or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple reveals long-awaited multi-touch 'iPad'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple reveals long-awaited multi-touch 'iPad' - Page 17

post #641 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

But, but, that is just...irrational!

Almost as irrational as people noticing the battery low icon and just...plug it in to chage?
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #642 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doors6767 View Post

That's a good point, how will the files be transferred that you are working on? Wifi, iTunes connection?


There are already several printing apps which allow you to print from iPhone and the iTouch available from the app store. I see no reason why the iPad would be any different.
post #643 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

That is irrational. The rational perspective is that iSteve knows better than you do what you should be doing.

Well then, I stand corrected.
post #644 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

The reason some of us here call it a "beta" is that it seems to be Apple's way for the first generation of a product they make.

Take the iPhone for example. No 3G, no MMS, no multitasking of third-party apps, no copy/paste when it was first introduced in 2007. It wasn't until the 3G that most of these features were added. And the iPhone 3GS just made things better. Some would argue that iPhone OS 3.0 should have been what was available for the iPhone back in 2007.

Why do other companies get a "pass" on this? They generally don't, if the product is really, really bad. But it's mostly that they release them with all the features us consumers ask for from the get-go. Sure the equivalent features may not be implemented as nicely as on Apple products, but they do work. And for some, just having the feature working from the beginning is much more important than waiting for Apple to get around to creating a "snazzy" way of making it work.

Yes, yes, maybe.

My point is, whatever you call it, it really is well known in the Apple community at large that you shouldn't buy a first release product. Most recent example, 27" iMacs. Look at all the problems users have reported with that beast.

Same with the iPhone 3G, same with unibody MacBook Pros, etc, etc.

Obviously, as slick as Apple's products are, Apple's zeal for keeping new products secrets mean they don't get acid or beta tested quite enough by enough people to be bug/defect free.
post #645 of 779
Too many people defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask 3rd party apps in mobile devices to respond to any particular post, but I thought I'd point out that despite all the assertions that multitasking is an unnecessary drain on the device, my Android phone suggests it's just not that big an issue unless you're running some app that pulls data off the network constantly in the background (such as Twitter or Pandora).

With those two apps, it's obviously the use of the 3G/WiFi radio that is the battery killer, NOT the fact that the app is running. I will have the same battery drain overall if I just listen to Pandora without multitasking.

What's more important to battery life I think, and has been totally ignored in the gripes here, is the choice of not using an OLED display. If battery life is your big concern, why aren't you criticizing this decision? It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.

Android phones have a feature in the About menu that shows you exactly what percent of your battery drain has been caused by what process. Assuming it's accurate, I've found over the past week that the DISPLAY is by far the biggest drain on the device, by orders of magnitude. Yesterday, before recharge, the tracking showed 76% of my battery drain over the day had been from the display. The next biggest drain was the "cell standby". All the other little apps running in the background, and there's always a dozen or more, were miniscule in comparison.

Food for thought if you're a multitasking is bad proponent.
post #646 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

Yes, yes, maybe.

My point is, whatever you call it, it really is well known in the Apple community at large that you shouldn't buy a first release product. Most recent example, 27" iMacs. Look at all the problems users have reported with that beast.

Same with the iPhone 3G, same with unibody MacBook Pros, etc, etc.

Obviously, as slick as Apple's products are, Apple's zeal for keeping new products secrets mean they don't get acid or beta tested quite enough by enough people to be bug/defect free.

I think we are actually agreeing here. I misread the last sentence on your last post and thought that you were being sarcastic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

Too many people defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask 3rd party apps in mobile devices to respond to any particular post, but I thought I'd point out that despite all the assertions that multitasking is an unnecessary drain on the device, my Android phone suggests it's just not that big an issue unless you're running some app that pulls data off the network constantly in the background (such as Twitter or Pandora).

With those two apps, it's obviously the use of the 3G/WiFi radio that is the battery killer, NOT the fact that the app is running. I will have the same battery drain overall if I just listen to Pandora without multitasking.

What's more important to battery life I think, and has been totally ignored in the gripes here, is the choice of not using an OLED display. If battery life is your big concern, why aren't you criticizing this decision? It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.

Android phones have a feature in the About menu that shows you exactly what percent of your battery drain has been caused by what process. Assuming it's accurate, I've found over the past week that the DISPLAY is by far the biggest drain on the device, by orders of magnitude. Yesterday, before recharge, the tracking showed 76% of my battery drain over the day had been from the display. The next biggest drain was the "cell standby". All the other little apps running in the background, and there's always a dozen or more, were miniscule in comparison.

