[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So we don't think people are going to be pleased with those products, but we'll see. We are watching that space. About 3% of PC industry was in this netbook kind of category so it's a category we watch. We've got some ideas here. But right now, we think the products are inferior and will not provided experience to customers that they're happy with.

I don't get this. Apparently the popularity with consumers and critics alike isn't enough for them to think that consumers like the idea of a netbook...?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Again, an Atom is about as powerful as an ARM -- and the comment pretty much says that either is (in Apple's point of view) not powerful enough. I interpret this comment (which is consistent with what Apple has said in the past) as saying that they don't know what a usable product in that category would look like -- also because any of the cpus available today in that segment are not powerful enough.

Remember, this thread was sparked by rumors that Apple has ordered a product with a 10" touchscreen -- which at least size-wise puts it into the netbook market.

I like to see some evidence for this. Even if we were to completely ignore x86-specific optimization, I still don't think what you claim is correct.

It's true that ARM is faster clock for clock as compared to Atom. However, Atom is generally much higher clocked, and will actually have a viable & mass-produced dual-core version available in 2009. So while clock-for-clock performance for ARM is better than Atom, and performance/watt is way, way better on ARM than Atom, Atom still takes the absolute performance crown.

I guess another way of putting it is that ARM easily beats Atom in the embedded market... but a truly viable netbook is actually quite far removed from the embedded market for the near term.

Remember, this thread was sparked by rumors that Apple has ordered a product with a 10" touchscreen -- which at least size-wise puts it into the netbook market.

See above. There really is little point in a 10" iPhone. A 10" laptop would do quite well however, if priced right and if it had a half-decent keyboard.

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

I don't get this. Apparently the popularity with consumers and critics alike isn't enough for them to think that consumers like the idea of a netbook...?

Well, critics generally dislike the netbooks' keyboards. I do too.

[Eug]

[OreoCookie]

Damn Firefox, it ate my post twice

Originally Posted by Eug 

I like to see some evidence for this. Even if we were to completely ignore x86-specific optimization, I still don't think what you claim is correct.

It's true that ARM is faster clock for clock as compared to Atom. However, Atom is generally much higher clocked, and will actually have a viable & mass-produced dual-core version available in 2009. So while clock-for-clock performance for ARM is better than Atom, and performance/watt is way, way better on ARM than Atom, Atom still takes the absolute performance crown.

There will be a quad core version of the Cortex A9 (the next generation) available next year as well. It's TDP is still 250 mW

It's not easy to compare the two cpus objectively.
First of all, there is not a single ARM cpu, but ARM sells its IP to companies which then make silicon, usually with specialized hardware for things like audio/video de-/encoding, GPS navigation, GPUs, de-/encryption modules, etc. So even if you use a weaker cpu, as many things are implemented in hardware, they may be faster in actual applications. Furthermore, it's not easy to find a common benchmark (with all the flaws that benchmarks have). The current Cortex A8 is capable of up to 2100 DMIPS, the popular Atom N270 is about twice as fast (3800-4000 DMIPS). The Cortex A9 is expected to churn out up to 8000 DMIPS in its quad core configuration. For comparison, an old Pentium M at 1.5 GHz achieves around 6000 DMIPS and is thus significantly faster than both, the Atom and the Cortex A8.

There have been videos that compared speed of browsing on an ARM vs. an Atom, but all of these videos (at least the ones I could find) have been removed. The result was that the ARM-based netbook was slightly slower (9 vs. 8 seconds or so).

In any case, both the current-gen Cortex A8's speed is about half at one tenth of the power consumption. However, this does not take into account the special silicon. Apple's recent move to leverage the power of gpus in its next desktop OS (via Grand Central and OpenCL) are also an indication that these technologies can be used by normal programs. This obviously improves the speed of any device that has sufficiently many gpus built in.

Originally Posted by Eug 

I guess another way of putting it is that ARM easily beats Atom in the embedded market... but a truly viable netbook is actually quite far removed from the embedded market for the near term.

A usable netbook in my book cannot be based on an Atom either, it's too slow for what I want to do. Especially if you only slap a desktop OS on it, even if it is Windows XP, you'll want to/have to use it like a desktop. It's not a very appealing selling proposition to me.

