You must be out of your mind to compare ford/Aig to Apple, good luck with your microsoft stock.
Really? It wasn't that long ago Apple stock was worth 60% less then it is today. I know in your tiny mind that can never happen again but the fact is it can. I don't own MS stock so stop making stupid statements.
I really despise the statement "competition breeds innovation" when referring to Apple, as it assumes that it's companies like MS and the various PC manufacturers that are driving Apple to do what it does.
Anyone who is not suffering from MISS (Microsoft-Induced Stockholm Syndrome) can see a few glaringly obvious things regarding Apple:
1. Stating that "Apple needs competition" is in itself an admission that Apple is indeed ahead of the competition, regardless of it's market share numbers.
2. If the iPod and the iPhone has shown us anything, it's that the only competition Apple has right now is Apple. Look at the iPod over the years: the more successful it became, the better it got, eventually giving us both the iPhone and the iPod touch. The MacBook / MacBook Pro lines are arguably the best laptops on the market, Mac or Windows, and are the top selling laptops over $1000, period. Apple needs no help from competitors like MS to improve on their products; they do it all by themselves.
3. Given that in every market that Apple has entered late, it has dominated that market (yes, even in the set top TV box category AppleTV is the top seller), is it not Apple that is providing the competition to other companies? Yet these companies have failed to utilize that competitive pressure to make more innovative products; they've simply time and time again copied much of what Apple has done.
Try looking at the facts and being intellectually honest in the future.
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to understanding how the end user benefits from competition. Apple isn't the one that needs competition the end users is the one the benefits from it.
That's the problem. MS whoring its OS out to all takers regardless of the hardware it runs on. MS chose HP (or HP chose MS, whichever, LOL.) And HP produced THAT.
MS = HP.
Done.
I'm not angry, just incredibly amused.
Oh, but you do sound angry, bitter, quite a bit scared as well. No idea why, though.
That's the problem. MS whoring its OS out to all takers regardless of the hardware it runs on. MS chose HP (or HP chose MS, whichever, LOL.) And HP produced THAT.
MS = HP.
Done.
I'm not angry, just incredibly amused.
not angry, but definitely stupid
ya notice all of those PC's on the stage with the monkey? they are not all HP computers... MS did not choose HP, but *USED* HP
Because they put a desktop OS, including it's interface, on a "slate" device. That is the pretty much the definition of clinging to the past.
Some of the other devices you list (Zune, etc) at least had some innovation in the UI. But why in god's name would they run a Windows 7 UI on a 10" screen?
Answer: Because Apple hasn't yet showed them what a good UI for such a device looks like. Once Apple shows their device, you can get MS will begin working on a new interface for these types of devices.
Anyway, the point of my post was that Apple has for many years, probably longer than any of us would suspect, been working towards the day when the personal computer as we currently know it is gone.
One problem that MS has, however, is that they lack a unified code base ready to be customized for new devices. So for intermediate devices like a mid-sized slate, manufacturers have to choose between a widget-y but compact WinCE based OS or full blown Windows with some touch bells and whistles.
Given the drift of things in the CE industry, it looks like most manufacturers are electing to forgo WinCE in favor of Linux variants or Android, so that leaves Windows 7 as the default OS for when you want to make claims to having "a real OS."
That distinction-- between light-weight but somewhat limited OSes for small devices on the one hand, and the entirety of Windows whether you want it or not-- represents a huge competitive advantage for Apple, IMO. They don't have to try to fit 100 lbs of potatoes into a 10 pound sack, and they don't have to try to make a potato into a meal-- they can use exactly the components that are called for, with the UI that works best, for each and every machine they make, all of it drawing from the same code base.
Of course, some people are going to confuse that with "crippling" OS X to fit a form factor or performance envelope, but then again some people can't understand what Apple could possibly do to make a tablet more desirable than the Windows running devices that have been around for a while.
I really don't understand majority of people here.
Apple keeps announcing pretty much same phones, ipods, laptops and desktops with small tweaks and updates for the last few years, and yet everyone here is really excited because new iPod Mini now has useless camera - what a huge step forward.
