Talk:Early tablet computers/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Core Functionality

In the current implementation of Tadewtwytyblet PC, the change is in software sense more than in hardware.

Digitizer is the single only most important component of Tablet PC. Other hardware features such as rotatable screen, hardware button are often optional.

There are a lot of touch screen technology used in PC monitor before, but none of it is called Tablet PC. Why?

Tablet PC is more than a Laptop computer plus a stylus. Microsoft really brings much change in Tablet PC Edition of Windows XP. The new OS creates the new kind of object called ink, and defines its corresponding behaviors including recognition. It ensure that user can finish all kinds of operation without keyboard.

So when we talk about Tablet PC, we inevitablely see one that use the Windows XP Tablet PC Edition.

Maybe sooner or later we will get Linux powered Tablet PC, who knows?

See http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,112743,00.asp for the first Linux tablet. Also, Linux can run on most tablets with digitizer support. However they all lack many of the nicities that make tablets usable under Windows. -- Tyler Colbert

-- such as ability to run MS Windows? Most "Tablet PC" run Linux, in fact all did until Microsoft came along.--KH Flottorp 20:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

"Tablet PC" / "tablet PC" distinction

This article combines the topics of the Tablet PC initiative started by Microsoft and supported by several OEMs and software houses, with the general concept of a "tablet PC," which have existed in various forms prior to the Microsoft initiative (eg the old Fujitsu pen-based slate form laptops). This is confusing and erroneous, as most of the comments in discussion have already indicated. eg while it is possible to run Linux on a tablet(-form) PC, running Linux on a "Tablet PC" is a contradiction in terms, as the Microsoft Tablet PC initiative necessarily includes Microsoft software components, including the specialized OS.

I think there needs to be a clear distinction made between "tablet PC" as refers to the general concept of pen-based computing and "Tablet PC," the Microsoft et al initiative announced in 2002 which refers to distinct specifications that Microsoft's software and hardware partners conform to.

Microsoft is the first company to get a tablet PC on the market with any success. Some it's to be expected that the article be about them. If you feel that it should be reorganized to include a history of older tablet PC attempts, be bold in your edits. PPGMD 15:34, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

What? Really? Well, if you say so. I don't really see what the fuss is about. Are we really providing useful information to the encyclopedia using public when we explain some oddity of nomenclature? What happens when "tablet PC" appears at the beginning of a sentence? I certainly don't think Microsot Tablet PC deserves special attention in an article about the tablet PC. Perhaps just mentioned as a disambiguation. Tablet PCs (see, are you confused because it has a capital T?) are just what English calls computing devices that have the power of personal computers, but have a touch-screen interface and are shaped like a tablet. Nuff said. Doesn't matter if you call the pen a "chisel". The point is the interface, the size, and the computing resources included. No one is confused. Some of you just work for Microsoft's advertising agencies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.206.157 (talk) 08:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Microsoft describes a Tablet PC this way: "Computers powered by the Windows XP Tablet PC Edition operating system, and equipped with a sensitive screen designed to interact with a complementary pen, are called Tablet PCs."[1] while the thesis to this Wikipedia article does not mention WinXPTPCE at all (and when it is mentioned later it is described as a non-necessary component).

Wikipedia instead describes it this way: "A tablet PC is a mobile computer shaped in the form of a notebook or a slate with the capabilities of being written on through the use of digitizing tablet technology or a touch screen. A user can use a stylus and operate the computer without having to have a keyboard or mouse." This generic definition not only includes older slate-form and pen-based laptops (like the old Fujitsus)... but it would also class Smart Displays and almost every PDA device as a Tablet PC!

I think the general (ie non Microsoft Tablet PC initiative related) "tablet PC" information ought to be removed to a separate article about Pen Tablet computers, while the "Tablet PC" article should describe primarily and foremost the Microsoft Tablet PC initiative and specification; though Microsoft did not coin the term "tablet PC," they are responsible for popularizing it and entering it into mainstream use. (Similar to the term "PC" itself, which usually refers to the "IBM PC-compatible" set of personal computers rather than all personal computers inclusive.)

What's odd is that, in my vernacular, "PC" means a unit with a separate tower and monitor, contrasting with "laptop." As I greatly prefer that sort of PC to any tiny laptop computer, I'm forced to wonder if actual tablet -PCs- exist, with a large monitor that has a drawing tablet/touchscreen built in. If so, I'd be quite interested in purchasing such a monitor...