Originally Posted by Eug 

ISee above. There really is little point in a 10" iPhone. A 10" laptop would do quite well however, if priced right and if it had a half-decent keyboard.

I 100 % agree when it comes to the iPhone. Again, it must look like I actually like the idea of such a device, I don't. It's just that rumors indicate(d?) such a device.
Although I don't see much use for a traditional netbook either. I've tried them and I find them slow. Sloooow. And that thing ran XP. Netbooks are pointless: the screen (or rather: the UI on screen) and keyboard are too small, it's too slow and it's still rather heavy (and ugly). They do their job badly (for me) in every way.

What I'm interested in is either a much lighter (say 500 g) device with a battery life of 8 hour work time. If it is 10" small, I'd like to use it without squinting. If it does not have a keyboard, I want to be able to connect one. And I want it to be usable without one. Otherwise, I'll stick to lightweight notebooks (think AirBook).

[Hawkeye_a]

I just remembered that the OSX system design has Aqua right at the top. So when Apple claims that they have OSX running on the iPhone does that mean it has all the other layers(kernel, drawing APIs and development APIs) in tack in the iPhoneOS ?

If that's he case then they could potentially have 3 different UI layers to get the desktop OS, iPhone and netbook/tablet UI, while maintaing the rest of the OS as a single project. right ?

Cheers

[ajprice]

Yes thats right, iPhone OS is a stripped down OS X with a different top layer interface. Do they need a third interface though? Does anyone know if the iPhone 3.0 SDK Interface Builder is set to only work at 480x360 iPhone resolution? The iPhone's ppi is very high density, most 10" netbooks are 1024x600. So that's around 2x2 the iPhone screen in resolution (4 screens would be 960x640). I think I'll do some photoshopping tonight of iPhone OS at a 10" screen resolution, to see what its like.

A small screen like 10" might be a bit tight for the full OS X - back in the days of the original iBook's 800x600 resolution, iLife '05 wouldn't install because it needs a higher resolution screen.

[blackstar]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Damn Firefox, it ate my post twice

TextEdit?

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

What I'm interested in is either a much lighter (say 500 g) device with a battery life of 8 hour work time. If it is 10" small, I'd like to use it without squinting. If it does not have a keyboard, I want to be able to connect one. And I want it to be usable without one. Otherwise, I'll stick to lightweight notebooks (think AirBook).

Thats what I'm interested in. A Macbook Air with a smaller screen that runs a full Intel processor and no atom. The Macbook Air doesn't really make sense to me because it is not that much smaller (think lighter) than a regular Macbook.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I don't get it. What's the joke? People who wish Apple would release a certain product end up buying one when they do? What's surprising about that?

[Dakar V]

The joke is they're waiting in line for something that is not even confirmed.

[CharlesS]

But that doesn't make sense. The second half of the year is still months away.

[Dakar V]

Making them major fanboys.

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by blackstar 

Thats what I'm interested in. A Macbook Air with a smaller screen that runs a full Intel processor and no atom. The Macbook Air doesn't really make sense to me because it is not that much smaller (think lighter) than a regular Macbook.

Do you think that you could get the performance you want at the size you want?

When you look at super compact, full-featured (and therefore horrendously expensive) machines, they generally come with ULV processors that are very powered down compared to higher end stuff. My 13" XPS M1330 has a 2.6GHz C2Duo, and it gets damn hot when I'm playing games. I can't imagine cramming something that powerful into an even smaller case.

Because the Atom is underpowered without being too weak, it's inexpensive. A higher end processor would add quite a bit to the cost of the machine (especially given that the processor is possibly the most expensive component in a personal computer). Now, this is in line with how Apple does things, but it would definitely keep it out of the "netbook" category.

[calverson]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

I don't get it. What's the joke? People who wish Apple would release a certain product end up buying one when they do? What's surprising about that?

Wow.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Because the Atom is underpowered without being too weak, it's inexpensive. A higher end processor would add quite a bit to the cost of the machine (especially given that the processor is possibly the most expensive component in a personal computer). Now, this is in line with how Apple does things, but it would definitely keep it out of the "netbook" category.

