still cannot compare the two companies because of the number of products Sony offers that Apple does not. TV's, DVD players, digital camera's, digital video cameras, gaming console(s), and the list goes on. And it is because of this that Sony can produce products for such niche markets. They are making so much money in other places, that making small margins or breaking even is not going to effect them nearly as much as it would Apple. Again, brand loyalty. The theory is that if you buy one of thier subnotebooks and love it, you will be more likely to purchase things that they stand to make ALOT more money off of like TV's and DVD players and digital cameras.
Wait, is this the same Sony that so many people are saying is on the skids, that desperately needs Blu-ray and PS3 to be a hit to save the company? That "making so much money in other places" Sony?
Kolchak;1039727]And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner.
...
And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner. But they're a heck of a lot wider than the 12" PB. Not to mention they're still pretty heavy. Haven't you noticed that people have been mentioning 3 lb. weights in previous posts, a weight no Mac laptop has never come close to, not even with the Powerbook 2400c? Thinness isn't everything.
Wait, is this the same Sony that so many people are saying is on the skids, that desperately needs Blu-ray and PS3 to be a hit to save the company? That "making so much money in other places" Sony?
1st. Weight isn't everything either, but we are talking about a 2lb. difference. And I know that the MacBook is larger and heavier than the PB 12". Man up and carry your fricken' computer. I'm not saying buy a boat anchor, either. Just quit acting like 2lbs is THE deciding factor in what machine you buy.
2nd. Sony does need BluRay and the PS3 to be a hit, not because they are "on the skids" but because some of thier most recent projects, not the least of which the PS3, have cost the company millions of dollars. There have been reports saying that Sony loses over $240.00 on each PS3 they sell. And that's not even taking into account the amount spent on research and development of the cell processor.
So yes, this is the same Sony we are talking about. Just because they are making money in other markets does not mean that they will sit idle by while certain products continue to lose them money.
And just what are you two talking about? Nobody ever said the Macbooks weren't thinner. But they're a heck of a lot wider than the 12" PB. Not to mention they're still pretty heavy. Haven't you noticed that people have been mentioning 3 lb. weights in previous posts, a weight no Mac laptop has never come close to, not even with the Powerbook 2400c? Thinness isn't everything.
If Apple were to resurrect a sub-notebook MBP, I would like to see them make it with an 11" screen remove the optical drive and use an ULV core 2 chip. Bring the weight down to 3 lbs or less and battery life up to 9 hours or more. Apple doesn't make anything like this and it would appeal to users that are currently ignored by Apple. With the iphone however, maybe apple sees that filling that niche.
I have a 12" Powerbook and bought it after returning a MacBook. The higher screen resolution and bright (too bright) glossy screen were not for me. I see the need for Apple to have a small, lightweight, powerful laptop. In the current lineup, there is none.
I agree with you in that I want a small, lightweight, powerful laptop, and that in the current lineup there isn't one. If they would make a 12" MBP, I'd be thrilled, but unfortunately they probably don't know I exist. I'd probably be satisfied with an option to add a graphics card to the current Macbooks, but I'd still prefer the Pro for the extra ports and speed. So, yes, there is a need for it, but whether or not the need is great enough for them to invest it is yet to be seen.
Oh, now I have a question. I haven't actually used a 13.3" Macbook, but I wondered about the screen. There aren't any Apple stores in the whole of Mississippi, so I can't exactly go check out all the new toys. Anyway...
A lot of the laptops released lately have gotten away from Anti-Glare and gone to super bright, glossy screens that are like glare magnets. I bought a Dell XPS M1210, since Apple doesn't have a small laptop with the specs I want, but returned it because of the glare-y screen. Otherwise it would have been great.
I think that laptops that are specifically designed to be portable/light/small and carried around should at least have an anti-glare option. After all, if you literally can't SEE the screen to use it effectively in 90% of the places you want to use it, what's the point of it being so portable? I don't want to sacrifice most of the visibility for a 10% improvement in sharpness or color vibrance that I won't notice unless I'm in a room with no lights on.
How bad is the Macbook screen?
Cheers,
CT
Note: I've just realised that this is a bad topic for this. I'll re-post later in the correct place if no one answers. Sorries.
If Apple wants to do this product right they would need to develop a smallish MacBook Pro that is perceived to be much better than the MacBook. No doubt they have more resources now than a few years ago to do so. I imagine they will do their sums and make up their minds as a function of their assessment how big and profitable this niche is.
The 12.1" PowerBook was a great machine but in reality it was essentially a glorified iBook. The price premium was high for limited product differentiation.
The 12" PowerBook is still a great machine.
glorified iBook? For the time being there was enough product differentiation
to sell off. As there are: small form factor, faster procs, bigger HDs, better Grafics,
metal case, what else?
...
If Apple wants to do this product right they would need to develop a smallish MacBook Pro that is perceived to be much better than the MacBook. No doubt they have more resources now than a few years ago to do so. I imagine they will do their sums and make up their minds as a function of their assessment how big and profitable this niche is.
The niche and therefore the need is there already. Well, Apple released the 12"
very late, iirc a year after they introduced the PowerBooks 15". So, maybe soon they
will surprise us one more time.
If Apple were to resurrect a sub-notebook MBP, I would like to see them make it with an 11" screen remove the optical drive and use an ULV core 2 chip. Bring the weight down to 3 lbs or less and battery life up to 9 hours or more. Apple doesn't make anything like this and it would appeal to users that are currently ignored by Apple. With the iphone however, maybe apple sees that filling that niche.
That's exactly what a lot of people in this thread have been begging for. Well, at least us "girlie men" who've been criticized for complaining about having to lug around a couple of extra pounds.
The iPhone isn't anything close to a full computer. It has very limited functionality, even if you don't take its closed OS into account. Even if it ran full OS X, it's not something you'd want to do serious word processing, long emails or even a tiny bit of spreadsheets on. That's what I liked about my old Mobilepro, even if it ran WinCE. It had a 90% scale keyboard that I could touchtype on as well as limited versions of Word, Excel and Outlook in ROM. Long battery life in particular would be a big attraction. I really liked that the Mobilepro could give me a full day's use on a charge so I wouldn't have to worry about rationing my off-grid use throughout a workday.
If Apple were to resurrect a sub-notebook MBP, I would like to see them make it with an 11" screen remove the optical drive and use an ULV core 2 chip. Bring the weight down to 3 lbs or less and battery life up to 9 hours or more. Apple doesn't make anything like this and it would appeal to users that are currently ignored by Apple. With the iphone however, maybe apple sees that filling that niche.
I think there are 2 issues confounding the discussion on this forum. The first relates to the demographics of the individuals who post here, i.e. mostly younger, own only 1, maybe 2, computers and not yet firmly entrenched in a career or profession. This is an inference on my part based on what I've read here. I am not a 33 yo, currently have 3 computers, and have worked in my profession for 25 years. I never think in terms of having only 1 computer because I need different tools for what I do. I know that my demograhic profile is different here but I feel compelled to express my point of view nonetheless. Although terms like "cool","consumer" and "creative pro" have been used loosely without definition on this thread, I consider myself all of the above (come on, I play video games and have a 4Gig Nano which makes me cool, right?) . And, I consider myself a target for Apple products, the posts on this thread notwithstanding. Why? Because they make great computers and other devices which I need when appropriate.
The second confounding issue is the misunderstnding about computer size. The 2 unwritten equations here are big computer equals "powerful" computer and, a big computer equals what I need all the time. By my definition, power, as it relates to computers, equals capability to perform a task(s) effectively and competely. I have a 3D molecular modeling app and a genome sequence searching app which require great horsepower when I'm at home engaged in such work. For that, I use a desktop unit with a lot of horsepower. When I travel to places where I need to discuss the outputs of these programs, I don't need my desktop monster. I need something portable and capable of displaying what I need to my audience/drug company/FDA.
The 3lb ultralight computers with ULV processor, ~11" screen, ODD and 2GB of ram made by manufacturers like Sony, Fujitsu, Lenovo, DELL, Asus and others are extremely powerful, flexible, portable tools for the many types of jobs that I engage in specifically when I'm not at home. I have also worked with engineers and architectural designers who also use such tools (as well as tablet PCs) in the field using apps like AutoCad and Photoshop, not in full creation mode but in a display mode. A key point is that all of us use only a subset of what we need while so engagaed out of the office on he road. (I aslo don't load my Nano with every song I own).
You folks live in a closed little world here with a myopic view of "coolness" and "creative pro-ness" dancing in you heads. There is another big part of your universe out there. And sooner rather later Apple will start making products for my demographic . Hey, they already have, It's called the iPhone.
The 2 unwritten equations here are big computer equals "powerful" computer and, a big computer equals what I need all the time.
This is a good point, as well as what you said about the demographics. When I was an undergraduate, I could only afford to buy one computer and I knew that I would be using it for a while before I could upgrade. Therefore I bought a big, powerful, desktop-replacement laptop. That was what I needed at the time, because I needed a computer that could perform like a desktop, but still be portable for classes if need be.
