I'm having a hard time discerning if you're being sarcastic or genuine in your comment. But really? How is it "gouging" for Apple (or whoever) to charge you for a new version of a product/service? I guess you'll just have to suffice with "last year's product" (shudder) until iWork & iLife 2011 rolls around.
Agreed. I'm still running Leopard and iLife '08. I hope they do announce iLife '10. I'm ready to upgrade to 10.6 and a nice upgrade to iLife at the same time would be great.
I still have and use iMovie HD. There are things I like better about it than the later "dumbed down" iMovies. Just because software is updated, doesn't mean your old stuff stops working. If you want the new features, you pay for them and are happy. Why complain when a manufacturer charges for a new version with new features? That's how they make $$$.
They should all be disgusted with themselves. The advent of "commentators" on news programs needs to end. There is a place for them on talk shows and such. Not the primetime news.
No paint program. You guys are taking things FAR too literally. It's just a quick backdrop to suggest creativity.
This thing (whatever it runs and however it does it) isn't going to ship without apps on it from Apple, and I mean other than the basic set on the iPhone. They won't just release an OS ans ask you to fill your boots with 3rd party software that may or may not be ready at laucnh and of the high quality required to show off the device to the full.
There will be a small number of new apps provided as part of the base build, and they will cover more creative areas allowing you to create content, rather than just access it. So expect a photo editor that sync in to iPhoto on your mac. Expect iMovie lite (or whatever) for performing more than just a "trim" on your videos, allowing you to use transitions and titles before uploading straight to Youtube. Expect some tweaks to MobileMe allowing you to edit your iWeb homepage direct from the device etc etc etc. Call it all iLife mobile if you like, if there is an iLife '10, it will just be a patch to include the integration into the above.
They should all be disgusted with themselves. The advent of "commentators" on news programs needs to end. There is a place for them on talk shows and such. Not the primetime news.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01
Your comment is probably one of the most offensive of anybody's so far. So because I watch Fox News, I no longer have a brain and I am all of those stupid stereotypes you rattled off?
I happen to be a very devout Christian. Yes, I am conservative. A couple of my wife's and my best friends are a gay couple two houses down. I play basketball every week with a group of guys from work every week, half of them black, and some of the best all-around guys I know. I can call a pile of crap just that when I see it, and some stuff on Fox News is just that. Guess what, the same can be said about CNN, MSNBC, C-SPAN, etc. Don't profile all of us just because of Rush's sometimes stupid comments. Please rethink your post and your state of mind, because while I respect anybody and everybody I come across, it is very hard to respect you based on comments like that, and I am sure you're better than that.
What I can't stand about Fox News is that they never give any credit to Obama, ever. In my state's paper there was an article about Obama being a secret Republican, because he handled the wars the same as Bush did. Obama set a timetable, he was criticized for it, even though Bush agreed to the same timetable, Fox was silent. Obama's budget for defense is growing by 3%, non-defense by 12%, yet Rove is saying Obama is cutting defense spending. Obama did a troop surge in Afghanistan, one that McCain was calling for during the election. But according to Fox, Obama didn't do it fast enough. Also according to Fox, Obama doesn't 'get' how to deal with terrorism or doesn't really mean it when he denounces it. The fear-mongering from Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh (I know, not Fox) is ridiculous. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
MSNBC does the same thing on the other side, I know. But let's be honest, it really doesn't matter what they do because nobody watches it. But I would expect the most-watched 24-hour "news" channel to be more...fair and balanced.
I'd still like to know what the mass appeal of a tablet is.
+1
But the marketing machine is in full force - resistance is futile. Given the fact that it is an Apple product, hopefully, it wont be one of these. (NSFW due to language)
This is something that Alex Lindsey was discussing on MacBreak Weekly about a month ago, and it makes perfect sense to me - the tablet would be a great (interactive) media device, and what better way to consumers to create interactive media than with support for it in Apple's consumer-level media tool suite.
This is something that Alex Lindsey was discussing on MacBreak Weekly about a month ago, and it makes perfect sense to me - the tablet would be a great (interactive) media device, and what better way to consumers to create interactive media than with support for it in Apple's consumer-level media tool suite.
