Twitter users' biggest complaint with iPad: it can't replace an iPhone - Page 5

The bottom line is that it isn't intended by Apple to be a standalone computer, but that there is, de facto, nothing preventing it from being used as such other than the initial activation, which can be done at an Apple retail store.

cant even do that

Yes you can, provided you want to pay the hidden fees.

In my opinion the best option for making the iPad into a phone is Toktumi's Line2 app which works on the iPhone, iPod Touch (with a headset) and of course the iPad. It's a VoIP app but you get your own phone number (800 if you wish) as well as a huge list of calling features including voice mail that sends you an email with an mp3 of the message. Works on WIFI and/or 3G.

It's $15 per month but considering 3G service is $30/month you have unlimited US and Canada talk for $45/month. If you have iPhone service, you can use it on WIFI to cut your minutes (as the name implies it's a second line).

In fact you can use Line2 on all these devices at once, having the same number on each device. They're soon releasing push notifications as well as OS X software to run it on your computer as well.

I use it as my only phone over WIFI. It's an iPhone I use it on but I no longer have an ATT contract. So I am paying $15/month for unlimited phone.

Read more here http://douglasdolde.com/news.html

Skype isn't free either

Typical just simply trying to put a spin on something in a pathetic attempt to prove you are right, when clearly neither you are mouse are correct.

Something is either a standalone device or is isn't. Stop trying to bend reality. Its not a standalone device and the fact that Apple lists other hardware as a system requirement means you can't even debate that fact without sounding foolish.

On your best day you couldn't school me. You're a joke and more and more people are finding that out. About all you are good for at this point is adding names to your signature which is at best childish.

This is true. In fact I wonder if devices like the iPad won't cause a reverse in the decline of desktop sales and increase of laptop sales. As an iPad and iPhone owner, an iMac makes more sense now as my next computer than another Macbook Pro.

It's a standalone device if it can be used as a standalone device. I invite you to present a valid argument as to why it can't be used as a standalone device, apart from initial activation, which can be done at the Apple retail store.

NOTE: You may wish to review the thread and avoid any of the arguments already used since none of them have shown that it can't be used as a standalone device.

Many thanks for the huge news ... so exactly who set Twitter users expectations that the iPad could replace an iPhone? That either is a bad survey, or it shows just how distracted Twitter users are.

I don't have to debate this the fact that Apple lists either a Mac or a PC as a system requirement means it is NOT as standalone device. You can debate that all you want but you will still be wrong. This is like saying because an iPod doesn't need to be connected to a PC 100% of the time its a standalone device.

Kind of funny because when you look at the iPod, iPhone, iPad they all have system requirements under tech specs. Not so for Macbook, Mac Mini, iMac, MBP, Mac Pro.

Let me let you in on a little secret thats because the first group are not standalone devices and the second group is.

Other then sloppyism jumping in on this to be Captain America there isn't anyone in this thread that believes the iPad is a standalone device.

The difference, of course, is that a care requires routine maintenance.

What routine maintenance does the iPad or iPhone require? Does it run out of electrons if you don't plug it into the computer? Does the software rot over time? Maybe the interconnects rust if you don't connect it to a computer?

Sure, you can get added functionality if you upgrade the OS, but it's not required to keep the thing running like oil changes are for a car.

Other than you and, I believe, two others, there isn't anyone claiming that it can't be used as such. And, well, you're simply wrong that it can't.

EDIT: BTW, I find it quite amusing that you're all of a sudden all, "If Apple says so, we must do as they say!"

Of course, that argument was already shown to not hold water, so, no, once again, you don't gain any traction with an already discredited argument.

Only because you're misinterpeting the web page.

It lists Mac AND PC requirements. Does that mean you need a Mac and a PC?

It says you need an iTunes online account. Does that mean you can't access the Internet except through iTunes?

Obviously not. What it is saying is that IF you use it with a PC or Mac, those are the minimum requirements. There's nothing on Apple's site that says that you must have a computer to use it.

In fact, Apple's support forums have several threads about using an iPad as the only computer and every time there is a response from an Apple employee, it says it is possible.

Well yeah me a few others and Apple. You know the vendor that makes the iPad. I mean I could really try to explain this too you a few other ways but something tells me you simply aren't going to catch on to this simple fact.

Lets try one more time. When you bought your brand new Macbook or MBP and turned it on you could simply start it up follow the directions and bam it was ready to go. You didn't have to hook it up to anything to activate it, load anything it just worked.

Now try that with and iPod, iPhone or iPad and let me know in a few days how far you get.

Also answer this question for me. If someone lives in Mississippi and ordered their iPad online and they don't live anywhere near Ridgeland where the only Apple Store in that state exists and they don't have a computer how do they get their iPad to work?

Same question applies to their iPod and iPhone.

No actually I am not. How do you startup your iPad, iPhone or iPod for the first time?

Already covered, numerous times.

@ jragosta and anonymouse. Unless you two are committed to some Trollodyte Outreach Program I'm not aware of you are just wasting your time. It's been stated more than enough times in thread thread so know that you tried your best to teach some objectivity and let him have the last word.

Users who want to replace the iPhone with the iPad must be nuts. Try to hold that thing to your ear, it's way too big.
It would make a nice little video conferencing device, if it had a camera (and the battery could handle the CPU load resulting from the video processing that entails). But it would certainly not be a phone replacement.

Much bigger gripes: the lack of being able to tether it to a phone or tether a laptop to it, both should be a matter of the contracts between carriers and the end user and not a concern for Apple. e.g. in Austria where I travel frequently, there is a no-restriction pre-paid, pre-metered data SIM available. €20 for either 1GB of data, usable over 12 months, or €20 for 2GB of data, usable over 30 days. They don't care what kind of data use send over that net, nor do they care what device is using it. So Apple being in bed with AT&T here restricts what I could use the iPad for over in Austria, even though Apple sells the iPad unlocked. Since unlocked isn't un-jailed, and since Apple won't permit the required software into the App Store, we just can't do what the device would be capable of, without jail breaking it first.

As such, the statistics of what people gripe about are hard to believe. I don't think that in the tech savvy crowd of Twitter users interested in the iPad there's not a significant percentage that's not griping about the fact that it's a closed device in need of jail breaking for the owner to assume full ownership over the device.

With that item not being listed at all, it makes the entire set of statistics questionable. More likely, these are the things Apple was interested in for purposes in market research, and thus these were the things that were being tracked on twitter. Other legitimate user concerns were likely simply neglected.

e.g. there's no one who thinks the device would be better if it could display an A4 or US Letter page in full size? Come on... Or people who think it should have had at least a resolution of HD (1280x720 instead of 1024x768)? Or that the iPhone/iPod/iPad still can't do S/MIME encryption for e-mail, which means if you get encrypted e-mail which you could read on your Mac, you can't read it on your iPhone/iPad/iPod? etc. etc.

Can't believe any statistics you didn't forge yourself.

they are stupid. THE IPAD IS THE NEW IPHONE KILLER!

That's how I feel. I used to have an iMac and MBP, but found keeping them synced was pain. So I got rid of the iMac even though I liked it more, because I needed something on the road. However, with the iPad, I plan to get an iMac to replace the MBP. Now, if they'd just make an iPhone Nano, I'd get that to replace my iPhone.

I've been using my iPad all day seeing if making a shift if the devices I use is a possibility for me. I've been using notebooks as main system for over a decade now so this could be tough transition.

So far, the iPad hasn't sold me. I am having some trouble adjusting to things that feel much more natural on the iPhone, like typing, hitting Home Button, entering one of many apps, typing more, hitting Home Button, <repeat>. The iPad has some major benefits over the iPhone but I'm not sure its benefits outweigh its cons to replace my 13" MBP. Some more testing is definitely needed.

I wish people would stop making this same stupid argument.

I also don't believe that the iPad will replace the iPhone for very many people, but believing that you would need to hold the iPad up to your ear is just plain silly. Have you ever heard of bluetooth headsets? (Or even headsets that plug in if the headphone jack also works as a microphone on the iPad like on some Macs).

Regarding Flash part... I was looking for new car recently (more like researching what is available here in NZ), and following sites:

subaru.co.nz
nissan.co.nz

were completely useless without Flash.

Other Japanese brands - Mazda, Honda, Toyota - had some Flash content, but were browsable, some more, some less.

That was the only real Flash experiment I have tried - normally I go for text-only (or phone-optimized) info on my iPhohe, screen is too small for full size media rich sites anyway... but on iPad, being full screen, I'm pretty sure I'd notice lack of Flash much more often.

As long as my wife is considered, no Facebook Flash games - no iPad.

Only for most basic users; not as a general rule.

It is not about specs, it is about features (or lack of them).

I don't even know if Intel Atom is any faster than A4 regarding RAW performance, but I do know I can easily (albeit slowly) copy NEF images from my Nikon D70 to a HDD, edit and convert them to JPG (if for any reason I need JPGs on the spot - say to email them to someone while away from home, update my blog/web album..?). It is going to be darn slow, but it is going to work. Likewise, I can drop handful of DivX files on HDD and watch them on long-haul flights (without converting them or what-so-ever) or even during vacation, in case of some rainy days. Any notebook should be able to handle 720p resolution (which, for me, is totally acceptable even on 42" full HD TV), and if viewing movies on big screen is my thing, I can get netbook with ION platform... but all fancy hotels I have seen recently had only 720p, sub-40" TVs anyway.

And my wife, beside playing her Facebook games, can type a new paper for her research group (she is physical chemist and does need equations in her word processing software).

Of course, everyone's mileage will differ, more or less.

I think that you, personally, are already there

That would be bad for iPad, as it is inappropriate for more tasks than netbook in general is

I do, however, agree iPad will replace netbook - with people who never needed netbook at all (but still got one as nothing else at the time came closer to their needs). For example, I will likely give iPad to my mom. She will read newspapers, a book or two and Skype with me and overseas relatives. She could do that with netbook, but would have to deal with updates, AV software, firewall... things she is completely incompetent with.

Other people with basic or very limited needs can replace computer with iPad... but holding onto that as general truth, I doubt.

It sounds like your needs would be better met with a 13" MacBook Pro; i don't know why you're fooling around with a netbook in the first place.

Agreed. Just sayin'...

Even if 3" doesn't sound much of a difference, in reality netbooks are significantly smaller and lighter than any 13" notebooks I'm aware of. They are also cheaper and some of them can squeeze 10 hours out of battery, a few even more.

Amen, brother. Amen.

I'm not - just giving example. Of course, netbook is still significantly cheaper and lighter than 13" MBP, so I might be tempted to get one, if for nothing else, then at least not worrying much about it while travelling.

But since I already have reasonably strong desktop and 15" notebook, instead of getting netbook as my 3rd computer, I'm more inclined to replace 15" one for 13" one which would cover casual in-house usage and travels... more likely one of Asus UL30 models, though...

If you've ever used a netbook, you'd realize that they're just to slow to do anything that the iPad does well. I agree that a MacBook would much better sit your needs. Or get a proper Windows 7 13" or 15" notebook, with a full-performance CPU.

True. But with Skype, as someone has already mentioned, it can be used in WiFi hotspots. Occasional use is not bad.


Not true. Try typing a LOT of information in the form factor the Touch or iPhone have. It does not work well. Yet this past week I had to take LOTS of notes for two issues and did so quickly in real type (helps in a previous life I was a touch typist doing Dictaphone work).


As already mentioned, no. There are some things the netbooks can do the iPad will not. For me, it makes no difference. If I need a computer I'll sit at my desktop or use our laptop. But 90% of what I do in the evenings can be done via the iPad.


Mostly, yes. And if I were willing to spend the $$$ and wait for the 3G version of the iPad, I could buy in to the vision of the iPad as a phone replacement with Skype.

But the iPhone serves its purpose very well and I don't need to spend $129 USD more + $30 USD for monthly service.


Very true. People though want simple answers to complicated questions and the answer does not always satisfy them.


Twitter is more than a stripped down FB. Just last night I used it to communicate with 1Password about issues I found between the iPad and iPhone version of their Pro app. Before that I asked questions of them and got quick responses.

Just as there are uses for SMS, there are uses for Twitter and FaceBook. There are blurred lines between Twitter and FB in some regards, but they still have distinct areas of focus and usability.

How many here remember the EARLY BBS days? This was pre-Internet. If so, you will remember that one board never met all of your needs. It is the same with technologies.

Take care,

That's actually what is interesting to learn from this analysis. Users realized that device as it is today can replace their iPhone, but it needs to be able to pass phone calls.
If they want their iPad to be able to call, that's because they are carrying it everywhere like a telephone and then they are wondering why Apple didn't bring this last functionality to it.

Why would anyone ever want a three pound, ten inch phone?

Uh, no, it is not dumb. Some people are going to take the iPad with them everywhere, and some of those people would be really happy if they could just use it to replace their iPhone. They are not saying that they expected the current iPad to be able to make calls, they are wishing that it had that capability.

Personally, when I get my iPad I do not envision carrying it everywhere, so it would not work for me, but I can understand the desire. With the use of a bluetooth headset a phone version of the IPad would work out well for a lot of people.