For the last time people, Apple isn't going to make a 'media tablet' any more than they make a 'media player'.
Apple builds solutions to specific problems, and keeps the focus on simplicity and key features.
The iPod is a music player, which just happens to come with side features like video playback, audio recording, calendar and games.
Any 'iPad' product will be pitched primarily as an eBook Reader, with heavy promotion of a Digital Bookstore that manages newspaper and magazine subscriptions, eBook sales, comic book sales for the youth market and some sort of play into the school textbook market (and the resulting bulk sales to educational institutions.)
If the pad is tied to any sort of contract of phone connection, I'm going to be deeply disappointed.
I have no interest in mobile connectivity with the pad, only wi-fi.
I hope the Verizon talks are about the iPhone lite (ahem, iPhone nano) alluded to in the article.
My guess..... be prepared for disappointment. Apple's 1st gen products tend to leave out the best stuff so they have an upward path to sell in the future.
I see what you are saying. I thought you meant some technical stuff about the keys themselves. Yeah, that is odd that they don't list those size dimensions. There are plenty of Google hits, but the sizes seem to vary... so take your pick.
I had a couple Apple support reps on the phone for about 20 minutes (bless their hearts) supposedly running around their lab department determined to get the exact dimensions - but they couldn't find a single spec for the size. Eventually they gave up and said they would email it to me tonce they got something. Funny stuff. Maybe it's a secret I feel a little bad making them look for it.
I don't see how such a device can be smaller considering all of the apps for the iPhone OS are designed around having a 3.5" touchscreen.
They're not designed around a certain screen size. They're designed around a certain resolution. Smaller screens could support that resolution. Isn't the iPod nano's screen particularly dense in pixels?
I had a couple Apple support reps on the phone for about 20 minutes (bless their hearts) supposedly running around their lab department determined to get the exact dimensions - but they couldn't find a single spec for the size. Eventually they gave up and said they would email it to me tonce they got something. Funny stuff. Maybe it's a secret I feel a little bad making them look for it.
I don't get this sub-thread at all. If the dimensions are so important to you, then take a tape measure to an Apple store or Best Buy and measure them. I don't think the lack of published measurements is a conspiracy or something (unless the keyboards are transdimensional...).
For the last time people, Apple isn't going to make a 'media tablet' any more than they make a 'media player'.
Apple builds solutions to specific problems, and keeps the focus on simplicity and key features.
The iPod is a music player, which just happens to come with side features like video playback, audio recording, calendar and games.
Any 'iPad' product will be pitched primarily as an eBook Reader, with heavy promotion of a Digital Bookstore that manages newspaper and magazine subscriptions, eBook sales, comic book sales for the youth market and some sort of play into the school textbook market (and the resulting bulk sales to educational institutions.)
Where can I short-sell this idea? I think Apple will do exactly what you say they won't (i.e., a tablet-sized iPod touch), and they won't market it as an eBook reader (except as a minor example of the thousands of apps available). Web and email and apps are great selling points. "Just like the Kindle but better!" is a dud.
They're not designed around a certain screen size. They're designed around a certain resolution. Smaller screens could support that resolution. Isn't the iPod nano's screen particularly dense in pixels?
That isn't quite right. If you shrink or enlarge the display size the icons will get smaller. Imagine trying to use the virtual keyboard on an iPhone display that is 25% less in each direction. It will be difficult.
I believe the iPhone OS already has RI built into it. When Apple ups the ?which they'll have to stay competitive? they can still keep the same screen size, which means everything is the same size, only a little crisper looking.
Where can I short-sell this idea? I think Apple will do exactly what you say they won't (i.e., a tablet-sized iPod touch), and they won't market it as an eBook reader (except as a minor example of the thousands of apps available). Web and email and apps are great selling points. "Just like the Kindle but better!" is a dud.
So this won't have an eInk display? It will have an LCD display? That means it can't compete with eBooks in the same way as it can't possibly run as long or be used outdoors as easily.
I also don't see a need for a large iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket. If Apple releases anything it will be a small MacBook. It might behoove them to have a swivel screen that is touch sensitive, but making just a tablet device seems pretty pointless. Where is the market for this device? Where is the growth for this market? What will it do to iPod Touch sales? Is there a large number of people clamouring for a device between an iPod Touch and Mac the way they wanted a device between the iPod and Mac?
For the last time people, Apple isn't going to make a 'media tablet' any more than they make a 'media player'.
