Isn't that a given for a device with a much larger screen size? That doesn't spell stunning resolution to me. She gives no hints at what the resolution could actually be and then regurgitates common rumors like a 3G and non 3G version. Anyone could have made these "predictions".
In one interpretation of the word "resolution", one is speaking strictly of the number of "lines" and "samples". In that manner, what you say is correct. But sometimes when one uses that word, they are speaking to the pixel density, which is the true measure of how "nice" a picture looks. I very strongly suspect that that is what is meant here by "resolution".
In other words, the author is claiming that the number of pixels per inch is going to be much higher on this new device, which yields the "stunning" resolution.
I wouldn't be so adamant about that. While the tablet may not have flash, I wouldn't suggest that as a sure thing. Many of the problems associated with flash and the iPhone would be largely alleviated with a tablet device with a larger battery and a better CPU. I'm not an advocate of flash by any means, and I don't really miss it on the iPhone (for the most part), but with so much flash only web content still out there, not having flash on a device as large as a tablet would be a disadvantage.
I agree with your points about Flash being more useful on a more powerful devie with a larger display, but would like to add that Flash does use quite a bit of power. Even on Apple’s notebooks with 7 hours of battery that can cut down considerably with the use of Flash, even if it’s just ads.
Here are some recent battery tests with Flash on and off with both 32-bit and 64-bit Safari…
I also speculate that Apple doesn’t want to promote Hulu and other sites that Flash is really only useful when they have their iTS video content to push. They also have the HTTPS Secure Streaming and other open standards that would work as well with less of a power drain if sites like Hulu incorporated it. Flash sites for the sake of using Flash just aren’t popular enough to be an issue for Apple to care about.
Translation: I've had an unhappy experience with Apple so I think everyone else should too! Anyone who actually enjoys using Apple products doesn't mind being controlled. If so many people are being controlled, why does Apple have the highest customer satisfaction ratings time and time again? Also, how are they continuing to post record revenue and sales? Because they're driving people away with their controlling nature?
True, I have had a very unhappy experience with Apple. I'm not saying everyone else should too, but I also think people shouldn't be blind! (And I've known plenty of people with a very happy experience with Apple.) I see comments of people who say they will buy one of these devices as soon as its released... which doesn't seem smart to me since we have no clue what it will actually be (let alone the fact that first gen products from Apple are usually finicky).
I don't like the fact that Apple has a very tight hand on their products. Its their right to do it, yes, but I don't like it. I am allowed to state that opinion. Even in a site that is very Pro-Apple. I am the voice of the other side (no, not the M$ side, just the Anti-Apple side)
I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
... I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
I think people "buy into it" because it's not really that big a deal. No one has absolute control over anything in the end, and what you are "giving up" is minimal compared to what you are getting.
I use a Mac pro which is very expensive and it's limiting in some ways, but those limits are really minor in the grand scheme of things and what I get out of it is (generally) a far better machine than I could get by going any other route.
It's been said before, but we are really talking about the "goose that laid golden eggs" parable here. Sure, if Apple allowed licensing of the OS there would be cheaper and more flexible computing options, and sure, I would probably buy one.
Eventually however, this would bring Apple down as a company and destroy their business model. Apple would become Microsoft, and some other company would rise up and create a more integrated and controlled product to fill the space that Apple left.
10" hi-rez touchscreen (multi-touch with fingers & stylus capable), Tegra 2 inside, 'Touch-ified' Mac OS X (and all of the accompanying apps; Mail, Address Book, Safari, Preview, iTunes, QuickTime X, etc. ...), iLife, iWork, mobile video iChat capable, iTunes-centric App Store, Apple Remote Desktop; I would SO buy one of these...!
For serious gaming, I would rather have a PlayStation 3/XBox 360/Wii... (Personally, the choise would be PS3, because M$ sucks & the Wii I could take or leave...)
Okay, I could see including the ability to run iPhone-type games, and of course, World of Warcraft... ;^p
For those needing more computing power, get a MacBook Pro, a beefy iMac or a Mac Pro...
But for the everyday email/surf the web/write a paper/play with photos/get some WoW time/etc. crowd, my vision of a MacTouch would do nicely...
If I could have it as a stand-alone, syncing to MobileMe via the Internet, and a solid back-up (also automatically synced with the MobileMe account where needed) on a Time Capsule; so much the better. The above is a computer that would cover the needs of a HUGE segment of current end-users, without the need for a home machine to sync with...
Multiple MacTouch users in a single household could opt for a Mac mini server (and a Promise RAID for larger aggregated iTunes collections) that would be a central depository for all syncing & Time Capsule back-up data, and said Mac mini server would still sync with individual MobileMe accounts as needed...
I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
The reasons why Apple operates the way they do have been explained, and it's got nothing much to do with "control." The reasons are simple and perfectly conventional, and don't require any "buy in" that I can see.
While I wouldn't be surprised if the tablet didn't have flash, I also wouldn't be surprised if it did. I do wish for flash content to die, but I would also like to see the content that is available on the web.
Flash is a resource hog for features and resources already provided by Apple in other ways making it redundant at best. I can watch h264 movies, youtube, LP's and anything that is HTML5. Why does it NEED Flash? Because there are lots of outdated publishers still using it? It's certainly not because of HULU or others and it's definitely not because of the flash banners. I understand lots of sites use flash but that's changing quickly. The largest growth for my company's web division are people leaving Flash because no one can find their site or it just functions poorly. At least that's what we've been busy doing this year. Recreating flash sites with HTML 5 and Javascript and PHP. Forget Flash and Cold Fusion.
Guess we'll see if Apple moves forward or lags behind sticking to old conventions; but that doesn't sound very Apple to me. They typically create new standards not rely on old ones. That's Microsoft's business model.
The Tablet is not an e-reader, per se, it's a subscription server that will revolutionize print and media delivery. Amazon and Sony have endeavored to replace books. Apple aims to replace the newsstand and library! From what I glean from Peter Kaplan and Marc Andreessen, Apple is in the process of reinventing print the same way it reinvented the phone. Dare I suggest, that's the Tablet.
I have to disagree with you. the Tablet will not be the server. The Tablet will be the client. And given Apple's previous style and the various potentials, it will be like the iphone not just in terms of the software but also in being several devices in one.
What I think Apple has been doing with these media companies is letting them see a glimpse of the device's form so they can see how it could be used as an ebook reader and even an emagazine reader and showing them how Apps have already been used to create comics and such for the phone. and so on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27
I'll believe it when I see it. And so far, I see nothing.
Of course, I will never buy one, but who cares.
Apple won't care when they sell them like mad.
You do a lot of this "I demand and if I don't get it, then it's shit" talk. And many of your demands lack a sense of logic. Particularly the logic that a company like Apple would be looking to fill a gap, not repeat what they have. They have a full powered laptop why make another one.
Suppose you also don't care that your 'tude is going to end up making you one of the top ignored posters on the board. Because you can be a voice of reason without being a troll, a jerk or a Microsoft shill. And yet you reveal in being all those things and acting like it makes you something slick and awesome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx
The iTablet must run Mac OS X applications (full Mac OS X inside - Tablet version). Must be as light and small as possible. Must have video-out and USB 2 ports for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.
the signs are it won't, so suppose you won't be buying one anymore than camroid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffmac7101
Anyone have a link to some of the "analysts" prognostications that were spewed prior to release of the iPhone? It'd be nice to see how wrong they were.
there were none because no one had a clue one was coming until the Macworld announcement and then Jobs laid it all out for everyone. nothing to predict
You will not, guarantee not see flash on the tablet. There are so many reasons; you should just do your research and discover why and thank god it won't.
Fine. Then let apple put SOMETHING in it's place because it is VERY annoying seeing youtube or whatever video placeholders with nothing visible. And that youtube apps of theirs STINKS!
If it is just the iPod Touch OS, it will be horribly crippled as a device. If it has its own version of OS X that isn't compatible with the iPod Touch OS, then you'll make Devs angry for having three systems to develop for.
