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.
Feasibility of Touch Screen Apple Notebooks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Another potential use for a touchscreen trackpad: character selection for non-Western alphabets (e.g., traditional Chinese, simplified Chinese, kanji, hiragana, Hangul).
- Faster processor (hopefully Apple will bump up the MBP's processors)
- Bigger screen
- Higher screen resolution
- More ports
- ExpressCard slot
- Backlit keyboard
- Graphics card (no other signs point to dedicated GPU in the MacBook, and an integrated GPU could be one of the differentiators)
- If Apple / Intel / PA Semi makes a custom chipset for Apple, then there could be additional differentiation like triple-channel RAM and a faster FSB.
The original train of thought -- suggested in the Macrumor's article, "Feasibility of Touch Screen Apple Notebooks" -- which reported on the Businessweek article that "explores the possibility of Apple introducing some sort of touchscreen laptop in the near future" has left the station but it soon left the mainline and started heading down the branch line, stopping briefly to take on new riders at Imaginationland Station, and from there that train is charging full-steam towards the branch line terminus at Crazyville.
The theoretical (9" or so) notebook with standard keyboard plus a touchscreen has somehow evolved into Cartman's Dawson's Creek Trapper Keeper Ultra Keeper Futura S 2000.
Go figure...
The theoretical (9" or so) notebook with standard keyboard plus a touchscreen has somehow evolved into Cartman's Dawson's Creek Trapper Keeper Ultra Keeper Futura S 2000.
Go figure...
While I don't disagree with the premise that Apple could do away with the consumer/professional distinction, I doubt it will happen. They've had the same distinction ever since the iMac and iBook were introduced and it's served them well.
Regardless, however, there is zero chance they will make the 13" and 15" versions the same price. It's not Apple's way. They're far more likely to charge more and only include certain features on the 15" and 17" (like they do now) than to remove all the distinctions.
Make that 1 USB port, drop the Ethernet and HSDPA/GPS, and you've got a decently likely machine. Not sure on the Atom, they might just use the Air's chip, but it's possible I suppose.
jW
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5A347 Safari/525.20)
Actually, screen will be 9.2" diagonal. (8"x4.5"). As I've said before, this allows an 8.5x11 letter to be read full size in landscape mode, just scroll up and down for the rest of it. And, its 16x9 screen is perfect for your movies. And while on your lap, with you on your couch it'll be a perfect remote screen for the desktop in the other room or the apple TV you're watching on the bigscreen.
Actually, screen will be 9.2" diagonal. (8"x4.5"). As I've said before, this allows an 8.5x11 letter to be read full size in landscape mode, just scroll up and down for the rest of it. And, its 16x9 screen is perfect for your movies. And while on your lap, with you on your couch it'll be a perfect remote screen for the desktop in the other room or the apple TV you're watching on the bigscreen.
No Way
That's describing a tablet that uses multi rather than stylus. No market for it because there's no reason for it.
That's describing a tablet that uses multi rather than stylus. No market for it because there's no reason for it.
It would be interesting if this 'notepad' was made at a size that would allow it to be a keyboard for a desk computer as well. With a 9" screen that isn't too feasible. A 12" screen would be minimal, with 14" being preferable. But it would be an excellent extension of a larger computer, and serve several functions. The Mac patent application of sliding a tablet into the iMac sucks, but lay it down as a keyboard and you have a winner.
A 9" tablet is a little small, but not bad. Anything smaller would be disappointing.
A positive post? Amazing. Most people seem to be naysayers, caught in a world of laptop horror.
------- EDIT :
I just checked- a 9" screen could harbor a current sized keyboard on it with some truncated design on the side of the regular letters, but gives ample room for all the current keyboard keys inside the width of the regular letters. If the screen was 11" it could have a well modifiable, drag to expand, keyboard within the screen. And then a tablet could be used as a keyboard with a base computer (iMac, MacMini, PowerMac, etc etc etc).
A 9" tablet is a little small, but not bad. Anything smaller would be disappointing.
A positive post? Amazing. Most people seem to be naysayers, caught in a world of laptop horror.
------- EDIT :
I just checked- a 9" screen could harbor a current sized keyboard on it with some truncated design on the side of the regular letters, but gives ample room for all the current keyboard keys inside the width of the regular letters. If the screen was 11" it could have a well modifiable, drag to expand, keyboard within the screen. And then a tablet could be used as a keyboard with a base computer (iMac, MacMini, PowerMac, etc etc etc).
I love how the post discusses prohibitive costs. If Apple is ballsy enough to release a $3,000+ MacBook Air, why in the hell would they hold any reservation to releasing a $2,500 touch screen MacBook (and of course subsequently dropping the price to around $2,000 after they get done screwing over us fanboys)?
