How Google Can Make Android Truly Tablet-Worthy

With an Android armada on the horizon (or at least expected), reader androidtablet plugs this piece on ways Android could be truly tablet-friendly. Armchair engineering may be easy to knock, but I like the ideas presented here, such as aggressively using the inactive (locked) screen state to display useful information.

Comments

Features Android tablets need

[symbolset]

I was thinking I would offer some features an Android tablet might need. I made a list:

Share screen - for educational purposes

Ebook reader.

Internet browser

Citrix client

IRDA capture/replay (media remote control apps)

Skype

Apparently I'm not very creative. Those things and many thousands more are available in the standard package. Truly inventive stuff is offerred in the app store.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[zill]

Actually I would rather not have Google work on any of those things you listed. All of these features can be provided by third-party developers so there's no need to burden Google's engineers.

What Google should be doing is improving the speed and stability of the entire Android OS, most critically the Dalvik virtual machine. For crying out loud they just enabled JIT on 2.2.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Zixaphir]

For crying out loud they just enabled JIT on 2.2.

...And it is MAGICAL!

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Man On Pink Corner]

What Google should be doing is improving the speed and stability of the entire Android OS, most critically the Dalvik virtual machine. For crying out loud they just enabled JIT on 2.2.

I wouldn't hold my breath. It's 2010, and they just now figured out that memset() is supposed to be able to write values other than zero.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Fnkmaster]

Have you tried running some apps on a Froyo-enabled Nexus One yet? There can be no doubt, Dalvik is now blazingly fast on a 1GHz snapdragon.

The only performance issues left that I've seen are:

1) For some reason, LauncherPro Beta is far smoother and snappier feeling than the stock Launcher. This was the case in 2.1 and is the case in 2.2. I use LauncherPro Beta, but really there's absolutely no excuse for the stock launcher to not be able to smoothly scroll through the home screens on such blazingly fast hardware. I don't know why the JIT didn't fix this issue with Launcher, but I'm guessing it has something to do with the way it interacts with the graphics hardware on the Nexus One, since the JIT is amazing.

2) Browser scrolling in Android Browser. Not rendering, but scrolling. In terms of page load time and rendering on a good internet connection, this is the fastest phone-based web browser I've seen. But even my iPhone 3G (which has a much less beefy processor) could scroll around on web pages without feeling... choppy. Something is wrong with the smooth scrolling algorithm, the number of frames/the amount of CPU time it uses to actually *scroll* vs. to incrementally render, or the way it puts the Javascript engine on hold or something. Please, please, please figure out how to make the web browser scroll without giving me a headache, the way iPhone does it. Cheat if you need to - skipping frames or a quick-pass and filling in once the primary scroll action is complete. Maintain smoothness at all costs. Since the browser engine is native code (just the outer UI stuff is Dalvik), this saw no benefit from JITing, and in fact is worse under 2.2 in my experience, probably because I came from CyanogenMod which is very well optimized.

If Android gets these two issues kicked, it will be amazing.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd just need it being able to simulate a wireless access point on my phone, so that I can use my iPad without paying the horror price.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Miamicanes]

It's easy... pair your iPad with just about any Android phone known to exist. Any rooted Android ROM worth mentioning can emulate a wireless access point, and there are lots of apps to do the same thing that can be downloaded and installed on any Android phone, rooted or not.

From the Android side, it's amusing that the first question journalists and users from the Apple side of the universe ask is whether a given tablet "supports 3G". Android owners don't care, because it'll be a cold day in hell before we pay our carrier yet more money for dedicated data service for a tablet. We just take for granted that any tablet we buy is going to wirelessly tether to our phone, and take advantage of the data service we already paid for. I haven't looked yet, but I'm sure someone has already written an app to let Android tablets make use of their Android phone's location services, too.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[ArsonSmith]

I'd much rather have a tablet sized monitor that I can slide my phone into, then have a pad with all the exact same applications and data as my phone.

Perhaps throw in some storage and graphics acceleration for the larger screen, and a standard slot/plug for android phones and I'd be ecstatic about it.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Miamicanes]

> Ebook reader.

The big one, IMHO. Especially since Amazon is going to officially support Android Kindle readers. The fatal flaw of current dedicated ebook readers like the Kindle for things like programming books is the latency. Programming books are rarely read from start to finish like a novel, one page at a time. You flip around, and often jump between a couple of pages. e-Ink is totally unsuited for that particular use case. On the other hand, an Android tablet with 1280x720 display is big enough to display two Manning/OReilly-sized/formatted pages side by side and read comfortably (ok, slightly higher resolution would be nice, but I've read PDFs on a 19" 720p TV with VGA input and easily read side-by-side pages, so I know it's viable).

The problem is, we need a tablet that actually HAS 1280x720. So far, all the ones that actually seem available to buy in America are stuck in the 800/854x480 ghetto, which is kind of pointless if you already have a Nexus One/Droid/Evo/Incredible-class phone. With a little luck, they'll be abundant by Christmas :-)

Now, if there's a god, Amazon will release an Android Kindle API that lets developers create their own user interface for it (treating the DRM-protected part as a rectangular black box that can be embedded as a View into any Android app, with the API providing access to things like document metadata, telling it to turn to page 832, zoom to 60%, and set the upper-right origin of the page to the point 3.425% down and 5.015% over). It would be great for Amazon, too, because it'll give them access to free user interface R&D. 99% of the Android KindleReader apps will utterly suck, and another .9% will be flawed... but that remaining .1% will give Amazon some new UI ideas for its own hardware kindles that it can freely use.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Anonymous Coward]

Who built with that rather than using the optimized version?

Re:Features Android tablets need

[SnapShot]

This is probably more of a hardware problem than an OS problem (Android, iPad or whatever) but what I would like to see in a tablet is Wacom-quality inputs. All the tablets appear to be platforms for consuming entertainment (music, movies, social networks, apps and books) that other people have created for you. I would like to be able to create on a tablet by painting, handwriting, or sketching directly on the screen.

I've only used an iPad for 10 minutes and I've never had a chance to work with an android tablet so I'm curious, how far away is that technology?

Re:Features Android tablets need

[LBt1st]

That's exactly what I want. And the technology exists. Sadly, it's a niche market. Tablets themselves are sort of a niche so I doubt we'll ever see one with a quality high resolution interface that would allow for artwork to be made. We can dream though.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[MemoryDragon]

Not that Dalvik really was that slow before, Google did some serious considerations before releasing Dalvik into the wild.

a) First use lots of native code in the libs to deal with the fact that they do not have a JIT, so apps run more in native space than in a normal Java VM usually.

b) Make a registere based vm instead of a stack based one, the result is smaller bytecode and less operations and probably a faster per java instruction execution on bytelevel than in an unoptimized native java vm.

They have always been aware of the non jit deficit however, but they clearly said, if the tradeoff for this was to increase ram they were not going to add it, they only will add it if they have a jit on their hands which is not a burden on ram, and in the meanwhile they will use all other options they have to improve speed (which were quite a lot)

So just if a few selective benchmarks were not that fast on Dalvik does not mean the average programs were which probably spent 80% of their code in native library code anyway.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[edumacator]

I'm a huge fan of the idea of sharing screens. As a teacher, that's the first thing I looked at for the iPad.

Education administrators are on fire about the idea of smart boards, but that technology does little to change the classroom. I want the capacity to connect to a tablet with a touch screen, and then go sit by little Johnny, who is busy flirting with Susie, while I take notes. Disconnecting the teacher and the board changes classroom dynamics significantly. I use a slate system now, that let's me write on the board, but the learning curve for non-techie teachers is huge. They have to look at the screen to see what they are writing. Most give it up.

So, I'd love to see this capacity built into a tablet, but until it is, do any of you geekier-than-I types know of a good solution for this concept that might exists now?

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Anonymous Coward]

Also memset and related memory functions really should have some custom optimization for each CPU that it runs on. at least Count down to take advantage of if CPU has a special jmp op for reaching zero. The android isn't so fast as not to need a little boost. You don't have to go crazy with assembly but just a little boost would help. See here http://www.embedded.com/columns/technicalinsights/19205567?_requestid=256406

Re:Features Android tablets need

[symbolset]

There are actually a ton of cheap network-attached HDMI media hubs available. It shouldn't be too tough to use these as network-attached displays controlled by your tablet over wifi. Maybe soon we'll see this sort of thing provided in coffee shops and airports and wherever.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[exomondo]

they just now figured out that memset() is supposed to be able to write values other than zero.

Looks more like a coding error than a lack of understanding...hence the fact that the function definition specified the data all along.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Anonymous Coward]

Share screen - remote access? not sure what you mean by this.

Ebook reader - Already present: Aldiko & Kindle(soon)

Internet browser - Already there: WebKit & V8

Citrix client - there are remote desktop apps available, but Citrix would be nice.

IRDA capture/replay (media remote control apps) - Looks to be part of Google TV, and Logitech has already showcased remote control apps last month.

Skype - stated to be coming out this summer.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[Deosyne]

A-fucking-men. I'm really over the idea that my operating systems have to include some representative of every application family ever imagined. I just want the leanest, most feature rich, and most developer friendly operating system that they can produce, and let the developer community have a field day blowing our minds.

Re:Features Android tablets need

[askmsrecipe]

I'm always amazed at how many things google is involved with.

Focus

[MrEricSir]

Wouldn't it be better for Google make Android 100% perfect as a phone OS before branching out into other areas?

Re:Focus

[TouchAndGo]

I believe they're capable of working on both goals simultaneously, and it's entirely possible ideas developed in the creation of a tablet could lead to a better phone OS. Also, it's in no one's best interest for Apple to become entrenched as the only game in town for a decent tablet.

Re:Focus

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't it be better for Google make Android 100% perfect as a phone OS before branching out into other areas?

Why? Didn't stop Apple?

*Boom* *Boom* *High Hat*

Re:Focus

[Anonymous Coward]

That's now how they roll. They like to release stuff to the public in beta, so people can tinker with it.

Pejeno

Re:Focus

[oiron]

Why?

Assuming that you could make anything 100% perfect, which would presumably involve making it everything to everyone, so that nobody would ever need another of its type, why should you wait till you reach 100%?

It's a different market, but so many of the same assumptions apply. It just makes sense for them to start using an existing codebase for a new device. Apple did it!

It doesn't need to be perfect - just good enough (on both the tablet and phone) that people will want to buy it.

