Right. So, in addition to echoing Curt and Gerhard's comments, I need
to add another fact against thin mobiles: achieving adequate response
time in the user interface is tough enough without having to go through
multiple wireless layers and networks. UI speed seems to have
resurfaced as a significant issue in many areas of the 505's, as it was
a few years ago when colour displays were just introduced without
sufficiently quick drivers -- a sign that the industry still isn't
including user interface response time requirements in its specs.
If you want to see the "utopia" of thin mobiles, check out the North
American market. When I returned last month, I was surprised to find
that everything -- E-mail, IM (baaaad idea) is done through the
browser, a process so painful that when I called to ask how to use it,
the tech support rep said, "Oh, sure, I guess you're supposed to be
able to do that, but you're the first person to ask ... could you
please hold while I go get the manual?" It's utterly unusable for a
million and one reasons, and the uptake numbers prove that.
I realize nobody is saying putting an XWindows client on a phone is a
good idea, but as a heuristic, fat seems to be better than thin....
On Wednesday, September 24, 2003, at 09:01 AM, Chris Wooldridge wrote:
> An alternative route to achieve the same end goal is for the network to
> become the phone interface.
> The idea is that the handset is essentially a thin-client. The actual
Received on Wed Sep 24 07:35:05 2003