New Apple tablet rumor: Larger form factor running Mac OS X

1234579

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 163
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zunx View Post


    ... The TDP has been dropped from 16W to 7W, while the average power consumption has been halved to 2W.

    http://techwoo.com/intel-atom-pineview-chip-photo...



    None of this makes any sense given that the ARM chips Apple is already using completely outperform the Atom.



    Why switch from a chip that's better to one that's worse? And that doesn't even take into account the fact that Apple is currently believed to be manufacturing an ARM variant of their own that outperforms the very best of the ARM chips you can buy or license today.



    One of the more solid rumours about the purported tablet also, is that it was almost cancelled because the Atom chip they were using couldn't do the job so they decided to go ahead and design and manufacture their own ARM-based chips instead.



    The idea that they will use "desktop" OS-X on a tablet is not very well thought out anyway, but een if they did, it would be quicker and easier to port Snow Leopard to ARM than it would to try and get performance out of intel's Atom chips on mobile devices.
  • Reply 122 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    None of this makes any sense given that the ARM chips Apple is already using completely outperform the Atom.



    Why switch from a chip that's better to one that's worse? And that doesn't even take into account the fact that Apple is currently believed to be manufacturing an ARM variant of their own that outperforms the very best of the ARM chips you can buy or license today.



    One of the more solid rumours about the purported tablet also, is that it was almost cancelled because the Atom chip they were using couldn't do the job so they decided to go ahead and design and manufacture their own ARM-based chips instead.



    The idea that they will use "desktop" OS-X on a tablet is not very well thought out anyway, but een if they did, it would be quicker and easier to port Snow Leopard to ARM than it would to try and get performance out of intel's Atom chips on mobile devices.



    *



    This really is the nut of it, isn't it? On one hand we have the proven (and implemented) ARM (RISC) solution and on the other hand the unproven (and unimplemented) Atom (CISC) solution... but it is more than that, really, it is the symbiosis among the CPU, GPU, h264 (media) encoder/decoder and the OS.



    The OS is, relatively incidental (whether Mac OS X or iPhone OS X, they are both OS X). What may be more critical is to adapt applications that don't, presently, use a touch interface, to the tablet.



    I believe that Apple will set the stage by adapting iLife and iWork to the tablet touch UI. If Keynote were to be enhanced to be able to use pp presos, then we're far along the road to meet the requirements that most users would require



    iWork will need to formally include an SQL database... ...hmmm



    The beauty of all this is that the content can reside:



    -- on the tablet

    -- on your (web-accessible) home computer

    -- on Apple's MobileMe servers

    -- on the web, wherever

    -- any combination of the above



    *
  • Reply 123 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shogun View Post


    My money's on OSX.



    As someone wrote a while back, Snow Leopard has technologies that will make a tablet much nicer to use. Expose in the dock, for example. Smaller size, for example.



    Over 110 features were added to ENABLE easier MOUSE interaction with the system... Um, yea.... Mouse...
  • Reply 124 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    *



    This really is the nut of it, isn't it? On one hand we have the proven (and implemented) ARM (RISC) solution and on the other hand the unproven (and unimplemented) Atom (CISC) solution... but it is more than that, really, it is the symbiosis among the CPU, GPU, h264 (media) encoder/decoder and the OS.



    The OS is, relatively incidental (whether Mac OS X or iPhone OS X, they are both OS X). What may be more critical is to adapt applications that don't, presently, use a touch interface, to the tablet.



    I believe that Apple will set the stage by adapting iLife and iWork to the tablet touch UI. If Keynote were to be enhanced to be able to use pp presos, then we're far along the road to meet the requirements that most users would require



    iWork will need to formally include an SQL database... ...hmmm



    The beauty of all this is that the content can reside:



    -- on the tablet

    -- on your (web-accessible) home computer

    -- on Apple's MobileMe servers

    -- on the web, wherever

    -- any combination of the above



    *



    The correct CPU to use in this Situation would NOT be an ATOM. ULV Penryn ALA MacBook Air or the RRRRULV CPU in 1.2-1.6ghz. (that's an exageration RRRRRRRRRR realy realy... but the CPU does exist).



