Why Apple should release a touch-screen Mac
Apple is one of the major leaders in the multitouch space and yet, the company's desire to bring a full-fledged touch-screen device to store shelves has stopped with the iPhone. In fact, the most it has done in bringing multitouch to its computers is offering the functionality in the track pad on its MacBook Air.
But simply offering multitouch on a trackpad isn't enough to make consumers want to flock to Apple products instead of HP or Dell machines. Instead, Apple needs to embrace the fact that many people prefer touch-screen technology and create a Mac that offers the same basic functionality found in the iPhone.
Innovation has been a key to Apple's success over the past decade and without it, the company would be nothing more than another computer vendor. But by releasing a Mac that eclipses the functionality of the tablet PC and fully harnesses the power of multitouch in a way that no one has seen before, Apple can create the computing world's first iPhone-like success.
And in the process, Apple could single-handedly propel the computing market forward into a new era where vanilla products are the exception and establish itself as the de facto leader in innovation.
The computing market may be an entirely different space than the cell phone market, where a touch screen is more desired, but we can't forget that it's still being dictated by the common desire of all consumers to use the single product that does what no other device can. And with the world's first touch screen, multitouch Mac in place, Apple can recreate the same iPhone scenario in the computing market and in the process, make competing vendors and Microsoft look outdated.
But Microsoft isn't so naive. The company has already started developing touchscreen technology of its own in the Surface, and has its own plans about what the future of touchscreens could hold. And although it's a much different technology than what I'm suggesting Apple provide, it highlights one important fact: when a company is willing to put its money behind ingenuity, game-changing products result.
Apple is well on its way to developing a full-fledged touch-screen Mac. The company's MacBook Air already sports multitouch technology on its trackpad and its iPhone is a prime example of its ability to create a product in that vein that people actually want.
So what would it look like? Ideally, the computer could be controlled with the touch screen and if you prefer, you can type on it as well. For those who aren't so keen on typing on a virtual keyboard, Apple's touch-screen Mac should sport a physical keyboard that can be slid out. In terms of aesthetics, I'll leave that up to Apple--I think it has proven to be quite capable in designing handsome products.
Right now, Apple has well over $18 billion just sitting in its coffers waiting to be used. And although a touch screen Mac would undoubtedly cost the company quite a bit and possibly cut down on margins, it's a risk worth taking. Sure, the price may be higher, but if the iPhone is any indication of buyer preference, it's quite apparent that consumers are willing to pay substantially more for a product that's both unique and more capable than any product in the market.
Why Apple and not Dell or HP? It's simple--Apple is the only company in the market that's willing to risk failure to be the most innovative and beloved company in the space. On top of that, Apple is the only company in that market that truly has a pulse on the desires of most consumers.
Of course, developing a touch-screen Mac won't be easy for Apple. It will need to modify its OS and ensure that it can interact with an entirely different computing style. Because of that, it may take some time for Apple to get up the courage (and quality) to release such a product. That said, it should endeavor to do so as soon as possible.
Right now, Apple is slowly gaining ground on HP and Dell in hardware sales and is the third-most popular hardware manufacturer in the US. And although it has been able to catch Acer and the rest, beating Dell and HP may be difficult. But by releasing a product that was once thought impossible, Apple can solidify itself as the company that's willing to go the extra mile to provide users with the products they truly want. And in the process, I think it could gain significant market share quite quickly.
There's no telling what Apple has up its sleeve in the coming weeks and although speculation abounds, there's no way to know if a new Mac will even hit store shelves. But if Apple finally does release a new Mac, it should harness the power of touch-screen technology.
It may be expensive and it may not appeal to everyone. But that's the same thing that was said about the iPhone and I think we all know how well that went for Apple.
Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter feed, and FriendFeed.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has written about everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Don is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and posts at The Digital Home. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Lenovo trumped anything Apple has done by including a wacom-like graphics tablet on it's latest Thinkpad W700. Much better than dirty fingers on a screen. I'm sure Apple could pull off a touch screen mac. That's not a reason to actually bring it to market.
A touchscreen mac has Newton written all over it.
I do agree that dirty fingers on a screen is very bad, because I have a habit of reaching up to touch the screen on my laptop and smudging it.
I say continue to improve the laptop line from the inside out, incorporate only solid state hard drives, and above all provide for unprecedented amounts of collaboration among different types of hardware through wireless means.
