Apple could do something similar and much cheaper. At least without 3G.
I'm imagining Apple producing something built on the absolute newest tech which should result in smaller hardware and better performance. The GPU ought to be the device setting the machine apart.
The problem I have is that everyone saying the iPad can't replace their desktop aren't actually giving a lot of examples of what it can't do.
Don't be silly that would just result in somebody trying to counter the complaint. The fact is the iPad can't do a lot of things. In part it simply isn't powerful enough.
Oh before you go on about how powerful iPad is try doing any thing CPU intensive on the machine.
Quote:
Converting movies, converting audio, ripping CDs/DVDs, video editing I can all kind of understand at least until iOS 4.2 next month when I suspect iMovie will be available for iPad which I'm really looking forward to.
Fine and dandy new software, but there is no way such software will hold up to desktop based equivalents. Even if those apps are running on a laptop.
Quote:
But for most requirements for ultra-portable devices the iPad is the perfect replacement. If your requirements are much more then I would also suggest that the MacBook Air isn't going to be enough for your needs either. There is always cloud storage for documents and photos you need access to if the drives aren't big enough.
The cloud can be shoved where the sun don't shine. There are far to many problems with cloud based storage. Beyond that latency sucks, there is no point in having a fast SSD if it is to small to take advantage of that speed.
Quote:
As for RAM you'd be amazed at what an iPad can do in 256MB of RAM.
You would be even more amazed at what it could do with more RAM. Frankly I've seen what is possible and I'm not impressed. Beyond that you don't have 256MB of ram available for user apps, rather you would be lucky to get 120MB of ram for a user app. With 4.2 you are likely to have even less RAM available.
Quote:
It's all about efficient development of applications which most desktops don't have.
I have to call BS on that. First; iOS apps are as varied in quality as desktop apps. Second; iPad can't possibly handle the range of apps available to users of Mac OS/X.
Quote:
I so hope that Apple makes desktop Mac OS X so refined that we're going to be able to see applications that take up megabytes of space instead of gigabytes of space leaving more room for actual data instead of wasted HDD space because of crappy badly written apps.
On one hand you have people complaining about app bloat and on the other you have people complaining about a obscure missing feature that they have seen on Windows, possibly in MS Office. I don't disagree with you but badly written apps are more about consumer demand than anything.
Quote:
Remember the good old days of computing when you didn't have ludicrous RAM sizes and apps had to be real streamlined in order to fit in the requirements?
Hell I'm old enough to remember when a Vic 20 was considered a computer, when an Apple 2 was looked at as bleeding edge, and the S100 crowd was trying to promote their way of thinking. Those are all gone now. Frankly I don't want them to come back either as I rather enjoy the possibilities that the melding of UNIX and Apple software design has wrought. I like being able to start up an IDE and have the power available to me in a snappy environment. I like the idea of running software that only a few years ago would have required a mini computer or mainframe. I like WYSIWYG! So stop your dreaming as very few people have the desire to go back to those days.
Quote:
We need to go back to that and iOS is actually pushing us that way.
Nope not if you are any sort of a professional or even beyond a casual user. Listen iOS has its place, I'm not arguing against that as I really like the platform being an iPhone user. The problem with people like you rattling on about changing Mac OS/X into some flavor of iOS is that you have no idea how intelligent people use computers. For many of use the Mac is a tool not a toy and some tools are meant to be used by professionals and others lesser beasts. If that sounds blunt so be it, I just don't need another Obama idiot ranting on about how much better life would be if they didn't have to think.
That is not to say I don't expect improvements to Mac OS/X, as I do. However doing away with its strong points is not improving anything. Frankly I expect a version of Touch sooner or later, but a version tailored for a desktop OS, not a direct port of iOS. In this case the implementation of Touch would have to expand the platforms capabilities not truncate capability. In any event Touch on Mac OS/X is a minor consideration as there are more pressing things they need to do with Mac OS/X. You are promoting regression for Mac OS/X and honestly that is unacceptable.
Choose an Installation Option*: Not quite sure what this really means (link doesn't work) But it costs extra ($149)
GPS US (and Canada?) only
Up to 3 hour battery life on standard battery. An extended battery (up to 12 hours) is also included but increases the weight by another half a pound, as well as, it increases the thickness by another half an inch†
SSD storage is 64 GB. 128 for $200 more
Check out the reviews,** all 3 pages. Definitely would be one for consideration for PC'rs
Can't say right now, but I would expect that the new Macbook Air will include Apple's standard Mac software, i.e,
Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard (includes iTunes, Time Machine, Quick Look, Spaces, Spotlight, Dashboard, Mail, iChat, Safari, Address Book, QuickTime, iCal, DVD Player, Photo Booth, Front Row, Xcode Developer Tools)
†"Batteries: 2/10 and 9/10: the machine comes with two battiers--the sleek skinny one that delivers the light weight and thin look, and the useful one. With the "big" battery, the machine now weighs a whole 2 lbs 4 ounces--still far less than my thinkpad, and with really great life--over 8 hours. The little one is really just a "party battery"--I have yet to get a full 2 hours off it. But for showing the thing to your friends, that's the outfit you want. "**
In regards to the limitations of the first-gen iPad, I see many of the device's weaknesses being addressed as technology evolves. Low-power processors will get significantly faster. Memory capacity will increase dramatically.
But that's where Apple's tablets will be in let's say 2014. This is 2010 and based on what the components Apple has available to it today can do, the iPad is not suited to being a laptop/desktop replacement.
I should qualify this by stating that those of us who legitimately need the horsepower and memory capacity found in today's full-function computers are simply not going to be able to replace our laptops/desktops with current iPads. The device is not intended for that purpose. It's a complimentary device which is to say that sometimes you don't need a full-function device and it's wasteful to be running such a device to perform tasks that can be handled by something less capable.
Why pay the price in terms of weight, battery life, etc. if you just want something that will allow you to browse, read, e-mail, play a few light-duty games, consume media, etc.
On the other hand, clearly, based on what has happened in the past, we have to assume computing power, memory capacity, etc. will continue to improve. So imagine it's 2014 and your basic iPad at that time will have the computing muscle of a current MacBook and the storage capacity to match. While that happens, software and input advancements are likewise inevitable.
I believe there will come a time when many people will not own a complimentary computer to work with the iPad. It will be a standalone device. But at the same time, that doesn't mean everyone will get it done without the use of a desktop or high-powered laptop. Jobs has said that the iPad is like a car compared to a full-function computer being like a truck. To me that suggests that Jobs sees a time when many of us will own just iPads (i.e. cars) but trucks (i.e. full-function desktops) will still be with us.
Still, as innovative as Apple has been, it is a company that likes to evolve products as opposed to trying to force something onto consumers before its time. Apple started off with a better MP3 player and has moved step by step to the iPad. The iPad itself is a step towards something more but it works fine as it is intended to be used at this time. In the meantime, Apple's other computing devices warrant attention because for a few more years, they still have a role to play. The Air might be rendered pointless some day but that day is not now.
Just to check - are you saying the MacBookAir works great for managing files & working seriously on copy?
(BTW I'm advocating an iBookAir (iOS), not iPad vs Netbook... and agree that writing on the iPad isn't a thing to do)
yeah, I think the new Air will work quite nicely for my job needs.
An iOS notebook would be fine sometime in the future, when they allow cursor/mouse based input and a real file system. I am attracted to the idea of a snappy mobile OS, but so far this one doesn't have the right approach for general computing needs (outside of media consumption).
Just to check - are you saying the MacBookAir works great for managing files & working seriously on copy?
(BTW I'm advocating an iBookAir (iOS), not iPad vs Netbook... and agree that writing on the iPad isn't a thing to do)
Although my main Mac is a MacBook Pro, I can't quite agree that writing on the iPad isn't a thing to do. But, based on what I heard to date, the new MacBook Air will definitely be up for consideration.
As for the iPat, I got the Taptyping app and have increased my typing skills on my iPad to nearly 40 words per minute (WPM). One day, I hope to meet this girl's* 75-92 WPM level.
Most of the time for large documents, I simply use my Bluetooth keyboard.
As well, using SoundNote and/or Dragon Diction, I have been able to significantly reduce and in some cases eliminate typing all together.
I really just hope this update means a lower price point + updated graphics / processor speed bump / SSD for the base model, so my future Mac setup can be a dual or quad core iMac at home, and the MBA for classes. I've realized I use my Acer 1410 more than my MBP because it's lighter and more portable, so I want to get a bigger screen + keyboard / more computing power for my life on the go. I love how my Acer can "play" HD content In MPC 720p files totally suck. They're better in VLC, but still not great. Anyone know how well the 9400M vs. 320M do with HD content?
One big difference. That computer has an Atom processor, which means 1 core. Granted, it has Hyper-Threading, so it can run 2 threads at once, but it's an Atom, which means that the processor has no where near the computing power of the SL9400 (1.83Ghz low-end MBA processor).
On Cine R10 32Bit Single benchmarks, the Atom scored a measly 657 compared to the SL9400's 2175. Thus the SL9400 is over 3X faster. (Couldn't find 3DMark06 comparisons).
Comments
$1299
11.1" 1366x768 screen, SSD storage, 2GHz Intel, 2GB RAM, Memory Stick & SD slots, Wifi, Bluetooth, Verizon mobile broadband (3G?), 12 hour max battery, 0.55" thick, 1.6lb weight.
I think the nearest equivalent to this would be a Sony Vaio X series - ...
$1299
11.1" 1366x768 screen, SSD storage, 2GHz Intel, 2GB RAM, Memory Stick & SD slots, Wifi, Bluetooth, Verizon mobile broadband (3G?), 12 hour max battery, 0.55" thick, 1.6lb weight.
Apple could do something similar and much cheaper. At least without 3G.
I'm imagining Apple producing something built on the absolute newest tech which should result in smaller hardware and better performance. The GPU ought to be the device setting the machine apart.
The problem I have is that everyone saying the iPad can't replace their desktop aren't actually giving a lot of examples of what it can't do.
Don't be silly that would just result in somebody trying to counter the complaint. The fact is the iPad can't do a lot of things. In part it simply isn't powerful enough.
Oh before you go on about how powerful iPad is try doing any thing CPU intensive on the machine.
Converting movies, converting audio, ripping CDs/DVDs, video editing I can all kind of understand at least until iOS 4.2 next month when I suspect iMovie will be available for iPad which I'm really looking forward to.
Fine and dandy new software, but there is no way such software will hold up to desktop based equivalents. Even if those apps are running on a laptop.
But for most requirements for ultra-portable devices the iPad is the perfect replacement. If your requirements are much more then I would also suggest that the MacBook Air isn't going to be enough for your needs either. There is always cloud storage for documents and photos you need access to if the drives aren't big enough.
The cloud can be shoved where the sun don't shine. There are far to many problems with cloud based storage. Beyond that latency sucks, there is no point in having a fast SSD if it is to small to take advantage of that speed.
As for RAM you'd be amazed at what an iPad can do in 256MB of RAM.
You would be even more amazed at what it could do with more RAM. Frankly I've seen what is possible and I'm not impressed. Beyond that you don't have 256MB of ram available for user apps, rather you would be lucky to get 120MB of ram for a user app. With 4.2 you are likely to have even less RAM available.
It's all about efficient development of applications which most desktops don't have.
I have to call BS on that. First; iOS apps are as varied in quality as desktop apps. Second; iPad can't possibly handle the range of apps available to users of Mac OS/X.
I so hope that Apple makes desktop Mac OS X so refined that we're going to be able to see applications that take up megabytes of space instead of gigabytes of space leaving more room for actual data instead of wasted HDD space because of crappy badly written apps.
On one hand you have people complaining about app bloat and on the other you have people complaining about a obscure missing feature that they have seen on Windows, possibly in MS Office. I don't disagree with you but badly written apps are more about consumer demand than anything.
Remember the good old days of computing when you didn't have ludicrous RAM sizes and apps had to be real streamlined in order to fit in the requirements?
Hell I'm old enough to remember when a Vic 20 was considered a computer, when an Apple 2 was looked at as bleeding edge, and the S100 crowd was trying to promote their way of thinking. Those are all gone now. Frankly I don't want them to come back either as I rather enjoy the possibilities that the melding of UNIX and Apple software design has wrought. I like being able to start up an IDE and have the power available to me in a snappy environment. I like the idea of running software that only a few years ago would have required a mini computer or mainframe. I like WYSIWYG! So stop your dreaming as very few people have the desire to go back to those days.
We need to go back to that and iOS is actually pushing us that way.
Nope not if you are any sort of a professional or even beyond a casual user. Listen iOS has its place, I'm not arguing against that as I really like the platform being an iPhone user. The problem with people like you rattling on about changing Mac OS/X into some flavor of iOS is that you have no idea how intelligent people use computers. For many of use the Mac is a tool not a toy and some tools are meant to be used by professionals and others lesser beasts. If that sounds blunt so be it, I just don't need another Obama idiot ranting on about how much better life would be if they didn't have to think.
That is not to say I don't expect improvements to Mac OS/X, as I do. However doing away with its strong points is not improving anything. Frankly I expect a version of Touch sooner or later, but a version tailored for a desktop OS, not a direct port of iOS. In this case the implementation of Touch would have to expand the platforms capabilities not truncate capability. In any event Touch on Mac OS/X is a minor consideration as there are more pressing things they need to do with Mac OS/X. You are promoting regression for Mac OS/X and honestly that is unacceptable.
I think the nearest equivalent to this would be a Sony Vaio X series - http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921644667494
$1299
11.1" 1366x768 screen, SSD storage, 2GHz Intel, 2GB RAM, Memory Stick & SD slots, Wifi, Bluetooth, Verizon mobile broadband (3G?), 12 hour max battery, 0.55" thick, 1.6lb weight.
A couple of things:
- Windows Home Premium Edition
- Windows Office Starter software only?
- Choose an Installation Option*: Not quite sure what this really means (link doesn't work) But it costs extra ($149)
- GPS US (and Canada?) only
- Up to 3 hour battery life on standard battery. An extended battery (up to 12 hours) is also included but increases the weight by another half a pound, as well as, it increases the thickness by another half an inch†
- SSD storage is 64 GB. 128 for $200 more
- Check out the reviews,** all 3 pages. Definitely would be one for consideration for PC'rs
Can't say right now, but I would expect that the new Macbook Air will include Apple's standard Mac software, i.e,- Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard (includes iTunes, Time Machine, Quick Look, Spaces, Spotlight, Dashboard, Mail, iChat, Safari, Address Book, QuickTime, iCal, DVD Player, Photo Booth, Front Row, Xcode Developer Tools)
- iLife (includes iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, iWeb, GarageBand)
*http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...d%3d.&mode=add†"Batteries: 2/10 and 9/10: the machine comes with two battiers--the sleek skinny one that delivers the light weight and thin look, and the useful one. With the "big" battery, the machine now weighs a whole 2 lbs 4 ounces--still far less than my thinkpad, and with really great life--over 8 hours. The little one is really just a "party battery"--I have yet to get a full 2 hours off it. But for showing the thing to your friends, that's the outfit you want.
**http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921644667494
But that's where Apple's tablets will be in let's say 2014. This is 2010 and based on what the components Apple has available to it today can do, the iPad is not suited to being a laptop/desktop replacement.
I should qualify this by stating that those of us who legitimately need the horsepower and memory capacity found in today's full-function computers are simply not going to be able to replace our laptops/desktops with current iPads. The device is not intended for that purpose. It's a complimentary device which is to say that sometimes you don't need a full-function device and it's wasteful to be running such a device to perform tasks that can be handled by something less capable.
Why pay the price in terms of weight, battery life, etc. if you just want something that will allow you to browse, read, e-mail, play a few light-duty games, consume media, etc.
On the other hand, clearly, based on what has happened in the past, we have to assume computing power, memory capacity, etc. will continue to improve. So imagine it's 2014 and your basic iPad at that time will have the computing muscle of a current MacBook and the storage capacity to match. While that happens, software and input advancements are likewise inevitable.
I believe there will come a time when many people will not own a complimentary computer to work with the iPad. It will be a standalone device. But at the same time, that doesn't mean everyone will get it done without the use of a desktop or high-powered laptop. Jobs has said that the iPad is like a car compared to a full-function computer being like a truck. To me that suggests that Jobs sees a time when many of us will own just iPads (i.e. cars) but trucks (i.e. full-function desktops) will still be with us.
Still, as innovative as Apple has been, it is a company that likes to evolve products as opposed to trying to force something onto consumers before its time. Apple started off with a better MP3 player and has moved step by step to the iPad. The iPad itself is a step towards something more but it works fine as it is intended to be used at this time. In the meantime, Apple's other computing devices warrant attention because for a few more years, they still have a role to play. The Air might be rendered pointless some day but that day is not now.
Just to check - are you saying the MacBookAir works great for managing files & working seriously on copy?
(BTW I'm advocating an iBookAir (iOS), not iPad vs Netbook... and agree that writing on the iPad isn't a thing to do)
yeah, I think the new Air will work quite nicely for my job needs.
An iOS notebook would be fine sometime in the future, when they allow cursor/mouse based input and a real file system. I am attracted to the idea of a snappy mobile OS, but so far this one doesn't have the right approach for general computing needs (outside of media consumption).
Just to check - are you saying the MacBookAir works great for managing files & working seriously on copy?
(BTW I'm advocating an iBookAir (iOS), not iPad vs Netbook... and agree that writing on the iPad isn't a thing to do)
Although my main Mac is a MacBook Pro, I can't quite agree that writing on the iPad isn't a thing to do. But, based on what I heard to date, the new MacBook Air will definitely be up for consideration.
As for the iPat, I got the Taptyping app and have increased my typing skills on my iPad to nearly 40 words per minute (WPM). One day, I hope to meet this girl's* 75-92 WPM level.
Most of the time for large documents, I simply use my Bluetooth keyboard.
As well, using SoundNote and/or Dragon Diction, I have been able to significantly reduce and in some cases eliminate typing all together.
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gbbJ8dkCcc
I think the nearest equivalent to this would be a Sony Vaio X series - http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921644667494
$1299
11.1" 1366x768 screen, SSD storage, 2GHz Intel, 2GB RAM, Memory Stick & SD slots, Wifi, Bluetooth, Verizon mobile broadband (3G?), 12 hour max battery, 0.55" thick, 1.6lb weight.
One big difference. That computer has an Atom processor, which means 1 core. Granted, it has Hyper-Threading, so it can run 2 threads at once, but it's an Atom, which means that the processor has no where near the computing power of the SL9400 (1.83Ghz low-end MBA processor).
On Cine R10 32Bit Single benchmarks, the Atom scored a measly 657 compared to the SL9400's 2175. Thus the SL9400 is over 3X faster. (Couldn't find 3DMark06 comparisons).
See here for more: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...st.2436.0.html
So that's why they only say '2ghz Intel' as the processor!
Lol, yep