That clie is just a gimmick device. It does nothing particulary well, except look cool. Everything on it is a bad comprimise. Size/usability/power. You can pretend to do a bit of everything without actually doing anything useful.
A big shiny agenda. At least paper had better price performance.
lets see.
-take one bad keyboard,
and one small display.
-Add one small battery,
and one a weak low res camera.
-A weak proc,
and cumbersome/marginal internet experience.
-A poor quality media player experience which is more novelty than quality player (see small display) tied to low capacity/expensive storage (for the purposes of media playback, Mp3 etc)
Great, now you have a device that mimics a number of truly capable devices without actually being good at anything. Even the slimness and efficiency of the original palm PDA concept has been sacrificed to bulky gimmicry. It's not really even that good for your pocket anymore, literally and figuratively.
<strong>Like the eMAc, use the old iBook form factor as a start. Make it a little less curvy, keep the latchless design, handle, rubbery sides,, make it real durable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just a note: flat surfaces and sharp corners (actually, any corners) are less durable. If you want something that can really hold up to abuse, you want something more in the spirit of the first iBook, or the eMate. Neither was well-rounded just to look cool.
Uhh, the G3 is history, get over it. Students need G4s every bit as much as other consumers.
For starters, OS X performs better on a G4 system, but that is the least of the reasons for Apple to use Altivec in all Macs.
The major obstacle to developers optimizing their applications for Altivec has always been the demand for Altivec. Until recently, only Powermacs had G4s, and this represented a very small minority of Mac users (except of course in the case of professional users, thus the reason apps like photoshop and FCP are altivec optimized). In fact the CEO of Westlake Interactive, when asked some time ago about the possibility of games being optimized for Altivec, replied that games would not be written for Altivec until the iMac had a G4.
The reason developers were waiting for widespread G4 use is simple; Altivec optimizations require an investment of resources that will not see a reasonable return if the only market for for the software is Powermac users. But if ALL Mac users represent a potential market for Altivec optimized apps, then suddenly it's a good investment opportunity for a developer to code for Altivec. Altivec code will make their app run faster on all Macs rather than a subset of Macs, and all Mac users will be looking for software that's accelerated for Altivec.
By putting G4s in as many Macs as possible, Apple is creating a market incentive for developers to code for Altivec. It's also a great move on Apple's part to lead the way by accelerating OS X for Altivec.
Ultimately, the more Macs that use G4s, the faster the G4s will run, because more software will be properly optimized for the CPU. This is precisely what Intel has failed to do with similar instruction sets on the Pentium CPUs, and it's Apple's ace in the hole.
This is why it is so close minded and nearsighted to think that a low end laptop or desktop computer doesn't "need" a G4. Furthermore, the more G4s Apple uses, the cheaper they will all become. You can be sure that when Apple began buying quantities of G4 chips needed for the iMacs, they started getting a better deal on all their purchases...and hopefully if Motorola pulls their head outta their collective arse, they will sink those extra revenues from G4 sales back into G5 R&D (yeah, right).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BTW, this talk of an eBook is nonsense. Apple already targets the iBook at education markets, and it does very well. There is little room for improvement in the iBook's value...it's using a cheap CPU that is obsolete for running OS X, it's got a budget-minded 12" display, and it's motherboard technology is circa 1997.
The eMac is needed because the current iMac is priced a bit higher than the original iMac, and it's design is considered by some edu buyers to be too fragile for a school environment. The iBook shares none of these traits with this iMac, and thus, there is no need for an eBook.
I think some of you take Apple's marketing far too seriously. The product matrix is an advertising slogan, nothing more. Don't
Apple already has an "eBook", it is called the iBook. What they need is a sleeker, slimmer, slighter, shinier, speedier portable as Escher has so often pointed out on these boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
JYD, you speak the truth brother. Just think of the original G4. Apple was going to sell max, 1-1.2 million when it was only in the powermac line-up, and that's generous. Those are nice sales, but not really something to base design decisions upon, when you can sell 10x as many PPC parts to other companies for routers/cars/industrial etc. But put that G4 into all the products and suddenly you're shipping around 5 million parts a year. Apple just became a much more important customer. If they want something, you at least listen to what they want to say. You keep Apple happy cause they pay for technology that eventually gets into all those embedded markets. If they want a desktop chip, you give it to them, cause you know they're going to buy them.
