PDA

View Full Version : Macworld San Francisco 2007 Rumor Wrapup: Winners and Losers




MacRumors
Jan 15, 2007, 11:26 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

After each major event, MacRumors provides a wrapup of rumors to reveal the sources of the most accurate and inaccurate information. Readers are encouraged to read our Macworld Rumor Roundup (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070101180909.shtml) which was written prior to the actual event.

iPhone

Prior to MWSF 2007, the iPhone rumor was likely the longest running Apple rumor that had yet to come true. One of the oldest references to it that we found was this usenet post (http://groups.google.com/group/uk.comp.sys.mac/browse_thread/thread/dffc084da31a5cd8/438023fcb2020e4f?lnk=st&q=iphone.org&rnum=2#438023fcb2020e4f) almost seven years ago:
Apple registered the domain iPhone.org in mid-December [1999]. Could this be a hint of a new hardware device or some streaming videoconferencing software to be added to QuickTime?
In 2006, the first hints of the iPhone emerged from the financial analysts. UBS, PiperJaffray, and J.P. Morgan offered early predictions that the iPhone was coming. Unfortunately, there were many conflicting reports as to the specs of the iPhone. To be fair, Apple deliberately spread false information to defuse such efforts (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070111115030.shtml).

ThinkSecret reports claiming that the iPhone would be Cingular-only (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060926075521.shtml) and GSM/EDGE only (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061215091228.shtml) turned out to be quite accurate, and LoopRumors was first to claim that the iPhone would run a 'light' version of OS X (http://www.looprumors.com/article.php?mac-mobile,4046720790) and clearly described (http://www.looprumors.com/article.php?apple-communicating-device,145979767) the upcoming device as a "communicating device" with touchscreen and wireless capabilities.

Both sites, however, also made many additional claims that did not pan out, including claims that the phone would pack a 3 megapixel camera and 2.2" screen (actual: 2 MP camera, 3.5" screen; claim: ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915182716.shtml)) and claims that the iPhone would contain videoconferencing ability (claim: LoopRumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061205152617.shtml)). MacRumors own sources were also tainted by false information, as our reported artist's rendition (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060913215342.shtml) was off the mark, and traditionally accurate Kevin Rose's leaked specs ($249/$449, slide out keyboard) (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061203094854.shtml) were also wrong.

Appleinsider offered (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061219140034.shtml
) some confirmation to the earlier "light" OS X rumors with accurate claims that Apple was "working an an operating system based on the core technologies in Mac OS X as the basis for upcoming device."

The most accurate leak of the actual iPhone specs came from Rebecca Runkle of Morgan Stanley (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061213162456.shtml) who described a 3.5inch full screen LCD phone which was 4/10th inch thick and made of metal. Runkle's prices were slightly off ($599 for 4GB, $649 for 8GB) but she was otherwise remarkably close to the final product. (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070109135244.shtml)

The much-publicized Commercial Times report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061115090741.shtml) appears likely to be accurate, but the several other reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2242) that the phone had been finalized and released to manufacturing were clearly inaccurate.

Finally, last minute reports from the Wall Street Journal (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070108221505.shtml) (phone "as early as Tuesday"), Cult of Mac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070108023757.shtml) ("Steve Jobs has invited all of his best friends to his MacWorld SF Keynote on Tuesday"), and International Herald Tribune (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070107233956.shtml) ("first of the next generation of devices that are closer to personal computers in pocket form") all turned out to be true.

Apple TV

AppleTV came with few surprises, and Appleinsider was on target (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070102134322.shtml) with information that the units would not ship immediately after being shown after the show.

iLife and iWork

The lack of iLife and iWork was preceded by last-minute claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070108205358.shtml) by both ThinkSecret and MacScoop that the software may not be ready (or too dependent on Leopard), although MacScoop did inaccurately add that a preview of iLife would be available.

One lesson to learn is that despite posting placeholders (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070104003903.shtml) for iLife '07 and iWork '07, like all resellers, Amazon has no special knowledge of future Apple releases.

Mac Pros, Leopard, and More...

With Steve saying that we'd all "see him soon" at the end of the keynote presentation, what is the next step for Apple?

Leopard remains a prime target for further information from Apple, and 8-core Mac Pros (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061229234528.shtml) are still anticipated. With the hype surrounding the iPhone, many have suggested that Apple may have delayed the 8 Core Mac Pro and Leopard demos for a future press event.

Meanwhile, thin MacBooks (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061204034048.shtml) and Flash booting MacBooks (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060928160047.shtml) are said to be on the horizon for 2007.

Summary

Unlike previous rumor wrapups, there were fewer clear winners and losers. Several sources clearly did have tidbits of accurate information, but much of it was diluted by the sheer volume of iPhone rumors leading up to the event.

- Rebecca Runkle of Morgan Stanley certainly deserves credit for having the most accurate physical specs of the rumored iPhone.
- Despite the ongoing litigation, ThinkSecret continues to leak accurate tidbits of information.
- Looprumors deserves credit for the first reports of the "light" OS X and "communication device".
- Flickr and YouTube "spy" photos/videos of unreleased Apple hardware have never been accurate.
- Appleinsider's accurate report about the "light" OS X also give the following exciting tidbit of information:

Apple intends to integrate the software on a couple of devices beginning early [2007], those people say, while more comprehensive plans call for it to form the bedrock of a jaw-dropping device not due to hit the market until the following year.



mrkramer
Jan 15, 2007, 11:30 PM
I was surprised that iLife and iWork did not come out. Probably the artists rendition was one of the fake versions that Apple showed to some of their workers.

BigPrince
Jan 15, 2007, 11:36 PM
So is it true that this Keynote had a much larger VIP Keynote section?

twoodcc
Jan 15, 2007, 11:38 PM
I was surprised that iLife and iWork did not come out. Probably the artists rendition was one of the fake versions that Apple showed to some of their workers.

i was suprised about iLife and iWork also. lets hope they are released soon....

mrkramer
Jan 15, 2007, 11:41 PM
i was suprised about iLife and iWork also. lets hope they are released soon....

I'm hoping that we will get at least iLife included with Leopard, but I don't think that it is likely.

arn
Jan 15, 2007, 11:41 PM
So is it true that this Keynote had a much larger VIP Keynote section?

