I found this link from a tech site. http://www.antelopetech.com/en/index.aspx?view=i-products_theVision.I I was thinking that this is a natural for Apple and the ipod. I wouldn't be the fastest animal on the block but for casual home users and college students it would be a good choice. Apple could merge the iMac/iBook line into one. I person could buy the ibook with the ipod then later buy the imac. the "shells" would be cheaper but still generate a lot of money because people would be buying shells for home, work, schools, etc. What do you think?
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.
What the iPod could be
- Thread starter asphalt-proof
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm conflicted about the extended-use ideas for iPod. On one hand, there is a lot more that can be done with them, on the other, it's so damn good at what it does now I'd hate to see it become a swiss army knife.
Say for instance that your iPod becomes your laptop and desktop hard drive ... and you forget it in the car one day and your wife drives off with it. Now you're not only without your music player, but two computers. That's making your life more complicated, not less.
Say for instance that your iPod becomes your laptop and desktop hard drive ... and you forget it in the car one day and your wife drives off with it. Now you're not only without your music player, but two computers. That's making your life more complicated, not less.
interesting idea. i don't think the ipod would be a good candidate, as i believe it's greatness comes from its simplicity, but i wonder if an idea like this would take off... having a compact computing unit that is pluggable to various shells.
my guess is that the current laptops would be hard to beat for the price/performance point of view. if this thing is to take off, it must offer at least the same functionality at about the same price. (or much greater functionality at not much increase in price.) novelty alone won't do it because there's only so much people are willing to pay to be able to email on the road or whatever. there's a reason people aren't really jumping on the camera phones and web-enabled phones in the u.s. their capability and usability is not justified by the additional price. (yes, it's a cool gadget, but again, novelty alone can't sustain anything for long.)
in addition, there's the concern for the computing unit security. as the prev. poster mentioned, now you can lose the most important part of your computer literally anywhere. with the wireless network rapidly spreading, i'd tend to think development of a "mobile" OS that can be accessed by dummy terminal shells anywhere would be more secure and logical..?
my guess is that the current laptops would be hard to beat for the price/performance point of view. if this thing is to take off, it must offer at least the same functionality at about the same price. (or much greater functionality at not much increase in price.) novelty alone won't do it because there's only so much people are willing to pay to be able to email on the road or whatever. there's a reason people aren't really jumping on the camera phones and web-enabled phones in the u.s. their capability and usability is not justified by the additional price. (yes, it's a cool gadget, but again, novelty alone can't sustain anything for long.)
in addition, there's the concern for the computing unit security. as the prev. poster mentioned, now you can lose the most important part of your computer literally anywhere. with the wireless network rapidly spreading, i'd tend to think development of a "mobile" OS that can be accessed by dummy terminal shells anywhere would be more secure and logical..?
The iPod price would go up. What you are talking about is more like a docking station. Take a notebook, when you are home put it into the docking station where you have a bigger monitor, all connections already in place, a regular keyboard and mouse. In order for a computer to have no display, base stations would need to be deployed with a common interface. Otherwise you would see this company uses this connector, another uses a different one, another company a different one again, etc. Then you still have KB problems though.