Oh damn, I've found it, and it's 2500 dollars.

The Not Invented Here Syndrome.

Several Tablet PC have been presented on trade shows long before Microsoft or rather Bill Gates showed any interest. In a sense, Microsoft derailed the entire notion, as they relied on a disk being present in the device for secondary storage. Most of the Tablet-PC use Linux - and not Windows at all, because here you have a full TCP/IP stack, and also more flexible device management. These were the days where IrDA was at its end, and USB had been introduced, while not for memory yet.

This develops into "somethings is not because Microsoft has not invented it" - like "To or or not to be is up to Bill Gates to decide". I doubt Bill Gates likes that definition. To allow technology in general to develop, you need to remove the tie to Microsoft. Also just as "Computer" is an American English term, I doubt it makes sense to discuss "Computers" in the context of computers running Microsoft Windows. If the Europeans had kept their research by themselves - you would not be reading this article - as this is based on technology developed on a Norsk Data computer (yes - not made in the US) located outside Geneva by a team of scientists, lead by a British(not by Al Gore).

The cost of system maintenance has not been focused in the US as in Europe, hence you also find that the first "Tablets" and "Slates" were made in Europe. To reduce management cost, no storage is held on the Tablet - only on the server - once you start pushing things out - and allow preliminary storage on the device you violate some of the fundamental properties of the tablet - such as that it need not be personal - but will then be equipped with a device to authorise access and identify the user (e.g. a SmartCard). With any disk - beside a USB device, you introduce the required backup and application management. The purpose of the device was to get rid of these, and when Microsoft comes years later an "introduces" their device with "mass storage and personal character recognistion" it is just obvious to the rest how little they understand and care about the problems and cost issues with their customers. However, they had seen something, decided it was time to make their version - and derailed the technology entirely.

Tablet PC such as Siemens Gigaset SimPad was available in Europe since 1998. They have been succesful used in several building management projects even by US companies such as Honeywell --KH Flottorp 19:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

-- Yeah, you're right. How dare Microsoft attempt to make a technology usable by people who aren't working in an environment with a central wireless server. They obviously don't understand usability at all.

v.s. Laptop Computers

I just added a section called "v.s. Laptop Computers".

Can we get more information about the advantages and disadvantages of using a Tablet PC v.s. a Laptop? Laptops seem to have been around longer (or at least used more) so this may be helpful to people who are new to the concept of a tablet PC. 66.92.144.74 18:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

--> This section is only correct with respect to slate (i.e. non-hybrid tablets); I edited it a little. --Ninjagecko 9-1-05

Can someone compare Tablet PC to a PDA? They seems to work pretty much the same these days.--Sueng 9-13-07

Smaller Size is not an advantage

The general laptop market has products of all sizes, covering the same sizes as Tablet PCs do, and more. Size is actually a disadvantage for Tablet PCs, as there are no (from what I have seen) convertible Tablet PCs with screens bigger than 14 inches. Of course, bigger laptops may defeat the whole purpose of a tablet, but that lessens the disadvantage, but does not eliminate it. And of course, the utility of each screen size is relative to each person and scenario. So I will delete that advantage, and put the lack of big screen laptops as a disadvantage. I also rewrote the introductory paragraph and added the disadvantages section.

Smaller sizes can be an advantage though, I'm a user of a Tecra M4 (a 14.1") and I often find it too bulky for general note-taking unless I rest it (in slate mode) on my lap, compared to the 12" M200/M400 which looks better for note-taking (albiet, with a smaller-resolution screen). The Tecra M4 has often been described as a "proper laptop with tablet functionality thrown in" (see C|Net's review) rather than a proper tablet-pc. W3bbo 00:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I use the notion that my pockets are no larger than a 5" screen to illustrate one aspect: You need to be able to carry it around with you. So check out (those of you who allow Linux Tablets) the Nokia 770 - this is a mobile phone tablet PC. Well, it does not run Windows, and never will. --KH Flottorp 20:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC).a

GO Corporation & PenPoint

The Momenta was not made by GO Corporation. GO Corporation made the PenPoint operating system which involved handwriting recognition. GO spun off EO, a hardware company which made the EO 440 and EO 880 personal communicators which were based on PenPoint and therefore included handwriting recognition. Other licensees of PenPoint included NEC and IBM. In fact, IBM came up with the name ThinkPad to refer to its tablet computer based on PenPoint, before using it for their popular line of laptops.

