• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Tablets - toys or tools?

Soapy Sam

Penultimate Amazing
S
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
28,769
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/2/20110107/-dell-streak-7-vs-samsung-galaxy-tab-bf205d4.html

Samsung are pushing their Galaxy Tab as an iPad competitor.
The above link compares it with Dell's Streak 7. (Verdict, the Samsung has a better screen).

At first glance, the Tab seems to out-iPad the iPad, having an actual telephonic capability. It also doubles as a bookreader and seems more like an actual computer than the iPad...but...having bought numerous gadgets apparently about to change my life, but which in reality languished on a shelf, I'm not about to lay out the hard earned moolah until I'm pretty sure I'd actually benefit by owning any of these things.

Several folk here are still to be heard cooing over their Kindles. On the face of it , a reader that also does video conferencing seems a step up... but how many of us choose to eat with a spork? Multi purpose tools are compromise solutions.

In short, are tablets tools or toys? Six months (or however long) after buying one of these devices (perhaps an iPad), who here is still using it, how often and for what?
 
Earlier this week I asked this question of a senior exec who was part of a pilot project for ipad use in the corporation.

He told me that there wasn't any single compelling thing about the iPad, but it seems to have made itself indispensable by making lots of little things easier to do. He threatened to hit me if I tried to take it away from him.
 
I have an iPad. I use it constantly (I'm using it now :)). But I think you have to be clear on what you need and whether an iPad, or other tablet, gives you this. It happens that the bulk of the things I do on a computer, the iPad does beautifully. I don't have a laptop. And portability is crucial for me. I definitely would not use a laptop to the same extent that I use my iPad, even if it had portable internet access. I already have a phone. I don't think I'd like a smaller size - I watch a lot of video, and I don't think the typing would be as easy in a smaller layout (my hands fit in touch-type position in landscape mode).

On the other hand, I have told my husband he needs a new laptop instead of the iPad, as the sorts of things he likes to do would have some restrictions on an iPad. And it drives my family crazy that now I try to navigate on their computers by touching their screens. :)

Linda
 
My experience.

Earlier tablets (at least the one I used at work) were not toys. They were full-function small format computers with the same extensibility of a comparable laptop, but far more convenient when in the field. I had a Motion Computing M1400 that made me a big fan of the format. While I was out on site I had all of the contract drawings, specs, and shop drawings for a $80 million project at my fingertips, with the images in a TIFF format that I could pan and zoom to higher resolutions than the paper versions, and whatever wireless connectivity that might be available at that location. XP Pro (tablet edition) and a suite of tablet dedicated utilities that was ... well ... sweet. (There was a handwriting recognition calculator that was awesome. Microsoft OneNote was downright addictive.) I plugged in a laptop clip-on webcam and could take pictures and write (not type) notes at the same time. Recognition accuracy was far better than I expected, and my handwriting can be a challenge for humans. :blush:

Once I was back at my desk all I had to do was drop it into the docking station (no need to reboot) and I was working with a standard keyboard, dual monitors, hardwired LAN, and more peripherals than you could shake a construction field engineer at.

It really was the best of both worlds.

Back then (2004) tablets were unusual enough that they were apt to be perceived as toys by people unfamiliar with them. Those people were mistaken, but nobody cared.

Apple has made a dent in the familiarity issue (for which I thank them) but they did it by mainstreaming a toy masquerading as a computer. Hopefully the pendulum will quit swinging sometime soon.
 
Toys. Fun gadgets, convenient for doing some things in some situations, but ultimately not actually better at doing anything than existing gadgets. Maybe they'll eventually take over the netbook niche, but even those I'd consider more as toys than tools.
 
Cuddles said:
Toys. Fun gadgets, convenient for doing some things in some situations, but ultimately not actually better at doing anything than existing gadgets. Maybe they'll eventually take over the netbook niche, but even those I'd consider more as toys than tools.
Click to expand...


