Got my new iPad yesterday. FirsT impressions were its heavier than the iPad 2 and definitely bigger. The screen is much nicer though, although some apps do need updating. I downloaded one that only displayed in a quarter of the screen, get the feeling they haven't followed apples guide on how to program and did everything in pixels!
Having used a wp7 phone for the last year there's a few things about ios that I'm finding really annoying. Overall love the pad but I hope apple copy a few more things off MS.
1. They keyboard is stupid! Why do I have to click a button to close it rather than click outside the keyboard. Why does it hardly ever autocomplete words or only big words and why when it's a keyboard on a screen can it not change the letters between upper and lower case.
2. The app store is awful. I had an iPhone before WP7 and in the time the app store has got worse. Rather then paid and free apps there is now paid, free apps that are actually demos of paid apps, free apps that aren't actually free, instead you pay in the app and free apps. On wp7 essentially every paid app has a trial version built into the paid app, so you download the paid one for free to try and then pay if you want to keep it. Simple concept, on ios though I have to find a free version of a paid app to see if it's any good. This has also meant free isn't free. On wp7 free apps are free as trials are built into the paid version, in ios free is mostly surprise cost once downloaded, ultimate disappointment and huge time wasted finding apps.
3. Double tapping the home button to switch open apps. That's really not user friendly.
Other than that it's great and absolutely loving it. But seriously apple sort the app store out. I want decent apps without ads. I don't care about paying for apps, but I'm not going to spend £4 on 6 different rss readers to find out which is the best. Let me try 6 different rss readers for free and then I'll happily pay £10 for the good one.
Oh yea MS Windows 8 is a complete mess. I do like the Metro UI though. It makes a fantastic phone OS and it will probably a good tablet one as well but this mixture of classic windows and Metro just sucks. I mean choose one guys. One minute I'm in a fancy new UI and the next Im back in Windows 7, back and forth, back and forth excuse me I feel sick.
About this convergence that's going on between OSX and iOS, you guys don't feel just a little upset that iOS is locked up tighter then Fort Knox and this is possibly what the future will bring when there is only one OS. Basicly shut up and use it and no outside food alowd, meaning everything must be bought threw iTunes.
Short answer: No!
I believe that iOS is locked up because it it had to be -- to control the limited resources on the original iPhone and preserve the user experience.
Over the 5 years, Apple has expanded the hardware and iOS resources -- allowing greater freedom to users and developers, alike.
I expect to see this trend continue!
Had Apple's initial approach been "anything goes" I do not believe they would have been anywhere near as successful.
It is easier (better) to start with strict control -- then gradually loosen the reins.
If you start with no control -- it is, likely, impossible to tighten the reins enough to gain effective control.
That's the iOS vs Android problem. Apple can loosen control in an instant -- Google may never be able to gain enough control to satisfy the needs of the sophisticated, non-tech user -- someone who just wants to use their device/apps for solutions.
As to iTunes -- I expect that it, too, will evolve (though it may retain the name). There is a lot to to be said for one-stop, one-click shopping -- secure, simple, easy, smooth, with recourse, implied guarantee. I think that Google, Amazon, MS are all attempting to evolve to a similar position.
iPad == one app at a time on the display -- though some apps can run in the background.
I didn't know that Android had a side-by-side capability for anything but widgets.
Windows 8 ARM has a "snap" implementation where two general apps can [potentially] run side-by-side... though the apps would, likely, need to be setup to dynamically reconfigure their display to fit in 1/2 the space. This could be a screen size fragmentation nightmare squared!
I do like, the concept, however... Apple could easily provide this capability and it would be fairly easy for developers because of a single display size (albeit 2 resolutions).
I think he is talking about Cornerstone. You are able to run three apps at once on the same screen. Very handy indeed, however you have to download a custom rom to use it right now and it's still in heavy development. They are working an a normal app that can be installed from Google market but it probably won't happen until the end of Q2. Cornerstone has spawned off a few more projects that should bare fruit in the near future as well. There are some great things coming to the Android world, I just love open source.
I believe that iOS is locked up because it it had to be -- to control the limited resources on the original iPhone and preserve the user experience.
Over the 5 years, Apple has expanded the hardware and iOS resources -- allowing greater freedom to users and developers, alike.
I expect to see this trend continue!
Had Apple's initial approach been "anything goes" I do not believe they would have been anywhere near as successful.
It is easier (better) to start with strict control -- then gradually loosen the reins.
If you start with no control -- it is, likely, impossible to tighten the reins enough to gain effective control.
That's the iOS vs Android problem. Apple can loosen control in an instant -- Google may never be able to gain enough control to satisfy the needs of the sophisticated, non-tech user -- someone who just wants to use their device/apps for solutions.
As to iTunes -- I expect that it, too, will evolve (though it may retain the name). There is a lot to to be said for one-stop, one-click shopping -- secure, simple, easy, smooth, with recourse, implied guarantee. I think that Google, Amazon, MS are all attempting to evolve to a similar position.
No I really believe it's locked the way it is to discourage people putting their own media on it. They want you to go threw iTunes to get everything you need. If this wasn't the case then the user would have the ability to mount his own device on any computer as a drive or include a filemanager or have other codecs except the ones iTunes uses. There of course is nothing wrong with that but then lower the cost of the iPad. Apple makes enough money selling TV shows that someone could have easly recorded with their Tivo, Music that's free to listen to on Youtube with playlists and all and movies that are well I'll stop there. They don't need 50 percent margins, it's simple greed. We still keep ponying up our cash though for not so special incremental updates. I wonder what the percentage of iPad 3 buyers just want it because it's new and never do more then surf with it. It has to be huge, I have friends that have their iPads in the kichen drawer where it stays 95 percent of the time untill its time to look up the number of a pizza joint.
Oh I'm sorry for that rant guys I'm fussy because Im in pain and Im stuck here in this lousy hospital bed. I have to use the bathroom and it envolves two people helping me. Don't get sick it sucks.
I think he is talking about Cornerstone. You are able to run three apps at once on the same screen. Very handy indeed, however you have to download a custom rom to use it right now and it's still in heavy development. They are working an a normal app that can be installed from Google market but it probably won't happen until the end of Q2. Cornerstone has spawned off a few more projects that should bare fruit in the near future as well. There are some great things coming to the Android world, I just love open source.
First, it is not the OS that is doing it -- it is a rooted install and a Modified OS. The fact that you can root or jailbreak a secured OS -- then modify it says nothing about the inferiority or superiority of the base OS.
Second, if this is to be done -- it cannot be done as a 3rd-party extension... it must be part of the OS -- or it will be total disaster...
Let's see we have these tablets with screen sizes and resolutions all over the map... Now we're going subdivide these screens into 3 windows...
What's a window... I see -- a window is a place where you put an app to run... What's an app... is this a joke?
...OK we have these three windows... running three apps... Oh, you can only run an app in the window if the window is big enough...
How big is a window... What... that depends on whether it is a big window or a small window... How small is a big window...
It depends on the number of pixels in the display and the size of the display... what's a pixel and how many fit into the size of the display... it depends -- on the resolution of the display, the display size and the aspect ratio...
...(this is a joke isn't it -- this is just one of the guys at the office kidding around).
I am not knowledgeable enough to offer an opinion on a text solution...
I wonder if you could design a web site for both portrait and landscape and have it reconfigure itself based on how the user is using the device -- similar how mail on the iPad switches between side-by-side and overlay panels when you switch from landscape to portrait.
Yes there are special Apple header codes for portrait and landscape so you can swap out CSS files for each orientation.
No I really believe it's locked the way it is to discourage people putting their own media on it. They want you to go threw iTunes to get everything you need. If this wasn't the case then the user would have the ability to mount his own device on any computer as a drive or include a filemanager or have other codecs except the ones iTunes uses. There of course is nothing wrong with that but then lower the cost of the iPad. Apple makes enough money selling TV shows that someone could have easly recorded with their Tivo, Music that's free to listen to on Youtube with playlists and all and movies that are well I'll stop there. They don't need 50 percent margins, it's simple greed. We still keep ponying up our cash though for not so special incremental updates. I wonder what the percentage of iPad 3 buyers just want it because it's new and never do more then surf with it. It has to be huge, I have friends that have their iPads in the kichen drawer where it stays 95 percent of the time untill its time to look up the number of a pizza joint.
Oh I'm sorry for that rant guys I'm fussy because Im in pain and Im stuck here in this lousy hospital bed. I have to use the bathroom and it envolves two people helping me. Don't get sick it sucks.
I have my own media on all my iDevices -- home movies, personal podcasts, ripped CDs and DVDs, some TV shows recorded on TiVo and EyeTV, some movies, TV shows, music purchased from iTunes, B&N or Amazon -- same with books... I have some of my media on YouTube that I can access through the YouTube app or the browser... search for dicklacara to see the public ones, or watch:
One can argue that Apple limits the codecs so that it can quickly and accurately decode the media with minimum use of bandwidth, storage and power (there's a chip that does h.264) -- of premier importance on a mobile device.
One can also argue that adding external devices and a finder-style file management would compromise the device for the tens of millions of users to which it is targeted.
I won't comment on your erroneous assumption that Apple has 50% margins -- you can search for their financials as easy as I can. But I would say that the potential for profits is, as it should be, what drives Apple to develop revolutionary new categories... Apple ][, Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad -- where nothing like it existed before.
Oh yea MS Windows 8 is a complete mess. I do like the Metro UI though. It makes a fantastic phone OS and it will probably a good tablet one as well but this mixture of classic windows and Metro just sucks. I mean choose one guys. One minute I'm in a fancy new UI and the next Im back in Windows 7, back and forth, back and forth excuse me I feel sick.
About this convergence that's going on between OSX and iOS, you guys don't feel just a little upset that iOS is locked up tighter then Fort Knox and this is possibly what the future will bring when there is only one OS. Basicly shut up and use it and no outside food alowd, meaning everything must be bought threw iTunes.
I'm not worried. It's locked up for phones and tablets. That doesn't mean it will be so for a "classic" computing device. More sophisticated programming and usage requires more access to the file system than does phone and tablet computing. Even there, it may open up a bit more in time. It's opened up as upgrades to iOS have progressed. Remember, we didn't even have apps in the beginning, that was pretty big opening on its own.
I think a lot of people are being overly harsh on Microsoft. I just bought a new iPad but even being the huge apple fan that I am, I think win 8 is a better tablet design for an os. Apple will obviously and already have copied a lot of the ideas they've come up with, but at this point in time it's still better.
The biggest problem Microsoft have is although metro is great for a tablet and even great for a home use laptop, it's awful for business. Full screen apps are awful for doing actual work, and thats why you still have the desktop, task bar, snap and all the other stuff that make windows great for working. Having 2 os's in 1 though is not user friendly and creates confusion, but at the same time having 2 separate os's is also confusing, people will want to know which one is the future and ignore the other.