Momenta was something different, a hybrid pen computer with a keyboard. 71.141.138.30 18:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I think someone added your corrections to the article. One correction: GO didn't spin off EO. AT&T founded EO to make a personal wireless communicator using their low-power Hobbit chip running on GO's PenPoint OS. When GO ran into difficulties it was folded into EO (GO's founders left), abandoning a general hardware-independent O.S. supporting third-party apps to focus on the software for EO's next-generation communicator. -- Skierpage 08:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

PARC "did" or "did not" support its development?

The History section says "did," but the context indicates "did not." Somebody who knows, please fix it or disambiguate it. Lou Sander 14:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

PARC did definitely NOT participate in the development of the Tablet PC developed in Europe 1995 - 2002. The people at PARC joined Apple, and complete the design here - though with the small screen.--KH Flottorp 20:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Missing word

A not seems to be missing from the sentence: "Alan Kay of Xerox PARC proposed a notebook using pen input called Dynabook in the late-1960s. However, the PARC management did support its development." - SimonP 21:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

---

07/08/2006 - Corrected missing word "not" - Carlos Cavalcanti 12/07/2006 - The PARC management did halt the Dynabook, it was another from PARC that brought it to Apple. The problem was the screen --KH Flottorp 20:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Disadvantages not clearly disadvantages

Some of the items listed as disadvantages (screen size, and typing crutch most notably) are very subjective in nature. Some people prefer the screen to be smaller to better enable the usability of the Tablet PC in situations where it would be impractical to use a conventional notebook PC. Some people prefer handwriting to typing as it is more comfortable to them.

Additionally, programming is just as practical on a convertible as it is on a notebook. For example, it is a great platform to develop programs intended for use on other Tablet PCs.

Battery life concerns can be alleviated in the same way as with other notebooks - additional battery options. I personally own a Gateway CX2618 which has the capability to add a battery in place of the optical drive and an extended primary battery. When combined, the two batteries offer me over 10 hours of continuous use (read: no sleeping) until the next need to swap the battery or recharge. Electrovaya Scribbler models also offer exceptional battery life by default, as the company was primarily a battery manufacturer before entering the Tablet PC market.

I think that the advantages/disadvantages section should be expanded to note the subjectivity of certain properties of the Tablet PC platform, and any workarounds or solutions if applicable.

--65.29.77.146 19:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I can add about programming, that where you program parallel execution, you will use something like a Tablet PC to program, because you need to be able to represent things in a 3D coordinate system. This is easier to "draw" using arrows between "nodes for execution". To type and then connect is not very efficient.--KH Flottorp 20:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Battery: Mobile phones is the clue, they were around in Europe, so we had the battery technology that allows a Tablet PC to last at least 14 hours without a recharge. I see that you suffer.... so I refer you to the "Not Invented Here Syndrome" section.--KH Flottorp 20:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

• * * *

This statement re. retention of information should be referenced:

"Note-taking — taking handwritten notes and drawing diagrams at a class or conference increases productivity and retention of information"

Pricing

While I agree that on average, the Tablet PC is a bit pricier, the higher price tag generalization no longer applies to every Tablet PC. Certain models are priced competitively in regards to their non-tablet counterparts (if applicable).

--65.29.77.146 19:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh. I'm not so sure. Every tablet I've ever seen has been overpriced. Usually (as mentioned in the article), the digitizer adds about $300 to the price. alphaChimp ^laudare 02:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Most tablets do not even have non-tablet brethren, so this statement of the digitizer adding $300 to the price cannot be reasonably proven. For example, if one were to actually do research into this statement, they might find the HP TC4200/TC4400, vs. the NC4200/NC4400. In this case the non-tablet models are actually more expensive. flurffmeister 22:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Higher Education Implementation

I believe it is worth mentioning in the article the effort of some higher education institutions to implement Tablet PCs into their education systems. I've gone ahead and added a section under external links pertaining to higher education, could someone add a section to the article on the progress of higher education institutions?

--Atlanta800 18:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Very good point. I know that Grove City College, for one, is giving tablets to all of their students (2400 total, ~700 each year). Think that bears note? alphaChimp ^laudare 02:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Panasonic Advertising suspected

The article has a strong intention for advertising Panasonic Tablet PCs, which is not considered as a neutral point of view in Wikipedia. I found three examples, and I want to delete them according to the policy of wikipedia.