That's not what I need anymore. Granted, I'm not quite in my 30s and I haven't had much of a career, but I'm in Grad School now; in my case that's basically like working full-time. I can afford two computers, so the best thing is for me to have a powerful desktop at home and a small, portable laptop to take around with me all day/on trips/for presentations/etc.
I can certainly see how I would enjoy having a laptop that weighed 3 lbs., had an 11" screen, and go for 9+ hours without recharging. This is the optimal laptop for what the previous post said.
On the other hand, I'd also like a small laptop, perhaps 4.5 lbs, with a 12 or 13" screen, that was more powerful than that one could be (I.e. Core 2 Duo, Optical Drive, and a graphics card, with perhaps 6+ hours battery life). Not quite as good for the road, but most of the time when I'm away I can use my laptop while it's charging, and the extra power would be nice for both working and entertainment.
I think that, of the two, the Ultralight with ULV processor is the most likely to appear because there is a specific niche for that sort of laptop. What I described is essentially the 12.1" MBP, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple felt that anyone who wanted one like that would be happy with either the Macbook or the 15.4" MBP. I personally think there is a market for it, but there may not be enough profit in it for Apple to invest.
I'd be thrilled to see Apple offer the option to put a proper graphics card in the 13.3" Macbook. I'd probably be happy with that. I'd prefer to see a 12.1" MBP, but that's looking less and less likely. If Apple releases an ultralight, but not the others, then I'd buy that and be happy. Let's all just cross our fingers shall we? I'd say there's about a 70% chance that we'll get to see at least ONE of those things.
Cheers,
CT
I think there are 2 issues confounding the discussion on this forum. The first relates to the demographics of the individuals who post here, i.e. mostly younger, own only 1, maybe 2, computers and not yet firmly entrenched in a career or profession. This is an inference on my part based on what I've read here. I am not a 33 yo, currently have 3 computers, and have worked in my profession for 25 years. I never think in terms of having only 1 computer because I need different tools for what I do. I know that my demograhic profile is different here but I feel compelled to express my point of view nonetheless. Although terms like "cool","consumer" and "creative pro" have been used loosely without definition on this thread, I consider myself all of the above (come on, I play video games and have a 4Gig Nano which makes me cool, right?) . And, I consider myself a target for Apple products, the posts on this thread notwithstanding. Why? Because they make great computers and other devices which I need when appropriate.
The second confounding issue is the misunderstnding about computer size. The 2 unwritten equations here are big computer equals "powerful" computer and, a big computer equals what I need all the time. By my definition, power, as it relates to computers, equals capability to perform a task(s) effectively and competely. I have a 3D molecular modeling app and a genome sequence searching app which require great horsepower when I'm at home engaged in such work. For that, I use a desktop unit with a lot of horsepower. When I travel to places where I need to discuss the outputs of these programs, I don't need my desktop monster. I need something portable and capable of displaying what I need to my audience/drug company/FDA.
The 3lb ultralight computers with ULV processor, ~11" screen, ODD and 2GB of ram made by manufacturers like Sony, Fujitsu, Lenovo, DELL, Asus and others are extremely powerful, flexible, portable tools for the many types of jobs that I engage in specifically when I'm not at home. I have also worked with engineers and architectural designers who also use such tools (as well as tablet PCs) in the field using apps like AutoCad and Photoshop, not in full creation mode but in a display mode. A key point is that all of us use only a subset of what we need while so engagaed out of the office on he road. (I aslo don't load my Nano with every song I own).
You folks live in a closed little world here with a myopic view of "coolness" and "creative pro-ness" dancing in you heads. There is another big part of your universe out there. And sooner rather later Apple will start making products for my demographic . Hey, they already have, It's called the iPhone.
You're preaching to the chior. I agree with everything you've said. I will say that I understand 'creative pros' to be those who work with digital media (audio, video, and photo) and those in design/DTP. The MBP was made to meet the needs of those users. Consumers are everyone else. IMO, that's the problem with Apple's marketing strategy because everyone else is pretty diverse group.
The iPhone isn't anything close to a full computer.
I'm not so sure about that. Obviously I've yet to get my hands on one but the iPhone looks like something that may do 75% of what most users actually do with their computers. Maybe Apple sees the iPhone as a UMPC. Time will tell. Apple is so worried about product overlap that when they don't make a sub-notebook you wonder if it is bumping into something already in Apple's lineup or in the case of the iPhone something on the way.
