Apple touch-screen netbook in Q3?

Boom: Apple netbook in Q3 -- that's the rumor being spread by the Commercial Times / DigiTimes tag-team of electronics tattlers. Apparently, Wintek will supply the touch-panels to Quanta computer who'll be tasked with assembling Apple's netbook. Take this one with a grain of salt though -- while these two Taiwan-based magazines tend to be accurate with insider info related to Taiwan-based companies like Acer and ASUS, they can often be wide of the mark with rumors related to foreign companies. Unless of course we missed the launch of the Blu-ray Xbox 360 and G5 PowerBooks.

[Image courtesy of Frunny]

[mikee366 @ Mar 9th 2009 7:21AM]

Hmm.

[Flashpoint @ Mar 9th 2009 7:35AM]

Apple could have put out a netbook for $500 with an enhanced version of the iPhone OS and it would damn near corner the market.

[Darkroom @ Mar 9th 2009 7:45AM]

if apple releases a touch-screen netbook it sure as hell won't be under $1k, unfortunately...

[Look_Around_You @ Mar 9th 2009 8:40AM]

Hmm nothing.

After other companies have done the same thing to catcalls of "why do we need this???" or "no one is going to to want to use a touch screen because it will make their arms tired", all of a sudden this is now a great idea to anyone?


Of course because they slap an Apple logo on the same thing, so now it's cool, right?


Oh and another thing. Since this type of device already exist, doesn't it make it, assuming this just isnt another manufactured rumor just to get Apple into the news, a "me too" "copycat" clone that's "late to the party".

Or does that standard not apply to Apple also?

[mike @ Mar 9th 2009 7:03PM]

@flashpoint..

market? the... netbook market?

the.. market where no product is allowed more than 5 cents of profit margin?

who cares? the iPod touch blows away and dumbass Netbook already.

[KarlW @ Mar 9th 2009 10:15AM]

@Look_Around_You

Apple is not like every other OEM. Apple have their own, mature operating system. If they create a touchscreen netbook, we wouldn't need to wait until Windows 7 until we can use it to its full potential - the operating system will support it from day one. The closest other OEMs can come to innovating in hardware-software integration is to use linux, but that's obviously not an ideal option.

Apple have a unique position that lets them do things Windows OEMs can't. That's why I'm excited about their netbook - they'll be able to make something exciting and just do it right.

[KarlW @ Mar 9th 2009 10:17AM]

Also: "another manufactured rumor just to get Apple into the news"

Paranoid much? Don't worry, I think Apple already have your precious bodily fluids, they come after you again.

[Look_Around_You @ Mar 9th 2009 11:01AM]

"Apple have a unique position that lets them do things Windows OEMs can't. That's why I'm excited about their netbook - they'll be able to make something exciting and just do it right."

Um, yeah... The old "Apple can make a "copycat" "me too" "late to the party" device, because we contrived a convenient cop out called the "They will do something exciting and just do it right" clause. Which, if we were to go by the low bar that Apple fans setup for that company, will mean that it will be no different than the existing models Apple is "ripping off", it just will have the Apple brand, and thus it ok.


Using the logic of Apple fans on Engadget that if Apple makes product A, no other company can make a similar product without being accused of stealing the idea from Apple. If Apple fans were consistent (heh), they would be screaming as to why Apple cant come up with an original idea in this case.

[Alex @ Mar 9th 2009 11:10AM]

@Look_Around_You

See I'm thinking of something like the iPhone. Did Apple copy anyone else with it? Not really. Phones had been around forever and so had touch screens, but Apple changed it in a way that it wasn't copying. While they might have copied things in the past and will continue to in the future, branding the company as lazy people copying everyone else for their products is incredibly short-sighted and biased.

You don't like their products - fine. I don't even like half their offerings. What I see as stupid and unnecessary (and KarlW did some of this, too) is arguing about copying other products when NOTHING HAS EVEN BEEN MADE YET. Both of you are speculating. NOT REAL.

So please, stop b@#%hing on the page and go read other articles.

[rube @ Mar 9th 2009 11:25AM]

there is not point in them making this.. worthless. they should put their attention on all the other things they blow at making first

[kccboy2004 @ Mar 9th 2009 1:00PM]

@Alex,

You speak nonsense.

