Widescreen iBook?

[MacRumors]

Digitimes claims (http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050408A1001.html) that Quanta Computer has recently obtained orders for a New model of Apple iBook.

Quanta, already the biggest contract maker for Apple’s PowerBooks, will start to ship 14.1-inch widescreen iBooks as early as the fourth quarter of 2005, the sources said.

In general, Digitimes' reports have been consistently inaccurate. Last report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/01/20050114041111.shtml) claimed that Apple would be shipping G5 iBooks as well as G5 PowerBooks by end of the 2nd Quarter of 2005.

[Davito]

That sounds good. But this source seems really unreliable.

[BornAgainMac]

Eventually it will happen. I am seeing more and more High Definition wide screen PC laptops that support HD video. The screens are very bright and clear. At least if we can't have G5's in a notebook, we can have better displays.

[mcadam]

Hmmm... could be nice, but not exactly a quantum-leap for apple... On the other hand I love the iBooks, so I very welcome further development on them.

A

[wilburpan]

I agree that this will eventually happen, especially if this is the year of HDTV and Apple.

But why is this a Page 1 item if Digitimes has been so unreliable in the past? Appleinsider has been more accurate and their last item was put on Page 2.

[slipper]

this absurd thread makes me want to puke all over myself.

[Knox]

But why is this a Page 1 item if Digitimes has been so unreliable in the past? Appleinsider has been more accurate and their last item was put on Page 2.

I think arn sometimes puts reports on the front page if there's going to be a high level of interest about it, even if the reports are likely to be wrong.

[liketom]

this absurd thread makes me want to puke all over myself.
nice .. if you puke on your lap people will think you just bought a dell LOL

also where's mini mod to close the other ibook widescreen thread ?

[edesignuk]

consistently inaccurateThe most important part of this article ;) Don't anybody go getting excited.

[arn]

But why is this a Page 1 item if Digitimes has been so unreliable in the past? Appleinsider has been more accurate and their last item was put on Page 2.

The last Appleinsider article didn't really offer much details - page 2, not for not being reliable - just for not being very substantial.

Digitimes unfortunately gets reported on by lots of web sites. As a result, people are going to be submitting this news item all day. it made more sense just to post it and say it's not likely to happen.

arn

[cal6n]

In general, Digitimes' reports have been consistently inaccurate. Last report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/01/20050114041111.shtml) claimed that Apple would be shipping G5 iBooks as well as G5 PowerBooks by end of the 2nd Quarter of 2005.
There's nearly 3 months till the end of Q2, so how is this unreliable?

this absurd thread makes me want to puke all over myself.
Feel free. Why should we care about your personal hygene?

[arn]

There's nearly 3 months till the end of Q2, so how is this unreliable?

Financial Q2 is about to end.

This isn't the first time they've been wrong: http://www.macrumors.com/site.php?mode=search&term=digitimes&submit=Search+Site

arn

[gadget-uk]

*cough*...

don't mind me ;)

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=119133

[JFreak]

not going to happen before the 12" power(less)book gets widescreen

[MacsRgr8]

I'll just be happy if they upped the rez on the 14" model.
Something like 1280 x 960 would be nice.

[AidenShaw]

I'll just be happy if they upped the rez on the 14" model.
Something like 1280 x 960 would be nice.


Apple's display resolution is falling way behind the industry.

My 14" Dell laptop has 13% more pixels than a 17" PowerBook....

- Dell D600 - 1400x1050 - 1.470 MPixels
- PB 17" - 1440x900 - 1.296 MPixels

[liketom]

Apple's display resolution is falling way behind the industry.

My 14" Dell laptop has 13% more pixels than a 17" PowerBook....

- Dell D600 - 1400x1050 - 1.470 MPixels
- PB 17" - 1440x900 - 1.296 MPixels
so i take it you get a bigger blue screen of death then ? lol

but you are right if apple wants to take the lead on displays it needs to start uping some of them! HD anyone ?

[AidenShaw]

so i take it you get a bigger blue screen of death then ? lol?

No, a smaller, brighter, more detailed BSOD !! ;)

[jaw04005]

If Apple was to provide higher resolution notebook displays, is there an automatic way to size up icons, fonts, etc to make them as large as they currently are with 1024 x 768?

I'm all for more resolution, but I wouldn't want to have to strain my eyes just to read text or click on an icon.

Currently, I know of just one way, and that would be manually adjust every icon and text size. :confused:

[alms]

If it's still a 14.1 inch iBook, what makes it "wide screen"? (Clearly I'm out of the loop on HD lingo.)

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

If Apple was to provide higher resolution notebook displays, is there an automatic way to size up icons, fonts, etc to make them as large as they currently are with 1024 x 768?

I'm all for more resolution, but I wouldn't want to have to strain my eyes just to read text or click on an icon.

