Technology wise I think we are at least a couple of years away from seeing a real tablet on the market. As you also point out durabiltiy would be an important factor, most LCD's simply would not survive long.
I'm thinking what we will need to see available before a true tablet hits the streets are the following:
1. Organic LED displays.
2. A System on Chip Processor. Such a procesor would have to be very low power, like sub watt, with standby in the mirco watt range.
3. A very low power GPU if it can be put on the SOC. A seperate GPU may be required just to spread the heat around.
4. Thin high capacity batteries.
It should be known that each of the above already exists in one form or another. It is now a matter of refining the technologies to deliver the product. Building an entire SOC processor is certinaly doable, the goal of course is one that is directly applicable to the product. OLED's are currently the biggest unknown, if they don't cut it then a new technology would be needed.
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by cubist
An enlarged Clie would not sell, it would be too expensive for something that offers little functionality beyond a Palm.
The tablet PCs with the flip-around screens are far too fragile and delicate. Wizard69 is right, it needs to be thin, light, with long battery life, and rugged. Very rugged.
And it also needs to be inexpensive. $699, with only one model. Screen resolution can be 640x480, it doesn't need to be so high. Even so, that's not going to be a cheap panel.
Add pen input to everything- the notebooks, the iMac, the standalone displays.
The iMac's swivel display could easily be made to bend a little more into a slanted, writing position. And how much would it really cost to re-engineer the ibooks and pbooks so the screens can fold back flat? Adding touch screen and stylus in mass production- less than a c-note I'd imagine.
Like wireless, start with the pbooks, then everything. Soon people will take it for granted that they can sign forms and fax them to people without printing them out and scanning them back in. Want to be able to look up a recipie on your kitchen iMac using your one, non-cookie dough covered finger, no problem.
Other applications? If you build it, they will come.
I don't supose that anyone wants to test the waters and create a thread/Poll to find out how many people on this forum currently want a touch screen ?.
A tablet computer would be even easier to use since you would be writing directly on the screen. There was some learning curve involved with me because I had to get used to drawing in on place and seeing the result in another.
Hasn't Wacom made a graphics tablet at one time that included a TFT-screen ? I think it was Wacom, but I'm not sure. I used it once & thought it was a great idea. I would have bought it, but at that time I had better use for my money.
Hasn't Wacom made a graphics tablet at one time that included a TFT-screen ? I think it was Wacom, but I'm not sure. I used it once & thought it was a great idea. I would have bought it, but at that time I had better use for my money.
Yeah, the Cintiq.
$1900 for a 15 in I think. If it was thinner I'd just buy one of those and duck tape it a portable. Although it might need an external power supply
The Cinique is way over priced for most people. Granted, its cool as hell. But for the money, I'd rather have a large format. Besides, they left me out in the cold when they dropped ADB support. my 2-year old tablet was useless to me once I went to OSX (classic was not an option.
IMO, a tablet computer needs to be priced around 5-600. If the current price of technology won't support this price, then Apple should wait. I don't think most people will view a tablet as a computer replacement. It will be seen as a device which compliments a computer.
Since I first heard of tablet computer, I've thought it sound really cool. But now, I can't honestly say I'd buy one. I do plenty of work on my 12" PB and I have a hard time seeing where a tablet would fit in.
The biggest problems that I think need to be addressed to put out a good Tablet/PDA:[list=1][*]Form Factor: What is the optimal size for a good tablet/PDA. Phones are handling the truely portable arena more and more, but they are too small for some tasks. Tablets out today may be too large and bulky for the majority of users. An in-between size seems best, but it must be large enough for Web use as well (as noted by someone earlier minimum of 800 ppi horizontal or vertical)
[*]The "Feel": as noted earlier, the pen needs to be functional, and offer the full range of "expression" that is capable to being given with the input device. This means something on par with Wacom's input devices, which are very expensive. Cheaper alternatives don't offer the resolution or full range of input (tilt, pressure, "reverse" for eraser, etc.). Most Mac users will demand Wacom's feature set, and deride Apple if its not there. Putting this sensitivity into the pen, OS and touch screen might make it too expensive to successfully market.
[*]OS: It has to be "tuned" for the tablet environment, while ideally using the same programs that the user has on the desktop. This is no small feet either for the OS programers or the third party software developers.
[*]Programs: They need at least one "killer" iApp (tApp?) as well as developer support for a whole range of application out as close to launch as possible. One of the big advantages of the Palm is the number of programs out there for it. One of the reasons DOS held on so long is the number of programs available, and in everyday use for the OS. An OS without programs is dead on arrival, case in point BeOS and OS/2, both well ahead of Windows was at when they came out.[/list=1]
I own a Palm that I no longer use due to a cracked case, I liked it allot. I had a database that I kept track of projects, took notes on it, kept a check register, and had it programed as a remote for my TV, VCR, stereo, and some dinosaur toy my nephew had. I felt the screen was a little too small, yet the device was a little too large to be conveniently carried around (it didn't fit in my shirt pocket). If someone can come up with a way to address these conflicting desires, and address as many of the above issues as possible then they may have a winner.
