[quote author=“capablanca”]Speculation only:  Could it be that the rumored 21st century Newton is actually an Intel phone with Leopard and an SDK?  iPhone II.

Not yet. It must be that Intel will produce a CPU suitable for an iPhone sized product. I don’t know if next year’s CPU is that chip, or if it will be a further year to 18 months away. But Apple do know. And I believe carrier exclusives and SDK are close to incompatible today; VOIP being the reason.

Another aspect of the Web-2.0-only thing is that it means all iPhone apps can be run on a personal computer too, with only a modern browser and Quicktime installed. I think the Mac range first grows innocently down towards the iPod & iPhone, and after the iPhone exclusives with carriers come to an end, the transition to iPhone-as-full-Mac becomes simply a soft switch for Apple, but its effect on the market is rapid and brutal, transforming other products into niche players.

The big question in my mind is, how will Apple ensure that flat rate mobile bandwidth is available when the exclusives end? Google may well have a hand in that. The carriers hate it because it destroys their “added value” revenues (content sales) and puts them in their place as a utility.

[quote author=“sleepygeek”][quote author=“capablanca”]Speculation only:  Could it be that the rumored 21st century Newton is actually an Intel phone with Leopard and an SDK?  iPhone II.

Not yet. It must be that Intel will produce a CPU suitable for an iPhone sized product. I don’t know if next year’s CPU is that chip, or if it will be a further year to 18 months away. But Apple do know. And I believe carrier exclusives and SDK are close to incompatible today; VOIP being the reason.

Another aspect of the Web-2.0-only thing is that it means all iPhone apps can be run on a personal computer too, with only a modern browser and Quicktime installed. I think the Mac range first grows innocently down towards the iPod & iPhone, and after the iPhone exclusives with carriers come to an end, the transition to iPhone-as-full-Mac becomes simply a soft switch for Apple, but its effect on the market is rapid and brutal, transforming other products into niche players.

The big question in my mind is, how will Apple ensure that flat rate mobile bandwidth is available when the exclusives end? Google may well have a hand in that. The carriers hate it because it destroys their “added value” revenues (content sales) and puts them in their place as a utility.

 

So the Mac becomes a “Mac Mobile” using Intel’s Silverthorne (or whatever), and the SDK for this pocket size “Mac Mobile” is the same as any other Mac Xcode/Cocoa.

This might even make sense as a branding play.

If you want third party apps, get a Mac (mobile, laptop, desktop).  And since you bought a Mac “computer”, pocketsize or othewise, you will just have to accept the shortcomings of computers:  limited battery life, occasional crashes due to buggy third party apps, etc.  But you will have a completely extensible device where you get to make the decisions about the tradeoffs between battery life, stability, and functionality.

When you buy an iPhone, you can expect amazing battery life, web apps, Apple approved offline apps whose stability will become rock solid soon enough, and a completely integrated user experience among all the apps and functions…oh, and soon enough, a $200 price point.

I’m not predicting Apple will take this approach.  I’m just thinking out loud as I try to understand SG’s posts by playing with the possible implications.

Little bit off topic but…

Has anyone noticed how low a profile the new keyboards are? I mean they appear to be that much lower than the Macbook I have - like 50% lower. I wonder if apple are “training” us to get used to being no keyboard at all.

So perhaps in two years they ship a display which is just a keyboard - but infinitely customizable. Want to change keyboards? - bingo - keyboard layout changes at the press of a button. Want to do music? - the keyboard converts to a simple music keyboard. Want to perhaps use it as a drum pad? - the layout can be set up for that too.

It would be very nice in that if you were stuck it could perhaps pulse the keys you might be looking for for example - and no paperclip helper in sight!

Just an idea…

[quote author=“rattyuk”]Little bit off topic but…

Has anyone noticed how low a profile the new keyboards are? I mean they appear to be that much lower than the Macbook I have - like 50% lower. I wonder if apple are “training” us to get used to being no keyboard at all.

So perhaps in two years they ship a display which is just a keyboard - but infinitely customizable. Want to change keyboards? - bingo - keyboard layout changes at the press of a button. Want to do music? - the keyboard converts to a simple music keyboard. Want to perhaps use it as a drum pad? - the layout can be set up for that too.

It would be very nice in that if you were stuck it could perhaps pulse the keys you might be looking for for example - and no paperclip helper in sight!

Just an idea…

Too late.  Zeke and your sincerely have thought of this idea.  Try harder .  What do you think when we say virtual, multi-touch keyboard?

[quote author=“Mace”]Too late.  Zeke and your sincerely have thought of this idea.  Try harder .  What do you think when we say virtual, multi-touch keyboard?

Damn should read the thread more carefully before posting. My bad.

[quote author=“alcatholic”][quote author=“sleepygeek”][quote author=“capablanca”]Speculation only:  Could it be that the rumored 21st century Newton is actually an Intel phone with Leopard and an SDK?  iPhone II.

Not yet. It must be that Intel will produce a CPU suitable for an iPhone sized product. I don’t know if next year’s CPU is that chip, or if it will be a further year to 18 months away. But Apple do know. And I believe carrier exclusives and SDK are close to incompatible today; VOIP being the reason.

Another aspect of the Web-2.0-only thing is that it means all iPhone apps can be run on a personal computer too, with only a modern browser and Quicktime installed. I think the Mac range first grows innocently down towards the iPod & iPhone, and after the iPhone exclusives with carriers come to an end, the transition to iPhone-as-full-Mac becomes simply a soft switch for Apple, but its effect on the market is rapid and brutal, transforming other products into niche players.

The big question in my mind is, how will Apple ensure that flat rate mobile bandwidth is available when the exclusives end? Google may well have a hand in that. The carriers hate it because it destroys their “added value” revenues (content sales) and puts them in their place as a utility.

So the Mac becomes a “Mac Mobile” using Intel’s Silverthorne (or whatever), and the SDK for this pocket size “Mac Mobile” is the same as any other Mac Xcode/Cocoa.

This might even make sense as a branding play.

If you want third party apps, get a Mac (mobile, laptop, desktop).  And since you bought a Mac “computer”, pocketsize or othewise, you will just have to accept the shortcomings of computers:  limited battery life, occasional crashes due to buggy third party apps, etc.  But you will have a completely extensible device where you get to make the decisions about the tradeoffs between battery life, stability, and functionality.

When you buy an iPhone, you can expect amazing battery life, web apps, Apple approved offline apps whose stability will become rock solid soon enough, and a completely integrated user experience among all the apps and functions…oh, and soon enough, a $200 price point.

I’m not predicting Apple will take this approach.  I’m just thinking out loud as I try to understand SG’s posts by playing with the possible implications.

Both of you describe the possibilities better than I did.  Use of the term “branding” clarifies my speculated bifurcation.  Two products.  Both are computers; both are phones; both fit in your pocket; both run OSX.  One is branded a computer; the other is branded a phone.  The “phone” remains web2.0; the “computer” has 3rd party aps and an SDK. 

SG: In your model it seems you envision a gradual merging of the Mac and the iPhone.  This is perhaps more likely, but the idea of two separately branded products is growing on me.  Come on, Intel.  Hurry up.