1. Remember that speeds of processors double every 18 months (Moore's law still works, even today). So the "slower" ultraportable is usually as fast as a slightly older desktop. It's not a big penalty.
That's only true if you stick with older versions of software. Software companies evaluate what the average computer user buying their software has. They then up the specs of the software to match that.
It's the case that newer versions of software are almost never as fast as older versions. They are almost slower. The speed being made up by the more powerful computer.
So if an ultra portable is released, it will be one of the weakest machines in the line. Even if it is improved later, which it likely would be, relative to the other newer machines, it would still be the weakest. But, the software companies would be looking at the new higher average, and upgrading their software to use the extra power.
This machine would still be a laggard.
Quote:
2. Memory matters and as long as you get the ultraportable with 2g of Ram or more, most programs will be pretty fast. I still work on an old G4 PB 12incher and it is fast for most jobs. Dunno how processor intensive iMovie is however...
If a program requires more memory, then 2 GB might help its speed. But, many programs have not proven to be faster with 2 GB, unless you are multitasking, and even then, the difference is not always meaningful.
But, a faster cpu will always make a difference.
Quote:
3. Flash based storage has much faster theoretical access times than a conventional HDD and this can conceivably help, including super fast start-up times. Unfortunately, tests to date of these things have not shown a big performance bump for computers.
That depends on what the program is, and how it bangs the drive. Some programs, like Photoshop, want to see the entire image (file) in RAM, to avoid just that problem. If you have 100% efficiency, then the speed of the drive is less meaningful, only effecting the opening, and saving of the image.
Quote:
I suspect firms like Apple, Sony and Toshiba will be thinking creatively about making use of the potential access times for this kind of memory. Probably too late to be of benefit for any January release product (one reason I hate Dell and Compaq is they buy better processors and stuff off the shelf, but they make zero effort to come up with creative platforms to make the best use of them, as you can see they don't even put money into coming up with better plugs and adapters).
Apple isn't any different, though sometimes, they are worse.
I'm not convinced of that either. Tablets have, so far, proven to have remarkably little interest to the computing public. The category has about 0.5% of computer sales.
OTOH, Apple has a fairly good track record of coming to a market that's not very successful, making a product that's new and exciting and essentially taking over that market. iPod comes to mind. So does iPhone. Just over a year ago, more than a few people were saying that an Apple cell phone would be a yawner in the marketplace. It's all in the design and marketing.
OTOH, Apple has a fairly good track record of coming to a market that's not very successful, making a product that's new and exciting and essentially taking over that market. iPod comes to mind. So does iPhone. Just over a year ago, more than a few people were saying that an Apple cell phone would be a yawner in the marketplace. It's all in the design and marketing.
They haven't done that with the iMac. Nor the Mac Pro. Or any of their other computers. Look at the Cube, or even the current Mini.
So, while several of their models are popular, they haven't "taken over the market". And others are not doing as well as that, or have outright failed.
The point is that is there was a new market—digital music players, and it was growing, though slowly, a much better design, and a totally new service with far lower pricing can easily change the entire equation, and it did.
The iPhone is selling very well here in the States. Not so well abroad. That shows that Apple understands some markets, but not all.
Also, lately, their greed is getting in the way of the take=up of the iPhone, and that's not good. 30% revenue sharing? Give me a break!
As for tablets. there is no proof that an Apple product, no matter how innovative, will change the prospects for that market. This is simply not a popular device. For most people, it's not even interesting.
That category has problems just from what the product is, and how it is expected to be used.
No matter what Apple does, the technology is simply not at the point that a tablet can be used the way it is expected to be. So, the way it is used, is not offering many people any advantage over more conventional designs—keyboarded models, isn't enough to get many people to switch to one.
I feel confident that there needs to be several areas that if addressed, will go a long way towards solving the usability problem. But until that time arrives, the answer is no, tablets won't be effective replacements for keyboarded conventional models.
Some of the areas needing new technologies are:
1. Screen. The LCD screen with its backlight has to go. Even LED backlights use too much power for a tablet. OLEDs are LED's but use much less power than even the LED backlights. They will also allow much thinner screens than LCD's with backlights, not only because there won't be any backlight, but because the display proper is simpler in construction, and thinner. It will also allow the tablet to be used outdoors.
2. Power source. Batteries, no matter how good, are just too heavy, and have too short a life between recharges. tablets will be expected to last more than the 3 to 5 hours most get now, and likely more than the 7, or so, some of the ultra lights get before going to much bigger, and heavier, optional batteries. Wait for fuel cells.
3. CPU/GPU. Right now, even the ultra low power CPU's use too much power, and give off too much heat. Those processors also need to be more powerful than the models used in the current UMPC's. On a level with current computer mobile units.We also need an integrated graphics solution that will be good enough for most medium graphics needs. Neither is available now.
4. Storage. While SSD's are getting bigger, and cheaper, they are still too small, and much too expensive in their medium, and larger, versions. Except for really light use, few people will accept a 32 GB internal storage medium anymore. look at how many complain at the 80 GB drive offered for the MacBook. 64 Gb is probably the smallest most people will accept, but at over $1,000, it's much too expensive for more than a very few. That price will have to drop to under $400, or so, before it will become viable for more people.
The problem there is that rising expectations amongst computer users means that size must continue to go up while prices continue to fall. What was acceptable two years ago is no longer acceptable today, and what is acceptable today, won't be acceptable two years hence.
We can look to prices of HDD's, RAM, and Flash to see that. People won't pay the prices for these products today that was being charged two years ago. What this means is that while many people might pay $400 for a 64 GB SSD today, and think that it's priced fairly well, even though it's far higher than an HDD of much larger capacity, will they think so by the time it IS priced at that level, when HDD's will be much larger than today, and priced even lower?
RAM and flash have dropped much as well. A Flash card that cost $279 towards the end of 2005, now costs $40. Even though the price of SSD's are dropping faster that that of HDD's, they are not dropping as quickly as that of Flash cards, and RAM. They are more complex products, and the other components inside are keeping the overall price from plummeting.
I see them becoming viable for a much larger part of the population by 2010.
And, if Fuel cells are available by then, and OLEDS, or some of the other newer technologies that are also not out in large sizes, are available, that's about the time when a well thought out product from Apple, or someone else, might make a breakthrough, if people can be taught to use their machines in a physically different way.
They haven't done that with the iMac. Nor the Mac Pro. Or any of their other computers. Look at the Cube, or even the current Mini.
So, while several of their models are popular, they haven't "taken over the market". And others are not doing as well as that, or have outright failed.
The point is that is there was a new market—digital music players, and it was growing, though slowly, a much better design, and a totally new service with far lower pricing can easily change the entire equation, and it did.
Leaving aside all your technical objections, which I don't agree with, either (I don't understand the obsession with "more power!" All I'd want with a tablet is watch some video and photo files, web surfing, email and do some light work, basically everything iLife and iWork can handle), your argument here is way off.
PCs are hardly a market that's "not very successful." It's difficult to take over a well established market, which Apple sacrificed with its early missteps decades ago. If PCs were still very rare today, I expect comparably priced Macs would stand a good chance of taking over the market. iPods didn't have far lower pricing. In fact, at the time of the original 5GB model's introduction, they were considered overpriced. Nor was the iTunes store a smash hit at the beginning, so the 99¢ pricing wasn't what made it successful. It was the iPod's intuitive user interface and iTunes making it so easy to load music collections onto it that made it far more attractive than its competitors. By the same token, Windows tablets are still crude -- basically thick, heavy units with barely any use of the tablet functions. If Apple can do it right (say something no thicker than an iPhone and with an intuitive stylus+MultiTouch interface), they can make this market take off, for themselves, at least.
One thing I'd like to see is a "pie" keyboard. Sort of like pie menus. Virtual keys arranged in curved portions at the lower corners of the tablet. With the predictive typing algorithms of the iPhone and good spacing between palm and thumbtip, it could be faster than any thumb keyboard to date. (By pie menus, I mean the quarter circle variety, not the circular variety.)
Leaving aside all your technical objections, which I don't agree with, either (I don't understand the obsession with "more power!" All I'd want with a tablet is watch some video and photo files and do some light work, basically everything iLife and iWork can handle), your argument here is way off.
While that's fine as your persional preferences, we aren't talking about one persons interests.
Apple can't look to what a few people might want. They have to look to the market overall, and come to some conclusion as to what it wants.
As far as that goes, my technical comments are very valid.
Quote:
PCs are hardly a market that's "not very successful." It's difficult to take over a well established market, which Apple sacrificed with its early missteps decades ago. If PCs were still very rare today, I expect comparably priced Macs would stand a good chance of taking over the market. iPods didn't have far lower pricing. In fact, at the time of the original 5GB model's introduction, they were considered overpriced. Nor was the iTunes store a smash hit at the beginning, so the 99¢ pricing wasn't what made it successful. It was the iPod's intuitive user interface and iTunes making it so easy to load music collections onto it that made it far more attractive than its competitors. By the same token, Windows tablets are still crude -- basically thick, heavy units with barely any use of the tablet functions. If Apple can do it right (say something no thicker than an iPhone and with an intuitive stylus+MultiTouch interface), they can make this market take off, for themselves, at least.
You are actually making some of my own points for me. The PC market is very successful. And Apple is doing well, as far as it goes, but are still at around 3+% worldwide. Apple has had very good percentages for their rise in sales, 30-35% a year. but some other PC companies have risen even faster, well over 50%. so it can be done, but Apple will alsway have the "OS problem" to overcome. While that's less of an issue than in the past, it's still considerable. People can't simply go from one manufacturer to the other when the Mac OS is involved, the way they do in the PC world. Superior, or not, it's a factor.