The reason for iLife X being announced is likely because a) it's January, and b) there will be a multi touch version compatible with Tablet and possibly iPhone 4.0.
And yes, iTunes LP creation for the average user as part of iDVD would be fantastic, and is entirely likely. Actually I'd be really surprised if this event went by without mention of iTunes LP creation, however it will occur. Great re-post!
So i'm still confused as to why we want/need this tablet.
Sure you can dismiss me, lump me with all the iPhone deniers that were proven wrong. But the iPhone had atleast a target. It was a phone that met and iPod. Sure that had been tried before, but there was a demographic that wanted it and Nokia, SonyEricsson had targeted those with specific media phones.. It was also a great mobile web browser. But again, it had been tried before. Same with Apps, you could download all sorts of apps for your phone before the iPhone, sure most of it was lame but it could be done. Apple just took all the together, made it consumer friendly in a great package.
So what in a tablet do we want/need? The only thing I can sorta think of is ebook reader. But that won't justify $1000. Or perhaps join the netbook craze of larger mobile browsing. But again, most of them are sold at $300 and some are even a household dedicated computer because they are as powerful as the computers of long past.
Microsoft has targted the tablet, albeit mostly towards businesses and not consumers. I will be very interested in seeing Apple's take.
But what in your speculative opinions will make Apple's tablet more successful than a MacBook Air?
Has anyone noticed that there seems to be a lot of leaks around the tablet, moreso than with previous product intros? Is this really going to be that big of a product? Just more partners / suppliers than in the past?
The only thing that hasn't leaked is the specifics...
Rob
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Please, no snide and dismissive remarks about religion on these forums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
Dead on Nostradamus! Somehow though... not funny. I'm an APPL shareholder...
I'm a bit surprised that there are not many people talking about the price. Especially since the ir could be subsidized models and I do hope there are not two models where the lower end one does nothing compared to the top of the line meaning. You have to get the pricey machine if you really want a tablet that say connects to the Internet.
I'd still like to know what the mass appeal of a tablet is.
It depends. To be honest a tablet doesn't really make sense if you're looking for a cheap laptop because that's not the intended purpose of a tablet and is the reason why tablets in the past have failed.
Tablets do however make sense to people who need something portable but with a screen larger than the current iPhone. I use my iPhone everyday to do job updates and get access to information I need to do jobs. A larger screen would make this so much easier especially for doing entries and while reading documentation.
I think a lot of people wanting a tablet aren't actually going to be the sort of people that need a tablet though.
I think a lot of people wanting a tablet aren't actually going to be the sort of people that need a tablet though.
Exactly. Tablets seem like a great idea for lots of tasks until you actually use one. At which point it becomes clear that the form dictates a niche of tasks to which it is suitable.
Because this set of tasks is smaller than the set of tasks optimally served by the laptop form, tablets have, and will continue to be less prevalent. The mantra I've been repeating (for quite a few years) is that tablets will not replace other form factors.
Instead they will supplement our current computing ecosystem. Tablets will provide an additional tool for our toolbox, but very seldom will it be a user's only tool. The same can be said for pocket computers (smart phones). They are a great addition to the computing ecosystem but aren't suitable as the sole tool for most users. Pocket computers don't have efficient input hardware and have comparatively small screens. The same is true for tablets. We'll put up with those shortcomings in an auxiliary device, but not a stand-alone device intended to meet all of a user's needs.
This suggests that price will make or break the apple tablet. I have confidence that apple can design usable hardware and software. The only question is, will it be cheap enough that people can justify it as an auxiliary device
FRUITY TOYMAKER Apple has started whipping up its tame industry press to get all enthusiastic about a rally of blackshirted true believers it is holding on January 27.
Apple is going to release either its Itablet, a touchscreen iMac, or something with an Intel Core i5 chip under the bonnet. There will be nothing to see that has not been done to death for the last six months.
Only Apple expects a frenzy of speculation and discussion for the launches of its products. When the day arrives we will also be treated to the shameful display of US press people standing up and applauding the appearance of Steve Jobs trying to hawk his latest product as if it is the cure for cancer.
