"CrunchPad"= Dead.
The Mike Arrington CrunchPad (ostensibly a competitor to a future tablet device from Apple) is officially dead.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/30/crunchpad-end/
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/30/crunchpad-end/
Comments
Fusion Garage appears to have been planning a web OS like on the Pre or like Google's Chrome OS. I'm still hoping Apple goes with 10.6 and not iphone OS.
For the $300 price point planned, Crunchpad would have been a decent netbook competitor though.
That's a shame, mainly because it's not through any fault of the product itself. The Crunchpad was a decent name and it had a good design. If it had arrived before an Apple offering with a 12" capacitive screen, it would have been one of the few products to rival their rumored devices before launch. A touch LG phone came before the iphone but it was nowhere near the same technology that changed how we look at mobile devices.
Fusion Garage appears to have been planning a web OS like on the Pre or like Google's Chrome OS. I'm still hoping Apple goes with 10.6 and not iphone OS.
For the $300 price point planned, Crunchpad would have been a decent netbook competitor though.
The unreleased, proposed tablet would have rivaled the rumored, completely unknown tablet? I guess.
Were they as close to releasing the Crunchpad as they claim? The story seems awful fishy to me.
The unreleased, proposed tablet would have rivaled the rumored, completely unknown tablet? I guess.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Kg_nNCIHrE
would have meant a pretty decent product could have materialized by now and that product could rival what I imagine a large ipod/iphone would be, even though Apple's product shouldn't be just a large ipod/iphone.
Apple's one could basically be like that prototype except smoother gestures and interface and with OS X. Also one thing to note is that's a 12" screen. Some people want Apple's model to be a 10" but for using to watch movies and read web pages, even 12" is a bit on the small side. Technology will be the limiting factor but I hope they aim for the largest screen the tech allows.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Kg_nNCIHrE
would have meant a pretty decent product could have materialized by now and that product could rival what I imagine a large ipod/iphone would be, even though Apple's product shouldn't be just a large ipod/iphone.
Apple's one could basically be like that prototype except smoother gestures and interface and with OS X. Also one thing to note is that's a 12" screen. Some people want Apple's model to be a 10" but for using to watch movies and read web pages, even 12" is a bit on the small side. Technology will be the limiting factor but I hope they aim for the largest screen the tech allows.
Ewwwwww.......... for reals? That appears to be a huge, clunky thing running a web browser with rudimentary touch controls and dead stock basic keyboard overlay. Even if it were dirt cheap, I can't see the appeal.
I would hope that whatever Apple eventually does (assuming they do anything) would be much, much thinner (and presumably lighter), with much less bezel, with way better touch integration, and some general rethinking of what a tablet is and what it's for, beyond "somewhat awkward and underpowered keyboardless laptop."
And, interestingly, my first thought on seeing that video was "that's way too big." At that size, why not just use a notebook?
Ewwwwww.......... for reals? That appears to be a huge, clunky thing running a web browser with rudimentary touch controls and dead stock basic keyboard overlay. Even if it were dirt cheap, I can't see the appeal.
That's just the prototype though, they are always very rough. Even the iphone had protoypes:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/03/hideous-iphone/
there are mentions of fakes and it just being diagnostic modes on the devices but Apple had the video removed. Either way, all manufacturers' devices at some stage in their life look very rough.
And, interestingly, my first thought on seeing that video was "that's way too big." At that size, why not just use a notebook?
If the screen was very thin, it wouldn't seem that way. That prototype was pretty chunky and didn't look much different from a standard convertible tablet.
Just take even a 15" MBP and imagine pulling the screen off:
It's so much lighter than a notebook, gives you enough space to do accurate finger gestures without using your little finger, leaves enough room for a large flat battery and you can still sit it on a stand to watch movies at a reasonable distance.
Sure, this tablet looks big:
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/10/...arks-interest/
but I think that guy is just really small. That's a Tegra-powered 15-16" resistive-touch tablet. Resistive touch isn't to be dismissed btw - there was a great tech demo on youtube a while ago of improved versions that behave just like capacitive touch but also give you pressure sensitivity for drawing.
After seeing 10" netbooks, I wouldn't want to use one for touch:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/d...nches-mini-10/
12" I could cope with but I'd prefer 15". It would make sense to be 720p so I guess 12" is ok for that resolution at the distance you'd hold a tablet.
From what I gather that Arrington is a douchebag.
