471–480 of 507 posts
Verdict: Could be a good Windows PC if the design was original and the specs were better.
1. The design is "borrowed" from Apple 2. Average specs for the price 3. ChromeOS cannot do anything this kind of hardware allows you to. Verdict: Could be a good Windows PC if the design was original and the specs were better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is your 2560x1440 screen only 13" though? I don't see the point of having a pixel density that high; almost no one has sharp enough eyesight to distinguish individual pixels at even lower densities than that, and enough people have poor enough eyesight that they won't be able to read text on software that doesn't scale its fonts properly. That resolution is appropriate for a monitor with twice the diagonal size. Also…
almost no one has sharp enough eyesight to distinguish individual pixels at even lower densities than that That's exactly the point. Apple markets its high-PPI displays as being higher-resolution than the human retina[0]. It does need some help from software to not cause usability problems like font scaling and tiny images, but we've had the hardware capability to do this for a while. It's past time we improved on th…
But the resolution doesn't need to be any higher than the maximum resolution of a human retina. By definition, you'd be unable to see the difference; you're just left with the scaling problems of an extremely high resolution on a very small display.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To encourage a world where a) companies build desirable hardware b) companies realise having a good screen is a feature c) companies build screens with more code friendly aspect ratios
> companies build screens with more code friendly aspect ratios I hear this complaint a lot and I think it's based on a flawed premise. Taller aspects might be better on very small screens that only fill tiny portions of your vision but on bigger screens -- the sort you should be using if you're working regularly on a computer -- you want wider not taller. It's the only way to usefully use your field of view. This is…
Could you go into more detail on this? I've been using 12 and 13" screens regularly for my day job for years, and I find the extra physical area of larger screens rather arduous. Basically, if there's some kind of ergonomics concern I'm prepared to change, but not otherwise.
> wider aspects -- they use your eyes better
Seems false, otherwise letters would be typed in landscape. There are other things in my FOV and that's a good thing.
Had a few friends who got invites and have one to play with for a month now. Must say I'm somewhat feeling meh about this on many levels. Initialy the price was a wake up and I thought, ok I'm missing something so I did a little digging and still think its too expensive for the sum of parts. Issues I have are: 1) Price 2) Limited local storage 3) Only USB2 and no USB3 4) No 3g or 4G options in the UK and given the pr…
On the Drive integration, there is access to other developers for FS for apps and extensions, so it is not just tied to drive http://developer.chrome.com/extensions/fileBrowserHandler.ht...
There is quite a lot of local Storage 32gb and 64gb.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see that. For most application the typical Wi-Fi access is enough, e.g. for music and movie streaming, working in Google Docs... Even if it was only working on home Wi-Fi, it would be far from worthless. People pay $200 for a Wi-Fi home NAS. Having your home NAS available anywhere is a nice plus. Also there is the screen that is higher resolution and multi-touch.
You're going to chew through 10 GB of LTE steaming music and movies. Working in Google Docs, maybe, but Google Docs sucks. I can justify $250 to use Google Docs over Starbucks WiFi. Not so much $1,300 to do the same thing.
To help get context on this, I went back in time and looked at discussion about the initial iPad launch: - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1081505 - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1081140 The first poll is especially telling. Overwhelmingly, people said they wouldn't get this device (2/3 of the voters). The initial iPad was obviously very successful. The complaints in the second thread are largely a mirror o…
1 in 3 people saying they want to get a new device is an extremely good result. IMO the ipad 1 wasn't that great either.
Honestly, the only thing I really miss compared to my girlfriend's newer model is that her backlight gets dimmer than mine.