hey fran, now that AI is back up and running, and we're in this thread talkin' about future pda's (or lack thereof)...
whatever happened to that inside info and work you were doing for some undisclosed device? it sounded like a pda, from your non-nda-violating comments, but you never elaborated. did that prototype just vanish into thin air?
the mor ei get into the apple insider information community, it becomes more obvious to me that apple seeds a LOT of different prototypes for hardware, many which never see the light of day. a friend of mine was on the engineering team that was responsible for creating pieces of recent hardware, but he says that, like, 80% of what he's worked with has been scratched, postponed, or gone to vapor-ware status...
certainly makes this rumor-mongering a difficult job.
They say in this digital hub commercial that you can "organize your organizer on it" which means that Apple considers a PDA to be a major piece to the digital appliance puzzle. Pretty interesting, I hope they do release a new PDA.
Bogie, is the article "The Next Big Thing" is yours? Spec-wise using an embedded PPC like the one below could make MacOSX running on a tablet-thingy feasible and would drastically improve on the old Newton specs while adding voice control functionality, encrypted wireless connection to the main machine, etc.
I already posted this in another thread:
<a href="http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/oct2001/new-prod2.html"; target="_blank"> IBM PPC 405LP </a>; SoC, integrating interfaces for RAM, LCD, DMA, serial, PCMCIA, touch panels , etc. Includes hardware support for voice recognition, encryption and code compression. Churns through 557 Dhrystone MIPS@500mW and 231 Dhrystone MIPS@53mW and... is designed around the PowerPC ISA! Samples to select customers (who in the world is using the PPC ISA anymore...? ) in Q1/02.
Now, what kind of a machine would *YOU* put this in?
No, PDAs are *O*U*T*!(can't even read the news headlines on them even if they display TV... )
Remember, the original G3@266 MHz did 488 Dhrystone MIPS... .
FYI: the PowerPC ISA is heavily used in the embedded markets. Automobiles, network boxes, signal processing apps (G4), robotics, Nintendo GameCube, etc. I'm pretty sure that the embedded PowerPC market far exceeds Apple's megre consumption of PowerPC chips.
They say in this digital hub commercial that you can "organize your organizer on it" which means that Apple considers a PDA to be a major piece to the digital appliance puzzle. Pretty interesting, I hope they do release a new PDA.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is it just me or is Apple the only company I've heard of that people can predict the company's future off one of their advertisements? Guys, the executives don't create the ads.
Is it just me or is Apple the only company I've heard of that people can predict the company's future off one of their advertisements? </strong><hr></blockquote>
OK. Let's assume, for a moment, that Apple really does have a PDA-like device ready. We'll give it some variant of a PowerPC 8xx or 4xx CPU. We'd probably have 64 MB memory, since that's what the iPaq has, and let's toss in a screen. So far, so good. Such a device is highly tangible and would be of reasonable cost (probably $500-$600).
But the problem is software.
There is no way on Earth you will fit OS X on there, if for no other reason than Quartz. Combine that with Cocoa and you'll use up all 64 MB RAM just running the OS, leaving nothing for storage. You'd need to fit this into a small space. That's not OS X's league at all. And, in the same breath, Apple cannot introduce a new operating system that this point. They're still struggling to get Carbon and Cocoa accepted on OS X. They can't simultaneously try to combat Classic and Windows and Palm and WinCE. Introducing a new language -- NewtonScript 2, or whatever -- wouldn't be wise either, since they're concentrating on moving developers to ObjC. And what about data entry? The Newton's handwriting is now licensed by Microsoft, from what I understand. Does anyone know whether that license is exclusive?
So, in short, Apple would have to:
- Develop a new operating system that was highly compact and suited for a PDA...
- That was nevertheless highly similar (at least from the programmer's perspective) to one of Apple's current APIs...
- And they'd probably have to develop handwriting recognition all over again.
- Develop a new operating system that was highly compact and suited for a PDA...
- That was nevertheless highly similar (at least from the programmer's perspective) to one of Apple's current APIs...
- And they'd probably have to develop handwriting recognition all over again.<hr></blockquote>
I'm going to come out of lurking in this thread to point something out.
Apple has an operating system for handhelds. It's called the Newton OS. Newton OS 3.0 was even supposed to have support for color screens and a better storage system.
Apple also doesn't need to 'rewrite' (forgive the pun) it's handwriting recognition either. If what we saw with the few 'Inkwell' shots that ZDnet provided us, Rosetta can definitely work on different platforms.
All that being said, I don't think the specs provided above are accurate. Plus, the entire 'megahertz myth' arguement doesn't work if both chips are ARM processors from the same family.
If Apple wanted to go back into the handheld market, they'd need to provide a device with the following:
Backlit Color screen (1.5x Palm- Newton size)
G3 processor
128 MB RAM
Newton OS 3.0 (could have Mac OS X like GUI)
Upgraded Rosetta
Internal Microphone
Internal Speaker
Built in Airport
Internal Micro HD (4-10 GB)
Firewire
All this would need to be achieved for $700, and that's expensive for a handheld computer.
I wonder what this actually does, and what effect it actually had on the OS footprint... mebbe we're not talkin about Newton OS at all.
[quote]IBM has incorporated three hardware accelerators into the PowerPC 405LP design — (1) The Speech Language Accelerator enables speech recognition, (2) the Cryptography Accelerator supports DES and triple-DES encryption algorithms, (3) and the IBM CodePack™ Code Compression Core executes instruction compression to reduce system memory requirements.<hr></blockquote>
The memory compression technology attempts to reduce the size of PowerPC executables. The PowerPC uses 32-bits for every single instruction which tends to make applications about 30% larger than for x86 and other processor designs (like ARM, for example). In the desktop or notebook this isn't a big deal because code size just doesn't get big enough to matter. In the embedded space every kilobyte of memory matters (yes, thats thousands of bytes, not the millions or billions that everybody is so used to nowadays).
Why would a PDA have to run a G3? The StrongARM family is much better suited to the task -- extremely low power consumption, smaller code size, higher integration levels, etc. That new IBM could be a candidate (its designed for that kind of thing), but it would depend on a lot of other factors. iPod uses an ARM. Newton used to use an ARM. If (big if) Apple were to resume its PDA efforts they could go in that direction. Will they? I really don't think so, at least not in the "personal data assistant" market that exists right now. Jobs has already says he doesn't think much of that market. No, if their new device is a handheld it will be "revolutionary" and won't fit into our preconceived notions of what a handheld computer is. The PDA market is crowded and to sell a new handheld it needs to be something really innovative. It may have some PDA-like features, but if Apple does it they'll try for a real paradigm shift so that they can make money from it. PDAs aren't making money. Like the iPod it won't run MacOS 9 or X, and it will use whatever the appropriate hardware is.
Programmer, I aggree with you on the notion that whatever Apple will come up with, in the sense of portable/handheld computing - if at all - will be drastically different from what's out there already. You are also right that most PPC processors have vendors other than Apple using them in their machines. What sets the 405LP apart is its very low power optimization and the on-chip touch screen and voice recognition support. That's not needed in basically any of IBM's other markets. Due to its specs the 405LP is also a real contender for the SA1110 and the upcoming XScale, it gets similar performance/W as the latter (although it doesn't scale quite that high up)with all goodies already on chip (AFAIK, XScale specs cover just the chip, unlike StrongARM specs).
What's the point? A tablet. It could run a stripped version of MacOS X and thus the regular applications. It would/could converge the different codebases of parts of NewtonOS with the main software efforts. (Remember, although iPod runs on an ARM, the OS wasn't developed by Apple).
I would wish for wireless connectivity and integration in home entertainment equipment. (by the way, this would also nicely integrate rumors of apple entertainment access kit to remote control your stereo system/TV, the new iMac removable flat panel rumor and the PDA rumors) I have no idea how to pull off the accompanying specs (probably it would come short on many of them if it came out right now).
It's all definitely only wishfull thinking on my side, sounds like fun AND usable and makes sense though, doesn't it?
But I really believe, PDAs are DEAD. And MS has noticed, too. Hence MS's push into the corporate market where the stuff might mature into something useful. I have a Psion 5mx and I love it. It doesn't play "The lord of the rings" or music or whatever but it can do all and everything a gadget this small could do without compromising usability (I think it's cool to be able to watch TV on a PDA but that's about it and no reason to spend a couple of hundred bucks on one.) but they're already dead, too. Too bad their niche got taken over and obsoleted by MS. (sob)
I'm going to come out of lurking in this thread to point something out.
Apple has an operating system for handhelds. It's called the Newton OS. Newton OS 3.0 was even supposed to have support for color screens and a better storage system.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but: where would you get developers? Old Newton developers might port their old apps, but it's going to be damn hard resurecting a platform on which Apple pulled the plug with no warning, leaving developers high and dry. In addition, as I said, this is not the right time to introduce yet another new language and another new OO toolbox that has nothing in common with what's out there. (NewtonScript isn't even classic OO; it's a prototype-based language, and therefore a much bigger leap for the common programmer than simpler moving from C++ to ObjC.) Even if Apple were willing to tackle this, you can't get over the fact that Jobs hated Sculley and all he stood for, and that means that Jobs hates the Newton no matter how advanced it may be. For purely ideological reasons if nothing else, the chance that we'll ever see another NewtonOS-based device is just about nil. That still leaves Apple with either condensing Mac OS X painfully into what would really have to be about 4 MB RAM maximum (we gotta have lots of RAM for storage here) or developing a new OS. I don't like either option much, frankly. Given what they have, Apple's best bet would actually be to start with System 7 and base their handheld's OS on that. Maybe that's why RosettaStone was a Classic app. Who knows.
Yes, I wrote The Next Big Thing, and if I can get off my butt over the holidays here I am planning on getting another article up there soon. For the most part The Next Big Thing sums up my views on an Apple PDA, and the fact that while I like the Newton OS and believe it has a lot of life left in it, Apple will not return to it.
What Fran outlined is a lot like what I imagine but more capabilities are more important than specs.
My guess is that IBM built that chip to get into the cel phone market. PDA's are toast, but cel phones are rapidly turning into monsters... soon you'll be able to surf the web on your GPS equipped cel phone while using it as a remote control and debit system! Perhaps Apple is going to build one of these uber-celphones?
(Personally I hate cel phones, so I hope they don't do this)
Comments
whatever happened to that inside info and work you were doing for some undisclosed device? it sounded like a pda, from your non-nda-violating comments, but you never elaborated. did that prototype just vanish into thin air?
the mor ei get into the apple insider information community, it becomes more obvious to me that apple seeds a LOT of different prototypes for hardware, many which never see the light of day. a friend of mine was on the engineering team that was responsible for creating pieces of recent hardware, but he says that, like, 80% of what he's worked with has been scratched, postponed, or gone to vapor-ware status...
certainly makes this rumor-mongering a difficult job.
They say in this digital hub commercial that you can "organize your organizer on it" which means that Apple considers a PDA to be a major piece to the digital appliance puzzle. Pretty interesting, I hope they do release a new PDA.
If you want my real thoughts check out <a href="http://www.macdiscussion.com"; target="_blank">http://www.macdiscussion.com</a>; the article should still be in the top three.
I already posted this in another thread:
<a href="http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/oct2001/new-prod2.html"; target="_blank"> IBM PPC 405LP </a>; SoC, integrating interfaces for RAM, LCD, DMA, serial, PCMCIA, touch panels , etc. Includes hardware support for voice recognition, encryption and code compression. Churns through 557 Dhrystone MIPS@500mW and 231 Dhrystone MIPS@53mW and... is designed around the PowerPC ISA! Samples to select customers (who in the world is using the PPC ISA anymore...?
Now, what kind of a machine would *YOU* put this in?
No, PDAs are *O*U*T*!(can't even read the news headlines on them even if they display TV...
Remember, the original G3@266 MHz did 488 Dhrystone MIPS... .
Yum.
<strong>
They say in this digital hub commercial that you can "organize your organizer on it" which means that Apple considers a PDA to be a major piece to the digital appliance puzzle. Pretty interesting, I hope they do release a new PDA.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is it just me or is Apple the only company I've heard of that people can predict the company's future off one of their advertisements? Guys, the executives don't create the ads.
<strong>
Is it just me or is Apple the only company I've heard of that people can predict the company's future off one of their advertisements? </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well Macintosh is quite an amazing guy
But the problem is software.
There is no way on Earth you will fit OS X on there, if for no other reason than Quartz. Combine that with Cocoa and you'll use up all 64 MB RAM just running the OS, leaving nothing for storage. You'd need to fit this into a small space. That's not OS X's league at all. And, in the same breath, Apple cannot introduce a new operating system that this point. They're still struggling to get Carbon and Cocoa accepted on OS X. They can't simultaneously try to combat Classic and Windows and Palm and WinCE. Introducing a new language -- NewtonScript 2, or whatever -- wouldn't be wise either, since they're concentrating on moving developers to ObjC. And what about data entry? The Newton's handwriting is now licensed by Microsoft, from what I understand. Does anyone know whether that license is exclusive?
So, in short, Apple would have to:
- Develop a new operating system that was highly compact and suited for a PDA...
- That was nevertheless highly similar (at least from the programmer's perspective) to one of Apple's current APIs...
- And they'd probably have to develop handwriting recognition all over again.
And this doesn't even get into answering "why."
- Develop a new operating system that was highly compact and suited for a PDA...
- That was nevertheless highly similar (at least from the programmer's perspective) to one of Apple's current APIs...
- And they'd probably have to develop handwriting recognition all over again.<hr></blockquote>
I'm going to come out of lurking in this thread to point something out.
Apple has an operating system for handhelds. It's called the Newton OS. Newton OS 3.0 was even supposed to have support for color screens and a better storage system.
