I just had a bright idea, why not a convertible that doesn't swivel? Think about a device that has a double sided display. One where the outside surface is active when the clam shell is closed and the interior display active when the lid is opened. This would solve the questionable swiveling display issue in a very Apple way.
Ok I understand that this isn't likely with LCD due to thickness but OLEDs are a wholelly different story. In anyevent one way for Apple to innovate. I still think ten inches is to big for a tablet but this idea might be very appealling to some.
So, wistful dreams about flexible computers and seamless clamshells aside....
We have orders for 10" touch screens. Obviously, multitouch. The natural assumption brings something like this to mind; Apple's entry into the netbook market...basically a slimmer Air with a smaller footprint but a full-sized keyboard. And a touch screen.
Personally, I don't see why you would want...or how you would use...a touch screen on a standard netbook form factor. Obviously it already exists on a few netbooks, but it's sort of a superfluous gimmick. As long as you've got a trackpad and keyboard shoved in front of you, there's very little reason to touch the screen...that's why we don't have touchscreen iMacs yet. Unless the screen swivels (ugh...very unpolished and non-Apple) or somehow otherwise changes to tablet mode, it doesn't make sense to match a device that has a full keyboard and trackpad with a touchscreen.
Any ideas for how Apple might implement a convertible netbook-to-tablet that would retain the Apple polish and clean look?
Moving past the natural assumption that it's a netbook: a 10" touch screen means that the new device would have to fit into one of two genres: USB-in or USB-out.
USB-in: has female USB-A ports. Charges via MagSafe; runs an OS capable of accepting USB devices like cameras, external drives, iPhones; (theoretically) possesses an open filesystem; can be configured to work off of an Ethernet internet connection; think computer
USB-out: has a 30-pin iPod connector port for docking. Charges via dock; syncs to a full-featured computer; may simulate the filesystem of a computer but with limited in-or-out functionality; think PDA
I don't see a merge of these two roles. It doesn't make sense to have a device with female USB-A ports without a full-featured OS. Either you are plugging things into the device, or the device is being plugged into something else.
If it's a USB-in device, then it has to run Leopard. Maybe a slightly different version of Leopard optimized for the smaller and multitouch screen, but Leopard nonetheless. Install programs (not "apps"), plug in an external hard drive or DVD burner...you get the point. Apple isn't going to design a completely new OS for a full-featured computer just because it's smaller and maybe lacks a keyboard.
If it's a USB-out device, then we are talking about a 10" tablet that you have to sync with another computer. It could run a scaled-up version of iPhone OS (so that it could use App Store applications) but that still means limited functionality. The iPhone has a solid browser, sure, but it's first and foremost a phone. Applications make it better because people want a phone with a good browser and access to the App store so they can do fun or industrious things. The iPod Touch is first and foremost a media player...people like it because it's a media player that does other things too.
But a 10" media player? Sure, it's been done before, but that's an awfully big screen for a "media player that does other things." The App store is great, but expanding screen size won't magically generate apps that fill all the functionality that a Tablet PC has...and that's the standard that a 10" tablet device will be compared to. So either Apple has to start it off with all the native apps that approximate Tablet PC functionality and hope that the App store fills in the inevitable gaps, or just make it a "media-player-and-web-browser that does other things" ... which is a rather niche market.
Hmmm....
Apple's about to release a device with a 10" touch screen. Form factor aside: will this device be USB-out or USB-in? 'Cause that's what makes the difference.
Thoughts?
If Steve isn't bold enough to do a flexible screen design for his ultraportable and really uses these 10" screens I can at least tell you one thing for sure. It won't have a traditional keyboard. He would rather make a slate.
I have a new theory. Now hear me out before you go nuts ok?
I think the uber tablet or whatever it is will NOT be at the June iphone 3.0 WWDC launch. And neither will Steve Jobs be at WWDC.
Now before you all scream and curse listen to my new theory.
I think Apple will hold a special event where Steve Jobs will headline AFTER WWDC just so he could personally introduce the new super device while making his triumphant return. I'm guessing October.
I just had a bright idea, why not a convertible that doesn't swivel? Think about a device that has a double sided display. One where the outside surface is active when the clam shell is closed and the interior display active when the lid is opened. This would solve the questionable swiveling display issue in a very Apple way.
Ok I understand that this isn't likely with LCD due to thickness but OLEDs are a wholelly different story. In anyevent one way for Apple to innovate. I still think ten inches is to big for a tablet but this idea might be very appealling to some.
Dave
I like it. It would take a while to get the hang of switching back and forth, but Apple could make it seamless. It would be prohibitively expensive, though!
Since the touch screens are capacitive, you CAN have back-to-back touchscreens with only one touch sensor. Which would cut back on thickness and cost. I'm just not sure about having an inactive glass screen hanging out back there....
What about a netbook with a touch screen that rotates all the way around? The keyboard is set into the body of the computer as it is; would it kill us to have a keyboard exposed on the back of a slate? That would allow Apple to maintain the unibody construction.