My point is that the tablet I was using was indeed better at some things than existing gadgets ... i.e., laptops, because it added the functionality of handwriting recognition and freehand sketching with a format that made it very convenient. At the same time it offered all of the functionality of a laptop.

In fact, one configuration used a low profile monitor cover which was also a quite ergonomically pleasing keyboard. It added not quite 3/8" to the overall thickness of the device (the non-keyboard version of the cover added a tad over 1/16"), and had two folded down arms which extended out to receive the tablet in a sort of 'easel' configuration. When used like that it was functionally indistinguishable from any other laptop, but the cover could just as easily be snapped onto the back side of the tablet, allowing it to be used as a pure tablet device.

It was kind of fun to watch the expressions on some faces while sitting at a conference table when I would take the Motion tablet out of its easel stand, lay it down like a legal pad (its approximate size) clip a section of a drawing out of my on-board set of contract drawings or a photo from the job site, and sketch on it like it was a sheet of paper, shoot a copy to everyone else's email, and pass it around the table for the ones who weren't on-line, and then stick the tablet back on the keyboard easel and go on to the next thing. It was almost like a stealth device. Some of them would look back and forth from the laptop they had in front of them to the tablet in their hand I had just passed them to the keyboard sitting in front of me and back again.

The usual reaction was along the lines of, "Damn! Where can I get one of those things." :D
 
I think a lot of these things are neither toys nor tools: they are experiments. These vendors are packing lots of gadgets and capabilities into these things, as fast as they can, and throwing them to the crowds. And letting the crowds drive out their real use.

When I was a teen, the city built a new high school. They put a lawn out front, but no paved walk to the front door. They left it that way for a couple months after the school opened. Then, when it was clear what paths people were taking to the front door, that's where they built the walks.

I think the iPads and iPods are sort of like that at the moment.
 
I would say a tablet is only necessary if sitting down is an impediment and a phone is insufficient.
 
Denver said:
I think a lot of these things are neither toys nor tools: they are experiments. These vendors are packing lots of gadgets and capabilities into these things, as fast as they can, and throwing them to the crowds. And letting the crowds drive out their real use.
Click to expand...


In some sense, offering new technology as a consumer device is always an experiment, so I'm not sure how relevant that perspective is. It hasn't been all that long since laptops were an experiment (I still have an Epson Hx-20.), or cell phones.

Price point is a huge factor. That Motion tablet I fell in love with was (list) priced at about the same as a high end laptop or very high end desktop. Touch screen technology wasn't particularly new, but carrying it around under your arm sure was. Handwriting recognition was only just becoming a practical data entry method for the sort of processor horsepower available to portable devices.

The stylus approach used by Motion was different still, and in retrospect I think this may have made a big difference. The M1400 model I had was not, strictly speaking, a touch screen, as the stylus was required for input. The upside to this was that the darn thing acted almost exactly like a legal pad with lots of bells and whistles when I didn't choose to use it like a laptop or a desktop (See "docking station"). Prior to that I spent a lot of time with a clipboard filled with several legal pads, and a desk with a stack of them. (Did I mention about MS OneNote being addictive?)

To me, the big problem in acceptance was just that the damn things were so rare, and the data entry method so unusual that most people couldn't or wouldn't take them seriously. I will cheerfully admit that if my company hadn't had someone with enough vision and influence to insist that we get them in the field instead of standard laptops then I would have been in that skeptical group. It was an enlightening moment when I realized just how wrong my preconceptions had been.

It is my hope that mainstreamed entry products like the iPad, in spite of its weaknesses and deficiencies, will engender a more general acceptance of the approach itself. That, with economies of scale and the increasing availability of low cost components with enough horsepower will (IMNSHO) lead to an increased popularity of devices that offer all the utility of laptops and tablets combined.

Much as that Motion tablet did for me.

Nearly seven years ago.

