I agree that replace probably isn't the best word. The over all point is that there will be a shift in the market. People will use tablets in the place of where in the past they might have used a second or third PC.
Exactly. After all you need a computer to update, sync etc your iPad.
Flipboard as you indicated is more than an app -- it is you! It is your stuff -- the way you want to arrange, organize and access it.
But, on My iPad -- it is me! It is my stuff -- the way I want to arrange, organize and access it.
What if you could put your apps in there? Your files? The web pages you are currently accessing?
Who needs iOS -- the UI is so 2007
Seriously what if you could put all your stuff (including the apps you are running) in there -- why would you need any "System" UI for iOS?
Just unfold your infinite-size, infinite-depth Flipbook -- and everything's just as you left it.
This would work today, on today's iPad -- the iPhone or Touch, not so much!
Absolutely.
The people who say the iPad is just a big iPod touch are wrong. The 9.7" screen size turns it into different. Flipboard is one of those things you can't do on an iPhone, iPod touch, etc. It's like trying to play waterpolo in a bathtub.
It actually took me a while to understand Flipboard. I initially looked at it as a newspaper and actually deleted it from my iPad for a while. I brought it back, and then it dawned on me that it was all about me, my stuff.
I've dabbled with Pulse, Pulp, and some of the RSS feed aggregators, but they aren't the same. I don't interact with those apps like I do with Flipboard.
You probably don't care since your main point seems to be just insulting the author in some way or another but ...
"The author" has a long and well established history as a humorous writer when commenting on the Dilbert-esque human side of Silicon Valley. His recent attempt to reinvent himself as a more serious writer fails miserably when he cannot get the basic tech terminology right. He's as bad as Wu and company in that way.
Quote:
The iPad is a textbook "think client" computer in many ways.
I completely disagree. The iPad doesn't even fit the Wikipedia article description of thin client computing you cite. There is no central server to do it's processing via a client-server interface only, it's not a simplified display device, it can operate just fine when disconnected from the network for apps designed to work stand alone.
I am actively engaged in cloud and cloud client research and thin clients are one of the options that many folks think is where it's all headed. We have collaborating researchers who are strong thin client advocates, but when they are given real-world task-loads to test they keep coming back with abhorrent results, and they are getting significant VMWare and Cisco assistance. The iPad has served as a wonderful moderately powered fat-client counter example for these guys.
Thin clients rely (as much as it is humanly possible to engineer) on the remote host system to do it's work, really only handling the task of trying to optimize the display path. They require continuous connectivity with the host server(s). iPad is the terminal opposite of that, it is a classic fat client just like laptop and desktop computers are. Just because it isn't yet considered a totally independent platform as far as transferring some content does not change where ALL the processing is done -- on board.
Thin clients fail because they need bandwidth to do everything, and the latency of UI inputs gets in the way unless the UI is as latency tolerant as good old fashioned command line. You can design a very narrowly focused, very local, system that works as a thin client as long as you don't need to transfer much data or have highly responsive interfaces. Again the exact opposite way an iPad operates. There is a ton of research on what makes for a bad thin client and business IT rags are ignoring all of it because when you ignore the reduction in workflow efficiency the bean counting looks good.
Thin client won't work in the wild where an iPad goes, for the same reasons thin clients have failed in general purpose rollouts ever since the term was invented -- latency and bandwidth. If the underlying problems aren't fixed, nobody can expect a different outcome.
That happened to me after I played with the iPad in the Apple Store for all of ten minutes! I couldn't believe it.
Trust me. For the generation of kids growing up with iPads, it's all done. Fin. The keyboard and mouse. It'll be like punch cards and tape drives to us.
Not a Citrix thin client? A fat client? Not a client? What?
If you have some point to make, why not give us an explanation that actually makes it?
WTF are you getting on about? Do we have to give full definitions for everything in the days of wikipedia and google searches? Geez, show a little initiative and look something up and say whether you agree or disagree based on that rather than whining because you can't be bothered to understand playing field.
Running a Citrix app doesn't make a platform a thin client. I have PCs and Macs that run Citrix too, I don't think anyone would call them thin clients. Hell the Citrix client app interfacing with the remote application server is running as a local fat application! When I connect to a remote cluster controller via X11, the X11 content is served from that remote machine, but I'm still running the X11 interface as a fat app locally.
Thick vs fat client is about the capabilities of the platform. If a platform does onboard general application processing and have large primary and secondary storage capability, its fat. Thats more than a few dozen MB of non-graphics dedicated RAM and any generally usable GB of HD/SSD in the current hardware generation and an OS that lets you chose what programs to run.
Smart phones are fat clients for heavens sake! Skimpy ones, but fat nonetheless. They are useful even when out of all network connectivity, a thin client would just sit there, useless.
I haven't touched my old MacBook for a couple of months, didn't even bother bringing with me on my last vacation. In a few months, I will probably donate it to charity.
With apologies to "Shrek" ......... "pick me, pick me, pick me " .......
I think the 'hardware keyboard' thing is overblown. Typing hasn't been a popular activity for long. Less than a generation ago everything was handwritten. Most people aren't fast typists and have no need to be. Onscreen keyboards are 'good enough.' There's certainly not such a strong need for a hardware keyboard that you'd do something as absurd as attaching one to the screen and switching to indirect control rather than touch because you then have to place the thing on your lap or a desk. If you look at it that way - would I sacrifice the iPad's qualities for these minuscule advantages a laptop/desktop form factor gives me in some situations? - I think it's obvious the tablet form factor will win out and in a big way.
Good point... what I would like to know is why I can't adjust the space between the keys on the virtual keyboard? I mean, it's a virtual keyboard, why is it so stultified? I have huge fingers and typing on those puny iPhone & iPad virtual keyboards are really difficult. I'm constantly hitting adjacent keys, nearly on every character. The software feedback from the strike on the key to the display of the character is still a bit slow but it's manageable, I think. And it will probably improve with time and iOS updates.
What the iPad & iPhone soft keyboard needs is the ability to provide a minor level of customization for each individual user. If I could increase the space between the keys, it would really help (even if that meant I had to delete a function key that rarely if ever gets used).
They don't have to "license" Android, Android is open source, so anyone can start using it in their devices without making a "licensing deal" (or any other deal) with Google. Or am I missing something?
They have to license it and agree to terms of use but the license does not include royalties. They are also allowed to modify the code to suit their needs. Anyone can download and fiddle around with the code but to sell products under the Android brand you need to license it.
They have to license it and agree to terms of use but the license does not include royalties. They are also allowed to modify the code to suit their needs. Anyone can download and fiddle around with the code but to sell products under the Android brand you need to license it.
There was an article just this past week about how few are abiding by the GPL. I?ll try to dig that up.
I had a similar experience. The first time I tried a friend's Kindle I started touching the screen. I looked at him quizzically after nothing happened. He was shaking his head. "Nah, you have to use the buttons on the side." I didn't even notice them.
As I mentioned earlier, these experiences irrevocably alter the way I look at all computing devices.
Good point... what I would like to know is why I can't adjust the space between the keys on the virtual keyboard? I mean, it's a virtual keyboard, why is it so stultified? I have huge fingers and typing on those puny iPhone & iPad virtual keyboards are really difficult. I'm constantly hitting adjacent keys, nearly on every character. The software feedback from the strike on the key to the display of the character is still a bit slow but it's manageable, I think. And it will probably improve with time and iOS updates.
What the iPad & iPhone soft keyboard needs is the ability to provide a minor level of customization for each individual user. If I could increase the space between the keys, it would really help (even if that meant I had to delete a function key that rarely if ever gets used).
I agree with this! I have small hands, fat fingers... and a thick head
The user should be able to customize the kb size and spacing on a system-wide and on an application level.
Customization could include things like:
-- key size
-- key spacing
-- key content
-- key arrangement
-- split keyboards (great for thumb typing)
One thing that would be interesting to experiment with (on the iPad) would be:
-- rest the thumbs and fingers rest on the keyboard (display) rather than hover over the home row
-- home row would be defined by where the hands were resting (the iPad recognizes 11 concurrent touches)
-- by definition, the keyboard would fit your hands
-- typing would be an up-down motion rather that a down-up motion
-- or typing could be a slightly harder (larger area) press (down-up)
-- non-home row keys could be detected with a much smaller (faster) motion than with a conventional kb
an example of the latter: an up-down (or sliding) motion from the J key, directed slightly to the left and away from you (then returned to the J position) would be a key press of the U key -- similar towards you would be the N key.
The range of movement could be an adjustable setting and/or, the keyboard could learn the way you type.
You could get to the point that very slight wiggles and slightly harder (bigger/longer) presses would allow very fast typing speeds with very little effort,
I suspect it would be a lot better for carpel tunnel and other physical complaints to have the fingers and palms resting on the surface.
So, the future of data entry may be as simple as just wiggling your fingers
"Microsoft is also believed to be attempting a second shot at launching tablets running Windows 7 at CES."
I really hope this is true. Another Windows 7 Stale, I mean, Slate, would be my favorite Ballmer keynote scenario. I'd love to see the look on Ballmer's face when he does the demo. He looked like a kicked dog last January when he quietly, timidly, apologetically, demoed the HP Slate. As though he were expecting another swift kick.
Well, he got that second kick. iPad 1 was announced just days after CES ended, and most of the wannabes ran straight back to the drawing board. (On second through, they straight back to the copy machine.) Others simply gave up and started writing iPad apps.
My next-favorite scenario would be Ballmer demoing an all-new "slate" version of Windows Phone 7 on a pad computer. It would be hilarious to see what his marketing department calls it. He has already said, on the record, that "It's called Windows."
So would it be "Windows Phone 7 Slate Edition"? No. Not unless there is a phone built into the stale. I mean slate. How about "Windows 7 For Tablets"? No. If it really is a tablet-friendly version of Windows Phone 7, then it isn't #7 of anything. Windows Phone 7 itself a 1.0 release (and, ironically, it's not like Windows at all.)
So whatever Ballmer demoes at CES will be just fine by me. He either bangs his head against the same Windows Slate brick wall, or he falls down the steep, dark staircase of pad computing that isn't just Windows 7 crammed into a smaller screen. Flip a coin, Ballmer.
Either way I'll be happy. Because it's a lose-lose situation for Ballmer. Another Windows 7 slate will trigger a barrage of tomatoes from the audience. And it will instantly wave a huge red flag for investors. The Ballmer-still-doesn't-get-it red flag.
On the other hand, an all-new variant of Windows Phone 7 will yank Microsoft all the way back to square one. No backward compatibility with Windows Mobile 6 (R.I.P). No compatibility with Windows 7 (or Vista for that matter). Few if any 3rd party apps (even after Microsoft has openly bribed developers). And zero infrastructure. Zune Market? What's a Zune? It will be another shot in the dark for Microsoft. And how much ammo do they have left?
Comments
I agree that replace probably isn't the best word. The over all point is that there will be a shift in the market. People will use tablets in the place of where in the past they might have used a second or third PC.
Exactly. After all you need a computer to update, sync etc your iPad.
Flipboard as you indicated is more than an app -- it is you! It is your stuff -- the way you want to arrange, organize and access it.
But, on My iPad -- it is me! It is my stuff -- the way I want to arrange, organize and access it.
What if you could put your apps in there? Your files? The web pages you are currently accessing?
Who needs iOS -- the UI is so 2007
Seriously what if you could put all your stuff (including the apps you are running) in there -- why would you need any "System" UI for iOS?
Just unfold your infinite-size, infinite-depth Flipbook -- and everything's just as you left it.
This would work today, on today's iPad -- the iPhone or Touch, not so much!
Absolutely.
The people who say the iPad is just a big iPod touch are wrong. The 9.7" screen size turns it into different. Flipboard is one of those things you can't do on an iPhone, iPod touch, etc. It's like trying to play waterpolo in a bathtub.
It actually took me a while to understand Flipboard. I initially looked at it as a newspaper and actually deleted it from my iPad for a while. I brought it back, and then it dawned on me that it was all about me, my stuff.
I've dabbled with Pulse, Pulp, and some of the RSS feed aggregators, but they aren't the same. I don't interact with those apps like I do with Flipboard.
You probably don't care since your main point seems to be just insulting the author in some way or another but ...
"The author" has a long and well established history as a humorous writer when commenting on the Dilbert-esque human side of Silicon Valley. His recent attempt to reinvent himself as a more serious writer fails miserably when he cannot get the basic tech terminology right. He's as bad as Wu and company in that way.
The iPad is a textbook "think client" computer in many ways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_client
I completely disagree. The iPad doesn't even fit the Wikipedia article description of thin client computing you cite. There is no central server to do it's processing via a client-server interface only, it's not a simplified display device, it can operate just fine when disconnected from the network for apps designed to work stand alone.
I am actively engaged in cloud and cloud client research and thin clients are one of the options that many folks think is where it's all headed. We have collaborating researchers who are strong thin client advocates, but when they are given real-world task-loads to test they keep coming back with abhorrent results, and they are getting significant VMWare and Cisco assistance. The iPad has served as a wonderful moderately powered fat-client counter example for these guys.
Thin clients rely (as much as it is humanly possible to engineer) on the remote host system to do it's work, really only handling the task of trying to optimize the display path. They require continuous connectivity with the host server(s). iPad is the terminal opposite of that, it is a classic fat client just like laptop and desktop computers are. Just because it isn't yet considered a totally independent platform as far as transferring some content does not change where ALL the processing is done -- on board.
Thin clients fail because they need bandwidth to do everything, and the latency of UI inputs gets in the way unless the UI is as latency tolerant as good old fashioned command line. You can design a very narrowly focused, very local, system that works as a thin client as long as you don't need to transfer much data or have highly responsive interfaces. Again the exact opposite way an iPad operates. There is a ton of research on what makes for a bad thin client and business IT rags are ignoring all of it because when you ignore the reduction in workflow efficiency the bean counting looks good.
Thin client won't work in the wild where an iPad goes, for the same reasons thin clients have failed in general purpose rollouts ever since the term was invented -- latency and bandwidth. If the underlying problems aren't fixed, nobody can expect a different outcome.
At least it wasn't the dominatrix position. That would have been hard to explain.
You really are a dirty old man, aren't you?
Yeah, your point?
BTW, has anyone besides me, when using their old computer, found themselves reaching out to do something by touching the monitor?
It's a really weird feeling....
That happened to me after I played with the iPad in the Apple Store for all of ten minutes! I couldn't believe it.
That happened to me after I played with the iPad in the Apple Store for all of ten minutes! I couldn't believe it.
Trust me. For the generation of kids growing up with iPads, it's all done. Fin. The keyboard and mouse. It'll be like punch cards and tape drives to us.
-----
Not a Citrix thin client? A fat client? Not a client? What?
If you have some point to make, why not give us an explanation that actually makes it?
WTF are you getting on about? Do we have to give full definitions for everything in the days of wikipedia and google searches? Geez, show a little initiative and look something up and say whether you agree or disagree based on that rather than whining because you can't be bothered to understand playing field.
Running a Citrix app doesn't make a platform a thin client. I have PCs and Macs that run Citrix too, I don't think anyone would call them thin clients. Hell the Citrix client app interfacing with the remote application server is running as a local fat application! When I connect to a remote cluster controller via X11, the X11 content is served from that remote machine, but I'm still running the X11 interface as a fat app locally.
Thick vs fat client is about the capabilities of the platform. If a platform does onboard general application processing and have large primary and secondary storage capability, its fat. Thats more than a few dozen MB of non-graphics dedicated RAM and any generally usable GB of HD/SSD in the current hardware generation and an OS that lets you chose what programs to run.
Smart phones are fat clients for heavens sake! Skimpy ones, but fat nonetheless. They are useful even when out of all network connectivity, a thin client would just sit there, useless.
I haven't touched my old MacBook for a couple of months, didn't even bother bringing with me on my last vacation. In a few months, I will probably donate it to charity.
With apologies to "Shrek" ......... "pick me, pick me, pick me " .......
At least it wasn't the dominatrix position. That would have been hard to explain.
You really are a dirty old man, aren't you?
I don't agree .... he's not that old ....
Yeah, your point?
Oh, none. Just an observation!
I don't agree .... he's not that old ....
Real dirty old men get an early start.
I think the 'hardware keyboard' thing is overblown. Typing hasn't been a popular activity for long. Less than a generation ago everything was handwritten. Most people aren't fast typists and have no need to be. Onscreen keyboards are 'good enough.' There's certainly not such a strong need for a hardware keyboard that you'd do something as absurd as attaching one to the screen and switching to indirect control rather than touch because you then have to place the thing on your lap or a desk. If you look at it that way - would I sacrifice the iPad's qualities for these minuscule advantages a laptop/desktop form factor gives me in some situations? - I think it's obvious the tablet form factor will win out and in a big way.
Good point... what I would like to know is why I can't adjust the space between the keys on the virtual keyboard? I mean, it's a virtual keyboard, why is it so stultified? I have huge fingers and typing on those puny iPhone & iPad virtual keyboards are really difficult. I'm constantly hitting adjacent keys, nearly on every character. The software feedback from the strike on the key to the display of the character is still a bit slow but it's manageable, I think. And it will probably improve with time and iOS updates.
What the iPad & iPhone soft keyboard needs is the ability to provide a minor level of customization for each individual user. If I could increase the space between the keys, it would really help (even if that meant I had to delete a function key that rarely if ever gets used).
The iPad isn't cannibalizing the iPod Touch because you cannot fit an iPad in your pocket.
That, and the iPod Touch is cheaper. The price and size hit the early teenager demographic squarely.
Thompson
They don't have to "license" Android, Android is open source, so anyone can start using it in their devices without making a "licensing deal" (or any other deal) with Google. Or am I missing something?
They have to license it and agree to terms of use but the license does not include royalties. They are also allowed to modify the code to suit their needs. Anyone can download and fiddle around with the code but to sell products under the Android brand you need to license it.
They have to license it and agree to terms of use but the license does not include royalties. They are also allowed to modify the code to suit their needs. Anyone can download and fiddle around with the code but to sell products under the Android brand you need to license it.
There was an article just this past week about how few are abiding by the GPL. I?ll try to dig that up.
There was an article just this past week about how few are abiding by the GPL. I’ll try to dig that up.
Apache 2 and GPLv2 among other licensing are involved but apparently no one is being very strict about it.
I had a similar experience. The first time I tried a friend's Kindle I started touching the screen. I looked at him quizzically after nothing happened. He was shaking his head. "Nah, you have to use the buttons on the side." I didn't even notice them.
As I mentioned earlier, these experiences irrevocably alter the way I look at all computing devices.
A matte touch device would be even better.
Oh, none. Just an observation!
Real dirty old men get an early start.
Yeah, I've been at it for over 60 years... "but we were just playing doctor"...
Good point... what I would like to know is why I can't adjust the space between the keys on the virtual keyboard? I mean, it's a virtual keyboard, why is it so stultified? I have huge fingers and typing on those puny iPhone & iPad virtual keyboards are really difficult. I'm constantly hitting adjacent keys, nearly on every character. The software feedback from the strike on the key to the display of the character is still a bit slow but it's manageable, I think. And it will probably improve with time and iOS updates.
What the iPad & iPhone soft keyboard needs is the ability to provide a minor level of customization for each individual user. If I could increase the space between the keys, it would really help (even if that meant I had to delete a function key that rarely if ever gets used).
I agree with this! I have small hands, fat fingers... and a thick head
The user should be able to customize the kb size and spacing on a system-wide and on an application level.
Customization could include things like:
-- key size
-- key spacing
-- key content
-- key arrangement
-- split keyboards (great for thumb typing)
One thing that would be interesting to experiment with (on the iPad) would be:
-- rest the thumbs and fingers rest on the keyboard (display) rather than hover over the home row
-- home row would be defined by where the hands were resting (the iPad recognizes 11 concurrent touches)
-- by definition, the keyboard would fit your hands
-- typing would be an up-down motion rather that a down-up motion
-- or typing could be a slightly harder (larger area) press (down-up)
-- non-home row keys could be detected with a much smaller (faster) motion than with a conventional kb
an example of the latter: an up-down (or sliding) motion from the J key, directed slightly to the left and away from you (then returned to the J position) would be a key press of the U key -- similar towards you would be the N key.
The range of movement could be an adjustable setting and/or, the keyboard could learn the way you type.
You could get to the point that very slight wiggles and slightly harder (bigger/longer) presses would allow very fast typing speeds with very little effort,
I suspect it would be a lot better for carpel tunnel and other physical complaints to have the fingers and palms resting on the surface.
So, the future of data entry may be as simple as just wiggling your fingers
I really hope this is true. Another Windows 7 Stale, I mean, Slate, would be my favorite Ballmer keynote scenario. I'd love to see the look on Ballmer's face when he does the demo. He looked like a kicked dog last January when he quietly, timidly, apologetically, demoed the HP Slate. As though he were expecting another swift kick.
Well, he got that second kick. iPad 1 was announced just days after CES ended, and most of the wannabes ran straight back to the drawing board. (On second through, they straight back to the copy machine.) Others simply gave up and started writing iPad apps.
My next-favorite scenario would be Ballmer demoing an all-new "slate" version of Windows Phone 7 on a pad computer. It would be hilarious to see what his marketing department calls it. He has already said, on the record, that "It's called Windows."
So would it be "Windows Phone 7 Slate Edition"? No. Not unless there is a phone built into the stale. I mean slate. How about "Windows 7 For Tablets"? No. If it really is a tablet-friendly version of Windows Phone 7, then it isn't #7 of anything. Windows Phone 7 itself a 1.0 release (and, ironically, it's not like Windows at all.)
So whatever Ballmer demoes at CES will be just fine by me. He either bangs his head against the same Windows Slate brick wall, or he falls down the steep, dark staircase of pad computing that isn't just Windows 7 crammed into a smaller screen. Flip a coin, Ballmer.
Either way I'll be happy. Because it's a lose-lose situation for Ballmer. Another Windows 7 slate will trigger a barrage of tomatoes from the audience. And it will instantly wave a huge red flag for investors. The Ballmer-still-doesn't-get-it red flag.
On the other hand, an all-new variant of Windows Phone 7 will yank Microsoft all the way back to square one. No backward compatibility with Windows Mobile 6 (R.I.P). No compatibility with Windows 7 (or Vista for that matter). Few if any 3rd party apps (even after Microsoft has openly bribed developers). And zero infrastructure. Zune Market? What's a Zune? It will be another shot in the dark for Microsoft. And how much ammo do they have left?
Real dirty old men get an early start.
Lucky them!