I stopped looking when I saw it took 10 seconds to load a the calculator app and then another 10 seconds to load the weather app, only to have the weather app apparantly crash the first time.
The Courier video does look interesting. I am a bit skeptical about a few things. For one, when they switched apps, they always managed to switch to just the right app the first time. The second is they managed to write a lot of text on one page when they wrote notes, I don't write that small on paper. Also, for some things a digital pen and paper interface is nice for sketching out ideas, but people can type, even on a touch keyboard, faster than they can hand write text.
You know what an air guitar is? Well, this is not quite air design, but it's only a little way beyond that (we can see something more than just your hands.)
"Oh, it 'll work this way! I like this so it will magically appear when I think about it, I want this to become a 'ToDo' list so tablet senses my every desire and fulfills it."
Using a graphics app at this level of granularity does not express a design, concept, or UI idea. This video is just a bunch of unresolved thoughts. This tells me MS's tablet is still at least 3 years away.
You know what an air guitar is? Well, this is not quite air design, but it's only a little way beyond that (we can see something more than just your hands.)
"Oh, it 'll work this way! I like this so it will magically appear when I think about it, I want this to become a 'ToDo' list so tablet senses my every desire and fulfills it."
Using a graphics app at this level of granularity does not express a design, concept, or UI idea. This video is just a bunch of unresolved thoughts. This tells me MS's tablet is still at least 3 years away.
Concerning the ZuneHD youtube video........For da luv of.....
Way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory Microsoft!
A commercial has to be seen before an app launches? Can you imagine it if every time you launch an app in windows you have to see a commercial?
It's late here at work and I'm too tired to rant and scream at microsoft at the moment.
Can someone please scream at microsoft for me? All I can say is actually seeing the ads run like that before finally launching an app was fairly horrific.
This offically dooms the zuneHD from ever succeeding in any meaningful way.
Now here is something else to consider. They want to also have win mobile 6.5 and win mobile 7 run concurrently with their zuneHD platform. Do you all think that apps that launch with their windows mobile platofrms will now show you a commercial before app launch as well?
Furthermore, you all are probably right when you say that this "courier" will be another potentially cool, hit gadget that microsoft will screw up come launch time.
I've already posted the article below, and it's something that should be read. New battery technology is here already, and Apple could use it now. Will they? Who knows, but they could.
Except there isn't any, and this is nothing more than speculation related to available technologies.
This IS speculation, even if it's good speculation.
He makes one major error though.
I've already posted the article below, and it's something that should be read. New battery technology is here already, and Apple could use it now. Will they? Who knows, but they could if they and Sony began work a year ago.
It sounds like the major advantage of these batteries is more charge-discharge cycles. I can see how this would be useful in any number of applications, but does this help Apple specifically?
It sounds like the major advantage of these batteries is more charge-discharge cycles. I can see how this would be useful in any number of applications, but does this help Apple specifically?
It's also able to hold more power per cubic inch, and per weight.
All around, these batteries will give longer times before a recharge will be required, and more than twice as many recharge cycles. Meaning that they could last four times as long. both of those issues would shut down the complaints about sealed in batteries.
So what we could have is a device with twice as long a play time. Think of an iPhone with 10 hours 3G talk time. 17 hours of video play, and 60 hours of music playback.
For this tablet, we could have an extended use before recharge as well, without needing a bigger, heavier battery.
The last feature is that these batteries are much safer than other lithium types. No more exploding batteries.
All advances in battery technology are important -- I get that. What I'm wondering is how this particular advance helps Apple in ways it doesn't or may not for anyone else. Maybe that's not what you were implying.
All advances in battery technology are important -- I get that. What I'm wondering is how this particular advance helps Apple in ways it doesn't or may not for anyone else. Maybe that's not what you were implying.
It would depend on how Apple and Sony are working together. As Apple is one of the largest, if not THE largest small mobile battery buyer, they could get this first, and advertise their advantage. They could also pay less for them because of their great buying power.
If Apple could improve their current devices and come out with new ones based on a much better battery before others, that would help establish those products.
As we can see with the iPhone and the App Store, first is best. Then others have to play catch-up.
If MS does come out with their book, but the battery is not up to snuff for a dual 7" screen, then it will be at a large disadvantage just from that.
The working rule is that you have to be noticeably better than the leader to have any chance of knocking it down. That's one reason why some of Apple's products have been so far ahead.
If Apple has a good lead time with these batteries, it won't matter as much if others follow 6 months to a year later. Apple will have established enough mindshare about it that others will have a difficult time explaining, and Apple could be on a second generation battery while they are on the first.
That's a lot of "ifs" but I understand your point. To be honest, when it comes to revolutionary battery technologies (or claims thereof) I find myself stifling a yawn. Most of what we've seen recently is far more evolutionary than revolutionary, and hardly exciting in terms of advances, especially when compared against the leaps made by other technologies. Fundamentally, battery technology is still in the 18th century.
That's a lot of "ifs" but I understand your point. To be honest, when it comes to revolutionary battery technologies (or claims thereof) I find myself stifling a yawn. Most of what we've seen recently is far more evolutionary than revolutionary, and hardly exciting in terms of advances, especially when compared against the leaps made by other technologies. Fundamentally, battery technology is still in the 18th century.
I agree that this isn't revolutionary. After all, what really is?
But I wouldn't characterize it as being in the 18th century.
Batteries are hard. People don't realize that. While its easy to put a lot of energy in a small space, it's not easy to get it out again in a controlled manner, or to prevent it from becoming unstable.
Batteries are vastly better than they were 20 years ago, or even ten. But there is no equivalent to the computer industrys' Moore's Law.
But we've seen lots of advancement.
Alkaline, NiCad, Nickel metal hydride, lithium.
All major advances. There are others in the labs, but we may not see them for at least five and possibly ten years.
The fuel cell so far has been a bust. Every year for the past ten years some company has announced that next year they will be manufacturing them for electronic gear.
The person or persons who make a fundamental breakthrough in battery tech will rule the world.
Yes, and I promise to rule benevolently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I agree that this isn't revolutionary. After all, what really is?
But I wouldn't characterize it as being in the 18th century.
The essential technology hasn't changed since then. The biggest leap was from wet to dry but even that happened 100 years ago, and wet cells are very much still in use. After that, it's been a matter of fighting for inches. As you say, there's no equivalent to Moore's Law in battery technology (which I was going to mention, even before I saw that you had). Imagine if energy storage had advanced at any where close to the rate of semiconductor technology, the start of which dates only to the late 1950s. Since then, the incremental improvements have been important enough in terms of what kind of processing can be accomplished that that sum total is revolutionary, several times over.
I know improving batteries is difficult stuff. That's my point, really. Vacuum tubes became transistors and transistors became semiconductors in a wink of an eye, by comparison.
I vaguely remember a friend trying to sell me on an IPO from some battery tech startup that was going to use nano-tubes to vastly increase available surface area for something something and therefore make batteries that changed the world. That was was about 15 years ago, if I recall.
Battery tech is one of those areas wherein huge advance are always 5-10 years out, but somehow we just keep plugging away at the incremental improvements that largely rely on identifying new materials that perform the same chemistry better.
The essential technology hasn't changed since then. The biggest leap was from wet to dry but even that happened 100 years ago, and wet cells are very much still in use. After that, it's been a matter of fighting for inches. As you say, there's no equivalent to Moore's Law in battery technology (which I was going to mention, even before I saw that you had). Imagine if energy storage had advanced at any where close to the rate of semiconductor technology, the start of which dates only to the late 1950s. Since then, the incremental improvements have been important enough in terms of what kind of processing can be accomplished that that sum total is revolutionary, several times over.
I know improving batteries is difficult stuff. That's my point, really. Vacuum tubes became transistors and transistors became semiconductors in a wink of an eye, by comparison.
It's why every 10% is appreciated. Chemicals are the only way batteries can be made. Anything else, and they aren't really batteries.
I happen to have, on my desk right now, an experimental capacitor from Sangien that's 24 Farads, 55 volts.
The amount of power this cap contains when fully charged, and it's only 8 inches high by about 2.5 inches in dia., is enough to blow a decent sized hole in a double thick brick wall.
It would power a MBP 15" machine for a couple of weeks, but who would want to take the chance?
It's why every 10% is appreciated. Chemicals are the only way batteries can be made. Anything else, and they aren't really batteries.
Which is why we need magic. Zero Point Energy perpetual motion mumble mumble profit!
Quote:
I happen to have, on my desk right now, an experimental capacitor from Sangien that's 24 Farads, 55 volts.
The amount of power this cap contains when fully charged, and it's only 8 inches high by about 2.5 inches in dia., is enough to blow a decent sized hole in a double thick brick wall.
It would power a MBP 15" machine for a couple of weeks, but who would want to take the chance?
Yeah, I guess "being blown to smithereens" is bit worse than "battery caught on fire." Keep everybody on their toes, however.
Comments
They already have... it's called The ZUNE HD -
Maybe you should have a look ?
I stopped looking when I saw it took 10 seconds to load a the calculator app and then another 10 seconds to load the weather app, only to have the weather app apparantly crash the first time.
The Courier video does look interesting. I am a bit skeptical about a few things. For one, when they switched apps, they always managed to switch to just the right app the first time. The second is they managed to write a lot of text on one page when they wrote notes, I don't write that small on paper. Also, for some things a digital pen and paper interface is nice for sketching out ideas, but people can type, even on a touch keyboard, faster than they can hand write text.
"Oh, it 'll work this way! I like this so it will magically appear when I think about it, I want this to become a 'ToDo' list so tablet senses my every desire and fulfills it."
Using a graphics app at this level of granularity does not express a design, concept, or UI idea. This video is just a bunch of unresolved thoughts. This tells me MS's tablet is still at least 3 years away.
You know what an air guitar is? Well, this is not quite air design, but it's only a little way beyond that (we can see something more than just your hands.)
"Oh, it 'll work this way! I like this so it will magically appear when I think about it, I want this to become a 'ToDo' list so tablet senses my every desire and fulfills it."
Using a graphics app at this level of granularity does not express a design, concept, or UI idea. This video is just a bunch of unresolved thoughts. This tells me MS's tablet is still at least 3 years away.
This is the best analysis of the video.
Way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory Microsoft!
A commercial has to be seen before an app launches? Can you imagine it if every time you launch an app in windows you have to see a commercial?
It's late here at work and I'm too tired to rant and scream at microsoft at the moment.
Can someone please scream at microsoft for me? All I can say is actually seeing the ads run like that before finally launching an app was fairly horrific.
This offically dooms the zuneHD from ever succeeding in any meaningful way.
Now here is something else to consider. They want to also have win mobile 6.5 and win mobile 7 run concurrently with their zuneHD platform. Do you all think that apps that launch with their windows mobile platofrms will now show you a commercial before app launch as well?
Furthermore, you all are probably right when you say that this "courier" will be another potentially cool, hit gadget that microsoft will screw up come launch time.
Apple iTablet Design and Technical Specs
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...echnical_specs
See the Apple iTablet specifications:
Apple iTablet Design and Technical Specs
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...echnical_specs
Except there isn't any, and this is nothing more than speculation related to available technologies.
See the Apple iTablet specifications:
Apple iTablet Design and Technical Specs
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...echnical_specs
This is speculation, even if it good speculation.
He makes one major error though.
I've already posted the article below, and it's something that should be read. New battery technology is here already, and Apple could use it now. Will they? Who knows, but they could.
http://www.eeproductcenter.com/power...leID=219400521
Except there isn't any, and this is nothing more than speculation related to available technologies.
This IS speculation, even if it's good speculation.
He makes one major error though.
I've already posted the article below, and it's something that should be read. New battery technology is here already, and Apple could use it now. Will they? Who knows, but they could if they and Sony began work a year ago.
http://www.eeproductcenter.com/power...leID=219400521
I personally believe it is going to be the most important year in personal computer products ever. It won't just be another year.
It sounds like the major advantage of these batteries is more charge-discharge cycles. I can see how this would be useful in any number of applications, but does this help Apple specifically?
It's also able to hold more power per cubic inch, and per weight.
All around, these batteries will give longer times before a recharge will be required, and more than twice as many recharge cycles. Meaning that they could last four times as long. both of those issues would shut down the complaints about sealed in batteries.
So what we could have is a device with twice as long a play time. Think of an iPhone with 10 hours 3G talk time. 17 hours of video play, and 60 hours of music playback.
For this tablet, we could have an extended use before recharge as well, without needing a bigger, heavier battery.
The last feature is that these batteries are much safer than other lithium types. No more exploding batteries.
This is a win, win, win situation.
It's also a win on the green level.
All advances in battery technology are important -- I get that. What I'm wondering is how this particular advance helps Apple in ways it doesn't or may not for anyone else. Maybe that's not what you were implying.
It would depend on how Apple and Sony are working together. As Apple is one of the largest, if not THE largest small mobile battery buyer, they could get this first, and advertise their advantage. They could also pay less for them because of their great buying power.
If Apple could improve their current devices and come out with new ones based on a much better battery before others, that would help establish those products.
As we can see with the iPhone and the App Store, first is best. Then others have to play catch-up.
If MS does come out with their book, but the battery is not up to snuff for a dual 7" screen, then it will be at a large disadvantage just from that.
The working rule is that you have to be noticeably better than the leader to have any chance of knocking it down. That's one reason why some of Apple's products have been so far ahead.
If Apple has a good lead time with these batteries, it won't matter as much if others follow 6 months to a year later. Apple will have established enough mindshare about it that others will have a difficult time explaining, and Apple could be on a second generation battery while they are on the first.
That's a lot of "ifs" but I understand your point. To be honest, when it comes to revolutionary battery technologies (or claims thereof) I find myself stifling a yawn. Most of what we've seen recently is far more evolutionary than revolutionary, and hardly exciting in terms of advances, especially when compared against the leaps made by other technologies. Fundamentally, battery technology is still in the 18th century.
I agree that this isn't revolutionary. After all, what really is?
But I wouldn't characterize it as being in the 18th century.
Batteries are hard. People don't realize that. While its easy to put a lot of energy in a small space, it's not easy to get it out again in a controlled manner, or to prevent it from becoming unstable.
Batteries are vastly better than they were 20 years ago, or even ten. But there is no equivalent to the computer industrys' Moore's Law.
But we've seen lots of advancement.
Alkaline, NiCad, Nickel metal hydride, lithium.
All major advances. There are others in the labs, but we may not see them for at least five and possibly ten years.
The fuel cell so far has been a bust. Every year for the past ten years some company has announced that next year they will be manufacturing them for electronic gear.
This is the biggest advance in years.
Savor it.
The person or persons who make a fundamental breakthrough in battery tech will rule the world.
Yes, and I promise to rule benevolently.
I agree that this isn't revolutionary. After all, what really is?
But I wouldn't characterize it as being in the 18th century.
The essential technology hasn't changed since then. The biggest leap was from wet to dry but even that happened 100 years ago, and wet cells are very much still in use. After that, it's been a matter of fighting for inches. As you say, there's no equivalent to Moore's Law in battery technology (which I was going to mention, even before I saw that you had). Imagine if energy storage had advanced at any where close to the rate of semiconductor technology, the start of which dates only to the late 1950s. Since then, the incremental improvements have been important enough in terms of what kind of processing can be accomplished that that sum total is revolutionary, several times over.
I know improving batteries is difficult stuff. That's my point, really. Vacuum tubes became transistors and transistors became semiconductors in a wink of an eye, by comparison.
Battery tech is one of those areas wherein huge advance are always 5-10 years out, but somehow we just keep plugging away at the incremental improvements that largely rely on identifying new materials that perform the same chemistry better.
We clearly need magic.
Yes, and I promise to rule benevolently.
Heh!
The essential technology hasn't changed since then. The biggest leap was from wet to dry but even that happened 100 years ago, and wet cells are very much still in use. After that, it's been a matter of fighting for inches. As you say, there's no equivalent to Moore's Law in battery technology (which I was going to mention, even before I saw that you had). Imagine if energy storage had advanced at any where close to the rate of semiconductor technology, the start of which dates only to the late 1950s. Since then, the incremental improvements have been important enough in terms of what kind of processing can be accomplished that that sum total is revolutionary, several times over.
I know improving batteries is difficult stuff. That's my point, really. Vacuum tubes became transistors and transistors became semiconductors in a wink of an eye, by comparison.
It's why every 10% is appreciated. Chemicals are the only way batteries can be made. Anything else, and they aren't really batteries.
I happen to have, on my desk right now, an experimental capacitor from Sangien that's 24 Farads, 55 volts.
The amount of power this cap contains when fully charged, and it's only 8 inches high by about 2.5 inches in dia., is enough to blow a decent sized hole in a double thick brick wall.
It would power a MBP 15" machine for a couple of weeks, but who would want to take the chance?
Heh!
It's why every 10% is appreciated. Chemicals are the only way batteries can be made. Anything else, and they aren't really batteries.
Which is why we need magic. Zero Point Energy perpetual motion mumble mumble profit!
I happen to have, on my desk right now, an experimental capacitor from Sangien that's 24 Farads, 55 volts.
The amount of power this cap contains when fully charged, and it's only 8 inches high by about 2.5 inches in dia., is enough to blow a decent sized hole in a double thick brick wall.
It would power a MBP 15" machine for a couple of weeks, but who would want to take the chance?
Yeah, I guess "being blown to smithereens" is bit worse than "battery caught on fire." Keep everybody on their toes, however.