So that's my opinion, MS have created the ideal ui for students and other home users to be able to Skype someone while watching Netflix, go on the web etc with the split pane ui. Or just do things full screen without os x's stupid button that is way to close to a hot corner action. And they also have windows 7 which has features I miss every time I use os x for working. But they are at complete opposites and will only sell if there in 1 product. I think people will love the tablets and hate the desktop (at work)
There's a lot of problems with Metro. For example, after some time of buying apps, we found that we were having too many screens of them. We called for folders for organizational purposes. Because the OS is app centric, that wasn't a problem for Apple, and they complied with our requests (so much for them never listening!). But Metro isn't app centric, it's organized around functions. The problem with that is as you obtain more apps, you have to scroll. There is no way that it can accept folders without hiding those functions. That goes against the entire concept of what they're doing.
So if they do that, they will have to change the OS so that it works more like Android and iOS. If they do that, then what's the point of buying it?
Right now, there is no way to avoid scrolling down lists either. With iOS and Android, you can have those small letters on the right side you can tap. Nothing like that in WP7. We can also type a few letters, but often that's even more work. Depends on the length of the list.
Also, when you have open apps in Metro, you have to swipe screen after screen to see which ones are open. There's no way to use a gesture as we can in iOs to pull up a list on the bottom.
There are a lot of "gotcha's" like that. They make using it wasteful of time and effort. On a phone, or like for the Zune HD for which it was first designed, it's ok. Tiny screen, low resolution; sure it works ok for that. But it doesn't take advantage of large real estate. You don't see much more on a 27" monitor than on a 10" tablet. And if you did, all those tiles would get confusing. Just a mass of boxes in different bright colors. I think it's a big mistake.
I agree -- MS: either get in the pool or get out, Now!
The people that MS's current tablet plans won't fool is IT and enterprise. From what I read, the majority of enterprises are moving the "meat" of their applications to the iPad. At some point, what they currently do on the desktop will diminish and migrate to the back room, like Payroll, where it can [eventually] be outsourced to someone like ADP.
I do believe that "enterprise" will retain their database, but that, likely will be in the back room and percolate up to the cloud then trickle back down to the back room -- providing a balance between access anywhere and access speed. MS could do this as well as or better than anyone.
God... I do enjoy exercising these atrophying brain cells
I think MS should concentrate on serving business, which is something they really do well. As a consumer brand they've never done well. The XBox lost them an estimated $7.5 billion, which they will never make up. Bing and other web initiatives are costing them billions a year, which they will never make a profit on. And people bought DOS and Windows machines because they thought they had to. They know better now.
MS should get used to the idea that going forward they will be a stronger but smaller company if they concentrate on what they do best rather than getting involved in what they can't hope to be competitive in. At least, not in a big way.
There's a lot of problems with Metro. For example, after some time of buying apps, we found that we were having too many screens of them. We called for folders for organizational purposes. Because the OS is app centric, that wasn't a problem for Apple, and they complied with our requests (so much for them never listening!). But Metro isn't app centric, it's organized around functions. The problem with that is as you obtain more apps, you have to scroll. There is no way that it can accept folders without hiding those functions. That goes against the entire concept of what they're doing.
So if they do that, they will have to change the OS so that it works more like Android and iOS. If they do that, then what's the point of buying it?
Right now, there is no way to avoid scrolling down lists either. With iOS and Android, you can have those small letters on the right side you can tap. Nothing like that in WP7. We can also type a few letters, but often that's even more work. Depends on the length of the list.
Also, when you have open apps in Metro, you have to swipe screen after screen to see which ones are open. There's no way to use a gesture as we can in iOs to pull up a list on the bottom.
There are a lot of "gotcha's" like that. They make using it wasteful of time and effort. On a phone, or like for the Zune HD for which it was first designed, it's ok. Tiny screen, low resolution; sure it works ok for that. But it doesn't take advantage of large real estate. You don't see much more on a 27" monitor than on a 10" tablet. And if you did, all those tiles would get confusing. Just a mass of boxes in different bright colors. I think it's a big mistake.
I remember that!
I've never used Metro -- but I saw a video of an early demo...
Everything seemed to work smoothly until you installed 30 or so apps -- then the interface degraded to a few tiles for the major apps and a really basic scrollable list to access all the others (in some order).
That just can't be the way it is now... they wouldn't try to force that on a desktop user used to a file system... would they?
Got my new iPad yesterday. FirsT impressions were its heavier than the iPad 2 and definitely bigger. The screen is much nicer though, although some apps do need updating. I downloaded one that only displayed in a quarter of the screen, get the feeling they haven't followed apples guide on how to program and did everything in pixels!
Having used a wp7 phone for the last year there's a few things about ios that I'm finding really annoying. Overall love the pad but I hope apple copy a few more things off MS.
1. They keyboard is stupid! Why do I have to click a button to close it rather than click outside the keyboard. Why does it hardly ever autocomplete words or only big words and why when it's a keyboard on a screen can it not change the letters between upper and lower case.
2. The app store is awful. I had an iPhone before WP7 and in the time the app store has got worse. Rather then paid and free apps there is now paid, free apps that are actually demos of paid apps, free apps that aren't actually free, instead you pay in the app and free apps. On wp7 essentially every paid app has a trial version built into the paid app, so you download the paid one for free to try and then pay if you want to keep it. Simple concept, on ios though I have to find a free version of a paid app to see if it's any good. This has also meant free isn't free. On wp7 free apps are free as trials are built into the paid version, in ios free is mostly surprise cost once downloaded, ultimate disappointment and huge time wasted finding apps.
3. Double tapping the home button to switch open apps. That's really not user friendly.
Other than that it's great and absolutely loving it. But seriously apple sort the app store out. I want decent apps without ads. I don't care about paying for apps, but I'm not going to spend £4 on 6 different rss readers to find out which is the best. Let me try 6 different rss readers for free and then I'll happily pay £10 for the good one.
Its 1.8 oz heavier; not much. Unless I'm holding my iPad 2 in the other hand, I can't tell the difference. Larger? You can see the .6mm difference? Amazing!
The app you downloaded was a phone app, not a tablet app. Make sure you read about what you're downloading. The store makes it clear whether it's a phone app, a tablet app, or works properly with both.
It's better the way Apple does it. What I hate about WP7 is when I try to scroll a screen I'm typing into, if I'm not careful, the keyboard goes away. Very annoying.
Yeah, it woul be nice to have a trial version. But it's not that big a deal, really. It's nice to have a real free app that doesn't go away after some time as many of those trial apps do.
Free is free. I don't know what you're talking about. You seem to have gotten it backwards. A trial app isn't really free, but a free app is. You don't have to buy the paid version. That an app with more features, which is why it's a paid app. With free apps, if the features are enough, you don't need to buy the paid version at all. If not, then you've got a pretty good idea as to how the paid version will work.
Are you sure you really got an iPad? You don't have to double tap the home button. That was some time ago. You use four or five fingers and swipe up to pick any open app. Pretty easy.
I think he is talking about Cornerstone. You are able to run three apps at once on the same screen. Very handy indeed, however you have to download a custom rom to use it right now and it's still in heavy development. They are working an a normal app that can be installed from Google market but it probably won't happen until the end of Q2. Cornerstone has spawned off a few more projects that should bare fruit in the near future as well. There are some great things coming to the Android world, I just love open source.
I think MS should concentrate on serving business, which is something they really do well. As a consumer brand they've never done well. The XBox lost them an estimated $7.5 billion, which they will never make up. Bing and other web initiatives are costing them billions a year, which they will never make a profit on. And people bought DOS and Windows machines because they thought they had to. They know better now.
MS should get used to the idea that going forward they will be a stronger but smaller company if they concentrate on what they do best rather than getting involved in what they can't hope to be competitive in. At least, not in a big way.
Yes serving businesses with services including front office, back room and cloud -- then whatever cloud infrastructure they develop they could subset, if desired, for the non-business user.
If they made a drop-dead simple (install, maintain and use) home backup/server that staged data to and from the cloud they would would have a winner, IMO. There are times where the cloud is fine and there are other times when you just need your stuff stored locally (for a while) while you a working on it.
Apple could do this in spades -- but they have too much on their plate, already -- and would need to start from scratch. MS already has much of the infrastructure (and experience) in place.
MS could remake themselves in much the same way as IBM has done.
I like that a lot better than MS getting into the hardware business.
Ahh... but then there's Oracle... who has been unusually quiet for a while, now...
No I really believe it's locked the way it is to discourage people putting their own media on it. They want you to go threw iTunes to get everything you need. If this wasn't the case then the user would have the ability to mount his own device on any computer as a drive or include a filemanager or have other codecs except the ones iTunes uses. There of course is nothing wrong with that but then lower the cost of the iPad. Apple makes enough money selling TV shows that someone could have easly recorded with their Tivo, Music that's free to listen to on Youtube with playlists and all and movies that are well I'll stop there. They don't need 50 percent margins, it's simple greed. We still keep ponying up our cash though for not so special incremental updates. I wonder what the percentage of iPad 3 buyers just want it because it's new and never do more then surf with it. It has to be huge, I have friends that have their iPads in the kichen drawer where it stays 95 percent of the time untill its time to look up the number of a pizza joint.
Oh I'm sorry for that rant guys I'm fussy because Im in pain and Im stuck here in this lousy hospital bed. I have to use the bathroom and it envolves two people helping me. Don't get sick it sucks.
Hope you get out soon.
Apple was the one that made the push to get rid of DRM in music files. We can be sure they have been trying to do the same for video and movies. So they really don't care if you get your stuff elsewhere. They make a very small profit, by their standards, on media. They sell it to give their users somewhere to get everything in an easy way. They also pushed for low pricing. Don't forget that. I remember when songs cost between $2.50 and $3.75. And could only be played on the device you bought it on.
The reason why Amazon is going to fail with the Fire in the long run is because they are trying to make all their profit on it from the same content that Apple just wants to make enough on to keep the operation out of the red. They sell it for the same amount of money, and they both make between 3-5% profit from a sale. Apple isn't stupid enough to think that that's a good way to do business. I think this is where Bezos is making a big mistake.
I could agree with you about the pricing for Apple if it weren't selling so well. But it is, and so they are pricing it right.
I have read that 20% of Fire owners put it away, and don't use it after a week or two. In addition, while 74% of iPad users are very satisfied, only 54% of Fire users are.
I've never used Metro -- but I saw a video of an early demo...
Everything seemed to work smoothly until you installed 30 or so apps -- then the interface degraded to a few tiles for the major apps and a really basic scrollable list to access all the others (in some order).
That just can't be the way it is now... they wouldn't try to force that on a desktop user used to a file system... would they?
Comments
Having used a wp7 phone for the last year there's a few things about ios that I'm finding really annoying. Overall love the pad but I hope apple copy a few more things off MS.
1. They keyboard is stupid! Why do I have to click a button to close it rather than click outside the keyboard. Why does it hardly ever autocomplete words or only big words and why when it's a keyboard on a screen can it not change the letters between upper and lower case.
2. The app store is awful. I had an iPhone before WP7 and in the time the app store has got worse. Rather then paid and free apps there is now paid, free apps that are actually demos of paid apps, free apps that aren't actually free, instead you pay in the app and free apps. On wp7 essentially every paid app has a trial version built into the paid app, so you download the paid one for free to try and then pay if you want to keep it. Simple concept, on ios though I have to find a free version of a paid app to see if it's any good. This has also meant free isn't free. On wp7 free apps are free as trials are built into the paid version, in ios free is mostly surprise cost once downloaded, ultimate disappointment and huge time wasted finding apps.
