[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by mduell 

what?

Netbooks (10.8MM) outsold portable Macs (1.75MM) by more than 6:1 in 2Q09. Heck, they even outsold iPods (10.2MM).

Netbooks from which company? It's like saying Ford, Volkswagon, Toyota, and Mercedes collectively sold more sedans than Voxel alone. No sh*t, really?

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Although personally I'm not at all interested in a tablet I do think a multi-touch tablet is more likely to become an actual Apple product than a netbook.

I only know that my iPhone has an excellent multi-touch screen. If they can scale that up they're fine.

I don't think I need a tablet, either.

But you never know. Many devices have lingered around until someone came up with the killer application.

For me it's the keyboard. I need a keyboard. So if Apple comes up with a solution that lets attach a keyboard, this could come closer. You could take the tablet like a screen, and put it on a stand, plug in a keyboard, and you could have something like a tiny desktop with a pocketable screen that is also the computer. In a way, a shrunk iMac with a touch screen, that you can use without a keyboard. With an 8 or 10 inch screen you could probably put it in a large pocket.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Consider a smaller even more compact MBA. A quality device, with a real KB, decent screen res, light weight, that comes with SL and iLife/iWork. That's a high quality package that can drive profit. Obviously it won't be cheap (MBA vs. MB), but it would be a very decent ultra-mobile solution w/o pushing those folks towards the touch and the iPhone OS/app store.

I'm absolutely with the high end approach. A smaller MBA would be of the size and weight of a netbook without their technical and esthetical shortcomings.

Looks like you missed my post regarding this farther up (from a quote of a post of mine that I late edited I could see you probably had the browser window open for quite a while without a refresh.

This is what I had posted (quoting myself only to save myself the retyping), and I'm sure we're not the only ones that would find an ultra-portable MBA (with a solid state drive) a great thing.

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

I could imagine a smaller MacBook Air. With solid state drives only. Now THAT could be interesting for those who want a smaller laptop, but don't like netbooks.

I'd say it depends how small a keyboard you want. That's pretty much the limit for usability. And, as turtle said, if you want to go much smaller, what's the point if you already have a smart phone.

PS: If you could plug in a keyboard into a iPod Touch or an iPhone. And aren't there keyboards that are collapsable?

[iDaver]

I never owned one but used a 12" PowerBook and I think it would be the perfect Apple netbook. It was a little too heavy, so drop the optical drive and whatever else necessary to lighten it up. Give it a 16x9 screen and a full size keyboard – edge to edge just like the PowerBook. With guts equivalent to the current white MacBook, it would be awesome; but only if priced below $1000. I'm hoping that's what the rumored new MacBook will be. (The MacBook Air is a joke at $1500. It's like a squashed crippled MacBook. Nice and light though.)

BTW, have you noticed some of the computer makers are discontinuing their pricey ultra portable laptops? Netbooks have made them unnecessary so they haven't been selling.

[SEkker]

If you have not used a netbook running a fully compatible/patched version of OS X 10.6, then you are in for a real surprise.

These machines CAN run photoshop - there is plenty of horsepower in the CPU.

I would not run Final Cut Pro, but I bet they'd edit an iMovie file just fine. Not fast - but quicker than any G4 powerbook.

Apple is avoiding this market just like they do not make a mid-range tower or a 15" mid-rangle laptop - they feel they cannot make any money in those markets.

That does not mean there is no interest for such form factors. The irony is that these machines are actually very GOOD form factors for a lot of people, which is why the competition is so stiff, and why even a little R&D goes a long way to refine the designs.

I cannot see Apple making a sub $500 netbook; and then again, considering the options we have now (like $200 netbooks that are quite capable of running 10.6), I would not want to buy one.

[Laminar]

Six hours of battery life, runs Office, Safari, iTunes, iPhoto, etc. Weighs 2.8 pounds. 95% full-size keyboard is easy to use. Fits neatly in a purse. What more does my wife need for taking to work and class?

[P]

Originally Posted by SEkker 

I would not run Final Cut Pro, but I bet they'd edit an iMovie file just fine. Not fast - but quicker than any G4 powerbook.