Currently, I know of just one way, and that would be manually adjust every icon and text size. :confused:Finder: View -> Show View Options (cmd-J)

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

If it's still a 14.1 inch iBook, what makes it "wide screen"? (Clearly I'm out of the loop on HD lingo.)
On a "normal" screen the width:height ratio is 4:3, on a widescreen its 16:9 (or 16:10).

[solvs]

Digitimes unfortunately gets reported on by lots of web sites. As a result, people are going to be submitting this news item all day. it made more sense just to post it and say it's not likely to happen.
Ah, see now that you've said that it makes more sense. Would be nice to get a widescreen mini-book though.

No, a smaller, brighter, more detailed BSOD !! ;)
I do believe that's the funniest thing I've ever heard you say. And I also would like better displays on some of the notebooks. But am I the only one that likes low resolution displays? Bad eyes. The 20" iMac is fine, but the 17" isn't so great, and it's even worse when you try to lower the res (being LCDs and all).

I can't imagine a 12" book at higher than 1024. 14", maybe. But even then I'm squinting. You guys must have pretty good vision, or you sit a lot closer.

[ccuilla]

Financial Q2 is about to end.

Was the rumor tied to financial or calendar quarters? Whenever I hear something that is non-financial, I generally assume calendar quarters.

That said, yes, they have been wrong before, and it also seems highly unlikely we'll see the G5 in a portable computer very soon. And almost certainly not by June 30th.

[jnicolso1]

Was the rumor tied to financial or calendar quarters? Whenever I hear something that is non-financial, I generally assume calendar quarters.

That said, yes, they have been wrong before, and it also seems highly unlikely we'll see the G5 in a portable computer very soon. And almost certainly not by June 30th.

I have given up hope and am going to keep running my machine until they release the next G5 desktop. I will just use my G4 PB to run the G5 using timbuktu when I am away.

[jholzner]

Financial Q2 is about to end.

This isn't the first time they've been wrong: http://www.macrumors.com/site.php?mode=search&term=digitimes&submit=Search+Site

arn

Actually, Fin. Q2 ended on March 25th.

[AidenShaw]

I can't imagine a 12" book at higher than 1024. 14", maybe. But even then I'm squinting. You guys must have pretty good vision, or you sit a lot closer.

I scale the font sizes for readability. This is still a "real estate win" over a lower resolution display for two reasons.

1. Photo viewing/editing on the higher resolution display is much better (your 5MPixel photo can be shown as a 1MPixel window, not as a 1/2 MPixel window)

2. Toolbars, buttons, window borders etc are relatively smaller, and therefore there's more room for text and pictures.

[wilburpan]

By the way, Compaq makes a 14" widescreen notebook. It has a 14" widescreen display with a resolution of 1280 x 768. So the ability to make such a notebook is not out of the realm of possibility. They retail for
$800 on up.

The details are available here (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/uk/en/ho/WF06a/21675-38187-179483-179483-179483-9337777.html).

[Maestro64]

Apple's display resolution is falling way behind the industry.

My 14" Dell laptop has 13% more pixels than a 17" PowerBook....

- Dell D600 - 1400x1050 - 1.470 MPixels
- PB 17" - 1440x900 - 1.296 MPixels

More pixels is not automatically better. There are two ways to achieve more pixels, increase the screen size or decrease the pixel size. If you increase the screen that is good, at some point the size gets too big to carry around. The other way is reduce pixel size. So of course you can cram more into the same space so either the things you are looking are getting smaller, which is fine for those with great and perfect eye site. or you just wasting pixels to scale back up.

At some point making a pixel size smaller does not made a noticeable different to the human eye. At some point you can not longer distinguish one pixel to the next. they tend to blur together. Apple has always known this and focus on where to put money, more pixels which has diminishing return or somewhere else.

[swissmann]

They should at least improve the resolution on the 14 inch model. Actually they should improve the resolution on pretty much every model.

[Maestro64]

Back to the subject of the article, there is no way Apple is placing any orders with any manufactures 6 months ahead of time let along a year ahead of time for a new product. Designs are not finalized until the 3 to 4 months prior to public announcement. Apple would never tell a CM more than 3 or 4 months ahead of time of a new product and what the specs where of that product. I know Apple still uses US based PCB houses and the such for all prototypes and these companies have no asian counter part.

I would say all we are seeing here is two asia companies flexing their muscles saying they have more business than the other and just through Apples name out since it would get them visibility. Oh BTW it will not get them in trouble with Apple if what they say does not relate to a real product. Notice, Apple only gets upset when real information gets out not speculation and made up information.

[jaw04005]

Finder: View -> Show View Options (cmd-J)

Yes, but you can only adjust your desktop/folder icons and the size/text of names in the finder. What about menus, save, close, and title bars? OS X currently has no way to adjust those aspects. Apple would need to incorporate a preference pane to control those features, similar to the advanced portion of display properties in Windows.