    Atom is IN SEQUENCE processing only cpu. Or in English, your not running HD video or working with half the iLife suite with it.
  • Reply 125 of 163
    I think the Tablet is going to be Apple's answer to the Kindle. Baby Boomers will have to usher this thing in if its priced as high as they're saying, and boomers are flocking to the Kindle and eBooks more than ever. I think "El Jobso" will hand them his answer on a silver platter: great eBook reader and new eBook section on iTunes, perhaps a magazine reader (magazines really only work in color), internet browser, and iTunes media center (including Apps of course). Think about it: we had good mp3 players before the ipod and good cell phones before the iPhone. Now we have good eBook readers out from the likes of Sony and Amazon. My prediction is Apple is going in for the kill in this market too. We'll see. And it will be interesting to see what they actually name it too. Can't wait.
  • Reply 126 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post


    The correct CPU to use in this Situation would NOT be an ATOM. ULV Penryn ALA MacBook Air or the RRRRULV CPU in 1.2-1.6ghz. (that's an exageration RRRRRRRRRR realy realy... but the CPU does exist).



    Atom is IN SEQUENCE processing only cpu. Or in English, your not running HD video or working with half the iLife suite with it.



    Pair it with the Nvidia 9400M, which is marketed as Ion, and you have a powerful enough system for HD video. However, I don't think it would work great for many CPU heavy apps, like iLife, unless they get OpenCL working with that platform. I think Ion is a muh better fit for the next AppleTV.
  • Reply 127 of 163
    zunxzunx Posts: 620member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    None of this makes any sense given that the ARM chips Apple is already using completely outperform the Atom.



    Why switch from a chip that's better to one that's worse? And that doesn't even take into account the fact that Apple is currently believed to be manufacturing an ARM variant of their own that outperforms the very best of the ARM chips you can buy or license today.



    One of the more solid rumours about the purported tablet also, is that it was almost cancelled because the Atom chip they were using couldn't do the job so they decided to go ahead and design and manufacture their own ARM-based chips instead.



    The idea that they will use "desktop" OS-X on a tablet is not very well thought out anyway, but een if they did, it would be quicker and easier to port Snow Leopard to ARM than it would to try and get performance out of intel's Atom chips on mobile devices.



    Yes, but there is a problem. Using an Intel Atom (aka, x86) chip does not require recompiling, debugging and optimizing for any new chip. Thus, all current Mac OS X applications can run on the new tablet.



    Whereas using ARM would mean a gigantic effort, as when moving from PowerPC to Intel (for Apple and other developers as well). Time will tell what Apple does, but if Intel offers an Atom that competes with ARM by 2010 as they have promised, chances are that Apple will wait and use it. ACTUALLY, THAT MAY BE THE MAIN REASON why the famous Apple Tablet has not been shipped yet!



    Because the tablet needs Mac OS X (optimized for small touch screens, of course) and not the OS X found on iPhone and iPod touch that is too crippled and limited as a Desktop OS. That is the key to success, because people want the tablet to carry their Mac stuff with them on their pocket, bag or purse, all the time, wherever they go.
  • Reply 128 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zunx View Post


    Yes, but there is a problem. Using an Intel Atom (aka, x86) chip does not require recompiling, debugging and optimizing for any new chip. Thus, all current Mac OS X applications can run on the new tablet.



    Whereas using ARM would mean a gigantic effort, as when moving from PowerPC to Intel (for Apple and other developers as well). Time will tell what Apple does, but if Intel offers an Atom that competes with ARM by 2010 as they have promised, chances are that Apple will wait and use it. ACTUALLY, THAT MAY BE THE MAIN REASON why the famous Apple Tablet has not been shipped yet!



    Because the tablet needs Mac OS X (optimized for small touch screens, of course) and not the OS X found on iPhone and iPod touch that is too crippled and limited as a Desktop OS. That is the key to success, because people want the tablet to carry their Mac stuff with them on their pocket, bag or purse, all the time, wherever they go.