An Atom-based netbook? No. One based on a CULV Celeron, sure, but the cheap ones people usually refer to are Atom + 945GC, and they really aren't very good - as witnessed by the return rates, which are through the roof compared to regular laptops.

The newer ones are better though - mostly because of the newer chipset - but I'd much rather buy a 2 year old laptop than them. When Atom gets an integrated memory controller (Pineview, early 2010) I'll give it another look. What Atom is missing is out of order execution. OOO is worth the transistors because of the comparatively high latency to main memory. With Hyperthreading hiding latencies and an IMC reducing them, Atom might be interesting. That it also reduces power usage is a nice side effect.

Anyone thinking "Apple Tablet" when you hear that: you're not alone - although I'd prefer an ARM design like the iPhone to save even more battery.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Six hours of battery life, runs Office, Safari, iTunes, iPhoto, etc. Weighs 2.8 pounds. 95% full-size keyboard is easy to use. Fits neatly in a purse. What more does my wife need for taking to work and class?

What lappy is that?

[lpkmckenna]

Here's the Apple netbook I want: look at the Apple BT keyboard. Cut it in half, and put a trackpad between the left and right halves. That's the overall footprint. Add a screen the same size, nice and wide but short. No optical, few ports, C2D + 9400m. Beauty.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by P 

Anyone thinking "Apple Tablet" when you hear that: you're not alone - although I'd prefer an ARM design like the iPhone to save even more battery.

ARM is what you shall receive.

ARM licenses Atom-killer chip to un-named vendor | 9 to 5 Mac

[SEkker]

All of the guesses for a tablet seem to be a large iPod touch. Such a device is not a replacement for a netbook or laptop. It might be cool - I have reasons to be interested for work use well beyond trying one for personal use - but not a convenient and cost-effective machine to get to the internet.

Again, for those criticizing the speed of the Atom CPUs - you are totally missing the point. They are fast enough to make a usable machine, with low power consumption - oh, and they are fully compatible with other Intel hardware, making them a no-compromise solution to run software like OSX.

Apple now exclusively makes BMWs - something most posters here are proud of. I understand, and I appreciate, the view that quality is worth paying for in the long-run. But Apple is not even giving us the option of a BMW netbook (unless you're counting the very expensive MBA); and the VW option seems to work.

[Eug]

What I find odd is how so many people are so gaga over an Apple iTablet. Other than something the size of the iPhone... as in the iPhone itself, I basically have zero interest in one.

OTOH, I would consider getting a reasonably priced Apple netbook. Atom (preferably dual-core) would be fine, as long as the keyboard was a reasonable size. What I'd really prefer though is an 11" 1024x768 Apple laptop. I'd forego both the backlit keyboard and the Firewire port to get one, if it meant saving 2 lbs in weight. If Apple did make an 11" 1024x768 low performance laptop without optical, it'd have to cost significantly less than $1000 before I'd buy.

It's unlikely though. Apple already makes a low performance light laptop without optical... but charges way, way more for it.

[P]

Originally Posted by SEkker 

All of the guesses for a tablet seem to be a large iPod touch. Such a device is not a replacement for a netbook or laptop. It might be cool - I have reasons to be interested for work use well beyond trying one for personal use - but not a convenient and cost-effective machine to get to the internet.

Sure it is. You're missing Flash, that's it. More annoying to me is the lack of video formats you can play on such a thing, but maybe H.264 is enough.

Originally Posted by SEkker 

Again, for those criticizing the speed of the Atom CPUs - you are totally missing the point. They are fast enough to make a usable machine, with low power consumption - oh, and they are fully compatible with other Intel hardware, making them a no-compromise solution to run software like OSX.

I'm not criticizing it's speed, I'm calling you on your claim that they will beat any G4 on video editing. They won't.

Originally Posted by SEkker 

Apple now exclusively makes BMWs - something most posters here are proud of. I understand, and I appreciate, the view that quality is worth paying for in the long-run. But Apple is not even giving us the option of a BMW netbook (unless you're counting the very expensive MBA); and the VW option seems to work.

There are two different things here. Intel made the Atom for "MIDs", Mobile Internet Devices, and it's a reasonable fit if you decide you need flash. It's being used for cheap regular laptops, and this seems to be what you're pushing. Atom in an iTablet is a possibility. Atom in a cheap Mac is not. Just look at the iMac: If they had kept the 20" panel on one model, used a desktop CPU just one notch below what they use today, and used the 9400M, they would have made an iMac better than half the last generation yet costing $799 at the most. They didn't. Between that minor step down, there are so many more before you get to an Atom: Drop to the lower-cache E7000 series, drop to the Core 2 Pentiums, drop to the Core 2 Celerons, drop to single core Celerons, drop to cheaper, older graphics etc. You're suggesting skipping all these steps and going to an Atom Mac?

As for an iTablet: There are better options than Atom for such an Apple machinel. The Atom as it stands today is a bit of in-between - a tiny, therefore cheap, CPU with performance that is better than most ARM alternatives and power usage that is lower than most desktop equivalents. It will get better with the next generation (Pine Trail), but right now it isn't very good in either respect. ARM will simply fit better. For Windows the situation is different, as there is no way that MS will recompile the whole thing for a different ISA, but Apple can easily do that again. OS X is on its 4th ISA, if you include the 68k CPUs that NeXTSTEP started on.

[freudling]

Found this article. Spot on the subject in this thread.

Arriving at the MacBook Air: From Netbooks to Epiphany

[SEkker]

freudling, the MBA that poster settled on lists for a minimum of $1799!

In my opinion, there is a lot of unsubstantiated criticism of the speed of the current round of netbooks. They may not be as fast in some tests as a venerable G4 PB, but they in practice outperform such machines for surfing the web, running M$ Office, and email. And their wifi is seamless - and all running a hacked version of the OS.

Pricepoint for hardware entry? $199 (or less in some cases). I'm sorry, but I'm not going to spend almost $2k for my daughter to have a decent machine with a keyboard to read her email, surf the web, access her online textbooks, etc.

Apple is missing this market - and even a $799 iTablet (a machine with NO keyboard) is not going to address this hole.

I like my Apple products, have given them hundreds of thousands of dollars of purchases from work and (less) from personal funds.

But there are times they simply do not make the computer hardware I need.

And that's ok.

Just don't try to convince me that just because Apple does not make something means that such a product would not be better for me than what they currently make. That's perhaps the worst part of the 'Apple Cult' because it's taken as criticism of Apple. Guess what? That's ok, too!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by SEkker 

Apple is missing this market...

Maybe, but they are DEFINITELY not missing out on profit of this market, as there is almost NONE to be had.

And the risk for Apple is huge: the risk that their products are perceived as underpowered and with bad hardware quality.

Apple is very good and smart about selecting a market where they can maximize profits.
The current netbook market is NOT such a market.

Back to your assertion "Apple is missing this market":

You could also state that Apple is missing out on the "iPhone for $ 0.99" market and the "integrated desktop computer for $ 300" market.
Those markets are not viable and desirable markets for Apple, they are only wet-dreams of Apple enthusiasts.

-t

[freudling]

SEkker:

I was in your position. I thought exactly what you thought. Then, I actually tried using a Netbook for real and the experience was horrible. I tried many different models. They are just too small and constrained to be of any real use to me.

[P]

The problems with netbooks is that the people who buy them think that they're just buying a cheap laptop. They're not. There are cheap laptops, at $400 if not at $300, or you might buy a used one. Atom has significant tradeoffs built in to be energy efficient, and if extreme battery life and/or portability isn't necessary for you, you're paying a significant performance price for a feature you don't need. That that performance might be enough for you isn't terribly relevant - you can get a cheap real laptop at the same price with better performance.

Apple's solution for those who need portability is the iPhone, and possibly a future tablet. Their solution for those who want a cheaper computer is the same as it's been for the last 10 years or more: Go somewhere else. It might seem stupid - it sure did to me - but it's working out for them. Perhaps Apple should accept used Macs as trade-ins, like car dealers do?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by freudling 

SEkker:

I was in your position. I thought exactly what you thought. Then, I actually tried using a Netbook for real and the experience was horrible. I tried many different models. They are just too small and constrained to be of any real use to me.