The biggest problems that I think need to be addressed to put out a good Tablet/PDA:[list=1][*]Form Factor: What is the optimal size for a good tablet/PDA. Phones are handling the truely portable arena more and more, but they are too small for some tasks. Tablets out today may be too large and bulky for the majority of users. An in-between size seems best, but it must be large enough for Web use as well (as noted by someone earlier minimum of 800 ppi horizontal or vertical)
There is no doubt in my mind that a steno pad is a good design point for form factor. But that doesn't mena that there couldn't be a series of devices, with the family starting in the shirt pocket and moving up to 8x10. All of these would have to be thing.
Quote:
[*]The "Feel": as noted earlier, the pen needs to be functional, and offer the full range of "expression" that is capable to being given with the input device. This means something on par with Wacom's input devices, which are very expensive. Cheaper alternatives don't offer the resolution or full range of input (tilt, pressure, "reverse" for eraser, etc.). Most Mac users will demand Wacom's feature set, and deride Apple if its not there. Putting this sensitivity into the pen, OS and touch screen might make it too expensive to successfully market.
Never usning a Wacom I can't respond directly to this point. But one issue that would have to be addressed in handwriting recognition.
Quote:
[*]OS: It has to be "tuned" for the tablet environment, while ideally using the same programs that the user has on the desktop. This is no small feet either for the OS programers or the third party software developers.
This is the one I disagree on the most. Ideally the OS would be OS/X with the absolute minimal in changes to support the device. It comes down to the issue of applications and developemnt effort. Palm, which has very nice hardware, has never been able to support a wide range of applications. Applications beyond the portability suites are what makes such a device useful to the individual.
Quote:
[*]Programs: They need at least one "killer" iApp (tApp?) as well as developer support for a whole range of application out as close to launch as possible. One of the big advantages of the Palm is the number of programs out there for it. One of the reasons DOS held on so long is the number of programs available, and in everyday use for the OS. An OS without programs is dead on arrival, case in point BeOS and OS/2, both well ahead of Windows was at when they came out.
Interesting the differences in perception here. I'm under the impression that the palms biggest issue is the lack of Applications beyond the little things that offer very little value. I don't believe that it is the lack of applications that kills an OS, it is the lack of developers. Thus my previous statement that the OS for this mythical device would have to be OS/X with a minimal of changes. In the end though we are talking about the same thing.
Quote:
[/list=1]
I own a Palm that I no longer use due to a cracked case, I liked it allot. I had a database that I kept track of projects, took notes on it, kept a check register, and had it programed as a remote for my TV, VCR, stereo, and some dinosaur toy my nephew had. I felt the screen was a little too small, yet the device was a little too large to be conveniently carried around (it didn't fit in my shirt pocket). If someone can come up with a way to address these conflicting desires, and address as many of the above issues as possible then they may have a winner.
It would be more interesting for us to find out why you have not replaced the Palm. Is it a matter of not living up to th promise? Or maybe it isn't worth the money that one has to invest in it.
This is the one I disagree on the most. Ideally the OS would be OS/X with the absolute minimal in changes to support the device. It comes down to the issue of applications and developemnt effort. ... It would be more interesting for us to find out why you have not replaced the Palm. ...
Just to amplify some of wizard69's points:
The OS must be absolutely standard for two reasons: (1) to avoid fragmenting Apple's limited resources, and (2) to ensure that there are lots of applications.
The Newton had a wonderful pen-oriented OS, with "soups", Newtonscript, and lots of other proprietarisms. Result? Nobody wrote anything for it. I'd love to write programs for the Newton, Palm or PocketPC, but they're all proprietary platforms that would require relearning everything. Who has the time? Not me - or anyone else, really. A specialized pen-oriented OS would be the kiss of death.
Oh, one more point: People hate having to re-buy the same software all over again. Make it completely Mac-compatible, and they can use the same software they already have.
I have a slightly different suggestion regarding the hardware: We can get 68K processors which use infintesimal amounts of power. If the tablet used one of these processors, we could run Mac OS 8 on it... Apple could revive their old source code, and we could use Classic programs on it... Apple could revive, as the development platform for pen applications, the classic Hypercard. FTM, the machine could look, to software, just like the Mac SE/30.
As for replacing the Palm, used Palm-IIIs are available for $20 to $30 now, and can use NiMH rechargables, so anyone who wants a Palm can get one really cheaply.
