Looks cheap. Check out the smudges and the warped bezel (watch the reflections through the entire video, particularly near the top).
Looks weak. Check out the REALLY slow framerate with a simple resize operation (beginning of video). Yes, I'm aware of what could be going on, but that sort of thing should be optimized, and a beta version capable of being released on video should scream performance, not lag, or you'll hurt your market before it exists.
Looks significantly more expensive. "Under $1000" != $499 at the bottom-end, and the iPad can claim the same for their top-end version. Plus, more likely, <1000 means 999.99 (before tax).
It also apparently has a separate CPU in the keyboard... which implies they're setting it up as a 2 CPU system when it's in, or they're wasting power by only using the Intel chip, and by using it as a tablet you immediately cripple it. (if the Snapdragon CPU was more powerful, and they are only using one at a time, then why bother with the Intel in the first place?)
No. Sorry, Lenovo, but Apple beat you on price, power, quality, and release date (and likely OS, too). I also saw no indication of multitouch capabilities, which are nearly essential for a tablet to be truly useful. You officially fail. The only thing you have going for you is a more open setup for software, and then you get the hassles of any regular computer, so it's a plus and a minus.
Unfortunately, the screen itself was pretty abysmal, with terrible horizontal and vertical viewing angles -- it basically disappeared at 45 degrees off axis.
I think it's worth insisting on that too. Their hybrid linux looks horrible, and is lagging terribly. The whole point about the ipad is the whole experience, as with every Apple products.
Also the 2 computers in one idea is quite ridiculous if you ask me. I hope they add some sort of sync, but if it is as buggy as their linux OS, it promises to be awful.
In short, this is the opposite of an apple product :
Bad user experience, useless display of technology, and weak hardware.
I'm no fan of apple but it's gonna take a better product to do better than the iPad
EDIT : Understanding how software works would be the first step in here. Ubuntu MID looks 1000x times better than their so called OS
http://www.ubuntu.com/products/mobile
I agree, I was largely hoping to avoid the knee-jerk anti-Apple-fanboy reaction a lot of people have. Plus, there's no reason they can't come up with a phenomenal OS... it just looks like they're going about it ass-backwards.
Oleo-phobic screens need to become more prevalent IMHO.
I liked the basic idea, snap the screen into a notebook for heavier work. But this looks like a cheap tech demo. I see no reason the major innards couldn't be in the screen, so there would be no OS switcharoo (I wasn't impressed by that after thinking about the lack of utility), put another battery and a hard drive in the keyboard and it could just be recognized as a few usb devices...
I was also expecting sub-$800 price point.
>Check out the REALLY slow framerate with a simple resize operation
This is a point lots of people are making I think. The slowness is not excusable...
When will hardware makers realize that you can't half-ass (or in this case, 1/8 to 1/16th-ass) the software stack for a new usage paradigm? Assembled parts does not a system make.
Tablet PCs have sucked for years for the simple reason that they just wanted to sell touch-screen, keyboardless laptops. They're completely different systems from the user's point of view, and just shoving an onscreen keyboard and handwriting recognizer doesn't cut it. Proper tablet computing is 10 years of user interface and systems research that hasn't (afaik) been done.
Notice how apple started with an appliance (an ipod touch) and scaled it up to just be a larger appliance. They recognized the problem and (not-very-cleverly) avoided it.
Sadly, we're going to see more bad ideas like this for a while; there are too many hardware vendors who simply don't understand the whole system stack. It's no coincidence that the only vendor to do a tablet that wasn't a desktop OS bolted-with-crap is Apple, a full-system vendor.
I think part of the problem is that nobody knows quite what a tablet is supposed to do. Is it just for web browsing (CrunchPad)? Is it for basic web, email and office (iPad)? Is it for everything that a laptop does (Windows tablets)? Once you have a scope/audience, then you can design a suitable UI.
Apple is attempting to take the lead here, defining what a tablet should and should not do. If it works out, then I suspect other tablet manufacturers will follow suit and create devices with similar scope to the iPad. If it doesn't then it's back to the drawing board.
I've seen even the currently-crappy tablets in heavy use in the medical field, I'd bet largely for signatures (I've signed on 5 separate tablet PCs at different locations, over several years). They're also capable of being carried around and used while walking.
That said, they are still crappy, and most require a powered pen (won't anybody learn from Wacom? Or did they somehow gain a ubiquitous patent, which the patent office isn't supposed to allow?). At the end of the day, though, they're just Windows with a couple marginally-intelligent tablet-oriented applications (ie, big buttons). Certainly not optimal.
What's the point of this beyond novelty? I could understand if it was running the same OS that stayed in sync, but having 2 OS's seems like way more trouble than it's worth. It basically becomes a different computer when you dock/undock. Personally I'd prefer a powerful 15" laptop and then a smaller, more portable tablet.
Exactly. If I am working on something and suddenly need more portability, why in the world would I want to suddenly end up in a totally unrelated, different OS? It would make a ton more sense if it was either running the same OS in both scenarios, preferably not just Android based.
Nothing keeps you from installing your favourite OS on it. And I do not see why they would not provide an option to simply "add" the keyboard to the currently running tablet OS if you plug it it.
It's an interesting approach but I think the problem is when you look at this thing you get a lot more questions than answers. How do files sync between the two computers? Do I have to worry which half my files are saved on when I take the tablet off? What happens to the Windows half? Does it stay on? Go off? What if I want it to stay on? How do I do that? Are there two batteries or one? Do I have to track the battery level of both devices? So if I use the tablet for 8 hours, come back and dock it into the laptop, can I just grab the laptop and go? Fully charged? Do the two halves communicate with each other or are they basically two separate computers with a shared display? How is networking handled? If I want to leave the Windows half going does it have its own separate wifi? Do I have to enter my WPA key into both devices or do they sync that information? Too much complexity for something that is supposed to make your life easier.
The dual-OS thing feels like a kludge, albeit possibly a necessary one for many people. But I think I'd be perfectly content with Linux running on the whole thing, and no need for multiple CPUs and all the requisite extra crud. But, I'm a weirdo that thinks Linux makes an excellent OS for day-to-day computing.
I think that point was that the 'base' has a full laptop computer in it, but when you detach you only have the Snapdragon processor (and board). That's why there are two separate operating systems. If you wanted the laptop to run Linux too, you'd be in the same boat (two separate Linuxes running).
Worse yet this is the thing Paul Thurrott said would make Apple's tablet look silly (before it was even announced)[1]. That interface lags a full inch behind Jim's finger, you can bet Apple would never demo, let alone ship, something that laggy. I don't understand why people feel the need to make outlandish predictions for their product of choice.
More is not always better, and I think that this video perfectly illustrates that. A tablet should do what a tablet does well and a notebook should do what a notebook does well.
My point wasn't that this was an awesome product. My point was that they are providing more than the iPad does, so they can't run it at the same price point.
Fair enough, then we should compare the iPad to the Lenovo without the extra computer. My impression is that Lenovo knows this tablet is rubbish, so won't sell you it by itself. Ergo, iPad wins by virtue of being on the market.
But you can currently spend a grand on a laptop that doesn't have any detachable screen and/or touchscreen interface. This is a step up from that, albeit not 100% perfect.
Watch the video in 720p and pause when "Windows 7" pops up. The taskbar isn't black, and there's an "Examples" folder on the desktop, which makes me suspect it's Kubuntu or something.
It doesn't look too 7-y, but there is an Internet Explorer icon / launcher right near the left edge. There's also an ungodly amount of those right-edge service icons (forget what they're called, don't feel any great loss at realizing that fact), which is pretty typical for a Windows box (however sad that may be).
Calling bullshit on that tablet. Why would I want two separate OS's in the same device?
In that test, you could see the display lagging terribly in the touch drag. And also the UI is completely horrible. As @austinshea says, its pretty rough. In fact, it looks like a caveman built it.
Looks weak. Check out the REALLY slow framerate with a simple resize operation (beginning of video). Yes, I'm aware of what could be going on, but that sort of thing should be optimized, and a beta version capable of being released on video should scream performance, not lag, or you'll hurt your market before it exists.
Looks significantly more expensive. "Under $1000" != $499 at the bottom-end, and the iPad can claim the same for their top-end version. Plus, more likely, <1000 means 999.99 (before tax).
It also apparently has a separate CPU in the keyboard... which implies they're setting it up as a 2 CPU system when it's in, or they're wasting power by only using the Intel chip, and by using it as a tablet you immediately cripple it. (if the Snapdragon CPU was more powerful, and they are only using one at a time, then why bother with the Intel in the first place?)
No. Sorry, Lenovo, but Apple beat you on price, power, quality, and release date (and likely OS, too). I also saw no indication of multitouch capabilities, which are nearly essential for a tablet to be truly useful. You officially fail. The only thing you have going for you is a more open setup for software, and then you get the hassles of any regular computer, so it's a plus and a minus.
EDIT: omg, it just gets worse, though apparently it is multitouch. Watch the scrolling not work (and they quickly pan away) in the first video, and read to the end: http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/05/lenovo-ideapad-u1-hybrid-...
Unfortunately, the screen itself was pretty abysmal, with terrible horizontal and vertical viewing angles -- it basically disappeared at 45 degrees off axis.