<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;screens&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:48:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>The Killer Feature I Would Design Into An Apple Tablet</title>
<dc:creator>Derek Kerton</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1603307765.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1603307765.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>To be clear, I've no influence in Cupertino, and the closest I've ever been to Steve Jobs was when I wore a black turtleneck skiing.&nbsp;But that said,&nbsp;there were a few developments at CES that got me thinking about a killer feature for a tablet. So here are the specific three developments from CES that stood out to me, and how I'd combine them in a disruptive tablet.
</p><p>
First, small, portable computing platforms were hot. No surprise to anyone, but Netbooks were all over the show, in<a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9143519/Image_gallery_Hottest_laptops_and_netbooks_of_CES"> creative new formats</a>, layouts, OSes, and component make-ups. This sector has already proven to be a consumer favorite, and the OEMs are responding in force. Tablets, slates, and new formats were being shown by a variety of vendors hoping to get the jump on Apple, notably Microsoft in what could&nbsp;be described as an anemic Keynote by Ballmer.
</p><p>
Second, <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=3710&#038;p=4">e-Readers were exploding</a> out of the booths. There were new e-Readers on display from Huawei, Spring Design, Plastic Logic, Entourage eDGe and many more. Many analysts predict growth in the e-Reader sector, largely predicated on the notion that the readers use crystal clear e-ink screens, which greatly extend battery life, are easier on the eyes, and can be read indoors or out. Devices with standard LCD screens like Netbooks or iPhones&nbsp;churn through batteries too quickly to pose a direct threat to e-Readers. Thus, for now, this sector is seen as &quot;protected&quot; from the cheaper or more versatile Smartphones, Netbooks and tablets.</p><p>Third, there was an immense amount of <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9143519/Image_gallery_Hottest_laptops_and_netbooks_of_CES">innovation in screen configurations</a> across Netbooks, TVs, laptops, etc. We saw two-screen laptops, touchscreens, tablets, double screen e-Readers, MEMS displays from Qualcomm, and more. Among the cool new screen technologies was one from PixelQi (<a href="http://gigaom.com/2010/01/08/ces-highlights-new-mobile-concepts-and-more/">discussed at GigaOm</a>). The PixelQi (pronounced Pixel Chee) screen can operate in two modes: one which is like a standard backlit LCD laptop screen, and a second that closely resembles the e-ink of the Kindle. In this high-resolution, black-on-white mode, power consumption is cut to ~1/3 of a regular laptop screen. This mode also is easier on the eyes, and can be read easily in sunlight.  PixelQi technology is cool in and of itself, since, as processors get more efficient, screens are becoming a relatively larger portion of the power budget - any savings here could have a dramatic impact on battery life. One could switch a laptop into &quot;ink mode&quot; and extend battery life at the expense of color.
</p><p>
I think you see where I'm going. If I were Jobs, I'd&nbsp;launch a tablet that used the iPhone OS, had access to the app store, iTunes, Safari browser...AND had an 8-10&quot; dual-mode screen. Such a tablet could suck the air out of the room for e-reader makers. A company like Apple has the clout to get access to a wide range of book content, including the NYT bestseller lists. If so, Apple's tablet could quickly end&nbsp;the dedicated reader era. Consider a tablet that offers the value proposition of an e-Reader, a Netbook,&nbsp;GPS,&nbsp;and 100k apps. That's the kind of product that could justify a price premium over a $300 Netbook or Reader.</p><p>Either way, I see the dedicated reader market&nbsp;fading in the future, much <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050202/1137247_F.shtml">as PDAs did</a>. Not that they're not in demand, but the dedicated Readers will evolve and be subsumed&nbsp;into&nbsp;general-purpose&nbsp;tablets, or will&nbsp;be beaten by tablets that can do more. If it's not Apple&nbsp;or PixelQi next month, it's going to be somebody else within a year. Either way,&nbsp;buyers&nbsp;win: we're all going to benefit from&nbsp;the active&nbsp;innovation in the screen/display category, and more functional devices with better battery life.</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1603307765.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1603307765.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100114/1603307765.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>e-Reader,-we-hardly-knew-ye</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100114/1603307765</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 9 Jan 2009 05:54:19 PST</pubDate>
<title>It's Not A Television, It's Just Another Screen</title>
<dc:creator>Carlo Longino</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090107/0951453314.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090107/0951453314.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A popular theme at this year's Consumer Electronics Show is <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111603391052641-email.html" target="_new">merging the internet with the television</a>. As the WSJ reports, a number of companies have announced products that aim to bring net content into the living room: some LG televisions will be able to directly access Netflix's on-demand service. Intel and Yahoo want to put widgets in TVs, and so on. This isn't a new trend, but it's one that is definitely gathering pace. Just as computer screens are becoming <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20081117/0118352846.shtml">popular places</a> for television content, TV screens are quickly becoming destinations for internet content, thanks to the likes of Netflix and the Xbox, the Nintendo Wii, Apple TV and other products. That means that viewers are moving more and more towards an internet-like viewing experience, one in which they access the content of their choice when they want it, not according to the scheduling department of a TV network.
<br /><br />
So will the further spread of internet content to people's living rooms hasten <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20070806/160811.shtml">the demise</a> of the TV channel? This is an idea that we've been kicking around <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050603/0231201_F.shtml">for a few years now</a>, that TV networks should <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20051208/1858206.shtml">unbundle their shows</a> and move away from their schedule-focused format. In short, they need to stop thinking of themselves as broadcasters, and instead as content distributors, adapting their distribution networks to changing technologies and their viewers' changing demands. Certainly DVRs are already doing this, and some cable companies are taking the steps that TV networks won't by creating remote DVRs. But instead of embracing these developments and working to successfully monetize them, networks simply just try to <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080804/1218551884.shtml">shut them down</a>. They must realize that television sets are nothing more than another screen for many types of content, not just on-ramps to network TV schedules. As it becomes easier for viewers to access internet content on their TVs, this lesson should become much clearer.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090107/0951453314.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090107/0951453314.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090107/0951453314.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>more-screen-less-keyboard</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090107/0951453314</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 20:05:09 PST</pubDate>
<title>Qualcomm Offering Up A BYO Screen Internet Terminal For Developing Nations</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/0123552819.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/0123552819.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Over the years, there have been many different attempts to bring back the old school terminal-mainframe computing paradigm with various internet terminals, but for the most part, they've failed to catch on.  More recently, with the growth of various internet application suites, the concept is starting to seem a bit more viable, and the rise of super cheap "netbooks" have taken advantage of that.  Qualcomm is apparently looking to take this a step further, with an attempt to basically turn <a href="http://tech.yahoo.com/news/afp/20081113/tc_afp/usittelecominternetcompanyqualcomm_081113011721" target="_new">any screen into an internet terminal using 3G connections in developing countries</a>.  
<br /><br />
Qualcomm, obviously, makes money wherever there's more mobile data usage, so it has every incentive to create new ways to get more people online.  The article is a bit short on details, but it sounds like Qualcomm will be offering up a small device that can easily connect to certain televisions or computer monitors, and connect them to the internet.  The idea is that someone with one of these devices can turn an existing screen into an internet terminal, without having to go purchase a computer or netbook or whatever.  As an idea, it's intriguing, but as with all of these things, it's the execution that really matters.  And, my guess is that the folks who already have screens that would work with such a device, are more likely to already have other means of internet access already.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/0123552819.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/0123552819.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/0123552819.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>interesting-ideas</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081113/0123552819</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>