Why I’m Not Surprised Tablets Haven’t Replaced My Laptop

The idea that the iPad, or any other tablet, becoming a laptop replacement for everyone is as misplaces as wanting to laptops to become a replacement for a desktop for everyone. To be honest tablets are the best option for some workflows, they aren't the best option for every workflow.

As laptops didn't completely replace desktops, tablet won't completely replace laptops or desktops. While tablets have proven to be more than capable in some instances, for others it isn't that that good of an option. Tablets have carved their niche, and they won't go anywhere anytime soon. I'd say that tablets are here to stay, because they have proven to quite useful for graphic designers, artists, and as point of sale, among many other things. But, it also have proven that it can't completely replace laptops, or desktops, in other areas where their form factors are better suited.

Laptops are more than portable enough for the people who use them for they work, while the tablet don't really bring any killer advantage. Their laptop can do everything they need better than a tablet, and then some. Not to say that tablets do the same for some people, but at the end this comes down to what each person wants from their device.

All comes down to the needs of each individual. With mobile chips getting better each year,  soon laptops will have SoC that will give them more computing power, while having as good battery life as tablets. Thus making the choice of which to get more dependent on which device better fits the use you are going to give it.

I'm not surprised that tablets have become the main computer for some, but they won't be the main device for everyone. 

The Office as a Hub, Not a Cage

The more I think about it, the more I realize the best compromise for administrative, programmers, and employees like that, is they hybrid work model. Bringing them in to the office according to whats needed, giving those the employees a more flexible schedule.

To be honest, these employees don't need to be all the time at the office to be effective. Depending on the individual, they can be more effective working remotely most of the time, just coming to the office for meetings or to talk face to face when needed. While others, might prefer to come to the office more often because they prefer to work there just using the remote mode from time to time. Most would fall somewhere in the middle, even splitting their work day between the office and remote work.

While some would like to work from a home office, others would prefer to work from a coffee shop or some where similar, for some hours a day, just to change their setting from the office. The office would become the place where to meet and iron things out, and then each go out to their preferred work setting where they can do their best work.

Even those who prefer to work at the office can benefit from the flexibility of being able to work remotely when required, knowing they'd be able to do when need without problem when they need to do so. Minimum time at the office could be set for all, to use as they see fit.

Personally, I'd split my days between working from home office and the office, with just a couple of full days working remotely and at the office. That way, I'd get to talk with my boss and set things for the week and have a better time management. Specially since at work we access a remote desktop to do our work, which means that i don't have to be at the office to do my work. Most importantly, that would give my boss and me more than enough time to talk things over on what needs to be done, while giving both of us the flexibility to work where we are most effective.

As important, is that we can change the schedule as needed. We could change things day to day if needed, since we both have the flexibility to come in and out the office to work as needed, which is something that makes the hybrid model even more effective and plausible for both of us.

Being able to work in a hybrid model is something that would make employees more effective, and committed. Specially because when needed, meeting could be held outside the office to boots moral when needed. The office could become the place where people come together when needed, or to meet to set things up, and work from where they are most effective the rest of the time.

In essence, the office would be the place where employees come to set targets, and their remote work place where they make things happen.

Solving the RDP Printer Redirection Nightmare: A Case Study in Linux vs. Windows

One of the aspects where Remmina as remote desktop client, running on Linux Mint, has proven better than the option we have on Windows 11 at work, is that it respect the printer settings.

To save on paper cost, the invoices we send to our clients are printed on both sides of the paper. On Windows 10 and 11, it is a hit or miss option. It does respects it a few times, mostly ignoring it. While on Remmina, we set it once when the printer is added and we can count that it will print on both sides of the paper,

We have test it on at least three brands of printers, like HP and Bother. While on Remmina it works consistently on every printer,  on Windows it consistently fails to work. One would think that running a Windows remote desktop on a Windows computer would be easy to set it up, it has proven not to be. While doing so on 3 different laptops running Linux Mint has worked every time.

To be honest, setting printing on both sides should be something that just works.  That it doesn't work on Windows not matter the printer, or the computer you use,  is something that baffles me. Specially since is something that is easy to do, and works consistently on several computers running Linux Mint.

For my department, is has been a long standing problem. For some five years, I've the only one that could print double sides print outs directly from the remote desktop. My boss, and coworker, had to send the document to their local desktop to be able to do so, which is not that bad if it something we do sparingly. Yet, we need to do it several times a day, then it becomes a problem.

Something so simple doesn't have a simple fix, and it seems that it is something that won't be fixed anytime soon. Which is a shame and frustrating. 

The Math of Mass Transit: How Integrated Fares Save More Than Just Time

The more I use mass transit, like the light train or bus rapid transit, in Guadalajara metropolitan area and compare it to using a car for everyday commute, the more I'm convinced that we need a larger integrated system.

Today I had some errands to run, and had to transfer between both systems to get where I had to be. If I had to use the normal bus, I´d have to pay four fares to get where I was going and would have taken at least half an hour longer since on normal bus it shares the road with private transport. Which means that it runs slower overall.

Using the Macro Periférico rapid bus line and the Línea 3 of the light train system it took an hour and 20 minutes, even accoutring for waiting time for the bus and train to arrive both ways, since they have their own right of way. Not only that, the transfer cost half the price of the fare, which means that for the round trip I paid the price of three fares, instead of the four it would had cost me using the bus. For one trip it doesn't mean much, but for those who make the trip for work between five and six times a week, or those who have to make it daily, it adds up quickly.

While the Macro Periférico is getting extended, and the another Macros Bus is getting done to get to the airport, and a fourth light rail line has been completed early this year, there is room to expand both systems. For example the Línea 2 of the light rail could be extended to at least the Periférico from where it ends now, and more light rail or rapid bus lines need to be added in mayor avenues like Mariano Otero and Lopez Mateos, where options to cars are badly needed.

Mass transit in not a luxury, or nice things to have, on metropolitan areas like Guadalajara. They are must haves, that make commuting within the city not only easier, but much faster. Just having a few lines is not enough, they must be complete systems that allow people to move around the city, and with the same payment system to allow seamless transition between them. The same goes for the normal bus system, adding that they should also accept the transfer discount when taking near the stations of the light train, and rapid bus systems.

Public transport should be seen as system, not as independent services. Taxis, and shared ride apps, could be seen as exceptions, but light rail, rapid  bus, buses, and trolleybus should be considered as part of the system and integrated as such. And should be made so that everyone living in the metropolitan area should be within a 15 minute walking distance of a bus stop, trolley bus stop, light rail, or rapid bus station. Not only that, transferring between them should be seamless when needed. Not only that, it should be cheap enough for most of the population to pay, even free in some cases.

Public transport should so good that most people can consider it as the first option for their daily commute, with private transport being primary mode of transport for as little as possible. It is not about taking freedom of choice away, is that the making the choice of public transport easier to make for a larger portion of the people living in cities.

Public transport makes building cities for the people who live in them much easier, it is time to make cities for people not for cars.