US bans Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

[phongn]

Looks like Apple has lost its case in the UK:

Samsung Electronics Co. (005930) won a legal ruling after a U.K. judge said its Galaxy tablets aren’t “cool” enough to be confused with Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s iPad.

The design for three Galaxy tablets doesn’t infringe Apple’s registered design, Judge Colin Birss said today in London in a court fight between the world’s two biggest makers of smartphones. Consumers aren’t likely to get the tablet computers mixed up, he said.

The Galaxy tablets “do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,” Birss said. “They are not as cool.”

Apple is fighting patent lawsuits around the globe against rivals including HTC Corp. (2498) and Samsung as it competes for dominance of the smartphone and tablet computer markets. The firms have accused each other of copying designs and technology in mobile devices. Together, Samsung and Apple make more than half of the smartphones sold worldwide, according to IDC, a Framingham, Massachusetts-based market researcher.

Samsung said the judgment affirms its position that the Galaxy doesn’t infringe Apple’s design rights.

“Should Apple continue to make excessive legal claims in other countries based on such generic designs, innovation in the industry could be harmed and consumer choice unduly limited,” Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung said in an e-mailed statement.

Unusual Details

“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad,” Apple spokesman Alan Hely said in an e-mailed statement that didn’t specifically address the ruling. “This kind of blatant copying is wrong and, as we’ve said many times before, we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property.”

Samsung asked the U.K. court to rule that its Galaxy tablets weren’t too similar to products created by the late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs and design chief Jonathan Ive, according to today’s judgment. Apple filed a counter-claim.

The judge found that Samsung’s products were distinctive because they were thinner and had “unusual details” on the back. He gave Apple 21 days to appeal.

Apple, based in Cupertino, California, has sought court orders in the U.S., Germany, the Netherlands and elsewhere seeking to block Samsung from selling its tablets.

Samsung has been ordered to stop selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the U.S. until a patent-infringement trial can be held. An order that it also stop selling its newest Galaxy Nexus smartphone was temporarily put on hold last week while an appeals court considers Samsung’s petition to have the ban lifted.

A win for Samsung, though a bit of (spot-on) snark from the judge

[Pendleton]

I'll admit, that's pretty damn funny. Too bad the judges in the US and Germany didn't open and shut the case this way. It's not like Samsung's tablets pose a threat to the iPad, contrary to what others may think with the stifling competition reasoning. The Nexus 7 would be more of a threat, and it isn't even really aimed at the iPad (more of an Android cannibalisation fest).

[someone_else]

I hope like hell they did care that portable versions were good, because otherwise it meant they were deliberately shipping a terrible product. You make it sound like it's okay to do that!

Why it shouldn't be prefectly moral to make and sell what they want? It's their product. They never thought it was worth serious investment.
Why? MS marketing has always been "thug market into remaining a monopoly, sell crap" and it worked like that for a while, while this is less true nowadays that Apple created a lot of new markets with its stuff (smartphones and tablets, and maybe even netbooks), at the times those portable devices were made MS was still more or less the only one making an OS for such things. (everyone else had to make their own) So why wasting money when you are a monopolist?

Now that MS is getting some significant competition from some linux distros and Apple (still well below dangerous levels, but the trend wasn't good), its main products (OS mainly) start to be better. I wonder why.

A lot of people don't have trouble with the onscreen keyboard. You might, but please do not mistake that for the larger market as a whole.

Depends from the amount of typing. All people I know that do use tablets have bought keyboards for their tablets and use them when they have to write docs. Heck, most people with smartphones I know complain about "how (physically) hard is the on-screen keyboard, it makes your fingers sore when typing SMS" as well.

And transflective LCD hackery? Please. Don't make me laugh: the vast majority of people aren't going to swap displays.

Companies sell kits to do that the same way they sell kits to change the battery of Iphones. Ok that most don't want to hack stuff, but it's not much harder than swapping Iphone battery.

You have zero understanding of what the larger market wants from computers. Hint: they want an appliance. Apple provides it.