The iPod is a music player with some extra stuff here and there. But the iPod Touch's other media playing features share equal billing. Or maybe you hadn't noticed the sudden and dramatic shift in marketing.
I think Apple is being truthful when they dismiss e-readers as a dedicated product. Frankly, it makes no sense for them, already having iTunes and the insane momentum on the App Store, to roll out a single-function e-reader.
All the laptops and netbooks currently being sold that only ever browse or do light email.("couch-" and "kitchen-laptops" in the modern vernacular)
All the portable dvd players out there.
(Inflexible and wasteful; burning battery to spin inconvenient plastic discs)
All the in-car/in-train/in-plane entertainment systems.
(Which are inflexible and obsolete long before the vehicle)
Both the ebook readers.
(the battery won't last as long as those single-function devices, but that won't matter. The thing will be so useful you'll always have it topped off.)
And all the places when digital records are useful but a full keyboard is far less important than good ergonomics, flexible postures, excellent markup and 'in the margins' note-taking.
(The 'traditional' tablet space: Hospital work, field work, class notes, meeting notes, brainstorming, sketching, inspection work, warehouse/shipping work, etc.)
You still have the fundamental issue here of what features will Verizon allow any product from Apple to perform without Verizon making all the money.
Look at every product that Verizon has on the market, they have cripple features and if you want something like songs, ring tones, file (pictures and the such) transfer, or GPS navigation you have to pay Verizon for the privilege of getting those things on the phone. If Verizon maintains their current business model with an Apple product, you can expect a lot of dissatisfied customers when they find out going to another provide you get it all free or less from Apple directly.
Now if Verizon changes their current business model to match that of the Apple & AT&T relationship, it will open the flood gates with all the cell phone manufactures to say they want the same deal as Apple is getting and have more control over product features.
I personally see Verizon loosing either way. They have been strong arming both the cell phone suppliers as well as their end customers for too long for this not to back fire somehow.
Also people you have to think about this, if apple does do a CDMA version for Verizon it would have to include GSM as well since people who travel will not want two phones. This has also been one of the fundamental issue with Verizon, you can not use their standard phone everywhere in the world. So if they make a truly CDMA/GSM phone it will suck on power that is for sure.
(The 'traditional' tablet space: Hospital work, field work, class notes, meeting notes, brainstorming, sketching, inspection work, warehouse/shipping work, etc.)
I can see the business sector, but Apple has yet to focus CE on that area. The iPhone is moving there but the primary focus is the consumer, not enterprise. I have not been shown any scenerio where someone would have an iPhone and a MacBook and then also carry a Mac tablet, or a viable reason why they could replace one for a tablet. That dog won't hunt.
That isn't quite right. If you shrink or enlarge the display size the icons will get smaller. Imagine trying to use the virtual keyboard on an iPhone display that is 25% less in each direction. It will be difficult.
I believe the iPhone OS already has RI built into it. When Apple ups the ?which they'll have to stay competitive? they can still keep the same screen size, which means everything is the same size, only a little crisper looking.
Hmm. I have no proof, of course, but looking at my iPhone, I find it hard to believe the icons couldn't scale down in size and not still be easily legible.
True, though, about the keyboard. Maybe this supports the idea that there won't be a smaller iPhone. After all, any phone these *absolutely* requires a keyboard. It's a non-starter without one.
I can see the business sector, but Apple has yet to focus CE on that area.
I don't think they'd -target- the traditional tablet sector at all. I think they'd build it and pitch it as an alternative to the consumer media devices and couch-laptops I mentioned. But they'd also have the foresight to include the App Store. It would be the third-party apps that serve the traditional tablet segment.
Quote:
I have not been shown any scenerio where someone would have an iPhone and a MacBook and then also carry a Mac tablet, or a viable reason why they could replace one for a tablet.
Any time you see someone with a pad of paper or a fixed function device instead of a smartphone or laptop, you have your answer.
Laptops have never been truly portable computers. They're just a more-portable desktop. If you have a proper chair and desk at the endpoints (and AC half the time) they're great. But for everywhere in between, and every other end-point situation, they're not as good. And if you're doing anything less than "Real Work" at the endpoints, they really don't justify their overhead and complexity.
Similarly the iPhone is very, very convenient for quick tasks. You almost always have it with you and it's quite capable. But if you're going to do something that takes more than a moment or two, or is more complex -- while it can do it -- it's no longer the right tool for the job.
