If Apple makes a netbook, it must run the same OS X as every other Mac, and be able to run the same apps.
Interesting. I personally would have to have a better notebook... or at least that's my initial reaction. Now that I think about it I'm not so sure.
Mostly I manage emails, use iTunes, use basic pages & numbers, watch movies, remote control Macs & PCs... but I also work with photos & edit movies, create iWeb & Dreamweaver websites. I have lots of smaller apps that _probably_ don't matter.
For me, the photos/web/movies would make me willing to jump from $600 to double or triple that (along with a bigger screen). Though I'd be seriously considering an iMac + Netbook combo!
What functionality must you have that upsells you?
It seems like its mostly about price with netbooks.
So I can't see Apple getting into this market.
But I do think Apple might have to consider creating another brand to cater to the more mainstream and lower-end consumer. They should try and become more of the Ikea of computing instead of remaining just the Lexus.
There are 2 different approaches to a small netbook device
a) take the current MacBook offerings and make a smaller one, cut back speed, some functionality, but pretty well stick OSX on it as now.
b) build something small and light - specifically to access email, web, IM, video/music, and with a functional keyboard.
I said earlier take the iPhone chip, OS, memory, etc and just give it a larger screen and keyboard, and a word processor. Kind of like how the Newton was made into the eMate. Then we're talking closer to iPod Touch prices.
But really... I was trying to escape the "put full OSX on a really cheap little machine" idea that is easy to fall into.
We know Snow Leopard is being designed with both Mac OSX and iPhone OSX in mind - so hopefully it will also be ideal for a Netbook/MID style machine. It'd have to use a more powerful ARM or Atom and it'd have to set a very clear, specific, lower expectation of what it does.
Apple is great at cutting back the functions and leaving the core/key functions working very well. If Apple produces a Netbook, expect it NOT to do everything OSX does. Millions of people will scream "why did they remove X, Y, & Z? they crippled it!". But its key functions will run well, look good, and be very attractive to more than 50% of people.
I'd bet on the ARM chip over the Atom. The Atom's are behind P.A. Semi's PWRficient in terms of performance/watt, and they still will be next year. ARM's offerings on the other hand are plenty powerful for a "netbook's" tasks and they are far more efficient than either. The P.A Semi guys Apple bought are probably optimizing the hell out of the Cortex processors cores right now, and I don't think they'll only end up in iPhones.
Also, I don't think there is any reason to run the iPhone OS on a speculated lightweight mobile computer. OS X is light enough to run on G4 computers still, even some that fall below the minimum requirements. The iPhone OS is basically OS X with frameworks more specific to a phone. A few of them can be applied to the Mac OS and replace/supplement older frameworks, but there will be frameworks that are exclusive to each side simply because the devices are different.
If I had to make a prediction, I'd say take a more powerful iPod touch and put it in a Macbook Air's enclosure with a less expensive display and Snow Leopard. It will be thinner, much cheaper (most of the expense is the high quality display and the motherboard), and have much better battery life. I can easily see that selling for ~$699. I don't think we'll ever see any Mac that's cheaper than an iPod though.
Alright, first off my eBay approval rating is 100%. Thats besides that point. I don't even know what made you question my integrity as a seller.
There's your problem. It's always about you, isn't it? It couldn't have been just a comment that used≠refurbished. If someone buys one of your "refurbs" and it dies in a month, they're screwed, while a real Apple-refurbished/reconditioned machine is warrantied for a year despite not being brand new. Unless you're willing to give them their complete refund after such a failure? Didn't think so. And BTW, 100% doesn't mean much anymore since eBay changed it to reflect only the last 12 months. I have 100%, too, over 1000 and no negatives ever.
Quote:
Anyways... Your wording in the first paragraph was good. "Lugging" around knapsacks?. No one wants to do that. Honestly. I'm trying to rid myself of the things I need to carry around with me. Isn't that part of whats great about being a guy? You don't have to lug a freaking bag with you everywhere you go?
Ah, sounds like you have issues about your masculinity, too. Go to a big city sometime. Someplace with a decent public transit system, like NYC. When people don't drive cars everywhere, they carry everything they may need throughout the course of a day with them. Hence, a bag on almost every back, everywhere you look on the street, on the subway, on the bus, etc. If you think it takes away from your manliness, you should talk to nearly every guy in the city, who's usually carrying a bag of some kind even if he's not carrying a laptop. If you don't believe me, go to Flickr and look at pictures from NYC. Everybody's got them. Young, old, male, female.
If I had to make a prediction, I'd say take a more powerful iPod touch and put it in a Macbook Air's enclosure with a less expensive display and Snow Leopard. It will be thinner, much cheaper (most of the expense is the high quality display and the motherboard), and have much better battery life. I can easily see that selling for ~$600.
Yes, that's how to make a cheaper machine. I quite like the idea.
But is it capable of having a full OSX running responsively, on an ARM chip generally (as I'm not aware of its power) and with OSX apps compiled for x86 (do you want Transitive translation?... I know fat binaries are possible of course).
