From: ben mccorkle (mccorkle.12_at_osu.edu)
Date: Wed Feb 12 2003 - 16:19:21 PST
all--
i'm currently making my way through donald norman's book _the invisible
computer_ (norman's known in academia for his work in
pshychology/design/interface research, and in the "real" world for his R&D
efforts at HP and apple). i thought his mixed remarks on the newton were
rather...ahem...interesting:
"One of the early PDAs, Apple's Newton, failed just after its introduction.
Rightfully so. Its designers did not understand how it was to be used.
They failed to provide utility to real people doing real work. Instead, the
Newton provided a new form of general-purpose computer. It promised too
much and delivered too little; however, the Newton did show the utility of
small devices. The Newton made an excellent displayfor reference work such
as maintenance manuals, city guides, and, in specialized markets, farm and
insurance information. This is a legacy that should not be forgotten; it
can still lead to a valuable product." (110)
i'm curious as to how norman's assessment sits with the list; does the
newton fail in its attempts to do "everything"? would a stripped-down,
task-specific appliance make more sense to "real" people? do the members of
newtontalk find these green bricks useful mainly because of the pleasures
associated with tinkering and resurrecting? hey, i'm just asking...
ben mccorkle
-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries List FAQ/Etiquette/Terms: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 19 2003 - 13:30:01 PST