×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Turn Your iPad Into a Star Trek PADD

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the assimilate-this! dept.

Handhelds 165

A new app from CBS interactive can help you figure out the trouble with tribbles once and for all. Star Trek PADD for iPad includes all the official data on ships, aliens, technologies, an episode guide, and uses a Starfleet-like interface. Live long and prosper.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

165 comments

Awesome! (4, Funny)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725428)

Awesome. Now I can conclusively prove that I have no life!

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725764)

Now you just need the faggy uniform and your iTransformation will be complete.

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725858)

No kidding. NO interest in buying one of these things. See app... Must own one...

Still not a PADD (1, Insightful)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725446)

PADDs are proper computers- they can run arbitrary code.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725494)

I dunno. Did you ever actually see that?

Although I've always thought of these things as terminals anyways. They're like dumb terminals or Sun workstations connecting to some other much bigger centralized machine (like the ship's main computer).

Although iPads aren't quite proper terminals either.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

yourmommycalled (2280728) | more than 2 years ago | (#36728084)

I dunno. Did you ever actually see that?

Although I've always thought of these things as terminals anyways. They're like dumb terminals or Sun workstations connecting to some other much bigger centralized machine (like the ship's main computer).

Although iPads aren't quite proper terminals either.

Since when does a Sun workstation need to connect to some other much bigger centralized machine? Oooh Now I get it you never used a workstation before just another dumb windows box

Re:Still not a PADD (4, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725742)

PADDs are proper computers- they can run arbitrary code.

You sure about that? I thought the acronym stood for Personal Access Display Device.

I was under the impression that they were used almost exclusively to display information... Maybe some basic data-entry capabilities. Something along the lines of a modern-day ereader.

Re:Still not a PADD (3, Insightful)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726378)

Jake Sisko wrote novels with PADDs on DS9.

I'm with the GP on this one. I'm sure the creative intent was that PADDs on Star Trek were programmable, rootable, and so on. Otherwise known as real computers.

Why? Because it was Star Trek, not 1984. I doubt the Federation exerted Orwellian control over its citizens' portable computers like Apple does today in the real world.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726568)

Are you kidding? Star Trek was very Orwellian, other than it just stared the people that got the benefits of the oppressed rather than the people that were oppressed.

Re:Still not a PADD (2)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727124)

You have no idea what Star Trek is about, do you? There's a scene from TNG: Time's Arrow, Part 2 [st-minutiae.com] that directly addresses your point. Sam Clemens (Mark Twain) is briefly brought to the future for complicated reasons. He and Troi have the following conversation:

CLEMENS: Oh? I'm not so impressed with this future... huge starships... weapons that can no doubt destroy entire cities... military conquest as a way of life.

She looks sidelong at him.

TROI: Is that what you see here?

CLEMENS: Oh, I know what you say... this is a vessel of exploration... your mission is to, discover new worlds...

The Turbolift arrives. A strange alien EXITS. Clemens reacts, stares after him. They ENTER the Turbolift.

TROI: Deck thirty-six.

CLEMENS: That's what the Spanish said... and the Dutch, and the Portuguese. It's what all conquerors say... (beat) I'm sure it's what you told that blue skinned fellow I just saw... before you brought him here to serve you.

TROI: He's one of thousands of species we've encountered. We live in a peaceful Federation with many of them... the people you see are here by choice.

Clemens ponders this for a moment.

CLEMENS: So there are a privileged few... who serve on these ships, living in luxury, wanting for nothing. But what about everyone else? What about the poor? You ignore them...

TROI: Poverty was eliminated a long time ago. And a lot of things disappeared with it: hopelessness... despair... cruelty... war...

He regards her solemnly. He's beginning to realize that his dark view is misplaced.

CLEMENS: I come from a time when men achieve wealth and power by standing on the backs of the poor... when prejudice and intolerance are commonplace... when power is an end unto itself... (beat) And you're telling me... that isn't how it is anymore?

TROI: That's right.

CLEMENS: (with a sigh) Maybe it is worth giving up cigars for, after all...

Troi smiles... the Turbolift door opens and they EXIT.

There's an episode of Voyager, Author, Author [memory-alpha.org] that does explore issues of the oppressed living in the Federation, but the oppressed are holograms and are obviously a stand-in for an arbitrary oppressed minority. They had to use holograms because it would have been unbelievable if they had used people whose rights were clearly established. This is also a very brief plot line that (as far as I recall) appeared only in that one episode. By contrast, Troi's view of the Federation/humanity in the future is the same one as in each of the series. Really, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Re:Still not a PADD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36727492)

other than it just stared the people

WTF does that mean?

