With a screen size ten times that of the iPhone, this hypothetical device needs 4G for reasonable performance. That places it in the 2012 time frame, not next year.
A ten inch glass screen requires a sturdy protective case that would place the complete unit in the typical laptop category. So why not just buy a laptop in the first place?
How many of those ten millions wear clothes with ten inch pockets? How many handbags would accommodate such a large device?

↓↑report

@Bertil Holmberg: I don't want to stuff a 10 inch tablet down my pants any more than the next guy. This calls for a new fashion accessory, something to keep the tablet strapped to your chest like those hands-free infant slings. Also according to Luke Wilson, 3G is fast enough and whether or not we like it that's what we're going to get. Even when 4G becomes available they'll still be limiting usage to 3G speeds. Doesn't that sound like the At&t that you know? It does to me.

There are two main reasons the Apple tablet has not arrived:

1. Apple would need to come up with another type of amazing new technology that justifies buying a device that nobody really needs. Plain and simple, nobody can really use a tablet. Those who _can_ really use one are already using one and it's loaded with proprietary software (which only runs in Windows) that will only be ported to Mac when it drops below 32 degrees Fahrenheit in hell.

2. They've already got an award-winning device. (the iPhone) The fact that they're still updating that device and releasing new models says that they are very committed to prolonging the life of this cash cow. If Apple produced a tablet at this point in time it would murder the iPhone. Apple's not going to let that happen.

↓↑report

Look like you aren't purchasing one then. Those prices aren't based on any reality we live in.

↓↑report

If it's closer to $1,000, there's no point in releasing it anyway.

↓↑report

It needs a full OS X or a hybrid OS X that allows for installation of normal Mac apps regardless. Otherwise, it's just a larger format of the iPod, which for me, I cannot justify purchasing.

For me, I was ready to spend $600 on Amazon Kindle's (one for me and the wife). My biggest hold up has been the fact that the Kindle is a unitasker (it's only purpose is an eBook reader). The idea of the Mac Tablet would be perfect for me because, in addition to being able to use it as an ebook reader, I can also use it as a much better netbook replacement (I currently own a Asus netbook that I purchased for $279 at Best Buy). However, for it to be of use to me as a netbook replacement (especially since it will likely be priced more than most netbooks on the market today), it will need to be able to do the same things that my current netbook can do (which is pretty much whatever the CPU will allow for since it came with a full Windows XP which has since been updated to Windows 7 Home Premium). If it's functionality is going to be limited to what the iPhone or iPod touch can do, just with a better looking UI, then the tablet is no use to me in its primary function, which would be to replace my netbook. Thus, I would just stick with getting Kindles.

↓↑report

You are probably one of the few people that I have seen that has said that they would pass if it has OSX. Most people are the other way around (in that they would pass if it has an iPhone OS on it). I am one of those people who would definitely pass unless it has a full OS or a hybrid OS (one that allows for both App store apps and the ability to run full OSX apps).

↓↑report

@Reggies: Seriously, why do you or anyone think this needs OSX? The iPhone OS is already built for multi-touch as are all of the programs written for it. The iPhone OS is easily powerful enough for this tablet. Have you seen what the iPhone can do? Especially graphics wise?

If you try putting OSX on a 10" tablet meant to be used with your fingers, then it will either be unusable or require a basic rewrite of all programs and the OSX UI.

↓↑report

@Mystic

The reason it needs a full or hybrid OS X is because I have no need for a larger iPod Touch/iPhone. You are absolutely right in that the iPhone OS could run a tablet. The issue that I have is that I want to be able to use my tablet as a full computer with the ability to install any program I want or need, just as I can with my iMac and laptops. If I'm going to be stuck with iApps, then my iPod Touch works perfectly for that. Sure, it doesn't have a 10.1" screen, but I don't need it to be able to play the games I have on it, surf, the web, use my iApps, etc. Does it require a rewrite of OSX? Possibly. But, heck, the rumors are saying that a UI rewrite is in forth for the device anyway.

