Originally Posted by spliff monkey
you said it yourself. THX
I understand the point, so fine let's say we can use flash. I hear ya, but I can think of a many other reasons other than surfing the web that the tablet will be better used for.
Despite what you you've said, my point is that it doesn't NEED (capitals) NEED flash to be a success. I already use click to flash on my computers but I guess that's just me. Someone already made that decision for the iphone (oh yeah that was pretty much SJ wasn't it? )
We are actually about 85% in agreement. My only point with Flash, and Java even more so, was that "I" think the netbook market is a very significant one that I think Apple would want to address with a tablet device, since they have nothing else at the moment.
To address that market I think you need full internet capabilities. I agree, the tablet would have to be a multi-purpose device with a myriad of possible uses to succeed. Most of those wouldn't need F&J, as you pointed out, but a certain set of possible uses would. A Swiss Army knife has multiple features, you don't usually need them all for each task, but that doesn't mean you would want them to have left a couple out.
One use I might have for a Tablet would be to get the kids off Runescape on the iMac, so if such a device were to exist but lacked, say Java and a reasonable graphics capability. It wouldn't be able to fulfill one of my possible uses. That might be enough to dissuade me from getting one.
No amount of BS marketing hype from Apple would be able to convince me a missing feature was a 'feature', though past experience tells me they certainly wouldn't be shy at giving it a shot.
If the iTablet runs MacOSX applications, it will certainly FAIL.
The main reason is a simple one, but to many people a strange one....
.... if it can do it, then people will actually run MacOSX applications on it.
As such... they'll find that the apps are built to expect fine control with a mouse as well as keyboard entry as a standard. So the tablet will feel clunky and the apps will be harder to use. AND if a regular Mac app works on the tablet, then developers won't bother retooling their app to work well on the touch interface and within any other restrictions of the device.
As a person who uses a touch interface with desktop OSX exclusively, I continue to be astonished by people who think a mouse is the only possible input device for fine control. Multi-touch via the trackpad anyone?
I manage fine control via the touchpad on my Macbook perfectly well. I don't see why I couldn't continue to do so were the touchpad functionality transferred directly to the screen. Then we have graphics tablets, which for decades have been the premier input device for fine control. Surely it doesn't take much imagination to see that a touch screen with graphic tablet like input would be perfectly usable.
A modified OSX that itself delivered enhanced touch interaction to all applications running under it might be one possibility. The browser on my phone presents web pages in a way that allows for touch interface with them and mechanisms for slick text entry in otherwise tiny fields.