The New York Times published a short but interesting piece in its Sunday business section (May 12, 2008) on mid-size mobile devices, which are about the size of a paperback ("Do you have that portable in a mid-size?", http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/technology/11stream.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin).

The piece was interesting for the longer history of mid-size mobile devices, including a proposal for the so-called "Dynabook" 36 years ago, to Microsoft's failed Ultra Mobile PC just a couple of years ago.

The article is interesting for its assessment of recent and near future developments. The author confesses to believing at one time that there was most definitely need for something between a palm size and a laptop size mobile device. But, in the end, he concludes that he has "been struck recently to see that when Web sites like Amazon, Facebook and Twitter are redesigned for the iPhone, the user experience is actually better than on a full Web screen."

"It turns out", he concludes, "that a high-resolution, palm-size, three-and-a-half-inch screen is just fine for seeing what your friends are up to, and for reading your e-mail and even your newspaper."

I wonder if this might be a bit overstated. It seems like there would be quite a few takers for an affordable device with a 7 or 8 inch screen and a more finger-size keyboard. This might be especially useful for people with low vision or limited dexterity in their hands. Indeed, many of the respondents to our Survey of User Needs (SUN, http://www.wirelessrerc.org/for-consumers/survey-of-user-needs.html) have identified the size of the screen, legibility of the screen, and size of the keys as improvements that would make their use of wireless devices easier.

Previously John Morris wrote:

><p>The New York Times published a short but interesting piece in its Sunday business section (May 12, 2008) on mid-size mobile devices, which are about the size of a paperback ("Do you have that portable in a mid-size?", <a href="http:/www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/technology/11stream.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/technology/11stream.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin).

><p>The piece was interesting for the longer history of mid-size mobile devices, including a proposal for the so-called "Dynabook" 36 years ago, to Microsoft's failed Ultra Mobile PC just a couple of years ago.<p>

><p>The article is interesting for its assessment of recent and near future developments. The author confesses to believing at one time that there was most definitely need for something between a palm size and a laptop size mobile device. But, in the end, he concludes that he has "been struck recently to see that when Web sites like Amazon, <a title="More articles about Facebook." href="http:/topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/facebook_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org">Facebook and Twitter are redesigned for the iPhone, the user experience is actually better than on a full Web screen."

><p>"It turns out", he concludes, "that a high-resolution, palm-size, three-and-a-half-inch screen is just fine for seeing what your friends are up to, and for reading your e-mail and even your newspaper."<p>

><p>I wonder if this might be a bit overstated. It seems like there would be quite a few takers for an affordable device with a 7 or 8 inch screen and a more finger-size keyboard. This might be especially useful for people with low vision or limited dexterity in their hands. Indeed, many of the respondents to our Survey of User Needs (SUN, <a href="http:/www.wirelessrerc.org/for-consumers/survey-of-user-needs.html">http://www.wirelessrerc.org/for-consumers/survey-of-user-needs.html) have identified the size of the screen, legibility of the screen, and size of the keys as improvements that would make their use of wireless devices easier.

><blockquote>