I'm not so sure about that. Obviously I've yet to get my hands on one but the iPhone looks like something that may do 75% of what most users actually do with their computers. Maybe Apple sees the iPhone as a UMPC. Time will tell. Apple is so worried about product overlap that when they don't make a sub-notebook you wonder if it is bumping into something already in Apple's lineup or in the case of the iPhone something on the way.
Well, maybe the iPhone could do 75% of what most people would do with an ultraportable laptop, but I doubt it will do it well enough to take over that market. One of the main uses of a computer, whether it's an ultraportable or a desktop, is word processing. I don't see how the iPhone could be really good in that regard as there won't be a proper keyboard.
The iPhone might be good for viewing work, but I doubt it will be great for doing it. I could see looking over a presentation with it before presenting and maybe making a few changes, or proof-reading a document, or surfing the internet... but I can't see creating a presentation, composing a lengthy document, publishing serious updates to webpages, or even doing much serious reading (a screen that size will eventually become irritating if you have to look at it for a few hours, even if you can zoom in on words).
Granted I'm only comparing the iPhone here to what most people would use an ultraportable laptop with an ULV processor for (like the 11.1" computers from Sony, the TX series I think). Comparing it to a more powerful laptop, like the Macbook Pro, would probably be pointless.
I think the iPhone will be quite nice, and I'm considering buying one, but I also think that the people who want small, lightweight computers are still going to want laptops instead of an iPhone. Probably they'll want both, as will the people who have more powerful laptops. I think the iPhone will be very useful with it's limited OS and other capabilities, but I can't really see it taking the place of a computer.
Many of the people I work with (more senior) do 50-60% of their work on a Blackberry, which you can say could be substituted by an iPhone. But for the real workers (like me, ahem) we need a machine on which we can write, do graphics and Powerpoints, and read pdfs, and work in Excel.
A sub-12" notebook would be ideal for this, especially if as suggested, the optical drive is sacrificed for more battery life. Sure I sometimes watch movies on the train, but they are loaded on the hard drive, and who needs a bigger screen in those circumstances? - check out the size of a portable DVD player.
For me the 15" is a desktop replacement (yes I have an old 550 version), and the 12" is THE portable Mac, the 13" MacBook is a compromise between the two.
When it is said that business people don't want Macs, remember that they do want Blackerry's and Palms, which are not Windows machines. Their secret is compatibility. I am sure that a smaller version of the 12", with the cachet of Apple's superior design, and the ability to easily integrate with Windows machines, a la Palm, Blackberry, etc, would open a window for Apple into the corporate market - attracting the attention of the people who make the decisions of what they want to buy irrespective of what their IT people say.
The niche and therefore the need is there already. Well, Apple released the 12"
very late, iirc a year after they introduced the PowerBooks 15". So, maybe soon they
will surprise us one more time.
They introduced the 12" long after the 15", yes; but if you remember, the 12" debuted THE SAME DAY as the 17". If Apple was going to keep it, they would have carried it over just like they did the 17inch.
I think that, of the two, the Ultralight with ULV processor is the most likely to appear because there is a specific niche for that sort of laptop. What I described is essentially the 12.1" MBP, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple felt that anyone who wanted one like that would be happy with either the Macbook or the 15.4" MBP. I personally think there is a market for it, but there may not be enough profit in it for Apple to invest.
I'd be thrilled to see Apple offer the option to put a proper graphics card in the 13.3" Macbook. I'd probably be happy with that. I'd prefer to see a 12.1" MBP, but that's looking less and less likely. If Apple releases an ultralight, but not the others, then I'd buy that and be happy. Let's all just cross our fingers shall we? I'd say there's about a 70% chance that we'll get to see at least ONE of those things.
Cheers,
CT
Right on the nose. If Apple would just give the MacBook a proper graphics card, then most people would be happy with them as thier mobile machine, end of story. It may be a little larger and/or heavier than thier ideal, but most folks would be happy to make due, just as you said.
Right on the nose. If Apple would just give the MacBook a proper graphics card, then most people would be happy with them as their mobile machine, end of story. It may be a little larger and/or heavier than their ideal, but most folks would be happy to make due, just as you said.
I don't mean to argue just for the sake of arguing but the Macbook has integrated graphics because it's a consumer product not a pro product. The integrated graphics gets a bad rap but they actually provide reasonable performance while keeping costs down give better battery life. The Macbook will henceforth have integrated graphics as it is a consumer product. You will be disappointed if you expect otherwise.