Wow, those all sound like really great technologies, which I'll be reading up on for some time. However, call me crazy, but I just don't soo Jobs getting up at the next MacWorld to show us all the next Nanotech-enabled Mac.
While it would be folly to put innovation past Apple (Airport was a big surprise too, in its day), I want to "think within the box", in that while I want to be creative, I won't design anything that I'm not positive could be buit yesterday. It would be stupid for me to rely on concepts that, well, are just concepts.
I can't get indignant at Apple for not having this Tablet if it couldn't even be built! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I guess my stance on this matter is: I'm calling the Apple concept-engineers fools to have not gone here. They could have at least done this much. I hope they do this, and surprise me with power-saving mram and a cheaper/brighter lcd, but at the very minimum I expect to see this design soon.
After reading this thread I can come to this conclusion: the tablet will only work if it's priced at about the iPod level. Anything more is doomed to failure. People won't buy a tablet that requires another computer when they can buy a computer for the same price or a little more. Nobody wants to pay 600 bucks and settle for a 'computer, jr' experience. Nobody.
"But, what about the iPod?" you might ask. "That sells for 400 bucks and people are snatching them left and right!"
True! Trust me, I bought one. I, too, felt the awesome power that is iPod. And I have paid the price, but I paid it on it's own merits: I loved the fact that this iPod was the easiest, most intuitively designed MP3 player out there. Hundreds of songs available to me in an object the size of a deck of cards, totally portable, not even a little intrusive. I knew I'd use it everywhere, from my car to my gym, and the money wouldn't go to waste. The fact that I could also use it as a hard drive and boot my computer from it and repair it was also a huge selling point, especially since I'm a technician by trade. Now that Apple keeps upgrading the software on the iPod, that's making my purchase an even better deal than it was before. The point is, the iPod is not a stripped down MP3 player, it's the real deal and a great value. The fact that it intergrates so well into the digital hub strategy makes it PERFECT for me and makes Apple look like geniuses.
The tablet, on the other hand, is coming off like a stripped down computer at the same price (or little less than) a full featured PC or used Mac. If you want to read PDFs on a screen; connectivity via firewire, airport, or bluetooth; portability; internet access; a headphone jack; a microphone; a fast processor; and all the like, why would you spend 800 dollars on a tablet that relies on another computer (like an 1800 dollar iMac) when you can get all that AND MORE on a 1200 dollar iBook? The costs don't make sense. I could understand a three hundred dollar (MAYBE) or two hundred dollar device (because at these prices, it's not competing in the lap top space anymore) for that functionality, but anything more is very much putting it in the wrong price range and competing with the wrong products.
The bottom line is, while the theory may sound good, people will NOT pay out the ear for a computer jr experience, not when there's something out there for a little more that does everything and more without the dependencies of a tablet.
[quote] Nobody wants to pay 600 bucks and settle for a 'computer, jr' experience. Nobody.<hr></blockquote>
I would gladly pay 600$ for a "computer jr" experience.
I need a notebook/binder/file cabinet, and pen and paper, 3 ring binders, and shelves aren't cutting it for me anymore.
[quote]I could understand a three hundred dollar (MAYBE) or two hundred dollar device (because at these prices, it's not competing in the lap top space anymore) for that functionality, but anything more is very much putting it in the wrong price range and competing with the wrong products.<hr></blockquote>
People pay 500$ for a "personal organizer", well I would pay 500$ for one too, only I have different needs.
I don't have 78 phone numbers, I have notes in 30 subjects.
I don't have a meeting at 3:00, I have a library of technical resources.
I don't have business cards, I have textbooks.
The tablet I've designed is perfect for me, and every other college student. Apple just needs to make it.