Then HP comes out with their first multi-touch Windows 7 tablet and some sort of Amazon/Kindle deal and everyone see it as judgement day come for both MS and HP, and probably rest of PC industry.
What gives?
While HP Slate is definitely not Courier, with decent battery life and good screen resolution I can see myself using it; recently majority of my laptop usage was about reading books too complex for iPhone screen, comics, occasionaly having a flick or TV show episode in bed, before sleep, review a document I did in the office and do some minor editing... I know that on this device my CDisplay, VLC, Word, PowerPoint and other software will work well with advantage of having less than half of a notebook bulk in a firm, single-piece unit.
Revolutionary? No.
Useful? Hell yes.
Sure I'd like to see something really breathtaking, like Courier might be. I'd also like to win LOTTO. Some things don't happen when we want them. Some things don't happen at all. Is Courier dead, or MS is again "following" Apple with keeping their lips sealed? Time will tell.
Untill then I'm waiting to see in-depth review of HP Slate, before I make my final judgement, and also see infamous Apple tablet. I'm hoping that it will really come out and be more than oversized iPod Touch. Having resemblance of iPhone's simple GUI would be nice, but if I can't do above mentioned things, whole exercise for me would really be pointless.
Then HP comes out with their first multi-touch Windows 7 tablet and some sort of Amazon/Kindle deal and everyone see it as judgement day come for both MS and HP, and probably rest of PC industry.
What gives?
... I know that on this device my CDisplay, VLC, Word, PowerPoint and other software will work well with advantage of having less than half of a notebook bulk in a firm, single-piece unit.
Revolutionary? No.
Useful? Hell yes.
What gives?
This new HP device still runs Windows. HP should choose another operating system and give consumers a real choice, now that would dazzle me. That would be revolutionary.
I agree with you that as this product is it's far from revolutionary, but since it's a Windows machine being useful and working well is still light years away.
One of the PC makers that I think does have some good ideas is ex-IBM/Lenovo,
and all their good stuff consists of disconnecting Windows.
The (IBM) ThinkVantage technology is nice for a PC, providing backup and recovery tools that live outside of Windows - even including a browser that connects to their support site when Windows won't even boot.
And there was something recently about a detachable Lenovo tablet that runs Windows when in laptop mode and seamlessly transitions into a non-windows system when you detach the screen.
Lenovo have found the key to differentiation in the PC market, which is to understand that Windows is unfit as an operating system and must be treated more like a flakey app within the system.
( But even with ThinkVantage, I gave up and switched to a Mac ).
The problem Microsoft has is they can't risk competing with their strong partners so I can't see how the Courier could ever have materialized.
To be perfectly honest, I actually like the slates that have been introduced including the HP one. Sure the UIs that are running aren't very good but they can be improved before shipping. I don't expect them to match the UI that Apple has because their UI is deeper than how it appears on the surface.
Apple anti-alias text system-wide, double buffer graphics contexts, hardware accelerate vector rendering - they do so many things you can't add by just copying layout and their gestures make sense.
But, consider this: if Apple do decide to make an iphone OS device with an intuitive UI, will you use it to write office documents - doctors, students etc? There are no text editors for the iphone OS. Will you use it to watch all your DivX/XVid/Mkv/Video-TS movies on the sofa? There is no Perian or VLC for iphone OS. If you want to do some work like design a website - no Photoshop, no FTP apps, no code editors. What if you want to play WoW in comfort? You can't.
Apple are vulnerable to failure like the other companies even if they are less vulnerable. If they make a great looking device that runs a great UI but you can't do half the things you use a laptop for, the question remains - why not buy a netbook at half the price running the full OS X? Sure it may be a nice kindle competitor but I personally don't own a kindle because I don't need what it offers. I have an iphone so iphone apps + ebooks on a big screen isn't enough.
HP should choose another operating system and give consumers a real choice, now that would dazzle me. That would be revolutionary.
I think plenty of people will install different operating systems on the HP slate. Its relatively easy to change OSes on anything that runs Windows. I think Apple's the one that won't let you install their OS on any other system, the iPod Touch requires you to jailbreak it to mod it, and I bet Apple won't let you install a different OS on their (alleged) tablet. I'm betting the HP slate isn't a closed system at all.
How many people do you see lugging around 10 inch screens for media consumption? Portable dvd players have pretty much been killed by PMPs like the iPod and Zune and whatever else there is. Now that smartphones have the same capabilities coupled with web surfing and email these tablet features would only appeal to someone who either doesnt have a smart phone/PMP or a laptop.
Ebook readers seem more like a new fad than anything right now. I see them occasionally from time to time at the Resort but if i head out to the local "reading" spots like Panera or Starbucks they are none-existent. I believe mac daily said that Amazon has sold only roughly 3 Million Kindles since its launch in 07 and i doubt any other company is remotely close in sales. For a specific feature device i guess thats decent but hardly setting the industry on fire and is shifting the world towards this.
Ebook readers have zero value to most people unless your an avid reader in which the device will pay for itself over time. If your just the average Twilight/Harry Potter junkie well a 300 dollar ebook is a hard sell, especially if your just trying to READ. A possible 5-700 dollar ebook reader with the same features as my phone is an even harder sell in my eyes for just content consumption.
The real motive behind this tablet announcement was for Microsoft to 1up Apple, and they failed miserably at it! (They also failed the tech community yet again) I am of the opinion that Microsoft is bloated with vaporware at this point. This announcement itself is evidence that the iSlate is indeed coming...
I don't think Microsoft is developing anything truly viable to compete at the level of the "iOS". Even if Windows 7 (or any win flavor) is multi-touch capable, the significance is minimal when the iPhone interface, app store, Mac hardware and user community is so tightly unified. Assimilate the iSlate into the ecosystem and you have an established quality product right out of the box. More importantly a product developers will have confidence to succeed in. Far more feasible is this scenario than anything Microsoft honchos and pundits can regurgitate against Apple's strategies.
Whether the iSlate will end up being a "Macbook Air" for mobile devices outside favorable pricing tiers remains to be seen. Still who wouldn't agree that the Macbook Air is a unique and beautiful peace of tech, and that one could expect the same level of quality in the iSlate.
P.S - Does Microsoft think it can still succeed by throwing it's OS onto any device and expect it to be a compelling contender in the slate market when they can barely achieve a contender against the iPhone?
The problem Microsoft has is they can't risk competing with their strong partners so I can't see how the Courier could ever have materialized.
To be perfectly honest, I actually like the slates that have been introduced including the HP one. Sure the UIs that are running aren't very good but they can be improved before shipping. I don't expect them to match the UI that Apple has because their UI is deeper than how it appears on the surface.
Apple anti-alias text system-wide, double buffer graphics contexts, hardware accelerate vector rendering - they do so many things you can't add by just copying layout and their gestures make sense.
But, consider this: if Apple do decide to make an iphone OS device with an intuitive UI, will you use it to write office documents - doctors, students etc? There are no text editors for the iphone OS. Will you use it to watch all your DivX/XVid/Mkv/Video-TS movies on the sofa? There is no Perian or VLC for iphone OS. If you want to do some work like design a website - no Photoshop, no FTP apps, no code editors. What if you want to play WoW in comfort? You can't.
Apple are vulnerable to failure like the other companies even if they are less vulnerable. If they make a great looking device that runs a great UI but you can't do half the things you use a laptop for, the question remains - why not buy a netbook at half the price running the full OS X? Sure it may be a nice kindle competitor but I personally don't own a kindle because I don't need what it offers. I have an iphone so iphone apps + ebooks on a big screen isn't enough.
I saw that MSI device, seems the closest but i want the Courier UI. Ill pass on anything else.
This is where MS agitates me. Not making hardware for PC is fine, they dont need to there are plenty that do and cheaply. Not making hardware for phones is pretty stupid but i can deal with it (Zune phone would be pretty amazing in my eyes but not to MS i guess).
Not capitalizing on a dead and weak sector with your own hardware is just stupid. Just because its a touch PC with windows means nada. No vendor has been successful at all in this market because they've been slapping just Windows on it and calling it a day. Its been that way for 9 years now.
Your points about the Apple Tablet are spot on, while a nice UI is to be expected, if i have to spend a higher price tag i need to get at least OS X on it.
however, lots of other companies did, using microsofts XP tablet edition
how did your perpetual motion machine go for being produced by others?
And virtually no one bought them. Is that because consumers were wrong or because such devices didn't serve any real purpose (outside of a few specialized markets)? If not, why? Perhaps because they were poorly designed? If so, what was wrong with them? Perhaps the OS was ill suited to the application? Perhaps the available hardware at the time of their introduction was inadequate to the task at hand?
Now what if Apple makes a well designed tablet, with an OS and UI that work very well with the hardware, which supports a pleasing user experience? Do we discount what Apple has done because "tablets already existed"? Do we pretend that Apple "got lucky" by being in "the right place at the right time", or that whatever it is they do is obvious and inevitable and they just happened to get their version out a little ahead of the pack?
Or would one be obliged to admit that Apple, again, looked at a market that was being poorly served by the incumbents, decided there was money to be made by doing better, and shook up the industry by doing things differently?
As an aside to Nikon133, the above is why no one is particularly excited about a tablet running Windows. They've been around for a while, and although Windows 7 has more touch stuff baked in, it's still a desktop OS in drag.
Comments
You must be out of your mind to compare ford/Aig to Apple, good luck with your microsoft stock.
Really? It wasn't that long ago Apple stock was worth 60% less then it is today. I know in your tiny mind that can never happen again but the fact is it can. I don't own MS stock so stop making stupid statements.
I really despise the statement "competition breeds innovation" when referring to Apple, as it assumes that it's companies like MS and the various PC manufacturers that are driving Apple to do what it does.
Anyone who is not suffering from MISS (Microsoft-Induced Stockholm Syndrome) can see a few glaringly obvious things regarding Apple:
1. Stating that "Apple needs competition" is in itself an admission that Apple is indeed ahead of the competition, regardless of it's market share numbers.
2. If the iPod and the iPhone has shown us anything, it's that the only competition Apple has right now is Apple. Look at the iPod over the years: the more successful it became, the better it got, eventually giving us both the iPhone and the iPod touch. The MacBook / MacBook Pro lines are arguably the best laptops on the market, Mac or Windows, and are the top selling laptops over $1000, period. Apple needs no help from competitors like MS to improve on their products; they do it all by themselves.
3. Given that in every market that Apple has entered late, it has dominated that market (yes, even in the set top TV box category AppleTV is the top seller), is it not Apple that is providing the competition to other companies? Yet these companies have failed to utilize that competitive pressure to make more innovative products; they've simply time and time again copied much of what Apple has done.
Try looking at the facts and being intellectually honest in the future.
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to understanding how the end user benefits from competition. Apple isn't the one that needs competition the end users is the one the benefits from it.
That's the problem. MS whoring its OS out to all takers regardless of the hardware it runs on. MS chose HP (or HP chose MS, whichever, LOL.) And HP produced THAT.
MS = HP.
Done.
I'm not angry, just incredibly amused.
Oh, but you do sound angry, bitter, quite a bit scared as well. No idea why, though.
Yep, tablet PCs have been around for ages - screens you could remove off of a keyboard and such.
and slate computers have been around for ages. They typically used pen input as touchscreen tech was pretty poor back in the 90's
M$ even had "windows for pen computing" back on Windows 3.1 to support that market
You don't demo/debut a product like that... if it's not ready to buy today or next month don't show it.
how long before the release of the iPhone did Apple demo it?
That's the problem. MS whoring its OS out to all takers regardless of the hardware it runs on. MS chose HP (or HP chose MS, whichever, LOL.) And HP produced THAT.