To me, it's like going to the moon. It's going to happen, it's just a matter of when. Touchscreens in the past, didn't seem to be so precise. However, the iPhones seems to be doing quite well with user interaction.
I do agree, that it will be difficult to type. But who knows, perhaps they will come up with even a better solution for that as well.
I do agree, that it will be difficult to type. But who knows, perhaps they will come up with even a better solution for that as well.
Laptops aren't meant to be touch in my opinion. If you want a touch screen, get an iPod Touch or an iPhone. Laptops are for real typing...keyboard typing.
Maybe I just need to get with the times
Get hip, broski. Touch is in. Physical buttons are out. JEEZE!
nope. Not to familiar with Atom chips, but I agree with the original.. My wife's mini has 4 usb and they are full (printer, keyboard, backup drive, ipod connector). I have a macbook (which only has 2 usb). Thank God my cool pad has a 4pt hub on it (1 usb is used to run the cool pad, then my usb mouse, backup drive, occassional thumbdrive).
This probably would not be the norm mobile but when working at home it is - so 2-3 USB with a docking station. PLEASE
Also wireless internet is a little slower. For my wife's mini - I ended up plugging in the ethernet.
Since screens are usually measured in diagonal inches, for a 9 -incher you are talking about roughly a 7 1/2 X 6 screen. Not that bad. my Dell is a 12-inch which comes to 6 1/2 x 10 1/4, so not too bad I suppose. Just a 9-inch may be a little small for tedious work like looking at spreadsheats, programming, or reports that SQL returns (I have a mjor problem if numbers are close but only 1 to 2 digits off - especially if those digits are in the middle of a string and not at the end; or if they are close looking like 6,8, 5 - I have to scan numbers quickly. That makes my 12-inch dell is about as small as I can handle. ok, I am 39 - so I guess it is that eyes as you get older thing. And Yes I already wear glasses.
What would be cool is a 12 inch device that I could flip like an iphone. Then depending on how many rows I need to look at, I could just flip it around and it would automatically re-size and redisplay rows automatically (ok maybe asking to much on the auto redisplay as it stands now with .net and IE, if you expand your window - you must click refresh in order to have it repopulate filling the window - but it is a drawback I can live with [frustrating, but livable])
the only issue, i have with touch screen (especially upright ones) is the thought of have to hold my arms up to the screen for hours
Finally, a voice of reason.
Creeping in on the Macbook
The models with 10" screens and nearly full size (92%) keyboards are usable for general web browsing, and "office-type" apps. They could also easily handle iTunes and photos as well. They have 3 hours or so of battery life, and weigh in at about 3 lbs. They can run some version of Windows (XP or Vista) and cost around $700-$1000.
I think these things are threats to Apple's MacBook line. They can do many of the things that consumers would by a Macbook for, for roughly $300-$500 less.
When you look at the processor lineup that Intel will bring to the table over the next couple of months, they will be emphasizing low-power, low-cost Atom processors and Nehalem quad-core powerhouses. There is even talk of a dual-core Atom. Perfect split for consumer and professional laptops.
I think there's going to be a "MacBook Mini" with multi-touch gestures (like the current Air and Pro) running a Dual-core Atom processor to hold off the MSI Wind, Eee PC, and HP Mini-Note. And I think you'll see MacBook Pros going with Nehalems with GPUs.
If there was any demand - ANY - for UMPC, tablets, and touchscreens, no matter how flawed the design, we would've seen it by now. Instead, low-cost laptops have been selling. Why would Apple introduce a tablet and leave their best-selling laptop exposed?
My bet is on a "MacBook Mini" in the $800-$1000 range.
This is the Summer of the Sub-Notebooks...
Asus introduced its Eee sub-notebook w/7 inch screen just before Christmas last year. It proved so popular (reportedly selling 300,000 units) that Asus has since expanded its line to include many additional models (the 2G, 4G, 900, 901, and 1000) with screens from 7 to 10 inches.
This summer: MSI introduced it's Wind model w/10" screen; Advent introduced a 10" netbook; Acer introduced the Inspire One, with 9" screen; HP has at least two sub-notebooks out w/screen under 11"; and Dell is saying they'll release a 10" netbook in August. Many more are expected before Christmas '08.
The models with 10" screens and nearly full size (92%) keyboards are usable for general web browsing, and "office-type" apps. They could also easily handle iTunes and photos as well. They have 3 hours or so of battery life, and weigh in at about 3 lbs. They can run some version of Windows (XP or Vista) and cost around $700-$1000.
