Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #73453 > unrolled thread

I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device.

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-04-20 00:35 +1200
    Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-04-19 09:07 -0400
      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-19 10:22 -0400
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-04-20 03:37 +1200
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Larry Moss <moss@airigami.com> - 2015-04-19 17:34 +0000
          Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-19 18:44 +0100
          Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-20 09:18 +1200
            Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-19 19:34 -0400
              Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-19 19:50 -0400
              Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-20 02:13 +0000
                Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-20 00:27 -0400
                  Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-20 18:11 +1200
                    Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Andreas Rutishauser <andreas@macandreas.ch> - 2015-04-21 08:00 +0200
                      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-21 18:22 +1200
                        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-04-21 19:37 +1200
                  Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-20 08:00 -0400
                  Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-20 12:36 +0000
            Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Larry Moss <moss@airigami.com> - 2015-04-20 01:01 +0000
              Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-20 13:17 +1200
              Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. rcp27g@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 08:00 -0700
                Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-04-21 03:51 +1200
                  Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. rcp27g@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 10:28 -0700
                Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Larry Moss <moss@airigami.com> - 2015-04-20 16:06 +0000
      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. billy@MIX.COM - 2015-04-19 17:25 +0000
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-19 19:35 -0400
          Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-19 19:50 -0400
            Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2015-04-20 12:24 -0500
          Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. rcp27g@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 10:31 -0700
            Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-20 15:00 -0400
            Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-21 09:22 +1200
    Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-19 10:38 -0500
    Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Bill F <anon@anonumost.org> - 2015-04-19 13:44 -0400
      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-19 18:48 +0100
      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-19 14:11 -0400
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-04-19 11:23 -0700
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-04-19 11:31 -0700
          Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-20 09:18 +1200
            Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-19 22:32 +0100
              Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-19 15:30 -0700
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2015-04-19 16:56 -0500
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. pixel_a_ted <pixel_a_ted@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-20 19:18 -0700
          Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-21 05:55 +0000
    Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2015-04-22 08:42 -0700
      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-22 12:07 -0400
        Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-04-23 05:03 +1200
      Re: I don't want a thinner Apple laptop or iOS device. Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-04-23 09:24 +1200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#73777

<rcp27g@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 20 April 2015 03:02:59 UTC+2, Larry Moss  wrote:
> > Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <1778264312451157010.302095moss-airigami.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > >  Larry Moss <moss@airigami.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >> I also bought
> > >> the equally annoying $30 adapter for Ethernet.  Yes, I'm wireless most of
> > >> the time, but when transferring massive files, a cable can make a huge
> > >> difference, and I wish the Ethernet port was still built in.
> > > 
> > > Forget Ethernet. Where's the ADB port?? Where's the floppy disk drive??
> > > Where's the CD/DVD drive?? Where's the numeric keypad?? Where's the
> > > built-in trackball ... even the old Macintosh Portable had one of
> > > those!  ;-)
> > 
> > I stated a specific reason for wanting Ethernet and you listed a bunch of
> > irrelevant pieces of technology that have been replaced by other things. I
> > bought a pro machine to do pro work. I need Ethernet frequently because of
> > the speeds it offers.
> 
> Is this still the case?  All current generation Macs (portables and
> desktops) support 802.11ac, which offers data speeds above 100 Mbit.
> While some networks are equipped with gigabit ethernet, it is by no means
> ubiquitous, and even if present, it is likely that actual data rates
> achieved will be limited by some other bottleneck.
> 
> Robin

While I only pay for 100Mbps fibre here, I can get gigabit, and many do.
Once prices drop I will, as one can never have too much additional
bandwidth when watching streamed HD video while BitTorrenting, for
example. Meanwhile I appreciate gigabit transfer speeds across my router
between my machines :-)

-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73790

On Monday, 20 April 2015 17:51:34 UTC+2, Jamie Kahn Genet  wrote:
> <rcp27g@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Monday, 20 April 2015 03:02:59 UTC+2, Larry Moss  wrote:
> > > Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <1778264312451157010.302095moss-airigami.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > > >  Larry Moss <moss@airigami.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > >> I also bought
> > > >> the equally annoying $30 adapter for Ethernet.  Yes, I'm wireless most of
> > > >> the time, but when transferring massive files, a cable can make a huge
> > > >> difference, and I wish the Ethernet port was still built in.
> > > > 
> > > > Forget Ethernet. Where's the ADB port?? Where's the floppy disk drive??
> > > > Where's the CD/DVD drive?? Where's the numeric keypad?? Where's the
> > > > built-in trackball ... even the old Macintosh Portable had one of
> > > > those!  ;-)
> > > 
> > > I stated a specific reason for wanting Ethernet and you listed a bunch of
> > > irrelevant pieces of technology that have been replaced by other things. I
> > > bought a pro machine to do pro work. I need Ethernet frequently because of
> > > the speeds it offers.
> > 
> > Is this still the case?  All current generation Macs (portables and
> > desktops) support 802.11ac, which offers data speeds above 100 Mbit.
> > While some networks are equipped with gigabit ethernet, it is by no means
> > ubiquitous, and even if present, it is likely that actual data rates
> > achieved will be limited by some other bottleneck.
> 
> While I only pay for 100Mbps fibre here, I can get gigabit, and many do.
> Once prices drop I will, as one can never have too much additional
> bandwidth when watching streamed HD video while BitTorrenting, for
> example. Meanwhile I appreciate gigabit transfer speeds across my router
> between my machines :-)

