- Status
Tomtompiper
Distinguished
- Jan 20, 2010
- 382
- 0
- 18,780
Key is interfacing / interaction with other devices. The key part ipad lacks. For example lets take the situation at a friends work place. They want to use a tablet to sign in people to their data center, they have a custom application which handles their authorization into the center. Currently its running on a tablet laptop. Allows for digital signatures, etc.
They would love to throw this onto a ipad but can't, being 5 floors below the ground, and no wi-fi allowed in the data center. And cell phone blocking technology in place. (mainly so people can't send infromation about the center out of the place unless they memorize it, which is usually difficult to do. The ipad ends up being pointless, no connectivity means no way to validate, also they tried a similar sign in upstairs but their app was denied by apple, they have a webpage but their programmers use flash, so they have to rewrite the whole webpage, or just wait for google / hp / MS to release tablets in 6 months.
Now yes I know they could build the app and just load it with the webkit etc, but its not clean / user friendly to boot it up that way.
They would love to throw this onto a ipad but can't, being 5 floors below the ground, and no wi-fi allowed in the data center. And cell phone blocking technology in place. (mainly so people can't send infromation about the center out of the place unless they memorize it, which is usually difficult to do. The ipad ends up being pointless, no connectivity means no way to validate, also they tried a similar sign in upstairs but their app was denied by apple, they have a webpage but their programmers use flash, so they have to rewrite the whole webpage, or just wait for google / hp / MS to release tablets in 6 months.
Now yes I know they could build the app and just load it with the webkit etc, but its not clean / user friendly to boot it up that way.
virtualban
Distinguished
- Feb 16, 2007
- 1,232
- 0
- 19,280
Open vs. Locked Down
that says it all, because even apple users admit at times they need some un-approved apps, since some of them got some apps that were latter withdrawn from the store, (not counting in those who jailbreak, those are disowned children now).
that says it all, because even apple users admit at times they need some un-approved apps, since some of them got some apps that were latter withdrawn from the store, (not counting in those who jailbreak, those are disowned children now).
I'm getting the same sinking feeling about tablets that I had about netbooks (for my use at least). When netbooks first hit the market I was thinking "damn, I'll just wait a few months and then grab the best one for the lowest price"... but a few months came and went and I never got a netbook because they just didn't seem... useful. Of course, having said that, I'm sure the flame-throwers will be coming out in defense of how awesome everyone's netbooks are.
.
Maybe the tablet craze will be different.
.
Maybe the tablet craze will be different.
My concern is that the quality of doing it "different than Apple" overlooks the things Apple is doing *right*. And despite all attitudes and bias, they do some things right. Unfortunately, one of those things is control. That power, abused or not, makes appliances work.
So, consider a two-tiered platform: One an open, flexible action space with all its boons and banes, and the Other a tighter, structured space much like Apple has, or perhaps a suped-up Valve Steam if you'd like. Things that are well built and fit can graduate from the former into the latter. AM and FM, in a radio appliance paradigm.
Just a thought.
So, consider a two-tiered platform: One an open, flexible action space with all its boons and banes, and the Other a tighter, structured space much like Apple has, or perhaps a suped-up Valve Steam if you'd like. Things that are well built and fit can graduate from the former into the latter. AM and FM, in a radio appliance paradigm.
Just a thought.
Googles Tablet will be tied to Googles apps. I suspect it will not be anymore capable that Apple's, Or HP's. The real question is usability and overall functionality and who's gonna make that happen.
Like it or not, Googles Os is still rough around the edges and seriously lack refinement and HP is trying to make use of windows who's interface is based on Keyboard and mouse inputs now rigged to work with touch input. Apple is the only company who has taken the time and resources to develop an OS for the sole purpose of working on touch based devices. If the other companies would just take their time and make a product from the ground up and stop being "me too" followers....Apple would not be consider the ones to beat, but just another flavor of an excellent selection of Tablet devices.
Like it or not, Googles Os is still rough around the edges and seriously lack refinement and HP is trying to make use of windows who's interface is based on Keyboard and mouse inputs now rigged to work with touch input. Apple is the only company who has taken the time and resources to develop an OS for the sole purpose of working on touch based devices. If the other companies would just take their time and make a product from the ground up and stop being "me too" followers....Apple would not be consider the ones to beat, but just another flavor of an excellent selection of Tablet devices.