I think therein lies the problem. Some expect an Apple tablet to be an overblown, fancy PDA. Others expect it to be a flat, portable extension of the standard Mac. Finally, there are those who want it to be a fully-functional it's-basically-a-laptop-without-the-keyboard machine.
I'd say I fall into the second category. That's what I designed my original post around.
I don't think anyone is suggesting a brand-new OS, or a version of OS X that is substantially different on tablets; the suggestion is that the OS X UI and applications should be tuned to be pen- as well as keyboard-and-mouse friendly. So Apple has been shipping InkWell for a while now, well in advance of any significant use for it, so that application developers can build in support for it. Once that's done, Apple can launch a tablet with an existing, shipping applications base: The same applications you already have can take handwritten text input and editorial gestures, and so forth. Then the whole pen-based system is not a special version of the OS, it's something that lies dormant unless it's needed.
I expect this technology to be latent for a good while until Apple feels that it is refined enough, and widely enough adopted, to introduce hardware that requires it. Also, of course, the hardware has to be there.
The reason I haven't replaced my Palm is that the models that I am interested in are beyond my budget for such an item right now. I think that most of them as slightly smaller than my old one, so it would be more convenient, but today I would say that a color screen is a must. I admit that I haven't looked much into price and features of the most current offerings from Palm and Sony.
For me the Killer Application was the database which I kept my expenses on, as well as keeping track of projects at work. Today I would get Pocket Quicken, I tried a demo of this when it was first released and it was great. I'm not the best at balancing my checkbook, and I know that this kept me from bouncing a number of checks. I don't consider this as much as a priority today because I have access to my checking account via the Web, Quicken on my home computer, and 2 people using the account which makes it harder to keep up to date on the road, so I have to spend the time updating it at home anyway.
As for the OS, you make good points about using a more a standard OS. It defiantly helps out the consumer who only has to buy one copy of an application, even though most software licensing states that you can only have the App installed on one computer at a time. I think, depending on the screen size, that this is a good way to go as long as the OS has adequate support for the input device. However I think that this model limits both the device and the software run on it. Here I agree with CosmoNut, and fall into his second category as well.
I view the tablet/pda as an extension of the computers that I work on daily. It is not a replacement for them. It is something that I sync up to my main computers (at work and home) so that my data is up to date on all 3 computers. I would never do any serious PhotoShop work on one, let alone even want to open Quark on one. I would want to be able to open my Word documents, exchange data with FileMaker databases, sync my address book, download e-mail for viewing later as well as composing them to send off the next time I plug it in.
While I see the merit in using the same OS as a desktop, with some input features added, I don't think that it is necessarily the solution that would make a tablet shine as a tablet. If Apple were to build one I do think that the core of the OS should be OS X, but that it should not be the same one size fits all OS. There is a reason that Apple has OS X server even though a lot of the features to make a server come standard with the consumer grade software. I think that a tablet OS would need to be "tuned" for use in a tablet as well or it will be too slow to be useful on the hardware that you could put on the market at a competitive price. I also think that the GUI that we love on our desktops could/should be tweeked for a tablet/pda use. Tone down the hardware requirements for the GUI, becouse that will just make the computer more expensive. The same with the memory requirements for the OS. You don't need device drivers for all those printers, scanners, and video cards. How much memory can you put into a thin, comfortable tablet and still have room for the CPU, GPU, Bluetooth, Airport, USB, and removable memory cards? The OS needs to take into account these limitations, as well as have an interface designed to work best for the way it is bieng used. The input system also needs to take full advantage of the "expressiveness" of pen input that earlier posters talked about.
On the software side, again there are different needs unless you are using it as a full replacement for a desktop. I would want it to have programs that worked with the files that I have on my desktop, so I would want a word processor that was fully compatible with desktop program. However a lot of the applications would be better if they were just clients of the parent program on the desktop. I wouldn't to cary around all of the full-blown data bases that I might use, however bieng able to sync certain fields to a portable version of that database would be very usefull. The same with e-mail, while some people need to be connected on the road I couldn't justify the added monthly expense of another wireless account. All I would like is a client that syncs to my e-mail program at work and home.
The main point is that it is the data that you need on the road, so that should be compatible. The programs that access them need to take advantage of the system that you are using which means, most of the time, no mouse or keyboard. Depending on the program this could be as simple as adding pen support to the program, or it could require a whole new interface for the program or somewhere in-between.
To think that a tablet can be a replacement for a desktop today is unrealistic with today's technology. Sure, most of it is there but to make it in a package that is small enough and powerfull enough would cost too much today and make it larger that it should be.