3. Double tapping the home button to switch open apps. That's really not user friendly.
Other than that it's great and absolutely loving it. But seriously apple sort the app store out. I want decent apps without ads. I don't care about paying for apps, but I'm not going to spend £4 on 6 different rss readers to find out which is the best. Let me try 6 different rss readers for free and then I'll happily pay £10 for the good one.
Oh yea MS Windows 8 is a complete mess. I do like the Metro UI though. It makes a fantastic phone OS and it will probably a good tablet one as well but this mixture of classic windows and Metro just sucks. I mean choose one guys. One minute I'm in a fancy new UI and the next Im back in Windows 7, back and forth, back and forth excuse me I feel sick.
About this convergence that's going on between OSX and iOS, you guys don't feel just a little upset that iOS is locked up tighter then Fort Knox and this is possibly what the future will bring when there is only one OS. Basicly shut up and use it and no outside food alowd, meaning everything must be bought threw iTunes.
Short answer: No!
I believe that iOS is locked up because it it had to be -- to control the limited resources on the original iPhone and preserve the user experience.
Over the 5 years, Apple has expanded the hardware and iOS resources -- allowing greater freedom to users and developers, alike.
I expect to see this trend continue!
Had Apple's initial approach been "anything goes" I do not believe they would have been anywhere near as successful.
It is easier (better) to start with strict control -- then gradually loosen the reins.
If you start with no control -- it is, likely, impossible to tighten the reins enough to gain effective control.
That's the iOS vs Android problem. Apple can loosen control in an instant -- Google may never be able to gain enough control to satisfy the needs of the sophisticated, non-tech user -- someone who just wants to use their device/apps for solutions.
As to iTunes -- I expect that it, too, will evolve (though it may retain the name). There is a lot to to be said for one-stop, one-click shopping -- secure, simple, easy, smooth, with recourse, implied guarantee. I think that Google, Amazon, MS are all attempting to evolve to a similar position.
iPad == one app at a time on the display -- though some apps can run in the background.
I didn't know that Android had a side-by-side capability for anything but widgets.
Windows 8 ARM has a "snap" implementation where two general apps can [potentially] run side-by-side... though the apps would, likely, need to be setup to dynamically reconfigure their display to fit in 1/2 the space. This could be a screen size fragmentation nightmare squared!
I do like, the concept, however... Apple could easily provide this capability and it would be fairly easy for developers because of a single display size (albeit 2 resolutions).
I think he is talking about Cornerstone. You are able to run three apps at once on the same screen. Very handy indeed, however you have to download a custom rom to use it right now and it's still in heavy development. They are working an a normal app that can be installed from Google market but it probably won't happen until the end of Q2. Cornerstone has spawned off a few more projects that should bare fruit in the near future as well. There are some great things coming to the Android world, I just love open source.
Check it for for your self;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MedNfbKVMSM
Not bad for such an inferior OS.
Short answer: No!
I believe that iOS is locked up because it it had to be -- to control the limited resources on the original iPhone and preserve the user experience.
Over the 5 years, Apple has expanded the hardware and iOS resources -- allowing greater freedom to users and developers, alike.
I expect to see this trend continue!
Had Apple's initial approach been "anything goes" I do not believe they would have been anywhere near as successful.
It is easier (better) to start with strict control -- then gradually loosen the reins.
If you start with no control -- it is, likely, impossible to tighten the reins enough to gain effective control.
That's the iOS vs Android problem. Apple can loosen control in an instant -- Google may never be able to gain enough control to satisfy the needs of the sophisticated, non-tech user -- someone who just wants to use their device/apps for solutions.
As to iTunes -- I expect that it, too, will evolve (though it may retain the name). There is a lot to to be said for one-stop, one-click shopping -- secure, simple, easy, smooth, with recourse, implied guarantee. I think that Google, Amazon, MS are all attempting to evolve to a similar position.
No I really believe it's locked the way it is to discourage people putting their own media on it. They want you to go threw iTunes to get everything you need. If this wasn't the case then the user would have the ability to mount his own device on any computer as a drive or include a filemanager or have other codecs except the ones iTunes uses. There of course is nothing wrong with that but then lower the cost of the iPad. Apple makes enough money selling TV shows that someone could have easly recorded with their Tivo, Music that's free to listen to on Youtube with playlists and all and movies that are well I'll stop there. They don't need 50 percent margins, it's simple greed. We still keep ponying up our cash though for not so special incremental updates. I wonder what the percentage of iPad 3 buyers just want it because it's new and never do more then surf with it. It has to be huge, I have friends that have their iPads in the kichen drawer where it stays 95 percent of the time untill its time to look up the number of a pizza joint.
Oh I'm sorry for that rant guys I'm fussy because Im in pain and Im stuck here in this lousy hospital bed. I have to use the bathroom and it envolves two people helping me. Don't get sick it sucks.
I think he is talking about Cornerstone. You are able to run three apps at once on the same screen. Very handy indeed, however you have to download a custom rom to use it right now and it's still in heavy development. They are working an a normal app that can be installed from Google market but it probably won't happen until the end of Q2. Cornerstone has spawned off a few more projects that should bare fruit in the near future as well. There are some great things coming to the Android world, I just love open source.
Check it for for your self;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MedNfbKVMSM
Not bad for such an inferior OS.
First, it is not the OS that is doing it -- it is a rooted install and a Modified OS. The fact that you can root or jailbreak a secured OS -- then modify it says nothing about the inferiority or superiority of the base OS.
Second, if this is to be done -- it cannot be done as a 3rd-party extension... it must be part of the OS -- or it will be total disaster...
Let's see we have these tablets with screen sizes and resolutions all over the map... Now we're going subdivide these screens into 3 windows...
What's a window... I see -- a window is a place where you put an app to run... What's an app... is this a joke?
...OK we have these three windows... running three apps... Oh, you can only run an app in the window if the window is big enough...
How big is a window... What... that depends on whether it is a big window or a small window... How small is a big window...
It depends on the number of pixels in the display and the size of the display... what's a pixel and how many fit into the size of the display... it depends -- on the resolution of the display, the display size and the aspect ratio...
...(this is a joke isn't it -- this is just one of the guys at the office kidding around).
Apologies to Bob Newhart!
Interesting...
I am not knowledgeable enough to offer an opinion on a text solution...
I wonder if you could design a web site for both portrait and landscape and have it reconfigure itself based on how the user is using the device -- similar how mail on the iPad switches between side-by-side and overlay panels when you switch from landscape to portrait.
Yes there are special Apple header codes for portrait and landscape so you can swap out CSS files for each orientation.
No I really believe it's locked the way it is to discourage people putting their own media on it. They want you to go threw iTunes to get everything you need. If this wasn't the case then the user would have the ability to mount his own device on any computer as a drive or include a filemanager or have other codecs except the ones iTunes uses. There of course is nothing wrong with that but then lower the cost of the iPad. Apple makes enough money selling TV shows that someone could have easly recorded with their Tivo, Music that's free to listen to on Youtube with playlists and all and movies that are well I'll stop there. They don't need 50 percent margins, it's simple greed. We still keep ponying up our cash though for not so special incremental updates. I wonder what the percentage of iPad 3 buyers just want it because it's new and never do more then surf with it. It has to be huge, I have friends that have their iPads in the kichen drawer where it stays 95 percent of the time untill its time to look up the number of a pizza joint.
Oh I'm sorry for that rant guys I'm fussy because Im in pain and Im stuck here in this lousy hospital bed. I have to use the bathroom and it envolves two people helping me. Don't get sick it sucks.
I have my own media on all my iDevices -- home movies, personal podcasts, ripped CDs and DVDs, some TV shows recorded on TiVo and EyeTV, some movies, TV shows, music purchased from iTunes, B&N or Amazon -- same with books... I have some of my media on YouTube that I can access through the YouTube app or the browser... search for dicklacara to see the public ones, or watch:
AndyAndy
One can argue that Apple limits the codecs so that it can quickly and accurately decode the media with minimum use of bandwidth, storage and power (there's a chip that does h.264) -- of premier importance on a mobile device.
One can also argue that adding external devices and a finder-style file management would compromise the device for the tens of millions of users to which it is targeted.
I won't comment on your erroneous assumption that Apple has 50% margins -- you can search for their financials as easy as I can. But I would say that the potential for profits is, as it should be, what drives Apple to develop revolutionary new categories... Apple ][, Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad -- where nothing like it existed before.
P.S. Get a catheter -- you'll learn to love it!
Oh yea MS Windows 8 is a complete mess. I do like the Metro UI though. It makes a fantastic phone OS and it will probably a good tablet one as well but this mixture of classic windows and Metro just sucks. I mean choose one guys. One minute I'm in a fancy new UI and the next Im back in Windows 7, back and forth, back and forth excuse me I feel sick.
About this convergence that's going on between OSX and iOS, you guys don't feel just a little upset that iOS is locked up tighter then Fort Knox and this is possibly what the future will bring when there is only one OS. Basicly shut up and use it and no outside food alowd, meaning everything must be bought threw iTunes.
I'm not worried. It's locked up for phones and tablets. That doesn't mean it will be so for a "classic" computing device. More sophisticated programming and usage requires more access to the file system than does phone and tablet computing. Even there, it may open up a bit more in time. It's opened up as upgrades to iOS have progressed. Remember, we didn't even have apps in the beginning, that was pretty big opening on its own.
I think a lot of people are being overly harsh on Microsoft. I just bought a new iPad but even being the huge apple fan that I am, I think win 8 is a better tablet design for an os. Apple will obviously and already have copied a lot of the ideas they've come up with, but at this point in time it's still better.
The biggest problem Microsoft have is although metro is great for a tablet and even great for a home use laptop, it's awful for business. Full screen apps are awful for doing actual work, and thats why you still have the desktop, task bar, snap and all the other stuff that make windows great for working. Having 2 os's in 1 though is not user friendly and creates confusion, but at the same time having 2 separate os's is also confusing, people will want to know which one is the future and ignore the other.
So that's my opinion, MS have created the ideal ui for students and other home users to be able to Skype someone while watching Netflix, go on the web etc with the split pane ui. Or just do things full screen without os x's stupid button that is way to close to a hot corner action. And they also have windows 7 which has features I miss every time I use os x for working. But they are at complete opposites and will only sell if there in 1 product. I think people will love the tablets and hate the desktop (at work)
There's a lot of problems with Metro. For example, after some time of buying apps, we found that we were having too many screens of them. We called for folders for organizational purposes. Because the OS is app centric, that wasn't a problem for Apple, and they complied with our requests (so much for them never listening!). But Metro isn't app centric, it's organized around functions. The problem with that is as you obtain more apps, you have to scroll. There is no way that it can accept folders without hiding those functions. That goes against the entire concept of what they're doing.
So if they do that, they will have to change the OS so that it works more like Android and iOS. If they do that, then what's the point of buying it?
Right now, there is no way to avoid scrolling down lists either. With iOS and Android, you can have those small letters on the right side you can tap. Nothing like that in WP7. We can also type a few letters, but often that's even more work. Depends on the length of the list.
Also, when you have open apps in Metro, you have to swipe screen after screen to see which ones are open. There's no way to use a gesture as we can in iOs to pull up a list on the bottom.
There are a lot of "gotcha's" like that. They make using it wasteful of time and effort. On a phone, or like for the Zune HD for which it was first designed, it's ok. Tiny screen, low resolution; sure it works ok for that. But it doesn't take advantage of large real estate. You don't see much more on a 27" monitor than on a 10" tablet. And if you did, all those tiles would get confusing. Just a mass of boxes in different bright colors. I think it's a big mistake.
I agree -- MS: either get in the pool or get out, Now!
The people that MS's current tablet plans won't fool is IT and enterprise. From what I read, the majority of enterprises are moving the "meat" of their applications to the iPad. At some point, what they currently do on the desktop will diminish and migrate to the back room, like Payroll, where it can [eventually] be outsourced to someone like ADP.
I do believe that "enterprise" will retain their database, but that, likely will be in the back room and percolate up to the cloud then trickle back down to the back room -- providing a balance between access anywhere and access speed. MS could do this as well as or better than anyone.
God... I do enjoy exercising these atrophying brain cells
I think MS should concentrate on serving business, which is something they really do well. As a consumer brand they've never done well. The XBox lost them an estimated $7.5 billion, which they will never make up. Bing and other web initiatives are costing them billions a year, which they will never make a profit on. And people bought DOS and Windows machines because they thought they had to. They know better now.
MS should get used to the idea that going forward they will be a stronger but smaller company if they concentrate on what they do best rather than getting involved in what they can't hope to be competitive in. At least, not in a big way.
There's a lot of problems with Metro. For example, after some time of buying apps, we found that we were having too many screens of them. We called for folders for organizational purposes. Because the OS is app centric, that wasn't a problem for Apple, and they complied with our requests (so much for them never listening!). But Metro isn't app centric, it's organized around functions. The problem with that is as you obtain more apps, you have to scroll. There is no way that it can accept folders without hiding those functions. That goes against the entire concept of what they're doing.
So if they do that, they will have to change the OS so that it works more like Android and iOS. If they do that, then what's the point of buying it?
Right now, there is no way to avoid scrolling down lists either. With iOS and Android, you can have those small letters on the right side you can tap. Nothing like that in WP7. We can also type a few letters, but often that's even more work. Depends on the length of the list.
Also, when you have open apps in Metro, you have to swipe screen after screen to see which ones are open. There's no way to use a gesture as we can in iOs to pull up a list on the bottom.
There are a lot of "gotcha's" like that. They make using it wasteful of time and effort. On a phone, or like for the Zune HD for which it was first designed, it's ok. Tiny screen, low resolution; sure it works ok for that. But it doesn't take advantage of large real estate. You don't see much more on a 27" monitor than on a 10" tablet. And if you did, all those tiles would get confusing. Just a mass of boxes in different bright colors. I think it's a big mistake.
I remember that!
I've never used Metro -- but I saw a video of an early demo...
Everything seemed to work smoothly until you installed 30 or so apps -- then the interface degraded to a few tiles for the major apps and a really basic scrollable list to access all the others (in some order).
That just can't be the way it is now... they wouldn't try to force that on a desktop user used to a file system... would they?
Got my new iPad yesterday. FirsT impressions were its heavier than the iPad 2 and definitely bigger. The screen is much nicer though, although some apps do need updating. I downloaded one that only displayed in a quarter of the screen, get the feeling they haven't followed apples guide on how to program and did everything in pixels!
Having used a wp7 phone for the last year there's a few things about ios that I'm finding really annoying. Overall love the pad but I hope apple copy a few more things off MS.
1. They keyboard is stupid! Why do I have to click a button to close it rather than click outside the keyboard. Why does it hardly ever autocomplete words or only big words and why when it's a keyboard on a screen can it not change the letters between upper and lower case.
2. The app store is awful. I had an iPhone before WP7 and in the time the app store has got worse. Rather then paid and free apps there is now paid, free apps that are actually demos of paid apps, free apps that aren't actually free, instead you pay in the app and free apps. On wp7 essentially every paid app has a trial version built into the paid app, so you download the paid one for free to try and then pay if you want to keep it. Simple concept, on ios though I have to find a free version of a paid app to see if it's any good. This has also meant free isn't free. On wp7 free apps are free as trials are built into the paid version, in ios free is mostly surprise cost once downloaded, ultimate disappointment and huge time wasted finding apps.
3. Double tapping the home button to switch open apps. That's really not user friendly.
Other than that it's great and absolutely loving it. But seriously apple sort the app store out. I want decent apps without ads. I don't care about paying for apps, but I'm not going to spend £4 on 6 different rss readers to find out which is the best. Let me try 6 different rss readers for free and then I'll happily pay £10 for the good one.
Its 1.8 oz heavier; not much. Unless I'm holding my iPad 2 in the other hand, I can't tell the difference. Larger? You can see the .6mm difference? Amazing!
The app you downloaded was a phone app, not a tablet app. Make sure you read about what you're downloading. The store makes it clear whether it's a phone app, a tablet app, or works properly with both.
It's better the way Apple does it. What I hate about WP7 is when I try to scroll a screen I'm typing into, if I'm not careful, the keyboard goes away. Very annoying.
Yeah, it woul be nice to have a trial version. But it's not that big a deal, really. It's nice to have a real free app that doesn't go away after some time as many of those trial apps do.
