What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.143 Comments
- Antialias, on 10/12/2007, -9/+81If you're going that route, this:
http://digg.com/hardware/CNET_Ten_Year_Old_Newton_Better_Than_Tablet_PC
Was posted almost an hour before the one you linked to. :P - gameboyhippo, on 10/12/2007, -23/+61Just because people don't dig your story doesn't mean you have to whine about it.
- tybris, on 10/12/2007, -15/+50"It's not my story. The other guy provided a better link that goes straight to the article AND he posted it 16 minutes earlier."
In that case, lets put it differently: We don't care. - dave_colorado, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28The battery life is what blows me away.
Newton: 30 hours
Origami: 2.5 hours
I've had a couple different newtons and palm pilots, but i've never found them particularly useful devices. I'd rather have a laptop or a pencil and engineering paper.
but hey, that's just me. - JustMatt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23we love you anyways
- RyeBrye, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Jobs single handedly KILLED the Newton. He hated it. Because of Jobs, the Newton is dead.
Jobs may do many nice things for Apple - but no amount of iPod will ever replace the bitterness that Newton users feel towards him for murdering the best PDA ever made. - XSforMe, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21From the article (last page):
"Although the Q1 won more points, the Newton was declared the overall winner of the battle and was crowned by CNET.co.uk in an emotional ceremony."
The exact reasons for the Q1 lost was mainly battery life. Even it got a score of 7 out of 10 possible points. - bob.os, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22You obviously never used a Newton, much less one of the MP2000 generation, which are still the best, most intuitive PDA ever created.
To this day, I can't think of a PDA that lets you write "Lunch Tuesday with Steve Jobs at Spagio" , draw a circle around it, tap it and have an appointment at Noon created and linked to the appropriate name and place cards.
The MP2000 could record stereo sound, print PostScript, connect over Ethernet, and I could go on. - coheedcollapse, on 10/12/2007, -11/+28Ok, stupid competition. Of course a freaking full color screen running mobile windows is going to run a ridiculous amount shorter than a 256 shade Black and white screen no matter what.
This is like comparing a widescreen gaming laptop with a full PC processor with a compact computer with a mobile processor.
My old Rolodex organizer runs for a countless amount of hours on one small watch battery and stores all of the numbers and schedules I'd ever need. That doesn't mean I don't need a laptop to have fun with. - billege, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21This has to be one of the most ***** articles I've read in a long time. The entire article goes on to show, point by point, how the Q1 is a better device. There are some pertanent points about the UI and how an OS can benefit from legacy-free custom code. Then at the very end, after the Newton has lost every comparison, they say (in a nutshell) "Well, the Newton has huge battery life and is cheap on Ebay, so it wins." What kind of crap call is that?
It's the kind of call you make when you want to write a headline backed by a substanceless BS story. - controlguy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Well, if the article read "Origami is better than 10-year old failed Newton", no one would have clicked the link to read through the 10 pages of advertisements served up by CNet.
These "comparisons" are beginning to get to me. A 3 page article is stretched to 10 or more and filled with pictures to make it look longer than it really is. Kind of like CPU comparisons.... how many charts do you need!?!?!? - dave_colorado, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21having owned a couple of revisions, i have to say your general "newton sucked" comment is pretty lame.
the device was easy to use, and gave you the exact features that you needed without the frills. in order to design something like that, you have to invest huge amounts of R&D. i think that apple came out with a phenomenal product.
like i said in my other post, i don't use handheld computers (cell phones, etc. excluded) but the newton was pretty amazing. - rasbill, on 10/12/2007, -10/+21did any of you people read the article, the q1 won every category accept battery time, but i mean its comparing a palm pilot to a laptop basically, so this story 1st off doesn't know who the winner is, if u win 9 out of 10 categories, who would u decide the winner is, article kinda pisses me off
- jgreene777, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17you assume it sucked because it didn't catch on. it didn't catch on because people didn't "get it" or see its potential. everyone who has ever reviewed the newton has said that it was way ahead of its time. put a phone in it today and it would sell a million.
- tejaycar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16Read the article. The newton was only 9 years old, and it won because it was less expensive TODAY and because it had better battery life. I guess we'll see this one next:
Gameboy beets PSP in head to head competition!!!
This is just stupid. - teamparadox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Yea this article was pretty weak. I was interested to see how the Newton was going to win against a new device but then when I found out it won because of battery life and the price of it on ebay i was pretty pissed off. What was the point of rounds if they totally ignored who won in their own points based system? Thats like a football game where Team X beats Team Y by 3 points but Team Y wins anyways because they pay their players less per year...
Of course a grey scaled LCD device is going to have better battery life then a color screen LCD. I would also expect the price of a 10 year old failed device to be alot cheaper then a brand new device on ebay...i mean come on. - fartingbob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11If the crappy old newton didnt win then they wouldnt have a story, there was only ever going to be 1 winner.
- Linkage155, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18Exactly, the Q1 is running an operating system you use on desktop these days, is the Newton running Mac OSX? Thought so.
