Originally Posted by quinney
Corporations are going to buy tens of thousands of devices which only run on Wi-Max?
That'll come in handy
Expressed an interest is not the same as actually putting down money. Show me the money. Especially for companies that did or were going to iPad but switched to the much better Playbook
Originally Posted by Aizmov
Summer 2011? Wont the iPad 2 launch before that?
Very possibly. But remember that the iPad is a consumer device that some businesses have found useful, not a device made for them like RIM is touting. They believe that focus is going to win folks over. Keep in mind that for many businesses they will be using these in house where there will be wifi and the road warriors can tether to the blackberries they already have.
This summer release will be a Book that has built in cell data, rather than needing to tether. And in a weird way, going with Sprint does make sense. Businesses don't want the problems of competing with thousands of iPhones etc for sketchy network connections. Sprint is unlikely to get the iPhone or any of the major phones, so they are less likely to suffer massive network bog down. And if you can still tether with your blackberry, you are covered if you travel to a spot without Sprint.
Originally Posted by samab
The next ipad will come with increased features that will eat up battery life.
The only way anyone can say that is if they have confirmed data about the iPad 2. Which I doubt you have.
Originally Posted by SockRolid
PlayBook is still vaporware. There are a few demo units at CES, but RIM won't release actual shipping units until this summer. So nothing about PlayBook is realistic. Not battery life, not anything.
They have sent out review devices but apparently without all the features ready. Not a smart move as it gave folks a reason to bash, especially over battery. Yes they tried to explain but it just comes off like desperate spin. Again not good.
Originally Posted by jca666us
Btw, all this talk about the iPad getting ten hours is bs.
I routinely get 12 - 14 hrs. of battery life.
It is NOT bs. Apple rated it at 'up to' ten hours. If you get, more awesome. But it doesn't make that they guarantee less a lie. Just caution. If they had said 'up to 14 hours' and folks weren't ever getting that, the talk on the boards/reviews would not be pretty.
Originally Posted by tundraBuggy
Have you been living in a cave? Adobe demonstrated the new Flash player that only uses .8% of CPU
But what spec of CPU and GPU is required. I am thinking both are well above the specs of any tablet.
Like t or not. Apple demonstrated their flexibility when they loosened their license and allowed Flash developed apps on the App store. Exciting stuff!
and what apps use such a method, how well are they being reviewed. After all if every app using that freedom is being shot down as battery sucking, crash prone tripe, then they are proving Apple's point.
Originally Posted by TalkingNewMedia
As Microsoft and HP have learned, it's one thing to announce a product, another to launch it.
Yep, and again this year we got a lot of talk about 'later this year'. These folks are trying to bet the current iPad specs and their guess for improvements. But they have shown their specs to Apple now, who can at least pick and chose their marketing to downplay any lacking.
Or laugh when it turns out that no one cares an the iPad 2 goes like mad
In fact I don't think we are going to see tons of huge changes in the iPad 2. Most of it will be feature improvement like more ram, more storage, perhaps a slightly faster processor. Maybe a new screen glass that isn't quite so glossy and easy to smudge.
The 'new' features, I think, will be a front facing camera for face time and replacing the unlocked GSM with a dual setup of unlocked GSM and CDMA (which will entice both main companies to lower their prices for data on such devices)
And I will wager that they actually keep the current 16gb wifi as is for schools, in house business and giving to the kiddies for playing games. With a $50-100 price drop
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach
As a Flash developer I feel a little twisted, since Flash is really nice to develop Websites with rich content rather easily and with minimal scripting.
And zero accessibility. Having a blind boy in the family that is a major deal for me.
Flash would have to be completely rewritten for mobile devices.
Adobe still hasn't done that rewrite for Mac OS and says it won't. That 'Tude is part of why Jobs resists them.
But in the end will it matter. More and more folks are stepping up with apps and non flash mobile pages. Even that 'evil' porn is going html5