I don't think they'd -target- the traditional tablet sector at all. I think they'd build it and pitch it as an alternative to the consumer media devices and couch-laptops I mentioned. But they'd also have the foresight to include the App Store. It would be the third-party apps that serve the traditional tablet segment.
Any time you see someone with a pad of paper or a fixed function device instead of a smartphone or laptop, you have your answer.
Apple would have to make a new device, make a new SDK, make another App Store. Then it has to get developers to work on these new apps, convince the consumer to buy these new apps. That is too many things out of the gate.
Quote:
Laptops have never been truly portable computers. They're just a more-portable desktop. If you have a proper chair and desk at the endpoints (and AC half the time) they're great. But for everywhere in between, and every other end-point situation, they're not as good. And if you're doing anything less than "Real Work" at the endpoints, they really don't justify their overhead and complexity.
Similarly the iPhone is very, very convenient for quick tasks. You almost always have it with you and it's quite capable. But if you're going to do something that takes more than a moment or two, or is more complex -- while it can do it -- it's no longer the right tool for the job.
Which is why I think it doesn't exist. It includes the worst aspect of both devices. Having an $800 couch computer just isn't feasible.
A 10" MacBook without an optical drive but pretty much all the standard components of a MacBook seems much more likely. Especially if it can come from a carrier via a data plan subsidation.
Seriously, you are setting yourself for major disappointment if you think that the US will be blanketed in LTE next year. You are buying into Verizon's latest marketing ploy. It's can't possibly happen. Check out the smaller by land area, dense by population, more advanced countries with a well entrenched cellular network with more than a 1:1 ratio of cellphone users to populace. They don't have LTE, so why do you think Verizon is going to create it when the standard isn't finished, and there is no available HW to implement. It is impossible to have an LTE iPhone next year!
Impossible? No.
Mid but more like late next year I still stand by that.
Oh, and ask Sprint how long its going to take them. They are going to be....no they are first.
Do you think the carriers are sitting on their lazy azzes using the economy as an excuse? They had better not be. They had better be investing on their infrastructure or they are liable to find themselves as an also ran.
Sprint sure as hell isn't.
Remember Apple's transition from the iphone edge to the 3G iphone? It was just the edge phone with a 3G radio.
The same thing is going to happen again. The 4G iphone will just be the one announced in June but with a 4G radio. It will have the same specs besides that.
Apple would have to make a new device, make a new SDK, make another App Store. Then it has to get developers to work on these new apps, convince the consumer to buy these new apps. That is too many things out of the gate.
Is it? After the iPhone the developer buy-in is going to happen even faster. And the SDK wouldn't be far off from the iPhone OS SDK either. Much of the plumbing would stay the same. While I also doubt they'd make it literally run the iPhone OS, I don't think it would be so different that the SDK was that much more complicated.
Quote:
It includes the worst aspect of both devices.
You literally cannot think of a situation where someone would like to have a digital record but doesn't need so much processing power as to justify kb/m UI and desktop applications? You've never been at a conference, hunched over your laptop keyboard thinking there must be a better way? Or at a meeting wondering why you're still scribbling on a legal pad, yet never questioning your decision to leave your laptop in your office?
Quote:
An $800 couch computer just isn't feasible.
That's Microsoft's argument against Apple's entire product line: Ignore quality, usefulness, design; Focus only on price.
That's never been a productive argument and it's certainly never been useful as a predictive one.
Quote:
A 10" MacBook without an optical drive but pretty much all the standard components of a MacBook seems much more likely.
Except that the keyboard will be too uncomfortable for heavy typing, making it a dubious 'feature'. The trackpad would be so small as to be even more frustrating. The UI doesn't scale well to that level. And the hardware can't put the processing power of a macbook in a chasis that size and have a respectable battery. It would have to be lower powered, meaning it would set up expectations of running desktop software but never be able to deliver on it.
It would still cost $800. It would still be used almost exclusively as a media consumption device. And it would be burdened with the overhead and ergonomic failures of the kb/m UI design, without getting any of the benefit (due it's low power, small screen and useless keyboard).
Apple took a stab at making a laptop as small as they dared without harming the user experience. That's the Air. A smaller laptop is not going to happen.
Comments
Apple builds solutions to specific problems, and keeps the focus on simplicity and key features.
The iPod is a music player, which just happens to come with side features like video playback, audio recording, calendar and games.
Any 'iPad' product will be pitched primarily as an eBook Reader, with heavy promotion of a Digital Bookstore that manages newspaper and magazine subscriptions, eBook sales, comic book sales for the youth market and some sort of play into the school textbook market (and the resulting bulk sales to educational institutions.)
For the last time people, Apple isn't going to make a 'media tablet' any more than they make a 'media player'.
I think a 10" MacBook Mini is more likely. Something that has an EV-DO and/or HSUPA 3G card in it and is subsidized by the carriers.
Agreed...
If the pad is tied to any sort of contract of phone connection, I'm going to be deeply disappointed.
I have no interest in mobile connectivity with the pad, only wi-fi.
I hope the Verizon talks are about the iPhone lite (ahem, iPhone nano) alluded to in the article.
My guess..... be prepared for disappointment. Apple's 1st gen products tend to leave out the best stuff so they have an upward path to sell in the future.
I see what you are saying. I thought you meant some technical stuff about the keys themselves. Yeah, that is odd that they don't list those size dimensions. There are plenty of Google hits, but the sizes seem to vary... so take your pick.
I had a couple Apple support reps on the phone for about 20 minutes (bless their hearts) supposedly running around their lab department determined to get the exact dimensions - but they couldn't find a single spec for the size. Eventually they gave up and said they would email it to me tonce they got something. Funny stuff. Maybe it's a secret
I don't see how such a device can be smaller considering all of the apps for the iPhone OS are designed around having a 3.5" touchscreen.
They're not designed around a certain screen size. They're designed around a certain resolution. Smaller screens could support that resolution. Isn't the iPod nano's screen particularly dense in pixels?
I had a couple Apple support reps on the phone for about 20 minutes (bless their hearts) supposedly running around their lab department determined to get the exact dimensions - but they couldn't find a single spec for the size. Eventually they gave up and said they would email it to me tonce they got something. Funny stuff. Maybe it's a secret
I don't get this sub-thread at all. If the dimensions are so important to you, then take a tape measure to an Apple store or Best Buy and measure them. I don't think the lack of published measurements is a conspiracy or something (unless the keyboards are transdimensional...).
For the last time people, Apple isn't going to make a 'media tablet' any more than they make a 'media player'.
Apple builds solutions to specific problems, and keeps the focus on simplicity and key features.
The iPod is a music player, which just happens to come with side features like video playback, audio recording, calendar and games.
Any 'iPad' product will be pitched primarily as an eBook Reader, with heavy promotion of a Digital Bookstore that manages newspaper and magazine subscriptions, eBook sales, comic book sales for the youth market and some sort of play into the school textbook market (and the resulting bulk sales to educational institutions.)
Where can I short-sell this idea? I think Apple will do exactly what you say they won't (i.e., a tablet-sized iPod touch), and they won't market it as an eBook reader (except as a minor example of the thousands of apps available). Web and email and apps are great selling points. "Just like the Kindle but better!" is a dud.
They're not designed around a certain screen size. They're designed around a certain resolution. Smaller screens could support that resolution. Isn't the iPod nano's screen particularly dense in pixels?
That isn't quite right. If you shrink or enlarge the display size the icons will get smaller. Imagine trying to use the virtual keyboard on an iPhone display that is 25% less in each direction. It will be difficult.
I believe the iPhone OS already has RI built into it. When Apple ups the ?which they'll have to stay competitive? they can still keep the same screen size, which means everything is the same size, only a little crisper looking.
Where can I short-sell this idea? I think Apple will do exactly what you say they won't (i.e., a tablet-sized iPod touch), and they won't market it as an eBook reader (except as a minor example of the thousands of apps available). Web and email and apps are great selling points. "Just like the Kindle but better!" is a dud.
So this won't have an eInk display? It will have an LCD display? That means it can't compete with eBooks in the same way as it can't possibly run as long or be used outdoors as easily.
I also don't see a need for a large iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket. If Apple releases anything it will be a small MacBook. It might behoove them to have a swivel screen that is touch sensitive, but making just a tablet device seems pretty pointless. Where is the market for this device? Where is the growth for this market? What will it do to iPod Touch sales? Is there a large number of people clamouring for a device between an iPod Touch and Mac the way they wanted a device between the iPod and Mac?
For the last time people, Apple isn't going to make a 'media tablet' any more than they make a 'media player'.
The iPod is a music player with some extra stuff here and there. But the iPod Touch's other media playing features share equal billing. Or maybe you hadn't noticed the sudden and dramatic shift in marketing.
