Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Tablet to Run iPhone OS and Launch in May or June 2010?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In my opinion there's an enormous need for two types of devices:
1. Digital paper. The purpose is note taking and sketching. A replacement for paper and plain black pencil. It ought to be based on e-paper display technology. The device must be incredibly simple, with at least 24 hours of battery life.
It doesn't need a full desktop OS. The main points are sketching, note taking, searchability, book reading and annotations. It should have wireless connection to a PC and Mac. Other simple features, such as calculator, calendar, web browser, are welcome, but wireless must not hurt the battery life during long-term inking and reading operation. Obviously a digital eraser is a must.
I believe in the not so distant future we're going to have color e-ink, which will open up new opportunities. But even a black-and-white edition would be enormously useful.
This device doesn't need much more capabilities than an iPhone. Perhaps not even that much, except inking.
2. A full tablet PC with a normal LCD display.
The e-ink product that I mentioned above in #1 solves the problem of note taking and simple annotations. A full tablet PC is necessary for more serious application, such as art. Think in terms of Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, 3D Studio, Maya; engineering, like Auto CAD; movie editing. Those applications need a full-blown desktop operating system. And we trade off the near-infinite battery life, the e-ink screen for that.
As much as I like Macs a lot, I have to admit that Microsoft is so well ahead of Apple in this regard. OS X is a very fine operating system for keyboard and mouse use, but Windows has the edge with tablets and inking. Where is an application like OneNote for OS X? I own a tablet PC, and have been using it for 2 years non-stop, every day, even though I'm not an artist, but a software engineer. If Apple had anything competitive with OS X, I'd migrate right away.
I believe that both types of devices have a role. An incredibly thin e-ink with virtually unlimited battery life, as well as an OS X tablet Mac. And they both must have a good inking and note taking/organizing application.
1. Digital paper. The purpose is note taking and sketching. A replacement for paper and plain black pencil. It ought to be based on e-paper display technology. The device must be incredibly simple, with at least 24 hours of battery life.
It doesn't need a full desktop OS. The main points are sketching, note taking, searchability, book reading and annotations. It should have wireless connection to a PC and Mac. Other simple features, such as calculator, calendar, web browser, are welcome, but wireless must not hurt the battery life during long-term inking and reading operation. Obviously a digital eraser is a must.
I believe in the not so distant future we're going to have color e-ink, which will open up new opportunities. But even a black-and-white edition would be enormously useful.
This device doesn't need much more capabilities than an iPhone. Perhaps not even that much, except inking.
2. A full tablet PC with a normal LCD display.
The e-ink product that I mentioned above in #1 solves the problem of note taking and simple annotations. A full tablet PC is necessary for more serious application, such as art. Think in terms of Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, 3D Studio, Maya; engineering, like Auto CAD; movie editing. Those applications need a full-blown desktop operating system. And we trade off the near-infinite battery life, the e-ink screen for that.
As much as I like Macs a lot, I have to admit that Microsoft is so well ahead of Apple in this regard. OS X is a very fine operating system for keyboard and mouse use, but Windows has the edge with tablets and inking. Where is an application like OneNote for OS X? I own a tablet PC, and have been using it for 2 years non-stop, every day, even though I'm not an artist, but a software engineer. If Apple had anything competitive with OS X, I'd migrate right away.
I believe that both types of devices have a role. An incredibly thin e-ink with virtually unlimited battery life, as well as an OS X tablet Mac. And they both must have a good inking and note taking/organizing application.
Please real OSX and not the iPhone one
If the tablet is not provided with the real OS (Snow leopard ) I won't buy it.
I want to buy a netbook and I dislike those with Windows.
Either Apple makes a simple Mac netbook (of the same size as the PC ones) or it makes a tablet of the size of a netbook. In that case I would treat the tablet as a netbook on which certain tasks could be undertaken: photos, etc, even if in a simplified way. Otherwise why would I add something in between the iphone and the Macbook?
The argument that it would need a mouse is irrelevant. It could be used, it should be used as an improved wacom tablet or even better as a small Modbook.
If this tablet is simply a big iphone, what's the interest of it?
If the tablet is not provided with the real OS (Snow leopard ) I won't buy it.
I want to buy a netbook and I dislike those with Windows.
Either Apple makes a simple Mac netbook (of the same size as the PC ones) or it makes a tablet of the size of a netbook. In that case I would treat the tablet as a netbook on which certain tasks could be undertaken: photos, etc, even if in a simplified way. Otherwise why would I add something in between the iphone and the Macbook?
The argument that it would need a mouse is irrelevant. It could be used, it should be used as an improved wacom tablet or even better as a small Modbook.
If this tablet is simply a big iphone, what's the interest of it?
this sounds quite dubious. people are saying that an iphone nano is not relevant due to different screen size and that iphone applications only work on one screen size. how would an iphone app work and scale on a 10" tablet? i second people saying that it should have osx. but - it might have some merging functionality/interactions between the platforms?
i say - give me iphone nano
that would sell like hotter cakes than iphone 3.5"!
i say - give me iphone nano
that would sell like hotter cakes than iphone 3.5"!
Well, then it seems obvious that you are just looking for another portable Mac. Last time I looked Apple make quite a few of those already. If there is to be any point to this rumoured tablet at all it has to fill a void / do something new. If it is totally touch-based it needs a completely different GUI to the Mac OSX if it is to be of any use. iPhone OS is the first logical step. It is essentially OSX, but with more or less ALL legacy code removed and a huge touch-framework added. How would this NOT be a perfect fit for a tablet?
As it has been said time and time again in this thread, it will probably NOT share the interface with the iPhone. It will however share most of the core OS, which makes perfect sense. The technology to leverage touch devices is there and you have an insane amount of developers already familiar with the API's etc...
Apple offered many developer tools to make sure the apps are resolution independent. Automatic centering for buttons and vector based games, iPhone apps can easily run in a fixed resolution window or choose to play the games in full screen upscales resolution. 10" seems a bit big to me but doable.
As for the iPhone OS, i prefer a low power $499 iPhone OS tablet over a full power $999 osX tablet.
Maybe we'll bet both, a smaller iPhone tablet and a bigger Macbook replacement with the same name.
Hype, hype, unrealistic hype!
I'm not sure about the "10's of millions".
About the other point - of course, people who did not get a 250 USD pocket device for its screen size WILL buy it in a book/tablet form for 7-800 USD!
I'm not sure about the "10's of millions".
About the other point - of course, people who did not get a 250 USD pocket device for its screen size WILL buy it in a book/tablet form for 7-800 USD!
How many of you bought a Modbook?
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple would be secretly waiting for another manufacturer to bring out a tablet with a different OS to Apple's (so I don't mean the Modbook).
Mp3 players were on the market already, when Apple thought they could improve the genre. So they did. They are not as innovative as some other companies. There was a device, called Newton, there is one called Modbook and they didn't really capture the public's imagination. Now Apple might be cautious - should they embarrass themselves with a failing product that might damage the iPhone's reputation? But what if it is a big gap? I think they will let other companies experience the risky launch first.
Well, I think we agree on that that people would associate any outcoming tablet with Apple. Even if Microsoft will bring one out sooner, I can see the media's response: Apple is said to plan something similar too. That sounds like a pretty safe media coverage on others' expense.
I purchased Apple portables with CD writer and without DVD writer as late as in 2007. Blu Ray is nowhere on their option list - Apple is not a leader, it simply relies on its unique position and makes small but careful steps most of the times (when they don't, they just take away Firewire and see similar mistakes).
So I officially gave up on the idea of a tablet. I do not care anymore. In fact, I might even sell my iPhone and get an iPod Touch. That will be my Apple Tablet. I have a MacBook Pro with annoying fan noise and glossy screen. I also have a 22" Samsung monitor with matte screen. I would be more interested in a keyboard that incorporates the new trackpad.
I wouldn't carry a tablet with me all the time but I couldn't rely on it as a primary computer. Perhaps, some people will be willing to replace their portable computers with a tablet - I will not. I cannot imagine Apple manufacturing full sized, attachable keyboards for the tablet, which would make it a considerable option as a netbook alternative.
