Tim Cook: 'Ideas' for a Netbook, iPhone Price Changes, iMacs?

[hiptobesquare]

God that would nice but damn if it's even possible it would be like $5K.

Why?

Basically a MacBook Air with the ports it should have, fewer layers of aluminum skin, no keyboard, and an up-facing multi-touch screen.

The parts count would actually lower than a main laptop.

People probably thought a device like iPhone would have cost $1K before it came out at $500, and is now even lower than that and more advanced.

All of the tech exists on the shelf right now, it is just a matter of packaging. I would even forgive it if it was as thick as an MacBook Air, and is only one piece, without the clam-shell action, just to fit the proper features and the glass thickness to be robust and quite torsionally stiff.

 

[rtdunham]

in response to a post claiming apple couldn't make a sub-$500 computer, chrmjenkins wrote:

Um, iPhone?
A phone it may be, but it's also a computer.

and what's the last price apple sold the phone for without a service contract?

too many people here are forgetting iPhone "prices" are subsidized. You can't see an iPhone with a bigger screen and a few other advances and expect it to sell for less than an unlocked iPhone (~$600?). UNLESS it's got a phone chip built in and can be sold subsidized, but then you have to factor in the cost of the service contract.

The "upgraded iPod Touch" argument has a little more merit, since it could be argued $200 of improvements might result in a nifty little sub-$500 "computer".

(I DO think apple will bring out a device that fits somewhere into the context of this thread. But i think it'll cost more than $500, maybe considerably more.)

 

[NT1440]

in response to a post claiming apple couldn't make a sub-$500 computer, chrmjenkins wrote:



and what's the last price apple sold the phone for without a service contract?

too many people here are forgetting iPhone "prices" are subsidized. You can't see an iPhone with a bigger screen and a few other advances and expect it to sell for less than an unlocked iPhone (~$600?). UNLESS it's got a phone chip built in and can be sold subsidized, but then you have to factor in the cost of the service contract.

The "upgraded iPod Touch" argument has a little more merit, since it could be argued $200 of improvements might result in a nifty little sub-$500 "computer".

Apple chooses not to go into the crapshoot cheap pc market, theres very little profit to be made. Why some people just cannot accept this is beyond me.

 

[Eric S.]

The gaps in Apple's computer lineup are unbelievable and many of the computers and peripherals are old, filled with two generation old components and bear 2007 prices.

I agree.

The netbooks are not not "pieces of junk".

Maybe you miss the point of the quote. "We [Apple] cannot make a sub-$500 computer that isn't a piece of junk." In other words, Apple chooses not to be in that market because they can't get the profit margin they require without the product being a piece of junk. Apple leaves the cutthroat, make-pennies-on-a-product market to others; they only make the high-margin products.

 

[winterspan]

1) 11" Macbook Mini with ~10 Watt Intel Core 2 Duo ULV

2) (more importantly) IPHONE ON VERIZON!!!!!!!

 

[cWeems]

i hope these iphone price changes include a price cut in the data plan.

dream on

 

[cWeems]

2) (more importantly) IPHONE ON VERIZON!!!!!!!

dream on

 

[Barbie]

A ship that leaks from the top...

 

[MattInOz]

Why?

Basically a MacBook Air with the ports it should have, fewer layers of aluminum skin, no keyboard, and an up-facing multi-touch screen.

The missing link to me is still the screen.
If you do a tablet (oh how I want a tablet) then it's really needs a high dpi screen. iPhone 160 dpi would be great the eee uses a 130dpi which is pretty nice.

I've tried other tablets it's a really different way of using the software and standard or even 100 dpi screens just don't carry it. You Just can't get a nice balance between screen far enough to read nicely but close enough to feel comfortable to use.

There are higher res screens in the size range but they are going add a fair bit to the price.

Screen any smaller than 10" and the Mobo from the Air isn't going to fit. So it either has to drop to an Atom or ARM platform. Then is are you going to have the power you need.

It's going to be a big balancing act.
It's been sooo.... close now but still maybe 6-12months off.

 

[Evangelion]

There's nothing contradictory about what he's saying. The MacBook is a C2D 2ghz+ machine, which is a pretty high end piece of technology. The average netbook runs a 1.6ghz Atom CPU, which is nice chip for what it is, but isn't suitable for 100% of what most people are going to want to do with their computer.

Well, neither is 2Ghz C2D suitable for 100% of the tasks people might want to do with their computer....

The point is that there are certain uses for certain technology. 1.6Ghz Atom might not be ideal for Photoshop (for example). But it would be ideal for other purposes. The Atom-equipped netbook would not be marketed for Photoshop-use, it would be marketed as a tool for those other tasks.

