Just out of curiosity... does anybody know if this mac will be 3G compatible? There's talk about the iPhone going 3G at MacWorld, and there has been a lot of hype about the ultra portable mac; but hey 1+1=2 and we all know 2 is better than one. Does anybody know if this thing will be 3G compatible? Most 3G cards are not compatible with mac. It would be pretty cool to have an ultra portable mac with internet virtually everwhere.
You must be from outside the US. #1 Wifi is faster, and everywhere. #2 I'm not sure people are willing to pay another mobile phone bill outside there existing one. #3 Is the 3G band even big enough to house every laptop computer user alongside the mobile phone community? There are a lot of phones in the US comparatively.
Just out of curiosity... does anybody know if this mac will be 3G compatible? There's talk about the iPhone going 3G at MacWorld, and there has been a lot of hype about the ultra portable mac; but hey 1+1=2 and we all know 2 is better than one. Does anybody know if this thing will be 3G compatible? Most 3G cards are not compatible with mac. It would be pretty cool to have an ultra portable mac with internet virtually everwhere.
None of us know anything. That's why we're always arguing.
Then about a month ago, another source revealed that Apple has shown significant interest in a 5.2″ 800 x 480 pixel touch screen design by Balda, a German company and the current iPhone screen supplier, and Wintek, an Asian component supplier. This second piece of evidence reveals the real purpose of this new device, an ultra mobile device occupying a position between the 3.5″ iPhone and the much rumored 7-10 inch Apple tablet.
Assuming the 0.2" sides and 0.75" margins on the iphone, and a 16:10 aspect ratio screen, the trusty calculator tells me that the screen is 4.41 x 2.76 inches, and the device would be about 6 x 3.2 inches wide. That's pretty big. The screen could actually fit in a 5 x 3 PDA like form factor (HP iPaq 200 series or lots of various Palm devices of yore) if they are able to use some pretty thin margins. I'm not sure Apple is willing to live with OS X mobile with different aspect ratios either as imagine the UI will have to be custom designed due to multi-touch, though this isn't a big difference.
I think it is a really good idea for Apple to diversify the iPhone line to 3 versions: a nano cheap version at 4 x 2 inches in size, the current iPhone size of 4.4 x 2.4 inches, and a pro version of 4.8 x 2.8 size or so. This would allow for screens of 3.2", 3.8" and 4.2" diagonal 3:2 aspect ratio screens, if they can thin out the current iPhone margin in half or so to 1/8 inch, and carry prices in the $150-250, $300-400, $450-$550 range. With the pro version having a larger screen, a half inch wider, I imagine a soft QWERTY would be a bit easier, while the nano version will have to resort to T9.
Just out of curiosity... does anybody know if this mac will be 3G compatible?
The new Macs could be compatible with lots of things if they simply add in the right PCI port for the product. Be it an XMAC or a laptop with the latest mobile PCI port. In any event yeah I would like ot see Apple become more responsive to peoples mobile needs.
One thing that Apple could do, that is change the game a bit, is to offer a laptop with an iPhone port. That is right, a port for plugging in your latest iPhone to get the communications you want. This would solve many concerns right off the bat.
Quote:
There's talk about the iPhone going 3G at MacWorld, and there has been a lot of hype about the ultra portable mac; but hey 1+1=2 and we all know 2 is better than one.
I'm not sure where you are hearing all this talk. The best indication I have is late spring for a 3G iPhone. That based mostly on what is known about chipsets that could support Apples needs.
Quote:
Does anybody know if this thing will be 3G compatible? Most 3G cards are not compatible with mac. It would be pretty cool to have an ultra portable mac with internet virtually everwhere.
You got that right. One of the reasons to want a cell modem in a laptop is to be able to establish a network connection almost anywhere. WiFi simply isn't available or locked out in many places. As to 3G cards that is simply an issue of having the right drivers written for them. As Apple sell more and more hardware there iwll be incentive for the suppliers to write that software. AT&T at the very least must realize now that there is money to b made off supporting Mac / Apple users.
Then about a month ago, another source revealed that Apple has shown significant interest in a 5.2″ 800 x 480 pixel touch screen design by Balda, a German company and the current iPhone screen supplier, and Wintek, an Asian component supplier. This second piece of evidence reveals the real purpose of this new device, an ultra mobile device occupying a position between the 3.5″ iPhone and the much rumored 7-10 inch Apple tablet.
I do like your calculations and to be perfectly honest this size is just about what I'm looking for. I say just about because just very slightly larger would be nice. The size is almost perfect for on the go usage.
