Slashdot Log In
TechCrunch Wants To Create an Open Source Tablet
Posted by
Soulskill
on Tue Jul 22, 2008 07:20 AM
from the i-prefer-gelcaps dept.
from the i-prefer-gelcaps dept.
RKo618 writes "TechCrunch announced that they are planning to design their own $200 web tablet device. Quoting: 'The idea is to turn it on, bypass any desktop interface, and go directly to Firefox running in a modified Kiosk mode that effectively turns the browser into the operating system for the device. Add Gears for offline syncing of Google docs, email, etc., and Skype for communication and you have a machine that will be almost as useful as a desktop but cheaper and more portable than any laptop or tablet PC.' The aim is for the tablet to run on modified open source software, which will be released back to the community along with the specifications for the hardware."
Related Stories
[+]
Hardware: First Prototype of Open Source TechCrunch Tablet 64 comments
holy_calamity writes "Big mouth tech blogger Mike Arrington decided earlier this year to 'teach gadget-makers a lesson' and make his own portable, touch screen web tablet. The first, very rough, prototype is complete. Despite the claims it would be fully open source — even the hardware — there's no sign of a project site or any other openness yet."
[+]
Hardware: Second Prototype of the $200 Open Source Tablet 259 comments
holy_calamity writes "TechCrunch blogger Mike Arrington decided last year to invent a new class of low-cost internet tablet using open source hardware and software. The second prototype has been unveiled, sporting a 12-inch touchscreen powered by a Via Nano processor, 1 GB of ram and a 4 GB flash drive. It runs a browser and nothing else on top of a custom Linux build. 'Resolution is 1024×768, which means the vast majority of websites are viewed in full width without scrolling. The device also has wifi, an accelerometer (so when you turn the screen on its side you can view more of a web page), a camera and a four cell battery.'"
[+]
Leaked Pics of CrunchPad Elicit Progress Update 85 comments
TechCrunch has released a few more technical details, pictures, and general comments about their CrunchPad project as a recent accidental leak saw a new round of images posted to the web. It seems that the tablet has continued to grow and evolve with the help of an Intel Atom chip (as opposed to the Via chip previously used), new software from Fusion Garage, and a bottom-up Linux install. "I wanted something I couldn't buy, and found people who said it could be built for a lot less than I imagined. The goal — a very thin and light touch screen computer, sans physical keyboard, that has no hard drive and boots directly to a browser to surf the web. The operating system exists solely to handle the hardware drivers and run the browser and associated applications. That's it."
[+]
Arrington's CrunchPad Dies 139 comments
adeelarshad82 writes "Michael Arrington announced the death of the CrunchPad on Monday morning in a blog post heavily spiced with angst and drama. According to Arrignton, the Cruchpad, a 12-inch Web tablet expected to be priced at about $300, was just days away from launch. At the last minute, however, Arrington received an email from Chandra Rathakrishnan, the chief executive of manufacturing partner Fusion Garage, apparently trying to cut Arrington out of the product on the eve of the launch. Fusion Garage, according to Arrington, wanted to market the device itself under its own name; which obviously was the deal breaker. Arrington claims that the company had overcome obstacles at every stage in the business such as deals with Intel, retail launch, securing venture capital and angel investments. Interesting bit is that some were already speculating that the Crunchpad was not real."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Hopefully they will get it right. (Score:5, Interesting)
They have to compete with the N770 and N800 both that run open source software and both already have a very large installed base of users.
They have to compete with that, so they really need to get it right. I love my N770 except for battery life. I wish these things could go at least 3 days between charges.
Re:Hopefully they will get it right. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
You forget the iPod Touch (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:You forget the iPod Touch (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Hopefully they will get it right. (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Hopefully they will get it right. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Kinda like the N800? (Score:5, Informative)
Okay, you can upgun to an Arm11, put in a bigger battery, and make the touch screen multitouch, but the device proposed is not something entirely new.