Food for thought if you're a multitasking is bad proponent.

Excellent find! The main counter-argument you'll come upon is that OLED screen are horrible in direct sunlight. With various examples of how the iPhone's LCD screen kicks ass and the whole "Zune HD had to be showed off in a dark room" nonsense. While this is true in general, there are some AMOLED screens out there that do pretty well in the sun. Enough to let you operate the phone, but not enough for you to really enjoy something like a movie. But then again, an LCD screen has the same issue.

But then you realize that the vast majority of our lives are spent under the cover of some type of structure! School, work, cars, home, etc. They're all places where the direct sunlight doesn't bother the screen. And for that one moment when you are outside, just angle the screen away from the sun or shade it with your other hand. If you're too lazy to do that and stand there and complain, then the problem is more than just the screen.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #647 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Wow! So I won't need uncle iSteve's permission to load the cool new software?

Guess again. This is a razor and blades sales strategy.

Are you so clueless as to not get Apple's model for the last 10 years? It has never been razors and blades because in that model you make all your money off the blades.
Apple makes all its money off the razors!! It makes next to nothing off the content - almost all goes back to the content owner and what's left pays for the insane bandwidth and serving costs. That is why Amazon are crapping themselves because they need to sell blades and are competing against Apple who could care less about the cost of blades - the cheaper the better to sell more razors. Apps/Music/Movies are all incredibly low margin (1-5% net) vs. Hardware (25-50%) by device.

Your quarter baked conspiracy ideas about Apple continue to hold no water.
post #648 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

[CENTER]Please stop being so petty over trivialities and try to stay on topic... Thanks

In case you forgot, we're discussing the Apple iPad.[/CENTER]

Ignore
post #649 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by usw View Post

This product may be great for what it is aimed for (entertainement black holes) but it seems to be designed almost as an App Store's extension and that makes Apple's greedy/totalitarian/populist evolution only more obvious...

When will you paranoid nuts realize that he iTunes store is not there to make money off the content. They don't. It is well publicized. Most revenue goes to the content holder and the rest mostly pays for bandwidth etc. It is there to give people something to watch/listen/read on their Apple devices (and make them more "valuable" to users. Apple are constantly trying to get content holders to reduce their prices but guess what, the content holders don't want to.
They lock you in because they want to control the total experience and the market has proved them right - 125M card holder accounts, 74million iOS devices etc.
Your paranoia is both misplaced and miscalculated. Apple is wildly successful without pandering to your desire to play torrent downloads and other alternative "lower cost" media.
post #650 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Nail -> Head.

...He knocked a nail into your head - but you probably didn't feel anything...

See previous posts about how wrong you and he/she/it are...
post #651 of 779
Don't get me wrong - I love Apple ... BUT ...

I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.

The he sat down and showed us the demo …

"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page …

I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?

So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.

But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks …
post #652 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickLW View Post

Don't get me wrong - I love Apple ... BUT ...

I use click to flash on Safari and generally avoid flash sites as much as I can. AFAIC, the more flash-free devices Apple sells the better.
post #653 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickLW View Post

Don't get me wrong - I love Apple ... BUT ...

I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.

The he sat down and showed us the demo

"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page

I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?

So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.

But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks


Most assumed that the first lego block was some kind of jab at Adobe.

The only problem with your theory is that it's almost impossible to believe that Steve Jobs didn't rehearse this presentation at least once. Wouldn't he and his crew have spotted this if it's as terrible as you describe.

I haven't watched the video, but it's just hard to fathom that something that glaring was missed in setting up the demo.
post #654 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by usw View Post

This product may be great for what it is aimed for (entertainement black holes) but it seems to be designed almost as an App Store's extension and that makes Apple's greedy/totalitarian/populist evolution only more obvious...

Thank you Che Guevara
post #655 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

So are you saying that the lack of functionality is a GOOD THING? A feature? An added benefit?

Stock answer No. 372?

Really, I said that? I said I want a device to work well. I don't consider multifunction at all important, or a benefit. Notifications is essentially the same thing. I don't want to accidentally have dozens of apps open, draining the battery.
post #656 of 779
The amazing thing about the iPad is that it will help to resurrect Palm's fortunes.

Because only the geniuses at Palm can save the Kindle now. Amazon must know that.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #657 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Really, I said that? I said I want a device to work well. I don't consider multifunction at all important, or a benefit. Notifications is essentially the same thing. I don't want to accidentally have dozens of apps open, draining the battery.

