Apple sees tablet as one device shared by the whole family - WSJ

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    7) Mrkoolaid is Techstud new handle.



    Ah, I see you beat me to it....
  • Reply 102 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    The face identification/sharing stuff sounds like total BS to me. You have to remember that even the rumours that turn out to be true, are true stories told through a sort of fuzzy filter. Like the person who had the info was right, but the interpretation of what they were told is off-base. It even says in the story that it's "unclear if these features will be included at launch."



    For starters, face recognition software just isn't that good. It works, it works pretty good, but it is no where near 100% outside of sci-fi movies and cop dramas. Everyone always talks about voice control also, but it's neither of these techs are really useful until they works 100% of the time and that last 20% always seems impossible.



    Additionaly, the idea of sharing a device like this makes it sound like the purpose of the device is media consumption only. That's great, but completely at odds with the sort of traveling journal or writing pad, or netbook replacement of last weeks rumours. Not many people *share* devices, despite the story of the man above who shares his iPod with his wife. Even if they do share devices, who would do any writing on the thing if half the time your partner or your kid is going to be using it? I know many more couples that have no idea what is on their partners computer, than I do couples that share a single computer.



    It just sounds ridiculous to me and I hope they are dead wrong about it. I want a netbook replacement type computer that I can use to create things, not a passive shared, robotic television/book/magazine.



    +∞



    You can bet that when it actually turns out to be one, the press will start writing about how "surprising" the tablet was.... Sigh
  • Reply 103 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    I went for a recent Apple in Education course, and there's a lot of sales propaganda, of course, but there are several iPhone and iPod targeted platforms for e-Learning:



    http://daap.uc.edu/mobilap/

    http://blackboard.com/



    I don't think Flash as an education/e-learning platform is that suitable. Either specific iPhone and iPod apps, or just make it all HTML+AJAX.



    As for Advertising, well, that's a benefit not having Flash on the Tablet.



    Video streaming though, can't argue with that, Flash is important.



    Apple I believe will hold out as long as possible, but I think it's a reasonable task for Apple to work with Adobe to "sandbox" Flash as much as possible within the iPhone, iPod and Tablet platform. They could negotiate somehow. For example, built in safeguards and throttling if Flash is gobbling up too much CPU and battery on the iPhone, iPod, Tablet.



    Apple is holding out as long as possible with regard to Flash.



    I don't 100% agree with it, time for Apple and Adobe to get back to playing nice.



    The Tablet could be an important platform for Adobe's e-Document/PDF workflow/software/etc *empire*



    I agree that Apple, at least from their behavior, want's to get around Flash if possible. However, in most of the jobs that I see posted that deal with e-learning Flash is usually a requirement. I believe that right now it is used in building tests and interactive content for coursework. The testing can be done easily enough with HTML, server side applications, and javascript but the interactive content is pretty entrenched with Flash right now.



    If you look at the history Adobe couldn't beat Flash so when they could they bought it. Since then it has become even more powerful and more entrenched in the internet. I think that it is not going to be easy to fill that gap with another technology in a main stream device. It may also be hard to ignore it in a main stream browser targeted at the "Family" if all of the children's web sites use it in their UI and for the games that the kids play.
  • Reply 104 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gregrochedc View Post


    another use for the "faces" feature in iPhoto; recognize who is using the (as yet unconfirmed) tablet, and voila! family members sharing a single (as yet unconfirmed) device.....



    Yes, but does this feature work for anyone in iPhoto? On my computer, with my photos, it's a joke. It processes and processes, and after a few hours it tags a photo of my brother as being my mother-in-law. Totally unusable.
  • Reply 105 of 124
    actually my sources tell me the creation is going to be the expandable mini tower mac. a mac mini on steroids... Woo Hoo!!!
  • Reply 106 of 124
    avidfcpavidfcp Posts: 381member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    honestly, i'm an apple fanboy, but this thing just sounds like a way to make me pay $1000 for the privilege of PAYING for what i can get FREE.



    i don't pay to visit news websites [and when they start charging i'll go to those that don't]. i don't pay to watch network tv. i pay 19 bucks a month for unlimited video rentals, not 4 bucks a movie. i'm not subscribing to magazines on a tablet, i'm not repurchasing all of the music i've bought in the last 33 years so it can all sit in apple's cloud.



    i don't know how this thing is going to succeed.



    I can feel for you because this is exactly what we're talking about.

    You can stream just about any TV show the next day online and you still can't do that with AT (or iPhone), so making it $1000 and making you pay for whats free makes no sense, especialy since early rumors had this priced much lower.



    You can subscribe to netflix for $4. Each TV episode free online is $1.99 to $2.99 at iTunes. For $999 it should come with a FREE two year 3G access and unlimited TV shows via wi fi, not the other way around.



    Will know in a week I guess.



    I do wonder, in this crappy economy, I don't see how it succeeds if it's $999 and iTunes only. No way. Even if it has face to face cameras so you are looking at the person, it's still to high.



    Now if it will run Logic and includes the free stuff, then perhaps that's different.then againg it could be way off from what all of us are trying to guess.



    I want to see 8/16 core mbp with the ability to run just two cores if need be.
  • Reply 107 of 124
    avidfcpavidfcp Posts: 381member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Phoenix29 View Post


    Gizmodo and Engadget will be doing live reporting but I doubt you will get to see a full video of the performance until later in the evening once Apple posts it on their site



    You would think 2010 it would stream live but we are still stuck in the 90s on that regard.



    Cmon Jobs, pay for the servers and make this live.
  • Reply 108 of 124
    and the reason we haven't seen it is because Apple/Steve wants it to be revolutionary and REALLY useful and relevant. And so it WILL be! It will be awesome.

    Furthermore: this time M$ needs Apple so if the latter's going to team up with M$ they sure will get a LOT more than just the use of Bing and lending it the Apple-magic it sorely needs. THIS time Apple's calling the shots!
  • Reply 109 of 124
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by peter_private View Post


    Will there be some kind of live coverage of the event on Jan 27?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Avidfcp View Post


    You would think 2010 it would stream live but we are still stuck in the 90s on that regard.



    Cmon Jobs, pay for the servers and make this live.



    Why go through the expense of live streaming, dealing with all the potential hiccups that will occur and excluding the reason for journalists and bloggers to attend the event on their own dime? In every single way, it?s a better marketing move to let them do the live blogging and articles with a stream a few hours later and then the Podcast download available a few hours after that.
  • Reply 110 of 124
    The pundits seem to have assumed the $1000 price point. I don't see that. I'll bet the actual price for the basic unit with WiFi but no 3G will be more like $500.



    My questions are more basic: Will it have a hard drive (needed for storing lots of video content) or will they opt solid state (battery life over storage capacity)? Will it have a single iPhone compatible port or will their also be USB? What about support for a Bluetooth Keyboard? Will the 3G version have a phone (perhaps pull out Bluetooth headset)? Will there be a dock for more than just charging the battery (keyboard, ports, disk)?
  • Reply 111 of 124
    OK, nice discussion around the device - which hasn't been released yet, with features that haven't been disclosed yet, and objections to both which are as fundamentally solid as the device and features have been to date. Yeah.



    Let's back up and review our Apple device release history, using the most recent one - the iPhone. Perhaps you remember all those proposed designs: click-wheel versions, the sliders, the would-be iPhone minis and so forth. All fundamentally flawed when compared to the real article.



    How about when Apple started courting the carriers with the concept and rough prototypes? Anything? Of course not. Apple doesn't give away the farm to it's potential partners, unless they are very on-board with the process and Apple enjoys a good trust relationship with them. Apple is only going to tell these publishing partners what they think they want to hear and what they can best relate to. Not the whole whole picture - not the vision for what this device could ultimately do.



    So as you fuss and bother over the pile of misinformation published by the WSJ - or any of these "my very cool insider" postings, keep in mind what we have seen before, how Apple has handled the process and remember - Apple only lets go what they think will be the least important, the most distracting information before a release. So when SJ walks out on stage, he can grin and say, "its been a really good quarter for Apple so far, but we've been working on some things that we think are pretty cool, and I want to show them to you..."



    See, nobody steals SJ's thunder, not WSJ, not The Street, not Rob Enderle (sry had to throw him in here for laughs), not Paul Thurott, not TechCrunch, not Gizm, not Engag, not even AI.
  • Reply 112 of 124
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davesmall View Post


    The pundits seem to have assumed the $1000 price point. I don't see that. I'll bet the actual price for the basic unit with WiFi but no 3G will be more like $500.



    My questions are more basic: Will it have a hard drive (needed for storing lots of video content) or will they opt solid state (battery life over storage capacity)? Will it have a single iPhone compatible port or will their also be USB? What about support for a Bluetooth Keyboard? Will the 3G version have a phone (perhaps pull out Bluetooth headset)? Will there be a dock for more than just charging the battery (keyboard, ports, disk)?



    1) I do think it strange so many have solidified on $999. I don?t think that will happen for several reasons, but the simplest is that Apple usually don?t offer products with the same price point and since this ?accessory? device is already being touted as a MacBook replacement by many having the exact same price as the MB seems unlikely. They don?t even price any of the iPods the same. The cheapest Touch starts at $50 more the most expensive Nano.



    2) I think $699-$899 is most likely. Remember that a 32GB iPhone is ~$600 without the carrier subsidy. Though, all this depends on HW features we are not privy too.



    3) The 30-pin connector is a proprietary but it?s USB. Mini-DisplayPort can push 750Mbps USB and I think it can also push power. If so, I wonder if it?s about time to start obsolescing the large, 9yo 30-pin dock connector port from iDevices in favour of something smaller and more versatile. If not, I hope that USB3.0 shows up this year on Apple products, but I?m doubtful.



    4) I think it?s certain it will be NAND in some regard. It won?t have a HDD or ODD. Not sure if it will be a SSD. i think on-board NAND like in iDevices is most likely. Note: tests have found that small HDDs, like in the iPod Classic, don?t use much power. That savings takes place with the larger and faster drives found in notebooks and desktops.



    5) A typical doc seems tough. What if you want to orient it differently. They might have to use a cable with a stand that allow for portrait or landscape.



    6) I hope they offer 3G, but I?m certain it will be data-only, but I bet using VoIP will b an option in some regard.



    7) I figured it would allow for mouse and keyboard attachment but one blogger made a good point. To Paraphrase, "If Apple is trying to get you to understand a new paradigm for using their Tablet OS UI then offering a solution that you are used to with PCs isn?t going to help the device.? I half agree. They can shoot themselves in the foot if they offer it yet it seems there are legitimate reasons for some to use them. Personally, I?d like the support but don?t see it happening as this is likely an accessory device, not a primary computing device.
  • Reply 113 of 124
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,611member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by arlomedia View Post


    Yes, but does this feature work for anyone in iPhoto? On my computer, with my photos, it's a joke. It processes and processes, and after a few hours it tags a photo of my brother as being my mother-in-law. Totally unusable.



    If this will be a feature it could be much more accurate than iPhoto. The face it has to recognize is always at more or less the same distance and pretty close up. The point is not really how well it works right now - its the introduction of the device as a 'family device' which is so clever. Marketing genius, me think. The problem for Apple is how to sell a totally new computing experience to families across the land(s) and lets face it, we know its not going to cost $200.-. By focussing on the sharing element it suddenly makes sense to people - its a coffee table device for all the family! And best of all - this will be excellent ammo for the family techno purchasing driver. Yes, you. I imagine everyone will latch onto this argument to convince themselves, spouses and girl / boyfriends. Once the device is in the house and the battle begins we all know what the solution will be. You gonna have to get another one. At least.
  • Reply 114 of 124
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    If this will be a feature it could be much more accurate than iPhoto.



    Maybe, especially if it's only looking for a few saved faced from the limited number of users as NasserÆ pointed out to me, but I say it won't be as accurate and that it won't be used. Here is my reasoning...



    For starters, pics of people are usually taken and then kept under ideal situations with much higher resolution cameras than front-facing "webams" tend to offer. Then you have the issue of the system trying to capture a less stable image than one already set in iPhoto. Finally, I bet tablets are more likely used in darker environments than the bright outdoors and flash-assisted pics that we usually keep for sentimental value.



    Then you have the elephant in room: indentical twins and more common nearly indentical looking family members. That isn't a problem in my household but it's something that would make this rumored feature DOA for many.



    I just don't think the tech is here for that. I think a more likely option is a finger print reader Perhaps side-edge mounted and positioned for your index finger to how you'd most likely be holding it when you first pick it up, but I don't expect that either.
  • Reply 115 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Why go through the expense of live streaming, dealing with all the potential hiccups that will occur and excluding the reason for journalists and bloggers to attend the event on their own dime? In every single way, it?s a better marketing move to let them do the live blogging and articles with a stream a few hours later and then the Podcast download available a few hours after that.



    Which is why I use the no spoiler email. The first :30 though when I read the blogs, is mostly about growth which one would think lead to price reductions. But if Apple can get away with high prices, I sure hope it streams free online tv.



    Cio
  • Reply 116 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Maybe, especially if it's only looking for a few saved faced from the limited number of users as NasserÆ pointed out to me, but I say it won't be as accurate and that it won't be used. Here is my reasoning...



    For starters, pics of people are usually taken and then kept under ideal situations with much higher resolution cameras than front-facing "webams" tend to offer. Then you have the issue of the system trying to capture a less stable image than one already set in iPhoto. Finally, I bet tablets are more likely used in darker environments than the bright outdoors and flash-assisted pics that we usually keep for sentimental value.



    Then you have the elephant in room: indentical twins and more common nearly indentical looking family members. That isn't a problem in my household but it's something that would make this rumored feature DOA for many.



    I just don't think the tech is here for that. I think a more likely option is a finger print reader Perhaps side-edge mounted and positioned for your index finger to how you'd most likely be holding it when you first pick it up, but I don't expect that either.



    Actually, they don't need advanced image recognition in this case. Aspect ratio of human head dimensions may do pretty good.
  • Reply 117 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ApplePi View Post


    I just don't see this thing being a device you share with the family. Even if Apple intends it to be. We no longer live in the age of the family computer. We now live in the age of personal computers for everyone. Especially when we're talking about portable devices.



    It's a marketing trick.
  • Reply 118 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by @homenow View Post


    I agree that Apple, at least from their behavior, want's to get around Flash if possible. However, in most of the jobs that I see posted that deal with e-learning Flash is usually a requirement. I believe that right now it is used in building tests and interactive content for coursework. The testing can be done easily enough with HTML, server side applications, and javascript but the interactive content is pretty entrenched with Flash right now.



    If you look at the history Adobe couldn't beat Flash so when they could they bought it. Since then it has become even more powerful and more entrenched in the internet. I think that it is not going to be easy to fill that gap with another technology in a main stream device. It may also be hard to ignore it in a main stream browser targeted at the "Family" if all of the children's web sites use it in their UI and for the games that the kids play.



    Not to mention nearly all of TVs online streaming.
  • Reply 119 of 124
    irelandireland Posts: 17,669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Looks like Apple might have just re-imagined the family room.



    Considering there's no mention of the TV they have.
  • Reply 120 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Avidfcp View Post


    Not to mention nearly all of TVs online streaming.



    Yes, and if they implemented a way to take advantage of that then they would have a much more compelling reason to buy an AppleTV, and a lot of people would be seriously considering dropping their cable subscriptions. In fact I'm amazed that Apple isn't pushing harder on this front given that cable TV bills can range in the $40-100/month range. I would think that even if it is a "free" streaming service with ads then they could add in a way to count the views and attach a pay for view ad service to pay for the streaming that would be more targeted and reliable than the current network estimates for viewing habits.



    That is a service I would use, free for me with ads (well except for my high speed online subscription) which I have to watch on most television I pay for with cable anyway. Let me choose when and what I want to watch, and the networks get a lot more accurate data on my viewing habits to gauge success of future venture, and the ads that I do watch are more targeted to me which would help the people buying the ad space.
Sign In or Register to comment.