2003 Macs, my guess...
Ok, this is completely a guess with nothing to back it up, but hear me out for a moment:
New macs coming out in 2003 will be OS X only. (not counting older macs that they continue to sell for various reasons.)
Steve Wozniak will be at MWSF 2003.
How do these two things relate?
Well, the OS X only thing will be the result of some new hardware. Among other things, this new hardware will not have a MacOS ROM chip which will slightly reduce costs and reduce mobo complexity. However, it won't really reduce mobo complexity as there are likely to be some new things added to these boards as well. I have a lot of ideas of what they could put on, but I'm not goign to speculate on that here. Instead I will just mention my one guess in a moment.
Next, Steve Wozniak will be there. If Woz is going to be there, there must be some innovation coming. Something that makes computers more accessible to the common person and/or an innovative new digital device. However, I'm only going to talk about computers in this thread, so here's my thought:
Which item does not belong in this list and why:
A. Stereo
B. Computer
C. Television
D. Playstation 2
Answer: B. Computer
Why? Because it does not turn on instantly. However, the computer has a lot of potential, for it can replace the other three items in the list. The thing a computer is lacking is the simplicity and ease of use that is inherent in a television, stereo, or game console.
With that in mind, I think Apple is going to have some "instant-on" technology on the 2003 Macs. Not truly instant-on, I mean, even a TV takes a few seconds for the tube to warm up and all that, but I think we'll see startup times in the 10 second range. (that is, from the moment you press power up until you see the login screen) In my opinion, that is a significant leap in the consumer-friendliness of a computer.
I know somebody's going to post and say, "who needs instant-on, just put it to sleep like everybody else does?" and I do put computers to sleep, but "everybody else" doesn't. With the JFS, fsck doesn't need to run on startup, which will provide a significant boost, and a power outage won't cause any filesystem corruption, a computer could be flicked off in an instant like you would turn off a stereo or playstation.
It's just a guess, but I like to think that it's at least a somewhat educated one.
New macs coming out in 2003 will be OS X only. (not counting older macs that they continue to sell for various reasons.)
Steve Wozniak will be at MWSF 2003.
How do these two things relate?
Well, the OS X only thing will be the result of some new hardware. Among other things, this new hardware will not have a MacOS ROM chip which will slightly reduce costs and reduce mobo complexity. However, it won't really reduce mobo complexity as there are likely to be some new things added to these boards as well. I have a lot of ideas of what they could put on, but I'm not goign to speculate on that here. Instead I will just mention my one guess in a moment.
Next, Steve Wozniak will be there. If Woz is going to be there, there must be some innovation coming. Something that makes computers more accessible to the common person and/or an innovative new digital device. However, I'm only going to talk about computers in this thread, so here's my thought:
Which item does not belong in this list and why:
A. Stereo
B. Computer
C. Television
D. Playstation 2
Answer: B. Computer
Why? Because it does not turn on instantly. However, the computer has a lot of potential, for it can replace the other three items in the list. The thing a computer is lacking is the simplicity and ease of use that is inherent in a television, stereo, or game console.
With that in mind, I think Apple is going to have some "instant-on" technology on the 2003 Macs. Not truly instant-on, I mean, even a TV takes a few seconds for the tube to warm up and all that, but I think we'll see startup times in the 10 second range. (that is, from the moment you press power up until you see the login screen) In my opinion, that is a significant leap in the consumer-friendliness of a computer.
I know somebody's going to post and say, "who needs instant-on, just put it to sleep like everybody else does?" and I do put computers to sleep, but "everybody else" doesn't. With the JFS, fsck doesn't need to run on startup, which will provide a significant boost, and a power outage won't cause any filesystem corruption, a computer could be flicked off in an instant like you would turn off a stereo or playstation.
It's just a guess, but I like to think that it's at least a somewhat educated one.
Comments
A. Stereo:
Sure a low end stereo may boot up really fast, but what about high end stuff? Vacuum tube amplifiers that take half an hour to warm up, there's your boot up time.
C. Television
What about projectors, going up in TV size... those take about a minute to boot up.
D. Playstation 2
Not sure about this one...
And B. Computer
What about all those hand helds and low end computers that boot up fast?
Simply the computer is not a simple appliance as such, it is too powerful and versatile to be. Thus it has boot up time
And geez, just put the computer to sleep
-All TV's take a few seconds for them to turn on, I have never seen a TV where you press the on button and there is a picture right away.
<strong>Hm, those analogies can be extended..
A. Stereo:
Sure a low end stereo may boot up really fast, but what about high end stuff? Vacuum tube amplifiers that take half an hour to warm up, there's your boot up time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So true. In fact, I'm "booting up" my Summit tube preamp/compressor as well as my Vox AC15TBX tube guitar amp. It'll take about half an hour, which is why I'm here, but it'll be worth the wait!
Mmmm.
Vox.
OT- what guitar do you run through that amp?
-12
<strong>Don't let it "boot up" too long. The AC15 is a class A amplifier... you could fry an egg on top of that thing.
Mmmm.
Vox.
OT- what guitar do you run through that amp?
-12</strong><hr></blockquote>
You're so right - the top of my Vox gets HOT. I'm running a 70's Strat reissue through the amp. Also I play keyboards, mostly organ and electric piano so what I do is run Native Instruments B4 and Emagic's EVP88 (plug-in instruments) out of my iBook into the Vox - it shaves off that digital harshness and makes it sound sweet and warm.
To get back on topic a little, I like the idea of the same processor (1 ghz) across the board, and then differentiate by media drive/memory/etc. Less parts to make/carry result in huge cost savings, pass those on to the customers and generate more sales at the same (very high in the computer industry) margins.
I also want to make one more comment - I hear the term "cannibalize" a lot on Mac forums. Users saying that Apple wouldn't do that because it would "cannabalize sales" from some other machine. I think when that term is used, they should stop and think that maybe the reason the other product would be "cannibalized" is because that product (ie. getting a PowerMac Dual-G4 Tower just to get spanning???) is just not plain good enough in terms of value. Perhaps instead of worrying whether another product line would be cannibalized, they should add value to that product so that people would WANT to pay more.
Ordinary consumers don't buy vacuum tube amplifiers.
Nobody complains about waiting a few seconds for a TV. They do complain about waiting 1-2 minutes for a mac to boot up.
People really complain about waiting for Windows to shut down as well.
It was just a goofy guess anyway, but I still think these new 2003 macs will boot up faster than earlier ones (relative to hardware specs) because they will be making some hardware changes to make these computers more suited to OS X.
[Insert clapping and cheering]
Steve Jobs: "The innovation is, instant on computing! Isn't everyone excited by this great technological leap I have bestowed upon the world?"
[.Mac-like Silence]
Instant booting isn't anything special. Some PCs have the feature, and even OS 9 was going to have it. Reducing the boot time for OS X would be very nice, obviously, but it wouldn't be earth shattering by any means.
[ 12-15-2002: Message edited by: Big Mac ]</p>
<strong>Reducing the boot time for OS X would be very nice, obviously, but it wouldn't be earth shattering by any means.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is exactly why they would make a big deal out of it.
Signs point to no.