[im_noahselby]

November 2002:

-15.2' Powerbooks were upgraded with 867Ghz and 1Ghz processors.
-The ibook was updated with speeds up to 800Mhz. The lowend iBook starts at $999.

January 2003:

-Apple releases new 12' and 17' Powerbooks with new enclosures and 867Ghz as well as 1Ghz processors.

End of January, Febuary:

-Apple is expected to update both the iMac lines and PowerMac lines.

March:

-Logically it would make sense for Apple to update the ibook line at this time. Nothing stellar just the same tried and true version of the machine we all know and love. With speeds starting at 800-900Mhz and prices starting at $999.

June:

-Now we're back to the Powerbooks again. Think about this for a second: Apple unveiled new Powerbooks in November with speeds 867-1Ghz. Than apple unveiled another new line of Powerbooks in January, still at the same processor speed. Now if Apple was going to update the 15' Albook line, don't you think they would put in a 1Ghz and 1.2Ghz processors? At this point, where we are now, it would make sense that when Apple does update the 15' line that they would offer faster processors. Would it had made any sense for Apple to relsease new Powerbooks in November and than announce the new Albook line approximately 2 months later with the exact same processors? I don't think this would make much sense for Apple at all and don't see them updating the 15' Powerbooks till faster processors (1.2Ghz) are available. And
once they are avaiable I forsee the 17' being upgraded to 1.2Ghz as well as the 12' to 1Ghz.

July:

-I think the ibook will be the star of this Macworld. Apple stressed that this was "The year of the notebook" so shouldn't one of Apple's biggest sellers get a new updated look? I think it's very likely that we'll see 900Mhz/1Ghz "Gobi" G3 chips in the ibook at this time. The Powerbook had it's time to shine at a Macworld, now why shouldn't iBook get the same treatment?
-10.3...

-------------------------------
I don't think we'll see the 970 hitting us until January 2004, and as Steve Jobs said in his last keynote, this will clearly be "The year of the notebook"...

As for what else I think we'll be seeing this year. I think new ipods utilizing the Firewire 800 interface is a given. I also think we'll be seeing an Apple webcam to work with iChat.

I think Apple's long term plan is to ditch AppleWorks for an Office like suite to go head to head with Microsoft Office. Or in the case that Microsoft ceases Mac development, I think Apple knows that AppleWorks just doesn't cut it and that they will need to satisfy Mac users with an Office like alternative. I think Keynote is just the beginning of what we'll be seeing from Apple this year and I expect Apple to slowly bring more Office-like apps out and eventually combine this suite of programs together.

So what does everyone else think? Any thoughts? Map what you believe to be in Apple's product timeline from here on...

Noah

[John123]

This seems a little heavy on the upgrade cycles. Two iBook revisions within a span of four months?

Not likely...

[ebisix]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
November 2002:

-15.2' Powerbooks were upgraded with 867Ghz and 1Ghz processors.
-The ibook was updated with speeds up to 800Mhz. The lowend iBook starts at $999.

January 2003:

-Apple releases new 12' and 17' Powerbooks with new enclosures and 867Ghz as well as 1Ghz processors.

End of January, Febuary:

-Apple is expected to update both the iMac lines and PowerMac lines.

March:

-Logically it would make sense for Apple to update the ibook line at this time. Nothing stellar just the same tried and true version of the machine we all know and love. With speeds starting at 800-900Mhz and prices starting at $999.

June:

-Now we're back to the Powerbooks again. Think about this for a second: Apple unveiled new Powerbooks in November with speeds 867-1Ghz. Than apple unveiled another new line of Powerbooks in January, still at the same processor speed. Now if Apple was going to update the 15' Albook line, don't you think they would put in a 1Ghz and 1.2Ghz processors? At this point, where we are now, it would make sense that when Apple does update the 15' line that they would offer faster processors. Would it had made any sense for Apple to relsease new Powerbooks in November and than announce the new Albook line approximately 2 months later with the exact same processors? I don't think this would make much sense for Apple at all and don't see them updating the 15' Powerbooks till faster processors (1.2Ghz) are available. And
once they are avaiable I forsee the 17' being upgraded to 1.2Ghz as well as the 12' to 1Ghz.