MS = HP.
Done.
I'm not angry, just incredibly amused.
not angry, but definitely stupid
ya notice all of those PC's on the stage with the monkey? they are not all HP computers... MS did not choose HP, but *USED* HP
Because they put a desktop OS, including it's interface, on a "slate" device. That is the pretty much the definition of clinging to the past.
Some of the other devices you list (Zune, etc) at least had some innovation in the UI. But why in god's name would they run a Windows 7 UI on a 10" screen?
Answer: Because Apple hasn't yet showed them what a good UI for such a device looks like. Once Apple shows their device, you can get MS will begin working on a new interface for these types of devices.
Anyway, the point of my post was that Apple has for many years, probably longer than any of us would suspect, been working towards the day when the personal computer as we currently know it is gone.
One problem that MS has, however, is that they lack a unified code base ready to be customized for new devices. So for intermediate devices like a mid-sized slate, manufacturers have to choose between a widget-y but compact WinCE based OS or full blown Windows with some touch bells and whistles.
Given the drift of things in the CE industry, it looks like most manufacturers are electing to forgo WinCE in favor of Linux variants or Android, so that leaves Windows 7 as the default OS for when you want to make claims to having "a real OS."
That distinction-- between light-weight but somewhat limited OSes for small devices on the one hand, and the entirety of Windows whether you want it or not-- represents a huge competitive advantage for Apple, IMO. They don't have to try to fit 100 lbs of potatoes into a 10 pound sack, and they don't have to try to make a potato into a meal-- they can use exactly the components that are called for, with the UI that works best, for each and every machine they make, all of it drawing from the same code base.
Of course, some people are going to confuse that with "crippling" OS X to fit a form factor or performance envelope, but then again some people can't understand what Apple could possibly do to make a tablet more desirable than the Windows running devices that have been around for a while.
Apple keeps announcing pretty much same phones, ipods, laptops and desktops with small tweaks and updates for the last few years, and yet everyone here is really excited because new iPod Mini now has useless camera - what a huge step forward.
Then HP comes out with their first multi-touch Windows 7 tablet and some sort of Amazon/Kindle deal and everyone see it as judgement day come for both MS and HP, and probably rest of PC industry.
What gives?
While HP Slate is definitely not Courier, with decent battery life and good screen resolution I can see myself using it; recently majority of my laptop usage was about reading books too complex for iPhone screen, comics, occasionaly having a flick or TV show episode in bed, before sleep, review a document I did in the office and do some minor editing... I know that on this device my CDisplay, VLC, Word, PowerPoint and other software will work well with advantage of having less than half of a notebook bulk in a firm, single-piece unit.
Revolutionary? No.
Useful? Hell yes.
Sure I'd like to see something really breathtaking, like Courier might be. I'd also like to win LOTTO. Some things don't happen when we want them. Some things don't happen at all. Is Courier dead, or MS is again "following" Apple with keeping their lips sealed? Time will tell.
Untill then I'm waiting to see in-depth review of HP Slate, before I make my final judgement, and also see infamous Apple tablet. I'm hoping that it will really come out and be more than oversized iPod Touch. Having resemblance of iPhone's simple GUI would be nice, but if I can't do above mentioned things, whole exercise for me would really be pointless.
Five hundred dollars!!!
Five hundred dollars!!!
Five hundred dollars for a picture frame without a keyboard!!!
Bwahahahhhaahhhaaahhhhaaa!!!
I wonder what price apple will charge for their picture frame without a keyboard
Then HP comes out with their first multi-touch Windows 7 tablet and some sort of Amazon/Kindle deal and everyone see it as judgement day come for both MS and HP, and probably rest of PC industry.
What gives?
... I know that on this device my CDisplay, VLC, Word, PowerPoint and other software will work well with advantage of having less than half of a notebook bulk in a firm, single-piece unit.
Revolutionary? No.
Useful? Hell yes.
What gives?