PS - iBook is not "a little more" than this, it's between 50 and 75% more, for (from my usage perspective) what amounts to nothing (oooh firewire! for my 600$ camera and my 400$ camera! If i had that kind of money, I'd buy a tablet ). That's alet
I would gladly pay 600$ for a "computer jr" experience.<hr></blockquote>
Think about that for a second: why would you pay $600 for a computer jr experience when you can buy a used iMac for less, a brand new CRT iMac for a little more, a used PC for MUCH less, or a brand new PC for the same amount? AND, since this tablet is dependant on a 'digital hub', that means this $600 dollars for an incomplete computing experience is just an added cost to the complete computer experience you have to buy to begin with! Which REALLY doesn't make it cost effective! Why buy a $600 dollar tablet with dependencies on a 'real' compuer when you can buy a 'real' computer for about that price? All of a sudden the tablet doesn't make sense. You can buy an iBook, a standalone full featured laptop, or you can buy a computer plus the tablet. It starts adding up, doesn't it? At that price range, the tablet doesn't make sense.
[quote] People pay 500$ for a "personal organizer", well I would pay 500$ for one too, only I have different needs.<hr></blockquote>
For the most part, COMPANIES pay for PDAs, not people. Everyone I know that has a PDA has it only because it's company supplied. Not to say people don't buy PDAs, I just don't see that many college students walking around with PDAs when they're on a tight budget to begin with. Especially when most students have a black book of sorts (yes, phyiscal paper) or a cell phone to store the information on.
Point is, this tablet may be a good idea for you, but I don't think it has mass-market appeal at that price range. The economics don't add up; it doesn't make sense.
By the way, I hate to be "that one dude in every thread that nay-says", and hell, I'm all for gadgets! AND I'm not saying this is a bad idea! I love it. But this tablet thing isn't very realistic given the current costs of the technology needed to make this work. Sorry. <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
Give me a Clie 615c with the thinness of the 415 and the thumb keyboard of the NR70v with integrated Bluetooth, 128MB and a 802.11a+b memmory stick and I'm a happy camper..
Could they make the screen edge to edge to edge and make it a 640x640 screen?
My vote is still out on whether or not I'd buy one of these...but I do like the concept (once you add firewire - not worth considering without).
[quote] why would you pay $600 for a computer jr experience when you can buy a used iMac for less, a brand new CRT iMac for a little more <hr></blockquote>
Now this is just silly - first, it presumes you don't own a computer already - this is a supplementary device. Second, try lugging that CRT iMac into class to take some notes... If I have an iMac at home, but I'd like to (presuming I'm a student) have all of my textbooks and notes in one convenient lightweight and portable unit, I think this is a fantastic solution.
glasses based HUD's will become almost invisible, very cheap and reqire very little power over the next 6 years. This hapened in cell phones because they gave the user a significant advantage over not having one.
Augmented reality will take it 1000 times further. Utilizing city wide 802.11x wireless networks providers can link your AR glasses to powerfull networks of computers to read the world around you and provide any information you need or ask for. It's already happening in Japan with Cell phones snapping pictures of signs, uploading the image to a server, which OCR's it and send an english translation in a few seconds.
This is the portable computer of the future, the very near future. I'll give it 5 years. 5 years ago.. 1997 would you have belived someone if they told you there would be Titianium powerbooks 1" thick?
Not really silly, think about it: why would you pay x amount of dollars for a 'jr' experience when the same amount will get you a 'full' experience?
Think about this another way: after spending your money on a new computer (especially a laptop) and software for said computer, would you want to buy this tablet for another $600? THAT is the real question. Not: "wouldn't it be cool?" but "Would you buy it?" I'm sure Apple has a lot of really cool things they'd love to release but can't because they're afraid of another Cube situation.
In '97, if I had heard that, I'd be like "that's it?"
Jason, please don't try to turn this thread into a futurism "let's go on a journey of our imaginations" thread. I am very serious about this tablet's realism. No transporters or holographic interfaces, please. I appreciate your interest, but let's stay in the zone of reality.
How the hell am I going to write notes on my glasses anyway?