One last thing, developers make money by selling software. Most licensing agreements say 1 copy of the software per computer. If I were a developer I would want to have as much of my code base standard as possible, but to have 2 distinct products so that my desktop app cant be used on the tablet. This ensures that I will sell the software for the tablet as well as the desktop that the user has my software installed on.
I don't think anyone is suggesting a brand-new OS, or a version of OS X that is substantially different on tablets; the suggestion is that the OS X UI and applications should be tuned to be pen- as well as keyboard-and-mouse friendly.
I'm sort of suggesting that, because I'm sceptical of the viability of just making the existing OS pen-friendly. I see a catch-22 here: either you take a Newton type approach and do a new OS (or at least a substantial change to an old one) and make a tablet that people really find natural to use, but have all the problems with getting developers to support the platform and the distraction of two platforms for the company; or you make the existing OS pen-friendly and are able to get a lot of application support, but end up with a product that feels like pen support is grafted on -- the interface metaphors are just too different IMO. I think this is a very good reason for Apple NOT to attempt a tablet. Of couse, if someone could pull it off, that would be a tremendous coup!
OS X probably has the best suited GUI for stylus control out of any mainstream OS. The Dock is a control method begging for stylus control- click once to launch or swap apps- it's identical to the control system on psion pda's which I always thought were far superior to anything palm ever produced
OS X probably has the best suited GUI for stylus control out of any mainstream OS. The Dock is a control method begging for stylus control- click once to launch or swap apps- it's identical to the control system on psion pda's which I always thought were far superior to anything palm ever produced
But then you would probably have to use the active pen approach as opposed to the passive surface approach. That is, the pointer would move as the pen passes near the surface, but a "click" is only registered upon contact. Consider the difficulty with the dock set to hide.
The newton really was ahead of it's time with gesture controls (scribble to erase, draw a line for new page). Really, all apple needs to do is employ the same strategy they did with the keyboard... every feature can be accessed through a menu, but once you get proficient you bother to learn the quick-keys. Same thing with pen input. Of course, it's a little harder to have a diagram of pen movements next to a menu command. Wouldn't be to hard to have a quick animation of the corresponding gesture pop up after the menu command is issued (maybe a learning mode selection).
As for handwriting recognition, the final days of the newton really demonstrated a robust, accurate recognition system. The cheapness of storage also makes it possible now to always store the original image that corresponds to the inputed text.
But then you would probably have to use the active pen approach as opposed to the passive surface approach. That is, the pointer would move as the pen passes near the surface, but a "click" is only registered upon contact. Consider the difficulty with the dock set to hide.
This is exactly the problem with Windows Tablet Edition: it represents the pen in the GUI with a pointer as a kludge to get around not having a properly gestural pen interface in the first place. I would have to see Apple make the same mistake!
The hidden Dock is a good example of where the OS X assumes that the input device is represented (by a pointer) in the GUI. These sorts of cases are going to keep popping up because the interface was built on those assumptions. So it isn't so much a problem of adding pen support to OS, but of altering the assumptions on which the interface was built and following the consequences through system-wide (including applications).
I don't think the GUI would have to change much, but the design of the pen interface is absolutely critical... including the pen (&surface) itself. I think Apple could pull it off, if they wanted to. That's the real question.
To be useful and sellable a tablet would have to be:
- Light enough to hold for a long period on one arm (even for wimps like me).
- Virtually indestructable so it doesn't break, crack or dent when I casually plunk it down on the table or accidentally walk into a wall while reading the screen.
- Have very long battery life (10+ hours). The whole point is to carry it around with you and if you're tethered by a power cord every couple of hours it'll get old really fast.
- Network wirelessly, interconnect effortlessly. USB, FireWire, CompactFlash, 802.11. CD/DVD is probably too heavy so you'll just have to network wirelessly to a desktop or notebook with a drive.
- Have an 8x11 display of decent resolution. Anything less and it should shrink down and become a PDA... in which case its not a tablet and this should be in a different thread. A tablet needs to be big enough, a PDA needs to be small enough. The sizes in the middle are just awkward.
- Run standard Mac software. The last thing Apple needs to do is try and convince developers to develop for yet another tiny market. Leverage what you've got. Frankly, I think Aqua would look gorgeous on a tablet.
- The previous point implies serious performance. We're talking Radeon w/ 32+ MB RAM, 1 GHz G4 class performance. This probably means something like the rumoured IBM 750VX @ 90 nm. Motorola's chips aren't going to cut it, and the G3 doesn't have AltiVec to give this machine enough punch to private effortlessly responsive gesture-based interface.
- Inexpensive. Less than US$1000. I just don't think people are comfortable feeling "free" with a device that costs more than that. Some will, but it limits your market to a tiny niche. The whole point of this gadget is to free yourself from the machine's requirements and have it operate in your prefered environment. How many $1000+ items to you carry about in a carefree fashion?
