Why I did not buy a Samsung tab...or an iPad

Last Saturday, I walked into an electronic store to purchase a Tablet, a tab. My preference was for the Samsung 10.1; in the store I also came across the iPad 2. And in this section was also on display an array of laptops.

Why do I need a tab? My usual practice is to surf the net after dinner, possibly read an e-book, catch up with people on Facebook or LinkedIn. I do it on a laptop connected to the net through Wi-Fi, sitting at a table in the living room. And I doze off most of the time. It would be so much more comfortable if I could do all of these propped up in bed, and doze off without a care.

The Samsung 10.1 on display was a 3G+ Wi-Fi 16GB version priced a little over Rs 33,000. Its cover, a necessary accessory, was an extra Rs 3,500 or so. Which meant that the tab would cost me between Rs 36-37K. The 3G+ Wi-Fi 16GB version of the iPad2 with cover was Rs 37,000. The one with 32GB was around Rs 41,000.

At this point I began to wonder if, at this price, it made any sense to buy this device. At a price of Rs 40-45K one could purchase a much, much more powerful laptop with oodles more hard drive space, and do more on it than is currently possible on a tab. [Don’t believe me? Check out the Dell Vostro 3750 which sells for about Rs 41,000 all inclusive.] And of course, any worthwhile laptop can connect to the net through a Wi-Fi connection, or a wireless device from your favorite mobile service provider, or can be tethered from a 3G phone. So what would I miss? The touch screen for one, its light weight, and certainly the convenience of surfing or reading propped up in bed.

Didn’t I know all this before I visited the store? I guess I did, but the heart went like “Let’s get one, let’s get one”; and it was only after we actually fiddled around with the tab that the head asserted “Come on. This gizmo is not worth 37K. A 40K laptop is more value for money any day. Get a hold of yourself. You want to spend 37K so you can surf lying down, and push things around the screen with your finger? Shame on you!” The heart didn’t have an answer.

So I am back at my laptop. The heart is disappointed. And so is the head. This innovation did not match up to expectations; or perhaps it wasn’t created for me.

Weird Architecture

Sometime back the technical consultant of a customer accused me of having created a ‘weird architecture’ for her project. And this after we had completed an iteration that met agreed goals, work which was commended by the customer as ‘brilliant’.

This was a Web 2.0 application, built on the ASP.NET framework, written in C# and targeted the .NET Framework 3.5, with a SQL Server 2005 database, and hosted on IIS 6.0.

So what was ‘weird’?

The project consisted of several web applications and was deployed on the IIS in the manner shown in Figure 1. A web site was created and web applications were deployed as virtual directories under this web site.

Figure 1

A separate Application Pool was created for this web site, as indicated in Figure 2.

Figure 2

From the above example, Application1 could be accessed from the URL http://www.myapplication.com/Application1 and so on.

In the past few years, I have come across several applications which have been or will be deployed in this manner. What was/is the motivation for deploying the applications in this manner?

We analyse this through a couple of case studies. Read the analysis here.