I think these things are threats to Apple's MacBook line. They can do many of the things that consumers would by a Macbook for, for roughly $300-$500 less.
When you look at the processor lineup that Intel will bring to the table over the next couple of months, they will be emphasizing low-power, low-cost Atom processors and Nehalem quad-core powerhouses. There is even talk of a dual-core Atom. Perfect split for consumer and professional laptops.
I think there's going to be a "MacBook Mini" with multi-touch gestures (like the current Air and Pro) running a Dual-core Atom processor to hold off the MSI Wind, Eee PC, and HP Mini-Note. And I think you'll see MacBook Pros going with Nehalems with GPUs.
If there was any demand - ANY - for UMPC, tablets, and touchscreens, no matter how flawed the design, we would've seen it by now. Instead, low-cost laptops have been selling. Why would Apple introduce a tablet and leave their best-selling laptop exposed?
My bet is on a "MacBook Mini" in the $800-$1000 range.
I think we still need conventional laptops with physical keyboards and decent sized screens. well, atleast for us that do a lot of typing/programming and do not want to be tied to a desk.
Now, I could see a button to turn on/off the screen sensor. Programmers and number crunchers tend to touch and point at the screen a lot. However, if it had a real useful keyboard and a touch screen. i could see the advantage of using both. would eliminate the need for a mouse/trackpad. Although - there is always that rightclick thing. ok - command touch?
It's the content, stupid
What new products has Apple introduced in the past five years that aren't built primarily to supply a stream of purchasable content to the user?
ipod: music
ipod video: video
ipod touch, iphone: software
In my opinion, Apple didn't get into the cell phone business for the cell phone profits: it entered the market because it realized its iPod buyers were starting to consolidate devices, and Apple wanted to be in the space where most people were consolidating towards: i.e., where the puck is going to be, not where it is now.
Any "pad"-type device would have to a) not cannibalize its other markets (computers and iphones) and b) have to have a high degree of non-redundancy, that is to say, offer unique functionality compared to its other product lines.
So the question is, what type of content do end users need a pad type device for? Amazon thinks its market wants a sophisticated (and ugly) e-book reader. Does Steve think there's a market for this? What type of media do consumers use that isn't currently serviced by Apple's current line? Newspapers? Live television broadcasts? Satellite radio? Magazines?
Think like Steve: what is the content people want? And what type of device do we build to deliver it to them?
What new products has Apple introduced in the past five years that aren't built primarily to supply a stream of purchasable content to the user?
ipod: music
ipod video: video
ipod touch, iphone: software
In my opinion, Apple didn't get into the cell phone business for the cell phone profits: it entered the market because it realized its iPod buyers were starting to consolidate devices, and Apple wanted to be in the space where most people were consolidating towards: i.e., where the puck is going to be, not where it is now.
Any "pad"-type device would have to a) not cannibalize its other markets (computers and iphones) and b) have to have a high degree of non-redundancy, that is to say, offer unique functionality compared to its other product lines.
So the question is, what type of content do end users need a pad type device for? Amazon thinks its market wants a sophisticated (and ugly) e-book reader. Does Steve think there's a market for this? What type of media do consumers use that isn't currently serviced by Apple's current line? Newspapers? Live television broadcasts? Satellite radio? Magazines?
Think like Steve: what is the content people want? And what type of device do we build to deliver it to them?
I think there is a market for such a device- a 8-9" Touch pad type of device that has connectivity at its heart. The general masses don't use their computers for much other than the internet, email, office apps and entertainment.
The problem with what's been released (UMPC's, tablets etc) is they have tried to position themselves as fully fledged computers but in a small, mobile package. They are a solution looking for a problem.
Today's youth are accustomed to 24/7 connectivity and the internet is such a big part of their lives that they want access to it whenever and wherever they want.
The beginning of this decade saw the four main UK mobile operators pay £23 billion pounds for the right to the 3G spectrum- and the heady heights of the dot com boom promised rich rewards for this 24/7 speedy connectivity.
Just a few years later all had written off the billions invested. It is only now that they are actually realising the potential of their investments- forget the gimmicks and just provide mobile 3G access- and that's where such a device by Apple should aim.
Give us a platform/device that allows us to be fully connected without the bulk and poor battery life of a laptop- something I can just pick up and throw (gently and with care) in my bag but is bigger than the iPhone/Touch
The problem with what's been released (UMPC's, tablets etc) is they have tried to position themselves as fully fledged computers but in a small, mobile package. They are a solution looking for a problem.
Today's youth are accustomed to 24/7 connectivity and the internet is such a big part of their lives that they want access to it whenever and wherever they want.
