14 ms·

Video: Notion Ink Adam, iPad alternative

105 points by mrphoebs 17y ago

MaysonL 17y ago
This looks like it's going to be technically quite impressive versus the iPad: Pixel Qi screen[1024x600], multi-touch (plus a backside trackpad!), camera, 3 USB ports, running Android, Ubuntu, or Chromium, with a dual-core 1Ghz Tegra CPU + GPU. More specs: http://www.technoholik.com/news/exclusive-a-sneak-peek-at-the-notion-ink-adam-tablet-specs-pics/ http://www.technoholik.com/news/exclusive-a-sneak-peek-at-th...
- Zev 17y ago
  running Android, Ubuntu, or Chromium Then its not an iPad competitor or alternative. It might be a tablet, but it is not in the same market as Apple is in with the iPad. None of these three OS's is a drastic change from what a computer is or how a computer is currently used, which the iPad is shaping up to be.
  - cookiecaper 17y ago
    They are drastic changes from what most users are accustomed to, which is Windows, and I'm sure there will be some changes for the platform in the case of at least Ubuntu. iPad is not shaping up to be a "drastic change from ... how a computer is currently used". It's shaping up to be a computer you use on your couch that's controlled via touch screen instead of keyboard and mouse. Otherwise, it's basically the same concept ... you click on the program that does what you want and use it. The web browser is basically the same, too; you click on it, type in the URL of the place you want to go, and then it's basically identical. iPad is not some revolution in computer interfaces, it's just a computer designed for couch usage instead of mobile or desktop usage. I'm really kind of sick of this Apple worship, and these ideas that if something isn't using Apple's OS it's hopeless against Apple. I don't believe that, and I think the majority of it is senseless fanboyism and hype.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
    - Zev 17y ago
      Otherwise, it's basically the same concept ... In that case, cell phones aren't a new concept. Its the same as talking to my neighbor, only through this speaker... Or maybe a car isn't a novel concept. It is, after all, the same as walking somewhere. Only slower. Or even a book. Its just another representation of stories that have been told verbally for thousands of years, after all. Sharing functional similarities in use with something that already exists doesn't mean it isn't a drastic change in how the function is performed.
      - cookiecaper 17y ago
        No, man, it's different. The iPhone/iPad isn't any kind of great boon or new magic thing. Like, cars are much different than walking because while both are means of getting from one place to another place, the cars is several dozen times faster. That's a huge improvement in the "getting somewhere" field. The same with cell phones. Cell phones are a huge boon because they allow you to call people almost anywhere. They eliminated the need for a hard telephone line, meaning you can now use your phone in thousands of places where you couldn't use a phone before, at least not without paying. Now, what major game-changing feature does the iPad enable? Nothing, really. All of the major iPad apps could be performed on a laptop just as well. The touching might make the interface more humane, but it doesn't create such a universally, obviously superior thing. The fact that it's made for couch is nice, and nicer for couch computing than a laptop because of the design of its hardware, but it doesn't enable anything that wasn't possible before. Some people might like or want an iPad, which is all fine, but it's not a major or revolutionary improvement like buggy -> car that made so many things possible that were impossible before. Like, before cars, it would take weeks or months to go from, say, St. Louis to Denver. With cars, you could make that trip in a few days or less. That's a huge, major, revolutionary improvement. Now, what thing does iPad provide that is similar to that?
  - markkanof 17y ago
    In what way is the iPad OS so different from a traditional desktop OS that Android or Chrome are not?
    - tumult 17y ago
      It's possible to break Android from just within the OS itself. This also applies to Ubuntu and almost every other OS I can think of. I don't know if this will be the case with Chrome.
    - Zev 17y ago
      Android has a file browser. Plus, it seems to be designed around small, portable devices. Which the iPad (and the tablet in the video) isn't. And are there any devices with ChromeOS available or about to be available in the next month or two? It was announced months and months ago. Can you write apps specifically targeting it yet? Do you even want to? What kind of device is Google targeting with ChromeOS? Whatever it can fit on? How is a ChromeOS app different from an HTML5 app on the iPad? I don't even know what Google's intentions with ChromeOS are. At least with Android, theres some sort of direction, even if it does get hijacked and thrown away by other companies. With the iPad, you know what market the OS is aimed at. Not so with ChromeOS or Android, to a lesser degree.
      - theBobMcCormick 17y ago
        Android does not come with a file browser, although there are third party file browsers available in the Android Market. By default, all access to files on the SD card are through the individual that manage those types of files. For example, there's a built in service that index's all media files (mp3s, AAC's, etc) and presents them, with metadata, to any app that wants them. Same goes for pictures.
    - tolmasky 17y ago
      I am a big fan of Chrome OS, but iPad is simply a completely different model of computing, whereas Chrome OS is a completely different foundation of computing. At the end of the day, for Google to succeed, one of Chrome OS's achievements has to be to match a lot of what desktop computing is today. In fact, one "ideal" scenario is for Chrome OS to simply be the same as desktop computing today, except "better". For example, it would be faster (launch more quickly, open apps faster, etc.); the deployment model would be simpler (over the web, no more software updates for apps, etc.); and more secure. However, while these advancements are certainly great, these are all very much simply an evolution of the current desktop model. Most of the "revolutions" in Chrome OS exist for developers, not users. On the other hand with iPad you have to admit that it is drastically asking you to reanalyze what it means to use a computer. This isn't a value judgment: it remains to be seen whether this new model will be good or intuitive or successful or what have you, but it is different.
  - whughes 17y ago
    Android? Chromium? These are not exactly traditional desktop OSes. Ubuntu I'll concede, but if they're putting Android on it by default it will be a lot closer to the iPad than to your Windows/Mac desktop. I think this was something you brushed aside too quickly earlier. Android was shown in the video, and if they want to compete with the iPad it's a very good starting point (being at least in the same league, if not on par with, the iPhone OS). As far as I know, there are no files in Android or Chrome-OS. Android also has a touch interface (and this tablet doesn't have a mouse anyway).
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
    - cookiecaper 17y ago
      Ubuntu actually released a netbook remix that would handle much better on something like this than the traditional GNOME desktop. Take a look: http://www.canonical.com/projects/ubuntu/unr http://www.canonical.com/projects/ubuntu/unr
      - Zev 17y ago
        The iPad (and this tablet, for that matter) is not a netbook. Throwing Gnome without the bar on the bottom on it won't magically make Ubuntu usable on the tablet in any way that makes sense. I can go compile an X server for the iPhone and run all of those apps on it as well (or, most of them. Some apps or their dependancies might do weird things with bits that may break). That doesn't mean that I will have a good experience using them.
        cookiecaper 17y ago
        These tablets are essentially netbooks that use a touch screen instead of a mouse. As such, I think that UNR would be pretty much just as usable on this as it would on a netbook.
        flogic 17y ago
  - wvenable 17y ago
    Wait.. the iPad runs the same OS as the iPhone (slightly modified) and this tablet runs the same OS as the Droid (slightly modified). So how is this not directly comparable?
    - Zev 17y ago
      The core of OS X and Springboard might be shared, but if you think that the UI of the applications on the iPad shared with the iPhone, might I suggest that you go and watch the iPad release video where Steve Jobs shows the device off? From what I've seen in the video, this device doesn't have much custom UI and the main selling point is hardware. Also this tablet might also run Ubuntu or ChromeOS. Which means that the OS won't be nearly as integrated with the hardware as it is on the iPad. Or that the tablet's UI won't be designed specifically for the device it is on. Or apps that it will run won't be designed specifically for the device and instead will be generic, to the lowest common denominator (which, most of the time, will be a phone, not a tablet).
      - Que 17y ago
        > Also this tablet might also run Ubuntu or ChromeOS. Which means that the OS won't be nearly as integrated with the hardware as it is on the iPad. Or that the tablet's UI won't be designed specifically for the device it is on. Or apps that it will run won't be designed specifically for the device and instead will be generic, to the lowest common denominator (which, most of the time, will be a phone, not a tablet). Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but it seems this means you would prefer a device that didn't have any advanced capabilities so that way all applications won't attempt to use any? Making the iPad without any extensibility was a design choice because it would be easier to make applications uniform? You would prefer to use a hindered device by design rather then software that selects its functionality based on available hardware? By contrast a gigantic portion of applications for the iPad will be designed to be run on a phone... the iPhone. I think you underestimate or don't fully understand Android. I don't intend to sound condescending here, I am truly curious.
        Zev 17y ago
  - samuel 17y ago
    I can't agree. What's revolutionary about the iPad? Only that isn't running a desktop OS? There have been Windows CE tablets for ages. The difference is realization, which is everything, of course, it's the difference between Altavista and Google. The iPad will be successful But revolutionary? On other side, you have the first device that it's at the same time, a tablet and a eink reader. I don't know if it will be successful, probably not at the same scale, but certainly it's much more revolutionary. Anyway, if anything, I think this device could hurt more Kindle sales than iPad ones.
    - Zev 17y ago
      The iPad isn't about hardware, at all. The iPad is about getting away from the hardware. About having a completely new way to use a computer. Yes, to do the same tasks you do now. But to do them in a better way. That this device is betting on hardware to beat Apple means that they've already lost. That they had to resort to comparing their device to a MacBook Pro with the brightness turned down to have a selling point looks desperate. The tablet these guys are selling doesn't offer a new way to go about your routine. It just offers a more complex device to go about your daily routine.
  - theBobMcCormick 17y ago
    Huh? Isn't the iPad running iPhone OS? I've got a Nexus 1 and I've used my friends iPhone a few times. They seem pretty damn similar. Certainly more similar to each other than either are to Windows or OSX.
sjs382 17y ago
This is exactly what I was hoping for from the Apple Tablet.
- weaksauce 17y ago
  I agree with you to a degree. I would like the Apple Tablet to have those features except I want the Apple tablet to have the same screen that it does now. I know that a good portion of HN readers appreciate the difference between a TN Screen and the IPS screen that Apple is putting in the iPad. The epaper screen in this tablet is just not the way that apple wants to go with a tablet. It's also a direction that I don't think that apple should go because battery life and readability in direct sunlight are the only real draws to the epaper screen. The real thing that makes an ebook readable on a computer screen is dpi and the dpi on the iPhone is good and they continued this with the iPad. This is not to say that the kindle et al are not readable but they give up a lot just to be good book readers. The iPad is not aiming to be just a ebook reader. It's aiming to be a portable media device.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - glymor 17y ago
    This has a Pixel Qi screen not a e-ink screen. (The OLPC screen has the same technology.) It has the same reaction speed as a LCD. I'm not sure how good the colour mode is (probably TN level). The monochrome mode has 3 times the DPI (because of each RGB sub-pixel). About e-ink readers: it's not the DPI. They generally have 160dpi which is lower than many mobile LCDs. For example the N770 I used to read on had a 225 dpi screen but I'm still faster on e-ink. I'm not sure what it is, it might just be the lack of backlight.
    - weaksauce 17y ago
      Thanks for the clarification on the Qi screen. There are a few factors that make ebook screens usable in my opinion. I would say that you need a certain level of dpi to handle small font rendering well. After a certain threshold I don't know if it benefits you as much. The second factor is screen size the n770 had a 4.1" screen which leads to a lot of context switches. The kindle has 167ppi on a 6" screen. The kindle screen allows for much less context switches which are jarring to the mind. (context switch in this example would be turning the page) With the iPad's 10" screen the context switches will be much less even still. (Though the iPad has the least ppi of all the devices I mentioned I think it should be over the minimum threshold for readability)
cwilson 17y ago
When there is a device like this that I can walk into a store and play with before buying as well as have access to thousands of quality applications that make my life easier or more fun then I'll consider it a competitor to the iPad. Until then this is nothing more then a cool gadget that likely won't see the light of day inside any major retailer. The iPad is currently the only "tablet" that will ever see mass consumer adoption for a few reasons: 1. Apple is releasing it (meaning it's hyped up, has that cool factor, and you can go play with one in any Apple store first), 2. The app store is unlike anything else out there, and 3. The user experience on the iPad/iPhone is superior to anything else out there right now. This doesn't mean the Adam won't be cool, but why would any "regular" consumer (meaning not Hacker News readers or anyone like us) consider buying one, or hell, how would they even know it exists?
- dzlobin 17y ago
  >The app store is unlike anything else out there, If you run Ubuntu on the Adam, I'm pretty sure the internet w/o limitations > the app store.
  - SwellJoe 17y ago
    It's always been amazing to me that Apple has managed to convince a sizable number of otherwise intelligent people that a walled garden, tightly controlled by an overbearing schoolmarm, is preferable to the Internet and a totally free market. The app store is a huge bug, not a feature. It's just plain bad for developers (because Apple owns yours customers and the pipeline to those customers, and can cut you off without warning if you happen to compete with them or do something they don't like), and bad for consumers (because the approval process slows updates, puts a filter in the relationship between developer and user, keeps useful applications out of users hands, and insures that Open Source applications have almost no room in the market). If consumers (and developers) were smarter, it would be a killer bug; one that prevented anyone from ever buying an iPhone or iPad or developing for it. But, people don't always act in their own best long-term interest, if the packaging is pretty enough.
    - 17y ago
z8000 17y ago
The swivel camera is a good idea. It's tough to really love the thing without more information. Oh, I love the comparison in sunlight to a macbook ... whose brightness was clearly turned down quite a bit.
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  Why do you think the brightness was turned down? Have you ever tried to use a macbook in bright sunlight? It's unreadable. In fact I was surprised by how clear the macbook screen was so I'd guess they had the brightness jacked right up. Cameras don't always accurately reflect what the human eye would see but an LCD backlight simply can't compete with bright sunlight. The Pixel Qi is effectively acting as a mirror for that light. edit: this video from last June has a good comparison with the kindle and a transflective screen right at the start and a standard LCD touchscreen at 5:20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oawX3wenxNc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oawX3wenxNc
  - z8000 17y ago
    I didn't think that the MacBook was actually in direct light. In fact from the angles it actually seemed to be shilouetted. The one time I did try to use a MacBook in direct sunlight, I found that turning the brightness off completely sort of worked ok. But then I just got up and moved somewhere else in the shadows.
proee 17y ago
That swivel camera would be a nice addition to the iPad.
bj 17y ago
WOW, a real computer actually. This is pretty much what I was expecting the iPad was going to be instead of just an oversized ipod touch that doesn't run real applications but a bunch of jokes from the app store. After the iPad was officially announced I thought I was going to have to get a joojoo instead but this looks way more promising.I think I will wait a few months then.
- andrew1 17y ago
  > I thought I was going to have to get a joojoo instead You could always just not get a tablet thing and make do with whatever technology you already have. The stuff we have now seems to work OK.
sker 17y ago
The camera is one of those things that makes you say "why didn't I think of that first." I was kinda allergic to all the tablet hype that is surrounding the tech scene lately, but this really makes me consider one. I want one, actually.
- amandle 17y ago
  Swiveling cameras are not a new idea, Sony picture books had one at least ten years ago: http://www.transmetazone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=381&page=2 http://www.transmetazone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=381&#...
  - jimmyjim 17y ago
    He mentions in the video that he filed a patent for it not so long ago. I suppose there might prove to be a few problems there that may ultimately end up delaying its release, or worse, killing it altogether.
    - sunchild 17y ago
      Filing a patent != having a patent. The Sony device is clearly prior art. I had one of those Sony's, BTW. I can't believe anyone would compare this device favorably vs. an iPad. That's willful ignorance, I guess.
      - dagw 17y ago
        I will happily compare it favorably vs the iPad for two simple reasons. 1. Better screen for what I'll be using it for and 2. more open and thus easier to make it work the way I want a tablet to work. Will it outsell the iPad? No. To want this device more than an iPad? Very much so.
mrphoebs 17y ago
More links http://www.slashgear.com/notion-ink-adam-hands-on-0969281/ http://www.slashgear.com/notion-ink-adam-hands-on-0969281/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/notion-ink-adam-stripped-bare-and-our-in-depth-video-hands-on/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/notion-ink-adam-stripped-... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy9fPc1yGSU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy9fPc1yGSU
_debug_ 17y ago
Prima facie, the key feature of the Adam seems to be that it's much more Open than the iPad. That sounds awesome! Plain Ubuntu + touchscreen + whatever I can do == wow.
jasonkester 17y ago
I like the touchscreen on the back side. I can see that catching on with other tablets. The screen that works in direct sunlight is nice too. I'm looking forward to the day I can get one of those on my laptop.
Blasa 17y ago
What I'd like is a device that can fold (but has a seamless screen when unfolded) so it fits more easily in small places. Also you can type and have part of the screen angled up at you (this would still be an ergonomic nightmare for as a 6'4" guy wanting to improve his posture, but less of one than a purely flat item). I'd also like one I can set up as a small tv screen (in-built stand) and remote mouse/trackpad so I can surf you-tube without having to hold it up.
nirmal 17y ago
If you're interested in more behind the display interaction check out the LucidTouch project. http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/projects/lucidtouch/index.html http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/projects/lucidtouch/index.htm...
dataminer 17y ago
This is awesome, I can read books, watch videos in my backyard under the sun. I want this tablet
elblanco 17y ago
I really really like how they actually spent time thinking about how people will use the device instead of spending man years being concerned about how the bezel looks with aluminum hi-lights. Trackpad on the back? Brilliant! Pixel Qi display so I can read in sunlight? Awesome! 3 USB ports, why? 1 for keyboard, 1 for mouse and 1 for a thumb drive. Fantastic! Now sell it for $250 and I'll have it in my backpack tomorrow.

105 points by mrphoebs 17y ago

This looks like it's going to be technically quite impressive versus the iPad: Pixel Qi screen[1024x600], multi-touch (plus a backside trackpad!), camera, 3 USB ports, running Android, Ubuntu, or Chromium, with a dual-core 1Ghz Tegra CPU + GPU. More specs: http://www.technoholik.com/news/exclusive-a-sneak-peek-at-the-notion-ink-adam-tablet-specs-pics/ http://www.technoholik.com/news/exclusive-a-sneak-peek-at-th...

Zev 17y ago
running Android, Ubuntu, or Chromium Then its not an iPad competitor or alternative. It might be a tablet, but it is not in the same market as Apple is in with the iPad. None of these three OS's is a drastic change from what a computer is or how a computer is currently used, which the iPad is shaping up to be.
- cookiecaper 17y ago
  They are drastic changes from what most users are accustomed to, which is Windows, and I'm sure there will be some changes for the platform in the case of at least Ubuntu. iPad is not shaping up to be a "drastic change from ... how a computer is currently used". It's shaping up to be a computer you use on your couch that's controlled via touch screen instead of keyboard and mouse. Otherwise, it's basically the same concept ... you click on the program that does what you want and use it. The web browser is basically the same, too; you click on it, type in the URL of the place you want to go, and then it's basically identical. iPad is not some revolution in computer interfaces, it's just a computer designed for couch usage instead of mobile or desktop usage. I'm really kind of sick of this Apple worship, and these ideas that if something isn't using Apple's OS it's hopeless against Apple. I don't believe that, and I think the majority of it is senseless fanboyism and hype.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
  - Zev 17y ago
    Otherwise, it's basically the same concept ... In that case, cell phones aren't a new concept. Its the same as talking to my neighbor, only through this speaker... Or maybe a car isn't a novel concept. It is, after all, the same as walking somewhere. Only slower. Or even a book. Its just another representation of stories that have been told verbally for thousands of years, after all. Sharing functional similarities in use with something that already exists doesn't mean it isn't a drastic change in how the function is performed.
    - cookiecaper 17y ago
      No, man, it's different. The iPhone/iPad isn't any kind of great boon or new magic thing. Like, cars are much different than walking because while both are means of getting from one place to another place, the cars is several dozen times faster. That's a huge improvement in the "getting somewhere" field. The same with cell phones. Cell phones are a huge boon because they allow you to call people almost anywhere. They eliminated the need for a hard telephone line, meaning you can now use your phone in thousands of places where you couldn't use a phone before, at least not without paying. Now, what major game-changing feature does the iPad enable? Nothing, really. All of the major iPad apps could be performed on a laptop just as well. The touching might make the interface more humane, but it doesn't create such a universally, obviously superior thing. The fact that it's made for couch is nice, and nicer for couch computing than a laptop because of the design of its hardware, but it doesn't enable anything that wasn't possible before. Some people might like or want an iPad, which is all fine, but it's not a major or revolutionary improvement like buggy -> car that made so many things possible that were impossible before. Like, before cars, it would take weeks or months to go from, say, St. Louis to Denver. With cars, you could make that trip in a few days or less. That's a huge, major, revolutionary improvement. Now, what thing does iPad provide that is similar to that?
- markkanof 17y ago
  In what way is the iPad OS so different from a traditional desktop OS that Android or Chrome are not?
  - tumult 17y ago
    It's possible to break Android from just within the OS itself. This also applies to Ubuntu and almost every other OS I can think of. I don't know if this will be the case with Chrome.
  - Zev 17y ago
    Android has a file browser. Plus, it seems to be designed around small, portable devices. Which the iPad (and the tablet in the video) isn't. And are there any devices with ChromeOS available or about to be available in the next month or two? It was announced months and months ago. Can you write apps specifically targeting it yet? Do you even want to? What kind of device is Google targeting with ChromeOS? Whatever it can fit on? How is a ChromeOS app different from an HTML5 app on the iPad? I don't even know what Google's intentions with ChromeOS are. At least with Android, theres some sort of direction, even if it does get hijacked and thrown away by other companies. With the iPad, you know what market the OS is aimed at. Not so with ChromeOS or Android, to a lesser degree.
    - theBobMcCormick 17y ago
      Android does not come with a file browser, although there are third party file browsers available in the Android Market. By default, all access to files on the SD card are through the individual that manage those types of files. For example, there's a built in service that index's all media files (mp3s, AAC's, etc) and presents them, with metadata, to any app that wants them. Same goes for pictures.
  - tolmasky 17y ago
    I am a big fan of Chrome OS, but iPad is simply a completely different model of computing, whereas Chrome OS is a completely different foundation of computing. At the end of the day, for Google to succeed, one of Chrome OS's achievements has to be to match a lot of what desktop computing is today. In fact, one "ideal" scenario is for Chrome OS to simply be the same as desktop computing today, except "better". For example, it would be faster (launch more quickly, open apps faster, etc.); the deployment model would be simpler (over the web, no more software updates for apps, etc.); and more secure. However, while these advancements are certainly great, these are all very much simply an evolution of the current desktop model. Most of the "revolutions" in Chrome OS exist for developers, not users. On the other hand with iPad you have to admit that it is drastically asking you to reanalyze what it means to use a computer. This isn't a value judgment: it remains to be seen whether this new model will be good or intuitive or successful or what have you, but it is different.
- whughes 17y ago
  Android? Chromium? These are not exactly traditional desktop OSes. Ubuntu I'll concede, but if they're putting Android on it by default it will be a lot closer to the iPad than to your Windows/Mac desktop. I think this was something you brushed aside too quickly earlier. Android was shown in the video, and if they want to compete with the iPad it's a very good starting point (being at least in the same league, if not on par with, the iPhone OS). As far as I know, there are no files in Android or Chrome-OS. Android also has a touch interface (and this tablet doesn't have a mouse anyway).
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - cookiecaper 17y ago
    Ubuntu actually released a netbook remix that would handle much better on something like this than the traditional GNOME desktop. Take a look: http://www.canonical.com/projects/ubuntu/unr http://www.canonical.com/projects/ubuntu/unr
    - Zev 17y ago
      The iPad (and this tablet, for that matter) is not a netbook. Throwing Gnome without the bar on the bottom on it won't magically make Ubuntu usable on the tablet in any way that makes sense. I can go compile an X server for the iPhone and run all of those apps on it as well (or, most of them. Some apps or their dependancies might do weird things with bits that may break). That doesn't mean that I will have a good experience using them.
      - cookiecaper 17y ago
        These tablets are essentially netbooks that use a touch screen instead of a mouse. As such, I think that UNR would be pretty much just as usable on this as it would on a netbook.
        flogic 17y ago
- wvenable 17y ago
  Wait.. the iPad runs the same OS as the iPhone (slightly modified) and this tablet runs the same OS as the Droid (slightly modified). So how is this not directly comparable?
  - Zev 17y ago
    The core of OS X and Springboard might be shared, but if you think that the UI of the applications on the iPad shared with the iPhone, might I suggest that you go and watch the iPad release video where Steve Jobs shows the device off? From what I've seen in the video, this device doesn't have much custom UI and the main selling point is hardware. Also this tablet might also run Ubuntu or ChromeOS. Which means that the OS won't be nearly as integrated with the hardware as it is on the iPad. Or that the tablet's UI won't be designed specifically for the device it is on. Or apps that it will run won't be designed specifically for the device and instead will be generic, to the lowest common denominator (which, most of the time, will be a phone, not a tablet).
    - Que 17y ago
      > Also this tablet might also run Ubuntu or ChromeOS. Which means that the OS won't be nearly as integrated with the hardware as it is on the iPad. Or that the tablet's UI won't be designed specifically for the device it is on. Or apps that it will run won't be designed specifically for the device and instead will be generic, to the lowest common denominator (which, most of the time, will be a phone, not a tablet). Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but it seems this means you would prefer a device that didn't have any advanced capabilities so that way all applications won't attempt to use any? Making the iPad without any extensibility was a design choice because it would be easier to make applications uniform? You would prefer to use a hindered device by design rather then software that selects its functionality based on available hardware? By contrast a gigantic portion of applications for the iPad will be designed to be run on a phone... the iPhone. I think you underestimate or don't fully understand Android. I don't intend to sound condescending here, I am truly curious.
      - Zev 17y ago
- samuel 17y ago
  I can't agree. What's revolutionary about the iPad? Only that isn't running a desktop OS? There have been Windows CE tablets for ages. The difference is realization, which is everything, of course, it's the difference between Altavista and Google. The iPad will be successful But revolutionary? On other side, you have the first device that it's at the same time, a tablet and a eink reader. I don't know if it will be successful, probably not at the same scale, but certainly it's much more revolutionary. Anyway, if anything, I think this device could hurt more Kindle sales than iPad ones.
  - Zev 17y ago
    The iPad isn't about hardware, at all. The iPad is about getting away from the hardware. About having a completely new way to use a computer. Yes, to do the same tasks you do now. But to do them in a better way. That this device is betting on hardware to beat Apple means that they've already lost. That they had to resort to comparing their device to a MacBook Pro with the brightness turned down to have a selling point looks desperate. The tablet these guys are selling doesn't offer a new way to go about your routine. It just offers a more complex device to go about your daily routine.
- theBobMcCormick 17y ago
  Huh? Isn't the iPad running iPhone OS? I've got a Nexus 1 and I've used my friends iPhone a few times. They seem pretty damn similar. Certainly more similar to each other than either are to Windows or OSX.

sjs382 17y ago

This is exactly what I was hoping for from the Apple Tablet.

weaksauce 17y ago
I agree with you to a degree. I would like the Apple Tablet to have those features except I want the Apple tablet to have the same screen that it does now. I know that a good portion of HN readers appreciate the difference between a TN Screen and the IPS screen that Apple is putting in the iPad. The epaper screen in this tablet is just not the way that apple wants to go with a tablet. It's also a direction that I don't think that apple should go because battery life and readability in direct sunlight are the only real draws to the epaper screen. The real thing that makes an ebook readable on a computer screen is dpi and the dpi on the iPhone is good and they continued this with the iPad. This is not to say that the kindle et al are not readable but they give up a lot just to be good book readers. The iPad is not aiming to be just a ebook reader. It's aiming to be a portable media device.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- glymor 17y ago
  This has a Pixel Qi screen not a e-ink screen. (The OLPC screen has the same technology.) It has the same reaction speed as a LCD. I'm not sure how good the colour mode is (probably TN level). The monochrome mode has 3 times the DPI (because of each RGB sub-pixel). About e-ink readers: it's not the DPI. They generally have 160dpi which is lower than many mobile LCDs. For example the N770 I used to read on had a 225 dpi screen but I'm still faster on e-ink. I'm not sure what it is, it might just be the lack of backlight.
  - weaksauce 17y ago
    Thanks for the clarification on the Qi screen. There are a few factors that make ebook screens usable in my opinion. I would say that you need a certain level of dpi to handle small font rendering well. After a certain threshold I don't know if it benefits you as much. The second factor is screen size the n770 had a 4.1" screen which leads to a lot of context switches. The kindle has 167ppi on a 6" screen. The kindle screen allows for much less context switches which are jarring to the mind. (context switch in this example would be turning the page) With the iPad's 10" screen the context switches will be much less even still. (Though the iPad has the least ppi of all the devices I mentioned I think it should be over the minimum threshold for readability)

cwilson 17y ago

When there is a device like this that I can walk into a store and play with before buying as well as have access to thousands of quality applications that make my life easier or more fun then I'll consider it a competitor to the iPad. Until then this is nothing more then a cool gadget that likely won't see the light of day inside any major retailer. The iPad is currently the only "tablet" that will ever see mass consumer adoption for a few reasons: 1. Apple is releasing it (meaning it's hyped up, has that cool factor, and you can go play with one in any Apple store first), 2. The app store is unlike anything else out there, and 3. The user experience on the iPad/iPhone is superior to anything else out there right now. This doesn't mean the Adam won't be cool, but why would any "regular" consumer (meaning not Hacker News readers or anyone like us) consider buying one, or hell, how would they even know it exists?

dzlobin 17y ago
>The app store is unlike anything else out there, If you run Ubuntu on the Adam, I'm pretty sure the internet w/o limitations > the app store.
- SwellJoe 17y ago
  It's always been amazing to me that Apple has managed to convince a sizable number of otherwise intelligent people that a walled garden, tightly controlled by an overbearing schoolmarm, is preferable to the Internet and a totally free market. The app store is a huge bug, not a feature. It's just plain bad for developers (because Apple owns yours customers and the pipeline to those customers, and can cut you off without warning if you happen to compete with them or do something they don't like), and bad for consumers (because the approval process slows updates, puts a filter in the relationship between developer and user, keeps useful applications out of users hands, and insures that Open Source applications have almost no room in the market). If consumers (and developers) were smarter, it would be a killer bug; one that prevented anyone from ever buying an iPhone or iPad or developing for it. But, people don't always act in their own best long-term interest, if the packaging is pretty enough.
  - 17y ago

z8000 17y ago

The swivel camera is a good idea. It's tough to really love the thing without more information. Oh, I love the comparison in sunlight to a macbook ... whose brightness was clearly turned down quite a bit.

ZeroGravitas 17y ago
Why do you think the brightness was turned down? Have you ever tried to use a macbook in bright sunlight? It's unreadable. In fact I was surprised by how clear the macbook screen was so I'd guess they had the brightness jacked right up. Cameras don't always accurately reflect what the human eye would see but an LCD backlight simply can't compete with bright sunlight. The Pixel Qi is effectively acting as a mirror for that light. edit: this video from last June has a good comparison with the kindle and a transflective screen right at the start and a standard LCD touchscreen at 5:20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oawX3wenxNc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oawX3wenxNc
- z8000 17y ago
  I didn't think that the MacBook was actually in direct light. In fact from the angles it actually seemed to be shilouetted. The one time I did try to use a MacBook in direct sunlight, I found that turning the brightness off completely sort of worked ok. But then I just got up and moved somewhere else in the shadows.

proee 17y ago

That swivel camera would be a nice addition to the iPad.

bj 17y ago

WOW, a real computer actually. This is pretty much what I was expecting the iPad was going to be instead of just an oversized ipod touch that doesn't run real applications but a bunch of jokes from the app store. After the iPad was officially announced I thought I was going to have to get a joojoo instead but this looks way more promising.I think I will wait a few months then.

andrew1 17y ago
> I thought I was going to have to get a joojoo instead You could always just not get a tablet thing and make do with whatever technology you already have. The stuff we have now seems to work OK.

sker 17y ago

The camera is one of those things that makes you say "why didn't I think of that first." I was kinda allergic to all the tablet hype that is surrounding the tech scene lately, but this really makes me consider one. I want one, actually.

amandle 17y ago
Swiveling cameras are not a new idea, Sony picture books had one at least ten years ago: http://www.transmetazone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=381&page=2 http://www.transmetazone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=381&#...
- jimmyjim 17y ago
  He mentions in the video that he filed a patent for it not so long ago. I suppose there might prove to be a few problems there that may ultimately end up delaying its release, or worse, killing it altogether.
  - sunchild 17y ago
    Filing a patent != having a patent. The Sony device is clearly prior art. I had one of those Sony's, BTW. I can't believe anyone would compare this device favorably vs. an iPad. That's willful ignorance, I guess.
    - dagw 17y ago
      I will happily compare it favorably vs the iPad for two simple reasons. 1. Better screen for what I'll be using it for and 2. more open and thus easier to make it work the way I want a tablet to work. Will it outsell the iPad? No. To want this device more than an iPad? Very much so.

mrphoebs 17y ago

More links http://www.slashgear.com/notion-ink-adam-hands-on-0969281/ http://www.slashgear.com/notion-ink-adam-hands-on-0969281/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/notion-ink-adam-stripped-bare-and-our-in-depth-video-hands-on/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/notion-ink-adam-stripped-... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy9fPc1yGSU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy9fPc1yGSU

_debug_ 17y ago

Prima facie, the key feature of the Adam seems to be that it's much more Open than the iPad. That sounds awesome! Plain Ubuntu + touchscreen + whatever I can do == wow.

jasonkester 17y ago

I like the touchscreen on the back side. I can see that catching on with other tablets. The screen that works in direct sunlight is nice too. I'm looking forward to the day I can get one of those on my laptop.

Blasa 17y ago

What I'd like is a device that can fold (but has a seamless screen when unfolded) so it fits more easily in small places. Also you can type and have part of the screen angled up at you (this would still be an ergonomic nightmare for as a 6'4" guy wanting to improve his posture, but less of one than a purely flat item). I'd also like one I can set up as a small tv screen (in-built stand) and remote mouse/trackpad so I can surf you-tube without having to hold it up.

nirmal 17y ago

If you're interested in more behind the display interaction check out the LucidTouch project. http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/projects/lucidtouch/index.html http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/projects/lucidtouch/index.htm...

dataminer 17y ago

This is awesome, I can read books, watch videos in my backyard under the sun. I want this tablet

elblanco 17y ago

I really really like how they actually spent time thinking about how people will use the device instead of spending man years being concerned about how the bezel looks with aluminum hi-lights. Trackpad on the back? Brilliant! Pixel Qi display so I can read in sunlight? Awesome! 3 USB ports, why? 1 for keyboard, 1 for mouse and 1 for a thumb drive. Fantastic! Now sell it for $250 and I'll have it in my backpack tomorrow.