Free is free. I don't know what you're talking about. You seem to have gotten it backwards. A trial app isn't really free, but a free app is. You don't have to buy the paid version. That an app with more features, which is why it's a paid app. With free apps, if the features are enough, you don't need to buy the paid version at all. If not, then you've got a pretty good idea as to how the paid version will work.
Are you sure you really got an iPad? You don't have to double tap the home button. That was some time ago. You use four or five fingers and swipe up to pick any open app. Pretty easy.
I think he is talking about Cornerstone. You are able to run three apps at once on the same screen. Very handy indeed, however you have to download a custom rom to use it right now and it's still in heavy development. They are working an a normal app that can be installed from Google market but it probably won't happen until the end of Q2. Cornerstone has spawned off a few more projects that should bare fruit in the near future as well. There are some great things coming to the Android world, I just love open source.
Check it for for your self;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MedNfbKVMSM
Not bad for such an inferior OS.
The problem is that most Android users will never be able to use that, so it has limited appeal, assuming that they ever get it to work.
...and an ATV.
Down boy...down...
Lemon Bon Bon.
I think MS should concentrate on serving business, which is something they really do well. As a consumer brand they've never done well. The XBox lost them an estimated $7.5 billion, which they will never make up. Bing and other web initiatives are costing them billions a year, which they will never make a profit on. And people bought DOS and Windows machines because they thought they had to. They know better now.
MS should get used to the idea that going forward they will be a stronger but smaller company if they concentrate on what they do best rather than getting involved in what they can't hope to be competitive in. At least, not in a big way.
Yes serving businesses with services including front office, back room and cloud -- then whatever cloud infrastructure they develop they could subset, if desired, for the non-business user.
If they made a drop-dead simple (install, maintain and use) home backup/server that staged data to and from the cloud they would would have a winner, IMO. There are times where the cloud is fine and there are other times when you just need your stuff stored locally (for a while) while you a working on it.
Apple could do this in spades -- but they have too much on their plate, already -- and would need to start from scratch. MS already has much of the infrastructure (and experience) in place.
MS could remake themselves in much the same way as IBM has done.
I like that a lot better than MS getting into the hardware business.
Ahh... but then there's Oracle... who has been unusually quiet for a while, now...
No I really believe it's locked the way it is to discourage people putting their own media on it. They want you to go threw iTunes to get everything you need. If this wasn't the case then the user would have the ability to mount his own device on any computer as a drive or include a filemanager or have other codecs except the ones iTunes uses. There of course is nothing wrong with that but then lower the cost of the iPad. Apple makes enough money selling TV shows that someone could have easly recorded with their Tivo, Music that's free to listen to on Youtube with playlists and all and movies that are well I'll stop there. They don't need 50 percent margins, it's simple greed. We still keep ponying up our cash though for not so special incremental updates. I wonder what the percentage of iPad 3 buyers just want it because it's new and never do more then surf with it. It has to be huge, I have friends that have their iPads in the kichen drawer where it stays 95 percent of the time untill its time to look up the number of a pizza joint.
Oh I'm sorry for that rant guys I'm fussy because Im in pain and Im stuck here in this lousy hospital bed. I have to use the bathroom and it envolves two people helping me. Don't get sick it sucks.
Hope you get out soon.
Apple was the one that made the push to get rid of DRM in music files. We can be sure they have been trying to do the same for video and movies. So they really don't care if you get your stuff elsewhere. They make a very small profit, by their standards, on media. They sell it to give their users somewhere to get everything in an easy way. They also pushed for low pricing. Don't forget that. I remember when songs cost between $2.50 and $3.75. And could only be played on the device you bought it on.
The reason why Amazon is going to fail with the Fire in the long run is because they are trying to make all their profit on it from the same content that Apple just wants to make enough on to keep the operation out of the red. They sell it for the same amount of money, and they both make between 3-5% profit from a sale. Apple isn't stupid enough to think that that's a good way to do business. I think this is where Bezos is making a big mistake.
I could agree with you about the pricing for Apple if it weren't selling so well. But it is, and so they are pricing it right.
I have read that 20% of Fire owners put it away, and don't use it after a week or two. In addition, while 74% of iPad users are very satisfied, only 54% of Fire users are.
I remember that!
I've never used Metro -- but I saw a video of an early demo...
Everything seemed to work smoothly until you installed 30 or so apps -- then the interface degraded to a few tiles for the major apps and a really basic scrollable list to access all the others (in some order).
That just can't be the way it is now... they wouldn't try to force that on a desktop user used to a file system... would they?
Uhh...
I have my iPad and I like it!!!
...and an ATV.
Down boy...down...
Lemon Bon Bon.
Yeah, it got the new aTv as well, but haven't had time to take the old one out and set it up.
Here's an interesting site:
http://labs.chitika.com/ipad/
When I first saw this yesterday, the new iPad figures were about 0.08% -- now they are 4.065%.
If there are, say, 50 million iPads 1 & 2... and 50% are in the US -- that's 25 million iPads 1 & 2 in the US.
That would mean that ~= 1 million new iPads are in use in the US.
Hmmm...
Here's an interesting site:
http://labs.chitika.com/ipad/
When I first saw this yesterday, the new iPad figures were about 0.08% -- now they are 4.065%.
If there are, say, 50 million iPads 1 & 2... and 50% are in the US -- that's 25 million iPads 1 & 2 in the US.
That would mean that ~= 1 million new iPads are in use in the US.
Hmmm...
It's been estimated that apple could sell a million the first weekend.
But new users often use their new toy more in the very beginning. I know I am, and I use my iPad a lot anyway.