    First, Mac OS X and iPhone OS X (and AppleTV OS X) are basically the same OS with different components, APIs and frameworks appropriate for the targeted devices. For example, Apple did not include Apache Web server or PHP on the iPhone because 99.44% of the users do not need that capability on an iPhone or iPod Touch. But, if you JailBreak the iPhone you will see the same OS X structure as on the Mac-- yes Virginia, the apps on the iPhone go into the Applications folder (just like on the Mac). Now, if you want to install Apache Web Server and PHP on the iPhone you can do that with ease, using the same procedure you'd use on Linux, Unix, Mac OS X. iPhone OS X does multitasking-- you play music while you surf the web and receive mail, SMS messages, Push notifications and phone calls. Within an app you write, you can start multiple threads, say Parsing an XML file can proceed while populating the screen with images in a custom view. What you are not permitted to do is have your (3rd-party) app continue running while other 3rd-party apps are running. There are several reasons that apple does not allow this on the iPhone: battery drain; performance; limited resources; security. IMO, this limitation makes sense on these small devices.



    The iPhone OS X could easily be enhanced for larger devices like a tablet-- include more Mac OS X components, frameworks and APIs, permit multitasking of 3rd-party apps, share data among apps, etc.



    For the iPhone, it is a simple recompile to run an iPhone app on the device (ARM) or the simulator (Intel).



    There are a few high-profile Mac OS X app that are not written in Cocoa, and are difficult to port to any platform. However, these apps would also need to be rewritten to use a touch interface. So, likely, these will not be ported.



    If you need these apps to run on a tablet running Mac OS X, then an ARM tablet is not for you. (An Intel tablet probably wouldn't be acceptable either, because of the UI).



    For other people, and I suspect that they are a large majority, an ARM tablet would be fine. Apple could port iLife and iWork (if they haven't, already) and that, plus some enhanced iPhone apps would satisfy the needs of many users. This is especially true if Apple targets the ARM tablet to a new class of users.



    *
  • Reply 129 of 163
    zunxzunx Posts: 620member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    There are a few high-profile Mac OS X app that are not written in Cocoa, and are difficult to port to any platform. However, these apps would also need to be rewritten to use a touch interface. So, likely, these will not be ported.



    If you need these apps to run on a tablet running Mac OS X, then an ARM tablet is not for you. (An Intel tablet probably wouldn't be acceptable either, because of the UI).



    Unless Intel offers an Atom chip as efficient as ARM (as they have promised by 2010), and Apple (not requiring the other developers necessarily) tunes the UI for Mac OS X to run on a tablet (as suggests their dozens of patents). THAT WOULD ROCK because allows to use the current Mac OS X applications on the Apple Tablet!
  • Reply 130 of 163
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zunx View Post


    Yes, but there is a problem. Using an Intel Atom (aka, x86) chip does not require recompiling, debugging and optimizing for any new chip. Thus, all current Mac OS X applications can run on the new tablet.



    You make a fundamental mistake here in that you seem to associate running an app with said app being useful. Apps built around the Mac Os/X / Cocao interface can not automatically be considered useful on the a tablet. Apps built around even older APIs don't have a chance of functioning well.

    Quote:

    Whereas using ARM would mean a gigantic effort, as when moving from PowerPC to Intel (for Apple and other developers as well).



    There is nothing gigantic about running existing iPhone apps which ought to be a snap. Plus many developers are into iPhone because they smell the money, if the new tablet even remotely appears to be successful we will have more apps than we know what to do with. For exanmple the current app store.



    The other part of this equation is that people have wild expectations about what a tablet could realistically be useful for. Tablets will never run many of the productivity apps well that people use laptops for. The history is sound here, marketing a tablet as an alternative way to run the same apps that you have on a laptop is doomed to failure.