That's why I think the technology isn't there yet. Just think of it: a cpu with a tdp of 250 mW or 2.5 W has about the same power as a 1 GHz G4. It's amazing, but not good enough for my computing needs. If it weren't for Aperture, I could make do with a slower cpu than I currently use, though.

But that's why I think, Atom or ARM, as a cpu for a small laptop, they're too slow and IMO it wouldn't make much of a difference with which they actually went. For an embedded-type device, the answer is different, though.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

That's why I think the technology isn't there yet. Just think of it: a cpu with a tdp of 250 mW or 2.5 W has about the same power as a 1 GHz G4. It's amazing, but not good enough for my computing needs. If it weren't for Aperture, I could make do with a slower cpu than I currently use, though.

But that's why I think, Atom or ARM, as a cpu for a small laptop, they're too slow and IMO it wouldn't make much of a difference with which they actually went. For an embedded-type device, the answer is different, though.

But that's just it. You've said it's just fine for you except for your one, high-resource app. So it would accommodate most of your needs. The issue is how important Aperture is for your daily use, and how often you compute or want to compute away from your desk. If you really need to be able to work with your photos away from your desk then obviously it won't work, but if you only need to have Aperture working at your desk but still want to be able to do other things elsewhere, then a netbook does work as your secondary computer.

Besides which, consider Moore's law. In ~18 months there should be a netbook that's that's perfectly well suited to even your edge case needs.

[ajprice]

Apart from the processing power, I wouldn't want to be using Aperture out in the middle of wherever on any 10" screen.

[nonhuman]

Nor would I want to do my work (coding) on a 10" screen (though it would do in a pinch). However I still think a netbook would be perfectly adequate for my casual computing needs and, with an external monitor, the screen size issue disappears.

[ajprice]

Exactly, its not a full power computer, but you can do more on it than you can on a iPhone/smartphone.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by ajprice 

Exactly, its not a full power computer, but you can do more on it than you can on a iPhone/smartphone.

How is it not a full power computer? Netbooks are more powerful than any computer I owned up through maybe '04. I absolutely guarantee that a netbook is plenty powerful for my standard usage. My only complaint is screen size, and that's easily mitigated with an external monitor.

Just because it's not as powerful as its most powerful contemporaries doesn't mean that it's 'not a full power computer'.

[Eug]

1) I can't confirm this first hand, but I seem to recall from my reading an Atom 1.6 with OS X is actually superior to a 1 GHz G4 in general surfing, I believe specifically due to flash handling. Perhaps the optimization for x86 is better. What I can tell you is that surfing on a 1 GHz G4 is irritating since flash video is often jumpy. (We have a G4 1.07 iBook, an 800 MHz G4 iMac, and a 1.25 GHz G4 iMac.) In fact, this is one of the main reasons I rarely recommend a G4 Mac as primary computer to anyone these days. Sure if they already have a G4 and are short on money, then it makes sense to stick with the G4. However, if a family has no computer at all, then sometimes it makes more sense to just spend the extra $200 or whatever on a Mac mini rather than a used G4.

2) I don't think Apple would release a netbook until dual-core Atom came out anyway.

3) IIRC Aperture won't install on a netbook regardless of the CPU speed, because the screen resolution is too low.

[ajprice]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

How is it not a full power computer? Netbooks are more powerful than any computer I owned up through maybe '04. I absolutely guarantee that a netbook is plenty powerful for my standard usage. My only complaint is screen size, and that's easily mitigated with an external monitor.

Just because it's not as powerful as its most powerful contemporaries doesn't mean that it's 'not a full power computer'.

Fine, so by your own reasoning it's as powerful as a five year old computer. Thats fine these days for standard usage, as you've said, but isn't good for modern intensive work. I should know, my work Mac is a G4 MDD, which isn't even the minimum spec to run Adobe CS4.

I'm not sure what you're arguing against, we're saying the same thing, a netbook is fine for standard use but not so good for intensive stuff.

[- - e r i k - -]

You can get an Apple netbook already:

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by ajprice 

Fine, so by your own reasoning it's as powerful as a five year old computer. Thats fine these days for standard usage, as you've said, but isn't good for modern intensive work. I should know, my work Mac is a G4 MDD, which isn't even the minimum spec to run Adobe CS4.

I'm not sure what you're arguing against, we're saying the same thing, a netbook is fine for standard use but not so good for intensive stuff.

