> The physical form factor isn't what's new, the implementation, software, use cases, and the whole experience is what's new
Actually. I want to explain why I was so vicious before. What made Wieser's ideas about computing so fantastic wasn't physical form factors. It was about a new age of computing where the way that people use computers would be significantly different to what we had then. It's taken more than 20 years for that to /start/ happening. The iPhone/iPad is the start of a Wieserian world because it bought the idea to people, not because they invented it.
The iPad really is an extension of the pad idea from Ubiquitous Computing. End of story. There's no counter argument. It's irrelevant who you've shown your ipad to, or how novel you think it is. You're wrong. End of story.
In fact, the iPhone and iPad are two great examples of what Wieser talked about so often in his work. The only core difference is that Wieser, the optimist he was, believed that devices should be like note pads in the office and not owned by a distinct person. Computers should transend the need for us to serve them, but instead they should serve us. Pads would be used like note pads are today, but with the power of computing facilitating our contextual needs.
But just because it's new to you, and your group of friends is irrelevant. The idea is old. Even from an implementation point of view.
The one thing that Apple can be congratulated for is bringing that idea into a marketable position. That's no small feat there, they deserve recognition. However, they didn't invent the idea. Just a marketable implementation.
He also thought that there should be more computers, everywhere, that pads/tabs/boards interlink with.
Actually. I want to explain why I was so vicious before. What made Wieser's ideas about computing so fantastic wasn't physical form factors. It was about a new age of computing where the way that people use computers would be significantly different to what we had then. It's taken more than 20 years for that to /start/ happening. The iPhone/iPad is the start of a Wieserian world because it bought the idea to people, not because they invented it.
The iPad really is an extension of the pad idea from Ubiquitous Computing. End of story. There's no counter argument. It's irrelevant who you've shown your ipad to, or how novel you think it is. You're wrong. End of story.
In fact, the iPhone and iPad are two great examples of what Wieser talked about so often in his work. The only core difference is that Wieser, the optimist he was, believed that devices should be like note pads in the office and not owned by a distinct person. Computers should transend the need for us to serve them, but instead they should serve us. Pads would be used like note pads are today, but with the power of computing facilitating our contextual needs.
But just because it's new to you, and your group of friends is irrelevant. The idea is old. Even from an implementation point of view.
The one thing that Apple can be congratulated for is bringing that idea into a marketable position. That's no small feat there, they deserve recognition. However, they didn't invent the idea. Just a marketable implementation.
He also thought that there should be more computers, everywhere, that pads/tabs/boards interlink with.