Apple could easily run multiple iPhone apps in "windows" on a larger device. Though iPhone/Touch developers have been told since the beginning NOT to assume screen dimensions and resolutions, in which case apps like, say, the Kindle application could easily run full screen.
I think one also needs to take a look at several of the patents that have surfaced recently regarding pen input, a perfect additional entry system for a notepad-sized device.
So... a pad that can run iPhone apps fullscreen with Apple-smooth note taking and sketching capabilities. And do multimedia music and video and games?
Flash is a resource hog for features and resources already provided by Apple in other ways making it redundant at best. I can watch h264 movies, youtube, LP's and anything that is HTML5. Why does it NEED Flash? Because there are lots of outdated publishers still using it? It's certainly not because of HULU or others and it's definitely not because of the flash banners. I understand lots of sites use flash but that's changing quickly. The largest growth for my company's web division are people leaving Flash because no one can find their site or it just functions poorly. At least that's what we've been busy doing this year. Recreating flash sites with HTML 5 and Javascript and PHP. Forget Flash and Cold Fusion.
Guess we'll see if Apple moves forward or lags behind sticking to old conventions; but that doesn't sound very Apple to me. They typically create new standards not rely on old ones. That's Microsoft's business model.
I'm fully aware of the limitations of flash and Apples tendency to abandon old technologies and push new ones. That however, doesn't mean that the transition would be painless for the end user. I was looking at condos earlier this year and every single developers site used flash, so while flash use may be declining, it is still there. It becomes of a question of how much pain does Apple want the user to endure in their quest to kill flash? Also, have you even considered the possibility of a more open version of Safari on a tablet, in theory we could get a version that has plugin support, which would thus make flash the choice of the user.
Abandoning old but still widely used technologies because they are "bad" isn't always the best move. This isn't a monitor port where you can at least buy an adapter to make things work.
True, I have had a very unhappy experience with Apple. I'm not saying everyone else should too, but I also think people shouldn't be blind! (And I've known plenty of people with a very happy experience with Apple.) I see comments of people who say they will buy one of these devices as soon as its released... which doesn't seem smart to me since we have no clue what it will actually be (let alone the fact that first gen products from Apple are usually finicky).
I don't like the fact that Apple has a very tight hand on their products. Its their right to do it, yes, but I don't like it. I am allowed to state that opinion. Even in a site that is very Pro-Apple. I am the voice of the other side (no, not the M$ side, just the Anti-Apple side)
I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
I think what I and other people are saying is that we don't mind "non-Apple" people. If you have a constructive argument or criticism about something we'll more than listen. But these type of people are few and far between. The vast majority of "non-Apple" people here just post the exact same thing in every thread. They have they same list of complaints that get repeated over and over again. It doesn't matter if the thread has anything to do with what they're talking about. Change the wording a bit, maybe tie it into the thread topic a bit, re-post it in another thread.
You will not, guarantee not see flash on the tablet. There are so many reasons; you should just do your research and discover why and thank god it won't.
One of the most obvious raisons d'être for the tablet I can think of is to take on the net book market. I don't see that as being doable without flash. A semi-internet capable device just won't excite.
The other huge market potential and one I have a suspicion the device might be aimed at, is the medical field. If my guess is correct, then the graphics and display capabilities would need to be impressive. I am of two minds about this. On the one hand I can see reasons why SJ might be motivated to develop a device the medical establishment have lobbied him for, but on the other hand, fulfilling their wishes would likely require leading edge hardware, something Apple doesn't normally do.
If it has OSX on it I'm interested but if it's just the iphone OS on a larger screen I could care less. Add wacom-like pen sensitivity I'd be all over that thing, perfect for presentations or sketching on a plane.
What is interesting is that it has been proven that the iPhone and iPod touch can process HD video at 1080 they have enough processing power in graphics. What they don't have is alot of space for HD and the lack of being able to show HD on a HD screen.