Yeah, I think we're just agreeing.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

But that's just it. You've said it's just fine for you except for your one, high-resource app. So it would accommodate most of your needs. The issue is how important Aperture is for your daily use, and how often you compute or want to compute away from your desk.

That depends on what the device is supposed to be: if it is meant as a laptop (and I'd use a netbook like a laptop), it would serve as my primary and only machine. That's the way it has been ever since I got my first laptop (a PowerBook G3).

The power of an Atom- or ARM-class cpu would be sufficient for a device that doesn't try to be a laptop replacement (read: most netbooks out there that just run a desktop OS). I would also need an adapted interface (this is just a matter of eyesight, not cpu power, I wear glasses )

Some time ago, I've described my vision of a perfect future setup: a small mobile tablet, that I plug into an iMac-like computer. My data is automatically synced, etc. etc. I would be a lot more flexible with compromises (e. g. screen quality) than I am now.

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Besides which, consider Moore's law. In ~18 months there should be a netbook that's that's perfectly well suited to even your edge case needs.

That's exactly what I'm waiting for.

[Eug]

Andy Ihnatko's 9 minute video of a Dell Inspiron Mini 9 netbook running OS X

It runs very, very smoothly, and this is on a single-core Atom 1.6, with GMA 950.

[Salty]

I think if Apple came out with a netbook it should be accompanied by a release of OS X that includes a "Buddy computer" feature, obviously they wouldn't call it that. But essentially allowing you to control which directories in your home folders you want to sync with your NetMac or MacBook mini. You could have a small iPod sized HD, with a modified install of OS X, you could choose to keep your photos, your new and most listened to iTunes tracks, and maybe a few movies. Heck even an 80 gig 1.8 inch drive shouldn't cost that much. Maybe even provide a few gigs of Flash memory to boot off of and it'd be mighty quick.

[shifuimam]

I'm sure Apple could make a super slick file syncing utility to work with Mac and Windows machines...of course, it'll probably come with a subscription premium.

In the meantime, check out DropBox. I use it constantly now, and the boyfriend and I use it to send files to each other online instead of relying on an IM client's file transfer protocols.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

In the meantime, check out DropBox. I use it constantly now, and the boyfriend and I use it to send files to each other online instead of relying on an IM client's file transfer protocols.

Awwwwwwwwwwwww

[shifuimam]

Hey, I'm just saying - it's fast, it's reliable, it has a bottomless recycle bin to undelete files, and it's got fab revision control.

And it's free.

And they have an iPhone UI that makes it easy to access (read-only) any file format that the iPhone supports.

So it's a win in my book.

[Salty]

I more want to be able to do things like show off photos or drawings to people on the go, or find that document I wrote back in college, and that sort of thing. It's more about having a more seamless experience.

[calverson]

Originally Posted by Salty 

It's more about having a more seamless experience.

[INSERT COMMENT ON SEXUALITY OF THE POSTER HERE]

CapsLock

[Salty]

Originally Posted by calverson 

[INSERT COMMENT ON SEXUALITY OF THE POSTER HERE]

CapsLock

I got a place for you to insert...

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by Salty 

I more want to be able to do things like show off photos or drawings to people on the go, or find that document I wrote back in college, and that sort of thing. It's more about having a more seamless experience.

So you want something more along the lines of "electronic paper" so to speak...but would you rather have a convertible tablet with a built-in keyboard, or a touch-only device?

Tablets have gotten super small and slick (check out the Dell Latitude X300)...I'd rather see a tabletPC from Apple than a touch-only device, only because the lack of a physical keyboard would seriously limit the usability/flexibility of the thing.

Another option would be the old HP TabletPC style, where the tablet completely detaches from the keyboard. *THAT* would be awesome - it's personally my favorite form factor for a TabletPC.

[waxcrash]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

...where the tablet completely detaches from the keyboard. *THAT* would be awesome - it's personally my favorite form factor for a TabletPC.

http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/

[shifuimam]

That's pretty badass.

If only it came with an Atom CPU...

[Salty]

I'd say I prefer the idea of a device with a keyboard but not with the current way of doing things. Or with a good soft keyboard.