[Barbaric @ Mar 9th 2009 5:32PM]

I agree that they could make one. But Jobs said Apple could not make a good enough product at the current price point.
He also said iPods would not have photos or video.
Heres some guesses of mine:

I bet we see an Apple netbook, just as soon as they come up with an "i" name. Maybe revert back to the iBook? iPad? iTop? NetPod?

And it will be $500 on wireless carrier contract only. I bet on 3G tech with possible 4G/LTE included. Maybe have Gobi? AT&T exclusive again, but will work on Verizon's network when hacked... or when officially supported by Apple after a certain time period.

iPhone OS, but with full Flash & cut & paste. But I bet no way on Skype or any other VoIP... due to locked down OS. Prob have multi-ouch.
other ideas I see within reason: built in iPod iPhone dock; non removable battery; Wi-Fi built in, no Bluetooth; NO USB ports... no tethering or BT dongles, Integrated iTunes and Safari into OS. 64GB or less SSD; .mac address and huge online storage, mobile me;.

I'm not an Apple guy, but I know a few. Dont go crazy with the flames, these are just ideas I had. I dont have any Apple stuff, but if the thing came out like I as proposing, I might buy it and switch to apple.

[Joshua Walters @ Mar 9th 2009 5:34PM]

@Alex

Uh, smart phones with touchscreens have been around a lot longer than the iPhone. Most of them ran Windows Mobile.

Just because Apple does something, does not make it the greatest. All the iPhone did was over simplify the system, and sleek it down so it would have mainstream appeal.

[utahnkid @ Mar 9th 2009 5:54PM]

@Look_Around_You - Haha.. What's your deal man? Did Apple touch you as a child?

Where are these "Apple fans" calling this a great idea that you speak of? And if somebody said that a touchscreen netbook, or some derivative of that, was a bad idea in the past does that somehow make them Apple fans? Are you supposed to support every PC product to come out of every PC manufacturer if you use PC's or you're an automatic Apple user?

Your posts make absolutely no sense and reek of jealousy. Why would you even take the time to read an article about an Apple product and comment about it if you have such a disdain for the company?

[hitsthings @ Mar 9th 2009 6:43PM]

AAAAHHHHH I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!

True or not, to us this is just random speculation. Realistically, who can really vet these wild rumors? You might as well throw darts at an Apple rumor dartboard and write about the results because at some point ONE of them will be true. (iPhone Nano/iTablet/New Mac Mini - wait...)


...But show me some ballyhooed "fake" blurrycams and I'm sold.

[Hugh @ Mar 9th 2009 6:50PM]

Or as Rorschach would say: Hrm

[Decoy @ Mar 9th 2009 10:06PM]

nVidia card failures in MBP = not breaking news
Speculation about Q3 Apple product = breaking news

[VanillaSpice @ Mar 9th 2009 10:11PM]

@Look_Around_You - you have gone off on a tirade, accusing Apple fans of double-standards, and saying they are supporting something that they have previously ridiculed ...

all because someone said "Hmm" !

Bloody hell! How on Earth did you manage to read all that into "Hmm" ?

I have often said that the anti-Apple trolls indulge in precisely the same behaviour (and worse) that they accuse the 'iFans' of engaging in, and here is a perfect example. There were no pro-Apple troll comments and yet you responded as though there were! This should not be a surprise, seeing as how the anti-Apple crowd also brays on and on about Engadget's 'Apple bias' despite the fact there is no. fucking. evidence. of. it. whatsoever.

But hey, I guess you're just testing the theory that if you say something often enough, you'll get plenty of fools believing you.

[Saad @ Mar 10th 2009 9:28PM]

will canabalize the Macbook Air market so will not happen.

[M-RES @ Mar 11th 2009 2:29PM]

@ Saad

Won't necessarily cannibalise the MacBook Air market. If it's not a vaporware product, there's always the possibility that it will BE the MacBook Air market (next gen). Don't discount any eventuality when there's no proof of anything even existing! ;)

[Zunavio @ Mar 9th 2009 7:23AM]

Umm.