No more buggy roll-outs, no more closed off public image, and most importantly - stay unique. Apple can't be caught pandering to the HP's and Dell's of the world, or it will compromise the persona which has made it so popular since Jobs came back to the company.
/P
This wouldn't be something that would be good for a desktop however, unless you were making a keyboard strip that could easily be changed to allow you to type in different languages.... something that I have to do on an almost daily basis and get seriously angry at Microsoft for not including some way to type in another language without buying a Japanese language keyboard.
HP has a touch (single) tablet at Costco for you to demo if you want to try it out. It'll obvioulsy be better when the OS is developed with touch in mind. Not only is this not new thinking, it's been glaringly obvious an inevitable move for years now, it was just a question of who would do it first.
It is not multi touch, but it has some handy capabilities for somebody wanting touch convenience.
Secondly your article stated in the third last paragraph that Apple was now the number 3 OEM vendor behind Dell and HP. As of Q2 2008, Apple was fifth behind Lenovo.
The rankings are:
HP 13.2M units shipped
Dell 11.4M units shipped
Acer 8.4M
Lenovo 5.6M
Apple 2.5M
Also, that HP machine, as you mention, is not multi-touch, so it's not the same.
You can tell that HP took a lot of ideas from Apple and I think in many ways did it better. Glad to see HP is putting some style in their products.
if you are talking about US your shouldnt say "Right now, Apple is slowly gaining ground on HP and Dell in hardware sales and is the third-most popular hardware manufacturer in the world"
you specifically say in the world
also the HP machine is 2-point multitouch.
Apple really just doesn't blow me away with their innovation. The iPod/iPhone is "cute" but that's about it.
A touch-screen-only computer, with no keyboard, is a highly impractical idea.
In addition, Microsoft Surface is setting a high bar for consumer multi-touch computing; there is no experience quite like it. Contrary to the opening statement in this article, Apple is no where near Microsoft's Surface technology; not by a long shot.
You're right, the Surface is not meant for consumer use- nor was it ever intended or marketed to be.
However, it is superior to Apple's closest product in much the way a Ferrari is to a Model T. They do different jobs. The Surface unit can be used by mulitple people at once, apps can be shared or given to other people on the unit, the integration with services is tighter, etc. It's a different product entirely. Trying to compare the two is just silly. If you put the iPhone OS on a projection table that size, you'd still end up with a single user experience and much more limiting. It just doesn't scale that way.
True, but it is not too late to do one that is better.
Don
-
by open-mind
August 25, 2008 1:47 PM PDT
- I think there is definately a market for a touch-screen tablet from Apple. After all, there is already a successful commercial touch-tablet running OS X. I think the main question is whether the tablet should be a small touch screen Mac or large touch screen iPod. I think the latter, say in a 6x9 inch form factor would be quite successful. Let's call it the "iPod Tablet".
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
-
by open-mind
August 25, 2008 1:59 PM PDT
- Sorry, one more benefit of the the iPod Tablet that I sort of implied, but didn't specifically say. For many, iPod Tablet would be a better ultra-portable than the MacBook Air. It would certainly be smaller in size than the Macbook Air, yet do many of the same things. Apple would want to include a video out port so it could connect to projectors for presentations.
-
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (72 Comments)Obviously the iPod Tablet wouldn't be something you would use while jogging, and it wouldn't fit in your pocket. But I have a 5G iPod, and I don't use it for that anyway. But here is where the iPod Tablet would shine...
It would include an internal speaker, so you wouldn't have to drag around earbuds, although you could.
It would be a better portable gaming device, video player, and web/email client than the iPod touch, mostly because of its bigger screen.
It would include a couple USB ports, allowing for external keyboards, storage and backup. This would also allow it to work as an IP telephone.
It would include a hard drive in addition to the flash storage, so it could carry much more video content than is possible with the current iPod Touch.
Its extreme ease of use (relative to Windows and even OS X) would make it popular to people who don't need the flexibility (and don't want the complexity) of a traditional computer.
You could actually use an iPod Tablet at the gym. The elyptical workout machines at my gym all have a place to set a magazine to read while on the machine. The iPod Tablet would work there just fine.
Anyway, I'd be surprised if Apple is not working on such a thing. The Cocoa Touch development guidelines suggest that developers not make assumptions about screen size. There's no reason the Touch GUI cannot scale up to something much larger, just like the original Mac GUI scaled from 9 inch to 21 inch desktop screens.