Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Microsoft Portables Apple Hardware

The iPad vs. Microsoft's "Jupiter" Devices 293

harrymcc writes "A dozen years ago, Microsoft convinced major manufacturers to put Windows CE inside devices that looked like undersized touchscreen personal computers. The platform was code-named 'Jupiter' and shipped as Handheld PC Pro, and it flopped — it turned out that people wanted full-strength notebooks. But in retrospect, it was a clear antecedent of what Apple is doing — much more successfully — with the iPad."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The iPad vs. Microsoft's "Jupiter" Devices

Comments Filter:
  • the older product actually has 12-16 hour life compared to iPad's 8 hour life

    For the record, the iPad has a *minimum* battery life of ~10 hours. So if you play 720p video all day long, your battery is supposed to last about 10 hours, and reviewers have said that it stands up to the claim. Standby time is supposed to be 1 month.

  • by sopssa ( 1498795 ) * <> on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @05:46PM (#31850520) Journal

    Why do you think I absolutely dislike the window mobile 7 move to Apple like App Store and not allowing to run your own or freeware apps? Sometimes people can think on their and not be someones shill and see faults and goods at anyones products.

  • "Successfully"? (Score:5, Informative)

    by bradgoodman ( 964302 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @05:50PM (#31850568) Homepage
    I don't know that you can say that Apple is doing it more "Successfully". The Newton sold like hotcakes when it first came out. Just because it got an initial rush of die-hard Apple fans and "early adopters" doesn't mean the product won't go the way of the Newton, too. I thing it's too early to call the iPad any kind of a success, just yet...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @06:05PM (#31850748)

    Er, the ipad isn't even meant to be used productively. It's a pure consumer's gadget.

  • Re:"Successfully"? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Wyatt Earp ( 1029 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @06:09PM (#31850790)

    The Newton flopped.

    100,000 the first year. []

    While the iPad has at least tripled that []

    I had a couple Newtons, an MP 130 and later a 2000

  • Re:Apple is Evil (Score:2, Informative)

    by maxwell demon ( 590494 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @06:15PM (#31850852) Journal

    Unlike Microsoft, neither Google nor Apple are convicted monopolists. Hence they are not as "evil".

    It just means their behaviour is not illegal. It doesn't tell anything about the morality of their behaviour.

  • by MikeFM ( 12491 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @06:26PM (#31850976) Homepage Journal
    A modem is better than Wifi/3G? THANK GAWD I don't have to use those horrible devices anymore. If someone could just convince everyone to stop printing you'd have killed my pair of most hated devices.

    I doubt there are more apps for WinCE than iPhone OS. My experience is WinCE typically doesn't run most Windows apps, or much of anything really. And writing apps for WinCE can be a real pain - at least as bad as developing for iPhone.

    Both have syncing but iPhone can sync many files over the air with MobileMe, Air Sharing, etc. Doubt your modem can do that.

    Multitasking is really overall a bad idea. Apple has gradually been adding it to iPhone OS in such a way as to keep it from totally screwing the pooch. For a few apps it's really justified but the vast majority it is just waste. Sounds as if Apple is getting it right. I doubt Microsoft did but I don't have any specifics on their implementation other than assuming it's normal WinCE.

    640x480 is doable (not bad for back then really) but is certainly not better. Stylus driven is really not the same as a touch display. Even touch is nowhere as good as multitouch. My DS, video camera, still camera, and some older PDAs have stylus or single-touch and they really suck when your used to multitouch. Better than no touch though.

    I'm not that impressed with that in 1998. I hand built a handheld computer at about that time that was smaller, had built in camera, mp3, and VoIP, local wireless and cellular wireless, and ran a full Linux OS. And I did that for a few hundred dollars as a stupid hobby project because I was annoyed at how limited my cell phone and PDA were. Again not as pimp as the iPhone but very close in concept. If Microsoft had been on the ball they should have brought us all a real iPhone-ish device a decade sooner.

    Have you even used the App Store? It has thousands and thousands of free apps. And you can program your own apps pretty easily (could be a little better but helps protect the market from the spam Android gets).

    I don't get book tablets. The reason my laptop isn't as good as a tablet is because it folds in the middle. Why take the worst feature of a laptop and put it into a tablet? If they do that they need to make it so you can use it in slate form when a book isn't a handy format but then they'll have extra bulk and weight for nothing. Doesn't really add up. Maybe make it so two slates can hook together to form a book that works in unison - that might have some uses.

    I hope MS does have the sense to go the App Store route. It'll give customers a better experience. Is sure easier than managing a dozen DVDs, going to a dozen websites, and pulling a few things off random Flash drives to get your new computer setup. It would be cool if the App Store would let you save templates of what apps you have installed on different systems and re-install them on new systems all at once. Maybe the new enterprise tools will allow that.

    There is certainly still room for improvement in the tablet market. While the iPad is pretty cool and is the closest yet to what I started working on making for myself so many years ago it's still far from perfect. I think eventually we'll see a merge between these lightweight desktops and what we think of desktop operating systems today to get something less restricted but easier and safer to use that will take over both markets (effectively remerging them). I think Chrome OS's idea of apps running in the cloud will get merged in there somewhat too although I tend to think the app will be on the device but heavy processes will run on the cloud when it's available to speed things up.

    Still interesting that Microsoft played with the concept back then. To bad they never really took it all the way.
  • Re:"Successfully"? (Score:2, Informative)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @06:48PM (#31851174) Journal
    So it's almost as successful as the Sega Dreamcast. Meanwhile the Commodore Amiga was a complete flop.

    You can't make absolute determinations on the success yet. Give it a few months at least.
  • by gyrogeerloose ( 849181 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @10:28PM (#31853122) Journal

    Flash content on the web represents a very large and significant portion of contemporary web experience. (And I can't believe anyone needs to state this.) The developing web standards are adopting most of the features presently provided by Flash. If a portion of the web experience is omitted, you know it is missed.

    I've had ClickToFlash on my computer for months now and am only rarely forced to view the Flash content to use a site. As it turns out, Flash is used mostly for needless embellishments that add nothing to the content and ads. I don't miss either one at all.

    Comparing Microsoft's intentional damage to actual Web standards to Apple's refusal to include proprietary additions is specious.

  • by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @11:38PM (#31853592)

    Uh no. 1990 called to remind you about the megahertz myth.

    does a 2Ghz i7 run faster than a 2Ghz P4? yes by more than a factor of 10.

    processors have been increasing in flops/ghz than they have in ghz alone.

  • by twidarkling ( 1537077 ) on Thursday April 15, 2010 @12:42AM (#31853954)

    The "average user" visits things like YouTube or blip regularly, or sites with embedded video, so having that missing is significant. Yes, YouTube's now moving to html5, but again, these are average users, who won't understand the need to upgrade their browser AND go find the appropriate codec. And they don't understand whitelisting either.

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling