Category: 📁 Tech Plans

I wonder if Apple WWDC 2022 might not include the release of the newly redesigned consumer MacBook or Mac mini.

Notes

• I have an alternate idea about the products that could be announced at Apple's WWDC 2022 event, as we often expect things earlier than they arrive, like people thinking M2 could come in spring 2022, a flat Watch in 2021, or a redesigned flat back iPhone in 2022.
• Since the new MacBook and Mac mini are giant updates to decade old designs, I wonder if it could make sense to only release a MacBook Pro sans notch and a larger iMac with 5nm M1X/M2 in 2Q22, and leave the new MacBook and Mac mini for the 3nm M2/M3 with ARMv9 for around 1Q23.
• The new Mac Pro with the most powerful chip Apple will make could then be the star of the show, as long as it is ready to be released. The Mac Pro and iMac are more developer focused devices anyway, as opposed to the MacBook and Mac mini, which are targeted more at consumers.
• Rebranding or naming of products is much tougher to guess, but I wonder if there is at least a chance that the Mac Pro could be renamed to something else, based on the Mac Studio being released with a new name earlier this year, and including the M1 Pro chip.

Update - June 4th

• While my alternative guess is that the newly redesigned MacBook and Mac mini could wait until 2023 for the 3nm M1-series chip, I will add that maybe they could still release an updated MacBook Air with the old design, instead of the new colorful design.
• Since the potential third generation 5nm M1X/M2 chip for this year may not be a big enough upgrade for the new design, they could release both the MacBook and MacBook Pro this year in the old designs, which they used for the original M1 Macs from late 2020.

Previously:

@gruber I wonder if Apple could make their next iMac and consumer oriented display to each have a design with a 30 inch 6K screen, a resolution of 5760 x 3240 with 220 PPI, and a 60Hz IPS screen without Mini-LED and likely without 120Hz ProMotion. [Link]

They could. But why would they? I don’t see them making standalone displays that aren’t technically excellent, and that means ProMotion and probably Mini LED. - John Gruber

TLDR

• What size would you choose to make the larger iMac?
• I somewhat agree with your point about Pro displays
• Why would they? Larger than 27", consumer price, etc.
• Should they? Yes, according to me it's the best option
• Will they? Probably not
• Who's on first? Yes

Why 30" iMac?

• Larger than previous 27" size started in 2009
• Proportionally larger as new 24" is over 22"
• Wider horizontal resolution at 1620 over 1440
• Keeps the same 220 PPI retina resolution
• Creates 6K 5760 x 3240 standard
• Created 2K 2560 x 1440 standard

Why 30" Consumer Display?

• I agree they could leave this to others or have 120Hz
• But, allows lower cost than Pro XDRs for consumer Macs
• They DO make a consumer level of most products
• Makes a good match for all M1 Macs and forward
• Matching single or dual 24" and 30" - 27" and 32" Pro
• M1 supports up to 6K and 60Hz

Why Not 32"?

• OK, you got me there
• But, 6K at 5760 x 3240 would be a good standard
• Maybe others would also make 30" at 6K
• Could be considered upgrade to industry 27" at 4K
• In 2009, others embraced 27" 2K at 2560 x 1440
• Others haven't embraced 27" 5K or 32" 6K thus far

Why Consumer Display And Products?

• iMac, MacBook Air, Mac mini - Displays to match?
• iPad Air, iPad mini, iPad
• iPhone, iPhone mini, iPhone SE
• AirPods, HomePod mini, iPod Touch
• Apple TV 4K, Apple TV, Apple Watch SE
• iPad screen isn't technically excellent like Pro XDR, for instance

Lineup

• Suggested consumer and pro lineup of Macs and Displays
• Larger sizes for both iMacs and possible consumer displays
• iMac - 24" and 30" - Same display tech as Apple Display
• Apple Display - 24" and 30" - 60Hz IPS LED for now
• Mac Pro - Mac Pro and Mac Pro Max - Mac Pro "mini"?
• Apple Display Pro - 27" and 32" - 120Hz Mini-LED for now

More reasons in original post with idea for 30" 6K iMac and display

I wonder if Apple shouls make their next large-size iMac and consumer oriented display to each have a design with a 30 inch 6K screen, a resolution of 5760 x 3240 with 220 PPI, and a 60Hz IPS screen without Mini-LED and likely without 120Hz ProMotion.

Devices

• 30" iMac
• 30" Apple Display

Specs

• 30 inches
• 6K display
• 5760 x 3240
• 220 PPI
• IPS - No Mini-LED
• 60Hz - No 120Hz - Maybe though

Notes

• 2000:1 Contrast - LG's new "IPS Black" technology
• 60Hz IPS - No Mini-LED and likely no 120Hz ProMotion
• Regular iMac only at 30", not an iMac Pro
• Space Gray or Black color option unlike earlier 24" iMac
• No iMac Pro with higher cost and pro features
• No Mini-LED and likely no 120Hz ProMotion

Whys

• Larger than 27" similar to new 24" being larger than old 22"
• Get larger screen but still smaller than 32" Pro XDR Display
• Targets approximate retina 220 PPI just like 24" and 27" iMacs
• Lower cost without Mini-LED and 120 Hz "Pro" features
• iMac Pro isn't needed because Mac Pro box and 32" XDR Display
• Matching 30" iMac and display at reasonable consumer prices

Lineup - Added February 24th

• Suggested consumer and pro lineup of Macs and Displays
• Larger sizes for both iMacs and possible consumer displays
• iMac - 24" and 30" - Same display tech as Apple Display
• Apple Display - 24" and 30" - 60Hz IPS LED for now
• Mac Pro - Mac Pro and Mac Pro Max - Mac Pro "mini"?
• Apple Display Pro - 27" and 32" - 120Hz Mini-LED for now

Reply To: John Gruber “But Why Would they?”

I wonder if it will ultimately be tablets, and not phones at all, that will be primarily redesigned in their best and most common form to be foldable.

Notes

• They would open up similar to a book with the screen only on the inside, but most importantly have a much larger single screen when flipped into portrait orientation like a tablet when opened.
• They would also fit in a much smaller space so that a tablet opened up to be about 9 inches, like an iPad mini, could fit in your pocket while being wider and shorter than a typical phone when closed.
• They would not have any screen on the outside to function like a phone, but would be designed more like a book or notebook, with the screen fully protected inside the device when closed.

Could Apple announce or release these unlikely products at their second fall event of 2021 or in the future? Here are some quick guesses and a few key details for some unlikely products I wonder about Apple announcing if they have a second or third fall event in 2021.

Products

• 14" MacBook or MacBook Air - M2
• 30-32" iMac - M2
• 24" and 30-32" Apple Displays
• AirPods 3

Future

• 12" MacBook mini - M2
• 14" MacBook Pro - M2X. Mini-LED.
• 16" MacBook Pro - M2X. Mini-LED.
• 40-80" Apple TV - M2. Mini-LED. 55" and 75"?

Thoughts

• Many of you likely know what the rumors are currently.
• So I understand that the rumors are currently suggesting the MacBook Pro and maybe Mac mini will likely come first this fall, possibly with an M1X chip.
• Then, sometime next year the MacBook Air would be released and a larger iMac.
• I just like to think a little different.
• I like to try and guess what might not be currently predicted or most rumored at the time.
• So here are some alternative ideas and thoughts for products they could release next based on my haphazard analysis.
• I'm also skeptical that the lower tier MacBook Air will include Mini-LED in its next release, as is being rumored.
• To keep costs down and differentiate their products, I would guess that Apple continues to leave Mini-LED for their Pro level products only.
• I wonder if this strategy could be the plan even for the MacBooks for at least the next release, and maybe more.

Here is an idea that I think Apple could use if they build a display with an integrated ARM processor, along with some of the basic features and specifications I think the device should have.

Features

• Hybrid smart TV/console/home hub, computer desktop monitor, and "anywhere" counter display
• Used by itself with built-in processor and tvOS, or as a display or TV for computers and devices
• Plug in Macs, iPads, computers, or any HDMI capable boxes to function as a monitor or TV
• 41" size would work as a TV in a bedroom, a computer monitor on a desk, or a display in the dining room
• Controlled by remote with Apple remote or by voice with Hey Siri - Switches inputs automatically
• Integrated FaceTime camera, microphone, and speakers for FaceTime and always-on Siri
• 40.5" display at 4K matches perfectly with macOS target dpi of 109 PPI for desktops
• 40.5" display at 8K would match perfectly with macOS target dpi for retina displays with 218 PPI

Specs

• Name - Apple Home 4K, Apple Display 4K - Ideas below
• OS - tvOS - Renamed homeOS?
• Size - 41" 4K Display - Actually 40.5"
• Density - 109 PPI - Matches macOS target DPI
• Cost - $999-1499 US? - "Budget" Apple TV/Display
• Storage - 64-128 GB and 256-512 GB - $999 and $1299?
• Processor - A-Series A14 - Or newer ARM chip like M1
• Inputs - 2 USB-C and 2 HDMI 2.1 - 1 Thunderbolt 4?
• Camera - FaceTime Camera - Microphones
• Speakers - Integrated Speakers - Optical out

Names

• Apple Home 4K, Apple Home, Apple Home Display, Apple HomeTV
• Apple Display 4K, Apple Display TV, Apple Display, Apple Display HDR
• Apple Screen 4K, Apple Screen, Apple Screen HDR, Apple Screen TV
• Apple TV Display, Apple TV Screen, Apple TV, Apple TV HDR

Exclusive: Apple testing new external display with a dedicated A13 chip and Neural Engine

Here is an idea for how to create a singular and clear Wordpress brand for both Automattic and the WordPress Foundation. I wonder if this could potentially help both of them prosper and grow much better together into the foreseeable future.

