Why do they bother to still design tablets with the CPU/GPU on board? When I think about the future of windows with windows 8 I think about tablets being heavier to run the x86 architecture and I wonder why not just use something like intels widi and transmit only the picture to a tablet and have a server plugged in doing all the processing, maybe even running another instance or switchable session of the OS attached to a standard desktop display/keyboard mouse. The tablet would of course still need a processor but only to process a ready to go image, audio and to interpret touch inputs and transmit them to the server. This would allow for larger batteries and be much more cost effective in the long run.
Of course we will still need today's style for outside the home/office but like the desktop there is still a market for the LAN only machines.
Maybe this is already available and someone can point me to where I can buy it now! :x
You want the cloud? Not ready yet. Until then, splashtop will have to do. Also, botnet.
jdeoxys said:
You want the cloud? Not ready yet. Until then, splashtop will have to do. Also, botnet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, nothing over the internet. I'm simply talking about a wireless display with a battery but one that can transmit touch inputs. Not sure how else to put it but if you have seen the wireless transmitter and receivers for HDMI, similar to this.
Does anyone see where I'm going with this? Windows 8 is touch screen but the best I could find that are desktop-like is the dell ST2220T which only has 2 touch points that is not cetified for windows 8 which I believe accepts up to 4.
Next I looked at tablets and there are a few budget(if you can call $500 with a small display, bad/slow graphics card and little storage budget) that look promising but could easily have 100 hardware issues that would drive me nuts and then theres the name brand stuff like samsungs $1,000 pc tablets which still suffer from built in gpu's that suck.
My idea would simply be the cost of a screen and battery if you already own a desktop with say, intel widi (wireless display) and some sort of input receiver to receive the touch commands from the tablet display. The performance would be virtually unlimited!
Are you basically talking about a device that connects through your local network to a transmitting PC running an OS of your choosing? Sort of like a portable monitor that doubles as a touchscreen?
Constant wifi or similar connection would drain the battery as well. Also, that would require a whole separate computer to run the system itself (if you're doing it at home), or a fast, VERY low latency broadband connection to a cloud (so forget about the device being very cheap just because you have to somehow pay for the server-side as well). Otherwise you'd be struggling with laggy UI which is the exact opposite of what everyone wants.
So... not for a few more years... or decades
Tristanlogd said:
Are you basically talking about a device that connects through your local network to a transmitting PC running an OS of your choosing? Sort of like a portable monitor that doubles as a touchscreen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like a portable monitor with touchscreen that transmits touch inputs/commands wirelessly back to the desktop just like a mouse.
I don't think transmitting through networks is a good idea and thats why I mentioned the Intel WIDI wireless display technology that is already in most new Inte'ls so all we would really need to change on the PC side is a customized wireless receiver for the touch inputs.
Hell, I'm thinking about calling a friend who is an EE and getting something made if nobody else is...lol.
aard said:
Constant wifi or similar connection would drain the battery as well. Also, that would require a whole separate computer to run the system itself (if you're doing it at home), or a fast, VERY low latency broadband connection to a cloud (so forget about the device being very cheap just because you have to somehow pay for the server-side as well). Otherwise you'd be struggling with laggy UI which is the exact opposite of what everyone wants.
So... not for a few more years... or decades
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eh the technology is here with http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/intel-wireless-display.html
Using wifi isn't efficient, but tablets use most of their energy on the display and processing. Since all you would be doing is signal processing vs actual computation @ the tablet end you would use considerably less juice. Like Half.
You are talking direct wireless connection from tablet to monitor, not going through a wireless router or connection? Interesting idea, but why not just go through a wireless connection? Wouldn't this also kind of tether you to your pc? Splashtop or Logmein allows you to do this anywhere.
Tristanlogd said:
You are talking direct wireless connection from tablet to monitor, not going through a wireless router or connection? Interesting idea, but why not just go through a wireless connection? Wouldn't this also kind of tether you to your pc? Splashtop or Logmein allows you to do this anywhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All I'm talking about is a PC or laptop with a second display thats wireless. Then we call it a tablet because it has a touch screen that sends signals back to the PC or laptop to move the mouse or rather gestures. Not cloud computing, I have done this and it's terrible. Cloud is basically remote desktop which is choppy and worse then current tablets. What I'm talking about would make the performance increase as Intel claims virtually no latency with WIDI and even 5 milliseconds would be hard to notice considering how laggy android is as it's basically a virtual machine.
Hereis a clip I just found, not sure if it's available yet but:
Now ASUS brings another solution to the table, the WiCast, which can be connected to any computer and any television and promises latency-free 1080p video and audio.
Related
Ok, I've been thinking about a veritable carputer for years and all this development in tablet PC's has me interested. In particular I've been keeping an eye out for a ~5" tablet with GPS, bluetooth, and support for Verizon EV-DO. I want to directly wire it to a 5V connection without the Li-ion battery (140F parked car) and rig up a mounting solution that enables me to store the bugger in the 5.25" stereo DIN when not in use, and pop out and up when in use. I've always hated the idea of visible screens in parked cars because it's worse than a "Steal Me sticker" such as a Kicker, Infinity, or Kenwood sticker, so the idea of a tablet that's as wide as a CD player is quite nifty to me. Now, the big kicker for this is I need it to run Garmin Mobile XT which isn't supported by Android, and the only device that fits the bill that's scheduled for relatively soon release is the Dell Streak, and it runs on Android. I also want to use it to stream FLAC's from my 70lb desktop at home via Verizon's enormous EV-DO network to the car, rather than having to keep a hard disk in the car/subject it to egg-cooking temperatures.
Do y'all think it'd be possible to get WinMo running on such a device? If not, are there any Android navigation softwares that DO NOT require a data connection to obtain map data; I kick it and work in enough middle o' nowhere spots without a 3G connection, and those are the places I need GPS the most. I really like Garmin Mobile XT because it occupies a bit over 1GB of maps for the contigious 48 + Canada on my microSD.
Any suggestions would be epicly appreciated.
You should use copilot live. It's as good if not better than garmin. And cheap.
CoPilot is useless in rural North America.
I already have a CarPC running Windows 7. I would kill to have Google Navigation running on it (through an android emulator or something, but with working GPS). Is this possible with the dev kit alone, or do they block the Maps.apk and use of a USB GPS.
from personal experience (i have a car-pc, and the verizon mifi), if you really love music, lol , i'd stay away from streaming from your home.
your idea was intially my intention, wen i got into the carpc project. (stream form my server's at home)
i'd recommend storing the content locally. say a 32gb sd card?
Streaming from last.fm or slacker radio works very well.
Is those on my nexus when the pc decides to act up and not start..
After spending the last 3 months waiting patiently, I'm dismayed to hear that the Surface Pro won't have GPS. Does anyone know if there is a way Windows 8 could use the GPS signal of a Windows Phone 8 via wifi or bluetooth?
It seems ridiculous to me that I would buy a portable computer and then not be able to use accurate location based services, but I have no problem with the idea of tethering it to my phone for 4G services, so GPS could easily be the same. Similarly, the transfer of NFC data via a WP8 would be cool too.
foaf said:
After spending the last 3 months waiting patiently, I'm dismayed to hear that the Surface Pro won't have GPS. Does anyone know if there is a way Windows 8 could use the GPS signal of a Windows Phone 8 via wifi or bluetooth?
It seems ridiculous to me that I would buy a portable computer and then not be able to use accurate location based services, but I have no problem with the idea of tethering it to my phone for 4G services, so GPS could easily be the same. Similarly, the transfer of NFC data via a WP8 would be cool too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but it won't happen. GPS tethering requires the Bluetooth serial port profile which will not be available in the WP8 Bluetooth stack. I pre-ordered my Surface RT and bought a 3G+GPS usb stick for $28 for those rare occasions that I would need a giant navigation device
With WP8 now supporting the Object Push profile, you could transfer data through Bluetooth between each device. Though definitely not as cool as NFC.
It wouldn't be *too* hard to write a virtual GPS driver that takes data, perhaps in NMEA format or similar, over WiFi or other network transport. You could then write a smartphone app that would connect to the PC (Surface or otherwise) over the network and send the smartphone's GPS info. It would be hell on the phone's battery, but for short periods or if plugged in it would work fine.
Actually, I'd be somewhat surprised if such things don't already exist. There are certainly PC apps that handle GPS data over a network connection, and there are GPS drivers for x86/x64 Windows (including Win7, which means they will also work on Win8 including Surface Pro). Whether there yet exists such a "network GPS" driver, I can't say at this time, but it wouldn't be hard to write one.
Now, getting something like that on Surface RT, or any other Windows RT device... that would take some hacking. We do that here, of course, but it won't be nearly as easy; I can't imagine that Windows RT is going to be easygoing about loading third-party drivers (considering that it doesn't even want to run third-party executables).
GoodDayToDie said:
It wouldn't be *too* hard to write a virtual GPS driver that takes data, perhaps in NMEA format or similar, over WiFi or other network transport. You could then write a smartphone app that would connect to the PC (Surface or otherwise) over the network and send the smartphone's GPS info. It would be hell on the phone's battery, but for short periods or if plugged in it would work fine.
Actually, I'd be somewhat surprised if such things don't already exist. There are certainly PC apps that handle GPS data over a network connection, and there are GPS drivers for x86/x64 Windows (including Win7, which means they will also work on Win8 including Surface Pro). Whether there yet exists such a "network GPS" driver, I can't say at this time, but it wouldn't be hard to write one.
Now, getting something like that on Surface RT, or any other Windows RT device... that would take some hacking. We do that here, of course, but it won't be nearly as easy; I can't imagine that Windows RT is going to be easygoing about loading third-party drivers (considering that it doesn't even want to run third-party executables).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that would only work where there's wifi. Won't help much where there's no signal. I wouldn't be surprised if a bluetooth - external GPS option doesn't pop up down the road. I was also disappointed to hear that there was no GPS in the Surface, as so many tablet/Ipad apps utilize location data now, which the Surface will not be able to do.
I want to design a program that will run on an Android Mini PC. It'll be connected to any monitor so that when the monitor is turned on, it'll power up the android mini pc via USB (monitor will be required to have USB port) and then the program will start automatically and display on the monitor.
The program itself is a visual acuity chart (like at your eye doctor's office). So it will run all day as you use an RF remote to flip through the images.
Sound easy? I'm trying to figure out if Android or Raspberry Pi would be best for this.
Thanks
Pretty cool idea. The only thing I can think of is Android on the Android sticks allows a customizable boot animation which would be cool to create your own for marketing. The Android sticks are also faster and boot quicker so less wait.
You can also remote desktop into a more powerful machine to offload some work. Essentially have a server as the mainframe.
Android will also require you program it to run at startup. I'm not sure how you do this without a 3rd party app, but I know some apps that load on startup.
Both units are tiny and the android sticks include wifi and there are some Bluetooth models. The Raspberry Pi has neither. And boots slower and isn't powerful.
I think its an easy choice.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Premium HD app
player911 said:
Android will also require you program it to run at startup. I'm not sure how you do this without a 3rd party app, but I know some apps that load on startup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, so it would at least be possible but I'd need some intricate coding and extra apps which is ok with me. thanks
You need to look at the power requirements of the Android Mini PC as well. Often they draw more power than is available through TV and monitor USB ports. You might get enough power to run the mini PC but if you have wifi, wireless keyboard/mouse, bluetooth and other devices the power draw might exceed the output of the monitor. This is something I am interested in as well as I am trying to resolve the power on/off problem on these mini PCs. The probox has a remote with a power button but I've heard the remote has problems with distances more than 1M.
strongsad said:
You need to look at the power requirements of the Android Mini PC as well. Often they draw more power than is available through TV and monitor USB ports. You might get enough power to run the mini PC but if you have wifi, wireless keyboard/mouse, bluetooth and other devices the power draw might exceed the output of the monitor. This is something I am interested in as well as I am trying to resolve the power on/off problem on these mini PCs. The probox has a remote with a power button but I've heard the remote has problems with distances more than 1M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I won't need BT, wifi, or really anything. I need to find someone that thinks he can tackle this project. Any good places to hire someone for this type of work?
apparker said:
I won't need BT, wifi, or really anything. I need to find someone that thinks he can tackle this project. Any good places to hire someone for this type of work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't you use tasker or locale or something similar to run an app on startup? Just an idea...
Hi,
I did not see any topic about mouse for the surface rt.
Well, my question is which mouse can i use on my rt without use the USB port.
I know, the microsoft mouse, but 70 euros for this tactical mouse... i think it's a bit expensive for it. does exist any alternantive?
well thank's for any answer
Any standard bluetooth mouse, any standard USB mouse.
Or basically 99.9% of modern mice.
Only reason there is no topic is because it is pretty obvious that x mouse will work. There is nothing special about how windows RT handles mice. Only thing to watch out for are additional device drivers if your mouse has macro buttons etc, but even my RAT5 works fine in standard USB mode, I just dont get to replrogram the macros. WiFi mice are out of the window (and damn rare) because they require special device drivers which you cant install on the RT. Serial mice are also out the window. PS/2 mice can be used with USB adaptors (as can keyboards). Wireless mice with the little USB recievers are fine, bluetooth mice are fine, regular wired USB mice are fine.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Any standard bluetooth mouse, any standard USB mouse.
Or basically 99.9% of modern mice.
Only reason there is no topic is because it is pretty obvious that x mouse will work. There is nothing special about how windows RT handles mice. Only thing to watch out for are additional device drivers if your mouse has macro buttons etc, but even my RAT5 works fine in standard USB mode, I just dont get to replrogram the macros. WiFi mice are out of the window (and damn rare) because they require special device drivers which you cant install on the RT. Serial mice are also out the window. PS/2 mice can be used with USB adaptors (as can keyboards). Wireless mice with the little USB recievers are fine, bluetooth mice are fine, regular wired USB mice are fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thank's for you answer but you don't answer to my question, maybe i dont explain my problem.
i search a wireless mouse to use without any receiver. The official mouse use the Bluetooth, and i did not know that, but now it's ok and i can search a bluethooth mouse ^^
i know that all usb mouse work fine, i use it at the moment ^^
is the bluetooth burn the battery ?
Bluetooth is specifically meant to utilise little power. It will impact your battery life but it shouldn't be massively so. WiFi uses far far more energy, screen brightness would also make a bigger difference to battery life than whether bluetooth is on or off I reckon.
If you want to know how much difference it will make, perhaps see if you can get your phone to pair with the RT and then mess about from there. It wont be a completely realistic test as there will be more data transfer between a mouse (which always sends some data even when not moving, albeit at a slower rate) than a phone which is paired but not doing anything.
You can buy mice which use Bluetooth 4.0, off the top of my head I dont know if the surface RT supports 4.0, if it does I would try to find a 4.0 mouse as there are additional energy savings in 4.0 if you are really concerned.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Bluetooth is specifically meant to utilise little power. It will impact your battery life but it shouldn't be massively so. WiFi uses far far more energy, screen brightness would also make a bigger difference to battery life than whether bluetooth is on or off I reckon.