And Gambit, about the tablet vs cheaper desktop, you need to read ricRocket's thread. Of course nobody who doesn't want a tablet in the first place is going to be the market!!!
This is what I've been looking for for years. As a former sysadmin to bunches of creative types, including the editorial staff of several construction and architecture magazines I've got to tell you,
- first of all, once you add one port, some user will demand another. Don't weaken, stay pure. The only exception that I could see would be some form of ethernet port or other remote login means that is only acessable from, say, a small jack hidden behind the screen. in other words, there if you *really* need it but not there for daily use.
-secondly, even those multiton Panasonic Toughbooks can get trashed through their ports. No ports, no worries.
Beyond that, yeah, sign me up. I'll buy one. If I were a sysadmin I'ld propose to get one for every user. This is what Kay's Dynabook was meant to be.
As for the fact that Firewire is cheap, you are misunderstanding a premise here: cheaper or not, we don't want firewire on the computer, because that would make it a more competitive offering compared to our own other products. The FW port stays off, even if it were subsidized by the government, because only this way can the iTablet + iMac combo remain attractive; this is the true reason for creating the product. Just like the iPod, it's sole purpose in this world is to sell Macs...
-First, POWER! what are you nuts! how are you going to power this sucker! When you add a single firewire port you make it dependant on your base computer for charging... what could be better?
-File transfer! HELLO! If you want this thing to feed off of the CD drive of a base computer you've got to connect it with something more than airport or bluetooth! can you imagine downloading a 30MB or 70MB file over a 56k modem? WHY when you can do it so fast over firewire? Create the firmware to recognise the drives on the computer that it's connected to and allow it to access them.
Look, I'm not looking to edit digital video on these things, it's too damn slow for that at 400Mhz! It's just practicle to put one firewire port in. Think of it as a multi-purpose power cord.
I can appreciate the idea behind the beauty of no ports, but until wireless bandwidth increases, I don't want to try to move much data around with this thing.
I'm also thinking that a digital ink disply may be more appropriate, but Aqua won't look too good with it. Here's the first rudimentary applications of e-ink.
Maybe it's OS is by Pixo like the iPod. (now there's a cost savings) If you want this to be cheap you have got to cut something out. Bye Bye Color LCD, hello iPod OS,
I guess it's a Newton OS / iPod OS merge. with the handwriting recognition.
I keep seeing it as a firewire enabled Newton with a 10 GB hard drive and firewire.
The reality is your machine uses old hardware that will be obsolete before you can have time to bring it to market (unless you have a time machine in which case you'll have other opportunities to pursue)
If you want to design products like the way I think you want to, you might want to look at bathroom fixtures, hey that's where Jonathan Ive started.
You don't write notes with the glasses (it could be as small as a stip of tape that would stick to the inside of your current glasses), you converse with the machine. Not speach to text, but true contextualy sensative understanding. Semantic Web + GRID + Wireless high speed GRID access = synthetic assistant. If you need the weather, you ask. If you need to know who manufactured the manhole you're looking at, just ask. How far away is the green? Just ask. etc, etc..
- first of all, once you add one port, some user will demand another. Don't weaken, stay pure.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think Apple's had any trouble doing that. Remember all the clamoring for ports on the iMac when that first came out?
[quote]<strong>The only exception that I could see would be some form of ethernet port or other remote login means that is only acessable from, say, a small jack hidden behind the screen. in other words, there if you *really* need it but not there for daily use.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You don't want FireWire but you want Ethernet?
If you're going to have one physical port to communicate with Macs, FW is your best choice. It's fast, it supplies power (so your tablet can have a built-in battery like the iPod's - one less thing to fall out and leave a big, vulnerable hole), it's easier to plug and unplug then ethernet cords are, and it has nifty value adds like FireWire Disk Mode that work both ways. You can also do networking over FireWire.
