Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:10:24 -0700, "John C. Randolph"
> <jcr[at]nospam.idiom.com> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:11:21 -0700, "John C. Randolph"
> >> <jcr[at]nospam.idiom.com> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >>
> >> >Jim Polaski wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Some of the rumor sites are saying 5-6 months, maybe.
> >> >
> >> >... and their information is nothing more than speculation, just like
> >> >everyone else's.
> >> >
> >> >Guys, think about it: building a 64-bit laptop will be *really* hard to
> >> >do. Don't expect it to happen in a hurry.
> >>
> >> It wasn't so hard to do last year. What's changed?
> >> http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/1453481
> >
> >Thanks for helping to support my point.
>
> Your point seems to be nullified.
>
> > Have you ever tried to *use* one of those $6-$12,000 SPARCBooks?
>
> I can't say that I have.
>
> > Let's just say that power management isn't their long suit.
>
> Which somehow negates their existence?

Did I say they don't exist?

I said that building a 64-bit laptop is hard to do, which it is. Apple
can't get away with a product like the Tadpole, which is sold to the
people who just have to have a SPARC even if it results in a product
that doesn't work very well.

-jcr

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 01:54:57 -0700, "John C. Randolph"
<jcr[at]nospam.idiom.com> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:

>Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:10:24 -0700, "John C. Randolph"
>> <jcr[at]nospam.idiom.com> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>>
>> >Mayor of R'lyeh wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:11:21 -0700, "John C. Randolph"
>> >> <jcr[at]nospam.idiom.com> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>> >>
>> >> >Jim Polaski wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Some of the rumor sites are saying 5-6 months, maybe.
>> >> >
>> >> >... and their information is nothing more than speculation, just like
>> >> >everyone else's.
>> >> >
>> >> >Guys, think about it: building a 64-bit laptop will be *really* hard to
>> >> >do. Don't expect it to happen in a hurry.
>> >>
>> >> It wasn't so hard to do last year. What's changed?
>> >> http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/1453481
>> >
>> >Thanks for helping to support my point.
>>
>> Your point seems to be nullified.
>>
>> > Have you ever tried to *use* one of those $6-$12,000 SPARCBooks?
>>
>> I can't say that I have.
>>
>> > Let's just say that power management isn't their long suit.
>>
>> Which somehow negates their existence?
>
>Did I say they don't exist?
>
>I said that building a 64-bit laptop is hard to do, which it is. Apple
>can't get away with a product like the Tadpole, which is sold to the
>people who just have to have a SPARC even if it results in a product
>that doesn't work very well.
>
>-jcr

Why couldn't they? There's a laptop segment in the PC world that goes
by the name desktop replacement or portable desktop amongst others.
They're full bore powerful machines that aren't really meant to be
used away from a plugin. The battery life is in the half hour range.
They're selling point is that they're as powerful as a desktop but
portable. I'm sure Apple could sell a goodly many of a similar
configuration.


--

"Whoever is advising them [Democrats] on gun control
should be shot."

Blaine Rummel, spokesman for the Coalition to
Stop Gun Violence.