Yes, the CEOs of all the major tech companies where there, as well as Steve Job's wife and kids.

arn

mymacluvsme
Jan 16, 2007, 12:08 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Macworld San Francisco 2007 Rumor Wrapup: Winners and Losers



From what I've been reading on these forums, the title should be

"Whiners and Loosers"

Object-X
Jan 16, 2007, 12:39 AM
Did I read that last part right about a jaw dropping product to be released in 2008? Or is that talking about the iPhone? :confused:

Because when I saw the iPhone my jaw dropped. :eek:

I could also detect a gleem in the eye of Steve Jobs as he hinted more was to come.

I'll just say that I think the iPhone's interface is a harbinger of things to come. Design cue and even touch functionality are going to make their way into Leopard I'm sure. The 160 dpi screen seems to forshadow new displays with very high resolution and that would require the rumored UI scaling; they might even let you do with your fingers!

Gump
Jan 16, 2007, 12:42 AM
Well, I know one thing is for sure:
I love Peebees!

sw1tcher
Jan 16, 2007, 12:49 AM
Me thinks they're going to use this "light" version of OS X to power the next iPod(s).

It will do everything the iPhone can do as far as the iPod functions on the iPhone go. Now that would be cool. That would actually get me to upgrade from my 3G iPod.

.dingledorph
Jan 16, 2007, 01:03 AM
Meanwhile, thin MacBooks (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/12/20061204034048.shtml) and Flash booting MacBooks (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060928160047.shtml) are said to be on the horizon for 2007.

Are there more than one rumor about the "Thin Macbook"?
I would really buy this product. I think we are missing a ultraportable in the MB/MBP lineup.

Will_reed
Jan 16, 2007, 01:09 AM
Heres hoping for another stevenote with in the coming months

Doctor Q
Jan 16, 2007, 01:18 AM
I wonder how long Apple was actively working on the iPhone, given their registration of the domain in 1999.

Choosing and reserving a name don't necessarily correlate with technical development, but Apple certainly had something in mind by then.

Multimedia
Jan 16, 2007, 01:28 AM
Patience and we will all have what we want soon enough. Gotta remember this stuff is very complex and takes a long time for all the physical and intellectual parts to come together in what can only be described as amazingly more and more powerful tools.

I thought Toast 8 was among the third party surprise winners as well. It's Oct core ready and much more optimized for the Quad core Macs already. Griffen also had a lot of great new stuff. But my favorite by far was the Blackmagicdesign Intensity HDMI i/o PCIe card (http://blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/) for Mac Pro and soon also for PCIe G5 PowerMacs. The implications it has for inexpenisve high quality High Definition Video Production are huge.

By Summer we will be in the midst of a completely new Mac Eco System that will be blowing all our minds soon enough.

Sorry I missed the opportunity to meet Arn whom I probably passed in the press room more than once without realizing it.

Hunabku
Jan 16, 2007, 01:51 AM
So if Apple puts OS X mini and multitouch on the new ipods the possibilities, with bundled hardware and software, increase dramatically. Unfortunately, they will probably lobotomize these new ipods even more than the iphone.

This is where our rumored new class of device comes in. First it combines the storage of the ipod with iphone features (wi-fi, etc) and a larger touch sceen. It has more horsepower, ports and other hardware niceties with an open environment for developers to add apps, etc.

Perhaps the whole thing (in width) is bit smaller than a macbooks keyboard - and then we could type on a near full sized virtual keyboard. Although evolution in inkwell and voice recognition might play a larger factor by next year.

freddiecable
Jan 16, 2007, 02:12 AM
1. how can people get surprised that Apple/Jobs didn't distract the iPhone announcement with iLife, Leopard, Mac's? it's quite obvious that the impact would have lessened.

2. it's also quite obvious that Apple will harness the "new platform" of iPhone and it's technologies! we will probably see an iPhone nano? I would certainly want to have a 2.5" iPhone - that smaller footprint should suite me better.

furthermore - apple has patented/developed resolution independent os of some sort. this would be very relevant on mobile devices and developing software for multiple devices. together with multitouch this can/will be very powerful.

it is going to be interesting to run the iphone. the only weak part is that it has no tactile feedback - for sms etc. lot's of people send sms without looking at their phone. don't know about USA that much - but in Europe and definitively in Sweden kids mostly sms - and they are darned fast at it. It will be hard to be able to attract these users with an interface you must look at. Actually I can think of quite a few scenarios where I don't want to look at my device when interacting...well time will tell.

Marble
Jan 16, 2007, 02:17 AM
I'm hoping that the extra time Apple has taken with Mac OS 10.5 will mean that they've got something incredible up their sleeve. The company's plans for the future are more mysterious now than ever.

helgeg
Jan 16, 2007, 02:23 AM
You forgot one important source. For some reason, it wasn't reported in the English-speaking world that the German magazine MacLife published a report in its December issue (published November 1st), that Balda would provide Apple with touchscreens for a new touchscreen iPod.

Noone believed them, but their report turned out to be true (although they didn't know the new touchscreen iPod was going to be a phone).

Here's someone who posted this is November, but no one was interested.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/archive/index.php/t-68162.html

Moz4
Jan 16, 2007, 03:43 AM
So when will the next Jobs keynote be? I thought these things were usually part of bigger events, like MacWorld Conference. If there's not an event, how will there be a keynote?

Or do Apple ever do press conferences?

r-sparks
Jan 16, 2007, 04:09 AM
Thanks for this report. This is one reason why MacRumors is my favorite Mac site - it's as much about the culture of Mac rumors and news, as it is about the rumors themselves. :)

mark88
Jan 16, 2007, 04:50 AM
I think that Apple realized that the iPhone announcement would get mass press attention and therefore chose to announce it early for the following reasons:

1. Vista launch is days away
2. CES week
3. They had to announce it before getting approval

If they had shown Leopard aswell it would have got little attention so they chose to leave it out. Also, Apple probably realized that these little special events they have been doing have been pretty successful so maybe the decided to hold one just for Leopard.

Ofcourse, the flip side is that Leopard is way behind schedule and just not ready for prime time. I also think that iLife apps are going to be Leopard only.

mark88
Jan 16, 2007, 04:56 AM
1. how can people get surprised that Apple/Jobs didn't distract the iPhone announcement with iLife, Leopard, Mac's? it's quite obvious that the impact would have lessened.

I half agree, I think it wouldn't have lessened the impact of the iPhone, but the iPhone would dwarf the software related announcements and no one would be taking about them.

I'm sure Apple wants lots of attention of Leopard when they are ready

GregA
Jan 16, 2007, 05:28 AM
i was suprised about iLife and iWork also. lets hope they are released soon....