[quote]<strong>-secondly, even those multiton Panasonic Toughbooks can get trashed through their ports. No ports, no worries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 10" LCD is a much bigger target. I'd assume that protecting the ports would be a small matter. Of course, there is always the possibility that any protection could get thwarted, but then that's true in general.
I'd actually give version 1 FireWire and Bluetooth, and only offer AirPort as an option. Reason: AirPort consumes lots more power than either alternative. For the most part, I'd prefer to have Bluetooth (to be able to sync with other devices, scan and print wirelessly), and hotplug briefly to sync files quickly and recharge via the iMac, since I'd be doing that less often. (In fact, if you make the FW port the only way to recharge the tablet, then you eliminate a port and require that the Tablet be tethered to a Mac - but that might be going too far ).
Gambit, I think very few people who have bought a laptop would buy this, you are right. But then again, I think many, many people would rather have this and an iMac instead of the iBook, myself first among them.
Laptops are way overrated.
About the FW port:
OK, I guess. I don't like it, but I'll accept it for now.
This is an amazing communications technology that will harvest all the evergy it needs from it's environment... no batteries... cool.
I never meant to insult your idea or your process, and I certainly don't want to stray to far away from the perscribed limits you've set in this future forum. I just wanted to drop a few wrenches in conventioanl thinking here. The issue of computing is note nessisarily about how many ports you have, I think it's more about how the machine solves problems faster cheaper and less obtrusivly.
We'd all love to see a Mac that had a sugar-cube sized holographic hard drive, home-grown neurons as the motherboard bus, a quantum processor, and used luminescent bacteria as the display. Or was implanted in your brain, always connected to the conscious overmind, and able to upload interpreted information to your between them instantly.
Alas, I'm just not convinced that Apple could offer that -->tomorrow <--.
But they could offer this, so while I am honestly fascinated by the links you've provided (where do you start to find these things, anyway?), they really have nothing to do with this thread, which is about how frustrated I am that this -- the ideal solution to my needs (and a highly marketable one for Apple at that) -- is not provided.
For anybody who missed it, the new iTablet has all the ports and only the ports that the iPod has. Probably an improvement.
I am an engineer who regularly must travel from cubical to manufacturing floor to resolve design issues. My Palm pilot ain't cutting it. I'd much (MUCH,MUCH, MUCH!!!)rather have an iTablet so that I can stand and show someone a drawing or a routing or a spreadsheet INSTANTLY (in hell, the inhabitants are forced to navigate large spreadsheets on palm pilots. In purgatory, they are allowed laptops... which still sucks, but not as badly. In heaven, the Good are given their very own iTablets.). I'd rather stand and do my computing thing, and I defy any of you anti-iTablet volk to stand with your laptop and type. Not everyone is a designer sitting at a desk all the live-long day. Many professionals walk around to collect data, convey information, do computing tasks and goddamn, an iTablet would be NIRVANA! I must come down on the side of those who advocate a Firewire socket. Why? Say an insurance adjuster, takes a digital photo, and wants to download it to a computer (for information backup if he/she looses the camera). The iTablet would be perfect.
The Tablet would be perfect for a student. I'd give my eye-teeth to have all my notes (and texts!) from both of my engineering degrees (ME & EE - I dream of designing gears that emit sparks...) as well as my business degree (in my nightmares, I'm chased by spark emitting gears and I'm the Chairman of Enron.) for consultation at a moment's notice on something like a pad of paper. I can only imagine that a doctor would have even more use for something like this and don't get me started on the uses that a lawyer would have for such a device. Those who don't think that there's a market for this device should look at the Marketing King: Microsoft (an ugly truth, but there it is). They're putting out a tablet. Apple can/should/must kick their ass in this market segment. To not enter this segment would be a sad disservice to the stockholders, pure and simple.
All the pieces seem to be in place for such a device. The questiion isn't so much IF, but WHEN, DAMNIT?! WHEN?!
Comments
While it would be folly to put innovation past Apple (Airport was a big surprise too, in its day), I want to "think within the box", in that while I want to be creative, I won't design anything that I'm not positive could be buit yesterday. It would be stupid for me to rely on concepts that, well, are just concepts.
I can't get indignant at Apple for not having this Tablet if it couldn't even be built! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I guess my stance on this matter is: I'm calling the Apple concept-engineers fools to have not gone here. They could have at least done this much. I hope they do this, and surprise me with power-saving mram and a cheaper/brighter lcd, but at the very minimum I expect to see this design soon.
"But, what about the iPod?" you might ask. "That sells for 400 bucks and people are snatching them left and right!"
True! Trust me, I bought one. I, too, felt the awesome power that is iPod. And I have paid the price, but I paid it on it's own merits: I loved the fact that this iPod was the easiest, most intuitively designed MP3 player out there. Hundreds of songs available to me in an object the size of a deck of cards, totally portable, not even a little intrusive. I knew I'd use it everywhere, from my car to my gym, and the money wouldn't go to waste. The fact that I could also use it as a hard drive and boot my computer from it and repair it was also a huge selling point, especially since I'm a technician by trade. Now that Apple keeps upgrading the software on the iPod, that's making my purchase an even better deal than it was before. The point is, the iPod is not a stripped down MP3 player, it's the real deal and a great value. The fact that it intergrates so well into the digital hub strategy makes it PERFECT for me and makes Apple look like geniuses.
The tablet, on the other hand, is coming off like a stripped down computer at the same price (or little less than) a full featured PC or used Mac. If you want to read PDFs on a screen; connectivity via firewire, airport, or bluetooth; portability; internet access; a headphone jack; a microphone; a fast processor; and all the like, why would you spend 800 dollars on a tablet that relies on another computer (like an 1800 dollar iMac) when you can get all that AND MORE on a 1200 dollar iBook? The costs don't make sense. I could understand a three hundred dollar (MAYBE) or two hundred dollar device (because at these prices, it's not competing in the lap top space anymore) for that functionality, but anything more is very much putting it in the wrong price range and competing with the wrong products.
The bottom line is, while the theory may sound good, people will NOT pay out the ear for a computer jr experience, not when there's something out there for a little more that does everything and more without the dependencies of a tablet.
I would gladly pay 600$ for a "computer jr" experience.
I need a notebook/binder/file cabinet, and pen and paper, 3 ring binders, and shelves aren't cutting it for me anymore.
[quote]I could understand a three hundred dollar (MAYBE) or two hundred dollar device (because at these prices, it's not competing in the lap top space anymore) for that functionality, but anything more is very much putting it in the wrong price range and competing with the wrong products.<hr></blockquote>
People pay 500$ for a "personal organizer", well I would pay 500$ for one too, only I have different needs.
I don't have 78 phone numbers, I have notes in 30 subjects.
I don't have a meeting at 3:00, I have a library of technical resources.
I don't have business cards, I have textbooks.
The tablet I've designed is perfect for me, and every other college student. Apple just needs to make it.
PS - iBook is not "a little more" than this, it's between 50 and 75% more, for (from my usage perspective) what amounts to nothing (oooh firewire! for my 600$ camera and my 400$ camera! If i had that kind of money, I'd buy a tablet
I would gladly pay 600$ for a "computer jr" experience.<hr></blockquote>
Think about that for a second: why would you pay $600 for a computer jr experience when you can buy a used iMac for less, a brand new CRT iMac for a little more, a used PC for MUCH less, or a brand new PC for the same amount? AND, since this tablet is dependant on a 'digital hub', that means this $600 dollars for an incomplete computing experience is just an added cost to the complete computer experience you have to buy to begin with! Which REALLY doesn't make it cost effective! Why buy a $600 dollar tablet with dependencies on a 'real' compuer when you can buy a 'real' computer for about that price? All of a sudden the tablet doesn't make sense. You can buy an iBook, a standalone full featured laptop, or you can buy a computer plus the tablet. It starts adding up, doesn't it? At that price range, the tablet doesn't make sense.
[quote] People pay 500$ for a "personal organizer", well I would pay 500$ for one too, only I have different needs.<hr></blockquote>
For the most part, COMPANIES pay for PDAs, not people. Everyone I know that has a PDA has it only because it's company supplied. Not to say people don't buy PDAs, I just don't see that many college students walking around with PDAs when they're on a tight budget to begin with. Especially when most students have a black book of sorts (yes, phyiscal paper) or a cell phone to store the information on.
Point is, this tablet may be a good idea for you, but I don't think it has mass-market appeal at that price range. The economics don't add up; it doesn't make sense.
[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Gambit ]</p>
Could they make the screen edge to edge to edge and make it a 640x640 screen?
[quote] why would you pay $600 for a computer jr experience when you can buy a used iMac for less, a brand new CRT iMac for a little more <hr></blockquote>
Now this is just silly - first, it presumes you don't own a computer already - this is a supplementary device. Second, try lugging that CRT iMac into class to take some notes... If I have an iMac at home, but I'd like to (presuming I'm a student) have all of my textbooks and notes in one convenient lightweight and portable unit, I think this is a fantastic solution.
rr.
<a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/2002/0402issue/0402feiner.html"; target="_blank">http://www.scientificamerican.com/2002/0402issue/0402feiner.html</a>;
glasses based HUD's will become almost invisible, very cheap and reqire very little power over the next 6 years. This hapened in cell phones because they gave the user a significant advantage over not having one.
Augmented reality will take it 1000 times further. Utilizing city wide 802.11x wireless networks providers can link your AR glasses to powerfull networks of computers to read the world around you and provide any information you need or ask for. It's already happening in Japan with Cell phones snapping pictures of signs, uploading the image to a server, which OCR's it and send an english translation in a few seconds.
This is the portable computer of the future, the very near future. I'll give it 5 years. 5 years ago.. 1997 would you have belived someone if they told you there would be Titianium powerbooks 1" thick?
<strong>
Now this is just silly </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really silly, think about it: why would you pay x amount of dollars for a 'jr' experience when the same amount will get you a 'full' experience?
Think about this another way: after spending your money on a new computer (especially a laptop) and software for said computer, would you want to buy this tablet for another $600? THAT is the real question. Not: "wouldn't it be cool?" but "Would you buy it?" I'm sure Apple has a lot of really cool things they'd love to release but can't because they're afraid of another Cube situation.
Jason, please don't try to turn this thread into a futurism "let's go on a journey of our imaginations" thread. I am very serious about this tablet's realism. No transporters or holographic interfaces, please. I appreciate your interest, but let's stay in the zone of reality.
How the hell am I going to write notes on my glasses anyway?
And Gambit, about the tablet vs cheaper desktop, you need to read ricRocket's thread. Of course nobody who doesn't want a tablet in the first place is going to be the market!!!
This is what I've been looking for for years. As a former sysadmin to bunches of creative types, including the editorial staff of several construction and architecture magazines I've got to tell you,
- first of all, once you add one port, some user will demand another. Don't weaken, stay pure. The only exception that I could see would be some form of ethernet port or other remote login means that is only acessable from, say, a small jack hidden behind the screen. in other words, there if you *really* need it but not there for daily use.
-secondly, even those multiton Panasonic Toughbooks can get trashed through their ports. No ports, no worries.
Beyond that, yeah, sign me up. I'll buy one. If I were a sysadmin I'ld propose to get one for every user. This is what Kay's Dynabook was meant to be.