Did you try the models with full-sized keys? They are rare but they do exist.
The 1024x600 10.1" screen is a bit cramped, but that's why I'd like an Apple 11" 1152x720 netbook. That's actually higher resolution than a 12" PowerBook.

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Six hours of battery life, runs Office, Safari, iTunes, iPhoto, etc. Weighs 2.8 pounds. 95% full-size keyboard is easy to use. Fits neatly in a purse. What more does my wife need for taking to work and class?

10.6.2 breaks Atom support.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Eug 

10.6.2 breaks Atom support.

Get ready for all the conspiracy theories...

-t

[freudling]

Eug:

I tried them all. Fuller sized keyboards, 11.1" screens even. They are all cheap junk, underpowered, and generally too constrained for any real work. That's my opinion though, of course.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by freudling 

I tried them all. Fuller sized keyboards, 11.1" screens even. They are all cheap junk, underpowered, and generally too constrained for any real work. That's my opinion though, of course.

No, not "fuller-sized" keyboards, full-sized keyboards. ie. 100% normal sized keys, with just a couple of keys rearranged. There are only a couple of ones available with full-sized keyboards, so you may not have encountered them.

I've tried several Atom-based netbooks. I think they're quite fine for basic Office usage, web browsing, and email, in terms of responsiveness. My main issue with them is the small trackpad and small keyboards (for the non-full-sized keyboards).

[Eug]

Mac OS X 10.6.2 Build 10C540 Seeded to Developers - Mac Rumors

Last week's released build... appears to have restored Atom compatibility

[P]

Note that both of these reports come from the same guy. One person uses 10.6.2 on a netbook, and it stopped working with one beta and was restored with the next. That Atom support was removed is his conclusion. It could have been absolutely anything.

[Eug]

You're right, but it does illustrate the delicateness of Atom Hackintosh support.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Eug 

...but it does illustrate the delicateness of Atom Hackintosh support.

Well no surprise there. Using an Atom Hackintosh means you're using OS X on a computer Apple doesn't make/sell with a CPU Apple has never used. Having it supported by OS X is luck alone and there is absolutely no guarantee it will remain so forever. To me that has always been rather evident. Anybody who invests in an Atom Hackintosh should keep in mind it's just a gamble. If you can stick with whatever OS X version you got to work you'll be fine. If you want the option of upgrading you're gambling.

[Eug]

Atom CPU - Sir, your pants are on fire. | Stell's Blog

I made a post a few days about the Atom CPU now being unsupported by Apple’s latest Snow Leopard update, 10.6.2. This information is based on very reliable sources that have each personally tested the update. A few days later, I started to hear feedback that it is IN FACT supported. The Insanelywind user “MachVoluM” has posted this picture showing the kernel version.



Kernel 10.2.0 - Date Fri Jul 31 22:47:34 PDT 2009

I spoke to another colleague of mine and he noticed the date of the kernel. He sent me a picture of his kernel information from 10.6.1, which uses the same kernel as 10.6.0. (The name has been removed for privacy purposes)



Kernel 10.0.0 - Date Fri Jul 31 22:47:34 PDT 2009

As you can see the date is exactly the same as the old kernel. Now, let’s take a look at my gf’s Core2Duo system that’s running 10.6.2 Build 10C535. (The name has been removed for privacy purposes)


Kernel 10.2.0 - Date Fri Oct 16 01:47:07 PDT 2009

Obviously the date is different than the previous two. Anyone can tell the first image from “MachVoluM” is a fake. My sources still tell me the Atom CPU is still unsupported even in the latest 10.6.2 build 10C540.

That is all.


YouTube - OSX 10.6.2 (Vanilla Kernel) on Atom (MSI Wind U100) is a no go

[Spheric Harlot]

But doesn't the _64 indicate that he's running the 64-bit version?

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Eug 

No, not "fuller-sized" keyboards, full-sized keyboards. ie. 100% normal sized keys, with just a couple of keys rearranged. There are only a couple of ones available with full-sized keyboards, so you may not have encountered them.

I've tried several Atom-based netbooks. I think they're quite fine for basic Office usage, web browsing, and email, in terms of responsiveness. My main issue with them is the small trackpad and small keyboards (for the non-full-sized keyboards).

YES. 100% full sized keyboard, a couple different ones, I tried. They were horrible too. Not as bad as their smaller brothers, but still horrible. When I say too constrained to be of any real practical use, I am talking about the form factor, the trackpad and trackpad button size, and the size of the screen. For ME, they don't work. My MacBook Air blows them all away. After about 2 months with my Air, I am even more happy that I went this route.

I have probably done more research and tested more Netbooks than pretty much anyone on the planet. I went through a 2 week period of trying out dozens of them at all the stores (Future Shop, Best Buy, London Drugs, Boutique Electronic Stores, etc.). I still have my database with all my ratings and notes, including the report I did up for a friend's computer store on Netbook buying recommendations. I focused in a few I liked during the demos, and the top five netbooks as per Amazon.

In the end, all of them are too constrained and thus non-starters for me. My "NetBook" is my iPhone; my sub-notebook is my Air, although it can function as a sole computer because it has the power (2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo, 128 SSD...).

Whey they don't work:

1. Screen is too small for me to feel compelled to carry it around and use it in lieu of my iPhone. My Air is big enough that it trumps the experience on the iPhone, so I use it on the road. Yes, NetBook screens are much bigger than the iPhone, but what I experienced when using them was that I just wanted to be sitting in front of a 13" screen. That really is the sweet spot, for me, and, I guess, for Apple too.

2. Egregiously small trackpad and trackpad button. Every single one of the NetBooks are like this. Every new model I tried, I just laughed at how small they are. I really dislike that part of NetBooks.

3. Underpowerd. People will play Devil's Advocate, but there is no way those Atom processors are going to keep up with something like a top end Air running OS X. I need to do video, run iWork and MS Office, and the Air is the better choice for me because it is more powerful.

4. Cheap, cheaper, cheapest. 95% of the NetBooks on the market are cheap junk. I inspected the build quality and its just thin, cheap plastic. The Air's aluminum in this area won me over too, as did its "real" full sized, no keys rearranged, solid, backlit keyboard.

So here I am, NetBook in pocket (iPhone), and Air in briefcase, and I am not looking back.

[Eug]

To each his own I guess.

To me, the Air is a total ripoff. It has the same awkward footprint of the 13" MacBook Pro, and it's slower and costs way more. The only advantage of the Air is its weight.

I personally would trade my 13" MacBook Pro for an 11" MacNetBook any day... if the price was right... which would mean it should cost less than the MacBook Pro, not way, way more like the Air... which is why Apple is resisting that machine.

-----

In the meantime, Apple has officially broken Atom support with 10.6.2.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Eug 

To each his own I guess.

To me, the Air is a total ripoff. It has the same awkward footprint of the 13" MacBook Pro, and it's slower and costs way more. The only advantage of the Air is its weight.

I personally would trade my 13" MacBook Pro for an 11" MacNetBook any day... if the price was right... which would mean it should cost less than the MacBook Pro, not way, way more like the Air... which is why Apple is resisting that machine.

-----

In the meantime, Apple has officially broken Atom support with 10.6.2.

Well, to me, the Air is completely not a ripoff. After 15 years with Apple, coming from someone who actually owns an Air, I can honestly say that it is the best, finest computer I have ever used. And while it has a tad slower clock speed than the MacBook and MacBook Pro, it's L2 cache is double the size and it has the same graphics processor and front side bus speed. I did some of my own benchmarks too. It's faster for many things, because of the SSD. Application launching, shut down and start up, etc.

And awkward footprint? I love the footprint of the Air.

Just finished watching a HD movie on it too. No issues.

It is more expensive than a MacBook or a MacBook Pro 13", but that gets you almost identical specs, save for a slightly slower clock speed. But the 2.13 GHz also includes the 128 SSD which makes all the difference for many tasks. Any other machine I get is now going to have an SSD after this experience. And for the money you also get something way thinner at about 1.5 pounds lighter. This thing is a revolution, and the Adamo still can't match it.