Apple also doesn't need to 'rewrite' (forgive the pun) it's handwriting recognition either. If what we saw with the few 'Inkwell' shots that ZDnet provided us, Rosetta can definitely work on different platforms.
All that being said, I don't think the specs provided above are accurate. Plus, the entire 'megahertz myth' arguement doesn't work if both chips are ARM processors from the same family.
If Apple wanted to go back into the handheld market, they'd need to provide a device with the following:
Backlit Color screen (1.5x Palm- Newton size)
G3 processor
128 MB RAM
Newton OS 3.0 (could have Mac OS X like GUI)
Upgraded Rosetta
Internal Microphone
Internal Speaker
Built in Airport
Internal Micro HD (4-10 GB)
Firewire
All this would need to be achieved for $700, and that's expensive for a handheld computer.
Now I'm going to step back out of this thread.
[quote]IBM has incorporated three hardware accelerators into the PowerPC 405LP design — (1) The Speech Language Accelerator enables speech recognition, (2) the Cryptography Accelerator supports DES and triple-DES encryption algorithms, (3) and the IBM CodePack™ Code Compression Core executes instruction compression to reduce system memory requirements.<hr></blockquote>
[ 12-29-2001: Message edited by: Programmer ]</p>
Why would a PDA have to run a G3? The StrongARM family is much better suited to the task -- extremely low power consumption, smaller code size, higher integration levels, etc. That new IBM could be a candidate (its designed for that kind of thing), but it would depend on a lot of other factors. iPod uses an ARM. Newton used to use an ARM. If (big if) Apple were to resume its PDA efforts they could go in that direction. Will they? I really don't think so, at least not in the "personal data assistant" market that exists right now. Jobs has already says he doesn't think much of that market. No, if their new device is a handheld it will be "revolutionary" and won't fit into our preconceived notions of what a handheld computer is. The PDA market is crowded and to sell a new handheld it needs to be something really innovative. It may have some PDA-like features, but if Apple does it they'll try for a real paradigm shift so that they can make money from it. PDAs aren't making money. Like the iPod it won't run MacOS 9 or X, and it will use whatever the appropriate hardware is.
Think Different.
What's the point? A tablet. It could run a stripped version of MacOS X and thus the regular applications. It would/could converge the different codebases of parts of NewtonOS with the main software efforts. (Remember, although iPod runs on an ARM, the OS wasn't developed by Apple).
I would wish for wireless connectivity and integration in home entertainment equipment. (by the way, this would also nicely integrate rumors of apple entertainment access kit to remote control your stereo system/TV, the new iMac removable flat panel rumor and the PDA rumors) I have no idea how to pull off the accompanying specs (probably it would come short on many of them if it came out right now).
It's all definitely only wishfull thinking on my side, sounds like fun AND usable and makes sense though, doesn't it?
But I really believe, PDAs are DEAD. And MS has noticed, too. Hence MS's push into the corporate market where the stuff might mature into something useful. I have a Psion 5mx and I love it. It doesn't play "The lord of the rings" or music or whatever but it can do all and everything a gadget this small could do without compromising usability (I think it's cool to be able to watch TV on a PDA but that's about it and no reason to spend a couple of hundred bucks on one.) but they're already dead, too. Too bad their niche got taken over and obsoleted by MS. (sob)
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
<strong>
I'm going to come out of lurking in this thread to point something out.
Apple has an operating system for handhelds. It's called the Newton OS. Newton OS 3.0 was even supposed to have support for color screens and a better storage system.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but: where would you get developers? Old Newton developers might port their old apps, but it's going to be damn hard resurecting a platform on which Apple pulled the plug with no warning, leaving developers high and dry. In addition, as I said, this is not the right time to introduce yet another new language and another new OO toolbox that has nothing in common with what's out there. (NewtonScript isn't even classic OO; it's a prototype-based language, and therefore a much bigger leap for the common programmer than simpler moving from C++ to ObjC.) Even if Apple were willing to tackle this, you can't get over the fact that Jobs hated Sculley and all he stood for, and that means that Jobs hates the Newton no matter how advanced it may be. For purely ideological reasons if nothing else, the chance that we'll ever see another NewtonOS-based device is just about nil. That still leaves Apple with either condensing Mac OS X painfully into what would really have to be about 4 MB RAM maximum (we gotta have lots of RAM for storage here) or developing a new OS. I don't like either option much, frankly. Given what they have, Apple's best bet would actually be to start with System 7 and base their handheld's OS on that. Maybe that's why RosettaStone was a Classic app. Who knows.
What Fran outlined is a lot like what I imagine but more capabilities are more important than specs.
(Personally I hate cel phones, so I hope they don't do this)