Also, look at other things that have languished in dev hell because they tried to go for perfection: Enlightenment, WinFS (actually, most of Longhorn), Plan 9,... Better to have something working today than something perfect next millennium.

Re:Focus

[buchner.johannes]

There is no such thing as 100% perfect software with HCI. Nor is there completed software.

Re:Focus

[DrXym]

a) There is no such thing as "100% perfect" in software, and b) Android phones are perfectly fine as it is. Doesn't mean there is no room for improvement but there is nothing wrong with the implementations out there already. My HTC Desire does an excellent job as a phone.

Re:Focus

[darthdavid]

Hell, I don't think it's even in Apple's interest to be the only game in town for tablets, really. Competition drives innovation, pressure keeps you sharp...

Re:Focus

[hairyfish]

"100% perfect" a myth. Tech moves too fast to ever be perfect, That is why we have the POGE. The challenge for Google will be come up with some sort of controlled release schedule with versions. We're only a year in and we already have 4 versions. Joe Average can't keep up, and this practice will simply turn them away to the likes of iPhone and Windows Mobile.

Re:Focus

[nacturation]

Wouldn't it be better for Google make Android 100% perfect as a phone OS before branching out into other areas?

I suppose you think that Google should wait until Linux is 100% perfect before they use it to power Android, then wait until the hardware is 100% perfect, then test Android on the hardware until it's 100% perfect, then launch a product?

Re:Focus

[hedwards]

Apple's interest is to make the hugest profit possible. And that's definitely not something that's ever been helped by competition. Competition is what helps people on the demand side of the equation, not the supply.

Haven't RTFA but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't "aggressive use of the locked screen" lead to massive battery use? What sort of power are we talking for an LCD whilst not backlit?

Re:Haven't RTFA but...

[Zixaphir]

The "lockscreen" is the screen you see when you start up the phone from inactivity, or a powered-off screen. When the screen powers on, the lock screen is the first thing you see. You unlock it, whether via button, via some "intuitive" slide-to-unlock gesture, or some pattern or lock pin, to go to whatever application you left at. So by "aggressive use of the locked screen", they are just saying, "Dammit! Allow us to customize it," or they're saying put more useful information there. They mention widgets, so it's logical to say they want customization. Honestly, I think they just want a prettier clock and an animated battery "charging" widget. Oh, and maybe Tetris as a widget. Wouldn't that be awesome?

Re:Haven't RTFA but...

[oiron]

The lock screen even on my HTC Tattoo (Android 1.6) shows the currently playing song, and song controls (notably, pause). When the screen turns off (I've set it to 15 seconds of inactivity), it takes no (display) power. When I turn the screen on again, it shows those widgets. I don't think it should be a problem

Re:Haven't RTFA but...

[nacturation]

I actually want PointCast back! Any oldtimers here will remember the info-packed screensaver. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PointCast_(dotcom)

Re:Haven't RTFA but...

[Fnkmaster]

Like everything else in Android, there are 3rd party apps that allow you to do just that. For example, Flyscreen or MyLock, and Executive Assistant and Lockbot...

All allow customizations to the lock screen, lock screen widgets, or other useful information on the lock screen.

Wrong

[0xdeadbeef]

Mandatory hardware buttons, and dictate their placement. Having the back button, menu button, and home button change places on different Android devices is retarded. And make it hard to accidentally hit them. Apple's "fuck whatever you're doing and quit" key is stupidest UI decision ever made. Putting it where you hold the device makes it even worse.

Want to be real awesome? Have touch-sensitive dedicated scroll areas off the display surface.

Support pen input, from low-end pressure screens to that fancy induction Wacom stuff. That is the real future of tablets, always has been, always will be. There is a reason only children fingerpaint.

Re:Wrong

[Stan Vassilev]

Apple's "fuck whatever you're doing and quit" key is stupidest UI decision ever made.

If you ask most people, they wish they had that button on absolutely every device they have to use.

Re:Wrong

[shikaisi]

I don't think David Hockney would be classed as a child, and he seems pretty enthusiastic about the iPad as a (finger)painting medium.

Re:Wrong

[timothy]

I am sympathetic to the idea of mandated hardware buttons and placement, buuuuuut ... I'd rather have tiered recommendations / human interface guidelines, because there might be a lot of cool applications for Android where a mandated layout wouldn't work, but a secondary recommended layout / alternative would. I'm spur-of-the-moment imagining an embedded display in a convertable's dashboard that's intended to have little chance for dust to get in. I don't have a convertable, and maybe that's a silly example, but Hey. I know that on many of my electronic gizmos, the actual electronic bits and display have outlived the life of the buttons.*

Want to be real awesome? Have touch-sensitive dedicated scroll areas off the display surface.

As long as we're thinking of the same sort of thing, that's one thing I look forward to in the (of-course-it's-delayed) Notion Ink Adam tablet. (Though I also worry that it will be distractingly bad, as when a touchpad on a notebook is oversensitive and leads to all kinds of curse-inducing pointer misplacement.)

timothy

* Another reason I hate trackpads :) When their "mouse buttons" fail or start to go wonky, the simple, elemental-to-human-life matter of click, Yea, whether left or right, can bring great wailing and gnashing of teeth and bashing of buttons.

Re:Wrong

[bemymonkey]

I would LOVE a 10-inch Android tablet with a Wacom digitizer... that would make my Thinkpad tablet obsolete, meaning I could upgrade to an X201s for the gobs of battery life.

However, I get the feeling we'll never see hardware that expensive for Android. And if we do, it'll be, well, expensive :P

Re:Wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

"Have touch-sensitive dedicated scroll areas off the display surface."

This x1000

I don't understand why more (any) devices don't integrate something like this. A small strip vertically on each side of the keyboard for a laptop/netbook, or next to the screen for phones, pda, and tablet use. One of the most frustrating things with my nokia tablet is vertical scrolling. It sucks. Some laptops do similar by sectioning off part of the touchpad, but simple strips along the sides where you actually -hold- a portable devices would greatly increase ease of use.

Re:Wrong

[oiron]

I agree about having hardware buttons, but not about the Apple Bailout Key. It's a good feature to have, as long as it is in a decently off-limits area of the device.

Touch sensitive dedicated scroll areas does sound interesting, though!

Re:Wrong

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Given how big the bezel is on the iPad and that the button is recessed, I don't think it will be much of an issue. It's never been an issue with my iPhone. Also, accidentally hitting the button should cause any data loss if the developer wrote the app properly -- perhaps games are the exception. Besides, do you really think you know more about product design than Apple? You think they didn't bother testing for such problems?

Re:Wrong

[Rich0]

Why not take a page from the Sony Clie and put a scroll wheel on the side? I'm not sure I want to give up screen real-estate for this (though maybe a tablet could afford it). Why sacrifice space on a state-of-the-art OLED screen that has 200 pixels in the width of your index finger, when a 10 cent potentiometer will do the same job?

Re:Wrong

[Superken7]

I really dont mean any offense but... have you ever used an android device? or an iphone? I really dont understand whats wrong with the vertical scrolling. I honestly see no need for a dedicated scroll area when the whole scrollable surface serves that purpose.
Sure, it might suck for some other devices (i.e. symbian, etc, who did not get it close to "right"). But on iphone? android? I think most users find it perfect just how it is.
Maybe I just misunderstood? What would be the advantages?

Re:Wrong

[rtb61]

You think way to small. I would really appreciate a 100" tablet screen, the bigger the better. The first thing I though of when I read "How Google Can Make Android Truly Tablet-Worthy" is forget little pokey 10" screens focus on the big screen. As for the touch pad remote, that of of course needs to be smaller, hand held, pocket capable, hmm, a touch screen android smart phone should hit that sweet spot and if I want to type perhaps a smart book to up the interaction level.

This could lead to another potential business, big screens located at every kind of recreational venue that you can log into with your portable device to temporarily up you screen real estate for a far more readable display and o access a wider variety of wired services and you could blue tooth the sound to your head set.

Re:Wrong

[yyxx]

If you ask most people, they wish they had that button on absolutely every device they have to use.

That button is standard on most phones, including all Android phones.

What Apple is missing is the "go back", "search", and "show me my options" buttons. Those functions are inconsistent among many iPhone and iPad apps.

Re:Wrong

[yyxx]

If you use vertical swipes for scrolling, you can't use them for something else. It's also hard to see what you're scrolling while your scrolling it.

Having said that, a separate scroll area is not going to catch on; the lowest common denominator wins, and that's scrolling with vertical swipes.

Re:Wrong

[mobby_6kl]

HTC used to put something like this on some of their phones. Here's a demo with a circular scroll thing that is used for zooming, but of course could be used to scroll just as well. I'm pretty sure I saw a device with a thing, straight strip as well, but I'm not sure what it was. I dunno why they stopped making these :(

Re:Wrong

[Alien1024]

Yeah, as a former Windows Mobile user, the one thing I miss on Android is the ability to select text by swiping; then you can copy it to the clipboard with a long tap+proper option on context menu (or even easier, Ctrl+C if you have a physical keyboard). Well, that, and the ability to "reverse tether", i.e. get network access from a PC, and seamless access to SMB resources.

Re:Wrong

[drinkypoo]

Having the back button, menu button, and home button change places on different Android devices is retarded.

This clearly doesn't matter as long as they all have the same icon. People expect small devices to have varying layouts. They're putting Android into cars now, where the typical button layout might not even make sense; the cost of Android means it's going to show up just about everywhere.

Apple's "fuck whatever you're doing and quit" key is stupidest UI decision ever made. Putting it where you hold the device makes it even worse.

Amen to that.

Support pen input, from low-end pressure screens to that fancy induction Wacom stuff. That is the real future of tablets, always has been, always will be. There is a reason only children fingerpaint.

I couldn't agree more. I want a display with both touch and fancy wacom tilt/rotation/pressure stylus "stuff". Unfortunately even the $2000 Wacom Cintiq 21UQ doesn't do this, it's stylus-only. Fail, fail.

Re:Wrong

[hedwards]

Yes, the people that built a mouse with only one button are surely the people that you want designing everything else. They've gotten better, but let's be honest about something, most of their ideas were stolen from elsewhere. The iPod interface with the buttons excepted, was a complete rip off of what Creative had already been shipping. The iPhone is great, as long as you don't need buttons and don't want to do something that Apple doesn't like. It's easy to put together reliable and efficient products if you prevent the user from doing things that are hard to design for.