If Steve is bold enough to do a flexible screen design for his ultraportable and really uses these 10" screens I can at least tell you one thing for sure. It won't have a traditional keyboard. He would rather make a slate.
I don't think that these 10" touchscreens are flexible. That's the first thing that rumors or leaks would highlight.
Does ANYONE think that Apple would ever do a rotating convertible tablet?
Dave: if they had something with a dual-screen "lid", do you think that the 10" tablet side would run Leopard or scaled-up iPhone OS/e-reader?
I'd lean towards having full OS X. Although...if you could put a Kindle-style OLED or color e-ink screen on the back of a 10" MacBook Air...media, web browsing, e-book reader, App Store apps, and calendar/PDA functions (note-taking, anyone?) in an instant-on mobile OS...that would be pretty awesome. I can see Jobs making the pitch:
"In researching portable computing, we found that the multitouch tablet form factor is unparalleled at handling media, notetaking, on-the-go functions, and web browsing. But it cannot match the functionality of a notebook in terms of software versatility, interface, and usability. It's hard to imagine editing movies or writing a novel on a multitouch tablet, but those are expected functions of a portable notebook running Mac OS X. We didn't want to make a multitouch tablet without the functionality of full Mac OS X, but we knew that adding a touchscreen to a smaller MacBook wasn't the answer either.
"The Apple II changed the way that people interact with desktop computers, and the iPhone with the App Store changed the way that people interact with mobile devices. The device that Apple is releasing today will completely change the way that people think about portable computing."
The more I think about your idea, Dave, the more I like it. You have the processor, battery, and graphics of a full-size notebook for a tablet "Touch OS" that does media and web browsing beautifully and runs App store apps, but you can take advantage of full Mac OS X simply by opening it. It's a large iPod Touch and e-reader, but you don't need to dock it to sync; it's already docked because it has a Mac OS X netbook built-in.
College students would buy that in droves. Especially since the battery life would be amazing (in tablet mode, at least)! That would be the perfect netbook.
Unibody construction like the MacBook Air
Intel processor
64GB SSD with 128GB upgrade option
Full Mac OS X Leopard with touchscreen on the inside but with keyboard and glass trackpad
Instant-on "Touch OS" that's a larger, more powerful version of iPhone OS 3.0, accessible when the screen is closed
Touch OS accesses iTunes and iPhoto from Mac OS X
12-15 hour battery life when running Touch OS from the internal battery, 3-4 hour battery life when running Mac OS X
0.6" thick at its thickest, 10.4" diagonal screen (inside and out), 16:10 aspect ratio
One powered USB port that operates when the screen is open, MagSafe power port, Mini-DV video out
No internal optical drive
Automatic EDGE/3G tethering via WiFi with iPhone, but only in tablet mode (this will keep people from abusing downloads over the cellular network)
It's too small of a screen size to cut dramatically into MacBook or MBAir sales, but it's a full-powered computer so it is differentiated from the iPhone and iPod Touch (the iPTouch is seen mostly as a media player, anyway). A $599 price point (if you drop the MacBook White) will place it in competition with the lower-priced PC netbooks that lack the functionality that this device would have.
I have a new theory. Now hear me out before you go nuts ok?
I think the uber tablet or whatever it is will NOT be at the June iphone 3.0 WWDC launch. And neither will Steve Jobs be at WWDC.
Now before you all scream and curse listen to my new theory.
I think Apple will hold a special event where Steve Jobs will headline AFTER WWDC just so he could personally introduce the new super device while making his triumphant return. I'm guessing October.
I don't think that these 10" touchscreens are flexible. That's the first thing that rumors or leaks would highlight.
Does ANYONE think that Apple would ever do a rotating convertible tablet?
Dave: if they had something with a dual-screen "lid", do you think that the 10" tablet side would run Leopard or scaled-up iPhone OS/e-reader?
I'd lean towards having full OS X. Although...if you could put a Kindle-style OLED or color e-ink screen on the back of a 10" MacBook Air...media, web browsing, e-book reader, App Store apps, and calendar/PDA functions (note-taking, anyone?) in an instant-on mobile OS...that would be pretty awesome. I can see Jobs making the pitch:
"In researchng portable computing, we found that the multitouch tablet form factor is unparalleled at handling media, notetaking, on-the-go functions, and web browsing. But it cannot match the functionality of a notebook in terms of software versatility, interface, and usability. It's hard to imagine editing movies or writing a novel on a multitouch tablet, but those are expected functions of a portable notebook running Mac OS X. We didn't want to make a multitouch tablet without the functionality of full Mac OS X, but we knew that adding a touchscreen to a smaller MacBook wasn't the answer either.
"The Apple II changed the way that people interact with desktop computers, and the iPhone with the App Store changed the way that people interact with mobile devices. The device that Apple is releasing today will completely change the way that people think about portable computing."
The more I think about your idea, Dave, the more I like it. You have the processor, battery, and graphics of a full-size notebook for a tablet "Touch OS" that does media and web browsing beautifully and runs App store apps, but you can take advantage of full Mac OS X simply by opening it. It's a large iPod Touch and e-reader, but you don't need to dock it to sync; it's already docked because it has a Mac OS X netbook built-in.
