Personally I think it looks great.
I was responding to tablets being used for gaming.
I was also making certain people were aware of the speed and efficiency of a keyboard and mouse vs a tablet.
I would love to see how fast you could word process with a tablet vs me at 160wpm+ on a keyboard. I would love to see how fast you could provide a complicated spreadsheet solution using a tablet vs a keyboard and mouse.
Tablet is a gimmick, because it is not a tactile peripheral. It is great for generating media, for viewing media, for phones, for document reading, for browsing... but to suggest that it has more productivity than a keyboard and mouse? That it will eventually surpass them? That is asinine.
If you want to know why I call it a gimmick, get the dictionary again. It is a gimmick because it doesn't do anything a keyboard and mouse cannot, and it doesn't do it faster. Aside from built in accelerometers it's selling point is the fun and "coolness" or "hipness" of being able to touch a screen.
If you are disputing what I have said, you are welcome to do so by yourself.
(p.s. I like tablets, and I like the operating system, and I like being hip. But If I have work to do, it's a keyboard and a mouse - and considering my job is 45+ hours a week of typing and reporting, that my previous job involved network practitioning and IT consultancy in an upcoming business where adoption of a computer based infrastructure was paramount to their growth, and that previously I studied general IT that included IT in the workplace and Systems Analysis and Design, I like to consider myself experienced enough to use myself as a source in discussions around peripheral use, peripheral and device market niché and the comparitive efficiency of peripherals and devices.)
Not that your being inexperienced is bad nor am I trying to be insulting, but you should probably read up some more and go to workplaces and go to peoples homes and see what people use.
Tablets are great, no doubt about it. But I think you seem to have dropped into a marketing trap whereby you think they will soon make the world turn.
You are partly right by saying smartphones will be very important - partly right because they already are - but there is not much growth available there. Not saying that the market is entirely satured or stagnating, but it's incredibly presumptuous to consider any other market penetration from these devices. Soon they will act as credit cards, perhaps even ID cards, which will make them grow... slightly, but they already own casual gaming, phone/diary/calculator, portable media players - and social cameras, they will keep improving at those, but there are not many other markets they can get hold of and certainly not many markets with the size or influence of the aforementioned.
---------- Post added 2011-09-19 at 04:52 PM ----------
And it will be interesting to see Apple's response to it. As I completely empathise with your frustration and I don't even have an iPad, I can already imagine the annoyance of its inability to communicate with your other devices - or your need to buy apple based peripherals instead of peripherals that can be used on almost every other machine and device out there.
---------- Post added 2011-09-19 at 04:57 PM ----------
Anyone know what the current driver support is like? Are Windows 7 drivers (mostly) adequate?
Debating whether or not to test this now or when beta hits.
i5-2500 - HD 7970 Ghz - 16GB DDR3 Ripjaws - 90GB OCZ Vertex 3 / 120GB HyperX 3K / 2x WD Caviar Black RAID0
As long as it is a desktop and not a laptop you should be fine.
A better test of OS resource-efficiency is, as I already stated, launching many resource-hungry programs and observe the computer's performance. And here is where you really start to see the difference between Unix and Windows. The Windows kernel wasn't really developed with heavy multitasking in mind. Try launching Visual Studio, Word, Excel, some DB development software, Matlab, open a dozen or two browsers windows and add some PDF files to the mix, all that while playing music and you will notice delays and heavy swapping when switching between the stuff. My point is: a better investment of time for MS would be to reduce the process/thread overhead and efficiency of resource usage in heavy multitasking environment. This is what makes the end user happy, not 100Mb less reported idle RAM usage.
In operating systems that don't do that, you get a heavy use of the swap file even with +8GB RAM, which reduces the performance significantly.
Last edited by haxartus; 2011-09-20 at 06:23 AM.
That doesn't make me feel any better