The beginning of this decade saw the four main UK mobile operators pay £23 billion pounds for the right to the 3G spectrum- and the heady heights of the dot com boom promised rich rewards for this 24/7 speedy connectivity.
Just a few years later all had written off the billions invested. It is only now that they are actually realising the potential of their investments- forget the gimmicks and just provide mobile 3G access- and that's where such a device by Apple should aim.
Give us a platform/device that allows us to be fully connected without the bulk and poor battery life of a laptop- something I can just pick up and throw (gently and with care) in my bag but is bigger than the iPhone/Touch
dead on
i think the point will be to sell this as a secondary computer platform. some people want the portability of a laptop, but also the power that can be provided by a desktop. to get this, you're going to pay $2000 or more for a decent macbook pro.
people want the constant connection, and a small, cheap, low power tablet would give them that. i've been wanting something like this for years. imagine it in the college setting for instance. you could obviously take notes (ever try taking math or engineering notes on a laptop?). you could view presentations (beats printing out 20 pages a day). it could even help the e-books industry through itunes, just like it did for mp3s. the one place where i would actually prefer an electronic copy to a physical copy is text books (think interactive graphics, videos, etc). and at the same time, connected through wi-fi, you could be on the internet, just like the iphone. you could be chatting with friends. i'm not saying it's productive, but there are so many applications.
they could even go low storage and save power (and price). remember, the key is that this isn't your main computer. aside from syncing documents and media like an ipod, think of using back-to-my-mac and retrieving documents and files as you need them.
for those wanting a keyboard, how much you really use a keyboard for just everyday, wasting time (non-programming or technical usage) at the computer, which is again, how i think this will be marketed. typing in URLs maybe? IMs? apple is pushing video ichat, and i can't think it would be hard to implement a feature that would allow you to draw pictures, or just hand write anything. they even already showed off some handwriting recognition with their east asian language recognition on the iphone.
if you re-examine what most people actually use a computer for most of the time, and what they want out of it, i think this platform has huge potential. you need to defeat the idea that the success of a tablet is with a full featured, heavy duty laptop set up. a standard computer is for work. this tablet could be for fun.
i think the point will be to sell this as a secondary computer platform. some people want the portability of a laptop, but also the power that can be provided by a desktop. to get this, you're going to pay $2000 or more for a decent macbook pro.
people want the constant connection, and a small, cheap, low power tablet would give them that. i've been wanting something like this for years. imagine it in the college setting for instance. you could obviously take notes (ever try taking math or engineering notes on a laptop?). you could view presentations (beats printing out 20 pages a day). it could even help the e-books industry through itunes, just like it did for mp3s. the one place where i would actually prefer an electronic copy to a physical copy is text books (think interactive graphics, videos, etc). and at the same time, connected through wi-fi, you could be on the internet, just like the iphone. you could be chatting with friends. i'm not saying it's productive, but there are so many applications.
they could even go low storage and save power (and price). remember, the key is that this isn't your main computer. aside from syncing documents and media like an ipod, think of using back-to-my-mac and retrieving documents and files as you need them.
for those wanting a keyboard, how much you really use a keyboard for just everyday, wasting time (non-programming or technical usage) at the computer, which is again, how i think this will be marketed. typing in URLs maybe? IMs? apple is pushing video ichat, and i can't think it would be hard to implement a feature that would allow you to draw pictures, or just hand write anything. they even already showed off some handwriting recognition with their east asian language recognition on the iphone.
if you re-examine what most people actually use a computer for most of the time, and what they want out of it, i think this platform has huge potential. you need to defeat the idea that the success of a tablet is with a full featured, heavy duty laptop set up. a standard computer is for work. this tablet could be for fun.
Then what about the majority of us creative pro's who need a portable art pad?
