Ultra-portable MacBook display rumors surface

Apple rumor mill aficionados, prepare for action. According to reports that are making their way out into the public arena today, the Cupertino monolith has placed orders for a new type of 13.3-inch LED backlight unit, destined to be used in an as-yet-unannounced product... like, say, a new ultra-portable MacBook. The "news" here, as divulged by "industry sources" is that Kenmos Technology and Taiwan Nano Electro-Optical Technology (Nano-Op) have recently become suppliers to both Apple and Dell for the aforementioned goods -- meant to be used in "high-end models" -- with a shipment of over 90,000 units this month. Those numbers are expected to rise to 200,000 before year's end, and 300,000 during Q1 of 2008. Whether or not this tips the scales in favor of a new Apple MacBook is questionable, but it certainly provides some food for thought.

[Via AppleInsider]

[joule @ Dec 4th 2007 10:56AM]

13.3" hardly qualifies as ultra portable, it makes much more sense for a small macbook pro.

[jrc @ Dec 4th 2007 10:59AM]

I agree, and would be sold on, more durable than the macbook but smaller than the current pros. Seems like a logical void that should be filled in their line.

[James Yopp @ Dec 4th 2007 11:28AM]

I'll just be happy if they can release an aluminum-clad notebook that's actually portable. I hate my MacBook Pro with a passion; It creaks and warps if I pick it up with one hand, I could cook an egg on it even after disassembling it and reapplying the thermal grease, and the screen, while nice, makes it much too large for portable use. For me, somewhere between my 3-year old Powerbook G4 12" (that I have recently gone back to) and the 15.4" MBP lies a subtle dividing line between "portable" and "luggable", but I won't carry around something made of shiny plastic with a shiny screen, that looks and feels like a toy.

I want a laptop with aesthetics, that fits well in my bag, and that doesn't feel like it's going to break under its own weight when I pick it up. For me, as I would assume for most readers here, a laptop is a second machine that should serve a limited purpose, comfortably and pleasantly. An aluminum 13.3" without an optical drive and using a solid-state disk sounds as good as anything I could have imagined on my own. If it feels as sturdy as the PB 12", I'm sold already.

[kev @ Dec 4th 2007 11:02AM]

I wish they would compete head-on with the Sony TZ series, so that there's another 11.1"/16:9/insane battery life laptop out there.

[getz76 @ Dec 4th 2007 12:28PM]

Check out the Fujitsu T2010. Battery life is great, 3.5lbs...

[apeguero @ Dec 4th 2007 11:04AM]

I wouldn't exactly call this an ultra-portable people. Ultra-portables are normally screens 10" or smaller. I don't know if I would want to pay extra for an aluminum MacBook. If Apple wants my $$ then they should put out a real ultra-portable notebook be it in the MacBook or MacBook Pro line. The 15" MBP is the perfect size for a good, all around notebook. The 17" is perfect as a desktop replacement (if that desktop is an iMac of course). A 13.3" MacBook Pro? No use for me. A 10" MacBook Pro? Will buy in a heartbeat to use it as a UMPC or, here's a new one Mr. Jobs: a UMMAC.

[Jason @ Dec 4th 2007 11:19AM]

With no bezel around the display, SSD instead of HD, no optical drive to allow it's ~0.7" thickness, less than 2 pounds weight, 7-9 hours battery life, and multi-touch screen or track pad and I'd pay. Oh I'd pay.

[RIFRAF @ Dec 4th 2007 11:26AM]

It all depends on what else is in the box. If they throw in high powered gpu, and plenty of memory and decent hard drive (SSD would be preferred), well then I'd buy it.

[Andrew @ Dec 4th 2007 12:32PM]

YOU wouldn't. Many people would. A common definition of an ultra-portable is WEIGHT being less than 4 pounds, with no stipulation on size (as it is implied by weight that it cannot be too big). I have Toshiba Portege R-100 which is 1.8 pounds and 12" - about the size and weight of a notebook - if that's not an ultraportable, I don't know what is. A 10" or less is a TOY, not a computer. I would welcome a 13" 2 pound SSD drive MacBook ultraportable - and buy one most likely.