So, if you've read this far before leaping ahead and replying impulsively to my list... clearly this device is currently impossible for anybody (especially Apple) to build and actually make money selling. The technology isn't available to build it at any price, and that means if all the pieces suddenly came available tommorrow, the price would be astronomical. Therefore I don't think we'll see a tablet from Apple at the present time. Depending on what happens with some display and battery technologies currently indevelopment this thing might become feasible in ~2005, and marketable at the required price points a year or two later. Its possible that somebody could start selling it before then at a higher price, but that limits the market to people who buy really expensive toys. I don't think that's a market segment Apple will attack.
Comments
Technology wise I think we are at least a couple of years away from seeing a real tablet on the market. As you also point out durabiltiy would be an important factor, most LCD's simply would not survive long.
I'm thinking what we will need to see available before a true tablet hits the streets are the following:
1. Organic LED displays.
2. A System on Chip Processor. Such a procesor would have to be very low power, like sub watt, with standby in the mirco watt range.
3. A very low power GPU if it can be put on the SOC. A seperate GPU may be required just to spread the heat around.
4. Thin high capacity batteries.
It should be known that each of the above already exists in one form or another. It is now a matter of refining the technologies to deliver the product. Building an entire SOC processor is certinaly doable, the goal of course is one that is directly applicable to the product. OLED's are currently the biggest unknown, if they don't cut it then a new technology would be needed.
Dave
Originally posted by cubist
An enlarged Clie would not sell, it would be too expensive for something that offers little functionality beyond a Palm.
The tablet PCs with the flip-around screens are far too fragile and delicate. Wizard69 is right, it needs to be thin, light, with long battery life, and rugged. Very rugged.
And it also needs to be inexpensive. $699, with only one model. Screen resolution can be 640x480, it doesn't need to be so high. Even so, that's not going to be a cheap panel.
UBIQUITY, UBIQUITY, UBIQUITY!!!!!
Add pen input to everything- the notebooks, the iMac, the standalone displays.
The iMac's swivel display could easily be made to bend a little more into a slanted, writing position. And how much would it really cost to re-engineer the ibooks and pbooks so the screens can fold back flat? Adding touch screen and stylus in mass production- less than a c-note I'd imagine.
Like wireless, start with the pbooks, then everything. Soon people will take it for granted that they can sign forms and fax them to people without printing them out and scanning them back in. Want to be able to look up a recipie on your kitchen iMac using your one, non-cookie dough covered finger, no problem.
Other applications? If you build it, they will come.
Originally posted by onlooker
I've never heard SJ say No Tablet from Apple. I would like to see a link to that quote.
Go to google and type "tablet jobs" and you will find plenty of links.
Seems like a valid question ?.
Perhaps an Admin could ?.
Originally posted by Keda
A tablet computer would be even easier to use since you would be writing directly on the screen. There was some learning curve involved with me because I had to get used to drawing in on place and seeing the result in another.
Hasn't Wacom made a graphics tablet at one time that included a TFT-screen ? I think it was Wacom, but I'm not sure. I used it once & thought it was a great idea. I would have bought it, but at that time I had better use for my money.
Originally posted by knappa
Hasn't Wacom made a graphics tablet at one time that included a TFT-screen ? I think it was Wacom, but I'm not sure. I used it once & thought it was a great idea. I would have bought it, but at that time I had better use for my money.
Yeah, the Cintiq.
$1900 for a 15 in I think. If it was thinner I'd just buy one of those and duck tape it a portable. Although it might need an external power supply
Originally posted by Matsu
PS, Amorph, how can I get some of those guerilla marketing dollars Apple seems to be slipping into your Paypal account?
Three letters: AIO. Be the All in One. It's the Zen thing to do.
Now, if only I had a PayPal account...
IMO, a tablet computer needs to be priced around 5-600. If the current price of technology won't support this price, then Apple should wait. I don't think most people will view a tablet as a computer replacement. It will be seen as a device which compliments a computer.
Since I first heard of tablet computer, I've thought it sound really cool. But now, I can't honestly say I'd buy one. I do plenty of work on my 12" PB and I have a hard time seeing where a tablet would fit in.
Waiting to purchase the Tablet (to go with a 20" iMac, Bluetooth keyboard & mouse. And maybe an iPod for
I'm patient but running out of HD space. (Damn, but I love iTunes!).
Aries 1B
[*]The "Feel": as noted earlier, the pen needs to be functional, and offer the full range of "expression" that is capable to being given with the input device. This means something on par with Wacom's input devices, which are very expensive. Cheaper alternatives don't offer the resolution or full range of input (tilt, pressure, "reverse" for eraser, etc.). Most Mac users will demand Wacom's feature set, and deride Apple if its not there. Putting this sensitivity into the pen, OS and touch screen might make it too expensive to successfully market.
