1) It Won’t be a PC - Not only “it won’t be a tablet” but it won’t be a PC.  The desktop metaphor won’t work here, period.   A “Start” button on a tablet is a joke.   A hovering mouse pointer is stupid.  Drag-able windows everywhere is nuts.  Icons and menus and scroll bars driving functionality is lame.

Apple gets it.  There is no Finder on the iPhone is there?  Thank goodness.  The failure of screen-driven devices beyond pocket size has to do with the reluctance of the industry to disrupt the PC.  Instead this class of device has always been forced into a position of comparison with that of the standard PC either as a companion,  or as an extension, or as a replacement.   This is what happens when industries, not the end users, get to dictate how new technology will be applied into the market.  One of the major criticisms of Apple has been they failed to open their platform and create an industry like the Wintel world, and they also failed to compromise their fixation on the consumer and the end-user experience, rather than put more effort on the standards of corporate IT world.  Thank goodness again, otherwise we would have no iPhone.

2) EBook Store – Yet another store for Apple:  iTunes, AppStore, and now an ebook Store.  I remember reading awhile back that Steve Jobs said nobody reads anymore. Ha ha.  More revenue PLUS, the possibility of a subsidizing angle from a top book store, say Borders?  Unlike the muzak industry, retailers have a bigger foothold on the market and therefore Apple won’t be dealing with the publishers directly.  Border’s makes sense, they are the number 2 giant and just last year decided to go after Amazon head to head with its own internet presence. Why wouldn’t Apple make a deal directly with them? It makes a lot of sense.

3) Video –  This is not the no-brainer people think it is.  A laptop has an advantage besides having a keyboard.  It works well with tops: laps, desks, tables, airplane trays, and other flat surfaces.  Watching video is mainly a stationary activity.  That is why I should also say you can’t take the “TV metaphor” and put it on this device.  If the user interface for this winds up being an Apple TV extension or a touch version of Front Row then this will fail.  It won’t be though, Apple is too smart.  The real killer application of an iPad for video of course is an extension of how we already are using the iPhone 3GS.  Not just for video clip streaming and viewing while in ultra mobile environments, but for video clip creating. It will have a camera, and it will supplant the home cameras in a way that will make it a home video studio with feet.

4) Personal Communicator with Choice. “Not an iPhone” means Verizon and Sprint will be a contractual possibility.   That means the iPAD Pro (vs. a possible WiFi only version) most likely have both a CDMA and GSM radio in it like HTC’s Touch Pro 2. Though I am pretty sure the iPAD will be based on upgraded version of the iPhone’s cocoa touch OS, it is likely the “iPAD” will be considered a new product category.  It won’t be a phone, but it will be a Personal Communicator class of device that was supposed to (and should have) disrupted the PC’s dominance a decade ago. The competition from having more than one choice of providers will allow for even better subsidized prices, making this new contraption even more appealing.

5) WebPad. Wanderbook was conceived with from the idea of creating a WebPad in 1999.   When wireless technology began its rise, the idea of pen computers running a browser, untethered, seemed to be a no-brainer. It was, and still is a valid concept.  As I said in #1 above, the problem is the concept got killed by trying to also port a big fat desktop operating system on to these devices where the will of the mighty PC industry refused to compromise for the benefit of the end user.

6)  Headset Oriented – The iPhone is a self contained phone, and like all phones you can raise it to your ear and speak into it, put it into your pocket etc.  - a major advantage over Personal Communicators with larger screens.  Ok, but this advance could be a disadvantage as well.  Is it really healthy to put a transmitter next to your brain all day?  I won’t feed into the health concerns of mobile phones, just that it is a concern to many people, valid or not.  Plus, handsets are now a no-no in many states while driving and it seems wireless speaker or headsets are the way of the future for this and other reasons.  Plus, unless it is a speaker phone, which for many reasons are not practical all the time, you can’t use your screen simultaneously. So, a device that is meant to be used with a head makes sense.

7) Games – The iPhone and iPod Touch have open up news possibilities in the game market.  A bigger screen simply means bigger possibilities.

8) A New Metaphor UI - This is one I am not sure of…(why I said 7 reasons).  I think this is going to be a very tough nut for Apple to crack. Sticking to the phone metaphor was brilliant, but I think it could fall apart with a bigger device.  However, a more sophisticated digitizer integrated with multitouch may be too much too soon.  Also, of course, breaking too far away from the iPhone U/I would be risky.

But the thumb can only reach so far, and let’s face it, thats the primary “stylus” we use, our other digits on our hand – not as much.  The phone metaphor itself can only go so far.  I am guessing the iPAD will not only have a bigger display, but  a richer display, like that from Pixel QI which is a new kind of epaper that has a rich full color and fast refreshing screen, and with a lot of the advantages the other epaper technologies have: high paperlike contrast, low power, lightweight .

Pixel Qi Product Vision

Therefore a richer U/I to go along with it makes sense.

Personally I love the Notebook metaphor of the electronic briefcase (AKA PenPoint), and I find it amusing the PC industry took away the notebook name for itself, but never took the metaphor.  A richer interface means more gestures, and now that Apple has brought back the notion that gestures can be good, instead of bad (yes, there was a time when this was standard thinking, again it was driven by PC industrial driven world).  Not to forget the “ThinkPad” which by the, was also originally a system design for PenPoint.

Anyway, this iPad means there is a need for something richer than the finger or thumb as a stylus.  No not a keyboard, arg…I mean yes, a better software keyboard, perhaps, maybe handwriting reonigiton done right (but thats another article for me to write) – but one that includes ink.  You know, like ink on a piece of paper but digital, concept we some of use know as “ink as a datatype”.  By the way, those who know a little know nothing…Microsoft did not invent ink writing applications.  The whole concept was full realized out of, yes once again, GO corporation with PenPoint.

But I digress.  Handwritten digital  ink, and the ability to manipulate it with a rich gesture set would enable a more human interface, not simply a paper note taking application, no, no, this would permeate throughout the entire U/I, like a lamented layer over everything.   Get it?  Maybe not, it’s really sad that  much of what was PenPoint was ripped from the history books.

I have been thinking about telling the full story of the stylus-driven computer devices, especially what happened during the 1990’s – where from my unique point of view a full chapter of history on this technology has been forgotten, misremembered, and never properly recorded.

Of course, currently I am being driven by the hype and heated rumors of Apple’s upcoming Tablet (just google it)… I’ve seen this hype before, for 20 years as a matter of fact, but never this loud.

Anyway, if you know me, you know I know tablets (and their many other AKAs).
Mobilepoint (e-case)
The word “Tablet” actually would be one of the dumbest names Apple could use and it shows how Microsoft has brainwashed the media.  “Tablet” might have been appropriate 10 years ago when these devices were more than an inch thick, but this is the 21st century.   Besides the fact that the “Tablet PC” has been a grandiose failure – not because it was called a “Tablet”, but because it was using a OS that is meant for desktop PC’s. Big, and fat OS at that.  Putting a little i in front of the word won’t fix the word.  Forget it.

So, anyway,  I came across an inquiry on the google finance board which summarizes the entire wacko world of Internet speculation on these rumors….:

http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.22144/browse_thread/thread/80c7af8e9b015a30

“Subject: iTablet Aug 9, 7:58 pm
I would like to hear your opinions on what OS you think tablet will
use. Full-fledged Mac OS makes better sense to me, as I would like to
be able to use on it apps like Photoshop,Pages,Numbers,Rhino and
others. But full-fledged Mac OS on it might cannibalize laptop sales.
iPhone Touch OS allows for fast development of many apps, but doesn’t
allow existing desktop graphic, 3D modeling etc. apps. Hybrid? Full
Mac OS with some bridge to iPhone apps? Hmm. Not sure. Then there is
the price. For expected $800 for device I would expect full Mac OS,
not just access to app store apps. Personally, I would be willing to
spend $800 for tablet with full OS, not for limited iPhone Touch like
OS.”

Ignoring the desire for a Mac OS I focused on the word tablet and whipped out this response.

“Well, we know it will be OS X…
The question at a technical level is whether it will be cocoa (as in
Leopard) or cocoa touch (as in iPhone).
It will take a lot of guts on Apple’s part to create a new platform,
but if they do it won’t be called a tablet. I agree, the appstore is
very inviting, especially with a larger and more capable device. I
would guess it will be based on the iPhone OS, and overall won’t be
radically different than the iPhone other than it have a little more
of everything. It will be a challenge not to screw up the user
interface, with a screen slight bigger the thumb won’t be the primary
stylus anymore. Most likely it will be a Personal Communicator class
of device, somewhat smarter than a smart phone, somewhat less desktop
oriented than a Mac. I am also guessing it will be called the iPhone
Pro. You heard it from eddie clay first.”

Yep, “iPhone Pro” makes sense.  Although if Apple had the guts they would resurrect the “iBook”name, but only if it was truly going to be a new platform or at the very least, presented a user interface and organization metaphor beyond the iPhone’s.  More what that might be  (and why you don’t want a “full fledge Mac OS X”) in my next post.

Powered by Qumana

I am certain Apple’s response to this “Netbook” era will be more of a new platform, not just a big iPhone, or little Mac.  The phone metaphor for a pad size device won’t work, but it probably will use a lot of the iPhone functionality, app store for sure, and apps in general should mostly be compatible.   Speaking of Pads (lighter version of tablets) and netbooks, this technology could be the biggest breakthrough yet.

From Pixel Qi – Home.

“We are a fabless developer of a new class of screens that use standard LCD manufacturing materials and processes.

The screens will be available for mini-laptops and ebook readers in high volume mass production in mid-2009.  Our mainstream laptop screens will be available in 2010.

The readability and legibility of our new screens rival the best epaper available today.  What’s new about our screens: fast video rate update (refresh), and fully saturated color at very low pricing because we use standard manufacturing materials, processes and factories.  Our screens use 1/2 to 1/4 the power of a regular LCD screen, and when integrated carefully with the device can increase battery life between charges by 5-fold.

The choice of the screens used in a computer, or any portable, can have a huge environmental impact.  Pixel Qi screens are the greenest screens ever made and will be critical to new generations of green electronics.”

Pixel Qi – Home.

I wrote this document a decade ago.  It was based on many years of work and many many dollars of investment.  Yes, some will recognize it as looking a lot like PenPoint.  Yes, this was all based on GO and Eo’s technology that had supposedly died in 1995.  It didn’t.  We at Mobilepoint had some success deplying it and making it into a very exciting solution for a specific need: face-to-face…as you saw briefly shown in one of my past video clips.   Ecase was not only based on penpoint, and much of the “in development” work that Go was doing at the time of their sudden death, but also many of the applications that in themselves were revolutionary…whom we also licensed the source code from the ISV (application vendors) before the faded away.  I was tasked to put it all togther gain, port it on existing hardware, and make it more integrated (i.e. make it a whole).

I did all that instead of pursuing Internet startup opportunies that I am embarrass to name….arg.

I still think the concepts of ecase were many years ahead of its time, and only recently has the concepts and technology surpassed it…(yeah, I thinking of the iPhone’s cocoa OS).

ecase1998.pdf>

Here’s some clips from marketing promos we did back then with me giving a brief overview of the technology at the end:

On this blog I am going to talk a lot about Short Messaging and how my favorite sales people use newer and newer solutions based on it.   But first I want to discuss some background, and past work I did… just because.

Like me you may have realized that sometimes the only way to communicate effectively with a teenager, say a 13 year daughter,  is to “Sm-ess” with her.   Yeah I am learning not to mess with her,  she is becoming a tough cookie, but in this case I mean “texting”.

Even if she is in the next room, I find it is less inhibitive to discuss the deep issues, (like “what would you like for dinner?”) by “texting” rather than face-to-face.  No, I don’t dare take a chance of interrupting her listening to “Panic At The Disco” on her iPod while watching Hanna Montana, and risk her wrath upon me.

Anyway, short messaging is everywhere, smart phones make it easy,  I do it all the time on my Mac – it surplaces (surpasses and replaces)  IM & Chat and even email on many occasions.  From Twittering to Facebook status updates, it can be used to and from blogging sites etc.   Its not rude like calling someone, its immediate, yet not rude.  Only Luddites deny now that it is one of life’s necessities.

Wasn’t always that way, especially here in Silicon Valley over 10 years ago, where short messaging was seen as kind of a joke.   Except maybe in vertical industrial applications,  where an oil well in a desert needs to send a status messages to a central station.  But not too much glamour was seen during what was then, the first Internet bubble era.

Awe, but satellites, those are always cool.  So I got into it when I joined in on a project called Leo One.

Leo One was one of the many planned Low-Earth-orbiting satellite systems that almost, but never quite made it off the ground.   Because LEO’s are closed to the earth,  they act like radio towers in the sky.   Only problem is they move (unlike GEO’s which are far away but in stationary orbit).   So you have to have lots of satellites following each other, handing off transmissions to provide continuous coverage.  That’s okay, LEO’s are cheap (relatively) to put into orbit versus GEO’s.

LEO’s had started as satellite phone services, like Iridium and Globalstar.   Back in the early 90’s remember, terrestrial mobile phone systems were hardly ubiquitous, nor did they seamlessly work together across many boundaries….so this seemed like a killer product for almost all mobile professionals.

Besides phones, a wide range of applications were envisioned.  The most ambitious was the idea of putting broadband internet into the sky (does anyone remember Teledesic from a good old boy at Microsoft?)

Another idea was less ambitious, real time short messaging.  One that did make it off the ground was Orbcomm.  Leo One was to be a much more reliable, ubiquitous, and faster version of this.  A 48-satellite constellation providing 24-hour coverage with near real-time operation on a global basis.

So I was tasked with an exciting assignment, research the market requirements of  numerous industrial solutions applicable to Leo One, and define a set of common application interface requirements for service providers reselling the Leo One service.

I came up with a concept called Global SMS. Now think back and remember, in the year 2000  “text messaging” was hardly known here in the USA, much less “SMS”.  But it was big time in Europe.  Guess why?  Yeah, the kids…what we are going through now with the kids text this and that, well, Europe had been in this craze 10 years ago.

Also, vertical applications were already being developed there, like  telematics solutions for Mercedes Benz.   I saw the light.  Didn’t take a genius I thought, so obvious. Until I came home.

To keep a long story short, let me just say this: whats obvious now, wasn’t so then if you don’t see it.  So put your self in a time machine and pretend you have just came back from Europe 10 years ago and now are facing a bunch of brilliant american engineers who say SMS is just a fad, no viability, etc.

I thought different, in fact I thought the whole Leo One effort should have renamed themselves to “Global SMS”, thats how big I thought this was going to be.   Yes, SMS was a technical term, specific to GSM networks in Europe.  One that many here tough was not viable.  So here I am trying to promote a broader SMS technically, but also “Global SMS” as a marketing term.  I thought it was obvious, still is today (even without satellites).

Oh well, eventually years later, the US phone systems began to market “text messaging” and the companies began to understand the need to standardized it among themselves.  Now finally, we can SMS someone easily in Europe without much thought to it.   Also, finally “SMS”, as a marketing term is taking its place here, thank you iphone.

Why is SMS an important technical marketing term?  Because it goes so much farther beyond simply “text messaging” between humans.

Anyway, attached here are PDFs of one of my original papers

global-smsdoc1

and presentations I wrote at the time:

globalsms1

It was 2001, and I had this vision.  Ha ha, well, based on on some technology we were developing at Deskin Research Group,  a group of brilliant satellite, communications and signal processing engineers (among many other things).

I had no idea at the time, my name for this vision was also the pinnacle song in movie Deep Throat, nor did I foresee that the term “bubble” was about to become a connotation for bad things in the tech industry.  Oh, well, I had fun learning the power of Flash.

The MagicBubble product concept and platform (i2i) generated a lot of excitement within Deskin and for them (they got bought out by some Japanese outfit I heard shortly after the fallout from the bubble burst and 911).   The concept and design was an 802.11 alternative technology and device communications standard (or possibly new proposed standard) using a different part of the spectrum that was then, and is currently being used by what we all know now as WiFi and Bluetooth products. The advantages of the technology allowed for imagining advance solutions perhaps still a dream today…at least not at the low cost we were proposing…

This is a snippet of a much larger presentation (I left the technical part out which may still be propriatary for all I know). The song (maybe the best part)i one of my favs, a band called the plimsouls… I’ll have to get a higher res version up later.  Done in Flash, back then not as powerful as today, but I had a lot of fun doing it.  I had close to a zero budget for multimedia and marketing tools and it was meant for internal use only. Oh yeah, and that cute kid blowing the bubble, that’s my son James.

I think the project actually got bought off by some far east company after I left (gee, that sounds familiar)…

This was done in Flash, the version before Adobe bought Macromedia…I really had fun doing it…I wish I could have continued doing flash development and marketing, however annoying I think flash can be do users these days.