Originally Posted by nikon133
I can't see canon, HP, Brother, Epson... doing printer and other drivers for iPad any time soon, but that would be cool.
Why not? IPhone OS is based on Mac OS X, so it may not be a huge problem. In any event, iPads are selling like hotcakes - I can see 'iPad ready' being a big selling point.
Originally Posted by antkm1
ok, maybe you're not getting my point. I'm trying to get across to you that the iPad SHOULD NOT BE, AT ALL, EVER BE dependent on another device for anything.
Why? That sounds like the philosophical 'software should be free' argument. It's a pure faith-based argument with no bearing on reality. There's absolutely no rational reason why 'connect to computer to sync' is bad while 'do not connect to computer to sync' is good.
Furthermore, for some people, there IS no need to connect to a computer. Ever. They can have it activated before they leave the store and then it will work for many people's needs without syncing. Not everyone needs to upgrade their OS every time a new version comes out.
You are assuming that just because YOU want something that it must be essential. It's not.
Originally Posted by Superbass
Everybody I know that uses Skype and has a webcam uses the friggin webcam and does video chats.
Maybe you should avoid thinking that the whole world is like you and your friends. Every one of the employees in my company who travel use Skype - and not a single one uses video. None of our customers use video on Skype (we do a lot of international business, so Skype is one of our main means of communication).
Then there's the issue of where you want Apple to put the camera. Landscape or Portrait? And how you expect a video picture of a handheld device to remain stable and properly oriented without becoming a nostril-cam.
But, if you really insist on using vide with the iPad, someone announced a camera that will use the 30 pin connector. I just don't see why I should pay for it just because 0.02% of geeks want it.
Originally Posted by Superbass
There are plenty of websites you can't properly see on the iPhone due to flash being broken. That won't change for at least several years, unless apple accepts Flash 10.1 when it arrives....
No doubt. 15 years ago, there were still some companies that provided their software on floppies. Change is uncomfortable, but when it's the right thing to do, you do it. It has been thoroughly demonstrated why Flash on the iPhone is a bad idea. Of course, that's hypothetical because ADOBE NEVER RELEASED FLASH FOR THE IPHONE. Don't believe me? Then where is the full version of Flash for jailbroken phones? Or the full version of Flash for Symbian? Or WebOS? Or Windows Mobile? Or even Android? (Yes, I'm aware that after years of promises, they're saying that the Android version will be out 'real soon now', but even that version reqiures much more CPU power than the iPhone will provide). So if you want to whine about lack of Flash, blame Adobe for never creating a full mobile version capable of running on the iPhone.
Originally Posted by Stevie
An iPad will not do half of what a real computer will do. Even for surfing the web, a Netbook will display/play Flash sites, while the iPad will not.
You're confusing check lists with usefulness. If you buy every product by going through some check list and looking only at features, you're right. Fortunately, not everyone works that way. Lots of people look at what they need and what they're hoping to accomplish - and then see if a product meets their needs.
For a lot of people, the iPad meets their needs quite well. I personally don't miss Flash. There are only a few sites that I would ever use that require it and that number is dropping fast. Fortunately, even if I absolutely MUST VISIT a Flash site while traveling, I fire up LogMeIn to access my home computer and visit the Flash site. So why cripple the iPad by adding Flash when it's not necessary?
Furthermore, you are falling into the trap of believing that the iPad is the only computer in a household. While that might be true for some people, there are a lot more who are buying an iPad as a second (or third or fourth or fifth) computer. Syncing isn't a problem. Even its 'limitations' aren't a problem because they have another computer to use. The iPad is for light content consumption - and it works very, very well for that.
The fact that a Ferrari won't easily haul 6 kids doesn't mean that it's not a good car.
Originally Posted by WilliamG
If what you say is true, then the iPad "needs" to support Flash.
Based on what? Your arbitrary view that Flash is essential? So far, there are 85 million customers who disagree with you. Why should anyone believe that you know what I need better than I do?
Originally Posted by Smiles77
The one mistakeI think you're making here is that Apple is comparing the iPad to a net book, not a notebook.
Not really. Apple said it's neither a netbook nor a notebook. It's a different device. The rest of your post was accurate-though. The mistake being made is that the iPad haters are apparently refusing to understand that different people have different needs. If even 1% of computer users could use the iPad instead of their computer, that's tens of millions of users. No one ever said that the iPad was right for everyone.
Originally Posted by ltcompuser
Sure it is, for some
Reason: For SOME
people even a netbook provides more than they need. I know of many people who have a netbook strictly for:
* email from family
* web surfing
* sync their iPod
* some YouTube videos.
That's all they need their netbook to do. For them
the iPad is fine as a netbook replacement, and they plan to get one when available here..
Exactly. SOME PEOPLE will find the iPad suitable. Some will not.