Apple Questioned About Netbook (Again) and App Store Pricing and Rank Lists

[deconstruct60]

If the engineers don't design the laptops, then who does? Please note that I did say that the designs have to be approved by Apple's management, but the engineers determine what the system looks like and what goes in them. Assuming their designs would be approved, they are ones who would know.

Now if management declines them, thats another issue entirely.

You have it backwards. No engineering team is going to get a substantial budget to build a machine and then later have management reject it.


What more likely happens is that management/marketing/concept designers come to them with a prototype device and the engineers are asked if they can pack the correct innards/functionality into the device. Ideally that group would be coming to the engineers with the "problems"/"needs" that users have that need a solution. However, if is also likely that is were the fanatic "thin is super important" comes from to though.



The process doesn't "start" with the engineers. That is where you are off the track. They are essential to a production product but they are not necessarily driving the selection of which market segments for which products that ship.

There may be R&D projects where they are given a budget to create a concept device (that is never going to ship) but that also is substantially different. Those are research projects that need some development to construct the prototype ( R&d) . Not development projects that need some research (r&D) . The vast majority of Apple is spent on r&D projects. There is extremely little revolutionary research being done at Apple now.



At one time I think there was a process at Apple where various teams went off and built competing overlapping concepts and management tried to pick the "best" set of winners from that to ship. That's when the R&D budget was much higher and Apple didn't quite do as well as they are doing now.

 

[deconstruct60]

netbooks aren't meant to be quality devices.

That is dubious premise that divides much of the disussion about netbooks.
What consumer actually wants a substandard device. Seriously. I don't run into many folks who want their device to break down, crap out on them, or exhibit defects. You do?

There are some that more large sacrifices to hit the lowest possible price point. ( e.g. OLPC devices). However, that is not an inherent property of the market segment. It is more often the inherent property when folks are searching for something to dismiss the category.

they are meant to be cheapo laptops you carry around to surf the internet at Starbucks or the beach if you have a data plan for one. i bet most people don't care if their netbook doesn't have a nice LED backlit screen or a 9400M graphics chip compared to integrated intel. no one will notice anyway.

I bet the folks who watch video care. Or engage in an occassional game.

So iPod mini and shuffles are cheapo devices or inexpensive devices?

Quality devices can be built at lower (relatively inexpensive ) prices. Just have to leave some features off. As the CPU/GPUs/Screens/RAM get more inexpensive you can build a reasonable computer at lower prices. It has been happening for the 3-4 decades. That hasn't changed now.

What you have to be willing to let go of for netbooks is that can get smaller and still be on the bleeding edge performance wise. (It is a fake argument that a netbook is some kind of desktop replacement machine . ) The more relevant question is whether computers 4-5 years ago were good enough.

Can throw in a few specialized hardware assist ( for video playback) and can do a wide range of stuff.

In the real world the vast majority of the people on the planet cannot afford $1000 computers.

Small screen devices are much better "consumer" devices than producer devices. Compose anything of substance and length on a iPhone/Touch. It is painful. If want a primarily consume while mobile device then iPhone/Touch make sense. If want to consume and produce knowledge/communication while mobile then something like a netbook is closer to your needs.
[ yes you can record on a iPhone/Touch, but the production is somewhere else. ]

I can certainly see why a media/content seller wants everyone to have a consumer content device as oppose to a compose one.

 

[Eidorian]

it's not an issue of engineering

for years notebook makers have made low end notebooks with desktop components because they are cheaper. years ago there were P4 laptops even though the battery time was crap. Apple is the complete opposite and uses laptop components on all their computers except the Mac Pro line

netbooks aren't meant to be quality devices. they are meant to be cheapo laptops you carry around to surf the internet at Starbucks or the beach if you have a data plan for one. i bet most people don't care if their netbook doesn't have a nice LED backlit screen or a 9400M graphics chip compared to integrated intel. no one will notice anyway.

my wife an I have iphones for this purpose. for us we'll take the small screen rather than pay an extra bill for a netbook to get data everywhere. if Apple were to come out with a tablet i probably wouldn't buy it since i already have an iphone

netbooks are supposed to be so cheap that you don't care if it breaks, you just buy another one.