It's nice to have really high data rates available, but I'm not sure this is likely to be a huge issue for a laptop in everyday use.  My understanding is that 1080p 60 Hz H.264 video plays at something like 36 Mbps, so having a network connection that only exceeds that by a factor of 3 is hardly going to limit your video watching experience.  Sure, for shuffling files around it's great and all, but it's not likely to be a game changer for a portable.  I'm guessing if you have multiple machines, not all of them are portable, and nobody (not even Apple) is talking about removing ethernet from desktops.

Robin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73779

<rcp27g@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 20 April 2015 03:02:59 UTC+2, Larry Moss  wrote
>> 
>> I stated a specific reason for wanting Ethernet and you listed a bunch of
>> irrelevant pieces of technology that have been replaced by other things. I
>> bought a pro machine to do pro work. I need Ethernet frequently because of
>> the speeds it offers.
> 
> Is this still the case?  All current generation Macs (portables and
> desktops) support 802.11ac, which offers data speeds above 100 Mbit. 
> While some networks are equipped with gigabit ethernet, it is by no means
> ubiquitous, and even if present, it is likely that actual data rates
> achieved will be limited by some other bottleneck.

Unfortunately, yes. Just as one example, I have Airport Extremes at home
and in my office. In most cases, I'm using wifi and more than happy with
it. I bought a new MPB. When I ran Migration Assistant, it reported that it
was going to take 13 hours to migrate everything to the new machine. I let
it run overnight. Woke up in the morning and saw it failed. With no clue
how to pick up where it left off (if it's even possible),  I started over.
Ran out to the store, bought the adapter and was done in 3 hours, including
the trip to the store. Now, admittedly, I don't need to do a migration
every day. But it's not unusual to have to transfer 200-300 meg files. The
difference is noticeable, and the impact on other nodes is also noticed
when those transfers happen. For example, when a lot is being transferred
to my drobo wirelessly, AirPlay devices drop out intermittently until the
transfers are done. Plugging in a cable solves that. There may be other
solutions that I'm not aware of, but a direct cable is cheap and always
works. 

-- 
The fine art of folding air - airigami.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73463

In comp.sys.mac.system Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

> I'd rather Apple let their devices be a little fatter for the sake of 
> maintainability.

Still being sold -

http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro?product=MD101LL/A&step=config

Plenty of ports, ambient light sensor, internal DVD drive, et cetera.

Billy Y..
-- 
        sub     #'9+1   ,r0             ; convert ascii byte
	add     #9.+1   ,r0             ; to an integer
	bcc     20$                     ; not a number

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73483

billy@MIX.COM:
> Still being sold -

> http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro?product=MD101LL/A&step=config
> 
> Plenty of ports, ambient light sensor, internal DVD drive, et cetera.

Here I am complaining about having to buy a 15" MBP rather than a 17",
and you point me to a 13" machine. Bet that's great for Final Cut Pro
X, huh?

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73485

In article <190420151935579213%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net>
wrote:

> > http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro?product=MD101LL/A&step=config
> > 
> > Plenty of ports, ambient light sensor, internal DVD drive, et cetera.
> 
> Here I am complaining about having to buy a 15" MBP rather than a 17",
> and you point me to a 13" machine. Bet that's great for Final Cut Pro
> X, huh?

it has the ports you think you need.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73789

In article <190420151950104125%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <190420151935579213%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net>
> wrote:
> 
> > > http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro?product=MD101LL/A&step=confi
> > > g
> > > 
> > > Plenty of ports, ambient light sensor, internal DVD drive, et cetera.
> > 
> > Here I am complaining about having to buy a 15" MBP rather than a 17",
> > and you point me to a 13" machine. Bet that's great for Final Cut Pro
> > X, huh?
> 
> it has the ports you think you need.

which is why I bought a 13" to replace my 15"

-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73791

On Monday, 20 April 2015 01:35:59 UTC+2, Davoud  wrote:
> billy@MIX.COM:
> > Still being sold -
> 
> > http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro?product=MD101LL/A&step=config
> > 
> > Plenty of ports, ambient light sensor, internal DVD drive, et cetera.
> 
> Here I am complaining about having to buy a 15" MBP rather than a 17",
> and you point me to a 13" machine. Bet that's great for Final Cut Pro
> X, huh?