Leo Laporte would probably agree with you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsV-lgnAjps
That's just the prototype though, they are always very rough. Even the iphone had protoypes:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/03/hideous-iphone/
there are mentions of fakes and it just being diagnostic modes on the devices but Apple had the video removed. Either way, all manufacturers' devices at some stage in their life look very rough.
If the screen was very thin, it wouldn't seem that way. That prototype was pretty chunky and didn't look much different from a standard convertible tablet.
Just take even a 15" MBP and imagine pulling the screen off:
It's so much lighter than a notebook, gives you enough space to do accurate finger gestures without using your little finger, leaves enough room for a large flat battery and you can still sit it on a stand to watch movies at a reasonable distance.
Sure, this tablet looks big:
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/10/...arks-interest/
but I think that guy is just really small. That's a Tegra-powered 15-16" resistive-touch tablet. Resistive touch isn't to be dismissed btw - there was a great tech demo on youtube a while ago of improved versions that behave just like capacitive touch but also give you pressure sensitivity for drawing.
After seeing 10" netbooks, I wouldn't want to use one for touch:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/d...nches-mini-10/
12" I could cope with but I'd prefer 15". It would make sense to be 720p so I guess 12" is ok for that resolution at the distance you'd hold a tablet.
Hmmm, what those various links and thoughts suggest to me is that a successful tablet device would be an exquisitely nuanced thing, carefully balancing battery life, size, weight, screen, form factor, UI, and hardware capabilities.
The difference between a forgettable lump like that CrunchPad prototype and a thing that might actually kick-start the market all comes down to sweating the details and making the device a joy to use.
Hey, that sounds familiar-- didn't Apple do something similar in the phone market? Thought about a device holistically, from purchase to activation to software updates, from how it felt in the hand to how apps interacted to a thousand little details? So that just picking it up brought a smile to people's faces?
If anyone can make a device like this suddenly seem forehead slappingly obvious, I would put my money on Apple. And it won't come from any startlingly new paradigms or next gen hardware, it'll come from a great many little, nuanced decisions, all weighted against the total experience. Which means inevitable shortfalls in "features and specs" that'll get the usual tongues wagging.
At any rate, I'm pretty sure Apple can make a great tablet-- but I've never been sure if the world needs a great tablet. That's the big unknown, IMO-- once you leave behind pocketable, is there a big demand for something that forgoes laptop functionality for a relatively modest boost in portability? It may be even Apple can't engineer past that stopper, although I'm guessing they have some kind of "killer app" up their sleeve to sweeten the deal.
Hmmm, what those various links and thoughts suggest to me is that a successful tablet device would be an exquisitely nuanced thing, carefully balancing battery life, size, weight, screen, form factor, UI, and hardware capabilities.
The difference between a forgettable lump like that CrunchPad prototype and a thing that might actually kick-start the market all comes down to sweating the details and making the device a joy to use.
Hey, that sounds familiar-- didn't Apple do something similar in the phone market? Thought about a device holistically, from purchase to activation to software updates, from how it felt in the hand to how apps interacted to a thousand little details? So that just picking it up brought a smile to people's faces?
If anyone can make a device like this suddenly seem forehead slappingly obvious, I would put my money on Apple. And it won't come from any startlingly new paradigms or next gen hardware, it'll come from a great many little, nuanced decisions, all weighted against the total experience. Which means inevitable shortfalls in "features and specs" that'll get the usual tongues wagging.
At any rate, I'm pretty sure Apple can make a great tablet-- but I've never been sure if the world needs a great tablet. That's the big unknown, IMO-- once you leave behind pocketable, is there a big demand for something that forgoes laptop functionality for a relatively modest boost in portability? It may be even Apple can't engineer past that stopper, although I'm guessing they have some kind of "killer app" up their sleeve to sweeten the deal.
At any rate, I'm pretty sure Apple can make a great tablet-- but I've never been sure if the world needs a great tablet. That's the big unknown, IMO-- once you leave behind pocketable, is there a big demand for something that forgoes laptop functionality for a relatively modest boost in portability? It may be even Apple can't engineer past that stopper, although I'm guessing they have some kind of "killer app" up their sleeve to sweeten the deal.
The thing that immediately sells it to me is portrait mode. I have one of those displays you can rotate vertically and when you do, it's like a whole other machine. Much less scrolling when viewing web pages, writing documents is easier and most obviously, portrait images look much better instead of being shrunk down or cropped on a landscape screen.
