By work, I mean turn into a regular laptop, as like this: http://www.notebooks.com/wp-content/uploads/gateway_tablet_e-155c_d.jpg
Honestly...I kinda don't care. I have my MBP. I have my iPod touch. Why in the hell would I need this mythical "iSlate"? Honestly...who is this targeted towards? I gather it's not simply going to be a larger iPhone/touch, as Apple could've done that a while back. And it's most likely not gonna be as full powered as the Macbooks or the Macbook Pros. If it comes to pass, I'm guessing it may very well run on NVidia's ION platform. Or maybe, just maybe, it'll run on a multicore ARM Cortex A9 and multicore SGX solution. And that means it'll be it's own little beast (especially if using the former solution) and therefore will have to "wow" people on it's own rather than "piggybacking" off of the iPhone/touch platform. Either way, it won't be as powerful as Apple's consumer or prosumer laptops. It won't be as "portable/mobile" as the iPhone/touch platform. It'll have to target a slightly new consumer base, and there's no telling if it'll pay off. It'll be targeted as a "disruptive" product against the netbooks, but it'll be more expensive than the better selling netbooks and therefore probably won't do as well as those cheaper options. It'll be less portable than the iPhone/touch, and less powerful than the Macbook. Who is this for, anyway? It's not really for current Macbook or iPhone/touch users. It's for new consumers...and they may indeed balk at the device. As an aside, people are mentioning games, etc...but what we fail to realize is that the games on this platform are in a lower screen resolution than the rumored tablet. So the current App Store games either will be in tiny windows or zoomed in and looking fuglier than they should. Or, worse yet, the 7-10" screen will have the 320x240 resolution of the current iPhone/touch...and that's just a nasty idea. Not to mention it'll just split the market for the mobile App Store games even more if developers target it separately. I just don't really dig the idea much of this being an iPhone/touch on steroids. It has to be different and stand on it's own.
But either way it simply doesn't appeal to me as much as, say, the better idea for Apple in the long run: A new AppleTV and a new AppleTV strategy. Now's the time to strike, IMHO. A new AppleTV with a new motion sensing remote with touch interface, ala iPhone/touch. Not using an iPhone/touch itself, but rather a less powerful remote control version packaged with this new next gen AppleTV(no need for uber mobile graphics or an uber ARM processor, after all). Obviously it would need a new CPU and GPU and more RAM in the AppleTV itself for true 1080p HD and (perhaps) multitasking, but that's par for the course. The big step, however, would be to create an AppleTV specific App Store. This will not only allow for games (which we all love, otherwise we wouldn't be on toucharcade ) but also for apps of all sorts, including entertainment, creativity and productivity apps. For the first, this would allow things like a Hulu app, therefore expanding the usage of AppleTV (something AppleTV owners have been shouting about for a while now). It would also allow internet radio streams, etc. On the creativity and productivity side, things like photo and video editing apps, as well as even office work apps (word processing, spreadsheets, etc.) would extend the usefulness of AppleTV even further. In essence, AppleTV would be to the living room hub what iPhone/touch is to your pocket: a small, somewhat powerful enough mini-computer that you can use for entertainment as well as more productive work on the side if you so choose. And, of course, you can use it for gaming . That's IMHO more important than this "iSlate". It's not a "sexy" idea like the "iSlate", but it's a better one because it has a more clearly defined market of consumers. Digital downloads of entertainment in homes is taking off in a big way nowadays. Even on PS3 and 360 you've got Netflix, and music downloads as well as game download services. What makes AppleTV different is that it can be extended much further beyond those devices because those devices are first and foremost game consoles. It's the same way Sony's got PSN on PSP for movie and music downloads (and even e-comics), but can't really give you photo editing or office suite stuff like we can have on iPhone/touch - PSP is a game system, iPhone/touch a mobile computing platform. And since everyone seems to be really pissed at cable companies nowadays, now's the time to strike with a better implemented digital download set top box option. Apple has something with AppleTV. They just haven't gone as all out as they could and should be going with it. It's not a "sexy" item like the mythical "iSlate", but it makes a helluva lot more sense in the long run. It's a game changer but they haven't used it to change the game because they seem confused by it's potential. Game changing? Sure. As it will be less expensive than Apple's other computing options by design, and not as "full featured", it would become Apple's de facto "inexpensive nettop" computer option. As it would have games and such, it would compete somewhat in the game console race, but not directly as it wouldn't be a game console and would, in fact, serve more purposes due to the iTunes download hub, internet radio and streaming video options (Hulu apps, Youtube, etc.) and productivity and creativity app options. The beauty of it is it wouldn't really a nettop even though it could be used as one, and wouldn't be a game console even though it could be used as one...same as iPhone/touch isn't really a portable game system and yet scares the hell out of Sony and Nintendo. Just like that, this new, broader Apple TV would be it's own thing, on the periphery, and serve multiple purposes and straddle a bunch of different markets while focusing on none. And it wouldn't "split" the market at all, as it would be used exclusively at home. You'd use your iPhone/touch on the road (and maybe if you want at home), but you'd use this new AppleTV exclusively at home. Plus, even if you already own an iMac or Macbook or whatever, it wouldn't nudge over those products at all...it would just compliment those products for current Apple computer owners (it'd be a "2nd, cheaper" family internet/entertainment computer), and would be a new primary family computer hub for those folks not currently owning Apple computers because of the "expense".
well YOU may not care, but for me, this sounds awesome. I have a desktop and an itouch that is sure to break anyday. An iSlate would be ideal for me, hypothectically speaking of course
I thought it's going to be a great product. Look at how App Store is currently allowing us to run so many things but may be limited by it's small screen size, this is definitely going to change that. Remote computer access, editing your documents, gaming or some may even want to fart on a big screen? It's pretty much like a laptop/notebook but having a integrated App Store will define an unlimited possibility. It will be lighter, and more portable than a laptop. We have to see how they are going to recreate the iPhone OS. I doubt it will be the app flow that we see on our Springboard in iDevice, perhaps partial desktop/flow. Totally come down to the price on whether one should buy it or not. If it's in the range of $500. It's definitely greater than a netbook that you should get.
As convenient as a device like this would be, it'd be hard to market because most people already have everything they need, just not in an all-in-one device. If people want a movie, they usually just go to Blockbuster. They wanna download one, they use their consoles or Netflix streamer. Sure, hooking up a device straight to the TV would be cool, but it doesn't feel like something that would catch on. At least not immediately. Second, another app store? It would in no way grow as fast as the iPhone's app store. Besides, who needs one when they have a computer or iPod just mere feet away from their TV? Games? Grab a cheap Wii console or 360. They'd definitely be cheaper than an Apple TV, especially used. Anyone's that serious about Hulu or internet radio streaming can easily find cheap alternatives. I plug in my iPod to my dock speakers for Pandora. Hulu, well, I probably wouldn't try to hook up my TV to my MacBook, so you get a point there. Maybe if it had been introduced earlier with more features and integrations, it would've caught on faster, but it's obviously going to be at least a little pricey, and many of its features will be redundant to people that already have a load of tech. I'm not saying getting people to get accustomed to the idea of an Apple TV is far-fetched, they're just gonna need to make it more than just the Apple experience on your TV. They'd have to bring the revolutionary craze that had with the iPhone onto the ATV.