Quick • Name Changes And Locations

• Automattic Inc. > Wordpress Inc. - wordpress.com/inc
• WordPress.com > Wordpress - wordpress.com
• WordPress > Wordpress Org or Wordpress.org - wordpress.org
• WordPress Foundation > Wordpress Foundation - wordpress.org/foundation
• Automattic > Wordpress Automattic - automattic.com
• Ma.tt & Matt.blog > Matt Mullenweg - mattmullenweg.com

What

• Sell WordPress trademark to Automattic and rename Automattic Inc. to Wordpress Inc.
• Allow use of WordPress trademark to be used on anything for eternity for WordPress Foundation too
• Rename WordPress.com > Wordpress and Wordpress Inc. - Wordpress, formerly WordPress.com
• Rename WordPress > Wordpress Org and Wordpress Foundation - Wordpress Org, formerly WordPress. Alternatives > Wordpress.org? Wordpress Open? Wordpress Core? Wordpress Base? Wordpress Free?
• Relocate Wordpress Foundation > Wordpress Org - Simplify with Foundation at Wordpress.org and Inc. at Wordpress.com
• Rename Automattic > Wordpress Automattic - Stay at automattic.com as Careers website and internal company domain

Why

• Life is short. Take a chance. The risk is worth the reward. Simplify and create a single, well-known, and strong brand.
• Wordpress.com and Automattic can help WordPress Foundation a lot by making more money
• Automattic could make much more money if it can use Wordpress trademark and name for anything
• Wordpress could be best name for both WordPress.com and for Automattic company going forward
• We can use Wordpress brand name on many products for both Inc. and Foundation creating a network effect
• Wordpress.org and WordPress is so popular now that Wordpress Inc. would likely face trouble restricting future trademark access

Axiomattic

• If you don't trust yourself with trademark, do you think someone in the future who is less altruistic will care? - Build for our generation
• Accept that you can only control trademark, foundation, and company while you are leader and alive - Even Rome fell

Updated Date - Nov 22, 2023
Original Date - May 26, 2021

Could iPhone SE 3 be released in Spring 2024 and Touch ID debut on side of iPhones in Fall 2021 or later? Here is a guess for when we might see another iPhone SE as well as for how and when Touch ID might be added to the iPhone. This idea is based on an analysis of when each of these changes and additions to the iPhone lineup occurred in the past.

Notes

• There are many reports recently and over the last year about when the next iPhone SE will debut and what features it will have.
• Some mention that a new iPhone SE will debut in Spring 2022 with another 4.7" display, and then another version in Spring 2023 with a punch hole notch.
• Before that, there was a rumor that a version with a 5.5" or 6" display would be released as early as Spring 2021.
• There are also many reports over the last few years about how and when Apple might add fingerprint authentication back to the iPhone.
• After looking into it I came up with an alternate idea and guess on what could happen and when.
• Follow along if you wish.

iPhone SE

• Fall 2013 - iPhone 5S released as first phone with Touch ID in bottom button and last phone with 4" screen
• Spring 2016 - iPhone SE 1 released with same design as iPhone 5S and upgraded internals - 2.5 years later
• Fall 2017 - iPhone 8 released as last phone with Touch ID in bottom button and last phone with 4.7" and 5.5" screens
• Spring 2020 - iPhone SE 2 released with same design as iPhone 8 and upgraded internals - 2.5 years later
• Fall 2021 - iPhone 12S or 13 releases as first phone with Touch ID in side button and possibly last phone with 5.4" and 6" screens
• Spring 2024 - iPhone SE 3 releases with same design as iPhone 12S or 13 and upgraded internals - 2.5 years later

iPhone Authentication

• Fall 2013 - Touch ID Bottom - iPhone 5S released as first phone with Touch ID in home button
• Fall 2017 - Face ID Top - iPhone X released as first phone with Face ID in top notch - 4 years later
• Fall 2021 - Touch ID Side - iPhone 12S or 13 releases as first phone with Touch ID in side button - 4 years later

Thoughts

• So, besides guessing that they could add fingerprint authentication back to the iPhone this year, I'm also guessing that they will use a side-mounted Touch ID instead of an in-screen fingerprint reader.
• This guess also basically implies that this will be a year in which they leave the design very similar to the iPhone 12.
• But even though it could be an S year, whether or not they brand it as such, they would still be making a fairly large addition to the lineup in the form of the side-mounted Touch ID sensor.
• I will add though, that I wonder if they may even remove Face ID from the non-Pro phones for 2021, or less likely from all of the phones. I'm not talking about the notch, just that Face ID could be removed.
• Removing Face ID from the non-Pro phones and not using an in-screen fingerprint reader would allow them to reduce the cost on them in the Fall of 2021, partially obviating the need for a new SE in the Spring of 2022, while also offering the exact same design without Face ID in the Spring of 2024, on that potential entry level iPhone SE 3.
• With that said, the details for what they will do with Face ID, and when they will change the size of the notch or go to no notch at all is a separate issue I think.
• I also have a few contrarian guesses for how that could happen.
• However, I think the issue of Face ID and the notch is kind of unrelated to the main two ideas in this article.
• The first idea being that the next iPhone SE 3 could possibly not be released until the Spring of 2024, and be based on the design from the Fall 2021 iPhones.
• The second idea being that Apple could possibly add fingerprint authentication back to the iPhone using the side-mounted Touch ID sensor already in use on the iPad, instead of creating a new in-screen fingerprint reader.
• Furthermore, that this side-mounted Touch ID could possibly debut on the main line of iPhones released this year in the Fall of 2021, similar to how the first Touch ID came to the iPhone 5S in a year in which they didn't radically change the design and screen size.

Could Apple release a smaller and cheaper mid-range 5.4" iPhone in 2020, or even 2019? Here’s a theory for why, when, and how Apple might release a 5.4″ iPhone as a smaller and cheaper mid-range device to replace the iPhone 8 at about the $649 price point, but which could also be not too much larger in size than the 4″ iPhone SE.

Good Thing, Small Package

I wonder if Apple could announce a surprise 5.4″ iPhone in September 2019 with about a 1602 x 740 pixel screen at 326 PPI. It would be a smaller version of the 6.1″ XR, just like the 5.8″ XS is to the 6.5″ XS Max, and it would be physically not too much larger than the iPhone SE. [Link]

The inspiration for this article comes from the above thought I wrote previously on my website and social media. John Gruber from Daring Fireball made my day by taking the time to respond, pointing out that such a device would be unlikely to be released in the fall of 2019. I most certainly agree with this. Yet here I am anyway, thankfully inspired to write a few more of my thoughts behind the possibility of a 5.4" iPhone, including why, when, and in what form Apple might release the device.

It would be delightful if they did, but that seems impossible given how leaky the supply chain is.

— John Gruber (@gruber) September 6, 2019

Leaky Mid-range Math

• 4.7 - 0.7 = 4.0" - iPhone 5/SE
• 5.4 - 0.7 = 4.7" - iPhone 6/SE2
• 4.7 + 0.7 = 5.4" - iPhone 11?
• 5.4 + 0.7 = 6.1" - iPhone XR/11?
• 6.5 - 0.7 = 5.8" - iPhone XS/Pro
• 5.8 + 0.7 = 6.5" - iPhone XS/Pro Max
• ----
• 5.4 - 0.6 = 4.8" - Test Device/Size?
• 6.1 + 0.6 = 6.7" - Test Device/Size?

So the supply chain production leaks and all of the rumors for this year point to only updates to the 5.8" XS, 6.1" XR, and 6.5" XS Max. However, there has at least been one small leak about a 5.4" iPhone, which I will talk about later on in this article, even if it's for the 2020 phones. While it's quite likely that the top-tier devices end up being the 5.4" and 6.7" versions from that leak, I wonder does Apple really want to change the size of the XS from 5.8" to 5.4" so soon? If not, would the above list of devices point to a possible range of display sizes that Apple could have been testing and planned to produce in the end?

Apple made 5 versions of the 3.5" phone, from iPhone to iPhone 4S. They made 4 versions of the 4.0" phone, from iPhone 5 to iPhone SE. If they release a 4.7" "SE2" in the spring of 2020 they'll have made 5 versions of the 4.7" phone, from iPhone 6 to iPhone SE2. But they are only going to make 2 versions of the 6.5" device, in 2018 and 2019, just to bump it up not even 0.2 inches to 6.7" in 2020? That doesn't quite sound like what Apple has typically done in the past, which is pick a size and resolution, commit to it and stick with it for a number of generations.

It would be interesting if Apple had planned to evenly space out the size of these devices, going up from the 4.0" and 4.7" sizes, up to the 5.4" and 6.1" sizes. If they did release a 5.4" device as their regular mid-range and mainstream device at some point, along with a budget 4.7" in spring 2020, they would end up with 3 evenly spaced out display sizes of 4.7", 5.4", and 6.1" for their non-Pro phones.