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726436)

I distinctly remember an episode where Wesley used a PADD to control a mini-tractor-beam / forcefield projector that he created. And wasn't there an episode where someone used a PADD to control the whole ship?

No citations, sorry, but I know for a fact that they did a lot more with them than just "something along the lines of a modern-day ereader".

Re:Still not a PADD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36727126)

So what. I can control my entire desktop from a ssh or VNC/RDP session. That's a display-only session.

For all we know that's what the PADD is, just a display hooked into the real computers on the backend.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727246)

Wesley with tractor beam was The Naked Now [memory-alpha.org] (which was a dreadful episode and firmly established hatred for Wesley). I can't think of any episodes where the whole ship was controlled via a PADD. My knowledge of TNG episodes is pretty encyclopedic, so there probably isn't one. There is an episode where Picard pilots a shuttle which in turn pilots the Enterprise, but he uses the usual shuttle controls, and at one point his commands are relayed by voice and entered into one of the consoles on the bridge.

Re:Still not a PADD (2)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727384)

You're right - I was remembering something else [arstechnica.com]:

"But PADDs were much more powerful than electronic note pads. "We realized that with the networking capabilities we had postulated for the ship, and given the [hypothetical] flexibility of the software, you should be able to fly the ship from the PADD," Okuda said."

Also, the Star Trek TNG Technical manual [google.ca] talks about the same thing.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

flappinbooger (574405) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727344)

I'm pretty sure that the PADDs were more prop than solidly-defined devices - meaning, they did whatever the script required of a handheld informational device for that scene. Which, from a futuristic standpoint, is probably what a "real" PADD would be - as much or as little as you need it to be. For data. As opposed to the tri-corder, which was apparently for sensing.

Similarly, I remember seeing somewhere that the script for the engineering persons had sections that read something like "insert mildly plausible sounding techno-babble here" when they had to save the day.

What I have always wondered is how they supposedly entered text with those GUIs... Probably like any other tablet, poke a certain area and QWERTY pops up. I recall Jake writing his books using a stylus... Probably some sort of graffiti style input similar to palm?

ST-TOS is credited for prophesying the floppy disk and Bluetooth headset. ST-TNG will probably be credited for prophesying the iPad, huh?

Re:Still not a PADD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36728970)

I'm pretty sure that the PADDs were more prop than solidly-defined devices - meaning, they did whatever the script required of a handheld informational device for that scene. Which, from a futuristic standpoint, is probably what a "real" PADD would be - as much or as little as you need it to be. For data. As opposed to the tri-corder, which was apparently for sensing.

As opposed to Data, who was for Tasha Yar.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727314)

PADDs have been used on-screen to open doors, take inventory, sign contracts, read text, watch video with audio, display diagrams, activate site-to-site transports, compose a novel, and download information wirelessly from other computers. It's not clear to me that they could run arbitrary code, though it certainly fits. Mostly they're used for data entry and retrieval, and they also make a convenient place to put buttons that do plot-related things. See the Memory Alpha article [memory-alpha.org] for more.

Re:Still not a PADD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725880)

I love this comment, but I can't resist also replying to bitterly point out that yet again, Apple fans get to enjoy something that has already existed elsewhere for a long time [synthesize.us].

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725926)

PADDs are proper computers- they can run arbitrary code.

No episode of Star Trek has ever demonstrated a rooted PADD. Funnily enough, no episode of Star Trek has ever demonstrated a PADD infected with malware.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726504)

No episode of Star Trek ever demonstrated PADDs lacking that capability either and we have no good reason to assume that the Federation would impose such a limitation like Apple does with the iPad.

Apple locks down iPads because they have a profit motive for doing so. The Federation had no such profit motive to do so on Star Trek, so it is reasonable to assume that PADDs were not locked down in this fashion and were, as the GP implied, programmable, rootable, etc.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726588)

No episode of Star Trek ever demonstrated PADDs lacking that capability either and we have no good reason to assume that the Federation would impose such a limitation like Apple does with the iPad.

That depends on what their security policies are, duddn't it.

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726616)

I always just assumed that they were terminals that tied into the main computer.

Although they could have the same bash shell, X terminal, touch terminal network transparency that Unix machines had back in the days those shows aired.

