No. The way that you structured this whole article is strange. It doesn't feel as you read through that you are talking about the title nor does it feel like each subsection is connected in either way. Generally a reader expects: introduction to concept, hypothesis/argument based on introduced concepts, supporting arguments for or against the hypothesis, and finally a conclusion. I feel like you are missing the introduction entirely, so a reader has to assume the title is your argument (as sometimes appears in news articles). Given that argument you end up wandering through 3 sections that do not seem related to that title, and at the end I still have no idea what you wanted to say.
There is no conclusion or resolution to what was introduced so I still can't fathom what you are trying to share. It feels like a situation where only half the thoughts hit the page and since we don't know the context we can't fill in the gaps.
Our issues are in the actual writing of the post, not as much what you are trying to say because we can't even get to that.
First I go through steps of computer evolution: desktops -> laptops -> tablets
When desktops became popular in Sweden computers where rare in say South America.
Now computers are not rare in South America, which is good. The bad thing is that they are common in a consumption only format.
The problem is UI in particular text input. The solution use say gloves as input and VR systems which I predict will be cheaper and broadly available.
Until that happens a huge amount of people are stuck with smart devices, so I'd like to improve the situation. To get there I'm doing my work on a tablet to get a good idea on what works and what doesn't. Why? Because I want teenagers in the rest of the world to be able to have fun with computers as I did.
Your "article" reads like four or five separate blog or facebook posts scrunched together with no rhyme or reason. And it has the setup of a clickbait article, luring you in with a question, going on about a bunch of stuff not related to it at all, and then finally approaching the question at the very end but never _really_explaining it. Complete with a link to an unrelated software project and a separate link to donate to you (and we're donating for ... what? A VR input method you didn't really explain and has nothing to do with the headline?)
As a blog post for a random tech friend people follow, sure, that's fine. But I don't understand why this was posted to hacker news, and I don't understand why people voted it up.
I answer the question: to see how hard it is to work on a tablet.
Why: because desktops aren't widely available in the developing world
The "unrelated" link is a suggestion on how to write
fast without a keyboard. Something that might come in handy for a non-desktop machine, don't you think?
Although I'm very interested in your "Chorded Typing" article [0], I too admit to being confused by the article listed here on HN.
Personally, I've roamed the world with a Galaxy Tab 2 7" (3G version) on rooted Android 4.x. I used a mini USB keyboard, and developed quite a bit of software on it (mainly nodejs at the time, but not exclusively). I upgraded the system in 2013 to a MBA (better battery, bigger screen, prettier OS IMHO, but lost mobile data), & didn't continue with it. Fun times.
Thank you. Well what I'd like to do is to make it possible to do it without a bluetooth keyboard.
So I'm looking into alternative ways of doing this.
The chorded input method is interesting in conjunction with say a all in one android VR-headset and haptic glove input, where you have all ten fingers.
What kind of software did you develop was it on a commercial basis or on open source projects?
Didn't mean to be blunt, but I had no idea how the sections fit together and what you were trying to say. Clearly I am missing the context which others seem to have, since it's on the frontpage of HN.
There is no conclusion or resolution to what was introduced so I still can't fathom what you are trying to share. It feels like a situation where only half the thoughts hit the page and since we don't know the context we can't fill in the gaps.
Our issues are in the actual writing of the post, not as much what you are trying to say because we can't even get to that.