[jilie @ Dec 4th 2007 11:12AM]

Apple is jumping on bandwagons lately?

[MSM @ Dec 4th 2007 12:25PM]

Well Apple had the 12" Powerbook G4, so I wouldn't say they are just now jumping on the bandwagon on making smaller laptops.

[w @ Dec 4th 2007 11:15AM]

seems as ultra portable as the current macbooks.

but maybe they will get rid about half of the size if they make it touch sensitive.

[a ham sandwich @ Dec 4th 2007 11:27AM]

if its just a 13.3 inch led backlight, they could just be upping the macbooks to led, like they did the pros.

[perfectionist @ Dec 4th 2007 6:56PM]

Agrees. I'm predicting Apple will release new MacBook & MacBook Pros with:
- Penryn
- Silver anodized aluminum with black Apple logo
- LED-backlit screens standard on 13" and 15"

Less likely details:
- Macbook/iMac style keys standard on all models
- Glass over screens (somehow)
- An all-black model to replace the BlackBook

But, speed bumps for the current line and Mac Pros with Penryn are going to come first...

[info @ Dec 4th 2007 1:18PM]

Maybe it will be a multitouch tablet...

[nate @ Dec 4th 2007 11:30AM]

Hopefully the laptops will include a wireless connection anywhere built in like Dell offers, not requiring a user to insert a PCMCIA card. That's been the biggest complaint I've heard as to why the business community is slow to adopt macs.

http://answers.nobosh.com/

[Jeff Lewis @ Dec 4th 2007 1:28PM]

"Hopefully the laptops will include a wireless connection anywhere built in like Dell offers, not requiring a user to insert a PCMCIA card. That's been the biggest complaint I've heard as to why the business community is slow to adopt macs."

Excuse me? Having to use a PCMCIA card for EVDO/EDGE/HSDPA is the reason the business community is slow to adopt Macs? In which parallel universe?

Take a look at all the PC laptops. Now - count up how many offer ANY kind of cell network based connectivity built in. It's almost NONE. This is a non-issue for most people and since it requires a rate plan, most businesses would ask twice if an employee wanted this feature. They'd be more inclined to hand them a Blackberry.

The reason Macs are slow to penetrate businesses is simple:
1) Corporations want to standardise one as few different platforms as possible, preferably ones that can be repaired easily and inexpensively. Cost is very important, and because of how most businesses do cost accounting - the hardware is in a different budget from training or maintenance, so the cost per laptop is very important. If they can get two adequate laptops for the price of one Mac laptop, then they've just halved their hardware budget.

2) Corporations want multiple sources so they can get the best deal and have back up suppliers in case the primary supplies go under.

3) Corporations want to control what goes onto the laptop and what comes off it. (MacOS doesn't have the same depth of policy control Windows does - consider this a good thing...)

4) Corporations want to standardise their software so everyone has the same configuration. Makes training and maintenance easier. For most businesses, that standard is Microsoft Office running on Windows.

And so on.

[Brian @ Dec 4th 2007 1:36PM]

The "business community" is slow to adopt macs because you often have to run the platform, applications, and software that your customers require. When your customer asks for a project timeline in MS Project format, that's what you give them. You don't fire up Mr. Project on your Linux box and send them that file and hope it's good enough. You don't fire up whatever the Mac gant chart software is and export it as a PDF and hope it's good enough.

My toaster has a wireless card, but if my customer isn't asking for toast then what's the point?

[Fubar @ Dec 4th 2007 6:47PM]

Mr. Project? I love it.

Of course, the voice of Homer Simpson is now running through my brain, singing "Mr. Project" to the tune of Mr. Plow....

[Kevin @ Dec 4th 2007 11:34AM]

This might make me get a mac...I'm looking for a replacement for my slow and aging (but still great) Sony V505.

[Alevino @ Dec 4th 2007 11:35AM]

Who cares??? Overpriced...Overated...Over...Over but Twainese just a holy crap junk under Apple`s griffe!!!!
By the way, Blasées funboys...Does it run Doom????

[Danny @ Dec 4th 2007 11:45AM]

Yes. It runs Doom.

[Ej @ Dec 6th 2007 8:42PM]

It's my first time to comment in here. But I'm pretty sure its the 13.3 inch ultra portable macs that are coming. I'm 100% sure! 13.3 inches would fit the ultra portable macs coz they will have a very lightweight and very, very, very slim body. It's crazy thin.

I just don't know how strong it will be if it will fit to replace my macbook pro for work. I doubt it. Except that Apple is born to make wonders maybe it will.

[Alex Johnson @ Dec 4th 2007 11:51AM]

As someone who runs a Powerbook G4 15" as my main computer, this is interesting. I have been thinking about getting a smaller laptop, as the 15" is a pain to carry around. A 13" sounds good. I could use it with a monitor at home, and have a tiny little computer to carry around for when I need to be portable. I hope that this is the long awaited replacement for the 12" Powerbook. My father would like to replace his 12" Powerbook too. In case anyone is wondering, Macs usually last me 5-7 years before I need to buy a new one. Oh, I want to buy one before that, but I don't need to.

[Ondra Soukup @ Dec 4th 2007 11:52AM]

13" isn't ultraportable, not even if you cut yourself into tiny little pieces...

[St. Stephen @ Dec 4th 2007 11:55AM]

oh I don't know I pack 13" in my boxers an pants every morning before I leave the house without an portability problems

[Sly Raskal @ Dec 4th 2007 11:55AM]

Hey Apple, thanks for the innovative stuff, but how about speeding up development on these issues:

An SD card reader built-in to the notebook like so many of the Windows based notebooks have had for years. WHAT!?!? A feature that Apple's notebooks DON'T have and so many others do!!! That's blasphemy! ;)

How about enabling/supplying drivers so that macbook pro users running boot camp and windows can use the nVidia Forceware software.

[kpfeif @ Dec 4th 2007 12:10PM]

This guy's Apple Product Lifecycle is never wrong...

http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/

[Jeff Lewis @ Dec 4th 2007 7:40PM]

Case in point - we've already got people speculating on it being a multitouch TOUCH screen. :)

[zamir.evan @ Dec 4th 2007 12:15PM]

13" doesn't sound portable, if the notebook were a typical notebook. However, imagine a notebook that is very thin (1/4-1/2") and flexible. That would be neato.

[aoeu00 @ Dec 4th 2007 12:14PM]

Apple running out of original ideas? I wonder what innovative (borrowed?) technology they are going to incorporate. I guess they do better when they pick up on technologies others have invented.. When they invent something (Newton, etc?), it bombs and others become successful.. ironic.

[vep @ Dec 4th 2007 1:11PM]

Could it be more of a full size iTouch portable laptop? Just thought i'd throw that out there...

[Chad Murray @ Dec 9th 2007 11:44PM]

Does anyone know the stats on the read/write speed differenced between SSD and a traditional Hard Drive?

This is going to be one fast machine... Boot times like nothing and should run significantly cooler without the moving parts of the hard drive running nonstop.

Any hints on the supplier.. whether it be Samsung or Sandisk?


Long time engadget reader... first post

-Chad Murray

[manfesto @ Dec 4th 2007 12:59PM]

Hey here's a thought - maybe they're buying 13'3" LED-backlit panels to

*GASP*

Put in their already 13.3" Macbook?

[qwert @ Dec 4th 2007 1:00PM]

engadget, i really like you an all, and youre a fun to read and informative source for all my tech news needs, but please, stop calling a 13" screen a ultraportable. it is way to effin big to be ultraportable!

if you make this mistake again, you will force me to use the CAPSLOCK KEY, and go all the "im leaving, you stupid fuckers !!!1eleven!".
you know, there is a line, and repeated use of the word "ultraportable" for a huge 13" screen crosses this line.

you have been warned.