"I would agree with Kay that a mainstream computing device should be easily programmable to adapt to certain scenarios when you want it to. Imagine a visual programming language that would enable you to create simple applications to perform very specialized tasks."
What I wish my computer had is the ability to write a script through normal sentences. This could for example be used for easy but time consuming tasks such as "copy all the rows in the excel file with the word 'New' and paste them in the word document". Depending on the length of the file it can take AGES as a human being to do, the computer would do it in less than a second.
For more complicated tasks, lets say you have tons of physical books or movies to choose from. You want to pick out the best rated one. There are applications on the mobile devices to take a pic of the cover and then give details about it. If things were open and easy, you should be able to just ask the device to just take a pic of all of them and return with the name of the highest rated one.
The application that analyzes pictures of things shouldn't only be a stand-alone program, it should be just one open feature that can be used together with other things.
What I wish my computer had is the ability to write a script through normal sentences. This could for example be used for easy but time consuming tasks such as "copy all the rows in the excel file with the word 'New' and paste them in the word document". Depending on the length of the file it can take AGES as a human being to do, the computer would do it in less than a second.
For more complicated tasks, lets say you have tons of physical books or movies to choose from. You want to pick out the best rated one. There are applications on the mobile devices to take a pic of the cover and then give details about it. If things were open and easy, you should be able to just ask the device to just take a pic of all of them and return with the name of the highest rated one.
The application that analyzes pictures of things shouldn't only be a stand-alone program, it should be just one open feature that can be used together with other things.
Regulas
Distinguished
- May 11, 2008
- 1,202
- 0
- 19,280
Interested in the Google one. It bet it will do what the iPad does and use Linux and hopefully have a removable battery. If not I will wait for Acer.
As far as the headline, the biggest copycat is Microsoft. They have copied since the beginning. Back then it was copying from Apple to make Windows 3.1.
As far as the headline, the biggest copycat is Microsoft. They have copied since the beginning. Back then it was copying from Apple to make Windows 3.1.
jsc
Champion
- Jul 14, 2004
- 16,893
- 6
- 52,960
Shez wrote:
Would a tablet work as well? I don't think so.
regulas:
Don't forget. Macintosh was based on a copy of the old PARC Xerox Star complete with paper white screen and single button mouse.
Netbooks aren't awesome. They are just another tool realistically aimed at a fairly small niche market. For me, a netbook is a perfect travel computer. When I am traveling, all i need is internet access for email and an ebook reader. Mine has an especially long battery life under light usage. Battery charge will last one Middle East to Europe hop and Europe to US hope before it needs charging. And it fits inside my carry-on bag - really important now that some airlines are prohibiting 2 carry-ons.
Would a tablet work as well? I don't think so.
regulas:
Don't forget. Macintosh was based on a copy of the old PARC Xerox Star complete with paper white screen and single button mouse.
I think something the author is missing is that he talks about the Google tablet as being cloud focused. The iPad has a browser and can use any non-Flash content (by and large), so most of the cloud-based things would be the same for either. There is already a job posting at Apple that gives away the fact that the next version of the iPad will have a camera. You already have Skype functioning on the iPad and there is a built in mic, so conferencing is already possible. The initial version is less crippled than some people want to believe.
nukemaster
Titan
- Nov 23, 2004
- 19,626
- 6
- 74,965
Well, its not like tablets are anything new anyway....I would bet on google, but with Apples advertising schemes(ones that have worked well in the past 
)I would say its a bit too early to call a winner.
)I would say its a bit too early to call a winner.One weaknesses Google will continue to have is that they do not build hardware. Apple, on the other hand, is arguably the best quality hardware builder out there. People will buy an Apple product because Apple can stand by their hardware and repairs can be done as near as any Apple Store.
Yeah, I know this is barely anything to do with the perspective of the discussion but I had to ask myself which of these two I'd buy in a given situation. I hate shoddy hardware, or even the chance of it.
Yeah, I know this is barely anything to do with the perspective of the discussion but I had to ask myself which of these two I'd buy in a given situation. I hate shoddy hardware, or even the chance of it.