July:

-I think the ibook will be the star of this Macworld. Apple stressed that this was "The year of the notebook" so shouldn't one of Apple's biggest sellers get a new updated look? I think it's very likely that we'll see 900Mhz/1Ghz "Gobi" G3 chips in the ibook at this time. The Powerbook had it's time to shine at a Macworld, now why shouldn't iBook get the same treatment?
-10.3...

-------------------------------
I don't think we'll see the 970 hitting us until January 2004, and as Steve Jobs said in his last keynote, this will clearly be "The year of the notebook"...

As for what else I think we'll be seeing this year. I think new ipods utilizing the Firewire 800 interface is a given. I also think we'll be seeing an Apple webcam to work with iChat.

I think Apple's long term plan is to ditch AppleWorks for an Office like suite to go head to head with Microsoft Office. Or in the case that Microsoft ceases Mac development, I think Apple knows that AppleWorks just doesn't cut it and that they will need to satisfy Mac users with an Office like alternative. I think Keynote is just the beginning of what we'll be seeing from Apple this year and I expect Apple to slowly bring more Office-like apps out and eventually combine this suite of programs together.

So what does everyone else think? Any thoughts? Map what you believe to be in Apple's product timeline from here on...

Noah

I wouldn't be surprised if you're right about Apple making office software. AppleWorks can't cut it. I'm sure that Apple's office software would improve on Microsoft Office as well.

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by John123:
This seems a little heavy on the upgrade cycles. Two iBook revisions within a span of four months?

Not likely...

John,

Just remember back to November, and now January 7th. A 4-5 month cycle is far more likely than a two month cycle, yet it can happen...

"The Year of the notebook"

I think it's far more likely we'll be seeing "more" of notebooks this year than we will of desktops. Wouldn't you?

Noah

[John123]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
John,

Just remember back to November, and now January 7th. A 4-5 month cycle is far more likely than a two month cycle, yet it can happen...

"The Year of the notebook"

I think it's far more likely we'll be seeing "more" of notebooks this year than we will of desktops. Wouldn't you?

Noah

No.

Upgrade cycles exist for a reason: there is a lot of costly R&D that goes into each incremental model.

The November/January 7th discrepancy could be explained by several theories all of which could be compatible with no change in upgrade cycle patterns.

[Athens]

I can see the product line changing by price and features a few times a year... I have yet to see one of the new 17" in person

[seanyepez]

I disagree with your predictions. The updated 15-inch PowerBook will probably be released in March when the new Power Mac G4's come out. The 7457 G4's will not be ready in time for the releases, though.

An 800-megabit FireWire connection on the iPod is not necessarily a given. The hard disk inside the iPod is not capable of utilizing the faster interface. Also, Apple will not update it for compatability reasons. Switching to a new port would mean people would have to use an adapter to use their iPods with their older hardware. There's really no point in updating the iPod to an 800-megabit FireWire interface. Besides, an old FireWire port will remain standard on all new products featuring 800-megabit FireWire.

A smaller-sized display will replace the aging 22-inch Cinema Display in the near future.

[elvis2000]

Originally posted by ebisix:
I wouldn't be surprised if you're right about Apple making office software. AppleWorks can't cut it. I'm sure that Apple's office software would improve on Microsoft Office as well.

Probably will be based on OpenOffice to boot.

[skyman]

There are several key factors that determine the timing of a product cycle. They are:

1 - Component pricing & supply
2 - Advances in component technology
3 - The economy
4 - Demand for current product line

All or one of these can dictate when a product will "cycle" and be upgraded.

Apple or any company for that matter has learned that you need to keep your product line fresh (technology advanced) in order to grow sales.

[vmarks]

Originally posted by ebisix:
I wouldn't be surprised if you're right about Apple making office software. AppleWorks can't cut it. I'm sure that Apple's office software would improve on Microsoft Office as well.

Think about the purpose AppleWorks currently serves.

AppleWorks is pre-loaded on iBooks, eMacs, and iMacs, as a convenient way for people to do rudimentary documents, spreadsheets, database, and paint.

This is so that people who buy the machine best suited to their home or educational needs don't have to immediately go and buy a hugely expensive office package.

Certainly the Office Party promotion mitigates that expense somewhat, but for people who just have money to get the machine, it allows them to begin working.

