HP releasing $799 Slate 500 to take on iPad in tablet market - Page 9

Regular computer applications as opposed to cellphone-style applets. Compare, for example, Chrome or IE to the iPhone's browser. I call Chrome "real software" when distinguishing its category from cellphone-style applets.

General purpose use is the stuff that lots of computer users do. Not niche stuff. Not specialty stuff. Not limited stuff constrained by a weak OS and a cellphone style CPU. Regular computer stuff. That's all I meant.

Just to be redundant (because I already linked to the article in an earlier post), this guy agrees with nvidia.

Interesting distinction.

And it is ironic that the iPad can also be docked to the HP Slate. Does that fact, in your opinion, negate any comparison between the iPad and the Slate?

If not, why not?

aapl, I think I recognise your style of debate. Your join date and your style makes me think you've been doing this for longer than one might first think. But that's alright, I don't mind playing the game with you. As long as I don't get too worked up, and if I have time...

I think it highly interesting that you've moulded the conversation from the HP Slate to the iPad running a "cellphone OS" with "applets" not "real software" with a "cellphone CPU".

Guys reading this, isn't this style a little too familiar?

I gotta sleep now though... y'all have fun...!

I just realised it's user appl not aapl, we shouldn't get confused by this.

How is it "ironic" ?

He convinced me. Given the choice between owning a motorcycle or a bicycle, I would prefer the motorcycle. I can't imagine having only a bicycle for transporttion, but I could get by with only a motorcycle.

For a second vehicle to supplement my car, I would likewise prefer an HP Slate, errr, motorcysle.

Careful now, you're slipping further into your modus operandi.

Let's stick to the topic at hand.

Because he uses it as a reason why the Air is in a "higher" or "better" or "more advanced device" category than the iPad. He doesn't realize that his reasoning damns his conclusion, and positions the HP in the same category as the Air. Which it is not.

Instead, it is in the same category as the iPad, albeit with vastly greater capabilities.

What is my MO?

And besides, I've said that I'm pretty unlikely to buy the HP. None of these tablet computers float my boat compared the cheap laptops currently available.

Likely in a couple of years (or less) there will be lots and lots and lots of great choices. I'm curious for example, about the WebOS tablets that HP is rumored to be producing, as well as the upcoming Android tablets. I would also need to use a Win7 tablet to see if the interface is as bad as people say.

At this point, I see nothing that seems worth buying. But the category is in its infancy, and IMO, will quickly evolve.

I'm glad that there are some completely different approaches to tablets. I don't know if a cellphone-style OS would be satisfying long-term. I don't know if a real OS would have its own challenges on that form factor.

But my guess is that before long, there will be different devices for everyone who thinks different from the current paradigm of the tablet being a limited-use extra-large PDA.

I've used tablets before the iPad arrival and always considered the UI decision insane. You might think I'm all conjecture, but I am 100% sure you will agree with me when you'll first use one and compare with a touch based UI, like iOS or Android.

This discussion is getting confusing, so I'm gonna back up to your statement when you mentioned "real software" and "general purpose use"


So, breaking down your comment: "It will run real software..." I assume your pronoun "it" is referring to the Air. In other words, you're saying, the Air seems much better than the iPad, because the Air will run real software.

Then you say "But it still has insufficient disk space for general purpose use..." I assume here, the pronoun "it" is still referring to the Air; in other words, you're saying the Air still has insufficient disk space for general purpose use...

But then when I asked what you meant by general purpose use, you said "General purpose use is the stuff that lots of computer users do. Not niche stuff. Not specialty stuff. Not limited stuff constrained by a weak OS and a cellphone style CPU. Regular computer stuff."
But you first mentioned "general purpose use" in reference to the Air (which has a full CPU, not a cell-phone style CPU, and runs OS X, not a "weak" OSby which I assume you mean iOS). In your response to my inquiry about what you meant by "general purpose use", it sounds like you're talking about the iPad rather than the Air.

I'm confused.

I guess I'm a little more liberal in my definition of "real software". I think the software that parses image data from the sensor in my digital camera is no less "real" than the Firefox browser I use on my MacBook. Software is software, regardless of its function or breadth or capability in my book, and all of it is equally "real".
We can just agree that I'm right and you're wrong about that. <JOKING!!!>

I think you missed the point the author was trying to make with his analogy. The point he was making was that comparing a motorcycle and a bicycle doesn't make sense, because they belong in different categories—they serve different purposes. A motorcycle is more powerful and faster than a bicycle, and could be used as a primary means of transportation (IOW the HP Slate), whereas, a bicycle is a recreational means of transportation—it's good to get around town, it's efficient, it's fun, it's good exercise, etc. but it would not be feasible as a primary means of transportation, particularly for long distances (IOW the iPad). Both are perfectly capable for the tasks they're designed to handle. But it doesn't make sense to say that a bicycle is an underpowered motorcycle. That's what the author was saying.
Many people have bicycles, BUT, most of those people also have a more powerful, more capable means of transportation as well—in the literal, and analogous sense.

The author said that, if your main PC could be analogous to your car (your primary means of transportation), the HP Slate could be analogous to a motorcycle (a fully functional, stand-alone, self-powered means of transportation, though less capable than your car), and the iPad could be analogous to a bicycle (many capabilities, but not self-powered—i.e. doesn't have the same capabilities as a self-powered vehicle like a car or motorcycle). In other words, you can have a car and a motorcycle and a bicycle (in the literal or analogous sense) Hope this clears things up!

So far, so good. One point, however, the full OS is only an example of why I made my comment about the Air. There are loads of other examples.




Nope. I'm talking about the Air not having sufficient disk space for general purpose use. ISTM that it has less disk space than el-cheapo computers had many, many years ago. I am under the impression that multi-hundred gigabyte drives are pretty normal for general purpose use, as I use the term. I cannot imagine, for example, that the Air would be an optimal place to keep your vacation videos, because the drive is so small. I cannot imagine that the Air is the optimal place to keep your music, or pictures, or movies, or documents, or years' worth of archived emails, or anything that lots of folks use their computers for.

Yep. I got that.

I was running with his analogy, and demonstrating that it falls apart. Not only does it fall apart, but it paints the iPad as much less capable compared to the HP.

And BTW, a motorcycle is a great way to get around town, its efficient compared to most other modes of transportation, its fun, etc.

The analogy falls apart. It paints the iPad as an inferior device that is positively anemic and lacking in versatility compared to the HP. The defense that because it is missing the power of the HP, it is therefore in a differerent category, is specious.

And insulting to the iPad. It is like the HP, just not quite as powerful in either the hardware or the software. That's OK. No need to feel bad. No need to relegate the iPad to a lower status or a different category.

Actually, I long for the old 4:3 monitors. I really hate this stupid fad of 16:9, as if we would all be seeing movies all the time with our laptops and desktops. The screen of my laptop just feels cropped at the top.

This is true, of course. The HP slate will have "vastly greater capabilities", but of course that these won't matter, for it's not important for a slate to have huge capabilities, but rather the competence to do exactly what one wants a tablet to be able to do, no more than that. The problem of putting an entire Windows 7 ecossystem inside a Tablet is that now you are dealing with another pc in your house, with folders, registers, antiviruses, a whole computer when all you wanted was to be able to read a book, watch a movie, make some cool stuff in the web or in some basic app, play a game, etc.

It's like arguing that a screen on the face of a fridge would have "vastly greater capabilities" if it would run full blown Windows 7. Why not wrist watches? That would be Gates' orgasm, I'm sure!

That's a bad software developer only querying the Ghz rating of the hardware and making a determination on that. They forgot that the memory architecture is more important that the CPU speed in many applications, and iPad's A4 is FAR superior to an Atom in that aspect.

So before you din'g the hardware, make sure the software dev actually made good assumptions.

The analogy does not paint the iPad as less capable than the HP. It describes it as differently capable than the HP. Just like a bicycle is differently capable than, though not necessarily inferior to, a motorcycle. Neither I nor the author were suggesting that the iPad is inferior to the HP, but you are suggesting precisely that by saying, "It is like the HP, just not quite as powerful in either the hardware or the software."

And neither I nor the author are trying to be specious by saying that the iPad is missing the power of the HP. The simple fact is, the HP Slate works as a standalone PC. The iPad is not a standalone PC, neither was it ever marketed as such. In fact, with regard to the iPad's functionality, a PC/Mac is required if you want to install or update software on the iPad according to the way it was designed (I'm sure there are hacks or whatever that allow you to install software without tethering it to a computer, but that's the exception, not part of its original design or purpose). The HP on the other hand, doesn't require tethering to a host PC for software installations or updates. The iPad is not trying to be more than it is. It is an iOS device, not a full-fledged PC. It is happy with its identity. It doesn't feel insulted.

Ok. I guess I don't accept that a tablet has to be so anemic. Maybe I should.








I use my laptop for all that stuff. To watch a movie, I double-click the name of the movie. To play a game, I click on the name of the game. I have stuff in logical places in the file system, and I use shortcuts and the built-in libraries to get to the meat in seconds.

I don't worry about antivirus - it works automatically and transparently.

I don't share your view that a computer is a PITA that gets in the way of doing what you want to do. I also disagree with you that lopping off functionality in the name of simplicity is a good way to go about things.

If I had the choice between a fully-functioning device that works pretty well, or a limited-functionality device that is a little bit easier, I would choose the fully functioning device every time.

But I seem to think different.

I have tried to use a 12" Wacom Cintique with my MBP for things other than artistic content creation and it absolutely SUCKS for that kind of work. I was hoping it would be a great way to mark up PDFs and do napkin style sketches but I cannot get anything out of the interface that is worthwhile. I know artists that work with them and love them, but I see them using either using wide brushes or very high zoom levels, techniques that don't work for daily business notes and document markup. If HP is using Cintique technology I don't see them overcoming that easily.

I'll fully admit those problems may be application software related, rather than hardware limitations, but I have spent enough hours hunting for both Windows and OS X software to overcome the limitations I have seen that I doubt there is a magic repository of brilliant business tablet software HP can leverage.

Agreed. 4:3 is a much better aspect ratio for doing anything other than watching movies. Unfortunately, the monitor industry transitioned to 16:9 for two basic reasons:

1. For a given diagonal dimension (which is how monitors are marketed) a 16:9 monitor has less surface area than a 4:3 or 16:10 monitor, and therefore is cheaper to manufacture.
2. For larger size monitors, monitor vendors want to use panels for multiple purposes. 16:9 panels could be used to make LCD TVs as well as computer monitors.

Computer monitors should really be marketed based on viewable surface area instead of the diagonal dimension.

Note that HP Slate with a 8.9" screen has only 65% of the viewable surface area compared to an iPad with 9.7" screen.

Where can one get a copy of this real software that runs on Windows?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vomkNSluWW4

http://www.proloquo2go.com/About/article/ipad

Or this?

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/star-...63486802?mt=8#

Or this?

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/3d-br...331399332?mt=8


It s extremely difficult to carry on an intelligent conversation with one who rejects something out of hand because it does not measure up to his preconceived ideas.


Watch the video in the first link and tell me how real a $199 piece of software is to someone who needs it.


You can put together a total solution, using iOS, costing $400 - $700.

A comparable solution for a real OS costs $7,000 - $20,000.


That's the reality of life!

.

According to Apple Insider, Apple has made an iPad competitor with the new Air Mini:

"similar to the iPad, but running the full Mac OS X...

... This injects some competition between the ... iPad and the .. MacBook [Air].

...a new definition of notebook that overlaps in many respects with the iPad... "



I see no mistakes by either company. The overlap is great.

Are fewer choices a better idea? Must a tablet have a cellphone OS? I give both of those a resounding NO!

It is true that the word "real" can be used in either the sense that I used it in, or alternatively, the sense that you used it in.

I don't think we have any argument about that. And I think that the app you highlighted is great.

I remember back in the early days of the PalmOS devices. It was amazing that all sorts of folks wrote little programs that helped niche users. It is good to see that such a thing is being carried on by iOS developers, even in this day and age.

I think you've been confused by the fact that other vendors are offering "cell phone OSes" because they don't' have a desktop client (Android, RIM) or can't shoehorn legacy OS into the hardware (Windows).

iOS is OS X with a touch UI and the appropriate I/O stacks, there's nothing whatsoever diminished or limited or "toyish" about it. Apple will have no problem scaling functionality as the hardware becomes more powerful, but Apple, at least, understands that matching the software to the hardware makes for a better user experience.

I look forward to you steadily redefining "real computing" steadily upward as the iPad grows more capable, until you're insisting that until it can do 3D modeling and real time HD editing it remains a crippled toy.

Good to know that you are such a dedicated fan!

BTW, you'll be looking forward for a good long time if you're waiting to see steady redefinitions.

Enjoy!

Is it worth 3x the cost of netbook?

For me, hell yes!

I bought a Dell Mini-9 to Hackintosh it. I wanted something more portable than always taking my 13inch MacBook.

Once I got the Dell Mini 9, I hated it. The trackpad was crap, and the keyboard was too cramped. So, I left it as a Windows machine.

After I bought my iPad it quickly become the most used computing device in our house.

It freed me from the shackles of my desktop, and from the inconvenience of balancing my MacBook on my chest or legs when I used it in bed or on the couch.

With the iPad, I:

* do all casual browsing/email through it
* read training PDFs through CloudReader
* read saved files in my desktop Yojimbo
* collaborate with others using Evernote
* watch training videos through GoodReader
* stream training videos from desktop external drive, using Air Server
* Login to my desktop remotely using Logmein. Leaving PhotoBooth on also lets me check my office remotely
* With Line2, I can have phone calls go to the iPad

Doing the above with my iPad allows me to spend less time at my iMac. I use it mainly for Final Cut Pro, creating Screencasts, and Programming.

So, while I initially hoped that the iPad would have full OS X, I am more than happy with it the way it is now. It's fast and lets me get my work done quickly.

Would it be suitable for my only computer? Not at all.

Would it be suitable for my wife's and children's only computer? Yes.

There is no perfect device for everybody.

As an aside, I saw my first Windows Tablet back in 2006. I met with a client who had a Windows Tablet, and I was using a Windows laptop. It was so inefficient it wasn't funny. He hated it, but that's what they used at his work (a hospital)

It sounds to me like the new Air Mini is the best machine for you. The Dell Mini 9 never really caught on, likely for many of the reasons you cite. (The Mini 10, OTOH, is extremely popular).

So the Air Mini 11 is likely a great choice for you. It seems like a high-quality netbook to me, with some very nice aspects, despite having some storage issues.

But if you have NAS, and if you remember to load it with content before you leave home, it might be perfect.

Doesn't require the least bit of fandom to see how specious your posts generally are. I don't own an iPad because I already have a MacBook Pro and portability isn't a primary concern for me. Nevertheless, anyone who's paying attention understands that iOS is a touch friendly subset of OS X. Dismissing it as a "phone OS" is merely ignorant.

The new MacBook Air would have been a great choice before the iPad came out.

However, I prefer the tablet form factor. It's easier to use and having used a mouse for 25 or so years, I'm not a big trackpad fan. I have a Magic Mouse and Magic Trackpad and I use the mouse 90% of the time when I'm on that system.
And, a HUGE advantage of the iPad vs MacBook or MacBook Air is the no contract 3G. I simply get the data when I'm travelling. No need for a USB stick and a contract.

The only things I can't do with my iPad that I wish I could would be to use Facetime and stream my iTunes library. Those disadvantages aren't that major though.

It's been a while, but I JailBroke an original iPhone and (with help and apps from others) I was able to:

-- Install Apache and use an iPhone as a web server
-- play all the popular A/V codecs that were discussed in the VCL banter
-- stream any of thousands of videos available on the web

http://idude.org/2007/11/07/an-iphon...rver-with-php/

As a developer, I can tell you that the iOS version of OS X is very similar to the Mac version of OS X. They are the same OS. iOS has things that are unnecessary for a touch removed -- and replaced by things that make sense for the device. With each release, the two OS Xs become more and more similar and share more and more common code, Frameworks and APIs.

In fact, many things developed for the iDevices are being ported back to the Mac -- Location Services and Notification Services to name 2.

In addition, Apple is taking the opportunity to take legacy Mac OS X code from Next -- and [re]implement it the way it should have been done for iOS. This code is then migrated back into the OS X mothership.

Finally, there has been some preliminary talk of porting the open-source Blender3D app to the iPad -- the big deterrent appears to be the small 10" screen size.

But, others have done some interesting things, such as:



http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/finge...376028507?mt=8


But, of course, @appl will call this a niche cellophane applet program running on a cellphone OS.


Yes, @appl has been here before -- and soon will reappear using a different pseudonym.


.

Sure you do, just like everyone else. And it's great for a laptop. I'm not even saying that the iPad iOS is "finished", it sure needs a lot of work in the "file system" and its management, but my point is that all the stuff that is obvious and easy on a laptop isn't so natural on a tablet.


I don't know about you. My HP laptop has a freeware antivirus that I had to know where to pick it up, and it is sometimes a hassle. You found out a better way, perhaps, but that's also part of the problem, I shouldn't need to know "a better way" to deal with antivirus, at all.


Then we will have huge disagreements. I cannot imagine a wrist watch with a full windows 7 on it, but perhaps you will think that such a thing makes sense. Even Microsoft realised what should be planet design obvious, and created windows mobile phone 7 series out of a completely different philosophy of the previous "Windows everywhere" design strategy.

But while your taste is really bad, I must be humble and also recognise that tastes are subjective. And design is also about taste.


Well yes, but that's alright. For you, perhaps the HP slate is a better option. I think it will *fail* commercially, but that is an independent assessment. For you, these things are huge wins. Well, power to the market!

We all marvel at your dedication and commitment to trolling too. So, pat yourself on the back, it's takes a lot to do what you do.

appl can't even read, comprehension of a real sentence is beyond him. Sad little sock puppet...

I don't look at things in terms of a "win", but maybe we mean the same thing nevertheless.

I've said that none of the current tablets I have seen appeal to me - not enough to buy one, anyhow.

The HP might be great, I don't know, but I've heard so much grumbling about Win7 being bad on a tablet, that I'd really have to use it first before I could make any kind of a valid conclusion.

I don't know if it will be a commercial success or not. I suspect it will be a continuing line for HP, and that it will sell well enough to keep it and its progeny around. But that is just a WAG.

Fuck you, Bitch.

(Moderators, I'll accept the demerit.)

.

You know what is funny? A troll like @appl comes to a site like this to spread FUD, disrupt reasonable discussion, and basically demean Apple and its producrs.

The goal of all this appears to be to make anyone looking for Apple solutions, to reconsider or look elsewhere.

Most readers will ignore a little of this behavior. After a while, reasonable people, tire of this and begin to challange the untrue assertions.

This begins a kind of death spiral -- the assertions of the troll become more and more outrageous, with every fact presented to refute his statements.

Sometimes, the troll will abruptly change subjects or take a different tack to deflect the facts or otherwise bolster his anti-Apple agenda. Often, in his singleminded persuit of his goal, he will lose track of what he has said, and end up contradicting his earlier statements.

Thoughtful people, with no particular agenda other than learnining the pros and cons of a particular Apple offering, will follow the thread to help them discerne the truth.

When the thread is viewed in its entirity, it is obvious what is occuring -- unreasonable assertions are countered with verifible facts, then countered with even more unreasonable and incoherent assertions.

Thus, the troll undermines his very objective -- he encourages others to present Apple advantages that might not come up in a normal discussion.

Rather than be "put off" an Apple solution, the thoughtful reader will learn of additional Apple advantages he might not have known.

Hey, @appl, keep on, keeping on!

.

.

Oops... And now, @appl is gone

.

Can we stick to the topic?