So, I think it will be a Hackintosh netbook for me, thank you very much! Or a Sony e-book reader.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple would be secretly waiting for another manufacturer to bring out a tablet with a different OS to Apple's (so I don't mean the Modbook).
Mp3 players were on the market already, when Apple thought they could improve the genre. So they did. They are not as innovative as some other companies. There was a device, called Newton, there is one called Modbook and they didn't really capture the public's imagination. Now Apple might be cautious - should they embarrass themselves with a failing product that might damage the iPhone's reputation? But what if it is a big gap? I think they will let other companies experience the risky launch first.
Well, I think we agree on that that people would associate any outcoming tablet with Apple. Even if Microsoft will bring one out sooner, I can see the media's response: Apple is said to plan something similar too. That sounds like a pretty safe media coverage on others' expense.
I purchased Apple portables with CD writer and without DVD writer as late as in 2007. Blu Ray is nowhere on their option list - Apple is not a leader, it simply relies on its unique position and makes small but careful steps most of the times (when they don't, they just take away Firewire and see similar mistakes).
So I officially gave up on the idea of a tablet. I do not care anymore. In fact, I might even sell my iPhone and get an iPod Touch. That will be my Apple Tablet. I have a MacBook Pro with annoying fan noise and glossy screen. I also have a 22" Samsung monitor with matte screen. I would be more interested in a keyboard that incorporates the new trackpad.
I wouldn't carry a tablet with me all the time but I couldn't rely on it as a primary computer. Perhaps, some people will be willing to replace their portable computers with a tablet - I will not. I cannot imagine Apple manufacturing full sized, attachable keyboards for the tablet, which would make it a considerable option as a netbook alternative.
So, I think it will be a Hackintosh netbook for me, thank you very much! Or a Sony e-book reader.
What the hell are Apple thinking about! If true this is the biggest fail since Apple removed firewire on the unibody MacBook. What is the point on putting an inferior iPhone OS on the Tablet when it should of been Mac OSX.
Oh well!! there goes my idea of buying a Tablet to use Reason and Logic Pro 9 through the touch screen instead of the awful mouse and trackpad
Art
If true this is the biggest fail since Apple removed firewire on the unibody MacBook. What is the point on putting an inferior iPhone OS on the Tablet when it should of been Mac OSX.Oh well!! there goes my idea of buying a Tablet to use Reason and Logic Pro 9 through the touch screen instead of the awful mouse and trackpad
Art
Folks,
I think right now Apple may have TWO prototypes of the finalized design of the new tablet computer under test right now.
One prototype runs an ARM-derived CPU based on the PA Semiconductor design. It will essentially run an enhanced version of the iPhone OS, adding features that make sense for a tablet computer like multitasking and overlapping windows.
The other prototype runs Intel's new Pine Trail platform using the Atom N450 CPU. This will run a reduced version of MacOS X 10.6, designed specifically to boot from firmware chips with enhanced touchscreen capabilities such a touchscreen keyboard.
It's going to be a difficult decision on which one to choose, especially since the Intel Pine Trail platform will offer very long running time per battery charge. I myself would actually favor using the Atom N450 CPU, since it would be easier to port current MacOS X 10.6-compatible apps over to the Apple tablet computer. (And Intel may offer Apple a big price break on the Pine Trail chipsets, since Apple may end up buying more of these chipsets than any other manufacturer.)
I think right now Apple may have TWO prototypes of the finalized design of the new tablet computer under test right now.
One prototype runs an ARM-derived CPU based on the PA Semiconductor design. It will essentially run an enhanced version of the iPhone OS, adding features that make sense for a tablet computer like multitasking and overlapping windows.
The other prototype runs Intel's new Pine Trail platform using the Atom N450 CPU. This will run a reduced version of MacOS X 10.6, designed specifically to boot from firmware chips with enhanced touchscreen capabilities such a touchscreen keyboard.
It's going to be a difficult decision on which one to choose, especially since the Intel Pine Trail platform will offer very long running time per battery charge. I myself would actually favor using the Atom N450 CPU, since it would be easier to port current MacOS X 10.6-compatible apps over to the Apple tablet computer. (And Intel may offer Apple a big price break on the Pine Trail chipsets, since Apple may end up buying more of these chipsets than any other manufacturer.)
Indeed, because Apple designed a touch-screen, gesture based UI for the iPhone, and didn't try to squeeze a desktop OS designed for large screens with keyboard & mouse input into a mini device without any of these things.
You can't just "flick a page up", since in most apps, that's how you would select text/objects in Mac apps - by dragging across them. If Apple use that "gesture" for scrolling instead, then how would the user select?
Apple could support zooming through pinch/squeeze gestures, that's true; but apps couldn't support any other multi-touch gestures without changes.
Waited for a mac tablet for years but there is no way will buy this thing if running iPhone OS. It is not much useful if only runs iPhone application.
That thing would be hideous to use. How do you tap on tiny menu items with your fingertip? Scrolling via tapping those tiny scroll arrows? Try accurately selecting multiple files in the Finder, (without a Shift or Cmd key). How are you going to accurately tap buttons in the toolbar? Word processing on a touch-screen keypad?
That article ignores that most apps would need to be rewritten to use the snazzy multi-touch MacOSX.
One thing is certain: half the people here will be disappointed with either way that Apple goes, as far as cpu and OS.
So how about a hybrid? Make it Leopard based for desktop apps, and use a newly written iPhone simulator to run iPhone apps. Best of both worlds.
Personally, I think we're all off the mark though. What does Apple do? They take an objective, and then throw away all the extra stuff that would be nice, but not necessary. They don't throw in the kitchen sink, like other companies try to.
So somehow we're missing the objective.
So how about a hybrid? Make it Leopard based for desktop apps, and use a newly written iPhone simulator to run iPhone apps. Best of both worlds.
Personally, I think we're all off the mark though. What does Apple do? They take an objective, and then throw away all the extra stuff that would be nice, but not necessary. They don't throw in the kitchen sink, like other companies try to.
So somehow we're missing the objective.
Maybe... but AFAIK, the current Flash plugin for Windows browsers performs well. I stopped bitching to Adobe/Macromedia years ago... they said it [Macs] was a smaller market and required a different solution because of the different CPU architecture (PPC). Then the Mac-Intel transition came and went. Things were the same: Windows users were [mostly[ satisfied with Flash, Mac users not so much. Now, I hear the new Flash player will support GPU acceleration. Good! but will (and if so, how well will) it be implemented for the Mac.
The problem seems to be sloppy code that leaks and doesn't release CPU and RAM resources. If they are true to their past efforts, they will only add "monopolization of GPU resources" to that list on the Mac platform.
Adobe has done a similar move with Photoshop-- Lots of attention to the Windows platform product while the Mac platform product languishes with minimum attention.
On one hand I can understand [and support] the business decision to cater to the segment (Windows) that has the most customers.
On the other hand I think Adobe is missing great opportunities (and future profits) by ignoring the Apple Platform where most of the hardware and software innovation is made.
Ask yourself why Adobe doesn't have any apps (not one) in the App store. I'll tell you why! Because App store apps use Cocoa Touch and are written in Cocoa. All but the latest Adobe Mac apps (especially Photoshop) are written using legacy Carbon. *
So, Adobe is missing opportunities to refine their products for a mobile platform and a MultiTouch interface (more than just drawing with a tablet). No big deal, except the iPhone and iPod Touch are just "training wheels" for future products, like a tablet, light table, video wall, etc.
* Apple is not without blame/responsibility for Adobe's legacy Carbon code, see:
http://daringfireball.net/2008/04/64000_question
*
If Apple is looking at a new class of device, it would be a mass-market product. Despite the howls of complaint. No tablet running desktop applications has every been anything of the sort. Some people will have to get used to disappointment.
