Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!decwrl!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!ur-tut!aptr From: aptr@ur-tut.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Flat Displays and Portable Computers Message-ID: <991@ur-tut.UUCP> Date: Thu, 29-Jan-87 10:18:31 EST Article-I.D.: ur-tut.991 Posted: Thu Jan 29 10:18:31 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 31-Jan-87 07:39:55 EST References: <1191@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> <191@its63b.ed.ac.uk> Reply-To: aptr@ur-tut.UUCP (The Wumpus) Organization: Univ. of Rochester Computing Center Lines: 63 In article <1249@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> edjames@ic.Berkeley.EDU (Ed James) writes: >In article <275@netxcom.UUCP> ewiles@netxcom.UUCP (Edwin Wiles) writes: >>... >>No, don't add a keyboard on the end! It was designed with the idea in mind >>that it would be about the size of a notebook. If you add an auxiliary >>keyboard you defeat the design intent. > >No, I think the design is to make a portable computer. I could not use >it if it didn't have a reasonable keyboard. What we need is a very >flat keyboard. I am not sure that very flat is the right idea. Having ahd experience with many keyboards and computers, I have found that a low profile keyboard in the manner of an IBM PC keyboard works very well. Of course, user feed back is very important. I believe the key board should have a slight bump on each key when the key makes contact. (If you can find a Xerox 16/8 keyboard, that is the feel I like.) Another important question is making the keyboard compatible with something else. I remember my days in high school when I would play with Apple II+'s at school and write my reports on a Xerox 820-II at night. Making the transitions between the keyboard lay outs was always a problem. The keyboard should also be designed to have the same layout as any machine the computer is made compatible with. >>I seem to remember that with the resolution given in the original design, and >>with the room available on the surface of the screen, you could have a full >>80x24 character screen, and still have enough room for a keypad. The key > >[ The CPU, batteries, ROM_stuff and keyboard could fold up against > screen when being carried. Keeping the folded package to around an > inch or so thick is the trick. ] I think the unit probably end up being about three inches thick. The NEC Multispeed uses this folded setup, but it still takes room to get everything in it. A point which I have not seen mentioned is compatability. In this day of computers, it is nice to have a computer that is compatible with one of the big brands (ie. MacIntosch or IBM). How much software is there available for CP/m or generic MS-DOS? It was this lack of software that caused my father to by an AT&T 6300 (well really a Xerox 6064). One of the main reasons I now own a NEC Multispeed is that it is IBM compatible (even more compatible then the IBM Convertible) Another question is that of data storage. My apartment-mate owns a Tandy 100 portable computer with 32k, part of which is used for Ramdisk. Having seen the problems he has with space, I preffer large amounts of Ram (can you say gigobyte?) and Harddisks (300+Meg). Realizing that this is on the large side for a portable, I think it should have atleast 2 3 1/2" disk drives and the possibility for a 20 Meg hard disk. This would allow running large programs that are disk intensive without swapping disks. BTW: In either last weeeks, or the previous weeks Infoworld, there were several articles on portables (ie. Laptops). One of the things that was pointed out is that people are starting to want as much in a laptop as in a Desktop. (ie. 640k IBM compatible with 730 x 600 resolution, 20M hard disk, 2400 baud modem, 2 3 1/2" drives, 2+Meg above board memory, etc...) -- The Wumpus UUCP: {seismo,allegra,decvax}!rochester!ur-tut!aptr BITNET: aptrccss@uorvm Disclaimer: "Who? When? Me? It was the Booze!" - M. Binkley