[James Yopp @ Dec 4th 2007 4:33PM]

Screen size has little, if anything to do with ultraportable-ness. As far as I've ever heard, ultraportables are defined as being below some specific weight. Tell me that a Toshiba RX1 or a Sony Vaio G2 (both under one kilogram) aren't ultraportable, and I can laugh at you as I port them around everywhere anyway, ultra-easily and ultra-comfortably.

If they had claimed it was a UMPC, then your ire might be justified. But at half the weight of the current MBP (5.4 lbs ÷ 2 = 2.7lbs), it would be an ultraportable.

[Constable Odo @ Dec 4th 2007 1:02PM]

Two million units to be sold in six months. An instant hit among the elite businessmen. A must have device for the rich and famous. Apple haters everywhere green with envy insisting it's been done before.

The rest of the computer manufacturers say it's overpriced and overhyped and yet they start their copiers working overtime trying to capture the Apple cachet. Useless, of course, but they must stop the Apple freight train before they get run over.

Such sad times for Dell shareholders, such happy times for Apple shareholders.

[Teetdogs @ Dec 4th 2007 3:31PM]

Are you High?

[Constable Odo @ Dec 4th 2007 10:07PM]

Yes, how can you tell?

[js @ Dec 4th 2007 1:03PM]

I really doubt that it's an ultraportable for these reasons:

1. the CPU is most likely a non-ULV or LV of the Core 2 duo and dedicated graphics -- horrible battery life
2. the screen is 13.3"
3. no WWAN?

[guybrush @ Dec 4th 2007 1:06PM]

w00t w00t! Apple FTW! Bring it!

[Martin Trautmann @ Dec 4th 2007 1:10PM]

I do not have any what would make another 13.3" display more ultra portable than a current MacBook. Maybe lighter, maybe slimmer (actually the MBP is slimmer than the MB).

My ancient iBook12" does not qualify for ultra..

However, these news are anti-news: probably no tablet pc, not to speak of multi-touch portables...

[Jenga @ Dec 5th 2007 2:16PM]

I was really hoping this was going to be a tablet. A 13 inch laptop isn't a product that needs to be kept secret :( :( :(

[pstelman @ Dec 4th 2007 2:32PM]

Sounds good so far. 13.3" is a great size for the screen of a small notebook. Hopefully there will be very little border around it, so the footprint will be small. I hope the screen will feel sturdier than the one on my Sony TX, which is blade thin, but very flexy.

They can leave out an optical drive. I hardly ever load software from CD/DVD anymore. By the time software gets burned and shrinkwrapped, it's out of date and you have to download updates anyway. As for saving off data, I save it to a USB thingy or I send it somewhere over the net. As for the needs of gamers... put the darned games on SD cards -- not DVDs.

I could live with as little as 64GB for now, for the sake of having no moving parts, as long as I can swap the 64 for bigger SSDs as they become available.

Bring it on!

[Matt @ Dec 4th 2007 2:49PM]

They need to redesign the macbook pro casing, more accessible for upgrades like the macbooks and just give them a newer look, the new macbooks showed they can still do it right even if the design isn't a light years difference from the current pro's.

Hopefully this will see a 13in macbook pro and the release of a redesign.

[Teetdogs @ Dec 4th 2007 3:34PM]

Gamers on a Mac... now that is hillarious...Gamers dont generally consider bubble popper a must have game of the season.

[Teetdogs @ Dec 4th 2007 3:35PM]

Gamers on a Mac... now that is hillarious...Gamers dont generally consider bubble popper a must have game of the season

[csbosox @ Dec 4th 2007 4:10PM]

This doesn't sound ultraportable, now my 2lb eee pc, that's ultraportable...

[Jeff Lewis @ Dec 4th 2007 8:02PM]

Nooo... my 1.25lb Samsung Q1 Ultra UMPC that's the size of largish book yet still has a 7" 1024x600 screen...

THAT'S ultraportable. :)

[pcmike @ Dec 5th 2007 1:09AM]

James Yopp,

I think you're wrong. I'm willing to bet most people who read this website with a laptop use it as their primary machine, therefore an optical drive would actually be of use and forget solid state drives. They're still too small.