[citation][nom]mj4358[/nom]Googles Tablet will be tied to Googles apps. I suspect it will not be anymore capable that Apple's, Or HP's. The real question is usability and overall functionality and who's gonna make that happen.Like it or not, Googles Os is still rough around the edges and seriously lack refinement and HP is trying to make use of windows who's interface is based on Keyboard and mouse inputs now rigged to work with touch input. Apple is the only company who has taken the time and resources to develop an OS for the sole purpose of working on touch based devices. If the other companies would just take their time and make a product from the ground up and stop being "me too" followers....Apple would not be consider the ones to beat, but just another flavor of an excellent selection of Tablet devices.[/citation]
While you are 100% correct here, that's why Apple wins where it wins. They take the time to do things right and, despite everyone kicking and screaming, do things the way they envision it. Sometimes that means ignoring certain technologies, other times it means jumping on open standards before they are popular.
A good example is Blu-ray or a front facing camera - which they are criticized for. But then they go and use the new USB specs for the iPad charging - which they are criticized for.
While you are 100% correct here, that's why Apple wins where it wins. They take the time to do things right and, despite everyone kicking and screaming, do things the way they envision it. Sometimes that means ignoring certain technologies, other times it means jumping on open standards before they are popular.
A good example is Blu-ray or a front facing camera - which they are criticized for. But then they go and use the new USB specs for the iPad charging - which they are criticized for.
[citation][nom]nukemaster[/nom]Well, its not like tablets are anything new anyway....I would bet on google, but with Apples advertising schemes(ones that have worked well in the past )I would say its a bit too early to call a winner.[/citation]
As someone who never owned an Apple product in their life until the iPhone 3G - let me promise you it had nothing to do with advertising. Once Apple added Exchange support to their phone, I abandoned Windows Mobile. And, it being an MP3 player, I was forced into the iPod world that I had avoided.
Regardless, the product sold me because it was quality in every way, and did exactly what it was supposed to do without the hangups...and now I pay much closer attention to Apple's products, because I recognize their value in a way I hadn't. Advertising is definitely not what sold me an iPad over a Google tablet that doesn't even exist yet - which is another point. The iPad name is going to be synonymous with tablets from here out - it's the first of a new type of portable that relies on a more efficient OS, and has a humongous head start because Apple did something that nobody else would.
As someone who never owned an Apple product in their life until the iPhone 3G - let me promise you it had nothing to do with advertising. Once Apple added Exchange support to their phone, I abandoned Windows Mobile. And, it being an MP3 player, I was forced into the iPod world that I had avoided.
Regardless, the product sold me because it was quality in every way, and did exactly what it was supposed to do without the hangups...and now I pay much closer attention to Apple's products, because I recognize their value in a way I hadn't. Advertising is definitely not what sold me an iPad over a Google tablet that doesn't even exist yet - which is another point. The iPad name is going to be synonymous with tablets from here out - it's the first of a new type of portable that relies on a more efficient OS, and has a humongous head start because Apple did something that nobody else would.
megamanx00
Splendid
- Sep 3, 2008
- 8,216
- 2
- 31,465
PRICE??? PRICE!!! You didn't mention PRICE. Price will be very important. At equal price points it can't compete with Apple, it will have to be significantly cheaper, but I think this is key. A lot of people could put together or rationalize $250-300 but couldn't rationalize $500-600.
This is a typical article written by someone who clearly has no programming experience, and doesn't understand at all software development.
I'm not fan of Apple, at all, but pure freedom in design of applications is a disaster, and antithetical to proper software development.
I'm not clear on all of Apple's motives, as I don't care about the company and don't closely watch what they do, but using a consistent design with software is imperative. It's been that way for a very long time. You want users to jump on your app and know exactly where everything the first time they use it, if they have experience with that platform.
It's not about being cute, and showing what a great programmer you are, and showing your personality. Jerks like this learn quickly it's not tolerated. It's putting things where people expect it, and following the guidelines of that computer so the customer is as comfortable as possible with the application.
I'm not suggesting Apple should artificially limit what apps are available for their device to make a profit, but I am suggesting they define a common user access interface as a standard and have applications follow it as much as possible. Anything else makes the device more difficult to use, and the device less useful. Not everyone wants to fidget with a computer, they just want it to do what they want it to do. So, it's got to be simple to use and intuitive, and consistent with what they know, but, admittedly, Apple's got to allow applications that do these things as well.
My point is, a blank slate without standards is nearly useless to most people, and not a product that can sell. Keep It Simple, Stupid! It's a bit condescending and insulting, but it's really important to remember when developing software.
I'm not fan of Apple, at all, but pure freedom in design of applications is a disaster, and antithetical to proper software development.
I'm not clear on all of Apple's motives, as I don't care about the company and don't closely watch what they do, but using a consistent design with software is imperative. It's been that way for a very long time. You want users to jump on your app and know exactly where everything the first time they use it, if they have experience with that platform.
