Meh, looks like one of those Windows tablets. Thick, and prototype-looking. Of course, back then, this was great.
It looks like something that was possible during that era within the permissible tolerance levels of a consumer grade device. What more do you want? There are parts and components today that just weren't available at that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
That actually existed? I'm pretty sure that was the minority. Most Windows tablets were of the "convertible" style.
I remember a few variants. I never paid that much attention to them, but I felt that laptops of that era were somewhat strained. These weren't very appealing to me. I still lack an ipad simply because I wouldn't use it most of the time. Further software development and better storage and connectivity options would change that for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
The fact that Apple was happy to spend 8 years perfecting it tells you everything you need to know about whether innovation comes from visionary companies and is then copied or if it comes from everybody zeroing in on an "obvious" design. Frankly, if you think the latter is true, you know nothing about design or development. Android and the Android tablets are not just copies, they're obviously the product of careful and deliberate reverse engineering. They simply would not exist otherwise. I have no doubt at all that Google very carefully studied the iPhone and measured the way it responded to touch, etc, probably using some kind of robotic rig and high speed cameras to ensure they could copy it just-so. I have no doubt that Samsung took apart the iPhone and iPad and carefully studied them so they could make their own. That's how these products came into existence in such a short time after the iPhone/iPad was released.
You are so silly. 8 years perfecting it? It's more likely that the technology wasn't there to do it the way they wanted to at the time, and they couldn't afford a flop product (remember they were a much smaller company back then). It looks more like something was put on the back burner rather than perfected for 8 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeniThings
Nope.
That's backwards thinking that lacks vision and imagination. MS thought a tablet was simply a keyboard-less laptop. One that ran a marginally modified, stylus driven version of Windows, and one that was burdened with the same PC era expansion and media slots.
Apple re-invented the idea of a tablet by abandoning the windows metaphor and stylus input in favor of a completely new touch-based OS. Then they removed the expansion slot idea. Then they did away with the keyboard. All these bold decisions defined what Apple was doing, and all these concepts were absent in the wholly unoriginal and failed MS tablets.
You are equally unimaginative with this statement. It's fully possible that this project was working within the budget they were given. Budget and timeline may not have allowed for a full rewrite, or they may not have been confident that they could get developers on board. It's far less likely that they simply had a lack of forward thinking at an engineering level (they had access plenty of amazing programmers and engineers). Some of you are filled with too much hatred and too little independent thought.
This is Knigth Ridder circa 1994 when they envisioned "tablet newspaper" and its many other possible uses, and yes..., it's in rectangular shape, much like paintings, theater screens, televisions and computer monitors that come before it.
Undoubtedly, public apology is the least Apple can do for the waste of time and money it had created for its patent infringing cases based on some its dubious patents issued by USPTO. I suggest the court to punish Apple lawyers by making them sit underneath Apple trees during its harvesting season. Barrages of rotten apples hitting their heads ought to knock some senses out of them.
What? FACT: The Hp TC1000 very much 'predated the iPad' given that the Hp TC1000) Tablet Computer was avaiable for purchase in 2002, and the Apple iPad wasn't even announced until 2010.
I don't contest that there were many models of TabletPCs made, but they failed to grow outside of a niche, in large part because of the baggage and assumptions made by the OS provider. The hardware didn't help much either.
What? FACT: The Hp TC1000 very much 'predated the iPad' given that the Hp TC1000) Tablet Computer was avaiable for purchase in 2002, and the Apple iPad wasn't even announced until 2010.
Thanks to you et al. you've made it crystal clear that despite prices below the iPad and many models to choose from that vendors were so inept in making a tablet that it wasn't until Apple came along and showed them how to do it right that it became a successful market.
Did you really think Apple didn't and doesn't have all sorts of various products in labs? The difference is a smart company doesn't just launch a half-assed product that isn't read for the market just because they have some basic form and functionality in place. I bet you place chess by bringing out queen ASAP. Care to play me in chess?
I don't contest that there were many models of TabletPCs made, but they failed to grow outside of a niche, in large part because of the baggage and assumptions made by the OS provider. The hardware didn't help much either.
I don't see it so much as assumptions by the OS provider. It looked more like they did what they could with whatever R&D/project budget. No one was really pushing this into a mainstream product class of its own.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges
Meh, looks like one of those Windows tablets. Thick, and prototype-looking. Of course, back then, this was great.
It looks like something that was possible during that era within the permissible tolerance levels of a consumer grade device. What more do you want? There are parts and components today that just weren't available at that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
That actually existed? I'm pretty sure that was the minority. Most Windows tablets were of the "convertible" style.
I remember a few variants. I never paid that much attention to them, but I felt that laptops of that era were somewhat strained. These weren't very appealing to me. I still lack an ipad simply because I wouldn't use it most of the time. Further software development and better storage and connectivity options would change that for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
The fact that Apple was happy to spend 8 years perfecting it tells you everything you need to know about whether innovation comes from visionary companies and is then copied or if it comes from everybody zeroing in on an "obvious" design. Frankly, if you think the latter is true, you know nothing about design or development. Android and the Android tablets are not just copies, they're obviously the product of careful and deliberate reverse engineering. They simply would not exist otherwise. I have no doubt at all that Google very carefully studied the iPhone and measured the way it responded to touch, etc, probably using some kind of robotic rig and high speed cameras to ensure they could copy it just-so. I have no doubt that Samsung took apart the iPhone and iPad and carefully studied them so they could make their own. That's how these products came into existence in such a short time after the iPhone/iPad was released.
You are so silly. 8 years perfecting it? It's more likely that the technology wasn't there to do it the way they wanted to at the time, and they couldn't afford a flop product (remember they were a much smaller company back then). It looks more like something was put on the back burner rather than perfected for 8 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeniThings
Nope.
That's backwards thinking that lacks vision and imagination. MS thought a tablet was simply a keyboard-less laptop. One that ran a marginally modified, stylus driven version of Windows, and one that was burdened with the same PC era expansion and media slots.
Apple re-invented the idea of a tablet by abandoning the windows metaphor and stylus input in favor of a completely new touch-based OS. Then they removed the expansion slot idea. Then they did away with the keyboard. All these bold decisions defined what Apple was doing, and all these concepts were absent in the wholly unoriginal and failed MS tablets.
You are equally unimaginative with this statement. It's fully possible that this project was working within the budget they were given. Budget and timeline may not have allowed for a full rewrite, or they may not have been confident that they could get developers on board. It's far less likely that they simply had a lack of forward thinking at an engineering level (they had access plenty of amazing programmers and engineers). Some of you are filled with too much hatred and too little independent thought.
This is Knigth Ridder circa 1994 when they envisioned "tablet newspaper" and its many other possible uses, and yes..., it's in rectangular shape, much like paintings, theater screens, televisions and computer monitors that come before it.
Videos on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCeOM0XwXsY
Undoubtedly, public apology is the least Apple can do for the waste of time and money it had created for its patent infringing cases based on some its dubious patents issued by USPTO. I suggest the court to punish Apple lawyers by making them sit underneath Apple trees during its harvesting season. Barrages of rotten apples hitting their heads ought to knock some senses out of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
If you want to be utterly infuriated with Android fanboyism, troll posts and baiting, visit this thread on The Verge: http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/18/3167346/apple-order-samsung-copy-uk ;
Haha! This is how people think. Apple is not that popular anymore.
Competition trumps litigation every time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperJunior
Haha! This is how people think. Apple is not that popular anymore.
Competition trumps litigation every time!
Apple has never been that "popular" among certain people, as I quickly learnt when first using the Internet in 1993.
As Apple has come back to rub their face in it, they seem to be getting more and more desperate.
[IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/8729/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[VIDEO]
Not necessarily true.
Which one of my reincarnations were you referring to?
The screen captures of Knight Ridder's "The Tablet Newspaper" in 1993.
Youtube videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBEtPQDQNcI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCeOM0XwXsY
Well, it has rectangular shape, much like paintings, theater screens, televisions and computer monitors that precede it.
I don't contest that there were many models of TabletPCs made, but they failed to grow outside of a niche, in large part because of the baggage and assumptions made by the OS provider. The hardware didn't help much either.
Thanks to you et al. you've made it crystal clear that despite prices below the iPad and many models to choose from that vendors were so inept in making a tablet that it wasn't until Apple came along and showed them how to do it right that it became a successful market.
Did you really think Apple didn't and doesn't have all sorts of various products in labs? The difference is a smart company doesn't just launch a half-assed product that isn't read for the market just because they have some basic form and functionality in place. I bet you place chess by bringing out queen ASAP. Care to play me in chess?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I don't contest that there were many models of TabletPCs made, but they failed to grow outside of a niche, in large part because of the baggage and assumptions made by the OS provider. The hardware didn't help much either.
I don't see it so much as assumptions by the OS provider. It looked more like they did what they could with whatever R&D/project budget. No one was really pushing this into a mainstream product class of its own.