Quote:
Assuming the 0.2" sides and 0.75" margins on the iphone, and a 16:10 aspect ratio screen, the trusty calculator tells me that the screen is 4.41 x 2.76 inches, and the device would be about 6 x 3.2 inches wide. That's pretty big. The screen could actually fit in a 5 x 3 PDA like form factor (HP iPaq 200 series or lots of various Palm devices of yore) if they are able to use some pretty thin margins. I'm not sure Apple is willing to live with OS X mobile with different aspect ratios either as imagine the UI will have to be custom designed due to multi-touch, though this isn't a big difference.
While I'm not sure people have the same idea at hand as I do when the term PDA is used this is what the device would be. its usage would be similar to what the jail broken iPhones and Touches are being sued for. Which is as a hand held computer. Frankly I'm not sure why you thing the case needs to be all that much bigger than the screen, as long as they have room for the required I/O it should be good.
Required I/O is really more of a limitation on a device like this than anything else. Even if this is not an iPhone capable machine ( a mistake in my mind), it should have fully supported Bluetooth, hopefully a host USB port, and at least one compact flash port. Ohh and a big ass battery, I'm hoping for twelve hours on on time.
Quote:
I think it is a really good idea for Apple to diversify the iPhone line to 3 versions: a nano cheap version at 4 x 2 inches in size, the current iPhone size of 4.4 x 2.4 inches, and a pro version of 4.8 x 2.8 size or so.
You won't get an argument form me about a broader iPhone Line up but it really should be seen as a Cell phone line up. Apple needs a phone that isn't a smart phone at the rock bottom and as you have noted a larger model. The larger model simply to delvier a bigger screen for the user and a few more capabilities.
Quote:
This would allow for screens of 3.2", 3.8" and 4.2" diagonal 3:2 aspect ratio screens, if they can thin out the current iPhone margin in half or so to 1/8 inch, and carry prices in the $150-250, $300-400, $450-$550 range. With the pro version having a larger screen, a half inch wider, I imagine a soft QWERTY would be a bit easier, while the nano version will have to resort to T9.
That is the most confused paragraph I've seen today. The biggest problem is you are not applying any downward pressure on the company price wise. Without the downward price pressure the cost of these devices will soar in the future. Thus the need for competition and better exchange rates.
Is the 3G band even big enough to house every laptop computer user alongside the mobile phone community? There are a lot of phones in the US comparatively.
Well Apple is usually quicker to advance with technology than most PCs. Bluetooth for example or even (but not so much) built-in WiFi. Apple might try to go 3G and beat the PC market to the punch. granted, i have no info to back this idea up but wouldn't it be cool! I know the mac has grown in sales but it still isn't a large portion of computer sales. So it might not be able to withstand EVERY computer but it should be able to withstand (what is apple at now?) 5-6% of the computer market. right? only speculation i know... But wouldn't it be cool.
as for info about the 3G iphone, i thought i read it on Appleinsider, but then again i might have googled it. Again, it's all rumors. i have no idea
It should be remembered that most cell phones are of the SoC variety where everything you see here is one one chip. Intel still has a ways to go before competing in the cell phone market. Menlow is really an untra-mobile type of platform while Moorestown looks like it can creep into handheld territory.
This is the size I've been pushing for this device. for those who don't remember, the Newton was just about this size, though the old technology required that it be too thick, and too heavy.
But, it was fine on a belt. This could be slimmer, and lighter.
Of course, you could also keep it in your pocket, as you suggest, or throw it into an attache case.
Like the Newton the HPC handhelds had strong growth and good sales of well over 2.3 million per year before MS dropped the OS. If Apple modernized something like a Psion HPC handheld that would just be the perfect mobile device for business.
You know I like your perspective on the devices physical size. Nothing you've suggested is out of line with what I expect or want. But then you really loose me with the obsession with Windows software.
This issue with software is this. It will be 2009 before there is a significant number of devices on the market and we will be moving into 2010. We can do better than to be running tired old MS applications. Especially applications that have never transfered to a pocket platform well.
Iphone has clearly demonstrated that there is a demand for fresh perspectives with respect to software and user interaction. I'm not saying that we don't want to be able to handle old file formats but rather want to point out that living in the past is a bit like tying an anchor around your neck and jumping overboard.
dave
I only use MS becuase all the business softwares are only available in their OS typically. If Apple finds a way for me to run business programs in a jacket size device with a keyboard I and millions of MS users would switch in a heartbeat and likely not go back.
I have never understood the UMPC makers. A modern HP Journada or NEC MobilePro 900c running full windows would have done MUCH better than the UMPC that actually got made.
The NEC is a tad bigger than your Journada but the keyboard is IMHO much better. I dunno that you could get much less wide/tall than the NEC and have a QWERTY keyboard that worked well. Thinner I can see even though those things are only 3-4 years old and running real Windows.