When I was a teen, the city built a new high school. They put a lawn out front, but no paved walk to the front door. They left it that way for a couple months after the school opened. Then, when it was clear what paths people were taking to the front door, that's where they built the walks.
I think the iPads and iPods are sort of like that at the moment.
Click to expand...


A similar effort was tried when I was at Duke in the early 70s.

There was a wealth of existing walkways, carefully planned with aesthetics in mind, but it was clear from the wear and tear on the landscaping that the students preferred alternate routes. In a well-intentioned attempt to accommodate these preferences (and protect the grass) they re-routed some of the walks to align with the evidence.

It didn't work. New impromptu and unsanctioned foot trails through the rearranged landscaping were quickly established, some in the very locations where the old sidewalks had been removed.

It put "Get off my lawn!" in a whole new perspective. :p
 
Last edited:
If you investigate the multitude of uses to which the iPad is being put, I think it's pretty clear it's not a toy for many people, but it certainly can be one if you want it to. Earlier tablets struck me as aimed at the enterprise, which seems to be the general pattern of computer manufacturing over the last couple of decades. Sell it to business, then tweak it for the home market. Apple as far as I can see does the reverse.
 
commandlinegamer said:
If you investigate the multitude of uses to which the iPad is being put, I think it's pretty clear it's not a toy for many people, but it certainly can be one if you want it to. Earlier tablets struck me as aimed at the enterprise, which seems to be the general pattern of computer manufacturing over the last couple of decades. Sell it to business, then tweak it for the home market. Apple as far as I can see does the reverse.
Click to expand...


I agree with this, and again I expect that the price point has a lot to do with it.

Seven years ago the iPad couldn't have been marketed as a consumer product in the price range it is today. (I'm not even certain if it could have been produced in its current form factor at all.) Twenty seven years ago neither could a desktop PC. Business application was generally needed to get a return on investment that was noticeably more significant than the existing alternatives. Home hobbyists were few and far between, and veiwed with a certain amount of perplexity.

My first home computer was an Leading Edge Model M, in 1983. It was marketed as a low-cost alternative to the IBM PC. I was able to buy it at wholesale cost and still paid $1500 for it. That wasn't chump change back then. The general attitude by most of my contemporaries was "You spent how much?!! What the hell do you need that thing for?" At that same time the penetration of the desktop PC was still pretty limited even in the business community. It was the more adventurous entrepreneurs who were gingerly investing in them.

Tablets were much the same when the local management of the company I was working for took a chance on them. Very carefully. I was fortunate to be a field engineer on the pilot project. They were quickly demanded by everyone else in our regional branch. It was an international construction management outfit, and in less than a year we had people flying over from Europe just to check out our implementation on the jobsites.
 
quadraginta said:
Apple has made a dent in the familiarity issue (for which I thank them) but they did it by mainstreaming a toy masquerading as a computer. Hopefully the pendulum will quit swinging sometime soon.
Click to expand...

It isn't clear to me why doing the things you described on your Motion was working on a tool, but doing those same things on an iPad is working on a toy. What makes the difference?

Linda
 
commandlinegamer said:
Earlier tablets struck me as aimed at the enterprise, which seems to be the general pattern of computer manufacturing over the last couple of decades. Sell it to business, then tweak it for the home market. Apple as far as I can see does the reverse.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think Apple is dual-focused. Some of their products are clearly not intended for the home market.
 
fls said:
It isn't clear to me why doing the things you described on your Motion was working on a tool, but doing those same things on an iPad is working on a toy. What makes the difference?

Linda
Click to expand...


I was approaching this discussion in the sense of "toy" as opposed to a standard laptop PC, because I don't think there is much question that the iPad is not the equivalent of a laptop.