Heck, my 25yr remote control has more batery life than my laptop, that doesn't make it better. - damber, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9
this bit of genius in the last page did it for me...
"Although the Q1 won more points, the Newton was declared the overall winner of the battle"
With that kind of logic who needs a comparison... - invader, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"Although the Q1 won more points, the Newton was declared the overall winner of the battle and was crowned by CNET.co.uk in an emotional ceremony."
oh.... so the Q1 won.. but they declare the Newton the winner anyway? hmm.. yeah.. of course it's cheaper! it doesn't do 1/100th of the things the Q1 can do!! the ONLY thing it had going for it was battery life.. important, yes, but that alone cannot make it better than the UMPC overall.. i was intrigued by reading their intoduction/conclusion on page one.. then when i read through it and found out that they made their conclusion in the introduction, without taking into consideration any of their "rounds" i came to my own conclusion: they are friggin idiots. - Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -20/+29Stupidest thing I've read all week.
- dave_colorado, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12what about tic-tack-toe? it works great with my engineering paper!
- peterthegreat4, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12yea you are right. theres no reason why and ultra portable machine should have less battery life than most laptops.
- kowgod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Yeah, this article is kind of bogus, considering at the end it says: "Although the Q1 won more points, the Newton was declared the overall winner of the battle and was crowned by CNET.co.uk in an emotional ceremony."
This was based off of battery life. So, you can have a machine that does next to nothing for 30 hours, or you can have a machine that does a lot of things for 2.5 hours. I'll pick the machine that can do something... - Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16The Samsung is cluttered with button?
it has 4 buttons and a directional pad. More than the Newton, but that ain't cluttered - synd, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Yeah, it's obvious you don't use a Mac.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -9/+16I'll trade an Apple Newton for an Oragami any day. That's the real test.
- Double-Z, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10It seems a little pointless to compare the two to me.
- misteryxz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"Although the Q1 won more points, the Newton was declared the overall winner of the battle"
They compare apples (ha-ha) and oranges, find that the Q1 is superior in most parts and finally decide to put so much weight on battery life that the Newton wins. Big deal.
Next week's editorial: "Programmable solar calculator beats MacBook Pro". Lots of mathematicians who don't use notebooks are expected to agree. - blamanj, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12OK, maybe the _original_ Newton sucked. But the later versions, especially the MP2K did not. It had a web browser, email, fax, database, word processor, spreadsheet, and more. I had an Ethernet card and a modem card for network or dialup access. The only things it didn't have that modern machines do is WiFi and a color screen. Oh, and bloated operating systems.
If you re-issued the Newton with a faster CPU, color, and WiFi and shrunk the form factor to about 75% of the original and cut the weight in half (all easily doable considering the age of the original technology), it would kick the crap out of most PDAs and UMPCs out there and probably cost under $400. - IQ70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Same problem with every MS or Apple story.
First people post how ridiculous MS is and how superior Apple is.
Then later it dawns on the readers that the story has no credential whatsoever and the discussion gets more sane. - pwhalen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I have a calculator from the 80's that gets well over 100 hours of battery life...does that beat the Newton? Lame story
- RuneSpells, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I'll toss in my 2 cents. Mainly a direct comparison of the two devices isn't that valid. They both are meant for vastly different applications. The Newton overall acts more like an advanced PDA. Able to do most of and or more of your standard data keeping needs or organization needs. The Q1 as far as i can see the entire UMPC standard is really meant for those who need access to a more desktop like device while on the road.
The Q1 is designed and built to run XP probably because it is the most common OS and the easiest for someone already familiar to sit down and start using the device without having to learn the quirks of a new OS. No it may not be a battery life winner. Yes it may be prone to old code hang ups and the defacto Such and such Program needs to be terminated messages. But for its specific audience its the best thing to use. The Newton's OS for its specific audience is well suited. Clean.. simple.. uncluttered. Exactly what you need to jot down notes.. or look up appointment information.
Overall i think both devices neither win nor lose. They are both triumphs of innovation and technology. - matt428, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Relax - it's an article, and hardly one aimed to justify existence. In a competitive industry like technology the competitive spirit is the single most driving force behind innovation, creativity, and quality. Are you saying you don't find it interesting to read about something ahead of its time? Regardless if it's from Apple, Microsoft, or Atari? (Of course, Apple in this case).
If you think this constitutes ridiculous and epic proportions, you've been very sheltered. - ratbear, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9That was a waste of 5 minutes that I will never get back. The Q1 just completely mops the floor in every category, and then gets "blown away" because a device with 1/50th the power and a grayscale display gets better battery life and is cheaper? It almost looks like the guy testing the Newton had full editorial control of the article, and kind of slipped the part about the Newton winning at the end before the other guy could give final approval.
- gcnaddict, on 10/12/2007, -13/+19Copying DesireCampbell's post:
""The Newton beats the Q1"?
What? How?
1. Design - they both look okay, neither one really looks that different from the other. Moreover, as long as it isn't pink and covered in ponies, I don't give a ***** what it looks like.
