I've been wanting one since the first hint of rumors. People that point at the flaws in existing tablet forms simply aren't taking in to account this is Apple we're talking about. They'll figure it out and it will rock.
First, I really want a device like the theoretical iTablet. That said, here are a couple of key problems:
1. Price: If the iPhone and more importantly iPod Touch are any indication, a 10 inch Apple iTablet couldn't hit the market for less than $500, and probably closer to $800. Apple doesn't make cheap products and that's fine, but at that pricepoint, the device can't compete with netbooks or even full laptops. It's a new category altogether, which by nature will slow design.
2. Form Factor Usability: Keyboarding will not be like the iPhone, or like a Laptop. You can't "thumb-type" because the body is too large (even if it's only 4 inches across, which means you have to set it down on a surface to type, or type one-handed (not practical for form processing as Mark suggested above, only really practical for touch based navigation and reading). So, once again, the price makes the device ineffective from a cost perspective, since a Kindle is only $300 and offers a good reading experience.
I want Apple to launch a successful tablet product, but I'm skeptical.
Hello, Touch Computing. Most have no clue what it is all about. The rest have a base idea but no clue how to use it. The issue is context and how it is used. Also the touch computing interface leaves much to be desired at this time.
LOCARS interface like Star Trek is so Yesterday. It is not flexible and really unimaginative.
Multi Touch is a start. But as in the comments listed in the story, as I mentioned the people have no clue how or why to use a multi touch interface.
They do not realize the abilities a multi touch screen could give you so you can use your fingers to rearrange your desktop in a couple motions of your fingers. Or take objects and literally twist and turn them on the screen with out the need of a mouse. The zoom function of the iPhone is just the tip of the ice berg as it were when it comes to the features and functions of multi touch screens.
Multi Touch is the screen of the future.
also no left hand right hand bias either. no left click right click. no three button snafu. It is one touch, two touch, or three touch and how the touches interact with each other determines the actions taken by the computer.
Multilevel menu systems would be extremely easy to formulate. Also 3 dimensional menu systems would be possible too. Whole new meaning to pealing the onion.
Apple has the start on this. I look for this to get very heated fast as the next generation sees this interface and grows with it, like the keyboard is to the type writer these touch screens will be to the flexible sensor screens of the future. Who knows. The sensor screens may end up being globes.
Mark Wild - 15 years ago
Holds great interest from a corporate viewpoint for form processing etc where the additional functionality of a full blown PC tablet is not required or could not be used due to technical level of staff.
I've been wanting one since the first hint of rumors. People that point at the flaws in existing tablet forms simply aren't taking in to account this is Apple we're talking about. They'll figure it out and it will rock.
First, I really want a device like the theoretical iTablet. That said, here are a couple of key problems:
1. Price: If the iPhone and more importantly iPod Touch are any indication, a 10 inch Apple iTablet couldn't hit the market for less than $500, and probably closer to $800. Apple doesn't make cheap products and that's fine, but at that pricepoint, the device can't compete with netbooks or even full laptops. It's a new category altogether, which by nature will slow design.
2. Form Factor Usability: Keyboarding will not be like the iPhone, or like a Laptop. You can't "thumb-type" because the body is too large (even if it's only 4 inches across, which means you have to set it down on a surface to type, or type one-handed (not practical for form processing as Mark suggested above, only really practical for touch based navigation and reading). So, once again, the price makes the device ineffective from a cost perspective, since a Kindle is only $300 and offers a good reading experience.
I want Apple to launch a successful tablet product, but I'm skeptical.
Hello, Touch Computing. Most have no clue what it is all about. The rest have a base idea but no clue how to use it. The issue is context and how it is used. Also the touch computing interface leaves much to be desired at this time.
LOCARS interface like Star Trek is so Yesterday. It is not flexible and really unimaginative.
Multi Touch is a start. But as in the comments listed in the story, as I mentioned the people have no clue how or why to use a multi touch interface.
They do not realize the abilities a multi touch screen could give you so you can use your fingers to rearrange your desktop in a couple motions of your fingers. Or take objects and literally twist and turn them on the screen with out the need of a mouse. The zoom function of the iPhone is just the tip of the ice berg as it were when it comes to the features and functions of multi touch screens.
Multi Touch is the screen of the future.
also no left hand right hand bias either. no left click right click. no three button snafu. It is one touch, two touch, or three touch and how the touches interact with each other determines the actions taken by the computer.
Multilevel menu systems would be extremely easy to formulate. Also 3 dimensional menu systems would be possible too. Whole new meaning to pealing the onion.
Apple has the start on this. I look for this to get very heated fast as the next generation sees this interface and grows with it, like the keyboard is to the type writer these touch screens will be to the flexible sensor screens of the future. Who knows. The sensor screens may end up being globes.
Holds great interest from a corporate viewpoint for form processing etc where the additional functionality of a full blown PC tablet is not required or could not be used due to technical level of staff.