Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 00:39 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Hardware, Embedded Systems "Efforts are split between models in which keyboards detach from screens, ones in which the keys remain attached but can be hidden behind displays, and traditional fixed clamshell designs." None of these really float my boat. They work with clunky connectors and weird hinges, while I'd much rather have Surface's nice magnetic connection. On top of that, Surface just looks way better than this stuff. Pretty clear why Microsoft felt the need to make their own hardware.
Permalink for comment 533747
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Why so different
by ndrw on Tue 4th Sep 2012 02:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why so different"
ndrw
Member since:
2009-06-30

I see how this could be useful and I agree with you on principle.

It is just that adding a full-fledged input device and using it only as a secondary input method isn't going to be particularly efficient (cost, power, weight, image quality etc). If I had one, I'd like to make a better use of it.

BTW, most of your use cases would be served rather well by replacing a touchpad in your laptop with an inductive tablet sensor. We could go further and make the whole keyboard one big touchpad/tablet (I wonder if that's what Touch Cover in Microsoft's Surface is going to be).

Reply Parent Score: 2