Ever hear of Microsoft Works suite? It serves the same purpose for Windows machines, only it doesn't come pre-loaded with Windows, necessarily.

So, AppleWorks serves a certain customer who buys a certain level of hardware. For the PowerBook and PowerMac, they now pre-load the Office v.X test drive.

Would Apple make their own office suite? Impossible to tell. Would it make sense to? Only if you can answer how Apple would handle the proprietary .doc file format without getting locked out by an MS upgrade. (Hint, MS did this in the past and isn't afraid to do it again- any change in the .doc format helps them convince people to buy new Windows Office software so they can share with other Windows users.)

[Athens]

.doc is a open format

[Athens]

since some one will say no its not here...

Microsoft Office documents are OLE structured storage files created and maintained using the OLE Storage APIs of the underlying operating system. OLE files support more advanced file writing capabilities including Unicode, document summary properties, document versioning, transaction edits, complex multi-application ("compound") documents, and portability (currently implemented by Macintosh and Windows).
When working with Office documents in their native format, developers must use the same OLE Storage APIs (Stg*) as Office to ensure compatibility. Please note that current versions of Visual Basic and VBA do not support these APIs, so developers are encouraged to use VC (or a C/C++ add-in for VB) to view or edit native Office documents.

[ebisix]

Originally posted by vmarks:
Think about the purpose AppleWorks currently serves.

AppleWorks is pre-loaded on iBooks, eMacs, and iMacs, as a convenient way for people to do rudimentary documents, spreadsheets, database, and paint.

This is so that people who buy the machine best suited to their home or educational needs don't have to immediately go and buy a hugely expensive office package.

Certainly the Office Party promotion mitigates that expense somewhat, but for people who just have money to get the machine, it allows them to begin working.

Ever hear of Microsoft Works suite? It serves the same purpose for Windows machines, only it doesn't come pre-loaded with Windows, necessarily.

So, AppleWorks serves a certain customer who buys a certain level of hardware. For the PowerBook and PowerMac, they now pre-load the Office v.X test drive.

Would Apple make their own office suite? Impossible to tell. Would it make sense to? Only if you can answer how Apple would handle the proprietary .doc file format without getting locked out by an MS upgrade. (Hint, MS did this in the past and isn't afraid to do it again- any change in the .doc format helps them convince people to buy new Windows Office software so they can share with other Windows users.)

I see what you mean. If Apple did make an office suite, I would hope that it would be compatible with Microsoft Office. Like how Apple improved on PowerPoint with Keynote and it is still compatible with PowerPoint. Thanks.

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by seanyepez:
I disagree with your predictions. The updated 15-inch PowerBook will probably be released in March when the new Power Mac G4's come out. The 7457 G4's will not be ready in time for the releases, though.

An 800-megabit FireWire connection on the iPod is not necessarily a given. The hard disk inside the iPod is not capable of utilizing the faster interface. Also, Apple will not update it for compatability reasons. Switching to a new port would mean people would have to use an adapter to use their iPods with their older hardware. There's really no point in updating the iPod to an 800-megabit FireWire interface. Besides, an old FireWire port will remain standard on all new products featuring 800-megabit FireWire.

A smaller-sized display will replace the aging 22-inch Cinema Display in the near future.

Sean,

Hmmm, maybe in iPods current state Firewire 800 wouldn't make much sense. Think about this for a second, Apple needs a key product to promote Firewire 800. Firewire 800 serves very little of a purpose when there is nothing to support it. I'm sure the majority of people could care less that a few external hard drives support it. We need some new exciting stuff that compells us to want to use and possibly buy a new computer for this technology! And what better product is there than the iPod to bridge this gap together.

New iPods could ship with both a Firewire 400 and Firewire 800 port. This way, everyone could use the new iPod and an extra adapter would not be an issue.

The iPods we use today will be supported for many years to come. Apple isn't going to drop Firewire 400 anytime soon just because they've released Firewire 800. We both agree on this.

The iPod of tomorrow will be changing. And I fully expect Apple to exploit this gems potential. And while you, Sean, may disagree with me. Firewire 800 will eventually come to the iPod.

Noah

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by vmarks:
Think about the purpose AppleWorks currently serves.