I can see where your argument against multitasking holds if the app is data intensive (i.e. uses the radios). However, just the act of having multiple apps open at once in the background is the least of the things consuming your battery.

As long as I don't have Google Maps open on my BlackBerry, it doesn't matter if I have the default 6 native apps or up to 20 apps open. I'm at the same battery amount by the end of the day.

More proof? My roommate and I work at the same company and he has an iPhone 3G. We both use our phones roughly the same amount during the day (texts, Google Maps, e-mail, browser). His phone needs to be recharged right when he gets home. Mine, with multiple apps going on constantly, lasts a few more hours before needing to be recharged.

Granted my battery is slightly larger than his. But following your logic, me having my 10+ apps open all day should at the very least cause my BlackBerry to need a recharge at the same time as his iPhone.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #658 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickLW View Post

Don't get me wrong - I love Apple ... BUT ...

I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.

The he sat down and showed us the demo

"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page

I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?

So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.

But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks

Maybe that is how Steve believes the iPod is best internet experience. That video probably doesn't look that good anyway. You gotta admit that blue lego brick looks beautiful on that gorgeous screen. It just makes me want to go out and buy one right now. And if it's video, you really don't want that cheap low quality free video anyway. Wouldn't you rather pay for higher quality video anyway?
post #659 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

Most assumed that the first lego block was some kind of jab at Adobe.

The only problem with your theory is that it's almost impossible to believe that Steve Jobs didn't rehearse this presentation at least once. Wouldn't he and his crew have spotted this if it's as terrible as you describe.

I haven't watched the video, but it's just hard to fathom that something that glaring was missed in setting up the demo.

I agree that it seems unlikely that they wouldn't have ironed this out prior to showtime, but I can't imagine why Steve would want to show the lego piece in his keynote.
post #660 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

I agree that it seems unlikely that they wouldn't have ironed this out prior to showtime, but I can't imagine why Steve would want to show the lego piece in his keynote.

As some have said, it was definitely intentional, and it's because optimization of Flash for the iPhone has been on Adobe's shoulders since 2007, as Apple has said before.
post #661 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

I don't want to accidentally have dozens of apps open, draining the battery.


That is great - FOR YOU. But the rest of us don't often have such "accidents".
post #662 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

I can see where your argument against multitasking holds if the app is data intensive (i.e. uses the radios). However, just the act of having multiple apps open at once in the background is the least of the things consuming your battery.

As long as I don't have Google Maps open on my BlackBerry, it doesn't matter if I have the default 6 native apps or up to 20 apps open. I'm at the same battery amount by the end of the day.

More proof? My roommate and I work at the same company and he has an iPhone 3G. We both use our phones roughly the same amount during the day (texts, Google Maps, e-mail, browser). His phone needs to be recharged right when he gets home. Mine, with multiple apps going on constantly, lasts a few more hours before needing to be recharged.

Granted my battery is slightly larger than his. But following your logic, me having my 10+ apps open all day should at the very least cause my BlackBerry to need a recharge at the same time as his iPhone.

Don't BBs have far smaller screens than iPhones, as well as much larger batteries? Why would someone need to have multiple apps open at the same tine? Notifications tells me when I have a new e-mail. Is the Black Berry so slow at opening apps, it is more efficient to just open them up all at once, rather than waiting for them to open? Such is not the case on the iPhone, nor iPad, from what I have seen.
post #663 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

OK, fine. It is a device suitable for folks who refuse to touch a computer. It is a device for them, and not us?

iPass.

And yet here you are, endlessly, repeatedly, some might say sort of obsessively and pointlessly explaining, over and over and over and over again, why you wouldn't buy this product, and why anyone you might arrogantly deem a "real computer user" shouldn't buy it either.

Why is that? I see products all the time that don't interest me; I certainly don't rush to the internets to explain to everyone why I find that product lacking. I just, you know, don't buy it.

I can't help but notice that lost among all the third grade snark about "MaxiPads" and "it's a toy" and "iPass" is a complete lack of interest regarding the actual OS and UI of this particular device. People who are proudly claiming to be "real computer users" and "tech enthusiasts" seem to be astonishingly incurious as to how Apple has gone about making a tablet specific experience, settling immediately into "it's a big iPod Touch" without any further reflection.

Here's a hint: it's not a big iPod touch, and some really interesting UI work has gone into this thing. Not that you'd care, I realize you have netbooks to buy.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #664 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

That is great - FOR YOU. But the rest of us don't often have such "accidents".

Really? You never open an app in OS X, then forget to quit it?
As long as you can speak for everyone here...
post #665 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123 View Post

That video probably doesn't look that good anyway.


Stock answer no. 569: "Those grapes probably were sour anyway."
post #666 of 779
I just can't believe the religious-like fervor that those who don't care about multitasking take when defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask the apps we want. What is the harm to you who don't want to multitask if it's an OPTION for those of us who do? None. What is the harm to those of us willing to make the trade off in battery life vs multitasking? Loss of functionality we consider valuable. Why can't you just acknowledge that for some of us, multitasking has legitimate purpose, and would be a nice feature?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Don't BBs have far smaller screens than iPhones, as well as much larger batteries? Why would someone need to have multiple apps open at the same tine? Notifications tells me when I have a new e-mail. Is the Black Berry so slow at opening apps, it is more efficient to just open them up all at once, rather than waiting for them to open? Such is not the case on the iPhone, nor iPad, from what I have seen.

Did you catch my post above re: multitasking and displays and battery life? Here's a paraphrase of it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

What's more important to battery life I think, is display. It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.

Your assertion about BBs having smaller screens is the reason they use less battery fits right into my point. Android Nexus One multitasking a dozen or more apps all day long loses 76% of its battery to the display, not to running all those apps.

With that in mind, it doesn't matter how fast the apps open if they can be a screen swipe away and be open that much faster with negligible system resources used to maintain that state. And some apps, especially on the iPhone ARE slow to open. Something as simple as the Gym Buddy app I use at the gym takes long enough to open on the iPhone 3G[s] that it's just much simpler to leave it backgrounded (jailbroken iPhone) and it's right on the page I left it. Gas Buddy's another example I use: I stop at a stop light and there's a gas station. if Gas Buddy is open already and multitasking sitting in the background, I can get to it instantly to report a price before the light even turns green; if it's not, it takes long enough to open that I might as well not bother unless I want to input while driving (unsafe).

Inrix Traffic the same thing and Navigon navigator the same thing. If I want to allow my location/speed data to feed the Inrix traffic reports system, I have to leave the app running all the time. If I do this without multitasking, I can do NOTHING else with the phone. Battery life is not a concern, since in the car I am plugged into a charger. Navigon I can set up a route, then let it background while I do something else and it spits out directions as appropriate, but only if I can multitask, otherwise my iPhone becomes nothing more than a GPS.

The number one drain on battery life on computers and AppPhones is the display. The number 2 is the radios, unless some errant application (like Flash, ahem) runs amok with the CPU.

With the logic some have of "you don't need to multitask because it chews up battery" then we should be arguing that we don't need a 9.7" IPS display because it chews up battery...we should settle for e-Ink, because that's good enough.
post #667 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

some really interesting UI work has gone into this thing. Not that you'd care, I realize you have netbooks to buy.

Please give examples of the really interesting UI work. I see nothing much different from the iTouch UI.
post #668 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Really? You never open an app in OS X, then forget to quit it?
As long as you can speak for everyone here...

To tell the truth, I don't recall EVER opening an app in OS X.

But when I put an app into the background on my iPhone, I usually know what the heck I've done. Usually I don't put them into the background. But at least once a day, I do.
post #669 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

I just can't believe the religious-like fervor that those who don't care about multitasking take when defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask the apps we want. What is the harm to you who don't want to multitask if it's an OPTION for those of us who do? None. What is the harm to those of us willing to make the trade off in battery life vs multitasking? Loss of functionality we consider valuable. Why can't you just acknowledge that for some of us, multitasking has legitimate purpose, and would be a nice feature?

.

I'm sure there are tradeoffs for allowing multitasking, which I would rather not have to accept for the tiny minority who want it, so they can listen to Pandora, who will probably never buy an iPad in the 1st place.
post #670 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

To tell the truth, I don't recall EVER opening an app in OS X.

But when I put an app into the background on my iPhone, I usually know what the heck I've done. Usually I don't put them into the background. But at least once a day, I do.

Figures, you don't even own a Mac. I just had the Grab app open, and didn't quit it. No big deal on a robust desktop; could be draining on the iPad, though, should it have a Grab-like app, or any others that would use memory and drain the battery.
post #671 of 779
I'm not really a first generation guy, but I will buy the first generation iPad. However it won't be for me. It'll be great for older children and parents who don't get computers. I might buy one each for my children and parents. They'll think it's great.
Eventually as more hardware and software features are added, I could even buy one for myself and replace my laptop.
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
post #672 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

That is great - FOR YOU. But the rest of us don't often have such "accidents".

Oops, I just opened up a half dozen app. Damn, I hate it when that happens.
post #673 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Figures, you don't even own a Mac. I just had the Grab app open, and didn't quit it. No big deal on a robust desktop; could be draining on the iPad, though, should it have a Grab-like app, or any others that would use memory and drain the battery.

Y'know, the other day I left the lights on on my car by accident, and the battery went dead.

By your logic, I would have a better car if they just excluded the headlights.
post #674 of 779
While I am disappointed with some of the specs (no forward facing camera for one), I see this device for what it is. It's not a e-book reader (won't beat the Kindle for avid readers). I don't even think it's really a tablet computer. I see it as an Apple mobile internet/media device (MID). Yes, it's a giant iPod Touch and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Personally, I think the iTouch/iPhone sucks for viewing movies or surfing the web for any extended length of time. They are class leading to be sure. But that does not mean you want to spend hours surfing the web on them.

That's where netbooks came in. There are two kinds of netbook users. Those that use it as quick, compact inernet access machine and those that use it for some basic productivity. Nobody is going to write an essay on a netbook (hopefully), but it is useful to make minor changes to documents or quickly edit slides or use the internet for longer than you would on a phone. And these are the tasks the iPad needs to take on.

And this where I feel ambivalent about the device....it's a nice MID. Much better than the iPhone or iTouch. And it could replace netbooks and even some laptops (for those that just use 'em to surf the net). But the productivity functions just aren't there yet. To start with, multi-tasking is needed when you're editing documents. Next, the OS needs to support some more productive software. Stripped down iWorks is okay. Now, if they can get a stripped down version of Office for Mac on there.... A camera is not essential but is a great tool for teleconferencing. Allowing for the use of a mouse would also be a good idea. I am sorry, but it would be annoying to type away on a bluetooth or docked keyboard and then have to touch the screen to move the cursor for example. A USB port to accept data sticks would be nice too. As would the ability to actually 'write' on it with some kind of capacitive touch input stylus (making it more paper pad like). So there are a few areas it could improve.

But for some users, it does offer a lot of functionality. I'd rather carry this than a laptop on trips, even business trips (adding Office for Mac will make that feasible). I'd just pack my bluetooth keyboard (which is otherwise sitting at home beside my imac) and a dock and be on my way. I can use the MID functions on the plane or on the road. And when I get where I am going I can set up something resembling a basic notebook or desktop.

And that's where I see this device slot in. It's really for the notebook crowd who really use notebooks as internet machines and for anybody that wants a MID. Maybe, it'll get true tablet PC computing functionality down the road, it's just not there yet. And that's why the iPad name makes sense to me. If it was more OS X instead of OSX Mobile, than Macbook Touch would have been an awesome name!

Anyway, I think I'll wait for version 2 and maybe see what the competition comes up with...Android is starting to get on tablets/MIDs. And we'll see what WM7 has to offer (though I don't hold much hope for that). I have on old Windows laptop that I've been dying to replace. But a macbook is far too expensive and too much machine for what I'd do with this laptop (since I use my iMac most of the time). And I would prefer not to get a cheap notebook and run Windows, because the OS will be clunky and the machine will a chore to carry around. An iPad with a few more features though would give me a portable Apple computer at a price point that's right for me, for the functions that I would most use it for (watch movies, surf the web, light document editing).

It's a really good first attempt at tablet computing for Apple. Can't wait to see v2!
post #675 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


As for the netbook comparison, thats silly. As near as I can tell, this is superior in almost every way unless youre typing a novel, and even then, the iPad with external keyboard probably beats the netbooks cramped keyboard.

The multitasking complaints are just plain wrong, as well. First, like the iPhone, it WILL multitask with Apple apps. Thus, you can check the email while using Skype to converse with someone. More importantly, my DVD player doesn't multitask, either. Who cares? Do you really expect to be playing Mario Chases Rodents while reading a book or while preparing a book report? I sure don't want to trade off the battery life and performance for a theoretical advantage with no real benefit.

You cant please everyone and fortunately Apple knows enough not to try. Dont confuse I dont want one of these with No one will want one of these


No, you're being silly. Steve himself made the netbook comparison, and to be frank, a netbook absolutely blows away the iPad. A netbook will multi-task, it will run flash (which if you hadn't noticed is absolutely EVERYWHERE on the web), it will use any USB device, it has a webcam for Skype, and so on. Oh, and it's cheaper too.

The lack of multi-tasking is totally indefensible. You Apple fanboys simply have no ground to stand on here. Ever received an IM on your iPhone while you're in a Twitter client or playing a game? It's such fun to have to quit out, load the IM client, reply, quit the IM client, then reload whatever it is you were doing before. Then another IM arrives 2 minutes later. Aweseome stuff, it's like going back to 1980s computing. I've had multi-tasking since my first Amiga and it's an absolutely fundamental, completely essential thing to have.

And I won't get started on flash, except to say, watch the Steve presentation on apple.com. Note how Steve hastily trys to zip past the missing GIANT flash parts of websites which are completely broken on the iPad. Like it or not, flash powers much of the internet, and especially for the casual user which Steve wants to go after, they use it ALL the time.
post #676 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Once again the forum is full of non believers. This thing is gonna sell like hot cakes. I have seen the future and it is pad shaped.

Maybe with version 2.
post #677 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Figures, you don't even own a Mac. I just had the Grab app open, and didn't quit it. No big deal on a robust desktop; could be draining on the iPad, though, should it have a Grab-like app, or any others that would use memory and drain the battery.

You would have to specifically tell it you wanted to keep an app running in the background. Default behavior would be to close the app.

This makes it impossible to accidentally leave an app running.
post #678 of 779
Come on. How can you not have a stylus? How am I going to write notes on a document? (And please don't say using the keyboard.) To me, the biggest advantage of a tablet is the ability to take notes directly on a document. That would be great for me in my MBA classes and in meetings. I don't know if Pages for iPad lets use your finger...I didn't see them mention that during the presentation. But even if it does, it seems like it would be sloppy. Finger -painting anyone?

iPod, iPad, iPad2, iPad 3, iPad Mini, iPhone, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, AppleTV (1,2 & 3), 13" MacBook Pro, 24" Cinema Display, Time Capsule, 21.5" iMac (Mid 2011)

Reply

iPod, iPad, iPad2, iPad 3, iPad Mini, iPhone, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, AppleTV (1,2 & 3), 13" MacBook Pro, 24" Cinema Display, Time Capsule, 21.5" iMac (Mid 2011)

Reply
post #679 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneaburns View Post

Come on. How can you not have a stylus? How am I going to write notes on a document? (And please don't say using the keyboard.) To me, the biggest advantage of a tablet is the ability to take notes directly on a document. That would be great for me in my MBA classes and in meetings. I don't know if Pages for iPad lets use your finger...I didn't see them mention that during the presentation. But even if it does, it seems like it would be sloppy. Finger -painting anyone?

Perhaps you could use this?-

Code:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19512_7-10443415-233.html
post #680 of 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

No, you're being silly. Steve himself made the netbook comparison, and to be frank, a netbook absolutely blows away the iPad. A netbook will multi-task, it will run flash (which if you hadn't noticed is absolutely EVERYWHERE on the web), it will use any USB device, it has a webcam for Skype, and so on. Oh, and it's cheaper too.

The lack of multi-tasking is totally indefensible. You Apple fanboys simply have no ground to stand on here. Ever received an IM on your iPhone while you're in a Twitter client or playing a game? It's such fun to have to quit out, load the IM client, reply, quit the IM client, then reload whatever it is you were doing before. Then another IM arrives 2 minutes later. Aweseome stuff, it's like going back to 1980s computing. I've had multi-tasking since my first Amiga and it's an absolutely fundamental, completely essential thing to have.

And I won't get started on flash, except to say, watch the Steve presentation on apple.com. Note how Steve hastily trys to zip past the missing GIANT flash parts of websites which are completely broken on the iPad. Like it or not, flash powers much of the internet, and especially for the casual user which Steve wants to go after, they use it ALL the time.

Your typical netbook will offer a vastly inferior browsing experience, be far inferior at displaying movies, be heavier, last not nearly as long, have significantly inferior battery life, be less engaging as a gaming platform, and cost more to load up with software, thanks to price gouging by major software developers on the PC side like Microsoft.

The last update to the OS the iTab will run off cost, if memory serves, around $10. A far cry from the more than $100 it cost me and many others to upgrade to Windows 7.

But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple reveals long-awaited multi-touch 'iPad'