Arrington's Web Tablet Nearly Ready For Launch?

narramissic writes "The 'dead simple and dirt cheap' touchscreen Web tablet that Michael Arrington of TechCrunch set out to build last July seems to be nearing completion, writes blogger Peter Smith. 'The CrunchPad is a Linux-based touchscreen tablet using a browser-based UI. When you turn the unit on, it boots right into the webkit-based browser. There's a pop-up virtual keyboard for entering URLs and such (you wouldn't want to do any significant typing on it) and scrolling is via swiping the screen. When Arrington first visualized the project he was shooting for a $200 price point, then discovered that a $299 price was more realistic.'"

Comments

Wait till Slashdot tablet

[Renderer of Evil]

Gartner has projected that in the next 5 years about half of all internet bloggers will paper launch their own internet tablets, because it's the next logical step.

Looks great but...

[Nursie]

A cursory glance through TFA and the main post it links to do not reveal the specs of the device.

What's the platform? What sort of connectivity does it have?

Re:Looks great but...

[Jamamala]

Have a look at here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrunchPad.
It's supposedly running an ubuntu variant, so debian should be fine. In the recent video of it the narrator apologised for the loading times claiming that they were "on a 3G connection".

less functional than netbook at same price

[LodCrappo]

I don't see what is compelling or really even interesting about this product. A netbook for the same money is a far more capable device.

Re:less functional than netbook at same price

[Anonymous Coward]

When I think of industrial design, impeccable user-interface, rock-solid software, and industry leading portable products I immediately think of Michael Arringon. A blogger on TechCrunch.

Where few dozen companies with multi-million dollar R&D budgets have failed, one man who posts internet rumors in his underwear will succeed.

Re:I wonder...

[notarockstar1979]

No, but if anyone reads much Techcrunch you'll know that there will almost certainly be a few dozen Twitter clients, and it will probably be the default browser homepage.

Expensive For what it is

[Bicx]

Don't get me wrong: I love the simplicity of the idea. However, if for $300 I am only able to surf the web, I would go for a netbook instead. Sure, netbooks lack the style and aesthetic appeal of a big touchscreen, but you have a real keyboard, a real OS, and you can use it for many different tasks (as much as you can with a tiny screen and keyboard anyway).

However, I may have been sold if the price had stayed at $200.

Re:nice mockups...

[harryandthehenderson]

The resolution looks about what the mockups show. You can find a shot of the actual thing here.

A platform for output-only applications

[Animats]

Think of it as a mobile platform for mostly-output applications. eBook reader. Web browser. PowerPoint. TV and movies. Maps. Things where input is minimal.

That's the proper positioning for this - as a content delivery platform with a screen big enough to be useful. There's a market for that.

Cost

[rm999]

"When Arrington first visualized the project he was shooting for a $200 price point, then discovered that a $299 price was more realistic"

Why do so many people make this same mistake? I think it is hubris - the idea that "I'm smarter than everyone else in the industry, and I have ideas that none of them do". One of the worst PR moves is to drastically raise your estimated price, in this case by 50%. And in the end, the promised price point of 200 dollars was necessary; for 300 dollars, I can get a fully-featured netbook or iPod touch.

And I'd like to add that there are several examples of companies promising a great price, and then actually delivering on it (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Nano)