On the larger LCDs, it's not as big of a problem. However, on a 12" iBook/Powerbook screen it will be.

[sushi]

But am I the only one that likes low resolution displays?
No you are not.

...and I have aviator eyes. I just prefer larger pixel size.

I use both PC and Mac daily. My use is mostly text based. For me, I find that the higher resolution screens are a pain to use.

Sushi

[DickArmAndHarT]

"swissmann
They should at least improve the resolution on the 14 inch model. Actually they should improve the resolution on pretty much every model."

I just got my dad a 14 in ibook and i love the look of the screen, and with his eye sight now going a little down hill, it works great for him. His 14" works out pretty perfect for him while my 15" looks pretty snazzy and i cant picture it any other way.

[pizzach]

True on that for most people having a lower res will not do any good. But, when people are using pro-apps a lot of times all of the important windows don't fit....

I can NOT use the 17-inch LCD iMac for that reason.

[AidenShaw]

At some point making a pixel size smaller does not made a noticeable different to the human eye. At some point you can not longer distinguish one pixel to the next. they tend to blur together.


Look at 5 MPixel photograph full screen on two different 14" displays - one 1024x768 and the other 1400x1050. There's a phenomenal difference in clarity.
Look at a full screen PDF file (select "fit to page") with or without font smoothing - again a huge difference in the crispness of the letters.


Why are 96 dpi displays deemed acceptable, yet a $99 inkjet printer has 1440 dpi ???? (e.g. Epson R200)

Of course there's a point of diminishing returns, but current LCDs (except perhaps for this one (http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/intellistation/pro/t221/index.html)) are laughably far away from that point.

[buryyourbrideau]

i honestly cant stand widescreen books......my dad just got a 15in widescreen dell and even tho the res may be higher...its surely way harder to look at then my 14 ibook...maybe its just MY eyes but i can definetly notice it for me...after he got it he said the best words ever..."I should have gotten the same book as you" so now he says when G5 book comes, he will switch... :D

[shawnce]

[list]
Why are 96 dpi displays deemed acceptable, yet a $99 inkjet printer has 1440 dpi ???? (e.g. Epson R200)
For one most current display rendering systems do not scale up what they render as the screen DPI increases so was you see on the screen gets smaller and smaller. Printers however don't do that (at least not normally) instead they build the same size image for 150 DPI output as they do for 1440 DPI output with the later using more pixels to add visual clarity to what they render.

So that goes against simply packing more and more pixels into the same screen dimensions.

Two it isn't cheap yet to product things like 300 DPI displays.

Of course Mac OS X from the beginning, thanks to Quartz, was designed to not have this issue in it core windowing / rendering system. Windows is gaining a similar shift in windowing / rendering in the future (on of the features outlined for Longhorn) and yes Windows does have some aspects shoehorned in today but they aren't well supported and friendly across applications, etc.

Apple hasn't exposed / leveraged the inherent ability that Quartz has to do this for displays (a few technical reasons exist for this as well as getting developers to do the right thing so they don't prevent it from working).

I have seen rumors for Tiger in this space (I will not confirm nor deny them since I am under NDA).

[~loserman~]

Eventually it will happen. I am seeing more and more High Definition wide screen PC laptops that support HD video. The screens are very bright and clear. At least if we can't have G5's in a notebook, we can have better displays.

IMO the problem with Apple's laptop displays is not their quality. It is their insufficient backlight. They had to make a trade off between a very bright crisp looking display(quality backlight) and the thinness of their laptops.

Personally I would much rather trade back 1/8 inch in display thickness for a better backlight.

[hartsft]

i would be much more interested in an improved screen quality than size or aspect

i have seen a new type of screen on many laptops in stores, it seems to me that they are usually sony or toshiba, which has come flashy name. it looks so much better than all the other screens around that its like night and day. they are glassy and very bright, and look more clear and less grainy. if apple wants to keep a competitive edge in the market despite their high prices, i think they really should invest in some of these displays

[lindmar]

I really really really mis my iBook!

That was without a doubt my favorite mac yet!

If I can ever afford another I will buy a new one.. and this would be cool :)

[aswitcher]

I think our second Mac will be an ibook or a mac mini 2nd rev...15" would be nice.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Yes, but you can only adjust your desktop/folder icons and the size/text of names in the finder. What about menus, save, close, and title bars? OS X currently has no way to adjust those aspects. Apple would need to incorporate a preference pane to control those features, similar to the advanced portion of display properties in Windows.
Open a Finder window, make sure you view as Icons (cmd-1), then choose View -> Show View Options (cmd-J), and you can change icons and font size, for that window OR globally for all windows...

For everything else, here's an idea: Don't increase the resolution... :rolleyes:

[d.perel]

I agree that this will eventually happen, especially if this is the year of HDTV and Apple.


