Slashdot Mirror
TechCrunch Wants To Create an Open Source Tablet
RKo618 writes "TechCrunch announced that they are planning to design their own $200 web tablet device. Quoting: 'The idea is to turn it on, bypass any desktop interface, and go directly to Firefox running in a modified Kiosk mode that effectively turns the browser into the operating system for the device. Add Gears for offline syncing of Google docs, email, etc., and Skype for communication and you have a machine that will be almost as useful as a desktop but cheaper and more portable than any laptop or tablet PC.' The aim is for the tablet to run on modified open source software, which will be released back to the community along with the specifications for the hardware."
They have to compete with the N770 and N800 both that run open source software and both already have a very large installed base of users.
They have to compete with that, so they really need to get it right. I love my N770 except for battery life. I wish these things could go at least 3 days between charges.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I don't see how this beats a Linux distro, it's just as cheap, and just as portable. It's also probably going to be a lot more realistic for your average Joe user. Just my humble opinion, though.
I think all this is great, but $200 is too much.
I mean, those specs pretty much match a Nokia N800 with a pair of 2 GB SD cards and running OS 2008. Heck, they even got the Linux part.
Okay, you can upgun to an Arm11, put in a bigger battery, and make the touch screen multitouch, but the device proposed is not something entirely new.
It is, however, something eminently useful on a daily basis.
Make that two hundred, or 200. Not 200 hundred, which would be 20,000. This is why I don't post in the morning.
At a dollar a piece, I'd buy a few. But what would you do with 200 of them?
And what the hell is 200 hundred?
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
They could use Jabber for instant messaging, and Asterix for voice communications.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Linux kernel ... check. ... check. ... Gecko-based browser, so check. ... check. Also all the other IM protocols. ... check. Also Bluetooth to my EDGE phone. ... check. ... still waiting. But I have abiword.
Touchscreen interface
Firefox
Skype
Wifi
Headphones, mike, camera
Google Gears
About $100 over the target price, but not bad.
http://www.nseries.com/products/n800/#l=products,n800
I'd like a bigger touchscreen, but then it wouldn't fit in my pocket.
They are likely to want to use Flash on this as well. As we know Flash works so well on Linux, and Gnash is frequently questionable, but probably a better choice if they want a choice in processors.
For VOIP it would probably make sense to include a SIP client as well as Skype, and if a non intel processor is being used, then they would need additional cooperation from the company, more than if they merely wanted to include it.
Firefox is a great operating system it lacks a good browser, though.
At a dollar a piece, I'd buy a few. But what would you do with 200 of them?
Sell them at the (two) dollar store.
And what the hell is 200 hundred?
Twenty thousand.
Next customer!!
America, Home of the Brave.
I just love the way that people are wanting and buying thin client hardware after years saying they couldn't possibly work without a REAL computer
I think these things would be more useful going the thin-client approach. E.g., just use it to ssh+vnc into a persistent desktop on your home PC. That way you have all your settings preserved, and the performance will likely be much better for anything more complicated than reading.
I think the opera browser for most smartphones / blackberries use a thin client approach, where they render your web page on their servers and send screenscrapes to your device which you can pan and zoom around in their interface.
Anyway, I've been looking for something to eventually replace my Palm T|X, and don't really see anything I like too much. The N810 looks nice, but seems like the PIM functionality will be taking a step back from what I have now (granted it wasn't really designed for PIM at all to begin with).
a technology blog wants to create a device?
yea right seems like linkbait to get more ad impressions (open that site while having firebug open they load so much ad shit)
The iPod Touch is also a serious contender. If it were about 4-5x bigger, it would be almost exactly what TechCrunch is asking for.
$200 for a web connected device that runs all of it's apps from the internet rather than locally... I can think of one device that does that exact thing already, costs $199 and has enough power to do some stuff locally on it's own hardware, plus adds a phone and MP3 player to the mix - the Apple iPhone...
But I don't see how this is useful at all except for a communications device. I don't see any way to input anything - no KB, no mouse. I guess your finger becomes the mouse but how do you type, even in the most rudimentary fashion? Even simple web browsing most times entails some sort of keyboard input. I like the idea but I don't see it being useful as a computer without a keyboard. Am I missing something?
Now it is official: Firefox is the new EMACS.
If only Firefox had a good web browser.
Read that as 'TechCrunch Wants to Create an Open Source Toilet' and I was like 'Hell...yeah'.
I want a 9" iPod Touch.