This affects the tablet as well. moving from a PC laptop to a Mac laptop involves those same considerations. moving to a Mac tablet will be more difficult, as it is a very unpopular computer category.
The iPod, when it first came out, was no more expensive than any other HDD based digital music player. The iTunes store became very popular very quickly.
At the end of your post, even though you don't seem to realize it, you are calling for the technical innovations I am. Just look at the specs you are mentioning.
You are actually making some of my own points for me. The PC market is very successful. And Apple is doing well, as far as it goes, but are still at around 3+% worldwide. Apple has had very good percentages for their rise in sales, 30-35% a year. but some other PC companies have risen even faster, well over 50%. so it can be done, but Apple will alsway have the "OS problem" to overcome. While that's less of an issue than in the past, it's still considerable. People can't simply go from one manufacturer to the other when the Mac OS is involved, the way they do in the PC world. Superior, or not, it's a factor.
This affects the tablet as well. moving from a PC laptop to a Mac laptop involves those same considerations. moving to a Mac tablet will be more difficult, as it is a very unpopular computer category.
That's only because you're hung up on doing everything on the tablet that you would do on your desktop machine. If the tablet were a mere supplement as other people in this thread have also suggested, it wouldn't need to be a replacement for a Windows machine any more than an iPhone or an iPod Touch is at a disadvantage for not running Windows. What exactly is your point anyway? I was specifically saying that the larger the market, the greater the inertia that needs to be overcome and the harder it would be to take it over, just like the personal computer market, and you seem to agree, then turn around and castigate Apple for not making headway against all that momentum.
Quote:
The iPod, when it first came out, was no more expensive than any other HDD based digital music player. The iTunes store became very popular very quickly.
Check out this thread from six years ago. Quite a few users of this very forum said it was overpriced at the time.
That's only because you're hung up on doing everything on the tablet that you would do on your desktop machine. If the tablet were a mere supplement as other people in this thread have also suggested, it wouldn't need to be a replacement for a Windows machine any more than an iPhone or an iPod Touch is at a disadvantage for not running Windows. What exactly is your point anyway? I was specifically saying that the larger the market, the greater the inertia that needs to be overcome and the harder it would be to take it over, just like the personal computer market, and you seem to agree, then turn around and castigate Apple for not making headway against all that momentum.
No I'm not. I'm hung up on the fact that people won'y buy a $2,500, or so, computer, no matter what type it is, if they can't do most of, or even all of, their work on it.
What have so many discussions on this board, and others, said? That laptops are desktop replacements.
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
Quote:
Check out this thread from six years ago. Quite a few users of this very forum said it was overpriced at the time.
I know all this. I've said it was overpriced as well, and poorly marketed. But, that's only part of the point. the other, more important part is that Jobs is no marketing god. he makes plenty of mistakes. and he doesn't always listen to his customers, or he could have fixed that one.
What I really wonder is whether all of the people here who are asking for this will buy it if it came out. I tend to doubt it. This won't be some cheap addition to people's computing experience. It will (again, if it ever happens) be a machine that, as Apple has shown us time and again, will be a full addition to the line in giving the Apple experience. That will make it too expensive for people to use as the semi toy I see you and a few others want it to be. Because, if it isn't a full fledged computing device, capible of serious work, then it will be a toy.
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
If Apple ever did come out with a full sized tablet, it would be a showcase for Apple's technologies, and so would be expensive.
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
No I'm not. I'm hung up on the fact that people won'y buy a $2,500, or so, computer, no matter what type it is, if they can't do most of, or even all of, their work on it.
This is where your argument falls apart because no one in their right mind is talking about a $2500 tablet. What most of use are looking for is a melding of the Touch and the iPHone and a bit of growth hormone. We are really talking about a $400 class machine. This table isn't designed to be your main computer, nor your laptop nor a replacement for any of these.
Quote:
What have so many discussions on this board, and others, said? That laptops are desktop replacements.
They can be used that way but you do realize that not everyone goes that route. There are still considerable advantages to desktop hardware. Here though you are trying to compare two computing appliances with a tablet. Tablets are not intended to be general purpose computing units.
Quote:
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
That is just totally in denial of reality. People don't give up their desktop or laptop when the buy an iPod do they? NO OF COURSE NOT and you won't find people giving up their computing machines in favor of a laptop.
Quote:
I know all this. I've said it was overpriced as well, and poorly marketed. But, that's only part of the point. the other, more important part is that Jobs is no marketing god. he makes plenty of mistakes. and he doesn't always listen to his customers, or he could have fixed that one.
Jobs biggest problem is being greedy to the point he'd rather see a product fail in the marketplace rather than to lower the price. Apple could certainly blow it with the Ultra or a tablet device this time around. The bigger mistake that he could make though is no to leverage MultiTouch in any way reasonably possible.
Quote:
What I really wonder is whether all of the people here who are asking for this will buy it if it came out. I tend to doubt it. This won't be some cheap addition to people's computing experience. It will (again, if it ever happens) be a machine that, as Apple has shown us time and again, will be a full addition to the line in giving the Apple experience.
How do you know what Apple has up its sleeve with respect to an ultra? Apple can be very aggressive here because there in one thing that is certain the current crop of Win ultras are grossly over priced and do not appeal to a persons sense of value. The Eee PC shows you what is possible and gives you an expected price.
Quote:
That will make it too expensive for people to use as the semi toy I see you and a few others want it to be. Because, if it isn't a full fledged computing device, capible of serious work, then it will be a toy.
What utter garbage from a posting filled with garbage. First; off what is serious work and do you really expect everybody to have the same definition? Second all computing devices that aren't making money or other wise adding to the environment are indeed toys. Some people have some very SERIOUS toys.
In any event I have to totally reject the idea and the person delivering it, that something that isn't capable of serious work is a Toy. It is even harder to define what a full fledge computing device is.
Quote:
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
So you can make an excuse for one machine not being top of the line but not anther. Hell my old HP RPN calculator is capable of serious work, and today it would be considered damn slow. It however wasn't and isn't a toy in my mind. It might not be used as frequently as newer hardware but it still adds, subtracts and does trig when I need it. (It does the trig find when I remember my math).
In any event your logic simply escapes me, or maybe you are a troll. I don't really know. What I do know that a Toy is usually defined by the person playing with it.
Quote:
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
HuH?
Quote:
If Apple ever did come out with a full sized tablet, it would be a showcase for Apple's technologies, and so would be expensive.
The Touch and the iPhone showcase Apple technologies yet they are rather fairly priced. In fact since some of this technology could reasonably be expected to show up in a tablet one might consider it old and cheap technology. the world is currently full of Apple technologies that where delivered at reasonable prices.
Quote:
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
Again what the hell are you trying to say.
Quote:
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
Show me a reasonably priced Ultra running Windows that is selling well. Then look at the Eee PC, which is running Linux and apparently selling very well. Whats the difference, well the big one is price. If Apple wants to be successful with an ultra they need to understand the value equation. In America people don't want to shell out big bucks for a compact car no matter how well done. The same could be said about Apples hardware, people are willing to pay a little extra for a big engine (Mac OS/X) but they are not going to throw a lot of money in to a miniature chassis (Ultra) that offer nothing over another.
Consumers see a certain value in a Ultra and won't be drawn into the hardware at the wrong price point.
No I'm not. I'm hung up on the fact that people won'y buy a $2,500, or so, computer, no matter what type it is, if they can't do most of, or even all of, their work on it.
Whoever said it was going to be $2500? I don't remember that being mentioned anywhere in this thread. You latch onto a figure as being what you expect it to cost then proclaim nobody will want it. I can prognisticate that it can be $1400 or less and still be as authoritative as you.
Quote:
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
Wow, somebody died and made you emperor of the world? Everybody must buy only what you like?
Quote:
I know all this. I've said it was overpriced as well, and poorly marketed. But, that's only part of the point. the other, more important part is that Jobs is no marketing god. he makes plenty of mistakes. and he doesn't always listen to his customers, or he could have fixed that one.
Make up your mind. I say the original iPod was considered overpriced. You argue almost seemingly for the sake of argument that it was fairly priced. Now you come back and claim you said it was overpriced. Steve may make plenty of mistakes, but he's also made quite a few good moves. Not for nothing was he named the most influential CEO this year.
Quote:
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
And some people complain that the iPhone isn't fully capable of serious work. I guess it must be a major flop.
Quote:
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
And yet the rumors of the Mini's death still remain exaggerated.
Quote:
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
News flash: The vast majority of users will never run Photoshop or FCP on this or any other Mac. So some people claim the Macbook is too slow. Guess what? It sells well and most people who buy it are quite happy with it. What about the road warriors, the businessmen who are always traveling? They check into a hotel room and what do you think they do? Edit their latest video for the broadcast suite? No, they relax on the bed and check their email, surf the web, write some reports, update Keynote presentations.
Quote:
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
And if Apple were to take over even 50% of that 0.5% market share with a breakthrough device the way iPhones took the lead among smartphones, that would be 0.25%, wouldn't it? 0.25% is nothing to sneeze at if your company's total market share is only 4% or so. It could be even more profitable if Apple could *gasp* expand the market for themselves. Wow, what a concept, huh? It doesn't have to be a zero sum game. You remind me of the old story of two shoe company reps sent to a third world country to scout the market. One calls back to HQ and says, "Terrible market potential here. Nobody wears shoes." The other calls back and says, "Fantastic market potential here. Nobody has shoes!" Guess which one you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
This is where your argument falls apart because no one in their right mind is talking about a $2500 tablet. What most of use are looking for is a melding of the Touch and the iPHone and a bit of growth hormone. We are really talking about a $400 class machine. This table isn't designed to be your main computer, nor your laptop nor a replacement for any of these.
