I totally understand your point, but I can't see myself getting Apple's slate if I have to carry it around as well as my netbook.
That is unless it's somehow <$200 in which case it can sit at home on my coffee table as an eBook\\web browser.
Maybe a separate slate UI that runs on OS X would be the best compromise? (i.e. think Front Row)
Why would you have to carry your netbook around? All these low ball numbers amuse me too. It would most likely be priced like a "premium" netbook or low end laptop ($700 or more). There will likely be a subsidy if you get it with a contract, but I can't fathom it going below $500 ($700 could very well be the subsidized price). There are tablets coming out designed solely as internet appliances priced close $500.
A separate slate UI does not change the fact that OSX programs are not designed for multitouch. Can you provide a reason for OSX other than wanting an OSX program that is only an app store submission away?
I own nothing but Apple hardware (have for years) but I remember when a little "amazing" product came out called the cube. As soon as it was out and the specs price could really be examined, I predicted utter death for the thing unless they seriously dropped the price. It was, at the time, a piece of engineering in search of a market.
Why do I bring that up? Is it because I have superior powers of prognostication? I wish!
No, I only bring it up because IMHO, if the tablet is just a fully touch-screen macbook sans keyboard, then whats the point? Are die-hard laptop toting travelers really going to want to save 1 pound at the expense of a keyboard? Who is going to want to walk around with $1000 10" LED screen all the time? I mean, it won't fit in your pocket like your iPhone/iPod Touch.
Personally, I think any product that is essentially like the slate will be niche market at best. I think a big tablet is really just an in-between laptop to thin fold-able reading screens that sync/communicate with your iPhone (e.g. like tethering).
I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is something truly amazing released by Apple. Unfortunately I suspect it's nothing more than an Apple branded tablet (in the meaning that word currently carries with it), then it may be no more successful than the Apple TV.
I own nothing but Apple hardware (have for years) but I remember when a little "amazing" product came out called the cube. As soon as it was out and the specs price could really be examined, I predicted utter death for the thing unless they seriously dropped the price. It was, at the time, a piece of engineering in search of a market.
Why do I bring that up? Is it because I have superior powers of prognostication? I wish!
No, I only bring it up because IMHO, if the tablet is just a fully touch-screen macbook sans keyboard, then whats the point? Are die-hard laptop toting travelers really going to want to save 1 pound at the expense of a keyboard? Who is going to want to walk around with $1000 10" LED screen all the time? I mean, it won't fit in your pocket like your iPhone/iPod Touch.
Personally, I think any product that is essentially like the slate will be niche market at best. I think a big tablet is really just an in-between laptop to thin fold-able reading screens that sync/communicate with your iPhone (e.g. like tethering).
I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is something truly amazing released by Apple. Unfortunately I suspect it's nothing more than an Apple branded tablet (in the meaning that word currently carries with it), then it may be no more successful than the Apple TV.
Here's to looking forward to being wrong!
The idea would obviously be that the tablet would be better at performing certain tasks than a laptop. The laptop with a touch screen idea has been played out many times. Companies are just starting to work on making tablets more user friendly.
I own nothing but Apple hardware (have for years) but I remember when a little "amazing" product came out called the cube. As soon as it was out and the specs price could really be examined, I predicted utter death for the thing unless they seriously dropped the price. It was, at the time, a piece of engineering in search of a market.
Apples move to high priced low performance hardware is what drove me to Linux for years. That from somebody that started out, in Apple hardware, with a Mac Plus.
Quote:
Why do I bring that up? Is it because I have superior powers of prognostication? I wish!
Anybody with fuzzy balls must have super powers. Hi fuzz_ball!
Quote:
No, I only bring it up because IMHO, if the tablet is just a fully touch-screen macbook sans keyboard, then whats the point? Are die-hard laptop toting travelers really going to want to save 1 pound at the expense of a keyboard? Who is going to want to walk around with $1000 10" LED screen all the time? I mean, it won't fit in your pocket like your iPhone/iPod Touch.
You are absolutely right with respect to a device priced that high. As to the iPhone/Touch, I'd love to have one of those is a larger version. But even $399 is expensive for them.
Quote:
Personally, I think any product that is essentially like the slate will be niche market at best. I think a big tablet is really just an in-between laptop to thin fold-able reading screens that sync/communicate with your iPhone (e.g. like tethering).
Priced right it would serve some markets really well. But it won't make the girl friend happy that likes to watch youtube in bed. A netbook does that fine. Unless the Touch keyboard is far better than I'm expecting people won't be using that for bulk text entry either.
Quote:
I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is something truly amazing released by Apple. Unfortunately I suspect it's nothing more than an Apple branded tablet (in the meaning that word currently carries with it), then it may be no more successful than the Apple TV.
It all depends upon them getting the formula right. From what I'm hearing they already have screwed up.
Come on. This is hardly the first time that an poster has been called on his assertion.
Come on, I provided evidence for my recollections, you demand "proof"-- which in the absence of any other explanation, suggests to me that nothing short of an infinity of evidence will be considered by you to be proof.
Come on, I provided evidence for my recollections, you demand "proof"-- which in the absence of any other explanation, suggests to me that nothing short of an infinity of evidence will be considered by you to be proof.
No, not an infinity of evidence. A majority of opinion will suffice.
No. You assertion was about an event that happened nine years ago. There was either substantial doubt about the iPod or there was not. It's a historical fact. You can't put facts to a vote.
The iSlate sounds dumb dumb dumb. I could not want one less. Too big for my pocket, small enough for me to lose somewhere, and just the right size to slip out of my hand and fall on the floor. It sounds just worthless.
But they also consume Flash video, WMV, DivX, write simple Word documents and spreadsheets, edit photos, use chat programs like MSN, connect to printers, scanners, batch compress/rename photos for upload to bebo and FTP. The iphone OS we see on the iphone does almost none of that - you can't even use the upload buttons on the internet. The only apps you can use are the ones Apple say you can and this will likely be true of the slate unless it's a proper Mac system.
There are always going to be some people who demand such functionality. But the tablet is simply not for them. There are people who have a pilot's licence. But that does not mean that designing a car without wings will lose market share.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
It just cuts out too much good stuff. This is Apple's big chance to sway the PC industry over to OS X. Few people turn to OS X and go back but it's no good if they don't see the advantages and so aren't willing to pay more for a Mac in the first place. This way Apple hit a big audience and it encourages 3rd party developers to support the OS X system.
Mac OS is a given. It is out-there already. It serves a growing audience and is largely better, in my opinion, than the Windows OS. Apple already makes a full-range of Mac OS products.
But it makes no sense for the tablet to be another OS X product. The tablet is trying to reach a new audience that is unimpressed with Mac OS, or Windows or Linux. Just as the iPhone was an attempt to reach an audience that was unimpressed with Symbian and Windows Mobile. And remember, Apple's most successful recruiting sergeant for OS X was the iPod.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
All OS X desktop apps recognize the built-in software keyboard in OS X and they all recognize standard clicks from a variety of devices like Wacom tablets. They are just signals that get sent to a driver. There could be a keyboard icon in the bottom left near the dock, which you tap and a semi-transparent keyboard swishes up where the dock would normally be and you just type there. Not floating as it's easier to remember key positions if it's fixed.
That would be great, unless I wanted to type into an area *behind* where the keyboard now is.
Some of the Apps I run expect me to hold down the control key while rolling the scroll wheel of my mouse. Exactly how does the tablet cope with that?
Trying to run un-modified desktop apps on a tablet, by remapping inputs, was tried by Microsoft. It works only in the minds of engineers who have not thought the problem through. It may be possible, but it is not desirable. Not intuitive and not fun. It certainly is not better.
Imagine a gesture for dragging and dropping an icon. How is that different to the gesture for scrolling?
The hardware, the interface and the software that run on the interface all have to be designed together. With any part of this out of step, you get clunkiness and breakages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Why have they made so many changes to OS X unless they planned to use them for touch:
To offer desktop users some of the benefits of touch, without breaking the UI?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I doubt many developers would put the resources in to build apps specially for the device.
That depends on the size of the audience. The lesson from the iPhone was, get in on the ground floor, wait 5 months and buy a Ferrari.
But I do think that one important aspect of the size of the audience will be determined by the quality and nature of the entertainment content on the platform.
At the right price, and without a single application, but with the right Newspapers, Magazines, Books, Movies and TV shows, this device will sell to a large consumer audience.
Throw in social networking, web browsing, music - and the audience grows some more.
Add an HDMI out, and a webcam and it gets a little bigger still.
The provision of 3rd party applications to do some of the computery stuff you are concerned about is just icing.
I am certain that a lot of techies are going to hate this device. But it won't matter in the slightest.
No. You assertion was about an event that happened nine years ago. There was either substantial doubt about the iPod or there was not. It's a historical fact. You can't put facts to a vote.
Exactly, which is why insisting on a "majority opinion" is so absurd. I've provided support for my recollections, you have provided none. Do I need to repeat your original statement? It was "I simply do not recall all the doubt about the iPod." Do you recall it yet? Or are we just going to go back to "proof" and "majority opinion?"
Can you provide a reason for OSX other than wanting an OSX program that is only an app store submission away?
Are users expected to buy apps with OS X equivalents all over again? Also, Apple have strict rules for App Store apps - no scripting or VMs of any kind so no Flash, Python, Perl, PHP, emulators, Java. Major apps used for teaching like Mathematica wouldn't get through the approval process.