Mysterious $649 iPhone Rumor

• $399 - iPhone 4.7" - SE 2
• $649 - iPhone 5.4" - 11
• $749 - iPhone 6.1" - 11
• $999 - iPhone Pro 5.8" - 11 Pro
• $1099 - iPhone Pro 6.5" - 11 Pro

In a rumor from EDN in April of 2019, it was mentioned that there could be 4.7" iPhone update in 2020 with a potential price of $649. Again my theory might be unlikely, but I wonder if this device to be released in spring 2020 will target a lower price point, similar to the price point of the original iPhone SE, at $399 or $499. To achieve this price point, Apple may or may not have to design the 4.7" iPhone SE successor with a metal or plastic casing and no wireless charging. Potentially this design could be externally more like the original iPhone SE and recent iPad Pros with flat metal sides and back, as opposed to the iPhone 8 glass design with wireless charging.

However, Apple could still have a device planned to target that $649 price point, making that part of the rumor also true but in a different phone. I wonder if this is where this new mid-tier 5.4" iPhone with Face ID could come in, either this year or more likely in the fall of 2020. It might make sense, because like the XS being $100 cheaper than the XS Pro, this new 5.4" iPhone could potentially be priced $100 cheaper than the XR from 2018. Of course it's possible that they change these prices slightly going forward, but the basic tiers would be segmented nicely in the above list, hitting base price points of around $400, $700, and $1000.

Back To The Future In 2020

I wonder if Apple could announce a surprise 5.4″ iPhone in September 2019 with about a 1602 x 740 pixel screen at 326 PPI. It would be a smaller version of the 6.1″ XR, just like the 5.8″ XS is to the 6.5″ XS Max, and it would be physically not too much larger than the iPhone SE.

While it's unlikely that Apple announces or releases a 5.4" iPhone in 2019, the thinking behind my original thought was mainly the idea that the rumored 5.4" iPhone for 2020 could possibly be a smaller version of the XR/iPhone line, and not a new device size for the current XS/Pro line.

In June of 2019 some completely unknown guy named Ming-Chi Kuo wrote this super far-fetched note about Apple potentially releasing 5.4" and 6.7" iPhones for release in the fall of 2020. Seriously though, this idea instantly becomes a pretty likely scenario, because of the legendary analyst that Ming-Chi Kuo is. However, I just wonder if there is a small chance that this rumor is only partially true, since it was still pretty early in the design testing and rumor mill for the 2020 iPhones. Sometimes these rumors are based in evidence but a little off, like in February of 2017 when he was thinking that the new 2017 iPhone design, the eventual iPhone X, would have a 5.8" screen, but that it would include a 5.15" usable screen with a virtual button area integrated below as part of the screen.

I wonder if the 5.4" device he is seeing evidence of could possibly, just maybe, be an early testing device that ends up being the smaller version of the current XR mid-range device, while the 5.8" and 6.5" XS/Pro device sizes remain the same going into 2020 and the future.

Surprise "Product"ion

• September 10th - Release 3 phones, and announce 1 other phone
• September 11th - Start production of the announced phone - 5.4" iPhone
• December 6th? - Release the announced phone in December or November

As far as this 5.4" phone being released in 2019, it's certainly unlikely. We may never be surprised by a new iPhone again because of leaks coming out well before the Apple event announcements. If Apple was to ever surprise us again with an iPhone product, I wondered if there is any chance that they could pull it off by following the above strategy and schedule? Probably not, but it was just another crazy idea I had behind the unlikely idea of a 5.4" iPhone being announced in September, but still released later the same year in December, and at least still being released before Christmas.

Basically, now that Apple is releasing so many phones in the fall, could they delay the release of just one of those phones until December, but announce it in September? On top of this, could that one phone each year be some type of new design that they are trying to hide, now that they seem to be staggering a single new device each year, with the iPhone X in 2017, and iPhone XR in 2018?

One interesting thing about this schedule, if it was at all possible, is that the strategy might possibly be repeatable. For instance, in 2020 they could redesign only the 5.8" device with an in-display fingerprint reader and/or camera under the display, but leave the other three devices with the current design. Those three devices would go into production in about July, and the single device with a new design would go into production in about September after the fall Apple event, and be released later in December or November.

Started From The Top

• 2017 Fall - Pro Small - X at $999
• 2018 Fall - Pro Large, Regular Large - XS Max at $1099, XR at $749
• 2019 Fall - Regular Small - 5.4" iPhone at $599-$699? $649?
• 2020 Spring - Budget Classic - 4.7" SE2 at $399-$499?

It could make sense to release a smaller mainstream tiered iPhone this fall or winter. One reason for using this release schedule is that there appears to be a more legitimate rumor and frequent prediction of a budget device coming out next spring. As I noted above, it appears to be sounding more and more likely that this could be a 4.7" device based in some way on the iPhone 8, according to another report from Nikkei earlier this September.

If Apple was to release a 5.4" iPhone in this smaller form factor this year, then I would think many people would buy this device immediately and see this phone as a mainstream successor in price to the iPhone 8 and in size to the iPhone 5/SE, even though the $649 price is higher than the SE. If Apple doesn't release a 5.4" iPhone before the release of the physically larger but lower priced 4.7" budget device in the spring of 2020, then all of the people who buy this other potential SE successor, possibly priced in the budget category at a price of around $399, won't be interested in buying this $649 5.4" device in the fall of 2020. I would think that Apple might prefer making more money on larger margins, by getting more people to first buy this $649 phone in 2019 with the new small bezel design, as opposed to that $399 phone in 2020 with the old large bezel design.

Besides releasing a more expensive mainstream 5.4" before the more budget 4.7" update in the spring of 2020, Apple might also not mind having this 5.4" phone at $649 be released in December because it would be released after their high-end phones. Some people will wait until December because they want the smaller, cheaper 5.4" device. But many people want the larger, more premium devices just because they are the premium devices, or because they are available at the announcement. And there could even be people who will debate between the $999 5.8" iPhone Pro and the $649 5.4" iPhone, who end up going with the Pro because they want it now and don't want to wait.

99 Problems, And A Big Notch Was One

Besides starting near the top prices of the product line in the fall of 2017 with the iPhone X and going to the bottom prices of the product line in the spring of 2020 with the iPhone SE 2, here are a few more reasons why 2019 might make sense as the perfect time to release a smaller and cheaper 5.4" version of the iPhone XR from 2018. Again, 2020 is more likely because we haven't heard any rumors or leaks, but nonetheless now would make sense if Apple had planned this all out beforehand for various reasons.

• Making the notches smaller for 2019 makes this 5.4" or a 4.8" device possible
• Making phones thicker for 2019 makes a decent battery size and life possible
• It would make a "new" device for 2019, to follow new X in 2017, and XR in 2018
• Indecision on whether they should make a 4.8" or 5.4" regular small iPhone
• Cost reductions in Face ID since 2017, making a $649 smaller device possible
• Cost reductions in other areas from the larger and similar design XR device

Now We're Here

So on September 10th, in a couple days, we're likely to hear about the release of updates to the 5.8", 6.1", and 6.5" iPhones for 2019, which have been rumored for a long time. Then, in 2020 the most likely scenario at this point appears to be high-end 5.4" and 6.7" Pro iPhones.

But keep your eye out for the small hope of a small phone, with the idea that the rumored 5.4" iPhone might be the mid-range iPhone, making it the new mainstream iPhone. It might make sense to equally space out the sizes going from the classic 4.7", up to the current sizes of 5.4" and 6.1" phones. And it might not be a coincidence that the difference between 6.5" and 5.8" is 0.7", while the difference between 6.1" and 5.4" is that same 0.7". As John Gruber mentioned, a 5.4" device to go along with the current 6.1" phone could be "delightful". Especially for people who might want a smaller and cheaper mid-range device around $599-$699, so they don't have to pay over $1000 for a phone.

Here are the potential names I would use for a new disc-less or all digital Xbox.

Predicted

• Xbox One S All-Digital Edition
• Xbox One E
• Xbox One D - For "Digital"
• Xbox One Digital

As far as what they are likely to call it, I think Xbox One E is certainly a possibility. One of the reasons is because that is the name they used for an updated version previously, the Xbox 360 E. As long as they still like that scheme, they could stick with it. I am aware that it has been rumored to be called Xbox One S All-Digital Edition, so that is very likely as well. I just wonder if there is a possibility of that name being more of  a behind the scenes full name, and they go with a simpler brand name at retail for customers. Probably not, but you never know.

Suggested

• Xbox One T
• Xbox One R
• Xbox One E
• Xbox One TV
• Xbox One Tiny
• Xbox One Small

I like the simplicity of using single letters for different products in a product line. Plus, Microsoft has been using that type of branding for both the Xbox One S and Xbox One X, as well as the most recent versions of the Xbox 360 S and Xbox 360 E. So it makes sense to stick with the single letter naming scheme for this version as well, instead of using a more full name like the rumored "All-Digital Edition", or the previous Arcade and Elite of the 360.

I like R better than E because it is commonly used for higher end devices and they are not yet using that letter for any Xbox One device. Using letters like A, C, E, G might typically be thought of as lower tier devices. Using letters like R, S, T, X might typically be thought of as higher tier devices. So basically, I'd go with R because it sounds cooler and is still a letter less than S and X, which are higher end devices and already in use. Or I'd go with T because it might sound even better than R, and could denote the longer name of Tiny or TV, similar to how the current S could denote the longer name of Small or Slim.

