How About an iPhone OS Or Android-Based Netbook? 162
perlow (Jason Perlow of ZDNet) suggests that the current crop of netbooks might be missing the boat when it comes to getting maximum battery life and small-screen usability, and asks "Could Mac OS X iPhone or Google's Android be the key to mass adoption of the next generation of netbooks?" Android looks pretty nice, I admit, but so far I like having full-fledged Ubuntu on my own small computer. He's not the first one to think that the iPhone would be well-employed as the guts of an ultra-portable, though. (Note: it's only a model.)
Because those OS's don't have the apps I want? (Score:1, Interesting)
Let me know when I can run vi, gcc, PC/SC (smartcards), and Thunderbird (for its PKCS#11 smartcard S/MIME) on iPhone OS or Android. Otherwise STFUAGBTW.
Re:Smartphone power (Score:4, Interesting)
You are correct. I can do more things with an Cellphone than I could do with my old full-sized Commodore 64 or Amiga 500 back when I was a student. In fact most cellphones are powerful enough to emulate those old machines and play the classic videogames.
The only flaw I can see with cellphones is their tiny keyboard. Perhaps Apple or some other maker should repackage their phones to include laptop-sized keyboards so users can run some limited software (like MS Word). They could call it the Iphone or Ipod lapbook.
Re:OpenMoko (Score:4, Interesting)
OpenPandora is more interesting. OpenMoko is using truly ancient hardware. It's a generation behind my phone, which is one or two generations behind the state of the art. My phone does, however, act as a bluetooth dial-up networking device using UMTS or (falling back to) GPRS. I can use it to make calls, and I can use it to access data. This means that any device I own with Bluetooth can connect to the Internet via the phone, as long as the phone is in my pocket. I can use the same connection with my laptop or with a palmtop (I currently use a Nokia 770, but I'll probably grab one of the next generation of the OpenPandora system).
There is already some very nice hardware in this arena, such as OpenPandora and the BeagleBoard, that run open operating systems. Once you ditch Windows, you ditch the x86 requirement and so you can make much nicer devices.
Pandora (Score:4, Interesting)
http://openpandora.org/ - can run unbuntu, pocket-sized and a 10 hour battery life = win!
What? (Score:4, Interesting)
So I'll have a big laptop-like device with an incredibly confined proprietary OS I can't change, and that has a tightly controlled application base?
Great! Sign me up! I totally hate how I can run any OS I please, any application I please. I want to have an OS that locks me into using the applications the manufacturer tells me I may use on my hardware!
You know, sarcasm aside, the linux versions of these netbooks have a much higher return rate than the Windows versions. If you make your device around an iPhone, you're looking at the same higher return rate for a confined OS that isn't windows, but you're also disregarding the benefits of an OS that costs about 5 bucks per machine. Basically, you're taking the worst of both worlds, and you don't even have a Windows XP version to sell to the masses when they realise that's what they really want.
Re:ZDNet is missing the point (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, the Debian on G1 install gives you access to phone, Android, and Debian functionality at the same time. At the moment it's done with a chroot environment, but there are plans to package/replace the Android stuff to give a native Debian install. Basically, libc and the dynamic linker are non-GNU under Android, but they are standards compatible, so it shouldn't be too difficult to replace them. The G1 runs Linux by default, so of couse there is already support in its kernel for the phone hardware.
Re:ZDNet is missing the point (Score:5, Interesting)
Cellphone technology based "laptops" have existed for years, and they have a solid fan base, but they are still big cellphones, not small PCs.
Actually, the iPhone OS IS Mac OS X. All Apple did was add some hardware support and a bit of custom GUI to better support the minimal size of the screen and the mouseless interface. Mac OS X is very modular, versatile, and it has the ability to scale down or up well depending on the resources available to it. It's vastly different than just taking a cellphone OS and modifying it for a netbook, Apple would just use the regular Mac OS X and add hardware support so it could run on a netbook.
All of this looks like it's gone over the heads of the people at ZDNet. They talk about Mac OS X and the iPhone OS as if they were two completely different animals instead of both being Mac OS X. They don't seem to realize that you can have your cake and eat it too: a version of Mac OS X that runs like a laptop version and yet has a small OS "footprint" like a cellphone version. You certainly can and it wouldn't take a major reworking of anything to get the job done.
Been wondering about this for years (Score:4, Interesting)
My Palm Tungsten is a hell of a computer. With the IR keyboard, it serves as a somewhat awkward laptop. It got me to thinking, the only real difference between it and a proper laptop is the screen. Of course, the screen is over half the cost of a laptop so I kind of figured "Ah, that's why we don't see sub-$400 laptops." But then the netbooks came out and I said "well, looks like I called that one wrong."
What we're seeing here are the warring priorities of usage and form factor. If I'm on the go but need the full feature set of a proper desktop, I'm stuck with a laptop. I need the large screen, I need the keyboard and touchpad, I need to run proper PC apps. If I'm really on the go and can't afford to sit down and setup my laptop every time I need to do something, then I really need a PDA-format device. But then there are the situations, usually in businesses, where you end up with weird hybrids of those demands. That's where you see the tablet PC's that are supposed to serve as digital clipboard replacements. There's also the hybrid tablets where you can close the lid like a laptop or turn it around and close it and now you have a tablet PC. Personally, I think those units are just too damn fragile. The old-school blackberries were completely awesome and the biggest part of that was how durable they were. You could take these things into the field and do abuses to them that would make Jack Bauer toss his cookies and they'd still work. There's also a number of businesses that just put a proper desktop PC on a cart and say "haul it where you need it, plug it in when you get there." I've seen that for medical equipment and also inventory systems at warehouse stores.
It pretty much boils down to "how much screen do you need to display what you need to look at" and "how are you inputting information?" At this point, horsepower is pretty much a secondary concern, we can put amazingly powerful computers in little tiny PDA formats. But as powerful as they are, if you need to do a lot of typing, you need a computer. I can read slashdot just fine on a berry but I wouldn't have wanted to thumb-type this post on one.
Re:ZDNet is missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
Uh, web apps are being made for one reason. SAAS (Software as a Service).
Companies think there is a market for products that don't have a license, they have a subscription. Additionally there are savings to be had by updating features/bugs and providing support for a central repository of software rather than for a distributed user install base where the environment is unknown.
Throw in the opportunity for an extra revenue stream from Ad supported 'free' versions of the software (which is to provide an alternative to piracy) and you can see that companies have a genuine business model to work towards.
You're right that security is a big issue - but not for consumers.
Companies just need to offer VPN-like access to webapp VMs for customers with more than 20 users of an application (or individuals wiling to pay extra).
Re:ZDNet is missing the point (Score:4, Interesting)
Not really.
The problem with most netbooks has been the UI.
The Linux distros they used just where not that good. XP works but with the smaller screens it really isn't great.
Using the software you are used too? Only if your a techie. Most netbooks don't come with a optical drive and external optical drives are not yet super common.
What an Android or iPhone based netbook offers is trouble free computing.
If you want software you get it from Itunes or the Android store.
Learning curve? More myth than anything. I set up a Linux box for a church library. The PC was super old so I had to use Zenwalk on it. I put Gnumeric on it to keep track of their media.
The woman that runs it didn't even know what a flash drive was. Did she have any problem?
Not at all. She is using it just fine and wishes her XP system at home looked as pretty.
People have made the jump to Mac, iPhones, and Cell phones with no real problem.
So I do think this is a great idea.
Re:The iPhone would work (Score:5, Interesting)
I doubt your eye could perceive the extra detail at a sensible viewing distance anyway.
He wants about 300dpi which is starting to get into printer resolution range. That would enable serif fonts (like times) to look better than sans serif fonts (arial, helvetica). You would also find smaller point fonts more readable thanks to the additional pixels. So viewing a webpage might finally make sense on a device that small that is commonly held in your hand like a book or a sheet of paper. If we could get to OLED contrast ratios and that dpi, your display would basically look almost like a printed photograph. With current displays at around 90 to 100dpi, everything looks pixely (windows) or blurred because of the low dpi of the display.
Today 300dpi might be unreasonable for a color display. I think e-ink displays get to about 300 dpi but they can't display color or refresh quickly. My 9" eee pc lcd screen is at about 130 dpi. So I think lcd manufacturers should be able to get that up to 150 dpi or so.
I'd like to see the more expensive electronics manufacturers (sony, apple) demand high dpi displays because everything would really start to look sharp without anti aliasing or sub pixel lcd tricks. For example just imagine going from 100 dpi to 200 dpi. That means in the same pixel on 100 dpi you now have 4 dots instead of 1 to render it. If the font is adjusted for the higher dpi, curved or diagonal lines would look super sharp.