In fact Apple has already seeded test gear to a few newspapers and tech magazines but only those who will praise it to the skies. We will not see a balanced review until the machines start to hit the shops in a month's time. By then Apple will have whipped its fanboy base into becoming early adopters and they will queue outside stores to give the impression that there is a movement to buy the product.
Then a month afterwards when the gear starts to crack, or develop faults, Apple will quietly ignore the problems while the tame press bangs on about the "new phenomenon sweeping American".
You might wonder why Apple gear does not sell so well in Europe. It is because the European press generally does not allow itself to be used like a cheap whore by a cynical proprietary company as a tool to screw more cash out of the generally IT illiterate customers. In countries where the media coverage is balanced or, like Russia, anti-Apple, Jobs Mob fails to do so well. It seems to rely on keeping people ignorant and the US tech press does that job for it.
In the days when products were looked at on the basis of merit, a company would have to bribe us with free booze, or perhaps a novelty item or too, before we would even show up at a product launch. Then there would be no guarantee that we would not slam the product, the company, its CEO or the person who came to escort us from the building. Now Apple expects hacks to show up and mingle with salivating fanboys who really do believe that Steve Jobs is God. We are expected to stand and applaud while Apple releases another phone, PDA or PC box at an outrageous price.
Apple is the Liberace of the IT industry. The camp piano player had hardcore of fans, and no doubt could use both hands to play chopsticks. But the act was a show based on syrupy sequins, fake diamonds, and smoke and mirrors where everything was sizzle and there was no steak.
Why the hell should any decent hack want to report anything like that? µ
This is something that Alex Lindsey was discussing on MacBreak Weekly about a month ago, and it makes perfect sense to me - the tablet would be a great (interactive) media device, and what better way to consumers to create interactive media than with support for it in Apple's consumer-level media tool suite.
It will get a new application instead named iBlu-ray and Apple will release new iMacs with Blu-ray drives and all will be right in the world.
I wonder about the rumour for limited multi-tasking.
What does that mean?
My guesses
Only allow 2 or 3 apps to multitask?
allow a "mini" app to run with a VERY small memory footprint, pulling up the main app when needed.
give an app 30 seconds to close. So when we exit an app it immediately goes to the home screen while the app takes its time to cleanly close up in the background. (after I make a move in chess it sometimes takes 30 seconds to send... I'd like to go to home page without aborting the send).
only multitask while plugged in
Sorry I don't know which thread had that rumour... hopefully it was this one...
I wonder about the rumour for limited multi-tasking.
What does that mean?
My guesses
Only allow 2 or 3 apps to multitask?
This is the only one that rings true to me. I think for multitasking to work for the average user of a phone with very finite battery a few things have to be set up.
First, Apple has to design a method for which background apps will run. I expect this to be similar to the way Push Notifications are turned on and off in Settings and then the apps that have the specific API are listed.
They also make the OS allow a select amount of RAM and cycles that the background apps can take so that it doesn?t affect the foreground app (the most important app) or any other critical process, like the phone app that is always running.
This means the 2nd thing is for developers to use the Backgrounder API to allow you to turn your app on in the background. Why not all apps? Because the average person doesn?t think about this stuff and shouldn?t need to with a phone.
Example: Imagine someone non-technical leaving their crossword puzzle app running in the background all day because they don?t want to lose their puzzle entries because they don?t realize the app autosaves saves their entries. You may laugh because you know better but most people don?t know how this tech works.
So once a developer adds the Backgrounder API to their app and caters hwo much system resources it can use you can then turn it on in Settings. When you press the Home Button you go back to the home screen but the app is still running. They?ll need a quick access method to your background apps. Addabox had a nice idea to flick the screen up to see a list of running apps and your notification history from any Home Screen. This sounds reasonable. If you are in an app that is running in the background and want to close it, not just leave it, holding hold the Home Button for 2 seconds could kill it.
I think this all requires a lot of trial and error, especially the end user access, to get it right. Apple took their sweet time with copy/paste but it?s perfect so I expect their solution to be perfect on this, too, not the endless 3rd world bus ride of Android where you can just keep piling on more apps until others gets squeezed out of the whole thing crashes from being overloaded.