<strong>
As for the fact that Firewire is cheap, you are misunderstanding a premise here: cheaper or not, we don't want firewire on the computer, because that would make it a more competitive offering compared to our own other products. The FW port stays off, even if it were subsidized by the government, because only this way can the iTablet + iMac combo remain attractive; this is the true reason for creating the product. Just like the iPod, it's sole purpose in this world is to sell Macs...
</strong><hr></blockquote> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Look... here's where firewire counts:
-First, POWER! what are you nuts! how are you going to power this sucker! When you add a single firewire port you make it dependant on your base computer for charging... what could be better?
-File transfer! HELLO! If you want this thing to feed off of the CD drive of a base computer you've got to connect it with something more than airport or bluetooth! can you imagine downloading a 30MB or 70MB file over a 56k modem? WHY when you can do it so fast over firewire? Create the firmware to recognise the drives on the computer that it's connected to and allow it to access them.
Look, I'm not looking to edit digital video on these things, it's too damn slow for that at 400Mhz! It's just practicle to put one firewire port in. Think of it as a multi-purpose power cord.
I can appreciate the idea behind the beauty of no ports, but until wireless bandwidth increases, I don't want to try to move much data around with this thing.
I'm also thinking that a digital ink disply may be more appropriate, but Aqua won't look too good with it. Here's the first rudimentary applications of e-ink.
Maybe it's OS is by Pixo like the iPod. (now there's a cost savings) If you want this to be cheap you have got to cut something out. Bye Bye Color LCD, hello iPod OS,
I guess it's a Newton OS / iPod OS merge. with the handwriting recognition.
I keep seeing it as a firewire enabled Newton with a 10 GB hard drive and firewire.
Shrug.
MSKR
[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Masker ]</p>
why not just get one of these:
<a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/vaio/picturebook/index.shtml"; target="_blank">http://www.sonystyle.com/vaio/picturebook/index.shtml</a>;
or one of these once you miss the drive:
<a href="http://www.fmworld.net/globalpc/products/p_series.html"; target="_blank">http://www.fmworld.net/globalpc/products/p_series.html</a>;
If you want to design products like the way I think you want to, you might want to look at bathroom fixtures, hey that's where Jonathan Ive started.
You don't write notes with the glasses (it could be as small as a stip of tape that would stick to the inside of your current glasses), you converse with the machine. Not speach to text, but true contextualy sensative understanding. Semantic Web + GRID + Wireless high speed GRID access = synthetic assistant. If you need the weather, you ask. If you need to know who manufactured the manhole you're looking at, just ask. How far away is the green? Just ask. etc, etc..
[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: JasonPP ]</p>
<strong>
- first of all, once you add one port, some user will demand another. Don't weaken, stay pure.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think Apple's had any trouble doing that. Remember all the clamoring for ports on the iMac when that first came out?
[quote]<strong>The only exception that I could see would be some form of ethernet port or other remote login means that is only acessable from, say, a small jack hidden behind the screen. in other words, there if you *really* need it but not there for daily use.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You don't want FireWire but you want Ethernet?
If you're going to have one physical port to communicate with Macs, FW is your best choice. It's fast, it supplies power (so your tablet can have a built-in battery like the iPod's - one less thing to fall out and leave a big, vulnerable hole), it's easier to plug and unplug then ethernet cords are, and it has nifty value adds like FireWire Disk Mode that work both ways. You can also do networking over FireWire.
[quote]<strong>-secondly, even those multiton Panasonic Toughbooks can get trashed through their ports. No ports, no worries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 10" LCD is a much bigger target. I'd assume that protecting the ports would be a small matter. Of course, there is always the possibility that any protection could get thwarted, but then that's true in general.
I'd actually give version 1 FireWire and Bluetooth, and only offer AirPort as an option. Reason: AirPort consumes lots more power than either alternative. For the most part, I'd prefer to have Bluetooth (to be able to sync with other devices, scan and print wirelessly), and hotplug briefly to sync files quickly and recharge via the iMac, since I'd be doing that less often. (In fact, if you make the FW port the only way to recharge the tablet, then you eliminate a port and require that the Tablet be tethered to a Mac - but that might be going too far
[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
Laptops are way overrated.
About the FW port:
OK, I guess. I don't like it, but I'll accept it for now.
The computer you speak of will appear in 2012. The one I'm talking about won't be obsolete for another 4 years. Yes, I'll consider PayPal wagers.
Airport, Bluetooth, and LCD's obsolete before they get to market...sheesh
Semantic Web + GRID + Wireless high speed GRID access...riiiiiiight.
Hey, it's you're opinion and that's cool. I'm probably wrong about what's coming, but that really doesn't matter either.
computing power is acceletating and an ever increasing rate. Today a spin off in Geneva began offering a quantum encrytion communication device you can plug into your USB port. <a href="http://slashdot.org/articles/02/03/28/1846232.shtml?tid=93"; target="_blank">http://slashdot.org/articles/02/03/28/1846232.shtml?tid=93</a>;
Also read up on researchers efforts to build pervasive picoradio networks: <a href="http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu/Research/Pico_Radio/Default.htm"; target="_blank">http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu/Research/Pico_Radio/Default.htm</a>;
This is an amazing communications technology that will harvest all the evergy it needs from it's environment... no batteries... cool.
I never meant to insult your idea or your process, and I certainly don't want to stray to far away from the perscribed limits you've set in this future forum. I just wanted to drop a few wrenches in conventioanl thinking here. The issue of computing is note nessisarily about how many ports you have, I think it's more about how the machine solves problems faster cheaper and less obtrusivly.
Cheers, peace, have a great long weekend.
Alas, I'm just not convinced that Apple could offer that -->tomorrow <--.
But they could offer this, so while I am honestly fascinated by the links you've provided (where do you start to find these things, anyway?), they really have nothing to do with this thread, which is about how frustrated I am that this -- the ideal solution to my needs (and a highly marketable one for Apple at that) -- is not provided.
For anybody who missed it, the new iTablet has all the ports and only the ports that the iPod has. Probably an improvement.
[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Gametes ]</p>
I am an engineer who regularly must travel from cubical to manufacturing floor to resolve design issues. My Palm pilot ain't cutting it. I'd much (MUCH,MUCH, MUCH!!!)rather have an iTablet so that I can stand and show someone a drawing or a routing or a spreadsheet INSTANTLY (in hell, the inhabitants are forced to navigate large spreadsheets on palm pilots. In purgatory, they are allowed laptops... which still sucks, but not as badly. In heaven, the Good are given their very own iTablets.). I'd rather stand and do my computing thing, and I defy any of you anti-iTablet volk to stand with your laptop and type. Not everyone is a designer sitting at a desk all the live-long day. Many professionals walk around to collect data, convey information, do computing tasks and goddamn, an iTablet would be NIRVANA! I must come down on the side of those who advocate a Firewire socket. Why? Say an insurance adjuster, takes a digital photo, and wants to download it to a computer (for information backup if he/she looses the camera). The iTablet would be perfect.
The Tablet would be perfect for a student. I'd give my eye-teeth to have all my notes (and texts!) from both of my engineering degrees (ME & EE - I dream of designing gears that emit sparks...) as well as my business degree (in my nightmares, I'm chased by spark emitting gears and I'm the Chairman of Enron.) for consultation at a moment's notice on something like a pad of paper. I can only imagine that a doctor would have even more use for something like this and don't get me started on the uses that a lawyer would have for such a device. Those who don't think that there's a market for this device should look at the Marketing King: Microsoft (an ugly truth, but there it is). They're putting out a tablet. Apple can/should/must kick their ass in this market segment. To not enter this segment would be a sad disservice to the stockholders, pure and simple.
All the pieces seem to be in place for such a device. The questiion isn't so much IF, but WHEN, DAMNIT?! WHEN?!
Thanks for listening.
Aries 1B