Well with iLife and iWork, Apple can have a small release and the mac-web will go crazy. IF it has some great new features, it'll be advertised by many newspaper reports as well (which would have ignored them if shown alongside the iPhone).

Same goes for a macbook thin. Or 8-core Macs.

10.5 gets left out a bit. Can't really have a press conference until they're ready to release it. I guess they could release iLife/iWork and preview 10.5 simultaneously (since iLife might have some 10.5 specific features??!?)... if that's the plan, I guess it'd happen close to the Vista release?

Cubert
Jan 16, 2007, 06:32 AM
I think that the "jaw-dropping" product to be released in 2008 will be an iPhone with video conferencing capabilities.

Beam me up, Scotty!

Bobo68
Jan 16, 2007, 07:21 AM
This article said someone refers to cool future products for the "lite" OS-X in the new iPhone. Has anyone considered smart TV's that have the apple TV built into them and an OS?

fixyourthinking
Jan 16, 2007, 07:30 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)



iPhone

To be fair, Apple deliberately spread false information to defuse such efforts (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2007/01/20070111115030.shtml).



To be fair to some wrong prognosticators ... there were 3 REAL prototypes floating around. I managed to see all 3 in the August-November 2006 timeframe. One did have a touchpad and a 2.2" screen and no buttons. One did have a slide out keyboard and no touch pad and one looked similar to the final release. The same person had each prototype.

I think of all the most accurate rumors Slashphone actually had the best scoop ... a photograph with a (close to actual pic) and the word iPhone on it.

I really think Macrumors deserves the most credit though for presenting all the various sides to this rumor.

Rojo
Jan 16, 2007, 08:15 AM
This article said someone refers to cool future products for the "lite" OS-X in the new iPhone. Has anyone considered smart TV's that have the apple TV built into them and an OS?

You know, before, I really didn't think this would be something Apple would do. But now, with the company name change that de-emphasizes "Computer," it really seems like ANYTHING is possible, doesn't it?

matthiasgoodman
Jan 16, 2007, 08:23 AM
I'm hoping that we will get at least iLife included with Leopard, but I don't think that it is likely.

I think a lot of people forget that at the WWDC Steve said that Leopard would include all of their apps (I think he meant the same ones that come with a computer, ie iLife). Why does everyone forget so quickly? I never hear anyone mention this.

SciTeach
Jan 16, 2007, 08:39 AM
I think a lot of people forget that at the WWDC Steve said that Leopard would include all of their apps (I think he meant the same ones that come with a computer, ie iLife). Why does everyone forget so quickly? I never hear anyone mention this.

I remembered that statement also, but I wasn't thinking about iLife/iWork. More along the lines of their usual apps (PhotoBooth, iTunes, iPhoto, etc). That would be cool if Apple did that. UPGRADE!!!!:D

fixyourthinking
Jan 16, 2007, 08:42 AM
I think a lot of people forget that at the WWDC Steve said that Leopard would include all of their apps (I think he meant the same ones that come with a computer, ie iLife). Why does everyone forget so quickly? I never hear anyone mention this.

The full installs of Panther came with iLife 05 ... Tiger omitted the iLife apps ... I imagine we will see the "return of iApps inclusion" with Leopard if not to make it more compelling for upgraders to purchase it and installers to have updated versions of the Apps that are compatible.

Just as 10.3 was A HUGE step from 10.2 - Leopard is a HUGE step from 10.4

Chundles
Jan 16, 2007, 08:47 AM
The full installs of Panther came with iLife 05 ... Tiger omitted the iLife apps ... I imagine we will see the "return of iApps inclusion" with Leopard if not to make it more compelling for upgraders to purchase it and installers to have updated versions of the Apps that are compatible.

Just as 10.3 was A HUGE step from 10.2 - Leopard is a HUGE step from 10.4

The full installs of Panther DID NOT include iLife 05. The pre-installed software discs that come with a new Mac include iLife but you do not get iLife with OSX, you never have and you never will. Panther came out before iLife '04, let alone iLife '05.

The apps to be bundled with Leopard that Jobs was referring to are Photo Booth (with an expanded range of compatible cameras), Front Row and Boot Camp.

The iLife suite is not now nor ever has been, bundled with the OS. With a new Mac yes, but never as a part of a boxed OSX purchase.

matthiasgoodman
Jan 16, 2007, 09:01 AM
The full installs of Panther DID NOT include iLife 05. The pre-installed software discs that come with a new Mac include iLife but you do not get iLife with OSX, you never have and you never will. Panther came out before iLife '04, let alone iLife '05.

The apps to be bundled with Leopard that Jobs was referring to are Photo Booth (with an expanded range of compatible cameras), Front Row and Boot Camp.

The iLife suite is not now nor ever has been, bundled with the OS. With a new Mac yes, but never as a part of a boxed OSX purchase.

I do remember having iPhoto on the Panther disks, but it was an outdated (even at that time) version.

Clive At Five
Jan 16, 2007, 09:05 AM
Prior to MWSF 2007, the iPhone rumor was likely the longest running Apple rumor that had yet to come true.

PowerBook G5... need I say more?

It'll come... someone will jimmy it into a laptop or something... ;)

-Clive

Ti_Poussin
Jan 16, 2007, 09:39 AM
I do remember having iPhoto on the Panther disks, but it was an outdated (even at that time) version.

It was a free download at the time. iLife should be a free upgrade with OS X IMO. That would push more people to buy the new OS X version and ensure that the iLife is running on the latest OS, less problem and less time for the developper by the same time.

my 2 cents.

Porchland
Jan 16, 2007, 09:51 AM
Me thinks they're going to use this "light" version of OS X to power the next iPod(s).

It will do everything the iPhone can do as far as the iPod functions on the iPhone go. Now that would be cool. That would actually get me to upgrade from my 3G iPod.

AppleInsider is reporting that a Beatles announcement (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2401) will be coming by Valentine's Day, so I wouldn't be too surprised to see some kind of iPod refresh.

It was a free download at the time. iLife should be a free upgrade with OS X IMO. That would push more people to buy the new OS X version and ensure that the iLife is running on the latest OS, less problem and less time for the developper by the same time.

my 2 cents.

I would be surprised to see Apple start giving away for free what they've charged $79 in the past.

If you buy a new computer, you get the new iLife. That's where Apple puts the incentive.

tk421
Jan 16, 2007, 10:18 AM
Me thinks they're going to use this "light" version of OS X to power the next iPod(s).