    In fact it is so important that people not think of this machine as a laptop alternative I can see Apple maintaining software restrictions on the device just like they do on iPhone. That won't be because of any evil intent on Apples part but rather a need to make sure people don't get the wrong idea about running normal Mac software. Trying to shoehorn a regular Mac app into this device will lead to all sorts of consummer dissatisfaction.

    Quote:

    Time will tell what Apple does, but if Intel offers an Atom that competes with ARM by 2010 as they have promised, chances are that Apple will wait and use it. ACTUALLY, THAT MAY BE THE MAIN REASON why the famous Apple Tablet has not been shipped yet!



    Well anything is possible but in this case I believe it is highly improbable. First PA Semi was purchased for a reason which frankly has never been complete spelled out. Second no matter what Intel does ARM will always be a lower power device. The ARM core is so small that it beats Intel even when intel uses the most advanced processes known. On top of all that I can see PA Semi souping up ARM in ways that make it even harder for Intel to compete. In the end ATOM fails because Intel packed to much legacy crap into the hardware.

    Quote:



    Because the tablet needs Mac OS X (optimized for small touch screens, of course) and not the OS X found on iPhone and iPod touch that is too crippled and limited as a Desktop OS.



    Here we go again, somebody that doesn't know what they are talking about saying iPhone OS is crippled. Of you keep saying that you will criple any credibility you may have. Come to think of it you just assasinated your credibility.



    Learn a little bit about iPhone OS and you will realize it is the closest thing on the market right now with full blown UNIX. Sure there are limitations due to hardware shortcomings and Apple design decisions. Realize this though, all of those issues can be changed with new hardware specs.



    While it may be obvious I will point out that the tablet is new hardware and will come with (you guessed it) new specs. So ram and CPU resource issues go away. As will other iPhone short comings such as hardware ports.



    In any event don't listen to me. Rather go look at the Jailbreak sites and see what developers there have accomplished with poor tools and zero support. It is actually impressive that there is so much capability in Apples Touch devices.

    Quote:

    That is the key to success, because people want the tablet to carry their Mac stuff with them on their pocket, bag or purse, all the time, wherever they go.



    Nope not at all!!!!!!! I just want a bigger iPhone like device that gives me more control. By control I mean resouces to access the file system, the ability to multi task and packaged software that allows for file system access. Oh and one more thing I/O, this to allow backing up my DSLR on the road.



    As it is right now iPhone delivers about 80% of what I need while traveling. A new device could easily deliver 100% and not become grossly more expensive. Just a bit of I/O and more freedom with access and apps. What is notable here is that some of this is already in iPhone as can be seen via a jailbreak.







    Dave
  • Reply 131 of 163
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zunx View Post


    Unless Intel offers an Atom chip as efficient as ARM (as they have promised by 2010), and Apple (not requiring the other developers necessarily) tunes the UI for Mac OS X to run on a tablet (as suggests their dozens of patents). THAT WOULD ROCK because allows to use the current Mac OS X applications on the Apple Tablet!



    I sit here as a MBP owner and as an iPhone owner and can't possibly understand how you could come to that conclusion. The differences in the User interfaces is so great that I can't see success at all running straight Mac Cocao applications. To much of the Mac world is ancient history, things like the menu bar are not Touch friendly at all. Plus it is obvious that many Mac apps have been designed around a mouse as an interface device.



    The problem with mouse based interfaces is that they work great visually, that is when you can see the pointer move over an interface element and easily click or double click on it. Doing so via Touch can be frustrating. The basic problem is you need interface elements design around a finger.



    This doesn't even delve into the idea that many Mac Programs are resouces hogs. Try running them on a resource thin device and it will look like sludge. Part of keeping a tablet snappy will revolve around best practices for resource usage. New and limited APIs mean proper acceleration of the things that matter.



    On top of all that a tablet gives Apple the opportunity to break from the past. In part this would be seen in focused APIs and new input methods. Couple that with a little AI and we are on our way to interacting in radically different ways with the platform.







    Dave
  • Reply 132 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The other part of this equation is that people have wild expectations about what a tablet could realistically be useful for. Tablets will never run many of the productivity apps well that people use laptops for. The history is sound here, marketing a tablet as an alternative way to run the same apps that you have on a laptop is doomed to failure.