Or real OSX with iWork or Office. Keynote presentations from a Journada or MobilePro sized device would be handy. And if it can Bootcamp...even better.
Out of all the devices in the handheld era, the best to me hardware wise was the Psion 5mx or Revo models as that small 6.9" x 3.6" x .9" device was light and when you opened up the device it had a great keyboard that actually expanded a bit wider and was a joy to type yet jacket size. I switched fromt both the Psion and NEC to the Jornada as a compromise. The HP had a decent keyboard to touch type not as good as the other two but it was jacket pocket size and had MS OS. The Psion had their proprietary OS which was a drag.
Think of jacket size modern HPC that Apple could make? That would change many MS users to adopt Apple if they could have a touch type keyboard jacket pocket device that ran business applications. I do not care about the OS, I care about mobility, ease of input, and having the right programs.
no offense, but this is pretty much what every naysayer says about new apple products until apple releases them.
Remember this is apple. they dont do anything the way everybody else does, and thats why they're succeeding.
I hereby predict that a tablet mac will sell at least one million units in its first year.
The problem with a tablet is that to be usable for pen input it needs to be 7" and larger that puts it in direct competition of all sub and notebooks. It would have to have great processing power, both pen input and some thing to satisfy most keyboard users that is easy, and it needs to be cheap. A better bet is make jacket size device but to me it needs to have a touch type keyboard as pen or touch screen only is not adequate when the screen is that small.
Apple is smart enough to understand that products are built from the user on down. There are ergonomics issues with holding a 11x8.5 device or notepad of similar size, and it gets even worse when you have to do it with a 1 lb device. A ~10" tablet will be used horizontally on a flat surface, on the lap, or resting on something as you won't be holding it up for extended periods of time. On top of this, there are still many issues about the feel of pen on touchscreen. It's just isn't fine grained enough yet. It has to be like pencil on paper.
If it is a tablet, like seen on many of Apple's patent applications, I think it'll be a limited use device, or a vertical market device (which Apple doesn't do).
Something like this, from a long long time ago, as a UMPC type device will probably prove much more useful:
A full-size laptop keyboard with a 1280x640 screen would be usable in coach class!
If that was able to fit in a jacket pocket say about 7.5" long that would be the ideal mobile device for business users. I'd buy one right now.
The UMPC line sunk because it was too big for pocket size but lacked any decent degree of productivity. The DialKey system was distracting and hard to use, and no one could get any kind of speed on it. If the UMPCs had been given a simple pocket touch typing keyboard, they would have been seen as a productivity tool rather than a novelty, and their sales would have been much better.
I agree.
The only problem with this is that the idea of a "pocket keyboard" is a little bit hard to work with, since the whole point of a pocket keyboard is touch typing, and you can't actually touch type on a keyboard that's less than 7" wide and 3.5" deep. And even if the screen is pillarboxed inside speakers with a clamshell design (to allow for a greater-than 16:10 aspect ratio overall), you still need some physical margins on the keyboard, which places the physical device dimensions at 8" x 4.5" x <1"; that's only barely pocketable. Additionally, you are still restricted to a notebook form factor, which means that the switch-to-slate functionality is missing.
Yes you can type on a device less than 7", the Psion was 6.9" and was actually easier to type than the 7.3" Jornada. The Psion's keyboard expanded when the device was open. Another way to make a device jacket pocket yet even greater keyboard capacity is the what the Samsung SPH P9200 has done. That device trifolds to reaveal a 5" screen and a keyboard close to desktop; problem is they are only sold in Korea. When folded it is about 4.25" which is about the max depth to fit in a jacket pocket. http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-sph...ver-097876.php
The Jornada is 5" wide - hardly pocketable. And all of Apple's patents point to a touch type tactile feedback onscreen multitouch smart keyboard.
The Jornada is not 5" wide, I own one and carry it in suit/coat pockets all the time. It is a little under 4". A jacket pocket would be the ideal parameter not a shirt pocket. A jacket pocket could handle about 4.25" x 7.5" max. You could find a way to rotate the screen 180 so that it could be a pocket touch/pen input with the option of touch type keyboard clamshell.
What do you mean "screen flipable"? And that mockup was using a high-res promo image of the iPod Touch; did you mean making the screen larger to remove the bezel or making the device itself smaller? And landscape is absolutely the way to go in physical button placement for a device of this size. The bezel won't be so large that you can't stretch your thumb over it to manipulate keys on the left edge of the screen when you are holding it in portrait "steno pad" style.
The mockup I had was a 7.63" x 4.77" screen, so at 800x500 resolution that's only 105 PPI. At 160 PPI (iPhone) that's 1220x760 resolution. Somewhere in between, perhaps.