Re:Wrong

[hedwards]

Off screen is a bad idea. My Nexus One can change orientation based upon it's physical orientation, there isn't really anywhere on the device where you could put it where it would be both out of the way and off screen. And I don't like the idea of them limiting the directions in which I can turn it because then I have to use the hand to control it that they tell me to or face the problems above.

Re:Wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

er...shut up!

  i've known the man since i was a child (being friends of celia birtwell and ossie clarks' kids) - he is exactly like a child and has all the intelligence of a duvet.

Re:Wrong

[UnknowingFool]

Support pen input, from low-end pressure screens to that fancy induction Wacom stuff. That is the real future of tablets, always has been, always will be. There is a reason only children fingerpaint.

Um, haven't they tried that for like the last ten years and it turns out users didn't like it that much? The problem facing all tablet makers in the future is the problem of UI. Right now Apple has it right in that the iPad is more designed to consume media than create it. You can use it for some input but not much. So the touch UI works well for that. In the future, they'll either have to refine touch or come up with something better for more serious input. Pen based input has been judged and found wanting.

Re:Wrong

[symbolic]

For the record, Apple has made quite a few stupid UI decisions - my favorite is a copy of what Microsoft did with the Start menu: Start -> Turn Off Computer -> Restart. Huh?

Apple stakes its claim in the world of UI mess by including podcasts as a subset of "Music". Of course, there's always the complete and total exclusion of any kind of "Delete All" function for the email app, the thought being that you should be perfectly happy to click on every single one of a hundred or more emails...stupid.

Re:Wrong

[Sancho]

"Go back" is, if not implemented per application, at least overrideable per application. It usually works pretty well, but some apps (Pandora, for example) don't work intuitively IMO.

Re:Wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

"There is a reason only children fingerpaint."

What? Wait...oh. Um...hmm....

Looks down bashfully at his chubby, colored fingers.

DAMMIT!!! ...

That was a huge fail at a retrograde attempt to relax this holiday weekend and take the stress off. *sigh* Screw it, I'll go back to Sketchbook and GIMP now.

Re:Wrong

[BasilBrush]

Yes, the people that built a mouse with only one button are surely the people that you want designing everything else.

A one button mouse was the perfect design when the Mac came out - the 1980s. A time when few had computer literacy, and no one had GUI literacy. If you'd ever done any support or taught anyone to use a computer, you'd know that beginners press the wrong button all the time. For sure, Apple continued to ship a one button mouse with their computers for two long. By the time OSX came along, computer literacy was good enough that there was no need to stick to a single button mouse. But no, it certainly wasn't a bad design decision at the time they originally took it - in the early 80s.

They've gotten better, but let's be honest about something, most of their ideas were stolen from elsewhere.

Troll.

Re:Wrong

[BasilBrush]

1) On a desktop computer, scrolling is probably done more than 1000 times as often as multiple/range select. On a mobile phone, probably more than 10,000 times more often. It's not worth compromising the scrolling UI for multiple/range select.

2) Swiping is a direct form of control for scrolling, your off-screen touch area is indirect. What that means is that if the screen was a cut-out window, and there was a piece of paper below it, the natural way of seeing more of the paper would be to push it with your finger. The UI is modelling a direct action with an obvious physical model. Off screen scroll areas by contrast are an indirect control. It's performing a task by pressing buttons. Like a remote control on a toy car.

3) Swiping makes it easy to scroll fast and far with a long swipe, and slow and short with a gentle drag, and to scroll in any direction (useful for example in maps). Whilst it would be possible to build in some degree of dynamic scrolling for the scroll areas suggestion, it could never be anything like as easy to control and intuitive as the swiping design.

Apple implemented the best design for scrolling on a touch screen. Not that they were the first to do it in that way - there were demos before. But I suspect they were the first to put it in a mainstream commercial product.

Re:Wrong

[bingoUV]

2) Swiping is a direct form of control for scrolling, your off-screen touch area is indirect.

But it precludes using swiping for text-selection. The natural way of "selecting" text on a paper would be trace it with a marker pen / finger steeped in colour. Now we have to use other, more complicated means for selection.

Arguably, one needs more "direct form of control" for text selection because it is more intimate with the objects you are working with (text in this case) rather than the "paper". When working on a paper, a human being is not likely to focus on the paper itself. One quickly immerses into the objects/text on the paper.

Re:Wrong

[BasilBrush]

But it precludes using swiping for text-selection. The natural way of "selecting" text on a paper would be trace it with a marker pen / finger steeped in colour.

Indeed, so the scrolling by ONLY swiping (not doing anything else first) is more natural than multiple selection, and is an operation done probably >1000 times as often on a phone. That makes it a slam dunk that it's better to use simple swiping for scrolling than multiple selecting.

Re:Wrong

[BasilBrush]

Or put it another way - everybody uses scrolling nearly every time they use the phone. Many people will never need to use multiple selection on a phone. Most of the rest will will only use it rarely. It thus makes no sense whatsoever to make multiple selection easier than scrolling.

Re:Wrong

[bingoUV]

You seem to be correct.

I generally don't like scrolling. I prefer moving a whole screen at a time - e.g. the action of page up / page down. I do this because it is much quicker and I am somewhat deficient in patience. On the other hand, I select a lot - not just for copying but looking up a word/phrase on Google/Dictionary/Wikipedia. But maybe these are peculiarities of my own, and I can almost see how general public would use scrolling "> 1000 times as often" as you put it.

But I don't understand why, in all your posts in this thread, you cite "multiple selection". What is "multiple" about selection? My whole reply was based on text-selection so maybe I misunderstood you.

Why is Android 1.5 always seen on tablets?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure if there's a reasoning behind it.. but lately, all the tablets I've seen running Android are running Android 1.5 (and maybe a few with 1.6). Why is that?

If there's releasing a new piece of hardware, wouldn't it make sense to release it with the latest version of the OS?

Re:Why is Android 1.5 always seen on tablets?

[MichaelSmith]

Maybe because there has been a lot of porting work done on those versions. Android 1.5 runs on the openmoko.

What is this "don't hurt the Apple-fans" day?

[Anonymous Coward]

The big difference with the Android tablet army is that the Apple iPad doesn’t have much of a head start. Apple’s iPhone had a few years on the first Android device. Google’s Android platform is growing quickly, but isn’t likely to catch the iPhone in terms of smartphone market share any time soon. Google’s Android will be a solid No. 3 in smartphones.

and ...

However, tablets are a different story. Apple’s iPad isn’t as expensive as originally thought, but it’s not going to be $199 any time soon. Android tablets will hit that price point. Just to reiterate: None of these Android devices are going to matter to Apple, which doesn’t sweat market share standings.

So just to iterate, a product which competes directly with another product doesn't affect one another because some douche bag jourislist says so?

Status information!

[teh dave]

aggressively using the inactive (locked) screen state to display useful information

I don't know exactly what that means but I like the sound of it. Mobile operating systems, especially ones from Apple, should be a lot better than they are at at displaying device and communications status. It's one of the... maybe two things Windows Mobile is good at: at a glance I can see how many emails I have in each individual account, how many appointments I have today and the two or three coming up, how many active tasks I have and the first few highest priority/earliest due, how much data I've used this month, what the weather will be like tomorrow, and of course the time, date, battery and signal et cetera. All from one button press. And of course there are lots of other Today plugins available and they are easy to develop.

If you cringe at that, that's fine. You don't like it and most people I know don't want "clutter" on their home screen either. That's fine for them but iPhone OS doesn't give the choice to those of us who would like to use an otherwise purposeless blank screen for displaying useful information. The key word there is choice... you can have it your way and I can have it my way. At least, we could, if iPhone supported a single bit of customisation...

Re:Status information!

[Rich0]

It does need to be a choice though.

There is a reason that windows doesn't display anything at all on a locked screen but the unlock message, and why it doesn't automount media/usb/etc while locked. This is a potential security hole.

Granted, putting sensitive data on a device that is small and lightweight is already a bigger security issue, so unless they're going to implement some kind of full-flash encryption scheme with a boot password the lock screen is the least of their worries. Forget remote wipe/etc - if I really want to steal data on a smartphone I'd just yank the battery before it got wiped, and then extract the data right from the flash chips or via JTAG.

A big issue for device security would be the password complexity - full-storage encryption is only as good as key size, and there is no way somebody is going to type a strong password into a phone. Your next best bet is to use the cloud - user enters a PIN on the phone, phone transmits PIN to the cloud, if correct cloud sends key back to the phone - which prevents brute force attacks and allows for revocation. Of course, now you have to trust your life to the cloud and your phone will never boot offline (which means mandatory data roaming when you travel unless the phone has a dumbed-down feature phone mode of some kind that doesn't need the key).

Re:Status information!

[mobby_6kl]

Well the only thing a WM phone displays that could be potentially sensitive are the upcoming appointments, and you can disable those. I don't think the number of new emails can be in any way sensitive information in all but the most contrived circumstances. Unlike the iphone, which (used to, I think?) display the text of incoming messages for all to see, whether it was locked or not.

Speaking of the iphone, I actually laughed for a few minutes straight when I played with one for the first time and realized that the home screen where you get dropped all the time is just a bunch of application icons. So yeah, don't do that.

Re:Status information!

[UnknowingFool]

aggressively using the inactive (locked) screen state to display useful information

While this sounds good in theory, in practice, it's bad for battery life Having something constantly update information while locked will take more battery. Right now, the iPhone and other devices show any messages that have been pushed to the phone. That's the current compromise.

Re:Status information!

[joshki]

You shut off that functionality as soon as the screen timeout is reached, and the screen shuts off. Then you simply update the widgets again when the screen is activated -- that way you're not continually updating the widgets when nobody's looking at them.

Re:Status information!

[nine-times]

Android phones have widgets that can be made to show any kind of information, but you can't have the widgets display when the device is locked. In some sense, this is reasonable; the point of locking your device is generally so that people can't see or get to your personal information. Still, it would make sense to allow people to display some set of information when locked, if they choose.

Re:Status information!

[Belial6]

That is no longer true. My Nexus One with 2.2 has live wallpapers. They display when the device is locked. The live wallpapers display information perfectly well. I have tried two different apps that work outside of the lock. One is a weather live wallpaper that shows the weather. I didn't find it very good, but it did offer information outside the lock. The other is a widget with the controls for the media player on the outside of the lock. This is VERY convenient.

Re:What about actually making it work right???

[Zixaphir]

I don't know, man. All the features I could ever want work great outta the box. As long as I'm locked into Android, there is no way I'll ever lose my contacts. When I format or switch to a new phone, my apps are all downloaded again automagically. If I don't like something about the OS, I can generally replace it with some third party application. When android tablets start coming out, if I get one, my custom "Android" will likely follow me onto it. I don't know, as someone who had to deal with people when they had synchronization problems with ActiveSync and their Windows Mobile phones (problems sync'ing generally mean loss of everything without some roundabout backup/restore of PIM), I can't get enough of Android's robust synchronization with "the cloud"

Re:What about actually making it work right???

[oiron]

ahem Insightful? Brain holiday for some editors?

It would be insightful if you listed anything that actually was "halfazz", instead of just making blanket statements with no provenance...

Re:What about actually making it work right???

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell are you trolling about? Have you ever even used Android? I have and Android phone right here and it is awesome. Everything on it works great. Thanks to the 1 GHz Snapdragon proc, multi-touch is butter smooth, the browser is blazing fast, maps and the free navigation is the best this side of a 500 dollar garmin, the camera takes decent phone pictures, it's easy to use, the ui is intuitive, voice input into any text entry box, I could go on. About the only thing that was indeed half-assed is the market app. It downright sucks. Of course, that's what sites like this are for. As someone that's been through over a dozen Windows Mobile phones through the years, Android is like when Dorothy stepped out of black and white and into color. It's nothing short of phenomenal as a smartphone OS. Even developing for it is brain dead easy with the free emulator and eclipse plugin integration.

I have to think you are trolling or just laying down the 'turf, one.

"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[Animats]

It's amusing that one of the linked articles mentions an "iPad killer" from Foxconn. Foxconn makes the iPad.

Foxconn's 2008 revenue was $62 billion. They're the "largest exporter in Greater China" and the world's largest maker of phone handsets. They have 486,000 employees. (Apple: 35,000. General Motors: 245,000.)

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[TouchAndGo]

I'll admit, somewhat shamefully, that when I saw "Foxconn" and "killer" I thought you were going in an entirely different direction...

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[timothy]

Amusing, but not crazy, as far as I can see. There are only so many large-scale makers of this kind of electronics -- and it's no weirder than different parts of Apple, or HP, or Microsoft (or GM, for that matter) trying to put the other parts out of business. Foxconn seems like one of the very most likely sources for an "iPod Killer" device, because they have in-house expertise. (Of course, maybe they have agreements with Apple that rule out certain routes to producing an iPod killer ;))

timothy

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[sznupi]

Hm, "Foxconn ... the world's largest maker of phone handsets"? Not even close...

Nokia 37%, Samsung 21%, LG 11%, Motorola & SE both 5%; while SE and perhaps Motorola might be using some OEM manufacturers, it's rather unlikely for LG and Samsung. And Nokia owns all their fabs (most of them not in China, 125k employees)

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[Anonymous Coward]

Hm, "Foxconn ... the world's largest maker of phone handsets"? Not even close...

Nokia 37%, Samsung 21%, LG 11%, Motorola & SE both 5%; while SE and perhaps Motorola might be using some OEM manufacturers, it's rather unlikely for LG and Samsung. And Nokia owns all their fabs (most of them not in China, 125k employees)

Foxconn OEMs for almost everyone (Apple, Motorola, RIM, SE), including Nokia.

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Foxconn seems like one of the very most likely sources for an "iPod Killer" device, because they have in-house expertise.

For the hardware, perhaps. But do they write their own software (apart from OS drivers)?

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[sznupi]

They one of the big suppliers of parts, sure; but that doesn't make them the largest handset maker.

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[am 2k]

Foxconn seems like one of the very most likely sources for an "iPod Killer" device, because they have in-house expertise.

No they don't. The real value behind tablets is in the software, not the hardware (except that the HW shouldn't hinder the SW), and Apple produces that part themselves. The Foxconn employees just copy it to the device.

I'm already seeing it coming that most tablet developers will miss this crucial thought and fail miserably. Just stuff some UI (aka Android) meant for 3.5" onto a 10" tablet and sell your hardware with it. This is really easy to do and will work perfectly, right?

Just like that "iPad killer" tablet produced by some Chinese manufacturer I saw a few months ago on television. It worked so well that even the Skype application that ships with it doesn't scale correctly. Not to mention that the presenter had to do every tap on the screen twice because the touchscreen was so good that it didn't recognize the first one (that was an official presentation!).

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[timothy]

(also in response to the other reply raising similar point)

Right, I'm only talking about as the maker of hardware. Android seems to be the software of choice, and it seems to be pretty good, esp. in the more recent iterations. There are some cheesy devices running it, and tantalizing demos, but that doesn't mean better ones aren't actually (hopefully) bare months from available.

Admission: I've seen Android in action only on a few phones (but not one I own) and -- now "ancient" versions -- at on tablets at CES earlier this year. But that's why I'm glad that YouTube means we get to see demos so quickly ;)

timothy

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[Anonymous Coward]

You are clueless. Having just returned from FoxConn's Longhua facility about four weeks ago, I assure you they assemble plenty of phones from Nokia and Samsung.

Re:"iPad killer" from Foxconn

[sznupi]

If I'm clueless, so is Nokia for thinking they themselves manufacture all their phones (well, they are aware of Chinese made copies...maybe there are some "from" Samsung too)

Re:What about actually making it work right???

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if I'll also be tagged insightful for saying the iPhone suckz without any providing any justification for my blanket statement.

Archos

[Xacid]

Archos is already doing it and doing it well. First time using one was today, actually. Pretty damned swanky, imo.

want one now!

[MrDoh!]

All these demo unit's/available in China, I just want one now!

2.2 minimum, tegra would be nice, standard usb socket to charge (as well as another one to drop in cradle for hdmi output I guess), bluetooth keyboard support as standard so I can use a keyboard with it if I want to, or just lug around without and use the onscreen one if I have to.
Done.
I've got a credit card warmed up and ready to use for something like that. Why all this 1.5/1.6 stuff?
Seems to be true that there's alot of Android Tablets inc, heck, they were showing dozens of them off before Apple even admitted they had a tablet

I do have some fears.
It appears if you've got a non-Google phone, updates are looking risky. As much as the new Dell tablets ones look neat, if Google(htc) brought their own out, I'd probably go for that with a better expectation that it'll be supported for later updates.
Whats the Chome Tablet for? Seems odd for them to fracture their own market when Android seems great and well suited for a tablet. Can the Chrome browser just be chucked on an existing Android platform to give people more choice?

But yeah, if the Dell tablets were going on sale tomorrow at Best Buy, I'd be typing this out on my G1 camped outside.

Re:want one now!

[itsdapead]

Whats the Chome Tablet for?

Anybody who is happy to work exclusively with web apps.

Makes a lot of sense with a mobile device if where you plan to use it has good Internet connections. Until that is universal it makes sense to have a dual track approach. Anyway, developing ChromeOS must be a relatively small job c.f. A full blown OS like android, and all the related web apps could (potentially) work across multiple platforms.

I'd see ChromeOS as more suitable for mobile use within an office/shop/warehouse than for road warriors (initially).

Re:want one now!

[MrDoh!]

I'm still confused though, wouldn't Android + Chrome browser work just as well, if not better? And Android + browsers are out now, working.

As is, when they do eventually bring out a Chrome tablet and it doesn't have access to all the Android marketplace apps, just web, why would someone choose that over an Android tablet + web + apps? Just seems an odd thing.

The article referenced originally does make a fair point, we're about to be flooded with cheap (and very inferior) Android Tablets shortly, it might hurt the overall platform.

Again, if they had a Tegra powered, 1GB ram, 8ish inch Android tablet running 2.2 to get Flash/existing apps, 3g, I'd be all over it.

Re:want one now!

[itsdapead]

I'm still confused though, wouldn't Android + Chrome browser work just as well, if not better?

I think the idea is that ChromeOS can be stripped down to the bare minimum of features needed to support the browser, for fast boot, low power, low memory. Not letting apps run locally at all must also make security easier.

You have a point though: the power/hardware requirements for chrome systems had better be vastly lower than for full featured systems or people won't see the point. I think this is what has kept thin client systems in a niche - they're no cheaper than a proper PC.

100% perfect

[symbolset]

Wouldn't it be great if all those who expect 100% perfection were rounded up and locked in a Klein bottle where they could resolve their issues by the Kilkenny cats method?:

There once were two cats of Kilkenny

Each thought there was one cat too many

So they fought and they fit

And they scratched and they bit

'Til (excepting their nails

And the tips of their tails)

Instead of two cats there weren't any!

I'm bemused

[91degrees]

The iPad seems to be a huge success. Tablets have never been hugely popular before. Now everyone wants to make one. Why all of a sudden?

And what are they actually for?

Re:I'm bemused

[tsa]

Apple has a very dedicated herd of followers who buy everything Apple throws at them. Now they all have an iPad it's time for the next iPhone to be bought by them and crank Apple's stock up some more. After the iPhone there will be new Macs the herd will absolutely need, and after that it will be the next iPod versions. And so the game goes on.

Re:I'm bemused

[lostsoulz]

And what are they actually for?

Fitness - your arms grow strong from trying to hold the damn things on the daily commute to the office and your cardio improves as you try to outrun the mugger that is interested in your oversized iPhone.

Re:I'm bemused

[yyxx]

The iPad seems to be a huge success. Tablets have never been hugely popular before. Now everyone wants to make one. Why all of a sudden?

Because battery and screen technology has improved to the point where you can have $200 tablets weighing 2 pounds, with a big screen, and 10h battery life.

As usual, Apple has rushed out this kind of product a little earlier at a premium price and marketed the hell out of it. But tablets were going to happen now anyway, Apple or no Apple.

Re:I'm bemused

[hey!]

Actually, Apple timed this product just right. The appeal of tablets have been clear for years, it's just that the technological infrastructure wasn't good enough and the implementations were lousy. Windows tablets anyone? I have one, and I almost never use it as a tablet.

If you look at the iPod, iPhone and iPad, they're all cases where Apple chose the right time to capture the second mover advantage. It's a natural role for a company driven by a perfectionist like Jobs who sees the mistakes the first generation products make and does not repeat them.

Now if things go true to form, the third generation competitors will scramble for scraps from Apple's table by copying whatever they can, repeating the mistakes made in the first generation products, and trying to come up with bullets for a side by side comparison. It'll take several iterations before a credible competitor to the iPad emerges.