This new HP device still runs Windows. HP should choose another operating system and give consumers a real choice, now that would dazzle me. That would be revolutionary.
I agree with you that as this product is it's far from revolutionary, but since it's a Windows machine being useful and working well is still light years away.
and all their good stuff consists of disconnecting Windows.
The (IBM) ThinkVantage technology is nice for a PC, providing backup and recovery tools that live outside of Windows - even including a browser that connects to their support site when Windows won't even boot.
And there was something recently about a detachable Lenovo tablet that runs Windows when in laptop mode and seamlessly transitions into a non-windows system when you detach the screen.
Lenovo have found the key to differentiation in the PC market, which is to understand that Windows is unfit as an operating system and must be treated more like a flakey app within the system.
( But even with ThinkVantage, I gave up and switched to a Mac ).
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/m...ader-hands-on/
The problem Microsoft has is they can't risk competing with their strong partners so I can't see how the Courier could ever have materialized.
To be perfectly honest, I actually like the slates that have been introduced including the HP one. Sure the UIs that are running aren't very good but they can be improved before shipping. I don't expect them to match the UI that Apple has because their UI is deeper than how it appears on the surface.
Apple anti-alias text system-wide, double buffer graphics contexts, hardware accelerate vector rendering - they do so many things you can't add by just copying layout and their gestures make sense.
But, consider this: if Apple do decide to make an iphone OS device with an intuitive UI, will you use it to write office documents - doctors, students etc? There are no text editors for the iphone OS. Will you use it to watch all your DivX/XVid/Mkv/Video-TS movies on the sofa? There is no Perian or VLC for iphone OS. If you want to do some work like design a website - no Photoshop, no FTP apps, no code editors. What if you want to play WoW in comfort? You can't.
Apple are vulnerable to failure like the other companies even if they are less vulnerable. If they make a great looking device that runs a great UI but you can't do half the things you use a laptop for, the question remains - why not buy a netbook at half the price running the full OS X? Sure it may be a nice kindle competitor but I personally don't own a kindle because I don't need what it offers. I have an iphone so iphone apps + ebooks on a big screen isn't enough.
What gives?
HP should choose another operating system and give consumers a real choice, now that would dazzle me. That would be revolutionary.
I think plenty of people will install different operating systems on the HP slate. Its relatively easy to change OSes on anything that runs Windows. I think Apple's the one that won't let you install their OS on any other system, the iPod Touch requires you to jailbreak it to mod it, and I bet Apple won't let you install a different OS on their (alleged) tablet. I'm betting the HP slate isn't a closed system at all.
Ebook readers seem more like a new fad than anything right now. I see them occasionally from time to time at the Resort but if i head out to the local "reading" spots like Panera or Starbucks they are none-existent. I believe mac daily said that Amazon has sold only roughly 3 Million Kindles since its launch in 07 and i doubt any other company is remotely close in sales. For a specific feature device i guess thats decent but hardly setting the industry on fire and is shifting the world towards this.
Ebook readers have zero value to most people unless your an avid reader in which the device will pay for itself over time. If your just the average Twilight/Harry Potter junkie well a 300 dollar ebook is a hard sell, especially if your just trying to READ. A possible 5-700 dollar ebook reader with the same features as my phone is an even harder sell in my eyes for just content consumption.
The real motive behind this tablet announcement was for Microsoft to 1up Apple, and they failed miserably at it! (They also failed the tech community yet again) I am of the opinion that Microsoft is bloated with vaporware at this point. This announcement itself is evidence that the iSlate is indeed coming...
I don't think Microsoft is developing anything truly viable to compete at the level of the "iOS". Even if Windows 7 (or any win flavor) is multi-touch capable, the significance is minimal when the iPhone interface, app store, Mac hardware and user community is so tightly unified. Assimilate the iSlate into the ecosystem and you have an established quality product right out of the box. More importantly a product developers will have confidence to succeed in. Far more feasible is this scenario than anything Microsoft honchos and pundits can regurgitate against Apple's strategies.
Whether the iSlate will end up being a "Macbook Air" for mobile devices outside favorable pricing tiers remains to be seen. Still who wouldn't agree that the Macbook Air is a unique and beautiful peace of tech, and that one could expect the same level of quality in the iSlate.
P.S - Does Microsoft think it can still succeed by throwing it's OS onto any device and expect it to be a compelling contender in the slate market when they can barely achieve a contender against the iPhone?
I'd say the MSI dual-screen device is the closest to the Microsoft Courier:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/m...ader-hands-on/
The problem Microsoft has is they can't risk competing with their strong partners so I can't see how the Courier could ever have materialized.
To be perfectly honest, I actually like the slates that have been introduced including the HP one. Sure the UIs that are running aren't very good but they can be improved before shipping. I don't expect them to match the UI that Apple has because their UI is deeper than how it appears on the surface.
Apple anti-alias text system-wide, double buffer graphics contexts, hardware accelerate vector rendering - they do so many things you can't add by just copying layout and their gestures make sense.
But, consider this: if Apple do decide to make an iphone OS device with an intuitive UI, will you use it to write office documents - doctors, students etc? There are no text editors for the iphone OS. Will you use it to watch all your DivX/XVid/Mkv/Video-TS movies on the sofa? There is no Perian or VLC for iphone OS. If you want to do some work like design a website - no Photoshop, no FTP apps, no code editors. What if you want to play WoW in comfort? You can't.
Apple are vulnerable to failure like the other companies even if they are less vulnerable. If they make a great looking device that runs a great UI but you can't do half the things you use a laptop for, the question remains - why not buy a netbook at half the price running the full OS X? Sure it may be a nice kindle competitor but I personally don't own a kindle because I don't need what it offers. I have an iphone so iphone apps + ebooks on a big screen isn't enough.
I saw that MSI device, seems the closest but i want the Courier UI. Ill pass on anything else.
This is where MS agitates me. Not making hardware for PC is fine, they dont need to there are plenty that do and cheaply. Not making hardware for phones is pretty stupid but i can deal with it (Zune phone would be pretty amazing in my eyes but not to MS i guess).
Not capitalizing on a dead and weak sector with your own hardware is just stupid. Just because its a touch PC with windows means nada. No vendor has been successful at all in this market because they've been slapping just Windows on it and calling it a day. Its been that way for 9 years now.
Your points about the Apple Tablet are spot on, while a nice UI is to be expected, if i have to spend a higher price tag i need to get at least OS X on it.
not like Bill Gates didn't demo a tablet back in 2001
And I demoed a perpetual motion machine back in 1997. I never did produce it, though.
And I demoed a perpetual motion machine back in 1997. I never did produce it, though.
just like microsoft did not produce a tablet.
however, lots of other companies did, using microsofts XP tablet edition
how did your perpetual motion machine go for being produced by others?
just like microsoft did not produce a tablet.
however, lots of other companies did, using microsofts XP tablet edition
how did your perpetual motion machine go for being produced by others?
And virtually no one bought them. Is that because consumers were wrong or because such devices didn't serve any real purpose (outside of a few specialized markets)? If not, why? Perhaps because they were poorly designed? If so, what was wrong with them? Perhaps the OS was ill suited to the application? Perhaps the available hardware at the time of their introduction was inadequate to the task at hand?
Now what if Apple makes a well designed tablet, with an OS and UI that work very well with the hardware, which supports a pleasing user experience? Do we discount what Apple has done because "tablets already existed"? Do we pretend that Apple "got lucky" by being in "the right place at the right time", or that whatever it is they do is obvious and inevitable and they just happened to get their version out a little ahead of the pack?
Or would one be obliged to admit that Apple, again, looked at a market that was being poorly served by the incumbents, decided there was money to be made by doing better, and shook up the industry by doing things differently?
As an aside to Nikon133, the above is why no one is particularly excited about a tablet running Windows. They've been around for a while, and although Windows 7 has more touch stuff baked in, it's still a desktop OS in drag.