It will do everything the iPhone can do as far as the iPod functions on the iPhone go. Now that would be cool. That would actually get me to upgrade from my 3G iPod.

Agreed. I'd love a device with just the iPhone's iPod functions. I don't need a cell phone or a camera, but I do want more than 8GB storage. Hence a hard-drive-based iPod with a larger touch screen and OS X.

SciTeach
Jan 16, 2007, 10:20 AM
PowerBook G5... need I say more?

It'll come... someone will jimmy it into a laptop or something... ;)


I thought everyone's New Years' Resolution was to quit mentioning that....:p

Digital Skunk
Jan 16, 2007, 10:22 AM
I don't mind paying the $79 for iLife and iWork. Compare those prices to what others charge like the student version of Office. That is $150 and the only other thing that you get is Entourage... which I don't use. I only use Word and PowerPoint. Keynote beats the snuff out of PowerPoint and Pages is much better for word processing AND graphics than Word will ever be.

As for iLife.. All of the apps are much better than the comp. I haven't seen an app like iPhoto in the "other" world. Corel, Adobe, and Jasc all have that.. "We don't really care about how well it works, or how well it looks, we just want our customers to have something," feel to it.

I will pay the bucks. I just won't pay for minor updates. I have the first iWork, didn't get 06 version. Didn't change much. I hope the 07 version is on FIRE! :D :D

Same with iLife. I may not buy this years version of iLife if it isn't that much difference from the 06 version. And I don't use many of the apps, except iPhoto to do personal photo stuff.

We will see. :)

rtdunham
Jan 16, 2007, 10:41 AM
So is it true that this Keynote had a much larger VIP Keynote section?

I'm not privy to head counts, but here's anecdotal evidence that that's true: my brother had a special pass...one step down from press/VIP passes, I think...that cost about a grand...and by the time his line was allowed to enter--before those of us in the traditional queue forming outside--he was halfway back in the hall. And the hall had a capacity of 5,000, according to staffers i spoke to, compared to 3,000 last year.

(I'm less sure of this observation, but i THINK everyone in line was fitted into the hall for the keynote)

Daringescape
Jan 16, 2007, 10:54 AM
Itunes is technically part of iLife, isnt it? Maybe thats the delay, along with Leopard.

I think we will see a big change to itunes because of the iPhone - maybe even a name change. itunes looks like it is becoming a major hub and will need some major updating. Of course I could be waaayyy wrong too.

JosephKr
Jan 16, 2007, 11:14 AM
I don't know how many people picked up on this, but if Apple registered "iphone.org" back in 1999, where were Cisco's lawyers back then?

bretm
Jan 16, 2007, 12:00 PM
I don't know how many people picked up on this, but if Apple registered "iphone.org" back in 1999, where were Cisco's lawyers back then?

Registering a domain name gives you no legal rights to anything. It's a domain name. That's it. It costs $5 or less to register a domain name.

If YOU had thought to register the domain iphone.org at the time you could have done so. It would've taken you about 5 minutes.

TheBobcat
Jan 16, 2007, 12:07 PM
I don't know guys, $79 for iLife is kind of a rip I think. I mean, iTunes is free, but iPhoto, iWeb, GarageBand and iMovie/iDVD...Windows now includes equivilents for free, why shouldn't Apple? Or at least offer a bundle with a little savings.

fixyourthinking
Jan 16, 2007, 12:19 PM
The full installs of Panther DID NOT include iLife 05. The pre-installed software discs that come with a new Mac include iLife but you do not get iLife with OSX, you never have and you never will. Panther came out before iLife '04, let alone iLife '05.

The apps to be bundled with Leopard that Jobs was referring to are Photo Booth (with an expanded range of compatible cameras), Front Row and Boot Camp.

The iLife suite is not now nor ever has been, bundled with the OS. With a new Mac yes, but never as a part of a boxed OSX purchase.

Yes they were ... I checked my 4 disc CD install before making that statement. It may not have been on the initial retail release CDs but it was on later discs. iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, and I think iDVD.

Registering a domain name gives you no legal rights to anything. It's a domain name. That's it. It costs $5 or less to register a domain name.

If YOU had thought to register the domain iphone.org at the time you could have done so. It would've taken you about 5 minutes.

Apple could have legitimately sold a thing called the iPhone in 1999, whereas Cisco did NOT own a consumer brand (they did not yet own Linksys who actually held the iPhone name - which they themselves acquired in 1999 from a company called Infogear which had registered the name in 1997)

You have 6 years to prove a patent at market ... if you don't you lose the name and the patent!

Actually there IS A POINT there. Cisco admitted themselves that Apple has been discussing this with them for a very long time. It has now been discovered that Cisco FAKED USPTO "proof of marketed concept" submissions.

longofest
Jan 16, 2007, 12:32 PM
I think that the "jaw-dropping" product to be released in 2008 will be an iPhone with video conferencing capabilities.

Beam me up, Scotty!

That's been mentioned by LoopRumors, but I am forever skeptical of such claims. Videoconferencing requires on-the-fly encoding as well as decoding of audio and video. I don't know of any mobile-capable H.264 encoding chips, especially ones that could compress the video to a point that it could travel over a 2.5G or even 3G network.

EDIT: nevermind... http://www.mobilygen.com/pdf_files/Mobilygen_MG1264_200508.pdf

still have to deal with network bandwidth, but at least I have found one chip that can do it (and if this company can do it, others could too...)

bretm
Jan 16, 2007, 01:29 PM
I don't know guys, $79 for iLife is kind of a rip I think. I mean, iTunes is free, but iPhoto, iWeb, GarageBand and iMovie/iDVD...Windows now includes equivilents for free, why shouldn't Apple? Or at least offer a bundle with a little savings.

Please specify the Windows Equivalents to those applications. Good luck.

Digital Skunk
Jan 16, 2007, 01:30 PM
I don't know guys, $79 for iLife is kind of a rip I think. I mean, iTunes is free, but iPhoto, iWeb, GarageBand and iMovie/iDVD...Windows now includes equivilents for free, why shouldn't Apple? Or at least offer a bundle with a little savings.