Xbox One R

There are admittedly a couple reasons not to call the device the Xbox One T, and use Xbox One R instead. First, if they want to follow one style of typical letter naming scheme, a lower letter denotes a lesser capable or more budget device. With that scheme, this new device should use a letter lower alphabetically than S. In that case, Xbox One R or Xbox One E makes more sense. However, you don't have to make lesser letters mean a lesser device. So Xbox One T is still fine to use if you think it's the best name, and T also comes one letter after S, which I think could be interesting to signify that it comes after the Xbox One S device chronologically.

Similarly, if they were to ever update the Xbox One X with a smaller design they could consider naming it the Xbox One Z, which comes shortly after X alphabetically and after the Xbox One X device chronologically. Using the letters S, T, X, and Z might be the four best letters to use when naming these products.

Second, if they do eventually release a dongle or stick Xbox device, or even an Xbox TV integrated into regular TVs, then the distinction between the names Xbox One TV and Xbox One T could be confusing in the future. However, it might also make sense going forward, because the Xbox One T could morph into the Xbox TV. People might associate that T with TV, and see that the Xbox TV is a further evolution, or even smaller and integrated version of the older Xbox One T, with similar features. The Xbox One T would be like the console box version, and the Xbox TV would be the version integrated into TVs or as a small stick or dongle.

Xbox One T

I like T better than E, and possibly even R, for multiple reasons. While it's debatable for sure, I think it might just sound better than R and be more preferable to consumers. Meaning that if you were just to pick 3 letters to use for branding that you would choose S, T, and X for your three products simply because they are the most marketable and cool sounding. S, T, and X are also in order if you don't count those weird U, V, and W letters that companies don't generally use for naming products with letters.

Another reason I might like T better than R though, is for what it "stands" for. While the name for a product with a single letter branding scheme should stand on its own and just sound good, it might not hurt if it also brings reference to certain words as well, like S does with Small, Slim, or Sleek. Using Xbox One T makes sense in this regard, even if the most important aspect is just using the best sounding letter. So I like that the T can stand for Tiny, Television, or TV, and that people might associate it with those words.

In particular, I like that the S in Xbox One S could be lengthened to the full name Small, and the T in the Xbox One T could be lengthened to the full name Tiny. And possibly the X in Xbox One X could be an acronym for "Xtra", just like XL means extra large. They could even potentially use these full names in certain places in branding or at least marketing. Salespeople could use the longer name to explain the consoles to consumers, and it could help consumers understand the main difference between the devices. "Oh, the S is the small one smaller than the original, the T is the tiny one that's good for using for TV and movies, and the X is the extra large one that's extra powerful for gaming."

However, the most important thing is having a simple name that sounds best. So that is why I think they should stick with the single letter naming, and use the name Xbox One T or Xbox One R.

Here are the prices and features I'd put in the new 2019 iPad and iPad Mini products.

Why

• Keep the existing budget iPad in the lineup for a low cost device
• Put a bit newer technology in the other entry level iPads to make them desirable
• Raise the prices a bit if needed for a bit newer technology
• Include laminated display and thinner chassis because it's important
• Price iPad and iPad Mini only slightly different, not a much cheaper Mini
• Keep the old design with Touch ID to keep costs down some still though

Prices

• iPad 9.7" - 2018 - $299 32 GB, $399 128 GB
• iPad Mini 7.9" - 2019 - $449 64 GB, $549 256 GB
• iPad 10.5" - 2019 - $499 64 GB, $599 256 GB

Features

• Same Design - Touch ID and Bezels
• Similar Display Sizes and Resolutions - 7.9" and 10.5"
• Thinner Chassis for iPad - Like Mini 4 and Pro 10.5
• Laminated Display - And Anti-Reflective
• A12 Processer
• 3 GB RAM
• Apple Pencil Gen 1
• Touch ID Gen 2
• Wifi 802.11ac
• Bluetooth 5

It sounds like Google has aquired much of HTC's hardware team and some non-exclusive IP in their latest 1+ billion deal. But I also read that HTC will likely continue on with a new phone separately, using the HTC brand name. So this might mean that Google isn't going to use the HTC name for a product, and may not have acquired the rights to the brand name. This makes sense, as they have now branded their smartphone and some other hardware products as "Pixel". Before that, they had used the "Nexus" brand name for many products.

Back in 2012, it sounded like Google did a similar but slightly different type of acquisition with Motorola. That deal was worth 12+ billion, and they acquired the hardware team and IP. But I believe they also acquired the brand name, and the entire Motorola company, in that much bigger deal. However, they haven't kept the brand name, and did not use it on many products. I believe Lenovo later bought the rights to the Moto and Motorola brand names along with some other assets in a deal with Google.

Missed Opportunity

I find it interesting that Google ended up not using the Motorola brand name, and selling the brand name to Lenovo. And with this smaller HTC deal, it sounds like they again won't be using the brand name in their large purchase of a fairly prominent hardware company's assets. Just like Moto, HTC is a hardware brand that has actually been around for a very long time, going back to Microsoft's Pocket PC mobile OS.

I wonder if Google missed an opportunity when making their decisions to buy HTC and Motorola. HTC may not be a strong enough brand name. But Motorola, and their nickname brand Moto, were and are very strong brand names. So much so, that Lenovo purchased Motorola and its name from Google. And they even decided to keep the brand name and ditched its own brand name for the Moto phones. It sounded like they originally thought they would go with "Moto by Lenovo", and even decided against that to just use Moto by itself as the brand name for Moto branded phones.

Brand Name Value

Brand names can be quite valuable. Other good brand names in the smartphone technology space that have been acquired in deals include Nokia and Palm. If you either want to use your own brand name like "Google Phone", or a brand name you come up with like "Pixel", then you make the decision that you don't want to buy a company partially for its brand name. But Google payed so much for Motorola, a brand name that was up there with Nokia and Palm, because of its history with the popular Moto Razr and other phones.

And now it looks like Google is getting serious again about upping their hardware game and getting a better team in-house. To go head to head with the iPhone like most articles say. But they have chosen not to buy an established brand name as part of the costly deal when other companies have payed a lot of money largely, or at least partially, for the brand names of Moto, Nokia, and Palm. Personally, I agree that not using HTC as their main smartphone brand is probably the best move. But it still makes me think of that big deal for Motorola as well. I just think Google might have been able to get a leg up if they had made more of a commitment to the established Moto brand by using it for the first smartphone they developed in-house.

But Android Won

Of course, it's worth noting that both the Nokia and Palm acquisitions did not turn out well. Maybe Google knew what it was doing when it decided not to go with the Moto brand name, but go with their own brand "Google Nexus". It's Android that is still going strong, while the Palm and Nokia brand names were kind of squandered by HP and Microsoft.

There are so many other factors though. I still think Microsoft and HP were wise to use the strong Nokia and Palm brand names after their equally huge deals for those companies. Microsoft's deal for Nokia was around 7 billion, and HP's deal for Palm around 1 billion. But at least they wanted to use the great smartphone brand names. Windows Mobile and Palm OS are basically dead for now and both companies resold the brand names of Nokia and Palm just as Google resold the Moto and Motorola brand names. However Google payed around 12 billion for Moto and 1 billion for HTC, but it doesn't look like they will use the brand names at all.

Tough Decision

It's a touch decison though. How far do they go with it? Would we now have a "Moto Home" and a "Moto Notebook"? Google decided they didn't want to use Motorola, and now HTC, as brands for their smartphone or other hardware devices. I'm not saying they made the wrong decision for sure. But they sure payed a hefty price, especially in the Motorola deal, to end up not using such a strong brand name. They are paying billions of dollars in these hardware deals to further their commitment to making their own Android devices with integrated hardware and software. But they may have missed an opportunity to at least start off using a solid smartphone brand name like Moto, HTC, or some other established brand, when they made these huge acquisition deals.

Update - April 20th, 2017

We have more rumors and real analyst articles which show that my idea of the iPhone 8 having a flexible screen wrap around the sides isn't likely at all. Not surprising of course, and the first rumor to really disprove my crazy theory came just a few days after I wrote this article. For people who are interested in finding out what features will be in the "iPhone 8", don't bother reading this article. For people interested in hardware design or possible form factors for future iPhones or other mobile phones, you might still be interested in reading this. I talk about how future phones and mobile devices could have flexible screens that wrap around the side, as well as a couple of the uses this design would have.

• Apple's 'iPhone 8' to replace Touch ID home button with 'function area,' start at $1,000 - Feb 15, 2017
• Alleged 'iPhone 8' diagrams show display dimensions, sensor array - Apr 17, 2017

Original Article

First of all, to get up to speed on some of the possible rumors, here is a quick overview by AppleInsider, which they have been using in their articles about the next big redesign of the iPhone. For instance, this quick overview is included in their last rumor I read today, Apple's 'iPhone 8' again rumored to feature reinforced glass back, stainless steel frame

• Sept. 2017 launch
• Screen sized 5.1"-5.2"
• Edge-to-edge OLED
• Curved glass back, screen
• Dual-lens camera
• 10nm "A11" processor
• Wireless charging
• Touch ID, FaceTime camera, speaker embedded in screen

AppleInsider and many others have also noted various times about 5.8" OLEDs being produced for the next iPhone. And that maybe the actual size of the screen will end up being a usable 5.1" even though the OLED screens being manufactured are 5.8" in size. One possibility might be that they are getting larger sized screens produced, but they will be cut down to a lower 5.1"-5.2". Another is that with a rounded screen, extra length is added to the actual screen size, 5.8", to make the usable screen size appear over a smaller real life dimension, 5.1". A third option would be that there will eventually be two different sizes, both a 5.1-5.2" device, and later or the following year a Plus sized 5.8-5.9" device.