AppleWorks is pre-loaded on iBooks, eMacs, and iMacs, as a convenient way for people to do rudimentary documents, spreadsheets, database, and paint.

This is so that people who buy the machine best suited to their home or educational needs don't have to immediately go and buy a hugely expensive office package.

Certainly the Office Party promotion mitigates that expense somewhat, but for people who just have money to get the machine, it allows them to begin working.

Ever hear of Microsoft Works suite? It serves the same purpose for Windows machines, only it doesn't come pre-loaded with Windows, necessarily.

So, AppleWorks serves a certain customer who buys a certain level of hardware. For the PowerBook and PowerMac, they now pre-load the Office v.X test drive.

Would Apple make their own office suite? Impossible to tell. Would it make sense to? Only if you can answer how Apple would handle the proprietary .doc file format without getting locked out by an MS upgrade. (Hint, MS did this in the past and isn't afraid to do it again- any change in the .doc format helps them convince people to buy new Windows Office software so they can share with other Windows users.)

I think Apple's long term plan is to create an Office like suite of their own. I think Apple may just be testing the water at this stage and I think Keynote was just the beginning. Apple needs to be prepared for the worst and we all know what that is...

Judging by how Keynote performs, I'd suspect each other Apple Office app to compare similarily to their respective MS applications. Nothing is perfect the first time thru, but by the time Apple releases them all, one by one and has the opportunity to fine-tune them all, maybe then the'll be ready for primetime!

Noah

[ebisix]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
Sean,

Hmmm, maybe in iPods current state Firewire 800 wouldn't make much sense. Think about this for a second, Apple needs a key product to promote Firewire 800. Firewire 800 serves very little of a purpose when there is nothing to support it. I'm sure the majority of people could care less that a few external hard drives support it. We need some new exciting stuff that compells us to want to use and possibly buy a new computer for this technology! And what better product is there than the iPod to bridge this gap together.

New iPods could ship with both a Firewire 400 and Firewire 800 port. This way, everyone could use the new iPod and an extra adapter would not be an issue.

The iPods we use today will be supported for many years to come. Apple isn't going to drop Firewire 400 anytime soon just because they've released Firewire 800. We both agree on this.

The iPod of tomorrow will be changing. And I fully expect Apple to exploit this gems potential. And while you, Sean, may disagree with me. Firewire 800 will eventually come to the iPod.

Noah

What you said makes sense. The iPod is an excellent way to promote the use of FireWire 800.

[skyman]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:
Sean,

Hmmm, maybe in iPods current state Firewire 800 wouldn't make much sense. Think about this for a second, Apple needs a key product to promote Firewire 800. Firewire 800 serves very little of a purpose when there is nothing to support it. I'm sure the majority of people could care less that a few external hard drives support it. We need some new exciting stuff that compells us to want to use and possibly buy a new computer for this technology! And what better product is there than the iPod to bridge this gap together.

New iPods could ship with both a Firewire 400 and Firewire 800 port. This way, everyone could use the new iPod and an extra adapter would not be an issue.

The iPods we use today will be supported for many years to come. Apple isn't going to drop Firewire 400 anytime soon just because they've released Firewire 800. We both agree on this.

The iPod of tomorrow will be changing. And I fully expect Apple to exploit this gems potential. And while you, Sean, may disagree with me. Firewire 800 will eventually come to the iPod.

Noah

Having two ports would increase the cost of the iPod. They could however include an Firewire 400 adapter.

[ebisix]

Originally posted by skyman:
Having two ports would increase the cost of the iPod. They could however include an Firewire 400 adapter.

I agree that it would increase the cost. But by how much about? Would people mind do you think? I'd pay a little extra not to have to buy and use an adapter.

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by ebisix:
I agree that it would increase the cost. But by how much about? Would people mind do you think? I'd pay a little extra not to have to buy and use an adapter.

I think a lot of people would agree with you ebisix, myself included. I would much rather have both ports on the iPod rather than having to buy and use an extra adapter, but both senerio's are possible I suppose...

I think that if Apple decided to only include a Firewire 800 port, I would hope they would have the courtesy of including a free adapter. And in such a case, the cost to implement a Firewire 400 port in the iPod wouldn't be that great of an issue.

Noah

[seanyepez]

I still disagree. A FireWire 800 port on an iPod would be completely useless. An adapter would only make things more delicate and cluttered. The disk in the iPod can't even supply 400-megabit FireWire with enough data. If you still don't believe me, look at the Toshiba data sheet yourself.

http://www.toshiba.com/taissdd/produ...GAH-Spec.shtml

The maximum transfer speed possible with these drives is a meager 204.4 megabits per second.

[seanyepez]

The iPod will not offer FireWire 800 until disk technology gets significantly better.

Keep in mind that no PC ships with 800-megabit FireWire at this time. They will not ship with 800-megabit FireWire for another few months. FireWire 800 won't help us, and it won't help PC users; there's no point for Apple to include it.

Apple will likely update their iPod to FireWire 800 in 2004. Until FireWire 400 ports are a thing of the past, there's no reason for Apple to spend time, money, and effort to update their iPod to FireWire 800.

[rampant]

removed, really inappropriate.

It's been explained before and I'll say it again: There is not a single reason in the world that Apple should waste time making the iPod's firewire 800mbps. Not only does the HD in the current ones have a max of near 1/4th 800mbps, but since most users of the iPod use it in conjunction with their laptops (which almost all have 4200RPM HD's), even if the iPod's HD magicly became fast enough to benifit from faster firewire, you would see almost no speed increase anyway.

And lastly, pretending your music would transfer faster- why does it matter? How long does it take to transfer your Music? Seconds per song, only minutes for the whole damn thing. I hear you guys every day say "So what if a PC is x time faster in this test. Does it really matter? My Mac is fast enough for me!" There's no reason for Apple to waste time on this.

Rampant, please save the inflammatory stuff for the lounge. Thanks, vmarks.

[seanyepez]

Originally posted by rampant:

It's been explained before and I'll say it again: There is not a single reason in the world that Apple should waste time making the iPod's firewire 800mbps. Not only does the HD in the current ones have a max of near 1/4th 800mbps, but since most users of the iPod use it in conjunction with their powerbooks (which almost all have 4200RPM HD's), even if the iPod's HD magicly became fast enough to benifit from faster firewire, you would see almost no speed increase anyway.

And lastly, pretending your music would transfer faster- why does it matter? How long does it take to transfer your Music? Seconds per song, only minutes for the whole damn thing. I hear you guys every day say "So what if a PC is x time faster in this test. Does it really matter? My Mac is fast enough for me!" There's no reason for Apple to waste time on this.

Amen.

[rampant]

Oh come on then!

[vmarks]

Originally posted by Athens:
since some one will say no its not ...

This means you define open as using a common MS API that MS controls the changes within, only for use within the confines of MS licensing.

I define open as being fully documented and freely usable, not tied to the changes made in the API at MS' whim.

You cannot tell me that they didn't force people to upgrade from word 6.0 and word 95 to word 97 and again to word 2000 by introducing file format incompatibilities.

Nothing prevents them from using this as a tool against OpenOffice and anyone else who tries .doc compatibility, because it only benefits their bottom line when customers have to buy a new version of Office.

[Athens]

Originally posted by seanyepez:
I still disagree. A FireWire 800 port on an iPod would be completely useless. An adapter would only make things more delicate and cluttered. The disk in the iPod can't even supply 400-megabit FireWire with enough data. If you still don't believe me, look at the Toshiba data sheet yourself.

http://www.toshiba.com/taissdd/produ...GAH-Spec.shtml

The maximum transfer speed possible with these drives is a meager 204.4 megabits per second.

Only a single port would be needed firewire 800 would be able to use firewire 400 devices like USB 2, any use 1 device will plug into it. Using firewire 800 on ipod would be to market and bring to light firewire 800 even if its not used to its full potential.

[Athens]

Originally posted by vmarks:
This means you define open as using a common MS API that MS controls the changes within, only for use within the confines of MS licensing.

I define open as being fully documented and freely usable, not tied to the changes made in the API at MS' whim.

You cannot tell me that they didn't force people to upgrade from word 6.0 and word 95 to word 97 and again to word 2000 by introducing file format incompatibilities.

Nothing prevents them from using this as a tool against OpenOffice and anyone else who tries .doc compatibility, because it only benefits their bottom line when customers have to buy a new version of Office.

I define open as being fully documented and freely usable to which is why I said its a open standard. And yes its a good thing to change the format from 6.0 and 95 to 97 and to 2000, the 2000 format can do alot more then the version 6 format, why should we remain with something when it can be improved, and besides Microsoft included patchs for the old words so they could use the new format anyways, does this sound like they put incompatibilities into there software on purpose or does it sound like they made improvments, if they didnt add the patches I would have called it incompatibilities, but since they offered a solution to the old versions i'll call the file formats improvments, and the patches where free, go figure eh. I remmeber putting the patches on word 5.1 for office 97 on the old LC475 Mac Lab at my old highschool

The reason MS controls the API because they want to keep it standard kinda the way apple use to control how hardware worked with macs in the 90's like the good old NuBus technology. The NuBus was great, it was true plug n play and you had to follow apples rulls. Im not going to bother arguing about this either cuz i use to be the biggest hard core macaddict around, then I opened my eyes and now I love both Macs and Windows. I still hate MS for stealing ideas and software, but Im not going to blindly hate them for everything either.

[Athens]

my correction looks like the ends are different.

Here is a picture of the firewire 2 cables
http://www.heilind.com/products/molex/1394b.jpg

Also read the standard is open to more types of ends, using different cables so im going to assume that you dont always need a adapter.

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by rampant:
removed, really inappropriate.

It's been explained before and I'll say it again: There is not a single reason in the world that Apple should waste time making the iPod's firewire 800mbps. Not only does the HD in the current ones have a max of near 1/4th 800mbps, but since most users of the iPod use it in conjunction with their laptops (which almost all have 4200RPM HD's), even if the iPod's HD magicly became fast enough to benifit from faster firewire, you would see almost no speed increase anyway.

And lastly, pretending your music would transfer faster- why does it matter? How long does it take to transfer your Music? Seconds per song, only minutes for the whole damn thing. I hear you guys every day say "So what if a PC is x time faster in this test. Does it really matter? My Mac is fast enough for me!" There's no reason for Apple to waste time on this.

Rampant, please save the inflammatory stuff for the lounge. Thanks, vmarks.

You dabble with music here and the current versions of the iPod, whereas I speak of the next iPod. A lot of people use the iPod as a portable hardrive, just as much as they use it as an mp3 player. And I'm sure there are many more uses it could and will have...

In it's current form I agree with both you and Sean when I say it is fast enough for everyday average use. But there is still room for improvement and "innovation" in this product. I for one, would rather see Firewire 800 hit the next iPod line-up earlier rather than later....

By the end of 2003 most likely every new mac purchased will have Firewire 800. I would like to think that Apple will have at least one dld to promote this technology. I still believe that in iPods next form, be it in 2003, the year I believe we will see such a feature in the iPod, or 2004, that this will be the device!

Noah

[Athens]

and what if you chained a couple dozen ipods together to load music and software onto in one shot, my old high school had 5 and some times for projects Digital performer data was loaded on them. WOuld be nice to plug them in all at once, and for that you need the bandwidth of the bus which in the new format would be 800 MB divided between many ipods hehe

[Superchicken]

A Firewire 800 device right now would be the most moronic thing for apple to do... least as far as the iPod is concerned...
GASP! Yes all you power book owners are WRONG! Hazza!
What's the average income per month of the people saying Firewire 800 is gona be in the next iPod right away? Lets say it's a few thousand each month... IE over 2. Now lots of people believe it or not buy Macs and even iPods and they DON"T make money hand over fist and don't spend it all on computers.
MOST people will think apple was stupid for putting two ports on and jacking up the price for them. They can do this with the Power Macs and Power Books because you're paying for LOTS of features, with iMac users and iBook users, you're paying for a sweet computer that does what you want but doesn't neccicarly woop a PC in everything it does.
to include Firewire 800 would jack up the price of the iPod EVEN MORE than it already is, this would kill a good chunk of apple's sales that they're already screwing up with such high price tags on these things. Yes they're selling well and the 5 gig moddel is almost resonably priced.

Perhaps when faster hard drives come out we'll see Firewire 800 on a 20+ gig version, but the 5 or 10 gigger?
Heck no.

