A project that I am working on requires the use of a small, ruggedized PC design like this . I also, because of the application, require it to have a flash drive rather than a hard drive (an air density concern).

Anyway, my buyer is telling me that my delivery is delayed because of the flash drive. According to the manufacturer of the PC, Apple is buying up all of the 64GB flash drives they can get.

I do not have anything to corroborate this, but I thought it was an interesting reason, if true. Has some major implications.

Thanks very much for the heads-up

A flash-based subnotebook and/or tablet would create a significant buzz if released at MacWorld, especially with Intel’s brand new processors.

I say we get a slim MacBook Nano but it might have up to a 13” screen.

[quote author=“lumi”]A flash-based subnotebook and/or tablet would create a significant buzz if released at MacWorld, especially with Intel’s brand new processors.

I say we get a slim MacBook Nano but it might have up to a 13” screen.

I just want a touch screen.    

So right now we seem to expect a 13 inch MacBook Pro with LED backlight and flash drive, and presumably the new Intel mobile CPU . We’ll have to wait on the tablet, and probably the touch screen too.

Re: interesting conversation with our buyer…

[quote author=“Intruder”]Apple is buying up all of the 64GB flash drives ...

Am I right in understanding that you are talking of Gigabyte (as opposed to Gigabit).

Yes. Just like standard hard drives.

I should have been more specific. 64GB Solid State Drive (SSD).

Of course this could just be destined for a new config of the standard Macbook Pro, but it certainly looks as though we’re getting a new 13 inch as well ( Digitimes ); a widescreen replacement for the old 12 inch Powerbook probably; I don’t think volumes of LED backlight displays are enough for it to be a Macbook. (SSD’s are drop-in replacements for standard hard disks)

I don’t believe a proper tablet will have either hard disk, SSD or CD/DVD drive. Any of those would make it too thick.

[quote author=“sleepygeek”]
I don’t believe a proper tablet will have either hard disk, SSD or CD/DVD drive. Any of those would make it too thick.

Then, why not a special designed thin flash HD. Solid state HDs should not have the form or size constraints that current spinning disks have, so I guess they could be produced in any form factor Apple might ask to the suppliers. I believe that behind a multi-touch flat screen of 13” or so there must be space enough to allocate a big battery, a solid state HD and all the circuitry, provided all of the components are specially designed to be extremely flat. Just think of what Apple has been able to allocate behind the amazing iPhone screen. I am sure it is not a big deal for Apple designers to produce such a device, and I am sure Apple is only waiting for the right time from a strategy/commercial point of view to release such a thing. IMO It will not be released until Apple have done with the iPhone, so to maximise total sales, not because of any current design or spec constraints.

Since the 64G flash chips are thin, multiples could be used to give a more substantial “drive”. But there is also the possibility that the new Intel fast start motherboards can incorporate both solid state and moving hard drives. If the iPhone’s touch screen is the basic design, then Flash drives provide the immediate feedback needed. A tablet with only 64GB storage may be too skimpy.

[quote author=“willrob”]Since the 64G flash chips are thin, multiples could be used to give a more substantial “drive”. But there is also the possibility that the new Intel fast start motherboards can incorporate both solid state and moving hard drives. If the iPhone’s touch screen is the basic design, then Flash drives provide the immediate feedback needed. A tablet with only 64GB storage may be too skimpy.

I disagree with the 64GB not being enough. I believe that for an iTablet (or whatever it ends to be called) this storage capacity should be enough for most tasks that most people currently do in subnotebooks. I mean, you are not supposed to to edit movies on it. In any case you should be able to use an optional external USB drive if needed.

[quote author=“carbonat”]I disagree with the 64GB not being enough. I believe that for an iTablet (or whatever it ends to be called) this storage capacity should be enough for most tasks that most people currently do in subnotebooks. I mean, you are not supposed to to edit movies on it. In any case you should be able to use an optional external USB drive if needed.

I agree. I don’t even think 64GB is needed. 32GB would be enough for a basic model as a first product (remember Apple is always tight-fisted on capacity with new products - witness the iPhone, the first nano, and the AppleTV). This is going to be used chiefly to run a handful of applications, access the internet, and media playback. It will sync with your main PC or Mac via iTunes.

I don’t think it will be designed to be thought of as a main PC replacement, but an extension of it, and will work/sync in much the same way iPhones, iPods, and AppleTVs do via iTunes - though it will likely offer full access to the file system so you can transfer your own documents to it. It will run Widgets sync’d from your Mac too, and software developed for the iPhone will easily be cross-compiled for it with changes to the interface to accommodate a larger screen.

It will feature 802.11n networking so it can sync wirelessly though, enabling you to put the charger/stand wherever you like rather than having to have it tethered phsyically to your main computer.

I wouldn’t be surprised if it didn’t even run the Finder but was more iPhone-like in its interface. It could even use an ARM-based chipset to keep costs and power requirements down.

I think people are mistakenly anticipating a MacTablet. I think its more likely to be an iTablet, if you get my meaning.

I recall that many people wanted Apple to produce a tablet years ago so they could run proprietary software for medical records, inventory, sales, etc. An electronic clipboard type device that would replace the cumbersome open laptop. If these types of apps can run, along with the needed database, on 64GB, then perhaps that is enough. But there will always be a market for more storage, particularly if one can connect a camera to it and transfer RAW files while in the field, or change catalog page layouts while visiting a client. The things we do these days have all gotten bigger, more RAM hungry, more disk devouring.

Of course I’d probably buy a 32GB version if that is all that was offered.

particularly if one can connect a camera to it and transfer RAW files while in the field

Interesting.

I’ve always wondered, though, why there’s such a substantial market for these “ultralight” laptops.  You give up an optical drive, HD expansion, CPU speed, graphics, RAM, extra ports and sometimes pay more than a 2-lb. heavier laptop that has _all_ of these.  Is it the style or the lightness/form factor that’s more appealing for the target market? 

I say the MacBook is fine and there’s no need to make anything thinner or lighter.  Then again, I’ve always been a desktop computer kinda guy.

I believe there’s more than few pro photographers or graphics folk around here who can attest that the pounds add up.  And needing to protect the electronic gear as well as haul it around is an issue.

Photographers would shoot polaroid test photos in the analog age.  Now the lap top is used on most location shoots.  I lust for a lightweight tablet/laptop.  A touchscreen image processor…......nice.  Direct, fast, wireless downloading from the camera….....even nicer, but I’m probably dreaming.  These things will come someday.  At Macworld?.......  Who knows.