Some of the firms tasked with supplying parts for Apple’s rumoured tablet PC have been named. Industry sources reportedly told Taiwanese website Apple Daily that Wintek Corp will supply the tablet’s touch-sensitive display, which it’s widely believed will measure 10in. The Dynapack International Technology Corp will provide the …
So very un-Apple like
I call shenanigans; the iPhone/iTouch is already a competent web browsing platform, sure the screen could do with being bigger but that would break compatibility with all the current applications which assume a 320x480 display size.
September is only a few months after the release of the 3GS too, usually there's a longer wait between releases. I'm of the opinion Apple is developing a touch display for the Apple TV.
/Evil Steve because his company is so unpredictable at times
re: So very un-Apple like
Actually Apple tends to announce the new iPod range (including the iPod Touch) each September, so this is very Apple-like.
Makes sense to align this with the iPods so it's thought of as a 'jumbo iPod Touch', i.e. a media-centric device, rather than a stripped-down MacBook with touch controls.
No flexible screen? No magical unicorns to help carry it?
Already bored with it...
And the target audience is.....
.....................MacTurds with more money than sense.
Put it in the corner with the Sinclair C5, Segways and Apple TV.
I know how much
I know how much it will be...too much, like all apple products.
Yes, the touch and the 'phone are good READING devices, but they are pretty abysmal WRITING devices. And yes, I do go around writing emails on them every day. But I would use them much more if I could properly take notes on them at meetings and lectures, for which they are currently not suitable, mainly because of the size. If the rumoured device will accept a stylus for taking notes on (I don't even care about OCR, just record the image!) I'll queue up on release day. I really really really hate paper. (But love trees!)
re: So very un-Apple like
> I call shenanigans;
That is all for today, do with it what you will.....
Can someone tell me ...
... what i will be using the iTablet for? I've got an iPhone which covers practically everything i'd ever want to do while not at home, i.e email, web, movies and music. And in fact when i am home, i only break out the laptop/desktop if i've got some proper work to do. If someone can give me a good reason i'll happily fork over the $8billion Cupertino will no doubt ask for it.
Do ye muppets spend your days over on the Ferrari forums complaining about how much more expensive they are and that only FerrariTurd Fanbois would pay the price for it and how Ferrari rip people off because you can buy a Toyota for a quarter of the price.
@ Seania Ryan
Good analogy, assuming the Ferrari only runs on Ferrari-sanctioned roads, and can only use petrol dispensed from Ferrari-sanctioned garages, and lacks basic features like seats, steering wheel and an engine. Shyah.
Why is everyone going iTablet
Just because it is the category name. Somehow iPad sounds like something the marketing folks could run with,pay off the iPod etc..
also @ Seanie Ryan
And, remember, in your analogy, the Ferraris in question would still be Honda Civics under the hood. Apple products use the same componants as PCs you idjut, just in shiny wrappers.
You would think The Reg readers would appreciate OS X. Unix underpinnings with a pretty UI? So it costs more -- people still keep buying them, so why would it matter to Apple?
not iTablet but iPad !
BAD analogy on your part. Apple runs on the same roads (network/internet), uses the same petrol (electricity) and has the same basic features. In short, Seania's point was well made, why are the bitching, but yours was full of errors.
"And, remember, in your analogy, the Ferraris in question would still be Honda Civics under the hood. Apple products use the same componants as PCs you idjut, just in shiny wrappers"
So? Audis have Skoda parts in them, Jaguars have Ford parts in them. Are they all priced the same?
Starbucks muffins have the same ingredients in them as Tesco muffins yet they cost twice the price.
Nobody's forcing you to buy anything from Apple. Grow up and get over the fact that people are willing to pay more for what they perceive as a better product.
RE: B 9
I'm absolutely certain he was referring to software and Apple's bad record with third-party compatibility. Not redundantly obvious things like power and the internet.
@Aaron 10, good post.
now some answers...
"Apple products use the same componants as PCs you idjut, just in shiny wrappers."
ferraris are fancy Fiats. and they do lack things found in other cars. You think the metal or fibre glass in a ferrari is somehow "better" metal etc. than in a ford?
"Good analogy, assuming the Ferrari only runs on Ferrari-sanctioned roads, and can only use petrol dispensed from Ferrari-sanctioned garages, and lacks basic features like seats, steering wheel and an engine. Shyah."
Just tried to put the dashboard from a ferrari into a mini. didnt work. bloody ferrari !!! ripping people off as always.
Are you suggesting I can put a HP motherboard in my dell laptop?? last time i check you could replace parts like HD' s etc in a mac and you can run os x , windows , linux on it. Maybe you are saying that linux is bad because it also doesnt natively run win apps?
Good job personal preference and freedom of choice exists. Option are not 'bad' just because they are not your options...
Its strange how 99% of people who use macs think they are worth the money, but 99% of people who use PC's think they are too expensive but are unwilling to accept others opinions. Open your minds
"BAD analogy on your part. Apple runs on the same roads (network/internet), uses the same petrol (electricity) and has the same basic features. In short, Seania's point was well made, why are the bitching, but yours was full of errors."
Sure, Apple runs on the same roads, but it can only run on some of them (iPhone is only available on O2 in the UK and AT&T in the US).
Sure it uses the same petrol (apps, I was thinking) but you can only load apps from the app store, not from anywhere else, hence the analogy.
In terms of basic features (e.g. steering wheel), iPhone has, for instance, no multi-tasking.
I rest my case, m'lud.
@Hombre sin nombre
"I'm absolutely certain he was referring to software and Apple's bad record with third-party compatibility."
Huh? There's a huge wealth of software available for Macs and only a small portion of that is written by Apple.
No. they use the same *processors* as everyone else now - the rest of the components were always the same - in fact Apple were using many technologies before anyone else such as Firewire, Wireless networking and USB to name a few (NB fanboi's; this isn't the same as saying Apple *invented* the technology, merely implemented it first). So, when Mac had different processors, would the analogy work better in your mind? What is it with you dim-witted, childish fanbois? Why don't you think things through?