11-06-2002, 04:30 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
The Instant On Computer
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,668870,00.asp
One of the biggest hassles of a computer is that unless you leave it on 24/7, it takes time to boot. A fast Windows XP machine can take 45 seconds from the time you hit the power until the time you can actually launch a program. Even resuming from a suspend is a 15 second ordeal and often a bit longer for all attached devices to work properly. This is why I think the Oqo will fail. It has the small screen of a PDA, a UI designed for a large screen and the boot/resume times of a slow PC.
John C. Dvorak has written an article on what changes would need to be make to a PC to make it an instant on device, just like a PDA. While it all sounds good, the cost of flash ROM necessary for XP would be prohibitive. Even if you just put the \system32 and subfolders and put them on flash ROM, that is a 700MB chip. It is an interesting concept and has lots of upside, and if done, could have staggering implications on limited devices like the Pocket PC when compared to their PC cousins. What do you think?
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 04:54 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 209
|
|
Attention PCMag, Zdnet, Cnet, and all other technology news sources:
STOP!
Stop writing articles about devices without an image of the device that you are writing about. I may be missing something here, but I am not familiar with Oqo and would be interested to see it, good, bad, or indifferent.
Make your articles show and tell instead of just tell. Use the internet. Add images.
__________________
And there you are.
I was just thinking, "What could take this headache I have over that edge to a full blown migrane?"
And there you are.
- Dr. Cox, Scrubs
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:00 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 89
|
|
Re: The Instant On Computer
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
What do you think?
|
I think we need an OS designed to be instant on, and Windows is not. Tricks, workarounds, and compromises will not make it so. Windows' virtue is that it works with a vast (to put it mildly) array of hardware. It is designed to check for attached devices on a variety of ports and to load drivers to enable many different peripherals. This takes time and requires the availability of many (to again put it mildly) drivers.
I feel that in the PDA/handheld world the OS needs to be specific to the hardware. That is it need to be tuned to the device it is installed on and not waste time and resources on polling for peripherals or hardware variances. If the screen and input methods of the device are fixed and invariable that can be hardcoded into the OS and will speed up boot time.
This brings me back to one of my favorite arguments about handheld devices. It is your data that you need, not your applications. Many PDA users are fixated on the holy grail of desktop application portability. They seem to feel that they need full versions of Word and Excel in their pocket. Some people actually might need all of that, and it's hard to believe they would not be better off with a laptop. The rest of us really need our data. I liken it to going on a business trip. When you conduct business outside your office you do not saw off the legs of your desk to make it easier to lug along. You put your most important and relevant documents into a briefcase and leave everything else behind. That's the PDA. I doesn't need to have pivot tables and an equation editor, it needs your key data.
And it needs to be instant on.
Scott
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:10 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 513
|
|
IIRC, Dvorak didn't mention OQO, just Ed. But I always love reading his latest opinion columns, especially his Inside Track... Awesome to read about his longing recollections of tech in the 70's...
VERY sad though to hear about Jim Seymour 
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:10 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jpaq
Make your articles show and tell instead of just tell. Use the internet. Add images.
|
Y'know, you could have done a google search for oqo and you'd notice www.oqo.com is the first link...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scottmag
This brings me back to one of my favorite arguments about handheld devices. It is your data that you need, not your applications.
|
Ahem - how do you view and manipulate your data? And what is "data"? I'm a sysadmin, and to say that bare-bones applications, like Pocket Word or Docs-to-Go is sufficient, is a huge generalization. People have different requirements as to what they need to take with them. Having more full-functionality in a PDA is a big win for me, for example; I find new applications for my PDA nearly every day. For example, I am seriously considering buying a Ethernet CF card so I can do network diagnostics at customers, although I'm still waiting for better software to handle this. I already use my iPaq with its PC sleeve and a Orinoco card to do range tests for customers...
However, I do absolutely agree with you on the requirement that instant-on be there. I prefer defining a PDA as a computing device that gives you instant access to information and tools and pocket-sized convenience.
--bdj
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:17 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13
|
|
Link to OQO handheld computer
jpaq
Link to Oqo http://www.oqo.com/
This is where the Tablet PC needs to go if it is going to be successful...
