Tools for Thought

As I mentioned in my last post, The Zen of Q10, I just scored a cheap AlphaSmart 3000 word processor on eBay. It came Saturday afternoon, and due to a tight schedule I hadn’t planned to use it much. I had “real” writing to do, and didn’t think I could take on the learning curve of a new writing platform while working on a product review. And to be honest, I was having so much fun with Q10 that I couldn’t pry myself from it.

That was until I unboxed the AS3K. As soon as I installed the three AA batteries and hit the power switch, I was off and running. The beauty of the AlphaSmart is its singular function. It’s a dedicated word processor, and nothing but. Some people might prefer to call it a text editor, since it only saves and transfers text files, and has none of the richer formatting that some writers imagine they cannot live without: italics, underscores and so on. Stripping layout issues from the drafting processes forces the writer to shift to focusing exclusively on content.

The AlphaSmart 3000 is an older, discontinued version of the company’s product line of word processors, the current versions being the Neo and the Dana. The 3000 and the Neo are the same conceptual design: a keyboard roughly the same size as a desktop PC keyboard, but with an small LCD screen inset above the keys. The screens are the older nematic LCDs, similar to those on calculators or digital watches, with no backlight. The 3000 displays four lines of monospaced text, the Neo up to six lines. Both device are basically buffers for user input, for later transfer to a PC or PDA via USB or infrared (IrDA).

Unlike the Neo, the Dana uses the Palm OS as its computing platform. It runs any Palm software compatible with the deprecated 4.1 version of POS, which is still a large percentage. The display is still monochrome, but has backlight capability and a 560 x 160 resolution. The few apps written specifically for the Dana, like AlphaWord, take advantage of the higher resolution, but legacy Palm apps still run in a 160 x 160 boundary. The standard version is $350, there’s also a wireless version for $429.

After my limited use of the AlphaSmart 3000, I can already tell I need to upgrade to a later model for reasons I’ll discuss shortly. I’ve considered purchasing the Dana Wireless, with its more robust operating system. There are a couple of Palm apps that I’d love to use, like Documents to Go for spreadsheets, or SuperMemo for creating and reviewing flashcards; and then there’s email. On further thought, it looks like I’ll be going with the Neo (pictured) instead. It’s cheaper at $219, has no internet access to lure me away from my writing, and has a vastly greater battery life: 700 hours instead of the Dana’s 25 hours.

So why would someone want an AlphaSmart in any version, when for a hundred or more extra dollars he or she could own a laptop that does infinitely more?

The AlphaSmart by design is biased towards output. No iTunes, no Facebook, no Wikipedia, no Gmail, no eBay, no DVDs. Like a typewriter, from the moment you sit down with the device, you are focused on producing, not consuming, content.

Instant on. The AlphaSmart is ready to work when you are. Hit the power button, and the AlphaSmart takes just over one second to load the file that was automatically saved when it was last turned off. The device saves in real time as the user is typing, so there’s no need to manually save the current file. Shutting down the device takes as long as the split second needed to hit the power button.

It’s extremely small and lightweight. At just under two pounds, you can throw the AlphaSmart in your go bag, and the weight difference barely registers. As mentioned, AlphaSmarts are comparable in size to desktop keyboards without numeric keypads, so they take up very little volume.

Incredible battery life. What part of 700 hours can someone not understand? Most users posting reviews of the Neo after a year of ownership claim they haven’t replaced the original set up batteries. Even the Dana’s 25 hours—perhaps a bi-weekly charge—is a massive leap ahead of a typical laptop’s anemic battery life. Walking into a coffee shop without having to hunt for a table next to an outlet is hugely liberating.

No backlight. This is by far the most overlooked advantage. Initially, I thought the lack of a backlight would be a liability, and was gravitating toward the backlight-enabled Dana as my next AlphaSmart. But the nematic LCD on the AS3K and the Neo are exceptionally easy to read, usually more so than the backlit, active-matrix fullscreen displays of laptops. The experience between the two types of displays is fundamentally different. It’s easy to forget that when using computer monitors, we’re basically staring directly into a light source for hours, and for myself the eyestrain is pronounced. The AlphaSmart’s nematic LCD polarizes light (hence the black characters) against a reflective surface. My eyes don’t glaze over after hours of writing. However, if you often write in low-light situations, like taking notes during a PowerPoint presentation, give the Dana more consideration.

As a proof of concept, the AS3K has been a persuasive test run. It has all of the aforementioned advatages of the Neo: inexpensive, long battery life, no connectivity. So why upgrade? After all, several reviewers on sites like Epinions insist that were anything to happen to their AS3Ks, they would probably replace them on eBay rather than spend three times as much on the Neo?

The AS3K is perfect usable, and I do enjoy it, but it has a couple of annoyances that keep nudging at my satisfaction. The keyboard is rather noisy. Ironically, this is less of a problem in a public venue, since it tends to blend in with its aural surroundings. When I’m at home, where it’s complete quiet, the keyboard is noisy enough to make writing a more self-conscious activity than I’m used to. That might diminish with further use, but I doubt it. The Neo’s keyboard appears to have keys a denser molding—it looks quieter than the AS3K’s bondi blue construction (the Neo also looks more professional overall). Noise comes up as an occasional complaint with the AS3K, but I have yet to come across anyone mentioning similar problems with the Neo.

Another problem I’m having with the AS3K is data transfer to the Centro. In reading many online discussions of the AlphaSmart’s ability to transfer text via infrared to Palms, I incorrectly assumed that this feature applied to the AS3K, not just the Neo and Dana. The AS3K’s IR transfer probably works fine on an IrDA-enabled laptop, but transfer to the Palm is not supported. Since neither the 3000 nor the Neo support memory cards, I wanted to be able to transfer my writing to the Centro, then email or otherwise upload it to the Cloud. Only the Neo and Dana can do this (though the Dana supports SD cards).

Finally, the Neo’s display has a higher contrast, and displays up to six lines of text instead of the 3000’s four lines. This helps to see each paragraph in full, making editing easier. Some AlphaSmart users insist that the display is not suitable for editing (often argued as an advantage, since it’s easy to get mired in endless rewriting during a draft), which should be done at the desktop. It is a little more inconvenient to edit on the device, but not impossible. Some writers advise that the best practice is to take advantage of the AlphaSmart’s direct printing capabilites, printing the raw text draft directly from the device, and line editing the hard copy. As a former editor myself, I know that it’s much easier to catch technical errors by reviewing print drafts.

We’ll see how things change next month when I get the Neo. For now, the AlphaSmart 3000 remains my satellite keyboard for writing on the go, and Q10 remains my primary writing tool.