AI must really be desperate for eyeballs if it keeps propping up rumours to resurrect 15 year old dead Newton as a tablet 2 weeks in a row. Go make a Hackintosh netbook if you want a 10" MB otherwise apple wouldnt have discontinued 12" G4 PB.
The mini basically has all the functionality of an apple tv and the front row interface looks pretty much exactly like the apple tv, and it could also replace your dvd player.
One big difference is that Front Row doesn't allow you to browse the iTunes Store and buy things directly from the TV the way the Apple TV does. But I do wish you could surf the web using Apple TV.
I am shocked, just shocked, to discover that someone with physical access to a computer can do bad things to it. Who knew?
/sarcasm
The key logger can be installed by someone clicking on a malicious website link and download stuff that automatically runs in Safari. You don't need physical access to the device to install the firmware hack. I agree with the authors that this is defective by design. Since when did keyboards need the amount of flash memory and upgradable firmware (that isn't protected) that are present in Apple's aluminum keyboards? My tinfoil hat says this is intentional.
The key logger can be installed by someone clicking on a malicious website link and download stuff that automatically runs in Safari. You don't need physical access to the device to install the firmware hack. I agree with the authors that this is defective by design. Since when did keyboards need the amount of flash memory and upgradable firmware (that isn't protected) that are present in Apple's aluminum keyboards? My tinfoil hat says this is intentional.
The initial keyboard firmware update software was created by Apple. So by maliciously altering this code it has access. It needs a delivery system via Trojan, browser exploit or hands on to install.
For example, a "free" program that routinely checks for updates without your knowledge can be attacked with a "man in the middle" attack (say via a compromised open wifi spot), replacing the trusted app with a altered one during the update cycle.
Since nearly all apps now request a admin password, and you have given this app you downloaded your "trust" you think nothing of giving it total access to your machine.
The Trojan now can do what it wants, it has root, so it infects the keyboard firmware and everything else. Including EFI and OS X.
If you get suspicious and wipe your hard drive, the keyboard firmware exploit just records your keystrokes and IP like a key logger, and sends it out over the internet, which the hacker can SSH back in and reinfect OS X and EFI all over again.
In order to really do a secure reinstall, the keyboard firmware will now also have to be wiped and reinstalled.
Apple doesn't provide a outgoing firewall, so apps can "phone home" for updates without the user first deciding upon the security of the connected network.
What Apple needs to do is:
1: To compartmentalize OS X with it's own password. There is no reason a app install needs total access to your machine to install. Except certain third party system level and altering apps, which are very few and a appropriate warning dialog used. Trojans exist because Apple allowed 'total system access' for simple word processing program installs, so it created a lax security environment.
2: Provide a outgoing firewall that alerts users that a app wants to connect to the internet so people can decide if the network they are on is secure enough for software updates. Windows anti-malware software have this already. (LittleSnitch for the Mac).
Of course a EFI firmware exploit doesn't need OS X (or any of it's apps) to be running to do what it wants, it's nearly impossible to verify EFI contents (rEFIt is one software for the skilled) to see what was installed there by programs. (phone home, backdoors etc)
3: Provide a keyboard firmware update for all Mac's, first to clear any non authorized code and then lock it down properly.
4: Provide a verification process of EFI in a Admin System Preference Pane.
One big difference is that Front Row doesn't allow you to browse the iTunes Store and buy things directly from the TV the way the Apple TV does. But I do wish you could surf the web using Apple TV.
These are my own views of what a possible tablet could be like, nothing more.
Why Tablets have failed till now:
Most of the apple tablet naysayers point out that there are many tablets in the market, and they have all been utter failures. Then they go on to say, that it implies the apple tablet failing as well.
Well, though I completely hate the tablets in the market today, and am not ruling out the possibility of the apple tablet failing, I believe, that if a tablet is done right, it could very well be the next best thing.
The one major reason for the failure of tablets is crappy software. Almost all tablets in the market run windows. Even the its ok as a desktop/laptop OS, (i don't wanna start an OS war here) it just doesn't have good support for touch. It makes somethings possible by touch, which are way easier using the mouse and keyboard. It doesn't bring anything to the table.
How to design a Tablet.
When designing a tablet, one of the most important features is the software. Something that apple understands.
A 10" screen with iphone OS just doesn't make sense. But nor does OSX as it is. Of course it needs to be made for touch. So of course they need an all new OS for the tablet.
Again, it needs much more functionality than an ipod touch, but it can't afford to do everything a laptop can. It needs to create its own space, and let people do the things netbooks can, and also let people do somethings that ONLY tablets can.
First and foremost, it needs to work with both a stylus and your fingers.
It needs to have something like a finder. (not like iphone please)
and it definitely need multitasking.
This Is how I picture it.
There will be a scrollable home screen which will contain icons for apps.
one if the app would be something like a finder.
It would need touch friendly versions of iwork, itunes, iphoto, Safari and some sort of photoshop-ish software to name the most essential ones.
These apps(except itunes, and safari) would open basically one full screen document, a lot like the iphone.
There will be minimal controls. the toolbars will work in an auto-hide way, like the do in pages full-screen. This way you can make full use of a smaller screen.
The documents should make use of the accelerometer, to auto-align, but the controls should stay in their own place and turn. (some toolbars need the longer edge)
Moreover, to save space, these programs should not be in windows floating on a desktop, which would complicate things on a tablet. The apps should launch in an iphone sort of way, with each app taking up something like a space.
A scrollable "home" button, should be able to flick left and right across apps, like on the palm pre. Also, pushing it down should open something like expose to choose the very app you want. and it clicking it should bring up the home screen.
it could also have some buttons to bring up mini controls for itunes.
(Considering the low power, it may not allow multitasking while running some games.)
It should allow you to save files easily. (again, not like the iphone)
It should give both a landscape and portrait keyboard in all apps. (an external bluetooth keyboard would be very nice as well.)
It should invent some new gestures to speed things up. e.g. using three fingers to "pick up" (cut) and reverse to paste files and other items. two fingers to scroll universally makes sense. So does single finger tap, and two finger tap, to make it easy to use after a mac laptop. pinching etc, are a given.
It definitely should allow simultaneous use of the stylus and fingers. For example, someone should be able to draw with a stylus, while simultaneously scrolling, zooming on the document.
However, the stylus should only be allowed for input. All navigation should be done by hands and multi-touch. The problem with a stylus is that it can only touch the screen at one point making controls extremely complicated.
Wifi is a given. It needs at least one USB drive, if not more. That much is enough.
It does not need a disk drive. It needs to be portable with little or no moving parts.
I will put up mock ups after a week, if I still feel like it.
Is is possible?
Of course its possible per say. But going in line with rumors, is it possible for a price of about $800.
I believe so.
The ipod Touch comes for about 229 dollars. Increasing the size to 10" increases the price by a few hundered dollars. Also, increasing the power of the device increases it further. To make it as thin, it would probably cost over a thousand dollars. But it can be thicker. more like the macbook air. And suddenly, the price of $800 seems just right.
It doesn't need core 2 duo, but it definitely needs to be faster than the iphone. Which I think is totally possible. Also as its a much bigger device, it can have a bigger battery. A 6-10 hour battery would be good enough.
I am not saying that the apple tablet is definitely coming out. But its very possible, and this is what I consider would make an excellent design, that everyone would wanna buy. P.S. I have read what people want throughout the blog, and I'm pretty sure I meet all their requirements.
Wish apple, or any good company for that matter would do something like it.
I hope they can use mac OSX in whatever does emerge
MY MBP 15 GHz burns very hot . So i feared for a tablet out in the field all day .
I hope NOT. While OSX would be helpful at times, it's a trade off and I would rather have something cheaper, lighter, cooler, longer battery, and more focused on Touch.
Also ignoring trade off, if it runs OSX then developers and users will use OSX apps - which work better with keyboard and mouse - and ultimately they'll prefer to buy something with a keyboard and mouse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaCameron
Isn't Apple's current policy to incorporate "Mac" into the name of all of their computers?
Only if it runs MacOS. If it runs iPhoneOS it could easily be an "iBook" or something. I actually used to wonder if we'd see an "iBook Air" as a 9inch iPhone-OS based version of the "MacBook Air". Same goes for tablets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2
I'm hoping for the same thing (more a mini-computer than a super-duper iPod).
Unless this product is just a new iPod that is being confused with the actual tablet, it doesn't make much sense to me. The way this analyst describes it, it just sounds like a bigger iPod. If that's true then it will kind of upstage the new iPods we all ready know about won't it? Why even call it a tablet if all it is, is a media device like the current iPod? Wouldn't that make it "iPod Jumbo" and not a tablet at all?
The iPod touch is really a different beast to the other iPods, so a "super iPod Touch" could be quite good. The iPhoneOS does so much, but is much more limited than a full Mac. I don't think a full fledged OSX machine would get much interest, for multiple reasons.
BTW, if Apple releases a 'tablet", I expect they might rename the iPod Touch to fit that tablet's name. eg: "iPad", and "iPad Nano".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
I think a nice feature would be remote desktop back to your Mac. I'm not sure how they'd handle input, mouse and clicking would be easy, but you'd need some sort of virtual keyboard overlay for text input. Bandwidth might be an issue on cellular networks. Why is Apple's screen sharing so much more bandwidth intensive than Windows remote desktop, and Windows ?
That IS a good idea. A lite computer with remote control options. You can already do that from the iPhone too with a VNC app, but it is a TINY screen and the keyboard covers the screen even more. Touching the screen doubles as a mouse click or to move around the screen... it's not so easy but it's doable and a bigger screen would help! (as would a native Apple app, and faster rendering).
Microsoft only sends basic window drawing commands over the net, commands like "draw a window here" - where VNC has to send images of everything and is MUCH slower. The original OSX (& earlier) used display Postscript so just sent the postscript commands over the net, but Apple dumped all that when it switched to PDF.
I always look out for info on some better graphic system to allow this in the rumours, and almost never see it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimMok
BRAVO!!....Me too. Im sick of the internet commercials on Hulu. Damn they are annoying. I know they help pay....but really.
I like commercials! Well, not really, but I do really want legal, free TV. We should be able to download any iTunes TV show in 1 of 4 ways:
1) $1.99 to buy
2) $80c to rent
3) FREE but it puts in 4 minutes of ads customised to our specific interests, without fast forward
4) 50c with 2 minutes of ads customised
(or 5) the old way: FREE but with 16 minutes of regular ads we can fast forward through.)
50% more for HD content. Ad supported also means that while iTunes downloads the start of a show, it can play the first (preloaded) ad.
I hope NOT. While OSX would be helpful at times, it's a trade off and I would rather have something cheaper, lighter, cooler, longer battery, and more focused on Touch.
Mac OS X 10.6 and iPhone OS 3.0 share 85% the same code, this was one of the facts mentioned at this year's WWDC. It seems the portability layer that let them go from PowerPC to Intel also enabled them to go to ARM. I would guess this this new device will share a similar OS percentage with it's siblings.
Mac OS X 10.6 and iPhone OS 3.0 share 85% the same code, this was one of the facts mentioned at this year's WWDC. It seems the portability layer that let them go from PowerPC to Intel also enabled them to go to ARM. I would guess this this new device will share a similar OS percentage with it's siblings.
Yeah, while the poster I replied to said "Mac OSX", I just said OSX... of which there are the 2 varieties (MacOSX, and iPhoneOS). I meant "I don't want the Mac OS on a tablet".
On a related note.... when it shares so much code, do you think of it as "iPhone OS" based or "Mac" based... or is it simply a 3rd version of OSX? I wonder if AppleTV will be another version. If you start with the Mac and remove little background tasks, at what point do you remove enough of the background tasks that you can no longer consider it a Mac?
BTW: I assumed but didn't realise they'd confirmed that iPhoneOS3 and OSX10.6 were the same base. Thanks.
One big difference is that Front Row doesn't allow you to browse the iTunes Store and buy things directly from the TV the way the Apple TV does. But I do wish you could surf the web using Apple TV.
-------
Yeah now that I think about it that's true. I'm so used to the Apple TV that I never use front row anymore and took that for granted. It's a shame you really should be able to buy from the store with front row. That's a no-brainer for using the mini as a kind of HTPC.
I think Apple doesn't want us surfing the web on the Apple TV because of sites like Hulu. Apple wants to sell you HD TV shows for $2.99, and if you can get em for free you might not buy.
It would be great though. The Wii uses Opera as its web browser which is a really good one. There's no reason we shouldn't have Safari on the Apple TV except that apple wants to force everyone through the iTunes store.
If you want to hack your Apple TV there is a web browser available, but who wants to bother with that.
On a related note.... when it shares so much code, do you think of it as "iPhone OS" based or "Mac" based... or is it simply a 3rd version of OSX? I wonder if AppleTV will be another version. If you start with the Mac and remove little background tasks, at what point do you remove enough of the background tasks that you can no longer consider it a Mac?
Good question. I would go with the "3rd version of OSX" answer myself. I think at Apple they are using the phrase "Core OS" for the 85% part.
For example, a "free" program that routinely checks for updates without your knowledge can be attacked with a "man in the middle" attack (say via a compromised open wifi spot), replacing the trusted app with a altered one during the update cycle.
Since nearly all apps now request a admin password, and you have given this app you downloaded your "trust" you think nothing of giving it total access to your machine.
The Trojan now can do what it wants, it has root, so it infects the keyboard firmware and everything else. Including EFI and OS X.
You're done here as your machine is now completely open. If your trojan has root the only thing that the keyboard firmware hack does is enable reinfection but any sensitive files are already compromised.
Quote:
What Apple needs to do is:
Improve security. M'kay, folks all agree on that point.
I hope NOT. While OSX would be helpful at times, it's a trade off and I would rather have something cheaper, lighter, cooler, longer battery, and more focused on Touch.
Also ignoring trade off, if it runs OSX then developers and users will use OSX apps - which work better with keyboard and mouse - and ultimately they'll prefer to buy something with a keyboard and mouse.
And the inability to run full OSX apps would make the tablet a lot less desirable. There's no reason there couldn't be a cradle or something and be able to use it as a netbook.
10 inch is such an odd size for a tablet that's only a mid/ipod. Too big to carry comfortably, too small to be that great for anything except as a super iPod.
A 7" tablet running iPhone OSX makes sense. A 10" netbook convertible tablet running full OSX makes sense.
A 10" tablet running iPhone OSX not so much if it wont fit in a coat pocket like a PSP or DS.
And the inability to run full OSX apps would make the tablet a lot less desirable. There's no reason there couldn't be a cradle or something and be able to use it as a netbook.
