Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

make it not so expensive that its like buying a laptop.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

did anyone suggest having a supercapacitor in it, so that if the device is deep asleep you can swap the battery without rebooting it, and thus have a spare fully-charged battery ready to go.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Yes, everybody has suggested everything (I've suggested this on multiple times), there isn't anything more to be said here.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Wow, a lot of posts that would lead to making it larger and more expensive!

I agree with those who say to keep it low priced so to compete with the iPod Touch.

Also, lets Keep it small enough to fit in a pocket.

Those wanting it to be a full laptop computer should find an ASUS eeepc forum and tell them to make the next model based on an ARM processor so it will run for more than two hours on batteries, then load it up with all Open Office, VGA in/out ports, keyboard features, etc. In other words please don't ask to make the N900 something that is so different (as in much larger and expensive) that those of
us that bought the current models would not be interested in it!

Back to those dreaming about doing the presentation in a board room on a NIT: They forgot that the special docking port would NOT typically be pre-installed in the board room and that it would require external power. By the time you tangle with all that mess you would be better off with a one-piece laptop anyway. Just demand one that has decent battery life. I don't know why every time an advance is made in laptop power, they compensate by putting in a smaller battery!

It seems like a lot of people who have owned several NIT models seem to like the size of the N800 the best. Maybe if the N900 went back to this size we could get some of these bigger machine features squeezed into it like bigger screen, better keyboards, bigger battery, full-sized SD, etc.

Finally, the supercapacitor is probably too big. I think a better solution the problem is for a 3rd party to make a sleek, thin external battery pack that nicely attaches on the back of the NIT and plugs in the charger jack. You could probably quadruple the battery life while only adding about 4mm across the whole back of the unit.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

on the battery issue, i think someone recently applied for a patent on a laptop battery with a built in connector so that it could be hooked up to the power port while removing the spent one and inserting the new.

beyond that i would just ask for this:

go back to the N800's two full size SD slots, put in a bigger ARM cpu and more ram, put in a screen thats similar to recent tablet pc ones. beyond that, dont change a thing.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

With you that far.

Well, I got tangled up in that, and got too busy defending the N800 is a laptop line to mention that, although I noticed it at the time... And I'm not a real big fan of docks anyway.

But, you're not unambiguously better off with a laptop, unless it's an insanely dinky (smaller than original eeePC) laptop. In the attachments, you can see my normal kit + USB-VGA; as you can see, the kit bag is about as easily pocketable as the N800, and often gets pocketed. The VGA adapter, naturally, doesn't go anywhere without a reason, but can also be pocketed with no trouble. Second picture shows entire contents of bag; third shows the actual setup for projection, with the unused stuff sitting on the bag.

Naturally, for smooth work in a conference room that I know has wireless, I'm not going to have the Ethernet stuff out, so the "tangling with all that mess" boils down to pulling two devices out of a bag, making three USB connections, and the VGA connection you'd need anyway. (If fidgeting with gadgets isn't a problem, I'll probably have the gadget-pulling, two of the three connections, and repocketing done already...)

As fast as a laptop? Not quite, obviously. Is the added delay (~5 seconds) worth lugging a non-pocketable device around for? To me, no way! To others, maybe. But it gets even easier if you have a separate, battery-powered dock, with VGA, USB hub, and batteries to run that and sustain the N900. I'm actually considering integrating mine up that way, but a factory one would be cool, and reduces it to pull dock out, make one VGA connection, and drop N900 in. Not unfeasible, just not quite as slick as envisioned.

Amen! I've actually only had (or even seen) N800s, but I do think the N810 went overboard cutting size.

Possible, but have you seen the high-capacity battery for the N810? Too lazy to dig up the link, but someone makes a thicker battery, which comes with a bulged back-door to accomodate it; much cleaner than a reach-around plug. Unless you're actually going to carry more than one of those, and want to use the charger jack to allow swapping without shutdown, that's just as good, and a touch tidier.

Good to see someone else reading the "realistically", though... ;)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

How about an operating system that really works and when it updates does not crash programs already installed. Like Diablo did to Xjournal, Camera, Videocamera. Not to metion that i have tried several fixes that did not work.
Now i do love my N800. But i would love to be able to not think Microsoft when i use it and it crashed. I would like not to have to be a computer programmer in order to use a product. I would like to just turn it on and have it work. Not to much to ask for. Just have it work.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Battery life:

* Newer kernel with CFS;
* Suspend-to-RAM included & enabled by default (see n800-s2ram project);
* PowerTOP debugging, also in SDK (works with QEMU?);
* Solar-based power over LCD screen (invented by RuG);
* Teaching users how to improve battery life of Li-Ion battery;

Connectivity:

* 3G functionality in Europe;
* Either no GPS, or a good GPS;

Performance:

* OMAP3;
* 256 MB RAM;
* 3D (for visual effects; related to usability);

..and last but not least for its the most important of an embedded device..

Usability:

* Not 20 applications providing the same functionality (multimedia wise a good example is the many audio and video players); Linux-related problem;
* Replace Navicore with Nokia Maps 2.0 port;
* 3G...
* Hildonized Evolution port, or hildonized maemo PIM;
* Usability-related improvements on the software part (Diablo was an improvement in this regard). Fix important bugs. Realize the huge importance of this.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

(Can't edit my post; page doesn't render well...)

I forgot to add:

Usability:

* Allow better remote management using the NIT; stable rdesktop port, and NX Client Embedded Edition port (already ported to ARM!).

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Number one on my wish list for the n900 right now. Availability for the holiday season this year. Well, before really, but we're supposed to keep it realistic, so....

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

1. community issue, not nokia issue.
2. no clue
3. not going to happen iirc
4. again, community issue
5. ...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

1) True, although Nokia has contributed their part to the problem.
2) Is possible because A) Nokia owns the source B) it is already ported to ARM C) directly increase profit for Nokia.
3) A pity, because 3G is rolled out well whereas WiMAX isn't. It allows 24/7 connectivity in contrast to WiFi. Makes the NIT much more valuable.
4) Isn't a community issue because A) Modest issues B) the framework of EDS is there C) the NIT doesn't have something as basic as a good PIM framework. My phone has it, my laptop has it, heck even my DAP has it... but my NIT doesn't.
5) See many other posts, or tabletui.wordpress.com. Hire this guy!! :)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

3,4) the nit is supposed to pair up with a phone, not replace it...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Really? Then why does it have Skype, Gizmo..? What you state is precisely my point; its better to have 3G _on_ the NIT, and eventually use a laptop with a NIT for tethering. Means one device less. Its possible to use 3G on a laptop too but maybe Nokia, given their phone business, isn't the right corporation for such an IT...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

toss the laptop, use the tablet, optionally with a external keyboard ;)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Sure, good point. It really depends on the situation. If I go hiking I'd take the NIT (or something similar) with me, not a TP. However, if I can't use it to phone, or if I can't use the GPS...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Um, what exactly 3D has to do with usability? ;)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

A 2D tablet would really cut you if you tried to hold it?

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

I meant a driver for the OMAP24x0's PowerVR allowing a more slick experience without much, if any, overhead. E.g. seeing a window minimizing like on GNOME with compiz. Many mobile devices support it although they not all use the Linux kernel. Pandora will support the PowerVR (different revision), iPhone makes heavy use of it...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Compiz is mostly stardust... There are usability plugins though - would love to see the screenshot plugin working.

But overall a 3D interface can add nothing to usability, only subtract. Of course everyone would love to see some windows spinning, but while it is pretty, it is not very usable :)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

I disagree, and these 2 posts describe my point well. 3D is not about eye candy. It is about user experience. That is why it is listed under Usability. The 3D effects have to be a useful addition to the experience. For example like Expose (and its clones) do, or the example I gave of minimizing a window. Besides that some effects give the user a slick feeling but these are only secondary; not the priority.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

its user experience, just like a sugar high is...

lets get the basics working first, before we sugar coat everything...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Funny, gqil made the same joke a few months ago. :p

Many apologies to lcuk for incorrectly attributing this to qgil.

http://mg.pov.lt/maemo-irclog/%23mae...04-09T23:23:54

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

@allnames..: Tell me what an informative 3D hint will tell you more than an informative 2D one?

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Nevermind the fact that some applications will be better off with hardware rendering (like playing a movie) one has to realize the following propositions:

1) Nokia wants to bring the NIT to a bigger market;
2) Nokia is aiming to improve the usability of the device;
3) Diablo has several usability related changes e.g. not requiring reflashing anymore, and the software update tray icon;
4) The hardware is there, right now, in at least the n8x0 series; unused;
5) Competitors are actively using this very hardware (e.g. smartphones), or going to use a revision of this hardware (Pandora);
6) Besides direct competitors, the main 3 OSes (latest NT series, Vista; latest OSX series, Leopard; latest Linux & X.Org 7.x based OSes) use this functionality.

Back to your question, a valid, related question would be:

What is more user-friendy
1) An error, with sound, with its own theme colour (e.g. gray), popping up on screen, with no hardware rendering;
2) An error, with sound, with its own theme colour (.e.g gray) popping up on screen, with hardware rendering;
3) An error, with sound, fading from the original background of the current application to its own theme colour (e.g. gray), popping up on screen, without hardware rendering;
4) An error, with sound, fading from the original background of the current application to its own theme colour (e.g. gray), popping up on screen, with hardware rendering?

Similar question can be asked related to the minimizing of an application.

What, do you think, feels the best to the user? Although, sure, it does depend on some technical factors there is a general concensus on the correct answer, and it is related to the way the human mind works, and we're talking about a visual interface; not CLI.

What is the first thing you do when someone physically attacks you on the street? You evade the attack.

Although, in the case of an error or information popup, you do want to get the attention of the user, you don't want to harm the peace of mind a user has when she minimizes an application. Therefore, the above minimizing example counts more than the information popup (cleverly picked to support your argument I give you that...), but it doesn't mean the example is irrelevant, and there is room for further development. For example, I would like to see an information popup showing where the heck it is related to. IOW, visually showing its parent application.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Up front: I'm an advocate of 3D for usability. Much of it is glitz, which *can* enhance the user experience, but it also opens the door for new types of visualization that can provide novel ways of usefully viewing/using information not possible with static perspective 2D (a coined term representing classic Win95-esque desktops).

Take a look at this (specifically the first half). It's a good example of what is possible with acceleration mixed with cleverness.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/b...hotosynth.html

Sure this can be done in 2D, but I'm guessing that it would more easily and efficiently be accomplished with 3D hardware; not to mention kinder on the battery of certain tablets.

Even glitzy compositing windowing systems like compiz fusion receive usability benefits from acceleration.
1) Zoom out to see all windows
2) Zoom in to magnify
3) True transparency of varying opacity
4) Quick tiling of windows for application selection.
5) Increased UI responsiveness

}:^)~
YARR!

Caaaaap

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not against 3D and I'm not talking about hardware acceleration.

@allnamesareout and Capt'n Corrupt: The things you describe are just 2D done with hardware acceleration. I'm talking about things like 3D cubes and animating windows (axis rotation or melting to statusbar like in OSX and Compiz). They sure are pretty, but if you are trying to do something fast - they tend to just get in the way. iPhone out of this (didn't see one), but HTC TouchFLO is horrible and the various touch interfaces based on gestures i've seen are pointless and slow (not the effects, but the usage). I'm still using them though, since WM is even worse. :)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

funny thing is that before we hade the 3D/gpu all upper tier grpahics cards did something called 2D acceleration. mind you, this is from as far back as windows 3.x or the isa bus...

these days the same feature have been folded into the 3D chip...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

this is for online sharing in Internet (web-cam)
but
COWON iAudio A2 (A3) is not a recorder too;
it has almost same ARM processor with DSP on the board;
and it records 640x480, 30 fps, AVI with MPEG-4 compression as well...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Hmm, I'm not sure the minimizing I describe is strictly 2D. If you see the window minimizing and going to the taskbar while seeing its artifacts going to the taskbar icon, being smaller, it is 3D.

If you think of useful 2D and 3D effects, I believe it is first important to observe how competitors and other devices (sometimes using the same soft- or hardware) provide these effects and what their usage is. That way, only useful effects are implemented, and I tend to believe there are various useful 2D effects like the ones I stated. Problem is: there is no hardware acceleration. The community could add these effects or build upon previous source code provided there is hardware acceleration, but the driver isn't there. Therefore, it should be first priority to get the driver (PowerVR) working on the NIT. It is difficult to test the PowerVR in a Scratchbox though because this is't emulated by QEMU and the performance isn't measurable.

The iPhone is quite an interesting machine to observe for usability analysis. I highly recommend you to review it for this purpose, there is much to be learned from this device. Mind you, I don;t like Apple, I don't like vendor lock-ins, I don't like proprietary software or hardware, the iPhone has its disavantages IOW I don't see it as the creme de la creme; however, it is a device to analyse for this purpose.

We agree more than it may seem. For starters, it is important one is able to put such effects off.

The NIT has a stylus, and allows finger mode too. Therefore, it has to support (together with its applications) 2 modes of operation: 1) stylus 2) finger. Some applications have a wide vertical bar while others have a tight one. IMO, there should be 2 modes which one is able to set. Based on that, the tablet goes into 'stylus' or 'finger' mode. This goal is partly succeeding.

The NIT has a battery, and AC plug. Therefore, it has to support 2 modes of operation: 1) power saving / energy efficient mode 2) experience mode and eventually 3) hybrid. Mode 1 is for battery when absolute battery longevity is required. The screen is, by default, lit on a minimum, daemons like tracker are disabled (metacrawler?), and everything is extremely fast. 2) everything is instead enabled for maximum user expereince 3) this is a hybrid. In relation to power saving it also has to support Suspend To RAM.

I want to write more, but I must go now. Maybe I edit my post later because I'd like to give some more examples of useful effects I use in GNOME 2.22, talk about MDI versus tabs, and related to the latter an example in Pidgin where I believe it'd be useful to inform the user better (this is Pidgin related; not strictly maemo related, but it describes a general problem).

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

All indications are that the next major OS release, Fremantle, will establish a consistent, finger oriented UI.

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

I'm actually not disagreeing with you. Yes the things described are just 2D done with acceleration. I'm merely suggesting the benefits of having these transformations done in hardware designed for this type of task; in this instance 3D acceleration. The benefits are higher performance, lower power requirements, and familiar APIs to work with.

In addition to enhanced zooming, real transparency, and smoother movement, 3D hardware is a very capable of real-time 2D vector renderer; a tremendous tool for enhanced visualization of certain types of data.

But I'm not ready to count out (just yet), the use of actual 3D in the UI simply because I haven't seen a great use for it yet. The ability to rotate and zoom on a constricted desktop could open the door for much simpler and more intuitive interfaces -- if done right, of course.


For the most part, it does seem superfluous, especially since some peoples desktops are jammed with every possible visualization (paper airplanes, fire, snowflakes, etc). However, this isn't always the case. Some 3D GUIS are quite subtle and most importantly many people seem to respond very well to them (OSX).

For example, my girlfriend, a very casual user, finds the mac OSX GUI far more pleasurable than WinXP, even when only using firefox and word. What's the difference? As far as I can tell: window dressings and animation. But it would seem that a lot is packed into those window dressings and animation. From my perspective it 'feels' more smooth, solid, and stable, while the comparatively jerky draw-bit-by-bit WinXP is more annoying. I know the smooth, solid, and stable, 'feeling' is an illusion (the apps are the same after all), but it appeals to something human in me.

Don't read this the wrong way: I respect your position, and am not arguing nor am I trying to convince you. 3D can be superflous and is certainly not for everyone.


}:^)~
YARR!

Corruption above

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

I'm not arguing too, certainly 3D interfaces have their place in our world - they are a big user magnet and we will see them more and more often from now on. I'm just saying that for now their usability is nonexistent and people tend to switch them off after some days/weeks/months (of course if that's possible). For instance - a good interface should have everything a couple of clicks away. What we are facing now in the mobile world is an awful number of clicks, gestures and effect waiting to get to what you need. Of course the screen estate is limited, but i'm starting to forget in which direction i should swing my finger away. And with these patents for touchless interfaces i'm starting to wonder when the arthritis will hit me :) At least the effects should be optional, unless the developer forgot to include that :)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

I disagree, with the correct chipset we could get RDS-TMC and try hacking into it :)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

well, as time goes by our expectations increase. Every week we see new stuff coming up on the news (Engadget, Crunchgear, Cnet, Pocket-link, etc.). We have a moving target...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

i would just like to see anything new from Nokia that does not resemble a repackaged N810. ;)

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

o Faster CPU.
o Waaaayyyy more onboard storage.
o Wayyyyyyy more RAM.
o Hardware accelerated graphics 2D and maybe 3D?
o Longer battery life.
o Extremely high accuracy GPS...
o Really long range on the wifi. 802.11n?
o Developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers developers....

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

You remind me of Steve Ballmer! :D


}:^)~
YARR!

Capt'n Capt'n Capt'n ...

Re: What woud you realistically like to see in the N900?
 

Bah. The stylus is not the problem with the tablets.