Apple files patent for collapsible ports

I do think a MacBook Mini is in the offing. Flash to too pricey right now so it'll use an 1.8" HDD like the iPod 5.5G first off and when SSD (Solid State Drives) get larger and cheap enough we'll see the MacBook Nano replace the MacBook Mini.

Why collapse the ports though? Sony can get all the required ports and an optical drive in a 11.1" ultra portable so why can't Apple?

http://vaio.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.action?product=VGN-TZ11MN%2FN&site=voe_en_GB_cons&pageType=Overview&category=VN+TZ+Series

OMG! I THINK THE NEWTON IS COMING BACK!

Its really amazing to me that so many people (myself included) have 12" PB g4s and are waiting to spend 2 grand to buy a 12" MBP or something like it. If you walkk into any mac store and ask them if theres one of those out (knowing full well that there isn't) theyll usually tell you "so many people are waiting on that 12" Well folks today I give up. My 12" is on ebay and I bought a black refurb macbook from apple.com (great deal 1049 for a C2D 2.0ghz 120 gb!) I will still buy an ultraportable if it ever does come out (i hope 12" or less!)

yes i love my 12" Powerbook as well

But its 3 years old and there's no model to replace it with

The pro line needs a small form factor option and pronto

I travel a lot and find my 12.1" G4 to be cumbersome. I see coworkers with the small Vaio and I'd certainly pay a premium for a Mac about that size. Flash-based drive, anyone?

All right, you guys make good points. :) You're right, an ultraportable buyer isn't shopping for price, they're shopping for size, and nobody makes them more unbelievably small than Apple.

I agree we won't see it for a while, but I guess there is a need for it.

By Mike's logic, a 3 carat diamond should be cheaper than a much bigger pound of coal. I mean they're both just chains of carbon atoms, right!

Add my vote for an ultraportable. As someone who used to have a PowerBook G4 12" and replaced it with a black MacBook 13", I long for the form factor of my long since eBay'd 12". The MacBook is a few inches too wide for my liking.

Most people dreaming of an ultraportable also see it as being flash based. A true flash based ultraportable would have many other benefits. Think of what the iPod Mini gained when it became the iPod Nano...

- very thin
- impressive battery life
- no spin up from a hard drive
- no sound from moving parts (whenever I un-sleep my MacBook, there's a characteristic mechanical sound)

Also, comparing using my silent, responsive iPhone to my whirring, pausing 60GB 5th gen iPod, I yearn for the day when a Mac can do the same thing.

But I don't know when it could happen. Flash hard drives are only really economical in the 32GB range currently, and an ultraportable Mac would really need a 64GB drive.

Very doubtful for this year.

"with the iPhone at $600, and the MacBook at $1100, Apple would have to squeeze a 13" display portable in at around $800-900."

Nonsense. Smaller doesn't mean cheaper, it means more expensive. An ultra-thin 13" laptop should come in more around $2000. Remember the 12" PowerBook G4, which sold just fine against iBooks which cost $600-800 less.

...you must blow it up in order to use it.

They propose limiting port functionality simply so the thing can be thin-ner? Odd. Then again this sort of thinking works for inflatable rafts...