If you watch carefully, you'll notice that when the finger is hovering to add text to the Note app, there is no blinking insertion point-- but one appears just before the finger makes contact with the screen.
God, it seems like ages since we had the chance to do forensics on fake videos. Dear fake video makers: keep up the good work!
It's fake. Note how he hesitates when tapping on an icon as if he trying to do it in sync with a preprogrammed animation. Also, the way the notes application dragged, the screen distortions that occur when pressing on a display without glass, etc.
They were clearly pressing against a Cinema display (you can see the LCD 'squish' effect you get from pressing too hard against the liquid crystal below the surface.
If Apple thinks a device retailing for so much can get away with not being able to run a fully-functioning version of Snow Leopard, they best forget about bringing this thing to market.
Form factor is important but what's the value of a having a device with a 10-inch screen that can't do any more than a typical iPod Touch. For one thing, one of the flaws of the Touch is that it can't handle Flash, which abounds on-line. Any cheap netbook can do that. So it has to be able to deliver a fully realized Internet experience. Regardless, the processing power of this device has to be an order of magnitude greater than what is possible with a device like the Touch if for no other reason than to handle files large enough to deliver a quality image on a much larger screen. Once you've done that, clearly you have a device that should be able to handle a full version of Snow Leopard with ease. After all, we're being assured that Snow Leopard will make all our computers run that much quicker on account of how efficient it is. As such, a stripped-down version of Snow Leopard hardly seems necessary. Is Snow Leopard not, in effect, a stripped down, leaner version of Leopard? Wouldn't be surprising to learn that Apple, when they started looking at how to make OSX friendly to a device like this rumoured tablet, realized that the speed benefits would do all their other computers a lot of good, also.
I would say $349 - $499 is more fair. Heck with what it's rumored to have (software wise) it's really no better than a 10" iPod Touch with Multi-tasking. As yourself, is $899 a fair price compared to a $499 netbook, which has a FULL OS and the ability to add any app you want?
Apple's smoking some major dube to think we'll pay that much. ..
All this price talk is kind of beside the point IMO.
Apple does research on this kind of thing before they make a product. They have often decided *not* to proceed with a product not because they couldn't make it, but because they couldn't make it at the price that people would pay or because the manufacturing capability isn't quite there, or the weight of the thing is just too much etc. Whereas Lenovo or Acer would just pump out the product and see if it sells, Apple always takes these issues into consideration *while* they are designing the product.
I can't think of a single Apple product in the "post-beleaguered era" that didn't sell enough not only to cover costs but make a handy profit. To think that they will push something out without thinking of it's saleability is like betting against the wind.
That being said, if the tablet is real, and if it is close to what is rumoured (i.e. you can write and draw on it as well as use some other apps), I would buy it at almost any price and I'm sure a lot of others would too.
For instance, the note application is dragged by simply touching and dragging. How would that work by application that respond to moving touches (like maps).
Also, the iPhone keyboard is simply unuseable on such a big device - you can't use your thumbs. If they spend 4 - 6 years developing I would figure they would've came up with something better.
But maybe that's just me...
I agree 100%.
That dragging is what made me doubt its legitimacy. It's just a very bad ui decision when apps use one finger scrolling on the iphone and they use the same gesture for moving the window. It's something Apple wouldn't do.
And the second nail to its coffin is the tiny keyboard. Which just isn't possible to thumb type on when there is no space to put your hands. Plus, Apple accuses netbooks of having cramped keyboards and this is their answer? No.
Although i hope that Apple has come up with something similar (multi-window, multitasking iphone os interface) and not a standard iphone os interface or mac osx version which doesn't really make sense. Nice fake though.
I'll second that. I'd also remind people that the 1st gen iPhone I'm carrying around cost $599. I find it hilarious that people expect a similar device with a 10" screen to somehow be the same price. (Granted, they're a couple of years apart, but really).
I find it hilarious that some are prepared to draw conclusions based on zero information.
Check that. I actually find it slightly depressing.
it would cost between $700 and $900. The device has allegedly been under development between four and six years, though the first prototype was only created in late 2008.
Apple only bought over PA Semi in 2008. It seems unlikely that Apple would use this tech for this device unless they have some major advance over Cortex A9.
Quote:
"To make up for the cost and make the device more than just a big iPod there was, this person claimed, there was talk of making the device act as a secondary screen/touchpad for iMacs and MacBooks," Lam wrote, "much like a few of the USB screens that have come out in recent months from Chinese companies."
