Detachable, touchscreen and stylus, Oh My!
Gates demonstrated a flat-screen monitor from Viewsonic that detaches from the base of the computer and can be used with a pen stylus, just like a PDA. So you could literally take your monitor around the house and keep using your computer.
<a href="http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,49558,00.html"; target="_blank">(From a Wired.com article)</a>
Expected to ship in 2003.
Now, my question is:
When will we Apple users have this?
Kormac7x, any news?
<a href="http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,49558,00.html"; target="_blank">(From a Wired.com article)</a>
Expected to ship in 2003.
Now, my question is:
When will we Apple users have this?
Kormac7x, any news?
Comments
The Tablet is the next evolution of the "shape" of computers...
I would have sworn on a bible that was the "new apple computer design"... instead we got a lamp...
I like the iLamp... its kinda cool...
but I was dead sure... considering the release of the "Viewsonic" the the iPad was here... Especially when they moved the date up...
alas...
E PLURIBUS UNIX
-----------------------------
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>
S
<strong>What's troubling is that as far as we know the iMac doesn't include any new technology (gigawire?) that might make this possible. I guess it would have to work over AirPort somehow - but I could swear I thought Gigawire was related to such a technology.
S</strong><hr></blockquote>
1) Not due to ship until 2003.
2) Expensive technology, effectively two separate computers, just how much will iMac buyers be prepared to pay?
It may yet appear in the powerMac line as an option, of course.
Michael
<strong>
1) Not due to ship until 2003.
2) Expensive technology, effectively two separate computers, just how much will iMac buyers be prepared to pay?
It may yet appear in the powerMac line as an option, of course.
Michael</strong><hr></blockquote>
The tablet would be a separate device no matter what, used as an extension of your desktop's monitor that you can carry around the house. Thus, one would think Apple would want to be able to sell it not only to users of one of its computers, but to all of it. I mean, if an iMac owner 6 months later wants to lay down $699 for an extra terminal to that machine, why would Apple want to stop him from giving them revenue?
I think the lack of these technologies in the new iMac indicates that we won't see a tablet anytime soon, unless like I said they would run over AirPort. But I can't say that I'm all too concerned. I think that Apple should be focusing on overcoming the GHz gap, and digital devices/solutions that work with the software applications they make, strengthening the brand. Then, maybe they can develop some cool toys. Unless these tablets become a standard purchase among PC users (and at the current size - too big - and price - too much), I don't think there's any immediate need for Apple to try to compete in that arena.
-S
Edit: how do software makers feel about something like this? One license per machine or user?
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: bunge ]</p>
<strong>
Edit: how do software makers feel about something like this? One license per machine or user?
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: bunge ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
As long as it's only installed once on the machine, it shouldn't be a problem, because that's how software is normally licensed. OS X has multiple logins, but each user shares the same install of applications.
I think it's likely that a first-generation tablet would simply mirror the desktop display but be mobile and placed in a separate (or perhaps several separate) location(s) for convenience. Eventually, a tablet would maybe allow a separate login from the desktop but still run off of that machine as if it were a server.
I say this because it'll be a while before Apple could fit a fully-functional, well performing computer into a tablet as a separate computing device, and they wont' do so until that can happen. So, for now it would be tethered to a desktop and share software in some fashion.
-S
Are you going to buy it?
<strong>$2000 US.
Are you going to buy it?</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. And it's too big. It should be about 12" like the iBook screen, which would bring the cost down as well.
S
<strong>Gates demonstrated a flat-screen monitor from Viewsonic that detaches from the base of the computer and can be used with a pen stylus, just like a PDA. So you could literally take your monitor around the house and keep using your computer.
<a href="http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,49558,00.html"; target="_blank">(From a Wired.com article)</a>
Expected to ship in 2003.
Now, my question is:
When will we Apple users have this?
Kormac7x, any news?</strong><hr></blockquote>
From the same article:
"Also announced were a pair of Windows XP supplementary technologies, codenamed Freestyle and Mira. Freestyle will allow mobile devices, such as a Windows CE.NET handheld, to access and operate a Windows XP computer, presumably using 802.11x wireless networking. This would allow users to operate their computer from anywhere within the wireless network. "
Hasn't Apple been using wireless networks within the OS for years???? Airport???? Geez... nobody realizes how far behind Microsoft really is! Well... some of us do
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Ariel
Hasn't the tablet/stylus idea been around for nearly a decade? If this concept was in such great demand, wouldn't that demand have driven the technology by now?
Just my $0.02
<strong>I still fail to see the 'incredible' benefits of a tablet...and a detachable monitor/tablet sounds only marginally better.
Hasn't the tablet/stylus idea been around for nearly a decade? If this concept was in such great demand, wouldn't that demand have driven the technology by now?
Just my $0.02</strong><hr></blockquote>
There's a demand for faster-than-light travel too, but believe it or not sometimes it takes us a bit of time to develop technologies no matter how desirable they are.
Please re-read my orginal post. Tablet/stylus technology has been around a while. Longer than, say, MP3 players and consumer digital cameras. But these technologies are booming because of the high demand.
In these categories, the technology is available but either cost prohibitive or just poorly implemented and nascent. Apple will let these markets develop and then introduce their own version of the product which will be better.
<strong>Uh....yeah.
Please re-read my orginal post. Tablet/stylus technology has been around a while. Longer than, say, MP3 players and consumer digital cameras. But these technologies are booming because of the high demand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
MP3 players didn't debut with a $10,000 price tag like the first tablets did. In the days of the Newton, as I'm sure you know, Fujitsu was selling these things. They have actually gained more adoption than you probably think - but in areas like construction and engineering (and by military contracts, more recently) where it wasn't always practical to bring a computer or even a laptop (considering their size at the time) to work locations.
Granted this is a small market compared to everyday consumers, but it has been profitable for some. The technology is *just now* trickling down and getting affordable enough that in 2 years' time or so the tablet will be able to compete with the laptop or serve as a reasonably priced remote terminal to a home computer, prohibiting the need for the cost and space of a second computer on another level of a home, for instance.
Thus, I hardly think it is fair to say that tablets are unsuccessful and haven't "taken off," because they have barely been marketed to consumers in any form except as "internet appliances," with a "lite" OS which is a completely different product. The *next* few years will determine whether the tablet computer is successful in the consumer market - the last years have just been spent getting to this point!
-S
This freakin pad thing won't ship until the end of the year.
Who knows, Apple may have one by then.
Regardless, Apple would blow this Viewsonic thingy out of the water. It would not be funny.
Has there ben a cost estimate on this Viwsonic marvel of technology?
Once there is a real Gigawire, then I hope Steve can show it off with real wireless mirroring (code name Galadriel) and all. And all this at MWNY or somewhere just about the time that the PC tablet starts to ship at twice the weight and half the resolution! That would be nice.
I do like the idea of tablets, but I realize the technology is still not there yet.
First of all Berber and Spiffy you guys somewhat "get it" and at least seem to understand the concept that the tablet screen Berber mentions is a terminal from which to operate the "BIG" main system remotely! That said I will reply individually to each of you! Though I encourage ALL to read the whole post to get my entire meaning!
TO FERRO:
Yes maybe SJ does need slapped but not for the iMac's lack of sufficient evolution. It was a great step forward and I love the "Digital Hub" concept! BUT! I do not want at home or office to tote around the whole goddamm computer; laptop or NOT! A computer in the "Tablet" form of the future is just another laptop. However "distributed computing" where the user operates a thin client terminal cum/keyboard/display "Tablet"... now that would be something! And I've been saying this for 2 years now though I'm a bit of a lurker here at AI.
TO SPIFFY:
Yessiree I would lay down 6 or 7 yards easy for a tablet that controlled the "main" system upstairs in my office! That I could be at my desk and working on a project and/or on the net researching... whatever!; and then simply unhook the interface and take it to the john when nature calls or go down stairs for coffee and a change of scenery or (insert here) without skipping a beat!!! That is at least IMO an extreme convenience!
TO MMICIST:
You say it is "effectively two computers". Well yes if a thin client is a computer or has enough guts at least to be a reciever and transmitter of high res monitor video and audio and key/cursor commands then yes it is a computing device. But certainly not the guts of a high end system and thats a far cry both cost wise and network wise from operating your laptop networked to the main computer. If you are networked to your "main" sys. w/laptop when you launch a program from your laptop and then open a file that is on a volume on the "main" then that file will launch and load over the wireless to your laptops RAM!! Very cumbersome. Would be unbeleivably slow with a 250mb photoshop file! And "SAVES" FORGET IT!! I'd jump out the window waiting for that over wireless. Oh copy the file to a zip and use it on the laptop you say? I hate the endless tranfer of files from one computer's drive to the others; zip disk after zip disk, burn this cd that cd another cd; put it on a jaz its TOO big for a zip blaha blah blah ad nauseum. And then you have to replace the file you copied with the updated version back to your main drive. What a pain in the ass!! I don't care if fast wide 160Mb/sec SCSI is used. File transfers and updates are a pain when you want to work from your laptop! You should be able to run your main system anywhere in the local vicinity (200'?) wirelessly with a terminal/s that is portable. By that I mean launch apps and open files on the desktop sys. loading to its own RAM. No file copying, no waiting to load an app over wireless, no lugging a full(heavy) laptop around and worrying that it might get breakfast or coca-cola on it becuse it cost $3500 to have the same speed (well almost) as your desktop machine. whew!
TO MICHAEL GREY:
Michael, you fail to see the benefits of a tablet as an input device. You are missing the entire point about the type of so called "tablet" we're discussing here. Were not talking about just an input device but a portable user interface piece of hardware that would give you the computers video audio output/GUI and allow you to input data as well anywhere in a local wireless network! And to connect all of the DO-Dads Steverino wants you to have right at that terminal! Why cary the Camera or other devices to the computer? Wireless screen/keyboard terminal device with connectivity BINGO! Instant solution.
And not rocket science. They make little wireless modules to distribute your main A/V system video (640x480) anywhere in the home to another TV monitor. Anyone can see its just more pixels to send to the portable computer terminal unit. Bandwidth is not an issue since 100'-200' is short local effective range.
SPIFFY QUOTE :
"I think it's likely that a first-generation tablet would simply mirror the desktop display but be mobile and placed in a separate (or perhaps several separate) location(s) for convenience. Eventually, a tablet would maybe allow a separate login from the desktop but still run off of that machine as if it were a server.
I say this because it'll be a while before Apple could fit a fully-functional, well performing computer into a tablet as a separate computing device, and they wont' do so until that can happen. So, for now it would be tethered to a desktop and share software in some fashion."
TO SPIFFY:
Yes the display would be mirrored! Yes indeed terminals many places in the home to control the "main" you have it correct and that would be a good thing indeed! But Spiffy, for you to turn around and say that fitting a fully functional computer into the "tablet" No NO NO that is not it at all. Tablet notebook fully functional computer yes, fine but that is a separate issue, and definately not needed to control the "main" system or "hub" system. In fact a notebook computer should eventually have a detachable tablet module that is wireless to the nootbook's base as well and is a tablet that fully functions as the interface to the notebook and doubles as a terminal for your home system. You could have several of these guys around so you don't have to carry the same one around or many users can have their own wireless terminal.
TO EVERYONE:
Now what I've noticed is that I'm increasingly disenchanted about computing because I as the "intelligent human" user have to subjugate myself to the computer by coming to it. There I am stuck in front of the "oracle" and must stay until I am finished or go do something else! The computer as an idealized concept is supposed to help do things better faster and enhance lifestyle and business dealings. In networked office environments that advantage has payed off handsomely though one might argue at inflated costs of a burgeoning PC infrastucture over the last 10-20 years. However for many individuals the computer is starting to become the divergent, the time soaking and inconvenient complicator of daily living. I admit I have built my career as a graphics professional entirely on the foundation of the multiplicity of genius and invention of software and hardware that the PC world (namely Apple & Adobe) has provided. But until I start intuitively using a computer to "uncomplicate" and ease my utilitarian needs and my recreational desires, the computer will increasingly divest me of time and not optimize it. Yes I use it to do important tasks & skills like graphics and accounting that hertofore were very difficult and time consuming and not even accessable to mere mortals.
