Jump to content

Talk:2-in-1 laptop

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 98.23.142.57 (talk) at 23:30, 12 August 2015 (new header). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconArticles for creation Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Note icon
This article was accepted on 22 May 2011 by reviewer Monty845 (talk · contribs).

name change: laplet → 2-in-1 laptop

Article name change: laplet → 2-in-1 laptop. "laplet" is a name hardly used. TheHoax (talk)

What is a 2-in-1 computer? I do not see this on the web often. Can you provide some links? TranslucentCloud (talk) 13:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
TranslucentCloud Sorry. I meant 2-in-1 laptop. See here:[1] TheHoax (talk)
The term 2-in-1 laptop is not very suitable, because these devices may be not very reminiscent of laptops, also some of them may not at all resemble a tablet. Thus, neither 2-in-1 laptop, nor 2-in-1 tablet are very suitable. By the way, both terms redirect here. TranslucentCloud (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy

If I understand this correctly, the term 'laplet' is used to refer to a laptop in the shape (form?) of a tablet, i.e., a powerful version of a tablet hybrid. (How annoying marketing can be!) Nevertheless, 'laplet' fails the first criteria of 'Deciding on an article title' on Wikipedia:Article_titles because it never caught on: it only gets 326,000 search results off of Google, whereas something like '2 in 1 laptop' gets 136,000,000 results. Additionally, I don't believe there's an actual term for x86 tablets as they're just powerful versions of their ARM counterparts. Even Micrsoft just calls its 'laplets' tablets. 98.23.142.57 (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The term laplet is used to refer to a laptop in the shape/form of a tablet and to a tablet in the shape/form of a laptop. Not just this, it should conform to some technical requirements. Check the article for an explanation.
Yes, there is a lot of times being said, that the term laplet is less frequently met on the Internet, that 2 in 1/2-in-1 something.
Plain x86 tablets indeed are just powerful versions of their ARM counterparts, if these are just Atom-powered Android devices. But if we talk about some powerful and compact machines with USB and DisplayPort, there is still no official term, but some non-official (laplet included).
Microsoft calls its Surface models a tablet that can replace your laptop or just 2 in 1. Not just a regular tablet (however Surface Pro 3 does appear in Tablets section of the Microsoft Store (for better visibility)).
Resume: we can rename article to 2 in 1 tablet, 2 in 1 laptop (or 2-in-1 *, as Intel calls them) but still will it be proper decision? All these terms variants redirect here. Maybe we need a poll or something. TranslucentCloud (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Check the article" - That should be a meme ;) Yes, I read the article before posting on the Talk page. (Unrelated: I have a friend who edits the pages as he reads them and them complains when his edits are reversed.)
When the essential information is missing judging by the comments, it is a good practice to suggest to read the article, where the missing information can be found in the comprehensible form. TranslucentCloud (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know. It's just a feature of Wikipedia that, in my opinion, is redundant because it's (usually) instinct to search for the unknowns. 98.23.142.57 (talk) 23:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What worries me is how the term 'smartphone' ecompasses devices from the Nokia 9210 Communicator to modern-day devices like the iPhone 6, but the term 'tablet' has to be so fragmented. The criteria for a laplet are x86 arch, full OS, ports, and an attachable keyboard.[citation needed] Architecture shouldn't matter because both PPC and x86 based machines are PCs. OS shouldn't matter because older smartphones (dumbphones?) run OSs that make modern mobile OSs look 'full' though they share an umbrella term. Ports shouldn't either, because the ports of an IBM PC are different than those of a modern PC, yet the two share the same category. The philosophy behind all hybrid tablets are the same; a tablet with a dedicated removable keyboard that is designed to be laptop-like. Hybrid tablets are just evolving, like smartphones did.