Sometimes I would sneak onto a professor's personal Sun box when all of the Sun machines in the computing labs were overloaded.

When storage is pervasively networked, it doesn't necessarily matter what's what or what's where.

Re:Still not a PADD (2)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726876)

I always just assumed that they were terminals that tied into the main computer.

There's an episode where a time traveler claiming to be from the future stole a bunch of their stuff, a tricorder included. When the door opened the ship's computer disabled everything he had taken.

Apparently they still have DRM in the future. ;)

Re:Still not a PADD (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727788)

I always figured they were X terminals too, but given the stuff that has been done with them without the computer (and they move from installation to installation if you like) they must be more like a ChromeOS device if not even more general-purpose in intent.

Re:Still not a PADD (2)

lennier (44736) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726944)

Funnily enough, no episode of Star Trek has ever demonstrated a PADD infected with malware.

And yet, the holodeck gets rooted every second week. I guess it's running a different OS.

("MoriartyOS (tm), the only Starfleet military-grade holographic cinematic entertainment system developed with the sole purpose of granting artificial sentience to period Victorian villains! With a MoriartyOS console installed in your flagship, you'll be either the envy or pity of every other advanced race in the galaxy as holographic characters periodically run rogue and attempt to subvert your warp engineering systems! Either way, everyone will know that you're too weird to mess with and steer clear! Even the Klingons are too scared to have one of these, and they pioneered the qu'Nkt real-pain touch/bite interface! As Sybok the mad Vulcan prophet would say, we'd be crazy to sell you this system for such a low, low price of one billion Federation credits (gold pressed latinum also accepted at Ferengi acquisition depots). But hey, we are! That's why we're throwing in the Grevious-Harm(tm) safety interlock disabling system for free! Make every workout a surprise when your AI opponents might suddenly pull out a real Tommy gun! But if you were entirely sane, you wouldn't have beat the Kobashi Maru test and made captain in the first place, am I right? Just touch the PADD here, it's a steal!")

So then, an iPad (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727170)

PADDs are proper computers- they can run arbitrary code.

The iPad is a computer that can run arbitrary code.

Anyone can develop for it. Were you out in space a hundred light-years away, you could re-purpose one if you saw fit.

Where the analogy really comes in though is with the nearly all touch screen display. You'll note the real PADD had no buttons whatsoever, yet those decrying the iPad as being like the PADD claim that devices with more physically hardcoded elements are more like the ultimately flexible device that was the PADD...

Where do you think the "Pad" in iPad came from anyway?

Re:So then, an iPad (1)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727272)

The issue isn't whether or not the iPad is a real computer, but on whether or not its users are allowed to have total control over it.

Semantically speaking, you're right that the iPad is a real computer. But given the restrictions Apple imposes on its uses, it might as well not be.

Nobody on Star Trek ever had to jailbreak their PADDs. Likewise, nobody in real life should have to jailbreak their iOS devices.

Re:So then, an iPad (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727606)

The issue isn't whether or not the iPad is a real computer, but on whether or not its users are allowed to have total control over it.

That wouldn't be the stupidest statement I've ever heard.

But we are on Slashdot. You should know better.

Any device that you physically possess, you have total control over. No matter how it might ship.

But given the restrictions Apple imposes on its uses, it might as well not be.

Bullshit. For most people, it is the PADD. It is a world of freedom from the tyranny of normal computers and how they constantly cause problems for non-technical users. It's a world of a ton of applications that are all purpose built for the device to do a specific task well. Just like the PADD... Most people do not need side loading or the ability to modify the kernel, they need and want a device that works, and runs a variety of applications to make the device useful.

For technical users, there are no restrictions at all as they can simply jailbreak.

Nobody on Star Trek ever had to jailbreak their PADDs

You sure about that? I remember a lot of security protocols being overridden and general device hacking going on in Star Trek. I'll bet someone even nerdier than myself can remember Crusher doing something with a PADD that wasn't strictly approved of...

Re:So then, an iPad (1)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36728194)

Your answer to my complaint about Apple's restrictions on iOS was, and I quote, that it is instead "a world of freedom from the tyranny of normal computers and how they constantly cause problems for non-technical users."

That reply isn't an argument, it's propaganda. You should get a job doing marketing for Apple. That was terrific.

As for your whole "you can just jailbreak it" schtick, I've got a better solution: Apple can just stop shipping a device that needs to be jailbroken in the first place. What a concept.

That way you can keep on writing poetry about how revolutionary the iPad's UI is while I can use it to actually get work done without having to exploit security holes to run apps which don't appear in the App Store.

Then we'd both be happy with it. Wouldn't that be nice?

Re:So then, an iPad (1)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727572)

It can run arbitrary code if you fork over protection money to apple, or if you jailbreak, which is becoming harder and harder to do with each release. If you don't do either of those things, then no, the iPad cannot run arbitrary code.

Frisky Pornstar - But Gay This Time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725458)

Wowza, this is Gay! (capital G!)
 
waste time very often? how about let's post more stories where a "university of phoenix professor" is interviewed?? HAH!
 
--drinkypoo

Okay, but... (3, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725488)

Can I just yell out the word "computer!" and then tell it how to advance the plot of this week's storyline?

Re:Okay, but... (1)

i kan reed (749298) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725988)

We're getting there, already actually. Google is pretty close to the kind of semantic information retrieval seen, and watson is a good demonstartion of more direct question/answer functionality. And speech recognition is nearly dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.

Slashvertisement... (1)

mwfischer (1919758) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725516)

"The app costs $4.99"

Hey wait a minute I thought currency was outdated by the PADDs were out?!

Re:Slashvertisement... (3, Funny)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725754)

"The app costs $4.99"

Hey wait a minute I thought currency was outdated by the PADDs were out?!

You have to pay in bitcoins.

Damn straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725522)

I was wondering how long it'd be before there'd be an app for that.

Re:Damn straight (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725634)

You COULD. Have got the Diagnostic PADD app that got C&D a month or so back. It was basically just a demo anyway, but come on guys...

Seems expensive (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725524)

Hey, neat, a little bit of star trek memorabilia, sounds great! And it has actual information about the shows? Very interested.

The app costs $4.99, and is available now in the App Store.

Never mind. For something that sounds like little more than a wikipedia page with some decorations, "very interested" translates into "will download if it's free."

Re:Seems expensive (3, Interesting)

Announcer (816755) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725576)

Five bucks = expensive? Dude, I'm out of work, and if I had an iPad (HA! If I could AFFORD one!) I would have already downloaded this app. Five lousy bucks is NOT "expensive". The iPad? Yeah, *THAT* is expensive.

Re:Seems expensive (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725612)

Apparently you don't understand the price/value relationship.

Re:Seems expensive (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725672)

Back in the days of proprietary applications that were displaced by (mostly) free web applications, you would be spending something like $20 or $50 for something like this.

Re:Seems expensive (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726204)

Back in the days of proprietary applications that were displaced by (mostly) free web applications, you would be spending something like $20 or $50 for something like this.

More likely it would be downloaded for "free". But for $5 I would actually pay for it rather than download it. Its closer to what its worth.

Re:Seems expensive (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726666)

Your loose morals really aren't the issue here.

That kind of software managed to thrive at those prices despite your unwillingness to pay anything.

$20 or $50 is really so much when you consider what dead tree references go for.

Re:Seems expensive (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726260)

Five bucks = expensive?

For something that sounds like little more than a wikipedia page with some decorations.

Re:Seems expensive (1)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727316)

Five lousy bucks is NOT "expensive".

Calling people cheap: one of the most frequently modded-up ad hominems on slashdot.

Article error in headline! (1, Funny)

Announcer (816755) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725544)

Let's get it right... we are NOT "Trekkies", we are TREKKERS!

Trekkies are the kids with the Spock ears and Geordi visors.

TREKKERS are more "normal"! We love Star Trek, yes, but we ALSO have a life. ;)

Re:Article error in headline! (1, Interesting)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725588)

I've always seen "Trekkie" used as a sort of catch-all for Star Trek fans while "Trekker" was a term I only heard people who took Star Trek way too seriously use about themselves.

Re:Article error in headline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725752)

nope, that's Treknologist :-)

Re:Article error in headline! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725804)

I've always seen "Trekkie" used as a sort of catch-all for Star Trek fans while "Trekker" was a term I only heard people who took Star Trek way too seriously use about themselves.

Or the union of those terms: Loser

Re:Article error in headline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726702)

You mean the intersection of those terms, right?

Re:Article error in headline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726188)

Oh, no... There's "Trekologist" for that class of geek... >:-D

Re:Article error in headline! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725626)

Defending what they call you automatically makes you the geekiest term there is.