    Dave



    I agree with almost all of your post! And I agree, to a point, with the above paragraph.



    But, there are creative people (artists, designers, songwriters, etc.) doing creative tasks with tools that hamper the creative mind. A touchable, graphical UI could be implemented to be less a barrier to that creative mind.



    A simple example: Aperture, iPhoto and other, similar, apps could use a tablet as a light table where control of individual (and stacks of) images is at your fingertips for rotating, resizing, and other visual effects. You could gather items into a stack with a single swipe of the hand, try various effects, then disperse them with a flick of your fingers.



    Or, you want a 3D effect of, say, fingerpainting or raked sand (as in a Japanese rock garden)... How do you do that with a keyboard and a mouse?



    Or, you are using FCP to composite a video track with an audio track of a different length. Wouldn't it be nice if you could 2-finger tap the audio track, then drag/drop it onto the video track where the software matched the length and time while simultaneously maintaining the pitch and beat of the audio.



    My point here, is that many of the creative apps, as we know them (am I allowed to use that phrase) were implemented within the constraints of the UI tools of the time: the kb and mouse. If we were to rethink these apps from the perspective of a creative user with a new, multi-touch, graphical, tool bag, we could develop superior apps.



    We've all seen the TV ads and demos of HP touch, MS Surface (and a few others). Fantastic! What if those kinds of UI elements could be applied to the tasks (apps) that we do on a day-to-day basis.



    I am willing to bet that an Apple multitouch tablet will open new doors, and minds! And that they will revolutionize how we do what we do!



    *
  • Reply 133 of 163
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    I agree with almost all of your post! And I agree, to a point, with the above paragraph.



    But, there are creative people (artists, designers, songwriters, etc.) doing creative tasks with tools that hamper the creative mind. A touchable, graphical UI could be implemented to be less a barrier to that creative mind.



    A simple example: Aperture, iPhoto and other, similar, apps could use a tablet as a light table where control of individual (and stacks of) images is at your fingertips for rotating, resizing, and other visual effects. You could gather items into a stack with a single swipe of the hand, try various effects, then disperse them with a flick of your fingers.



    Or say, you want a 3D effect of say, fingerpainting or raked sand (as in a Japanese rock garden)... How do you do that with a keyboard and a mouse?



    Or, you are using FCP to composite a video track with an audio track of a different length. Wouldn't it be nice if you could 2-finger tap the audio track, then drag/drop it onto the video track where the software matched the length and time while simultaneously maintaining the pitch and beat of the audio.



    My point here, is that many of the creative apps, as we know them (am I allowed to use that phrase) were implemented within the constraints of the UI tools of the time: the kb and mouse. If we were to rethink these apps from the perspective of a creative user with a new, multi-touch, graphical, tool bag, we could develop superior apps.



    We've all seen the TV ads and demos of HP touch, MS Surface (and a few others). Fantastic! What if those kinds of UI elements could be applied to the tasks (apps) that we do on a day-to-day basis.



    I am willing to bet that an Apple multitouch tablet will open new doors, and minds! And that they will revolutionize how we do what we do!



    *



    This is along the lines of my thinking, as well.



    Many folks have focused on text entry as being the achilles heal of a keyboard-less tablet, but for the apps you mention touch control might actually enhance the user experience.



    Your example of video editing is a good one, as I have mentioned the newest iMovie had some perplexing UI changes that actually make sense if you imagine that Apple had touch optimized iLife apps in the pipeline. Not to mention Quicktime X's adoption of similar conventions for trimming.



    Audio editing? What ever happens in an audio editing program that requires keyboard and mouse precision? Adjustment sliders, track select, EQ, effects are all perfectly amenable to touch, and waveform editing could actually benefit from pinch zoom and timeline dragging. I know I'd rather change the timescale on a timeline through direct manipulation than fussing with widgets or keyboard shortcuts. Just scrub to my desired location by dragging my finger, spread my fingers to zoom in, or use a heads up numeric keypad to enter timecode. Drag the wave form directly, or tap parameter sliders for pop-up adjustments.