Here's the thing: it wouldn't be hard for the Mac Touch to have an updated version of Spaces that works together with multitouch. So you could zoom in within programs just like the iPhone zooms on webpages and such (two-finger pinch), but you could also zoom in on the overall desktop (three-finger pinch). This would take care of the screen size problem. Having a virtual workspace of 15"+ in a 9" screen is priceless. Okay, not priceless, but close to it.
Pocketable would be nice, but I just don't see how Apple is going to fit any kind of workable touch typing keyboard on a pocket-sized device. Even jacket pocket size. And I am pretty sure that a virtual keyboard (more than 7" wide) will be fine for touch typing.
Virtual is not practical; people are already used to touch typing and if you just copy and modify designs in the past like the Psion Revo/5mx or Jornada 728 they proved a touch type jacket pocket device was possible and worked.
The only non-slate option that Apple might be considering for a UMPC would be the clamshell posted by TMT. Not that bad. The only trouble is that A. the screen aspect ratio is totally not Apple and B. this would require a touchscreen since you have no trackpad, which is very limited if you can only use it like a laptop. I'm sure that touchscreens will start to come standard, but even so it would only be truly useful and worthy of an Apple UMPC if the screen can be used in multiple orientations. And there is no way to use something like that as a slate.
I think Apple has the talent to either mdernize a proven design like the Psion clamshells of the past and make it a real hit or go way out of the box and build upon what Samsung did with their SPH P9200 prototype. A large version of an Iphone is not what business users would buy; they want a replacement to a laptop in their pocket.
Well, I just hope that the current iPhones will be opened for new software and that the SDK announcement is not just for future devices...I'll be really gutted otherwise!
While I'm not sure people have the same idea at hand as I do when the term PDA is used this is what the device would be. its usage would be similar to what the jail broken iPhones and Touches are being sued for. Which is as a hand held computer. Frankly I'm not sure why you thing the case needs to be all that much bigger than the screen, as long as they have room for the required I/O it should be good.
For the size of the screen versus the size of the device, well, we have to have some bit of reality. To fit a 5.2" diag, 16:10 aspect ratio, 4.41 x 2.76 inch screen onto a 5 x 3 inch PDA form factor, the sides will need to be 0.12 inches with a pretty sharp corner. The new screen sizes I laid out required this. For the top and bottom, I was keeping with the physical home buttom and cellular philisophy of the iPhone. These are iPhones, not iPods, so it needs cellular wireless tech (room for an earpiece), and the single home button is, well, one of Apple's signature features in the device.
All-in-all, the cases are about the size of the screens, especially relative to other phones and PDAs.
I know you'd like a SD card and a full USB port (let alone a mini one), but those things limit Apple's thin thin thin design philosophy. (And Iike a 100+ GB HDD version too). I don't think they'll ship a handheld device on the order of 0.75" thick anymore.
Quote:
You won't get an argument form me about a broader iPhone Line up but it really should be seen as a Cell phone line up. Apple needs a phone that isn't a smart phone at the rock bottom and as you have noted a larger model. The larger model simply to delvier a bigger screen for the user and a few more capabilities.
Yeah. Apple will need to separate functionality of a prospective iPhone lineup, and I think it will be quite simple for them to do.
The "nano" version has to be multi-touch, very similar to the current iPhone, but only smaller, and as I've written before, smaller means 3 to 3.2 inch multi-touch screens. It should just be a shrunken version of the existing iPhone. If released in 2008, it should have 8 GB. As for functionality, well, that's easy. Only EDGE, no UMTS/HSPA. No QWERTY soft keyboard due to the width of the device (1.6 inches) being too small, so T9 for text entry. No computer like functionality. 1.3 MP camera. Less applications. Lots of things can be done to eliminate cannabilization of the upper tiers.
If released in 2008, the mid-range would have 3.5 to 3.8 inch screen, UMTS/HSPA, soft QWERTY, 3.2 MP camera, 16 GB storage, faster processor, GPS, and more applications. And the high end should have everything the mid-range should have, but more: 4.2 to 4.5 inch screen, 32 GB flash or 120 MB HDD, 2 cameras, etc.
It's going to be long wait before this happens, if it happens at all.
Quote:
That is the most confused paragraph I've seen today. The biggest problem is you are not applying any downward pressure on the company price wise. Without the downward price pressure the cost of these devices will soar in the future. Thus the need for competition and better exchange rates.
I don't understand what you are saying. 150-250 for a nano. 300-400 for mid-range and 450 to 550 for a high end. Those are the prices points I think Apple should target, not what I as a consumer want. I'll leave it to other companies to drive the cost of the device down, but like the iPods, these are the price point for a pocketable cellular device.
Comments
You must be from outside the US. #1 Wifi is faster, and everywhere. #2 I'm not sure people are willing to pay another mobile phone bill outside there existing one. #3 Is the 3G band even big enough to house every laptop computer user alongside the mobile phone community? There are a lot of phones in the US comparatively.
Just out of curiosity... does anybody know if this mac will be 3G compatible? There's talk about the iPhone going 3G at MacWorld, and there has been a lot of hype about the ultra portable mac; but hey 1+1=2 and we all know 2 is better than one. Does anybody know if this thing will be 3G compatible? Most 3G cards are not compatible with mac. It would be pretty cool to have an ultra portable mac with internet virtually everwhere.
None of us know anything. That's why we're always arguing.
None of us know anything. That's why we're always arguing.
No we're not!!
"Rubbing sticks?"
lol I was gonna say the same thing.
Revealed: Details of Apple?s Mysterious New Portable Device
Then about a month ago, another source revealed that Apple has shown significant interest in a 5.2″ 800 x 480 pixel touch screen design by Balda, a German company and the current iPhone screen supplier, and Wintek, an Asian component supplier. This second piece of evidence reveals the real purpose of this new device, an ultra mobile device occupying a position between the 3.5″ iPhone and the much rumored 7-10 inch Apple tablet.
Assuming the 0.2" sides and 0.75" margins on the iphone, and a 16:10 aspect ratio screen, the trusty calculator tells me that the screen is 4.41 x 2.76 inches, and the device would be about 6 x 3.2 inches wide. That's pretty big. The screen could actually fit in a 5 x 3 PDA like form factor (HP iPaq 200 series or lots of various Palm devices of yore) if they are able to use some pretty thin margins. I'm not sure Apple is willing to live with OS X mobile with different aspect ratios either as imagine the UI will have to be custom designed due to multi-touch, though this isn't a big difference.
I think it is a really good idea for Apple to diversify the iPhone line to 3 versions: a nano cheap version at 4 x 2 inches in size, the current iPhone size of 4.4 x 2.4 inches, and a pro version of 4.8 x 2.8 size or so. This would allow for screens of 3.2", 3.8" and 4.2" diagonal 3:2 aspect ratio screens, if they can thin out the current iPhone margin in half or so to 1/8 inch, and carry prices in the $150-250, $300-400, $450-$550 range. With the pro version having a larger screen, a half inch wider, I imagine a soft QWERTY would be a bit easier, while the nano version will have to resort to T9.
Just out of curiosity... does anybody know if this mac will be 3G compatible?
The new Macs could be compatible with lots of things if they simply add in the right PCI port for the product. Be it an XMAC or a laptop with the latest mobile PCI port. In any event yeah I would like ot see Apple become more responsive to peoples mobile needs.
One thing that Apple could do, that is change the game a bit, is to offer a laptop with an iPhone port. That is right, a port for plugging in your latest iPhone to get the communications you want. This would solve many concerns right off the bat.
There's talk about the iPhone going 3G at MacWorld, and there has been a lot of hype about the ultra portable mac; but hey 1+1=2 and we all know 2 is better than one.
I'm not sure where you are hearing all this talk. The best indication I have is late spring for a 3G iPhone. That based mostly on what is known about chipsets that could support Apples needs.
Does anybody know if this thing will be 3G compatible? Most 3G cards are not compatible with mac. It would be pretty cool to have an ultra portable mac with internet virtually everwhere.
You got that right. One of the reasons to want a cell modem in a laptop is to be able to establish a network connection almost anywhere. WiFi simply isn't available or locked out in many places. As to 3G cards that is simply an issue of having the right drivers written for them. As Apple sell more and more hardware there iwll be incentive for the suppliers to write that software. AT&T at the very least must realize now that there is money to b made off supporting Mac / Apple users.
Dave
Well, rumor dujour:
Revealed: Details of Apple?s Mysterious New Portable Device
Then about a month ago, another source revealed that Apple has shown significant interest in a 5.2″ 800 x 480 pixel touch screen design by Balda, a German company and the current iPhone screen supplier, and Wintek, an Asian component supplier. This second piece of evidence reveals the real purpose of this new device, an ultra mobile device occupying a position between the 3.5″ iPhone and the much rumored 7-10 inch Apple tablet.
I do like your calculations and to be perfectly honest this size is just about what I'm looking for. I say just about because just very slightly larger would be nice. The size is almost perfect for on the go usage.
