Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

I want the NIT to be a part of my multitasking, real-life experience responding pre-emptive. I don't want to wait 5 seconds until my TV shows the next channel. If my TV would do that I'd start more multitasking as well. But the reason for doing so is a negative impulse; a design flaw. No thanks. I already gotta pee during the commercials.

Yes, and that shows the big gap between a device like the iPhone and the NIT. If you want to cater to a bunch of techies, then the past NITs serve that purpose. If you, like Nokia wants, prefer to cater more the masses, you have to adapt to the way the masses interact with a device. And thats different than a bunch of techies. Its more akin to the way I described in my previous posts. Will it change to that way? No way, not overnight. But eventually 1) it will 2) or the NIT remains some sorry niche because soon some corporation comes which will design the interfaces described minus the disadvantages of Apple's shitty vendor lock-ins. The techies will have their customization while the newbies will have pleasant default settings.

You must not understand Occam's razor or KISS principle. Why would I need the same buttons on my TV as well as my remote control? Do I look like someone who hangs around the TV the whole time simply to push some buttons? Do I look like I'm foolish enough to sell my remote control?

Yeah, and I have a Nikon, because I just want to shoot pictures without having to worry about all kind of crap. I can edit the picture later with Photoshop or GIMP.

The only reason a manufacturer adds switches is to make the thing attractive to men who require toys.

If you really wish to lower yourself to such metaphors: a lower denominator.

It is assumed the user feels this way; therefore the first user experience should not be frightening; the opposite; it should be pleasant. Those who knows, with their huge IQ (and ego), will be able to find the secret levers.

Perhaps you don't like GNOME either then. Or Hildon. Maybe you prefer KDE, or you programmed your own WM. And, the KDE people are starting more towards the GNOME path these days.

You clearly have no experience in UI designing. Stay away from it, or expect a leap of a learning curve.

Another example. I'm from a small country. When I lived in the USA the first big store I went to was Fry's in San Jose. It was so huge! For American standards relatively small, but for me it was huge. I went to search for a WiFi card (USB preferably). Well, guess what? Tons of them, tons. 30 meters long, 4 heights: WiFi cards. I looked at lots of boxes, and had a written note with me for the chipsets I was searching for. Lots of choices! Sometimes the same version popped up again behind a different location. Yet none they were selling was Linux compatible...

Now, some observations:

* Huge store, with so many choices, it was overwhelming.
* With regards to the WiFi cards: many choices yet not the one I was looking for.
* In the meanwhile my friend already picked her CPU, motherboard, RAM, and PSU.
* Filling in the WiFi chipset on eBay yielded a few, cheap sales.
* A specialized (Linux-friendly) electronics store might have been a better solution.
* Some hardware manufacturers put a Tux logo on their Linux compatible logo. Do you think this is quicker noticed than the name Linux? Why do you think companies have logos? Why do you think IBM is called IBM and not International Business Machines?
* Is it that more choice was better? On the Fry's layer it wasn't. On the store layer it was because I found a sale on eBay.

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

LMAO.... you don't like buttons and now you admit you don't like large stores where there are many items to chose from.

This just keeps getting better with every rebuttal.

BTW- I am an engineer, and I have designed many a user interface. I was in the biomedical electronics instrumentation business. I understand user interfaces and the value of numerous buttons.

I do not "freak out" for fear of pressing the wrong button as you admitted to being earlier.

Buttons are good.

The Philips plasma TV I dumped??? It stopped responding to the remote control one day (some defect occured), and all that could be done with that TV after that was turning it on and off at the set. Nice design....NOT! If it had a few buttons the set would still have some value. No buttons meant no changing channels, no volume up/down, no selecting video source. The thing ended up in a landfill prematurely primarily because Philips ( from the Netherlands ??? ) was too lame to understand the things which many of us understand. I guess in Holland the Dutch just dislike (or fear) buttons.
.
.

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

BTW- I didn't edit pictures on my Canon digital camera. The buttons I liked because they allowed me to quickly change setting on how the picture would be taken (before I took it) and it allowed those setting changes without navigating through soft menus and drilling in and out of menus. THAT camera had good UI (and lots of buttons).

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

Just a quick question, you did try changing the batteries and hitting the remote against the side of the chair didn't you?

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

So you're saying that non-techie people are just a flock of sheep?

You're getting quite good of missing the point though. ;)
I'm not against simple interfaces, i'm against not having a choice.

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

I tried several things. Banging the remote against the side of a chair wasn't one of them though :-)

The remote was emitting infra-red light when you pressed a button (there are various ways to test for this).

Even after I downloaded the 170 page pdf service manual complete with schematics fixing the set was a nightmare. Fixing that Philips TV required some specialized diagnostic tools (and software Philips only let's their Auth. Serv. Centers access to). That 32 " Plasma was VERY computer-like inside, and difficult to work on the way it was constructed. I spent quite a few hours working on it before selling it to a guy on Craigslist ( who probably sent it to a landfill shortly thereafter ).

All the manufacturer had to do was have a few "buttons" on the thing and it would have continued to be worth something.

It wasn't a real big deal because it was given to me not working (no picture) and I got the picture part fixed, but then the remote problem was discovered. The set was given to me, I would have never purchased a product like this that had no buttons on it. The reason should be clearer now that I've explained the details.

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

That is how I'm feeling the whole time in this thread. In GNOME the default is simple and you have many choices to extend it. The default choices are the user's first experience. They should be pleasant. I'm pro ability of extending. But I don't need a serial and paralel port on my PC, I don't need an embedded Cray, and I don't need 100 incompatible WiFi cards.

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

We get it.... "choice" isn't in your vocabulary. You also don't think your computer should have serial or parallel ports (you said so), and your TV should not have more than one way for video to get in (you don't want Svideo or other connectors on it). You hate having choices to make, and you fear pressing the wrong button so in your mind the Future of the Internet Tablet should take away choice, take away as many buttons as possible, take away ports (your idea of a future NiT would have no USB port, right?).

If your PC should not have serial and parallel ports in your mind than I have to presume a Future Internet Tablet would not need any I/O ports in hardware either. Oh man, you are exposing some messed up thoughts.

Re: Future of Internet Tablets
 

Exactly. The point is that less is (sometimes) more. If you never deal with people who want something to just work you don't have this compassion.

If you're from a society where everybody wants more more more and becomes fatter and fatter. Yes, then I understand you are not able to sympathise, let alone empathise.

You're no UI designer. You probably never wrote software for a non-tech, normal person. And I'm pretty sure you've never worked in a helpdesk environment either. Just like your buddy GA. :D

Sorry, you do not understand user interfaces.

What does this button do? *Poof*.

I had a toaster oven with an on/off button. I moved it aside. It touched the wall. It went on. I didn't notice. No light indicator for on/off. Later, there was a fire. Bad design. A toaster oven shouldn't have an on/off button on its side, and it should give user feedback about whether it is on or off. OTOH, it was very cheap.

I bet when someone comes at your door theres an entire interface to control the US nuke supply instead of one simple doorbell.

Buy a new remote control.

Or buy it in EU with a standard 3 years warranty.

No wait, you did neither, you bought a second hand device with no knowledge of its usage history, and you complain it doesn't work. Sherlock!

We don't have many outlets in the Netherlands.

But you're right. In Holland everybody rides a bicycle equipped with a little bell. Everyone eats cheese. A garden without a windmill is a golf terrain.

Nobody has a Nokia. Too many buttons. They're actually banned here. The Dutch have a too low IQ to handle 'em. When George Bush visited the country his Nokia was confiscated. Everybody has a Philips Plasma, and Philips flags, towels, etcetera. Everybody has an iPhone. And we are all the lowest common denominator in the world, with the lowest IQ.

About the only thing true is that 'everybody has an iPod'. I got a different device, and I'm satisfied with it (+ Rockbox 3.0), so I'm not switching.