I do not see the point why anyone can be worried by the fact that the Nokia 9210 and iPhone 6 both are smartphones, running the OS with the user's ability to install third-party apps. The main criteria for laplet/2 in 1 tablet/2-in-1 laptop is essentially just one: to act both as a tablet and a laptop. Basically, architecture does not matter, the x86 is mentioned in the article just because it is the sole architecture of modern laptops. We can remove any mentions of x86 altogether off the article, but this just may not seem right. The philosophy behind all hybrid tablets is the same: just form factor. The philosophy behind laplets is different: versatility. TranslucentCloud (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Modern smartphones are ""powerful and compact machines (with USB)"", but are categorized along with the classical smartphones. In essence, modern smartphones are built under the philosophy of 'superhub'. They perform tasks that classical smartphones wouldn't dream of doing. Versatility.
Older smartphones did not have a touchscreen; the philosophy behind interaction was the keyboard. Newer ones have the philosophy of tap-to-interact. New smartphones also contain (relatively) powerful components, contain new technologies (e.g., Wifi, SD card reader), and have a different design philosophy. 'Regular' hybrid tablets are designed to be versatile as well; why else would they be designed w/ a dedicated keyboard in mind? 98.23.142.57 (talk) 23:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, the Tablet computer article does not distinguish well between a 'hybrid' and a 'traditional hybrid'. In fact, 'traditional hybrid' is mentioned once in the article and then abandoned.
In the Tablet computer article the section Traditional hybrid is a subsection of Hybrid, thus the Traditional Hybrid is the offshoot of the more generic Hybrid category, just like the Laplet.TranslucentCloud (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The indentation and font size suggest the absense of subsections. "Traditional hybrid" appears with the same font size and intentation as "Hybrid". 98.23.142.57 (talk) 23:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How many tablet categories are actually buzzwords? (Opinion: On Wikipedia, two.) In any case, let's avoid the naming situation encoutered with USB flash drives a couple years back.
Tablets now are too diverse to split into 2-3 categories. What seems buzzwords to someone, may be useful distinguishing terms to someone else. TranslucentCloud (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Though laptops are also diverse, the term 'notebook' eventually dropped out.
The designs vary, but 'hybrid tablet' still means a tablet with a keyboard. It doesn't matter what design the keyboard has; it's still a hybrid tablet. Keyboard design didn't separate smartphones into different categories. 98.23.142.57 (talk) 23:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"tablet that can replace your laptop" seems to be a tagline, not a way to reference a product. A Surface tablet is still referenced as a tablet (or just 'Surface'); i.e., a tablet (that can replace your laptop). The title tag of http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-US is "Microsoft Surface Tablets - The Windows Laptop Replacement That Does More". Unless Microsoft laplets are actually called 'Windows Laptop Replacements . . .?
Indeed it is the tagline. But if we take the Microsoft's approach to classify devices, things will get very confusing. Go to the Microsoft Store, then to the All PCs & tablets category. Check the Tablets subcategory. Surface Pro 3 is there. Check 2 in 1. Surface Pro 3 is there. Check Windows 10 PCs. Surface Pro 3 is there. Poll: what the Surface Pro 3 is? TranslucentCloud (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As you've stated before, it's posted in multiple categories for visibility. However, the SP3 user manual refers to it solely as a tablet. It's under the PC category because tablets, along with Laptops, are technically PCs.
Not renaming. In my opinion, laplets shouldn't be a (sub)category at all; they're hybrid tablets. Likewise, 'dumbphone' and 'supersmartphone' aren't categories. Opinion: Merge Hybrid, Traditional Hybrid, and Laplet on Tablet_computer and merge this article with the resulting category. 98.23.142.57 (talk) 21:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Hybrid tablets are too diverse to be a single category. Surface Pro 3 has very little in common with Asus Transformer Pad. TranslucentCloud (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They (SP3 & Asus Transformer Pad) both have dumb (not much processing power) keyboards. It doesn't matter whether the detachable keyboards is thicker or has ports. In both, the smart portion in the screen part, and the dumb portion is in the (dedicated) detachable keyboard.