New Apple announcements next week!

[RedRock]

I was just saying the other day--if Apple had a larger iPhone that could also work like a Kindle and have a bigger keyboard and screen area, sort of an iPhoneBook, I'd be very interested. It could be what's up!

www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f2768f923ef8a8ad851412476690dcb9.971&show_article=1

I knew you guys would want to be kept abreast of all the titillating information on Apple's continued technological and business successes!

[Death's Shadow]

What a shocker Apple too announce more WAY over priced goodies too buy by Xmas time. LOL

[Lamron]

A touch screen only tablet would be cool. With smart phones getting bigger and more computer-like, and netbooks getting smaller, I'm hoping for them to meet in the middle.

I'd like to see something with:

9"-10" screen with minimal border/frame. The smallest overall size the screen will fit in.

Touch screen (no keyboard) with no hinges/swivels to break or add bulk.

Built in Cellular connection (sim card type) and WiFi (N), with auto switching to best available.

Single row of manual controls including lockout switch, scroll wheel, and user definable keys

Easy switching between landscape and portrait modes, minimum 1280x720 resolution

Common laptop type SSD. I should be able to pop in any future generic drive. No soldiered-in proprietary hardware!

And most importantly, the end user should be able to pick what operating system to run on it. Or even dual or triple boot it. There's no reason that one set of hardware couldn't run any/all of these:

Expanded iPhone-based OS
Snow Leopard
Android
Linux
Win7
Chrome OS


None of this requires any new technology, someone just has to put it together. I think these would sell great if they could get them down to a sub-$400 price point, or half that with a cellular contract.

My guess would be that Apple will have the first "Cellular Tablet", followed by something designed around Android to directly compete against it. But Asus will probably be the one that actually ends up making something closest to what I'm looking for.

[RedRock]

Yeah, I agree, Lamron, I'd like all that too and expect Apple will do it.

I like how my iPhone changes landscape/portrait automatically when I turn the iPhone on its side, and back. Some of the apps, though, don't do it, most notably the GPS/Maps one. The GPS function is pretty cool and useful, btw. The newest iPhones have a built-in software compass, too. I use the camera and internet/function of my iPhone all the time, but I haven't loaded the first song or video on it yet! I really like listening to Pandora.com via headphones on my home WiFi network on the iPhone--wonderful sound and great free internet radio.

And if you have WiFi turned on for the iPhone, if it finds a network, it connects automatically (asks for password if needed, but stores the password for next time so it's automatic), then goes back to 3G when the network fails. So I'll be driving through town and notice it connect to all kinds of free hotspots at businesses (especially motels!) and people who don't pw-protect their home networks. Of course, it drains the battery more trying to connect all the time, so I usually turn WiFi off until I need to use it. Likewise, the 3G can be turned off to use the slower but less-battery burning default E (Edge) network.

I've never heard of that Android os. What can you tell us, in brief, about it?

[Death's Shadow]

Here ya go Red.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_os

[RedRock]

Thanks, DS, but it didn't really help me. I mean, I gathered it's some sort of OS, but why anyone would want it, and what it does better or worse, etc., instead of the iPhone OS or the full Mac OS, etc., is what I wanted to understand in brief. That wiki was just a bunch of rumor, tech-speak, and business hype to me, but thanks again.

[Death's Shadow]

I am not sure of the comparisons, I will have too look further. I do know it utilizes Java as a programing language. Java is everywhere, phones, on your computer, some cars have it for the nav systems... etc.

I will see what I can find out for you.

maybe Lam knows alot more about it.

[Lamron]

Android does everything the iPhone does PLUS it can run on many types of smart phone hardware. The one it was first availble on was the G1 ( www.t-mobileg1.com ). Here's an emulator to play with: tmobile.modeaondemand.com/htc/g1/


The most important thing about it is that its completely open source. So you can do anything you want with it, and anybody can make applications for it without having to get "approval". (I.E. iPhone rejecting applications like bittorrent controlers or Google voice.)

Android mostly exists because of the necessity of jailbreaking iPhones to get control of them. And since its freely available to every hardware manufacturer, you can switch brands or celluar carriers without having to give up that operating system.

Android is designed to run on moble devices, but is a solid enough base to use as an operating system for a netbook. tinyurl.com/lon47o


Proofreading this post, I'm not sure it all made sense. I'll come back to it after the pain drugs wear off or kick in.

[Lamron]

Ok, I'm back now and a little more clear-headed.


I like the way that laptops and cellphones are moving closer to each other in blending functionality and portability. The Android laptop in the previous post and the new Nokia netbook ( tinyurl.com/md2h7m ) show that there is more and more crossover between them. It will be interesting to see what wins out among the competing hardware and software.

Here's my prediction ( I flatter myself by imagining anyone cares what I think ;D):


Apple took a huge early lead with the iPhone and introduced people to the nearly unlimited possibilities that a pocket sized computer could give them. Parallel development of the hardware and software done completely in-house gives them a strong advantage over competitors.

They probably won't loose any market share, but I think they will get left behind in the future of pocket-sized mobile computing. Unless they are willing to split the hardware and software portions of their company, there will be limits to customer acceptance of their products.


It used to be that each cellphone had a completely different set of menus and options that you had to learn how to use. If a phone didn't have a feature you wanted, you either bought something else or did without that feature. But as consumers start thinking of their cell phone as a computer, now we have a problem. If someone says you can't do something with your computer, you don't just accept it. You change an existing program or install new software so it does what you want. Nobody would put up with having to replace the whole thing every time they wanted decided they wanted a new feature.

For hardware companies, the solution is obvious. Develop industry standards and build generic hardware. Your product line would have units with different processing speeds, memory, input devices, and graphic capabilities. But the basic structure would be the same and the end user could run whatever he wanted on it. This is exactly the way the PC world is now. The parts I buy from New Egg don't care what OS I feel like running.

The Operating Systems just needs to be a framework that allows the programs running to connect the user input/output to the hardware. Its the software RUNNING on the unit that actually gives the user what they want. And the comercial and freeware programs available do closely match and keep up with what consumers want their hardware to do.

You can put whatever fine print you want into the EULA, but the user doesn't care about that. He thinks, "This is MY hardware. I paid for it. I'll do whatever I feel like with it. If I want something and it is technologically possible, it should be available to me. I'm not interested in excuses, or how it competes with something else you're trying to sell, or how you don't approve of what I'm doing, or anything else. I'm not going to subject myself to your limitations. I'll simply circumvent them or buy hardware that doesn't give me trouble, whichever is more convenient."


Examples:

Apple Rejects BitTorrent Monitoring Application for iPhone
tinyurl.com/lhoubk

I'm sure Apple had what they consider good reasons for doing this. But the user says, its technologically possible and I want it. Apple's reasons and desires are irrelevant to me.

Apple Rejects Official Google Voice iPhone App
tinyurl.com/ln4n5p

This was a very reasonable decision by the bean counters at Apple. You can't really expect them to support something that actually competes with them and looses them money. But the user doesn't care if Apple looses money. This is were there is a conflict of interest. Apple hardware prevented the customer from using a service because Apple software would loose money.


Having the hardware and software coming from the same company is a huge advantage to that company, even though it places limits on the customer. As long as they are at the forefront of technology this works fine (and is VERY profitable). But as soon as they have viable competition, they loose their advantage to companies that are not hindered by internal conflicts of interest and can freely supply the consumer with anything they can imagine.


=========================================================

In the end, the real money makers are the hardware manufacturers and the wireless service providers. The manufactures and providers that have the most open and flexible offerings will be what the customer wants. The customer will want to be able to choose his OS, hardware, and service plans independently. And being able to use nearly the same OS on your cellphone as your computer will be a big plus.

This shift in the market may give a few newer OSs a chance for acceptance that they wouldn't have had otherwise. Units running Android, Chrome, or Linux will be cheaper and much more user customizable. Units running a new portable version of Windows will probably be a little more polished and professional looking and may have a slight reliability advantage.

Apple could introduce a hardware independant mobile OS based on Snow Leapord or and expanded version of what the iPhone uses, but it seems quite unlikely since it would weaken sales of their hardware.


Apple does have the ability to create an awesome new peice of hardware that would let you run anything you want on it. They do make high quality products that people really do like using. I think that they COULD dominate the hardware market, and keep a strong presence in the software market too, but it would require such a huge restructuring of the company that I highly doubt they'd take the step. After all, they are VERY successful and profitable now. Why risk the good position they're in?


=================================================

So what do you guys think? Am I off my rocker, or do you see it playing out the same way?

[RedRock]

Apple's historical perspective is that when they open up their hardware for just any old Fool to run any old OS on, everything goes kaplooey with function, not to mention profit. They point to IBM, of which many youngsters have never heard of, for a company that used to be king with pc's and then went bust once they started letting the OS be purchased separately and put in at a whim, and Apple itself has experience with licensing its own Mac OS to third party vendors to put into their machines, it just doesn't work!!! (I know by experience, in the early 90's I bought a 68030-based processor laptop (a "hot" machine then) from a non-Apple company that ran the Mac OS on it, and it was a piece of garbage--didn't run smoothly, crashed a bunch, etc., and I ended up sending it back for a full refund in less than 30 days after receiving it.)

Also, Apple won't let you install ring-tones on the iPhone unless you've bought the tune from its store. But so what, there are apps, and work-arounds out there, including the iToner app, that work just fine for that (speaking from experience!), and even though Apple tries to block that app with each new OS update, the make of the app just releases a running updated version of the software! So to some extent, your argument is off, there, too, that there is no added or available non-Apple flexibility for change/user-desired upgrades. Could it perhaps be that as the consumate consumer and inveterate tinkerer, Lamron, you just want more than the average user??? Crap, there are kazillions of apps for the iPhone, and I've downloaded maybe 10, but they do all I need, or almost all I need, at the moment.

[Death's Shadow]

I do not know about Lam, but I do not like being "boxed" into an OS or approved app. I want too run what I want too run when I want too run it. (was that too many I's and runs lol ?)

As Lam said, if I buy the hardware I want too run what ever software on it that my heart desires. Play what ever ring tones I wish with out being forced too buy them from the manufacture of the hardware, and definitively not have the OS updater trying too block what I want on the hardware.


Too me that has over tones of what the libs are trying too do too us now.. Force what they want (product in this case), and think is best for their users down our throats. Not too pick a fight or be nasty, that's just how it feels too me.

[RedRock]

Yep, I understand, truly, and I support your desire (?right) to do that, I just don't overly care about doing it myself.

[RedRock]

Well, I'm disappointed, despite what the expert said.

"If you were expecting an Apple jetpack or an Apple hovercraft, or even an Apple tablet, you didn't get that," Gartenberg said, referring to speculation that Apple was producing a "tablet"-style device resembling a giant iPod Touch.

No, instead it's video recording capability on iPod nano's and some memory upgrades to existing iPods, etc., plus some talk about the iPhone, plus iTunes software upgraded capabilities for sharing purchased products.

apnews1.iwon.com//article/20090909/D9AK15DG0.html

Jobs, whose medical problems began more than five years ago and included treatment for a rare form of pancreatic cancer, seemed happy to be back in the spotlight, saying, "I'm vertical, I'm back at Apple and loving every day of it."

As was expected, Apple's announcements were mainly tied to music players and the iTunes software, though Jobs spoke briefly about the iPhone and said 30 million of the devices had been sold so far.

Apple compared the new video-camera Nano to Cisco Systems Inc.'s Flip Mino, a tiny, simple video recorder that sells for $149, just like the basic, eight-gigabyte version of the overhauled Nano (The 16 GB Nano costs $179). The Nano - the smallest iPod that has a screen - also has a microphone, a pedometer, a 2.2-inch display and an FM radio tuner.

Meanwhile, the new version of iTunes, known as iTunes 9, gives people more control over what content gets loaded on to iPods and iPhones. It lets five computers on the same home network share - by streaming or copying - music, video and other content, a departure from the strict copy protection Apple insisted on in the past.

Michael Gartenberg, a technology analyst with the Interpret market-research firm, said Apple met "reasonable expectations" with its Wednesday announcements.

[Death's Shadow]

Now is the time for Microsoft.. or even one of the other companies too strike while the iron is hot and put out the next new device that everyone wants at a reasonable price and quality.

I vote for the tablet pc/phone. maybe they could call it a PAD like on Trek.. HEHE.

(personal assistant device)

[Lamron]

Trek P.A.D.D (Personal Access Display Device)

memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/PADD