That's a good point, how will the files be transferred that you are working on? Wifi, iTunes connection?
There are already several printing apps which allow you to print from iPhone and the iTouch available from the app store. I see no reason why the iPad would be any different.
The reason some of us here call it a "beta" is that it seems to be Apple's way for the first generation of a product they make.
Take the iPhone for example. No 3G, no MMS, no multitasking of third-party apps, no copy/paste when it was first introduced in 2007. It wasn't until the 3G that most of these features were added. And the iPhone 3GS just made things better. Some would argue that iPhone OS 3.0 should have been what was available for the iPhone back in 2007.
Why do other companies get a "pass" on this? They generally don't, if the product is really, really bad. But it's mostly that they release them with all the features us consumers ask for from the get-go. Sure the equivalent features may not be implemented as nicely as on Apple products, but they do work. And for some, just having the feature working from the beginning is much more important than waiting for Apple to get around to creating a "snazzy" way of making it work.
Yes, yes, maybe.
My point is, whatever you call it, it really is well known in the Apple community at large that you shouldn't buy a first release product. Most recent example, 27" iMacs. Look at all the problems users have reported with that beast.
Same with the iPhone 3G, same with unibody MacBook Pros, etc, etc.
Obviously, as slick as Apple's products are, Apple's zeal for keeping new products secrets mean they don't get acid or beta tested quite enough by enough people to be bug/defect free.
Too many people defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask 3rd party apps in mobile devices to respond to any particular post, but I thought I'd point out that despite all the assertions that multitasking is an unnecessary drain on the device, my Android phone suggests it's just not that big an issue unless you're running some app that pulls data off the network constantly in the background (such as Twitter or Pandora).
With those two apps, it's obviously the use of the 3G/WiFi radio that is the battery killer, NOT the fact that the app is running. I will have the same battery drain overall if I just listen to Pandora without multitasking.
What's more important to battery life I think, and has been totally ignored in the gripes here, is the choice of not using an OLED display. If battery life is your big concern, why aren't you criticizing this decision? It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.
Android phones have a feature in the About menu that shows you exactly what percent of your battery drain has been caused by what process. Assuming it's accurate, I've found over the past week that the DISPLAY is by far the biggest drain on the device, by orders of magnitude. Yesterday, before recharge, the tracking showed 76% of my battery drain over the day had been from the display. The next biggest drain was the "cell standby". All the other little apps running in the background, and there's always a dozen or more, were miniscule in comparison.
Food for thought if you're a multitasking is bad proponent.
My point is, whatever you call it, it really is well known in the Apple community at large that you shouldn't buy a first release product. Most recent example, 27" iMacs. Look at all the problems users have reported with that beast.
Same with the iPhone 3G, same with unibody MacBook Pros, etc, etc.
Obviously, as slick as Apple's products are, Apple's zeal for keeping new products secrets mean they don't get acid or beta tested quite enough by enough people to be bug/defect free.
I think we are actually agreeing here. I misread the last sentence on your last post and thought that you were being sarcastic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop
Too many people defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask 3rd party apps in mobile devices to respond to any particular post, but I thought I'd point out that despite all the assertions that multitasking is an unnecessary drain on the device, my Android phone suggests it's just not that big an issue unless you're running some app that pulls data off the network constantly in the background (such as Twitter or Pandora).
With those two apps, it's obviously the use of the 3G/WiFi radio that is the battery killer, NOT the fact that the app is running. I will have the same battery drain overall if I just listen to Pandora without multitasking.
What's more important to battery life I think, and has been totally ignored in the gripes here, is the choice of not using an OLED display. If battery life is your big concern, why aren't you criticizing this decision? It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.
Android phones have a feature in the About menu that shows you exactly what percent of your battery drain has been caused by what process. Assuming it's accurate, I've found over the past week that the DISPLAY is by far the biggest drain on the device, by orders of magnitude. Yesterday, before recharge, the tracking showed 76% of my battery drain over the day had been from the display. The next biggest drain was the "cell standby". All the other little apps running in the background, and there's always a dozen or more, were miniscule in comparison.
Food for thought if you're a multitasking is bad proponent.
