<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Prototypically Speaking - The Software and Requirements Prototyping Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://softwareprototyping.net/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://softwareprototyping.net</link>
	<description>Thoughts on the world of software requirements prototyping and effective design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:04:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on The iPad As Quorn by Jason Cohen</title>
		<link>http://softwareprototyping.net/2010/01/28/the-ipad-as-quorn/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Cohen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:04:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://softwareprototyping.net/?p=253#comment-59</guid>
		<description>Great post, I completely agree.

If it does replace anything it could be a netbook, since both are designed for lightweight-work plus full entertainment, and the iPad is presumably similar for the former but better (or at least flashier and more fun) at the latter.

But yes, it&#039;s a new breed of tech.  We&#039;re so quick to categorize things when really they are brand new types of thing!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, I completely agree.</p>
<p>If it does replace anything it could be a netbook, since both are designed for lightweight-work plus full entertainment, and the iPad is presumably similar for the former but better (or at least flashier and more fun) at the latter.</p>
<p>But yes, it&#8217;s a new breed of tech.  We&#8217;re so quick to categorize things when really they are brand new types of thing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The iPad As Quorn by dave</title>
		<link>http://softwareprototyping.net/2010/01/28/the-ipad-as-quorn/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 10:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://softwareprototyping.net/?p=253#comment-58</guid>
		<description>Hmm, interesting thoughts.

think you may be misrepresenting history a little as these landmark models were hardly &#039;irrelevant&#039; - iPods entered a dull and uninnovative market - indeed the devices on the market were aptly described as &quot;big and clunky or small and useless&quot; with user interfaces that were &quot;unbelievably awful.&quot;

Apple dramatically innovated (or rather licensed/bought IBM et al&#039;s innovations and packaged them) in a way that offered a dramatic innovation.

Likewise iTunes launched and was a dramatic shake up to the status quo.

Both these were immediate successes and became market leaders shortly after their launches.

The iPad appear by most accounts to be almost the complete reverse - a very uninnovative product, in what has become a very innovative market.


A little too much of the Apple advertising makes one forget that they have screwed up as many opportunities as they have succeeded - indeed who remembers the original iPod launched in the states?  A set of internet kiosks for accessing the web.  The initial iPod was a total disaster, moving the brand to the portable player saved it entirely.

So in conclusion, agree that there is certainly room for recovery - but this launch was a damp squib and it&#039;ll need to await the next 12-18 months before anything worthy comes out.

This is a very basic iteration, not a step change. And I think the market was expecting the latter, and it didn&#039;t satisfy the demand that exists for this type of device.

Most interestingly, I think their fate lies in their competition&#039;s hands now, not theirs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm, interesting thoughts.</p>
<p>think you may be misrepresenting history a little as these landmark models were hardly &#8216;irrelevant&#8217; &#8211; iPods entered a dull and uninnovative market &#8211; indeed the devices on the market were aptly described as &#8220;big and clunky or small and useless&#8221; with user interfaces that were &#8220;unbelievably awful.&#8221;</p>
<p>Apple dramatically innovated (or rather licensed/bought IBM et al&#8217;s innovations and packaged them) in a way that offered a dramatic innovation.</p>
<p>Likewise iTunes launched and was a dramatic shake up to the status quo.</p>
<p>Both these were immediate successes and became market leaders shortly after their launches.</p>
<p>The iPad appear by most accounts to be almost the complete reverse &#8211; a very uninnovative product, in what has become a very innovative market.</p>
<p>A little too much of the Apple advertising makes one forget that they have screwed up as many opportunities as they have succeeded &#8211; indeed who remembers the original iPod launched in the states?  A set of internet kiosks for accessing the web.  The initial iPod was a total disaster, moving the brand to the portable player saved it entirely.</p>
<p>So in conclusion, agree that there is certainly room for recovery &#8211; but this launch was a damp squib and it&#8217;ll need to await the next 12-18 months before anything worthy comes out.</p>
<p>This is a very basic iteration, not a step change. And I think the market was expecting the latter, and it didn&#8217;t satisfy the demand that exists for this type of device.</p>
<p>Most interestingly, I think their fate lies in their competition&#8217;s hands now, not theirs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Pushing the envelope by Adrian O'Connor</title>
		<link>http://softwareprototyping.net/2009/11/21/pushing-the-envelope/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian O'Connor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://softwareprototyping.net/?p=203#comment-36</guid>
		<description>Interesting take on the good old British plug, but I&#039;d be amazed if this took off in any meaningful way. 

The British plug is a very clever design that addresses several important issues. Safety is the biggest. Another is durability, and this plug looks like it might end up suffering from reliability issues after repeated plugging/unplugging/abuse in a laptop bag. Not only that, but a damaged plug, especially one with live pins on a rotating arm will probably introduce serious safety issues as it starts to wear. I also can&#039;t tell from his diagrammes how the three lines are routed through the handle and down in to the rotating arm.

But top marks to this designer for looking for innovative ways to improve on an established design. If nobody challenges the accepted norm, nothing ever improves. I especially like the multi-adapter idea (shown on the linked page), where three of these slim plugs are plugged, side-by-side, in to one socket.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting take on the good old British plug, but I&#8217;d be amazed if this took off in any meaningful way. </p>
<p>The British plug is a very clever design that addresses several important issues. Safety is the biggest. Another is durability, and this plug looks like it might end up suffering from reliability issues after repeated plugging/unplugging/abuse in a laptop bag. Not only that, but a damaged plug, especially one with live pins on a rotating arm will probably introduce serious safety issues as it starts to wear. I also can&#8217;t tell from his diagrammes how the three lines are routed through the handle and down in to the rotating arm.</p>
<p>But top marks to this designer for looking for innovative ways to improve on an established design. If nobody challenges the accepted norm, nothing ever improves. I especially like the multi-adapter idea (shown on the linked page), where three of these slim plugs are plugged, side-by-side, in to one socket.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