Make a Linux based one with a glass screen and multi-touch that has that level of polish, and that level of simplicity and people will be interested.
Give them plain ol' Firefox on a lousy LCD with a resistive touch screen and it'll have the same success every other internet tablet has had... ie, it'll end up on TigerDirect at 80% off.
More power to them, but they need to scrap their list of requirements and put one thing at the very top: usability. If it doesn't have the UX and physical usability of an iPod Touch (where my grandmother could figure it out), its missed the boat. If the software is getting less than 95% of the attention, then they've missed the boat.
Pepper Computer already tried this, and they failed. It turns out that producing a device that can sell for $200 is quite difficult.
It also turns out that people aren't willing to spend $N for a limited-functionality device when they're able to get a full-featured laptop for $N, or even $N+100
I wish TechCrunch luck!
Provided you don't want to write anything down (no proper keyboard), connect your digicam or any other device (maybe one USB port, no other ports), play anything but the simplest of simple games (again, no keyboard/ports), no photo editing (not enought horsepower)...
So, yes, if all you do is to look at facebook and call people up with skype this is "as usefull as a desktop". But if that is all you do, why not get something like a Eee 2G, an Elonex One or a MSI Wind?
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
We know PDA-sized screens are no good for web-browsing (especially when the mocked-up picture implies showing print-sized text). So it follows that the screen will have to be at least the size of a paperback and preferably the size of an A4 sheet to get any kind of mass market take-up (with, of course the battery capacity to match). If you plan to do this for $200, you must know something that the rest of the world has missed.
Even the book readers that appeared last year didn't manage that - and they seem to have sunk without trace. Without this, the project is nothing more than pie in the sky.
I'll keep an eye out for the end product, but I won't hold my breath waiting for it.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
What the article suggests is using the browser as the interface to the computer. Which is just as silly as using the browser for an operating system.
Why not skip the idea of a separate browser "application" altogether and build web-rendering into something that resembles the "desktop," with some kind of multitouch swipe that brings up an application launcher for stuff like Skype and your favorite porn torrent downloader and video player? Whoa...I feel like Steve Jobs all of a sudden.
You want a Macbook-air thin wireless touch screen tablet device for $200? I want world peace, Dick Cheney's head on a pike, and a pony... good luck with that!
I'll admit what they are talking about sounds really cool, but the real world limitations of battery technology, thin electronics, and design prowess that only companies like Apple seem to have will make this thing cost $2000-3000 when it's finally done. Sorry, you just can't cram all of that good stuff into a 0.5 inch enclosure for $200.
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
You can use Nimbuzz for voice. Not open source, but uses Jabber/XMPP. They do have a web-client (that does not do voice) and a flash widget for Facebook et al that does do voice. Making a full-featured flash client that does voice should be an obvious next step, since it opens up linux/mac markets.
Nimbuzz connects to your Skype, MSN/Live, GTalk, Yahoo and AIM, with voice calling supported for the first three networks, and also works for mobile phones (both local dial-up and full VoIP) and PC (Windows only currently, which kindof sucks, given that I'm typing this on a Mac)
They should love to one-up Skype in a project like this, if they can get tight integration.
Hhow dare you come up with a complete business model.
I like the Idea. For the simple reason that if it were truly open it could be used for other purposes. Like alternative communications devices for the speech impaired (i.e. autistic, cerebral palsy, kids, with motor speech problems).
Currently the only thing available to my knowledge is the Prentkey Romich tablets at about $6,000 US a pop.
It would be nice to be able to have the ability to develop an open source low cost alternative. Something with maybe only one button besides the screen. For people that cannot afford these devices for one reason or the other.
once more into the breach
What this project needs is an on-screen keyboard/text entry method of roughly the same type and quality as the iPhone's keyboard. Until there's something like that in the linux world, using devices like this will be a pretty clunky affair.
What I really wanted from Apple was a touch screen macbook air. Instead of opening it's just a screen, they have the technology, the size is right; why didn't they make a tablet?!
Oh well, guess we'll have to wait for Steve.
Didn't Steve someone-or-other already do something like this. I think it was at the fruit company.
The N-series would be absolutely excellent if it had a well-designed PIM suite (and by well-designed, I mean not a poorly-designed, hacked together, proof-of-concept, "oh yes there is a PIM suite" sort of PIM suite).