Comments
I'm having a hard time discerning if you're being sarcastic or genuine in your comment. But really? How is it "gouging" for Apple (or whoever) to charge you for a new version of a product/service? I guess you'll just have to suffice with "last year's product" (shudder) until iWork & iLife 2011 rolls around.
Agreed. I'm still running Leopard and iLife '08. I hope they do announce iLife '10. I'm ready to upgrade to 10.6 and a nice upgrade to iLife at the same time would be great.
I still have and use iMovie HD. There are things I like better about it than the later "dumbed down" iMovies. Just because software is updated, doesn't mean your old stuff stops working. If you want the new features, you pay for them and are happy. Why complain when a manufacturer charges for a new version with new features? That's how they make $$$.
- Jasen.
They should all be disgusted with themselves. The advent of "commentators" on news programs needs to end. There is a place for them on talk shows and such. Not the primetime news.
Bingo.
This thing (whatever it runs and however it does it) isn't going to ship without apps on it from Apple, and I mean other than the basic set on the iPhone. They won't just release an OS ans ask you to fill your boots with 3rd party software that may or may not be ready at laucnh and of the high quality required to show off the device to the full.
There will be a small number of new apps provided as part of the base build, and they will cover more creative areas allowing you to create content, rather than just access it. So expect a photo editor that sync in to iPhoto on your mac. Expect iMovie lite (or whatever) for performing more than just a "trim" on your videos, allowing you to use transitions and titles before uploading straight to Youtube. Expect some tweaks to MobileMe allowing you to edit your iWeb homepage direct from the device etc etc etc. Call it all iLife mobile if you like, if there is an iLife '10, it will just be a patch to include the integration into the above.
No paint program!
They should all be disgusted with themselves. The advent of "commentators" on news programs needs to end. There is a place for them on talk shows and such. Not the primetime news.
Your comment is probably one of the most offensive of anybody's so far. So because I watch Fox News, I no longer have a brain and I am all of those stupid stereotypes you rattled off?
I happen to be a very devout Christian. Yes, I am conservative. A couple of my wife's and my best friends are a gay couple two houses down. I play basketball every week with a group of guys from work every week, half of them black, and some of the best all-around guys I know. I can call a pile of crap just that when I see it, and some stuff on Fox News is just that. Guess what, the same can be said about CNN, MSNBC, C-SPAN, etc. Don't profile all of us just because of Rush's sometimes stupid comments. Please rethink your post and your state of mind, because while I respect anybody and everybody I come across, it is very hard to respect you based on comments like that, and I am sure you're better than that.
What I can't stand about Fox News is that they never give any credit to Obama, ever. In my state's paper there was an article about Obama being a secret Republican, because he handled the wars the same as Bush did. Obama set a timetable, he was criticized for it, even though Bush agreed to the same timetable, Fox was silent. Obama's budget for defense is growing by 3%, non-defense by 12%, yet Rove is saying Obama is cutting defense spending. Obama did a troop surge in Afghanistan, one that McCain was calling for during the election. But according to Fox, Obama didn't do it fast enough. Also according to Fox, Obama doesn't 'get' how to deal with terrorism or doesn't really mean it when he denounces it. The fear-mongering from Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh (I know, not Fox) is ridiculous. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
MSNBC does the same thing on the other side, I know. But let's be honest, it really doesn't matter what they do because nobody watches it. But I would expect the most-watched 24-hour "news" channel to be more...fair and balanced.
I'd still like to know what the mass appeal of a tablet is.
+1
But the marketing machine is in full force - resistance is futile. Given the fact that it is an Apple product, hopefully, it wont be one of these. (NSFW due to language)
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/...ation-support/
This is something that Alex Lindsey was discussing on MacBreak Weekly about a month ago, and it makes perfect sense to me - the tablet would be a great (interactive) media device, and what better way to consumers to create interactive media than with support for it in Apple's consumer-level media tool suite.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this as part of the reason why an updated iLife might be mentioned at the same time as a tablet announcement:
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/...ation-support/
This is something that Alex Lindsey was discussing on MacBreak Weekly about a month ago, and it makes perfect sense to me - the tablet would be a great (interactive) media device, and what better way to consumers to create interactive media than with support for it in Apple's consumer-level media tool suite.
The reason for iLife X being announced is likely because a) it's January, and b) there will be a multi touch version compatible with Tablet and possibly iPhone 4.0.
And yes, iTunes LP creation for the average user as part of iDVD would be fantastic, and is entirely likely. Actually I'd be really surprised if this event went by without mention of iTunes LP creation, however it will occur. Great re-post!
Sure you can dismiss me, lump me with all the iPhone deniers that were proven wrong. But the iPhone had atleast a target. It was a phone that met and iPod. Sure that had been tried before, but there was a demographic that wanted it and Nokia, SonyEricsson had targeted those with specific media phones.. It was also a great mobile web browser. But again, it had been tried before. Same with Apps, you could download all sorts of apps for your phone before the iPhone, sure most of it was lame but it could be done. Apple just took all the together, made it consumer friendly in a great package.
So what in a tablet do we want/need? The only thing I can sorta think of is ebook reader. But that won't justify $1000. Or perhaps join the netbook craze of larger mobile browsing. But again, most of them are sold at $300 and some are even a household dedicated computer because they are as powerful as the computers of long past.
Microsoft has targted the tablet, albeit mostly towards businesses and not consumers. I will be very interested in seeing Apple's take.
But what in your speculative opinions will make Apple's tablet more successful than a MacBook Air?
Has anyone noticed that there seems to be a lot of leaks around the tablet, moreso than with previous product intros? Is this really going to be that big of a product? Just more partners / suppliers than in the past?
The only thing that hasn't leaked is the specifics...
Rob
Please, no snide and dismissive remarks about religion on these forums.
Dead on Nostradamus! Somehow though... not funny. I'm an APPL shareholder...
I'm a bit surprised that there are not many people talking about the price. Especially since the ir could be subsidized models and I do hope there are not two models where the lower end one does nothing compared to the top of the line meaning. You have to get the pricey machine if you really want a tablet that say connects to the Internet.
$1000??
I'd still like to know what the mass appeal of a tablet is.
It depends. To be honest a tablet doesn't really make sense if you're looking for a cheap laptop because that's not the intended purpose of a tablet and is the reason why tablets in the past have failed.
Tablets do however make sense to people who need something portable but with a screen larger than the current iPhone. I use my iPhone everyday to do job updates and get access to information I need to do jobs. A larger screen would make this so much easier especially for doing entries and while reading documentation.
I think a lot of people wanting a tablet aren't actually going to be the sort of people that need a tablet though.
I think a lot of people wanting a tablet aren't actually going to be the sort of people that need a tablet though.
Exactly. Tablets seem like a great idea for lots of tasks until you actually use one. At which point it becomes clear that the form dictates a niche of tasks to which it is suitable.
Because this set of tasks is smaller than the set of tasks optimally served by the laptop form, tablets have, and will continue to be less prevalent. The mantra I've been repeating (for quite a few years) is that tablets will not replace other form factors.
Instead they will supplement our current computing ecosystem. Tablets will provide an additional tool for our toolbox, but very seldom will it be a user's only tool. The same can be said for pocket computers (smart phones). They are a great addition to the computing ecosystem but aren't suitable as the sole tool for most users. Pocket computers don't have efficient input hardware and have comparatively small screens. The same is true for tablets. We'll put up with those shortcomings in an auxiliary device, but not a stand-alone device intended to meet all of a user's needs.
This suggests that price will make or break the apple tablet. I have confidence that apple can design usable hardware and software. The only question is, will it be cheap enough that people can justify it as an auxiliary device
Apple is going to release either its Itablet, a touchscreen iMac, or something with an Intel Core i5 chip under the bonnet. There will be nothing to see that has not been done to death for the last six months.
Only Apple expects a frenzy of speculation and discussion for the launches of its products. When the day arrives we will also be treated to the shameful display of US press people standing up and applauding the appearance of Steve Jobs trying to hawk his latest product as if it is the cure for cancer.
In fact Apple has already seeded test gear to a few newspapers and tech magazines but only those who will praise it to the skies. We will not see a balanced review until the machines start to hit the shops in a month's time. By then Apple will have whipped its fanboy base into becoming early adopters and they will queue outside stores to give the impression that there is a movement to buy the product.