    Maybe not ready for studio duty, but for casual to prosumer audio editing it could a revelation.
  • Reply 134 of 163
    In my personal opinion, the much-rumored tablet computer from Apple will be shown for the first time in October during the public event to unveil the next-generation MacBooks and MacBook Pros.



    Based on what Andy Ihnatko said on the current MacBreak Weekly podcast, we may be looking a device running a special version of MacOS X 10.6 ("Snow Leopard") with the OS running in firmware and possibly as much as 128 GB of SSD memory storage. Because of its size (about 10" diagonal), you can forget about an OLED screen, but an LCD screen with LED backlighting is very likely.
  • Reply 135 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    This is along the lines of my thinking, as well.



    Many folks have focused on text entry as being the achilles heal of a keyboard-less tablet, but for the apps you mention touch control might actually enhance the user experience.



    Your example of video editing is a good one, as I have mentioned the newest iMovie had some perplexing UI changes that actually make sense if you imagine that Apple had touch optimized iLife apps in the pipeline. Not to mention Quicktime X's adoption of similar conventions for trimming.



    Audio editing? What ever happens in an audio editing program that requires keyboard and mouse precision? Adjustment sliders, track select, EQ, effects are all perfectly amenable to touch, and waveform editing could actually benefit from pinch zoom and timeline dragging. I know I'd rather change the timescale on a timeline through direct manipulation than fussing with widgets or keyboard shortcuts. Just scrub to my desired location by dragging my finger, spread my fingers to zoom in, or use a heads up numeric keypad to enter timecode. Drag the wave form directly, or tap parameter sliders for pop-up adjustments.



    Maybe not ready for studio duty, but for casual to prosumer audio editing it could a revelation.



    Now, that's creative thinking! Exactly! You have described a work flow based on what you are trying to do (experimenting, actually) where a mouse and keyboard are a deterrent (at best) to the creative process.



    Why use a mouse & kb to press the keys on a [virtual] piano-- use your fingers.



    *
  • Reply 136 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    This is along the lines of my thinking, as well.



    Many folks have focused on text entry as being the achilles heal of a keyboard-less tablet, but for the apps you mention touch control might actually enhance the user experience.



    Your example of video editing is a good one, as I have mentioned the newest iMovie had some perplexing UI changes that actually make sense if you imagine that Apple had touch optimized iLife apps in the pipeline. Not to mention Quicktime X's adoption of similar conventions for trimming.



    Audio editing? What ever happens in an audio editing program that requires keyboard and mouse precision? Adjustment sliders, track select, EQ, effects are all perfectly amenable to touch, and waveform editing could actually benefit from pinch zoom and timeline dragging. I know I'd rather change the timescale on a timeline through direct manipulation than fussing with widgets or keyboard shortcuts. Just scrub to my desired location by dragging my finger, spread my fingers to zoom in, or use a heads up numeric keypad to enter timecode. Drag the wave form directly, or tap parameter sliders for pop-up adjustments.



    Maybe not ready for studio duty, but for casual to prosumer audio editing it could a revelation.



    I know this is about a straight up tablet device, and I agree wholeheartedly with everyone that the only way this would be feasible is if there is a new UI that is designed for touch, but I think that there is a more important and more useful solution for some of the things you mention above and for general computing in general.



    I think that making that large, button-less, multi-touch, glass trackpad that all Mac notebooks, sans the MBA right now, also output visual data for select apps that are in the foreground. You could have your regular notebook setup and when editing audio you could have EQ sliders on the trackpad. If you are in Calc you could have the buttons on the trackpad like you are using it on an iPhone. Same goes for cropping video in Quicktime X. You could even have non-input effected visual outputs like a stock ticker or iStat system stats running at the top part of the trackpad.



    Apple could even make the trackpad take up an even larger section of the palm rest area which is basically used for the most part. The iPhone?s touch interface is more than sophisticated enough to know when that many capacitance points are touching to know not to initiate an input in that area.



