BrianMcTavish's Profile

Ten inches? Maybe, around the home and in specialist niches (medicine, sales) I can see it and, as you say, it'll break new ground in terms of software and utility. And maybe they'll offer a bundle with a stand and tiny wireless keyboard, but that all seems too... clunky. The iPhone has taken off in part because it's made slick computing *effortlessly* portable. Despite these repeated 'big tablet' rumours I still have a sneaking feeling they'll bring out something truly pocket-/ paperback-sized (conceivably in addition to the above). The 'killer app' has to be the usability, the way it fits seamlessly into our quirky human ways as computing has not hitherto done... despite being technically ripe, dictation and voice transcription (e.g. voice search) have yet to fully hit the mainstream, as has all-my-docs-in-the-cloud-all-the-time, mobile phone-to-desktop videochat (e.g. remember that 'iChat answerphone' feature that was pulled from the Leopard beta?), gesture control, face and iris and emotion recognition, and of course touch control of everything. People forget that computers are still behaviourally relatively crude and require us to learn and do things that don't come naturally; if there's a bunch of people in a position to do anything about that, they're busting their brains to make it happen in Cupertino.

Forgive my ignorance but if, as Apple has announced, iMac G5 users can service/replace most parts in the new machine themselves (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86812) including the: "Mid-plane assembly (contains the main logic board, the G5 processor, fans, NVIDIA graphics processor, and so forth)." Is there a possibility that a third party will find a way to squeeze in a TV card?

History suggests strong and justified reluctance again to licence hardware manufacture. But this deal raises intriguing possibilities: think it through. No-one (least of all Apple marketing strategists) can escape the conclusion if it goes well: judicious agreements with reputable, trustworthy manufacturers may be possible without cannibalising hardware revenues (indeed probably growing them through royalties). Everyone is predicting Linux growth at Windows' expense. Why should Apple not put OS X on that train, positioning itself as 'Linux - only better' - perhaps even to the extent of Mac OS on specified Intel hardware? Imagine the market share impact of IBM, Sony and HP all offering match-priced Mac OS / Windows-capable computers. Vast increase in visibility, credibility, availability, software variety, support options. Suddenly corporates lose their fear of proprietory vendor lock-in. Risky, yes, but for such an outcome? Throw the dice, Steve!