Attempting to keep neutral information, while providing pertinent illustrations. Panasonic is a leader with tablets and portable touch screen technologies and has been for many years, so they are a logical point of illustration.Blathering1 20:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

1.In "Thin-Client Slates" section

"The Panasonic Toughbook 08 is representative of the application of thin-client computing to tablet PCs."

This Toughbook 08 (just brought out to market to replace the MDWD) is the only thin-client slate made by a major manufacturer that I am aware of. The value of having a $60 billion company bring this market is critical to see the perceived value of this class of tablet. Blathering1 20:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

2.In Convertible section

A convertible design, the Panasonic Toughbook 19 is a fully ruggedized convertible. Completely sealed to dust and water, and designed to withstand temperature extremes and drops onto concrete; the convertible element does not detract from this unit being even less prone to failure than most notebooks. USAT Corp. cites a failure rate of 1.58% on these units versus an average of 24% on notebooks. Blathering1 —20:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

However, after a detailed description of Panasonic pcs, other pc is mentioned as "One model by Acer" in short.

This would indicate a reason to delete the Acer unit (I do not have details on the Acer-- someone care to research?)-- I added detail and research stats on the model, and to illustrate that the failure issue was not universal across tablets.Blathering1 20:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

3.In Disadvantages section

a long passage for advertising Panasonic followed "Manufacturers have overcome this point of weakness such as the Panasonic Toughbook design which has a failure rate far less then most notebooks."

"Panasonic designed the Toughbook 19 to withstand the rigors of tablet use. The mobility engineering company, USAT Corp., cites the use of scissor shock absorbers mounted to the screen, flexible connectors, durable and replaceable screen overlayments that yield a failure rate on the Toughbook 19 far below that of other tablet form factor computers."

Do you agree with me? Should we delete these item? Please call me if you have your idea.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Css2002 (talk • contribs)

Agreed. Should be revised to remove bias. Doesn't help that four of the 10 references were from the usatcorp.com site (which isn't even the official Panasonic webiste). iamthebob^{(talk|contribs)} 02:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I edited out a lot of the Panasonic bias. Removed the sections that specifically touted the Panasonic features, and removed the links to the usatcorp.com website. iamthebob^{(talk|contribs)} 03:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I added notes as to why the illustrations on Panasonic were added. I am not with Panasonic, nor Matsushita, but I am broadly trained in the mobile technology space-- and Panasonic does lead this field. I used USAT as a point of reference as they provided me with a static address for the material (spec sheets) listed while Panasonic's addresses are dynamic. Also, I spoke with USAT and they agreed to be a reference point to validate the information provided. If the information is refuted, they would be a source to contact-- this is a standard Wiki practice-- provide references when possible. To be more objective we should add some better detail on Intermec and Symbol to keep the bias neutral-- I am adding to this and need to find a good reference point for these companies like USAT provided.Blathering1 20:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

This all said, the significant edit work refining a very pieced together article is appreciated. My aim is to refine the document as time allows to keep it clean and improve it with current info. So much of this info changes by the day, and sections do sound biased. We also need good thorough, objective information written with referenced information and refined in to a smooth document. All this around a technology that is rapidly changing. Blathering1

Can you site evidence that Panasonic actually "leads the field"? It is a standard Wiki practice to provide references when possible. However, references need to pertain to the thing that they are trying to prove, I do not think that the advertisements that you are using do that (see below for more information). In addition, you said that sections sound biased, and that we need a good thorough, objective information written. However when I try to edit out the bias and make the article sound less biased and remove the subjective information, you revert my edits? Does that mean that you like having bias in the article?

Also, I still maintain that the page as it is sounds biased. Take these examples:

