Talk:Hardware: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by Twenty-seven (Talk) to last revision by Docdtv) |
(Walter is an arsehole.) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Walter is an arsehole. |
|||
<div> |
|||
__TOC__ |
|||
</div> |
|||
== Older talk == |
|||
More discussion can be found in [[Talk:Hardware_specification]], |
|||
as [[Hardware]] was derived from [[Hardware specification]]. |
|||
== Against the integrated pad (XO-3) industrial design == |
|||
The original industrial design (of the XO-1) was splendid. |
|||
I am curious how field experience has validated this opinion |
|||
or not. How often were the different physical configurations |
|||
used, and for how long? How quickly/often did the |
|||
articulation mechanics break down from wear or abuse, |
|||
especially in challenging environments? Was repair practical? |
|||
Did software issues discourage use of the e-book configuration? |
|||
When one has a screen that needs protection, a basic clamshell |
|||
design is needed. In principle, one could use a rigid detachable |
|||
faceplate or case. But even adults might lose these, to say |
|||
nothing of small children! |
|||
Because the XO-2 design kept the clamshell, including weight |
|||
asymmetry which enabled a secure vertical landscape-AR screen |
|||
("laptop mode"), I could see some merit in it. What I didn't |
|||
like was the idea of combining a display surface with one |
|||
the user touches. Why? Keeping a touched screen clean without |
|||
regular cleaning remains an UNSOLVED problem! See [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704717004575268602440574716.html?mod=rss_personal_technology IPad Side Effect: Greasy Fingerprints]. This challenge |
|||
seems ESPECIALLY problematic when one projects use in areas |
|||
with lots of dust, which provides abrasive grit to scratch |
|||
the AR coating of the screen, if not the screen glass itself, |
|||
as a side effect of frequently degreasing the screen of |
|||
fingerprints with a cleaning rag. See [http://ask.slashdot.org/story/10/03/27/1931201/Rugged-LaptopTablet-Suggestions-2010-Version Ask Slashdot: Rugged Laptop/Tablet Suggestions, 2010 Version?] |
|||
If it REALLY was of great advantage to provide a large-area |
|||
touch surface, then one should have made each of the two XO-2 |
|||
sections provide either the display function, OR the touch |
|||
function, but NOT both. Specialization would have also reduced |
|||
cost and improved optimal design of the selected function. |
|||
And I also challenge the idea that a large touch area is |
|||
usually worth the real estate. Long ago, we learned we |
|||
could lift our mouse to make do with little surface area, |
|||
not to mention software tricks like de/acceleration. And |
|||
even if we allow that haptic feedback could provide keyboard |
|||
finger guidance as good as passive (semi-)rigid surface |
|||
sculpturing, the latter requires no energy or transducers. |
|||
Even if dirtying the screen were not an issue, there are |
|||
problems with directly touching the screen. Vertical |
|||
viewing surfaces reduce neck strain. But if that then |
|||
means one has to hold one's arm out to touch the screen, |
|||
one has traded neck strain for arm fatigue. I also |
|||
notice that my hands sadly lack transparency. There |
|||
are times when one wants to point at the screen and see |
|||
all of it at the same time, which displacing the touch |
|||
and viewing surfaces enables. One should also note that |
|||
virtual hands and fingers on a screen can vary in size, |
|||
unlike real hands and fingers, assisting delicate |
|||
interaction. While software lets us do this whether |
|||
we touch the viewing surface or another one, clearly |
|||
having a "natural-sized" hand on the screen itself |
|||
offers no advantage. Nature's way is not always best. |
|||
As you can imagine, if I view the move from the XO-1 |
|||
to the XO-2 industrial design as a step backward, then |
|||
I truly dislike the proposed |
|||
[http://blog.laptop.org/2009/12/24/xo-3-concept/ XO-3 design] |
|||
of a tablet |
|||
whose display integrates a touchscreen! Absent a case |
|||
(which can easily be lost), there is no screen protection |
|||
in transit and storage. The screen will need to be |
|||
regularly swabbed clean of finger grease, which will |
|||
offer lots of opportunities for dust to scratch it. |
|||
Surely if I have no tree or rock against which to prop |
|||
up my tablet as I lie prone on the ground, then I can |
|||
lay it on the ground or repose myself in a number of |
|||
ways while I hold it in my hands like an old-fashioned |