This makes sense but it's not a feature that would make you feel like it's worth paying $900 for.
Quote:
The source also said that there is a question of what operating system the device will run (Lam calls that detail a "huge secret").
Windows 7. Seriously though, this doesn't sound good because it suggests it's not Snow Leopard x86 - it can't actually be Windows 7 either if it's ARM - no bootcamp or VMWare. There's no way people will go through the whole PPC->Intel thing again but with ARM.
The advantage will be battery life. With Apple's battery tech and ultra low powered CPUs, they might even manage to make a machine that lasts a whole day without needing a recharge. But there's no point if you can't run the software you like.
Quote:
Meanwhile, a new report in Silicon Scoop alleges that Apple will launch in a tablet in limited release at $899 by the end of 2009. The "SmartBook" device, as author Trip Chowdhry calls it, is reported to have an 8-inch to 10-inch OLED screen and feature an ARM Cortex-A9 chipset, conflicting with AppleInsider's sources.
No way they will sell a $900 ARM-only tablet. People said they wouldn't sell a $500 iphone but this isn't the same. The iphone changed the way people used mobile devices. Tablets/slates already have touch interfaces and we've seen the iphone so it's not new. Netbooks with Linux fail because they don't have software support. The best way to transition is to offer both like this netbook:
Use custom ARM CPU for most things like web browsing etc and switch to an x86 Atom Pinetrail CPU for heavy duty processing. If it can do it transparently, it works out great. This way the ARM CPU becomes a low power co-processor. Having two CPUs can go some way to justifying the higher price.
This tablet has nothing to do with e-ink. It's golf balls and tennis balls.
Not necessarily. If this is targeted at the education market, it all but kills the DX. It would be the ultimate college tool if you could write on it. The regular Kindle will hurt some as well because there will be some who will get a tablet because they can stillread fromit for a few hours a day and use it as a computer. The Kindle is also reported to have less than stellar sales.
The book companies would be falling over themselves to try and sign a deal with Apple.
If Apple thinks a device retailing for so much can get away with not being able to run a fully-functioning version of Snow Leopard, they best forget about bringing this thing to market.
Form factor is important but what's the value of a having a device with a 10-inch screen that can't do any more than a typical iPod Touch. For one thing, one of the flaws of the Touch is that it can't handle Flash, which abounds on-line. Any cheap netbook can do that. So it has to be able to deliver a fully realized Internet experience. Regardless, the processing power of this device has to be an order of magnitude greater than what is possible with a device like the Touch if for no other reason than to handle files large enough to deliver a quality image on a much larger screen. Once you've done that, clearly you have a device that should be able to handle a full version of Snow Leopard with ease. After all, we're being assured that Snow Leopard will make all our computers ran that much quicker on account of how efficient it is. As such, a stripped-down version of Snow Leopard hardly seems necessary. Is Snow Leopard not, in effect, a stripped down, leaner version of Leopard? Wouldn't be surprising to learn that Apple, when they started looking at how to make OSX friendly to a device like this rumoured tablet, realized that the speed benefits would do all their other computers a lot of good, also.
If by "Snow Leopard" you mean the UI, then no.
Apple already has portable devices that will run Snow Leopard, they're called "laptops." The have built in keyboards and touch pads around which the entire UI is built.
If, as is being broadly assumed, Apple brings a touch tablet to market, then it must have a UI optimized for such a device. Such a UI would bear little resemblance to Snow Leopard, which has evolved from over 20 years of keyboard/mouse UI conventions.
That doesn't mean that a tablet from Apple couldn't have computational heft far beyond what an iPhone can muster, but an iPhone has the UI it has because of constrained screen real estate, not compromised computing power. A more powerful touch based device would still need an optimized UI, but that wouldn't necessarily make it less a real computer than a laptop, just one with a different set of assumptions about how the user interacts with it.
So in that sense it likely could be running "Snow Leopard", which is to say a larger subset of the OS X underpinnings that power all of Apple's machines.
So you think it should be the same price as a 32gig iTouch huh ...
I really don't get all of the "i think it should be .. 12 dollars! heck apple can afford it and the price they want is too much for me to pay!!"
Not at all. My price-point is based on applicability and comparability to similar devices. My opinion is in no way based on some miserly crankyness about the profitability of big business.