Then a month afterwards when the gear starts to crack, or develop faults, Apple will quietly ignore the problems while the tame press bangs on about the "new phenomenon sweeping American".
You might wonder why Apple gear does not sell so well in Europe. It is because the European press generally does not allow itself to be used like a cheap whore by a cynical proprietary company as a tool to screw more cash out of the generally IT illiterate customers. In countries where the media coverage is balanced or, like Russia, anti-Apple, Jobs Mob fails to do so well. It seems to rely on keeping people ignorant and the US tech press does that job for it.
In the days when products were looked at on the basis of merit, a company would have to bribe us with free booze, or perhaps a novelty item or too, before we would even show up at a product launch. Then there would be no guarantee that we would not slam the product, the company, its CEO or the person who came to escort us from the building. Now Apple expects hacks to show up and mingle with salivating fanboys who really do believe that Steve Jobs is God. We are expected to stand and applaud while Apple releases another phone, PDA or PC box at an outrageous price.
Apple is the Liberace of the IT industry. The camp piano player had hardcore of fans, and no doubt could use both hands to play chopsticks. But the act was a show based on syrupy sequins, fake diamonds, and smoke and mirrors where everything was sizzle and there was no steak.
Why the hell should any decent hack want to report anything like that? µ
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...p-black-shirts
best independent piece I've seen.
...
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this as part of the reason why an updated iLife might be mentioned at the same time as a tablet announcement:
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/...ation-support/
This is something that Alex Lindsey was discussing on MacBreak Weekly about a month ago, and it makes perfect sense to me - the tablet would be a great (interactive) media device, and what better way to consumers to create interactive media than with support for it in Apple's consumer-level media tool suite.
It will get a new application instead named iBlu-ray and Apple will release new iMacs with Blu-ray drives and all will be right in the world.
Great- REAl multi-tasking. I look forward to it!
I wonder about the rumour for limited multi-tasking.
What does that mean?
My guesses
- Only allow 2 or 3 apps to multitask?
- allow a "mini" app to run with a VERY small memory footprint, pulling up the main app when needed.
- give an app 30 seconds to close. So when we exit an app it immediately goes to the home screen while the app takes its time to cleanly close up in the background. (after I make a move in chess it sometimes takes 30 seconds to send... I'd like to go to home page without aborting the send).
- only multitask while plugged in
Sorry I don't know which thread had that rumour... hopefully it was this one...I wonder about the rumour for limited multi-tasking.
What does that mean?
My guesses
This is the only one that rings true to me. I think for multitasking to work for the average user of a phone with very finite battery a few things have to be set up.
First, Apple has to design a method for which background apps will run. I expect this to be similar to the way Push Notifications are turned on and off in Settings and then the apps that have the specific API are listed.
They also make the OS allow a select amount of RAM and cycles that the background apps can take so that it doesn?t affect the foreground app (the most important app) or any other critical process, like the phone app that is always running.
This means the 2nd thing is for developers to use the Backgrounder API to allow you to turn your app on in the background. Why not all apps? Because the average person doesn?t think about this stuff and shouldn?t need to with a phone.
Example: Imagine someone non-technical leaving their crossword puzzle app running in the background all day because they don?t want to lose their puzzle entries because they don?t realize the app autosaves saves their entries. You may laugh because you know better but most people don?t know how this tech works.
So once a developer adds the Backgrounder API to their app and caters hwo much system resources it can use you can then turn it on in Settings. When you press the Home Button you go back to the home screen but the app is still running. They?ll need a quick access method to your background apps. Addabox had a nice idea to flick the screen up to see a list of running apps and your notification history from any Home Screen. This sounds reasonable. If you are in an app that is running in the background and want to close it, not just leave it, holding hold the Home Button for 2 seconds could kill it.
I think this all requires a lot of trial and error, especially the end user access, to get it right. Apple took their sweet time with copy/paste but it?s perfect so I expect their solution to be perfect on this, too, not the endless 3rd world bus ride of Android where you can just keep piling on more apps until others gets squeezed out of the whole thing crashes from being overloaded.