• "A convertible design, the Panasonic Toughbook 19 is a fully ruggedized convertible. Completely sealed to dust and water, and designed to withstand temperature extremes and drops onto concrete; the convertible element does not detract from this unit being even less prone to failure than most notebooks." - This is irrelevant to the subject at hand, which is talking about the hinge design. We don't care whether it is sealed from dust water, or whether it can sustain drops onto concrete etc... we want to find out if there's a good hinge design or not. Plus, it sounds exactly like an advertisement, not like an encyclopedia.
• "USAT Corp. cites a failure rate of 1.58% on these units versus an average of 24% on notebooks. [4]" - I looked at the source, it's a Panasonic advertisement that is cited. It doesn't focus directly on Tablet PCs, but on Notebook PCs as a whole. It also doesn't focus specifically on failure rate of the hinge, which is what the section is about. It doesn't state how the PC Magazine poll was taken because a 25% failure rate average seems highly implausible. In addition, Panasonic did not use the results from the PC Magazine poll for it's numbers but instead uses some other number—and we don't know how that number was obtained.]
• "Manufacturers have overcome this point of weakness such as the Panasonic Toughbook design which has a failure rate far less then most notebooks." - Once again, the citation for this quote does not pertain directly to Tablet PCs or hinge design.
• "The Panasonic Toughbook 08 is representative of the application of thin-client computing to tablet PCs." - Explain please? Why the Toughbook representative of thin client computing and not some other tablet PC?
• "Panasonic designed the Toughbook 19 to withstand the rigors of tablet use. The mobility engineering company, USAT Corp., cites the use of scissor shock absorbers mounted to the screen, flexible connectors, durable and replaceable screen overlayments that yield a failure rate on the Toughbook 19 far below that of other tablet form factor computers." - Okay, at least this has some relation to the topic of screens. However, the source for this links once again to the page which doesn't specifically talk about Toughbook tablets, and that does not specifically show that its screen is better than other companies' screens. In addition, once again, this sounds like an advertisement. Aren't there any sources out there that aren't Panasonic advertisements or advertisements by Panasonic resellers?
• In the Popular Models section I removed the links to the usatcorp.com website for the Panasonic spec sheets in the name of equity because none of the other tablets have links to them... actually, I think the whole section should be removed because "popular" is a subjective word, and there is no reference for what determines popularity.

iamthebob^{(talk|contribs)} 04:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I did probably jump a bit-- I have been putting in a bit too much time on these pieces, and doing them as evolutionary processes (some of my references are functional placeholders, as I have asked for whitepapers that validate the statements-- the reference helps but could be much less sales like and can be more accurate, so I list them).

My plan is to dig for direct quotable and online references for market share-- but I am aware that the Toughbooks have ~80+% of the public safety market for this kind of unit.

USAT is a very reliable source for the mobility space as they have thousands of deployments across the country and are (their claim) platform agnostic. As for Panasonic, they ship over 100K touchscreen enabled units each year (SBC, for example, bought over 30,000 units) which is larger than any other tablet manufacturer (third party reference) and are a major provider to the military who have a distinct need for both rugged/reliable units and for touchscreen input. They are the only major core manufacturer of tablet computers, or any notebooks for that matter. Twinhead for example is a major supplier of units for others. This is significant since non-core manufacturers must rely on off-the-shelf products to build units (eg use notebook hardware to build a tablet and so on). This is why failures occur often in tablets-- the units hardware is cobbled together from a bid sheet and frequently not designed to be a tablet.

I cite the Panasonic specific touchscreen units as they designed these units to function as tablets from inception. The fact that most convertibles do have a hinge related failure issue is overcome by this manufacturers approach to the convertible, which is very pertinent to the article. The reference to the failure rate points to a brochure from them-- I have seen the independent SRI study that relates failures across notebooks (it is amazing! 20-35% failure in notebooks), but have not found it online. The pana 'brochure' is based on this study so this is the best I have at the moment.

On the popular models-- I agree that this is a can of worms-- we have a types of units section, and refer to the 'popular' manufacturers in the article. If anything, we could have a major manufacturers sections if they are in Wikipedia and no models. The only hesitation is the convertible and the slate stand relatively apart in design, reliability and (for the slate) function. Pictures are copyrighted, so I added the links. I am studying the creative commons licensing and seeing if I can pitch someone to contribute copyright free images-- but I haven't gotten this sorted out yet.

I plan to get at the documents cited by those brochures and list a link (they are copyrighted, so the link need to go external) to these as this would be most illustrative for the purposes of the article. Blathering1 19:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

One other item-- why the Toughbook 08 is a particularly representative of thin-client computing. I am not aware of any other major slate manufacturer doing this-- but the technology is very cool and very pertinent to this article. A bit like a throwback to the mainframe days. I added this piece to the article because of its value to pure tablet computing. The slate processes graphics, input, and output, and then has a permanent wireless connection to a host. The host may have hundreds of slates, and the connection today is campus limited to WiFi, but tomorrow can be WiMax or WAN (I believe HSDPA has just about enough bandwidth to permanently carry a session link to the slate) and so nationwide. The 08 uses a series of proprietary algorithms to compress the data stream and parse the tasks. With Larry Ellison's hosted applications dream (salesforce.com, Netsuite, Oracle E-business, etc.), Google's online free application push, and pervasive wireless-- this is a vital technology for the future of tablet computing. Blathering1 19:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see where you're getting with the Toughbook. I think eventually some of the stuff you say should probably be moved to the Toughbook article, but perhaps we should leave it in here until you finish getting the 3rd party sources etc. Thanks for enlightening me about the Toughbook situation. Don't forget that there is a consumer for tablet PCs as well though; we can't just focus all on the commercial/industry/military market. iamthebob^{(talk|contribs)} 06:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, now we have two opinions debating , my suggestion is that debating is good for a healthy Wikipedia, so why not let more people join our discussion? In order to do so, I placed a "spam discussion" tags in the wikipedia, please DONOT remove them. --Walter Smith 02:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it looks like spam and should be deleted and rewriten. I've seen alot of sources on the internet, so rewriting the Convertible section isn't impossible. We should stay away with using one company as the scource of information, Panasonic, isn't the only company to make convible notebooks.. I'll do some research and try to clean things up later. Usefull help is welcome. --69.24.160.124 21:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Nokia as major

Is Nokia really a major vendor in this market? or does it just want to be major? What constitutes major?

(Note: I'm note sure I disagree, and in fact it was a good thing that it was here otherwise I wouldn't have been able to use this page. - However, I'm not sure that it qualifies as major.)

08:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful

I would love too have one!!!!!111 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.105.202.194 (talk) 16:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Rumor?

....i heard things about getting tablets fer lyke $200 or $130

so is that true? and if it is-where could i get one T-T

oh yea i'm new here =]

Heartloving (talk) 03:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

TOC is way too comprehensive

look at it, it's ridiculous. Not every pair of sentences should have its own subheading —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.2.19.114 (talk) 10:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Which input technology?

I found not really much on the input technology of tablet PCs. Which ones use the Graphics tablet-screen hybrid and which ones are touchscreens. I think this is as important as the hybrid-slate difference. --Yamavu (talk) 09:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Screen Resolutions available in tablet pc

Give me various screen resolution in tablet pc and also the maximum resolution —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.85.47.1 (talk) 12:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Huge mistake about the Axiotron ModBook

The whole paragraph about the Axiotron Modbook is false. Axiotron does have an agreement with Apple to make its tablet. It's not a PC-based tablet, but a modified MacBook. Only the bottom case of the MacBook is preserved, with a Wacom Intuos Tablet on top of it, and a modified screen on top on the whole thing. As it's a MacBook, after all, this is a real Mac, though really modded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.68.210.8 (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Origins of Tablet PC term

I've removed a paragraph from this article that asserted the this term originated in speech by Bill Gates in 2001. For a start this claim was not backed up by the reference cited in evidence - the reference used the term within it, but did not claim it to be a freshly coined term. Indeed, since the project had got as far as the development of prototypes it must have existed under some moniker prior to that speech. There's no evidence of a change in name and therefore the term must have existed prior to the speech.

However, I also have evidence that directly contradicts the assertion made. In my loft I have several copies of Pen Computing from the late nineties. I haven't bothered to dig them out but I chanced upon the October 1997 edition lying around last night. What is clear is that at that time there was no consensus on what to call these devices - "pen computer", "pen PC", "slate" and "tablet" were all in use, along with even "Windows tablet" or "Windows 95 tablet". Look a little further though and you do find references to the key phrase. For instance in the buyer's guide section the Ricoh G-1200S is described as "First tablet PC with internal CD-ROM" - clear evidence that the term significantly predates the speech previously given as the origins of the term. CrispMuncher (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Microsoft trademarked and capitalized the term "Tablet PC", and issued a hardware specification for Tablet PCs (as their trademarked term). The Tablet PC OS was only permitted to be used on hardware which conformed to Microsoft's specifications -- the specifications were particularly narrow, and essentially required vendors to use digitizers from Wacom, as those were the only commercial components that met the digitizer part of the specification.

I have edited the entry to cite to the Microsoft "Tablet PC" specification, instead of saying that Bill Gates coined the term "Tablet PC".

PenComputingPerson (talk) 22:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PenComputingPerson (talk • contribs)

Ink collection

I assume this is a feature that won't get my fingers sticky, but shouldn't there be a description in this article or a link to whatever article might describe it? Jim.henderson (talk) 19:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Advertisement

The durability part on the toughbook sounds a bit like an advertisement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.242.163 (talk) 17:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Features section - daylight readability

The reference on daylight readability is wrong in this article. "Sunlight readable displays (800 nit display) are clearly readable even in bright and direct sunlight.[9]"

Daylight readability is more to do with contrast ration rather than brightness (nits). See this example for reference: http://www.ruggedpcreview.com/3_slates_motion_j3400.html

Contrast ratio of an LCD used outdoors is computed as 1 + (emitted light / reflected light). Average sunlight is about 10,000 nits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brettgilbertson (talk • contribs) 04:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Low screen resolution trend

Changed this section to incorporate the Motion LE1700 which has a 1400x1050 resolution... but does this section belong? Doesn't seem very nuetral / encyclopaedic.

"Almost all major tablet PCs makers cut costs by selling only 1200x800-resolution tablets. For example, as of October 2009, only the Motion Computing LE1700 (1400 x 1050) has a resolution greater than 1280x800." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brettgilbertson (talk • contribs) 04:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Inaccurate comments about availability of windows support?

The current text of the article indicates that versions of Windows with Tablet PC support are not available for commercial purchase (and machines must be sent back to "re-image"). This sounds completely bogus--it's my understanding that Tablet PC features are built-in to Windows 7 (though I haven't researched any limits in the different available versions of 7 (home, professional, etc.)). I would assume that you can install Win7 on any tablet PC and, acknowledging the normal issues of hardware and driver support, get full tablet functionality. I have heard demos of the Beta of Win 7 being sucessfully installed on old tablets and running well.

I'm not in a position to research this and edit the article correctly, but if anyone is closer to the topic to make such a substantial change, I'd welcome it. Does anyone know the status of this for sure?

Moyn2000 (talk) 09:57, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Apple?

Any mention of Apple's foray into this consumer product? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.160.8 (talk) 04:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

The ipad is a personal media player, not a tablet computer.

On the contrary, The New York Times page 1 (January 28, 2010) calls the iPad "a slender tablet computer". For example, I am seriously looking at it to draw and sketch on, which you cannot do with a media player. The drawing feature which sold it for me is instant replay; that means I can undo and redo a part of my sketch, which is important for this amateur. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 12:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality

I put up a neutrality warning on the Applications of Tablet PC's in Business section because I felt its tone was heavily biased. The information in the section is (mostly) good, but I believe it would benefit from a more neutral tone. On 2006.07.03 the Apostrophe Police removed all offending apostrophes from this section. It was otherwise not altered. Removing all traces of bias from this part would be very difficult as you would have to delete most of it.

You were right to issue the warning. See my frustrating notes. --KH Flottorp 20:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the section. There was no information in that section that isn't elsewhere in the article, and not written like a gushing editorial. Look in the history if you want to see it. 68.167.249.143 07:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I strongly object to the pro-Microsoft slant in the article, particularly the passage regarding the "popularized in a press release by Microsoft,..." and the discussion of a discrete graphics processor, which seems to be derived from the need for Microsoft OSes to have more powerful hardware to do the same job as their open source counterparts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.150.251 (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Severe bias/POV issues - Linux

"While the advent of improved handwriting recognition and additional applications have advanced the appeal of Linux tablets, the open source nature of Linux hampers Linux tablets featureset and innovation. The Linux Operating System's Tablet functionality is a poor carbon copy of Microsoft Windows XP or Vista's Tablet functionality. Linux significantly lacks creativity, R&D and most noteably, good developers."

I've rewritten the paragraph to remove some of the bias, but someone with more knowledge of Linux's capabilities on a tablet PC should add to it. -- 05:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Linux has significant tablet PC software available. It is quite right to remove the above mentioned bias. I have further edited both the Linux and Microsoft sections to remove bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.150.251 (talk) 23:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Auto archive

Can we setup 90 days/5 threads remaining auto-archiving? The talk page is getting a little long. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:15, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:29, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Tablets vs Traditional Notebooks

Given that the page for Laptops/Notebook Computers is uses "Laptop" as the primary name, should this section use the same title for consistency? The section doesn't seem very encyclopedic currently, even more so with the lack of citations which makes it feel more like it's mostly original research. I do think that a comparison section with laptops could be beneficial to the article if it was written properly. I also think that a history section that discusses why tablet PCs were created (the need for the touch interface over keyboard/mouse interface of laptops) would greatly help, though whether that belongs in this section or the more general history section, I'm not sure. UncannyGarlic (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)