However, one guess that I have is for something a bit different, which I don't think has been noted or suggested in most of the rumors.

A "Screen" On Each Side Of The Phone

I wonder if the reason for the discrepancy in screen sizes to date could be because of a new "feature" for this all new design. I think the usable and visible size on the front of the screen could be about 5.1", but that the actual screen continues and wraps around each side of the iPhone. And we would be able to touch each side of the device to provide other types of input, such as scrolling up and down without touching the front of the screen.

Meaning, the "screen" we see is just 5.1", but an "invisible" screen wraps around the sides.

Likely the OLED display would wrap around just the left and right side, not the top and bottom. Even if the screen wraps around the edge, it might not mean that we see an interface or image on the sides of the device either. Meaning, the "screen" we see is just 5.1", but an "invisible" screen wraps around the sides. And we can touch the sides of the device and it can respond in different ways. Though it could also provide an image possibly, for instance in what could appear as different "buttons" on different parts of the screen side.

Oh yeah, and when I say I "think" this could happen, I might actually mean "hope". Because I think it could be a good idea to allow the sides of digital devices to be touched for input by users. I think it would be a good design, and potentially be a very useful and intuitive interface option. What I mean, is I'm just guessing here everyone. I definitely don't have an inside track to what is actually going on. I have no idea what is going on, unlike people like writer John Gruber of Daring Fireball, or Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo.

Why Would A "Side-Screen" Be Useful?

So why would this all new design have a screen that wraps around the side? What could you do with this extra design feature? Since it could allow touch input, pretty much anything. As I mentioned, I think the most obvious use is for scrolling up and down by using your thumb on the side of the device.

You would just touch your finger along the side of the device to scroll through and select items on the screen.

Other options for the side screen could include "buttons" on the side of the device. Maybe from the front you just see skinny rectangles about a centimeter high along the edge, possibly even in different colors. And touching the side of the device clicks that "button". Having pressure sensitive force touch options using the side of the device makes sense too. Anyway, the options are numerous, and I think the most obvious use is for vertical scrolling or scrolling through options on the screen without having your finger or thumb covering the front of the screen.

By the way, I think a screen extending to the sides of a device could eventually be used in something like the Apple Watch possibly too. You could potentially remove the digital crown, a moving part. You would just touch your finger along the side of the device to scroll through and select items on the screen. So if this touchable side screen idea is something that works out, I would expect to see it in many more devices in the future by Apple and others.

What Size Will The Screen Be?

The rumors now seem to be pointing to a usable screen size of 5.1-5.2" for the iPhone 8. And that the actual screen being produced might be about 5.8". So above I've been discussing how that rumor might apply to a new iPhone with a screen that wraps around the edges. However I'll add that I think it could be possible that another option for the iPhone 8 is that it's usable size will remain at 4.7". Exactly the same size as the iPhone 6 and 7. And that those extra 0.4-0.5 inches in the 5.1" OLED panel could be used to wrap around the sides of the device.

There are a couple reasons why I wonder if the iPhone 8 will come in the smaller 4.7" screen size. First off, it seems like there was a lot more rumors about OLEDs of the larger 5.8-6.0" size much earlier, but not as much lately. It seems like the 5.1-5.2" OLED panel size has been in the rumors more lately. I wonder if those larger sizes were testing for the current 5.5" Plus iPhone. And these newer rumors of the 5.1" OLED panels are testing and production for the current 4.7" iPhone.

More importantly though, I think Apple could potentially stick with a 4.7" usable screen size for the iPhone 8 to keep the resolution the exact same as the iPhone 6 and 7, at 1334x750, with the PPI at 326.

Then in the end Apple could have decided to start producing their first OLED iPhone in only one size, the smaller 4.7" size. Reasons for this decision could include that they don't know if they can meet demand by going all in with OLED in the first year. They want to still at least introduce their new design for the iPhone 10th anniversary. And they will still have a new 7S Plus released at the same time. So basically, they may have decided to not put all their eggs in one basket by only having a new iPhone 8 and 8 Plus with the new design, OLED display, and other technology. So they could be releasing an iPhone 7S and 7S Plus, along with the iPhone 8.

More importantly though, I think Apple could potentially stick with a 4.7" usable screen size for the iPhone 8 to keep the resolution the exact same as the iPhone 6 and 7, at 1334x750, with the PPI at 326. And that the rumors of the 5.1" screens being produced will wrap around the edges of the smaller iPhone's usable 4.7" screen. Reason being, they can't make the usable screen size bigger, going from 4.7" to 5.1", without keeping their magical 326 PPI retina display.

So they'd have to use the 1920x1080 HD resolution from the 5.5" iPhone Plus or come up with a new resolution, such as 2560x1440 for a 5.1" iPhone. That is definitely a possibility, but would require another resolution form factor. So I think it's also possible that they may be happy with the current resolutions and usable screen sizes. Resulting in them keeping the one-handed 4.7" 1334x750 screen for the regular iPhone 8 in 2017, and the larger 5.5" 1920x1080 screen for the iPhone 8 Plus version in 2018, the following year.

Conclusion

So to recap, I have two possible predictions that are bit contrary to the rumors that I have been reading about for the next big iPhone redesign, the potential iPhone 8. I think that contrary to reports, the screen size of the iPhone could stay the same at a usable 4.7", even though the OLEDs produced have an actual size of 5.1-5.2". Then, the next year, an iPhone 8S Plus version could be produced with a usable screen size of 5.5", with an actual OLED panel size of 5.8-6.0".

Secondly, I wonder if that extra bit of screen panel is used to curve and wrap around the left and right sides of the device. That the side of the device will be used as a touch screen for input, effectively replacing buttons on the side and offering more options for input. This user input on the side of the device will change depending on the application. It could take the form of scrolling, to selecting elements, to clicking soft buttons, or anything else. And I think it would be a great idea and a potentially good design for mobile devices of all kinds in the future.

You've likely heard that Apple has made the Swift programming language open source. Of course, this means that developers could potentially be able to use Swift to make software on other platforms. That could eventually include Linux, Android, Windows, and web applications. I'm not completely sure of all the reasons why Apple has made this move. But here are a few ideas and thoughts.

Popularity Means More OS X And iOS Developers

Likely, Apple would simply like Swift to become more popular. If Swift becomes so popular that it is used for other platforms, then developers who have learned Swift might be more likely to build native apps for OS X and iOS at some point.

I believe Swift's first and foremost role at Apple will continue to be building native OS X and iOS apps, likely using Apple's XCode development environment. And Apple's main goal is still likely to get developers making native apps for their devices and computers. But anyone who learns Swift will likely think of building an app for OS X or iOS at some point, even if they first used Swift to build an app on Android or another platform.

Free Means Anyone Can Learn It, Including Students

Students are basically the developers of the future. By making Swift open source, it gives Swift a chance to be used as the basis for University or College classes. And if schools are teaching Swift, then businesses might want to make software using Swift because they have a bunch of young developers who already know the language.

At the same time, it makes it so that anyone, young or old, can use and learn Swift for free. While open source and free aren't the same things, it does essentially mean that anyone can learn Swift pretty easily now. They won't even need to get a Mac to learn Swift. But I think Apple still hopes that eventually they will get or use a Mac, whether it's at home or at work. That's because Swift will still be best used to build native apps on Mac and iOS.

Enterprise Is Where The Big Money Is

Apple at one point was largely targeting creative professionals with their Mac computers. But it seems they are trying to work their way into the enterprise more and more these days. They worked a deal with IBM to create iOS apps. And I wonder if open sourcing Swift could lead to many more enterprise customers for Apple as well.

While a large amount of enterprise software is shifting to the cloud, it doesn't mean that businesses don't still use or build software that isn't only web-based. Client-server applications are still used by most big businesses. It also doesn't mean that businesses won't ever find reasons in the future to make some software for a specific platform.

If Apple can figure out a way to get more enterprises to build custom software for Macs, they have a whole whack of money to gain. We're talking about huge businesses deciding to make custom client-server software on Macs, and outfitting their whole company with iMacs. Companies like Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, and HP are making all this money now. I don't think Apple is a big player in the enterprise space, but it doesn't mean they never will be. Maybe the announcement of Swift being open source could help Apple work their way into the enterprise.

Getting Help And Building A Community

Making a programming language and framework to build applications is not easy. When you make something open source, you basically gain a whole bunch of people who will help you build something without having to pay them. You also gain a community, hopefully making people feel like they are helping to build something together.

I think it's worth noting that making something open source and building a community around it hasn't been something Apple has done a lot of in the past. It will be interesting to see if they can do a good job with open sourcing Swift. I think Google and Microsoft have so much more experience in this area, and kind of make it look easy. Apple could go through a big learning curve with this approach, similar to their troubles with making cloud software. You know, things like MobileMe, iCloud, and Apple Maps. Being open like this certainly hasn't been Apple's strong point either. So we'll see how well they are able to pull this idea off.

It Worked For Android And WordPress

Google chose to use Java for Android, likely for many of the reasons above. Java was extremely popular both at schools and at enterprises. It was being used by students to learn programming, and enterprise developers were using it to build huge client-server applications, and also large business web applications and websites. Because so many developers already knew Java, it was easier for them to try making an Android app.