But mking the tablet thicker and heavier would also make the tablet a lot less desirable. If they can cut back on the demands on the processor they can use a simpler processor, with lowered battery demands, and make it lighter. If they can do it with an ARM chip they will also cut down the weight to some degree - I'm not sure to what degree and it's all a fine balance of course.
I think there are 2 reasons there couldn't be a cradle (with keyboard, I assume).
1) Apple wants people to buy a Mac AND a tablet (as per another user's post in another thread)
2) If they did offer a full Mac experience, including keyboard, too many apps would just be regular desktop apps. And that would make a tablet less desirable.. people would just buy a laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
10 inch is such an odd size for a tablet that's only a mid/ipod. Too big to carry comfortably, too small to be that great for anything except as a super iPod.
A 7" tablet running iPhone OSX makes sense. A 10" netbook convertible tablet running full OSX makes sense.
A 10" tablet running iPhone OSX not so much if it wont fit in a coat pocket like a PSP or DS.
Why is 10 inches too small to be great for anything? The iPhone works great within a much smaller limitation. And why would a 10" full OSX make more sense than a 10" iPhoneOSX (in doing "something great")?
BTW I think it's plausible that Apple could rename the iPhoneOS as the iPadOS, running on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. While that's unlikely, it might be useful to think of the iEcosystem as something with a "phone" as just one example.
But mking the tablet thicker and heavier would also make the tablet a lot less desirable. If they can cut back on the demands on the processor they can use a simpler processor, with lowered battery demands, and make it lighter. If they can do it with an ARM chip they will also cut down the weight to some degree - I'm not sure to what degree and it's all a fine balance of course.
If they are willing to port iLife and iWork to ARM and talk MS into porting Office to ARM that's fine.
Quote:
I think there are 2 reasons there couldn't be a cradle (with keyboard, I assume).
1) Apple wants people to buy a Mac AND a tablet (as per another user's post in another thread)
2) If they did offer a full Mac experience, including keyboard, too many apps would just be regular desktop apps. And that would make a tablet less desirable.. people would just buy a laptop.
Except that as a tablet it can do note taking (without typing), be drawn on, etc. The MBA as a convertible tablet would be great.
Quote:
Why is 10 inches too small to be great for anything? The iPhone works great within a much smaller limitation. And why would a 10" full OSX make more sense than a 10" iPhoneOSX (in doing "something great")?
For the same reasons that folks are moving to 12" netbooks. Screen real-estate (and keyboard size). A 10" slate is so-so since it has no keyboard, is a tad small as a drawing pad and yet is too big to fit in a pocket.
It has little advantage over a 7" slate if it isn't going to have a keyboard and significant size disadvantages.
It can't be great because it's a tweener size. Too big to be handy, too small to have high resolution/screen real-estate...which matters for surfing. 1024x600 is a tad short for non-mobile sites.
How do we know this? Because it's a common complaint for 10" netbooks. Even ones running OSX as hackintoshes.
Quote:
BTW I think it's plausible that Apple could rename the iPhoneOS as the iPadOS, running on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. While that's unlikely, it might be useful to think of the iEcosystem as something with a "phone" as just one example.
They don't need to rename anything. They call it OSX, not iPhoneOS.
If they are willing to port iLife and iWork to ARM and talk MS into porting Office to ARM that's fine.
I certainly think a cut back version of iLife & iWork could work on a tablet. And if Apple want to run an unmodified version of their iLife and iWork for a TABLET, I would say the tablet would be in great danger of total failure anyway!
If the tablet has to run MS Office... we're really moving outside of a tablet, and requiring the expense of MBA.
Quote:
Except that as a tablet it can do note taking (without typing), be drawn on, etc. The MBA as a convertible tablet would be great.
If you are saying that the tablet needs to have the full versions of all the apps, and a keyboard... then yeah you are just asking for a MacBook Air (with touch screen)?
So price similar to MBA, a slight price bump perhaps since it's a touch screen.
I'd just like to see a thinner, lighter, cheaper laptop - which is possible only by reducing the requirements and capabilities. And this is a thread on a Tablet .... I've never seen a good hybrid, and I'd personally like a real tablet (in the low price range).
Quote:
For the same reasons that folks are moving to 12" netbooks. Screen real-estate (and keyboard size). A 10" slate is so-so since it has no keyboard, is a tad small as a drawing pad and yet is too big to fit in a pocket.
It has little advantage over a 7" slate if it isn't going to have a keyboard and significant size disadvantages.
It can't be great because it's a tweener size. Too big to be handy, too small to have high resolution/screen real-estate...which matters for surfing. 1024x600 is a tad short for non-mobile sites.
How do we know this? Because it's a common complaint for 10" netbooks. Even ones running OSX as hackintoshes..
Yeah, it still sounds like you think 10" is too small in general, whether it's MacOSX or iPhoneOS.