You are missing my point. Rephrasing. Apple sells tons of high-priced computer appliances over status-symbol alone. Product quality and performance of its competitors (making computer appliances of similar purpose) is already comparable if not better on all critical fields, especially from Samsung.

a superior display (high color gamut, high pixel density, wide viewing angle)

You are speaking of Apple and its Samsung-produced Retina Displays? Because others usually use the same netbook-grade displays (and thus can be good or bad), touchscreen of course.

fast-enough to perform tasks,

but too limited to compare to a netbook, task-wise.

"walled-garden" approach that makes it more difficult to get malicious software

Bullshit as all claims that mac/apple are immune to viruses. It's just different code, but the tactics don't change. When the amount of stuff with that OS reaches a critical point, malware for it pops up. Apple stuff is no different.

If you're referring to Macintosh, its great innovation was 'GUI for the masses'

While this is dumbing everything down a bit, it allows significant freedom of movement to the user. The same cannot be said for Ipad UI and similar.

Computers are supposed to make life easier, not force them to run through usability hurdles created by the priesthood of software engineers.

Which is exactly what will happen when you make a smartphone-like UI for a PC and hammer it down the throats of customers like MS is doing.

Besides, what was wrong with the UI invented by Mac/Apple and then ripped-off by Windows and used by ALL serious linux distros as well until now?

Competent designers aren't treating them "like a retard", they're actually figuring out how people use computers and how to make their lives easier.

Hello? When you make a machine with heavily crippled functions (or "without uselelss functions" in the selling pamphlet), that does not allow any real software modification from the user (only a limited amount of customizations, although it's fucking easy to hack) and has an interface that even 5 yo children can use, yes, that's officially treating the consumers like retards. That they like being treated like that it's another matter.

A desktop all-in-one does not need Metro (unless Microsoft wants to make them touchscreens).

Which is the issue. Windows is pushing METRO a lot. You have to hack Win 8 to get the classic interface, just to say how hard they are pusing it.

If that does not go against your "Computers are supposed to make life easier, not force them to run through usability hurdles created by the priesthood of software engineers."....

And yes, tablets have the power to run Windows 8 ... hence Windows 8 RT. Or a hypothetical x86 Windows 8 tablet (which are coming).

Ehm, Win 8 RT is lighter and less demanding than Win 8 and also is supposed to run on ARM processors and hardware that works very differently from standard PC stuff, hereby, what I said still stands.
Tablets cannot run Win 7 or Win 8 without being different and more powerful than their Apple and Android-running brothers.

Ipads can act as terminals for windows computers running elsewhere, but that's it.

"I think interface X is shit because it looks like interface Y" is a horrible argument

Learn to read.
I said "The point is that a PC can do so much more things that a phone OS's UI (even if it's pretty damn good for a phone, if my experience with Lumias is worth something) just cannot do it without some serious overhaul."

So to clarify, I said that just taking a UI from a phone and trying to run it on a PC without some more thought will turn the PC into a big smartphone since the UI was not designed to handle so much possibilities as the current PC UI.
Even if the UI is good for the phone.
And this is bad not because of looks, but because does not allow easy access to functions not in the list of smartphone ones in a better way than the age-old UI.
It's a case of "Computers are supposed to make life easier, not force them to run through usability hurdles created by the priesthood of software engineers.".... to use your own words .

As it is, METRO is useful only for those that want to use the PC in the most simple ways (like it was an appliance).

Think of making a device using newest Xbox console hardware with wireless controllers if you wanna play stuff you can only download from a MS-owned internet store, smartphone UI and functions (with apps), since it has to be hooked to a TV this can shit all over Retina displays. And the icing on top: an integrated Kinect sensor to "touch" the screen from a distance (slightly better than forcing everyone to stay within arm's reach from the device to operate a touchscreen that is also expensive as fuck at these sizes). Optional bluetooth keyboard and other stuff if some customers need it. That's 250$ for the newest Xbox hardware that runs it without all the frills that rise the price in the finished product, 100 $ for kinect... let's add some 150$ for a cool case and other paraphenalia and that's 500$ for hardware alone. Likely in the 700 $ price range with a MS OS installed.
That's actually not that bad price for the stuff this can do if hooked to a HD 3D TV.
If it doesn't sell like cakes I don't know what will.

But hell, I'd love if they could differentiate and keep PCs different from the above kind of electronic appliance and from the tablets. I really hope businness keeps asking for a Win version that does not work like that for their workstations.

Design is not invention?

No. Design is art since it serves no other purpose than looking good, and as such should be protected by copyright just as movies, music and images. If you treat them like sculptures, you'll be fine.

Invention is making something that does have some kind of new function, better than what there is already in some field. And should be protected by patents.

Both can be innovation, since that's just "making something new", but they aren't the same.

That the current system is shit and you can patent the shape of your ass and then sue everyone with that ass is another matter.

Unsurprisingly, you don't understand the appeal of very-small-cars for urban environments and apparently cannot comprehend his original point, anyways.

I live in Italy where there is plenty of fucking small parking lots and tiny streets, so I know "urban environments" very well.
That car does offer one single good thing "can fit in small parking lots" (well, if you care about design then yeah, its pretty cool as well), does not take any other advantage from being small (like say fuel consumption for example, how can it burn the same amount of fuel of a car massing nearly twice as much? ), and has all issues of small cars, like say no space to carry my shit, no space to carry more than one passenger, no space to fuck (albeit fucking in cars is so gross.. ), safety sucks since it's so small and gets run over by anything in a crash.
Oh and yes, it costs like a normal-sized car despite hammering me with so many drawabacks.
Sorry, but the "can fit small parking lots" isn't worth so damn much. Smarts are a rare sight here.

At least the fucking Golf from wolkswagen (another obvious status-symbol for youngers here) is a normal car with quality components and strong chassis that justify a bit its higher price.

This is the same parallel I drew with tablets. They hammer me with crippling drawbacks and cost like netbooks.

I was aware that his point was "innovation can be even smaller things than turning carts into fucking cars".

[phongn]

So why wasting money when you are a monopolist?

It wrecks your corporate future, that's why. Incompetent product development opens room for a nimber competitor to break in ... like Microsoft was against IBM (and to a lesser extent, Apple-on-the-desktop).

Now that MS is getting some significant competition from some linux distros and Apple (still well below dangerous levels, but the trend wasn't good), its main products (OS mainly) start to be better. I wonder why.

Well, yes, Microsoft is under pressure and must now innovate ... after being so lazy as to permit competition. Also, "linux distros"? In the non-AD server realm, maybe, or if you consider Android to be a distribution.

Depends from the amount of typing. All people I know that do use tablets have bought keyboards for their tablets and use them when they have to write docs. Heck, most people with smartphones I know complain about "how (physically) hard is the on-screen keyboard, it makes your fingers sore when typing SMS" as well.

I don't know, I look at all the people using on-screen interfaces at O'Hare or Midway and the vast majority are not using keyboards nor are having trouble with it. Your particularly peer group might have some issue, I s'pose, but is it representative?

You are missing my point. Rephrasing. Apple sells tons of high-priced computer appliances over status-symbol alone. Product quality and performance of its competitors (making computer appliances of similar purpose) is already comparable if not better on all critical fields, especially from Samsung.

You're making the same errors that others on this board have: first, just because Apple sells many on status symbol does not mean that is the only reason people purchase it. Furthermore, product quality is often inferior (fit-and-finish, materials chosen, design, etc.) and the big idea on Apple isn't the usual engineer-speak of "performance is the only metric that matters." And, of course, there's the whole issue with UI/UX, of which Apple remains bounds ahead of the competition.

You are speaking of Apple and its Samsung-produced Retina Displays? Because others usually use the same netbook-grade displays (and thus can be good or bad), touchscreen of course.

I know who produces Apple's components, thank you. Samsung isn't using them in their own products - or damn near anyone else, for that matter. The point is that Apple uses the better components ... and others don't.

fast-enough to perform tasks,

but too limited to compare to a netbook, task-wise.

Different task modalities.

"walled-garden" approach that makes it more difficult to get malicious software

Bullshit as all claims that mac/apple are immune to viruses. It's just different code, but the tactics don't change. When the amount of stuff with that OS reaches a critical point, malware for it pops up. Apple stuff is no different.

I never said that it was immune, and I am specifically referring to the iOS walled-garden world (not the more open world of the Macintosh). It is more difficult to install malicious software if the usual source-of-software is the App Store!

If you're referring to Macintosh, its great innovation was 'GUI for the masses'

While this is dumbing everything down a bit, it allows significant freedom of movement to the user. The same cannot be said for Ipad UI and similar.

Again, this is not "dumbing down". Your insinuations are ridiculous and it is obvious you have not the slightest training or education in interface design or work. What is lacking in "freedom of movement"? The simplicity of iOS' interface makes it more accessible to novice users (particularly the elderly, of whom the desktop metaphor is sometimes not easily grasped) and very usable for anyone more sophisticated. What limitations are there (aside from pixel-precise pointing?) You keep harping on it.

Yes, I know that there are some limitations with smartphone/tablet interfaces. But you haven't yet demonstrated your point.

Which is exactly what will happen when you make a smartphone-like UI for a PC and hammer it down the throats of customers like MS is doing.

Besides, what was wrong with the UI invented by Mac/Apple and then ripped-off by Windows and used by ALL serious linux distros as well until now?

First, it was pioneered by Xerox PARC (and improved on by Apple and evolved by Apple and Microsoft ... and how Linux consistently gets it wrong is almost incomprensible to me).

Also, please note that I do not necessarily advocate use of a touch-centric direct-manipulation interface for the desktop. For a tablet, yes (or smartphone). There are different interface modalities for different use cases.

Hello? When you make a machine with heavily crippled functions (or "without uselelss functions" in the selling pamphlet), that does not allow any real software modification from the user (only a limited amount of customizations, although it's fucking easy to hack) and has an interface that even 5 yo children can use, yes, that's officially treating the consumers like retards. That they like being treated like that it's another matter.

Typical whining. That a five-year-old can use an iPad is not "dumbing down", it is a design and usability advance and that we can extend computing down is nothing short of a triumph. It's not treating customers like "retards", and you are a contemptuous fool for thinking so.

Frankly, who cares if "oh no I can't customize it to every last bit?" I can't do much customization on Windows 7, either, compared to some of its ancestors, and it's a perfectly reasonable OS. "Real software modification"? Why is that even important for a consumer device?

If that does not go against your "Computers are supposed to make life easier, not force them to run through usability hurdles created by the priesthood of software engineers."....

Again, please note that what I say is good on a tablet is not what I say is good on a desktop. Windows 8's half-step in either direction is a serious usability problem in the desktop world (but possibly one they must take to enter the "post-PC" world, with refinements to come in Windows 9, etc.)

Design is not invention?

No. Design is art since it serves no other purpose than looking good, and as such should be protected by copyright just as movies, music and images. If you treat them like sculptures, you'll be fine.

[/quote]
Design is not just how it looks, design is how it works. UI/UX is not just some pretty afterthought; it require serious thought and discipline (with a good chunk of psychology and other fields thrown into it).

[Stark]

I don't think it's meaningful to talk about UI concepts with someone who thinks accessible and intuitive UIs mean they are designed for retards.

[phongn]

I don't think it's meaningful to talk about UI concepts with someone who thinks accessible and intuitive UIs mean they are designed for retards.

You think this is annoying, you should see how physicists tend to view software. They genuinely think Linux On The Desktop is good, UI-wise.

[Stark]

The attitude is common, but I'm not sure if it is driven by people who grew up with shit UIs who equate complex with effective or useful, or if it's pure elitism that leads people to want to identify with the 'pro group' who have 'mastered' something, rather than something that is just plain easy to use. I usually encounter this in game UI discussions, rather than appliances, but I guess e attitude is the same.

The idea that 'easy' means 'dumb' and that 'hard' means 'smart' is pretty big in PC-land.

[phongn]

The attitude is common, but I'm not sure if it is driven by people who grew up with shit UIs who equate complex with effective or useful, or if it's pure elitism that leads people to want to identify with the 'pro group' who have 'mastered' something, rather than something that is just plain easy to use. I usually encounter this in game UI discussions, rather than appliances, but I guess e attitude is the same.

The idea that 'easy' means 'dumb' and that 'hard' means 'smart' is pretty big in PC-land.

Some groups of people can just solve their way through terrible interfaces - groups like scientists, engineers, technologists and whatnot. Their view is that doing the hard work of design is a waste of time: it just would make it "flashy" and it isn't like a bad interface stopped them from doing their work before! Given that idea, the perception of "well, you aren't too bright if you can't figure your way around after awhile" naturally follows. Now, some tasks are difficult and take work, but the idea that many other tasks can be simplified with improved design doesn't generally occur. At any rate, this sort of human-centered thinking is generally out of most people's education, training and expertise.

The design mantra of "less is more" is also an anathema to this sort of crowd (particularly enthusiasts, Linux users) as they want to customize as much as possible and leave many choices up to the user.

[Stark]

There's an important distinction before configuration and control, though. Just because (for example) iOS doesn't let you do much with backgrounds or icon layouts doesn't mean that its preventing users from getting down to 'nuts and bolts' if they want to. You can combine simple, intuitive and easy to use interfaces with access to all the complex technical details. Maybe the problem is conflating 'choose your own reflection type for icon shadows' and 'be able to manage network settings securely'.

[phongn]

There's an important distinction before configuration and control, though. Just because (for example) iOS doesn't let you do much with backgrounds or icon layouts doesn't mean that its preventing users from getting down to 'nuts and bolts' if they want to. You can combine simple, intuitive and easy to use interfaces with access to all the complex technical details. Maybe the problem is conflating 'choose your own reflection type for icon shadows' and 'be able to manage network settings securely'.

Well, a lot of the "tweakers/enthusiasts/Linux guys" want to get down to the nuts and bolts at a much deeper level, in ways that iOS (or WP7 or non-custom Android) deliberately prevents you from doing.

[Sharp-kun]

There's an important distinction before configuration and control, though. Just because (for example) iOS doesn't let you do much with backgrounds or icon layouts doesn't mean that its preventing users from getting down to 'nuts and bolts' if they want to. You can combine simple, intuitive and easy to use interfaces with access to all the complex technical details. Maybe the problem is conflating 'choose your own reflection type for icon shadows' and 'be able to manage network settings securely'.

Well, a lot of the "tweakers/enthusiasts/Linux guys" want to get down to the nuts and bolts at a much deeper level, in ways that iOS (or WP7 or non-custom Android) deliberately prevents you from doing.

Its the simple things. I got my new phone yesterday (Galaxy S3). I like to keep things clean, simple and know where everything is. I had a nice set up on my old HTC Desire and wanted to mimic it as much as possible on the S3. I was mostly successful in doing this, with a few nice ICS tweaks.

The phone however comes loaded with about 6 bookmarks that are locked and cannot be deleted. So I've got my nice list of bookmarks that I use, and in the middle are things like "Music Store" that I'll never touch. It's annoying and things like that are the reason I root and flash my phones. I don't need, want or use "Track your Stock" apps, nor do I want locked bookmarks to Yahoo News.

I don't want to get down to the nuts and bolts most of the time, I just want to be able to set up my phone how I want it and load the apps I want onto it. iOS won't let me do either of those and most stock versions of Android won't let me do the former.

Planning to load Cyanogenmod onto it anyway once its done.

/rant

[Pendleton]

The idea that 'easy' means 'dumb' and that 'hard' means 'smart' is pretty big in PC-land.

Given most people in my chemistry lab think the suites we use have good UIs, despite them looking like poor Excel spreadsheets that just happen to be niche use for mass spectrometers or gas chromatographs, I'd say it's a mainly scientist elitism thing, not just Windows/Linux nerd thing.

Funnily enough, most people have Androids here, but never have I seen anyone tinker with them or even pay for apps.

[phongn]

Given most people in my chemistry lab think the suites we use have good UIs, despite them looking like poor Excel spreadsheets that just happen to be niche use for mass spectrometers or gas chromatographs, I'd say it's a mainly scientist elitism thing, not just Windows/Linux nerd thing.

It's the "I can get my work done so the UI is done" philosophy.

Funnily enough, most people have Androids here, but never have I seen anyone tinker with them or even pay for apps.

As a whole, Android users spend substantially less money on apps.

[Terralthra]

Given most people in my chemistry lab think the suites we use have good UIs, despite them looking like poor Excel spreadsheets that just happen to be niche use for mass spectrometers or gas chromatographs, I'd say it's a mainly scientist elitism thing, not just Windows/Linux nerd thing.

It's the "I can get my work done so the UI is done" philosophy.

Funnily enough, most people have Androids here, but never have I seen anyone tinker with them or even pay for apps.

As a whole, Android users spend substantially less money on apps.

Source? All I've seen are studies showing that any particular Android app makes less money on average than an iOS app, which is not the same as Android users spending less money.

[Pendleton]

Source? All I've seen are studies showing that any particular Android app makes less money on average than an iOS app, which is not the same as Android users spending less money.

I've seen mixed reports on this. From personal experience, a couple of members of my team did balk at the idea I paid 59p for WhatsApp off iTunes when it was free* on the Android Store, no Google Play. That's pretty cheap.

*Free for a year, then it was £1 to keep using, so I read.

[General Zod]

Given most people in my chemistry lab think the suites we use have good UIs, despite them looking like poor Excel spreadsheets that just happen to be niche use for mass spectrometers or gas chromatographs, I'd say it's a mainly scientist elitism thing, not just Windows/Linux nerd thing.

It's the "I can get my work done so the UI is done" philosophy.

Funnily enough, most people have Androids here, but never have I seen anyone tinker with them or even pay for apps.

As a whole, Android users spend substantially less money on apps.

Source? All I've seen are studies showing that any particular Android app makes less money on average than an iOS app, which is not the same as Android users spending less money.

iOS generates more than 6 times the revenue. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/12/ ... s-android/

The rationale is that Google Checkout is more cumbersome to make payments on than the appstore.

[Terralthra]

As a whole, Android users spend substantially less money on apps.

Source? All I've seen are studies showing that any particular Android app makes less money on average than an iOS app, which is not the same as Android users spending less money.

iOS generates more than 6 times the revenue. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/12/ ... s-android/

The rationale is that Google Checkout is more cumbersome to make payments on than the appstore.

That's not actually what the study in question says. That's what it says if you pretend it isn't just talking about the top apps, or about gross sales instead of revenue, and doesn't take into account post-sale income ("freemium apps"). All of these are caveats just listed in the article you linked, let alone in the actual study source.

[Losonti Tokash]

How many apps cost money on iOS, but are free and ad-supported on android?

[phongn]

How many apps cost money on iOS, but are free and ad-supported on android?

Quite a few - particularly popular ones like Angry Birds.

It's a bit of an interesting parallel to the Mac/PC days: Mac users were substantially more likely to support shareware (and this was reflected in the proliferation of such software) while PC users tended to go for freeware.

[JLTucker]

I've bought two: Tapatalk and Poweramp. I plan to buy more when I get the nexus 7. :) I'm pumped for that release.

[Pendleton]

Ah, Tapatalk. Useful app, though a pity this forum isn't supported. I use it for Rational Skepticism's forums though.

[Irbis]

There's an important distinction before configuration and control, though. Just because (for example) iOS doesn't let you do much with backgrounds or icon layouts doesn't mean that its preventing users from getting down to 'nuts and bolts' if they want to. You can combine simple, intuitive and easy to use interfaces with access to all the complex technical details. Maybe the problem is conflating 'choose your own reflection type for icon shadows' and 'be able to manage network settings securely'.

My general experience with 'dumbed down' OS is quite different - they absolutely will let you pick from 16 million colors for icon shadows, but you can forget about touching 'nuts and bolts' so to speak.

Also, about Linux GUI (which I agree sucks wind in 20 different directions) - most of the users seem to be young people. Young, as it happens, have a lot of of free time they can afford to spend to tinker, plus less perspective showing them what they are doing is complete waste of time, older people I think are generally tired of this and have much less time, so there's that too.

[someone_else]

So why wasting money when you are a monopolist?