Re:I'm bemused

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has a very dedicated herd of followers who buy everything Apple throws at them.

Turn the hate down from 11 and think about why that is. My personal story is that after supporting a series of clunky laptops at home, Vista made me reluctantly buy the wifey a MacBook Air. Wow. Her experience with that made me replace my latest in a series of problematic Belkin routers with a Time Capsule (wireless N with automatic backups). She broke a MBA hinge and because we were no longer supported I got her a MacBook. After 11 months Apple decided to fix the MBA hinge at no charge. Wow. Then I got her a 2G iphone (which at the time the RAZR was the top selling phone for three years). Wow. Then came the 3G and I got one for myself (I got tired of rebooting the work HTC 8500 to make a phone call). Then the 3GS. Got one for myself and gave the 3G to the wifey because she dropped the 2G into a glass of tea. The iPhone makes me use my desktop only infrequently. My work laptop now stays at work. I bought and returned a Windows 7 netbook. Wow (in a bad way). Then the iPad came out (wow) and I got the wifey one and now she only uses her laptop to type meeting minutes and reports. Now that we have kids there is no screen to open, no laptop to lug around with both hands, and no keyboard for the monkeys to lunge at. I bought an old used eMac just like the one the girls use at school ($200US). I look around the house and see all the Apples and wonder what the hell happened, and then realize I wouldn't change a thing.

To do all this I gave up the features that are important to you but got features that turned out to be important to me. I paid more than I would have using the other technologies but they also sold at a higher rate. So I'm in the herd. With the options today, if I was buying my first phone I don't know if it would be an iPhone. But at each point in time what I purchased was the right one for me as compared to the other options.

Re:I'm bemused

[BasilBrush]

And what are they actually for?

Perhaps it only becomes apparent after you've used one for a while. Or you've heard enough stories from people that have. e.g.
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/05/ive-changed-my-mind-about-the-ipad.html

Re:I'm bemused

[tsa]

The only part of your post that I have a problem with is this: To do all this I gave up the features that are important to you but got features that turned out to be important to me. I never said anything about my needs so what do you know about them?
 
I knew I would get modded down of course because if you say anything that looks even remotely like downgrading Apple or Apple fans you get modded down here on Slashdot.

Re:I'm bemused

[Anonymous Coward]

Appleshdot

Fanboy fuel for the only fanboys that matters.

Taco, Your appetite for the pageviews the mouthfoamingapplefanboys give will be the last nail in the /. coffin. This place is getting worst than a .net forum. FU Apple and FU /.

Apple=!Nerd
Apple=!Geek
Apple=!Open
Apple=!News

Also FU

Android tablet prototypes not ready yet...

[IYagami]

...according to ArsTechnica:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/05/android-tablet-prototypes-not-yet-ready-for-prime-time.ars

"The performance stank. It was a stutter-fest (...) Resizing pages with the Web browser was jerky and uneven. The Gallery app stuttered a bit and generally wasn't nearly as responsive as it is on my Nexus One phone. And the Wired tablet app was just awful, running as it did on Adobe's AIR platform (...) In all, it's a genuine mystery as to why these tablets were in such rough shape. It could be some combination of beta software and beta GPU drivers--but really, I have no idea. It seems to defy the laws of physics that a Tegra 2-based Android tablet would have a less responsive UI than the Snapdragon-based Nexus One, but that was my experience yesterday. "

This is even with a nVidia Tegra2 processor, which should be more pwerful than Apple A4 processor.

Re:Android tablet prototypes not ready yet...

[peragrin]

this right here is the point. the software isn't optimized for the hardware. They can't get the best use out of any given chip. Apple does more "advanced" features on less powerful hardware and ram than anyone else. how is it possible that they got the OS working better than anyone else?

Oh and for the record every andriod phone I have used have had horrible interfaces, hard to navigate browsers(where the fsck is the back button in landscape mode, and why does the typing on the keyboard have to be so painful?)

Re:Android tablet prototypes not ready yet...

[oakgrove]

In all, it's a genuine mystery as to why these tablets were in such rough shape.

From the fracking title of that article you quoted...

Android tablet prototypes not yet ready for prime time

Sheesh, man, try to be a little more honest next time. Lying by omission is still lying.

Re:Android tablet prototypes not ready yet...

[Anonymous Coward]

> They can't get the best use out of any given chip.

Tablet-wise it's no excuse, but it is a legitimate complaint with specific regard to Android phones (and most Windows Mobile phones, for that matter). It's the fault of the unholy alliance between carriers, handset manufacturers, and Qualcomm. Qualcomm puts the acceleration hardware into every chip they make, but they only allow it to be used if the manufacturer pays higher licensing fees for the right to use them and documentation explaining how it works. Handset manufacturers (like HTC) won't pay the higher fees, because their real customers (the carriers) won't pay for them. Then, when their hapless captive (in America, at least) end users buy and root their phones, it ends up being damn near impossible to reverse-engineer how the acceleration is supposed to work and implement it in a custom ROM, because NOBODY has licensed it & there's literally no implementation to rip apart and study out in the wild. Qualcomm isn't interested in dealing with end users (even a few thousand) who'd happily pay the few dollars HTC would have otherwise had to pay to license the features officially for the phone that got sold to them.

IMHO, it's a stalemate that's not going to end unless Qualcomm gets a viable competitor, or Qualcomm puts its foot down and tells HTC & the rest that they're going to license the acceleration features whether they like it or not, so Qualcomm can then make the documentation publicly available.

Go industrial?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's lack of affordable HMI panels with proper OS for industrial applications.
Current ones available run Windows CE, and its really not suited for rich web-applications.
There are some which run linux, but are rather pricey and bulky.

To start with...

[Anonymous Coward]

To start with they should just get the paid version of Android market to all the country that iStore is in.

Reading slashdot while sitting in a comfy chair.

[itsdapead]

The tablets available previously were laptop computers running lightly modified desktop operating systems and applications. Consequently, that's what people tried to use them for. They were not very good at it.

The iPad doesn't pretend to be a laptop replacement, it's for web browsing, casual gaming and media playing with maybe a little light note taking. It's using an OS which is designed specifically for the job. Also, love it or hate it, the iPhone did revolutionise the design of touch interfaces - if you can't see how everything since has copied it then you need stronger glasses.

People describe the iPad as "just a big iPod Touch" as if that were a criticism - I bought an iPad because that was exactly what I wanted. Most of the haters are evaluating it as if it were a small PC.

Its also closer to the original Netbook concept, while Netbooks themselves have morphed into entry-level laptops because they could run desktop software, and there wasn't a lot of alternative net book-friendly software. The iPad arrives with a good developer base, lots of available apps and no option to stick Windows or Ubuntu on it...

Well, I tried out the ipad today..

[Superken7]

..for the first time (it was just released in europe), and after seeing the linked android tablet in the description, two things come to my mind:

1) 7'' might be a WIN. I found the ipad extremely gorgeus and fast, etc... but it was too uncomfortable to use because it was just heavy enough to use with both hands, but as soon as you need to interact with it a lot (i.e. almost anything other than scrolling) you need to switch to holding it with one hand and typing/interacting with the other hand. And it was way too heavy for me to do that comfortably.
That's why I think 7'' or 8'' might have been way better.

2) that android tablet will probably have a much poorer battery life (yes, pure speculation) and I doubt they will have access to android market, so.. (oh, and I hope they dont redo the entire homescreen/UI because that will probably mean they somehow f*cked it up)

I am eager to see 8'' android tablets made with great hardware, great battery life and stock android so it is easier for them to update the damn thing.
Also, I think 128MB or 256MB RAM is not enough. (see this one, for instance http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.39448)

Re:What about actually making it work right???

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't get enough of Android's robust synchronization with "the cloud"

of marketing companies.

Open the C API

[gig]

A closed C API is not suitable for a full-size computer (or even a phone since 2007). Apps need to be ported from iPad, Mac, Windows, Linux, PlayStation, XBox, Wii, and the arcade. Google should not be the only one making C apps for Android.

Re:Open the C API

[Fnkmaster]

What is the NDK? It's been available for some time now. To the best of my knowledge writing a Dalvik shell to expose the app to the O/S and then using a native NDK core *is* the way to do what you are saying.

These guys ported Quake 3. It uses a lightweight Dalvik launcher to control a native build of Quake 3.

While there might be some utility to a way to write a pure native code user-facing app in C, I don't think it currently exists. Android's browser, for example, is a Dalvik wrapper around the native code. You can of course build a pure native code executable that will run on the terminal (for example, see here) but that's not going to be useful for you.

Christ, this article is idiotic.

[ZorbaTHut]

The Android widget interface uses a 4×4 grid to arrange widgets and icons. With a larger display, there needs to be better use of the screen real estate. Some of the early tablets we've seen are running a basic stock Android home launcher. This makes space feel wasted by having giant widgets and shortcuts taking up too much room.

No, really? With a larger screen you have more screen real estate? What genius! Google has certainly not thought of that.

I mean, call me nuts, but I suspect this is pretty far down on their list of Critical Things To Change Right Now, but pretty high up on the list of Things That Must Be Fixed Before Release. It's not done yet. They still have time.

Two features

[asicsolutions]

I have the Ipad and I like the form factor and battery life.

there are two fetures they missed which would make this a killer for me:

1) A file system. Right now, I have two PDF viewers.
One I can use to markup, but doesn't work as well as the other one. However, There is no way to share data. I have to load the PDF twice or in some cases I can send the data from one to another which is dumb.

2) A way to capture something with a stylus. I have been looking for years for an easy note taking device. I don't want the Ipad to do handwriting to text, but capture the strokes and store them. They can be post-processed later. But it seems like the perfect device to do this. The issue now is twofold.
2a) Because of the multi touch filtering algorithm, you can't get a fine point.
2b) bacuse the touch is capacitive, you can't have your hand rest on the screen while writing which makes it difficult to write.

Finally, the price is rediculous. I so want a good tablet, but I got an OK one since the android ones aren't out and windows is not a tablet OS.

Re:Two features

[LynnwoodRooster]

2) A way to capture something with a stylus. I have been looking for years for an easy note taking device. I don't want the Ipad to do handwriting to text, but capture the strokes and store them. They can be post-processed later. But it seems like the perfect device to do this. The issue now is twofold.