The thing is, desktop applications don't want to run on a Tablet. People might want it to run Photoshop, or Word, - but there is no technology which will magically re-factor those apps into a good tablet experience. Microsoft tried exactly this approach with the Origami Project - and it flopped in a Zunelike fashion.
Here I agree totally.
If this device ever does come out, it will not be what people are expecting.
Perhaps it might be a little bit like this...
http://gizmodo.com/5369493/leaked-courier-video-shows-how-well-actually-use-it
C.
By "runs iPhone operating system," they most likely do NOT mean it runs, literally, the iPhone operating system. More likely, it runs an offshoot of the iPhone operating system.
Cocoa is not suited for tablet use. It assumes that the input will be a keyboard and mouse.
On the iPhone, all apps are written with Cocoa Touch to create their interfaces.
So, it makes more sense for Apple to pick the OS with Cocoa Touch (iPhone OS) as a starting point. However, much as the final product of iPhone OS differed greatly from the starting point of Mac OS X (Tiger, I think), the Tablet OS could be drastically different from iPhone OS.
Cocoa is not suited for tablet use. It assumes that the input will be a keyboard and mouse.
On the iPhone, all apps are written with Cocoa Touch to create their interfaces.
So, it makes more sense for Apple to pick the OS with Cocoa Touch (iPhone OS) as a starting point. However, much as the final product of iPhone OS differed greatly from the starting point of Mac OS X (Tiger, I think), the Tablet OS could be drastically different from iPhone OS.
OK, What would you do?
Say you are Apple and have a wide range of resources at your disposal!
Among these resources is a highly-successful (patent-protected) MultiTouch GUI! In 3 years it has revolutionized the way we interface with cell phones, and created an enormous following of developers and consumers.
Now, being perspicacious, you want to bring this GUI (and all that it entails) to the community of desktops and laptops (with its large install base).
Apple has some choices:
1) Apple could port the MultiTouch GUI to the desktop Mac OS X (along with a few apps)
That would limit the install base opportunity to the Mac platform. Also, it would allow many iPhone apps (Apple and third-party) to run on the Mac (with a recompile).
But adoption of the MultiTouch GUI would be slow: the users would continue using legacy (non-MultiTouch) desktop apps. There would be little incentive for developers to do a major redesign and rewrite to incorporate the MultiTouch GUI (pressures of making those quarterly numbers).
2) In addition to a Port to Mac OS X, Apple could port its MultiTouch GUI to Windows and Linux. Apple would have a larger potential (the combined install base) but it would mitigate a Mac platform advantage, and result in the same, slow adoption.
3) Apple could release a new device, the tablet, with MultiTouch GUI. This device would have a different OS than the current desktop community (Neither Mac OS X nor Windows), but would have compelling hardware and a sophisticated (albeit, different) OS software development platform. The iPhone apps would run (some, with minor tweaks) and the developers would be enticed to exploit the larger screen, powerful hardware for new apps.
But you wouldn't get the third-party legacy apps-- they would just continue running, as they are now, on the desktop/laptop, oblivious of this new, powerful Tablet with a MultiTouch GUI.
Mas o Menos... Apple throws a great party, but nobody shows up.
OK! Assuming we have a great new Tablet, MultiTouch GUI, a few New Apps, the app store repository of third-part apps, and the app developers.
What if, in addition to a stand-alone Tablet, Apple promotes this as a MultiTouch GUI peripheral (USB, Bonjour BlueTooth, WiFi) to a desktop or laptop. Apple would furnish Tablet "Drivers" and an API for Windows, Mac and Linux. Apple would also provide a few "Flagship" desktop apps (on all platforms) that show how to interface/exploit the Tablet peripheral (iLife and iWork might be good candidates).
So where are we, vis-a-vis, bringing the MultiTouch GUI to the desktop.
1) We have the device
2) We have developers
3) We have "Flagship" apps that showcase the MultiTouch GUI and and make their legacy counterparts look like... well, legacy apps.
Mmmm... What would you do if you were Apple? If you were a Legacy App developer?
*
*
Say you are Apple and have a wide range of resources at your disposal!
Among these resources is a highly-successful (patent-protected) MultiTouch GUI! In 3 years it has revolutionized the way we interface with cell phones, and created an enormous following of developers and consumers.
Now, being perspicacious, you want to bring this GUI (and all that it entails) to the community of desktops and laptops (with its large install base).
Apple has some choices:
1) Apple could port the MultiTouch GUI to the desktop Mac OS X (along with a few apps)
That would limit the install base opportunity to the Mac platform. Also, it would allow many iPhone apps (Apple and third-party) to run on the Mac (with a recompile).
But adoption of the MultiTouch GUI would be slow: the users would continue using legacy (non-MultiTouch) desktop apps. There would be little incentive for developers to do a major redesign and rewrite to incorporate the MultiTouch GUI (pressures of making those quarterly numbers).
2) In addition to a Port to Mac OS X, Apple could port its MultiTouch GUI to Windows and Linux. Apple would have a larger potential (the combined install base) but it would mitigate a Mac platform advantage, and result in the same, slow adoption.
3) Apple could release a new device, the tablet, with MultiTouch GUI. This device would have a different OS than the current desktop community (Neither Mac OS X nor Windows), but would have compelling hardware and a sophisticated (albeit, different) OS software development platform. The iPhone apps would run (some, with minor tweaks) and the developers would be enticed to exploit the larger screen, powerful hardware for new apps.
But you wouldn't get the third-party legacy apps-- they would just continue running, as they are now, on the desktop/laptop, oblivious of this new, powerful Tablet with a MultiTouch GUI.
Mas o Menos... Apple throws a great party, but nobody shows up.
OK! Assuming we have a great new Tablet, MultiTouch GUI, a few New Apps, the app store repository of third-part apps, and the app developers.
What if, in addition to a stand-alone Tablet, Apple promotes this as a MultiTouch GUI peripheral (USB, Bonjour BlueTooth, WiFi) to a desktop or laptop. Apple would furnish Tablet "Drivers" and an API for Windows, Mac and Linux. Apple would also provide a few "Flagship" desktop apps (on all platforms) that show how to interface/exploit the Tablet peripheral (iLife and iWork might be good candidates).
So where are we, vis-a-vis, bringing the MultiTouch GUI to the desktop.
1) We have the device
2) We have developers
3) We have "Flagship" apps that showcase the MultiTouch GUI and and make their legacy counterparts look like... well, legacy apps.
Mmmm... What would you do if you were Apple? If you were a Legacy App developer?
*
*
I very much agree. Apple, to me, aren't a hardware or a software company; they're a solutions company. They make the entire system; which is usually a tightly focused product with a specific purpose - or narrow range of purposes - in mind. (Which is partly why Microsoft struggle so much in their marketing - they're trying to sell devices to "everyone", for "everything". That's tough to do).
Mac + OSX (+ several Mac apps)
iTunes + iTunes Music Store + iPod
iPhone + iPhoneOS
I don't expect they'll say "here's a Mac, without a keyboard. Enjoy!". It will be a device targeted for a specific purpose - and it's not likely to be Office/Photoshop/Xcode/Motion/Quark/Indesign/Flash.
I can't understand why people would want those on a tablet; it's the wrong tool for the task. What advantage would a tablet offer over a normal laptop for those tasks?
I'm sorry if this sounds patronising, but to me this argument sounds like someone demanding a soup fork. "Would you prefer a spoon sir?" "No, I want a fork. Make it work with soup".
I just don't get why people want and Apple tablet so bad
Because they really want an iPhone or iPod Touch, but can barely see stuff on the friggin' tiny display without reading glasses.
Display on an iPhone is too small to comfortably read web pages (etc.) for lots of people.
You can do this now to see how worthless running regular full OS X apps is.
Get a VNC or Remote Desktop app for your iPhone or iPod Touch. Bring up your Mac/PC desktop on your device. Start photoshop. See how many hours of serious photoshop editing you can do before trying to use a desktop GUI on a small tablet drives you crazy. A lot of people complain that this is not even worth the $x.99 they paid in the App store.