lavo | # 71 | 2007-10-31, 22:48 | Report

The 2000/2100 Messagepad were far from being just a PDA. If you go through the Newton software archives (UNNA), you will see the newton can do just about everything the IT can do today (obviously limited to 1997 hardware and no camera). Newtonscript had a great following, and it shows in some of today's programs that can extend the newton far beyond its original capabilities. If you can find some of the ads from the time, it was being pitched as a personal computer, rather than a PDA.

The thing for me with the IT, is that there is no killer app. Why would people want to buy the IT? Deride Apple at will, but with almost all of their products they find a way to market a killer app to drive sales. Having a webcam on board and being portable, I thought Nokia would have really driven home video messaging. At this stage it is still all over the shop One other thing that impresses with the Newton is that everything is linked. You had "soups" which held various bits of information, such as addresses, and made this information available system-wide. So you could write a third party app that could access this information, without having to double up and enter it again. I'd love to see more of that in the IT. It really opens up the scope of what the IT can be used for, rather than just surfing the web or playing a video.

Texrat | # 72 | 2007-10-31, 23:10 | Report

Coincidentally, that was a portion of my corporate blog post today.

Wizard69 | # 73 | 2007-11-01, 05:36 | Report

I think we are artificially limiting ourselves with the definition of a PDA. People want to make these things into something static based on devices made years ago. That does no one any favors and flies in the face of the way similar technology gets evaluated.

I prefer a simpler approach; a PDA is simply a computing device, with the ability to execute user software, that you carry on you person.
A PDA is a computer. I really see no reason to drift from this concept PDA simply means a computer you can carry on your person.
This is what I mean by saying it has no primary function that is attractive to people or at least the mass market. This is why so much technology is going into the cell phone market, people see a need to have a cell phone, the added features just help with marketing
Apple demonstrates that you don't even need to have a completed software suite to take market share. Just bundle the right features and people will come.

The killer is that Apple either hasn't finished its software or has customers with low standards. Just today I was in the Apple sotre looking at iPhone again. If you go to Apples own iPhone web site it can't even handle that page fully. Things that should be links don't work, it won't even play Apples own videos and of course flash doesn't work. Granted the browser is probably better than 90% of the other Cell/PDA browsers out there. Still I expect better.
There seems to be a total lack of marketing for this device. They could have done well marketing it as a really intelligent MP3 player too. The funny thing about video messaging though is that the thing is obviously designed to do just that.
This really isn't out of the question right now. After all things like vcard have been around for awhile. I think it is just that nobody goes that route software development wise. Looking at the iPhone though it does look like Apple is moving back somewhat in that direction with the use of HTML.
The IT is open for those sort of things as it is. There is a rather large suite of apps that can be downloaded. The problem is that Nokia needs to sell the thing with a set of common apps that give owners and developers a base line as far a PDA type apps go.

Dave

Texrat | # 74 | 2007-11-01, 05:56 | Report

The single biggest thing Nokia needs to do, IF the company decides to directly and officially support PDA functionality, is start enforcing common usage of the tablet contacts database. I've encountered pushback on that.

Wizard69 | # 75 | 2007-11-01, 06:04 | Report

Size is relative! The problem is that if you have a big head and big hands the iPhone starts to look kinda small. Add in the fact that you have the eyes of a +45 year old individual and the thought of a bigger screen isn't all that bad.
Contrary to popular opinion some of those features can be very compelling. From the camera on I can take or leave those features.

Also it is rather surprising just how well these little guys can do some of those tasks. The vast majority of these devices are more powerful than half the computers I've owned over the years. It is more a question of doing things in a way acceptable to the user.
In my estimation the 810 is simply the best example of rolling all the wrong functions into a device. A lot of potential capability was sacrificed to add that keyboard.
Funny you should mention this tonight. I happened to stop into a local Wegmans (grocery store) and got a bit of a Halloween surprise. Two gals walk in dressed for the night, let me tell you more than a few cell cameras where whipped out. Made me wish that I had one with a camera. The big problem with this is that if I had a IT I probably wouldn't have been any better off.

By the way a testament to bad cell phone design was made that night. I got handed a cell to take a pic and the thing was practically unusable in that my thumb layed over the OK button in such a way that I had a difficult time snapping a pic. There are numerous problems with the common Cell phone, much of them due to the rush to make smaller and smaller phones. Too small to handle.

They do have their uses and it comes back to being a feature that becomes a free ride on the Cell. People, most anyways, won't carry around a camera every day - cell phones are not a problem.

As to 10MP yeah it will probably be a while before they hit a cell phone. The key with cell camera technology is making the cameras better. There is still a lot to accomplish here. No one wants to hold an SLR to their head to take a call either but making snap shots on a phone should be a better experience than it is.

dave

Texrat | # 76 | 2007-11-01, 07:16 | Report

Speaking of Apple vs Nokia...

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/whatsne...cbccdrcrd.html

Ouch!

rs-px | # 77 | 2007-11-01, 08:30 | Report

Personally I think that mobile phone data plans are a huge white elephant, despite the fact that the cell phone companies have invested billions in them. Here in the UK the mobile phone companies actually paid off our national debt a few years ago with the billions of pounds they paid for the 3G licenses. Very few people are actually using 3G data plans.

The future for Internet on the go will probably be discreet wifi zones -- simple but effective, and a lot cheaper than most phone data plans (and faster, and more reliable). Of course, Wimax will simplify all this.

benny1967 | # 78 | 2007-11-01, 09:22 | Report

BTW, only because I read this term so often here: Whats a "data plan"? My interpretation so far was it was some kind of additional contract you need to get online with your mobile carrier. Is it? Or is it the mobile internet-access you sign up for (with extra hardware to be plugged into your laptop) independent of any mobile voice contract you might have?

I'm confused because here, when you own a phone thats capable of any kind of data mode, you just go online with it. No need for an extra contract/"data plan"/whatever. (There are special rates for heavy users, as there are for people who do a lot of voice calls or primarily international calls, whatever, but thats an extra...)

rs-px | # 79 | 2007-11-01, 09:46 | Report

Here in the UK, you can add a data plan to any standard call package, by paying extra for it, or just get a call package that includes data.

You can also get SIM cards specifically to go into mobile devices that never make voice calls, which come with data plans rather than voice plans.

Of course, all modern cell phones use 'data' plans, because they're digital networks. But telcos still insist on making strict distinctions between data and voice calls, particularly in terms of cost. Maybe another reason why they're destined for eventual fossilisation?

benny1967 | # 80 | 2007-11-01, 10:27 | Report

So if you normally use your cell phone for voice calls only and have a "normal" contract for this, and then after 2 years for the first time you decide to use your phones built-in browser to get online because you need to check for the next train home... You cant do this because you would have to add a "data plan" to your package before?