This functionality in Notes on Windows Mobile is probably the single best, most-used feature of my phone. I use my WinMo phone for taking notes all over the place. Jot down a phone number, make quick drawings/sketches of ideas, etc. Stores them as drawings, not text. HIGHLY useful and rather surprising that it doesn't exist in the iPad. It's a natural for making large drawings.

Yes, keep the buttons

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with the sentiment of keeping the buttons. For myself, one of the best things about Android has been those buttons, especially the back button. Not only does it save screen real-estate, it can be hit repetitively in a quick fashion. Even the search button, which at first I thought was just for a Google-centric theme, I've found very useful.

Whether you think Apple's one-button concept is awful or great, it shouldn't be duplicated. Android works well because it's not really an iPhone clone, it's a whole other choice. Those buttons represent part of that choice, that alternative.

Too many of these "how to fix Android" writeups have a bit too much "make it like Apple does" on them. This article wasn't entirely driven that way, but on the button topic I start to wonder if they've been using Android much at all. I'd definitely want these on a Tablet, just as much as I do on a Smartphone.

VIDEO!!!!

[upuv]

Ok I've read story after story. And with out a doubt almost everyone is missing one simple thing. VIDEO.

Slates are primarily a content consuming device as touch input tends to be slow and eats screen to do. Thus reducing the business use potential ( I does have it's place in business just not a massive one. ) We here about book readers, music libraries facebook and email.

What I'm not hearing a lot about is good quality video. In my opinion good quality video playback is a must. A larger screen is begging for video.

for some sense of "right"

[yyxx]

If you look at the iPod, iPhone and iPad, they're all cases where Apple chose the right time to capture the second mover advantage.

Apple sells premium products a little ahead of the mass market. That's neither "right" nor "wrong". Nokia or HTC couldn't have sold the same devices in their markets.

Now if things go true to form, the third generation competitors will scramble for scraps from Apple's table by copying whatever they can, repeating the mistakes made in the first generation products,

If things go as they usually go for Apple, Apple will get stuck at a few percent market share, while the mainstream companies saturate the market with more powerful and much cheaper devices. The only time Apple ever managed to hold on to a significant lead was with iPod/iTunes. And the reason people copy prior products is not necessarily because they are better, but because users don't want to have to learn new systems all the time.

and trying to come up with bullets for a side by side comparison. It'll take several iterations before a credible competitor to the iPad emerges.

Apple's market niche isn't technology, it's branding. A competitor to iPad is like a competitor to Nike shoes: it doesn't really matter what the shoes are--they all get the job done--it matters how people perceive the brand. Can Apple maintain its brand perception as a supposedly innovative brand for create people? I don't know; they're getting a lot of bad press.

Re:for some sense of "right"

[BasilBrush]

If things go as they usually go for Apple, Apple will get stuck at a few percent market share, while the mainstream companies saturate the market with more powerful and much cheaper devices. The only time Apple ever managed to hold on to a significant lead was with iPod/iTunes.

So what markets are you talking about? PC market and smartphone market? The latter of which we still don't know the outcome of. So by usually, did you mean one market? Or were you splitting PCs up into different models?

Apple's market niche isn't technology, it's branding. A competitor to iPad is like a competitor to Nike shoes: it doesn't really matter what the shoes are--they all get the job done--it matters how people perceive the brand.

A brand is a promise of quality or value. It only "doesn't really matter" what you buy if you don't care about quality or value. A brand is only perceived well so long as they continue to fulfil their promise. See how the brand value of Mercedes, Sony and Marks & Spencer fell as the quality of their products worsened.

Sure, many people buy Apple products for the brand. But that brand perception was hard earned through releasing many excellent products. Branding is a virtuous circle.

Can Apple maintain its brand perception as a supposedly innovative brand for create people? I don't know; they're getting a lot of bad press.

Bad press comes with being successful. But so does all the good press they get. (e.g. Whenever they release a new product it's TV news, including the queues of customers waiting to buy one.) Geeks might be aware of a daily dose of "bad news", mostly exaggerated or cooked up by bloggers wanting ad-impressions. But the general public are far more exposed to quality of the products themselves, and the good news that gets on the TV. Apple's success will only recede when they stop delivering on their promise of quality products.

Re:for some sense of "right"

[yyxx]

Bad press comes with being successful.

It also comes when companies engage in censorship and anti-competitive behavior.

But that brand perception was hard earned through releasing many excellent products. Branding is a virtuous circle. ... Apple's success will only recede when they stop delivering on their promise of quality products.

Oh, come on, do you get paid for marketing Apple products? I've been an Apple customer for 25 years, and their record has been rather mixed. They have made some high quality products and some really shitty products. Their software and usability have also been mixed.

Re:for some sense of "right"

[BasilBrush]

It also comes when companies engage in censorship and anti-competitive behavior.

Bullshit. It's far harder to get an app on an Xbox, Wii or PS3. The public in general couldn't give a damn. They still rather use them than an "open" PC. Same goes for the iPhone, open source nerds on Slashdot complain. Normal users are more than happy that Apple keeps the worst of the crap out of their store, and have no interest in getting software from anywhere else. Apple makes it so easy.

Oh, come on, do you get paid for marketing Apple products?

What a stupid question. Do you get paid to trash them? You spend more time doing that. It's really not so hard to find people that appreciate Apple products. People like you that salivate over Linux are far fewer.

I've been an Apple customer for 25 years

You're convincing no one with your pretence to be a disillusioned Apple customer, rather than Linux using Apple hater. Your posting record is clear. Why not stick with the facts rather than accusing me of being a shill whilst trying to deceive people about who you are.

Re:for some sense of "right"

[yyxx]

What a stupid question. Do you get paid to trash them?

No. Who would pay for that? Let me know, maybe I can make some extra money.

It's really not so hard to find people that appreciate Apple products.

Well, and Apple makes decent products. They just don't live up to the God-like image the company has created for itself.

You're convincing no one with your pretence to be a disillusioned Apple customer, rather than Linux using Apple hater.

I never had any illusion about Apple and I never like them company, so I'm not a "disillusioned" Apple customer. I use their hardware because I port software to it. That's why I bought them 25 years ago, and that's why I still buy them.

The public in general couldn't give a damn.

The public in general also didn't use to care about pollution, global warming, or racism. Now they do.

Meetings...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because companies can't actually masturbate...

Inspired by Dave Barry

Re:Reading slashdot while sitting in a comfy chair

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah that may be fine for you, but not everyone is a useless retard who doesn't know the first thing about technology.

All lame but the home/lock screen stuff.

[drinkypoo]

Without going into detail on why the other stuff is lame... Upgrading the home screen to be more like chromium's is an obvious step. Run a strip across the screen that shows thumbnails of running apps, scroll it off-screen sideways, show the most-used or most-recently used or show them in opening order (preference option I hope) and put a nice big glowing arrow where there's more to scroll to, with a flick/tap interface. Sort of a touch-friendly chrome home for android. Lock screen only needs HTML widgets basically, like a personalized google for your tablet.

And all you have to do is sell your soul to google

[arcite]

for free. Google will track and record everything you do, search for, and record. Sell your personal information to the highest bidder. Not to mention those 'accidental' privacy leaks when they get hacked or someone finds a loophole. Oh sorry, too bad, our services are "free"...you get what you pay for right? Can't complain if its 'free'...

At least Apple is upfront and takes its users privacy seriously. But then I suppose some do not value their individuality as much as others.

Branding == technology and execution.

[guidryp]

"Apple's market niche isn't technology, it's branding."

WTF??

Perhaps you mean Apples niche isn't check-box marketing and they aren't meeting your check-boxes?? While I don't own anything Apple (yet) but it is clear to me that it is a lot more than just branding.

Unless Apples Branding is shorthand for technical excellence(at least in this case). Just look at the technology aspects.

Example: Brilliant industrial engineering and packaging.

Example: High Quality IPS screen: Apple is using a better screen here than practically every product shown so far. All I see in competitors is crappy TN screen with horrendous viewing angles, that might be acceptable in a netbook, but not in a tablet meant to be used in multiple orientations.

Example: Battery life. Apple engineer it to use the lowest power envelop possible and deliver solid 10 hour battery life, also it doesn't need a fan, doesn't get hot.

Example: Capacitive multi-touch. Many competitors are single touch resistive (Yuk).

Example: HW/SW integration. This is the special sauce that make enables them to build something that is greater than the sum of its parts. That enables true engineering to take place where every component is engineered to just deliver what needs to be there, so you can a low powered device that is more response than people dropping in much more powerful off the shelf components but poor integration.

So I would like a more open tablet with and SD-Slot/USB port, but I serious don't think we will have anything with remotely as good technology (Screen/digitizer/battery life/industrial engineering/HW-SW integration) all in one package for a long time to come.

To say Apple is just branding and not technology is completely ridiculous. Did you take any time to consider the technology and execution before you made that claim?

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[yyxx]

Example: Brilliant industrial engineering and packaging.

No, just luxury components and packaging. You pay for it. Brilliant would be to deliver the iPad for $199.

Example: High Quality IPS screen: Apple is using a better screen here than practically every product shown so far.

Yes, they buy expensive and high end components. Your point?

Example: Battery life. Apple engineer it to use the lowest power envelop possible

Same thing: they use expensive components.

Example: Capacitive multi-touch. Many competitors are single touch resistive (Yuk).

The choice between resistive and capacitive is not so clearcut. Capacitive is good for fingers, resistive is good for pens. iPad and iPhone are lousy for drawing, and handwriting input is a no-go. I hope someone will start making Android tablets with resistive input (or Wacom or hybrid input) because the Apple iPad input sucks for anything other than poking at oversized on-screen buttons.

Example: HW/SW integration. This is the special sauce that make enables them to build something that is greater than the sum of its parts.

There's nothing "special" about it; it's marketing fluff. iPhone batter life, screens, hardware integration, etc. is no better than on the Droid or the X10 or any of numerous other phones, and those cost much less.

So I would like a more open tablet with and SD-Slot/USB port, but I serious don't think we will have anything with remotely as good technology (Screen/digitizer/battery life/industrial engineering/HW-SW integration) all in one package for a long time to come.

The reason you won't see anything like that is not because other companies don't know how to build these kinds of machines, but because their customers aren't willing to pay as much.

To say Apple is just branding and not technology is completely ridiculous. Did you take any time to consider the technology and execution before you made that claim?

Yes, I did. Nothing you say contradicts what I said: Apple is a luxury brand delivering a luxury product made from premium components. They do use new technology, but most of that they just buy elsewhere.

The reason their competitors don't compete with Apple is not because they don't know how to, but because it's not rational to compete with Apple for a small part of the market. Google, Microsoft, Nokia, HTC and others are going for the mass market.

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[guidryp]

No, just luxury components and packaging.
Same thing: they use expensive components.
Yes, they buy expensive and high end components. Your point?

The point is you were claiming it was just branding and not technology. Using higher end components across the board is using BETTER TECHNOLOGY.

Do you want to save a few bucks and buy a cheap knockoff using second rate component?

Many will, but the people choosing to get a well designed product with superior industrial engineering, better components, and better sw/hw integration aren't merely choosing branding as you claim, they are choosing a higher quality product.

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[yyxx]

aren't merely choosing branding as you claim, they are choosing a higher quality product.

The money you pay extra for the iPhone or iPad doesn't translate into more utility. Actually, because of Apple's restrictions on what you can do with their devices, it translates into less utility and a whole lot of follow-on costs.

So, Apple may choose "high quality components", but that doesn't translate into a more useful or productive device, but merely into a more expensive, more luxurious device.

That's actually pretty common among luxury goods: they are "higher quality" but actually less useful in practice.

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[BasilBrush]

The choice between resistive and capacitive is not so clearcut. Capacitive is good for fingers, resistive is good for pens. iPad and iPhone are lousy for drawing, and handwriting input is a no-go. I hope someone will start making Android tablets with resistive input (or Wacom or hybrid input) because the Apple iPad input sucks for anything other than poking at oversized on-screen buttons.

This is woefully mis-informed. iPhone has the most accurate touchscreen of all the touchscreen mobile phones, as demonstrated here:
http://labs.moto.com/robot_touchscreen_analysis/

And you can of course use a stylus on the iPhone. There are many varieties sold specifically for the purpose.

The reason their competitors don't compete with Apple is not because they don't know how to, but because it's not rational to compete with Apple for a small part of the market. Google, Microsoft, Nokia, HTC and others are going for the mass market.

LOL! Those companies would LOVE to have Apple's market. It may not always be the largest market share, but it's the most profitable market share. They are all desperately trying to copy Apple. The fact is they are behind because they are copying today's Apple technology whilst Apple is working on the next thing.

Apple's market cap now exceeds all of those companies.

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[guidryp]

So, Apple may choose "high quality components", but that doesn't translate into a more useful or productive device

Seriously? A better screen with better viewing angles isn't more useful? Longer battery life isn't more useful or productive?

These are not meaningless luxuries as you keep trying to paint them, they are beneficial advantages.

You are appearing more and more like a nerd raging Apple hater, than reasonable, with your continuing dismissive attitude to all the things that were done in an exemplary manner here.

I don't own any of Apples products because none of them fits my needs, but it doesn't mean I have to go into "sour grapes" mode about them. I just recognize they aren't for me.

I think it is sad that some people can only be happy with their own choices by attacking (often irrationally) the alternatives.

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[yyxx]

Seriously? A better screen with better viewing angles isn't more useful? Longer battery life isn't more useful or productive?

They are better on their own, all things being equal. But all things are not equal. You pay a premium for that, and you have to live with numerous restrictions. On balance, Apple's products are just another compromise among many.

I don't own any of Apples products.

Well, and I do. How about that?

I think it is sad that some people can only be happy with their own choices by attacking (often irrationally) the alternatives.

Well, apparently I'm attacking my own choice. Is that sad, too?

Re:Branding == technology and execution.

[yyxx]

This is woefully mis-informed. iPhone has the most accurate touchscreen of all the touchscreen mobile phones, as demonstrated here: http://labs.moto.com/robot_touchscreen_analysis/ [moto.com]

It has the most accurate capacitive screen. Even the cheapest resistive screen Palm from a decade ago had more accurate pen input.

And you can of course use a stylus on the iPhone. There are many varieties sold specifically for the purpose.

I have a couple. They are a very broad rubber tip (think "pinky") on a stick. It's nearly impossible to write or draw with them.

They are all desperately trying to copy Apple. The fact is they are behind because they are copying today's Apple technology whilst Apple is working on the next thing.

The fact is that you're an utter moron who doesn't even know the difference between a capacitive and resistive touch screen, which means that your opinion about phones and tablets is worth zilch.

1996 is calling.

[glrotate]

It wants Pointcast back.

Re:Reading slashdot while sitting in a comfy chair

[ducomputergeek]

Ditto. I needed something to replace my 6 year old 12.1" powerbook that is/was on its last legs. I had a 15" MacBook Pro at work that was purchased last year, but I was still actively involved in coding and code auditing. I now travel a lot on business and mainly I need something that I can use for communications purposes (email, skype) and making small edits to documents. Only complaint is a lack of a video camera at this point for video conferencing. But even at work I gave my MBP to a new developer hire. And at $30 per month for wireless, it is half what we were paying for a similar USB 3G card with only 5GB of transfer per month. Now when I travel and stay in certain hotels, it saves $15 per day for wireless internet. Hell, at that rate, the saving for not having to buy hotel wireless will pay for the device by september.

iWork for iPad does enough document editing for my needs.

More-difficult problems to solve

[Zigurd]

The suggestion that the lock-screen host widgets is good. The suggestion to get rid of hardware buttons is OK, but it's really only an incremental change.

There are at least a handful of harder problems crying out for an officially sanctioned solution:

1. A shareable Android device. This is presumably on the project plan for an Android TV, which can't be tied to one individual's Google account. Some tablet devices also have shared use cases, e.g. a "kitchen tablet."

2. Cleaning up non-touch UI conventions. Android started out with an AWT-like ability to move a focus and substitute an "OK" button for a touch-press, but this has become diluted and ignored in some cases. Some tablet devices (and TVs, and in-car devices) need a non-touch mode that has not gone decadent.

3. A transparent licensing process for Google APIs and the Google Experience suite of applications. This would open Android to more OEMs that Google has the bandwidth to manage hands-on. As with Windows CE, the licensing process could be subbed-out to systems integrators.

Re:And all you have to do is sell your soul to goo

[Anonymous Coward]

*yawn*

Troll harder next time.

Shouldn't the higher priority be

[ClosedSource]

to make the iPad Truly Tablet-Worthy?

The linked story is ripped off from my site...

[notthatwillsmith]

This linked story is copied in its entirety from my site, Tested.com. While they have posted a link to the author's profile on the story, the content is copyright Tested. The link to the original story is http://www.tested.com/news/5-ways-google-can-make-android-truly-tablet-worthy/355/.

Your argument ignores physical reality

[SuperKendall]

Mandatory hardware buttons, and dictate their placement.

This is utterly wrong. I do not think you have used an iPad for any length of time, or you would realize just how wrong you are on this - not in an "your opinion differs" from mine wrong, but in a "you ignore how human hands work and are sized" wrongness.

I've been using an iPad since launch, and just ONE single button, that quite obviously has a mandatory placement, is kind of annoying. The reason is that tablets have no natural orientation. When you pick it up it could be from any side, and as you rotate it while using it, you often end up rotating in different directions.

With multiple physical buttons it does not matter how much you dictate the order they are placed, unless you place them on all edges just the fact they exist at all is annoying as you have to hunt for them - doubly so in Android because applications do in fact rely on some of those buttons heavily during use. On the iPad you only use that button to quit an app, not as part of the flow of use.

However, if you ACTUALLY place buttons on all sides, you have the issue where people WILL hit them by accident because of how the device is held.

An obvious solution would be to virtualize the buttons on screen, but then you are either overlaying button images in a place the application may have crucial information or controls, or you can have a non-display strip on the sides with controls but then you lose screen estate.

I think the suggestions in the article are spot on, but unfortunately kind of mean starting from scratch with applications, basically running anything not designed for an Android tablet in a smaller area. That's kind of what the iPad did so it could work, but Google has to be the one driving it so Android tablet application support is core to the frameworks the way there are core iPad specific areas of the iPhone SDK. Otherwise Android applications on a tablet will feel just a little bit nicer to use than desktop applications are on a Netbook, they will feel a touch out of place.

Spam reaches slashdot again.

[Anonymous Coward]

This whole article was stolen word for word from tested.com:

http://www.tested.com/news/5-ways-google-can-make-android-truly-tablet-worthy/355/

App context is better done custom

[SuperKendall]

That button is standard on most phones, including all Android phones.

Right, so it in fact was not a stupid idea to put it on the iPad as the original poster was claiming.

What Apple is missing is the "go back", "search", and "show me my options" buttons. Those functions are inconsistent among many iPhone and iPad apps.

Actually Back is pretty consistent being the upper left.

The other things you mention (and in fact even back) I believe do not need to be consistent, they are items better off presented in ways that make the most sense for the particular application they are running in.

Think about it this way, the "stop everything" button is really unrelated to the application, it's a system button. But the other three buttons are very much application specific buttons, even though they can also do other things in the system. That is the difference and why I think they are better done as virtual controls rather than physical ones.

Physically the buttons are very bad for other reasons on something the size of a tablet, for a phone size device I see how they are kind of nice but I still don't think they are a better idea than virtual controls can be.

Re:App context is better done custom

[0xdeadbeef]

Right, so it in fact was not a stupid idea to put it on the iPad as the original poster was claiming.

No, it is stupid, because it kills the application, and you'd better hope it saved state. Every fucking time I accidentally close Netflix on the iPad there is at least thirty seconds for the application to start again and the movie to buffer. Safari is pretty damn annoying too, as it re-downloads and re-renders large pages.

Actually Back is pretty consistent being the upper left.

Which is pretty stupid in a device that is usually being manipulated by the thumb of the right hand.

Re:App context is better done custom

[SuperKendall]

No, it is stupid, because it kills the application, and you'd better hope it saved state.

And that's why it is smart. Because applications that do not will simply not be used. So obviously it saves state, and also it gets you out of ANYTHING not matter how broken. That's why it's so vital, because being able to continue using your device instead of being blocked by one app from all other functionality is key. I've found finding the button to hit is more of a problem than accidentally hitting it.

Which is pretty stupid in a device that is usually being manipulated by the thumb of the right hand.

It's pretty humorous hearing someone so worried about losing data wanting to make the second most destructive action you can make in an application be easier to hit. And thanks to Fitts's Law, any corner of the screen is very easy to hit when that's what your target is so it's not like it slows down navigation.

Re:App context is better done custom

[Belial6]

You are exhibiting several symptoms of being an Apple fanboy. The first is in the claim that pushing a function from the OS to the application, and that introducing inconsistancy is a good thing. It is not, and inconsistencies between applications has been a major harping point by Apple fanboys against Microsoft and Linux. To claim that it is good when it is in an Apple product is a bad sign.

You also show the symptom in defending the One button is all you need idea. Having a button that always takes you out of what you are doing is not the problem. Having it as the ONLY button, and the Only control that you can really expect to see IS a bad idea. Having the most destructive action you can make in an application in an easy to accidentally hit location is a massive UI blunder. Even when done by Apple.

You also make the mistake of quoting Fitt's Law. Fitt's law isn't a law. It has some reasonable ideas, but taking them at face value is a poor idea. For example, the idea that corners are easy to hit, does make some sense with a mouse on a screen. Why? Because you just shove the mouse as far up and over as it can go and you will be on the target. You don't have to actually hit the target. On a touch screen, that does not apply. It also doesn't apply to buttons being at a difficult to reach location. The back button being (when it is there) in the upper left corner makes about as much sense as remapping the 'e' key on your keyboard to the Esc key because it is in the corner. Frequently used touch points should be as close to where the fingers naturally fall as possible without interfering with the rest of the application.

Re:App context is better done custom

[SuperKendall]

You are exhibiting several symptoms of being an Apple fanboy.

Irrefutable reason and logic? Yes, they are my stock in trade; my bread and butter if you will.

The first is in the claim that pushing a function from the OS to the application, and that introducing inconsistancy is a good thing

You're pretty ignorant for an Apple Hater. Otherwise you'd realize that in fact the hallmark of people who truly believe in Apple's UI design mantra, think that consistency is key. My instance that it is not is in fact total divergence from the party line, rather a heresy to those who prefer to follow any one style guide (not just Apples). But over time I have come to be sure it is true, and Apple has actually shown this to be true though the applications they have done even if they always advise one to follow the style guides.

You also show the symptom in defending the One button is all you need idea.

I am saying one button is tolerable, in the context of an iPad - for computers I have five button mice thanks. Again you are totally ignoring context, like you are unaware that different devices are used differently.

Having the most destructive action you can make in an application in an easy to accidentally hit location is a massive UI blunder.

You seem to be one of the few people with this problem, and like I said in almost no instance is it destructive anyway - you'd have to be an idiot application designer for it to be destructive, because it means someone taking a call would also lose data. Such an application would simply not sell.

In fact, here is where your mouth meets the road. Name two REAL applications that exhibit the flaw you are describing. My guess is, like so many elitists, you are simply stuck in the rarefied air of Architecture Astronauntism without considering how things work in the real world and have never seen such an app, you simply hypothesize one must exist because without it your whole foundation crumbles.

On a touch screen, that does not apply

Again you forget about context, again you float in a world without form or shape and consider only abstracts. For a device the size of an iPad you are correct, corners become meaningless - but that is most about the bezel.

But in the context of the phone, corners are just as easy to hit because of how quickly humans can move fingers to specific points in space within a small area, and your hand is cupped around the device to give your other hand positional context.

For example, the idea that corners are easy to hit, does make some sense with a mouse on a screen. Why? Because you just shove the mouse as far up and over as it can go and you will be on the target. You don't have to actually hit the target. The back button being (when it is there) in the upper left corner makes about as much sense as remapping the 'e' key on your keyboard to the Esc key because it is in the corner.

The context of a keyboard is that your fingers are hovering over the center, and you hit e the most often. The Back button is something that in fact you hit with much less frequency, and itself can be destructive if you have partially filled out form data the application does not save where you are - ironically even more destructive than the button you hate much, because most apps would retain partially filled forms and restore the information on a relaunch! Again, you simply are not thinking through the consequences of controls.

I find educating you to be really annoying since you simply cannot listen to reason, but hopefully others are learning something from the effort. As always, I give you the last response so you can come up with some other new wild reason for your beliefs, I think I have sufficiently covered the detail for mine that someone more reasonable can fully understand the extent of my arguments now.

Re:App context is better done custom

[0xdeadbeef]

It's pretty humorous hearing someone so worried about losing data wanting to make the second most destructive action you can make in an application be easier to hit.

No, dropping your iPhone is the most destructive action, which is a lot easier when you're trying to stretch your thumb across it. And unlike the fuck you and close button, back can be canceled, and its logic is more cleanly associated with individual screens.

Yeah, and thanks to Fitt's Law, a button near your thumb is way more ergonomic than a button away from it.

Re:App context is better done custom

[bingoUV]

But in the context of the phone, corners are just as easy to hit because of how quickly humans can move fingers to specific points in space within a small area, and your hand is cupped around the device to give your other hand positional context.

Are you talking about dragging one's finger to the corner? Or hovering over the screen until the corner, and then hit it?

If the former, Fitt's law can apply to it provided there is a physical barrier preventing the finger from overshooting the corner. Still, it applies less than in the case of mouse on a regular computer because getting your finger colliding with the barrier repeatedly is not pleasant.

If the latter, Fitt's law does not show a corner to be easy to hit. This is because the "size of target" is not infinite as in the case of mouse in a regular computer. The finger can hit anywhere, on the screen or out of it, and hitting a corner is as easy as hitting any other location on the screen, might be actually tougher if the corner is farther from the current location of the finger. In fact if you hit a specific location often enough (say, 60% down, 45% right from the top-left corner), it becomes the easiest point to hit.

You specifically talk of the "other hand", that too on a phone. Is ease of one hand operation not a concern at all?

iPad is not consumption only

[SuperKendall]

Right now Apple has it right in that the iPad is more designed to consume media than create it. You can use it for some input but not much.

I agree with what you said about stylus input and users not accepting it, but I think you are wrong on this.

Actually the iPad is pretty good at creation, it's decent at typing (much better than a smaller handheld device) and better than a computer at manipulating on-screen objects since you are directly working with them via your hands.

Re:iPad is not consumption only

[exomondo]

better than a computer at manipulating on-screen objects since you are directly working with them via your hands.

That's a bit broad, better if you are moving large objects and they don't have to be placed particularly accurately, which is the reason they give you that magnifying glass when moving the caret in a text field instead of just pressing to place it in the spot you want. Certainly not better for manipulating text or accurately positioning objects, but more often more intuitive for pushing things around.

The biggest annoyance is the press-and-hold to do stuff, it's like simulating a right-click on the desktop by pressing and holding down the left mouse button.

Re:Reading slashdot while sitting in a comfy chair

[sootman]

To anyone who says "the iPad is just a big iPod touch" I say "yes, and a swimming pool is just a big bathtub" and then let them think about the implications of that for a while.

Seriously? This is Trolling?

[guidryp]

So someone says Apple is all branding and I point out all the technical exemplars and it is trolling???

Looks more like Apple hater moderation. Is this Slashdot or Digg?

Re:What about actually making it work right???

[adolf]

Somewhat amusingly, my contacts all sync just fine (automagically over whatever available network) between my iPod Touch, my Droid, and all of Google's stuff, without no additional software beyond what the shipped OS provides.

By extension, this would also work with an iPad or an iPhone.

You're not quite as locked in as you think . . .

But given the amount of flexibility I had with an old Palm OS device almost a decade ago, I must say I'm really not all that impressed with any of the PDA functionality of any modern smartphone that I've had a chance to use.

+1 for stylus input

[hritcu]

Without a stylus (or a physical keyboard) any kind of tablet is useless for me. I would like to use it to read research papers and to make notes on the side.

Re:And all you have to do is sell your soul to goo

[Anonymous Coward]

Google hasn't actually sold any user's information to anyone, have they? Instead they keep it private and perhaps use it for targeted advertising which they sell.

Re:And all you have to do is sell your soul to goo

[exomondo]

At least Apple is upfront and takes its users privacy seriously. But then I suppose some do not value their individuality as much as others.

Shame they aren't as serious about security.

Large and Fine

[SuperKendall]

That's a bit broad, better if you are moving large objects and they don't have to be placed particularly accurately, which is the reason they give you that magnifying glass when moving the caret in a text field

The fine control simply requires slightly different UI but is still just as direct. And do not forget that it's not like the magnifier slows down or in any way alters your input - it simply is there to show you what your finger is covering, but otherwise your finger is perfectly capable of moving the cursor to an exact spot in 12 point text.

The biggest annoyance is the press-and-hold to do stuff, it's like simulating a right-click on the desktop by pressing and holding down the left mouse button.

Kind of, though I don't think it's used very heavily and usually triggers just one function, not a choice of them.

Re:Large and Fine

[exomondo]

The fine control simply requires slightly different UI but is still just as direct.

That's why it's less efficient though, having to change UI to get finer control. I mean your mouse cursor comes to a point, giving you much more accuracy.

And do not forget that it's not like the magnifier slows down or in any way alters your input - it simply is there to show you what your finger is covering, but otherwise your finger is perfectly capable of moving the cursor to an exact spot in 12 point text.

Perhaps, but actually manipulating that text, like doing cut and paste is not nearly as fast, nor is typing on a virtual keyboard vs a tactile computer keyboard. Im getting faster on the ipad keyboard but i can't see ever being able to be faster and more accurate than a normal keyboard.

Re:Large and Fine

[SuperKendall]

That's why it's less efficient though, having to change UI to get finer control. I mean your mouse cursor comes to a point, giving you much more accuracy.

Actually not any more accurate - just a little quicker to hit a specific object. But even there I think the speed of achieving accuracy is offset by having to see where the mouse cursor is first in order to travel to the destination - with a finger you go directly there.

Perhaps, but actually manipulating that text, like doing cut and paste is not nearly as fast, nor is typing on a virtual keyboard vs a tactile computer keyboard.

I find both means of clipping text to be about equally awkward, with a mouse I have to be pretty precise which takes time (and I often can easily be off by a character or two) while the finger selection method can be a little slow dragging the handles in either way can lead to a fairly speedy selection.

Im getting faster on the ipad keyboard but i can't see ever being able to be faster and more accurate than a normal keyboard.

Nor can I (although I can type pretty fast now on the iPad if I rely on the autocorrection), but then there is the bluetooth keyboard support if a lot of typing is needed.

Re:Large and Fine

[exomondo]

Actually not any more accurate - just a little quicker to hit a specific object.

Of course it is, and that's the reason it's quicker. If you were just as accurate with your finger on an ipad as you are with a mouse on a computer you wouldn't need to know what's under your finger with that magnifying glass.