Re:Article error in headline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725652)

The fact that this bothers you leads me to suspect you have your Spock Ears housed in a glass showcase, further supplanting your membership in the former group not that latter (if it exists).

As The Shat has said many times; it's JUST a tv show.

Re:Article error in headline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725836)

Please tell me this is satire.

Re:Article error in headline! (2)

ph0rk (118461) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725946)

Let's get it right... we are NOT "Trekkies", we are TREKKERS!

Trekkies are the kids with the Spock ears and Geordi visors.

TREKKERS are more "normal"! We love Star Trek, yes, but we ALSO have a life. ;)

If the nomenclature bothers you that much, I am not sure I can grant the bolded claim.

Re:Article error in headline! (3, Informative)

RJHelms (1554807) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725948)

Trekkers are more normal? I have never, ever heard the term used like that.

The real usage goes like this: Trekkies are hopeless Star Trek nerds. Trekkers are Star Trek nerds who are so hopeless, they're even hopeless nerds when it comes to discussing the terminology used to describe hopeless Star Trek nerds.

Re:Article error in headline! (3, Informative)

sootman (158191) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726020)

I always thought the main difference was that those who think they're actually accomplishing something by being a fan (i.e., denoted by "trekker") are the sadder of the lot. At least trekkies can admit "hey, this is just something I'm into." Anyone who calls himself a trekker is taking himself way too seriously.

Re:Article error in headline! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726066)

No, let's REALLY get it right. If you care about the distinction between being called a Trekkie or a Trekker... you're a Trekkie. Get a life.

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36728742)

There's a difference? I think you've thought about this too much. (And yes, I'm a Trekkie/Trekker, whatever. I like Star Trek!)

non stardard interface (0)

doconnor (134648) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725630)

I thought apps whose interface didn't follow iOS standards where forbidden.

Re:non stardard interface (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725724)

Evidently, you were misinformed.

Re:non stardard interface (2)

PNutts (199112) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725820)

I thought apps whose interface didn't follow iOS standards where forbidden.

Fascinating.

Re:non stardard interface (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726288)

This needs more mod points lol.

Re:non stardard interface (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726640)

Silly hoo-man. Don't you know that a sufficient amount of gold pressed latinum will allow you to break any rule you want.

Just grease the right palm.

There's probably even a rule of acquisition about it.

How much did these guys pay (3, Insightful)

joebok (457904) | more than 2 years ago | (#36725664)

How much did these guys pay to have their ad appear as a slashdot story? I guess the future is here - the line between ad and content is gone! Or was it already and I just didn't notice until now?

Re:How much did these guys pay (1)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#36727466)

Do you have any evidence that Business Insider ran this story as an advertisement for CBS Interactive's app? Maybe it's an innocent story. I enjoyed it, though I'm a big fan of Star Trek.

Nerdgasm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725682)

Shit. This alone makes me REALLY want to buy an iPad. Seriously. No sarcasm.
It's very, very hard for me to resist to order one RIGHT NOW just to be able to satisfy my inner Trekkie/Star Fleet soul by owning the closest thing to a PADD and 24th century StarTrek tech.

Must.....resist.....can't afford.... (well I could if I use my credit card)

It's been done on the Nook Color (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725812)

This guy's done it on the Nook Color a while back.
http://chingchongpingpong.com/2011/05/26/star-trek-padd/

Starfleet-like interface? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725822)

This is /., you can call it LCARS and we'll know what you're talking about.

Re:Starfleet-like interface? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726384)

This is /., you can call it LCARS and we'll know what you're talking about.

The interface looks exactly like the one from the "Star Trek Encyclopedia CD" which came with a computer magazine (PCPlus?) during the late 90s - which of course looked like LCARS.

This was done on a Nook Color (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36725916)

I've seen this done on a Nook Color. Just google Nook Color lcars padd

landscape (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726054)

I don't remember ever seeing a PADD being used in landscape mode...

Just what I needed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726404)

I just survived a huge Steam sale and managed to not buy anything.

So my guard was down when I saw this app. But IT'S THE FUTURE ON MY IPAD NOW.

Android? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36726512)

They should've made it for Android, they have smaller tablets that are closer to the correct size of a PADD than the iPad.

Too bad I cannot toss the iOs interface (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 2 years ago | (#36726862)

without tossing my iPad.

The interface with the apps, specifically with viewing active apps and the like, is the worst part of it. I sure hope we don't end up with years of this, similar to how the might blue Apple is the only thing allowed at the top of my OS X desktop

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...