Whatever happened to the year of HD at apple? I am still waiting...or am I impatient for TIGER? :p

[Windowlicker]

The 20" iMac is fine, but the 17" isn't so great, and it's even worse when you try to lower the res (being LCDs and all).

Huh!? The pixels are about the same size on both models. They don't get smaller on the 17". Those two models have different (native) resolutions.

[JzzTrump22]

Sound awsome, but Apple is getting closer and closer to making the iBook like the PowerBook, not really a smart move for business.

[arnette]

Digitimes reports: PIGS FLY!

[Yvan256]

Sound awsome, but Apple is getting closer and closer to making the iBook like the PowerBook, not really a smart move for business.

This could be the time for my "iBook mini" idea.

After all, they DID take my "headless, keyboard-less and mouse-less" idea and made the Mac mini... :cool:

Let's continue with the smaller-sized, optical-less iBook mini. :D

G4/1.25 GHz, 512MB on-board (1 free memory slot, or even no upgrade at all), 40GB 2.5" 4200RPM HD, ~7" widescreen LCD (1024x600 ?), 802.11g built-in, optionnal BlueTooth. Perhaps even touch screen (but still has a small keyboard). Use IBM's TrackPoint and ditch the touchpad (I prefer TrackPoint, and it requires less room than a TouchPad, could be the only way to make an iBook mini).

Edit: oups, "1024x800" isn't widescreen at all, I meant "1024x600". Or 1280x800 like someone said below.

[iDave]

I like this rumor. I think two new iBooks, a 14" and a 12", both at 1280 x 768 would be awesome. You'd have a choice, like now, of small or big pixels. Both would be wide screens and the 12" could become very compact, similar to Dell's new X1.

To those who are worried; so what if iBooks are starting to catch up with PowerBooks? Two iBook sales is likely more profitable than one PowerBook sale. Sell what is popular and don't hold them back!

[miloblithe]

G4/1.25 GHz, 512MB on-board (1 free memory slot, or even no upgrade at all), 40GB 2.5" 4200RPM HD, ~7" widescreen LCD (1024x800), 802.11g built-in, optionnal BlueTooth. Perhaps even touch screen (but still has a small keyboard). Use IBM's TrackPoint and ditch the touchpad (I prefer TrackPoint, and it requires less room than a TouchPad, could be the only way to make an iBook mini).

Would it have a keyboard? 7" screen wouldn't make much sense with a keyboard that you could type on.

[lorenzo]

im pretty new to all of this high definition stuff, and macs for that matter.. but how unreasonable is it for me to hope that within the next month they will release a g5 ibook or powerbook? i was presuming this would happen at the end of the 2nd quarter, not thinking about the difference between callander quarter and financial quarter.

also, what makes high definition so great? what makes it, high definition? if monitors are normaly 72dip, can you get a 300 dpi monitor? is that not possible?

[neutrino23]

Apple's display resolution is falling way behind the industry.

My 14" Dell laptop has 13% more pixels than a 17" PowerBook....

- Dell D600 - 1400x1050 - 1.470 MPixels
- PB 17" - 1440x900 - 1.296 MPixels

Remember the movie Brazil? They had small video screens and used large fresnel magnifiers to read them.

[AidenShaw]

Remember the movie Brazil? They had small video screens and used large fresnel magnifiers to read them.

I was more impressed with the magnificent ducts....

[iDave]

im pretty new to all of this high definition stuff, and macs for that matter.. but how unreasonable is it for me to hope that within the next month they will release a g5 ibook or powerbook? i was presuming this would happen at the end of the 2nd quarter, not thinking about the difference between callander quarter and financial quarter.

also, what makes high definition so great? what makes it, high definition? if monitors are normaly 72dip, can you get a 300 dpi monitor? is that not possible?
1) Nobody who knows is telling. Don't count on it.

2) Higher resolution displays look sharper. Most displays these days are in the range of roughly 80-140 pixels per inch. Anything higher (currently) gets really expensive. The drawback to high resolution with current operating systems is that it's not easy to scale the elements on screen so that everything (text, icons, etc.) is the same size as it would be on lower-resolution screens. This is why you'll see lengthy arguments regarding the benefits of high resolution. Personally, I think 110-120 ppi would be about right with current technology. Any lengthy text I need to read can be enlarged to suit me without much hassle. Other elements, while they may be small, can be seen well enough.

[gekko513]

1) Nobody who knows is telling. Don't count on it.

2) Higher resolution displays look sharper. Most displays these days are in the range of roughly 80-140 pixels per inch. Anything higher (currently) gets really expensive. The drawback to high resolution with current operating systems is that it's not easy to scale the elements on screen so that everything (text, icons, etc.) is the same size as it would be on lower-resolution screens. This is why you'll see lengthy arguments regarding the benefits of high resolution. Personally, I think 110-120 ppi would be about right with current technology. Any lengthy text I need to read can be enlarged to suit me without much hassle. Other elements, while they may be small, can be seen well enough.