You can get a netbook with Atom + ION + a LED display though.

The components aren't just available to Apple.

 

[deconstruct60]

Exactly what would an iTablet be for anyway? If it is just for apps, media, games, web, etc, then the iPhone/iPod Touch already does this fine.

Another one of common premises that are questionable. Why do folks already own a Touch/Phone? Or have to buy a Touch/Phone in addition to this tablet device. Why isn't it they buy the Tablet instead of Touch/Phone?
A phone that is just a phone can be taken more places that these gagets that have cameras , wifi, recorders on them. Although some places can even take any phone.

[ or if had a camera more likely on the front so that it could be used in conjunction with communicating rather than taking snapshots. ]


If someone has a Mac Pro or iMac they don't have a mobile computer. As a second "I'm gonig to move around a bit now" device this work. Similar reason why the MacBook Air works as a second computer only at a lower entry point with a much larger available market.


It has been almost two decades since the Newton. Might be time to try to come back and do it better. LOL.

 

[deconstruct60]

You can get a netbook with Atom + ION + a LED display though.

The components aren't just available to Apple.

The skewed point is that Atom + ION + LED isn't in the $399 range right now. You are focused on netbook functionality/qualities and they are primarily focused on the price point [ as if that is the primary quality of the category. ]

The overall volume of netbooks are driven buy their price point. Should not be earth shattering news that lower priced computers sell in higher volume; rather straightforward economics. That isn't necessarily the defining quality though.

[ Apple too is shooting for the volume with a lowered price device; the Touch. Instead of a 11" screen comprised back to 3" among other compromises to get the cost low. ]

 

[Eidorian]

The skewed point is that Atom + ION + LED isn't in the $399 range right now. You are focused on netbook functionality/qualities and they are primarily focused on the price point [ as if that is the primary quality of the category. ]

The overall volume of netbooks are driven buy their price point. Should not be earth shattering news that lower priced computers sell in higher volume; rather straightforward economics. That isn't necessarily the defining quality though.

[ Apple too is shooting for the volume with a lowered price device; the Touch. Instead of a 11" screen comprised back to 3" among other compromises to get the cost low. ]

Getting the 9400M G over Atom + Intel's 945G derivative bundle is going to be a small premium.

Aren't we talking about a "premium" product in the first place?

 

[Topher15]

Another one of common premises that are questionable. Why do folks already own a Touch/Phone? Or have to buy a Touch/Phone in addition to this tablet device. Why isn't it they buy the Tablet instead of Touch/Phone?

Because if the iTablet is just an iPod touch/iPhone with a larger display, and a large portion of Apple consumers (what is it now... 30+ million?) have an iPod touch or an iPhone, then it seems there is no need to get what is essentially the same device.

As for people who do not own a iPhone or iPod touch, it seems to me that a lot/most would go for the true 'pocket' portability of a phone or iPod, rather than a device that is essentially the same, but is harder to use on the go and requires a bag to be carried around.

If someone has a Mac Pro or iMac they don't have a mobile computer. As a second "I'm gonig to move around a bit now" device this work. Similar reason why the MacBook Air works as a second computer only at a lower entry point with a much larger available market.

Right, but the MBA is an actual computer.

Take your example of the Mac Pro/iMac owner who needs a secondary portable computer... if an iPod touch or iPhone isn't suitable for them, then why would a 10" version of the same device be suitable?

If the iTablet device has OS X then it is obviously trying to be a proper computer, so why not make it a netbook?

It seems to me that an iTablet device with the iPhone OS must offer something more than how it is currently used.

 

[ddTaylor]

I guess the question is why can't Apple do it "better"?

Apple might not do it better by performance but it may by implementation. You cannot improve on the general performance of a netbook based on size vs. performance. If they develop a in-house chipset with a super-fast graphics processor then that will be great and MAY outperform current off the shelf set-ups (although I doubt it) it would generally cost Apple FAR MORE in R&D costs unless they have other products in-line that would use the same chip set. Who knows - but my guess is they will implement the netbook/tablet set-ups and make them better without a huge performance or graphics increase. It is just not possible - especially given that Intel would be able to custom design a chipset JUST FOR APPLE using modified components that would likely cost far less for Apple in the short-term, unless they have plans for other uses of those chips and 'sets.

D

 

[iMacmatician]

Because if the iTablet is just an iPod touch/iPhone with a larger display, and a large portion of Apple consumers (what is it now... 30+ million?) have an iPod touch or an iPhone, then it seems there is no need to get what is essentially the same device.
…
It seems to me that an iTablet device with the iPhone OS must offer something more than how it is currently used.

I'm expecting such a device to have additional functionality (eBooks? iLife/iWork? multitasking?). I can see the larger display and higher specs leading to mini-tablet-only apps.

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Sorry to jump on these so late.

Remember the Porsche 914? How about the Cadillac Cimmarron?

Epic blunders.

Your brand suffers when you target the bottom feeders.

Apple has no business creating products for the bargain bin. No business at all.

The Cadillac was a failure because it was the 1980's. All American cars were crap then.

Porsche make a "bargain bin" car now; its called the Boxster.

Best Buy has a stack of NOTEBOOK computers on their Web site for less than $400. Now I personally wouldn't waste my money on one (Celeron!), but why spend $300 on a stripped-down 9-10" netbook when you can get a less-stripped-down notebook with a 15" screen and DVD drive? Aside from the netbook being lighter ("6.6 pounds and 1.7 inches thin -- for portable power!" the site says about the notebooks), I just don't get it.

I would also like to point out how people threw around the term "subnotebook" before the MacBook Air was released. Now that it has been retired for the much less interesting "oleophobic", I'd love to know what the F was the MacBook Air supposed to be? Did gutting a computer so much just to make it thin die and get replaced by gutting a computer to make it small? I'm on a MacBook Pro, so I just don't get these weird trends. I can only guess that 2010 will be Year of the Dongle or something.

I just want to point out that the first Core Duos put in Apple products were actually Celerons.

I have an iPhone and they only time I connect it to my computer is to do a backup or to sync some new music if I have any.

You do realize you can recharge the battery using the wall plug connector ?

I've never bothered to check. And you've obviously not bothered to check either, because at least two other people have attacked me for this.

 

[Eidorian]

Best Buy has a stack of NOTEBOOK computers on their Web site for less than $400. Now I personally wouldn't waste my money on one (Celeron!), but why spend $300 on a stripped-down 9-10" netbook when you can get a less-stripped-down notebook with a 15" screen and DVD drive? Aside from the netbook being lighter ("6.6 pounds and 1.7 inches thin -- for portable power!" the site says about the notebooks), I just don't get it.

What's wrong with the Celeron again? It isn't 1998.

I just want to point out that the first Core Duos put in Apple products were actually Celerons.

Please do tell.

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

What's wrong with the Celeron again? It isn't 1998.

Please do tell.

I was half wrong on the Celeron thing.

The Yonah Core Solo was pretty much a Celeron. The only major differences are the Yonah Celeron has half the L2 cache and doesn't support SpeedStep.

The C2D was largely a Pentium Dual Core as well.

There were two variants and one derivative of the Yonah, which did not bear the "Intel Core" brand name. A dual-core (server) derivative, code-named Sossaman, was released on 14 March 2006 as the Xeon (branded) LV (low-voltage). The Sossaman differed from the Yonah only in its support for dual-socket configurations (two CPUs - i.e. four cores - on board, like AMD Quad FX), and implementation of 36-bit memory addressing (PAE mode). A single-core variant, code-named Yonah-1024, was released as the Celeron (branded) M 400 series CPUs. It was largely identical to the Core Solo branded Yonah, except that it only had half the L2 cache and did not support SpeedStep. Another dual-core variant of the Core Duo branded Yonah was released as the Intel Pentium Dual-Core branded T2060, T2080, and T2130 mobile CPUs.