It is, however, something eminently useful on a daily basis.
Skype isn't Open Source (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Skype isn't Open Source (Score:5, Funny)
Asterix for voice communications.
I hear Obelix is way better.
(But other than that I agree. Skype is not open source and a security liability.)
Parent
Already have one (Score:5, Informative)
Linux kernel ... check. ... check. ... Gecko-based browser, so check. ... check. Also all the other IM protocols. ... check. Also Bluetooth to my EDGE phone. ... check. ... still waiting. But I have abiword.
Touchscreen interface
Firefox
Skype
Wifi
Headphones, mike, camera
Google Gears
About $100 over the target price, but not bad.
http://www.nseries.com/products/n800/#l=products,n800 [nseries.com]
I'd like a bigger touchscreen, but then it wouldn't fit in my pocket.
Don't get me wrong: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Don't get me wrong: (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Where have all the PDAs gone? (Score:4, Interesting)
I think these things would be more useful going the thin-client approach. E.g., just use it to ssh+vnc into a persistent desktop on your home PC. That way you have all your settings preserved, and the performance will likely be much better for anything more complicated than reading.
I think the opera browser for most smartphones / blackberries use a thin client approach, where they render your web page on their servers and send screenscrapes to your device which you can pan and zoom around in their interface.
Anyway, I've been looking for something to eventually replace my Palm T|X, and don't really see anything I like too much. The N810 looks nice, but seems like the PIM functionality will be taking a step back from what I have now (granted it wasn't really designed for PIM at all to begin with).
Re:Where have all the PDAs gone? (Score:4, Insightful)
I just replaced my cherished, precious Palm Tungsten T3 this Spring after I received an iPod Touch for Christmas.
It is absolutely the best PDA ever. I thought that even before I upgraded to the 2.0 firmware. I can now access my work's Exchange server plus all of my personal accounts. The apps are a mixed bag, but OmniFocus is the best Getting Things Done app on any platform, if you're into that.
A device this size is not the proper tool for remote support. For that I strongly recommend a ThinkPad X-series with a Verizon data card in a messenger bag or briefcase. People who use their handheld device (smartphone, PDA, Nokia Internet tablet, whatever) to do support are out of their minds.
Parent
let me get his right (Score:4, Interesting)
a technology blog wants to create a device?
yea right seems like linkbait to get more ad impressions (open that site while having firebug open they load so much ad shit)
3 hour of sleep (Score:3, Funny)
Read that as 'TechCrunch Wants to Create an Open Source Toilet' and I was like 'Hell...yeah'.
Re:3 hour of sleep (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Meh (Score:4, Interesting)
I want a 9" iPod Touch.
Make a Linux based one with a glass screen and multi-touch that has that level of polish, and that level of simplicity and people will be interested.
Give them plain ol' Firefox on a lousy LCD with a resistive touch screen and it'll have the same success every other internet tablet has had... ie, it'll end up on TigerDirect at 80% off.
More power to them, but they need to scrap their list of requirements and put one thing at the very top: usability. If it doesn't have the UX and physical usability of an iPod Touch (where my grandmother could figure it out), its missed the boat. If the software is getting less than 95% of the attention, then they've missed the boat.
Pepper tried this (Score:3, Informative)
Pepper Computer [pepper.com] already tried this, and they failed. It turns out that producing a device that can sell for $200 is quite difficult.
It also turns out that people aren't willing to spend $N for a limited-functionality device when they're able to get a full-featured laptop for $N, or even $N+100
I wish TechCrunch luck!
ducked the most important specification (Score:4, Insightful)
We know PDA-sized screens are no good for web-browsing (especially when the mocked-up picture implies showing print-sized text). So it follows that the screen will have to be at least the size of a paperback and preferably the size of an A4 sheet to get any kind of mass market take-up (with, of course the battery capacity to match). If you plan to do this for $200, you must know something that the rest of the world has missed.