It's not about being cute, and showing what a great programmer you are, and showing your personality. Jerks like this learn quickly it's not tolerated. It's putting things where people expect it, and following the guidelines of that computer so the customer is as comfortable as possible with the application.
I'm not suggesting Apple should artificially limit what apps are available for their device to make a profit, but I am suggesting they define a common user access interface as a standard and have applications follow it as much as possible. Anything else makes the device more difficult to use, and the device less useful. Not everyone wants to fidget with a computer, they just want it to do what they want it to do. So, it's got to be simple to use and intuitive, and consistent with what they know, but, admittedly, Apple's got to allow applications that do these things as well.
My point is, a blank slate without standards is nearly useless to most people, and not a product that can sell. Keep It Simple, Stupid! It's a bit condescending and insulting, but it's really important to remember when developing software.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Open vs Closed - Interesting arguement.
The statement is that the closed system is one that "just works" but you are forced to use pay-for Apps that Apple has the ultimate sanction over.
The further statement is that the open system is one that allows you to use whatever software you want from wherever.
The underlying implied statement is that the closed system and the "just works" are somehow linked and that being closed is what gives it stability. Poppycock. Where is it written anywhere that if a system is open it has to be unstable. A system may very well be unstable, or have been accused of being so in the past (eg "MS made Win ME so buggy so I dont trust Win 7, blah blah").
But let's get this straight. An open system is not the cause of instability. It may be a contributing factor, but the main reason why things go belly up is people installing something they shouldn't. This takes us back to the App Store. They ensure that only approved Apps go through to the end user and the end user is not given the choice other than what Apple tells them.
This is not a fanboy issue, this goes to the root of a political stance for many people, so imagine it was your Government.
Do you prefer an all-encompassing Party machine that runs everything, because they are supposedly the people in charge and therefore more qualified to make decisions for you? Alternatively, you could have smaller Government that privatises major services and leaves decision making to the individual.
Apple is basically a Communist State, which would make Steve Jobs the new Stalin.
The statement is that the closed system is one that "just works" but you are forced to use pay-for Apps that Apple has the ultimate sanction over.
The further statement is that the open system is one that allows you to use whatever software you want from wherever.
The underlying implied statement is that the closed system and the "just works" are somehow linked and that being closed is what gives it stability. Poppycock. Where is it written anywhere that if a system is open it has to be unstable. A system may very well be unstable, or have been accused of being so in the past (eg "MS made Win ME so buggy so I dont trust Win 7, blah blah").
But let's get this straight. An open system is not the cause of instability. It may be a contributing factor, but the main reason why things go belly up is people installing something they shouldn't. This takes us back to the App Store. They ensure that only approved Apps go through to the end user and the end user is not given the choice other than what Apple tells them.
This is not a fanboy issue, this goes to the root of a political stance for many people, so imagine it was your Government.
Do you prefer an all-encompassing Party machine that runs everything, because they are supposedly the people in charge and therefore more qualified to make decisions for you? Alternatively, you could have smaller Government that privatises major services and leaves decision making to the individual.
Apple is basically a Communist State, which would make Steve Jobs the new Stalin.
gm0n3y
Distinguished
- Mar 13, 2006
- 3,441
- 0
- 20,780
If I was to bet on this, I would bet on Apple. Marketing is just way too important to the majority of people. Unless Google comes out with a vastly superior product and gains a good portion of market share in a short period of time (Apple can match anything Google throws at them within 6-12 months), they have little chance.
I hope that Google can compete with Apple (I have little love for Apple) but regardless, I think tablets are about 2-3 years of software development away from being useful for the mainstream, which could give Google the time it needs to be competitive.
I hope that Google can compete with Apple (I have little love for Apple) but regardless, I think tablets are about 2-3 years of software development away from being useful for the mainstream, which could give Google the time it needs to be competitive.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Can´t open BIOS because no keyboard input is received.
- Started by Blatscher
- Replies: 11
-
-
-
News US sanctions transform China into legacy chip production juggernaut — production jumped 40% in Q1 2024- Started by Admin
- Replies: 35
-
-
Question New pc build r9 7900x3d rtx 4080 super no post only ram rgb turns on- Started by Harvey Durward
- Replies: 4
Latest posts
-
-
-
Question RTX 2060 Zotac stops giving display output when pushed hard- Latest: Moru Zerinho6
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram