To put it simply, when you've spent enough time puzzling over human computer interface related stuff, you'll will indeed know the issues. You don't really need to have the iPad in your hand either to understand the interface hell that it'll play when it comes to camera position when you rotate the screen. Just take a good look at your own camera at the top of your mac's screen. Rotate your mac 90 degrees, or 180 degrees, and see if the camera still have got your face in focus or not, and look at the holding position that you'll need to have to keep your face in focus. Try doing this with your notebook and see for yourself. Forget the 180 degree rotation, just try for the 90 degree.

I'm not being apologetic, I'm being realistic and I have given my reasoning on why I view it as such. And thus I prefer not to whine over something that is limited by technology at the moment either. I would rather spend my time looking at the various applications that I can think of for such a device. What I can say is that it does open new doors for me to pitch specialized applications to my clients. Seeing that none of what I've got in mind to build requires a camera, the lack of the camera right now doesn't bother me.

The Human Computer Interface constraints is the main reason why the full OS X is not stuffed into the iPad either, despite the iPad being capable of running the full OS. Its like when I first stuffed Linux into the 1st gen iPaq. While it was fun for a day or 2, I ended up asking myself after that, exactly how practical is it to have a linux command prompt on the iPaq.

This post has been edited by fyire: Feb 2 2010, 12:29 AM

Here's a little snippet from the iPad Human Interface Guidelines document:

And out of curiosity, which are the apps that you've read that cannot change their orientation views? And besides, have you forgotten about where your hands and fingers will be at when you hold the device? on the bezel of course. And where can the camera be located at? On the bezel of course. I can already imagine the cries of: 'Arrgghh. my hands are blocking the camera... grr.. which direction should I be holding it in so I don't block it??'.

Furthermore, whatever makes you think that this is a device aimed at the casual users? The fact of the matter is that you're just making assumptions here. This is actually a device capable of quite a number of purposes, and of which there's plenty of developers right now puzzling over the HCI aspect of things in order to plan their own apps for it.

Yes, a camera will indeed be useful. But it won't kill not to have one right now, considering the current constaint to deal with. Like I said, if its a choice between the multi orientation capability or the cam, I'll go with the multi orientation capability.

First off my mind:
- data center technicians. Those who actually go into the DC itself, not those sitting in the aquarium watching the screen. A specialized app that hooks onto the various monitoring systems, which also allows them to acknowledge fault reports and then report when problems are resolved. useful enough in situations where there's no space to put their notebooks, and so they do not have to balance their notebooks on one hand while typing with the other. Applicable for normal data centers as well as for telco rooms
- financial data on the go. Among other uses, one client that I'm already talking to for this will find it useful for those sitting in the makeup artists chair before they go on air, to review the stuff that they'll need to talk about on TV. once again, useful so they do not have to balance their notebooks on one hand while typing with the other. gives a pretty cool effect too if they're to hold the tablet device while on TV instead of just sitting in front of the normal notebooks.
- people who need to move around quite a bit but need to review and approve video clips. this is something that I'm looking at customizing and integrating into Final Cut Server, for it to expose an interface that is accessible by a custom app on the iPad.

And these 3 are merely the pitches that I had been making last Friday, and the same ppl has already expressed interest as well.

The key here are the situations for use. When ppl need a larger screen than a phone, and they do not want to have to balance a notebook in one hand and type with the other.

Other general purpose use will be for perhaps photographers to show their portfolio in a 'cool' manner?

Such are just the tip of the iceberg. You just need to use your imagination a little bit more you know.

This post has been edited by fyire: Feb 2 2010, 01:38 AM

Like I said, 2 main issues with the front facing camera position:
- orientation issue. as I had mentioned before try for a 90 degree orientation with your mac's camera and see if its still got you in proper sight or not
- and the camera lens can have all the protection in the world, it can have the protection that allows it to withstand a nuclear bomb, but still be useless if your finger happened to be covering it and blocking it.

But tell me something anyways, exactly how practical is the full OS X on a touchscreen only device for general purpose usage? After all, the standard OS X interface does not take into consideration of the on screen keypad covering that much of the screen area too when active.

Wei did mention as well that a Touch Screen OS X is not exactly something that will be of much use on your desk or on your hands.

Front facing camera will indeed be useful, but like I said, they need to resolve problem of the camera facing direction issue when you change orientation first.