Those apps are pure crap.... trust me... anyone that tells you different has no idea what they may be missing and is probably an arrogance pompous air bag. Really. When PC lover try comparing iLife with free apps on Windows machines they are usually dreaming. NOT SAYNG THAT you are Bobcat.... :D

Really though... there is nothing on the PC market that compares to GarageBand iMovie iDVD iPhoto and iWeb working seamlessly together... at the price tag of $79... all made by ONE company and not different ones (so only one customer service number):D That's why the apps are a great deal... and it's just $79 bucks :confused: is that really expensive... most people pay more for their cellphone bills.:D

JosephKr
Jan 16, 2007, 01:38 PM
Thanks to AdZoox a little further up the chain for validating my point. Not knowing the exact dates when the registration and the acquisition occurred, I assumed that the latter preceded the former.

At worst it would have brought up my question. At best it proves that Apple was first to "market" with the name.

Since subsequent discoveries have noted anomalies with various documents and submissions, I believe that this puts Apple in a very strong position.

Porchland
Jan 16, 2007, 01:41 PM
I also think that iLife apps are going to be Leopard only.

I could see that as a strategy for promoting Leopard, but I haven't heard any killer-app features rumored for iLife/iWork (or Leopard for that matter) that would make iLife/iWork difficult to run on Tiger.

JosephKr
Jan 16, 2007, 01:43 PM
If I was a betting man, I'd say that the folks at R.I.M. and like companies ought to be extremely nervous right now, because 2008 (or maybe sooner) might indicate the timeframe when the handwriting could be on the wall for them......or somewhere else.....pun intended!

Porchland
Jan 16, 2007, 01:45 PM
Itunes is technically part of iLife, isnt it? Maybe thats the delay, along with Leopard.

Apple does not include iTunes on its iLife (http://www.apple.com/ilife/) page, though I believe it used to.

sbrhwkp3
Jan 16, 2007, 01:53 PM
...or are there more iPhones coming?

Perhaps the next iPods will also have phones as an option, where you just slide in your sim card and it's good to go.

It'd be a great cover up for Steve to say that they spread false information about decoy phones, only to release different phones at a later date.

Anyone on board with this idea?

IJ Reilly
Jan 16, 2007, 02:05 PM
Once again, the big winner in the rumorfest is the Wall Street Journal, contributing to my theory that they are Apple's designated recipient of official leaks.

Bosunsfate
Jan 16, 2007, 02:18 PM
My hope is that these will be released like the new Airport did.

Been waiting for nearly 6 months now since I got my new Mac Pro...

alfismoney
Jan 16, 2007, 02:23 PM
I would be very intrigued by an ultra-thin machine which used those nifty new 32 gig compact flash hard disks instead of a traditional laptop drive. I could see a high performance feature like that being a big factor in Apple charging $1700 for a 12" machine.

Overall I found Macworld to be an interesting but uneventful start. The iPhone is pretty but needs to become compatible with applications I use in the office before I would carry a phone that large. Right now my trashbox office PDA has a touch screen phone that I can't dial without staring at it so I'm hesitant to cancel my personal cell just because I'm an Apple fan.

dXTC
Jan 16, 2007, 02:25 PM
I don't know guys, $79 for iLife is kind of a rip I think. I mean, iTunes is free, but iPhoto, iWeb, GarageBand and iMovie/iDVD...Windows now includes equivilents for free, why shouldn't Apple? Or at least offer a bundle with a little savings.Please specify the Windows Equivalents to those applications. Good luck.

Equivalents? I'd be hard pressed to find free, built-in Windows apps that are equivalents.

Windows XP's (disclaimer: I haven't yet seen Vista) built-in Photo Preview functionality is rather primitive compared to iPhoto. Windows Movie Maker is similarly simplistic. I don't think there is a Web-publishing app like iWeb built into XP; there might be one in Vista.

However, I can definitively say that there is nothing built into XP like GarageBand. Nothing. At best, there may be one General MIDI synth DLL, but its sounds are somewhat dull and static (even though the sound set is from the usually superlative Roland GS library), it's up to the user to find some sequencing program to harness it, and there is no changing the sounds themselves. Someone looking for GarageBand-level functionality would have to purchase something like Cubase or Cakewalk. I have Cakewalk Sonar 5 myself, and it cost me considerably more than what some people pay for entry-level PCs nowadays-- and it only does music/audio composition and recording.

Rocketman
Jan 16, 2007, 03:00 PM
Isn't videoconferencing practical now on browser based servises? You know, with postage stamp size images.

Rocketman

BillyShears
Jan 16, 2007, 03:05 PM
Does anyone else think it's time to rename iTunes? It already plays movies and syncs photos, but now it's going to sync your contacts, bookmarks, and everything the iPhone needs to sync. If iPhone also syncs PDFs and Office documents, it will do those, too.

I think this could be part of the delay in iLife.

I kind of like where it's going, but it almost replaces the Finder. Eventually it seems like everything is going to go through iTunes at some point. I'm not sure what they can do to sort this out. Most likely they would just rename iTunes (but then they lose the branding), but they could also make a new "iSync" app for Mac and Windows. Anyone have any ideas?

Doctor Q
Jan 16, 2007, 03:42 PM
iTunes is free, but iPhoto, iWeb, GarageBand and iMovie/iDVD...Windows now includes equivilents for free, why shouldn't Apple?
Please specify the Windows Equivalents to those applications. Good luck.
Those apps are pure crap.... trust me... anyone that tells you different has no idea what they may be missing and is probably an arrogance pompous air bag. Really. When PC lover try comparing iLife with free apps on Windows machines they are usually dreaming.
Equivalents? I'd be hard pressed to find free, built-in Windows apps that are equivalents.

Windows XP's (disclaimer: I haven't yet seen Vista) built-in Photo Preview functionality is rather primitive compared to iPhoto. Windows Movie Maker is similarly simplistic. I don't think there is a Web-publishing app like iWeb built into XP; there might be one in Vista.

However, I can definitively say that there is nothing built into XP like GarageBand. Nothing. At best, there may be one General MIDI synth DLL, but its sounds are somewhat dull and static (even though the sound set is from the usually superlative Roland GS library), it's up to the user to find some sequencing program to harness it, and there is no changing the sounds themselves. Someone looking for GarageBand-level functionality would have to purchase something like Cubase or Cakewalk. I have Cakewalk Sonar 5 myself, and it cost me considerably more than what some people pay for entry-level PCs nowadays-- and it only does music/audio composition and recording.There's a Windows equivalents of iLife apps thread about this. When iLife '07 is out, we'll need to update that discussion.

