I am trying to find a computer that is super easy to use, in order to convince my 70 yr-old technophobic mother to have one.  The best device that I have found so far is the Dell 2305.  I like that it displays the TIME and the WEATHER, and it has DEDICATED TOUCH ICONS for things like photos, music, email, etc., and only the one power cord leading from the back of the pc.   

The problem is that many reviewers have said that it is unreliable and keeps crashing.  If that is the case, it would really put my mother off.http://www.dell.com/ca/p/inspiron-one-2305-amd/pd?oc=dione23_f_3e&model_id=inspiron-one-2305-amd

I’ve been wondering about the dual-screen laptop but haven’t seen much analysis on it. I was fascinated by convertible tablets and bought one for grad school. The form factor was incredible, and the dual mode digitizer was amazing, and I couldn’t wait for an upgraded version … unfortunately, their proliferation stalled when the iPad came out–and when everyone realized that the NVidia processors were abysmal shite and HP wasn’t owning up to anything.

Anyway … I agree that innovation is needed, in fact I think it is ALWAYS needed. But people were ignorant about the uses for tablets, the tablet form-factor, and touchscreens. In fact, people “dissed” the entire concept–I only know because when I got mine, I got attention but also got a lot of confused looks and rolled eyes.

And … here in the US, ignorance too often devolves into disdain. I’m not innocent though, I posted that picture of the maxi pad/Apple (iPad) photo … what, it was funny. But soon after, I bought one and was impressed.

All I can offer is that over-innovation (dual-screens) won’t work to build the massive consumer base needed to compete with Apple. It is awesome and well worthwhile, but people just don’t want to deal with a high learning curve.

The masses want things that just work, which is why Lenovo does so well with their ThinkPad lines. They are powerful computers for business use, and they cater to that crowd very well while charging a pretty penny. On the consumer side, Apple has a real penchant for drawing attention while building solid devices. Could they push the envelope a lot more? Sure, but they’ve made more money playing it relatively safe.

In sum, it really seems to depend on the market you are chasing. If you want to sell hella devices, go with shiny and simple, but sturdy and easy. But, if you want to catch the attention of the bleeding-edge audience, by all means go for the dual touchscreen–you’ll definitely capture my $$.

I’ve been wondering about the dual-screen laptop but haven’t seen much analysis on it. I was fascinated by convertible tablets and bought one for grad school. The form factor was incredible, and the dual mode digitizer was amazing, and I couldn’t wait for an upgraded version … unfortunately, their proliferation stalled when the iPad came out–and when everyone realized that the NVidia processors were abysmal shite and HP wasn’t owning up to anything.

Anyway … I agree that innovation is needed, in fact I think it is ALWAYS needed. But people were ignorant about the uses for tablets, the tablet form-factor, and touchscreens. In fact, people “dissed” the entire concept–I only know because when I got mine, I got attention but also got a lot of confused looks and rolled eyes.

And … here in the US, ignorance too often devolves into disdain. I’m not innocent though, I posted that picture of the maxi pad/Apple (iPad) photo … what, it was funny. But soon after, I bought one and was impressed.

All I can offer is that over-innovation (dual-screens) won’t work to build the massive consumer base needed to compete with Apple. It is awesome and well worthwhile, but people just don’t want to deal with a high learning curve.

The masses want things that just work, which is why Lenovo does so well with their ThinkPad lines. They are powerful computers for business use, and they cater to that crowd very well while charging a pretty penny. On the consumer side, Apple has a real penchant for drawing attention while building solid devices. Could they push the envelope a lot more? Sure, but they’ve made more money playing it relatively safe.

In sum, it really seems to depend on the market you are chasing. If you want to sell hella devices, go with shiny and simple, but sturdy and easy. But, if you want to catch the attention of the bleeding-edge audience, by all means go for the dual touchscreen–you’ll definitely capture my $$.

I’ve been wondering about the dual-screen laptop but haven’t seen much analysis on it. I was fascinated by convertible tablets and bought one for grad school. The form factor was incredible, and the dual mode digitizer was amazing, and I couldn’t wait for an upgraded version … unfortunately, their proliferation stalled when the iPad came out–and when everyone realized that the NVidia processors were abysmal shite and HP wasn’t owning up to anything.

Anyway … I agree that innovation is needed, in fact I think it is ALWAYS needed. But people were ignorant about the uses for tablets, the tablet form-factor, and touchscreens. In fact, people “dissed” the entire concept–I only know because when I got mine, I got attention but also got a lot of confused looks and rolled eyes.

And … here in the US, ignorance too often devolves into disdain. I’m not innocent though, I posted that picture of the maxi pad/Apple (iPad) photo … what, it was funny. But soon after, I bought one and was impressed.

All I can offer is that over-innovation (dual-screens) won’t work to build the massive consumer base needed to compete with Apple. It is awesome and well worthwhile, but people just don’t want to deal with a high learning curve.

The masses want things that just work, which is why Lenovo does so well with their ThinkPad lines. They are powerful computers for business use, and they cater to that crowd very well while charging a pretty penny. On the consumer side, Apple has a real penchant for drawing attention while building solid devices. Could they push the envelope a lot more? Sure, but they’ve made more money playing it relatively safe.

In sum, it really seems to depend on the market you are chasing. If you want to sell hella devices, go with shiny and simple, but sturdy and easy. But, if you want to catch the attention of the bleeding-edge audience, by all means go for the dual touchscreen–you’ll definitely capture my $$.

I will be continuing to pursue this as my next one will look at which PC companies are best positioned to push the innovations in PC’s.  

To Geolemon’s point, he is right and in essence this market fragments as i’ve pointed out before. It will be similar to the car market.  

If you want a truck you buy a truck, if you want a hybrid you don’t’ buy a truck you buy a hybrid etc.   Consumers will make choices based on how they use computers and what fits their needs.  

My point is i’d like to see more experimentation in form factor so we can give consumer more choices.   This is in fact where the market is heading.

Respectfully, I can understand where Ben is coming from, but I think he’s asking the wrong question.  The real question is “How do tech/commo companies embrace the different form factors for the inter/intrawebs?”

Either way, I think that you BOTH carry very good opinions on this topic.  On a subject that I feel isn’t exploited enough.

What’s changing is whether we need our PC’s to get on the internet. 
The answer is no. 

If you just want to browse the web, watch YouTube, etc – then a tablet or even phone is more portable, cheaper, even easier to use than a computer.
In that context, it’s a bit like having a lifted monster truck with all-wheel-drive and an expensive diesel engine that can pull stumps, blow fire, break windows…
…when all you want to do at the moment is get in, turn on some relaxing music, and drive down the block to the grocery store to get milk for your cereal.

Where Microsoft is screwed in the head is that they think you will be using the same OS for both your work computer, and your internet/entertainment device.
The iPad [and ten years of windows-on-a-tablet failures] has already proved that’s not what people want.