And that's the story of Apple computing. They are always short on features (just recall the one button mouse) but they always claim that the only reason for this is a streamlined operation leading to improved user experience. iPad might become a classic example of how this approach fails.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
[Merged] HP Slate - Upcoming Tablet, Possibly Running WebOS
- Thread starter mbell75
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And that's the story of Apple computing. They are always short on features (just recall the one button mouse) but they always claim that the only reason for this is a streamlined operation leading to improved user experience. iPad might become a classic example of how this approach fails.
Wow... I cannot believe the smugness and over-the-top superiority complex of this thread. Inadequacy problems, anyone? The HP Slate will fail. Well, it may or may not, but I'll leave that outcome when the device actually comes out.
The iPad offers a lot, but not everything I need, and yes, I have an iPad and I've used a Tablet PC and a variety of touch devices for a number of years, so yes, I do know what I'm talking about.
The iPad offers a lot, but not everything I need, and yes, I have an iPad and I've used a Tablet PC and a variety of touch devices for a number of years, so yes, I do know what I'm talking about.
I agree, except I don't own an iPad since it is not out yet where I live. I need to test both devices before seeing which is better for me, it all comes down to if the slate can be used for web browsing properly or not.
Absolutely. If you can test both devices, or at least read fair reviews when the device actually appears, then by all means each of us should make up his or her own mind. Passing judgment prior to even turning on the bloody thing seems akin to mind reading. Snake oil anybody?
This thread reminds me of a few threads about four years ago when a lot of posters were bashing tablets, eventhough the vast majority of the naysayers didn't even have one or use one on any regular basis. And NOW look what the Kingdom of Steve has come out with and all of a sudden Apple can't keep the things in stock. I wonder how many tablet bashers have now miraculously converted?
This thread reminds me of a few threads about four years ago when a lot of posters were bashing tablets, eventhough the vast majority of the naysayers didn't even have one or use one on any regular basis. And NOW look what the Kingdom of Steve has come out with and all of a sudden Apple can't keep the things in stock. I wonder how many tablet bashers have now miraculously converted?
That's because tablets were useless junk until the iPad came out. Not too hard to understand.
I've used one for teaching for 7 years now with good results, and my graduate student has found it a godsend for the last 4 years. Tablets - like the iPad - are not perfect, but they have their place.
Don't knock what you don't know. And if you've had one, well then, have fun with your iPad.
I have used many different ones professionally for years, both PC-based as well as the Modbook.
A rock can be used as a hammer but that doesn't make it a good hammer.
Thanks though, I am indeed having lots of fun with my iPad. Also, if the tablet works for you more power to you.
Tablets before the iPad wasn't made for just browsing/movie on the go like the iPad is.
I can comment on a fairly specific use case. Tablets were hailed as the hardware that would enable physicians to use electronic medical record software efficiently and quickly. Unfortunately, the EHR software experience on tablets never has lived up to the vision. We've been equipping our physicians with various tablets over the years (Motion, Fujitsu, Toshiba, etc) and 95% of the physicians don't use the tablet functionality because it doesn't provide any advantage over a laptop unless the EHR software and templates are specifically designed for tablet use. I would say that the 3 most important things about using EHR with any device are (1) speed, (2) more speed, and (3) even more speed. Any computer, whether it is a desktop, laptop, or tablet, can be a success for EHR use if it doesn't slow the physician down. Of the tablets I've seen released or proposed, only the iPad promises the UI, instant-on capability, and long battery life that would give it a significant advantage over a laptop for EHR. The HP Slate, in its current configuration, isn't nearly as compelling as the iPad for EHR use.
Rather than make personal judgments against individual opinions why not address some very specific reasons why we believe that the HP Slate will fail? Given that you have so much experience with tablets (with the implication that none of us have) it should be easy to address the issues of the challenges posed by a touch UI for an operating system that is not touch-optimized.
Is there a good reason as a consumer to hope that all the competition fails? I mean it's almost like people are HAPPY when other devices are reviewed badly. The only review i've seen from the slate is a guy who happen to get to mess with a beta version of the slate for 10 minutes. It's like those Windows 7 commercials when the fake customers say they help create windows 7.