Excellent find! The main counter-argument you'll come upon is that OLED screen are horrible in direct sunlight. With various examples of how the iPhone's LCD screen kicks ass and the whole "Zune HD had to be showed off in a dark room" nonsense. While this is true in general, there are some AMOLED screens out there that do pretty well in the sun. Enough to let you operate the phone, but not enough for you to really enjoy something like a movie. But then again, an LCD screen has the same issue.
But then you realize that the vast majority of our lives are spent under the cover of some type of structure! School, work, cars, home, etc. They're all places where the direct sunlight doesn't bother the screen. And for that one moment when you are outside, just angle the screen away from the sun or shade it with your other hand. If you're too lazy to do that and stand there and complain, then the problem is more than just the screen.
Wow! So I won't need uncle iSteve's permission to load the cool new software?
Guess again. This is a razor and blades sales strategy.
Are you so clueless as to not get Apple's model for the last 10 years? It has never been razors and blades because in that model you make all your money off the blades.
Apple makes all its money off the razors!! It makes next to nothing off the content - almost all goes back to the content owner and what's left pays for the insane bandwidth and serving costs. That is why Amazon are crapping themselves because they need to sell blades and are competing against Apple who could care less about the cost of blades - the cheaper the better to sell more razors. Apps/Music/Movies are all incredibly low margin (1-5% net) vs. Hardware (25-50%) by device.
Your quarter baked conspiracy ideas about Apple continue to hold no water.
This product may be great for what it is aimed for (entertainement black holes) but it seems to be designed almost as an App Store's extension and that makes Apple's greedy/totalitarian/populist evolution only more obvious...
When will you paranoid nuts realize that he iTunes store is not there to make money off the content. They don't. It is well publicized. Most revenue goes to the content holder and the rest mostly pays for bandwidth etc. It is there to give people something to watch/listen/read on their Apple devices (and make them more "valuable" to users. Apple are constantly trying to get content holders to reduce their prices but guess what, the content holders don't want to.
They lock you in because they want to control the total experience and the market has proved them right - 125M card holder accounts, 74million iOS devices etc.
Your paranoia is both misplaced and miscalculated. Apple is wildly successful without pandering to your desire to play torrent downloads and other alternative "lower cost" media.
I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.
The he sat down and showed us the demo …
"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page …
I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?
So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.
But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks …
I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.
The he sat down and showed us the demo ?
"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page ?
I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?
So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.
But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks ?
Most assumed that the first lego block was some kind of jab at Adobe.
The only problem with your theory is that it's almost impossible to believe that Steve Jobs didn't rehearse this presentation at least once. Wouldn't he and his crew have spotted this if it's as terrible as you describe.
I haven't watched the video, but it's just hard to fathom that something that glaring was missed in setting up the demo.
This product may be great for what it is aimed for (entertainement black holes) but it seems to be designed almost as an App Store's extension and that makes Apple's greedy/totalitarian/populist evolution only more obvious...
So are you saying that the lack of functionality is a GOOD THING? A feature? An added benefit?
Stock answer No. 372?
Really, I said that? I said I want a device to work well. I don't consider multifunction at all important, or a benefit. Notifications is essentially the same thing. I don't want to accidentally have dozens of apps open, draining the battery.
Comments
Let me decide what amount of trade off in battery I am willing to make to multitask some apps I feel the need to run simultaneously.
That is irrational. The rational perspective is that iSteve knows better than you do what you should be doing.
Ummmm....is there any indication at all that this thing can print? If not, all that iWork stuff seems even less useful.
That's a good point, how will the files be transferred that you are working on? Wifi, iTunes connection?
Every time I listen to music whilst checking email I degrade performance and battery life. That is a choice I make and to me it is worth it.
But, but, that is just...irrational!
Greedy/totalitarian/populist? That's quite a business strategy!
The best strategy possible. It means they get to take all of your money by force and make you like it.
But, but, that is just...irrational!
Almost as irrational as people noticing the battery low icon and just...plug it in to chage?
That's a good point, how will the files be transferred that you are working on? Wifi, iTunes connection?
There are already several printing apps which allow you to print from iPhone and the iTouch available from the app store. I see no reason why the iPad would be any different.
That is irrational. The rational perspective is that iSteve knows better than you do what you should be doing.
Well then, I stand corrected.
The reason some of us here call it a "beta" is that it seems to be Apple's way for the first generation of a product they make.
Take the iPhone for example. No 3G, no MMS, no multitasking of third-party apps, no copy/paste when it was first introduced in 2007. It wasn't until the 3G that most of these features were added. And the iPhone 3GS just made things better. Some would argue that iPhone OS 3.0 should have been what was available for the iPhone back in 2007.
Why do other companies get a "pass" on this? They generally don't, if the product is really, really bad. But it's mostly that they release them with all the features us consumers ask for from the get-go. Sure the equivalent features may not be implemented as nicely as on Apple products, but they do work. And for some, just having the feature working from the beginning is much more important than waiting for Apple to get around to creating a "snazzy" way of making it work.
Yes, yes, maybe.
My point is, whatever you call it, it really is well known in the Apple community at large that you shouldn't buy a first release product. Most recent example, 27" iMacs. Look at all the problems users have reported with that beast.
Same with the iPhone 3G, same with unibody MacBook Pros, etc, etc.
Obviously, as slick as Apple's products are, Apple's zeal for keeping new products secrets mean they don't get acid or beta tested quite enough by enough people to be bug/defect free.
With those two apps, it's obviously the use of the 3G/WiFi radio that is the battery killer, NOT the fact that the app is running. I will have the same battery drain overall if I just listen to Pandora without multitasking.
What's more important to battery life I think, and has been totally ignored in the gripes here, is the choice of not using an OLED display. If battery life is your big concern, why aren't you criticizing this decision? It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.
Android phones have a feature in the About menu that shows you exactly what percent of your battery drain has been caused by what process. Assuming it's accurate, I've found over the past week that the DISPLAY is by far the biggest drain on the device, by orders of magnitude. Yesterday, before recharge, the tracking showed 76% of my battery drain over the day had been from the display. The next biggest drain was the "cell standby". All the other little apps running in the background, and there's always a dozen or more, were miniscule in comparison.
Food for thought if you're a multitasking is bad proponent.
Yes, yes, maybe.
My point is, whatever you call it, it really is well known in the Apple community at large that you shouldn't buy a first release product. Most recent example, 27" iMacs. Look at all the problems users have reported with that beast.
Same with the iPhone 3G, same with unibody MacBook Pros, etc, etc.
Obviously, as slick as Apple's products are, Apple's zeal for keeping new products secrets mean they don't get acid or beta tested quite enough by enough people to be bug/defect free.
I think we are actually agreeing here. I misread the last sentence on your last post and thought that you were being sarcastic.
Too many people defending Apple's decision to not let us multitask 3rd party apps in mobile devices to respond to any particular post, but I thought I'd point out that despite all the assertions that multitasking is an unnecessary drain on the device, my Android phone suggests it's just not that big an issue unless you're running some app that pulls data off the network constantly in the background (such as Twitter or Pandora).
With those two apps, it's obviously the use of the 3G/WiFi radio that is the battery killer, NOT the fact that the app is running. I will have the same battery drain overall if I just listen to Pandora without multitasking.
What's more important to battery life I think, and has been totally ignored in the gripes here, is the choice of not using an OLED display. If battery life is your big concern, why aren't you criticizing this decision? It's got far more impact on the device, especially one that is meant to have the display running full time as you use it, than an efficient unix-based OS running a few apps is going to have.
Android phones have a feature in the About menu that shows you exactly what percent of your battery drain has been caused by what process. Assuming it's accurate, I've found over the past week that the DISPLAY is by far the biggest drain on the device, by orders of magnitude. Yesterday, before recharge, the tracking showed 76% of my battery drain over the day had been from the display. The next biggest drain was the "cell standby". All the other little apps running in the background, and there's always a dozen or more, were miniscule in comparison.
Food for thought if you're a multitasking is bad proponent.
Excellent find! The main counter-argument you'll come upon is that OLED screen are horrible in direct sunlight. With various examples of how the iPhone's LCD screen kicks ass and the whole "Zune HD had to be showed off in a dark room" nonsense. While this is true in general, there are some AMOLED screens out there that do pretty well in the sun. Enough to let you operate the phone, but not enough for you to really enjoy something like a movie. But then again, an LCD screen has the same issue.
But then you realize that the vast majority of our lives are spent under the cover of some type of structure! School, work, cars, home, etc. They're all places where the direct sunlight doesn't bother the screen. And for that one moment when you are outside, just angle the screen away from the sun or shade it with your other hand. If you're too lazy to do that and stand there and complain, then the problem is more than just the screen.