I don't. NBs are underpowered, tiny and cramped...they only sell because of the economic depression, not because they are attractive per se.

That's a load of crap. Underpowered FOR WHAT? Sure, there are tasks for which those laptops are underpowered for. And there are loads of tasks where they have more than enough power. Word-processors run just fine on netbooks, as do spreadsheets, Web-browsing works just fine, emails works just fine, skype works just fine. Hell, photo-management and basic adjustments would probably also work just fine!

Hell, some could say that MacBook is underpowered, and that only Mac that has enough power is a Octo-core Mac Pro. It all depends what you plan to do with the machine. Netbooks are not marketed as tools for hi-end graphics-manipulation or video-editing, they are marketed for other tasks.

And here's a clue: netbooks started selling like crazy even before the economic meltdown. And why do they sell well? Because they are

a) cheap
b) small

Earlier, if you wanted a subnotebook, you were looking at spending about 2000 bucks on one. Introduction of netbooks means that the price was slashed by about 75%.

And since netbooks are selling well, it means that they are attractive to the consumers, regardless of the consumers motivation to buy one. If it wasn't attractive, they wouldn't sell well.

 

[burningbright]

I wouldn't consider getting a netbook until they're dual core and can play full HD videos really well. I believe the step up to dual core does offer major productivity boosts, whereas adding further cores doesn't currently do that much apart from for more specialist stuff like 3D and video editing. I think the toughest task most people would ever ask of a netbook, except for gaming, is watching HD video- on such a small screen people aren't going to be doing video editing or CAD, and of course there's no optical drive to encode DVDs off. You can never tell, but I'd be pretty confident that this spec of netbook would still be perfectly adequate for the things netbooks are marketed for for it's entire lifespan.

As for new Apple products, I'd most like to see an all-in-one TV incorporating really easy internet access, household media management, time capsule and the ability to play iPhone games. TV can't *just* be a hobby going nowhere, and TV is a classic Apple opportunity- TV manufacturers are dragging their heels and reluctantly introducing crippled web surfing despite the lack of technical barriers. That looks fertile territory for a product that transforms the industry...

 

[Evangelion]

I wouldn't consider getting a netbook until they're dual core and can play full HD videos really well.

Consideringn that the screens on netbooks are nowhere near FullHD, I fail to see the point....

I think the toughest task most people would ever ask of a netbook, except for gaming, is watching HD video- on such a small screen people aren't going to be doing video editing or CAD, and of course there's no optical drive to encode DVDs off.

So, you think that they wont be doing CAD etc. on such a small-screen, but you DO think that they would watch FuilHD-movies on such a small, low-resolution screen?

As for new Apple products, I'd most like to see an all-in-one TV incorporating really easy internet access, household media management, time capsule and the ability to play iPhone games.

Not gonna happen. TV-business is not profitable, and models depreciate in value really fast. Why should Apple sell a TV, when they can instead sell an addon to your existing TV?

 

[nadirturkman]

A ship that leaks from the top...

yes yes indeed.. Jobs did mention that somewhere..

 

[salmon]

I've been waiting for Apple to come out with a netbook type machine for about 6 years now. Although I hear a few people say they wouldn't carry it around if it didn't fit in a pocket, I think there'd be a huge market without them.

First, user-oriented features: eBooks (this is huge), calendars, web browsing, email, note taking, document reviewing, games, and all of the other app store goodies (finance, todo lists, etc) would make it indispensible for me. I'm not going to carry a laptop around everywhere, and while the iPod Touch's screen is magnificent, I'd prefer a bigger one, especially for eBooks. Having an integrated iSight would be awesome.

Lots of people carry around day planners, portfolios, laptops, purses, manbags, etc. For lots of people, it would be all the computer they need, and they could have it work with Time Machine to stay backed up.

It would be perfect for people in my office, for sure, because they're always getting others to review documents and collaborate on things. Lugging a laptop around is a PITA, and having to sit around a computer screen is less than ideal. This, one could take with them everywhere.

The iPhone's keyboard is way better than any other phone I've played with. Making it bigger would make it even better.

As for form factor, something like OLPC's 2nd generation concept would be perfect, if Ives could work his magic and make the 2 screens seamless when put together.

To me, it fits the sweet spot of portability. My ideal set up would be a really nice 24" iMac, an Apple tablet and an iPod Nano.

 

[BenRoethig]

netbooks aren't new.

Apple doesn't follow. They either innovate, or stagnate.

