Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
An upscaled iPod would be useless. If it's not running the full OS X and can't run Pixelmator, Pages, iPhoto, etc. it's just a toy.
 
An upscaled iPod would be useless. If it's not running the full OS X and can't run Pixelmator, Pages, iPhoto, etc. it's just a toy.

One thing is for sure- There is no up coming product which will be BOTH a competitor in the netbook market based on the cloud-computing model
AND
a Wacom style tablet suitable for professional creative design.

Sorry. Not going to happen. Place your bet, cheer for your horse and hope it wins.
 
Not sure if it's been posted before, but couldn't it have just been a normal netbook with Mac OS X on it? AFAIK, all current netbooks have resolutions of 1024 x 600.
 
Combine the Macbook Air's logic board (tiny), an Atom processor (low-power, medium performance), Unibody enclosure with maybe 1.5" thickness...


seriously? 1.5 inches thick, that's insane!

i think Apple should just wait till they can do a netbook, that has a C2D proc. that doesn't use as much power, and a thickness of no more than .75 inches.

we all know that they can do it, the macbook air is a clear example, they just need to reduce the screen size to about 11"

of course i also think that netbooks are not crucial, and Apple can obviously survive without them.:apple::apple::apple:
 
Read my lips Steve Jobs

Crank out a 10" Air like everyone was originally expecting

And make everyone happy!

Think Happy :D

Don't forget

Built in 3G Antenna
Silver Keys
Matte Screen
No Butt Ugly Black Bezel
No Sharp Edges

Think Extra Happy ;)
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone 3G; CPU iPhone OS 0_o) like Mac OS X; O HAI) AppleWebKizzle/420.1 (KHTML, like a G thang) Venda/ My Pimp Hand is way strong/ Safari/420.69)

...
Web user-agent identifications are easy to falsify. In fact, in many browsers users can enter whatever identifying string they would like. Similarly, resolution is a self reported statistic from the user's browser.
...
Whaaaaa? I'm sure I have no idea what they are talking about. http://upc.*************/uploads/smilies/dogeyes_s.gif
 
Anyone see this yet?
medium_2167867785_21c57ec5d9_o.jpg

http://gizmodo.com/5067405/macbook-nano-or-iphone-slate-caught-online-says-nyt
 
whatever they do it they need to put a FireWire port on it otherwise we won't hear anything but the moans and cries from all the people who believe they will die if they don't buy it .

Well if by that you mean, would i buy one with Firewire on it, then yes!

You have a problem with that?
 
So if I change my Mac Mini's resolution to something ridiculously low-res and mess about with the browser settings, G**gle will pick this up as new hardware?

The words "non" and "story" spring instantly to mind.
 
Only if the site asks the browser and stores that information. Storing UA strings is likely, storing screen resolutions isn't.
Besides, it's not like the resolution is indicative of anything. My UA string tells you the browser I'm using and the OS I'm on. I could be using an external screen, have set my resolution low, or be on a hackintosh.
Karl

1) In addition to browser/OS version information from the user agent, just about every decent 3rd party web analytics package will report the screen resolution of your visitors if javascript is enabled in their browser.

2) If we knew the actual details of the user agent, resolution, and visitor(s) IP address we could at least get a much better idea of the validity of this. If the user agent reported an heretofore unknown version of OSX or Safari and the IP address was registered to Apple or at least in the their area, I would be much more willing to believe.


An upscaled iPod would be useless. If it's not running the full OS X and can't run Pixelmator, Pages, iPhoto, etc. it's just a toy.
So you are calling the iPhone a "toy"?
 
seriously? 1.5 inches thick, that's insane!

i think Apple should just wait till they can do a netbook, that has a C2D proc. that doesn't use as much power, and a thickness of no more than .75 inches.

we all know that they can do it, the macbook air is a clear example, they just need to reduce the screen size to about 11"

of course i also think that netbooks are not crucial, and Apple can obviously survive without them.:apple::apple::apple:

Errr... ok.
The Macbook Air is worse than the Macbook in terms of performance, but costs considerably more because it is thin. The Air's battery is very large (although thin).

If Apple were to make an equally thin netbook, you coudn't really put anything inside. At least by today's standards.
 
My understanding was the search engine noticed (1) a different user agent string, and (2) a different resolution. I think the combination of things is why they made note of it, and my guess would be it has happened from enough IP addresses that they found it noteworthy.

Storing screen resolution is pretty likely for most search engines looking for statistics on their users. They generally want as much information as they can get on their users, especially now that they are all involved in webmail clients and other "Web 2.0" applications.

I'm not saying it's real, or that we'll ever see an Apple tablet, but I don't think you can discount the search engine's findings when you haven't seen all the information.

Since the resolution is retrieved through javascript, I believe a second HTTP request would be required to store the resolution. I find it very unlikely that any search engines would waste resources and literally double the amount of requests they have to handle just to retrieve resolutions of their viewers. This information could be tagged on to other ajax requests, but it seems to me that they would rely on third parties for resolution statistics rather than waste resources collecting the data themselves.
 
An upscaled iPod would be useless. If it's not running the full OS X and can't run Pixelmator, Pages, iPhoto, etc. it's just a toy.
I think it's fairly probable that this "upscaled iPod" will have mobile versions of Pages (iWork) and iPhoto (iLife)…

And Mac OS X on a small-screened and low-powered device isn't exactly useful either. Note that an Apple netbook is likely to have lower specs and higher prices than similar PC netbooks since the Apple version is likely to be much thinner.
 
Does it really matter if Apple is developing a netbook? When/If it does come out with one it will be significantly more expensive than the Linux based one and everyone here will just whine "it's too expensive, it will never sell."

The huge problem Apple has with a netbook is insuring it doesn't come out with something that cannibalizes MBA sales. So an Apple Netbook would probably resemble the Touch on steroids rather than a shrunken MBA.
 
I love this rumor : Someone saw something that shows Apple might have something that is a netbook, but we can't tell you anything about it.

This proves it--there is a new, small Cinema Display made specifically for people going retro. Those res-haters are going to foul up the market with their love of less.
 
Not a cheap netbook, but a mini laptop! Something along the lines of a 9" Air or 10" MacBook!

The iPhone is already a 'netbook and includes a camera, phone, iPod, GPS, etc...

As for a glass tablet, hmmmm. I like the mockup of the one where the cd/dvd goes into the side. Glass is fine for dialing, texting and emailing on the iPhone. I'm just not sure yet about how touch typing, ergonomics and privacy would translate to a flat and open glass tablet. I guess I'm open to it. Damage is not a concern with the iPhone.
 
Why wouldn't the user agent be spoofed?

Apple is not stupid -- their folks would certainly realize that a unique user agent would eventually be spotted in the logs. And they also realize that user agents can be masked by spoofing them, and so if they had a super-sekrit project they wanted to keep hidden, they could very simply make it appear to be some existing device.

So, either someone else is spoofing their user agent to give the impression of some super-sekrit (but fake) new Apple device, or Apple itself is creating a bit of stealth buzz. Given Apple, I think the former is far more likely.
 
The OLO may be fake, but might reveal a highly marketable peripheral for the iPhone. This would be interesting, and would likely work, with a little assistance from an additional internal processor to boot a fully operational OS X - A Netbook for the rest-of-us:

http://localtechwire.com/business/local_tech_wire/venture/story/3725254/

You mean a Palm Folio but from Apple?

Knowing how Folio ended from Palm I think it'd be the dumb est approach of the netbook market... OTOH APple is very good at taking someone else's idea and redressing then selling it as its own so who knows...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.