You guys do know that people have put a lot of hard work into it and aren't trying to make something bad right?
And that competition is good for consumers and not bad?
You guys do know that people have put a lot of hard work into it and aren't trying to make something bad right?
And that competition is good for consumers and not bad?
The term "fail" is not even defined in this context
. Also, they have built their touch GUI ontop of win 7, so as long as the browsing and movieplayer is working properly it is the same as an iPad, atleast for me.
...not hope that they fail. But there have been devices like the JooJoo that were hyped before they were released that fell far short. The critical dismissal of the iPad as "the greatest Apple failure since the Newton" completely ignored the difficulty and challenge of producing a viable tablet-form-factor device.
So rather than the critics acknowledge that they were wrong, they'll dismiss the sales of the iPad as simply the mindless drones of the cult of Apple buying anything with the logo on it. But in the same breath, the HP Slate will be *THE* tablet.
Tablet PCs have been around for nearly 2 decades. They all failed to gain mainstream attention. They are used for specific industries like the medical field, but there hasn't been a viable consumer tablet device.
Competition is good. Weak competition is not.
If that is true... that only browsing and movie playing are requirements for you (without regard to size, weight, battery life, boot time, responsiveness, and application support) then it WILL work for you.The term "fail" is not even defined in this context
If you look back at my previous post on the matter, you'll see that there is far more to putting Win7 on a tablet than a touch menu.
Size and weight is about the same. The only things the iPad does properly is surf the web, play movies and some games made for the mobile platform (and who got time to play games on the go anyhow?).
And you still haven't defined "fail".
Size weight?
The Slate is smaller and lighter... and having full windows 7 should be technically it has more application support no?
Disclaimer: I have an iPad
First off
Most of those audio apps won't be able to run on an atom chip , vsts maybe and loop / basic sequences.BUT Just because not everyone uses that software does that change his argument that it could be successful if it could?
Check again. There are physical differences between the HP Slate and iPad.
Looking for a definition of "fail"? If you couldn't glean it from the context of the posts, then I'll make it simple and clear....
HP Slate fail = the inability of the Slate to do the things (that the iPad can't do) as well as the things that the iPad CAN do.
If you need more specifics... If the HP Slate can't display webpages in all of their flash-ridden glory, then that is a "fail". If the Slate can't display hulu videos smoothly, then that is a "fail". And that is before talking about cooling fans, boot times, battery life, etc.
If you have read my previous post about the specific challenges that Win7 will face on a touch device and still don't understand, then I am not equipped to illuminate that for you. Sorry.
First off
BUT Just because not everyone uses that software does that change his argument that it could be successful if it could?
Just trying to point out the narrow mindedness of someone who thinks the computer industry revolves around music/video production. Sure, it's a big deal to a segment of the computer using public, but they operating word is segment.
Oh gosh, how completely smug you are about this. Note that we have an option for a keyboard for the iPad. How much of a boost is that to general use. You can also use a keyboard attachment for the slate if really needed. And yes, Win 7 as it currently stands is not made for a touch interface. But with HP's past experience with their touchsmarts, apps already currently made to work with tablet pcs, packages such as
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/194815/getting_touchy_with_windows_7_touch_pack.html
There is a thing called progress than can come quickly or slowly depending on how dedicated HP and MS is to fixing it. Even if it is released without perfect functionality. You can still improve on it. Not the most desirable option but possible. Yes very.
I mean as far back as 2002 there was a tablet pack for Windows XP. It's not impossible to change the things you mentioned.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...48-269B-4838-AB9E-74B64626A494&displaylang=en
See, that't the problem. HP will try to marry Windows 7 with bottom-of-the-barrell Atom Z processor and 1 GB of RAM. The end result is going to be quite ugly. Not to mention that Windows 7 was never intended for full touch interface, just look at that patheticly small software keyboard. I pity the full whio'll try to type on that without a stylus.