About flash on the tablet it is very very unlikely that it would be available. Apple Google and the Open source community are working to banish flash to history with HTML 5. A standard that is becomming supported in safari, Crome, and firefox that natively support video playback through the browser without the need for flash which is flash's biggest use. As for flash apps they are no good on a touch screen as they are designed for a mouse and keyboard. You can't just stick them on a touchscreen device as they simply won't offer the same user experence.
I think that an apple tablet would be very good with a few drawbacks. Given their thack record of making breakthrough devices and their skill at software and hardware. But don't expect interchangeable batteries going by their recent design decisions.
I think that if they are going to release a tablet. They will anounce it in January and release an SDK for third party devs similar to the iPhones SDK with emulator and Xcode and interface builder etc.... And then start selling the device in the spring or start of the summer. That would make sense taking advantage of their advantage of having many developers for the iPhone/mac already.
Actually, what I wish Apple would do is create both an iPad AND an iTablet. One a thin paperback sized item with a 5-6" or so screen, and the other a larger 10" device.
I think that I personally would prefer the smaller, more portable device, while others could definitely make use of the larger screen for work, notes, etc..
This is one area where Apple should, like notebooks, let people decide what's best for them and for their particular situations. Who knows? Entire markets could spring up around both.
This tablet will change the computing industry forever. It will usher in a new era of personal computing with regards to education. The landscape will be completely transformed in a year or so of it's release. I expect that Apple will promoting this device heavily towards students; high school, college etc. Instead of carrying books to class, students will use the tablet. Most importantly, these devices will create a symbiotic relationship between teachers and students, with permissions. It will have a stylus.
... 10" hi-rez touchscreen (multi-touch with fingers & stylus capable), Tegra 2 inside, 'Touch-ified' Mac OS X (and all of the accompanying apps; Mail, Address Book, Safari, Preview, iTunes, QuickTime X, etc. ...), iLife, iWork, mobile video iChat capable, iTunes-centric App Store, Apple Remote Desktop; I would SO buy one of these...!...
This is so not going to happen. You need to dial down your expectations a bit.
It will be either the same OS as the iPhone or a version of the same thing. in other words we will be lucky if it sports a file system. It will not run apps in Windows, or run OS X desktop class apps and will be more of a synced device than a "full on" computer.
I'd be happy if it costs under a $1000 and lets me write and draw on it. Anything more is gravy.
Comments
Isn't that a given for a device with a much larger screen size? That doesn't spell stunning resolution to me. She gives no hints at what the resolution could actually be and then regurgitates common rumors like a 3G and non 3G version. Anyone could have made these "predictions".
In one interpretation of the word "resolution", one is speaking strictly of the number of "lines" and "samples". In that manner, what you say is correct. But sometimes when one uses that word, they are speaking to the pixel density, which is the true measure of how "nice" a picture looks. I very strongly suspect that that is what is meant here by "resolution".
In other words, the author is claiming that the number of pixels per inch is going to be much higher on this new device, which yields the "stunning" resolution.
Thompson
I wouldn't be so adamant about that. While the tablet may not have flash, I wouldn't suggest that as a sure thing. Many of the problems associated with flash and the iPhone would be largely alleviated with a tablet device with a larger battery and a better CPU. I'm not an advocate of flash by any means, and I don't really miss it on the iPhone (for the most part), but with so much flash only web content still out there, not having flash on a device as large as a tablet would be a disadvantage.
I agree with your points about Flash being more useful on a more powerful devie with a larger display, but would like to add that Flash does use quite a bit of power. Even on Apple’s notebooks with 7 hours of battery that can cut down considerably with the use of Flash, even if it’s just ads.
Here are some recent battery tests with Flash on and off with both 32-bit and 64-bit Safari…I also speculate that Apple doesn’t want to promote Hulu and other sites that Flash is really only useful when they have their iTS video content to push. They also have the HTTPS Secure Streaming and other open standards that would work as well with less of a power drain if sites like Hulu incorporated it. Flash sites for the sake of using Flash just aren’t popular enough to be an issue for Apple to care about.