    I?m sure many are going to disagree with me on this, but I have no use for a tablet as it?s been mocked up and even discussed with having its own OS that is more robust like Mac OS X core but with a tailored made touch UI. I don?t doubt that Apple has many things like this in R&D, I just don?t see a market for it as it?s been presented, but I do see a market for making notebooks considerably more useful using iPhone tech and in ways that Windows and PC vendors couldn?t possibly keep up. Is anyone even using Synaptic?s multitouch trackpad drivers that just came out a year or two ago? I think this is the future of Mac computing.
  • Reply 137 of 163
    zunxzunx Posts: 620member
    Whatever it is, we need the Apple Tablet for full blown Keynote and PowerPoint presentations via a video-out port for the videoprojector connection and a USB port for the remote control. Because even the MacBook Air is too heavy and too large. We are looking for something like the OQO, but with Mac inside (either tablet or clamshell will do). Thus, we need to run Apple Keynote and Microsoft PowerPoint aplications to run the NATIVE ".key" and ".ppt" files. Thus, we need Mac OS X inside. Thus we need x86.
  • Reply 138 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zunx View Post


    Whatever it is, this is what we need tha Apple Tablet for full blown Keynote and PowerPoint presentations via a video-out port for the videoprojector connection and a USB port for the remote control. Because even the MacBook Air is too heavy and too large. We are looking for something like the OQO, but with Mac inside (either tablet or clamshell will do). Thus, we need to run Apple Keynote and Microsoft PowerPoint aplications to run the NATIVE ".key" and ".ppt" files. Thus, we need Mac OS X inside. Thus we need x86.



    You keep saying this and it still makes no sense. You don?t need to have Mac OS X running to be able to run Keynote and Powerpoint files. This talk of it being native or not native makes even less sense. If the OS and apps are compiled to run on ARM then they are native.
  • Reply 139 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SactoMan01 View Post


    In my personal opinion, the much-rumored tablet computer from Apple will be shown for the first time in October during the public event to unveil the next-generation MacBooks and MacBook Pros.



    Based on what Andy Ihnatko said on the current MacBreak Weekly podcast, we may be looking a device running a special version of MacOS X 10.6 ("Snow Leopard") with the OS running in firmware and possibly as much as 128 GB of SSD memory storage. Because of its size (about 10" diagonal), you can forget about an OLED screen, but an LCD screen with LED backlighting is very likely.



    One of the anchors holding back Windows is its need to support "legacy" applications.



    Apple, quite deftly, has been able to avoid this situation with a few noticeable exceptions.



    Snow Leopard, draws a line in the sand for Apple's PPC legacy apps. Though they still run on older hardware, and prior versions of OS X, these apps must be rewritten to take advantage of the latest, greatest hardware and software technology.





    Now, Apple has a new opportunity that may be even more significant. Because of the success of the iPhone multitouch UI, Apple can draw a new line in the sand for UIs for apps (and for the OSes on which they run).



    What if Apple were to say:

    -- Here's the hardware: a large multitouch display, no keyboard, no mouse, no stylus input (except as clumsy, inconvenient and expensive options).



    -- Here're some virtual keyboards and the interactive tools to customize them, and use them in any or all apps. Braille, StenoType, QWERTY, Dovorak, ThumbType, Emoji-- yeah, we can do those, and much, much more!



    -- Here's some virtual styli or pens/hockey pucks. Just tap on the screen where you want the pen to start, then position your finger(s) wherever convenient so as not to block the input, then drag your finger(s) to begin drawing



    -- You want pressure sensitivity? Just press harder or softer while dragging your finger(s) and the line width will change accordingly.



    --You want handwriting? Just position the thumb, index and forefinger as you would if you were holding an invisible pencil (Apple patent applied for), and write as you would on paper (pressure sensitivity works here, too).



    --You want assisted drawing? Just tap the option (virtual) button and you will be drawing perfect circles, ovals, squares, rectangles, and smoothed (or unsmoothed) irregular shapes.