Even the book readers that appeared last year didn't manage that - and they seem to have sunk without trace. Without this, the project is nothing more than pie in the sky.
I'll keep an eye out for the end product, but I won't hold my breath waiting for it.
Good luck with that! (Score:5, Insightful)
You want a Macbook-air thin wireless touch screen tablet device for $200? I want world peace, Dick Cheney's head on a pike, and a pony... good luck with that!
I'll admit what they are talking about sounds really cool, but the real world limitations of battery technology, thin electronics, and design prowess that only companies like Apple seem to have will make this thing cost $2000-3000 when it's finally done. Sorry, you just can't cram all of that good stuff into a 0.5 inch enclosure for $200.
Why these things keep failing. (Score:4, Insightful)
Every time these ideas come around, they simply boil down to lightweight desktop interfaces. Just taking interfaces people are used to elsewhere and dumbing them down is not going to solve any problems. First, determine if the product solves any problems, then make the solution fit those specific needs.
Windows Mobile demonstrates this pattern exactly, which is one reason the iPhone dominates it. Apple realized that the form factor, the input devices, and usage scenarios are radically different from the desktop. Microsoft used hierarchical menus, scroll bars, and other common metaphors that break-down on handhelds. Apple opted for user interfaces that give powerful visual clues where pixels and real estate are hard to come by. The different is, as millions of people will tell you, striking.
This “yet another tablet PC” is not going to catch on or provide any value if the designers simply repackage the laptops we already have (never mind other flops like Windows XP Tablet Edition). Figure out what users actually need and develop to those needs. Have they solved handwriting recognition? How are they going to deal with small screens? Will essential functions be quickly accessible? Do they have any concrete use cases? Have they considered that people dislike stylus input? Any ideas for one-handed keyboards perhaps?
Sorry, but trimming down the web browser and preserving constrained desktop functionality elsewhere is not going to make waves. This strategy has failed many times in the past, and I am surprised that we are still trying it so many years after the QBE.
The reason no one is doing one NOW... (Score:5, Insightful)
... is that it's not possible.
Look at the specs - if you want decent battery life, a decent screen (with decent resolution), decent RAM and storage (specced at 512MB and 4GB), and to all go for $200, it's hard.
The only thing on the market NOW that's even remotely close is the XO-1, but it only has 256MB of RAM and 1GB storage. And it's BOM costs are quite high already, even with its anemic CPU. If you want to mass-produce it and sell for $200 retail, after taking out everyone's profit and overhead, you're looking at a manufactured unit cost of around $100. Maybe $125, if you can squeeze profit margins from retailers and the like. (Figure in profit/time for doing the software, as asll as distribution costs to get it to retailers - you'll probably want wholesale to cost around $150-160). Of that, the screen, RAM and flash are the big budget items, and a good CPU can be pricey in quantity ($10-ish, nominally for a high-end ARM processor from the big companies - Samsung/Marvell/Freescale).
It's a tight squeeze, add in the other costs like warranty and support, and you'll find not many people are willing ot take on such a high-risk project with such little returns. You can try to sell it online like the OLPC guys with their "give one get one" thing, which lets you raise the manufactured cost more, but then have to deal with all the issues of distribution to end users.
It's not that no one wants to do it, it's just that it's really hard to do a good job in very tight constraints. Give it a year, and you'll probably be able to do it with last year's CPUs, last year's RAM, and last year's storage. But if you up the requirements next year, well.
The original Eee PC had a crappy screen, crappy battery life, OK CPU, as-required RAM and as-required storage, and still cost $400, even though the screen was bulk leftovers from portable DVD players, and the CPU was more or less "hey, I found a box of these things sitting on the shelf".
Re:I'd buy that for a dollar (Score:5, Funny)
At a dollar a piece, I'd buy a few. But what would you do with 200 of them?
Sell them at the (two) dollar store.
And what the hell is 200 hundred?
Twenty thousand.
Next customer!!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That $199 on the iphone is just a down payment.