In regards to the Pro Apps, ever tried running any of them on a Macbook White?

Oh yes, optimizations, you've finally gotten the picture here. How much stripping down do you need to do anyways from a full desktop app? For something like this, its actually easier to start from something basic and build up from there, rather than take something big to strip down.

Let's face it shall we, even if you're to strip down from a desktop app, you're still bound to get complaints. What more to say when they have to strip out something else later? Even more complaints?

---

Added on February 2, 2010, 11:28 amOf which pretty much defeats the multi orientation capabilities of the device already. Besides, ever thought of what happens when you need to fit more than 1 person into a video chat session on a screen with portrait orientation? squeeze squeeze squeeze (on the human side)

tried using the iPod nano with the camera? Sure, nobody would want to block the lens on purpose, but the form factor does cause this to happen a lot by accident to the point that it gets annoying.

This post has been edited by fyire: Feb 2 2010, 11:28 AM

With thickness comes weight. and keep in mind that the weight is indeed a constraint, considering that this is a device meant to be held in a single hand on the edges only. But seriously, try it out for yourself. Try holding a macbook air (with a closed lid) the same way a tablet is to be held, and see how long before your wrist gets sore.

Tada! and that's what they did too. Take the iPhone OS as a base and build it up from there.

Dude, do you realize that you just debunked your own arguments here?

Let's see now, the first thing that comes to mind will be the cost? The moment you've have the cost go above the price of the macbook white for any of the models, you're in for a world of pain when it comes to marketing.

For me, its quite simple actually. My next notebook is gonna be a 17' MBP. hence the iPad is something that fits nicely in my backpack in addition to the 17' MBP for the times when I don't feel like hauling out that 17' piece of equipment, and when I need something bigger than the phone screen.

- try squeezing in more than 2 ppl into a portrait view webcam and see for yourself.
- you've obviously never really observed ppl when they're relaxing and holding a book, some sort of device or they can look at while lepaking on the couch or anything like that. Hand positions on the device being held tends to go all over the place as they shift to make themselves comfortable or to alleviate that numb butt.

which is why trying to cram a full Desktop OS just like that onto a touchscreen only device is a bad idea. the entire UI needs to be revamped for use on a touchscreen. which is also the main reason why the full OS X is not dumped into the tablet despite it being proven that it can run on a nokia phone.

To tell the truth, I'm surprised that CSL would even dare to take on this seeing that there's a legal case pending on it.

My personal take on the joo joo pad's dimensions is that its pretty much a rather awkward form factor to wanna carry around all the time, and to be able to switch orientations easily. Not to mention as well, awkward to use in cramped environments.

The price of the joo joo is definitely one of the items that's gonna kill it though.

this: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/12/11/crunc...ional-thoughts/

ipad 3g 16gb will be roughly USD 499 + USD 130 multiply by forex

besides, the iphone 3gs 16gb is MYR2499 and not 3K to purchase outright. no such price in the US to compare for the iphone cause u cannot purchase it outright like that there. and the ipad price is an outright purchase and not contracted like the iphone is there

---

Added on February 5, 2010, 9:34 ama tablet is a device meant to be held with a single hand when one is on the go. Thus weight is indeed important.

out of curiosity, how many ppl do you think will wish to use a tablet primarily for the watching of movies? compare this to the number of ppl who will value a more portable form factor more?



This post has been edited by fyire: Feb 5 2010, 09:34 AM

Like I asked: out of curiosity, how many ppl do you think will wish to use a tablet primarily for the watching of movies? compare this to the number of ppl who will value a more portable form factor more?

watching of movies is merely one possible use among others.

if you're talking about having to pinch to zoom, then you're either using an iPhone or an iPod touch. these screens are running at 480x320, and not 1024x768.

Thing is, I tend to keep my desktop browser window size at around 1024 width most of the time, even on the 1920x1080 resolution of my Mac Pro, so I can fit more windows onto the screen.

If I need to work in a remote location, a netbook won't even hack it for the work that I need to do. If I need something that runs a full fledged OS as well as easy mobility, I'll be carrying something like a 13' MBP or the MBA, instead of a netbook.

This post has been edited by fyire: Feb 13 2010, 12:57 AM

Actually that's what I meant too, that a netbook can't replace the purpose of x86 computers either here. what I'm comparing here is the utility and usability. It does not have to be a 13' MBP, but any other easily portable machines that's not stripped down like a netbook is.