Assuming the 0.2" sides and 0.75" margins on the iphone, and a 16:10 aspect ratio screen, the trusty calculator tells me that the screen is 4.41 x 2.76 inches, and the device would be about 6 x 3.2 inches wide. That's pretty big. The screen could actually fit in a 5 x 3 PDA like form factor (HP iPaq 200 series or lots of various Palm devices of yore) if they are able to use some pretty thin margins. I'm not sure Apple is willing to live with OS X mobile with different aspect ratios either as imagine the UI will have to be custom designed due to multi-touch, though this isn't a big difference.
While I'm not sure people have the same idea at hand as I do when the term PDA is used this is what the device would be. its usage would be similar to what the jail broken iPhones and Touches are being sued for. Which is as a hand held computer. Frankly I'm not sure why you thing the case needs to be all that much bigger than the screen, as long as they have room for the required I/O it should be good.
Required I/O is really more of a limitation on a device like this than anything else. Even if this is not an iPhone capable machine ( a mistake in my mind), it should have fully supported Bluetooth, hopefully a host USB port, and at least one compact flash port. Ohh and a big ass battery, I'm hoping for twelve hours on on time.
I think it is a really good idea for Apple to diversify the iPhone line to 3 versions: a nano cheap version at 4 x 2 inches in size, the current iPhone size of 4.4 x 2.4 inches, and a pro version of 4.8 x 2.8 size or so.
You won't get an argument form me about a broader iPhone Line up but it really should be seen as a Cell phone line up. Apple needs a phone that isn't a smart phone at the rock bottom and as you have noted a larger model. The larger model simply to delvier a bigger screen for the user and a few more capabilities.
This would allow for screens of 3.2", 3.8" and 4.2" diagonal 3:2 aspect ratio screens, if they can thin out the current iPhone margin in half or so to 1/8 inch, and carry prices in the $150-250, $300-400, $450-$550 range. With the pro version having a larger screen, a half inch wider, I imagine a soft QWERTY would be a bit easier, while the nano version will have to resort to T9.
That is the most confused paragraph I've seen today. The biggest problem is you are not applying any downward pressure on the company price wise. Without the downward price pressure the cost of these devices will soar in the future. Thus the need for competition and better exchange rates.
Dave
Is the 3G band even big enough to house every laptop computer user alongside the mobile phone community? There are a lot of phones in the US comparatively.
Well Apple is usually quicker to advance with technology than most PCs. Bluetooth for example or even (but not so much) built-in WiFi. Apple might try to go 3G and beat the PC market to the punch. granted, i have no info to back this idea up but wouldn't it be cool! I know the mac has grown in sales but it still isn't a large portion of computer sales. So it might not be able to withstand EVERY computer but it should be able to withstand (what is apple at now?) 5-6% of the computer market. right? only speculation i know... But wouldn't it be cool.
as for info about the 3G iphone, i thought i read it on Appleinsider, but then again i might have googled it. Again, it's all rumors. i have no idea
It should be remembered that most cell phones are of the SoC variety where everything you see here is one one chip. Intel still has a ways to go before competing in the cell phone market. Menlow is really an untra-mobile type of platform while Moorestown looks like it can creep into handheld territory.
This is the size I've been pushing for this device. for those who don't remember, the Newton was just about this size, though the old technology required that it be too thick, and too heavy.
But, it was fine on a belt. This could be slimmer, and lighter.
Of course, you could also keep it in your pocket, as you suggest, or throw it into an attache case.
Like the Newton the HPC handhelds had strong growth and good sales of well over 2.3 million per year before MS dropped the OS. If Apple modernized something like a Psion HPC handheld that would just be the perfect mobile device for business.
You know I like your perspective on the devices physical size. Nothing you've suggested is out of line with what I expect or want. But then you really loose me with the obsession with Windows software.
This issue with software is this. It will be 2009 before there is a significant number of devices on the market and we will be moving into 2010. We can do better than to be running tired old MS applications. Especially applications that have never transfered to a pocket platform well.
Iphone has clearly demonstrated that there is a demand for fresh perspectives with respect to software and user interaction. I'm not saying that we don't want to be able to handle old file formats but rather want to point out that living in the past is a bit like tying an anchor around your neck and jumping overboard.
dave
I only use MS becuase all the business softwares are only available in their OS typically. If Apple finds a way for me to run business programs in a jacket size device with a keyboard I and millions of MS users would switch in a heartbeat and likely not go back.
I have never understood the UMPC makers. A modern HP Journada or NEC MobilePro 900c running full windows would have done MUCH better than the UMPC that actually got made.
The NEC is a tad bigger than your Journada but the keyboard is IMHO much better. I dunno that you could get much less wide/tall than the NEC and have a QWERTY keyboard that worked well. Thinner I can see even though those things are only 3-4 years old and running real Windows.
Or real OSX with iWork or Office. Keynote presentations from a Journada or MobilePro sized device would be handy. And if it can Bootcamp...even better.
Out of all the devices in the handheld era, the best to me hardware wise was the Psion 5mx or Revo models as that small 6.9" x 3.6" x .9" device was light and when you opened up the device it had a great keyboard that actually expanded a bit wider and was a joy to type yet jacket size. I switched fromt both the Psion and NEC to the Jornada as a compromise. The HP had a decent keyboard to touch type not as good as the other two but it was jacket pocket size and had MS OS. The Psion had their proprietary OS which was a drag.
Think of jacket size modern HPC that Apple could make? That would change many MS users to adopt Apple if they could have a touch type keyboard jacket pocket device that ran business applications. I do not care about the OS, I care about mobility, ease of input, and having the right programs.
no offense, but this is pretty much what every naysayer says about new apple products until apple releases them.
Remember this is apple. they dont do anything the way everybody else does, and thats why they're succeeding.
I hereby predict that a tablet mac will sell at least one million units in its first year.
The problem with a tablet is that to be usable for pen input it needs to be 7" and larger that puts it in direct competition of all sub and notebooks. It would have to have great processing power, both pen input and some thing to satisfy most keyboard users that is easy, and it needs to be cheap. A better bet is make jacket size device but to me it needs to have a touch type keyboard as pen or touch screen only is not adequate when the screen is that small.
Apple is smart enough to understand that products are built from the user on down. There are ergonomics issues with holding a 11x8.5 device or notepad of similar size, and it gets even worse when you have to do it with a 1 lb device. A ~10" tablet will be used horizontally on a flat surface, on the lap, or resting on something as you won't be holding it up for extended periods of time. On top of this, there are still many issues about the feel of pen on touchscreen. It's just isn't fine grained enough yet. It has to be like pencil on paper.
If it is a tablet, like seen on many of Apple's patent applications, I think it'll be a limited use device, or a vertical market device (which Apple doesn't do).
Something like this, from a long long time ago, as a UMPC type device will probably prove much more useful:
A full-size laptop keyboard with a 1280x640 screen would be usable in coach class!
If that was able to fit in a jacket pocket say about 7.5" long that would be the ideal mobile device for business users. I'd buy one right now.
The UMPC line sunk because it was too big for pocket size but lacked any decent degree of productivity. The DialKey system was distracting and hard to use, and no one could get any kind of speed on it. If the UMPCs had been given a simple pocket touch typing keyboard, they would have been seen as a productivity tool rather than a novelty, and their sales would have been much better.
I agree.
The only problem with this is that the idea of a "pocket keyboard" is a little bit hard to work with, since the whole point of a pocket keyboard is touch typing, and you can't actually touch type on a keyboard that's less than 7" wide and 3.5" deep. And even if the screen is pillarboxed inside speakers with a clamshell design (to allow for a greater-than 16:10 aspect ratio overall), you still need some physical margins on the keyboard, which places the physical device dimensions at 8" x 4.5" x <1"; that's only barely pocketable. Additionally, you are still restricted to a notebook form factor, which means that the switch-to-slate functionality is missing.
Yes you can type on a device less than 7", the Psion was 6.9" and was actually easier to type than the 7.3" Jornada. The Psion's keyboard expanded when the device was open. Another way to make a device jacket pocket yet even greater keyboard capacity is the what the Samsung SPH P9200 has done. That device trifolds to reaveal a 5" screen and a keyboard close to desktop; problem is they are only sold in Korea. When folded it is about 4.25" which is about the max depth to fit in a jacket pocket. http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-sph...ver-097876.php
The Jornada is 5" wide - hardly pocketable. And all of Apple's patents point to a touch type tactile feedback onscreen multitouch smart keyboard.
The Jornada is not 5" wide, I own one and carry it in suit/coat pockets all the time. It is a little under 4". A jacket pocket would be the ideal parameter not a shirt pocket. A jacket pocket could handle about 4.25" x 7.5" max. You could find a way to rotate the screen 180 so that it could be a pocket touch/pen input with the option of touch type keyboard clamshell.
What do you mean "screen flipable"? And that mockup was using a high-res promo image of the iPod Touch; did you mean making the screen larger to remove the bezel or making the device itself smaller? And landscape is absolutely the way to go in physical button placement for a device of this size. The bezel won't be so large that you can't stretch your thumb over it to manipulate keys on the left edge of the screen when you are holding it in portrait "steno pad" style.
The mockup I had was a 7.63" x 4.77" screen, so at 800x500 resolution that's only 105 PPI. At 160 PPI (iPhone) that's 1220x760 resolution. Somewhere in between, perhaps.
Here's the thing: it wouldn't be hard for the Mac Touch to have an updated version of Spaces that works together with multitouch. So you could zoom in within programs just like the iPhone zooms on webpages and such (two-finger pinch), but you could also zoom in on the overall desktop (three-finger pinch). This would take care of the screen size problem. Having a virtual workspace of 15"+ in a 9" screen is priceless. Okay, not priceless, but close to it.
Pocketable would be nice, but I just don't see how Apple is going to fit any kind of workable touch typing keyboard on a pocket-sized device. Even jacket pocket size. And I am pretty sure that a virtual keyboard (more than 7" wide) will be fine for touch typing.
Virtual is not practical; people are already used to touch typing and if you just copy and modify designs in the past like the Psion Revo/5mx or Jornada 728 they proved a touch type jacket pocket device was possible and worked.
The only non-slate option that Apple might be considering for a UMPC would be the clamshell posted by TMT. Not that bad. The only trouble is that A. the screen aspect ratio is totally not Apple and B. this would require a touchscreen since you have no trackpad, which is very limited if you can only use it like a laptop. I'm sure that touchscreens will start to come standard, but even so it would only be truly useful and worthy of an Apple UMPC if the screen can be used in multiple orientations. And there is no way to use something like that as a slate.
I think Apple has the talent to either mdernize a proven design like the Psion clamshells of the past and make it a real hit or go way out of the box and build upon what Samsung did with their SPH P9200 prototype. A large version of an Iphone is not what business users would buy; they want a replacement to a laptop in their pocket.
I flunked english and spelling and french but made it through dental school anyway.
That is so frightening. What dental school did you graduate from?
While I'm not sure people have the same idea at hand as I do when the term PDA is used this is what the device would be. its usage would be similar to what the jail broken iPhones and Touches are being sued for. Which is as a hand held computer. Frankly I'm not sure why you thing the case needs to be all that much bigger than the screen, as long as they have room for the required I/O it should be good.
For the size of the screen versus the size of the device, well, we have to have some bit of reality. To fit a 5.2" diag, 16:10 aspect ratio, 4.41 x 2.76 inch screen onto a 5 x 3 inch PDA form factor, the sides will need to be 0.12 inches with a pretty sharp corner. The new screen sizes I laid out required this. For the top and bottom, I was keeping with the physical home buttom and cellular philisophy of the iPhone. These are iPhones, not iPods, so it needs cellular wireless tech (room for an earpiece), and the single home button is, well, one of Apple's signature features in the device.
All-in-all, the cases are about the size of the screens, especially relative to other phones and PDAs.
I know you'd like a SD card and a full USB port (let alone a mini one), but those things limit Apple's thin thin thin design philosophy. (And Iike a 100+ GB HDD version too). I don't think they'll ship a handheld device on the order of 0.75" thick anymore.
You won't get an argument form me about a broader iPhone Line up but it really should be seen as a Cell phone line up. Apple needs a phone that isn't a smart phone at the rock bottom and as you have noted a larger model. The larger model simply to delvier a bigger screen for the user and a few more capabilities.
Yeah. Apple will need to separate functionality of a prospective iPhone lineup, and I think it will be quite simple for them to do.
The "nano" version has to be multi-touch, very similar to the current iPhone, but only smaller, and as I've written before, smaller means 3 to 3.2 inch multi-touch screens. It should just be a shrunken version of the existing iPhone. If released in 2008, it should have 8 GB. As for functionality, well, that's easy. Only EDGE, no UMTS/HSPA. No QWERTY soft keyboard due to the width of the device (1.6 inches) being too small, so T9 for text entry. No computer like functionality. 1.3 MP camera. Less applications. Lots of things can be done to eliminate cannabilization of the upper tiers.
If released in 2008, the mid-range would have 3.5 to 3.8 inch screen, UMTS/HSPA, soft QWERTY, 3.2 MP camera, 16 GB storage, faster processor, GPS, and more applications. And the high end should have everything the mid-range should have, but more: 4.2 to 4.5 inch screen, 32 GB flash or 120 MB HDD, 2 cameras, etc.
It's going to be long wait before this happens, if it happens at all.
That is the most confused paragraph I've seen today. The biggest problem is you are not applying any downward pressure on the company price wise. Without the downward price pressure the cost of these devices will soar in the future. Thus the need for competition and better exchange rates.
I don't understand what you are saying. 150-250 for a nano. 300-400 for mid-range and 450 to 550 for a high end. Those are the prices points I think Apple should target, not what I as a consumer want. I'll leave it to other companies to drive the cost of the device down, but like the iPods, these are the price point for a pocketable cellular device.