As it stands, the only real alternatives are the iPod Touch (which is very nice but can't do Flash and has no camera or mic) or a stodgy Palm device (do they still even make non-phone devices?). Nokia has the superior hardware, but alas the software just isn't nearly as versatile without a quality PIM.
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
Where does tech crunch get the funds and the in-house minds to pull something like this off? Seems to me they may not be able to.
Fifteen years someone's been trying to get the gadget that would be an online viewing device, tablet, NetPC, whatever. Michael "why won't they let me fly back on the Google Plane" Arrington is just one more arrogant joker, posing as a visionary in a high-profile spot, wanting to crack open the notebook/tablet/ultra-something marketplace. He'll fail, too.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
go directly to Firefox running in a modified Kiosk mode that effectively turns the browser into the operating system for the device. Add Gears for offline syncing of Google docs, email, etc., and Skype for communication and you have a machine that will be almost as useful as a desktop but cheaper and more portable than any laptop or tablet PC
What alternative reality are they living in? First, if we have an embeded Firefox in a kiosk mode, wouldn't that keep me from patching and upgrading the browser? Then, you are basically telling me that all I need to do on a computer is browse the web, and online word processing and e-mail, and VoIP? Shoot, the iPhone does more than that, and sells for the same price. And I certainly would not claim its as good as a desktop. Shoot, my desktop has more power than my maxed-out laptop, and I do video editing and 3D rendering, gaming, and multimedia. If I am using Google Mail, this probably means that I cannot sync to my exchange server.
And what is wrong with just taking a cheap tablet off of ebay and throwing Linux on it?
Also, Firefox is not an operating system. An operating system and a browser are not even remotely connected, no matter how much BS from Microsoft you have read. This is probably going to be a modified Linux build, boot directly into X, and then launch Firefox. For them to make Firefox into an operating system would require a HUGE rewrite of Firefox, and, as I said earlier, would keep them from being able to do patches and such.
I use my N800 on my commute to and from work on the train every day to watch TV/films. Battery life is no problem, because there are power outlets on the train.
What I find amusing is that a lot of passengers will look at the thing curiously, then finally ask what it is. When I tell them, the usual response is something like, "I didn't know that Nokia makes something like that!"
We know about it, but we also read Slashdot. I bet this thing would sell more if it somehow got Apple-like viral advertising.
"Hey, Nokia, is my check in the mail?"
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Every time these ideas come around, they simply boil down to lightweight desktop interfaces. Just taking interfaces people are used to elsewhere and dumbing them down is not going to solve any problems. First, determine if the product solves any problems, then make the solution fit those specific needs.
Windows Mobile demonstrates this pattern exactly, which is one reason the iPhone dominates it. Apple realized that the form factor, the input devices, and usage scenarios are radically different from the desktop. Microsoft used hierarchical menus, scroll bars, and other common metaphors that break-down on handhelds. Apple opted for user interfaces that give powerful visual clues where pixels and real estate are hard to come by. The different is, as millions of people will tell you, striking.
This “yet another tablet PC” is not going to catch on or provide any value if the designers simply repackage the laptops we already have (never mind other flops like Windows XP Tablet Edition). Figure out what users actually need and develop to those needs. Have they solved handwriting recognition? How are they going to deal with small screens? Will essential functions be quickly accessible? Do they have any concrete use cases? Have they considered that people dislike stylus input? Any ideas for one-handed keyboards perhaps?
Sorry, but trimming down the web browser and preserving constrained desktop functionality elsewhere is not going to make waves. This strategy has failed many times in the past, and I am surprised that we are still trying it so many years after the QBE.
If you build it, I will buy. This is a great idea and one that I hope gains steam.
Sorry, I must be new here.
America, Home of the Brave.
Microsoft's problem in handhelds is Windows. They don't want the Windows Mobile based devices to become laptop replacements, because that would compete with Windows sales, but they want them to be recognizably Windows to both make development easier and to promote the brand.
Windows Mobile loses because Windows CE is just not reliable and solid enough to serve both the needs of a mobile phone and the needs of a general-purpose handheld. Palm didn't have this problem nearly as badly because PalmOS ran under a real time OS (AMX) that you couldn't get into from user applications... the whole Palm environment is just one task for AMX.
Take away the phone, and just worry about making a PDA, and you get a lot more freedom. The iPod Touch has really got more potential to benefit from iPhone apps than the iPhone, because it's not such a critical device. In the Pocket PC WinCE would have been fine if ActiveSync worked as well as Palm HotSync, so your ActiveSync repository served as a complete backup for everything on your Pocket PC... losing data every time I ran my battery flat was what drove me back to PalmOS for my PDA. So the Pocket PC loses because Microsoft didn't make it good enough to run standalone, and didn't make PC-side software good enough that you didn't care.