[*]OS: It has to be "tuned" for the tablet environment, while ideally using the same programs that the user has on the desktop. This is no small feet either for the OS programers or the third party software developers.
[*]Programs: They need at least one "killer" iApp (tApp?) as well as developer support for a whole range of application out as close to launch as possible. One of the big advantages of the Palm is the number of programs out there for it. One of the reasons DOS held on so long is the number of programs available, and in everyday use for the OS. An OS without programs is dead on arrival, case in point BeOS and OS/2, both well ahead of Windows was at when they came out.[/list=1]
I own a Palm that I no longer use due to a cracked case, I liked it allot. I had a database that I kept track of projects, took notes on it, kept a check register, and had it programed as a remote for my TV, VCR, stereo, and some dinosaur toy my nephew had. I felt the screen was a little too small, yet the device was a little too large to be conveniently carried around (it didn't fit in my shirt pocket). If someone can come up with a way to address these conflicting desires, and address as many of the above issues as possible then they may have a winner.
Originally posted by @homenow
The biggest problems that I think need to be addressed to put out a good Tablet/PDA:[list=1][*]Form Factor: What is the optimal size for a good tablet/PDA. Phones are handling the truely portable arena more and more, but they are too small for some tasks. Tablets out today may be too large and bulky for the majority of users. An in-between size seems best, but it must be large enough for Web use as well (as noted by someone earlier minimum of 800 ppi horizontal or vertical)
There is no doubt in my mind that a steno pad is a good design point for form factor. But that doesn't mena that there couldn't be a series of devices, with the family starting in the shirt pocket and moving up to 8x10. All of these would have to be thing.
Quote:
[*]The "Feel": as noted earlier, the pen needs to be functional, and offer the full range of "expression" that is capable to being given with the input device. This means something on par with Wacom's input devices, which are very expensive. Cheaper alternatives don't offer the resolution or full range of input (tilt, pressure, "reverse" for eraser, etc.). Most Mac users will demand Wacom's feature set, and deride Apple if its not there. Putting this sensitivity into the pen, OS and touch screen might make it too expensive to successfully market.
Never usning a Wacom I can't respond directly to this point. But one issue that would have to be addressed in handwriting recognition.
Quote:
[*]OS: It has to be "tuned" for the tablet environment, while ideally using the same programs that the user has on the desktop. This is no small feet either for the OS programers or the third party software developers.
This is the one I disagree on the most. Ideally the OS would be OS/X with the absolute minimal in changes to support the device. It comes down to the issue of applications and developemnt effort. Palm, which has very nice hardware, has never been able to support a wide range of applications. Applications beyond the portability suites are what makes such a device useful to the individual.
Quote:
[*]Programs: They need at least one "killer" iApp (tApp?) as well as developer support for a whole range of application out as close to launch as possible. One of the big advantages of the Palm is the number of programs out there for it. One of the reasons DOS held on so long is the number of programs available, and in everyday use for the OS. An OS without programs is dead on arrival, case in point BeOS and OS/2, both well ahead of Windows was at when they came out.
Interesting the differences in perception here. I'm under the impression that the palms biggest issue is the lack of Applications beyond the little things that offer very little value. I don't believe that it is the lack of applications that kills an OS, it is the lack of developers. Thus my previous statement that the OS for this mythical device would have to be OS/X with a minimal of changes. In the end though we are talking about the same thing.
Quote:
[/list=1]
I own a Palm that I no longer use due to a cracked case, I liked it allot. I had a database that I kept track of projects, took notes on it, kept a check register, and had it programed as a remote for my TV, VCR, stereo, and some dinosaur toy my nephew had. I felt the screen was a little too small, yet the device was a little too large to be conveniently carried around (it didn't fit in my shirt pocket). If someone can come up with a way to address these conflicting desires, and address as many of the above issues as possible then they may have a winner.
It would be more interesting for us to find out why you have not replaced the Palm. Is it a matter of not living up to th promise? Or maybe it isn't worth the money that one has to invest in it.
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
This is the one I disagree on the most. Ideally the OS would be OS/X with the absolute minimal in changes to support the device. It comes down to the issue of applications and developemnt effort. ... It would be more interesting for us to find out why you have not replaced the Palm. ...
Just to amplify some of wizard69's points:
The OS must be absolutely standard for two reasons: (1) to avoid fragmenting Apple's limited resources, and (2) to ensure that there are lots of applications.
The Newton had a wonderful pen-oriented OS, with "soups", Newtonscript, and lots of other proprietarisms. Result? Nobody wrote anything for it. I'd love to write programs for the Newton, Palm or PocketPC, but they're all proprietary platforms that would require relearning everything. Who has the time? Not me - or anyone else, really. A specialized pen-oriented OS would be the kiss of death.
