Search results for 'app:weblogs' matching tags 'My Opinion', 'General', and 'Hardware'

An article on touchscreens..

mikehall — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 06:00:00 GMT

It brings up some interesting points:

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9223361/The_hidden_dangers_of_touchscreens?taxonomyId=15&pageNumber=1

I wouldn’t say that they were ‘hidden’ dangers though. maybe some just not completely obvious.

What is obvious is that with a reach of around 60cms, my dual screens are 20cms out of reach. They have to be back as far as they are to save me having to put stress on my neck as I glance from one to the other. I set text at 120% to save eyestrain. If they were touch screens, I would have to push in the keyboard tray and slide the chair forward. Why would I want to do that when I have two perfectly capable input devices nicely placed , bridging the gap?

I will not be paying out for touch screens unless my standard LCDs break and nothing else is available, and for the reasons above, I will not be using the touch facility anyway.

While I was messing with the laptop and a variety of lap desks and cooling bases, I noticed that when the machine was on my lap, the weight of the lid had a tendency to start a turning motion, the pivot point being the hinges. With both hands on the wrist rest, you would never notice anything untoward. Even if a hand is removed to use a mouse, the mouse adds no extra pressure to the screen hinges. Touching the screen changes the game, and one hand has to hold down the base.

I know one or two people who have touch screen machines, laptop and integrated desktop, but they are not used as touch screens. I don’t think that they know what to do with them, how to set them up, or ostensibly have any interest in the function.

Phones, tablets and e-readers are different. They have to be used up close and personal, in front of the area where a keyboard and mouse would be. One is left with no choice but to swipe, wipe and tap.

In the end, users will adopt an input method which works best for the machine in use. Touch will be a part..

‘Tiny’ will kill some of us..

mikehall — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 05:00:00 GMT

It was the usual cold Ontario kind of day, snow on the ground, freezing rain, sub-zero temperatures, the kind of day where one wraps up warm. I was in the elevator, en route to the Jeep in the underground parking lot. The elevator stopped on the forth floor, and a person alighted, full weather gear and face half covered.

Within a split second of entering, the person’s woolly glove clad hands started typing feverishly on a cellphone keyboard so small that I couldn’t even see it. So I came out with a well used cliché and got no response. I remarked on the ability to wear thick woolly gloves while typing, and got an “oh yes.. ha-ha”, and then it was back to typing. At the ground floor, the door opened, I said “We’re here” and got the same reply as before ““oh yes.. ha-ha”.

What a way to start the day! What is it that people have to type messages on cellphones as soon as they get out of the door in the morning? And how do they see what they are typing? I have problems seeing a number on tiny cellphone screens, let alone the numbers and letters on the keypad.

So, when I read that tablets are the future, laptops are on the way out and the desktop is dead, I shudder and say to myself “Not in my humble abode, they are not”.

I struggle to type on a full size 104 key keyboard, really struggle on an 88 key laptop keyboard, and wouldn’t type at all if I had to use a tiny onscreen keyboard and a touch pen. It would be as tedious as making labels with a handheld Dymo machine.

I have two 19” widescreen LG’s in front of me and there is not enough room. Laptop screens are too small for my liking and require much scrolling to surf the average web page, and laptops with 17” screens are not exactly portable in the true spirit of ‘portable’. I tried out a Sony Netbook for a day, but it was so small that, if I was distracted, I struggled to find it again, but at least it had a keyboard which raised its profile.

Tiny is all very well, and the technology is amazing, but it is not for everybody. Eighteen months from now, I will hit 60. My fingers are becoming arthritic, and I need a magnifier to read small stuff. What use will a tablet be to me or to the millions just like me. And I can’t walk far enough to make it worth putting a computer in my pocket, and don’t like over-sized pockets anyway.

A message to all of you tablet makers, typed on a full size keyboard and a screen I can see:

You are not going to win me over. If I had enough disposable cash, I would get one for bragging rights maybe, but as a day to day computer, my desktop is and will always be anything but dead, and my cellphone will be used for voice calls, the type where people on the other end hear me.

LCD monitor lifespan

mikehall — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 05:00:00 GMT

During 2006, I bought a 19” 4:3 LCD Monitor. It was bright, clear and offered more real estate than a 19” CRT type. It took up less room on the desk and generated less heat into the atmosphere too.

It replaced a seven year old 17” CRT which incidentally still works. It is not as bright as it once was, and it is maybe slightly fuzzy, but it still works and is still usable. This is more than can be said for the $300 LCD. It started to flicker during 2009, then displayed only 50% of the entire view, finally giving out completely. It goes without saying that the warranty came to an end only weeks before the final demise.

I tried to get it repaired, but four attempts failed. My $300 monitor became a rather ungainly doorstop. Initially, I replaced it with an LG 18” CRT bought for $30 out of the local classifieds. I must admit, for a monitor made in 1999, the LG CRT was/is really good. Very good brightness, very good clarity, not a flat screen, but for the price, who cares.

So how long does an LCD monitor last? Maybe forever. How long does the backlight last? Nothing like forever. Maybe two years, maybe three. Brightness falls off after this period although some claim 5 + years. Laptop LCDs seem to last maybe 6 years, but I suspect that this is because they are not always running at maximum brightness and tend not to be lefty on like desktop PC’s.

Repair or replace..

Is an aging laptop worth the cost of replacing the screen? I don’t think so because the screen isn’t the only part of the system that is showing its age.

The hard drive will be small and will almost always start to fail due to continued exposure to heat after a few years.
The CD/DVD drive laser will also deteriorate over a period of maybe 4 years. Burning will be a no no and reading disks will become more difficult.
The processor will be an early, low performance unit

I would imagine that most laptops which have been in for hardware repairs come out with refurbished parts fitted. A new screen for a laptop can cost in excess of $300 depending upon size, so if a repairer tells you that the overall repair is less than that, you have paid for refurbished parts. Will they last as well as the originals? I wouldn’t like to say.

I am not a great believer in putting too much cash into an aging computer. It is better to bite the bullet and buy a new one.

This is certainly the case with desktop monitors which is why I buy cheap LCD monitors for my own use. I also keep a spare CRT just in case one of the LCD pairing goes down for good, such is my reliance on a dual screen setup these days.