Author Topic: who's gonna buy the HP Slate 500? (Read 4577 times)

wellington1869 · « **on:** Fri, 22 October 2010, 22:30:38 »

So who's gonna buy the new HP Slate 500? Runs full version of win7, includes wacom digitizer for handwriting recognition, plus normal finger recognition as well, 1.5 lbs, 5+ hours battery. Atom 1.8ghz processor. $799, comes with docking station, case.

Btw, I'm already figuring out what junk to sell in my room so I can buy one...

WhiteRice · « **Reply #1 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 11:51:31 »

I was thinking about a tablet, but until they start widely releasing texts books on them I'll pass.

instantkamera · « **Reply #2 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 11:55:45 »

Quote from: wellington1869;237561

So who's gonna buy the new HP Slate 500? Runs full version of win7,

not I. Is the an atom dual core? I already have an atom based netbook (HP) which runs DECENT but is not a screamer. I like the idea of having a specialized OS for these low power devices, so I AM still waiting for the galaxy tab. If it works well and I can make calls with it, it could be the ultimate portable computing device. I want to build a new desktop more than anything right now.

NamelessPFG · « **Reply #3 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 16:47:23 »

I'm still skeptical that it uses Wacom instead of N-Trig. The pen's quite thick by Wacom standards, and prior HP Slate videos exhibited four-point multi-touch whereas Wacom tops out at two-point multi-touch for some reason.

At that price, I'd be far more likely to buy a used HP EliteBook 2710p or 2730p. No finger touch that way, but I don't mind.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #4 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 16:55:08 »

I'll probably get one in about 15 years when they're being thrown out.

unicomp · « **Reply #5 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 17:01:59 »

Quote from: microsoft windows;237742

I'll probably get one in about 15 years when they're being thrown out.

Too bad it doesn't have an optical drive, it will make it harder to 'upgrade' it to Windows 2000.

wellington1869 · « **Reply #6 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 20:09:46 »

Quote from: instantkamera;237682

not I. Is the an atom dual core? I already have an atom based netbook (HP) which runs DECENT but is not a screamer. I like the idea of having a specialized OS for these low power devices, so I AM still waiting for the galaxy tab. If it works well and I can make calls with it, it could be the ultimate portable computing device. I want to build a new desktop more than anything right now.

true, the atom processor blows -- i think what helps a bit in this case is the SSD drives its shipping with, definite boost to responsiveness.

That said, you're right. I've been having second thoughts. I'd like to wait for a 10" screen and a faster processor.

But it is basically a win7 tablet/slate that I could use the most (at work as well as for school) since my workflow is totally tied into windows applications and software.

The 1.5lb weight is so appealing though...

wellington1869 · « **Reply #7 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 20:11:21 »

Quote from: NamelessPFG;237741

I'm still skeptical that it uses Wacom instead of N-Trig. The pen's quite thick by Wacom standards, and prior HP Slate videos exhibited four-point multi-touch whereas Wacom tops out at two-point multi-touch for some reason.

At that price, I'd be far more likely to buy a used HP EliteBook 2710p or 2730p. No finger touch that way, but I don't mind.

supposedly it has both a resistive screen along with an active digitizer. When you use the pen, the resistive screen 'turns off' so you can rest your palm on it. When you move the pen away the resistive screen turns back on so you can use swipes and gestures with your fingers.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #8 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 22:41:18 »

Quote from: wellington1869

true, the atom processor blows

Not for mobile phones it doesn't. My Droid is pretty damn fast.

wellington1869 · « **Reply #9 on:** Sat, 23 October 2010, 23:42:19 »

ok, the digitizer is 'n-trig'. what the hell is n-trig? [update: never mind, figured it out.]

asus ep121 coming out in the spring next year: looks *great*. But doesnt have an active digitizer.

Has anyone tried handwriting recognition on a passive touchscreen? Is it as horrible as they say? Not functional?

mike · « **Reply #10 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 05:07:12 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;237843

Not for mobile phones it doesn't. My Droid is pretty damn fast.

What phone would that be ? I was under the impression that most Android phones had some ARM CPU in them.

instantkamera · « **Reply #11 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 05:18:23 »

well he said "droid" so I assume he actually means the Motorola Droid, which is NOT atom based.

Findecanor · « **Reply #12 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 07:15:59 »

The ARM Cortex A8 in Motorola Droid runs at 550 MHz, unless there is a newer model that I missed.

Personally, I am waiting for a ARM-based tablet computer with a decent feature set. I'd rather have an ARM in a battery-powered device than an x86-based CPU.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #13 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 07:59:47 »

It's the Verizon Droid Incredible, which is Atom based. I just call it a Droid because "Droid Incredible" doesn't have a nice ring to it

instantkamera · « **Reply #14 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 09:56:46 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;237901

It's the Verizon Droid Incredible, which is Atom based. I just call it a Droid because "Droid Incredible" doesn't have a nice ring to it

That phone is not atom based.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #15 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 09:57:48 »

Quote from: instantkamera;237929

That phone is not atom based.

Ahhh! Whoops you're right lol. It's a snapdragon or something. Sorry!

instantkamera · « **Reply #16 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:05:38 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;237931

Ahhh! Whoops you're right lol. It's a snapdragon or something. Sorry!

No worries. However, you bring up a good point: it isn't really the hardware that sucks, it's the software (specifically OS). Forcing a fairly beastly OS meant to run on varied hardware onto these types of platforms is not really fair, but pair it with a proper embedded/mobile OS and software (generally far more lean and optimized), and you realize the real potential of the hardware.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #17 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:08:30 »

Quote from: unicomp;237745

Too bad it doesn't have an optical drive, it will make it harder to 'upgrade' it to Windows 2000.

I bet I could hook up a USB CD-ROM drive and make it boot. And then I'll get W2k on there.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #18 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:09:27 »

Quote from: instantkamera;237933

No worries. However, you bring up a good point: it isn't really the hardware that sucks, it's the software (specifically OS). Forcing a fairly beastly OS meant to run on varied hardware onto these types of platforms is not really fair, but pair it with a proper embedded/mobile OS and software (generally far more lean and optimized), and you realize the real potential of the hardware.

Windows 2000 or Windows XP would make great embedded OS's for tablets and such.

instantkamera · « **Reply #19 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:13:07 »

Quote from: microsoft windows;237936

Windows 2000 or Windows XP would make great embedded OS's for tablets and such.

No they wouldn't.

microsoft windows · « **Reply #20 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:15:11 »

Quote from: instantkamera;237941

No they wouldn't.

Why not? You can run W2k on a Pentium with 32MB of RAM perfectly fine (Many of today's phones and tablets are more powerful than that). There's also a lot of software designed for W2k/XP and most people are familiar with it. They'd make great embedded OS's.

instantkamera · « **Reply #21 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:43:40 »

Quote from: microsoft windows;237943

Why not? You can run W2k on a Pentium with 32MB of RAM perfectly fine (Many of today's phones and tablets are more powerful than that). There's also a lot of software designed for W2k/XP and most people are familiar with it. They'd make great embedded OS's.

They are highly generalized x86 OS's that happen to also be incredibly outdated. They have not been built with alternate input methods in mind, their interfaces are not optimal, they don't have configurable kernels, they don't have drivers or support for newer hardware on a x86 platform, let alone different (portable) architectures. etc etc.

This is why MS originally built (the largely unsuccessful) CE (which performed and acted a little to much like windows for it to catch on) and why they are working on "Windows Phone 7" now (where it appears that they have finally "learned" that people don't want their portable devices to look like their desktop OS was shoehorned onto the hardware. By "learned" I mean, they watched 10 other companies do it right first).

But feel free to let MS know they are going down the wrong path.

muchadoaboutnothing · « **Reply #22 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 10:54:43 »

Price isn't right. Sure businesses and artists will like the cheap Wacom digitizer though in a nice tablet form.

Doesn't meet the needs I have (mainly price). If I had the money, I'd buy one, but if I had the money, I'd have a Ferrari too. So personally, it's as dead as Butterscotch the pony.

wellington1869 · « **Reply #23 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 12:57:26 »

so there's actually like four new eee tablets coming out in next few months.

in 'october', the monochrome lcd ereader, called either the 'eee tablet' or the 'eee note'. Doesnt look that great. meant to be an ereader, but doesnt seem to add any features other than scribbling on the screen (but no handwriting recognition).

in the "spring":
-12" core 2 duo slate/tablet, brilliant design, 1.5 lbs with detachable keyb, does everything, but $1000. Ouch. That price point will likely keep it out of my hands.

-10" same as above but running android or something, meant to compete with ipad. $399.

-10" same as above but running 'windows embedded" os (similar to win7 mobile). Limited functionality, but if it can run Office and do handwriting recog in onenote, I'll buy it. $399. But too many unknowns with it and its atleast 6 to 8 months away, realistically.

instantkamera · « **Reply #24 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 13:09:52 »

10" is too big for a "pad" device for me. 7" is a sweet spot. bring on the Galaxy TAB!!!

NamelessPFG · « **Reply #25 on:** Sun, 24 October 2010, 13:48:46 »

Quote from: wellington1869;237789

supposedly it has both a resistive screen along with an active digitizer. When you use the pen, the resistive screen 'turns off' so you can rest your palm on it. When you move the pen away the resistive screen turns back on so you can use swipes and gestures with your fingers.

That would be true for the HP tx2000 or tx2500, but the Slate definitely uses a capacitive digitizer for finger touch like the tx2 (N-Trig), tm2 (Wacom), and 2740p (Wacom). No particular reason to use resistive on a dual digitizer setup unless one wants finger touch while wearing gloves or something.

Also, it's definitely why I'm insistent on dual digitizers. There's nothing to lose in terms of finger touch to add decent pen input capability.

News:

Author Topic: who's gonna buy the HP Slate 500? (Read 4577 times)