Oh, one more point: People hate having to re-buy the same software all over again. Make it completely Mac-compatible, and they can use the same software they already have.
I have a slightly different suggestion regarding the hardware: We can get 68K processors which use infintesimal amounts of power. If the tablet used one of these processors, we could run Mac OS 8 on it... Apple could revive their old source code, and we could use Classic programs on it... Apple could revive, as the development platform for pen applications, the classic Hypercard. FTM, the machine could look, to software, just like the Mac SE/30.
As for replacing the Palm, used Palm-IIIs are available for $20 to $30 now, and can use NiMH rechargables, so anyone who wants a Palm can get one really cheaply.
I'd say I fall into the second category. That's what I designed my original post around.
I expect this technology to be latent for a good while until Apple feels that it is refined enough, and widely enough adopted, to introduce hardware that requires it. Also, of course, the hardware has to be there.
For me the Killer Application was the database which I kept my expenses on, as well as keeping track of projects at work. Today I would get Pocket Quicken, I tried a demo of this when it was first released and it was great. I'm not the best at balancing my checkbook, and I know that this kept me from bouncing a number of checks. I don't consider this as much as a priority today because I have access to my checking account via the Web, Quicken on my home computer, and 2 people using the account which makes it harder to keep up to date on the road, so I have to spend the time updating it at home anyway.
As for the OS, you make good points about using a more a standard OS. It defiantly helps out the consumer who only has to buy one copy of an application, even though most software licensing states that you can only have the App installed on one computer at a time. I think, depending on the screen size, that this is a good way to go as long as the OS has adequate support for the input device. However I think that this model limits both the device and the software run on it. Here I agree with CosmoNut, and fall into his second category as well.
I view the tablet/pda as an extension of the computers that I work on daily. It is not a replacement for them. It is something that I sync up to my main computers (at work and home) so that my data is up to date on all 3 computers. I would never do any serious PhotoShop work on one, let alone even want to open Quark on one. I would want to be able to open my Word documents, exchange data with FileMaker databases, sync my address book, download e-mail for viewing later as well as composing them to send off the next time I plug it in.
While I see the merit in using the same OS as a desktop, with some input features added, I don't think that it is necessarily the solution that would make a tablet shine as a tablet. If Apple were to build one I do think that the core of the OS should be OS X, but that it should not be the same one size fits all OS. There is a reason that Apple has OS X server even though a lot of the features to make a server come standard with the consumer grade software. I think that a tablet OS would need to be "tuned" for use in a tablet as well or it will be too slow to be useful on the hardware that you could put on the market at a competitive price. I also think that the GUI that we love on our desktops could/should be tweeked for a tablet/pda use. Tone down the hardware requirements for the GUI, becouse that will just make the computer more expensive. The same with the memory requirements for the OS. You don't need device drivers for all those printers, scanners, and video cards. How much memory can you put into a thin, comfortable tablet and still have room for the CPU, GPU, Bluetooth, Airport, USB, and removable memory cards? The OS needs to take into account these limitations, as well as have an interface designed to work best for the way it is bieng used. The input system also needs to take full advantage of the "expressiveness" of pen input that earlier posters talked about.
On the software side, again there are different needs unless you are using it as a full replacement for a desktop. I would want it to have programs that worked with the files that I have on my desktop, so I would want a word processor that was fully compatible with desktop program. However a lot of the applications would be better if they were just clients of the parent program on the desktop. I wouldn't to cary around all of the full-blown data bases that I might use, however bieng able to sync certain fields to a portable version of that database would be very usefull. The same with e-mail, while some people need to be connected on the road I couldn't justify the added monthly expense of another wireless account. All I would like is a client that syncs to my e-mail program at work and home.
The main point is that it is the data that you need on the road, so that should be compatible. The programs that access them need to take advantage of the system that you are using which means, most of the time, no mouse or keyboard. Depending on the program this could be as simple as adding pen support to the program, or it could require a whole new interface for the program or somewhere in-between.
To think that a tablet can be a replacement for a desktop today is unrealistic with today's technology. Sure, most of it is there but to make it in a package that is small enough and powerfull enough would cost too much today and make it larger that it should be.
One last thing, developers make money by selling software. Most licensing agreements say 1 copy of the software per computer. If I were a developer I would want to have as much of my code base standard as possible, but to have 2 distinct products so that my desktop app cant be used on the tablet. This ensures that I will sell the software for the tablet as well as the desktop that the user has my software installed on.
Originally posted by Amorph
I don't think anyone is suggesting a brand-new OS, or a version of OS X that is substantially different on tablets; the suggestion is that the OS X UI and applications should be tuned to be pen- as well as keyboard-and-mouse friendly.