I liked them much better when they were innovating, they produced some really great products. You still see flashes of that in the handheld arena, though Apple seems to be doing tis best to stifle that segment by alienating the developers.

iMac is only the base of APPLE's desktop market.

And only because Apple purposely positioned to be. Its much easier to steer your user base the way you want to go when you're holding all the strings. Who cares if they're happy as long as their cash is in your pocket?

 

[FoxHoundADAM]

Um, isn't the Air essentially a netbook? Yeah it's a PRICEY netbook but isn't that what it is used for?

 

[Evangelion]

Um, isn't the Air essentially a netbook?

No, it isn't

Yeah it's a PRICEY netbook but isn't that what it is used for?

Pricey netbook = subnotebook. Subnotebook is not a netbook.

 

[BenRoethig]

Um, isn't the Air essentially a netbook? Yeah it's a PRICEY netbook but isn't that what it is used for?

Its an ultra-portable designed more for business travelers. There are some larger netbooks though that creep into the area of a consumer equivalent to an ultra portable.

 

[greg.dorval]

I keep telling people March.

I have some friends that have been waiting for a Mac mini update for almost a year now.

What makes you believe that we will see new/updated products in March? And which products are you referring to? Mac Mini? iPhone? net book? iMac?

 

[chrmjenkins]

Um, isn't the Air essentially a netbook? Yeah it's a PRICEY netbook but isn't that what it is used for?

Fellow CAG'er? (chrmjenkins=anexanhume)

and what's the last price apple sold the phone for without a service contract?

400 . Mind you, that's the first gen iphone they were selling alone. Now that they're not concerned with the unsubsidized price being affordable, it goes for much more. Plus, the ipod touch comment you made is relevant as well.

 

[Sehnsucht]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here about the difference between a netbook and a tablet.

Netbook: A small, CHEAP computer in laptop form factor, usually without an optical drive. Contains mobile processor.

Tablet: A full sized computer (13" and above) with a touch screen and no physical keyboard. Usually has an optical drive. Can have "regular" dual-core laptop processors.

An Apple netbook? Gag! If they made one, I wouldn't be the least bit interested. As has been discussed countless times here, netbooks are underpowered as f***. A tablet, on the other hand, can be a real computer, and are definitely not a budget item. Tablets are large enough to contain real dual core processors and plenty of RAM. I'm drooling now as I imagine a Mac tablet with, say, an Intel Core Duo 2.93GHz, 256GB SSD, optical drive, etc. Apple would definitely charge about $4,799 for something like that.

Death to Apple netbooks, let's see a Mac tablet!

 

[burningbright]

Consideringn that the screens on netbooks are nowhere near FullHD, I fail to see the point....



So, you think that they wont be doing CAD etc. on such a small-screen, but you DO think that they would watch FuilHD-movies on such a small, low-resolution screen?

TV-business is not profitable, and models depreciate in value really fast. Why should Apple sell a TV, when they can instead sell an addon to your existing TV?

Erm, no, I don't think you would see better resolution etc. on netbook screens, but I think that more and more of the web will have HD content, and it would be handy to have processors that could cope with playing that. The primary purpose of netbooks is to surf the full web, no?

Regarding the TV business, I believe Apple will do something much more than the ATV. The existing add-on has hardly set the world on fire now, has it? I also think that computer-manufacture is more cut-throat than TV manufacture, and the models depreciate in value even faster. Premium products delivering a great, reliable experience tends to be what Apple aims for...

 

[Eric S.]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here about the difference between a netbook and a tablet.

Some people aren't necessarily confused; they just maintain that both would occupy the same market segment and offer essentially the same capabilities. I don't think we'll see either one any time soon, and for the same reason: not enough profit margin without pricing it out of its intended market.

 

[chrmjenkins]

Some people aren't necessarily confused; they just maintain that both would occupy the same market segment and offer essentially the same capabilities. I don't think we'll see either one any time soon, and for the same reason: not enough profit margin without pricing it out of its intended market.

Pricing it out of its intended market? Sony called, they have a letter they'd like to show you

 

[eastercat]

Even if Apple did release a netbook, I can't picture a $500 price tag (which is presumably why people are excited about the idea of an Apple netbook). Apple would likely price it closer to a high end netbook, possibly $700-$800.
Granted, you'd still get the features inherent in netbooks (light weight, portability, etc). However, the price point would be close enough to a white MB that it might cannibalize MB sales. Either that, or people don't see the point of buying the netbook when they can get a decently powered computer for a couple of hundred more.
Personally, I'm undecided as to whether I want an Apple netbook. I love my MBP, even though it's too heavy for regular travel.