[OreoCookie]

... and a device with 10-15 hours of battery life. Even if it is just half (7-8 hours), it'd be pretty darn good.

[Salty]

Good battery life is nice but not my biggest concern.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Andy Ihnatko's 9 minute video of a Dell Inspiron Mini 9 netbook running OS X

It runs very, very smoothly, and this is on a single-core Atom 1.6, with GMA 950.

Yeah I have a Mini9 running OSX 10.5.6; it works so flawlessly it makes me question if Apple really could do it much better. I'm certainly not holding my breath waiting for them to make what essentially already exists.

Also, it's pretty amazing how fast MacOS is on a dual core Atom, like the D945GCLF2. A dual-core Atom netbook would truly rock.

[Hg2491]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Andy Ihnatko's 9 minute video of a Dell Inspiron Mini 9 netbook running OS X

It runs very, very smoothly, and this is on a single-core Atom 1.6, with GMA 950.

Apple really needs to get their game going. These small machines are everywhere, and now that people are aware that the hacked version of Mac OS X runs perfectly fine on a Dell Mini, they'll be more eager to get them.

I know people who are holding themselves from getting a netbook because they trust Apple will release one.

Originally Posted by Salty 

I'd say I prefer the idea of a device with a keyboard but not with the current way of doing things. Or with a good soft keyboard.

I like the idea of having a software keyboard and then some sort of dock station with built-in keyboard. That way you'd be able to use the device standing up (á la iPhone) or do seriously typing when needed.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Yeah I have a Mini9 running OSX 10.5.6; it works so flawlessly it makes me question if Apple really could do it much better.

A better keyboard would almost be worth a $100 premium to me. Yeah, the Mini 9 is small, but you'll see there is still a lot of room on that unit that could be used for the keyboard. They could extend the keyboard all the way to the edges, a la the 12" PowerBook.



If they rearrange some buttons and shave the size down slightly, it could reasonably fit in a 10" netbook. In fact, Dell has already done that with their Mini 10. There's still room for improvement though, and Apple could do it.



It wouldn't fit well with a 9" screen though, like the one on the Mini 9. IOW, I think Apple could build a nice competitor to the Mini 10 and charge more for it.

Dual-core would worth a lot more too. Right now the Dell Mini 10 with 160 GB HD is CAD$429 with Windows XP. I think CAD$599 for a comparable machine is reasonable, but only if it had a better keyboard and dual-core Atom, and kept some sort of alternate video out. (Mini-VGA out would be sufficient, but mini-DVI would be preferred.)

I also happen to dislike dual touchpad buttons, because I'm used to being able to press anywhere on the button. On PC laptops, I'm constantly hitting the right button unintentionally.

[shifuimam]

The HP Mini Note has a 95% full size keyboard. If a good keyboard is your primary concern, that's as good as it's going to get without going full-size.

It's plenty big, too.

Most touchpad drivers allow you to configure what the buttons do - just reconfigure the right mouse button to act as a left click, and use something like this to enable Ctrl+Click for context menus.

[Eug]

I haven't tried the HP Mini. However, I don't recall the HP Mini Note being listed as one of the OS X-friendly netbooks. I specifically want to run OS X on a netbook.

Good point about configuring the right button.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Eug 

There's still room for improvement though, and Apple could do it.

All good points. I was speaking more to function (since everything works perfectly and the experience using the machine is the same as any 'real' Mac) but of course you're right, Apple always does form better than anyone.

I just think that Apple making a netbook is too much following, not leading. Apple rarely re-does a "me too! me too!" of someone else's thing, and really, netbooks are an Asus/MSI/Acer thing. (Even Dell I list as more a follower in the same camp).

And as much as I love having a couple of these things running OSX (my wife has an MSI Wind that I installed OSX on for her) I wouldn't want to use one as a primary machine, or do much serious typing on them. I just use mine to do a little light web surfing, emailing, and as a great in-flight distraction when traveling.

I just doubt there's any huge need for Apple to make one, and certainly not if it's more expensive (regardless of better form) since that destroys one of the key selling points: it's cheap and therefore justified over a full-fledged laptop.

I leave it to Apple to surprise everybody with some completely new take on the whole concept- or just leave others to their thing while Apple does its own.