Seriously think about the WHOLE market before you ramble off your rich american comments. I'm Canadian and our dollar sucks, it would cost me over 400 bucks to get just the 5 gig one, if some day I decide to get one I don't want to have to save up for even longer to be able to afford one because some guy wanted to pull out his iPod and say mine's faster than your's, and then touch his crotch and say, now it doesn't matter if your's is bigger.

Blah... the tech industry is very fortunate for people who always wanna have the toy to show up their friends.

What's likely? I think a web cam might be reasonable, a large chunk of Mac users do have enough cash that they'd like some sorta iChat cam, more like called iCam, probably with some sort of display clamp and poseable neck... but I hope they don't go with some sorta weird bendy thing cause those alwasy get bent to much to straighten... or they tend to be... kinda cheap looking, but I could deffinately see apple trying to come out with some sort of cammera.
Possibly make it work with both iChat, and iMovie, do something where you can hook it to your iBook or Power Book and just walk around and use it kinda like a real camcorder and just have it record by firewire directly to the hard drive... price it for 200 bucks and I'd buy. And I already have a digital cammera.
The problem would be working out a good mounting system and have it work with the iMac and iBook well.
The power book unfortunately would probably fall in a second as far as compatability goes if these were priced low, most power book users could probably afford a seperate higher scale cam or would use it as a desk mount anyway.

But I do think that combining Quick Time Streaming server in some sort of form, inside of iChat and working with an apple brand web cam would be pretty cool... it could of course also work with iPhoto in some way...
Although knowing apple they'd probably make it an add on to the iPod or something. I dono... or possibly something that can at least be compatable with the iPod... IE connect to it's firewire port... it'd need it's own LCD though to veiw pics...
hmmm a small 2 megapixel cammera the width of an iPod that just sits on top if you want it to?
You could use power from the iPod too I guess...
Hmm lotsa ideas... hmmmm well have to see.

As for word, excel and entorage killers? Anyone remember why apple settled with M$? They wanted Word, Excel and Power Point.
They also wanted IE. The problem was. IE development for the Mac was sucky. From what I understand word development and excel and so on has been pretty good.
I don't see apple doing anything to piss off microsoft since they WANTED them on the platform.
Seriously why do you want em to take on microsoft? So that you have a slightly better working product? But you'll loose compatability? Not to mention apple's already pumping out software tittles like crazy! They've got the iApps to continue developing, Safari, OS X, Mail, Sherlock, Quick Time.
I HIGHLY dout that even if apple has office killers they will EVER see the light of day unless mIcrosoft begins slacking compared to the PC offerings. As far as office suites apple simply wants it to be avalible they don't want to suddenly burst into that market... no one can right now. .doc is a closed file format, and if apple went against it they'd get screwed. Until .pda, or some other file format becomes a new standard... which it won't... we're screwed as far as that goes. Let sun and correl fight that fight and don't worry about apple, they're fighting in the arts and creative consumer feilds where they have good footing and where they can stay proffitable until they have things like the PPC 970 to help em out.

By the way, Personally... I think the iBook won't get a major case revision since the 12 inch PB came out.. but then again... you may find that it gets a more creative look... I dout a G4 but who knows... I think it'd be kinda cool if it was like

Revamped iBook with some sorta moveable screen... maybe not horizontally but on the y and z axies that'd be cool, perhaps on some sorta two pole system on each side?
kinda have a floating screen laptop that'd be cool.
And then come out with an eBook for the college crowd who need a decent powered machine but a really durable one.
SImply go for a clam shell iBook case but white.

Last... I really don't know why no Macs are coloureed any more... the last two people that I've talked into buying macs have said, it's to bad I can't get a key lime iBook... they reallyi don't like the white ones in comparison. Snow was cool when it came out... but now the colours need to go back!

[Athens]

half this post is populated by Canadians Im from Vancouver.

[Griggsy]

So what do you think Apple has in store for us in 2003...?

A view into ther plan for total world domination BWAHAHAHAHA (sorry its a monday )

[vmarks]

You know, this was a mostly powerbook thread. It is now more or less and ipod and everything-else speculation thread.

I'm moving it to the lounge.

[ironknee]

Im going off on a limb ...

Apple needs another iPod-like product. Why, because looking at the stats on iPods, a little more than half of iPods sold were the PC flavor. so there's a big market for something both Mac users and pc users will buy- with apple design.

No not a pda. ever.

What about a hard disk camera or video camera, with firewire 800? Why? because most of the video cameras are so complicated. They build things into it like editing, color/bw, and othe things one never uses and why would you when you have iMovie?

today, Samsung intros a HDD digital video camera...

http://www.samsungelectronics.com/ne...65_001300.html

[rampant]

Originally posted by vmarks:
You know, this was a mostly powerbook thread. It is now more or less and ipod and everything-else speculation thread.

I'm moving it to the lounge.

Does that mean I can use inflamitory remarks now!?

[im_noahselby]

I never quite expected the iPod explosion and the rage it would stir up from some people in this forum. This post was here for people to speculate about what they thought Apple had in store for us in 2003.

The reason I chose the Powerbook forum was because I could barely get through one thread without someone speculating on the next round of Powerbooks, including the rumored 15.4 Powerbooks. It was what the majority of the forum goers here were interested in and talking about for that matter, and I still believe that this thread would have been better suited in the Powerbook forum.

With this said, if you think you have a pretty good idea of what we'll be seeing from Apple this year, go right ahead and speculate! Lookin forward to hearing from some more people here

Thanks everyone!

Noah

[olePigeon]

Here's my prediction (I've been dead on so far):

July Macworld 2003:

- Safari 1.0

- iBook 900MHz G3, Airport Extreme
- iMac 900MHz G4, Airport Extreme
- eMac 900MHz G4, Airport Extreme

- Rendezvous enabled iPod.
- xRAID 4 Hot-Swap FireWire 800 drives.

January Macworld 2004 (Gonna be huge):

- Mac OS X 10.3 (PPC 970 enhanced)
- Advanced AppleScript
- iLife updates

- 17", 19" HD, 23" HD Displays
- PowerMac Dual 1.5 & 1.8GHz G5 (PPC 970), 600MHz BUS, DDR, 6x AGP, FireWire 800, Airport Extreme.
- xServe Dual 1.8GHz G5 (PPC 970), 600MHz BUS, DDR, FireWire 800.

[dillerX]

Originally posted by rampant:
Does that mean I can use inflamitory remarks now!?

Request approved. Do not disappoint.

[Nicko]

How about an Apple branded cellphone that integrates iCal, mail, address book, ect....

[pdot]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Here's my prediction (I've been dead on so far):

January Macworld 2004 (Gonna be huge):

- Mac OS X 10.3 (PPC 970 enhanced)
- Advanced AppleScript
- iLife updates

- 17", 19" HD, 23" HD Displays
- PowerMac Dual 1.5 & 1.8GHz G5 (PPC 970), 600MHz BUS, DDR, 6x AGP, FireWire 800, Airport Extreme.
- xServe Dual 1.8GHz G5 (PPC 970), 600MHz BUS, DDR, FireWire 800.

I agree with you for most parts, but seeing how the rumors are these days, I'm going to go with a 20" LCD instead of the 19" and 8x AGP (I think Intel boards went from 4x to 8x).

Hey, did you know that Ben Franklin wanted to use the turkey as a symbol of America? It was a good source of food for early settlers and Franklin thought the turkey looked noble. Obviously, the turkey vote lost. I found that out recently, but I don't remember where.

[rampant]

Originally posted by dillerX:
Request approved. Do not disappoint.

I never do, that's the problem.

[Athens]

I would like to see a firewire based PCI bus and 8x AGP.

I would like to see 128bit memory arch like on nVidia nForce boards
I would like to see a faster bus speed and more memory speed

[im_noahselby]

Originally posted by im_noahselby:


End of January, Febuary:

-Apple is expected to update both the iMac lines and PowerMac lines.

That's one out of the way It seemed like most here had given up on the hope that Apple would release Powermacs in the last week of this month. Most were thinking either Febuary or March. It would have been easy for me to say "Febuary" and leave it at that, especially considering this thread was created only a few days ago, but I didn't because I knew there was a good chance that one of these lines would be updated this week and it turns out I was right.

Noah

[im_noahselby]

Febuary:

-imacs

March:

-ibooks

Noah