I agree with you that "the cloud" is way too overhyped these days. There's a lot of stuff that I want to keep private & not on a hackable server. When I have my computer off, I don't want people or hackers to have access on rough drafts, financial document scans, pictures that I like but don't want other people to see, etc. etc.
The Cloud is great for collaboration purposes but when it comes to personal record keeping & not having access to Internet, the cloud falls short.
I disagree with your statement about apps only having utility with a touchscreen. Yes, I'd love to have a touchscreen but can't afford it.
Nonetheless, apps on my Blackberry (FB, Twitter, weather channel, ING Direct ATM finder, ING Direct balance checker, TiVo tell TiVo at home to record something, Google Maps) are awesome with just the optical sensor/roller ball. I guess that fits into the "touchscreen at heart" aspect, but I often prefer my Blackberry for a bunch of these things rather than use a PC. A couple of those things (ING Direct ATM finder, Google Maps) have a lot to do with having GPS, though. . ..
--The_Lex Wed Dec 15 13:23:16 2010
Big reason I like apps, though: faster than BB web browser, integrated-into-OS customization L allows for multi-tasking. No in-ap/program multi-tasking on PDA-esque devices that I know of.
--The_Lex Wed Dec 15 13:43:06 2010
BB web browser? customization L? What?
Part of the wonder of iDevices is that they DON'T foster hey-whats-that-in-the-corner-of-the-screen multitasking, but invite you to sink in and focus on the activity at hand.
--Kirk Thu Dec 16 08:21:02 2010
BB - Blackberry.
The "L" in "customization L" was a mistype that I didn't catch. There isn't supposed to be an "L" there.
Multi-tasking on the Web is almost essential, though. I see a link that I'm interested in, but I don't want to have to search for it later, "CTRL-click" the bring it up in its own tab.
I guess the issue is that the phone is SO MUCH more convenient than using a laptop or desktop that I want it to fit my Web needs, not just "I need to find how to get somewhere, so I'll plug info into Google Maps" or "What's this person's address, so I'll look it up in my address book."
I guess the solution would be to get an iPad or another type of tablet. The nice thing about Smartphones and iPad is the instant access to apps and the Web. With the laptop or PC, you have to load it up or keep it on all the time.
Macs do a lot better job with standby and all that, I know, but why keep a PC or laptop on all the time when something in my pocket could work just as well? As for iPad or another tablet, why should I have to add something more to all the crap I already carry around during my commute? Why should I worry about another expensive piece of equipment that someone could steal?
And I'm probably not alone here. There's probably a lot of people, especially people who use public transportation, that would love to have all these capabilities on their Smartphone rather than have to lug around a Kindle or an iPad or anything like that. The iPad would still have have its uses for sales people that travel around, people who would want a bigger screen for movies or Youtubes and other things. Allowing for more capabilities on a Smartphone would not marginalize the iPad or tablet markets. They would probably just become more of a niche market.
When I got my new Blackberry and learned how to transfer MP3s onto it, including stuff bought off the iTunes Store, I've practically stopped using my iPod (now I just use it with my alarm clock in the morning). And just for instant there, I forgot the name of the iPod.
Sure, the technology is probably not there to make Smartphones as powerful as an iPad, a tablet, laptop or PC. I'll use those when I need more power, a bigger screen and doing stuff on the BB/Smartphone is a drag because of screen size, the need for a big keyboard or actual computing power.
Otherwise, though, as an end user (and I think there's a lot of non-developer/techie people who think like me) I would prefer to do most of my Web browsing and social networking on my phone than on any other device. It's just so much more convenient.
And that's why automatic syncing is so useful, too. Cuts down on how much you need to use a laptop, PC, iPad or tablet. The idea of doing most of my everyday convenience computer use on the phone in my pocket is awesome to me.
--The_Lex Thu Dec 16 11:30:51 2010
Yeah, Amber uses an iPad browser that brings back "open link in background", it's annoying Safari doesn't offer that, just open in new window which pops the link destination up... on the other hand, it goes back to the idea that iDevices make it easier to follow a single stream.
In an iPadless world, an iPhone does great work as an always--at-hand browser, and I've comfortably read a few Kindle-ized novels on it. In fact, I'd say an iPhone refutes your speculation that "the technology is probably not there to make Smartphones as powerful as an iPad" - the iPad is just a more comfortable iPhone (well, iPod Touch, which is the iPhone sans phone) That's kinda all it offers over iPhone: comfort, which leads to a much stronger sense of "electronic communing" that I was talking about the other day.
Amber's irritated that you still need to run iTunes on a PC or Mac for your device, it doesn't run "standalone".
--Kirk Fri Dec 17 11:44:59 2010
Feels more like "forcing" the user into a single stream, making decisions for the user. Why would it be hard to stay on a single stream? Why would it be a pleasurable experience to be forced into a single stream?
--The_Lex Fri Dec 17 16:40:07 2010
I'm surprised it seems like a remote concept for you, you seem like you might be more with the people who are concerned about the constant level of distraction of the modern age - how the "random, intermittent reward" of new emails, tweets, and news articles can become a skinner box as we constantly get compelled to go check, just in case, even if we just checked a moment ago. The multiwindow design of PC OSes fosters that. So the single window of the IDevices can more easily keep a nice focus akin to getting into a book.
In terms of browsing, I guess I mostly want open in background for sites that have a lot of articles off a main page- but I find sometimes it's nice to go ahead, read the article, then hop back and continue the listing, rather than read the whole listing, assemble a stack of articles "to get to" in other tabs, and then tackle em.
--Kirk Sat Dec 18 09:13:43 2010
I work at an insurance agency. While there, e-mail, Twitter & Facebook become the Skinner Box. Also somewhat beneficial because it keeps me from getting too focused on less monetarily profitable but more emotionally rewarding work tasks that can become time sucks through natural hyperfocus. I can better manage my time with the skinner box.
Then there's lunch time when I don't have a book or don't want to lug around laptop to watch TV shows transferred from TiVo. It would be nice to have ability to multi-task research on topics for more thorough quicker research.
If I'm at home doing something I've really gotten into, out for dinner with wife or friends and something I can get into, I ignore my phone & generally forget its there. Missed plenty of calls that way. . .. When I'm not fully engaged, yeah, the phone is my skinner box.
I have cut down a lot on SPAM and getting off mailing lists, though. I have also gotten into the habit of asking myself "Is this e-mail important to keep around or not?" then I try to deal with it or just delete it (at least off the Blackberry if it might be something of interest when I have more time some day) to reduce clutter & e-mailbox intimidation.
I try rationalizing it that I'm not into the "random, intermittent reward" but more into at least keeping my non-engaged social life in control & low maintenance. But yeah, I admit I feel a little bored when there isn't e-mail activity or the only e-mails I see in my boxes are to and from the wife.
As for browsing & such, I guess I can easily see (probably somewhat like Amber) that if phone/PDA makers really wanted to, they could easily make themselves the primary & almost only primary computing device that the non-business consumer would need.
Then the secondary devices could easily be the entertainment systems to handle live, DVR & streaming video & audio. The whole Apple TV & iPhone synergy rocks, but the remote for the Apple TV probably works OK for most.
Cell phones have the ability to replace iPods, especially if you have the ability to change media cards. Just create an interface for the cellphone to purchase mp3s. Obviously computer would still be needed to rip CDs & such.
Word processing is really the only "average" end user operation that I can see difficulty replacing with a cell phone. Best way I can see with resolving that is allow for portable keyboard & mouse (like with iPad) & allow for some kind of docking station for the Smartphone to display on a monitor. All of that could probably be done through Bluetooth.
After that, for manipulating photos, editing video & audio, desktop publishing, gaming, graphics work, etc. etc., definitely desktop workstation (or laptop, depending on preference) definitely needed for processing power.
And I guess that's my thing: I want my Smartphone to replace the majority of my computer needs (and yeah, touch screen would advance that for me). I want to have the smallest device that can do the most stuff to replace the many STUFF that I have (yes, grammatically wrong, I'm doing it for emphasis). It's about reducing clutter for me in many ways & increasing freedom of mobility.
And also. . .to cut down on shoulder/back strain from carrying my laptop around. I probably should look into getting a smaller netbook for portability needs.
--The_Lex Sat Dec 18 13:09:45 2010
Kind of random but topical observation: following habits of "random, intermittent reward" through FB & e-mail combinations help entering real-life engagement with family & friends more efficient, at least once you get past the unsettling feeling of relatives and friends you don't see often being so up to date on your life without direct communication. It also cuts down on nagging family members nagging you for not communicating often enough. Cuts down on those areas of stress.
--The_Lex Sat Dec 18 13:23:04 2010
Comments Disabled... (Thanks Dirty Rotten Spammers)
Feel free to write kirkjerk at gmail dot com!