Going to a tablet, and you get even more freedom. Before "Tablet PC" there were Windows CE based clamshells and tablets that were quite capable, but Microsoft pretty much nuked them by loading the Pocket PC software down with restrictions (both technical and contractual) that meant the Windows CE based tablets were stuck with the previous generation of Windows Mobile software. Of course, they wanted their flagship product on the Tablet PC, not this stripped down embedded-only Windows CE.
I don't know if a browser-only tablet is a good solution, but a tablet is so far from the iPhone or Windows Mobile that trying to draw analogies between them is misleading at best... even if Microsoft hadn't continually undercut Windows Mobile to keep it from even potentially cannibalizing their flagship product.
If they really want to use Firefox as a kind of OS/GUI and webapps for everything, they've got a problem. To do this, you need a *large* screen (at least 12"), because webapps are made to be viewed at large screens and controlled with a mouse -- controls are too tiny and cramped to be used on a small touchscreen (without a stylus). And with a large screen they need either a really large battery or the battery life of the thing will be pathetic.
With an optimized GUI you can get away with a smaller screen (look at the iPhone), but this would mean to have actually applications written for that...
So, nice idea, but a cheap web tablet seems to be just not possible right now.
The iPhone costs three times as much as this device. If you subsidize it with a phone contract the list price is comparable, but then you have to add well over a thousand dollars per year for the contract.
As I read the title for an opensource Tablet, I was quite disgusted to read that they would include skype ...
Don't mess up skype with standards & Opensource...
please /...
Why not skip the idea of a separate browser "application" altogether and build web-rendering into something that resembles the "desktop,"
Microsoft did that in 1997. It was called "Active Desktop" and led to the biggest malware ecosystem ever.
The iPhone does not make that mistake. The browser is a separate application and the application, not the rendering engine, manages access between the sandbox and the outside world.
I've yet to get Google Gears to actually provide offline access to my files while actually offline. (It works fine while online, but of course what would be the point?)
Does anybody else have the same experience? All I ever get after logging in is a "file listing" which is blank, as if I didn't even have files stored in Google Docs.
Comment of the year
I just got an iPod touch 8GB and I simply do not understand the reputation it has received as being "usable". I've had mp3 players in the past (my last was an iRiver T60) and have had no trouble using them, but the iPod has been nothing but a head ache since I got it. It was difficult to get it to detect my wireless network, it was difficult to get it to play a proper playlist of music, it was difficult to get it play my movies (of course Apple doesn't even support many common formats, and you don't learn this until you actually go to play the fucking things). For christ sakes, I had to GOOGLE HOW TO TURN THE FUCKING THING OFF, god help Apple if they were to be so bothered to put a users manual in the box. Instead, all you get is this 5 page "quick start" guide that just tells you to install iTunes. Oh but they make it plenty clear that it was "designed in california!!!", like this is supposed to be some kind of a feature. And I love how you have this ONE button at the bottom that you have to press to switch from one function to another, because putting an icon on the screen in a standard location where it would be obvious would have been just too difficult for those california designers!
And to top it all off, there appears to be absolutely no way to transfer files to the thing on Linux unless you "jailbreak" it using some obnoxious looking (and probably warantee breaking) instructions. So now I have to always be near my Windows computer (my laptop runs only linux) if I want to be able to manipulate the play list. So much for the portability factor. I guess Apple expects you to buy a Windows or Mac computer specifically to use their MP3 player. And this is what people fawn over, calling it the standard of "usability"? What a load of crap. It is amazing how far Apple has come on fanboy generated hype.
$20,000 (20,000 @ $1) a piece is significantly more expensive than the great grandparent probably expected :D
... is that it's not possible.
Look at the specs - if you want decent battery life, a decent screen (with decent resolution), decent RAM and storage (specced at 512MB and 4GB), and to all go for $200, it's hard.