[z-man @ Mar 9th 2009 8:20AM]

Uhhh....

[ImaYam @ Mar 9th 2009 9:57AM]

Uhhuh..

[LondonConsultant @ Mar 9th 2009 10:22AM]

Oooh, yeah baby...

[kccboy2004 @ Mar 9th 2009 12:44PM]

Me-too.

Apple is the ultimate Me-too company.


Copy cat, copy cat, don't know what your lookin' at !!

[M-RES @ Mar 11th 2009 3:00PM]

@ kccboy2004

Yes that's right, Apple only ever copy don't they!?

Er... first ever pre-built home computer system, check... first mainstream OS using a GUI, check... first widely available machines using a mouse as input device, check... first PDA (and incidentally using both touchscreen and handwriting recognition), check... first hard-drive based MP3 player, check... Streaming video, check... Damn, just off the top of my head I accidentally thought of a whole bunch of markets they established or built through innovation rather than copying.

Oh wait... I think I've got something they copied - the configless network, that Bonjour is just a rip off of Windows Networking. Oh wait, no it isn't is it!

C'mon somebody help me out here - oh, oh ,oh, er... yes, they copied the Dock paradigm from the multitude of launcher apps that you used to see on the Amiga - got one! Oh, but hang on, wasn't the dock a reworking of the Launcher app that used to be in System 7, OS 8, OS 9? So it's not entirely a straight rip-off from Workbench 3.1 era miggies. Still, EVERY OS has ripped off the idea of multitasking from the miggy anyway, and AFAIK there's still not been another machine since that could display multiple resolutions/bit depths on the same monitor at the same time in different apps - yup the miggy was light years ahead.

Oh, and the miggy existed, which is more than can be said for the rumoured hardware speculated about in this article.

[Sam Jordan @ Mar 9th 2009 7:24AM]

Boom!

[Saad Rabia @ Mar 9th 2009 8:10AM]

(Applause)

[sacapuntas @ Mar 9th 2009 12:36PM]

...goes the dynamite...

[avis @ Mar 9th 2009 7:25AM]

nope! where is the money for the APPLE?

[AlekZander @ Mar 9th 2009 11:15AM]

What?

[martin @ Mar 9th 2009 7:27AM]

I dont own anything apple, but a netbook always seemed to me to be right up their alley. Im sure it will look great, just hope is costs great too :/

[superhobo @ Mar 9th 2009 7:33AM]

Sources say it'll cost only 1199 USD.

[kihaki @ Mar 9th 2009 7:47AM]

Except of course you would want 2GB of RAM wich u will really need for the ever so RAM hungry OSX then it will just cost you 1399 USD, oh and maybe you would want a 160GB HDD instead of 120GB and maybe an Apple Remote than it would be just 1999 USD but so what, it's still a netbook!

[Shenanigans @ Mar 9th 2009 9:15AM]

OS X RAM hungry? Not Leopard... I clock in at 420MB used RAM with Safari, Mail, iTunes, and an AIM client running. Without any thing going, the OS uses about 240MB of RAM.

And why would Apple price a netbook more then on the plastic MacBook?

[John Doe @ Mar 9th 2009 10:37AM]

I like the photoshopped netbook (in the pic above) though :)

[PG @ Mar 9th 2009 11:32AM]

Leopard really is bloated, without 2 gb of memory the thing slows to a crawl within seconds of bootup. It takes me a good 5-10 seconds to open safari on a mac mini with 1gb, try opening garage band and wait for paint to dry. The sad thing is Apple puts cheap crap hynix memory in the mac mini and tops it at 1gb, it's pathetic they even sell this machine with this amount of RAM and claim 'it just works'. It just works when you have to pry open the machine with a putty knife since apple has never heard of using screws and upgrade it to 2gb.

[M-RES @ Mar 11th 2009 3:00PM]

@PG

That's strange - I'm running Leopard on a Mac Mini with 512Mb and no slow-downs. I'm running Tiger on a decade-old 400MHz tower which is maxed out to 1.5Gb RAM and no slow downs. I'm running Leopard on an 800MHz G4 PowerBook with 512Mb and no slowdowns, and Tiger on a 1.5GHz G4 PowerBook with 1Gb RAM - again no slowdowns. So all PowerPC and Intel Macs I own seem to run Tiger/Leopard fine.