Quote:
They don't need to rename anything. They call it OSX, not iPhoneOS.
I personally think it's valuable having 2 different identifiers for OSX (currently "Mac OSX" and "iPhoneOS"), just to differentiate them as they do look and feel quite different.
Comments
/sarcasm
The mini basically has all the functionality of an apple tv and the front row interface looks pretty much exactly like the apple tv, and it could also replace your dvd player.
One big difference is that Front Row doesn't allow you to browse the iTunes Store and buy things directly from the TV the way the Apple TV does. But I do wish you could surf the web using Apple TV.
I am shocked, just shocked, to discover that someone with physical access to a computer can do bad things to it. Who knew?
/sarcasm
The key logger can be installed by someone clicking on a malicious website link and download stuff that automatically runs in Safari. You don't need physical access to the device to install the firmware hack. I agree with the authors that this is defective by design. Since when did keyboards need the amount of flash memory and upgradable firmware (that isn't protected) that are present in Apple's aluminum keyboards? My tinfoil hat says this is intentional.
The key logger can be installed by someone clicking on a malicious website link and download stuff that automatically runs in Safari. You don't need physical access to the device to install the firmware hack. I agree with the authors that this is defective by design. Since when did keyboards need the amount of flash memory and upgradable firmware (that isn't protected) that are present in Apple's aluminum keyboards? My tinfoil hat says this is intentional.
Intentional?
- with what intent?
How does it get in?
The initial keyboard firmware update software was created by Apple. So by maliciously altering this code it has access. It needs a delivery system via Trojan, browser exploit or hands on to install.
For example, a "free" program that routinely checks for updates without your knowledge can be attacked with a "man in the middle" attack (say via a compromised open wifi spot), replacing the trusted app with a altered one during the update cycle.
Since nearly all apps now request a admin password, and you have given this app you downloaded your "trust" you think nothing of giving it total access to your machine.
The Trojan now can do what it wants, it has root, so it infects the keyboard firmware and everything else. Including EFI and OS X.
If you get suspicious and wipe your hard drive, the keyboard firmware exploit just records your keystrokes and IP like a key logger, and sends it out over the internet, which the hacker can SSH back in and reinfect OS X and EFI all over again.
In order to really do a secure reinstall, the keyboard firmware will now also have to be wiped and reinstalled.
Apple doesn't provide a outgoing firewall, so apps can "phone home" for updates without the user first deciding upon the security of the connected network.
What Apple needs to do is:
1: To compartmentalize OS X with it's own password. There is no reason a app install needs total access to your machine to install. Except certain third party system level and altering apps, which are very few and a appropriate warning dialog used. Trojans exist because Apple allowed 'total system access' for simple word processing program installs, so it created a lax security environment.
2: Provide a outgoing firewall that alerts users that a app wants to connect to the internet so people can decide if the network they are on is secure enough for software updates. Windows anti-malware software have this already. (LittleSnitch for the Mac).
Of course a EFI firmware exploit doesn't need OS X (or any of it's apps) to be running to do what it wants, it's nearly impossible to verify EFI contents (rEFIt is one software for the skilled) to see what was installed there by programs. (phone home, backdoors etc)
3: Provide a keyboard firmware update for all Mac's, first to clear any non authorized code and then lock it down properly.
4: Provide a verification process of EFI in a Admin System Preference Pane.
One big difference is that Front Row doesn't allow you to browse the iTunes Store and buy things directly from the TV the way the Apple TV does. But I do wish you could surf the web using Apple TV.
A Mac mini is the best solution.
Why Tablets have failed till now:
Most of the apple tablet naysayers point out that there are many tablets in the market, and they have all been utter failures. Then they go on to say, that it implies the apple tablet failing as well.
Well, though I completely hate the tablets in the market today, and am not ruling out the possibility of the apple tablet failing, I believe, that if a tablet is done right, it could very well be the next best thing.
The one major reason for the failure of tablets is crappy software. Almost all tablets in the market run windows. Even the its ok as a desktop/laptop OS, (i don't wanna start an OS war here) it just doesn't have good support for touch. It makes somethings possible by touch, which are way easier using the mouse and keyboard. It doesn't bring anything to the table.
How to design a Tablet.
When designing a tablet, one of the most important features is the software. Something that apple understands.
A 10" screen with iphone OS just doesn't make sense. But nor does OSX as it is. Of course it needs to be made for touch. So of course they need an all new OS for the tablet.
Again, it needs much more functionality than an ipod touch, but it can't afford to do everything a laptop can. It needs to create its own space, and let people do the things netbooks can, and also let people do somethings that ONLY tablets can.
First and foremost, it needs to work with both a stylus and your fingers.
It needs to have something like a finder. (not like iphone please)
and it definitely need multitasking.
This Is how I picture it.
There will be a scrollable home screen which will contain icons for apps.
one if the app would be something like a finder.
It would need touch friendly versions of iwork, itunes, iphoto, Safari and some sort of photoshop-ish software to name the most essential ones.
These apps(except itunes, and safari) would open basically one full screen document, a lot like the iphone.
There will be minimal controls. the toolbars will work in an auto-hide way, like the do in pages full-screen. This way you can make full use of a smaller screen.
The documents should make use of the accelerometer, to auto-align, but the controls should stay in their own place and turn. (some toolbars need the longer edge)
Moreover, to save space, these programs should not be in windows floating on a desktop, which would complicate things on a tablet. The apps should launch in an iphone sort of way, with each app taking up something like a space.
A scrollable "home" button, should be able to flick left and right across apps, like on the palm pre. Also, pushing it down should open something like expose to choose the very app you want. and it clicking it should bring up the home screen.
it could also have some buttons to bring up mini controls for itunes.
(Considering the low power, it may not allow multitasking while running some games.)
It should allow you to save files easily. (again, not like the iphone)
It should give both a landscape and portrait keyboard in all apps. (an external bluetooth keyboard would be very nice as well.)
It should invent some new gestures to speed things up. e.g. using three fingers to "pick up" (cut) and reverse to paste files and other items. two fingers to scroll universally makes sense. So does single finger tap, and two finger tap, to make it easy to use after a mac laptop. pinching etc, are a given.
It definitely should allow simultaneous use of the stylus and fingers. For example, someone should be able to draw with a stylus, while simultaneously scrolling, zooming on the document.
However, the stylus should only be allowed for input. All navigation should be done by hands and multi-touch. The problem with a stylus is that it can only touch the screen at one point making controls extremely complicated.
Wifi is a given. It needs at least one USB drive, if not more. That much is enough.
It does not need a disk drive. It needs to be portable with little or no moving parts.
I will put up mock ups after a week, if I still feel like it.
Is is possible?
Of course its possible per say. But going in line with rumors, is it possible for a price of about $800.
I believe so.
The ipod Touch comes for about 229 dollars. Increasing the size to 10" increases the price by a few hundered dollars. Also, increasing the power of the device increases it further. To make it as thin, it would probably cost over a thousand dollars. But it can be thicker. more like the macbook air. And suddenly, the price of $800 seems just right.
It doesn't need core 2 duo, but it definitely needs to be faster than the iphone. Which I think is totally possible. Also as its a much bigger device, it can have a bigger battery. A 6-10 hour battery would be good enough.
I am not saying that the apple tablet is definitely coming out. But its very possible, and this is what I consider would make an excellent design, that everyone would wanna buy. P.S. I have read what people want throughout the blog, and I'm pretty sure I meet all their requirements.
Wish apple, or any good company for that matter would do something like it.
I hope they can use mac OSX in whatever does emerge
MY MBP 15 GHz burns very hot . So i feared for a tablet out in the field all day .
I hope NOT. While OSX would be helpful at times, it's a trade off and I would rather have something cheaper, lighter, cooler, longer battery, and more focused on Touch.
Also ignoring trade off, if it runs OSX then developers and users will use OSX apps - which work better with keyboard and mouse - and ultimately they'll prefer to buy something with a keyboard and mouse.
Isn't Apple's current policy to incorporate "Mac" into the name of all of their computers?
Only if it runs MacOS. If it runs iPhoneOS it could easily be an "iBook" or something. I actually used to wonder if we'd see an "iBook Air" as a 9inch iPhone-OS based version of the "MacBook Air". Same goes for tablets.
I'm hoping for the same thing (more a mini-computer than a super-duper iPod).
Unless this product is just a new iPod that is being confused with the actual tablet, it doesn't make much sense to me. The way this analyst describes it, it just sounds like a bigger iPod. If that's true then it will kind of upstage the new iPods we all ready know about won't it? Why even call it a tablet if all it is, is a media device like the current iPod? Wouldn't that make it "iPod Jumbo" and not a tablet at all?
The iPod touch is really a different beast to the other iPods, so a "super iPod Touch" could be quite good. The iPhoneOS does so much, but is much more limited than a full Mac. I don't think a full fledged OSX machine would get much interest, for multiple reasons.
BTW, if Apple releases a 'tablet", I expect they might rename the iPod Touch to fit that tablet's name. eg: "iPad", and "iPad Nano".
I think a nice feature would be remote desktop back to your Mac. I'm not sure how they'd handle input, mouse and clicking would be easy, but you'd need some sort of virtual keyboard overlay for text input. Bandwidth might be an issue on cellular networks. Why is Apple's screen sharing so much more bandwidth intensive than Windows remote desktop, and Windows ?
That IS a good idea. A lite computer with remote control options. You can already do that from the iPhone too with a VNC app, but it is a TINY screen and the keyboard covers the screen even more. Touching the screen doubles as a mouse click or to move around the screen... it's not so easy but it's doable and a bigger screen would help! (as would a native Apple app, and faster rendering).
Microsoft only sends basic window drawing commands over the net, commands like "draw a window here" - where VNC has to send images of everything and is MUCH slower. The original OSX (& earlier) used display Postscript so just sent the postscript commands over the net, but Apple dumped all that when it switched to PDF.
I always look out for info on some better graphic system to allow this in the rumours, and almost never see it.
BRAVO!!....Me too. Im sick of the internet commercials on Hulu. Damn they are annoying. I know they help pay....but really.
I like commercials! Well, not really, but I do really want legal, free TV. We should be able to download any iTunes TV show in 1 of 4 ways:
1) $1.99 to buy
2) $80c to rent
3) FREE but it puts in 4 minutes of ads customised to our specific interests, without fast forward
4) 50c with 2 minutes of ads customised
(or 5) the old way: FREE but with 16 minutes of regular ads we can fast forward through.)
50% more for HD content. Ad supported also means that while iTunes downloads the start of a show, it can play the first (preloaded) ad.
I hope NOT. While OSX would be helpful at times, it's a trade off and I would rather have something cheaper, lighter, cooler, longer battery, and more focused on Touch.
Mac OS X 10.6 and iPhone OS 3.0 share 85% the same code, this was one of the facts mentioned at this year's WWDC. It seems the portability layer that let them go from PowerPC to Intel also enabled them to go to ARM. I would guess this this new device will share a similar OS percentage with it's siblings.
Mac OS X 10.6 and iPhone OS 3.0 share 85% the same code, this was one of the facts mentioned at this year's WWDC. It seems the portability layer that let them go from PowerPC to Intel also enabled them to go to ARM. I would guess this this new device will share a similar OS percentage with it's siblings.
Yeah, while the poster I replied to said "Mac OSX", I just said OSX... of which there are the 2 varieties (MacOSX, and iPhoneOS). I meant "I don't want the Mac OS on a tablet".
On a related note.... when it shares so much code, do you think of it as "iPhone OS" based or "Mac" based... or is it simply a 3rd version of OSX? I wonder if AppleTV will be another version. If you start with the Mac and remove little background tasks, at what point do you remove enough of the background tasks that you can no longer consider it a Mac?
BTW: I assumed but didn't realise they'd confirmed that iPhoneOS3 and OSX10.6 were the same base. Thanks.
One big difference is that Front Row doesn't allow you to browse the iTunes Store and buy things directly from the TV the way the Apple TV does. But I do wish you could surf the web using Apple TV.
-------
Yeah now that I think about it that's true. I'm so used to the Apple TV that I never use front row anymore and took that for granted. It's a shame you really should be able to buy from the store with front row. That's a no-brainer for using the mini as a kind of HTPC.
I think Apple doesn't want us surfing the web on the Apple TV because of sites like Hulu. Apple wants to sell you HD TV shows for $2.99, and if you can get em for free you might not buy.
It would be great though. The Wii uses Opera as its web browser which is a really good one. There's no reason we shouldn't have Safari on the Apple TV except that apple wants to force everyone through the iTunes store.
If you want to hack your Apple TV there is a web browser available, but who wants to bother with that.
On a related note.... when it shares so much code, do you think of it as "iPhone OS" based or "Mac" based... or is it simply a 3rd version of OSX? I wonder if AppleTV will be another version. If you start with the Mac and remove little background tasks, at what point do you remove enough of the background tasks that you can no longer consider it a Mac?
Good question. I would go with the "3rd version of OSX" answer myself. I think at Apple they are using the phrase "Core OS" for the 85% part.
For example, a "free" program that routinely checks for updates without your knowledge can be attacked with a "man in the middle" attack (say via a compromised open wifi spot), replacing the trusted app with a altered one during the update cycle.
Since nearly all apps now request a admin password, and you have given this app you downloaded your "trust" you think nothing of giving it total access to your machine.
The Trojan now can do what it wants, it has root, so it infects the keyboard firmware and everything else. Including EFI and OS X.
You're done here as your machine is now completely open. If your trojan has root the only thing that the keyboard firmware hack does is enable reinfection but any sensitive files are already compromised.
What Apple needs to do is:
Improve security. M'kay, folks all agree on that point.
I hope NOT. While OSX would be helpful at times, it's a trade off and I would rather have something cheaper, lighter, cooler, longer battery, and more focused on Touch.
Also ignoring trade off, if it runs OSX then developers and users will use OSX apps - which work better with keyboard and mouse - and ultimately they'll prefer to buy something with a keyboard and mouse.
And the inability to run full OSX apps would make the tablet a lot less desirable. There's no reason there couldn't be a cradle or something and be able to use it as a netbook.
10 inch is such an odd size for a tablet that's only a mid/ipod. Too big to carry comfortably, too small to be that great for anything except as a super iPod.
A 7" tablet running iPhone OSX makes sense. A 10" netbook convertible tablet running full OSX makes sense.
A 10" tablet running iPhone OSX not so much if it wont fit in a coat pocket like a PSP or DS.
And the inability to run full OSX apps would make the tablet a lot less desirable. There's no reason there couldn't be a cradle or something and be able to use it as a netbook.