|||
codex - not too bad. But should I have a table and chair, |
|||
it is a pity that the tablet cannot stand vertically on |
|||
its own, leaving my hands free for work, or maybe just |
|||
swatting flies. |
|||
And one day making the screen out of plastic, instead |
|||
of glass, would make things EVEN WORSE. Glass is much |
|||
more resistant to scratching than (soft) plastic (the |
|||
potential AR coating issue aside). Talking about how, |
|||
unlike a glass screen, a plastic screen is "unbreakable," |
|||
only makes sense if one totally ignores the ease with |
|||
which the latter will be slowly but surely destroyed |
|||
by abrasive cleanings. |
|||
Is the current proposed OLPC design being driven by |
|||
fickle consumer fashion in the United States, rather |
|||
than by thoughtful ergonomic and maintenance issues, |
|||
which was the case with the original design? Perhaps |
|||
I am missing something and I can be educated. I will |
|||
admit to doing little reflection prior to making these |
|||
remarks. |
|||
- [[User:Docdtv|Docdtv]] 18:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Mitigating woes of the integrated pad (XO-3) industrial design == |
|||
Bromide: If one is stuck with lemons, one can still make lemonade. How might one mitigate the potential problems of the XO-3 industrial design outlined above? |
|||
Apple sells a carrying case for its new iPad, a view-mainly media device similar in design to the XO-3, and its rollout has inspired a third-party carrying case mini-industry, as the WSJ reports at |
|||
[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704379004575249092546984862.html?mod=rss_personal_technology iPad Fans Face New Dilemma With Tough-to-Tote Gadget]. |
|||
Below are some rudimentary ideas for dealing with XO-3 issues. Could an organization like the [http://d-lab.mit.edu/about D-Lab]do much better, or maybe just help with design and optimal fabrication/integration? Or do groups like that dislike OLPC for various potential reasons? |
|||
The simplest design to protect the screen against impact damage is a rigid faceshield. If sealing can be provided as well, it can also protect against dirt and moisture. |
|||
Perhaps a snug-fitting shallow tray design might be useful. The XO-3 could lie face down in it during transport and face-up during use. The latter mode decreases the chance the detachable tray is left behind and lost due to oversight. The XO-3 should be clamped into the tray for its safety and the tray should feature a carrying handle. |
|||
An elaboration of the tray could add a means to use it as the foot of a stand which erects the XO-3 into an almost vertical orientation, tilted slighly back, a mode |
|||
very useful when used as an e-book or an image screen. |
|||
Finally, one can imagine elaborating the tray so that it adds a keyboard and trackpad, basically remaking the XO-3 to try recovering the safety and ergonomic virtues of the XO-1 clamshell design. This assumes there is some means to cybernetically connect the tray with the XO-3, perhaps with wires, or perhaps without. |
|||
If one cannot add such an additional tactile input surface to the XO-3, other trouble mitigation strategies exist. |
|||
One can mandate all installed software segregate the screen into geographically consistent no-touch and touchable ghettos. The latter zone is much smaller than |
|||
the former and hosts virtual keyboards and trackpads containing no subtle visual details, making both finger grease and the abrasive effects of removing it more |
|||
tolerable. This touchable area should be restricted to one edge of the screen, or at very most, two. |
|||
The availability of a powerful microprocessor also encourages an interesting possibilty of potential utility to low-intensity-input applications. General |
|||
speech recognition is hard, but recognition of a very small sound vector set, like one representing the few distinct keys of a keyboard, is much less challenging, |
|||
both in doing speaker-specific training and in actual application. This can be made even more robust at the expense of speed by using the traditional crutch of a "phonetic alphabet," e.g. ALPHA - BRAVO - CHARLIE etc. |
|||
Finger grease issues aside, sometimes it would be helpful to do simple things like flip or zoom an e-book page with one's voice, allowing one's hands to do other |
|||
useful work, including that which makes them especially dirty. This includes things like cooking, building, repairing, cleaning, etc. |
|||
- [[User:Docdtv|Docdtv]] 06:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:59, 26 November 2010
Walter is an arsehole.