Let's look at the two theories about this rumored device:
Theory #1: it's like a jumbo iPod Touch with Multi-tasking and faster processor. Given the only thing that's even close to an Apple tablet-like device is the Archos 7 - 160 Gb (which retails for $349). Look it up. This is the most likely option for Apple since a tablet PC would be too tedious to operate completely on touch (even the best tablets out there still have the swivel keyboard)
Theory #2: It's more like a full OS X based tablet computer (like a tablet MB Air) the only things that really comes close to that is a tablet PC (which don't even come in a 10" screen) retails for around $1,099 (Lenovo Thinkpad X200). This is probably more the fans' dream than a reality. but then $899 sounds very feasible for this theory.
So that said, my price-range thought of $349 -$499 is based more the theory #1. But, if any part of theory #2 is correct, I gave the price range the upper end to compete with the most fully-equipped Dell 10" Netbook (which was around $500).
just thought i'd clarify. If Apple wants this product to compete, they need to stay within a range. Knowing Apple though, I'd say they typically price themselves higher than everyone else. So maybe $399-$599 (based on storage capacity).
"To make up for the cost and make the device more than just a big iPod there was, this person claimed, there was talk of making the device act as a secondary screen/touchpad for iMacs and MacBooks,"
That would be very cool. Not $900 cool, but enough to pique my interest. I'd love to replace my old iGesture pad. It's the best pointing device so far, and I've tried them all. Mice, finger mice, trackballs, thumb trackballs, trackpads, Wacom tablets, etc. All I would want is some way to customize the gestures, just like the fully programmable iGesture.
They were clearly pressing against a Cinema display (you can see the LCD 'squish' effect you get from pressing too hard against the liquid crystal below the surface.
Agreed.
Furthermore, when the user "drags" the Note app, it's slightly delayed--because he's using his other hand to drag the app with his finger on the portable's trackpad. As such, it's not in sync.
If Apple thinks a device retailing for so much can get away with not being able to run a fully-functioning version of Snow Leopard, they best forget about bringing this thing to market.
Form factor is important but what's the value of a having a device with a 10-inch screen that can't do any more than a typical iPod Touch. For one thing, one of the flaws of the Touch is that it can't handle Flash, which abounds on-line. Any cheap netbook can do that. So it has to be able to deliver a fully realized Internet experience. Regardless, the processing power of this device has to be an order of magnitude greater than what is possible with a device like the Touch if for no other reason than to handle files large enough to deliver a quality image on a much larger screen. Once you've done that, clearly you have a device that should be able to handle a full version of Snow Leopard with ease. After all, we're being assured that Snow Leopard will make all our computers ran that much quicker on account of how efficient it is. As such, a stripped-down version of Snow Leopard hardly seems necessary. Is Snow Leopard not, in effect, a stripped down, leaner version of Leopard? Wouldn't be surprising to learn that Apple, when they started looking at how to make OSX friendly to a device like this rumoured tablet, realized that the speed benefits would do all their other computers a lot of good, also.
User experience is what will sell this device, Snow Leopard wont bring it, just as every tablet with Windows as failed to bring a great and unified user experience. Your argument about flash as a reason against iPhoneOS just shows how much you are thinking inside the box. What if Apple wrote a version of Safari for the tablet that featured full plugin support? After all, many of the concerns related to the flash on the iPhone would be alleviated due to a stronger processor and a larger battery. So keep iPhoneOS and modify Safari, something that they would probably do anyway for the larger screen. Seems simple enough.
Now you are right, once you update the hardware enough, you will be able to run Snow Leopard. On the other hand, iPhoneOS would run blazingly fast. Furthermore, even if Apple made Snow Leopard super touch friendly and it ran well on the tablet hardware, the third party programs would still not be touch friendly and some of them would run poorly as they were made for stronger processors and a cursor based interface. In the end, iPhoneOS makes a lot of sense because of the far superior user experience it would provide.
When thinking of iPhoneOS on a tablet, please don't just scale up an iPhone. That isn't what it would be.
Considering the biggest OLED screen you can currently buy is 11" and that is going for $1000's does anybody seriously believe that apple is going to release a 10" OLED product that is affordable in this climate?
It would be nice, but it's simply not going to happen. The ipod touch maybe as smaller screens OLEDS are already competitive.
So anything else he has said has lost all credibility for me
Comments
God, it seems like ages since we had the chance to do forensics on fake videos. Dear fake video makers: keep up the good work!
I might be the only one, but the videos look quite astonishingly "true" to me.
Well, they're not.
It's fake. Note how he hesitates when tapping on an icon as if he trying to do it in sync with a preprogrammed animation. Also, the way the notes application dragged, the screen distortions that occur when pressing on a display without glass, etc.
They were clearly pressing against a Cinema display (you can see the LCD 'squish' effect you get from pressing too hard against the liquid crystal below the surface.
Form factor is important but what's the value of a having a device with a 10-inch screen that can't do any more than a typical iPod Touch. For one thing, one of the flaws of the Touch is that it can't handle Flash, which abounds on-line. Any cheap netbook can do that. So it has to be able to deliver a fully realized Internet experience. Regardless, the processing power of this device has to be an order of magnitude greater than what is possible with a device like the Touch if for no other reason than to handle files large enough to deliver a quality image on a much larger screen. Once you've done that, clearly you have a device that should be able to handle a full version of Snow Leopard with ease. After all, we're being assured that Snow Leopard will make all our computers run that much quicker on account of how efficient it is. As such, a stripped-down version of Snow Leopard hardly seems necessary. Is Snow Leopard not, in effect, a stripped down, leaner version of Leopard? Wouldn't be surprising to learn that Apple, when they started looking at how to make OSX friendly to a device like this rumoured tablet, realized that the speed benefits would do all their other computers a lot of good, also.
$899 is way to steep for that!
I would say $349 - $499 is more fair. Heck with what it's rumored to have (software wise) it's really no better than a 10" iPod Touch with Multi-tasking. As yourself, is $899 a fair price compared to a $499 netbook, which has a FULL OS and the ability to add any app you want?
Apple's smoking some major dube to think we'll pay that much. ..
All this price talk is kind of beside the point IMO.
Apple does research on this kind of thing before they make a product. They have often decided *not* to proceed with a product not because they couldn't make it, but because they couldn't make it at the price that people would pay or because the manufacturing capability isn't quite there, or the weight of the thing is just too much etc. Whereas Lenovo or Acer would just pump out the product and see if it sells, Apple always takes these issues into consideration *while* they are designing the product.
I can't think of a single Apple product in the "post-beleaguered era" that didn't sell enough not only to cover costs but make a handy profit. To think that they will push something out without thinking of it's saleability is like betting against the wind.
That being said, if the tablet is real, and if it is close to what is rumoured (i.e. you can write and draw on it as well as use some other apps), I would buy it at almost any price and I'm sure a lot of others would too.
And I am by no means a rich person at all.
I'm not buying those videos.
For instance, the note application is dragged by simply touching and dragging. How would that work by application that respond to moving touches (like maps).
Also, the iPhone keyboard is simply unuseable on such a big device - you can't use your thumbs. If they spend 4 - 6 years developing I would figure they would've came up with something better.
But maybe that's just me...
I agree 100%.
That dragging is what made me doubt its legitimacy. It's just a very bad ui decision when apps use one finger scrolling on the iphone and they use the same gesture for moving the window. It's something Apple wouldn't do.
And the second nail to its coffin is the tiny keyboard. Which just isn't possible to thumb type on when there is no space to put your hands. Plus, Apple accuses netbooks of having cramped keyboards and this is their answer? No.
Although i hope that Apple has come up with something similar (multi-window, multitasking iphone os interface) and not a standard iphone os interface or mac osx version which doesn't really make sense. Nice fake though.
I'll second that. I'd also remind people that the 1st gen iPhone I'm carrying around cost $599. I find it hilarious that people expect a similar device with a 10" screen to somehow be the same price. (Granted, they're a couple of years apart, but really).
I find it hilarious that some are prepared to draw conclusions based on zero information.
Check that. I actually find it slightly depressing.
it would cost between $700 and $900. The device has allegedly been under development between four and six years, though the first prototype was only created in late 2008.
Apple only bought over PA Semi in 2008. It seems unlikely that Apple would use this tech for this device unless they have some major advance over Cortex A9.
"To make up for the cost and make the device more than just a big iPod there was, this person claimed, there was talk of making the device act as a secondary screen/touchpad for iMacs and MacBooks," Lam wrote, "much like a few of the USB screens that have come out in recent months from Chinese companies."
This makes sense but it's not a feature that would make you feel like it's worth paying $900 for.
The source also said that there is a question of what operating system the device will run (Lam calls that detail a "huge secret").
Windows 7. Seriously though, this doesn't sound good because it suggests it's not Snow Leopard x86 - it can't actually be Windows 7 either if it's ARM - no bootcamp or VMWare. There's no way people will go through the whole PPC->Intel thing again but with ARM.
The advantage will be battery life. With Apple's battery tech and ultra low powered CPUs, they might even manage to make a machine that lasts a whole day without needing a recharge. But there's no point if you can't run the software you like.
Meanwhile, a new report in Silicon Scoop alleges that Apple will launch in a tablet in limited release at $899 by the end of 2009. The "SmartBook" device, as author Trip Chowdhry calls it, is reported to have an 8-inch to 10-inch OLED screen and feature an ARM Cortex-A9 chipset, conflicting with AppleInsider's sources.
No way they will sell a $900 ARM-only tablet. People said they wouldn't sell a $500 iphone but this isn't the same. The iphone changed the way people used mobile devices. Tablets/slates already have touch interfaces and we've seen the iphone so it's not new. Netbooks with Linux fail because they don't have software support. The best way to transition is to offer both like this netbook:
http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/...wsx86-2009064/
Use custom ARM CPU for most things like web browsing etc and switch to an x86 Atom Pinetrail CPU for heavy duty processing. If it can do it transparently, it works out great. This way the ARM CPU becomes a low power co-processor. Having two CPUs can go some way to justifying the higher price.
This tablet has nothing to do with e-ink. It's golf balls and tennis balls.
Not necessarily. If this is targeted at the education market, it all but kills the DX. It would be the ultimate college tool if you could write on it. The regular Kindle will hurt some as well because there will be some who will get a tablet because they can stillread fromit for a few hours a day and use it as a computer. The Kindle is also reported to have less than stellar sales.
The book companies would be falling over themselves to try and sign a deal with Apple.
If Apple thinks a device retailing for so much can get away with not being able to run a fully-functioning version of Snow Leopard, they best forget about bringing this thing to market.
Form factor is important but what's the value of a having a device with a 10-inch screen that can't do any more than a typical iPod Touch. For one thing, one of the flaws of the Touch is that it can't handle Flash, which abounds on-line. Any cheap netbook can do that. So it has to be able to deliver a fully realized Internet experience. Regardless, the processing power of this device has to be an order of magnitude greater than what is possible with a device like the Touch if for no other reason than to handle files large enough to deliver a quality image on a much larger screen. Once you've done that, clearly you have a device that should be able to handle a full version of Snow Leopard with ease. After all, we're being assured that Snow Leopard will make all our computers ran that much quicker on account of how efficient it is. As such, a stripped-down version of Snow Leopard hardly seems necessary. Is Snow Leopard not, in effect, a stripped down, leaner version of Leopard? Wouldn't be surprising to learn that Apple, when they started looking at how to make OSX friendly to a device like this rumoured tablet, realized that the speed benefits would do all their other computers a lot of good, also.
If by "Snow Leopard" you mean the UI, then no.
Apple already has portable devices that will run Snow Leopard, they're called "laptops." The have built in keyboards and touch pads around which the entire UI is built.
If, as is being broadly assumed, Apple brings a touch tablet to market, then it must have a UI optimized for such a device. Such a UI would bear little resemblance to Snow Leopard, which has evolved from over 20 years of keyboard/mouse UI conventions.
That doesn't mean that a tablet from Apple couldn't have computational heft far beyond what an iPhone can muster, but an iPhone has the UI it has because of constrained screen real estate, not compromised computing power. A more powerful touch based device would still need an optimized UI, but that wouldn't necessarily make it less a real computer than a laptop, just one with a different set of assumptions about how the user interacts with it.
So in that sense it likely could be running "Snow Leopard", which is to say a larger subset of the OS X underpinnings that power all of Apple's machines.
So you think it should be the same price as a 32gig iTouch huh ...
I really don't get all of the "i think it should be .. 12 dollars! heck apple can afford it and the price they want is too much for me to pay!!"
Not at all. My price-point is based on applicability and comparability to similar devices. My opinion is in no way based on some miserly crankyness about the profitability of big business.
Let's look at the two theories about this rumored device:
Theory #1: it's like a jumbo iPod Touch with Multi-tasking and faster processor. Given the only thing that's even close to an Apple tablet-like device is the Archos 7 - 160 Gb (which retails for $349). Look it up. This is the most likely option for Apple since a tablet PC would be too tedious to operate completely on touch (even the best tablets out there still have the swivel keyboard)
Theory #2: It's more like a full OS X based tablet computer (like a tablet MB Air) the only things that really comes close to that is a tablet PC (which don't even come in a 10" screen) retails for around $1,099 (Lenovo Thinkpad X200). This is probably more the fans' dream than a reality. but then $899 sounds very feasible for this theory.
So that said, my price-range thought of $349 -$499 is based more the theory #1. But, if any part of theory #2 is correct, I gave the price range the upper end to compete with the most fully-equipped Dell 10" Netbook (which was around $500).
just thought i'd clarify. If Apple wants this product to compete, they need to stay within a range. Knowing Apple though, I'd say they typically price themselves higher than everyone else. So maybe $399-$599 (based on storage capacity).
Happy?
Sounds like this is what you want. Funny that Gigabyte can't even get down into the price range you consider fair.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...SIN=B002HP5X3U
or this...but the Apple Version...http://www.archos.com/products/nb/ar...try=us&lang=en
or this...but the Apple Version...http://www.archos.com/products/nb/ar...try=us&lang=en
(Looks at picture of device)
(Reads ad copy: "breathtaking aesthetics")
(Looks at picture of device)
(Shakes head)
"To make up for the cost and make the device more than just a big iPod there was, this person claimed, there was talk of making the device act as a secondary screen/touchpad for iMacs and MacBooks,"
That would be very cool. Not $900 cool, but enough to pique my interest. I'd love to replace my old iGesture pad. It's the best pointing device so far, and I've tried them all. Mice, finger mice, trackballs, thumb trackballs, trackpads, Wacom tablets, etc. All I would want is some way to customize the gestures, just like the fully programmable iGesture.
(Looks at picture of device)
(Reads ad copy: "breathtaking aesthetics")
(Looks at picture of device)
(Shakes head)
I'll make a bet that the rumored iTablet will be just like this:
http://www.archos.com/products/imt/a...try=us&lang=en
Well, not aesthetically like the Archos 7 but will have the same feature set. And the Archos 7 retails for $349.
They were clearly pressing against a Cinema display (you can see the LCD 'squish' effect you get from pressing too hard against the liquid crystal below the surface.
Agreed.
Furthermore, when the user "drags" the Note app, it's slightly delayed--because he's using his other hand to drag the app with his finger on the portable's trackpad. As such, it's not in sync.
If Apple thinks a device retailing for so much can get away with not being able to run a fully-functioning version of Snow Leopard, they best forget about bringing this thing to market.
Form factor is important but what's the value of a having a device with a 10-inch screen that can't do any more than a typical iPod Touch. For one thing, one of the flaws of the Touch is that it can't handle Flash, which abounds on-line. Any cheap netbook can do that. So it has to be able to deliver a fully realized Internet experience. Regardless, the processing power of this device has to be an order of magnitude greater than what is possible with a device like the Touch if for no other reason than to handle files large enough to deliver a quality image on a much larger screen. Once you've done that, clearly you have a device that should be able to handle a full version of Snow Leopard with ease. After all, we're being assured that Snow Leopard will make all our computers ran that much quicker on account of how efficient it is. As such, a stripped-down version of Snow Leopard hardly seems necessary. Is Snow Leopard not, in effect, a stripped down, leaner version of Leopard? Wouldn't be surprising to learn that Apple, when they started looking at how to make OSX friendly to a device like this rumoured tablet, realized that the speed benefits would do all their other computers a lot of good, also.
User experience is what will sell this device, Snow Leopard wont bring it, just as every tablet with Windows as failed to bring a great and unified user experience. Your argument about flash as a reason against iPhoneOS just shows how much you are thinking inside the box. What if Apple wrote a version of Safari for the tablet that featured full plugin support? After all, many of the concerns related to the flash on the iPhone would be alleviated due to a stronger processor and a larger battery. So keep iPhoneOS and modify Safari, something that they would probably do anyway for the larger screen. Seems simple enough.
Now you are right, once you update the hardware enough, you will be able to run Snow Leopard. On the other hand, iPhoneOS would run blazingly fast. Furthermore, even if Apple made Snow Leopard super touch friendly and it ran well on the tablet hardware, the third party programs would still not be touch friendly and some of them would run poorly as they were made for stronger processors and a cursor based interface. In the end, iPhoneOS makes a lot of sense because of the far superior user experience it would provide.
When thinking of iPhoneOS on a tablet, please don't just scale up an iPhone. That isn't what it would be.
It would be nice, but it's simply not going to happen. The ipod touch maybe as smaller screens OLEDS are already competitive.
So anything else he has said has lost all credibility for me