$400 is a little extreme. That wouldn't even pay for a good-sized LED backlit LCD screen part.
Quote:
So you can make an excuse for one machine not being top of the line but not anther. Hell my old HP RPN calculator is capable of serious work, and today it would be considered damn slow. It however wasn't and isn't a toy in my mind. It might not be used as frequently as newer hardware but it still adds, subtracts and does trig when I need it. (It does the trig find when I remember my math).
In any event your logic simply escapes me, or maybe you are a troll. I don't really know. What I do know that a Toy is usually defined by the person playing with it.
Conversely, look at all the people with $2500 PCs who do nothing more with them than... play games! $400 graphics cards, not for 3D rendering, but again... gaming! It's not how much power you have, it's what you do with it. I know people who can do "serious work" with a sliderule. I also know a businessman who bought a top of the line Macbook Pro and doesn't do anything more demanding with it than use BootCamp to access a database.
Make up your mind. I say the original iPod was considered overpriced. You argue almost seemingly for the sake of argument that it was fairly priced. Now you come back and claim you said it was overpriced. Steve may make plenty of mistakes, but he's also made quite a few good moves. Not for nothing was he named the most influential CEO this year.
The mark of a good business man is really how you recover from your mistakes.
Quote:
And some people complain that the iPhone isn't fully capable of serious work. I guess it must be a major flop.
The iPhone is just about everything I need for traveling, if it wasn't for coming up short software wise I'd have one now and work around the hardware limitations. I really don't need a full fledge portable for my traveling needs. I think it is important for people to grasp this, it is easy to have a machine that is subordinate to another.
Quote:
And yet the rumors of the Mini's death still remain exaggerated.
Yep! And like all PC's it is likely to go through a major upgrade or replacement in the future. That future device is likely to target the same market. Because that is what companies do they make products for different market segments.
Quote:
News flash: The vast majority of users will never run Photoshop or FCP on this or any other Mac. So some people claim the Macbook is too slow. Guess what? It sells well and most people who buy it are quite happy with it. What about the road warriors, the businessmen who are always traveling? They check into a hotel room and what do you think they do? Edit their latest video for the broadcast suite? No, they relax on the bed and check their email, surf the web, write some reports, update Keynote presentations.
Further I've found that people who have serious software needs will often have a desktop machine as their primary computer. That simply to achieve better performance. Using the other posters logic that would imply that all laptops are not for "serious" work. This of course is BS.
Quote:
$400 is a little extreme. That wouldn't even pay for a good-sized LED backlit LCD screen part.
At this size the screen would be like what $60. If that. No matter how Apple approaches the device most of the cost will be in the storage area.
Quote:
Conversely, look at all the people with $2500 PCs who do nothing more with them than... play games! $400 graphics cards, not for 3D rendering, but again... gaming! It's not how much power you have, it's what you do with it. I know people who can do "serious work" with a sliderule. I also know a businessman who bought a top of the line Macbook Pro and doesn't do anything more demanding with it than use BootCamp to access a database.
Exactly! Like in life it isn't the gun but the owner that one needs to heed. Similarly a computer is nothing more than a pile of silicon and aluminum with no motivation of its own, it is the user that defines the machines use.
Further I've found that people who have serious software needs will often have a desktop machine as their primary computer. That simply to achieve better performance.
Quite right. Not an awful lot of FCP or Photoshop users will have a Macbook Pro as their "only machine." If you do that for a living, a mere two cores aren't going to cut it. Not to mention the RAM and storage requirements. Sure, you can add Firewire, USB or network drives, but plugging and unplugging all those devices (including a real keyboard, a mouse and a large display) from both sides of the MBP and having to remember to eject external drives or else get the dreaded "improperly removed" message gets old pretty quickly. Not to mention external drives are S-L-O-W when you're talking about the huge files that pros have to deal with.
Quote:
At this size the screen would be like what $60. If that. No matter how Apple approaches the device most of the cost will be in the storage area.
I meant in in the context of a complete machine. No machine in the $400 region has a decent display, with good brightness, color, resolution, response time, etc. Never mind touchscreen features, the only exception being the old eMate. A good tablet could be eMate 2.0, given how well it could work in terms of taking notes in class, with drawing capabilities and no annoying keyboard noise.
hows is an ultraportable "ultraportable" with a 13 screen or simply the same size as a macbook.
it's got to have a smaller size like 11 or even 9 widescreen....(it could consceivably have the same keyboard as the macbook)if it has a decent processor and memmory maybe even expandable flash memory slot so you can add more. THEN it would be an ultraportable targeted to business and mobile users.
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
(snip)
What I really wonder is whether all of the people here who are asking for this will buy it if it came out. I tend to doubt it. This won't be some cheap addition to people's computing experience. It will (again, if it ever happens) be a machine that, as Apple has shown us time and again, will be a full addition to the line in giving the Apple experience. That will make it too expensive for people to use as the semi toy I see you and a few others want it to be. Because, if it isn't a full fledged computing device, capible of serious work, then it will be a toy.
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
Mel, it seems you're blind to what is probably 60% of the hardware market, and that is hardware that one doesn't make a living off of, and that one doesn't expect to accomplish the hardest tasks one does in the course of the week.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
If Apple ever did come out with a full sized tablet, it would be a showcase for Apple's technologies, and so would be expensive.
Rubbish. By that reasoning they never would have released the iPod because the audio performance is a compromise to the audio we'd gotten in our living rooms. I live in NYC, as you do, and on my subway commutes I see LOADS of $400 - 600 internet tablets in peoples' hands. In fact while iPods may still dominate the mp3 players in riders hands they no longer dominate the total scope of certainly what the Wall St crowd has been buying this fall. It's a niche that Apple would like a part of. Now that the price point has been set before they've entered the fray I doubt they'll only release a tablet at 3 times that, and get none of that market. They've always served the lower end of market as well as the top and middle.
[QUOTE=wizard69;1179536]This is where your argument falls apart because no one in their right mind is talking about a $2500 tablet. What most of use are looking for is a melding of the Touch and the iPHone and a bit of growth hormone. We are really talking about a $400 class machine. This table isn't designed to be your main computer, nor your laptop nor a replacement for any of these.[quote]
Then you don't see the realities of the market, or of Apple. A mini tablet will go for less perhaps, but even these little UMPC's are going over $1,000 in some cases, and even they are accused of being too slow, and too small.
When you say "we" you mean "you".
There will not be any tablet for anywhere close to that. I would hope that people would understand that.
I've been calling for a machine somewhat larger than the iPhone/iTouch. But, some people think that's too big.
But, a tablet is much larger.
I can't even imagine how you think it could be produced for $400, when the iPhone already costs that, and even the 16 GB iTouch costs that. Why don't you detail such a device, and we'll figure out what it WILL cost?
Quote:
They can be used that way but you do realize that not everyone goes that route. There are still considerable advantages to desktop hardware. Here though you are trying to compare two computing appliances with a tablet. Tablets are not intended to be general purpose computing units.
I find it to be interesting that while tablets are being produced for that purpose, and for the purpose of replacing laptops as well, you can say that they are not being produced for that purpose.
I'm not saying that they can't be produced for other, less serious purposes, but there is no market at all worth talking about right now. Companies have to look at larger groups of users, and they are the ones who need their machines for work or school for the most part.
Quote:
That is just totally in denial of reality. People don't give up their desktop or laptop when the buy an iPod do they? NO OF COURSE NOT and you won't find people giving up their computing machines in favor of a laptop.
iPod? You are now comparing a tablet computer to an iPod? Well then, get an iPod. this isn't an iPod. It's a computer.
And, yes, people are getting portables to replace their desktops. You can read all about it anywhere you look, even in AI.
Quote:
Jobs biggest problem is being greedy to the point he'd rather see a product fail in the marketplace rather than to lower the price. Apple could certainly blow it with the Ultra or a tablet device this time around. The bigger mistake that he could make though is no to leverage MultiTouch in any way reasonably possible.
That's one of the points I'm making here. Jobs will not produce a machine that costs less than the lifestyle he wants it to exude. Why do you think the cheapest portable costs at least $1,100? They could make them for less, but they don't want to.
To meet the specs you want, the cost will be high. Settle for lessor specs, such as a much thicker, heavier machine, no SSD, and you can have a lower price. But, it will still be way over $1,000.
Quote:
How do you know what Apple has up its sleeve with respect to an ultra? Apple can be very aggressive here because there in one thing that is certain the current crop of Win ultras are grossly over priced and do not appeal to a persons sense of value. The Eee PC shows you what is possible and gives you an expected price.
None of us do. I don't say that I do. But, you don't know about the pricing. Were you ever in charge of pricing products? Do you really KNOW that those are overpriced? Or do you just want to believe it?
The Eee PC is a cheap piece of crap. Is that what you want?
Quote:
What utter garbage from a posting filled with garbage. First; off what is serious work and do you really expect everybody to have the same definition? Second all computing devices that aren't making money or other wise adding to the environment are indeed toys. Some people have some very SERIOUS toys.
Don't talk about a post filled with crap, unless you're reading your own. Is this a discussion or are you tripping? Should I take the rest seriously now?
Quote:
In any event I have to totally reject the idea and the person delivering it, that something that isn't capable of serious work is a Toy. It is even harder to define what a full fledge computing device is.
Well, I guess you aren't serious any more, you've gone off the deep end. If you don't want to take ME seriously, then just don't respond, but don't make stupid accusations.
Quote:
So you can make an excuse for one machine not being top of the line but not anther. Hell my old HP RPN calculator is capable of serious work, and today it would be considered damn slow. It however wasn't and isn't a toy in my mind. It might not be used as frequently as newer hardware but it still adds, subtracts and does trig when I need it. (It does the trig find when I remember my math).[
In any event your logic simply escapes me, or maybe you are a troll. I don't really know. What I do know that a Toy is usually defined by the person playing with it.
Perhaps you are the troll who has lost his way. Times change, what was serious then, is less so now.
Quote:
HuH?
I forget you're new. you don't know much of anything that goes on here.
Quote:
The Touch and the iPhone showcase Apple technologies yet they are rather fairly priced. In fact since some of this technology could reasonably be expected to show up in a tablet one might consider it old and cheap technology. the world is currently full of Apple technologies that where delivered at reasonable prices.
And both are considered to be expensive, even now. The iPhone was considered to be so overpriced, that Jobs for once was forced to drastically lower its price. I'd be willing to bet that the iTouch was priced the same as the old iPhone prices, but were released at the present ones once the iPhone price was dropped.
Quote:
Again what the hell are you trying to say.
It's pretty obvious. If this isn't going to be an expensive, serious work machine, then it will be an e-mail machine that will be of lessor capability. Your "fun" machine.
Quote:
Show me a reasonably priced Ultra running Windows that is selling well. Then look at the Eee PC, which is running Linux and apparently selling very well. Whats the difference, well the big one is price. If Apple wants to be successful with an ultra they need to understand the value equation. In America people don't want to shell out big bucks for a compact car no matter how well done. The same could be said about Apples hardware, people are willing to pay a little extra for a big engine (Mac OS/X) but they are not going to throw a lot of money in to a miniature chassis (Ultra) that offer nothing over another.
You want me to come up with sales figures for machines that YOU say aren't selling well? And then you assume that the Eee PC IS selling well?
Why don't you produce figures for both the ultra's, AND the Eee? It's your contention, not mine.
But, don't forget that an Ultra is also one of the most wanted devices from Apple on this board, and has been for quite a while.
Quote:
Consumers see a certain value in a Ultra and won't be drawn into the hardware at the wrong price point.
Whoever said it was going to be $2500? I don't remember that being mentioned anywhere in this thread. You latch onto a figure as being what you expect it to cost then proclaim nobody will want it. I can prognisticate that it can be $1400 or less and still be as authoritative as you.
I didn't say it was mentioned. I'm just looking at what he, wizard69, was looking for in physical specs, such as "thin as an iPhone", which is not even being close to being priduced for any computer as yet, and other specs that have been going around here, such as SSD's , size of screen, etc.
I figure that for a technology that will be as advanced as that, it will go for about $2,500.
It's really not unreasonable to think so. What would the iTouch cost if it was scaled up to a tablet size? Figure an 11" screen itouch. Then figure a 13" iTouch. I'm sure you can understand what I mean there.
Quote:
Wow, somebody died and made you emperor of the world? Everybody must buy only what you like?
All I'm doing is looking at the market. Many tablets cost much more than $2,500. What are the lowest priced models going for? I really don't know.
But, one can imagine that they are heavy, and thick, not even as thin as Apples laptops.
Quote:
Make up your mind. I say the original iPod was considered overpriced. You argue almost seemingly for the sake of argument that it was fairly priced. Now you come back and claim you said it was overpriced. Steve may make plenty of mistakes, but he's also made quite a few good moves. Not for nothing was he named the most influential CEO this year.
Sorry, my mistake. I got my paragraphs a bit mixed up. A sentence was left out.
I was referring back to the Cube, mentioned earlier.
Quote:
And some people complain that the iPhone isn't fully capable of serious work. I guess it must be a major flop.
The iPhone is a different product, at a much lower price lever, esp. now. It does what most people need in a smartphone, music/video player. Hopefully, it will do more after February.
Quote:
And yet the rumors of the Mini's death still remain exaggerated.
Yes, so far. I'm rooting for it. But the mere fact that there are constant rumors show that it isn't appreciated as much as, possibly, it should be. And we do know that it doesn't sell as well as Apple hoped it would. The estimates have been about 50,00 a quarter, though that was over a year ago.
Quote:
News flash: The vast majority of users will never run Photoshop or FCP on this or any other Mac. So some people claim the Macbook is too slow. Guess what? It sells well and most people who buy it are quite happy with it. What about the road warriors, the businessmen who are always traveling? They check into a hotel room and what do you think they do? Edit their latest video for the broadcast suite? No, they relax on the bed and check their email, surf the web, write some reports, update Keynote presentations.
Quite true. Though you just know that some will.
The reason I pointed out the MacBook was because of price/power. After all, it is much more a "fun" machine than is the MBP, yet, it is terrible for the most fun thing of all?games. You've been here a while, you know the discussions we've had about that one.
What will this tablet be capable of? Games? How? This is the problem. Games are more difficult than Photoshop. PS doesn't need a good graphics card. It is happy with built-in graphics chips, but games!
Even the iMacs are criticized for not doing well there.
Quote:
And if Apple were to take over even 50% of that 0.5% market share with a breakthrough device the way iPhones took the lead among smartphones, that would be 0.25%, wouldn't it? 0.25% is nothing to sneeze at if your company's total market share is only 4% or so. It could be even more profitable if Apple could *gasp* expand the market for themselves. Wow, what a concept, huh? It doesn't have to be a zero sum game. You remind me of the old story of two shoe company reps sent to a third world country to scout the market. One calls back to HQ and says, "Terrible market potential here. Nobody wears shoes." The other calls back and says, "Fantastic market potential here. Nobody has shoes!" Guess which one you are.
That's really reaching. 50% Be more realistic. If Apple took over the same percentage of tablets as it has of laptops around the world, a category that we agree they do best in, they might take 5% of the tablet market, worldwide. Oh, hell, let's go for broke, and say they get 7.5%. Thats still nothing of nothing.
Quote:
Conversely, look at all the people with $2500 PCs who do nothing more with them than... play games! $400 graphics cards, not for 3D rendering, but again... gaming! It's not how much power you have, it's what you do with it. I know people who can do "serious work" with a sliderule. I also know a businessman who bought a top of the line Macbook Pro and doesn't do anything more demanding with it than use BootCamp to access a database.
I agree, of course. But we both know that it's the exception, not the rule. Apple has to market for the rule, not the exception.
Mel, it seems you're blind to what is probably 60% of the hardware market, and that is hardware that one doesn't make a living off of, and that one doesn't expect to accomplish the hardest tasks one does in the course of the week.
Not really. i'm looking at the way tablets are being marketed, and to whom. i'm not making up a category. That's being done by others here.
If it's being said that Apple will market to other categories, then that's just a guess.
Actually, since there is no product from Apple, and we have no idea at all that there ever will be, it's all a dream.
Quote:
Rubbish. By that reasoning they never would have released the iPod because the audio performance is a compromise to the audio we'd gotten in our living rooms. I live in NYC, as you do, and on my subway commutes I see LOADS of $400 - 600 internet tablets in peoples' hands. In fact while iPods may still dominate the mp3 players in riders hands they no longer dominate the total scope of certainly what the Wall St crowd has been buying this fall. It's a niche that Apple would like a part of. Now that the price point has been set before they've entered the fray I doubt they'll only release a tablet at 3 times that, and get none of that market. They've always served the lower end of market as well as the top and middle.
Oh please!
Every product line Apple has ever come out with has been a platforn for Apple's technologies. That includes the iPod.
Don't talk about audio. I partnered in an audio manufacturing concern. I designed professional speakers, and audio equipment. I understand sound quality, and I have never bought an iPod, or downloaded compressed music, except to see what it sounded like (other than my own testing).
Nevertheless, it is a major example of Apple's technologies.
If you are talking about tablets that are a bit bigger than the iPhone/iTouch, then if you read back, you will see that it's a product that I have called for, and described. No argument there.
But if you are talking about the 11' to 13' tablet others here are arguing for, then no to both. They won't cost $600, and they won't be carried around on the subway here in good old New York.
Not really. i'm looking at the way tablets are being marketed, and to whom. i'm not making up a category. That's being done by others here.
No one's saying you're making up a category. The implication is that you're ignoring the existance of a category.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Oh please!
Every product line Apple has ever come out with has been a platforn for Apple's technologies. That includes the iPod.
Sure. But that has nothing to do with price point or who the market is. Or what anyone is talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Don't talk about audio. I partnered in an audio manufacturing concern. I designed professional speakers, and audio equipment. I understand sound quality, and I have never bought an iPod, or downloaded compressed music, except to see what it sounded like (other than my own testing).
Nevertheless, it is a major example of Apple's technologies.
Mel, if Steve Jobs was an critical audio engineer we'd never have iPods, which makes them boatloads of money. And if you've "never bought an iPod, or downloaded compressed music, except to see what it sounded like (other than my own testing", regardless of your audio background, you're a textbook example of someone who does not have their finger on the pulse of the people who do buy mp3 players. And they're the same people who buy low and mid range computers that won't run professional apps well enough to satisfy a professional. And they buy tons of them. (PS, I'm an audio professional and love mp3 players for what they are. I don't use them to chase the perfect sound. I have other things for that. It's not their purpose.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
If you are talking about tablets that are a bit bigger than the iPhone/iTouch, then if you read back, you will see that it's a product that I have called for, and described. No argument there.
But if you are talking about the 11' to 13' tablet others here are arguing for, then no to both. They won't cost $600, and they won't be carried around on the subway here in good old New York.
I see all kinds of devices on the subway, open and used, from Blueberries and Nokias to MacBookPros. If you're as in touch with these folks as you are with mp3 player users you should probably not continue making such sweeping statements based on your personal feelings.