Conversely I tried installing Vista on a brand-new low-end PC (with a massively higher spec than the 10 year old G4 Tower that's running THE LATEST VERSION OF OS X), and the thing just won't run. I got sick of it eventually and sacked off Vista for a nice smooth Ubuntu install running lightning fast. Vista certainly is a bloat-fest mess, which hopefully Win7 will correct (7 actually being the long-awaited REAL Vista... just not in Vista's current 'public beta' state).

From vast personal experience I can tell you that OS X is far from bloated if the very latest incarnations will run on machines that were designed for the last generation OS (OS 9.0.4 came with the G4 tower originally) and actually be more responsive now than anything before OS X 10.3. Apple are actually streamlining OS X with each release and speeding things up. Don't believe me? Try going back to 10.1 ;)

If you really DO have a mini and have speed issues, perhaps you should have a look into the hardware faults on your HD as that's likely causing problems.

And I can't believe someone can possibly moan about the fact the top just unclips (no messing around with fiddly tiny screws which you might lose when upgrading) and the whole layout is so neat and easy to access... so you'd rather have a half dozen screws to locate, undo, store while you're just wanting to quickly stick a 1Gb stick in? Weird, man... really weird. I bet you hated the G3/G4 tower design with the logic board mounted to the fold-flat side door that meant you could access everything without having to take half the case apart first like the average PC tower case. Do you also find it more pleasurable to get out of your car and push it up hills rather than just drive it up there too? Sounds like a masochistic streak you have. heh ;p

[Raheem @ Mar 9th 2009 7:29AM]

It is my contention that a Blu-Ray Xbox 360 was in planning at Redmond up until the very last minute i.e. a launch. Someone, somewhere realised what kind of economic times we were headed into and expanding costs without a good sales forecast paused or scrapped this project. I reckon you could find an Xbox with a Blu-Ray drive in MSHQ if you rooted around a bit.

Thoughts?

[martin @ Mar 9th 2009 7:37AM]

I may be wrong but I think the 360 lauch predates the bad news on the economy. I mean its been going down for years, but I think the last 2 years is when we really got to see how bad things are.

[Kris @ Mar 9th 2009 8:21AM]

martin, he was referring to the rumors that one was going to launch after HD-DVD went away; not at the XBox 360 launch.

[GodCentMe @ Mar 9th 2009 9:20AM]

My understanding is that Micro$oft has said they will be postponing the next generation of the 360 because of the economy. So by my logic, I guess you could use the next release of the Xbox as a sign of our economic turnaround.

[HunterXI @ Mar 9th 2009 11:35AM]

Um, Microsoft definitely can't foresee market troubles by 3 years. The Xbox 360 doesn't have Blu-Ray because, believe it or not, Microsoft actually did believe that DVD was sufficient, just like they said.

[Raheem @ Mar 9th 2009 2:39PM]

(If this is a double/triple post plz blame Engadget comment system)

Um... Hunter... read it properly. I was referring to the rumours last year regarding a blu-ray packin' 360. Um... um.. um..

[Shattered Ice @ Mar 9th 2009 7:30AM]

It'll will be high priced like the Sony vaio P. Sounds more like a tablet to me.

[Indefinite Implosion @ Mar 9th 2009 7:30AM]

"Wintek will supply the touch panels"
sounds more like an apple tablet
convertible tablet with 8.9" screen perhaps?
meh...
*draws on tx2500* :)

[rcappo @ Mar 9th 2009 9:51AM]

I was thinking that this should be a tablet as well. I might be interested in a product like this.

[Wolfticket @ Mar 9th 2009 7:32AM]

Bet it will be a netbookish forgodssakedon'tcallitanetbookelsepeoplewontpaytwicethepriceforit small portable computer ala the Vaio P.

[Adam @ Mar 9th 2009 7:32AM]

You couldn't have planned the first three posts better...that was made me laugh this morning.

[Will @ Mar 9th 2009 3:11PM]

grammar ftw!