College students would buy that in droves. Especially since the battery life would be amazing (in tablet mode, at least)! That would be the perfect netbook.
[list]
*Unibody construction like the MacBook Air
*Intel processor
*64GB SSD with 128GB upgrade option
*Full Mac OS X Leopard with touchscreen on the inside but with keyboard and glass trackpad
*Instant-on "Touch OS" that's a larger, more powerful version of iPhone OS 3.0, accessible when the screen is closed
*Touch OS accesses iTunes and iPhoto from Mac OS X
*12-15 hour battery life when running Touch OS from the internal battery, 3-4 hour battery life when running Mac OS X
*0.6" thick at its thickest, 10.4" diagonal screen (inside and out), 16:10 aspect ratio
*One powered USB port that operates when the screen is open, MagSafe power port, Mini-DV video out
*No internal optical drive
*Automatic EDGE/3G tethering via WiFi with iPhone, but only in tablet mode (this will keep people from abusing cellular downloading)
It's too small of a screen size to cut dramatically into MacBook or MBAir sales, but it's a full-powered computer so it is differentiated from the iPhone and iPod Touch (the iPTouch is seen mostly as a media player, anyway). A $599 price point (if you drop the MacBook White) will place it in competition with the lower-priced PC netbooks that lack the functionality that this device would have.
Yeah, I like it.
I mean't if Steve isn't (not is) bold enough to do a flexible screen then the product will be a slate without a physical keyboard.
I mean't if Steve isn't (not is) bold enough to do a flexible screen then the product will be a slate without a physical keyboard.
Oh, gotcha. Yeah. What OS would a slate like that run? Would it dock to a regular computer (like a giant iPod Touch), or would it be more like a 10" ModBook?
Oh, gotcha. Yeah. What OS would a slate like that run? Would it dock to a regular computer (like a giant iPod Touch), or would it be more like a 10" ModBook?
The iphone/ipod touch OS is really just a derivative of the main OSX. Most likely this new product will be of the same. But in this case the GUI and how it acts in general will probably be a cross between the iphone and a macbook.
I have a new theory. Now hear me out before you go nuts ok?
I think the uber tablet or whatever it is will NOT be at the June iphone 3.0 WWDC launch. And neither will Steve Jobs be at WWDC.
Now before you all scream and curse listen to my new theory.
I think Apple will hold a special event where Steve Jobs will headline AFTER WWDC just so he could personally introduce the new super device while making his triumphant return. I'm guessing October.
What do you all think?
Does it really matter to you as a Mac user whether Steve actually personally demos the product? I don't care who shows it off, I just want it.
Does it really matter to you as a Mac user whether Steve actually personally demos the product? I don't care who shows it off, I just want it.
I wouldn't care if Vince Shlomi the pitchman from the Shamwow commercials came out on stage and started pitching the tablet/umpc/iWonderdevice. I would still buy it.
I'm just communicating my theory on what is going to happen in a few months.
EDIT: Maybe they should hire Vince to do some Apple commercials.
I like the idea of a clam-shell device with a double sided screen. But as has been pointed out this typically amounts to two screens, one mounted on the inside and one on the outside = expensive.
But I remember there were some mobile phone LCD prototypes that were double sided with a single panel.
With such an OLED only thing needed is to flip the image if the clamshell is opened. If closed, it's a tablet, if opened, it reveals the keyboard underneath and is a notebook.
Regarding USB-in or USB-out. How about both as well?
A low-power Intel CPU plus a PA Semi created ARM based chip with GPU. When in 'Mac mode' that ARM chip's GPU would still be used, while in 'iPod mode' the Intel CPU would be sleeping.
And finally what if both CPUs could be used seamlessly? For not so taxing operations the ARM chip is utilized, and when more power is needed the Intel CPU awakes and takes over. Each in its own thread, yet both using the same GPU.
(Of course Mac apps would need to be compiled for ARM CPUs as well.)
I like the idea of a clam-shell device with a double sided screen. But as has been pointed out this typically amounts to two screens, one mounted on the inside and one on the outside = expensive.
But I remember there were some mobile phone LCD prototypes that were double sided with a single panel.
With such an OLED only thing needed is to flip the image if the clamshell is opened. If closed, it's a tablet, if opened, it reveals the keyboard underneath and is a notebook.
Regarding USB-in or USB-out. How about both as well?
A low-power Intel CPU plus a PA Semi created ARM based chip with GPU. When in 'Mac mode' that ARM chip's GPU would still be used, while in 'iPod mode' the Intel CPU would be sleeping.
And finally what if both CPUs could be used seamlessly? For not so taxing operations the ARM chip is utilized, and when more power is needed the Intel CPU awakes and takes over. Each in its own thread, yet both using the same GPU.
(Of course Mac apps would need to be compiled for ARM CPUs as well.)
Best of both worlds?
Or useful in neither?
You mean something like the OLPC XO-2? Take a look at the mockups below and picture the device having not two screens separated by a hinge as it is now but with one flexible screen that can fold in half. That would be beyond awesome.
Yet what I had in mind is more like a traditional notebook, just that the screen is completely see-through if the OLED is off, with (also transparent) multi-touch surface on both sides.
- When the notebook is closed you could in theory see the keyboard inside through the transparent display. But it's probably too dark to see well. Yet if the screen is on you can no longer see the content inside as it is too bright and the device effectively becomes a 'tablet'.
- If you open it up, the image on the screen flips and you can use the device like a normal notebook with a regular keyboard on the bottom half.
Of course people looking at the open notebook can see on the outside (albeit mirrored) what is displayed on the screen - since its content is visible on both sides.
But I'm sure such transparent displays could be made to be visible only from one side - switchable to which side at will.
Forgive my ignorance but what, exactly, did the newton do that the iPhone/iPod touch can't?
You have to have used a Newton to actually know.
The true beauty of the Newton was its OS. It was (and still is IMHO) far advanced compared to the iPhone OS, or Mac OSX for that matter.
The Newton OS' beauty was its total integration. You could add an application and its features would become available to all other applications immediately.
For example: to get text-to-speech support all you'd need to do was install the 'Macintalk' application and this feature was 'suddenly' available to all apps. Even apps that were never designed for text-to-speech!
Suddenly your text editor could read its contents to you, or the web browser would read a web page too you, as did every other app.
That total integration of all applications was a true beauty of the Newton OS.
And to this day IMHO no other OS matches that total integration. All features of all applications were available to all other applications. You would totally lose track of where an application's features end and where another apps features would start. It was all integrated.
You could open any text editor, notepad or word processor and write "schedule lunch with Bob Friday 1pm" and choose 'interpret' and it would analyze the text and know that Friday means the next Friday, 'Bob' was the first 'Bob' in your address book and lunch was typically 1 hour, i.e. the Newton OS would schedule 1 hour in your calendar between 1pm and 2pm the following Friday and put down 'Bob' as attendee.
I miss that in today's systems.
The Newton OS IMHO was 20 years ahead of its time. If not more.
Everything else I've used to this very day is a step backwards.
The true beauty of the Newton was its OS. It was (and still is IMHO) far advanced compared to the iPhone OS, or Mac OSX for that matter.
The Newton OS' beauty was its total integration. You could add an application and its features would become available to all other applications immediately.
For example: to get text-to-speech support all you'd need to do was install the 'Macintalk' application and this feature was 'suddenly' available to all apps. Even apps that were never designed for text-to-speech!
Suddenly your text editor could read its contents to you, or the web browser would read a web page too you, as did every other app.
That total integration of all applications was a true beauty of the Newton OS.
And to this day IMHO no other OS matches that total integration. All features of all applications were available to all other applications. You would totally lose track of where an application's features end and where another apps features would start. It was all integrated.
You could open any text editor, notebpad or word processor and write "schedule lunch with Bob Friday 1pm" and choose 'interpret' and it would analyze the text and know that Friday means the next Friday, 'Bob' was the first 'Bob' in your address book and lunch was typically 1 hour, i.e. the Newton OS would schedule 1 hour in your calendar between 1pm and 2pm the following Friday and put down 'Bob' as attendee.
I miss that in today's systems.
The Newton OS IMHO was 20 years ahead of its time. If not more.
Everything else I've used to this very day is a step backwards.
To be fair, OS X Services and Data Detectors are moving towards recreating that kind of integration, although I'll not argue that the Newton had some amazing functionality for its time.
To be fair, OS X Services and Data Detectors are moving towards recreating that kind of integration, although I'll not argue that the Newton had some amazing functionality for its time.
Yes, we're getting there - again.
But the Newton had all those features 15 years ago! Fifteen years!
On an iPhone, can you open any app and then 'email' that page to someone?
You can with some applications, but not generally. On the Newton you could email or fax any page from any application.
On an iPhone can you have any text read to you aloud (or via headphones)?
I'm so surprised about the hoopla the Kindle 2 caused about reading out eBooks.
The Newton could do that 15 years ago! Any eBook, email, web page, literally any text you had could be turned into an AudioBook instantly. That was standard (if you downloaded the free Macintalk app).
All you tech blog surfers should have seen this brand new Kyocera prototype by now. This is a closer example of what I think the "tablet" should be like if Apple uses flexible OLED technology.
Note: there are different types of flexible OLED technology that have been in existence for a couple years now that already addresses issues such as low cost, and extended life span. An apple prototype that can be approved by Steve Jobs for mass production CAN be done NOW not years from now.
It is a race against time to see which tech company will come out with such a device first. And they all don't want it to be Apple because they know Apple will patent the hell out of it and it will be game over for them....again.
Comments
Ok I understand that this isn't likely with LCD due to thickness but OLEDs are a wholelly different story. In anyevent one way for Apple to innovate. I still think ten inches is to big for a tablet but this idea might be very appealling to some.
