[wrs]

Two of the most important differences in design assumptions between Newton and Palm, from my POV on the Newton team:

1. Newton was designed with “natural” pen-based interactions as a core design goal. That had huge effects on the entire product from the OS to the UX, including the need to recognize normal writing. The Palm Pilot was designed as a fairly standard PDA OS with the keyboard replaced by an oddly modified set of character shapes that had to be learned by users before they could enter text. We thought that would be a deal-breaker for potential Palm users — we were wrong!

2. Newton was designed as a standalone system, the next generation of computing after desktops. The assumption was that it could be your only computer. Syncing to a PC/Mac was an afterthought. Palm was designed as an adjunct device for a PC, so its capabilities were far less and the sync functionality was core to the system.

There are lots of other differences but many can be traced back to those two. For example, the huge difference in the tech specs and therefore the cost of the devices is directly related to both of those assumptions.

[EricE]

Number 2 was the big stickler for me - and it was frustrating that Apple didn't get this when the original Mac had AppleTalk built in from day 1! If only Hypercard had better networking support and a server - we'd be surfing stacks instead of the web.

[AlbertCory]

You're right. Other failures back then were also trying to do that.

Unfortunately, it wasn't generally accepted that those two goals were not achievable. That's engineering for you: figuring out what's actually possible.

There was a little sticker you could put on the back of your Palm Pilot that reminded you of the Graffiti language. As you said, it was not a deal-breaker.