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

I think you're overreacting to Roope's comments. What he said does not preclude stylus HWR... just that he believes the main focus should be on finger friendliness.

I'm an employee too... and many times what I say about direction is my own opinion. ;)

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

I'm happy with the n800 and a usb keyboard at home

but

I would buy a n900 with :

770 form factor with hard cover
2 full size sdhc or al least 2 microSDHC slots
1 regular usb female connector for USBdrive and external USB keyboards
a bit faster CPU and a bit more RAm than the n8x0 for better Flash experience
GPS and Blutooth (but I don't use any of them right now)
WiFi
gamepad style hardware buttons layout

no slide out keyboard with "soon-to-die" flexible cable.

a fully open kernel and drivers to leave us the choice of windows manager instead of Hildonized crap.

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

Ship has sailed.

If I'm not going to see another decent pocketable tablet (at least one that can hold its head against my Newtons, I'm going to get the best possible pocketable keyboard-based device.

And that's definitely not the N810...

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

same here. really miss the cover and the large buttons on top.

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

BTW: What I'd really like to see on the N900 is the possibility to make them multi-user devices with a graphical login manager. (Default single user, something in the settings changes it to multi.)

A lot of Tablets are used by more than 1 person; having a login and distinct data (bookmarks, mails...) would be a nice feature if it's not default.

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

If I recall correctly, there is a proposal in Bugzilla for profiles, and it was well-received by maemo. I would imagine that would include logins...

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

There are arguments for opening all kernel code, but that's not one of them.

If lack of a fully open kernel and modules is stopping window managers, why are K, openbox-rox, xfce, and icewm available? If your favorite WM's not available yet, it's not because we don't have kernel source, it's just because no one who likes it is as ambitious as PenguinBait. :rolleyes:

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

And I sent him "thanks" and contribution for his time and efforts.

I don't need a finger friendly OS, I want a complete OS

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

I think a finger based ui or an option to have stylus ui would be good. Why not please both crowds. All it would take is a config option. I think it should have multitouch screen. I have one of the now rare fingerworks multitouch gesture keyboards. The ability to use gestures is just fantastic. I know that people think the iphone and itouch are overrated on the gesture features and that may be, but being able to zoom cut copy paste with simple gestures is a big big plus for me.
The other thing I think would be useful is to have a slot on the back that can accept wifi/extension cards. Kind of like a minipci. Perhaps just a regular SD slot but one that can have room for an antenna. I would like the device that I use to be able to support whatever gives me the best coverage for internet be it sprints wimax or google broadband or verizon 700mhz.
IMO the form factor should stay the same or have multiples to choose from. Any bigger and it gets hard to pocket/becomes a laptop. NITs shouldn't be in competition with eeepcs
Isaac.S

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

I would like to see a touch sensor that runs along the sides and top that can be used for a scroll wheel, zooming, and replaces the other buttons on the top. This would also allow programmable virtual buttons, like top buttons for gaming. This would also provide more input to decide when to autolock.

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

Hmmm, unassailable breakdown. Well, I completely agree with you regarding the ease of input that comes with a well implemented hardware keyboard. Now, I'm not sure, as in I have not used, a thumbsized keyboard for anything serious, so I'm not sure how convinced I am of it's utility in the larger scheme of things, say when I'd like to use the IT as a laptop replacement. I guess, if I were to be completely honest, I'd like to see Nokia implement a "profile" manager, with a "lightweight" profile comprising a finger driven UI(and perhaps the majority of the functions accessible in this profile would be PMP functions), a "welterweight" profile comprising a stylus driven UI (menus galore, options by the thousands), and a "heavyweight" profile which assumes that you have a keyboard (bluetooth) and intend to use the IT as a laptop replacement.

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

something like the eee "easy" or "expert" profiles. one is finger based and will do basic stuff like a itouch and the other like a 500mhz laptop with a full blown linux distro.

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

Well, don't confuse the handwriting of the NIT with the newton. The newton had proper handwriting recognition that worked, but more than that, the newton was designed to be used with a pen in that everything was designed to be used with handwriting that made sense to do so, or failing that, widgets designed to be used with a pen. The NIT is based on a small computer system, designed to be used with a keyboard and mouse, with an onscreen keyboard to make up for the lack of keyboard.
It went way beyond just typing (remembering that you didn't have to convert handwriting on the newton - it was happy to leave it there). If you want to copy text from one application to another on the newton (not always that necessary as other applications could read the data), you selected the text and dragged it to the edge of the screen. It stuck there. Then you switched to the other application (it didn't have the one application thing in front like maemo) and dragged it back.

When someone goes on about the newton people think 'oh it was the handwriting recognition', but although the handwriting recognition was excelent (in fact pretty unbeaten for conversion until the tablet PC), what really set the newton apart is that every part was designed from scratch to be used purely with a pen, rather than squashed down from a desktop user interface.