Similarly, PHP is being used for creating a large amount of the smaller websites and blogs on the internet. WordPress became extremely popular, largely because it is built using PHP, an open source programming language. And because WordPress itself is open source. Microsoft and Oracle could get big enterprises to use their programming tools and languages, but ended up losing a lot of customers because hosting a WordPress website is so much cheaper.

Apple is kind of following in Android's and WordPress' footsteps with this move. They want Swift to get more popular. And to do that, it needs to be free to use, and available to learn on platforms other than Macs.

• Q&A: Apple’s Craig Federighi talks open source Swift, Objective-C and the next 20 years of development
• Welcome to Swift.org - Swift.org

I guess Mozilla just couldn't wait until iOS was 10 years old. The Firefox web browser has finally been officially released for iOS, eight and a half years after iOS was first introduced with the first iPhone.

Syncing Bookmarks To Mobile Is (And Was) Important

In my mind, the release of Firefox for iOS is important for one main reason. We now have the ability to sync bookmarks to Firefox on iOS. For the majority of people out there, that is all that really matters.

You can count me as one of those people. Like many other people I'm sure, I used Firefox as my main browser for quite a number of years. When I bought my first iOS device, a 2G iPod Touch, I had to figure out which browser to use. For quite a while I still used Firefox on the desktop. My journey took me to drop Firefox on my desktop for Safari, then to Mercury which used Firefox Sync, then back to Safari, and finally to Chrome.

The only real reason I switched was because I couldn't easily sync my bookmarks in a fully supported way with an iOS Firefox app. I really think that Mozilla unfortunately underestimated this impact and  lost a boatload of dedicated users simply by not having an iOS app that synced bookmarks. While it might have mattered to Mozilla, it wouldn't have mattered much to users if it was a little slow or didn't use its own rendering engine. And a large majority of those people who switched to sync their bookmarks to their desktop aren't going to go back to Firefox now because they already switched.

The Competition Is Tougher Than It Was In 2005

You think that in, say 2005, that it was tough for Mozilla to compete with Microsoft's built-in IE browser? Yes, it was extremely difficult since IE was installed by default and Microsoft was a behemoth of a software company. Firefox slowly gained more and more users as more and more people became more knowledgable about computers. Some of those people looked into using a different browser.

But how about the competition now. Google has a crazy amount of money and the most dominant mobile platform with Android. Apple has a ridiculous amount of money too, and anyone with a Mac will simply use Safari. Not to mention Microsoft has recently released Windows 10, which has a built-in browser that is much improved, with Edge. If you follow my logic though, Mozilla actually has a leg up on Microsoft now, since Edge isn't yet available on Android and iOS mobile platforms yet. So you can't sync your bookmarks, er I mean favorites.

But however you look at it, it's only going to be tougher for Mozilla to gain back users that it lost by not having Firefox and bookmarks syncing available on iOS. Google and Apple are both as big as Microsoft now, and all three of those companies put a large amount of effort and resources into building their web browser. But at least going forward Mozilla can now promote Firefox being available on iOS, which will interest some people into giving it a shot on their laptop or desktop again too.

Firefox Web Browser For iOS Features

Here are some of the features highlighted by Mozilla on the Firefox for iOS App Store page.

Experience a fast, smart and personal Web. Firefox is the independent, people-first browser made by Mozilla, voted one of the Most Trusted Internet Companies for Privacy. Upgrade today and join hundreds of millions who depend on Firefox for a more personal browsing experience.

FAST. SMART. YOURS. Firefox is made with you in mind and gives you the power to take back control of your Web experience. That’s why we design the product with smart features that take the guesswork out of browsing.

SEARCH INTELLIGENTLY & GET THERE FASTER
- Firefox anticipates your needs and intuitively provides multiple suggested and previously searched results across your favorite search engines - every time.
- Easily access shortcuts to search providers

BROWSE PRIVATELY
- Your personal information belongs to you. In Private Browsing mode, Firefox won’t remember any of your history or cookies, but new bookmarks will be saved.
- Delete your browsing history, passwords and more in a single tap.
- Choose the private data you want to remove.
- **iOS 9 required for Private Browsing mode**

SYNC FIREFOX ACROSS YOUR DEVICES
- With a Firefox Account, access your history, bookmarks and open tabs from your desktop on your smartphone and tablet.
- Firefox can also remember your passwords across devices so you don’t have to.

INTUITIVE VISUAL TABS
- Intuitive visual and numbered tabs easily let you find content for future reference.
- Open as many tabs as you like without losing track of your open Web pages.

EASY ACCESS TO YOUR TOP SITES
- Spend your time reading your favorites sites instead of looking for them.

• Firefox web browser - App Store

We may have Android PCs and laptops by 2017, which could compete more directly with Windows and Mac computers. This has been rumored before, but this time it comes from the Wall Street Journal, a pretty reliable source.

Android PCs Make Sense

It makes complete sense to me that Google will eventually make "Android for PC". Android is an extremely popular mobile OS, so a lot of those apps could also run on a desktop OS. Google has been making an Android OS for pretty much every other platform over the last couple of years, except for the desktop. This includes their decision to make Android Auto, Android Wear, and Android TV. And thirdly, even though Google has focused on the cloud for desktop, there are still limitations to a desktop operating system like Chrome OS which doesn't support native applications.

Native Apps And Games Have Advantages

It's great to run software in the cloud so it is cross-platform. But there are still cases where native apps work better, and we can have the best of both worlds. Games is one of those categories. Google could make a large amount of money just from Android for PC games. Also any applications which could benefit from locally saved data will also work better with a native desktop OS. This includes productivity apps and even apps for photos and music.

I know browsers continue to get better with saving data locally, but just being able to have your own files on your computer is still better in many cases. Or to be able to install Dropbox for your Android PC if you use Dropbox instead of Google Drive. While most software is also moving online as well, there are still many people who will buy a Windows 10 computer instead of one with Chrome OS, just because they like having their files offline on their computer as well.

It's All About The Taskbar

I'm completely oversimplifying here, but as a very simple implementation, Google could almost just add a taskbar at the bottom for Android for PCs. I'm not saying that is all they will do or should do. They want to do something similar to Microsoft where an app can be created for all platforms, but the UI looks different on the desktop than it does on mobile. But I'm just saying that to me the biggest difference is just that taskbar at the bottom. That is why I thought Windows 8 didn't work without a taskbar, and why I believe Microsoft made the correct decision with Windows 10 to bring Windows Store apps into windows on the desktop.

Google's Single Android OS Advantage

One advantage that I believe Google has over Microsoft and Apple, is that they don't have to support legacy applications. While mobile Android apps are not designed for a large screen, at least they would run on a version of Android for PCs. It's not like the difference Microsoft has between the Windows 8 and later Store apps, and original Windows desktop "programs". Google does need to support Chrome OS apps, but that is kind of given. They are supporting them on every desktop OS, through Chrome. It's not like trying to merge iOS and Mac OS X for instance.

• Google to fold Chrome OS, Android together into new OS strategy for 2017 - Apple Insider
• Alphabet’s Google to Fold Chrome Operating System Into Android - Wall Street Journal - Subscription required

Could this hidden "ASUS E205SA" reveal an upcoming Windows 10 laptop to replace the excellent 11.6" ASUS eeeBook X205TA notebook?

While reading about Windows 10 budget notebooks I came across this interesting tidbit. It's a reference to an "ASUS E205SA", which has not been announced or mentioned anywhere by ASUS. I wonder if it could be the possible replacement for the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA, which was one of the best reviewed budget laptops with Windows, and a bit of a revival for ASUS of their old eeeBook netbooks. Here's what I found out, along with an overview of a number of cheap budget laptops that ASUS could release later this year with Windows 10.

Earlier this summer, it looks like ASUS announced or released information for three different lines of Windows 10 notebooks in the E series, some of which were previously known as eeeBooks. They have product pages for each of these laptops, with features and specifications.

However, I don't believe any of these have been released yet and their product specs could even change possibly. For instance, the 14" E402MA is listed with Windows 8.1, but I would guess it will come with Windows 10 when released. These laptops will most likely all be released later this year, as a whole line of new budget Windows 10 laptops from ASUS.

ASUS E402MA Regular 14"

There is the 14" ASUS E402MA, which is a 14" laptop with a 500 GB or larger hard drive. It looks like it will come in various colors. Because of the mechanical hard drive it won't be super thin or light. Battery life isn't mentioned but it likely won't be as great as the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA if it does come with only a mechanical hard drive.

ASUS E403SA Thin And Light 14"

There is the 14" ASUS E403SA, which is a 14" laptop with a 32-64 GB eMMC drive. It touts features such as a brushed aluminum finish, thin and light profile, and super long 14 hour battery life. Other than the brushed aluminum finish and 14" display, these specifications are more similar to the old 11.6" eeeBook X205TA.

It's a pretty interesting and good-looking device if you ask me. There's a good chance that it could end up being the best budget notebook with Windows 10. That is, if you are fine with a laptop that is more like a netbook or Chromebook, with only 32-64GB of flash eMMC storage. It has a battery life listed as 14 hours, and should be very light for a 14" laptop.