Comments
1. Remember that speeds of processors double every 18 months (Moore's law still works, even today). So the "slower" ultraportable is usually as fast as a slightly older desktop. It's not a big penalty.
That's only true if you stick with older versions of software. Software companies evaluate what the average computer user buying their software has. They then up the specs of the software to match that.
It's the case that newer versions of software are almost never as fast as older versions. They are almost slower. The speed being made up by the more powerful computer.
So if an ultra portable is released, it will be one of the weakest machines in the line. Even if it is improved later, which it likely would be, relative to the other newer machines, it would still be the weakest. But, the software companies would be looking at the new higher average, and upgrading their software to use the extra power.
This machine would still be a laggard.
2. Memory matters and as long as you get the ultraportable with 2g of Ram or more, most programs will be pretty fast. I still work on an old G4 PB 12incher and it is fast for most jobs. Dunno how processor intensive iMovie is however...
If a program requires more memory, then 2 GB might help its speed. But, many programs have not proven to be faster with 2 GB, unless you are multitasking, and even then, the difference is not always meaningful.
But, a faster cpu will always make a difference.
3. Flash based storage has much faster theoretical access times than a conventional HDD and this can conceivably help, including super fast start-up times. Unfortunately, tests to date of these things have not shown a big performance bump for computers.
That depends on what the program is, and how it bangs the drive. Some programs, like Photoshop, want to see the entire image (file) in RAM, to avoid just that problem. If you have 100% efficiency, then the speed of the drive is less meaningful, only effecting the opening, and saving of the image.
I suspect firms like Apple, Sony and Toshiba will be thinking creatively about making use of the potential access times for this kind of memory. Probably too late to be of benefit for any January release product (one reason I hate Dell and Compaq is they buy better processors and stuff off the shelf, but they make zero effort to come up with creative platforms to make the best use of them, as you can see they don't even put money into coming up with better plugs and adapters).
Apple isn't any different, though sometimes, they are worse.
I'm not convinced of that either. Tablets have, so far, proven to have remarkably little interest to the computing public. The category has about 0.5% of computer sales.
OTOH, Apple has a fairly good track record of coming to a market that's not very successful, making a product that's new and exciting and essentially taking over that market. iPod comes to mind. So does iPhone. Just over a year ago, more than a few people were saying that an Apple cell phone would be a yawner in the marketplace. It's all in the design and marketing.
OTOH, Apple has a fairly good track record of coming to a market that's not very successful, making a product that's new and exciting and essentially taking over that market. iPod comes to mind. So does iPhone. Just over a year ago, more than a few people were saying that an Apple cell phone would be a yawner in the marketplace. It's all in the design and marketing.
They haven't done that with the iMac. Nor the Mac Pro. Or any of their other computers. Look at the Cube, or even the current Mini.
So, while several of their models are popular, they haven't "taken over the market". And others are not doing as well as that, or have outright failed.
The point is that is there was a new market—digital music players, and it was growing, though slowly, a much better design, and a totally new service with far lower pricing can easily change the entire equation, and it did.
The iPhone is selling very well here in the States. Not so well abroad. That shows that Apple understands some markets, but not all.
Also, lately, their greed is getting in the way of the take=up of the iPhone, and that's not good. 30% revenue sharing? Give me a break!
As for tablets. there is no proof that an Apple product, no matter how innovative, will change the prospects for that market. This is simply not a popular device. For most people, it's not even interesting.
That category has problems just from what the product is, and how it is expected to be used.
No matter what Apple does, the technology is simply not at the point that a tablet can be used the way it is expected to be. So, the way it is used, is not offering many people any advantage over more conventional designs—keyboarded models, isn't enough to get many people to switch to one.
I feel confident that there needs to be several areas that if addressed, will go a long way towards solving the usability problem. But until that time arrives, the answer is no, tablets won't be effective replacements for keyboarded conventional models.
Some of the areas needing new technologies are:
1. Screen. The LCD screen with its backlight has to go. Even LED backlights use too much power for a tablet. OLEDs are LED's but use much less power than even the LED backlights. They will also allow much thinner screens than LCD's with backlights, not only because there won't be any backlight, but because the display proper is simpler in construction, and thinner. It will also allow the tablet to be used outdoors.
2. Power source. Batteries, no matter how good, are just too heavy, and have too short a life between recharges. tablets will be expected to last more than the 3 to 5 hours most get now, and likely more than the 7, or so, some of the ultra lights get before going to much bigger, and heavier, optional batteries. Wait for fuel cells.
3. CPU/GPU. Right now, even the ultra low power CPU's use too much power, and give off too much heat. Those processors also need to be more powerful than the models used in the current UMPC's. On a level with current computer mobile units.We also need an integrated graphics solution that will be good enough for most medium graphics needs. Neither is available now.
4. Storage. While SSD's are getting bigger, and cheaper, they are still too small, and much too expensive in their medium, and larger, versions. Except for really light use, few people will accept a 32 GB internal storage medium anymore. look at how many complain at the 80 GB drive offered for the MacBook. 64 Gb is probably the smallest most people will accept, but at over $1,000, it's much too expensive for more than a very few. That price will have to drop to under $400, or so, before it will become viable for more people.
The problem there is that rising expectations amongst computer users means that size must continue to go up while prices continue to fall. What was acceptable two years ago is no longer acceptable today, and what is acceptable today, won't be acceptable two years hence.
We can look to prices of HDD's, RAM, and Flash to see that. People won't pay the prices for these products today that was being charged two years ago. What this means is that while many people might pay $400 for a 64 GB SSD today, and think that it's priced fairly well, even though it's far higher than an HDD of much larger capacity, will they think so by the time it IS priced at that level, when HDD's will be much larger than today, and priced even lower?
RAM and flash have dropped much as well. A Flash card that cost $279 towards the end of 2005, now costs $40. Even though the price of SSD's are dropping faster that that of HDD's, they are not dropping as quickly as that of Flash cards, and RAM. They are more complex products, and the other components inside are keeping the overall price from plummeting.
I see them becoming viable for a much larger part of the population by 2010.
And, if Fuel cells are available by then, and OLEDS, or some of the other newer technologies that are also not out in large sizes, are available, that's about the time when a well thought out product from Apple, or someone else, might make a breakthrough, if people can be taught to use their machines in a physically different way.
They haven't done that with the iMac. Nor the Mac Pro. Or any of their other computers. Look at the Cube, or even the current Mini.
So, while several of their models are popular, they haven't "taken over the market". And others are not doing as well as that, or have outright failed.
The point is that is there was a new market—digital music players, and it was growing, though slowly, a much better design, and a totally new service with far lower pricing can easily change the entire equation, and it did.
Leaving aside all your technical objections, which I don't agree with, either (I don't understand the obsession with "more power!" All I'd want with a tablet is watch some video and photo files, web surfing, email and do some light work, basically everything iLife and iWork can handle), your argument here is way off.
PCs are hardly a market that's "not very successful." It's difficult to take over a well established market, which Apple sacrificed with its early missteps decades ago. If PCs were still very rare today, I expect comparably priced Macs would stand a good chance of taking over the market. iPods didn't have far lower pricing. In fact, at the time of the original 5GB model's introduction, they were considered overpriced. Nor was the iTunes store a smash hit at the beginning, so the 99¢ pricing wasn't what made it successful. It was the iPod's intuitive user interface and iTunes making it so easy to load music collections onto it that made it far more attractive than its competitors. By the same token, Windows tablets are still crude -- basically thick, heavy units with barely any use of the tablet functions. If Apple can do it right (say something no thicker than an iPhone and with an intuitive stylus+MultiTouch interface), they can make this market take off, for themselves, at least.
One thing I'd like to see is a "pie" keyboard. Sort of like pie menus. Virtual keys arranged in curved portions at the lower corners of the tablet. With the predictive typing algorithms of the iPhone and good spacing between palm and thumbtip, it could be faster than any thumb keyboard to date. (By pie menus, I mean the quarter circle variety, not the circular variety.)
Leaving aside all your technical objections, which I don't agree with, either (I don't understand the obsession with "more power!" All I'd want with a tablet is watch some video and photo files and do some light work, basically everything iLife and iWork can handle), your argument here is way off.
While that's fine as your persional preferences, we aren't talking about one persons interests.
Apple can't look to what a few people might want. They have to look to the market overall, and come to some conclusion as to what it wants.
As far as that goes, my technical comments are very valid.
PCs are hardly a market that's "not very successful." It's difficult to take over a well established market, which Apple sacrificed with its early missteps decades ago. If PCs were still very rare today, I expect comparably priced Macs would stand a good chance of taking over the market. iPods didn't have far lower pricing. In fact, at the time of the original 5GB model's introduction, they were considered overpriced. Nor was the iTunes store a smash hit at the beginning, so the 99¢ pricing wasn't what made it successful. It was the iPod's intuitive user interface and iTunes making it so easy to load music collections onto it that made it far more attractive than its competitors. By the same token, Windows tablets are still crude -- basically thick, heavy units with barely any use of the tablet functions. If Apple can do it right (say something no thicker than an iPhone and with an intuitive stylus+MultiTouch interface), they can make this market take off, for themselves, at least.
You are actually making some of my own points for me. The PC market is very successful. And Apple is doing well, as far as it goes, but are still at around 3+% worldwide. Apple has had very good percentages for their rise in sales, 30-35% a year. but some other PC companies have risen even faster, well over 50%. so it can be done, but Apple will alsway have the "OS problem" to overcome. While that's less of an issue than in the past, it's still considerable. People can't simply go from one manufacturer to the other when the Mac OS is involved, the way they do in the PC world. Superior, or not, it's a factor.
This affects the tablet as well. moving from a PC laptop to a Mac laptop involves those same considerations. moving to a Mac tablet will be more difficult, as it is a very unpopular computer category.
The iPod, when it first came out, was no more expensive than any other HDD based digital music player. The iTunes store became very popular very quickly.
At the end of your post, even though you don't seem to realize it, you are calling for the technical innovations I am. Just look at the specs you are mentioning.
You are actually making some of my own points for me. The PC market is very successful. And Apple is doing well, as far as it goes, but are still at around 3+% worldwide. Apple has had very good percentages for their rise in sales, 30-35% a year. but some other PC companies have risen even faster, well over 50%. so it can be done, but Apple will alsway have the "OS problem" to overcome. While that's less of an issue than in the past, it's still considerable. People can't simply go from one manufacturer to the other when the Mac OS is involved, the way they do in the PC world. Superior, or not, it's a factor.
This affects the tablet as well. moving from a PC laptop to a Mac laptop involves those same considerations. moving to a Mac tablet will be more difficult, as it is a very unpopular computer category.
That's only because you're hung up on doing everything on the tablet that you would do on your desktop machine. If the tablet were a mere supplement as other people in this thread have also suggested, it wouldn't need to be a replacement for a Windows machine any more than an iPhone or an iPod Touch is at a disadvantage for not running Windows. What exactly is your point anyway? I was specifically saying that the larger the market, the greater the inertia that needs to be overcome and the harder it would be to take it over, just like the personal computer market, and you seem to agree, then turn around and castigate Apple for not making headway against all that momentum.
The iPod, when it first came out, was no more expensive than any other HDD based digital music player. The iTunes store became very popular very quickly.
Check out this thread from six years ago. Quite a few users of this very forum said it was overpriced at the time.
Mac Devcenter around the same time.
On a MacNN forum.
Mel, all those points you made are exactly right.
Thanks. Tell Kolchak that.
That's only because you're hung up on doing everything on the tablet that you would do on your desktop machine. If the tablet were a mere supplement as other people in this thread have also suggested, it wouldn't need to be a replacement for a Windows machine any more than an iPhone or an iPod Touch is at a disadvantage for not running Windows. What exactly is your point anyway? I was specifically saying that the larger the market, the greater the inertia that needs to be overcome and the harder it would be to take it over, just like the personal computer market, and you seem to agree, then turn around and castigate Apple for not making headway against all that momentum.
No I'm not. I'm hung up on the fact that people won'y buy a $2,500, or so, computer, no matter what type it is, if they can't do most of, or even all of, their work on it.
What have so many discussions on this board, and others, said? That laptops are desktop replacements.
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
Check out this thread from six years ago. Quite a few users of this very forum said it was overpriced at the time.
Mac Devcenter around the same time.
On a MacNN forum.
I know all this. I've said it was overpriced as well, and poorly marketed. But, that's only part of the point. the other, more important part is that Jobs is no marketing god. he makes plenty of mistakes. and he doesn't always listen to his customers, or he could have fixed that one.
What I really wonder is whether all of the people here who are asking for this will buy it if it came out. I tend to doubt it. This won't be some cheap addition to people's computing experience. It will (again, if it ever happens) be a machine that, as Apple has shown us time and again, will be a full addition to the line in giving the Apple experience. That will make it too expensive for people to use as the semi toy I see you and a few others want it to be. Because, if it isn't a full fledged computing device, capible of serious work, then it will be a toy.
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
If Apple ever did come out with a full sized tablet, it would be a showcase for Apple's technologies, and so would be expensive.
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
No I'm not. I'm hung up on the fact that people won'y buy a $2,500, or so, computer, no matter what type it is, if they can't do most of, or even all of, their work on it.
This is where your argument falls apart because no one in their right mind is talking about a $2500 tablet. What most of use are looking for is a melding of the Touch and the iPHone and a bit of growth hormone. We are really talking about a $400 class machine. This table isn't designed to be your main computer, nor your laptop nor a replacement for any of these.
What have so many discussions on this board, and others, said? That laptops are desktop replacements.
They can be used that way but you do realize that not everyone goes that route. There are still considerable advantages to desktop hardware. Here though you are trying to compare two computing appliances with a tablet. Tablets are not intended to be general purpose computing units.
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
That is just totally in denial of reality. People don't give up their desktop or laptop when the buy an iPod do they? NO OF COURSE NOT and you won't find people giving up their computing machines in favor of a laptop.
I know all this. I've said it was overpriced as well, and poorly marketed. But, that's only part of the point. the other, more important part is that Jobs is no marketing god. he makes plenty of mistakes. and he doesn't always listen to his customers, or he could have fixed that one.
Jobs biggest problem is being greedy to the point he'd rather see a product fail in the marketplace rather than to lower the price. Apple could certainly blow it with the Ultra or a tablet device this time around. The bigger mistake that he could make though is no to leverage MultiTouch in any way reasonably possible.
What I really wonder is whether all of the people here who are asking for this will buy it if it came out. I tend to doubt it. This won't be some cheap addition to people's computing experience. It will (again, if it ever happens) be a machine that, as Apple has shown us time and again, will be a full addition to the line in giving the Apple experience.
How do you know what Apple has up its sleeve with respect to an ultra? Apple can be very aggressive here because there in one thing that is certain the current crop of Win ultras are grossly over priced and do not appeal to a persons sense of value. The Eee PC shows you what is possible and gives you an expected price.
That will make it too expensive for people to use as the semi toy I see you and a few others want it to be. Because, if it isn't a full fledged computing device, capible of serious work, then it will be a toy.
What utter garbage from a posting filled with garbage. First; off what is serious work and do you really expect everybody to have the same definition? Second all computing devices that aren't making money or other wise adding to the environment are indeed toys. Some people have some very SERIOUS toys.
In any event I have to totally reject the idea and the person delivering it, that something that isn't capable of serious work is a Toy. It is even harder to define what a full fledge computing device is.
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
So you can make an excuse for one machine not being top of the line but not anther. Hell my old HP RPN calculator is capable of serious work, and today it would be considered damn slow. It however wasn't and isn't a toy in my mind. It might not be used as frequently as newer hardware but it still adds, subtracts and does trig when I need it. (It does the trig find when I remember my math).
In any event your logic simply escapes me, or maybe you are a troll. I don't really know. What I do know that a Toy is usually defined by the person playing with it.
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
HuH?
If Apple ever did come out with a full sized tablet, it would be a showcase for Apple's technologies, and so would be expensive.
The Touch and the iPhone showcase Apple technologies yet they are rather fairly priced. In fact since some of this technology could reasonably be expected to show up in a tablet one might consider it old and cheap technology. the world is currently full of Apple technologies that where delivered at reasonable prices.
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
Again what the hell are you trying to say.
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
Show me a reasonably priced Ultra running Windows that is selling well. Then look at the Eee PC, which is running Linux and apparently selling very well. Whats the difference, well the big one is price. If Apple wants to be successful with an ultra they need to understand the value equation. In America people don't want to shell out big bucks for a compact car no matter how well done. The same could be said about Apples hardware, people are willing to pay a little extra for a big engine (Mac OS/X) but they are not going to throw a lot of money in to a miniature chassis (Ultra) that offer nothing over another.
Consumers see a certain value in a Ultra and won't be drawn into the hardware at the wrong price point.
Dave
No I'm not. I'm hung up on the fact that people won'y buy a $2,500, or so, computer, no matter what type it is, if they can't do most of, or even all of, their work on it.
Whoever said it was going to be $2500? I don't remember that being mentioned anywhere in this thread. You latch onto a figure as being what you expect it to cost then proclaim nobody will want it. I can prognisticate that it can be $1400 or less and still be as authoritative as you.
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
Wow, somebody died and made you emperor of the world? Everybody must buy only what you like?
I know all this. I've said it was overpriced as well, and poorly marketed. But, that's only part of the point. the other, more important part is that Jobs is no marketing god. he makes plenty of mistakes. and he doesn't always listen to his customers, or he could have fixed that one.
Make up your mind. I say the original iPod was considered overpriced. You argue almost seemingly for the sake of argument that it was fairly priced. Now you come back and claim you said it was overpriced. Steve may make plenty of mistakes, but he's also made quite a few good moves. Not for nothing was he named the most influential CEO this year.
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
And some people complain that the iPhone isn't fully capable of serious work. I guess it must be a major flop.
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
And yet the rumors of the Mini's death still remain exaggerated.
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
News flash: The vast majority of users will never run Photoshop or FCP on this or any other Mac. So some people claim the Macbook is too slow. Guess what? It sells well and most people who buy it are quite happy with it. What about the road warriors, the businessmen who are always traveling? They check into a hotel room and what do you think they do? Edit their latest video for the broadcast suite? No, they relax on the bed and check their email, surf the web, write some reports, update Keynote presentations.
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
And if Apple were to take over even 50% of that 0.5% market share with a breakthrough device the way iPhones took the lead among smartphones, that would be 0.25%, wouldn't it? 0.25% is nothing to sneeze at if your company's total market share is only 4% or so. It could be even more profitable if Apple could *gasp* expand the market for themselves. Wow, what a concept, huh? It doesn't have to be a zero sum game. You remind me of the old story of two shoe company reps sent to a third world country to scout the market. One calls back to HQ and says, "Terrible market potential here. Nobody wears shoes." The other calls back and says, "Fantastic market potential here. Nobody has shoes!" Guess which one you are.
This is where your argument falls apart because no one in their right mind is talking about a $2500 tablet. What most of use are looking for is a melding of the Touch and the iPHone and a bit of growth hormone. We are really talking about a $400 class machine. This table isn't designed to be your main computer, nor your laptop nor a replacement for any of these.
$400 is a little extreme. That wouldn't even pay for a good-sized LED backlit LCD screen part.
So you can make an excuse for one machine not being top of the line but not anther. Hell my old HP RPN calculator is capable of serious work, and today it would be considered damn slow. It however wasn't and isn't a toy in my mind. It might not be used as frequently as newer hardware but it still adds, subtracts and does trig when I need it. (It does the trig find when I remember my math).
In any event your logic simply escapes me, or maybe you are a troll. I don't really know. What I do know that a Toy is usually defined by the person playing with it.
Conversely, look at all the people with $2500 PCs who do nothing more with them than... play games! $400 graphics cards, not for 3D rendering, but again... gaming! It's not how much power you have, it's what you do with it. I know people who can do "serious work" with a sliderule. I also know a businessman who bought a top of the line Macbook Pro and doesn't do anything more demanding with it than use BootCamp to access a database.
Make up your mind. I say the original iPod was considered overpriced. You argue almost seemingly for the sake of argument that it was fairly priced. Now you come back and claim you said it was overpriced. Steve may make plenty of mistakes, but he's also made quite a few good moves. Not for nothing was he named the most influential CEO this year.
The mark of a good business man is really how you recover from your mistakes.
And some people complain that the iPhone isn't fully capable of serious work. I guess it must be a major flop.
The iPhone is just about everything I need for traveling, if it wasn't for coming up short software wise I'd have one now and work around the hardware limitations. I really don't need a full fledge portable for my traveling needs. I think it is important for people to grasp this, it is easy to have a machine that is subordinate to another.
And yet the rumors of the Mini's death still remain exaggerated.
Yep! And like all PC's it is likely to go through a major upgrade or replacement in the future. That future device is likely to target the same market. Because that is what companies do they make products for different market segments.
News flash: The vast majority of users will never run Photoshop or FCP on this or any other Mac. So some people claim the Macbook is too slow. Guess what? It sells well and most people who buy it are quite happy with it. What about the road warriors, the businessmen who are always traveling? They check into a hotel room and what do you think they do? Edit their latest video for the broadcast suite? No, they relax on the bed and check their email, surf the web, write some reports, update Keynote presentations.
Further I've found that people who have serious software needs will often have a desktop machine as their primary computer. That simply to achieve better performance. Using the other posters logic that would imply that all laptops are not for "serious" work. This of course is BS.
$400 is a little extreme. That wouldn't even pay for a good-sized LED backlit LCD screen part.
At this size the screen would be like what $60. If that. No matter how Apple approaches the device most of the cost will be in the storage area.
Conversely, look at all the people with $2500 PCs who do nothing more with them than... play games! $400 graphics cards, not for 3D rendering, but again... gaming! It's not how much power you have, it's what you do with it. I know people who can do "serious work" with a sliderule. I also know a businessman who bought a top of the line Macbook Pro and doesn't do anything more demanding with it than use BootCamp to access a database.
Exactly! Like in life it isn't the gun but the owner that one needs to heed. Similarly a computer is nothing more than a pile of silicon and aluminum with no motivation of its own, it is the user that defines the machines use.
Dave
Further I've found that people who have serious software needs will often have a desktop machine as their primary computer. That simply to achieve better performance.
Quite right. Not an awful lot of FCP or Photoshop users will have a Macbook Pro as their "only machine." If you do that for a living, a mere two cores aren't going to cut it. Not to mention the RAM and storage requirements. Sure, you can add Firewire, USB or network drives, but plugging and unplugging all those devices (including a real keyboard, a mouse and a large display) from both sides of the MBP and having to remember to eject external drives or else get the dreaded "improperly removed" message gets old pretty quickly. Not to mention external drives are S-L-O-W when you're talking about the huge files that pros have to deal with.
At this size the screen would be like what $60. If that. No matter how Apple approaches the device most of the cost will be in the storage area.
I meant in in the context of a complete machine. No machine in the $400 region has a decent display, with good brightness, color, resolution, response time, etc. Never mind touchscreen features, the only exception being the old eMate. A good tablet could be eMate 2.0, given how well it could work in terms of taking notes in class, with drawing capabilities and no annoying keyboard noise.
If you doubt you can make a slick machine that weighs 3lbs, just go to dynamism.com. I lust after the hardware there... shame they won't run OS X.
Let 10-11" be for the tablet.
Cheers
hows is an ultraportable "ultraportable" with a 13 screen or simply the same size as a macbook.
it's got to have a smaller size like 11 or even 9 widescreen....(it could consceivably have the same keyboard as the macbook)if it has a decent processor and memmory maybe even expandable flash memory slot so you can add more. THEN it would be an ultraportable targeted to business and mobile users.
You have to get it into your head that most people aren't going to go out and buy this if they will need another machine, because this WILL be their machine. Their only machine!
(snip)
What I really wonder is whether all of the people here who are asking for this will buy it if it came out. I tend to doubt it. This won't be some cheap addition to people's computing experience. It will (again, if it ever happens) be a machine that, as Apple has shown us time and again, will be a full addition to the line in giving the Apple experience. That will make it too expensive for people to use as the semi toy I see you and a few others want it to be. Because, if it isn't a full fledged computing device, capible of serious work, then it will be a toy.
As it is, some people complain that the MB isn't fully capable of serious work, though it is, just more slowly.
But, this will have to show that it is too, or it will fail, as the Mini is constantly being declared as doing.
While you might want to spend much for an e-mail machine, most people don't, so it would have to do substantially more, so it won't be cheap.
I still stand by my statement that people aren't interested. Maybe someday, they will be, but we don't know that. Meanwhile it is still chugging along with a 0.5% marketshare, not enough for Apple to be interested.
Mel, it seems you're blind to what is probably 60% of the hardware market, and that is hardware that one doesn't make a living off of, and that one doesn't expect to accomplish the hardest tasks one does in the course of the week.
If Apple ever did come out with a full sized tablet, it would be a showcase for Apple's technologies, and so would be expensive.
Rubbish. By that reasoning they never would have released the iPod because the audio performance is a compromise to the audio we'd gotten in our living rooms. I live in NYC, as you do, and on my subway commutes I see LOADS of $400 - 600 internet tablets in peoples' hands. In fact while iPods may still dominate the mp3 players in riders hands they no longer dominate the total scope of certainly what the Wall St crowd has been buying this fall. It's a niche that Apple would like a part of. Now that the price point has been set before they've entered the fray I doubt they'll only release a tablet at 3 times that, and get none of that market. They've always served the lower end of market as well as the top and middle.
Then you don't see the realities of the market, or of Apple. A mini tablet will go for less perhaps, but even these little UMPC's are going over $1,000 in some cases, and even they are accused of being too slow, and too small.
When you say "we" you mean "you".
There will not be any tablet for anywhere close to that. I would hope that people would understand that.
I've been calling for a machine somewhat larger than the iPhone/iTouch. But, some people think that's too big.
But, a tablet is much larger.
I can't even imagine how you think it could be produced for $400, when the iPhone already costs that, and even the 16 GB iTouch costs that. Why don't you detail such a device, and we'll figure out what it WILL cost?
They can be used that way but you do realize that not everyone goes that route. There are still considerable advantages to desktop hardware. Here though you are trying to compare two computing appliances with a tablet. Tablets are not intended to be general purpose computing units.
I find it to be interesting that while tablets are being produced for that purpose, and for the purpose of replacing laptops as well, you can say that they are not being produced for that purpose.
I'm not saying that they can't be produced for other, less serious purposes, but there is no market at all worth talking about right now. Companies have to look at larger groups of users, and they are the ones who need their machines for work or school for the most part.
That is just totally in denial of reality. People don't give up their desktop or laptop when the buy an iPod do they? NO OF COURSE NOT and you won't find people giving up their computing machines in favor of a laptop.
iPod? You are now comparing a tablet computer to an iPod? Well then, get an iPod. this isn't an iPod. It's a computer.
And, yes, people are getting portables to replace their desktops. You can read all about it anywhere you look, even in AI.
Jobs biggest problem is being greedy to the point he'd rather see a product fail in the marketplace rather than to lower the price. Apple could certainly blow it with the Ultra or a tablet device this time around. The bigger mistake that he could make though is no to leverage MultiTouch in any way reasonably possible.
That's one of the points I'm making here. Jobs will not produce a machine that costs less than the lifestyle he wants it to exude. Why do you think the cheapest portable costs at least $1,100? They could make them for less, but they don't want to.
To meet the specs you want, the cost will be high. Settle for lessor specs, such as a much thicker, heavier machine, no SSD, and you can have a lower price. But, it will still be way over $1,000.
How do you know what Apple has up its sleeve with respect to an ultra? Apple can be very aggressive here because there in one thing that is certain the current crop of Win ultras are grossly over priced and do not appeal to a persons sense of value. The Eee PC shows you what is possible and gives you an expected price.
None of us do. I don't say that I do. But, you don't know about the pricing. Were you ever in charge of pricing products? Do you really KNOW that those are overpriced? Or do you just want to believe it?
The Eee PC is a cheap piece of crap. Is that what you want?
What utter garbage from a posting filled with garbage. First; off what is serious work and do you really expect everybody to have the same definition? Second all computing devices that aren't making money or other wise adding to the environment are indeed toys. Some people have some very SERIOUS toys.
Don't talk about a post filled with crap, unless you're reading your own. Is this a discussion or are you tripping? Should I take the rest seriously now?
In any event I have to totally reject the idea and the person delivering it, that something that isn't capable of serious work is a Toy. It is even harder to define what a full fledge computing device is.
Well, I guess you aren't serious any more, you've gone off the deep end. If you don't want to take ME seriously, then just don't respond, but don't make stupid accusations.