Further more, the iPhone OS is a full OSX (at least, this is what Steve said when he keynoted the iPhone two years ago). The thing here is the that iPhone OS has a touch-based UI (versus the OS X UI) and does not allow for you to install full apps on it (which, as you may or may not know, is actually possible if the OS contained the proper UI elements). What I am hoping for is a hybrid in that I can enjoy the flexibility and ease of iApps, but also install any other Mac App that I want. To me, this is possible and is elementary. After all, the boys in Redmond who has those "other" tablets can run whatever apps you want on them. I'm not saying that those devices are better than what Apple has up its sleeve, but it is doable.

↓↑report

I'm definitely betting it will be a new version of the iPhone OS which will include a new SDK and new APIs. A full OS just has to much overhead to make a device like this plausible.

And along with this will come all kinds of new apps to fill pretty much every need, and at much better prices than current shareware.

Anyway, if I want OSX I'll get a Macbook, but I'm hoping the tablet is built on the simplicity and usability of the iPhone.

↓↑report

That's what I'm hoping for as well. I agree that a full OS X on the device would likely be overkill and could potentially hurt performance. However, I still would like the ability to run normal Mac programs. If it has that ability but also the same simplicity as the iPhone, then I'm all for that (that is what I mean by a hybrid OS). My biggest thing about getting the tablet is portability. For me, I have a ton of cases in which having a netbook/tablet would be more beneficial than using my laptop. And, that's the reason why I am considering one of these devices.

↓↑report

@Reggie
Define Regular OS X Apps. If you mean any App designed to run on Snow Leopard using GCD, Core Animation and written exclusively in Objective-C using Cocoa, it may be able to be ported to the new device.
If it relies on any legacy code *at all* it will require major re-writing. The Cocoa Touch API is much more restrictive than Cocoa. Photoshop and Word are way out, Pixelmator and iWork may work after a bit of tweaking, but may be missing certain features.

↓↑report

@Dan

By regular OS X Apps, I mean applications designed to run on Snow Leopard. I do not want an App Store-only driven tablet as it would be useless for me. Sure, there will likely be apps on the device which will allow for me to connect to remote computers (RDP, VNC, LogMeIn, etc) as most of them are available in the App Store today. But, there are other programs that I use on a daily basis that I would love to be able to use on my tablet (such as iWorks or Microsoft Word). Heavy duty items like the Adobe Suite (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, etc), would not be beneficial on a tablet mainly because the tablet will obviously not have enough CPU to run those effectively (I don't run those programs on my Windows Netbook today).

Now, I'm pretty sure that if the device ends up being App Store only, companies will start to release "Mac Tablet" versions of their applications to run on the device. The problem with that, for me, is that unless the "Mac Tablet" is a hit and becomes extremely popular, just as the iPhone and iPod Touch did, those apps are not going to be developed in the short term. Thus, for me to purchase one today would not work unless I could put those "missing" apps I need on it.

To better sum me up, I didn't purchase an iPhone until OS 2 came out (and the App Store). I didn't purchase my iPod Touch (did so when I got rid of the iPhone... due to AT&T, not Apple) until the iPod Touch got faster and ran as well as my iPhone. The same will happen here with the tablet for me. Unless I can justify its use and need in the short term, I'm not going to purchase one until such time as it can meet my needs.

↓↑report

Funny, because it's the iPhoneOS and it runs Flash I *will* have an issue with it.

Flash has no place on the iPhone or in any iPhoneOS device. Apple has said as much to Adobe;

http://mindtaker.blogspot.com/2009/11/guestworkerfraud-apple-to-adobe-lousy.html

Adobe is a Windows shop anyway, why would you want Flash on ANYTHING Apple?

-Drunken Economist
http://mindtaker.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/drunk_economist

↓↑report

@Mentok - if you don't want flash, you don't have to use it, but why would you not want it as an option? Choice is a good thing—I know you Apple fanboys often forget that. Some of us may want to browse sites that use flash.

↓↑report

Thanks for getting my back Kesey - I just want Apple to allow me ALL of the web on a device so portable with access to the Internet. Can't we all just get along?

↓↑report