My view of a successful device:
- 10.4" Transreflective Screen at least 800X600
1Gigahertz Processor or better
OS in ROM(Instant On)
256MB Ram or More
20GB Hard Disk or larger
Light weight(need to be able to carry it around like you would a note pad)
Must be much more durable than anythinig on the market today
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:18 PM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 300
|
|
Low-power RAM, and other things on my mind
First, I want to say that I have to agree with Scottmag's post above - the PDA is not supposed to be a full-fledged PC, although today's PocketPC has the same resolution, more color, and better apps than PCs did a decade ago. I like the analogy of the desk and briefcase by the way!
Anyway - I'm not sure what *will* happen, but some ideas are:
- In the near-term, desktop PCs boot-times will decrease as hard-drive speeds increase. Old 4200 RPM drives gave way to 5400 RPM drives, I now have a 7200 RPM drive in my desktop (which I never use, since i have a laptop), and there are 10,000 RPM drives (both IDE and SCCSI) out already. If you have Windows XP on a 15,000 RPM drive, and the memory and other components have the throughput, maybe we could get a full boot of XP down to 20 seconds, and a hibernation-resume down to less than 10 seconds. Still not good enough for a PDA, but better.
- Microsoft has created a modular version of Windows XP, which OEMs can use to assemble an OS that has just the components they need for a particular hardware config. If you have a device with fixed hardware, then maybe this Win XP embedded could be shrunk down to a 256 or 512 MB ROM. And true ROM (not "Flash ROM") is pretty cheap in bulk, since it's hardwired at the factory. If somebody does this, you'd have a pretty "instant on" machine, perhaps.
- If we get very-low-power RAM (as in, static memory), or very very fast flash RAM, then you would just turn off the computer/PDA that's running your OS, and it wouldn't *really* be off - it would just shut off power to the screen, etc., and trickle some juice to the memory... hey, wait - isn't this what we do with PocketPCs now? I mean - they are really just going into "standby" while they're "off" (hence the data loss if you wait too long!).
Finally - As scottmag pointed out, it's you information that's important, not the apps themselves, usually. So, as PocketPCs get more powerful, and their resolutions increase (i think we'll see 320x480 in a year, matching Sony), and processors get faster, etc., you'll have more and more of the data and functionality you want in a device that fits in you pocket!!
I hope i didn't bore everybody to tears!!
lol
Kirkaiya
__________________
Casio Z7000 >> Ipaq 3650 >> Viewsonic V36 >> Ipaq 1915
Dumb phones >> Axia A108 >> HTC StrTrk >> Touch Diamond
blog.HackingBangkok.com |
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:19 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 60
|
|
I need the connected aspect!
Personally although the OQO has that much more power
compared to a ppc. I think it's biggest downfall will be it's
lack of integrated GSM/GPRS.
Yes it has bluetooth and WIFI, but I don't drink coffee
and don't want to go to a starbucks every time I want to
contact someone.
I would love the integrated phone/data capabilities of
the PPCPE but with the power of XP
The size of UPCs is great. I have never and will never
buy a laptop, but with out the connectivity I would rather
have a full spec destop.
JPaq - check out www.stevebarr.com for a full list of oqo links
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:23 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 416
|
|
I'd rather have a device that does wonders with little memory than is a grotesque slob with a lot of memory.
I consider my PDAs to be enough to do the job, maybe only as a PC satellite and a back-saving device.
I couldn't find a picture of the elusive Oqo using Google. They are Macromedia flashed so I couldn't link them.
http://www.oqo.com/
It does look like some of the cigarette box PCs that have been popular the past few years, except with an LCD tacked on.
Edward
|
| |
|
|
|
11-06-2002, 05:29 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5
|
|
Either people are extremely impatient or I'm just super-patient.  I can understand that people want their PC to start up as fast as possible, but I don't think that should be at the top of the list of features to add to Windows. Heck, I already have an "instant-on PC" and it's called, lock your workstation instead of shutting it down.
With all the power-saving features that modern hardware and software have, leaving it on all the time does not consume much electricity. I calculated that having my machine on 24/7 all month costs me on average about $3.50 US. And that's with running SETI at night between 1AM and 8AM. So, it's not like the thing's sitting idle all the time. I typically only reboot my machine when software forces me to...maybe once a month or every other month. And that's with XP Pro none the less.
My FreeBSD machine has an uptime of 178 days. However, that box costs me about $5/month to keep running all the time, but that's doing work almost all the time.
- G!mpy
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