ASUS E202SA Regular 11.6"

Then there is the 11.6" ASUS E202SA, which is an 11.6" laptop with a 500 GB or larger hard drive. Like the 14" E402MA, it looks like it will come in various colors. It touts a solid 8 hours of battery life. While this laptop will be the same size as the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA, it doesn't have the flash hard drive, super thin and light profile, and excellent 12 hour battery life that it was known for.

ASUS E205SA Thin And Light 11.6" - Possible eeeBook X205TA Update?

However, unless I'm missing something, there is currently no 11.6" laptop with a 32 GB or larger eMMC drive listed anywhere. It got me thinking and wondering if they would also have an 11.6" with a flash eMMC drive to replace the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA. I wondered if it might be named either E203SA or E205SA, based on the product names of the other laptops.

Some quick detective work (yep, a Google Search) brought up an ASUS Web Storage excel file which contains a product named E205SA. It's also interesting that it is one of the few notebooks, along with the 14" E403SA above, to come with 500 GB of ASUS Web Storage as opposed to just 16-32 GB. This is likely because they will be touted as "cloudbooks" with only 32-64 GB of flash eMMC. So you get a large 500 GB of online storage from ASUS free for 2 years.

• Eee PC • ASUS WebStorage (ASUS • Google Translated web page)
• Product Information • ASUS WebStorage.xls (ASUS • English excel file)

What Features Could This New 11.6" ASUS E205SA Have?

So I think it's possible that the reference to an E205SA could mean that it is the actual successor of the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA. If that's the case, then this potential 11.6" E205SA could have similar features and specs as the already announced 14" ASUS E403SA, but be packaged with a 11.6" display.

The 14" ASUS E403SA and 11.6" ASUS E205SA could be very similar to the old 11.6" eeeBook X205TA in that they should be very thin, light, fanless, and have exceptional battery life. They should be cloudbooks and only come with 32-64 GB of eMMC flash storage, and of course come with Windows 10. And they should also be updated with a nice brushed aluminum finish version.

What Features Could All These New ASUS Laptops Have?

All 4 of these product lines could have Braswell processors, a USB Type-C port, and 802.11ac Wifi as a few of their main upgrades. Another interesting new feature could be what ASUS marketing is calling IceCool, which they say is an internal layout that keeps heat away from the palm rest of these laptops so your palms stay cool even when you use it for hours on end.

I do wonder if it's also possible that the colorful 14" ASUS E402MA and 11.6" ASUS E202SA might come in versions with 32-64GB flash drives instead of a 500GB-1TB mechanical hard drive. And maybe the brushed aluminum 14" ASUS E403SA and potential 11.6" E205SA might also come in different colors than just the brushed aluminum finish, either at launch or later.

Best Budget Windows 10 Laptops? (Plus The Competition)

So what does all this mean? Well, put simply, I think that the 14" ASUS E403SA and this uncovered 11.6" ASUS E205SA with flash storage have the potential to be the best budget Windows 10 laptops. Or more specifically, the best alternative to Chromebooks with flash storage and a super thin and light design. And the 14" ASUS E402MA and 11.6" ASUS E202SA could be the best budget Windows 10 laptops if you want a more traditional small laptop with some real hard drive space. Plus you'll hopefully be able to replace the hard drive with a real SSD if you want to on those laptops.

ASUS has a pretty great track record, and it looks to me like these new laptops might be a better option than the previously released 11.6" and 14" Acer Aspire One Cloudbook, and the soon to be released 2015 update to the HP Stream 11 and 13.

The 14" version of the Acer One Cloudbook sounds like a great device as reviews say it has a great 12+ hour battery life and great keyboard for a budget device. While the new version of the HP Stream hasn't been released or reviewed yet, it sounds like the 11" version of the Stream could be the better option since it has an improved 10.5 hour battery life and display. And the previous versions of the 11" Stream was known to have one of the best keyboards for a small netbook-like laptop.

But my spidey senses tell me that once these ASUS laptops come out, they will be reviewed extremely well, just like the old 11.6" ASUS eeeBook X205TA. So if you are looking to buy a good cheap Windows 10 laptop, you might want to wait until ASUS releases their budget Windows 10 lineup.

Conclusion - Potential ASUS Windows 10 Budget Lineup

So if my sleuthing is correct, the E205SA could be the real successor to the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA with flash storage. If not, this article should still have given you a good overview of the unreleased budget Windows 10 laptops that should be upcoming from ASUS. Here's a quick overview of what their Windows 10 budget lineup could look like, including the unannounced "ASUS E205SA", which could be the eeeBook X205TA replacement.

• 11.6" ASUS E205SA - 32-64GB flash eMMC
• 14" ASUS E403SA - 32-64GB flash eMMC
• 11.6" ASUS E202SA - 500GB-1TB drive
• 14" ASUS E402MA - 500GB-1TB drive

As far as pricing, the announcement of the 14" ASUS E403SA suggests it should come in a 32 GB and 2 GB RAM version for $299 USD. I wonder if the ASUS E205SA, the possible successor to the 11.6" eeeBook X205TA,  might come in a 32GB and 2 GB RAM version for $199 or $249 USD, and a 64 GB and 4 GB RAM version for $299 or $349 USD.

If it did, the prices and storage specs for these laptops would be similar to the ASUS ZenFone 2 Android phone, which has been a pretty big hit for ASUS. And it could make them the best and cheapest budget Windows 10 "cloudbook" laptops that offer 64 GB and 4 GB RAM.

Since the Apple Watch launched, it hasn't sold quite as well as some people thought it might. Here's my quick take on the key reasons why the sales for the Apple Watch might be lower than expected. From what I've read it sounds like it hasn't been as big of an initial success as the iPod, iPhone, or iPad. I wonder if the low sales could be boiled down to just one or two reasons, even though reviews focus on so many technical specifications and cool features.

The Apple Watch Is Simply Too Expensive

Like any tech product or gadget, the Apple Watch has been reviewed and analyzed excessively and in-depth. Every review has a different opinion about what features should make you want to get yourself an Apple Watch. Or conversely, reasons why it isn't worth buying or isn't selling well. Things like battery life or features that don't work perfectly.

And with a typical price of about $600 US, and a low price of $400 US, I think it is likely much too high of a price to reach any kind of mainstream adoption like we saw with the relatively low-priced iPods, iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad.

But often in the end, I think the large majority of regular consumers focus on price first. And the price of the Apple Watch might simply be too high over competing products, even in its lowest price version. So it might not matter that much if you need an iPhone to use all of the Apple Watch features, or how great the interface is, or even that the battery might not last long enough. While Apple can get people to pay a certain premium for their products, they also may need the price to be in the same vicinity of the products it is replacing or competing with.

And with a typical price of about $600 US, and a low price of $400 US, I think it is likely much too high of a price to reach any kind of mainstream adoption like we saw with the relatively low-priced iPods, iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad. While the smaller size is $50 less, it doesn't actually hit a significantly lower price point. Which leads me to the other reason why I think the sales of the Apple Watch haven't been as great as previous products.

Too Much User Choice With Too Many Bands And "SKUs"

I think Apple may also be trying to sell too many different Apple Watches, with way too many different bands. And I think that even the two different sizes might have been a bad choice for the first release, and maybe even at all. Apple has had success in the past with simplifying not only the amount of products they have, but also limiting the amount of options you can choose from for a single product. This decreases the chance that people will look elsewhere because of choice overload. But it seems to me that Apple is getting further and further away from focusing on simplifying their products and product lines.

One example of Apple not focusing their product choice is looking at all the different versions of iPads and iPad Minis they have had for sale at the same time somewhat recently. In the past, they would come out with a new version of a product, and the old version would simply be dropped, having been discounted in the months leading up to the new release. Then with the iPhone they started keeping around a previous generation at a lower specific price point.

But however you look at it, it's far more options than a single size iPad where all you had to choose was how many GB of space you want and if you were getting the WiFi or cellular version.

But now there is a dizzying amount of different iPads and iPad Minis, all with different storage amounts and wireless connection options. You got your iPad Air, iPad Air 2, iPad Mini, Mini 2 with retina display, and Mini 3. All with different options and so many different prices. Too many options I think, and they are not differentiated enough to help the consumer know exactly what you should buy with how much money you want to spend.

And now, with just the first release of the Apple Watch with its two different sizes and all kinds of different bands, Apple seems happy to continue the trend of offering lots and lots of choices. They even advertise their large amount of choices above all else on their website. Right at the top the Apple Watch highlights that it is "Available in 20 models", the Watch Sport is "Available in 10 models, and the Watch Edition is "Available in 8 models". That's got to be something like 50 different models. OK, hopefully your math is better than that.

But however you look at it, it's far more options than a single size iPad where all you had to choose was how many GB of space you want and if you were getting the WiFi or cellular version. With each set of options segmented into clear and distinct price points. Making those decisions wasn't hard for the consumer as they knew exactly what they were or weren't getting.

Could It Really Be This Simple?

So I'm guessing some of you will read this and say "Well yeah. Of course." I hope that's the case, as then I'm probably onto something if most people agree. But many of the reviews don't seem to mention the price or the fact that there are so many different options and price points to choose from. Yet they go into amazing depth with different features.

What I'm saying is that we have so many exhaustive reviews about features, and specifications, and cool things the Apple Watch can do. And I have read different reviews suggesting those are the reasons why people don't need or won't get an Apple Watch. But when it really comes down to it, I think there are more obvious and much more important deciding factors. While there are many factors, I think three key ones in this case include price, user choice, and desirability.

