11–20 of 51 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flexible and foldable products are so underwhelming. At this point they seem like something being developed just for the sake of demonstrating that it's possible. If the goal is to make attractive products, they're failing spectacularly.
The first generation iPhone was a bit clunky, a Nokia N95 could do so much more...
15 years ago flexible displays were probably fantasy. Now there are consumer products (Edit: ah, the laptops are concepts, but Samsung and Motorola have phones!) using them. We do really live in the future...
Flexible and foldable products are so underwhelming. At this point they seem like something being developed just for the sake of demonstrating that it's possible. If the goal is to make attractive products, they're failing spectacularly.
What the machine needs is a way for the fully folded out display to stand itself up at a comfortable viewing angle.
One thing I’m concerned about is the hardware-first mentality that OEMs have taken to foldable designs. The whole experience needs to make its advantages and use case more plainly obvious. To that end, you can tell by the demo video that Windows isn’t customized nearly enough to make this a pleasant experience.
Windows still isn’t a touch experience that I’ve seen anyone use in the wild because the bulk of its utility is with legacy style Windows applications that demand precise cursor movement and keyboard shortcuts. Every single person I’ve seen using a Surface Pro at coffee shops has been using it in “laptop mode.”
To this end, this device should be answering the question of “Why should I buy this over a cheaper XPS 13 or MacBook Air that fits in my backpack just fine?” With this computer’s minuscule keyboard and touchpad along with a digital drawing experience that can’t be any good I’m just not sure who this product is meant to appeal to.
Products like this ask the question “What hardware can we build?” But the correct question is “How do we make something that people will love to use and want to own?”
Foldable devices are in danger of being the 3D or curved TV of the 2020s. I think the most likely outcome will be us sitting here in five years wondering why anyone thought that foldable devices were a good idea.
Eh, I'm having a hard time finding what advantage this would actually give you.
In cramped quarters, a regular 12"ish laptop. When you have extra desk space, it's a desktop with a 17" display.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In cramped quarters, a regular 12"ish laptop. When you have extra desk space, it's a desktop with a 17" display.
It’s a bad laptop because you need a separate keyboard to use it (typing on screen is hard). So it fails at the both usage you listed.
Eh, I'm having a hard time finding what advantage this would actually give you.
In cramped quarters, a regular 12"ish laptop. When you have extra desk space, it's a desktop with a 17" display.
It's a solution looking for a problem, at least in that form / the consumer market.
I would have been extremely negative on this Lenovo machine if it didn’t have the keyboard docking solution that it does have. I have to admit that it’s clever and practical. What the machine needs is a way for the fully folded out display to stand itself up at a comfortable viewing angle. One thing I’m concerned about is the hardware-first mentality that OEMs have taken to foldable designs. The whole experience need…
A really cool demo would have been to show off this laptop form factor by using Linux with a tiling window manager such as i3wm. Having it automatically split or rearrange panes when a fold is detected would be really cool. Unfortunately, Lenovo seems to be quite a bit behind the likes of Dell, System76, Pureism, etc in creating developer editions (read: shipped with Linux).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flexible and foldable products are so underwhelming. At this point they seem like something being developed just for the sake of demonstrating that it's possible. If the goal is to make attractive products, they're failing spectacularly.
The big tech companies’ only advantage is that they can manufacture more complex tech. Their goal is to move what users want towards things that are hard to build, not necessarily what users would naturally want.
Only advantage? What about the already established user base, decades of experience, brand recognition, and giant piles of money? And I'm sure that I'm leaving out other important factors.
> Their goal is to move what users want towards things that are hard to build
Is there any evidence for this? Obviously there will be some incentive for this but that's not the same as being their goal.