2. Screen - like a laptop, the screen is important here because you're stuck with it. This is an easy decision: Q1 = huge, hi-res, and colour. Newton = 256 shades of grey.
3. Applications - the Q1 runs everything any other windows pc runs. The Newton runs software specifically designed for it. Did they actually say the Newton won this? *****.
4. Usability - the Q1 does handwriting with the stylise (very, very well), stylise keyboard, thumb keyboard, speech-to-text - and the Newton does stylus handwriting.
5. IO and Synchronization - again, the Q1 does everything a regular PC would do, and the Newton, uh, IR-ports? This is looking bad for the Newton, let's move on...
6. Reliability - I can't believe they brought up viruses. Yes, I know there are no viruses for this custom, 10-year-old operating system. It's not because it's better than Windows, it's because no one cares about it. ***** off already. The newton wins here because it has custom OS and applications. They never crash because they're written well AND they're so simple there's nothing to go wrong. Q1 runs WinXP, so it's not going to crash every two-minutes but will, at some point crap out.
7. Networking capabilities - pretty much the same. The Q1 has quick, wider-range bluetooth, while the Newton has a 3-foot IR-port. Not much of a difference, but enough to give Q1 the win here.
8. Special powers - okay, so the Q1 has a kick stand, lame. But the Newton tooting its batteries as 'special'? *****, I'd rather have a rechargeable battery pack, than have to keep buying batteries.
Overall: The Newton squeaks ahead in one category. One. And it JUST BARELY won that one. The Q1 is better than the Newton. You can't possibly make the case the Newton's better."
Just to bring it to the attention of those who don't read the whole story.
Rate me down for my post (as I know most of you will anyway) but I figure that I'll just go ahead and give the story an "inaccurate" mark for its stupidity.
(I - synd, on 10/12/2007, -14/+20And that was the old Apple. I'd love to see what Ives and Jobs would come up with today.
- AZTriGuy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Is it just me, or do the recent articles that have been dugg from CNET all seem to be pretty much *****? Just remembering the dugg article earlier about the iPod addon for high-def video was highly inaccurate?
- Photar, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Oh yeah? My paper notebook lasts forever on a charge! OMG PWNS ALL PDAs and laptops!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6OK so let me get this straight, the Newton wins 2 or 3 categories because its OLD and doesn't have modern graphics and therefore had longer battery life because its not processing more graphics and the fact that its parts are 12 years old make it obvious it'll have a lower price. It appears to me they fixed the review. "Lets see what are all the strengths of it, longer batery life and low price and stability. Ok now lets create a comparison where we can use those in order to make it appear that it outperforms the modern equivalent."
Another thing that BSOD on that pic is misleading. The article says it locked up once or twice, and the BSOD like that is not an XP style BSOD so the image was faked to begin with.
Pretty retarded article IMO. - WiseWeasel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm a Mac-head, and I agree that Windows (or rather MS) will probably continue to kick Apple's ass (in market share and revenue, at least). This is due to the fact that MS is catering to the business market, which is larger than the consumer market, and that they license to commodity hardware manufacturers. Apple will most-likely continue to relegate itself to its niche vertical platform, with control over the whole device.
On the flip side, Apple customers will continue to enjoy a better computing experience, and for general computing (as opposed to dedicated tasks), will retain the advantage in productivity as more care has been put into the design of OS and application interfaces and integration. While it was a lame flamebait post, I can't say it's wrong. Lowest common denominator will usually come out ahead in the marketplace, even if it's not the best-suited for the job. - phill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I want an 8x10x.5" Newton with a color screen, WiFi, and Bluetooth. Oh, and running OS X.
- aleandro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Ok silly strory...nothing to see here
- brianjameskirk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I think the fight was rigged... I was SURE that the Q1 had the advantage.
- TinFoil209, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7AA Batteries SWEET!!!
- tgilber, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5A little biased, eh? The Q1's comments are always to the point and objective. The Newton's are always meandering, philosophical and dismissive.
Sure, the Newton doesn't have spyware. It doesn't have WiFi either. Hmm, I know which one I'd rather in a portable device.
And the Newton perspective recommends that a user would be better served by a dedicated multimedia device (or a dedicated gaming device, or a dedicated music device). So, I could carry around a Newton + GBA + Video iPod or just a Q1? Or even Newton + PSP instead of a Q1? Starts to defeat the purpose of an ultraportable in my book... - chewbaka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Exactly, the Q1 is running an operating system you use on desktop these days"
The question then is do you need an entire full-blown windows OS running on ur tablet ultra-portable? Especially if it comes at the cost of 2.5 hrs battery life? - unrealJEDI, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10completely agree
- reevolutn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7yea but really, which would you pick?
- jiggadigga, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Come on, the article actually says, and I quote, "Although the Q1 won more points, the Newton was declared the overall winner of the battle and was crowned by CNET.co.uk in an emotional ceremony." This is just a biased article written by a phychophantic Apple user who is trying to use CNET to get some cred.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 143 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is