Digital Skunk
Jan 16, 2007, 03:51 PM
I would be very intrigued by an ultra-thin machine which used those nifty new 32 gig compact flash hard disks instead of a traditional laptop drive. I could see a high performance feature like that being a big factor in Apple charging $1700 for a 12" machine.

Overall I found Macworld to be an interesting but uneventful start. The iPhone is pretty but needs to become compatible with applications I use in the office before I would carry a phone that large. Right now my trashbox office PDA has a touch screen phone that I can't dial without staring at it so I'm hesitant to cancel my personal cell just because I'm an Apple fan.

My girlfriend and i would really like to see that. i hope that the harddrive isn't 32 gb though. Maybe they could come up with one that was twice or (preferrably) three times that size. 32 GB is my girlfriends photo collection. We were thinking about upgrading the HDD in her 12"PB to 160GB if all else fails. That flash based HD is also a bit expensive. Like $600.:eek: Understandably so, but man! Putting that into an ultra thin book is going to jack the price way above the 17inch MBP.

Even if Apple puts a regular HDD in the machine, there is much more than can be shaved off of the MBP to get it down to 12 inches.

* ExpressCard 34 slot
* FireWire 800
* Dedicated ram slot (like the old 12"PB and iBooks did)
* Full size dvi port

After that, it's up to engineering it and making it look good and making all of the features practical. Not that I am an engineer:D

The thinbook is something Apple could integrate that touchscreen tech into and make easier to read stuff on such a small screen. Make the battery life better than all of the current books (anything better than 5 hours) and price it at $1700 like alfismoney said and it would be a machine worth buying. :cool:

SMacDuff
Jan 16, 2007, 06:00 PM
I don't know if anyone else suggested this in a different thread but could it be possible that Apple has changed the look of Leopard's UI (something that has already been rumoured). It would then be logical that Apple did not release iLife at MWSF since that would reveal too much about Leopard's new UI. Am I making any sense?

lmalave
Jan 16, 2007, 06:05 PM
I think that the "jaw-dropping" product to be released in 2008 will be an iPhone with video conferencing capabilities.

Beam me up, Scotty!

Yup, 3G iPhone with secondary camera in front of phone for videoconferencing.

Not only that, but GPS built-in for even more Google Maps / Google Local integration goodness.

3G also implies the ability to download audio/video directly onto the phone, and also to view live streaming video or listen to streaming audio.

Speaking of Streaming Audio/Video, why not put Front Row/Apple TV type software directly on the iPhone? Why not put 802.11n on the iPhone, and then Macs can stream audio/video to the iPhone the same way they do to an Apple TV device?

Can't wait for 2008. I'm stuck with my Samsung Blackjack until December of 2008. (Not that the Blackjack is a bad phone. It's actually a fantastic device despite SJ's disparaging remarks).

theheadguy
Jan 16, 2007, 06:40 PM
I guess I'm a little disappointed.

In regards to this rumor roundup, and I don't think it's MacRumors fault mind you... I would be hard pressed to think that any of these tipsters truly had real information whatsoever. Through the last two years, I've read 100 different "insiders" claim they know the size of the iPhone. So it's not amazing to me that a person got it right (well, almost right) and coupled that "leak" with the fact that it was going to have metal casing (duh). We knew it would double as an iPod (even the crap Motorola model does that and syncs through iTunes!)... So where does it leave us? I'm not sure. But I know that we may not have many more real insiders left (I hope there are more to come).

Slightly off topic but this is how I saw this Macworld, let me know if anyone agrees (I already know lots will roll eyes with how unimpressed I am):

1. iPhone - 1000 insiders said this would be coming... I guess it's not a surprise anymore. Only for Cingular, NON-3g, 2mp camera. So many reasons that this product needs help.

2. iTV - Wow, already shown this. Now we see it again. Next.

3. Airport Extreme Base Station - About time to see 802.11n especially since we are supposed to be sending high def video to our TV. No gigabit ethernet port, so it's slower than the 802.11n... Not really surprised. Replaced a product that needed to be replaced and also is sub-par by tomorrow's standards. I'd rather they keep the price the same and give me the great Apple technology I have come to love.

4. No computer product, no new software, no non-obnoxiously rumored products released or talked about to surprise us.

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = Blah Macworld. Guess I'll put my hope in 2008.

shyataroo
Jan 16, 2007, 07:49 PM
Just as a show of hands...so to speak who thinks apple will have a "one more thing" type event? notice how steve didnt say it this year. this would lead me to believe that he will be introducing more products sometime between now and june. in that regard here is what I am hoping steve will introduce:

Full screen TRUE video iPod (with 100GB or 80GB HDDs) with a multi touch interface. (it will not have the same OS as the iPhone as not to cannibalize iPhone sales)

New Apple Cinema Displays with even higher contrast ratios and a iSight camera built in (hopefully with a higher resolution)

to go along with that Steve will release 10.5 as well as iWork/iLife (perhaps merged as a single product called iLife Complete?)

new Dual-Quad Core ProMacs with an LG hybrid HD-DVD/BD-ROM drive? (most likeley one or the other) with Nvidias 8800GTX or AMD X2800 XT (one can dream)

maybe new MacBook Pros?

R0bert
Jan 16, 2007, 08:13 PM
Maby this...

http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/5549/multitouchnv7.jpg

sdcacevedo
Jan 16, 2007, 08:36 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4VieMjZYfI

MattyMac
Jan 16, 2007, 10:18 PM
I'm so glad the iPhone is on the winners list.

I've been waiting for this for so long.

Everyone remember all of the pessimists in this forum...contradicting even the slightest hope that an iPhone would come out...boy am I happy they were wrong! I CANNOT WAIT UNTIL JUNE!!!

digitalbiker
Jan 16, 2007, 10:29 PM
I guess I'm a little disappointed.

4. No computer product, no new software, no non-obnoxiously rumored products released or talked about to surprise us.

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = Blah Macworld. Guess I'll put my hope in 2008.

I hear you!

At the end of the day, this is still just a phone and personally I'm not really that interested. I was really hoping for something new in the way of mac hardware and software as well as a demo on Leopard.

I'm sure the phone will sell just fine and Apple is actually overdue for an entry into this personal electronics market but I really really need a new mac pro and I want an octo core machine with updated displays.

Please Apple don't forget those that brought you to the big dance.