Wow! So I won't need uncle iSteve's permission to load the cool new software?
Guess again. This is a razor and blades sales strategy.
Are you so clueless as to not get Apple's model for the last 10 years? It has never been razors and blades because in that model you make all your money off the blades.
Apple makes all its money off the razors!! It makes next to nothing off the content - almost all goes back to the content owner and what's left pays for the insane bandwidth and serving costs. That is why Amazon are crapping themselves because they need to sell blades and are competing against Apple who could care less about the cost of blades - the cheaper the better to sell more razors. Apps/Music/Movies are all incredibly low margin (1-5% net) vs. Hardware (25-50%) by device.
Your quarter baked conspiracy ideas about Apple continue to hold no water.
[CENTER]Please stop being so petty over trivialities and try to stay on topic... Thanks
In case you forgot, we're discussing the Apple iPad.[/CENTER]
Ignore
This product may be great for what it is aimed for (entertainement black holes) but it seems to be designed almost as an App Store's extension and that makes Apple's greedy/totalitarian/populist evolution only more obvious...
When will you paranoid nuts realize that he iTunes store is not there to make money off the content. They don't. It is well publicized. Most revenue goes to the content holder and the rest mostly pays for bandwidth etc. It is there to give people something to watch/listen/read on their Apple devices (and make them more "valuable" to users. Apple are constantly trying to get content holders to reduce their prices but guess what, the content holders don't want to.
They lock you in because they want to control the total experience and the market has proved them right - 125M card holder accounts, 74million iOS devices etc.
Your paranoia is both misplaced and miscalculated. Apple is wildly successful without pandering to your desire to play torrent downloads and other alternative "lower cost" media.
Nail -> Head.
...He knocked a nail into your head - but you probably didn't feel anything...
See previous posts about how wrong you and he/she/it are...
I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.
The he sat down and showed us the demo …
"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page …
I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?
So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.
But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks …
Don't get me wrong - I love Apple ... BUT ...
I use click to flash on Safari and generally avoid flash sites as much as I can. AFAIC, the more flash-free devices Apple sells the better.
Don't get me wrong - I love Apple ... BUT ...
I couldn't believe it when I saw Steve Jobs' keynote demo of the iPad. He banged on for ten minutes saying how it offered the best ever internet experience - better than an iPhone, better even than an ibook.
The he sat down and showed us the demo ?
"Look - you can see the whole of the front page of the New York Times", he said. But what he didn't point out was the gaping white rectangle in the middle of the page with the familiar blue Lego brick icon in the middle of it - indicating that Flash was missing. "If I want to go into a story I can just touch it" he declared clicking on an item about health care. What did he find but another blank rectangle with Flash missing. "Let's go to Time Magazine" he said. Did I detect an element of panic in his voice? Up came Time Magazine. He scrolled to the bottom of it and guess what? Another Empty Flash box. Hastily he zipped to the top of the page ?
I don't know why Apple have such a downer on Flash, but, love it or loathe it, it's everywhere on the web. Why would anyone want to surf the web constantly coming across tantalising hints of images and movies they'll never be able to see?
So if you're tempted to buy an iPad, buy it for the great apps or for the iBooks or because it looks so damn sexy.
But don't buy it to seriously surf the web - unless you're crazy about blue Lego bricks ?
Most assumed that the first lego block was some kind of jab at Adobe.
The only problem with your theory is that it's almost impossible to believe that Steve Jobs didn't rehearse this presentation at least once. Wouldn't he and his crew have spotted this if it's as terrible as you describe.
I haven't watched the video, but it's just hard to fathom that something that glaring was missed in setting up the demo.
This product may be great for what it is aimed for (entertainement black holes) but it seems to be designed almost as an App Store's extension and that makes Apple's greedy/totalitarian/populist evolution only more obvious...
Thank you Che Guevara
So are you saying that the lack of functionality is a GOOD THING? A feature? An added benefit?
Stock answer No. 372?
Really, I said that? I said I want a device to work well. I don't consider multifunction at all important, or a benefit. Notifications is essentially the same thing. I don't want to accidentally have dozens of apps open, draining the battery.
Because only the geniuses at Palm can save the Kindle now. Amazon must know that.