I imagine even a 17" screen kind of sucks for Final Cut Pro.  I'd hazard a guess that people using a portable for FCP are using an external display, in which case the size of the build-in one is immaterial.

Robin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73799

In article <c20d800a-f478-4c6f-9b7c-25791ea81682@googlegroups.com>,
<rcp27g@gmail.com> wrote:

Davoud:
> > Here I am complaining about having to buy a 15" MBP rather than a 17",
> > and you point me to a 13" machine. Bet that's great for Final Cut Pro
> > X, huh?

Robin:
> I imagine even a 17" screen kind of sucks for Final Cut Pro.  I'd hazard a
> guess that people using a portable for FCP are using an external display, in
> which case the size of the build-in one is immaterial.

Actually, it's quite acceptable, especially on location. When Peter
Jackson was making the Lord of the Rings he used iPods (HD version) to
transport digital footage from New Zealand to the U.K., where
post-production took place. That's a long flight, and time is valuable
when making motion pictures. During the long flights they would perform
preliminary editing on PowerBooks running FCP. Sources: Peter Jackson
and "The Hollywood Reporter."

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73806

In article <c20d800a-f478-4c6f-9b7c-25791ea81682@googlegroups.com>,
<rcp27g@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 20 April 2015 01:35:59 UTC+2, Davoud  wrote:
> > billy@MIX.COM:
> > > 
> > > Still being sold -
> > >
> > > http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro?product=MD101LL/A&step=confi
> > > g
> > > 
> > > Plenty of ports, ambient light sensor, internal DVD drive, et cetera.
> > 
> > Here I am complaining about having to buy a 15" MBP rather than a 17",
> > and you point me to a 13" machine. Bet that's great for Final Cut Pro
> > X, huh?
> 
> I imagine even a 17" screen kind of sucks for Final Cut Pro.  I'd hazard a
> guess that people using a portable for FCP are using an external display, in
> which case the size of the build-in one is immaterial.

Most people using a portable for Final Cut Pro (which is a small niche
market) are doing so to be able to quickly edit video when "out in the
field", hence no external display.

Of course the reason Apple dropped the 17" model is that most people
found it too bulky and heavy to be easily "portable", and the speed /
power of the CPUs were virtually the same in the top-end 15" model
anyway. The new Retina MacBook Pros does have more pixels than the old
17" non-Retina display ... although everything in re-written
applications is "twice" the size so that it still looks the same size
on screen.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73461

On 4/19/15 7:35 AM, in article
1m35iuz.1k5pw6lmuzagdN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz, "Jamie Kahn Genet"
<jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote:

> I'd be sold on a thicker... almost every Apple product (maybe see how
> thin the Air models can get, but other than them - nup!), or at least no
> thinner than now. Battery life>thinness for years now, IMO.
> http://www.marco.org/2015/04/17/battery-outliers?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_
> medium=twitter&utm_campaign=tidbits

Give me a MacPro anytime...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73465

Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.  Why build a phone or tablet 
so thin and fragile that it requires a case to keep it from slipping 
out of your hand.  My ipad Air2 is so thin that the speaker makes it 
vibrate.

The new macbook is nice if it fits your needs.  I does not fit mine.  I 
am considering buying a 2012 MBP, non retina and putting in max memory 
and a 0.5 or 1.0 TB SSD.    I like having USB 3 so want nothing older 
than 2012.  My 2012 MBA can get handed down within the family.

I dont need a retina display because I am 75 and retina exceeds the 
current resolution of my eyes.

It would also be nice if Apple produced a simple and  affordable 
desktop in a box that was more upgrade friendly than the Mac Mini.  I 
am using a heavily upgraded G4 tower with SATA drives and a large 
monitor as a print server, NAS and desktop. Maybe a 2009 or newer Mac 
Pro would be a good replacement for the G4.
-- 
Bill Freeman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73467

In article <2015041913443431444-anon@anonumostorg>, Bill F
<anon@anonumost.org> wrote:

>Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.  Why build a phone or tablet 
>so thin and fragile that it requires a case to keep it from slipping 
>out of your hand.  My ipad Air2 is so thin that the speaker makes it 
>vibrate.
>
>The new macbook is nice if it fits your needs.  I does not fit mine.  I 
>am considering buying a 2012 MBP, non retina and putting in max memory 
>and a 0.5 or 1.0 TB SSD.    I like having USB 3 so want nothing older 
>than 2012.  My 2012 MBA can get handed down within the family.
>
>I dont need a retina display because I am 75 and retina exceeds the 
>current resolution of my eyes.
>
>It would also be nice if Apple produced a simple and  affordable 
>desktop in a box that was more upgrade friendly than the Mac Mini.

What kind of upgrades do you need? I've sent both mine off to have SSDs
added and the RAM bumped up, what else is needed?

-- 
"People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility
with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy
Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73468

On 15-04-19 13:44, Bill F wrote:
> Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.

What would Jony Ive and his elves do if there was no longer a challenge
to make things thinner ? He has already reached the "can't make it
smaller as people want big screens", so the only challenge left is to
strip it of "unnecessary" gadgets like ports and make it thinner.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73469

On 4/19/15   PDT 11:11 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 15-04-19 13:44, Bill F wrote:
>> Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.
>
> What would Jony Ive and his elves do if there was no longer a challenge
> to make things thinner ? He has already reached the "can't make it
> smaller as people want big screens", so the only challenge left is to
> strip it of "unnecessary" gadgets like ports and make it thinner.

Use your imagination!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73470

On 2015-04-19 18:11:29 +0000, JF Mezei said:

> On 15-04-19 13:44, Bill F wrote:
>> Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.
> 
> What would Jony Ive and his elves do if there was no longer a challenge
> to make things thinner ? He has already reached the "can't make it
> smaller as people want big screens", so the only challenge left is to
> strip it of "unnecessary" gadgets like ports and make it thinner.

Coming to you soon, the Ive designed, ultra thin, Apple iPaperSheet & 
iPencil combo. All of those pesky heavy & bulky batteries, logic 
boards, SSDs, ports, etc are gone. The iPaperSheet & iPencil user will 
be able to experience the thinnest portable computing device available.

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73471

In article <2015041911314034552-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2015-04-19 18:11:29 +0000, JF Mezei said:
> > On 15-04-19 13:44, Bill F wrote:
> >>
> >> Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.
> > 
> > What would Jony Ive and his elves do if there was no longer a challenge
> > to make things thinner ? He has already reached the "can't make it
> > smaller as people want big screens", so the only challenge left is to
> > strip it of "unnecessary" gadgets like ports and make it thinner.
> 
> Coming to you soon, the Ive designed, ultra thin, Apple iPaperSheet & 
> iPencil combo. All of those pesky heavy & bulky batteries, logic 
> boards, SSDs, ports, etc are gone. The iPaperSheet & iPencil user will 
> be able to experience the thinnest portable computing device available.

Don't forget that you need the third-party iEraser and iSharpner, as
well the iPaperClip or iStapler.  ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73473

In article <200420150918141399%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name
<YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

>In article <2015041911314034552-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com>,
>Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> On 2015-04-19 18:11:29 +0000, JF Mezei said:
>> > On 15-04-19 13:44, Bill F wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.
>> > 
>> > What would Jony Ive and his elves do if there was no longer a challenge
>> > to make things thinner ? He has already reached the "can't make it
>> > smaller as people want big screens", so the only challenge left is to
>> > strip it of "unnecessary" gadgets like ports and make it thinner.
>> 
>> Coming to you soon, the Ive designed, ultra thin, Apple iPaperSheet & 
>> iPencil combo. All of those pesky heavy & bulky batteries, logic 
>> boards, SSDs, ports, etc are gone. The iPaperSheet & iPencil user will 
>> be able to experience the thinnest portable computing device available.
>
>Don't forget that you need the third-party iEraser and iSharpner, as
>well the iPaperClip or iStapler.  ;-)

And the iBook, of log and trig tables.

-- 
"I love the way that Microsoft follows standards. 
 In much the same manner as fish follow migrating caribou."
                                               - Paul Tomblin, ASR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73479

In article <190420152232424915%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> >> Coming to you soon, the Ive designed, ultra thin, Apple iPaperSheet & 
> >> iPencil combo. All of those pesky heavy & bulky batteries, logic 
> >> boards, SSDs, ports, etc are gone. The iPaperSheet & iPencil user will 
> >> be able to experience the thinnest portable computing device available.
> >
> >Don't forget that you need the third-party iEraser and iSharpner, as
> >well the iPaperClip or iStapler.  ;-)
> 
> And the iBook, of log and trig tables.

And an iRack to put them on.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgSQA1jqFpM&spfreload=10>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#73477

In article <5533efd2$0$19988$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 15-04-19 13:44, Bill F wrote:
> > Thinness has gotten out of hand at Apple.
> 
> What would Jony Ive and his elves do if there was no longer a challenge
> to make things thinner ? He has already reached the "can't make it
> smaller as people want big screens", so the only challenge left is to
> strip it of "unnecessary" gadgets like ports and make it thinner.

so you have to have adapters for ports, an outboard CD player, etc.

-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web