Unlike the original release of the iPad, the price point of the Apple Watch is just too high compared to competing products. And there are too many options at different price points, which doesn't give the buyer a clear idea of what they are getting and why.

Desirability we know Apple is awesome at. While I'm not the best one to evaluate how the marketing for the Apple Watch has gone and how well they did to influence people's desire for the product, I think it's safe to assume it was done extremely well. That is what Apple has always been good at as far as I can tell. Part of its success has been their marketing and ability to get you to really want and desire something. They packed a lot of cool new features into the Apple Watch and have most likely done an amazing job marketing them and selling the Apple Watch.

I think it is likely just those other two factors that are stopping large numbers of people from buying an Apple Watch. Not really what specific features it has. Unlike the original release of the iPad, the price point of the Apple Watch is just too high compared to competing products. And there are too many options at different price points, which doesn't give the buyer a clear idea of what they are getting and why.

A number of years ago Apple had seemed to focus so much more on reducing and simplifying both the options and price points for their products. And I don't think they have done that as well with the Apple Watch. So I really do think the possible low sales is as simple as that; the price is too high and there are too many options.

Conclusion

So I just don't think Apple has been able to hit the right price points for the Apple Watch. And they have made the buying decision too complicated with too many choices. I think those are the real deciding factors that stop people from buying the first release of the Apple Watch.

Apple had been simplifying the amount of products and product versions it released in the past. But now with the release of the Apple Watch, they offer a dizzying amount of options, and advertise it as being a plus. They also had been hitting price points that were closer to mainstream adoption with new products like the iPod and iPad. But now with the Apple Watch, they have come out with a product that seems way too high above the price points it needs to be at.

I should mention I don't even have an Apple Watch. So I might not be the best person to have an opinion about this. However, I was considering buying one before it was announced, yet I didn't get one. Do you think you can guess one of the reasons why I didn't get one? Yes, you nailed it. I was hoping that a different font would be used for the UI. Either that, or I think that paying more than $299 for a watch might be a little excessive. Especially when you consider smart watches won't last nearly as long as analog or digital watches which people often payed a premium for. And I also feel like I might be missing out if I get the small version and the cheapest band. So a buyer starts off feeling like they might have made the wrong choice when they should be happy about their buying decision and their cool new gadget.

Links

• Apple Supplier Numbers Suggest Apple Watch Sales Are Below Analyst Expectations

One thing that I didn't see mentioned in the newest rumors about the next iPad Mini is how much it will weigh. I have a feeling that the new iPad Mini could have its weight reduced significantly, to somewhere around 250 grams or lower. Maybe anywhere from about 220 to 260 grams. Here's how I came up with that number, along with my thoughts about the potential release date.

I figured this out from looking at the weights of previous iPads and previous iPod Touches.

iPad Mini 4 Weight

When Apple released the iPad Air, the WiFi version went down from the 650 gram iPad 4th gen to just 450 grams. Apple also reduced the weight of the iPod Touch over two generations from the 115 gram 3rd generation to the 88 gram 5th generation. The drop in weight for each was around 70-75%.

And now it looks like the next iPad Mini should be much thinner and have the same thinner design that the iPad Air and iPod Touch 5g used. So I wonder if the iPad Mini will go down in weight to 70-75% of the 330 gram weight of the iPad Mini 3rd generation. So somewhere around 250 grams or lower.

It would be amazing if they figured a way to get the iPad Mini to be under 200 grams. That would be asking too much I think. But I wouldn't doubt if Apple has thought about 200 grams as a target weight for the Mini. However, for this release I think getting it to under 250 grams is a more realistic possibility.

iPad Mini 4 Release Date

And when will the iPad Mini 4 get released? Apple has an event scheduled for September 9th. Some of the products that have been in the rumor mill include the iPhone 6s, iPad Pro, Apple TV with new remote, iPad Mini with thinner design, and retina 21.5 inch iMac.

My guess is the September event will be about the iPhone and Apple TV, and the availability of iOS 9. While a second October or November event will highlight iPads. That would include the new iPad Pro, along with the new iPad Mini 4th generation.

The main reason for thinking the iPad Pro and iPad Mini will be launched in a separate October event is the fact that in both 2013 and 2014 they held a separate event. It was at that special event that iPads were announced. The iPad Air and Mini retina in 2013, and the iPad Air 2 and Mini 3 in 2014.

So it might make sense that they might stick with this schedule and announce the iPad Mini 4, alongside the new iPad Pro, in October or November of this year. It's worth noting that they also announced different laptop Macs and desktop Macs at each of the October events. So we might expect the new retina 21.5 inch iMac to be announced at the October event as well.

I wonder if the rumour about the 12.9 inch iPad might not be the whole story, or even the correct story. There is a good chance the rumor is correct. However, here are a few possibilities I thought up of what Apple could do. Maybe this is more wishful thinking on my own part. Ideas that have been going on in my mind of what could happen next with iOS, tablets, laptops, and mobile computers.

As I mentioned in an earlier article, I think it's possible that smaller 8 and 7 inch tablets could become much more popular. If that happens, 10 inch and larger tablets could fall out of favour. Or more likely, the role of the laptop and tablet could change for some people, and merge into a single device. So, what are some other options of what the 12.9 inch iPad rumour could really be? And what are some options that Apple could consider in the future for the design of iPads, MacBooks, and other portable computers.

1. A New iPad With Built-in Keyboard. iBook?

Could it be possible that Apple has seen how popular keyboard accessories are for the iPad? Maybe they feel an extra accessory is a poor experience and they could offer a larger "iPad" which is actually a laptop? What I'm saying is this would not be either an iPad or a convertible tablet. It would simply be a laptop form factor with a keyboard that cannot be disconnected. A 13 inch laptop with a keyboard that runs iOS. It could be superlight. It would have crazy battery life. If they kept the same resolution it would still have a PPI of 200, which isn't perfect but is still much higher than laptops. They could even bring back the old name of the "iBook".

Separately, what if even though a keyboard was attached you could still stand the computer on its side to put it in portrait. You could swivel the keyboard backward and behind the device so it stands up with the display facing you. The keyboard would be at the rear of the device and turned off. You could kind of lay it in your lap in portrait mode too. Maybe it would allow the full yoga form factor where you can also swivel it all the way around. Though I bet Apple might not do that unless they had a second LCD where the keyboard normally is so it doesn't feel weird holding it with the keys facing out. I wouldn't expect an LCD keyboard/touchpad with better predictive text input at this point yet.

2. A MacBook Air With Retina Display

So Apple is making a 12.9 inch iPad and people assume it must be true. Maybe it's as simple as that. However, what if it is "just" the next version of the MacBook Air with a retina display. Both changing the display size to make it a little smaller than the 13.3 inch version, and offering only one display size could be a possibility instead of the 11 inch version. Maybe a bit of bigger redesign and some new features is also possible. I'm not sure if the MacBook Air ever really had a big redesign since it was introduced in 2008.

3. A MacBook Air With Touch Screen

Many people would say this is very unlikely and I suppose it is. However, I still think it's very possible that touch screens will come to all laptop and mobile computers. Yes, it's uncomfortable to reach out and touch a desktop monitor like Windows 8 tried to get you to do. But reaching to touch a laptop screen that is on your lap or just above it on a desk makes sense.

4. A Macbook With A New Touch Centric OS X

What if Apple does like the idea of using touch on laptops but not on desktops? How would they make this happen without the poor experience of just slapping a touch screen on top of regular desktop Mac OS X? One option could be to slightly change Mac OS X to make a laptop version that is touch centric. They could allow regular Mac OS X applications to still run on these new touch screen MacBooks. But a new UI specification would be created for laptop applications kind of like how iOS for iPad was slightly different from the UI of the iPhone. Eventually developers would write to this new UI type and all desktop OS X applications would be written in it. This would be a way of making Mac OS X able to support touch on laptops without adding support for a touch screen to iMacs and Mac displays, while improving the UI of Mac OS X to be more touch friendly and like iOS.

5. A Macbook With OS X On ARM

Not that all of these aren't unlikely, but this guess is probably very unlikely this early on. It will happen at sometime probably though. The title pretty much says it all. My guess is Apple will probably port and release Mac OS X on ARM now that ARM is 64 bit. If and when that happens it will be a big deal, like when they switched from Power PC to Intel. So that announcement would really be the important one and would possibly supersede the announcement of a 12.9 Macbook with OS X on ARM.

6. A MacBook Air With Both OS X And iOS On ARM

Even crazier, they could have the next version of the MacBook Air run both OS X and iOS. In this case, the new MacBook Air would obviously have a touch screen. A button on the keyboard or a gesture could switch between OS X and iOS. Maybe tilting the screen back to a certain degree could switch it to iOS. And maybe like in my first guess you could stand the device on its side and when you turn it beyond 180 degrees to this portrait mode it automatically switches to iOS mode.

Conclusion

So the rumour was a 12.9 inch iPad, possibly with a 4K resolution. But I have found that people often take some of these rumours as being all or nothing. Sometimes a rumour has been possibly right about something but missing the exact result. These are some possible guesses I had of things Apple could possibly do that involve a 12.9 inch screen. All these are just guesses and thoughts but the rumour of a 12.9 inch made me think of these. Wouldn't it be cool if I somehow guessed the way they go with any of these?

Rumor: Apple considering 12.9-inch iPads with 2K and 4K resolutions for 2014 launch