MacinDoc
Jan 17, 2007, 12:40 AM
Maby this...
Now there's an idea. Perhaps the whispers about a new iMac form factor could also refer to a multi-touch screen. A 30" multi-touch iMac would rock! And the improvement would be even more significant for notebooks, upgrading from a small trackpad to a full screen for the ultimate in control.

With multi-touch technology, we could even see the beginning of the end of the mouse and the trackpad. Apple, one of the first companies to dispose of the floppy disc drive and the internal modem, may well be the first to dump the mouse (considering some of the mice Apple has come out with, some people may not consider this a great loss, but with a multi-touch screen, who needs 2 buttons?).

Object-X
Jan 17, 2007, 12:41 AM
Maby this...

I'm curious what people think about this idea. In what context would something like this make sense? Who would use it? I mean it's cool and everything, but how is it useful?

dakscott
Jan 17, 2007, 12:51 AM
Agreed. I'd love a device with just the iPhone's iPod functions. I don't need a cell phone or a camera, but I do want more than 8GB storage. Hence a hard-drive-based iPod with a larger touch screen and OS X.

here here!! :) I'm just waiting to replace my 3G ipod too. You have to wonder though, on one hand they could release the WS video ipod early because they don't need FCC approval. On the other hand, an early release might cannabalize iPhone sales.

MacinDoc
Jan 17, 2007, 01:23 AM
I'm curious what people think about this idea. In what context would something like this make sense? Who would use it? I mean it's cool and everything, but how is it useful?
Instead of moving your mouse over a pad on your desk to move the cursor on the screen to an item you want to move, double-clicking on the item, and finally dragging it, simply touch your finger directly on what you want to move and drag your finger to where you want it to go. Which would you say is easier and more intuitive?

FrankieTDouglas
Jan 17, 2007, 01:37 AM
Instead of moving your mouse over a pad on your desk to move the cursor on the screen to an item you want to move, double-clicking on the item, and finally dragging it, simply touch your finger directly on what you want to move and drag your finger to where you want it to go. Which would you say is easier and more intuitive?

I just drug my finger across my powerbook's screen. It shook. Doesn't seem like a great setup. Plus I didn't like dragging my finger all the way across a screen. Seems like a necessary hassle.

Not to mention that you presented your question in a biased way...

MacinDoc
Jan 17, 2007, 01:56 AM
I just drug my finger across my powerbook's screen. It shook. Doesn't seem like a great setup. Plus I didn't like dragging my finger all the way across a screen. Seems like a necessary hassle.

Not to mention that you presented your question in a biased way...
I didn't think of it as biased. The simplest, most intuitive way of doing something on a computer is to do on the computer what most closely represents what you would be doing with your own hands. When you're using a mouse, what you're doing with your hand is a close approximation of what's happening on a screen, but it's not exactly the same. The difference between the two makes using a mouse more difficult and less intuitive. And there is the added frustration of having the mouse at the edge of a mousepad or surface and needing to pick it up and reposition it to finish what you wanted to do on the screen. You may not notice this with daily use of a mouse, because you get used to it, but if you pay attention to how often this happens, you might be surprised. Of course, it's even worse with a trackpad.

This is not to say that a multi-touch display would be superior to a mouse or stylus pad for all applications, but I can see where a multitouch screen could improve the user interface.

GregA
Jan 17, 2007, 02:33 AM
Does anyone else think it's time to rename iTunes? It already plays movies and syncs photos, but now it's going to sync your contacts, bookmarks, and everything the iPhone needs to sync. If iPhone also syncs PDFs and Office documents, it will do those, too.
I agree. Rename it. Something.
Perhaps it should be called iLife :)

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if iPhoto appeared for Windows, but who knows..

ps. (Anyone notice that iTunes for Windows installs the "Apple Software Update", not the "iTunes Software Update". Why?)

GregA
Jan 17, 2007, 05:28 AM
I am hoping steve will introduce ... Full screen TRUE video iPod (with 100GB or 80GB HDDs) with a multi touch interface. (it will not have the same OS as the iPhone as not to cannibalize iPhone sales)No - it needs the same OS as the iPhone. Having a multi-touch interface and then a different OS would be a waste.

Otherwise I agree - it'd be nice to see a HD based video iPod.

How about a iPod which basically swaps the Phone component for a HD? Keep the "Internet Connectivity Device" by using wifi, or even bluetooth via your regular old cell phone.

Or an iPhone which dumps the cell phone for a VoIP phone? That way there's no deal-making with the cell networks (but... no phone when on the move either)

GregA
Jan 17, 2007, 05:33 AM
Airport Extreme Base Station - About time to see 802.11n especially since we are supposed to be sending high def video to our TV. No gigabit ethernet port, so it's slower than the 802.11n...
Yeah, the "no gigabit" seemed a bit weak.

"talk on the net" has it that if you put a 802.11g device on the 802.11n network, it slows down the whole 802.11n network???? Not sure how valid that is.

I had thoughts of connecting the iMac with gigabit, an AppleTV and MBP with 802.11n, and a Powerbook with 802.11g. But if it's all still at 100Mbit & 802.11g speeds, then may as well keep the old Airport Extreme.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong :)

eRondeau
Jan 17, 2007, 07:04 AM
Now there's an idea. Perhaps the whispers about a new iMac form factor could also refer to a multi-touch screen. A 30" multi-touch iMac would rock! And the improvement would be even more significant for notebooks, upgrading from a small trackpad to a full screen for the ultimate in control. With multi-touch technology, we could even see the beginning of the end of the mouse and the trackpad.

I supervise a 911/Police/Fire Dispatch Center and our new Zetron digital radio system consoles came with touch screen monitors. They were very cool for about the first 8-hours, until the cleaning lady paged-out a half-dozen fire stations with her Swiffer. Now we've mostly shut them off and we use the mouse like God intended us to. :D

sishaw
Jan 17, 2007, 08:04 AM
I supervise a 911/Police/Fire Dispatch Center and our new Zetron digital radio system consoles came with touch screen monitors. They were very cool for about the first 8-hours, until the cleaning lady paged-out a half-dozen fire stations with her Swiffer. Now we've mostly shut them off and we use the mouse like God intended us to. :D

The multi-touch screen of the iPhone has been widely reported not to react to anything but fingers and to be able to distinguish errors.

I also posted elsewhere that a touch-screen iMac would be excellent. I also agree that it may not work as well for a standard laptop, but then, we would expect some redesign to make it work, so "dragging my finger across my macbook screen" really isn't the point.

tk421
Jan 17, 2007, 09:08 AM
I didn't think of it as biased. The simplest, most intuitive way of doing something on a computer is to do on the computer what most closely represents what you would be doing with your own hands. When you're using a mouse, what you're doing with your hand is a close approximation of what's happening on a screen, but it's not exactly the same. The difference between the two makes using a mouse more difficult and less intuitive. And there is the added frustration of having the mouse at the edge of a mousepad or surface and needing to pick it up and reposition it to finish what you wanted to do on the screen. You may not notice this with daily use of a mouse, because you get used to it, but if you pay attention to how often this happens, you might be surprised. Of course, it's even worse with a trackpad.

This is not to say that a multi-touch display would be superior to a mouse or stylus pad for all applications, but I can see where a multitouch screen could improve the user interface.

Are you kidding? There's no way a touch screen is better than a mouse with a larger screen. You're making smaller moves in a very natural way to indicate larger movements. There's nothing strange about this at all. Most simple machines work by transferring smaller energy into larger tasks. Like riding a bicycle in a higher gear - nobody complains that their legs are just approximating the motion of walking. Instead, they are using something that's more efficient for their particular task.

And then there's the issue of those of us with two monitors. The mouse moves from one to the other seemlessly. It would be very awkward to physically move something from one to the other with touch.

Object-X
Jan 17, 2007, 01:34 PM
Instead of moving your mouse over a pad on your desk to move the cursor on the screen to an item you want to move, double-clicking on the item, and finally dragging it, simply touch your finger directly on what you want to move and drag your finger to where you want it to go. Which would you say is easier and more intuitive?

I'm not trying to being flippant or dis what you're saying, but actually I think the mouse is still better. To sit in front of a monitor with a keyboard, to lift up my arm and try to touch the screen to input actions would be tiresome, slower, and not as precise. I think I would just go back to using the mouse. This is what prompted my question in the first place.

Try it. Pretend like you are going to move a window out of the way and select something underneath it, or grab an item to drag to the dock or trash. Lift up your arm and reach out to the screen. Reach out all the way to the Apple logo in the menu bar (if you're right-handed, or spotlight if you're left). It's awkward and slow, you're whole body moves; I think your arm would get tired of doing it. Also, the mouse can instantiate Expose with a button, right-click for contextual menus, etc. How would these actions map to touch input? And if you are using both the mouse and touch, it seems to me you would end up just using the mouse.

So, I'm still not getting it. I mean, maybe new actions, things we haven't really thought of could be mapped to touch, maybe scrolling like on the iPhone. Perhaps some new application that would work better this way. I don't know. But for just moving stuff around the screen or inserting a cursor, highligthing text, the basic stuff you do with a mouse doesn't seem to translate well with touch.

GregA
Jan 17, 2007, 02:42 PM
Nice points about impracticality of a touch screen. You've 'set off' a few thoughts
1) In this context, using a mouse sounds like 'magic' - small gesture makes a big movement. I gesture towards my coffee cup and make a slight finger motion and it floats across to me. Far from imitating the real world, we'd rather imitate magic, right?
2) It would seem that a small screen is a really natural place to have a touch screen (like the iPhone).

The mouse will be superceded some time. Perhaps there'll be an interface that watches our eyes and our hand gestures so that we can look at a file and flick our finger to move it. Who knows.

PhotoLogic
Jan 17, 2007, 04:09 PM
Well, I am still waiting to see the new monitors. New sizes, lighter weight, fantastic color rendition like the EIZO, built-in iSite and an HDMI input. I returned for credit an unopened 30" Cinema Display two weeks before the MacWorld rumor of the new monitors, hoping to get the newest version. Isn't it about time for one that has iSite, since the latest "I'm a PC - I'm a Mac" Tech Support TV ad. :o I'm a little embarrased to go back and buy the same one again. Oh, well, I might as well. Then I can finally open up the box that has the Quad Xeon desktop, too!

theheadguy
Jan 17, 2007, 09:37 PM
The mouse will be superceded some time. Perhaps there'll be an interface that watches our eyes and our hand gestures so that we can look at a file and flick our finger to move it. Who knows.
This actually exists. I read about it over 10 years ago and saw a demonstration of it as a way for someone who was paralyzed to type using their eyes... I haven't thought about it since. Maybe it hasn't come very far since then. I think the setup took up an entire room, whereas we would want our built-in eyesites to take care of the trick.

w00master
Jan 17, 2007, 10:05 PM
I'm not trying to being flippant or dis what you're saying, but actually I think the mouse is still better.

<snipped for brevity>

So, I'm still not getting it. I mean, maybe new actions, things we haven't really thought of could be mapped to touch, maybe scrolling like on the iPhone. Perhaps some new application that would work better this way. I don't know. But for just moving stuff around the screen or inserting a cursor, highligthing text, the basic stuff you do with a mouse doesn't seem to translate well with touch.

I'm TOTALLY with you on this. However, I just had a thought. Maybe we're looking at this "touchscreen" stuff in the wrong way? Instead of looking up at the monitor, look down at the touchpad of your notebook. Maybe they're thinking of replacing the touchpad with a larger touchscreen display?

Here two things could happen: multitouch and mouse gestures, all in one package. Seems to follow Steve Job's philosophy (sometimes overly so) of simplication. Thoughts anyone?

w00master

PhotoLogic
Jan 17, 2007, 11:14 PM
So, what about this Multi-Touch Interaction Research:
http://cs.nyu.edu.nyud.net:8090/~jhan/ftirtouch/
Update: Yes, we saw the keynote too! We have some very, very exciting updates coming soon- stay tuned!
Maybe my new 30" cinema display is all touchscreen with a FTIR (frustrated total internal reflection) sensing technique!
:D

Object-X
Jan 18, 2007, 11:09 AM
I'm TOTALLY with you on this. However, I just had a thought. Maybe we're looking at this "touchscreen" stuff in the wrong way? Instead of looking up at the monitor, look down at the touchpad of your notebook. Maybe they're thinking of replacing the touchpad with a larger touchscreen display?

Here two things could happen: multitouch and mouse gestures, all in one package. Seems to follow Steve Job's philosophy (sometimes overly so) of simplication. Thoughts anyone?

w00master

Yes, I think you're right. A tablet touch screen makes better sense, but tablets can do hand writing and Jobs didn't seem too keen on a stylus nor has he been overly enthusiastic about tablets in the past. But, there is a new rumor of one coming, and the ModBook at MacWorld got a lot of attention. So, it remains to be seen.