And the software side should get a lot better too. Devs will either code for altivec or fall behind in just about any media intensive task. A/V especially. With enough of them doing it, they'll even get better at it. Info travels: designers and engineers change jobs, companies get bought-out -- what has been learned in one area gets applied in another and before you know it not only are devs coding for altivec but they're also out-doing each other with more efficient coding. Altivec doesn't just get more wide-spread, it gets faster too.
I think you are misunderstanding me. I would want an ebook to have a G4. My only concern is meeting a price point. I agree that a G4 is favorable for OSX and to encourage the use of Alti-vec, however could Apple make a sub-$1000 laptop with a G4?
The 800Mhz SOI G4 is $125 US in quantity. 600 and 733Mhz versions are available for less. A 600Mhz SOI G4 in an iBook shouldn't change prices or heat profiles.
Really? Its amazing they are that cheap, compared to the price of Pentium 4s and Athlons. Well if this is the case, Apple should do the unthinkable and lower their margins a bit, and include a 700mhz G4 in the next iBook revision, and a 500mhz 7410 in the eBook (hypothetically of course).
<strong>That clie is just a gimmick device. It does nothing particulary well, except look cool. Everything on it is a bad comprimise. Size/usability/power. You can pretend to do a bit of everything without actually doing anything useful.
A big shiny agenda. At least paper had better price performance.
lets see.
-take one bad keyboard,
and one small display.
-Add one small battery,
and one a weak low res camera.
-A weak proc,
and cumbersome/marginal internet experience.
-A poor quality media player experience which is more novelty than quality player (see small display) tied to low capacity/expensive storage (for the purposes of media playback, Mp3 etc)
Great, now you have a device that mimics a number of truly capable devices without actually being good at anything. Even the slimness and efficiency of the original palm PDA concept has been sacrificed to bulky gimmicry. It's not really even that good for your pocket anymore, literally and figuratively.
Congrats, you've just made a useless tech-toy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sez you. Everything you just descibed is true of all PDA's. If you want a full pc-level experience, buy a pc.
Just because you don't understand the PDA doesn't mean that no one does. And while the current clie may be insufficient or your needs, Moore's Law pushes them along as inexorably as pc's, and soon a clie-sized device will do all of those things.
And why shouldn't Apple invent that device, since they beat everyone to the PDA concept six years ago?
The iBook is the last major iteration of the traditional portable (notwithstanding the inevitable upgrades that will extend the concept out for a while). PDA-sized devices are the new battleground, and I hope Apple will be ready to play. iPod is a promising start, but they've still got a long way to go.
I'm not sure if a small PDA like device would replace the iBook. If the laptop is to evolve, most likely it will become a tablet device, not a small PDA. A relatively large screen is part of a laptop. In terms of an eBook, I am not sure if an eBook should be a completely new device. Look at the eMac, it really isn't that innovative technologically. It is a well designed and configured for education, but it doesn't stand out as something revolutionary like the new iMac. If Apple is to develop an eSeries of computers, they should focus of price. The way I see it, Apple releases an eBook this fall along with revised eMacs. Again it designed with education in mind, however it will be available to the general public. Make the eMac/eBook the sub $1000 line, iBook/iMac $1000-$2000 range. Powerbook/Powermac $2000 + (except for the entry level powermac, which should be about $1499). In a world where Dell has a 1.7ghz P4 with DDR memory, Apple has to work on making more affordable Macs.
Comments
A big shiny agenda. At least paper had better price performance.
lets see.
-take one bad keyboard,
and one small display.
-Add one small battery,
and one a weak low res camera.
-A weak proc,
and cumbersome/marginal internet experience.
-A poor quality media player experience which is more novelty than quality player (see small display) tied to low capacity/expensive storage (for the purposes of media playback, Mp3 etc)
Great, now you have a device that mimics a number of truly capable devices without actually being good at anything. Even the slimness and efficiency of the original palm PDA concept has been sacrificed to bulky gimmicry. It's not really even that good for your pocket anymore, literally and figuratively.
Congrats, you've just made a useless tech-toy.
<strong>Like the eMAc, use the old iBook form factor as a start. Make it a little less curvy, keep the latchless design, handle, rubbery sides,, make it real durable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just a note: flat surfaces and sharp corners (actually, any corners) are less durable. If you want something that can really hold up to abuse, you want something more in the spirit of the first iBook, or the eMate. Neither was well-rounded just to look cool.
For starters, OS X performs better on a G4 system, but that is the least of the reasons for Apple to use Altivec in all Macs.
The major obstacle to developers optimizing their applications for Altivec has always been the demand for Altivec. Until recently, only Powermacs had G4s, and this represented a very small minority of Mac users (except of course in the case of professional users, thus the reason apps like photoshop and FCP are altivec optimized). In fact the CEO of Westlake Interactive, when asked some time ago about the possibility of games being optimized for Altivec, replied that games would not be written for Altivec until the iMac had a G4.
The reason developers were waiting for widespread G4 use is simple; Altivec optimizations require an investment of resources that will not see a reasonable return if the only market for for the software is Powermac users. But if ALL Mac users represent a potential market for Altivec optimized apps, then suddenly it's a good investment opportunity for a developer to code for Altivec. Altivec code will make their app run faster on all Macs rather than a subset of Macs, and all Mac users will be looking for software that's accelerated for Altivec.
By putting G4s in as many Macs as possible, Apple is creating a market incentive for developers to code for Altivec. It's also a great move on Apple's part to lead the way by accelerating OS X for Altivec.
Ultimately, the more Macs that use G4s, the faster the G4s will run, because more software will be properly optimized for the CPU. This is precisely what Intel has failed to do with similar instruction sets on the Pentium CPUs, and it's Apple's ace in the hole.
This is why it is so close minded and nearsighted to think that a low end laptop or desktop computer doesn't "need" a G4. Furthermore, the more G4s Apple uses, the cheaper they will all become. You can be sure that when Apple began buying quantities of G4 chips needed for the iMacs, they started getting a better deal on all their purchases...and hopefully if Motorola pulls their head outta their collective arse, they will sink those extra revenues from G4 sales back into G5 R&D (yeah, right).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BTW, this talk of an eBook is nonsense. Apple already targets the iBook at education markets, and it does very well. There is little room for improvement in the iBook's value...it's using a cheap CPU that is obsolete for running OS X, it's got a budget-minded 12" display, and it's motherboard technology is circa 1997.
The eMac is needed because the current iMac is priced a bit higher than the original iMac, and it's design is considered by some edu buyers to be too fragile for a school environment. The iBook shares none of these traits with this iMac, and thus, there is no need for an eBook.
I think some of you take Apple's marketing far too seriously. The product matrix is an advertising slogan, nothing more. Don't
[ 05-01-2002: Message edited by: Junkyard Dawg ]</p>
<strong>
Apple already has an "eBook", it is called the iBook. What they need is a sleeker, slimmer, slighter, shinier, speedier portable as Escher has so often pointed out on these boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
agree : the ibook has to be improved.
And the software side should get a lot better too. Devs will either code for altivec or fall behind in just about any media intensive task. A/V especially. With enough of them doing it, they'll even get better at it. Info travels: designers and engineers change jobs, companies get bought-out -- what has been learned in one area gets applied in another and before you know it not only are devs coding for altivec but they're also out-doing each other with more efficient coding. Altivec doesn't just get more wide-spread, it gets faster too.
Come on Apple, give me a G4 iBook!
[ 05-01-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
<strong>That clie is just a gimmick device. It does nothing particulary well, except look cool. Everything on it is a bad comprimise. Size/usability/power. You can pretend to do a bit of everything without actually doing anything useful.
A big shiny agenda. At least paper had better price performance.
lets see.
-take one bad keyboard,
and one small display.
-Add one small battery,
and one a weak low res camera.
-A weak proc,
and cumbersome/marginal internet experience.
-A poor quality media player experience which is more novelty than quality player (see small display) tied to low capacity/expensive storage (for the purposes of media playback, Mp3 etc)
Great, now you have a device that mimics a number of truly capable devices without actually being good at anything. Even the slimness and efficiency of the original palm PDA concept has been sacrificed to bulky gimmicry. It's not really even that good for your pocket anymore, literally and figuratively.
Congrats, you've just made a useless tech-toy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sez you. Everything you just descibed is true of all PDA's. If you want a full pc-level experience, buy a pc.
Just because you don't understand the PDA doesn't mean that no one does. And while the current clie may be insufficient or your needs, Moore's Law pushes them along as inexorably as pc's, and soon a clie-sized device will do all of those things.
And why shouldn't Apple invent that device, since they beat everyone to the PDA concept six years ago?
The iBook is the last major iteration of the traditional portable (notwithstanding the inevitable upgrades that will extend the concept out for a while). PDA-sized devices are the new battleground, and I hope Apple will be ready to play. iPod is a promising start, but they've still got a long way to go.
Jet