If you want to know how much difference it will make, perhaps see if you can get your phone to pair with the RT and then mess about from there. It wont be a completely realistic test as there will be more data transfer between a mouse (which always sends some data even when not moving, albeit at a slower rate) than a phone which is paired but not doing anything.
You can buy mice which use Bluetooth 4.0, off the top of my head I dont know if the surface RT supports 4.0, if it does I would try to find a 4.0 mouse as there are additional energy savings in 4.0 if you are really concerned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank's for this helpfull answer.
Well, im not really focus on the battery life of my surface RT, but, i don't want to loose of its advantage : battery life.
So well, now it's ok, i will see to buy a Bluetooth mouse.
I see the logitech around 40 euros and a microsoft around 25 euros. The price is better, and it seems to be more friendly user, than this tactical mouse...
Hey everyone just got my shield I'm very pleasantly surprised by the quality of the gamepad. So I've run into an issue when I try to stream certain games that are supposed to be supported. What will happen is I choose a game i.e borderlands 2 and my computer goes to load but it gets stuck on a screen with the shield logo and the mouse will show loading but nothing will happen however when I try to stream through steam everything works just fine thank you guys in advance for helping out
ApexoftheVortex said:
Hey everyone just got my shield I'm very pleasantly surprised by the quality of the gamepad. So I've run into an issue when I try to stream certain games that are supposed to be supported. What will happen is I choose a game i.e borderlands 2 and my computer goes to load but it gets stuck on a screen with the shield logo and the mouse will show loading but nothing will happen however when I try to stream through steam everything works just fine thank you guys in advance for helping out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's hard to understand what you are talking about here. If you can load through steam big picture, and it works more reliably, then just stick to using that. The individually supported games (outside of big picture mode) are a convenience in case you aren't logged in to steam, but ultimately, using Steam Big Picture on this is quick and works VERY well. Of course, there are bugs and kinks, but for BETA software, it's impressive. Occasionally, I find that the GeForce experience application will "lose" the streaming feature, and requires a computer reboot.
Also, I find it best to launch the PC streaming while in a strong wireless network environment (i.e., closer to your router), then move to a distance farther away. Launching and getting the initial sync seems to be very dependent on network strength initially...once launched, the setup seems to handle streaming glitches better.
For example, I generally have a hard time launching from my 3rd story bedroom so I move downstairs, launch, then head back up stairs and it works great. I have no idea why I can stream reliably upstairs, but often have trouble getting streaming to launch initially!
Thanks for taking time to help you seem to be picking up what I'm putting down I tried again the other day and it worked OK, the entire streaming seems a little inconsistent at times. Just out of curiosity would it be significantly more stable if the geforce PC was connected through a hard wire?
P.S I just got VPN working can't wait to try it out
ApexoftheVortex said:
Thanks for taking time to help you seem to be picking up what I'm putting down I tried again the other day and it worked OK, the entire streaming seems a little inconsistent at times. Just out of curiosity would it be significantly more stable if the geforce PC was connected through a hard wire?
P.S I just got VPN working can't wait to try it out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Way more reliable to use an ethernet cable yes. I personally believe a person should always attempt to go ethernet first and only use WiFi for devices which are by their nature portable or if there is no way to practically route a cable there. My desktop is shamefully on wifi as I would have to run the cable through the dining room, hall, up some stairs, across a hallway and across my room. Going through walls is not so much an option in a house thought to be 150 to 200 years old, however I do have thin walls so get a great WiFi signal at least.
WiFi has significantly higher latency than a hardwired ethernet cable.
Only advantage of wifi really is the lack of a cable. Makes things quite straightforward.
every time i try to stream it kicks me off the game shortly after it starts. i have the newest update and i have the newest drivers and steam beta, i even tried the optimus fix just in case. but games just won't stay connected. my pc is hardwired(1gbps). i'm thinking its my router which is saddening because it works nearly flawless for everything else in my house(the router). its N300 and gbps wired but its not 5ghz..