I think Apple is being truthful when they dismiss e-readers as a dedicated product. Frankly, it makes no sense for them, already having iTunes and the insane momentum on the App Store, to roll out a single-function e-reader.
I think a 10" MacBook Mini is more likely. Something that has an EV-DO and/or HSUPA 3G card in it and is subsidized by the carriers.
In other words- a NETBOOK/NOTEBOOK.
Where is the market for this device?
All the laptops and netbooks currently being sold that only ever browse or do light email.("couch-" and "kitchen-laptops" in the modern vernacular)
All the portable dvd players out there.
(Inflexible and wasteful; burning battery to spin inconvenient plastic discs)
All the in-car/in-train/in-plane entertainment systems.
(Which are inflexible and obsolete long before the vehicle)
Both the ebook readers.
(the battery won't last as long as those single-function devices, but that won't matter. The thing will be so useful you'll always have it topped off.)
And all the places when digital records are useful but a full keyboard is far less important than good ergonomics, flexible postures, excellent markup and 'in the margins' note-taking.
(The 'traditional' tablet space: Hospital work, field work, class notes, meeting notes, brainstorming, sketching, inspection work, warehouse/shipping work, etc.)
You still have the fundamental issue here of what features will Verizon allow any product from Apple to perform without Verizon making all the money.
Look at every product that Verizon has on the market, they have cripple features and if you want something like songs, ring tones, file (pictures and the such) transfer, or GPS navigation you have to pay Verizon for the privilege of getting those things on the phone. If Verizon maintains their current business model with an Apple product, you can expect a lot of dissatisfied customers when they find out going to another provide you get it all free or less from Apple directly.
Now if Verizon changes their current business model to match that of the Apple & AT&T relationship, it will open the flood gates with all the cell phone manufactures to say they want the same deal as Apple is getting and have more control over product features.
I personally see Verizon loosing either way. They have been strong arming both the cell phone suppliers as well as their end customers for too long for this not to back fire somehow.
Also people you have to think about this, if apple does do a CDMA version for Verizon it would have to include GSM as well since people who travel will not want two phones. This has also been one of the fundamental issue with Verizon, you can not use their standard phone everywhere in the world. So if they make a truly CDMA/GSM phone it will suck on power that is for sure.
Att and Apple, Apple Dictates
Others, Carriers Dictate
Until Others change/demand
Apple Rules
(The 'traditional' tablet space: Hospital work, field work, class notes, meeting notes, brainstorming, sketching, inspection work, warehouse/shipping work, etc.)
I can see the business sector, but Apple has yet to focus CE on that area. The iPhone is moving there but the primary focus is the consumer, not enterprise. I have not been shown any scenerio where someone would have an iPhone and a MacBook and then also carry a Mac tablet, or a viable reason why they could replace one for a tablet. That dog won't hunt.
That isn't quite right. If you shrink or enlarge the display size the icons will get smaller. Imagine trying to use the virtual keyboard on an iPhone display that is 25% less in each direction. It will be difficult.
I believe the iPhone OS already has RI built into it. When Apple ups the ?which they'll have to stay competitive? they can still keep the same screen size, which means everything is the same size, only a little crisper looking.
Hmm. I have no proof, of course, but looking at my iPhone, I find it hard to believe the icons couldn't scale down in size and not still be easily legible.
True, though, about the keyboard. Maybe this supports the idea that there won't be a smaller iPhone. After all, any phone these *absolutely* requires a keyboard. It's a non-starter without one.
I can see the business sector, but Apple has yet to focus CE on that area.
I don't think they'd -target- the traditional tablet sector at all. I think they'd build it and pitch it as an alternative to the consumer media devices and couch-laptops I mentioned. But they'd also have the foresight to include the App Store. It would be the third-party apps that serve the traditional tablet segment.
I have not been shown any scenerio where someone would have an iPhone and a MacBook and then also carry a Mac tablet, or a viable reason why they could replace one for a tablet.
Any time you see someone with a pad of paper or a fixed function device instead of a smartphone or laptop, you have your answer.
Laptops have never been truly portable computers. They're just a more-portable desktop. If you have a proper chair and desk at the endpoints (and AC half the time) they're great. But for everywhere in between, and every other end-point situation, they're not as good. And if you're doing anything less than "Real Work" at the endpoints, they really don't justify their overhead and complexity.