What I find lacking in Steve's digital hub "vision" for the home is that it only includes the gadgits that SJ has deemed "important". Well I don't take digital photos and while I would do all of the neato things with iPhoto, it is not on my current "need to do" list. Nor will I find myself burning very many DVDs anytime soon. Neither of the aforementioned will help me in my daily routine and affairs. iTunes and the MP3 music library is great because as a music listener it would be very cool to have all my music with me in the car the office, vacation, etc. I love my audio/video equipment and listen to it often. I am NOT a rabid TV watcher nor movie renter and not a computer gamer at all. Now Steve Jobs has been quoted in the media saying "people go to TV to turn off their minds and to the computer to turn on" or words to that effect. Well I whole heartedly disagree. I do not regularly watch any specific sit coms, dramas, daily talk shows, game shows soaps or any other regularly scheduled programing. I catch some of these now and then but I am what is affectionately known as a "channel surfer", a "button pusher", a "remote hog". 70% of my minimalist TV viewing is done at late hours and mostly I treat it like the internet basically snooping around for something of interest. Sometimes I settle into a movie but often I jump around from informational entertainment like Discovery, A&E, MSNBC, History, HBO, SHO, TechTV, just to feed the head with stuff. I turn off by doing other things like exercise, hobbies, home projects, playing with my son, sex with the wife; these are the pleasures that relax me. And surfing for some tidbit of info on the net that will satisfy some aspect of my relaxational enjoyment of life is also a turn "off" of the frenetic pace of life. I also do my own graphics pet projects on the computer and all for my own enjoyment; not because it brings a paycheck, yet I use my "professional software" & hardware to do it. So I can say with all certainty that I go to the computer to turn off or relax as it were. Not what Steve Jobs said at all. I suspect that a lot of folks are like me too. I am enjoying posting this to all of you. All of you are not here because you are intensley "turning on" you just like to communicate with others and hey; its fun right?! SJ seems to be shunning convergence in the home of broadcast media/entertainment and the "digital hub" he so rightly points out is the future. HERE HERE the digital hub where one connects and manuvers all the devices and software conveniently in one neat and tidy package is the future; maybe? But if I or anyone else can't use the computer anywhere I want to for whatever task, professional or home productivity, including seemlesly viewing any media I might have access to uninterupted all accessable from the same portal; Well I can only believe that the digital hub will cause more problems than solutions. More reasons to visit the "oracle" to plug in this, or process that, or write down this, or surf for that, the less time I and all of you other fellow geeks spend living a balanced life with our families and OTHER interests outside of computers.
It doesn't take any great imagination to see that complete control of your finances, media, professional and home productivity is not possible on a computer that demands you come to visit it for those benefits. And it also takes barely any common sense at all to know that todays computer enabled population would be better off without computers that can do more but demand more of our time and effort. The device that Berber mentions in this post that Big Bill demoed is no great leap. The amount of digital information to bring over the wireless thus bringing the interface to the user wherever he/she is at is not a complicated thing. I know this because if you saw all of the digital media A/V equiment technologies I have seen you would see how simple this is. You should also be able to use the computer right on your TV or HDTV monitor all whilst picture-in-picture any channel you want. IEEE 1394 or USB enabled controllers for home HVAC, lighting, entry, security would come into the fold of the digital hub without much effort on software developers part. OSX's capabilities assures that universal control for home automation could be done affordably. Most home automation is proprietary technology and even system specific, and usually way out of range of the average home owner. There are some DIY Windows PC software and home control hardware but I sure wouldn't want to mess with it!!!! Point is if you can empower the individual home owner/Apple user to be able to be productive on the computer and in control of media from a portable teminal through that "digital hub" then home automation is a foregone conclusion. The digital hub will make more sense once you can perform the mundane tasks on it as well as the complex ones without increasing the complexity of those tasks and ultimatly making the mundane even easier!!! Open Quickbooks. "No problem lemme grab my tablet there!" "Honey would you warm up the coffee please! I have to take a constitutional, and check the bank balance online!" "Oh while your up there look on gooddeals.com I saw some shoes for jimmy on sale there print out the coupons." "Alright honey I'll get that for you." And just think, all while taking a crap!
SUMMATION: I LOVE the Mac platform. It is both esoteric and the common mans computer friendly to all revolutionary to lots. However I still have relagated my beloved Mac to being productivity tool for the work that I do and the associated aministrative duties that I have to do. It really won't help to be the digital hub unless it sits in front of me and not the converse. That is why I am considering the only other solution. A no holds barred G4 laptop so that I can at least compute & create anytime or any where I want to. Even if the upcoming Pro machines have all the features of the iMac and then some It will not be worthy of the "digital hub" nomenclature. The digital hub of a wirless LAN should be accessable anywhere within that LAN. Thing is, I and others know that this is all possible RIGHT F-----NG NOW. I hope Steve abandons his opinions on connectivity to media sources other than the toys he flourished at MWSF '02. I for one want all the connection and easy anytime control I can get. Otherwise......... I'm tired I'll check back later.
Regards,
Chris
"Long live the Mac!"
E PLURIBUS UNIX
-----------------------------
Once the high-bandwidth wireless protocols are in place, Apple will make one of these and do this right. Unfortunately, the likely outcome is that MS will overhype their vastly inferior product and outsell Apple 10:1, as usual.