Apple will need to decide whether they want to make a small machine that can run anything OSX runs but will be a bit slow (especially if people turn on all the bells and whistles), or whether they'd rather simplify the interface (for small 9-13" screens) and enforce rules so that multiple programs didn't run simultaneously etc - while making developers convert their Xcode based apps to the new interface requirements, touch screen, and other rules.
Would such a device stand out for its simplicity & speed, or be labelled as crippled?
Yes, that's how to make a cheaper machine. I quite like the idea.
But is it capable of having a full OSX running responsively, on an ARM chip generally (as I'm not aware of its power) and with OSX apps compiled for x86 (do you want Transitive translation?... I know fat binaries are possible of course).
Apple will need to decide whether they want to make a small machine that can run anything OSX runs but will be a bit slow (especially if people turn on all the bells and whistles), or whether they'd rather simplify the interface (for small 9-13" screens) and enforce rules so that multiple programs didn't run simultaneously etc - while making developers convert their Xcode based apps to the new interface requirements, touch screen, and other rules.
Would such a device stand out for its simplicity & speed, or be labelled as crippled?
The dual core Atoms are hyperthreaded (each core) and with two cores should be capable of running at least some apps simultaneously instead of using app switching like the iPhone. In my experience, the iPhone CPU is not really up to the tasks it presently is handling and its RAM (apparently something in the neighborhood of 128 MB) is totally inadequate.
The dual core Atoms are hyperthreaded (each core) and with two cores should be capable of running at least some apps simultaneously instead of using app switching like the iPhone.
I haven't read enough comparisons, but I get the impression that an Arm would still be slightly slower than the original Core Solo chips. Is that fair to say?
Of course, use Nvidea's ARM with GPU built in and perhaps Snow Leopard can take advantage. Perhaps Snow Leopard can slow background apps such that the foreground is always responsive (though ram limitations might be more of a problem than CPU time).
Interesting. I personally would have to have a better notebook... or at least that's my initial reaction. Now that I think about it I'm not so sure.
Mostly I manage emails, use iTunes, use basic pages & numbers, watch movies, remote control Macs & PCs... but I also work with photos & edit movies, create iWeb & Dreamweaver websites. I have lots of smaller apps that _probably_ don't matter.
For me, the photos/web/movies would make me willing to jump from $600 to double or triple that (along with a bigger screen). Though I'd be seriously considering an iMac + Netbook combo!
What functionality must you have that upsells you?
The iMac + netbook combo is exactly right. No one uses these things as their main computer. Netbooks are about two things; the first is low price, the second is having a computer- a real computer- that is so small and light, you don't even have to think about taking it places. But if it can't run the same apps as your other computers, then it loses a lot of the appeal for a lot of people.
The limitations of the netbook are self-evident: slow processor, limited memory and storage, small screen and keyboard. People who can't handle that, or who only want one computer, would be upsold to a bigger, more expensive machine. I don't think a netbook would cost Apple very many sales, but someone whose sole computer is an iMac, might pick one up for class or the coffee shop.
I haven't read enough comparisons, but I get the impression that an Arm would still be slightly slower than the original Core Solo chips. Is that fair to say?
Netbooks are about two things; the first is low price, the second is having a computer- a real computer- that is so small and light, you don't even have to think about taking it places. But if it can't run the same apps as your other computers, then it loses a lot of the appeal for a lot of people.
You skipped my question - what apps do you specifically need on your Netbook, without which you'd rather buy a full function notebook. :-)
It sounds as though you'd be happy to have a slow/plodding Netbook that did everything than a fast responsive Netbook that did basic word processing plus web/email/im/music/movies - but not every OSX app.
The dual core Atoms are hyperthreaded (each core) and with two cores should be capable of running at least some apps simultaneously instead of using app switching like the iPhone. In my experience, the iPhone CPU is not really up to the tasks it presently is handling and its RAM (apparently something in the neighborhood of 128 MB) is totally inadequate.
iPhone performance probably has more to do with the amount of RAM available more than the speed of the processor. That said, the newer ARM dual core processors are said to be able to scale up into the 1 GHz range. Add on a decent amount of RAM and hardware accelerated audio and video and it's a perfectly functional machine. Computers are idle most of the time, only operating in short bursts, so after a certain point higher frequency processors are only useful for smoothing out multitasking and long and intensive computations, such as compiling an entire operating system and its applications.
Like nearly all "journalists" this guy has no experience or financial education.
All economic slowdowns/recessions have a finite life. In the US the longest recession, since WWII, lasted 18 months. This one is now 12 months old. That means this has only 6 months to go before it too fades into our memories. That duration isn't anywhere near long enough to cause Apple any concern about "cash strapped" consumers.
This is just another bullsh*t article based on nothing more than the author's desire to generate hits.
I got a news flash for you, Gregg. This ain't your father's post-WWII recession, it's your grandfather's great speculative crash. The world's responding differently to it than it did in the '20's and '30's but no one knows if all the (some nearly frantic) moves will be enough.