So you can make an excuse for one machine not being top of the line but not anther. Hell my old HP RPN calculator is capable of serious work, and today it would be considered damn slow. It however wasn't and isn't a toy in my mind. It might not be used as frequently as newer hardware but it still adds, subtracts and does trig when I need it. (It does the trig find when I remember my math).[
In any event your logic simply escapes me, or maybe you are a troll. I don't really know. What I do know that a Toy is usually defined by the person playing with it.
Perhaps you are the troll who has lost his way. Times change, what was serious then, is less so now.
HuH?
I forget you're new. you don't know much of anything that goes on here.
The Touch and the iPhone showcase Apple technologies yet they are rather fairly priced. In fact since some of this technology could reasonably be expected to show up in a tablet one might consider it old and cheap technology. the world is currently full of Apple technologies that where delivered at reasonable prices.
And both are considered to be expensive, even now. The iPhone was considered to be so overpriced, that Jobs for once was forced to drastically lower its price. I'd be willing to bet that the iTouch was priced the same as the old iPhone prices, but were released at the present ones once the iPhone price was dropped.
Again what the hell are you trying to say.
It's pretty obvious. If this isn't going to be an expensive, serious work machine, then it will be an e-mail machine that will be of lessor capability. Your "fun" machine.
Show me a reasonably priced Ultra running Windows that is selling well. Then look at the Eee PC, which is running Linux and apparently selling very well. Whats the difference, well the big one is price. If Apple wants to be successful with an ultra they need to understand the value equation. In America people don't want to shell out big bucks for a compact car no matter how well done. The same could be said about Apples hardware, people are willing to pay a little extra for a big engine (Mac OS/X) but they are not going to throw a lot of money in to a miniature chassis (Ultra) that offer nothing over another.
You want me to come up with sales figures for machines that YOU say aren't selling well? And then you assume that the Eee PC IS selling well?
Why don't you produce figures for both the ultra's, AND the Eee? It's your contention, not mine.
But, don't forget that an Ultra is also one of the most wanted devices from Apple on this board, and has been for quite a while.
Consumers see a certain value in a Ultra and won't be drawn into the hardware at the wrong price point.
Dave
That's true of anything.
Whoever said it was going to be $2500? I don't remember that being mentioned anywhere in this thread. You latch onto a figure as being what you expect it to cost then proclaim nobody will want it. I can prognisticate that it can be $1400 or less and still be as authoritative as you.
I didn't say it was mentioned. I'm just looking at what he, wizard69, was looking for in physical specs, such as "thin as an iPhone", which is not even being close to being priduced for any computer as yet, and other specs that have been going around here, such as SSD's , size of screen, etc.
I figure that for a technology that will be as advanced as that, it will go for about $2,500.
It's really not unreasonable to think so. What would the iTouch cost if it was scaled up to a tablet size? Figure an 11" screen itouch. Then figure a 13" iTouch. I'm sure you can understand what I mean there.
Wow, somebody died and made you emperor of the world? Everybody must buy only what you like?
All I'm doing is looking at the market. Many tablets cost much more than $2,500. What are the lowest priced models going for? I really don't know.
But, one can imagine that they are heavy, and thick, not even as thin as Apples laptops.
Make up your mind. I say the original iPod was considered overpriced. You argue almost seemingly for the sake of argument that it was fairly priced. Now you come back and claim you said it was overpriced. Steve may make plenty of mistakes, but he's also made quite a few good moves. Not for nothing was he named the most influential CEO this year.
Sorry, my mistake. I got my paragraphs a bit mixed up. A sentence was left out.
I was referring back to the Cube, mentioned earlier.
And some people complain that the iPhone isn't fully capable of serious work. I guess it must be a major flop.
The iPhone is a different product, at a much lower price lever, esp. now. It does what most people need in a smartphone, music/video player. Hopefully, it will do more after February.
And yet the rumors of the Mini's death still remain exaggerated.
Yes, so far. I'm rooting for it. But the mere fact that there are constant rumors show that it isn't appreciated as much as, possibly, it should be. And we do know that it doesn't sell as well as Apple hoped it would. The estimates have been about 50,00 a quarter, though that was over a year ago.
News flash: The vast majority of users will never run Photoshop or FCP on this or any other Mac. So some people claim the Macbook is too slow. Guess what? It sells well and most people who buy it are quite happy with it. What about the road warriors, the businessmen who are always traveling? They check into a hotel room and what do you think they do? Edit their latest video for the broadcast suite? No, they relax on the bed and check their email, surf the web, write some reports, update Keynote presentations.
Quite true. Though you just know that some will.
The reason I pointed out the MacBook was because of price/power. After all, it is much more a "fun" machine than is the MBP, yet, it is terrible for the most fun thing of all?games. You've been here a while, you know the discussions we've had about that one.
What will this tablet be capable of? Games? How? This is the problem. Games are more difficult than Photoshop. PS doesn't need a good graphics card. It is happy with built-in graphics chips, but games!
Even the iMacs are criticized for not doing well there.
And if Apple were to take over even 50% of that 0.5% market share with a breakthrough device the way iPhones took the lead among smartphones, that would be 0.25%, wouldn't it? 0.25% is nothing to sneeze at if your company's total market share is only 4% or so. It could be even more profitable if Apple could *gasp* expand the market for themselves. Wow, what a concept, huh? It doesn't have to be a zero sum game. You remind me of the old story of two shoe company reps sent to a third world country to scout the market. One calls back to HQ and says, "Terrible market potential here. Nobody wears shoes." The other calls back and says, "Fantastic market potential here. Nobody has shoes!" Guess which one you are.
That's really reaching. 50% Be more realistic. If Apple took over the same percentage of tablets as it has of laptops around the world, a category that we agree they do best in, they might take 5% of the tablet market, worldwide. Oh, hell, let's go for broke, and say they get 7.5%. Thats still nothing of nothing.
Conversely, look at all the people with $2500 PCs who do nothing more with them than... play games! $400 graphics cards, not for 3D rendering, but again... gaming! It's not how much power you have, it's what you do with it. I know people who can do "serious work" with a sliderule. I also know a businessman who bought a top of the line Macbook Pro and doesn't do anything more demanding with it than use BootCamp to access a database.
I agree, of course. But we both know that it's the exception, not the rule. Apple has to market for the rule, not the exception.
Mel, it seems you're blind to what is probably 60% of the hardware market, and that is hardware that one doesn't make a living off of, and that one doesn't expect to accomplish the hardest tasks one does in the course of the week.
Not really. i'm looking at the way tablets are being marketed, and to whom. i'm not making up a category. That's being done by others here.
If it's being said that Apple will market to other categories, then that's just a guess.
Actually, since there is no product from Apple, and we have no idea at all that there ever will be, it's all a dream.
Rubbish. By that reasoning they never would have released the iPod because the audio performance is a compromise to the audio we'd gotten in our living rooms. I live in NYC, as you do, and on my subway commutes I see LOADS of $400 - 600 internet tablets in peoples' hands. In fact while iPods may still dominate the mp3 players in riders hands they no longer dominate the total scope of certainly what the Wall St crowd has been buying this fall. It's a niche that Apple would like a part of. Now that the price point has been set before they've entered the fray I doubt they'll only release a tablet at 3 times that, and get none of that market. They've always served the lower end of market as well as the top and middle.
Oh please!
Every product line Apple has ever come out with has been a platforn for Apple's technologies. That includes the iPod.
Don't talk about audio. I partnered in an audio manufacturing concern. I designed professional speakers, and audio equipment. I understand sound quality, and I have never bought an iPod, or downloaded compressed music, except to see what it sounded like (other than my own testing).
Nevertheless, it is a major example of Apple's technologies.
If you are talking about tablets that are a bit bigger than the iPhone/iTouch, then if you read back, you will see that it's a product that I have called for, and described. No argument there.
But if you are talking about the 11' to 13' tablet others here are arguing for, then no to both. They won't cost $600, and they won't be carried around on the subway here in good old New York.
Not really. i'm looking at the way tablets are being marketed, and to whom. i'm not making up a category. That's being done by others here.
No one's saying you're making up a category. The implication is that you're ignoring the existance of a category.
Oh please!
Every product line Apple has ever come out with has been a platforn for Apple's technologies. That includes the iPod.
Sure. But that has nothing to do with price point or who the market is. Or what anyone is talking about.
Don't talk about audio. I partnered in an audio manufacturing concern. I designed professional speakers, and audio equipment. I understand sound quality, and I have never bought an iPod, or downloaded compressed music, except to see what it sounded like (other than my own testing).
Nevertheless, it is a major example of Apple's technologies.
Mel, if Steve Jobs was an critical audio engineer we'd never have iPods, which makes them boatloads of money. And if you've "never bought an iPod, or downloaded compressed music, except to see what it sounded like (other than my own testing", regardless of your audio background, you're a textbook example of someone who does not have their finger on the pulse of the people who do buy mp3 players. And they're the same people who buy low and mid range computers that won't run professional apps well enough to satisfy a professional. And they buy tons of them. (PS, I'm an audio professional and love mp3 players for what they are. I don't use them to chase the perfect sound. I have other things for that. It's not their purpose.)
If you are talking about tablets that are a bit bigger than the iPhone/iTouch, then if you read back, you will see that it's a product that I have called for, and described. No argument there.
But if you are talking about the 11' to 13' tablet others here are arguing for, then no to both. They won't cost $600, and they won't be carried around on the subway here in good old New York.
I see all kinds of devices on the subway, open and used, from Blueberries and Nokias to MacBookPros. If you're as in touch with these folks as you are with mp3 player users you should probably not continue making such sweeping statements based on your personal feelings.
Respectfully,
TB