    --You want to reshape an object? Just pinch and drag with multiple fingers and the app will adjust the bezier curves accordingly. Or tap the shape to show finger-friendly anchor and control points.





    Apple can cut the cord with legacy UIs.



    It needs to be done!



    It is time!





    I suspect that an enhanced iPhone OS X is better suited for this than Mac OS X.



    *
  • Reply 140 of 163
    *



    Many of the posters, here, feel strongly that a keyboard and mouse are needed to make a computer a "real" computer.



    Why?



    Probably because that is what they are familiar with: a display, a kb, a mouse, some computing hardware, etc.



    Maybe that is all they have ever known (about computer configurations).



    But it was not always so.





    The first microcomputer (arguably) was the Altair and it came on the scene in 1975,



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altair_8800



    It is interesting that the Altair had neither keyboard nor display and the mouse was still in the Xerox labs. To input data you set a series of eight switches on or off to represent the eight bits of a byte. You entered this, then moved on to the next byte... entering all your program instructions and the data. The output was displayed in a series of lights that showed the on/off status of each bit in a byte. Advancements came where a paper tape reader could be used read in programs and data at, say, 10 bytes per second. Later, there were interfaces to [frustratingly unreliable] magnetic tape cassettes, at, say, 30 bytes per second. Bill Gates got started selling a BASiC (programming language) interpreter for the Altair.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altair_BASIC



    Concurrently, some were experimenting with teletype and typewriter keyboards. Also there were some experiments using CRTs (like TV Tubes) for displays.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Typewriter







    That was the state of the art for microcomputers for the next few years. The Apple I of 1976 was just a circuit board.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_I



    In 1977 Apple came out with a redesigned circuit board, single case keyboard, power supply and external interfaces (including TV adapter interface) all nicely packaged in a molded (expensive) plastic case. A breathtaking 40x24 display (40 white, uppercase characters and 24 lines or 40x24 blocks of any of 16 colors). That set the bar for the next few years.



    I bought my Apple ][ in July, 1978 with 8 KB (yes kiloBytes) of RAM for about $1900 (approx $5000 in 2009 dollars) Plus, I had to buy a TV modulator $15, TV $200, and several cassette recorders ($250 total). Floppy disks were not available until 1979 and a 5 MB Hard disk came out in 1980 for $4,000 (about the size of 4 loafs of bread).





    Do you think it was possible to do word processing and spread sheets on a single case kb with a single-case, 40-column, 24-line display and no mouse?



    The answer is a resounding YES!







    The mouse first appeared in general use in the famous 1984 Mac. I had a terrible time using the mouse-- it just wasn't intuitive for me and I couldn't get that little arrow positioned where I wanted it. An Apple ad at the time showed an infant, in diapers, using a mouse-- no problem for him as he didn't have anything to unlearn. But one Apple executive had his own set of problems with the mouse, or as he called it, the "click and point" interface.



    The Mac was the convergence of the computer, high resolution graphic display, OS, UI, mouse and keyboard (heavy on the OS and UI).



    A respected developer of that time said (paraphrased): "all software and hardware development from this time on will stand on the shoulders of the Mac".





    So, for 25 years now, we've been using the keyboard, mouse and graphic display as the "standard" for I/O.



    But, it is worth remembering that it hasn't always been so.







    Today, I can do more, easier, faster, and better on my $399 iPhone than I could on my $5,000 plus Apple ][.



    Give me a larger screen and apps with a touch UI, and I will outperform anything you could do on the 1984 era Macs.





    It aint the keyboard and mouse that made the computer successful, they were incidental, best of class accessories, for their time. Nothing more, nothing less!





    We have seen various touch and multitouch UIs in the last few years from different sources. In typical fashion, Apple assembled the best ideas and packaged them into a workable, deliverable: the iPhone:



    In the iPhone, the integration of OS, UI and apps provides a user experience that is better than the keyboard/mouse paradigm.





    IMO, it is time for us to stand on the shoulders of the iPhone!



    *
Sign In or Register to comment.