Translation: I've had an unhappy experience with Apple so I think everyone else should too! Anyone who actually enjoys using Apple products doesn't mind being controlled. If so many people are being controlled, why does Apple have the highest customer satisfaction ratings time and time again? Also, how are they continuing to post record revenue and sales? Because they're driving people away with their controlling nature?
True, I have had a very unhappy experience with Apple. I'm not saying everyone else should too, but I also think people shouldn't be blind! (And I've known plenty of people with a very happy experience with Apple.) I see comments of people who say they will buy one of these devices as soon as its released... which doesn't seem smart to me since we have no clue what it will actually be (let alone the fact that first gen products from Apple are usually finicky).
I don't like the fact that Apple has a very tight hand on their products. Its their right to do it, yes, but I don't like it. I am allowed to state that opinion. Even in a site that is very Pro-Apple. I am the voice of the other side (no, not the M$ side, just the Anti-Apple side)
I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
When was this decided? I'm blown away by the LED MacBook screens and the iPhone. What's so bad about them? My thinking is... Nothing.
... I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
I think people "buy into it" because it's not really that big a deal. No one has absolute control over anything in the end, and what you are "giving up" is minimal compared to what you are getting.
I use a Mac pro which is very expensive and it's limiting in some ways, but those limits are really minor in the grand scheme of things and what I get out of it is (generally) a far better machine than I could get by going any other route.
It's been said before, but we are really talking about the "goose that laid golden eggs" parable here. Sure, if Apple allowed licensing of the OS there would be cheaper and more flexible computing options, and sure, I would probably buy one.
Eventually however, this would bring Apple down as a company and destroy their business model. Apple would become Microsoft, and some other company would rise up and create a more integrated and controlled product to fill the space that Apple left.
Apple MacTouch...
10" hi-rez touchscreen (multi-touch with fingers & stylus capable), Tegra 2 inside, 'Touch-ified' Mac OS X (and all of the accompanying apps; Mail, Address Book, Safari, Preview, iTunes, QuickTime X, etc. ...), iLife, iWork, mobile video iChat capable, iTunes-centric App Store, Apple Remote Desktop; I would SO buy one of these...!
For serious gaming, I would rather have a PlayStation 3/XBox 360/Wii... (Personally, the choise would be PS3, because M$ sucks & the Wii I could take or leave...)
Okay, I could see including the ability to run iPhone-type games, and of course, World of Warcraft... ;^p
For those needing more computing power, get a MacBook Pro, a beefy iMac or a Mac Pro...
But for the everyday email/surf the web/write a paper/play with photos/get some WoW time/etc. crowd, my vision of a MacTouch would do nicely...
If I could have it as a stand-alone, syncing to MobileMe via the Internet, and a solid back-up (also automatically synced with the MobileMe account where needed) on a Time Capsule; so much the better. The above is a computer that would cover the needs of a HUGE segment of current end-users, without the need for a home machine to sync with...
Multiple MacTouch users in a single household could opt for a Mac mini server (and a Promise RAID for larger aggregated iTunes collections) that would be a central depository for all syncing & Time Capsule back-up data, and said Mac mini server would still sync with individual MobileMe accounts as needed...
I could go on...
I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
The reasons why Apple operates the way they do have been explained, and it's got nothing much to do with "control." The reasons are simple and perfectly conventional, and don't require any "buy in" that I can see.
While I wouldn't be surprised if the tablet didn't have flash, I also wouldn't be surprised if it did. I do wish for flash content to die, but I would also like to see the content that is available on the web.
Flash is a resource hog for features and resources already provided by Apple in other ways making it redundant at best. I can watch h264 movies, youtube, LP's and anything that is HTML5. Why does it NEED Flash? Because there are lots of outdated publishers still using it? It's certainly not because of HULU or others and it's definitely not because of the flash banners. I understand lots of sites use flash but that's changing quickly. The largest growth for my company's web division are people leaving Flash because no one can find their site or it just functions poorly. At least that's what we've been busy doing this year. Recreating flash sites with HTML 5 and Javascript and PHP. Forget Flash and Cold Fusion.