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

Fair enough, a pen/stylus optimized UI. Not adapted from anything else, but designed from scratch specifically for pen use. I'd like that, but as an option. Honestly, I can't write with a pen as fast a I can with a keyboard, and there are instances when it's easier to just use my finger. I'd like all three. Admittedly, I haven't programmed anything since the one class I had (a thousand years ago) as an undergrad, so I don't know how involved (read: doable) it is to implement multiple UI and be able to switch between them. Maybe it is unreasonable, but that doesn't stop me from wanting it :P.

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

Hi. For the specific issue of handwriting, I do stand by my original comment. Any sensible form of handwriting requires stylus usage, and therefore a stylus usable UI. It would make very little sense to go towards finger usability while insisting on a stylus usable input method.

As a purely personal opinion, the stylus must be killed, the sooner the better. It's good for specific limited operations, but it's about the single geekiest part of using a PDA or a tablet. Mass market acceptance will never come with a device requiring extensive use of the stylus. The slideout keyboard in the N810 is the first stab in the physical domain, but for the health of the platform the onscreen methods need also to be kept healthy.

Practically I see also very little interest in handwriting solutions, even those that Karel is praising. If HWR really would be the killer input method, those solutions would be very much more popular than what they are. The situation is of course different with certain scripts, like Japanese and Chinese, but for Western input the virtual keyboards are simply faster to use and require much less effort, both physically and mentally from the users than what handwriting does. I don't see this changing. If Apple owns the Best Ever handwriting input method and engine, then I don't really see much light coming even from their direction in this issue.

Then again, I'm only an interaction designer. If some manager higher up wishes otherwise, then what I say has rather little significance. :)

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

I'd say the right solution would be not to have 100 different options for a small application. Once again imho it has vastly too much settings, I'm a rather advanced user and still even I have difficulties in actually doing anything sensible with those settings.

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

I find handwriting much faster than a virtual keyboard. Nowhere near as fast as a real keyboard.

Apple don't though. All they have is the rosetta printed writing engine which is no better than anyone else.
Microsoft appear to have the proper handwriting stuff now, and I beleive it is built into vista. However it is only there as a little option, as all you can do with it is use it in place of text fields, which is little to no advantage.

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

Obviously we see things differently.

I agree to the extent that the UI should heavily favor finger usage-- but I also believe the stylus should be kept and highly-specific functions for it be supported-- including HWR. I don't know what such an approach would hurt. Let users who wish to do so pull the stylus out when it suits them.

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

Well, there are applications that need many options. I use Xchat *because* of its power. You can use others if you dont like that. Use notepad instead of word, the calculator instead of excel. It's all a matter of personal preference. Less options means less power, but it's easier to use then.

However, saying a UI can be overly simple because applications should not have many options in the first place is somewhat irritating.

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

I don't use xchat, so I don't know specifically, but I think that in general things with 100 options should be command line or config file based. Now things (like a word processor) with 100 actions are different, but if you've really got 100 settings, they don't belong in a menu or setting dialog; at best you might have a settings dialog for the most common ones, and good documentation for a config file for the rest...

Just my thoughts, and I know there'll be lots of disagreement on that. :)

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

There are many different answers to this issue, but right now I feel like quoting the 37signals blog:

http://www.37signals.com/svn/archive...thing_away.php

"What’s the most ignored paradox in software development? Every time you add something you take something away.

Screen real estate. Interface clarity. Simplified testing. Shorter development time. Certainty. Agility. Managability. Familiarity. Adding anything dilutes everything else. That’s not always a bad thing, just be aware of it. Be aware of the trade-offs."

It's a very good statement, in its entirety. It's not always a bad thing, but all the listed elements there ring true.

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

I don't think that is a necessity in this case, though, ragnar. I believe the drawbacks are easily overcome... and a solution can easily stay out of the way of other usability.

I am an optimist when it comes to coding and UI design. 20+ years of doing it myself, on a wide variety of platforms, hasn't discouraged me yet. ;)

EDIT: besides, who's talking about adding anything? I'm just talking about keeping something already there and improving it.

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

If development was always a tradeoff we would still be using a terminal interface... sometimes you really do make legitimate progress in terms of usability. I dare say, warts aside, the Mobile OSX platform does reveal some very interesting UI/UX design features that I think deserve some attention by more mobile developers.

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

Tradeoff != zero-sum game.

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

I agree with this completely. :)

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

I go with texrat. The stylus is a wonderful thing when you play games like numpty physics, Lbreakout etc. Try playing those without the stylus!

And there is always the option of having two different profiles as someone else have already mentioned. The argument that the presence of a stylus putting the average noob off and away from the internet tablets is wrong as long as the advertisements show that both can be done.

Some apple fans think ..... just because Apple decided to go away from the stylus they think the stylus is a boring thing!
I can clearly see wonderful uses of the stylus like the sketch, numpty physics etc which are really "cool" stuff.

The stylus has to stay. After all the internet tablets considering the size and screen ..... are mostly intended for two hand use. So for a two handed input would it really matter if the second hand was replaced by a stylus? infact it is the other way. I would understand the lack of a stylus in a one handed device where the primary use would be the finger..... but not definitely on a two handed usable device.

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

Fine, but you're paying, and I pick the routes.

:p

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

I am an apple fan.

I think the iPod is great because it doesn't need a stylus. I think the NITs would be useless without one.
Horses for courses really.

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

Having the stylus is one thing, but I would like to see it's use in basic system interaction reduced or eliminated. 3rd party apps I could care less about, but I would hope they too would only *require it* when the situation calls for it.

I think it's possible to have the base software not require the stylus at all ( except for handwriting ). There is also a lot of useless interaction that should be tossed on the floor as well without loosing a single ounce of functionality.

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

Trying to do an hybrid stylus-/finger-based UI with an option is quite frankly the worst thing that could happen if you ask me.

Pick one, build everything according to the chosen philososphy - everything else will lead to an utterly inconsistent chaos.

And as the ultimate focus of the internet tablets just has to be the general public, instead of the comparably tiny Linux nerd/sys admin demographic (which I feel are the most vocal opponents of an simple, finger-based UI on here), I'd be absolutely happy to see an completely finger-optimized and largely consistent interface.

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

I think this is just a silly prejudice. Thousands of mainstream PDA-/Smartphone-/...-units are sold today that use a stylus. I dont see them used by GNU/Linux nerds. (At least not where I work.. the people there have trouble using any kind of computer.)

I firmly believe this finger thing is a trend that will fade away once people see its limitations. It may prevail in devices that are made for limited use (media players, phones, ...), but please don't forget that finger-based UIs have been around for quite a while now and never managed to get out of a very narrow niche. This is for a good reason.

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

I'd like to see a magic press-and-hold key or keys on reboot that shows what the device is really doing. That way, when i get into another reboot loop, i'll have a clue.

I'd like some more documentation, perhaps on a CD or something, that talks about what the apps really do. Media Player, for example, has a byzintine set of functions, half of which seem mislabeled. I was not able to create a playlist from a directory of mp3's (there are 350+ audio files in this book), despite new directions on this forum. Maybe that's Media Player's fault. But no attempt was made. On the subject of documentation, i'd really like to disable the script that strips /usr/share/doc/* while adding apps. The NIT is very good for reading.

I'd like Evince to be the standard PDF reader.

I'd like a larger boot flash drive - at least as an option. The n800 has the 'internal' slot, which gives you two addable SD slots. Perhaps the boot drive could be replacable. Then i could put in a 16+ GB SD.

The boot drive is a compressed linux filesystem. I might want a compressed filesystem for other SD drives. I certainly would like an encrypted filesystem for some drives. Perhaps FileManager could handle it.

I want real backup. If it goes into a reboot loop, and i have to reflash, i don't have to reinstall everything.

I want to be able to get an apps repository on CD. NFS mount of WiFi instructions (or script)., or something. That way i can restore the exact same version of some app - not just what happens to be out there.

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

How many prior-iPhone devices actually had fully finger-usable interfaces? Pretty much none, and certainly no mainstream, mobile device.
On the other hand, the iPhone was a tremendous success, and I don't believe this was just because of Apple's marketing hype. Think about it - the hardware of it is average at best, but the UI is a step ahead, not least because it ditched the stylus and is based on an interface that just doesn't need one.
I actually think it's a silly prejudice to think that stylus-less UI's can't be similar capable...

And note that I'm very far from an Apple or iPhone fan. In fact, I'm completely annoyed by the ongoing media hype that thing enjoys...

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

Well, I never used an iPhone, but I used an iPod Touch which should be very close to it in this respect. I found th UI unbearable. Couldn't type on the keyboard when the device was in portrait mode and could hardly type when it was in landscape mode. Very, very limited functionality because for each function, you need a whole video game to implement it. Takes ages to "scroll" through your music.

You know, even for those who can use it without becoming impatient after a few minutes, it's a good example of how limited a device must be in functionality in order to be used with finger gestures.

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

All I can say is that the N800's finger-sized keyboard works very well for me with my two thumbs - if it would be made transparent instead of opaque, I think this would work just nice. On the other hand, I find the stylus keyboard of OS2007 cumbersome, as it demands a solid surface to be used. But obviously, YMMV.

What? In which way? That sentence really doesn't make much sense without a couple of illustrating examples.

What has Apple's implementation of a long list for searching through music to do with the general finger/stylus discussion going on here? What hinders an UI designer to create eg finger-sized tabs for intelligently chosen letter groups to limit a long list?


Even though I can't prove it or back it up with studies, I dare to say that the vast majority of people who have ever gotten used to stylus-free UI's on small devices would never go back to a UI that requires a stylus for basic operations. Just a gut feeling, but one I'd bet quite a bit on.

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

1024x600
512 MB RAM (MUST HAVE)
faster CPU

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

Again: that's not a given, I don't care how much sense it makes in general or how many times it's repeated.

The contextual approach we had going for a while makes the most sense to me and many other users. I don't understand why it was scrapped but I won't speculate on it... I'll only say that it satisfied both camps and with no obvious intrusion or loss of functionality.

What you seem to fail to realize is that the right approach will look like a "pick one" to users depending on their personal usage. Touch the screen with your narrow stylus and the UI gives you stylus-based input modes. Touch it with your big greasy finger and you get big fat icons and gestures. Simple. Elegant. Effective. Win-win.

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

The first thing most people learn in schools when they are young is still writing...with a pencil or pen. Ergo, it is quite a natural format for involved input. What if your taking notes or writing poetry? My Treo650 just died because the qwerty mechanical keyboard failed. Chicklets and membrane keyboards, same potential. What about something like TEALSCRIPT from the Palm world? They have a 'write anywhere' capability and were not necessarily confined to a specific 'field' for input. The slide out qwerty keyboard at this stage, to me, is just copy-cat stuff. Its already been done numerous time and it is anything, but, efficient for high speed or spontaneous writing input. Sorry, qwerty was originally invented to specifically slow down input on old manual typewriters in order to avoid jams. How ironic is that? So more time and money and methods are toyed with around those themes that are not in the best interests of people effectively recording thoughts or notes or programming. As Karel has many times lamented about the Newton, it seems the whole industry has been stumbling blindly for well over a decade since. Palm was really the spin off of the orphans from the Newton team and it was certainly good in many areas but alas they have run out of gas at 2008.

I really don't think at this stage of computing that one has to pick an either/or scenario. OS2007 showed fairly well 'sensing and switching' between finger or stylus in regards to the interface. Why does everyone keep trying to make it one way only? Its like the PIM premise I have heard. I think it is all excuses. Finger is fine, and the ground has ALREADY been well paved a long time back for good stylus use. Each has great value, period. There is no competition, lets just get to effective application of them for the real end result. If your 'brain mapping' or practicing 'stream of consciousness' writing, I'm sorry tapping on a keyboard or using the screen with a finger is not really the choice for that flow to work well. To me this is core stuff for the consideration of the next evolution of a tablet to N900. How to input effectively and with fluidity in different requirements.

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

http://phasetwo.org/post/the-querty-myth.html

I don't buy the whole "we write with a pen therefore a stylus is natural" because there are so many differences. When Nokia comes out with a 8.5x11 tablet with a paper texture screen and an active or magnetic stylus then I'll reconsider, but passive screens are just not accurate enough to handle that kind of functionality cleanly.

Palm chose stylus input and it shows in their design. It was possible to cleanly use the device with only the 4 hardware buttons + dpad or the stylus. Their UI guidelines were designed from the ground up for stylus and they invested real time and money into handwriting.

And I'll agree with everyone that the Apple keyboard sucks, but since this was never intended to be an input heavy device it makes sense. But looking at it more holistically there are a number of really great ideas even in that sucky keyboard. The one biggest thing is the next/previous buttons so that you don't have to do a context/modal change three or four times just to enter a username and password on a webpage. Taking the Nokia OSK and adding an application controlled area would be a big start too so you don't have to change modality in IM just to see what the other person said.

On the other hand there are items like Application Manager that make a mockery of UI/UX issues leading to a needlessly complicated application. For instance you go to the menu->tools->Refresh application list... and then it prompts you to confirm, why? Check for updates... doesn't actually check it only lists and browse installable applications is a joke because they don't enforce any QA on extras.

That's just one application and I can brainstorm 3 or 4 alternate interfaces that would have been cleaner and clearer. I'm not talking about major rewrites here, just slightly different wrappers on the same functionality. It's obvious they don't see UI design as a high priority on the platform.

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

I don't think iontruo2 was concerned with any of the differences (and neither am I)-- I suspect his focus was on the important similarities. At the end of the day your complaints become moot; given that we do indeed learn to write with some sort of stylius, and continue that until death, it only stands to reason that any hurdles in the way of achieving that on tablets are simply opportunities looking for solution.

Which just goes to show it CAN be done. All it requires is commitment. And even then, your example still does not preclude a UI approach that uses context to switch cleanly and transparently from stylus input mode to anything else we can imagine.