Dave
Musings....
So, wistful dreams about flexible computers and seamless clamshells aside....
We have orders for 10" touch screens. Obviously, multitouch. The natural assumption brings something like this to mind; Apple's entry into the netbook market...basically a slimmer Air with a smaller footprint but a full-sized keyboard. And a touch screen.
Personally, I don't see why you would want...or how you would use...a touch screen on a standard netbook form factor. Obviously it already exists on a few netbooks, but it's sort of a superfluous gimmick. As long as you've got a trackpad and keyboard shoved in front of you, there's very little reason to touch the screen...that's why we don't have touchscreen iMacs yet. Unless the screen swivels (ugh...very unpolished and non-Apple) or somehow otherwise changes to tablet mode, it doesn't make sense to match a device that has a full keyboard and trackpad with a touchscreen.
Any ideas for how Apple might implement a convertible netbook-to-tablet that would retain the Apple polish and clean look?
Moving past the natural assumption that it's a netbook: a 10" touch screen means that the new device would have to fit into one of two genres: USB-in or USB-out.
- USB-in: has female USB-A ports. Charges via MagSafe; runs an OS capable of accepting USB devices like cameras, external drives, iPhones; (theoretically) possesses an open filesystem; can be configured to work off of an Ethernet internet connection; think computer
- USB-out: has a 30-pin iPod connector port for docking. Charges via dock; syncs to a full-featured computer; may simulate the filesystem of a computer but with limited in-or-out functionality; think PDA
I don't see a merge of these two roles. It doesn't make sense to have a device with female USB-A ports without a full-featured OS. Either you are plugging things into the device, or the device is being plugged into something else.If it's a USB-in device, then it has to run Leopard. Maybe a slightly different version of Leopard optimized for the smaller and multitouch screen, but Leopard nonetheless. Install programs (not "apps"), plug in an external hard drive or DVD burner...you get the point. Apple isn't going to design a completely new OS for a full-featured computer just because it's smaller and maybe lacks a keyboard.
If it's a USB-out device, then we are talking about a 10" tablet that you have to sync with another computer. It could run a scaled-up version of iPhone OS (so that it could use App Store applications) but that still means limited functionality. The iPhone has a solid browser, sure, but it's first and foremost a phone. Applications make it better because people want a phone with a good browser and access to the App store so they can do fun or industrious things. The iPod Touch is first and foremost a media player...people like it because it's a media player that does other things too.
But a 10" media player? Sure, it's been done before, but that's an awfully big screen for a "media player that does other things." The App store is great, but expanding screen size won't magically generate apps that fill all the functionality that a Tablet PC has...and that's the standard that a 10" tablet device will be compared to. So either Apple has to start it off with all the native apps that approximate Tablet PC functionality and hope that the App store fills in the inevitable gaps, or just make it a "media-player-and-web-browser that does other things" ... which is a rather niche market.
Hmmm....
Apple's about to release a device with a 10" touch screen. Form factor aside: will this device be USB-out or USB-in? 'Cause that's what makes the difference.
Thoughts?
If Steve isn't bold enough to do a flexible screen design for his ultraportable and really uses these 10" screens I can at least tell you one thing for sure. It won't have a traditional keyboard. He would rather make a slate.
I think the uber tablet or whatever it is will NOT be at the June iphone 3.0 WWDC launch. And neither will Steve Jobs be at WWDC.
Now before you all scream and curse listen to my new theory.
I think Apple will hold a special event where Steve Jobs will headline AFTER WWDC just so he could personally introduce the new super device while making his triumphant return. I'm guessing October.
What do you all think?
I just had a bright idea, why not a convertible that doesn't swivel? Think about a device that has a double sided display. One where the outside surface is active when the clam shell is closed and the interior display active when the lid is opened. This would solve the questionable swiveling display issue in a very Apple way.
Ok I understand that this isn't likely with LCD due to thickness but OLEDs are a wholelly different story. In anyevent one way for Apple to innovate. I still think ten inches is to big for a tablet but this idea might be very appealling to some.
Dave
I like it. It would take a while to get the hang of switching back and forth, but Apple could make it seamless. It would be prohibitively expensive, though!
Since the touch screens are capacitive, you CAN have back-to-back touchscreens with only one touch sensor. Which would cut back on thickness and cost. I'm just not sure about having an inactive glass screen hanging out back there....
What about a netbook with a touch screen that rotates all the way around? The keyboard is set into the body of the computer as it is; would it kill us to have a keyboard exposed on the back of a slate? That would allow Apple to maintain the unibody construction.
I should mock that up in SketchUp.
If Steve is bold enough to do a flexible screen design for his ultraportable and really uses these 10" screens I can at least tell you one thing for sure. It won't have a traditional keyboard. He would rather make a slate.
I don't think that these 10" touchscreens are flexible. That's the first thing that rumors or leaks would highlight.
Does ANYONE think that Apple would ever do a rotating convertible tablet?
Dave: if they had something with a dual-screen "lid", do you think that the 10" tablet side would run Leopard or scaled-up iPhone OS/e-reader?