 

[Eidorian]

The C2D was largely a Pentium Dual Core as well.

I'd like you to elaborate once again.

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I'd like you to elaborate once again.

I read somewhere once that Intel didn't quite have the CD ready when Apple put Intel chips in their stuff. The only thing available was a Pentium something. As you know, Apple has bashed Pentiums in the past, and a Pentium in an Apple would cause a hoo-ha. So Apple called it a CD while it was a Pentium something.

Can't remember where I read that, but if I find it, I'll be sure to let you know.

Wikipedia did say this, however:

Another dual-core variant of the Core Duo branded Yonah was released as the Intel Pentium Dual-Core branded T2060, T2080, and T2130 mobile CPUs.

 

[Eidorian]

I think you're mistaking the Pentium Dual Core for something else. Apple has only used full fledged, even the lower cache ones, Core Duo and Core 2 Duo processors and not their Pentium Dual Core or Celeron derivations.

The AppleTV has a Pentium-M but does that really matter?

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I think you're mistaking the Pentium Dual Core for something else. Apple has only used full fledged, even the lower cache ones, Core Duo and Core 2 Duo processors and not their Pentium Dual Core or Celeron derivations.

The AppleTV has a Pentium-M but does that really matter?

Could be that I'm doing that, but I swear that I read something about Apple using a Pentium in the Mac mini.

Better not let that one get into the wild.

 

[AidenShaw]

I read somewhere once that Intel didn't quite have the CD ready when Apple put Intel chips in their stuff.

Could be that I'm doing that, but I swear that I read something about Apple using a Pentium in the Mac mini.

Instead of saying "I read something somewhere", please get the references down before posting. It saves us all time.

I think that your references and recollection are missing the perspective of the time line.

The way I see the history is:

• The initial MacIntels used "Yonah", or "Core Duo/Solo" chips. This was a 32-bit only chip.
• The next wave of MacIntels used "Merom", or "Core 2 Duo" chips. These were 64-bit chips, but initially only worked with 32-bit memory chipsets, therefore had a limit of 4 GiB of RAM (and only about 3.25 GiB could be used).
• In the context, I'd take "not ready" to mean that Apple went with the Yonah chips because she didn't want to want for Merom to start the transition.
• After the Core 2 brand was established, Intel essentially renamed the lower tier chips (the chips with smaller caches and cheaper prices) from "Celeron" to "Pentium".

So, when Apple was making the transition, "Core" chips were the newer chips based on the more power efficient architecture, and "Pentium" chips were Netburst-based chips. Apple never used these "Pentium" Netburst-based chips.

Today, however, "Pentium" is the product name for the budget bin Core2 chips. Apple still does not use them, but they are obviously from the same family as the chips that Apple does use.

 

[LagunaSol]

Porsche make a "bargain bin" car now; its called the Boxster.

Methinks someone hasn't priced a Porsche Boxster recently. Either that or you have a very warped definition of "bargain bin."

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Methinks someone hasn't priced a Porsche Boxster recently. Either that or you have a very warped definition of "bargain bin."

Compared to the 911, which starts at $76,300, the Boxster is a "bargain" at $46,600.

 

[LagunaSol]

Compared to the 911, which starts at $76,300, the Boxster is a "bargain" at $46,600.

I think you're missing the point of the "pricing for the masses" approach of the Netbooks that are being discussed here...

Oh, and the 914 might have been a bad example on my part as I actually liked that car.

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I think you're missing the point of the "pricing for the masses" approach of the Netbooks that are being discussed here...

Compared to the 911, the Boxster is for the masses.

Compare the Boxster to a used Saab, for example, the Boxster is not for the masses.

Compared to a used PM G4, a netbook is expensive.

 

[deconstruct60]

Because if the iTablet is just an iPod touch/iPhone with a larger display, and a large portion of Apple consumers (what is it now... 30+ million?) have an iPod touch or an iPhone,

So Touch/iPhone growth is about to go flat and then down, right? Just about everyone who would want Touch/iPhone like abilities already has one and isn't going to buy another.

Does that match what has been happening last several months?

As for people who do not own a iPhone or iPod touch, it seems to me that a lot/most would go for the true 'pocket' portability of a phone or iPod, rather than a device that is essentially the same, but is harder to use on the go and requires a bag to be carried around.

If you have bag anyway (for other work tools ) what is the difference?

Essentially the same? How much zoom/scroll do you do when you visit a mainstream website on a Touch/Phone versus on a more mainstream computer. On a Touch/Phone there is lots of huffing/puffing to navigate a site. Dramatically less so on a computer.

View some power point presentations?

Write some documents with the upcoming version of Microsoft Word?

View 720p content that isn't scaled?



Get a tablet to play iFart. Yeah there is not material difference.

Take your example of the Mac Pro/iMac owner who needs a secondary portable computer... if an iPod touch or iPhone isn't suitable for them, then why would a 10" version of the same device be suitable?

Faced with the options of using a 3" device and a 7-10" device which one of those would be more useful if had to do "real computer" things? They're are going to be compromises because trading even lighter weight and screen size for portability.

What's the difference between a Mac Book Pro 13" and a Mac Book Air ?

If the iTablet device has OS X then it is obviously trying to be a proper computer, so why not make it a netbook?

Why is not a netbook? Tablet with an overlay keyboard. What is the netbook quality it doesn't have. Atom + keyboard + desktop OS ....

It seems to me that an iTablet device with the iPhone OS must offer something more than how it is currently used.

Besides more screen real estate and most likely a substantially faster processor and some probability of faster graphics.

What's the difference between a iMac and Mac Pro with 30" display.
Oh more screen real estate , substantially faster processor, and probability of faster graphics.

 

[deconstruct60]

Today, however, "Pentium" is the product name for the budget bin Core2 chips. Apple still does not use them, but they are obviously from the same family as the chips that Apple does use.

errrr, The 1 GHz Pentium chips in Apple-TV I think go back to Pentium-M era. Those were a line of chips Intel had targeted to the embedded market. When pentium 4 (netburst ) was out there was also a mobile line. Pentium-M. Eventually that got tweaked and became the precursor to Core architecture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_NetBurst




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Pentium_M



Intel didn't toss the hot running netbust stuff at the embedded market (with typical lower TDP constraints.) It wouldn't win very many design wins. Primarily it simply died off in desktop designs and just stopped.


Apple TV is an embedded processor system running with a relatively slow clock ( about 1.0 GHz ) is completely counter to netburst. ( Netburst was all trying to push closer to 2-3 GHz than to 1.0. Intel was already at 1.0 when Netburst came online.).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_TV


Pentium has some modifier dangling off of it. Pentium 4 , Pentium D , Pentium III .... Pentium just by itself a high end versus low end designator. (e.g., i7 or i3 with the current terminology. )

 

[queshy]

Uh, exactly my thoughts. My cousin's have those tiny things and to me, I get just as much done on my iPhone as they do on that little computer.

OSX would definitely help out the netbook in a number of ways. Oh, and the one button mouse that so many are not fond of would work wonders on it. There 2 buttons are literally merge into one.

I too say the heck with it. Just build what we have. Maybe make the air smaller.

Netbooks initially look really cool and superficially seem like a great idea -- but then you try typing on it and the keyboard is just awful, and the screen is tiny, etc. Clearly not everyone can afford a MacBook Air, but I just think if apple is going to compete in this area, they need to differentiate themselves from all the crap out there. Netbooks have tons of "features" but they're just not that usable. If I had a strict budget, I would save up a bit more so I can afford a full sized notebook (>= 12").

 

[iMacmatician]

What's the difference between a iMac and Mac Pro with 30" display.
Oh more screen real estate , substantially faster processor, and probability of faster graphics.

I forgot about this analogy for a long time, thanks for bringing it up again.