Much of the world's "wealth" has disappeared in a near instant because it was all phony money laundered through hedge funds, banks, brokerages, insurance companies, pension funds, and many other institutions. And having been wiped off the books, there is no replacement source to quickly reflate the economy. 50-100 year old stable businesses are disappearing every day. 20% of house sales are of foreclosures. 10% of owned homes are in danger of falling into foreclosure and unemployment is likely to increase by millions in the next six months, making more homes vulnerable and increasing defaults on credit card payments.
The stock market and unemployment rate will not be at mid-2007 levels six months from now. More like 18-36 months at best. And more dire scenarios are not off the table.
Does this have anything to do with Apple and the netbook business? You can bet it's being avidly discussed at board meetings. Apple IS -- due to its buzz and cachet -- and its somewhat more job-secure clientele -- more recession resistant than many businesses. And, look it up, a fair number of businesses catering to high-end clientele did quite well during the Great Depression while many, many more commodity oriented ones failed.
But A, Inc. cannot simply ignore this economic credit-default-swap crisis tsunami, nor do I think they are doing so. I don't know what the response will be, but having turned the tentative, stumbling mp3 player business into a highly profitable, huge iPod business which itself is morphing into other new businesses (like the App Store and its 2.2M/day downloads), and the pioneering work of creating netbooks in a similar position to where mp3 players were years ago, AND with a great multi-touch OS-X based software system at their disposal, "reinventing the netbook" is not at all out of the question as a possible next move from Dear Leader and company.
Again, the profit and the margins that fuel Apple today for these lower-priced devices would be augmented by sales of new content and the apps such devices will create a new market for, and being Apple, their gross margins on a new family of $450-700 devices could be kept around 40%.
Remember, Apple wouldn't keep refreshing and marketing the affordable Shuffle if they weren't making bank on it -- from the store in this case more than from the device.
So I will say, look out Asus with your EEE's and all you other netbooks come lately.
And I for one am expecting a very interesting MacWorld which will, yes, be colored by events in the larger world.
I *own* an Apple netbook and it is a great machine.
Ok - so it isn't really an Apple computer. It is a MSI Wind running OS X (Macbook Wind).
It's more faster than the G4 Powerbook it replaced, and it is about as light as a Macbook Air. It was also very very inexpensive. Made by Apple, it would be awesome, and an ideal computer for the Education market.
BUT
Apple would have to be crazy to sell one of these machines. The margins are razor thin.
They'd have to sell 4 or 5 netbooks to match the profit of a single Macbook. - And furthermore, those Netbook sales would cannibalize sales of the higher end laptops. It would be a double loss.
Apple has never competed at the low end because profitability is more important than unit volume.
That the iPhone, crippled to death as it is, can be used as a netbook has got to be the joke of the year.
Had my phone for a few months now and can type almost as fast on it as I can on my full keyboard.
As for being "crippled", that is a matter of debate; people made the same claim about the MacBook Air and that was all bunk. I know some people who have put their phones to very good use (myself included), and the capabilities are improving with the improving apps coming out. Several have cut and paste, including Zeptopad.
I also find that I use my iPod Touch at home for surfing more than I use my iMac or MacBook Air, so for me it has become my netbook of choice. Add the 3G iPhone that allows me to view the Net anywhere without even popping out a notebook and I am a happy camper.
.... What exactly would you change in a MB (or MBA) to halve the price while maintaining performance and quality....
Well, it's not precisely about that...
What I'm saying is that I think the market for low end, low weight, low capacity, sub notebooks today is targeted at high income professionals with extra money for a spare computer they wanna carry around and use on the go. A kind of luxury item. Manufacturers target these deliberately because I guess they think sub notebooks are for geeks and pros.
I think it would be a far more useful use of resources, if they managed to market this exact same product for a broader masses of people who would use this low end, low capacity sub notebook as their main computer instead. I think a lot of people would do that, at the right price. A lot of people after all just use a browser, mail and office, and a power cable. No games, no display, no extras.
I know they could do it if they start out with this as a goal. If they start out with a luxury item as a goal, of course they'll end up with a luxury item.
Also Apple's line up would be easier to understand and easier to sell with the Air as the entry level. From entry level to Pro. It would all make sense. Now we've got this luxury entry level Air product in the middle... doesn't make any sense.
I know they could do it if they start out with this as a goal. If they start out with a luxury item as a goal, of course they'll end up with a luxury item.
Apple is still a boutique vendor in many ways. If they go cheap it's hard to get out of being sonsidered cheap. The Big Three Japanese automakers are an example of not being about to sell a luxury item with a recognized cheap moniker. They finally realized they had to create subsidiary companies with a new branding to sells their wares. This goes with computers too.
Quote:
Also Apple's line up would be easier to understand and easier to sell with the Air as the entry level.
Could you explain in detail how this could this be done? For example, the MBA's CPU by itself is nearly as much as whole netbook so you;'d have to get rid of the SFF, high performance C2D CPU in favour or a under performing Atom processor. That will knock off about $250 from the price. Then you'd have to get rid of the high-quality LED-backlit LCD in favour of a non-backlit TN panel. then you'll have to get rid of the quality keyboard and backlit for a cheap one. As well as move to cheap plastic for the case which will thicken up the device quite a bit while still making it weaker and considerably less attractive and appealing. You'll have to remove the power saving DDR3 RAM, the Nvidia GPU, remove the 1/8" HDD in favour of a 2.5" drive, but since we have to thicken up the case this one is a freebee). Then, even if you get the price in the netbook range you'll have to charge for OS X which will bump the price up considerably over Linux-based machines.
I'd still like to read your take on it, but my point is that Apple could make one, but chooses not to . The same reason why they choose not to sell $400 15" notebooks like HP and Dell. The volume is their but the money isn't. How many netbooks have to be sold to equal the net profit of one MBA sale?
Really guys Atom has a very long way to go if it is ever expected to perform as well as ARM on a perfoance per watt basis. In fact I will go so far as to say it won't ever beat ARM. No matter howany process shrinks Intel can manage against the competition the fact remains that ARM processors are extremely small with very low transistor counts.
As to the performance of iPhone I'd have to say that it is pretty damn good for a gen one device. Especially to considering it's size. Could it be better overall, certainly but what exactly is causing the performance issue? As has been pointed out more RAM could do more for iPhone than a taste processor right now. Of course that depends on how and why you measure performance. IPhone simply wasn't designed for CPU intensive work, on the other hand it is more impressive than my old Mac Plus.
While I consider the netbook market to be a bit of a joke I can see Apple coming out with a tablet that amounts to a Touch on steroids. There is no need for an Intel CPU in such a device as it adds no value what so ever. The reality is that such a device is not a laptop nor a desktop replacement. Rather like Touch it is a device in it's own category that being Internet tablet. Since a modern ARM CPU can easily triple the performance of the current iPhone CPU that won't be an issue. What will be is the capability to run all day on battery power. Atom can't do that in a reasonably sized machine so it is dead in the water. Mobile OS would be fine here if properly extended for multi processing or as commonly stated back ground apps. What you don't want on these devices is traditionally designed desktop apps. The problem is and always will be screen size, these handheld tablets are no place for windowed apps in the sense of desktop machines. Apple simply needs to leverage the good parts of Mobile OS and otherwise extend it to be able to offer up a very nice OS for tablets.
When it comes right down to it I just don't see a huge sustainable demand for netbooks. Yes it is trendy to have one today but the question is how long do such device remain in operation and usefully deployed. From what I'm seeing not that long. The problem is that as more and better software becomes available for things like IPhone there is little rational need for a big netbook. I have very little in the way of software installed on my iPhone and it has already become a primary platform for many tasks. E-Mail is one significant example. The reality is that I can get to the net from anywhere with this device, not even a netbook can do that without a cellular modem. In the end netbooks will die because they are the wrong solution set to the problem of mobile computing.
I got a news flash for you, Gregg. This ain't your father's post-WWII recession, it's your grandfather's great speculative crash. The world's responding differently to it than it did in the '20's and '30's but no one knows if all the (some nearly frantic) moves will be enough.
Much of the world's "wealth" has disappeared in a near instant because it was all phony money laundered through hedge funds, banks, brokerages, insurance companies, pension funds, and many other institutions. And having been wiped off the books, there is no replacement source to quickly reflate the economy. 50-100 year old stable businesses are disappearing every day. 20% of house sales are of foreclosures. 10% of owned homes are in danger of falling into foreclosure and unemployment is likely to increase by millions in the next six months, making more homes vulnerable and increasing defaults on credit card payments.
The stock market and unemployment rate will not be at mid-2007 levels six months from now. More like 18-36 months at best. And more dire scenarios are not off the table.
Does this have anything to do with Apple and the netbook business? You can bet it's being avidly discussed at board meetings. Apple IS -- due to its buzz and cachet -- and its somewhat more job-secure clientele -- more recession resistant than many businesses. And, look it up, a fair number of businesses catering to high-end clientele did quite well during the Great Depression while many, many more commodity oriented ones failed.
But A, Inc. cannot simply ignore this economic credit-default-swap crisis tsunami, nor do I think they are doing so. I don't know what the response will be, but having turned the tentative, stumbling mp3 player business into a highly profitable, huge iPod business which itself is morphing into other new businesses (like the App Store and its 2.2M/day downloads), and the pioneering work of creating netbooks in a similar position to where mp3 players were years ago, AND with a great multi-touch OS-X based software system at their disposal, "reinventing the netbook" is not at all out of the question as a possible next move from Dear Leader and company.
Again, the profit and the margins that fuel Apple today for these lower-priced devices would be augmented by sales of new content and the apps such devices will create a new market for, and being Apple, their gross margins on a new family of $450-700 devices could be kept around 40%.
Remember, Apple wouldn't keep refreshing and marketing the affordable Shuffle if they weren't making bank on it -- from the store in this case more than from the device.
So I will say, look out Asus with your EEE's and all you other netbooks come lately.
And I for one am expecting a very interesting MacWorld which will, yes, be colored by events in the larger world.
In 3 Quarters time, the markets will have recovered around 3,000 points on the NYSE and only after 2 Quarters time the notion of targeting a netbook will be nothing but a loss.
I hate to break it to you, but these price points are addressed 2 quarters and sometimes longer prior to the products pending release.
This is DOA by Intel and AMD. It sure as hell is DOA by Apple.
Comments
If Apple makes a netbook, it must run the same OS X as every other Mac, and be able to run the same apps.
Interesting. I personally would have to have a better notebook... or at least that's my initial reaction. Now that I think about it I'm not so sure.
Mostly I manage emails, use iTunes, use basic pages & numbers, watch movies, remote control Macs & PCs... but I also work with photos & edit movies, create iWeb & Dreamweaver websites. I have lots of smaller apps that _probably_ don't matter.
For me, the photos/web/movies would make me willing to jump from $600 to double or triple that (along with a bigger screen). Though I'd be seriously considering an iMac + Netbook combo!
What functionality must you have that upsells you?
So I can't see Apple getting into this market.
But I do think Apple might have to consider creating another brand to cater to the more mainstream and lower-end consumer. They should try and become more of the Ikea of computing instead of remaining just the Lexus.
I agree.
There are 2 different approaches to a small netbook device
a) take the current MacBook offerings and make a smaller one, cut back speed, some functionality, but pretty well stick OSX on it as now.
b) build something small and light - specifically to access email, web, IM, video/music, and with a functional keyboard.
I said earlier take the iPhone chip, OS, memory, etc and just give it a larger screen and keyboard, and a word processor. Kind of like how the Newton was made into the eMate. Then we're talking closer to iPod Touch prices.
But really... I was trying to escape the "put full OSX on a really cheap little machine" idea that is easy to fall into.
We know Snow Leopard is being designed with both Mac OSX and iPhone OSX in mind - so hopefully it will also be ideal for a Netbook/MID style machine. It'd have to use a more powerful ARM or Atom and it'd have to set a very clear, specific, lower expectation of what it does.
Apple is great at cutting back the functions and leaving the core/key functions working very well. If Apple produces a Netbook, expect it NOT to do everything OSX does. Millions of people will scream "why did they remove X, Y, & Z? they crippled it!". But its key functions will run well, look good, and be very attractive to more than 50% of people.
I'd bet on the ARM chip over the Atom. The Atom's are behind P.A. Semi's PWRficient in terms of performance/watt, and they still will be next year. ARM's offerings on the other hand are plenty powerful for a "netbook's" tasks and they are far more efficient than either. The P.A Semi guys Apple bought are probably optimizing the hell out of the Cortex processors cores right now, and I don't think they'll only end up in iPhones.
Also, I don't think there is any reason to run the iPhone OS on a speculated lightweight mobile computer. OS X is light enough to run on G4 computers still, even some that fall below the minimum requirements. The iPhone OS is basically OS X with frameworks more specific to a phone. A few of them can be applied to the Mac OS and replace/supplement older frameworks, but there will be frameworks that are exclusive to each side simply because the devices are different.
If I had to make a prediction, I'd say take a more powerful iPod touch and put it in a Macbook Air's enclosure with a less expensive display and Snow Leopard. It will be thinner, much cheaper (most of the expense is the high quality display and the motherboard), and have much better battery life. I can easily see that selling for ~$699. I don't think we'll ever see any Mac that's cheaper than an iPod though.
Alright, first off my eBay approval rating is 100%. Thats besides that point. I don't even know what made you question my integrity as a seller.
There's your problem. It's always about you, isn't it? It couldn't have been just a comment that used≠refurbished. If someone buys one of your "refurbs" and it dies in a month, they're screwed, while a real Apple-refurbished/reconditioned machine is warrantied for a year despite not being brand new. Unless you're willing to give them their complete refund after such a failure? Didn't think so. And BTW, 100% doesn't mean much anymore since eBay changed it to reflect only the last 12 months. I have 100%, too, over 1000 and no negatives ever.
Anyways... Your wording in the first paragraph was good. "Lugging" around knapsacks?. No one wants to do that. Honestly. I'm trying to rid myself of the things I need to carry around with me. Isn't that part of whats great about being a guy? You don't have to lug a freaking bag with you everywhere you go?
Ah, sounds like you have issues about your masculinity, too. Go to a big city sometime. Someplace with a decent public transit system, like NYC. When people don't drive cars everywhere, they carry everything they may need throughout the course of a day with them. Hence, a bag on almost every back, everywhere you look on the street, on the subway, on the bus, etc. If you think it takes away from your manliness, you should talk to nearly every guy in the city, who's usually carrying a bag of some kind even if he's not carrying a laptop. If you don't believe me, go to Flickr and look at pictures from NYC. Everybody's got them. Young, old, male, female.
If I had to make a prediction, I'd say take a more powerful iPod touch and put it in a Macbook Air's enclosure with a less expensive display and Snow Leopard. It will be thinner, much cheaper (most of the expense is the high quality display and the motherboard), and have much better battery life. I can easily see that selling for ~$600.
Yes, that's how to make a cheaper machine. I quite like the idea.
But is it capable of having a full OSX running responsively, on an ARM chip generally (as I'm not aware of its power) and with OSX apps compiled for x86 (do you want Transitive translation?... I know fat binaries are possible of course).
Apple will need to decide whether they want to make a small machine that can run anything OSX runs but will be a bit slow (especially if people turn on all the bells and whistles), or whether they'd rather simplify the interface (for small 9-13" screens) and enforce rules so that multiple programs didn't run simultaneously etc - while making developers convert their Xcode based apps to the new interface requirements, touch screen, and other rules.
Would such a device stand out for its simplicity & speed, or be labelled as crippled?
Yes, that's how to make a cheaper machine. I quite like the idea.
But is it capable of having a full OSX running responsively, on an ARM chip generally (as I'm not aware of its power) and with OSX apps compiled for x86 (do you want Transitive translation?... I know fat binaries are possible of course).
Apple will need to decide whether they want to make a small machine that can run anything OSX runs but will be a bit slow (especially if people turn on all the bells and whistles), or whether they'd rather simplify the interface (for small 9-13" screens) and enforce rules so that multiple programs didn't run simultaneously etc - while making developers convert their Xcode based apps to the new interface requirements, touch screen, and other rules.
Would such a device stand out for its simplicity & speed, or be labelled as crippled?
The dual core Atoms are hyperthreaded (each core) and with two cores should be capable of running at least some apps simultaneously instead of using app switching like the iPhone. In my experience, the iPhone CPU is not really up to the tasks it presently is handling and its RAM (apparently something in the neighborhood of 128 MB) is totally inadequate.
The dual core Atoms are hyperthreaded (each core) and with two cores should be capable of running at least some apps simultaneously instead of using app switching like the iPhone.
I haven't read enough comparisons, but I get the impression that an Arm would still be slightly slower than the original Core Solo chips. Is that fair to say?
Of course, use Nvidea's ARM with GPU built in and perhaps Snow Leopard can take advantage. Perhaps Snow Leopard can slow background apps such that the foreground is always responsive (though ram limitations might be more of a problem than CPU time).
Dude well said, glad you are not as clueless as a lot of people out there.
Thanks
Interesting. I personally would have to have a better notebook... or at least that's my initial reaction. Now that I think about it I'm not so sure.
Mostly I manage emails, use iTunes, use basic pages & numbers, watch movies, remote control Macs & PCs... but I also work with photos & edit movies, create iWeb & Dreamweaver websites. I have lots of smaller apps that _probably_ don't matter.
For me, the photos/web/movies would make me willing to jump from $600 to double or triple that (along with a bigger screen). Though I'd be seriously considering an iMac + Netbook combo!
What functionality must you have that upsells you?
The iMac + netbook combo is exactly right. No one uses these things as their main computer. Netbooks are about two things; the first is low price, the second is having a computer- a real computer- that is so small and light, you don't even have to think about taking it places. But if it can't run the same apps as your other computers, then it loses a lot of the appeal for a lot of people.
The limitations of the netbook are self-evident: slow processor, limited memory and storage, small screen and keyboard. People who can't handle that, or who only want one computer, would be upsold to a bigger, more expensive machine. I don't think a netbook would cost Apple very many sales, but someone whose sole computer is an iMac, might pick one up for class or the coffee shop.
I haven't read enough comparisons, but I get the impression that an Arm would still be slightly slower than the original Core Solo chips. Is that fair to say?
You're confusing ARM chips with Intel's Atom.
Netbooks are about two things; the first is low price, the second is having a computer- a real computer- that is so small and light, you don't even have to think about taking it places. But if it can't run the same apps as your other computers, then it loses a lot of the appeal for a lot of people.
You skipped my question - what apps do you specifically need on your Netbook, without which you'd rather buy a full function notebook. :-)
It sounds as though you'd be happy to have a slow/plodding Netbook that did everything than a fast responsive Netbook that did basic word processing plus web/email/im/music/movies - but not every OSX app.
The dual core Atoms are hyperthreaded (each core) and with two cores should be capable of running at least some apps simultaneously instead of using app switching like the iPhone. In my experience, the iPhone CPU is not really up to the tasks it presently is handling and its RAM (apparently something in the neighborhood of 128 MB) is totally inadequate.
iPhone performance probably has more to do with the amount of RAM available more than the speed of the processor. That said, the newer ARM dual core processors are said to be able to scale up into the 1 GHz range. Add on a decent amount of RAM and hardware accelerated audio and video and it's a perfectly functional machine. Computers are idle most of the time, only operating in short bursts, so after a certain point higher frequency processors are only useful for smoothing out multitasking and long and intensive computations, such as compiling an entire operating system and its applications.
Like nearly all "journalists" this guy has no experience or financial education.
All economic slowdowns/recessions have a finite life. In the US the longest recession, since WWII, lasted 18 months. This one is now 12 months old. That means this has only 6 months to go before it too fades into our memories. That duration isn't anywhere near long enough to cause Apple any concern about "cash strapped" consumers.
This is just another bullsh*t article based on nothing more than the author's desire to generate hits.
I got a news flash for you, Gregg. This ain't your father's post-WWII recession, it's your grandfather's great speculative crash. The world's responding differently to it than it did in the '20's and '30's but no one knows if all the (some nearly frantic) moves will be enough.