I'd lean towards having full OS X. Although...if you could put a Kindle-style OLED or color e-ink screen on the back of a 10" MacBook Air...media, web browsing, e-book reader, App Store apps, and calendar/PDA functions (note-taking, anyone?) in an instant-on mobile OS...that would be pretty awesome. I can see Jobs making the pitch:
"In researching portable computing, we found that the multitouch tablet form factor is unparalleled at handling media, notetaking, on-the-go functions, and web browsing. But it cannot match the functionality of a notebook in terms of software versatility, interface, and usability. It's hard to imagine editing movies or writing a novel on a multitouch tablet, but those are expected functions of a portable notebook running Mac OS X. We didn't want to make a multitouch tablet without the functionality of full Mac OS X, but we knew that adding a touchscreen to a smaller MacBook wasn't the answer either.
"The Apple II changed the way that people interact with desktop computers, and the iPhone with the App Store changed the way that people interact with mobile devices. The device that Apple is releasing today will completely change the way that people think about portable computing."
The more I think about your idea, Dave, the more I like it. You have the processor, battery, and graphics of a full-size notebook for a tablet "Touch OS" that does media and web browsing beautifully and runs App store apps, but you can take advantage of full Mac OS X simply by opening it. It's a large iPod Touch and e-reader, but you don't need to dock it to sync; it's already docked because it has a Mac OS X netbook built-in.
College students would buy that in droves. Especially since the battery life would be amazing (in tablet mode, at least)! That would be the perfect netbook.
- Unibody construction like the MacBook Air
- Intel processor
- 64GB SSD with 128GB upgrade option
- Full Mac OS X Leopard with touchscreen on the inside but with keyboard and glass trackpad
- Instant-on "Touch OS" that's a larger, more powerful version of iPhone OS 3.0, accessible when the screen is closed
- Touch OS accesses iTunes and iPhoto from Mac OS X
- 12-15 hour battery life when running Touch OS from the internal battery, 3-4 hour battery life when running Mac OS X
- 0.6" thick at its thickest, 10.4" diagonal screen (inside and out), 16:10 aspect ratio
- One powered USB port that operates when the screen is open, MagSafe power port, Mini-DV video out
- No internal optical drive
- Automatic EDGE/3G tethering via WiFi with iPhone, but only in tablet mode (this will keep people from abusing downloads over the cellular network)
It's too small of a screen size to cut dramatically into MacBook or MBAir sales, but it's a full-powered computer so it is differentiated from the iPhone and iPod Touch (the iPTouch is seen mostly as a media player, anyway). A $599 price point (if you drop the MacBook White) will place it in competition with the lower-priced PC netbooks that lack the functionality that this device would have.Yeah, I like it.
I have a new theory. Now hear me out before you go nuts ok?
I think the uber tablet or whatever it is will NOT be at the June iphone 3.0 WWDC launch. And neither will Steve Jobs be at WWDC.
Now before you all scream and curse listen to my new theory.
I think Apple will hold a special event where Steve Jobs will headline AFTER WWDC just so he could personally introduce the new super device while making his triumphant return. I'm guessing October.
What do you all think?
Totally agree.
I don't think that these 10" touchscreens are flexible. That's the first thing that rumors or leaks would highlight.
Does ANYONE think that Apple would ever do a rotating convertible tablet?
Dave: if they had something with a dual-screen "lid", do you think that the 10" tablet side would run Leopard or scaled-up iPhone OS/e-reader?
I'd lean towards having full OS X. Although...if you could put a Kindle-style OLED or color e-ink screen on the back of a 10" MacBook Air...media, web browsing, e-book reader, App Store apps, and calendar/PDA functions (note-taking, anyone?) in an instant-on mobile OS...that would be pretty awesome. I can see Jobs making the pitch:
"In researchng portable computing, we found that the multitouch tablet form factor is unparalleled at handling media, notetaking, on-the-go functions, and web browsing. But it cannot match the functionality of a notebook in terms of software versatility, interface, and usability. It's hard to imagine editing movies or writing a novel on a multitouch tablet, but those are expected functions of a portable notebook running Mac OS X. We didn't want to make a multitouch tablet without the functionality of full Mac OS X, but we knew that adding a touchscreen to a smaller MacBook wasn't the answer either.
"The Apple II changed the way that people interact with desktop computers, and the iPhone with the App Store changed the way that people interact with mobile devices. The device that Apple is releasing today will completely change the way that people think about portable computing."
The more I think about your idea, Dave, the more I like it. You have the processor, battery, and graphics of a full-size notebook for a tablet "Touch OS" that does media and web browsing beautifully and runs App store apps, but you can take advantage of full Mac OS X simply by opening it. It's a large iPod Touch and e-reader, but you don't need to dock it to sync; it's already docked because it has a Mac OS X netbook built-in.
College students would buy that in droves. Especially since the battery life would be amazing (in tablet mode, at least)! That would be the perfect netbook.
[list]
*Unibody construction like the MacBook Air
*Intel processor
*64GB SSD with 128GB upgrade option
*Full Mac OS X Leopard with touchscreen on the inside but with keyboard and glass trackpad
*Instant-on "Touch OS" that's a larger, more powerful version of iPhone OS 3.0, accessible when the screen is closed
*Touch OS accesses iTunes and iPhoto from Mac OS X
*12-15 hour battery life when running Touch OS from the internal battery, 3-4 hour battery life when running Mac OS X
*0.6" thick at its thickest, 10.4" diagonal screen (inside and out), 16:10 aspect ratio
*One powered USB port that operates when the screen is open, MagSafe power port, Mini-DV video out
*No internal optical drive
*Automatic EDGE/3G tethering via WiFi with iPhone, but only in tablet mode (this will keep people from abusing cellular downloading)
It's too small of a screen size to cut dramatically into MacBook or MBAir sales, but it's a full-powered computer so it is differentiated from the iPhone and iPod Touch (the iPTouch is seen mostly as a media player, anyway). A $599 price point (if you drop the MacBook White) will place it in competition with the lower-priced PC netbooks that lack the functionality that this device would have.
Yeah, I like it.
I mean't if Steve isn't (not is) bold enough to do a flexible screen then the product will be a slate without a physical keyboard.
I mean't if Steve isn't (not is) bold enough to do a flexible screen then the product will be a slate without a physical keyboard.
Oh, gotcha. Yeah. What OS would a slate like that run? Would it dock to a regular computer (like a giant iPod Touch), or would it be more like a 10" ModBook?
Oh, gotcha. Yeah. What OS would a slate like that run? Would it dock to a regular computer (like a giant iPod Touch), or would it be more like a 10" ModBook?
The iphone/ipod touch OS is really just a derivative of the main OSX. Most likely this new product will be of the same. But in this case the GUI and how it acts in general will probably be a cross between the iphone and a macbook.
A mutant from the fifth dimension!
I have a new theory. Now hear me out before you go nuts ok?
I think the uber tablet or whatever it is will NOT be at the June iphone 3.0 WWDC launch. And neither will Steve Jobs be at WWDC.
Now before you all scream and curse listen to my new theory.
I think Apple will hold a special event where Steve Jobs will headline AFTER WWDC just so he could personally introduce the new super device while making his triumphant return. I'm guessing October.
What do you all think?
Does it really matter to you as a Mac user whether Steve actually personally demos the product? I don't care who shows it off, I just want it.
Does it really matter to you as a Mac user whether Steve actually personally demos the product? I don't care who shows it off, I just want it.
Ditto.
Does it really matter to you as a Mac user whether Steve actually personally demos the product? I don't care who shows it off, I just want it.
I wouldn't care if Vince Shlomi the pitchman from the Shamwow commercials came out on stage and started pitching the tablet/umpc/iWonderdevice. I would still buy it.
I'm just communicating my theory on what is going to happen in a few months.
EDIT: Maybe they should hire Vince to do some Apple commercials.
I like the idea of a clam-shell device with a double sided screen. But as has been pointed out this typically amounts to two screens, one mounted on the inside and one on the outside = expensive.
But I remember there were some mobile phone LCD prototypes that were double sided with a single panel.
I also think a transparent OLEDs would be double-sided by nature.
With such an OLED only thing needed is to flip the image if the clamshell is opened. If closed, it's a tablet, if opened, it reveals the keyboard underneath and is a notebook.
Regarding USB-in or USB-out. How about both as well?
A low-power Intel CPU plus a PA Semi created ARM based chip with GPU. When in 'Mac mode' that ARM chip's GPU would still be used, while in 'iPod mode' the Intel CPU would be sleeping.
And finally what if both CPUs could be used seamlessly? For not so taxing operations the ARM chip is utilized, and when more power is needed the Intel CPU awakes and takes over. Each in its own thread, yet both using the same GPU.
(Of course Mac apps would need to be compiled for ARM CPUs as well.)
Best of both worlds?
Or useful in neither?
Could we have our cake and eat it?
I like the idea of a clam-shell device with a double sided screen. But as has been pointed out this typically amounts to two screens, one mounted on the inside and one on the outside = expensive.
But I remember there were some mobile phone LCD prototypes that were double sided with a single panel.
I also think a transparent OLEDs would be double-sided by nature.
With such an OLED only thing needed is to flip the image if the clamshell is opened. If closed, it's a tablet, if opened, it reveals the keyboard underneath and is a notebook.
Regarding USB-in or USB-out. How about both as well?
A low-power Intel CPU plus a PA Semi created ARM based chip with GPU. When in 'Mac mode' that ARM chip's GPU would still be used, while in 'iPod mode' the Intel CPU would be sleeping.
And finally what if both CPUs could be used seamlessly? For not so taxing operations the ARM chip is utilized, and when more power is needed the Intel CPU awakes and takes over. Each in its own thread, yet both using the same GPU.
(Of course Mac apps would need to be compiled for ARM CPUs as well.)
Best of both worlds?
Or useful in neither?
You mean something like the OLPC XO-2? Take a look at the mockups below and picture the device having not two screens separated by a hinge as it is now but with one flexible screen that can fold in half. That would be beyond awesome.
You mean something like the OLPC XO-2?
Actually no.
Although it is awesome.
The OLPC XO-2 is just like the Samsung foldable mobile - only bigger.
Yet what I had in mind is more like a traditional notebook, just that the screen is completely see-through if the OLED is off, with (also transparent) multi-touch surface on both sides.
- When the notebook is closed you could in theory see the keyboard inside through the transparent display. But it's probably too dark to see well. Yet if the screen is on you can no longer see the content inside as it is too bright and the device effectively becomes a 'tablet'.
- If you open it up, the image on the screen flips and you can use the device like a normal notebook with a regular keyboard on the bottom half.
Of course people looking at the open notebook can see on the outside (albeit mirrored) what is displayed on the screen - since its content is visible on both sides.
But I'm sure such transparent displays could be made to be visible only from one side - switchable to which side at will.
Here's another video of that Samsung transparent OLED.
I mean, I always figured the iPhone IS the new Newton.
Forgive my ignorance but what, exactly, did the newton do that the iPhone/iPod touch can't?
You have to have used a Newton to actually know.
The true beauty of the Newton was its OS. It was (and still is IMHO) far advanced compared to the iPhone OS, or Mac OSX for that matter.
The Newton OS' beauty was its total integration. You could add an application and its features would become available to all other applications immediately.
For example: to get text-to-speech support all you'd need to do was install the 'Macintalk' application and this feature was 'suddenly' available to all apps. Even apps that were never designed for text-to-speech!
Suddenly your text editor could read its contents to you, or the web browser would read a web page too you, as did every other app.
That total integration of all applications was a true beauty of the Newton OS.
And to this day IMHO no other OS matches that total integration. All features of all applications were available to all other applications. You would totally lose track of where an application's features end and where another apps features would start. It was all integrated.
You could open any text editor, notepad or word processor and write "schedule lunch with Bob Friday 1pm" and choose 'interpret' and it would analyze the text and know that Friday means the next Friday, 'Bob' was the first 'Bob' in your address book and lunch was typically 1 hour, i.e. the Newton OS would schedule 1 hour in your calendar between 1pm and 2pm the following Friday and put down 'Bob' as attendee.
I miss that in today's systems.
The Newton OS IMHO was 20 years ahead of its time. If not more.
Everything else I've used to this very day is a step backwards.
You have to have used a Newton to actually know.
The true beauty of the Newton was its OS. It was (and still is IMHO) far advanced compared to the iPhone OS, or Mac OSX for that matter.
The Newton OS' beauty was its total integration. You could add an application and its features would become available to all other applications immediately.
For example: to get text-to-speech support all you'd need to do was install the 'Macintalk' application and this feature was 'suddenly' available to all apps. Even apps that were never designed for text-to-speech!
Suddenly your text editor could read its contents to you, or the web browser would read a web page too you, as did every other app.
That total integration of all applications was a true beauty of the Newton OS.
And to this day IMHO no other OS matches that total integration. All features of all applications were available to all other applications. You would totally lose track of where an application's features end and where another apps features would start. It was all integrated.
You could open any text editor, notebpad or word processor and write "schedule lunch with Bob Friday 1pm" and choose 'interpret' and it would analyze the text and know that Friday means the next Friday, 'Bob' was the first 'Bob' in your address book and lunch was typically 1 hour, i.e. the Newton OS would schedule 1 hour in your calendar between 1pm and 2pm the following Friday and put down 'Bob' as attendee.
I miss that in today's systems.
The Newton OS IMHO was 20 years ahead of its time. If not more.
Everything else I've used to this very day is a step backwards.
To be fair, OS X Services and Data Detectors are moving towards recreating that kind of integration, although I'll not argue that the Newton had some amazing functionality for its time.
To be fair, OS X Services and Data Detectors are moving towards recreating that kind of integration, although I'll not argue that the Newton had some amazing functionality for its time.
Yes, we're getting there - again.
But the Newton had all those features 15 years ago! Fifteen years!
On an iPhone, can you open any app and then 'email' that page to someone?
You can with some applications, but not generally. On the Newton you could email or fax any page from any application.
On an iPhone can you have any text read to you aloud (or via headphones)?
I'm so surprised about the hoopla the Kindle 2 caused about reading out eBooks.
The Newton could do that 15 years ago! Any eBook, email, web page, literally any text you had could be turned into an AudioBook instantly. That was standard (if you downloaded the free Macintalk app).
Can the iPhone do that?
No. Not even 15 years later.
Note: there are different types of flexible OLED technology that have been in existence for a couple years now that already addresses issues such as low cost, and extended life span. An apple prototype that can be approved by Steve Jobs for mass production CAN be done NOW not years from now.
It is a race against time to see which tech company will come out with such a device first. And they all don't want it to be Apple because they know Apple will patent the hell out of it and it will be game over for them....again.