The only thing on the market NOW that's even remotely close is the XO-1, but it only has 256MB of RAM and 1GB storage. And it's BOM costs are quite high already, even with its anemic CPU. If you want to mass-produce it and sell for $200 retail, after taking out everyone's profit and overhead, you're looking at a manufactured unit cost of around $100. Maybe $125, if you can squeeze profit margins from retailers and the like. (Figure in profit/time for doing the software, as asll as distribution costs to get it to retailers - you'll probably want wholesale to cost around $150-160). Of that, the screen, RAM and flash are the big budget items, and a good CPU can be pricey in quantity ($10-ish, nominally for a high-end ARM processor from the big companies - Samsung/Marvell/Freescale).
It's a tight squeeze, add in the other costs like warranty and support, and you'll find not many people are willing ot take on such a high-risk project with such little returns. You can try to sell it online like the OLPC guys with their "give one get one" thing, which lets you raise the manufactured cost more, but then have to deal with all the issues of distribution to end users.
It's not that no one wants to do it, it's just that it's really hard to do a good job in very tight constraints. Give it a year, and you'll probably be able to do it with last year's CPUs, last year's RAM, and last year's storage. But if you up the requirements next year, well.
The original Eee PC had a crappy screen, crappy battery life, OK CPU, as-required RAM and as-required storage, and still cost $400, even though the screen was bulk leftovers from portable DVD players, and the CPU was more or less "hey, I found a box of these things sitting on the shelf".
I want something with a reasonable sized screen for use where a laptop is awkward or unnecessary but I don't need pocketability.
I haven't found such a place, yet. In the off-chance that I do happen to come across such a place, I'll take the risk that I won't need a specialized, one-task computer to access the internet, right at that very moment.
Hmmm, sounds like TechCrunch already lost a customer for a product they don't even have ready to market.
Hmm? Why's that? Why would any firmware prevent Opera from running?
And regardless of that, one can update the Linux version on the thing, which surely would get around any problem, yes?
Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
Just add a keyboard with a touchpad (hinged to the display) and I'm there.
Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
The browser is going to be an operating system? Hello? Am I the only one here who knows what an OS is? (Hint: it's not a GUI). Or has Firefox developed features that allow it to instantiate and run application threads on CPUs, interfaces for hardware device drivers, and file systems that I'm not aware of?
And, OK, I probably should know...but what the heck is "kiosk" mode? The thing unfolds into a little hut with a French guy inside who sells you newspapers and magazines?
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
And yes...that was 5 Mb as in megabytes...
no comment
http://news.cnet.com/2300-1044_3-6239928-1.html
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
http://cherrypal.com
Oh this is sooo easy to do: http://gumstix.com/store/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=202 Ok done. Only problem, it is going to run closer to $500 for all the parts you need. Considering a 4.3" touch screen runs $85 if you're not buying in quantity, and a 4GB micro SD runs about $15, that's $100 right there. And the cheapest retail 15" touchscreen I've seen is $299, Megavision MV155U, and the power requirements for that thing make "portable" an impossibility. I've been playing around with building a dual screen ebook reader and I've come to the conclusion that it will cost at least $800 to make a one off prototype without doing anything really special engineering wise. To get down to the $200 range you need basically need to get your screen for free, or buy an iPhone :)
Arrington & Co. appear to be completely naive about the realities of running a business or building technology products. If they even manage to create a prototype, how are they going to deal with support, with legal compliance and defense against outside legal threats, just to name a few issues? Are they really going to get engineers and designers good enough on a volunteer basis?
The weirdest part about this is the volunteer aspect. Does anybody think they are going to find enough quality volunteers to devote a significant portion of their lives to this? It's not like volunteering for humanitarian causes, or your pet political issue. You'd be volunteering to help someone make a gadget. If they get their beloved gadget, they probably aren't going to have time to use it, if they then have to spend all their time working for free to support the damn thing. Wouldn't it be a lot more efficient just to work a few hours more, and buy a more expensive device made by a serious company that has the ability to deliver and support the device?
Somebody has to make a profit to be able to continue investing in the platform and keep the business running. And if somebody is making a profit, they they are basically exploiting the volunteer labor.
Poorly thought-out plans like this that involve such massive amounts of volunteer labor really piss me off. It amounts to laziness wasting a lot of people's time. "Hey everybody, come do this work for free, because I couldn't be bothered with the effort of making a viable business plan."
... and then they built the supercollider.
I'd much much prefer to see it digitiser based, having used a Fujitsu 4210 for a couple of years at my last place I'm a major fan of the tablet and the digitiser too. However, I tried out a touch screen one for a few days and was seriously unimpressed, it's a big step backwards, so much so that I sent it back.
I can provide a recently patented multitouch screen for this. manuko1977@hotmail.com.