It wrecks your corporate future, that's why. Incompetent product development opens room for a nimber competitor to break in ... like

[/quote]Or like Ipads. The tablets and smartphones (concepts anyway) from windows were crap because they thought like I said and didn't pay a lot of attention to them, Apple jumps on the concept ---> profit.

Also, "linux distros"? In the non-AD server realm, maybe, or if you consider Android to be a distribution.

Linux is out of the geek locker, although of course not that widespread. Especially Ubuntu distro and others are growing as well. There were netbooks with a linux distro as their retail os (back when their hardware was too crappy for windows), and you will see tablets running linux in a short time. It's not much and does not threaten anyone atm, but it's the trend that matters. Shit happening now was totally ludicrous to expect say 10 years ago (when it was hard to explain to the geeks developing distros that linux needed a fucking decent GUI and console-only was for wankers).

I don't know, I look at all the people using on-screen interfaces at O'Hare or Midway and the vast majority are not using keyboards nor are having trouble with it. Your particularly peer group might have some issue, I s'pose, but is it representative?

I said that touchscreens are annoying IF YOU NEED TO TYPE A LOT. People that does not type a lot can think touch-centric interfaces are awesome for everything, but it's not the case.

You're making the same errors that others on this board have: first, just because Apple sells many on status symbol does not mean that is the only reason people purchase it.

They also look cool and have a good interface. But being a status symbol makes the difference between "successful product" and "the first thing anone thinks of when I say tablet" (and the obvious sale boost linked to that). I've seen lots of the upper class people call all mp3 players not from Apple, even those clearly not looking like Ipods "Ipod-ripoff" ("tarocc'iPod" in Italian).

I mean here branding a otherwise crappy t-shirt (and I mean the quality of the materials) and turning it into (minor) status symbol can make you fucking rich. Maybe I am biased, but maybe I'm not.

Different task modalities.

Can you clarify? Stop evading the question.

I never said that it was immune, and I am specifically referring to the iOS walled-garden world (not the more open world of the Macintosh). It is more difficult to install malicious software if the usual source-of-software is the App Store!

But they still manage to do so, and being walled-garden makes users feel much more safe than they should.
Btw, the link was about Ipad and Iphone's vulnerabilities, not about Mac world as a whole.

Your insinuations are ridiculous and it is obvious you have not the slightest training or education in interface design or work.

I spent enough time in front of a fucking PC at work and in front of my PC when at home to istinctively know how man-machine interfaces have to be to not cause your body to sour in pain after hours of working with it.

The screen must be at arm's lenght from your head and your eyes have to be at the height of the center of the screen, the wrists have to be on a supporting surface all the fucking time. Touchscreens simply go against any of this in the most obvious of manners, so they are good for a portable device to save space, but that's it.
Laptops and netbooks are much better because you can at least turn the screen and rest the wrists on them. And have a keyboard. And run a OS that can do what I need.

The simplicity of iOS' interface makes it more accessible to novice users (particularly the elderly, of whom the desktop metaphor is sometimes not easily grasped) and very usable for anyone more sophisticated.

Making a good interface for a tool with 300 functions is much easier than making an interface for a tool with 3000 (numbers are made up just to illustrate the concept, not claiming that tablets or computers have that number of functions).
It just means that before tablets people had to buy a machine (A PC ot laptop) and severely under-use it.

What limitations are there (aside from pixel-precise pointing?) You keep harping on it.

Yes, all works needing precise pointing (digital art and CGI or CAD) need a dedicated peripheral with a bit more sensitivity than what touchscreens offer (and a bigger screen). But the main is typing, typing and even more typing. On a tochscreen is a pain in the ass, and there are plety of jobs where you have to type fucktons of stuff even when you don't really care if it's a netbook or a PC.
And again, touchscreens are not confortable to work with 7+ hours a day as a laptop or a PC (unless you add a wireless keyboard and a stand to keep the screen up, but that defies the purpose of a tablet).

Look at Apple, did they change their Macbook's OS to look like the Ipad's? No.
Will they use touchscreens in their desktops? No.
Is there any indication they will in the future? No.
Because they fucking know it will suck for the tasks that hardware is usually used for (other than looking cool they have models that are top workhorses in all kids of jobs revolving around pictures, music, movies, CGI and CAD).

