 |
 |
its fake. but that dont mean it aint pretty.
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: detroit,mi,usa
Status:
Offline
|
|
or is it fake? (maybe im just being wishful.) *sigh
scott
[This message has been edited by scaught (edited 01-29-2001).]
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Cambridge
Status:
Offline
|
|
Definitely fake. I think the original site even has a statement from the artist that says its purely conceptual. It's nice, but don't expect to see it. With Apple as the "digital hub," I don't think they are looking into making any if the "digitial extensions."
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Davis, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Very pretty, very fake, very nice conceptual design though. Good combination of the Aqua interface in a handheld version.
What I wouldn't give for a handheld running the Quartz graphics engine.
-THX
------------------
Just because Windows users vastly outnumber Mac users, numbers alone do not denote a higher form of life. Cøckroaches outnumber humans many times over, and no one says a cøckroach is better than a human.
|
|
Just because Windows users vastly outnumber Mac users, numbers alone do not denote a higher form of life. Cøckroaches outnumber humans many times over, and no one says a cøckroach is better than a human.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
It is cool. It has a better graphics display than the Palm IIIc, although it looks a bit larger. But man, its cool. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm sorry to say, but the color palm looks horrible! I bought a Visor, and I'm really not all that impressed. I think there are some cool applications, but the resolution isn't anything that I would ever consider adequate for anything other then a rolodex on steroids.
I think that the artist did one hell of a job. It's always nice to see what a person can do when they put their minds to it.
I wonder if you stripped the hell out of the services of OSX how small you could get it to be (and then burn it on a ROM)?
Here are my realistic specks for such a unit...
-Operating System: OSX (naturally) without classic
-Processor: 233 Mhz G3 (That would do all of the basics (web, notes, bla bla bla...)
-I/O: One USB port (think of what you could do with just a USB port...CD-R, Hard Drive, Print, MP3, keyboard, sound, etc
-Runs 12 hours before a recharge...
-Passive matrix screen
-256M of ram
Yes, you couldn't update the OS all that much (unless it was a removable ROM - which Apple wouldn't do), but it's an inspiring design none the less...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: ny
Status:
Offline
|
|
I would buy it in a second...
How come Palm still hasn't a native USB connection in their
cool Vx. The Visors are nice but too bulky.
Please Apple get us a new sexy PDA.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trunks_essex
|
|
i'm speechless,  kick ass!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Cambridge
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't want to be a jerk or anything here, but I don't see why OS X has to go on a handheld. This isn't the first time I've heard this suggestion. I think it'll make an outstanding desktop OS, but you can't push a desktop OS on a handheld platform. Look at how M$ failed when they pushed WinCE. If you read Apple's history in the PDA market, you'll realize that they got it right when they had the Newton. The OS is easy to navigate and appropriately compact for a handheld. The only things they did wrong were invent it ahead of its time and price it a little too high.
I think if Apple is smart, they will resurrect the Newton platform. Only a few things are missing from the basic OS like good multitasking and ATA support (which Paul Guyot has nearly solved). The latest Newton ROMs from Apple even had support for a color screen. The framework is there, just not the willingness to push forward.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Davis, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I agree with TimmyDee51, that OSX is a great desktop OS, but not a viable handheld OS.
It would be nice if Apple could make a sub $500 dollar PDA, and make a handheld OS that would feel like OSX, but be a true handheld OS.
Realistically, I think Apple will not get back into the PDA market for a while, but it would be fun to ponder.
However, I think that mitchell_pgh's stats are a little overblown.
I would like to see:
- 166 mhz G3 (fast enough for MP3s, but cheap, cool, and light on batteries)
- I/O: Definite USB, and a fast cradle input that could connect to firewire on F/W based Macs, or USB on non F/W Macs
- A LiIon battery, pretty much the best out there
- Passive Matrix screen on lower model, Active on higher.
- 64 megs of ram, but a slot that can hold IBM MicroDrives (or similar removable non-solid state hard disk), but not required.
- Models that are in sub-sub-notebook form (like the eMate) and true handheld style.
-THX
------------------
Just because Windows users vastly outnumber Mac users, numbers alone do not denote a higher form of life. Cøckroaches outnumber humans many times over, and no one says a cøckroach is better than a human.
|
|
Just because Windows users vastly outnumber Mac users, numbers alone do not denote a higher form of life. Cøckroaches outnumber humans many times over, and no one says a cøckroach is better than a human.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