I'm sort of suggesting that, because I'm sceptical of the viability of just making the existing OS pen-friendly. I see a catch-22 here: either you take a Newton type approach and do a new OS (or at least a substantial change to an old one) and make a tablet that people really find natural to use, but have all the problems with getting developers to support the platform and the distraction of two platforms for the company; or you make the existing OS pen-friendly and are able to get a lot of application support, but end up with a product that feels like pen support is grafted on -- the interface metaphors are just too different IMO. I think this is a very good reason for Apple NOT to attempt a tablet. Of couse, if someone could pull it off, that would be a tremendous coup!
Originally posted by mortigi tempo
OS X probably has the best suited GUI for stylus control out of any mainstream OS. The Dock is a control method begging for stylus control- click once to launch or swap apps- it's identical to the control system on psion pda's which I always thought were far superior to anything palm ever produced
But then you would probably have to use the active pen approach as opposed to the passive surface approach. That is, the pointer would move as the pen passes near the surface, but a "click" is only registered upon contact. Consider the difficulty with the dock set to hide.
The newton really was ahead of it's time with gesture controls (scribble to erase, draw a line for new page). Really, all apple needs to do is employ the same strategy they did with the keyboard... every feature can be accessed through a menu, but once you get proficient you bother to learn the quick-keys. Same thing with pen input. Of course, it's a little harder to have a diagram of pen movements next to a menu command. Wouldn't be to hard to have a quick animation of the corresponding gesture pop up after the menu command is issued (maybe a learning mode selection).
As for handwriting recognition, the final days of the newton really demonstrated a robust, accurate recognition system. The cheapness of storage also makes it possible now to always store the original image that corresponds to the inputed text.
Originally posted by Nordstrodamus
But then you would probably have to use the active pen approach as opposed to the passive surface approach. That is, the pointer would move as the pen passes near the surface, but a "click" is only registered upon contact. Consider the difficulty with the dock set to hide.
This is exactly the problem with Windows Tablet Edition: it represents the pen in the GUI with a pointer as a kludge to get around not having a properly gestural pen interface in the first place. I would have to see Apple make the same mistake!
The hidden Dock is a good example of where the OS X assumes that the input device is represented (by a pointer) in the GUI. These sorts of cases are going to keep popping up because the interface was built on those assumptions. So it isn't so much a problem of adding pen support to OS, but of altering the assumptions on which the interface was built and following the consequences through system-wide (including applications).
To be useful and sellable a tablet would have to be:
- Light enough to hold for a long period on one arm (even for wimps like me).
- Virtually indestructable so it doesn't break, crack or dent when I casually plunk it down on the table or accidentally walk into a wall while reading the screen.
- Have very long battery life (10+ hours). The whole point is to carry it around with you and if you're tethered by a power cord every couple of hours it'll get old really fast.
- Network wirelessly, interconnect effortlessly. USB, FireWire, CompactFlash, 802.11. CD/DVD is probably too heavy so you'll just have to network wirelessly to a desktop or notebook with a drive.
- Have an 8x11 display of decent resolution. Anything less and it should shrink down and become a PDA... in which case its not a tablet and this should be in a different thread. A tablet needs to be big enough, a PDA needs to be small enough. The sizes in the middle are just awkward.
- Run standard Mac software. The last thing Apple needs to do is try and convince developers to develop for yet another tiny market. Leverage what you've got. Frankly, I think Aqua would look gorgeous on a tablet.
- The previous point implies serious performance. We're talking Radeon w/ 32+ MB RAM, 1 GHz G4 class performance. This probably means something like the rumoured IBM 750VX @ 90 nm. Motorola's chips aren't going to cut it, and the G3 doesn't have AltiVec to give this machine enough punch to private effortlessly responsive gesture-based interface.
- Inexpensive. Less than US$1000. I just don't think people are comfortable feeling "free" with a device that costs more than that. Some will, but it limits your market to a tiny niche. The whole point of this gadget is to free yourself from the machine's requirements and have it operate in your prefered environment. How many $1000+ items to you carry about in a carefree fashion?
So, if you've read this far before leaping ahead and replying impulsively to my list... clearly this device is currently impossible for anybody (especially Apple) to build and actually make money selling. The technology isn't available to build it at any price, and that means if all the pieces suddenly came available tommorrow, the price would be astronomical. Therefore I don't think we'll see a tablet from Apple at the present time. Depending on what happens with some display and battery technologies currently indevelopment this thing might become feasible in ~2005, and marketable at the required price points a year or two later. Its possible that somebody could start selling it before then at a higher price, but that limits the market to people who buy really expensive toys. I don't think that's a market segment Apple will attack.
All just my opinion, of course.