Page 8 of 11 « First 67 8 910 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
lavo's Avatar
lavo is offline lavo
2007-10-31 , 22:48
Posts: 68 | Thanked: 6 times | Joined on Jan 2007 @ Perth, Australia
#71
Originally Posted by Wizard69 View Post
There is no sense in comparing the IT to PDAs because they are PDAs . The only difference being that they are a more modern rendition of the product. Nokia doesn't seem to want to recognize that this is part of the product, instead trying to sell the device as an internet cruising device. I just don't see a demand for a device with that narrow focus. To Nokia credit the device does run Linux and as such people can customize to their hearts content. That is great if you are a techie or geek but pretty hard row to hoe from the marketing standpoint.

<snip>

Dave
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's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2007-10-31 , 23:10
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#72
Originally Posted by rs-px View Post
Nokia's problem may be that it is sticking to its original brief for an Internet tablet and only responding to criticism of their implementation of that brief, rather than responding to criticism of the brief itself.
Coincidentally, that was a portion of my corporate blog post today.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 
Wizard69 is offline Wizard69
2007-11-01 , 05:36
Posts: 27 | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on Oct 2007
#73
Originally Posted by lavo View Post
The 2000/2100 Messagepad were far from being just a PDA.
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.
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.
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.

The thing for me with the IT, is that there is no killer app. Why would people want to buy the IT?
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
Deride Apple at will, but with almost all of their products they find a way to market a killer app to drive sales.
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.
Having a webcam on board and being portable, I thought Nokia would have really driven home video messaging.
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.
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.
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.
It really opens up the scope of what the IT can be used for, rather than just surfing the web or playing a video.
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's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2007-11-01 , 05:56
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#74
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.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 
Wizard69 is offline Wizard69
2007-11-01 , 06:04
Posts: 27 | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on Oct 2007
#75
Originally Posted by Hedgecore View Post
It's small because it's a phone. I couldn't imagine holding a laptop up to the side of my head whenever I wanted to annoy every person around me with one-sided details of my mundane life (I don't have a cell phone - - could you tell?)
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.

One of the biggest things that irks me about the potential for tablets is feature creep. Imagine if you had a tablet that had Wifi/Bluetooth connectivity, cell, video/audio playback, GPS, a full 7mp camera w/video recording options, a hardware keyboard, etc, etc, etc. It would only perform several of those tasks well.
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.

Feature creep is a dangerous thing that only diminishes the final product for most. I think the greatest example of this that I saw was a cheap $10 mouse from some overseas sweatshop that had a dialpad on top. Your phone handset or headset would plug into the mouse and you'd use the mouse to dial...

That said, I think there *are* some combinations that can be pulled off. The n810 is a good combination of many features but the conflicting form factor considerations between it being a cell phone and it being an internet tablet are too great.
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.
How small can you make it before it's a good cell phone and a crappy internet experience & vice versa? The shoddy camera is fine - - I thought cell cameras were a horrid idea until I played with one at the bar one night.
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.


You're not taking wedding pics, you're taking spontaneous pics of funny things in the street or your drunken friends. Feature creep, but acceptable as you're not trying to marry a phone with an 10mp SLR camera.
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's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2007-11-01 , 07:16
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#76
Speaking of Apple vs Nokia...

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

Ouch!
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 
rs-px is offline rs-px
2007-11-01 , 08:30
Posts: 255 | Thanked: 15 times | Joined on Oct 2007 @ United Kingdom
#77
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
Speaking of Apple vs Nokia...

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

Ouch!
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's Avatar
benny1967 is offline benny1967
2007-11-01 , 09:22
Posts: 3,790 | Thanked: 5,718 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ Vienna, Austria
#78
Originally Posted by rs-px View Post
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.
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 is offline rs-px
2007-11-01 , 09:46
Posts: 255 | Thanked: 15 times | Joined on Oct 2007 @ United Kingdom
#79
Originally Posted by benny1967 View Post
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...)
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's Avatar
benny1967 is offline benny1967
2007-11-01 , 10:27
Posts: 3,790 | Thanked: 5,718 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ Vienna, Austria
#80
Originally Posted by rs-px View Post
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.
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?
 
Reply
Page 8 of 11 « First 67 8 910 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:02.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top