Although the display I use has that functionality, it's a nuisance enabling it for viewing a portrait image or web page and moving back. With a tablet, it's no more difficult than turning a photograph round - just as it is on the iphone. The iphone is way too small to enjoy looking at pictures and movies though.
Even having a 720p screen in portrait mode allows you to get higher than the vertical resolution of the 24" Cinema screen but right there in your hand. If the device is cheap enough, I would be tempted to buy one just so that I could take it on holiday. $499 (£299) would be the maximum price I'd be willing to stretch to for it.
If they go for data contracts with the carriers, the purchase price can be quite low. O2 in the UK charge £15 per month for a 3GB capped 3G connection. £15 per month for 18 months + £99 purchase price would likely have a significant impact on the netbook market. That initial price is what draws people in and you often forget about the contract. I pay small monthly payments on loads of services - insurance, phone, home broadband, gas, electricity and don't even consider it.
The thing that immediately sells it to me is portrait mode. I have one of those displays you can rotate vertically and when you do, it's like a whole other machine. Much less scrolling when viewing web pages, writing documents is easier and most obviously, portrait images look much better instead of being shrunk down or cropped on a landscape screen.
Although the display I use has that functionality, it's a nuisance enabling it for viewing a portrait image or web page and moving back. With a tablet, it's no more difficult than turning a photograph round - just as it is on the iphone. The iphone is way too small to enjoy looking at pictures and movies though.
Even having a 720p screen in portrait mode allows you to get higher than the vertical resolution of the 24" Cinema screen but right there in your hand. If the device is cheap enough, I would be tempted to buy one just so that I could take it on holiday. $499 (£299) would be the maximum price I'd be willing to stretch to for it.
If they go for data contracts with the carriers, the purchase price can be quite low. O2 in the UK charge £15 per month for a 3GB capped 3G connection. £15 per month for 18 months + £99 purchase price would likely have a significant impact on the netbook market. That initial price is what draws people in and you often forget about the contract. I pay small monthly payments on loads of services - insurance, phone, home broadband, gas, electricity and don't even consider it.
That's a good point-- to get a standard 8.5x 11 letter size it'd have to be a 13" diagonal screen, which is right out, I'd think.
OTOH, you can get 6x8 out of 10" diagonal, which is paperback book size. With accelerometer enabled portrait/landscape rotation, that's really not a bad size for viewing content, while maintaining a reasonable amount of portability.
I think whatever the sweet spot between portability and usability is a really big deal. Too big, and you're left wondering why you don't just grab a laptop, but too small and you've got a swollen iPhone.
Leo Laporte would probably agree with you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsV-lgnAjps
I don't know the back story of their interactions, but ouch.
I don't know the back story of their interactions, but ouch.
"Ouch" is right...
This is too bad, but they were UBER NAIVE to have trusted Fusion Garage and this Chandra guy without better contracts. There is a reason why there's less business partnerships with Indian firms than you'd think: their legal structures don't exist explicitly enough to prevent this sort of thing.
It's the problem in Asia, SouthEastAsia... There's too much greed going around for real innovation to bloom. Silicon Valley and the US, despite whatever issues there are, remains a very unique environment and is still a great "incubator" for startups.
The f*king key is if you guys/gals in the US can somehow get back on the manufacturing bus. Software creation and innovation surges ahead but when it comes to physical stuff you're hampered by having to go through India and China, etc. Many people get regularly get burned by doing business in China... I guess in this case this Indian company thought they'd grab something and sell it themselves without worrying about any recourse.
There must be cities in the USA, or perhaps some other reputable manufacturing cities in different parts of the world that can produce reasonably priced material.
There needs to be a manufacturing revolution that takes away the dominance from the way things are made in China, or at least take a nibble out of the Chinese dominance in manufacturing.
Some new revolution in machining, 3D/ prototype/ moulding/ logic board "printing" etc.
It's almost 2010 and cheap human labour all around the world still trumps machines in many cases.
http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...0/daily69.html
"Chandrasekar "Chandra" Rathakrishnan, founder and CEO of Fusion Garage, will speak to reporters and demonstrate "the device" both in a video call and in private briefings scheduled for later Monday at the St. Regis Hotel in San Francisco"
http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...0/daily69.html
But the ODM they contracted to produce the thing, Pegatron (the manufacturing arm of ASUS) says it's not building anything until the issue of who owns the IP is settled.
This keeps getting weirder and is probably going to end up in legal hell.