Guess we'll see if Apple moves forward or lags behind sticking to old conventions; but that doesn't sound very Apple to me. They typically create new standards not rely on old ones. That's Microsoft's business model.
The Tablet is not an e-reader, per se, it's a subscription server that will revolutionize print and media delivery. Amazon and Sony have endeavored to replace books. Apple aims to replace the newsstand and library! From what I glean from Peter Kaplan and Marc Andreessen, Apple is in the process of reinventing print the same way it reinvented the phone. Dare I suggest, that's the Tablet.
I have to disagree with you. the Tablet will not be the server. The Tablet will be the client. And given Apple's previous style and the various potentials, it will be like the iphone not just in terms of the software but also in being several devices in one.
What I think Apple has been doing with these media companies is letting them see a glimpse of the device's form so they can see how it could be used as an ebook reader and even an emagazine reader and showing them how Apps have already been used to create comics and such for the phone. and so on.
I'll believe it when I see it. And so far, I see nothing.
Of course, I will never buy one, but who cares.
Apple won't care when they sell them like mad.
You do a lot of this "I demand and if I don't get it, then it's shit" talk. And many of your demands lack a sense of logic. Particularly the logic that a company like Apple would be looking to fill a gap, not repeat what they have. They have a full powered laptop why make another one.
Suppose you also don't care that your 'tude is going to end up making you one of the top ignored posters on the board. Because you can be a voice of reason without being a troll, a jerk or a Microsoft shill. And yet you reveal in being all those things and acting like it makes you something slick and awesome.
The iTablet must run Mac OS X applications (full Mac OS X inside - Tablet version). Must be as light and small as possible. Must have video-out and USB 2 ports for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations.
the signs are it won't, so suppose you won't be buying one anymore than camroid.
Anyone have a link to some of the "analysts" prognostications that were spewed prior to release of the iPhone? It'd be nice to see how wrong they were.
there were none because no one had a clue one was coming until the Macworld announcement and then Jobs laid it all out for everyone. nothing to predict
You will not, guarantee not see flash on the tablet. There are so many reasons; you should just do your research and discover why and thank god it won't.
Fine. Then let apple put SOMETHING in it's place because it is VERY annoying seeing youtube or whatever video placeholders with nothing visible. And that youtube apps of theirs STINKS!
If it is just the iPod Touch OS, it will be horribly crippled as a device. If it has its own version of OS X that isn't compatible with the iPod Touch OS, then you'll make Devs angry for having three systems to develop for.
Apple could easily run multiple iPhone apps in "windows" on a larger device. Though iPhone/Touch developers have been told since the beginning NOT to assume screen dimensions and resolutions, in which case apps like, say, the Kindle application could easily run full screen.
I think one also needs to take a look at several of the patents that have surfaced recently regarding pen input, a perfect additional entry system for a notepad-sized device.
So... a pad that can run iPhone apps fullscreen with Apple-smooth note taking and sketching capabilities. And do multimedia music and video and games?
Doesn't sound "horribly crippled" to me...
Flash is a resource hog for features and resources already provided by Apple in other ways making it redundant at best. I can watch h264 movies, youtube, LP's and anything that is HTML5. Why does it NEED Flash? Because there are lots of outdated publishers still using it? It's certainly not because of HULU or others and it's definitely not because of the flash banners. I understand lots of sites use flash but that's changing quickly. The largest growth for my company's web division are people leaving Flash because no one can find their site or it just functions poorly. At least that's what we've been busy doing this year. Recreating flash sites with HTML 5 and Javascript and PHP. Forget Flash and Cold Fusion.
Guess we'll see if Apple moves forward or lags behind sticking to old conventions; but that doesn't sound very Apple to me. They typically create new standards not rely on old ones. That's Microsoft's business model.
I'm fully aware of the limitations of flash and Apples tendency to abandon old technologies and push new ones. That however, doesn't mean that the transition would be painless for the end user. I was looking at condos earlier this year and every single developers site used flash, so while flash use may be declining, it is still there. It becomes of a question of how much pain does Apple want the user to endure in their quest to kill flash? Also, have you even considered the possibility of a more open version of Safari on a tablet, in theory we could get a version that has plugin support, which would thus make flash the choice of the user.
Abandoning old but still widely used technologies because they are "bad" isn't always the best move. This isn't a monitor port where you can at least buy an adapter to make things work.
True, I have had a very unhappy experience with Apple. I'm not saying everyone else should too, but I also think people shouldn't be blind! (And I've known plenty of people with a very happy experience with Apple.) I see comments of people who say they will buy one of these devices as soon as its released... which doesn't seem smart to me since we have no clue what it will actually be (let alone the fact that first gen products from Apple are usually finicky).
I don't like the fact that Apple has a very tight hand on their products. Its their right to do it, yes, but I don't like it. I am allowed to state that opinion. Even in a site that is very Pro-Apple. I am the voice of the other side (no, not the M$ side, just the Anti-Apple side)
I also said that Apple is doing well business wise with the controlling factor. It works, power to them. I just happen to not agree with it and am quite confused as to why people buy into it.
I think what I and other people are saying is that we don't mind "non-Apple" people. If you have a constructive argument or criticism about something we'll more than listen. But these type of people are few and far between. The vast majority of "non-Apple" people here just post the exact same thing in every thread. They have they same list of complaints that get repeated over and over again. It doesn't matter if the thread has anything to do with what they're talking about. Change the wording a bit, maybe tie it into the thread topic a bit, re-post it in another thread.
You will not, guarantee not see flash on the tablet. There are so many reasons; you should just do your research and discover why and thank god it won't.
One of the most obvious raisons d'être for the tablet I can think of is to take on the net book market. I don't see that as being doable without flash. A semi-internet capable device just won't excite.
The other huge market potential and one I have a suspicion the device might be aimed at, is the medical field. If my guess is correct, then the graphics and display capabilities would need to be impressive. I am of two minds about this. On the one hand I can see reasons why SJ might be motivated to develop a device the medical establishment have lobbied him for, but on the other hand, fulfilling their wishes would likely require leading edge hardware, something Apple doesn't normally do.
About flash on the tablet it is very very unlikely that it would be available. Apple Google and the Open source community are working to banish flash to history with HTML 5. A standard that is becomming supported in safari, Crome, and firefox that natively support video playback through the browser without the need for flash which is flash's biggest use. As for flash apps they are no good on a touch screen as they are designed for a mouse and keyboard. You can't just stick them on a touchscreen device as they simply won't offer the same user experence.
I think that an apple tablet would be very good with a few drawbacks. Given their thack record of making breakthrough devices and their skill at software and hardware. But don't expect interchangeable batteries going by their recent design decisions.
I think that if they are going to release a tablet. They will anounce it in January and release an SDK for third party devs similar to the iPhones SDK with emulator and Xcode and interface builder etc.... And then start selling the device in the spring or start of the summer. That would make sense taking advantage of their advantage of having many developers for the iPhone/mac already.
I think that I personally would prefer the smaller, more portable device, while others could definitely make use of the larger screen for work, notes, etc..
This is one area where Apple should, like notebooks, let people decide what's best for them and for their particular situations. Who knows? Entire markets could spring up around both.
... 10" hi-rez touchscreen (multi-touch with fingers & stylus capable), Tegra 2 inside, 'Touch-ified' Mac OS X (and all of the accompanying apps; Mail, Address Book, Safari, Preview, iTunes, QuickTime X, etc. ...), iLife, iWork, mobile video iChat capable, iTunes-centric App Store, Apple Remote Desktop; I would SO buy one of these...!...
This is so not going to happen. You need to dial down your expectations a bit.
It will be either the same OS as the iPhone or a version of the same thing. in other words we will be lucky if it sports a file system. It will not run apps in Windows, or run OS X desktop class apps and will be more of a synced device than a "full on" computer.
I'd be happy if it costs under a $1000 and lets me write and draw on it. Anything more is gravy.