Similarly the iPhone is very, very convenient for quick tasks. You almost always have it with you and it's quite capable. But if you're going to do something that takes more than a moment or two, or is more complex -- while it can do it -- it's no longer the right tool for the job.
I don't think they'd -target- the traditional tablet sector at all. I think they'd build it and pitch it as an alternative to the consumer media devices and couch-laptops I mentioned. But they'd also have the foresight to include the App Store. It would be the third-party apps that serve the traditional tablet segment.
Any time you see someone with a pad of paper or a fixed function device instead of a smartphone or laptop, you have your answer.
Apple would have to make a new device, make a new SDK, make another App Store. Then it has to get developers to work on these new apps, convince the consumer to buy these new apps. That is too many things out of the gate.
Laptops have never been truly portable computers. They're just a more-portable desktop. If you have a proper chair and desk at the endpoints (and AC half the time) they're great. But for everywhere in between, and every other end-point situation, they're not as good. And if you're doing anything less than "Real Work" at the endpoints, they really don't justify their overhead and complexity.
Similarly the iPhone is very, very convenient for quick tasks. You almost always have it with you and it's quite capable. But if you're going to do something that takes more than a moment or two, or is more complex -- while it can do it -- it's no longer the right tool for the job.
Which is why I think it doesn't exist. It includes the worst aspect of both devices. Having an $800 couch computer just isn't feasible.
A 10" MacBook without an optical drive but pretty much all the standard components of a MacBook seems much more likely. Especially if it can come from a carrier via a data plan subsidation.
Seriously, you are setting yourself for major disappointment if you think that the US will be blanketed in LTE next year. You are buying into Verizon's latest marketing ploy. It's can't possibly happen. Check out the smaller by land area, dense by population, more advanced countries with a well entrenched cellular network with more than a 1:1 ratio of cellphone users to populace. They don't have LTE, so why do you think Verizon is going to create it when the standard isn't finished, and there is no available HW to implement. It is impossible to have an LTE iPhone next year!
Impossible? No.
Mid but more like late next year I still stand by that.
Oh, and ask Sprint how long its going to take them. They are going to be....no they are first.
Check out their release schedule:
http://newsreleases.sprint.com/phoen...oom&ID=1269807
Do you think the carriers are sitting on their lazy azzes using the economy as an excuse? They had better not be. They had better be investing on their infrastructure or they are liable to find themselves as an also ran.
Sprint sure as hell isn't.
Remember Apple's transition from the iphone edge to the 3G iphone? It was just the edge phone with a 3G radio.
The same thing is going to happen again. The 4G iphone will just be the one announced in June but with a 4G radio. It will have the same specs besides that.
Apple would have to make a new device, make a new SDK, make another App Store. Then it has to get developers to work on these new apps, convince the consumer to buy these new apps. That is too many things out of the gate.
Is it? After the iPhone the developer buy-in is going to happen even faster. And the SDK wouldn't be far off from the iPhone OS SDK either. Much of the plumbing would stay the same. While I also doubt they'd make it literally run the iPhone OS, I don't think it would be so different that the SDK was that much more complicated.
It includes the worst aspect of both devices.
You literally cannot think of a situation where someone would like to have a digital record but doesn't need so much processing power as to justify kb/m UI and desktop applications? You've never been at a conference, hunched over your laptop keyboard thinking there must be a better way? Or at a meeting wondering why you're still scribbling on a legal pad, yet never questioning your decision to leave your laptop in your office?
An $800 couch computer just isn't feasible.
That's Microsoft's argument against Apple's entire product line: Ignore quality, usefulness, design; Focus only on price.
That's never been a productive argument and it's certainly never been useful as a predictive one.
A 10" MacBook without an optical drive but pretty much all the standard components of a MacBook seems much more likely.
Except that the keyboard will be too uncomfortable for heavy typing, making it a dubious 'feature'. The trackpad would be so small as to be even more frustrating. The UI doesn't scale well to that level. And the hardware can't put the processing power of a macbook in a chasis that size and have a respectable battery. It would have to be lower powered, meaning it would set up expectations of running desktop software but never be able to deliver on it.
It would still cost $800. It would still be used almost exclusively as a media consumption device. And it would be burdened with the overhead and ergonomic failures of the kb/m UI design, without getting any of the benefit (due it's low power, small screen and useless keyboard).
Apple took a stab at making a laptop as small as they dared without harming the user experience. That's the Air. A smaller laptop is not going to happen.