Slashdot Mirror


Apple Newton vs Samsung Q1 UMPC

An anonymous reader writes "CNET has run a comparison between the 1997 Apple Newton and a modern Windows ultra mobile PC, the Samsung Q1. Remarkably, the Newton comes off as the winner. From the article: 'An operating system designed for a desktop computer will rarely shoehorn well into a portable device, yet that is exactly what Samsung has tried to do with the Q1. Very little consideration has been given to the differing priorities of desktop and small-form computer users. Windows is a one-size-fits-all solution, whereas the Newton OS is very specifically built for the efficient use of a small screen and stylus.'"

6 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. UMPC = Stupid Idea by the+linux+geek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have no idea what M$ was thinking with these "ultra-mobile PCs." They manage to combine the speed of a PDA with the lean-ness of a full Windows with the spaciousness of a small screen, and the result is pathetic. They seem to be trying to doom themselves to a flop far bigger then that of the Newton.

  2. It's the usability, stupid! by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course the Newton won -- considering that it runs software custom-designed for mobile PIM use, while the Q1 is more-or-less running normal desktop Windows (tablet edition, whoop-de-do), was there ever any doubt?

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  3. Newton Advantages by Feneric · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wrote a bit about this before. The Newton does a lot of things well as it was designed from the ground up to be a hand-held device. As a consequence it's still seeing use, still seeing third-party development, and still more usable than some devices currently getting produced.

    It's not ideal, either; it could definitely use a diet to shed some weight, and these days features like wireless, bluetooth, etc. shouldn't have to be added via cards. An evolutionary development of the Newton platform could easily beat almost any other device on the market today, though.

  4. Re:Wow, it's a review troll by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This smells fishy to me. If you were to run a Ferrari against a Model T, you'd expect the Ferrari to kick butt -- in fact, you'd receive some raised eyebrows for even testing the two together. I suspect there was some hanky-panky here from the start.

    not at all. In this comparison the Model T has a traditional steering wheel and gas/brake pedals. The Ferrari has a laptop trackpad for steering and a strange USB device for breaking and gas that seems to get disconnected at random times and at regular times the steering will either slam the wheels to the right hard for no reason or fail to accept input.

    THAT is the difference between a Newton and XP Tablet. The newton was designed from the beginning to be a non keyboard/mouse device. XP is designed ot have a keyboard and mouse and then MSFT slapped some crud into it to work with the other hardware.

    It does not work (I have 2 Xp tablets, I hate the XP tablet tools, they simply suck.) and is unreliable at best.

    That seems to be a very fair comparison to me with no fishyness.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  5. The Newton Already Lives On... by mattybinks · · Score: 5, Informative

    just in segmented form. It's sprinkled throughout OS X and the iPod. One can only hope that an iPhone would bring the bulk of that functionality and organizational power back in one device. And if you're really obsessive about using a Newton on newer technology, check out the Einstein project. It's moving along at a good pace.

  6. Re:"Winner?" by rthille · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, you can think about it this way. "I prefer a screen that stays greyscale for 30 hours, vs a screen which is color for the first 2.5 hours, then just black after that."

    --
    Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/