I wont be buying one if i can't use it as a sketch pad... If it had touch capabilities surely
would include a stylus for the artists in usI think
should make an all rounder device that caters for the gadget freak as well as the professional. An ideal tablet for me would be 10 - 12" inches in the slate form
not forgetting new bundled software "Apple Sketch"
A little feedback from someone who KNOWS about touchscreens
I've finally given up lurking and registered here because of this thread. Why? Because I happen to be a touchscreen specialist. I work as an engineer for one of the major touchscreen manufacturers, and have been here over 12 years, so I know a little about not only the design and manufacture of touchscreens, but also about how people use them in real life. So, I thought this would be an ideal topic for me to jump in on
So, leaving aside details about exactly which of the nine different touch technologies Apple are using (Projected Capacitive if you really want to know), I seriously doubt we will see a mainstream laptop device where a touchscreen is the primary point of input. The reason is that while a touchscreen on an iPod Touch or an iPhone draw low levels of power, the power significantly increases for a glass based touch solution like this when you get over about 5" diagonal. Also, the way the screen is made (almost certainly ito sputtering onto a PET layer, is reasonably easy on small sizes, the yields fall off pretty rapidly as you increase the size. So, from a manufacturing/cost standpoint, we're not there yet. Also, the accuracy on a handhels device is typically between 5 or 10% of the viewing area diagonal. Think about it, on an iPhone, each button is reasonably big compared to the viewing area. Now, think of the same size button/icon on a 15" screen, and the accuracy required as a percentage of viewing area is a lot tighter. This means more complex electronics, so more cost and, more importantly, higher power consumption, reducing battery lifetime significantly (after all, the touchscreen would have to be always on to register a touch).
Seperately, most people find touch great for short periods of time, or where they're using maybe three or four buttons all the time. If it's more complex, people generally find it's too much hassle.
As for the idea of a second touch sensor to act as the whole keyboard, it's been tried by a few people. The drawback is that people find it ergonomically challenging, as they end up flicking their eyes a lot more between the two displays. On a physical keyboard, most people will concentrate on eith er the keyboard or the displa, not both together...
So, there's my view from the "inside". Hope this helps to stimulate debate.
I've finally given up lurking and registered here because of this thread. Why? Because I happen to be a touchscreen specialist. I work as an engineer for one of the major touchscreen manufacturers, and have been here over 12 years, so I know a little about not only the design and manufacture of touchscreens, but also about how people use them in real life. So, I thought this would be an ideal topic for me to jump in on
So, leaving aside details about exactly which of the nine different touch technologies Apple are using (Projected Capacitive if you really want to know), I seriously doubt we will see a mainstream laptop device where a touchscreen is the primary point of input. The reason is that while a touchscreen on an iPod Touch or an iPhone draw low levels of power, the power significantly increases for a glass based touch solution like this when you get over about 5" diagonal. Also, the way the screen is made (almost certainly ito sputtering onto a PET layer, is reasonably easy on small sizes, the yields fall off pretty rapidly as you increase the size. So, from a manufacturing/cost standpoint, we're not there yet. Also, the accuracy on a handhels device is typically between 5 or 10% of the viewing area diagonal. Think about it, on an iPhone, each button is reasonably big compared to the viewing area. Now, think of the same size button/icon on a 15" screen, and the accuracy required as a percentage of viewing area is a lot tighter. This means more complex electronics, so more cost and, more importantly, higher power consumption, reducing battery lifetime significantly (after all, the touchscreen would have to be always on to register a touch).
Seperately, most people find touch great for short periods of time, or where they're using maybe three or four buttons all the time. If it's more complex, people generally find it's too much hassle.
As for the idea of a second touch sensor to act as the whole keyboard, it's been tried by a few people. The drawback is that people find it ergonomically challenging, as they end up flicking their eyes a lot more between the two displays. On a physical keyboard, most people will concentrate on eith er the keyboard or the displa, not both together...
So, there's my view from the "inside". Hope this helps to stimulate debate.
Just do 2 screens. Put a 9" in there and get rid of the keyboard. Now you replace 1 interface with, well, anything you want on there. It becomes more like a nintendo DS, but when it ain't broke don't fix it. This is what I've been waiting for since I saw the multi-touch: one for interface/display, one for display only. Well, you could do it all on a single display, but it would cost $$$$ for a 20" multi-touch. And I just like to handle work flow that way.
If there is any sense in the world, Apple will make the tablet. And it can be used as an interface if you dock it to any other mac. And they would sell millions just as a portable device, and millions to mac users who will use it for both purposes. Unfortunately, it will probably only be a mobile device and we'll just have to wait for ungodly expensive new interface tables to replace the current monitors that haven't been updated in 4 years. Granted, a 20" interface is nice, but a 9" you can take with you anywhere and use without a computer as well? MINT.
If there is any sense in the world, Apple will make the tablet. And it can be used as an interface if you dock it to any other mac. And they would sell millions just as a portable device, and millions to mac users who will use it for both purposes. Unfortunately, it will probably only be a mobile device and we'll just have to wait for ungodly expensive new interface tables to replace the current monitors that haven't been updated in 4 years. Granted, a 20" interface is nice, but a 9" you can take with you anywhere and use without a computer as well? MINT.
How about a tablet that could second as a multitouch trackpad for the iMac or Mac Pro? Throgh bluetooth or something. I think that'd be badass. I just went from the Air to an iMac and I miss the trackpad the most.