I agree for the most part, the PowerBooks are around 100dpi, right? Extrapolating from that I think I could be happy with 110dpi, but I think I would find 120dpi to be too small. When Tiger arrives my opinion may change as they say it's going to be resolution independent, or whatever it is they call it.

Edit: I see AidenShaw is here talking about his Dell with the amazing resolution again, so I guess I have to repeat my take on that, too, to balance the opinions. I have a 15" Dell with 1600x1200 resolution. That's quite amazing, but it's a pain to use with Windows XP because all the text and ui elements are tiny. It is possible to change the size of some of the GUI elements in the control panel and it is also possible to change the default font sizes, but it is a hassle and the result looks weird and isn't consistent across apps. When I used the Dell regularly I ended up turning the resolution down to 1280x1024 even if that made the screen a bit blurry. Now I just avoid using it whenever possible.

[visor]

i mean - the 12" ibook makes sese because its really small and all - cheap small rugged, not very performant but - one has a G5 for performance....

anyway - i cant realy imagine who would buy the 14" ibook - they are to big to have the advantage of the smallness - to underpowered to be a real computer - same resolution as the 12" actually - so no infogain on screen - more expensive....
Now a wide screen might make it more appealing to get. higher resolution would be a great gain, even if its not much different from the 12" anyway.

i've been experimenting with xgrid a bit recently - and it turns out that one can really get results fast on an ibook if a remote set of g5's do the calculations. :)

[visor]

also, what makes high definition so great? what makes it, high definition? if monitors are normaly 72dip, can you get a 300 dpi monitor? is that not possible?

I think the highest you can currently buy for small screens are about 150dpi. It's only available for cellpones and the like, but it's really great.
now 300dpi would be great for the print guys - could they actually see what the graphics look like on paper...

[AidenShaw]

I have a 15" Dell with 1600x1200 resolution. That's quite amazing, but it's a pain to use with Windows XP because all the text and ui elements are tiny.

Perhaps the way that we use our computers is different.

First of all, I like the small UI elements. Small buttons and toolbars leave more room for the work windows.

I typically don't read them (not like I read a book), so small text isn't often an issue. Most of the time you're hitting the same menu items (or even using keyboard shortcuts), so it's easy to recognize the right item without literally reading it.

For things that you do *read*, there isn't any issue with font size. Every browser has a font size button, as do text editors and word processors. The terminal window has a font size property, the PDF viewer scales everything - actually reading text isn't a problem.

If you blow the Adobe Reader to full screen, and "fit to page" for the document - your letters will be the same size regardless of whether the screen resolution is 1024x768 or 1600x1200. They'll just be much crisper and easier to read at 1600x1200.
______________

I do look forward to Avalon and resolution-independence, however.

I'd love to have a 14" laptop with a 2048x1536 screen and an OS that would smoothly handle whatever scaling I felt like....

[AidenShaw]

I think the highest you can currently buy for small screens are about 150dpi. It's only available for cellpones and the like, but it's really great.
now 300dpi would be great for the print guys - could they actually see what the graphics look like on paper...

The notable exception to that generally true statement is the IBM T221 22" LCD (http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/intellistation/pro/t221/index.html), a 22" with 9.2 million pixels (3840x1200).

Pretty specialized for high quality imaging, and more than $7000....

[gekko513]

Perhaps the way that we use our computers is different.
Probably.


For things that you do *read*, there isn't any issue with font size. Every browser has a font size button, as do text editors and word processors. The terminal window has a font size property, the PDF viewer scales everything - actually reading text isn't a problem.

If you blow the Adobe Reader to full screen, and "fit to page" for the document - your letters will be the same size regardless of whether the screen resolution is 1024x768 or 1600x1200. They'll just be much crisper and easier to read at 1600x1200.
Yes, that's where we have different experiences. I did not find it easy enough to change text size in all the applications that I use.

I agree about the full screen PDF viewing. Did I mention that I love full screen PDFs? No? I do. :)
I'd love to have a 14" laptop with a 2048x1536 screen and an OS that would smoothly handle whatever scaling I felt like....
Me too. :D

[Yvan256]

Would it have a keyboard? 7" screen wouldn't make much sense with a keyboard that you could type on.

Yes, I even said so in the part you quoted...

"Perhaps even touch screen (but still has a small keyboard)."

[Yvan256]

I'm still hoping for an iBook mini on next tuesday. Those who say the 12" iBook is "small enough" or "no optical but keep it 12" need to consider that a laptop's size is not determined by it's thickness. A 12" iBook that's 3 inches thick would still take the same area as a 1-inch thick 12" iBook.

There is lower-sized LCDs that still have 1024x768 resolution, such as this one from Sharp:
http://www.impactcomputers.com/lq089b1ls01.html

So, again, here's my wish list for an iBook mini (which is a wish in itself):
- G4/1.25GHz (unless IBM or Freescale has something similar with less power requirements, what happened to that "G3 with altivec" from IBM?)
- 512MB on-board (perhaps no memory slot to keep it small, and to separate it from the other iBooks)
- 1.8" or 2.5" 40GB 4200RPM (we want battery life, not speed)
- Radeon 9200 Mobility/32MB (again, battery life, not speed/power)
- 8.9", 1024x768 Sharp LCD display
- Keyboard
- IBM TrackPoint (trackpads takes too much room) and/or touchscreen (with a stylus that stores into the iBook mini like a PalmPilot)
- S-Video output built-in (I wonder why Apple isn't putting this on all its laptop, and especially without needing a stupid adapter)
- 1/8" stereo headphones output
- One USB 2.0 port (or two if there's room)
- One FireWire 400 port (if only to connect an iPod)
- One ethernet port
- 56kbps modem built-in
- Airport Extreme built-in (hey, it's a laptop, right?)
- Optionnal bluetooth
- NO optical drive
- NO VGA output (not even mini-DVI)

As for the size, imagine a 12" iBook cut in two, I guess.

"Apple will never make something like this" you say. Yep, just like they'd never make a headless, low-cost Mac that won't even ship with a keyboard a mouse. ;)

[tsunami2k3]

I think essentially the reason they won't go that small is that the 12" PB is as small as you can go while keeping a fullsize keyboard. Yes, a 8.9" laptop would be cool, but I'd get real sick of not having a fullsize keyboard quite quickly. Just my instinct...

[sushi]

anyway - i cant realy imagine who would buy the 14" ibook - they are to big to have the advantage of the smallness - to underpowered to be a real computer - same resolution as the 12" actually - so no infogain on screen - more expensive....
Many folks prefer the 14 inch iBook's larger pixel size.

When Apple came out with the 14 inch iBook, I was skeptical as to who would use it. I now know many teachers, lawyers and Engineer types who love it due to the large pixel size. Think of it this way, if it wasn't selling well, why would Apple keep upgrading and marketing it?

Sushi

[sushi]

I think essentially the reason they won't go that small is that the 12" PB is as small as you can go while keeping a fullsize keyboard. Yes, a 8.9" laptop would be cool, but I'd get real sick of not having a fullsize keyboard quite quickly. Just my instinct...
I read where the concept for the 12 inch Powerbook is to have everything in the smallest package possible.

Living in Japan, you get to see many cool gaggets that never get to the states. Many of the smaller laptops and palmtops, while very cool, are not as functional if you need to take along an external CD/DVD burner, external keyboard, mouse, etc. to make them functional.

The 12 inch PowerBook has a great keyboard, allows you to burn CDs and DVDs, does not require and external mouse, and has a small footprint.

Sushi

[scu]

I just don't see it happening anytime soon. A widescreen iBook will one arrive when everything else has been widescreen for a while.

[iDave]

I just don't see it happening anytime soon. A widescreen iBook will one arrive when everything else has been widescreen for a while.
Um, well, everything else Apple makes HAS been wide screen for awhile, with the exception of the iBooks and 12" PowerBook.

[DHagan4755]

I just don't see it happening anytime soon. A widescreen iBook will one arrive when everything else has been widescreen for a while.
Dell has a consumer 12.1" widescreen notebook out. HP has a consumer 14" widescreen notebook out. Widescreen iBooks are coming. Rest assured. Apple won't sit on its laurels especially when the thriving part of their business at the moment, second to the iPod, is the consumer notebook segment.

[scu]

Um, well, everything else Apple makes HAS been wide screen for awhile, with the exception of the iBooks and 12" PowerBook.

I don't think the eMac is wide screen. Only the new displays are wide screen and they just came out a few months ago.

[Yvan256]

I think essentially the reason they won't go that small is that the 12" PB is as small as you can go while keeping a fullsize keyboard. Yes, a 8.9" laptop would be cool, but I'd get real sick of not having a fullsize keyboard quite quickly. Just my instinct...

Keeping the "fullsize keyboard" gets in the way of getting the ultra-portable form factor. For a sub-notebook you need to make the keyboard as big as the sub-notebook size will allow, not the other way around (don't make the laptop as big as it needs to house a full-size keyboard).

Just as you don't NEED an optical drive in a sub-notebook, you don't NEED a full-size keyboard.

Also, keep in mind it'd be an "iBook mini", not a "smaller PowerBook".

[AidenShaw]

Also, keep in mind it'd be an "iBook mini", not a "smaller PowerBook".

And keep in mind that it might not be the right 'book for any particular reader, but the Wintel camp is selling millions of these small laptops.

I manage purchasing for my division, and I wouldn't want a 17" laptop (too big for the airplane, carrying bag, and most any place). I wouldn't want a 12" (screen too small, no media bay for additional batteries, disk drives, ...).

However, I order the 17" laptops for the people who want big screens over portability. I order the 10" and 12" laptops for people who want portability over functionality. I even order PowerBooks for the two people in the group who think differently.

Too many of the arguments in this thread are basically "it's not what *I* want, so Apple shouldn't sell it".

If Apple wants to be in the mainstream - it should offer what its customers want - not what the Lord God Jobs thinks that the customers should want.

Dell offers the 14" D600 with either 1024x768 or 1400x1050 displays. It offers the 15.4" D800 widescreen with 1280x800, 1680x1050, or 1920x1200 displays. Why doesn't Apple offer a BTO option for screen resolution?

[AidenShaw]

http://img.dell.com/images/global/products/latit/x1_45degree_150x150.jpg

For comparison, Dell recently added a newLatitude X1 (http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/latit_x1?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz) widescreen 12" laptop.


12.1" 1280x768 display
2.5 lbs
less than 1" thick
standard Gigabit Ethernet, 802.11g, Bluetooth
standard SD and CF readers
$1654


Not for everyone, but people looking for a super-light system with full-sized keyboard like it.

[gekko513]

I think one of the reasons why Apple doesn't allow BTO of screens is that Dell sells, I don't know exactly, 10 times as many laptops as Apple does. That allows them to use several different panels and still be able to negotiate good prices for buying in large numbers. It also makes the extra logistics and service costs introduced by the BTO option much smaller per unit.

If that 12" Dell doesn't have an optical drive (I can't find any mention of it on the product page), it doesn't look like a good deal at that price to me. Sure there is probably a market for these anyway, but divide it by 10, and it wouldn't make sense from a business point of view.

[iDave]

If that 12" Dell doesn't have an optical drive (I can't find any mention of it on the product page), it doesn't look like a good deal at that price to me. Sure there is probably a market for these anyway, but divide it by 10, and it wouldn't make sense from a business point of view.
The Dell X1 comes with an external DVD-RW drive. I'd bet Apple's engineers could shoehorn the optical drive into the computer and still beat Dell's price. They'd have a real winner there, but it would probably have to be a PowerBook, not an iBook because it likely could not sell for $999.

[AidenShaw]

The Dell X1 comes with an external DVD-RW drive. I'd bet Apple's engineers could shoehorn the optical drive into the computer and still beat Dell's price. They'd have a real winner there, but it would probably have to be a PowerBook, not an iBook because it likely could not sell for $999.

The Dell is about 20% thinner and half the weight compared to the 12" PowerBook.

As I said earlier, I order the laptops for my group.

Many of the people who travel (both by air, and just go to a lot of meetings on-site and off-site) are most concerned with size and weight of the laptop.

They don't need or want an optical drive that adds size and weight. We get the docking stations with the DVD drives, and usually a 20" LCD and keyboard/mouse, for office and home use. (Or any USB 2.0 DVD or CD works fine.)

And it is a "good deal" - if you consider that "small and light" has value. We'll pay more for a small/light system than for a bigger system with more features - because "small and light" itself is a valuable feature.
_________________________

Apple doesn't need to have an optical drive in a super-lightweight system.... Think about a 2 pound super-portable.

But Apple should look at docking stations - that seems to be one major missing feature of the current lines. It saves wear-and-tear on the ports, and makes it less necessary to include all the bells and whistles on the laptop itself. (E.g. the D600 docking station has both DVI and VGA video outputs - the laptop itself has just a standard VGA port. You can connect either kind of monitor at your desk, and have the VGA for connection to conference room projectors without have to carry a dongle.)

It would be amusing if this rumour (order for 12" widescreen ibook) turns out to be true, and Apple is adding a super-lightweight 'book similar to the Dell X1 to the PowerBook lineup.

[GilGrissom]

Toshibas Portege range is also ultra portable.

Some have built in optical drives and are therefore bigger/thicker slightly (but still very impressive ultraportable laptops) and others do not (and are unbelievably thin!!!)

Whatever Apple do I do not want them to swop it for the current 12" model. I think that should be the model where you try and strike a compromise between portability and power, and have a seperate ultraportable laptop with the reduced specs...that would make me happy. (and awkward people who want the best of both worlds!!)

But it does strike me as more likely an update to the powerbook range as opposed to the ibook range, although could be proven wrong. Powerbook range seems to fit better.

[killuminati]

I dont understand the difference in a 14" display and 14" widescreen display. The size is measured diagonally so wouldnt it not be 14" anymore if they make it wider? Or is it just not at tall?

[AidenShaw]

Or is it just not at tall?

That's right, it would be shorter and wider.

Note also that if the dpi (pitch) is the same, it will have fewer pixels than the normal screen 4x3 version.

[tsunami2k3]

One thing that struck me as very odd about the Latitude X1 was that nowhere could I find out the expected battery life range. Typically on ultraportables such as this that is one of the main marketing points (VAIOs bragging about up to 10 hrs battery life on some of their ultraportables), but nowhere did Dell mention this. That scares me.

[AidenShaw]

One thing that struck me as very odd about the Latitude X1 was that nowhere could I find out the expected battery life range. Typically on ultraportables such as this that is one of the main marketing points (VAIOs bragging about up to 10 hrs battery life on some of their ultraportables), but nowhere did Dell mention this. That scares me.

And of course, YMMV based on your activity.... (but you won't have to worry about DVD/CD usage reducing the battery life ;) )

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2283
http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/notebooks/0,39023985,39193432,00.htm

[GilGrissom]

One thing that struck me as very odd about the Latitude X1 was that nowhere could I find out the expected battery life range. Typically on ultraportables such as this that is one of the main marketing points (VAIOs bragging about up to 10 hrs battery life on some of their ultraportables), but nowhere did Dell mention this. That scares me.

I dont know what it is about Dell, but something about then makes me feel weiry!!!
IBM are planning to put the new fuel cells into their thinkpads, the direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs). Supposed to easily give battery life of over 8 hours per cartridge. Wonder if Apple will come up with something similar or some equally impressive battery technology for future PowerBooks?!...(hint hint for a solution for G5 power!! hehe!!...shame about the heat still!)

[Yvan256]

I dont know what it is about Dell, but something about then makes me feel weiry!!!
IBM are planning to put the new fuel cells into their thinkpads, the direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs). Supposed to easily give battery life of over 8 hours per cartridge. Wonder if Apple will come up with something similar or some equally impressive battery technology for future PowerBooks?!...(hint hint for a solution for G5 power!! hehe!!...shame about the heat still!)

I thought IBM wasn't going to make laptops anymore?

Where's my iBook mini! :mad:

And don't make any "sub-notebook" run a stripped-down version of OS X... We need a full-fledged ultra-portable solution, not some limited crap like PocketPC or PalmOS...

[GilGrissom]

I thought IBM wasn't going to make laptops anymore?

Where's my iBook mini! :mad:

And don't make any "sub-notebook" run a stripped-down version of OS X... We need a full-fledged ultra-portable solution, not some limited crap like PocketPC or PalmOS...

As far as I know they physically arnt, more pushing it onto other companies under licence, but they're still IBM machines. The fine detail is, as they say, in the small print!! So I dont know the full story there!
They still research into their machines though I think, so I think this would be classed as R&D or product development.
Much prefer IBM over Dell anyday!! Although their machines are butt ugly, you cant fault them!! (Some Dell machines are ugly aswell, several friends have got various ones [granted not business line or ultraportable ones] but there ugly!!
I think they could do with a splash of Apple!!

Ye I agree with you on the last point...fully fledged. I doubt it it will have a cut down version of OS X though, I think it would have a full version of the OS, so no worries there.

[whenpaulsparks]

~7" widescreen LCD (1024x800)

1024x800 isn't widescreen. it's portrait screen ish if anything. normal 4:3 would be 1024x768. maybe someone already posted this before. but even then, a 1024x768 can't be made into a widescreen without squashing pixels. it would have to be 1024x576, or 1280x768. but nice thinking anyways.

i would love an "ibook mini" or whatever, just a simple laptop that would be used as an accessory to a desktop, that could sync between them.

[iPC]

hp also has a decent 14" widescreen model. very sexy sizing for me. still a hp though. ;)

[Yvan256]

Would it have a keyboard? 7" screen wouldn't make much sense with a keyboard that you could type on.

The answer is the Butterfly keyboard (http://alek.xspaces.org/2004/12/13/rare-butterfly). IBM did this years ago. I also think an iBook mini would need a trackpoint (also from IBM) since there'd be no room for a trackpad.

[blogman41]

I will buy it

[GilGrissom]

I think an iBook mini would be very good!! tackle a unique market inbetween that of the mac mini and the normal ibook. I can imagine lots of different types of people who would want one or who would find it a match to what they want. I hope something comes out of this even if it isnt an ibook mini. Please leave the Powerbook line alone tho!!...just increase spec and reliability!! (maybe make 12" a touch thinner!!! hehe)...Not much to ask for eh?!! Im not sure how the trackpoint will go with Apple. It doesnt seem quite apple to me!!...especially with them trying out their own trackpads on the latest powerbook line, but it ma y go well!! I think its because I associate the trackpoint with older laptops, (although true they still do appear on ultra thin/mini laptops!!)

A small widescreen ibook mini??...sounds almost believable!! Sounds wantable too!!! :D