It's not important that in theory any app could go on an ipod slate, it's the uncertainty that those apps may never get there or that there are restrictions preventing you doing certain tasks with your device. A Mac touch guarantees flexibility because at worst you could plug in a keyboard and mouse and have a netbook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carniphage
There are people who have a pilot's licence. But that does not mean that designing a car without wings will lose market share.
That analogy suggests that Apple's slate will only cut out a minority of users with its restrictions. I would suggest that the inflexible iphone OS in a form factor that users expect to be flexible will cut out a majority of users.
In other words like selling a car without a reverse gear. It's a feature that you only use for a fraction of the time while driving and some may never use it in a given day but leave it out and the car is useless in certain critical situations and I'd bet most people wouldn't buy a car without a reverse gear these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carniphage
The tablet is trying to reach a new audience that is unimpressed with Mac OS, or Windows or Linux.
I can't imagine people thinking of those systems being suboptimal for any given task. I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to think that iphone OS is more impressive than the desktop systems with it being less functional. It's just the hardware inputs that feel more natural. The best way to go is to simply add that great input method onto the flexible system that consumers and developers are used to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carniphage
That would be great, unless I wanted to type into an area *behind* where the keyboard now is.
Some of the Apps I run expect me to hold down the control key while rolling the scroll wheel of my mouse. Exactly how does the tablet cope with that?
Imagine a gesture for dragging and dropping an icon. How is that different to the gesture for scrolling?
The drag/drop vs scrolling is an issue on the iphone too when reordering icons but you can get it to work. Ctrl + scroll is uncommon but there could be a small tab with modifier keys. Typing on things behind the keyboard could certainly be an issue but they could even do the same thing as the iphone where it pushes the screen up when typing. I don't think the slate keyboard would have to be significantly larger than the iphone keyboard and that leaves plenty room for seeing what you're typing.
We would agree that the form factor would be suboptimal for typing but whether it's iphone OS or a Mac OS, they are going to have to fit a keyboard on the screen somewhere.
I don't see this being the multi-stacked window interface the desktop uses but the single screen iphone interface with Expose usage a requirement. No such thing as a desktop in that setup. To move files, you just need a dual pane Finder UI with one window.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carniphage
Trying to run un-modified desktop apps on a tablet, by remapping inputs, was tried by Microsoft. It works only in the minds of engineers who have not thought the problem through. It may be possible, but it is not desirable. Not intuitive and not fun. It certainly is not better.
People have tried touch screen PDAs and phones before too though. It's not the concept that's wrong but the way it's done. Apple have put a lot of effort into making OS X a great system from the ground up in ways that others can't, due to legacy support. Also, the capacitive touch and accuracy of the response is where Apple's input succeeds. Most tablets have had terrible responsiveness and it's frustrating having to prod repetitively at an unresponsive screen or use a stylus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carniphage
To offer desktop users some of the benefits of touch, without breaking the UI?
Or to experiment with those types of interaction and see what works. They've gradually increased the gesture support as time went on. Ultimately, the trackpad can be removed from laptops altogether.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carniphage
But I do think that one important aspect of the size of the audience will be determined by the quality and nature of the entertainment content on the platform.
If they hit on the right needs very well and get the right price, it could work being limited. After all people buy HDTVs and expensive audio systems and pay substantial subscriptions for more or less a single purpose and the content alone drives the sale.
Trouble is, TV can't be delivered any other way yet and the major networks have the content locked down. If people have to decide between an inexpensive magazine subscription or an expensive slate plus the subscription, it's not so easy to determine the success.
Apple haven't proved that they have great content to offer with the iphone or ATV platforms. Stats show that people rarely use the 3rd party apps on offer because they are so poor.
Exactly, which is why insisting on a "majority opinion" is so absurd. I've provided support for my recollections, you have provided none. Do I need to repeat your original statement? It was "I simply do not recall all the doubt about the iPod." Do you recall it yet? Or are we just going to go back to "proof" and "majority opinion?"
Let's not get silly. I said that there was not substantial doubt. That does not mean nor did I imply that there was no doubt. There is always some doubt. You have shown irrefutable evidence that there was some doubt. This was not an issue in dispute. The issue in dispute was your assertion that the doubt was substantial. There are billions of people on Earth with at least as many opinions. Proving your point by presenting individual opinions is impossible. The only way that you could do it would be to present one or more opinion polls conducted at the time.
Are users expected to buy apps with OS X equivalents all over again? Also, Apple have strict rules for App Store apps - no scripting or VMs of any kind so no Flash, Python, Perl, PHP, emulators, Java. Major apps used for teaching like Mathematica wouldn't get through the approval process.
It's not important that in theory any app could go on an ipod slate, it's the uncertainty that those apps may never get there or that there are restrictions preventing you doing certain tasks with your device. A Mac touch guarantees flexibility because at worst you could plug in a keyboard and mouse and have a netbook.
This is not a challenging problem.
If you really need to run Mac applications, then buy a Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I can't imagine people thinking of those systems being suboptimal for any given task. I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to think that iphone OS is more impressive than the desktop systems with it being less functional. It's just the hardware inputs that feel more natural. The best way to go is to simply add that great input method onto the flexible system that consumers and developers are used to.
In a shift from notebook to tablet, there will be functions lost. It's inevitable. If you desperately care about those functions, don't shift to a tablet. Get an MSI Wind and make it into a hackintosh. (I did!)
Yes some tablets have attempted to bring along a full-deskop OS, and not compromise an inch of functionality. And every single one of those products has failed to sell.
The proposal is simple. For many types of common computer usage, the tablet offers a more convenient form factor, improved battery life, and a way of using it which is simpler and more immediate than a notebook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I don't think the slate keyboard would have to be significantly larger than the iphone keyboard and that leaves plenty room for seeing what you're typing.
The tiny iPhone keyboard is accessible to two thumbs. Where would you place it on a 10" tablet so that I could type in the same way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
We would agree that the form factor would be suboptimal for typing but whether it's iphone OS or a Mac OS, they are going to have to fit a keyboard on the screen somewhere.
Oh I agree. When needed, the UI will bring up the keyboard, while guaranteeing the typing field will be visible in the un-obscured portion of the screen. I expect the virtual keyboard will be a 10-finger design. But applications designed for the tablet explicitly bring up a keyboard. They are designed to reconfigure the screen accordingly. Mac apps respond to keypresses 24-7 should the keyboard be on-screen permanently?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
If they hit on the right needs very well and get the right price, it could work being limited. After all people buy HDTVs and expensive audio systems and pay substantial subscriptions for more or less a single purpose and the content alone drives the sale.
Exactly!
Applications will be a welcome plus, but its the media experience that will initially drive this product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Apple haven't proved that they have great content to offer with the iphone or ATV platforms. Stats show that people rarely use the 3rd party apps on offer because they are so poor.
Content is the real issue for Apple. Because there is a chicken and egg problem.
Apple's movie content is okay - but needs a bigger catalog.
Were there a larger audience, I am certain the content would follow. A tablet could offer movies, television, books and periodicals. That could grow the audience - which in turn would bring more content.
Oh and one more thing. Content needs to be stored on something. We need a storage device. Perhaps the Time Capsule could turn into a Media Vault?
I'm really concerned about all the hype surrounding the still unannounced device that will allegedly be introduced this month. Unlike the iPod and the iPhone people (other than we fanboys) didn't expect those two products to succeed. If you think back to the introduction of the iPod it was dismissed outright by the media, pundits, and "tech types." The predictions of failure were numerous and vicious. When the iPod was announced there was actual laughter from the mobile industry. Does anyone remember John Dvorak's utterly contemptuous dismissal and Nokia's scoffing?
However, after the unparalleled success of those two products, the world is a different place these days. Whatever this device is people, and the media, EXPECT it to wow and amaze. They EXPECT it to take this emerging market by storm. Even Dvorak has changed his tune on this one this time. Whereas the iPod and iPhone wowed and amazed because they weren't expected to, let alone succeed in the marketplace, this device is completely over-hyped. No offense to Steve Jobs but the hype can't possibly live up to the reality this time. It remains to be seen if the Steve Jobs RDF can overcome the masses this time. I think not. Mind you, I am as incurable an Apple fanboy as anyone and I am concerned. The device will be excellent, I have doubt about that, but pundits and the media are expecting it to be game changing and will lash out if it doesn't live up to the hype.
Just a thought.
Is that unusual for people to change their tune after Apple has smacked everyone in the face with their success?
Let's not get silly. I said that there was not substantial doubt. That does not mean nor did I imply that there was no doubt. There is always some doubt. You have shown irrefutable evidence that there was some doubt. This was not an issue in dispute. The issue in dispute was your assertion that the doubt was substantial. There are billions of people on Earth with at least as many opinions. Proving your point by presenting individual opinions is impossible. The only way that you could do it would be to present one or more opinion polls conducted at the time.
I'm not the one being silly. I'm not trying to "prove" my point, only support it. Which I have done for my opinion and you still have not done for yours. Never mind, I can see you are going to duck and weave so there's no point in discussing the question further. We might just ask ourselves how successful the iPod would have been if it had remained Mac-only. The answer should not require any "proof," only a small amount of knowledge and some honesty.
Comments
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
I totally understand your point, but I can't see myself getting Apple's slate if I have to carry it around as well as my netbook.
That is unless it's somehow <$200 in which case it can sit at home on my coffee table as an eBook\\web browser.
Maybe a separate slate UI that runs on OS X would be the best compromise? (i.e. think Front Row)
Why would you have to carry your netbook around? All these low ball numbers amuse me too. It would most likely be priced like a "premium" netbook or low end laptop ($700 or more). There will likely be a subsidy if you get it with a contract, but I can't fathom it going below $500 ($700 could very well be the subsidized price). There are tablets coming out designed solely as internet appliances priced close $500.
A separate slate UI does not change the fact that OSX programs are not designed for multitouch. Can you provide a reason for OSX other than wanting an OSX program that is only an app store submission away?
Why do I bring that up? Is it because I have superior powers of prognostication? I wish!
No, I only bring it up because IMHO, if the tablet is just a fully touch-screen macbook sans keyboard, then whats the point? Are die-hard laptop toting travelers really going to want to save 1 pound at the expense of a keyboard? Who is going to want to walk around with $1000 10" LED screen all the time? I mean, it won't fit in your pocket like your iPhone/iPod Touch.
Personally, I think any product that is essentially like the slate will be niche market at best. I think a big tablet is really just an in-between laptop to thin fold-able reading screens that sync/communicate with your iPhone (e.g. like tethering).
I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is something truly amazing released by Apple. Unfortunately I suspect it's nothing more than an Apple branded tablet (in the meaning that word currently carries with it), then it may be no more successful than the Apple TV.
Here's to looking forward to being wrong!
Two articles are hardly proof of significant doubt surrounding the iPod.
Hmm, proof. I had no idea I was on trial. How many stories repeating the same doubts do you need to rise to your level of proof?
I own nothing but Apple hardware (have for years) but I remember when a little "amazing" product came out called the cube. As soon as it was out and the specs price could really be examined, I predicted utter death for the thing unless they seriously dropped the price. It was, at the time, a piece of engineering in search of a market.
Why do I bring that up? Is it because I have superior powers of prognostication? I wish!
No, I only bring it up because IMHO, if the tablet is just a fully touch-screen macbook sans keyboard, then whats the point? Are die-hard laptop toting travelers really going to want to save 1 pound at the expense of a keyboard? Who is going to want to walk around with $1000 10" LED screen all the time? I mean, it won't fit in your pocket like your iPhone/iPod Touch.
Personally, I think any product that is essentially like the slate will be niche market at best. I think a big tablet is really just an in-between laptop to thin fold-able reading screens that sync/communicate with your iPhone (e.g. like tethering).
I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is something truly amazing released by Apple. Unfortunately I suspect it's nothing more than an Apple branded tablet (in the meaning that word currently carries with it), then it may be no more successful than the Apple TV.
Here's to looking forward to being wrong!
The idea would obviously be that the tablet would be better at performing certain tasks than a laptop. The laptop with a touch screen idea has been played out many times. Companies are just starting to work on making tablets more user friendly.
Hmm, proof. I had no idea I was on trial. How many stories repeating the same doubts do you need to rise to your level of proof?
Come on. This is hardly the first time that an poster has been called on his assertion.
I own nothing but Apple hardware (have for years) but I remember when a little "amazing" product came out called the cube. As soon as it was out and the specs price could really be examined, I predicted utter death for the thing unless they seriously dropped the price. It was, at the time, a piece of engineering in search of a market.
Apples move to high priced low performance hardware is what drove me to Linux for years. That from somebody that started out, in Apple hardware, with a Mac Plus.
Why do I bring that up? Is it because I have superior powers of prognostication? I wish!
Anybody with fuzzy balls must have super powers. Hi fuzz_ball!
No, I only bring it up because IMHO, if the tablet is just a fully touch-screen macbook sans keyboard, then whats the point? Are die-hard laptop toting travelers really going to want to save 1 pound at the expense of a keyboard? Who is going to want to walk around with $1000 10" LED screen all the time? I mean, it won't fit in your pocket like your iPhone/iPod Touch.
You are absolutely right with respect to a device priced that high. As to the iPhone/Touch, I'd love to have one of those is a larger version. But even $399 is expensive for them.
Personally, I think any product that is essentially like the slate will be niche market at best. I think a big tablet is really just an in-between laptop to thin fold-able reading screens that sync/communicate with your iPhone (e.g. like tethering).
Priced right it would serve some markets really well. But it won't make the girl friend happy that likes to watch youtube in bed. A netbook does that fine. Unless the Touch keyboard is far better than I'm expecting people won't be using that for bulk text entry either.
I hope I'm wrong, I hope there is something truly amazing released by Apple. Unfortunately I suspect it's nothing more than an Apple branded tablet (in the meaning that word currently carries with it), then it may be no more successful than the Apple TV.
It all depends upon them getting the formula right. From what I'm hearing they already have screwed up.
Here's to looking forward to being wrong!
Yes lets hope so.
Dave
Come on. This is hardly the first time that an poster has been called on his assertion.
Come on, I provided evidence for my recollections, you demand "proof"-- which in the absence of any other explanation, suggests to me that nothing short of an infinity of evidence will be considered by you to be proof.
Come on, I provided evidence for my recollections, you demand "proof"-- which in the absence of any other explanation, suggests to me that nothing short of an infinity of evidence will be considered by you to be proof.
No, not an infinity of evidence. A majority of opinion will suffice.
No, not an infinity of evidence. A majority of opinion will suffice.
Then we shall take a vote.
Why didn't I think of that?
Then we shall take a vote.
Why didn't I think of that?
No. You assertion was about an event that happened nine years ago. There was either substantial doubt about the iPod or there was not. It's a historical fact. You can't put facts to a vote.
But they also consume Flash video, WMV, DivX, write simple Word documents and spreadsheets, edit photos, use chat programs like MSN, connect to printers, scanners, batch compress/rename photos for upload to bebo and FTP. The iphone OS we see on the iphone does almost none of that - you can't even use the upload buttons on the internet. The only apps you can use are the ones Apple say you can and this will likely be true of the slate unless it's a proper Mac system.
There are always going to be some people who demand such functionality. But the tablet is simply not for them. There are people who have a pilot's licence. But that does not mean that designing a car without wings will lose market share.
It just cuts out too much good stuff. This is Apple's big chance to sway the PC industry over to OS X. Few people turn to OS X and go back but it's no good if they don't see the advantages and so aren't willing to pay more for a Mac in the first place. This way Apple hit a big audience and it encourages 3rd party developers to support the OS X system.
Mac OS is a given. It is out-there already. It serves a growing audience and is largely better, in my opinion, than the Windows OS. Apple already makes a full-range of Mac OS products.
But it makes no sense for the tablet to be another OS X product. The tablet is trying to reach a new audience that is unimpressed with Mac OS, or Windows or Linux. Just as the iPhone was an attempt to reach an audience that was unimpressed with Symbian and Windows Mobile. And remember, Apple's most successful recruiting sergeant for OS X was the iPod.
All OS X desktop apps recognize the built-in software keyboard in OS X and they all recognize standard clicks from a variety of devices like Wacom tablets. They are just signals that get sent to a driver. There could be a keyboard icon in the bottom left near the dock, which you tap and a semi-transparent keyboard swishes up where the dock would normally be and you just type there. Not floating as it's easier to remember key positions if it's fixed.
That would be great, unless I wanted to type into an area *behind* where the keyboard now is.
Some of the Apps I run expect me to hold down the control key while rolling the scroll wheel of my mouse. Exactly how does the tablet cope with that?
Trying to run un-modified desktop apps on a tablet, by remapping inputs, was tried by Microsoft. It works only in the minds of engineers who have not thought the problem through. It may be possible, but it is not desirable. Not intuitive and not fun. It certainly is not better.
Imagine a gesture for dragging and dropping an icon. How is that different to the gesture for scrolling?
The hardware, the interface and the software that run on the interface all have to be designed together. With any part of this out of step, you get clunkiness and breakages.
Why have they made so many changes to OS X unless they planned to use them for touch:
To offer desktop users some of the benefits of touch, without breaking the UI?
I doubt many developers would put the resources in to build apps specially for the device.
That depends on the size of the audience. The lesson from the iPhone was, get in on the ground floor, wait 5 months and buy a Ferrari.
But I do think that one important aspect of the size of the audience will be determined by the quality and nature of the entertainment content on the platform.
At the right price, and without a single application, but with the right Newspapers, Magazines, Books, Movies and TV shows, this device will sell to a large consumer audience.
Throw in social networking, web browsing, music - and the audience grows some more.
Add an HDMI out, and a webcam and it gets a little bigger still.
The provision of 3rd party applications to do some of the computery stuff you are concerned about is just icing.
I am certain that a lot of techies are going to hate this device. But it won't matter in the slightest.
C.
No. You assertion was about an event that happened nine years ago. There was either substantial doubt about the iPod or there was not. It's a historical fact. You can't put facts to a vote.
Exactly, which is why insisting on a "majority opinion" is so absurd. I've provided support for my recollections, you have provided none. Do I need to repeat your original statement? It was "I simply do not recall all the doubt about the iPod." Do you recall it yet? Or are we just going to go back to "proof" and "majority opinion?"
Can you provide a reason for OSX other than wanting an OSX program that is only an app store submission away?
Are users expected to buy apps with OS X equivalents all over again? Also, Apple have strict rules for App Store apps - no scripting or VMs of any kind so no Flash, Python, Perl, PHP, emulators, Java. Major apps used for teaching like Mathematica wouldn't get through the approval process.
It's not important that in theory any app could go on an ipod slate, it's the uncertainty that those apps may never get there or that there are restrictions preventing you doing certain tasks with your device. A Mac touch guarantees flexibility because at worst you could plug in a keyboard and mouse and have a netbook.
There are people who have a pilot's licence. But that does not mean that designing a car without wings will lose market share.
That analogy suggests that Apple's slate will only cut out a minority of users with its restrictions. I would suggest that the inflexible iphone OS in a form factor that users expect to be flexible will cut out a majority of users.
In other words like selling a car without a reverse gear. It's a feature that you only use for a fraction of the time while driving and some may never use it in a given day but leave it out and the car is useless in certain critical situations and I'd bet most people wouldn't buy a car without a reverse gear these days.
The tablet is trying to reach a new audience that is unimpressed with Mac OS, or Windows or Linux.
I can't imagine people thinking of those systems being suboptimal for any given task. I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to think that iphone OS is more impressive than the desktop systems with it being less functional. It's just the hardware inputs that feel more natural. The best way to go is to simply add that great input method onto the flexible system that consumers and developers are used to.
That would be great, unless I wanted to type into an area *behind* where the keyboard now is.
Some of the Apps I run expect me to hold down the control key while rolling the scroll wheel of my mouse. Exactly how does the tablet cope with that?
Imagine a gesture for dragging and dropping an icon. How is that different to the gesture for scrolling?
The drag/drop vs scrolling is an issue on the iphone too when reordering icons but you can get it to work. Ctrl + scroll is uncommon but there could be a small tab with modifier keys. Typing on things behind the keyboard could certainly be an issue but they could even do the same thing as the iphone where it pushes the screen up when typing. I don't think the slate keyboard would have to be significantly larger than the iphone keyboard and that leaves plenty room for seeing what you're typing.
We would agree that the form factor would be suboptimal for typing but whether it's iphone OS or a Mac OS, they are going to have to fit a keyboard on the screen somewhere.
I don't see this being the multi-stacked window interface the desktop uses but the single screen iphone interface with Expose usage a requirement. No such thing as a desktop in that setup. To move files, you just need a dual pane Finder UI with one window.
Trying to run un-modified desktop apps on a tablet, by remapping inputs, was tried by Microsoft. It works only in the minds of engineers who have not thought the problem through. It may be possible, but it is not desirable. Not intuitive and not fun. It certainly is not better.
People have tried touch screen PDAs and phones before too though. It's not the concept that's wrong but the way it's done. Apple have put a lot of effort into making OS X a great system from the ground up in ways that others can't, due to legacy support. Also, the capacitive touch and accuracy of the response is where Apple's input succeeds. Most tablets have had terrible responsiveness and it's frustrating having to prod repetitively at an unresponsive screen or use a stylus.
To offer desktop users some of the benefits of touch, without breaking the UI?
Or to experiment with those types of interaction and see what works. They've gradually increased the gesture support as time went on. Ultimately, the trackpad can be removed from laptops altogether.
But I do think that one important aspect of the size of the audience will be determined by the quality and nature of the entertainment content on the platform.
If they hit on the right needs very well and get the right price, it could work being limited. After all people buy HDTVs and expensive audio systems and pay substantial subscriptions for more or less a single purpose and the content alone drives the sale.
Trouble is, TV can't be delivered any other way yet and the major networks have the content locked down. If people have to decide between an inexpensive magazine subscription or an expensive slate plus the subscription, it's not so easy to determine the success.
Apple haven't proved that they have great content to offer with the iphone or ATV platforms. Stats show that people rarely use the 3rd party apps on offer because they are so poor.
Exactly, which is why insisting on a "majority opinion" is so absurd. I've provided support for my recollections, you have provided none. Do I need to repeat your original statement? It was "I simply do not recall all the doubt about the iPod." Do you recall it yet? Or are we just going to go back to "proof" and "majority opinion?"
Let's not get silly. I said that there was not substantial doubt. That does not mean nor did I imply that there was no doubt. There is always some doubt. You have shown irrefutable evidence that there was some doubt. This was not an issue in dispute. The issue in dispute was your assertion that the doubt was substantial. There are billions of people on Earth with at least as many opinions. Proving your point by presenting individual opinions is impossible. The only way that you could do it would be to present one or more opinion polls conducted at the time.
Are users expected to buy apps with OS X equivalents all over again? Also, Apple have strict rules for App Store apps - no scripting or VMs of any kind so no Flash, Python, Perl, PHP, emulators, Java. Major apps used for teaching like Mathematica wouldn't get through the approval process.
It's not important that in theory any app could go on an ipod slate, it's the uncertainty that those apps may never get there or that there are restrictions preventing you doing certain tasks with your device. A Mac touch guarantees flexibility because at worst you could plug in a keyboard and mouse and have a netbook.
This is not a challenging problem.
