NOTEBOOK PC PC : DISCUSSION

Where would you use a touchscreen?
Posted in Notebook PC | August 10, 2009 1pm

Before the iPhone, touch was mostly a gimmick.  There were very few touch interfaces that I really felt worked well.  Touch panels in airports, home automation systems and even smartphones were just a burden to use.  Your touch would either not register or you had no feedback, whether visual or tactile, and it confused the experience.  The iPhone changed all of that for me at least.  From that point on, whenever I used anything with a touch UI I wanted it to work like the iPhone.  And unfortunately, nothing did.We’re finally at the point where other manufacturers are catching up to what Apple has accomplished, even in the smartphone market with devices like the Palm Pre.  The inevitable question is what role will touch play in PCs?Is it something that will be segmented by use: work, play or home?  Or perhaps device: notebook or desktop.  Necessity is the mother of invention, so where do you guys see touch screens and touch based interfaces being most useful to you?  The match in smartphones makes total sense, but the question is how should it be brought to other computing devices?  The touchscreen kitchen PC is easy to see; a flat non-porous surface is far easier to wipe off than a physical keyboard with keys.  A large touchscreen tablet also makes sense, but what about on your notebook or desktop?  Do you see a touchscreen being useful there at all?  And what comes after touch?  Will it stick around like physical interfaces like the keyboard and mouse have for decades or is it a stop gap solution?

The scene from Back to the Future II always comes to mind where Marty is playing on an old arcade machine in a diner of the future and two kids walk up to him and say that the game looks like a baby’s toy because you have to use your hands.  Are gesture based inputs ultimately what will transcend touch?

NOTEBOOK PC PC : DISCUSSION

Matte or Glossy Screens?
Posted in Notebook PC | August 3, 2009 8am

Last year Apple switched, almost entirely, to glossy screens on its line of notebooks.  It’s more extreme than simply a move to glossy, the new Apple notebook displays are actually covered with a thin piece of glass.  Aesthetically, few will argue that the new MacBook and MacBook Pro are at the top of their class, but the tradeoff is noticeable.I took this picture outdoors last year comparing the previous generation MacBook Pro to the new glass-covered model:

That’s a bit exaggerated since the system is off.  With the display on and at full brightness, it’s still pretty distracting:

Indoors however, it’s not a problem.  Here’s the old MacBook vs. the new MacBook:

In fact, indoors, I do actually prefer some glossy screens to their matte counterparts.  If I were still in school doing a lot of work on nice spring or fall days outside, I would go insane trying to use the new glossy notebooks; the brickyard at NCSU had very little in the way of shade from the sun.  These days, I do most of my work inside and thus don’t really have an issue with the glossy displays.If we see that more users are using their notebooks as desktop replacements, then perhaps the matte vs. glossy debate doesn’t really matter to the majority of users.  So I ask you: do you prefer matte or glossy screens?  Do you use your notebook mostly indoors or outdoors?  Is any form of glossy screen acceptable or is completely matte the only option?  Apple went to the extreme with its glass-covered displays, but they are selling well - should the rest of the industry follow?  

GAMER PC PC : DISCUSSION

Handheld Gaming - The future of smartphones?
Posted in Gamer PC | June 24, 2009 1pm

Before the iPod and the cellphone merged, the two devices happily coexisted in our pockets and luggage.  We used our iPods (or other portable media players) when we wanted entertainment and our cellphone when we wanted communication.  Thanks to Moore’s Law, the components that went into both got small enough that companies could start building unified devices.  Many cell phones started offering MP3 playback capabilities and of course there was the iPhone.Being able to play music and videos doesn’t actually take a lot of work.  The processing power required to decode both audio and video formats is easily included in some very low power System on a Chip designs.  Thankfully, Moore’s Law doesn’t stop once a key feature has been introduced.  The processors that power our smartphones will continue to get more powerful as will the graphics cores that accompany them.I’ve always scoffed at the idea of serious gaming on the iPhone, but with the latest hardware update in the iPhone 3GS I’m beginning to think that there’s some potential here.  The PowerVR SGX core in the 3GS is multiple times faster than the PowerVR MBX-Lite that drove 3D graphics in the iPhone 3G, and significantly faster than what’s in Nintendo’s DS handhelds.  The horsepower is there, not to mention the flash storage (up to 32GB with the 3GS) so all that’s missing are developers.I’ve played some fun games on the iPhone 3GS but we’re really missing big AAA titles on the platform.  Give the app store some more time to mature and get even faster hardware into the hands of the populace and I believe there may be some merit in serious gaming on touch screen smartphones.  I’m particularly excited about ngmoco’s untitled FPS for the iPhone.

Is that odd to say?  What about you?  Looking forward to any smartphone games or is it too early to get excited about that?

NOTEBOOK PC PC : DISCUSSION

The End of Removable Batteries?
Posted in Notebook PC | June 14, 2009 11pm

Last week I reviewed Apple’s new 15-inch MacBook Pro.  You can read the review here but I’ll summarize the important part for you.Through some nifty new battery technology, Apple was able to cram a 74WHr battery into the same chassis that originally held a 50WHr battery.  That’s a 46% increase in battery capacity.  And here’s the kicker, Apple did it without increasing the size or the weight of the notebook at all.  The dimensions of the new 15-inch MacBook Pro are identical to the old one and they both weigh 5.5 lbs.A 46% increase in battery capacity is nothing to scoff at.  That will deliver, at minimum, a 46% increase in battery life.  My tests found that through some other optimizations Apple was able to squeeze even more battery life out of the machine.  The 15” notebook will last you anywhere between 5 to 8 hours on a single charge.  The previous version?  3 - 5 hours.  The improvements are nothing to scoff at.  But Apple claims that they are made possible through the use of a non-removable lithium polymer battery.  If you’d like, you can unscrew the base of the notebook and remove the battery yourself, but doing so voids your warranty.  If you’re worried about its premature death Apple appears to have to implemented an intelligent charging technology into the battery that extends its usable lifespan up to 1000 cycles, which Apple works out to be around 5 years of normal use.

In my opinion, I’d take 8 hours of battery life from a 15” notebook that weighs 5.5 lbs over a removable battery any day.  But perhaps I’m in the minority.  Is this the sort of tradeoff you’re willing to make?  I suspect that if everyone accepts what Apple has done then we’ll see more OEMs move to custom lithium polymer battery designs.  You’ve got the ears of ASUS and Intel among other major players in the industry, what say you?