Much of the world's "wealth" has disappeared in a near instant because it was all phony money laundered through hedge funds, banks, brokerages, insurance companies, pension funds, and many other institutions. And having been wiped off the books, there is no replacement source to quickly reflate the economy. 50-100 year old stable businesses are disappearing every day. 20% of house sales are of foreclosures. 10% of owned homes are in danger of falling into foreclosure and unemployment is likely to increase by millions in the next six months, making more homes vulnerable and increasing defaults on credit card payments.
The stock market and unemployment rate will not be at mid-2007 levels six months from now. More like 18-36 months at best. And more dire scenarios are not off the table.
Does this have anything to do with Apple and the netbook business? You can bet it's being avidly discussed at board meetings. Apple IS -- due to its buzz and cachet -- and its somewhat more job-secure clientele -- more recession resistant than many businesses. And, look it up, a fair number of businesses catering to high-end clientele did quite well during the Great Depression while many, many more commodity oriented ones failed.
But A, Inc. cannot simply ignore this economic credit-default-swap crisis tsunami, nor do I think they are doing so. I don't know what the response will be, but having turned the tentative, stumbling mp3 player business into a highly profitable, huge iPod business which itself is morphing into other new businesses (like the App Store and its 2.2M/day downloads), and the pioneering work of creating netbooks in a similar position to where mp3 players were years ago, AND with a great multi-touch OS-X based software system at their disposal, "reinventing the netbook" is not at all out of the question as a possible next move from Dear Leader and company.
Again, the profit and the margins that fuel Apple today for these lower-priced devices would be augmented by sales of new content and the apps such devices will create a new market for, and being Apple, their gross margins on a new family of $450-700 devices could be kept around 40%.
Remember, Apple wouldn't keep refreshing and marketing the affordable Shuffle if they weren't making bank on it -- from the store in this case more than from the device.
So I will say, look out Asus with your EEE's and all you other netbooks come lately.
And I for one am expecting a very interesting MacWorld which will, yes, be colored by events in the larger world.
Ok - so it isn't really an Apple computer. It is a MSI Wind running OS X (Macbook Wind).
It's more faster than the G4 Powerbook it replaced, and it is about as light as a Macbook Air. It was also very very inexpensive. Made by Apple, it would be awesome, and an ideal computer for the Education market.
BUT
Apple would have to be crazy to sell one of these machines. The margins are razor thin.
They'd have to sell 4 or 5 netbooks to match the profit of a single Macbook. - And furthermore, those Netbook sales would cannibalize sales of the higher end laptops. It would be a double loss.
Apple has never competed at the low end because profitability is more important than unit volume.
C.
That the iPhone, crippled to death as it is, can be used as a netbook has got to be the joke of the year.
Had my phone for a few months now and can type almost as fast on it as I can on my full keyboard.
As for being "crippled", that is a matter of debate; people made the same claim about the MacBook Air and that was all bunk. I know some people who have put their phones to very good use (myself included), and the capabilities are improving with the improving apps coming out. Several have cut and paste, including Zeptopad.
I also find that I use my iPod Touch at home for surfing more than I use my iMac or MacBook Air, so for me it has become my netbook of choice. Add the 3G iPhone that allows me to view the Net anywhere without even popping out a notebook and I am a happy camper.
.... What exactly would you change in a MB (or MBA) to halve the price while maintaining performance and quality....
Well, it's not precisely about that...
What I'm saying is that I think the market for low end, low weight, low capacity, sub notebooks today is targeted at high income professionals with extra money for a spare computer they wanna carry around and use on the go. A kind of luxury item. Manufacturers target these deliberately because I guess they think sub notebooks are for geeks and pros.
I think it would be a far more useful use of resources, if they managed to market this exact same product for a broader masses of people who would use this low end, low capacity sub notebook as their main computer instead. I think a lot of people would do that, at the right price. A lot of people after all just use a browser, mail and office, and a power cable. No games, no display, no extras.
I know they could do it if they start out with this as a goal. If they start out with a luxury item as a goal, of course they'll end up with a luxury item.
Also Apple's line up would be easier to understand and easier to sell with the Air as the entry level. From entry level to Pro. It would all make sense. Now we've got this luxury entry level Air product in the middle... doesn't make any sense.
No netbooks to see here . Move along
I know they could do it if they start out with this as a goal. If they start out with a luxury item as a goal, of course they'll end up with a luxury item.
Apple is still a boutique vendor in many ways. If they go cheap it's hard to get out of being sonsidered cheap. The Big Three Japanese automakers are an example of not being about to sell a luxury item with a recognized cheap moniker. They finally realized they had to create subsidiary companies with a new branding to sells their wares. This goes with computers too.
Also Apple's line up would be easier to understand and easier to sell with the Air as the entry level.
Could you explain in detail how this could this be done? For example, the MBA's CPU by itself is nearly as much as whole netbook so you;'d have to get rid of the SFF, high performance C2D CPU in favour or a under performing Atom processor. That will knock off about $250 from the price. Then you'd have to get rid of the high-quality LED-backlit LCD in favour of a non-backlit TN panel. then you'll have to get rid of the quality keyboard and backlit for a cheap one. As well as move to cheap plastic for the case which will thicken up the device quite a bit while still making it weaker and considerably less attractive and appealing. You'll have to remove the power saving DDR3 RAM, the Nvidia GPU, remove the 1/8" HDD in favour of a 2.5" drive, but since we have to thicken up the case this one is a freebee). Then, even if you get the price in the netbook range you'll have to charge for OS X which will bump the price up considerably over Linux-based machines.
I'd still like to read your take on it, but my point is that Apple could make one, but chooses not to . The same reason why they choose not to sell $400 15" notebooks like HP and Dell. The volume is their but the money isn't. How many netbooks have to be sold to equal the net profit of one MBA sale?
As to the performance of iPhone I'd have to say that it is pretty damn good for a gen one device. Especially to considering it's size. Could it be better overall, certainly but what exactly is causing the performance issue? As has been pointed out more RAM could do more for iPhone than a taste processor right now. Of course that depends on how and why you measure performance. IPhone simply wasn't designed for CPU intensive work, on the other hand it is more impressive than my old Mac Plus.
While I consider the netbook market to be a bit of a joke I can see Apple coming out with a tablet that amounts to a Touch on steroids. There is no need for an Intel CPU in such a device as it adds no value what so ever. The reality is that such a device is not a laptop nor a desktop replacement. Rather like Touch it is a device in it's own category that being Internet tablet. Since a modern ARM CPU can easily triple the performance of the current iPhone CPU that won't be an issue. What will be is the capability to run all day on battery power. Atom can't do that in a reasonably sized machine so it is dead in the water. Mobile OS would be fine here if properly extended for multi processing or as commonly stated back ground apps. What you don't want on these devices is traditionally designed desktop apps. The problem is and always will be screen size, these handheld tablets are no place for windowed apps in the sense of desktop machines. Apple simply needs to leverage the good parts of Mobile OS and otherwise extend it to be able to offer up a very nice OS for tablets.
When it comes right down to it I just don't see a huge sustainable demand for netbooks. Yes it is trendy to have one today but the question is how long do such device remain in operation and usefully deployed. From what I'm seeing not that long. The problem is that as more and better software becomes available for things like IPhone there is little rational need for a big netbook. I have very little in the way of software installed on my iPhone and it has already become a primary platform for many tasks. E-Mail is one significant example. The reality is that I can get to the net from anywhere with this device, not even a netbook can do that without a cellular modem. In the end netbooks will die because they are the wrong solution set to the problem of mobile computing.
Dave
I got a news flash for you, Gregg. This ain't your father's post-WWII recession, it's your grandfather's great speculative crash. The world's responding differently to it than it did in the '20's and '30's but no one knows if all the (some nearly frantic) moves will be enough.
Much of the world's "wealth" has disappeared in a near instant because it was all phony money laundered through hedge funds, banks, brokerages, insurance companies, pension funds, and many other institutions. And having been wiped off the books, there is no replacement source to quickly reflate the economy. 50-100 year old stable businesses are disappearing every day. 20% of house sales are of foreclosures. 10% of owned homes are in danger of falling into foreclosure and unemployment is likely to increase by millions in the next six months, making more homes vulnerable and increasing defaults on credit card payments.
The stock market and unemployment rate will not be at mid-2007 levels six months from now. More like 18-36 months at best. And more dire scenarios are not off the table.
Does this have anything to do with Apple and the netbook business? You can bet it's being avidly discussed at board meetings. Apple IS -- due to its buzz and cachet -- and its somewhat more job-secure clientele -- more recession resistant than many businesses. And, look it up, a fair number of businesses catering to high-end clientele did quite well during the Great Depression while many, many more commodity oriented ones failed.
But A, Inc. cannot simply ignore this economic credit-default-swap crisis tsunami, nor do I think they are doing so. I don't know what the response will be, but having turned the tentative, stumbling mp3 player business into a highly profitable, huge iPod business which itself is morphing into other new businesses (like the App Store and its 2.2M/day downloads), and the pioneering work of creating netbooks in a similar position to where mp3 players were years ago, AND with a great multi-touch OS-X based software system at their disposal, "reinventing the netbook" is not at all out of the question as a possible next move from Dear Leader and company.
Again, the profit and the margins that fuel Apple today for these lower-priced devices would be augmented by sales of new content and the apps such devices will create a new market for, and being Apple, their gross margins on a new family of $450-700 devices could be kept around 40%.
Remember, Apple wouldn't keep refreshing and marketing the affordable Shuffle if they weren't making bank on it -- from the store in this case more than from the device.
So I will say, look out Asus with your EEE's and all you other netbooks come lately.
And I for one am expecting a very interesting MacWorld which will, yes, be colored by events in the larger world.
In 3 Quarters time, the markets will have recovered around 3,000 points on the NYSE and only after 2 Quarters time the notion of targeting a netbook will be nothing but a loss.
I hate to break it to you, but these price points are addressed 2 quarters and sometimes longer prior to the products pending release.
This is DOA by Intel and AMD. It sure as hell is DOA by Apple.