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I haven't tried the HP Mini. However, I don't recall the HP Mini Note being listed as one of the OS X-friendly netbooks. I specifically want to run OS X on a netbook.

Good point about configuring the right button.

Looks like plenty of people have gotten it to work:

http://myhpmini.com/forum/mac-os-x-f17.html

In my (entirely theoretical, *cough*) hackintoshing experience, OS X will generally run on anything. The problems arise when you try to get specific hardware components working. It ran perfectly back when it was still in 10.4 beta on my Dell D600, except for the Intel wireless card. The bottom line is that you can get most everything to work on any of the netbooks. I'd imagine the one component you'd have issues with is the webcam - most netbooks come with an Atheros wireless card (I would imagine it's cheaper than Broadcom or Intel-based cards) and Intel integrated graphics, so as long as those bits work, you should be good to go.

[scaught]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Yeah I have a Mini9 running OSX 10.5.6; it works so flawlessly it makes me question if Apple really could do it much better. I'm certainly not holding my breath waiting for them to make what essentially already exists.

Also, it's pretty amazing how fast MacOS is on a dual core Atom, like the D945GCLF2. A dual-core Atom netbook would truly rock.

I have one, too. I'm using it currently. The keyboard IS an issue, but I also don't see myself doing any lengthy typing on it. It boots FAST and browses and does simple things well. For the price it's perfect to me.

Have you seen the international keyboard? It looks maybe a bit more cramped, but also puts the apostrophe key where it should be. I have one on order $20

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

I just think that Apple making a netbook is too much following, not leading. Apple rarely re-does a "me too! me too!" of someone else's thing, and really, netbooks are an Asus/MSI/Acer thing. (Even Dell I list as more a follower in the same camp).

You mean like going all-USB 2.0 and switching to Intel processors...?

It's not going to directly hurt Apple to not get into the netbook market. However, ever since they ditched the 12" PB G4, they don't really have a super portable machine in their lineup. 13" widescreen machines are just too big to be considered ultraportable.

I doubt Apple will lose any current customers by not making a netbook...they're just missing out on some new customers who are waiting to buy their first one until they see what move Apple makes.

I also don't think that Apple is capable of making a sub-$500 laptop. It completely goes against their premium pricing scheme. If anything, I imagine they'll come out with a smaller version of the Air, with a lack of features and an overinflated price tag.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

You mean like going all-USB 2.0 and switching to Intel processors...?

I meant an actual product line, not individual features of existing products. And really, USB is not a great example. Apple actually led the way with USB (1.0) in the original iMac. (I actually remember floppy disk, and legacy serial port enthusiasts losing their freakin' minds- to say nothing of the 'What? It's not beige?' crowd.) Nor has Apple ditched Firewire for USB- their entire desktop line still has it, as does the MBP.

Switching to a different third party CPU was really only ever a big deal to drinkers of the 'whole widget' coolaid. Nearly EVERYTHING in any Apple product is a third party part- just when it came to the CPU architecture, Apple was smart enough to see the future was with Intel, and trying to reinvent the wheel to appease a few 'whole-widget' believers was folly.

And, as usual, they were right. (Really, is anyone still clamoring for some underpowered G-whatever, as opposed to a killer i7 based Mac? If so, I'd merely say to them that Time Machine is a great backup tool, but really, you need to get out of your 'technology' version and come on forward to the present already. )

As for Apple leading, not following, I can't think of a product line they've ever launched in response to what everyone else was doing. (Hey, x is popular, we need to make our own "me too!" version.) Heck, they've even done the opposite- been the leader with a product like the PDA (Newton) then abandoned it.

I don't see why they'd break form and introduce their take on someone else's product, unless they can add innovation enough to make it really their own product- the way the iPhone is to other cell phones/PDAs for example.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by scaught 

Have you seen the international keyboard? It looks maybe a bit more cramped, but also puts the apostrophe key where it should be. I have one on order $20

I hadn't- but I'm really interested to know how you like it, compared to the standard keyboard.

Are you running OSX on yours?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

However, ever since they ditched the 12" PB G4, they don't really have a super portable machine in their lineup. 13" widescreen machines are just too big to be considered ultraportable.

What about the MacBook Air?
Plus, the new MacBook is lighter and I find it similar in size to the 12" iBook/PowerBook.