Menu

Main Menu
Talk Get Daily Search

Member's Online

    User Name
    Password

    What If the Next IT Was This?

    Reply
    Page 2 of 3 | Prev |   1   2   3   | Next
    attila77 | # 11 | 2009-04-05, 10:23 | Report

    Originally Posted by qgil View Post
    Memory is becoming really small these days, and it gets easily replicated online. Why not having the memory and processor with you and using the convenient peripherals you will find when moving around (screens, speakers, keyboards...)
    We already have a version of that, sorta. It's called an ATM There are three immediate problems I see. Scarcity (are you going to wait for that guy to finish his irc session to check your mail ? Who's going to upgrade ALL peripherals every other year ?), Accessibility (not everybody has the same requirements for screen size, keyboard size/layout, I'd even put here bandwidth), and Security (keyloggers anyone ?).

    But seriously, you described an Internet kiosk with a no-exec storage USB port.

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    sjgadsby | # 12 | 2009-04-05, 11:52 | Report

    Originally Posted by attila77 View Post
    ...you described an Internet kiosk with a no-exec storage USB port.
    Huh. I thought qgil described the IBM Meta Pad.

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    geneven | # 13 | 2009-04-05, 12:57 | Report

    "And who will fund these millions of ubiquitous computers?"

    The consumer, who else?

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    attila77 | # 14 | 2009-04-05, 13:05 | Report

    Originally Posted by sjgadsby View Post
    Huh. I thought qgil described the IBM Meta Pad.
    In what way is the metapad (conceptually) different from, say, a beagleboard ?

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    fms | # 15 | 2009-04-05, 13:18 | Report

    Originally Posted by geneven View Post
    "And who will fund these millions of ubiquitous computers?" The consumer, who else?
    The correct answer is "US Military". Especially if you equip each one with a microphone, camera, and/or explosives.

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    sjgadsby | # 16 | 2009-04-05, 13:25 | Report

    Originally Posted by attila77 View Post
    In what way is the metapad (conceptually) different from, say, a beagleboard ?
    They differ in much the same way a locomotive and a large diesel engine do. The later is one of a number of alternatives that might be used as the fundamental, driving core of the former. However, on its own, the later is but a component part that cannot independently provide the features, nor meet the specifications, that make the former a functional, usable tool.

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

    Last edited by sjgadsby; 2009-04-05 at 13:28.

     
    mullf | # 17 | 2009-04-05, 13:38 | Report

    Originally Posted by geneven View Post
    The consumer, who else?
    Hell no! I'm not funding any computer that I'll never use!

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    attila77 | # 18 | 2009-04-05, 13:48 | Report

    Originally Posted by
    the later is but a component part that cannot independently provide the features, nor meet the specifications, that make the former a functional, usable tool.
    Let me rephrase. What specification and features does the beagleboard lack to call it a metapad core implementation ?

    Meta Pad computer core SPECS:
    * 9 ounces,
    * 3x5 inch, 3/4 inch thick,
    * 800 MHz processor,
    * 128 MB SDRAM,
    * 10 GB hard disk drive,
    * 3D Graphics chip with 8 MB RAM

    This is awfully close to the beagleboard specs (just replace the 10GB harddrive with a 8GB SD). Nobody prevents you from making different form factor enclosures for the beaglebox to provide PDA/netbook/desktop layout for the same unit (in fact, the touchbook did almost exactly this).

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    sjgadsby | # 19 | 2009-04-05, 14:46 | Report

    Originally Posted by attila77 View Post
    Let me rephrase. What specification and features does the beagleboard lack to call it a metapad core implementation ?
    I see the interesting bits of the Meta Pad idea a little differently from you, I suppose.

    I see the key ideas of the Meta Pad being a well defined, well designed, fairly rugged physical enclosure with a connector interface that's well defined both physically and electrically. These are what allow the Meta Pad to be a transportable, pluggable computer core--its core concept, and the bit that, to me, sets it apart.

    The Beagleboard's core concept is to be a small, inexpensive, ARM systemboard for developers and hobbyists. It could certainly be used as the guts of a Meta Pad-type system, but so could many other things.

    I'm less interested in, "If we had a system like the Meta Pad, at how many MHz would the CPU run?" than, "If we had a system like the Meta Pad, how would it change how we use, and think of, computers?"

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    ragnar | # 20 | 2009-04-05, 15:42 | Report

    Originally Posted by ARJWright View Post
    From the folks at Symbian-Freak (because I don't know where else this was posted before hand)...would this work as a possible (hardware and UX) design direction for the IT/N-series Nokia devices?

    http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/00...ne_concept.htm

    It looks like the E75, but without edges.


    Perhaps I'm a bit jaded, but it doesn't look even that good. Why such a small screen? How you're supposed to use that? Would that be a touch screen, I guess not. The copy text on that page is quite funny. It's the worst kind of "a weird design = revolution = awesome" attitude.

    The future is a bit brighter than that concept device, I would say.

    Edit | Forward | Quote | Quick Reply | Thanks

     
    Page 2 of 3 | Prev |   1   2   3   | Next
vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Normal Logout