Then comes Windows and like a dumb mole does stupid things like forcing Metro in Win 8 that has to go on all devices and ludicrous 82 inch touchscreens trying to catch up with Apple when it could use kinect-like tech and do way better.

Also, please note that I do not necessarily advocate use of a touch-centric direct-manipulation interface for the desktop. For a tablet, yes (or smartphone). There are different interface modalities for different use cases.

Mh, then this part of the tangent seems just a misunderstanding then, or are you backpedaling?

That a five-year-old can use an iPad is not "dumbing down", it is a design and usability advance and that we can extend computing down is nothing short of a triumph.

I could nitpick saying that I wouldn't call it "a triumph" as they cannot do much more than simple games (forget that ninja fruit game) due to them being too young.

But my opinion still stands. The interface and general design of the devices that run it are the results of dumbing down a PC, since well, that interface is good only on devices that have significantly less needs and functions than a PC. On a PC that UI it's crap since it is based on touchscreens that just don't work on a PC.

Frankly, who cares if "oh no I can't customize it to every last bit?" I can't do much customization on Windows 7, either, compared to some of its ancestors, and it's a perfectly reasonable OS.

What you would like to have in Win 7? Maybe I can help digging out something that pleases you.

"Real software modification"? Why is that even important for a consumer device?

With that I meant is what Irbis said "they absolutely will let you pick from 16 million colors for icon shadows, but you can forget about touching 'nuts and bolts' so to speak."

With Windows you can add any kind of thing packed in a easy program or go and start fucking with its gazillion options that affect dramatically its use with this or that program that most don't need. They aren't really apparent (so to not allow users that don't know what they are doing to fuck it up), but does not mean that they aren't there.

Design is not just how it looks, design is how it works.

Sigh, let's go look dictionary.
"design" as noun the dictionary and "invention"

So, turns out Design is making artistic stuff, but Invention covers artistic stuff as well. Oh noes, neither of us is right. .

Some groups of people can just solve their way through terrible interfaces - groups like scientists, engineers, technologists and whatnot. Their view is that doing the hard work of design is a waste of time

The developers of those programs don't have really big budgets nor expect a huge revenue from such very specialistic programs, you know (also why they cost so much). Designing good interfaces is hard as you said, that's a pretty hefty cost for something as fucking complex as a 3D tool like Maya or 3d max (unless they suddenly made a quantum leap in the last 4-5 years anyway).

For linux... heh, you are seriously asking nerd programmers that wank with console comands (an UI that was crap even at its inception) to make good UIs? They are too far from the user to understand its needs fully.

Well, a lot of the "tweakers/enthusiasts/Linux guys" want to get down to the nuts and bolts at a much deeper level, in ways that iOS (or WP7 or non-custom Android) deliberately prevents you from doing.

Yeah but it's when they do stuff with good UI (by linux standards anyway) that the distro has any kind of users (user being "people that are not so geeky").

You can combine simple, intuitive and easy to use interfaces with access to all the complex technical details. Maybe the problem is conflating 'choose your own reflection type for icon shadows' and 'be able to manage network settings securely'.

It's what Win 8 is trying to do. Just that being their dsign team back to "dumb as usual" it's targeted more at tablets are only a segment of the market, since operating Metro with a mouse arrow make it lose most of its appeal. thrown into it).

[Sharp-kun]

Link

In a computer-implemented method, a portion of an electronic document is displayed on the touch screen display. The displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical position in the electronic document. An object is detected on or near the displayed portion of the electronic document. In response to detecting the object on or near the displayed portion of the electronic document, a vertical bar is displayed on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document. The vertical bar has a vertical position on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the electronic document. After a predetermined condition is met, display of the vertical bar is ceased. The vertical bar is displayed for a predetermined time period when the portion of the electronic document is initially displayed.

Apple files a patent for displaying lists or documents on a phone. Yay. -_-

[Questor]

Apple files a patent for displaying lists or documents on a phone. Yay. -_-

Leaving aside the appropriateness of the patent, do you actually feel that is an accurate description, or were you trying to make yourself look silly?