If you really need to run Mac applications, then buy a Mac.
I can't imagine people thinking of those systems being suboptimal for any given task. I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to think that iphone OS is more impressive than the desktop systems with it being less functional. It's just the hardware inputs that feel more natural. The best way to go is to simply add that great input method onto the flexible system that consumers and developers are used to.
In a shift from notebook to tablet, there will be functions lost. It's inevitable. If you desperately care about those functions, don't shift to a tablet. Get an MSI Wind and make it into a hackintosh. (I did!)
Yes some tablets have attempted to bring along a full-deskop OS, and not compromise an inch of functionality. And every single one of those products has failed to sell.
The proposal is simple. For many types of common computer usage, the tablet offers a more convenient form factor, improved battery life, and a way of using it which is simpler and more immediate than a notebook.
I don't think the slate keyboard would have to be significantly larger than the iphone keyboard and that leaves plenty room for seeing what you're typing.
The tiny iPhone keyboard is accessible to two thumbs. Where would you place it on a 10" tablet so that I could type in the same way?
We would agree that the form factor would be suboptimal for typing but whether it's iphone OS or a Mac OS, they are going to have to fit a keyboard on the screen somewhere.
Oh I agree. When needed, the UI will bring up the keyboard, while guaranteeing the typing field will be visible in the un-obscured portion of the screen. I expect the virtual keyboard will be a 10-finger design. But applications designed for the tablet explicitly bring up a keyboard. They are designed to reconfigure the screen accordingly. Mac apps respond to keypresses 24-7 should the keyboard be on-screen permanently?
If they hit on the right needs very well and get the right price, it could work being limited. After all people buy HDTVs and expensive audio systems and pay substantial subscriptions for more or less a single purpose and the content alone drives the sale.
Exactly!
Applications will be a welcome plus, but its the media experience that will initially drive this product.
Apple haven't proved that they have great content to offer with the iphone or ATV platforms. Stats show that people rarely use the 3rd party apps on offer because they are so poor.
Content is the real issue for Apple. Because there is a chicken and egg problem.
Apple's movie content is okay - but needs a bigger catalog.
Were there a larger audience, I am certain the content would follow. A tablet could offer movies, television, books and periodicals. That could grow the audience - which in turn would bring more content.
Oh and one more thing. Content needs to be stored on something. We need a storage device. Perhaps the Time Capsule could turn into a Media Vault?
C.
Can you provide a reason for OSX other than wanting an OSX program that is only an app store submission away?
I've got no issue with the apps available on the app store, it's the ones that aren't that are the problem.
I'm really concerned about all the hype surrounding the still unannounced device that will allegedly be introduced this month. Unlike the iPod and the iPhone people (other than we fanboys) didn't expect those two products to succeed. If you think back to the introduction of the iPod it was dismissed outright by the media, pundits, and "tech types." The predictions of failure were numerous and vicious. When the iPod was announced there was actual laughter from the mobile industry. Does anyone remember John Dvorak's utterly contemptuous dismissal and Nokia's scoffing?
However, after the unparalleled success of those two products, the world is a different place these days. Whatever this device is people, and the media, EXPECT it to wow and amaze. They EXPECT it to take this emerging market by storm. Even Dvorak has changed his tune on this one this time. Whereas the iPod and iPhone wowed and amazed because they weren't expected to, let alone succeed in the marketplace, this device is completely over-hyped. No offense to Steve Jobs but the hype can't possibly live up to the reality this time. It remains to be seen if the Steve Jobs RDF can overcome the masses this time. I think not. Mind you, I am as incurable an Apple fanboy as anyone and I am concerned. The device will be excellent, I have doubt about that, but pundits and the media are expecting it to be game changing and will lash out if it doesn't live up to the hype.
Just a thought.
Is that unusual for people to change their tune after Apple has smacked everyone in the face with their success?
No it really isn't
Let's not get silly. I said that there was not substantial doubt. That does not mean nor did I imply that there was no doubt. There is always some doubt. You have shown irrefutable evidence that there was some doubt. This was not an issue in dispute. The issue in dispute was your assertion that the doubt was substantial. There are billions of people on Earth with at least as many opinions. Proving your point by presenting individual opinions is impossible. The only way that you could do it would be to present one or more opinion polls conducted at the time.
I'm not the one being silly. I'm not trying to "prove" my point, only support it. Which I have done for my opinion and you still have not done for yours. Never mind, I can see you are going to duck and weave so there's no point in discussing the question further. We might just ask ourselves how successful the iPod would have been if it had remained Mac-only. The answer should not require any "proof," only a small amount of knowledge and some honesty.
.... We might just ask ourselves how successful the iPod would have been if it had remained Mac-only. ...
The iPod was already a resounding success while it was still Mac-only. Expanding to Windows only made it more so.