But mking the tablet thicker and heavier would also make the tablet a lot less desirable. If they can cut back on the demands on the processor they can use a simpler processor, with lowered battery demands, and make it lighter. If they can do it with an ARM chip they will also cut down the weight to some degree - I'm not sure to what degree and it's all a fine balance of course.
I think there are 2 reasons there couldn't be a cradle (with keyboard, I assume).
1) Apple wants people to buy a Mac AND a tablet (as per another user's post in another thread)
2) If they did offer a full Mac experience, including keyboard, too many apps would just be regular desktop apps. And that would make a tablet less desirable.. people would just buy a laptop.
10 inch is such an odd size for a tablet that's only a mid/ipod. Too big to carry comfortably, too small to be that great for anything except as a super iPod.
A 7" tablet running iPhone OSX makes sense. A 10" netbook convertible tablet running full OSX makes sense.
A 10" tablet running iPhone OSX not so much if it wont fit in a coat pocket like a PSP or DS.
Why is 10 inches too small to be great for anything? The iPhone works great within a much smaller limitation. And why would a 10" full OSX make more sense than a 10" iPhoneOSX (in doing "something great")?
BTW I think it's plausible that Apple could rename the iPhoneOS as the iPadOS, running on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. While that's unlikely, it might be useful to think of the iEcosystem as something with a "phone" as just one example.
But mking the tablet thicker and heavier would also make the tablet a lot less desirable. If they can cut back on the demands on the processor they can use a simpler processor, with lowered battery demands, and make it lighter. If they can do it with an ARM chip they will also cut down the weight to some degree - I'm not sure to what degree and it's all a fine balance of course.
If they are willing to port iLife and iWork to ARM and talk MS into porting Office to ARM that's fine.
I think there are 2 reasons there couldn't be a cradle (with keyboard, I assume).
1) Apple wants people to buy a Mac AND a tablet (as per another user's post in another thread)
2) If they did offer a full Mac experience, including keyboard, too many apps would just be regular desktop apps. And that would make a tablet less desirable.. people would just buy a laptop.
Except that as a tablet it can do note taking (without typing), be drawn on, etc. The MBA as a convertible tablet would be great.
Why is 10 inches too small to be great for anything? The iPhone works great within a much smaller limitation. And why would a 10" full OSX make more sense than a 10" iPhoneOSX (in doing "something great")?
For the same reasons that folks are moving to 12" netbooks. Screen real-estate (and keyboard size). A 10" slate is so-so since it has no keyboard, is a tad small as a drawing pad and yet is too big to fit in a pocket.
It has little advantage over a 7" slate if it isn't going to have a keyboard and significant size disadvantages.
It can't be great because it's a tweener size. Too big to be handy, too small to have high resolution/screen real-estate...which matters for surfing. 1024x600 is a tad short for non-mobile sites.
How do we know this? Because it's a common complaint for 10" netbooks. Even ones running OSX as hackintoshes.
BTW I think it's plausible that Apple could rename the iPhoneOS as the iPadOS, running on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. While that's unlikely, it might be useful to think of the iEcosystem as something with a "phone" as just one example.
They don't need to rename anything. They call it OSX, not iPhoneOS.
If they are willing to port iLife and iWork to ARM and talk MS into porting Office to ARM that's fine.
I certainly think a cut back version of iLife & iWork could work on a tablet. And if Apple want to run an unmodified version of their iLife and iWork for a TABLET, I would say the tablet would be in great danger of total failure anyway!
If the tablet has to run MS Office... we're really moving outside of a tablet, and requiring the expense of MBA.
Except that as a tablet it can do note taking (without typing), be drawn on, etc. The MBA as a convertible tablet would be great.
If you are saying that the tablet needs to have the full versions of all the apps, and a keyboard... then yeah you are just asking for a MacBook Air (with touch screen)?
So price similar to MBA, a slight price bump perhaps since it's a touch screen.
I'd just like to see a thinner, lighter, cheaper laptop - which is possible only by reducing the requirements and capabilities. And this is a thread on a Tablet
For the same reasons that folks are moving to 12" netbooks. Screen real-estate (and keyboard size). A 10" slate is so-so since it has no keyboard, is a tad small as a drawing pad and yet is too big to fit in a pocket.
It has little advantage over a 7" slate if it isn't going to have a keyboard and significant size disadvantages.
It can't be great because it's a tweener size. Too big to be handy, too small to have high resolution/screen real-estate...which matters for surfing. 1024x600 is a tad short for non-mobile sites.
How do we know this? Because it's a common complaint for 10" netbooks. Even ones running OSX as hackintoshes..
Yeah, it still sounds like you think 10" is too small in general, whether it's MacOSX or iPhoneOS.
They don't need to rename anything. They call it OSX, not iPhoneOS.
I personally think it's valuable having 2 different identifiers for OSX (currently "Mac OSX" and "iPhoneOS"), just to differentiate them as they do look and feel quite different.