In a more general sense I'd have to say that "toy" as an epithet means little to me either. It all depends on what you're doing with it. I don't think that the iPad would have performed sufficiently well to satisfy me as a replacement for a laptop. The Motion tablet served flawlessly in that respect, while also providing all of the additional utility which a tablet format offers. As an adjunct to a laptop perhaps an iPad might have filled some of the jobs that tablet provided, but not with the same access to every piece of software that was available to run under XP Pro. I even had AutoCad loaded, (although admittedly it was a pretty constrained environment for it.)

We had dingle blackberries and PDAs, but I was still using an HP41 GX for the data collector for my total station, even though that would be a "toy" for nearly anyone who wasn't in an engineering or science field. The other three HP41s and the TI59 I had at home pretty much were toys in view of the way I used them there. So was my slide rule, I guess.

I understand the point you are making, but it is bounded by the constraints of application. When I see "tablet" used in a sense which assumes the comparisons to and limitations of iPad-like devices I think the comparison to be dangerously flawed, because by comparison to what a full-fledged tablet can offer there are certainly many toylike qualities to an iPad. I understand that not all uses an iPad can be put to reflect that, but I still find that the mis-used comparisons can be misleading. To me the iPad and similar offering constitute a very limited subset of what tablets really can be, and have already been for more than a few years.

I hope I explained that properly. I don't know if I articulated it very well.

:boggled:

To me the iPad exists in an ill-defined region somewhere between internet capable phones and book readers, and full function PCs. I think I would probably have a much higher opinion of it if it had been offered with something more closely resembling a useful OS and more peripheral connectivity. But then, if it had it would have been a "real" tablet PC. :p As similar offerings develop those capabilities they will, too.

I expect that this is what will happen, and five or ten years from now we'll have trouble explaining to the youngsters what the fuss was all about.

Try explaining about "bag phones", and cars that had their horns go off when you were away from them and got a phone call.
 
quadraginta said:
To me the iPad exists in an ill-defined region somewhere between internet capable phones and book readers, and full function PCs. I think I would probably have a much higher opinion of it if it had been offered with something more closely resembling a useful OS and more peripheral connectivity.
Click to expand...


... a third category of device in the middle, something that's between a laptop and a smartphone.
- Steve Jobs' initial announcement of the iPad​
 
daSkeptic said:
... a third category of device in the middle, something that's between a laptop and a smartphone.
- Steve Jobs' initial announcement of the iPad​
Click to expand...


Yes. Which is the point I'm trying to make.

It's the confusion between iPads and actual tablet PCs which I am trying to address. The iPad uses a tablet-style interface. The iPad is not a tablet in the sense that tablet PCs and laptop PCs can be seriously compared.

When I hear about iPad-like devices being referred to as "toys" it is almost always in a context where the term "tablet" is applied as a synonym to those devices, such as in the title of this thread, and then the entire class of tablets is downplayed. I believe that this is misleading,and helps perpetuate erroneous preconceptions about the usefulness of tablet PCs, but I suppose it was inevitable.

I'm not certain why Apple elected to offer a device which was less capable than it easily could have been. I expect that part of the reason was cost based, but I'd be surprised if that was really the most significant aspect. I think more of it had to do with their success marketing mainstream consumer devices. Perhaps also some remnant of the "computer for the rest of them ... er, us" mentality which felt that additional utility could amount to a discouraging complexity. Apple has found a significant niche in appealing to a toy user's gadget lust, and offering products which transcend such limited utility just enough to dodge the "toy" label, but not so much more that the product is the least bit intimidating.

It works for them, and I am in no sense condemning the products. "One man's toy ... blah, blah".

The idea that they somehow "invented" the tablet, or created some technologically astounding improvements for them is what irks me.

They mainstreamed the format, for which I am grateful. They did it by dumbing down the potential of the format. Not so good, but the mainstreaming is more important, so they get kudos from me for that.

Now, everyone else will do it better (um, continue to do it better), and because they will no longer be obscure and unusual that high ticket Motion tablet I fell in love with years ago will soon be just another item at Best Buy.

This is a "good thing".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom