Figures, you don't even own a Mac. I just had the Grab app open, and didn't quit it. No big deal on a robust desktop; could be draining on the iPad, though, should it have a Grab-like app, or any others that would use memory and drain the battery.
You would have to specifically tell it you wanted to keep an app running in the background. Default behavior would be to close the app.
This makes it impossible to accidentally leave an app running.
Come on. How can you not have a stylus? How am I going to write notes on a document? (And please don't say using the keyboard.) To me, the biggest advantage of a tablet is the ability to take notes directly on a document. That would be great for me in my MBA classes and in meetings. I don't know if Pages for iPad lets use your finger...I didn't see them mention that during the presentation. But even if it does, it seems like it would be sloppy. Finger -painting anyone?
Come on. How can you not have a stylus? How am I going to write notes on a document? (And please don't say using the keyboard.) To me, the biggest advantage of a tablet is the ability to take notes directly on a document. That would be great for me in my MBA classes and in meetings. I don't know if Pages for iPad lets use your finger...I didn't see them mention that during the presentation. But even if it does, it seems like it would be sloppy. Finger -painting anyone?
No, you're being silly. Steve himself made the netbook comparison, and to be frank, a netbook absolutely blows away the iPad. A netbook will multi-task, it will run flash (which if you hadn't noticed is absolutely EVERYWHERE on the web), it will use any USB device, it has a webcam for Skype, and so on. Oh, and it's cheaper too.
The lack of multi-tasking is totally indefensible. You Apple fanboys simply have no ground to stand on here. Ever received an IM on your iPhone while you're in a Twitter client or playing a game? It's such fun to have to quit out, load the IM client, reply, quit the IM client, then reload whatever it is you were doing before. Then another IM arrives 2 minutes later. Aweseome stuff, it's like going back to 1980s computing. I've had multi-tasking since my first Amiga and it's an absolutely fundamental, completely essential thing to have.
And I won't get started on flash, except to say, watch the Steve presentation on apple.com. Note how Steve hastily trys to zip past the missing GIANT flash parts of websites which are completely broken on the iPad. Like it or not, flash powers much of the internet, and especially for the casual user which Steve wants to go after, they use it ALL the time.
Your typical netbook will offer a vastly inferior browsing experience, be far inferior at displaying movies, be heavier, last not nearly as long, have significantly inferior battery life, be less engaging as a gaming platform, and cost more to load up with software, thanks to price gouging by major software developers on the PC side like Microsoft.
The last update to the OS the iTab will run off cost, if memory serves, around $10. A far cry from the more than $100 it cost me and many others to upgrade to Windows 7.
But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
I'm sure there are tradeoffs for allowing multitasking, which I would rather not have to accept for the tiny minority who want it, so they can listen to Pandora, who will probably never buy an iPad in the 1st place.
You're trolling, right? Either that or you're just stubbornly refusing to apply any logic to the situation.
There is ZERO trade off for you if multitasking is allowed as an OPTION for advanced users and you choose not to enable it. There is a world of benefit beyond listening to Pandora in the background (but hey, that's a nice benefit in and of itself) for those willing to make the tradeoff.
OS X (even the mobile version on iPhones/iPods/iPads) is unix-based and designed from the ground up as a multiuser multitasking OS. The phone already supports multitasking for Apple apps. All we want is the OPTION to enable it for other apps.
Give an intelligent, coherent explanation of why having that as an OPTION is a bad thing for those of you who wouldn't enable it in the first place.
You're trolling, right? Either that or you're just stubbornly refusing to apply any logic to the situation.
There is ZERO trade off for you if multitasking is allowed as an OPTION for advanced users and you choose not to enable it. There is a world of benefit beyond listening to Pandora in the background (but hey, that's a nice benefit in and of itself) for those willing to make the tradeoff.
OS X (even the mobile version on iPhones/iPods/iPads) is unix-based and designed from the ground up as a multiuser multitasking OS. The phone already supports multitasking for Apple apps. All we want is the OPTION to enable it for other apps.
Give an intelligent, coherent explanation of why having that as an OPTION is a bad thing for those of you who wouldn't enable it in the first place.
If there were no trade-off, why, then has multi-tasking for 3rd-party apps been excluded? Surely the Apple engineers know what works best with the products they developed, no?
If there were no trade-off, why, then has multi-tasking for 3rd-party apps been excluded? Surely the Apple engineers know what works best with the products they developed, no?
If there were no trade-off, why, then has multi-tasking for 3rd-party apps been excluded? Surely the Apple engineers know what works best with the products they developed, no?
If the best you can do is throw out "Apple knows best" type comments, then I say again, you're either trolling, or a mindless fanboy. Either way, it's pointless to continue with you. I'm sorry I took the bait in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
It's a business decision, not a technical one.
Exactly, and it's one that will hurt them in the long run.
A couple of thoughts. One is that Apple nailed the most important detail, namely price.
The basic model with 16G and no 3G will still be quite useful for many of us. That Apple got the pricing right and still will deliver a good quality, decent-sized screen, is rather impressive.
The other thought is that this device could, potentially, help bring about a resurgence in the popularity of the desktop. A desktop system in combination with the iPad makes a lot of sense. More portable than a laptop and with better battery life. By not trying to be a computer that happens to work anywhere, the device eliminates some of the trade-offs that laptops impose on us. At the same time, it is a handy product that does a lot of what people were in fact using laptops for.
Compared to a PC netbook, this thing will look good. My netbook can barely deliver two hours of battery life and it has a significantly inferior display. It's running inferior technology (no LED backlighting or IPS) and a resolution of 1024X600 compared to the iPad's 1024X768. The iPad is more money but also a higher-quality device all around. Also, longer battery life means fewer charge cycles and that means the battery will take a lot longer to wear out and require replacing. Over the long haul, that could offset the initial higher price.
This device will be very successful because Apple gets it, especially when it comes to price. As a shareholder, I'm quite pleased.
Ouch, isn't there something wrong with your netbook? Most units I have seen recently will go for 6 to 10 hours, and have LED screens (though no IPS). Additionaly, I think that 3G option is not that expensive.
Netbooks are slower (and arguably of lower quality), but they do come with keyboard (which is extra cost for iPad) and much greater storage. They can also run software I do require and can't have for iPad at present (Lightroom, Office, comics reader) and will behave on the network (as in being able to copy files from and to shared network locations) and work with external storage.
Those things are big must for me. I'm sure iPad will gather it's army of satisfied owners, but such as it is, it is not for me \
I don't think the price is particularly good either. Since this device is intended principally for the consumption of visual media, nothing less than the 64gb version is likely going to be adequate.
That's $699 to start with.
Case - got to have the case - what's that - another $30?
$729
Got to have the SD card adapter and the USB one - that's $20 each.
$769
Keyboard and stand - got some reports to catch up on - got to have the keyboard - That's $60.
$829
$1 - the cost of the bullet to shoot myself with when I realise I could have had a Macbook for only $170 more.
While the Ipad has a lot of features and lack others, the real advantage of a "giant iphone touch" is mobility. Many professionals do not sit all day in a cubicle punching a keyboard, on a computer which is sitting on a table. The killer feature is the simplicity, easy interface and most importantly--the mobility of the device.
Doctors, nurses, construction foreman, fireman, clerks, waitresses, police officers, soldiers, mothers, farmers...(you get what I am saying)... need the ability to access and enter information quickly, on the run, without having to use a keyboard. Most dedicated profession-specific hardware/software are very expensive. Each ipad can be customized for any job description at a very low price or run it just the way it is.
It's true that most gear heads on this site will not need it, but for the average working person this will be phenomenal. No doubt it will sell well for as a novelty or for home use, but it will also sell well for the workers who work on their feet.
But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
I don't play games, but I can't agree with some of your other points. What makes the iPad superior for movies? The display's aspect ratio is all wrong, being old-style 1.33:1. The average netbook has a 1.7:1 screen, close to the 1.78:1 (16:9) ratio of HDTV, and the nearly identical diagonal measurement means it's actually wider than the iPad display, so both factors combine to give you a bigger picture with less letterboxing. I can and have played 720p AVC videos back just fine on my Wind, using VLC. As for browsing, I don't consider being unable to view Flash animations as being a good thing. Sure, most of it is gimmickry sold to the site owners by Flash designers, but there's also useful stuff like some interactive features on the NY Times or zoomable previews of merchandise. I also personally consider a keyboard essential for Web browsing. I type and modify a lot of URLs by hand. It's different if you're just relying on bookmarks and clicking on links. Composing longer emails (either via IMAP in Mail or on a webmail site like Gmail or Yahoo) would also be a pain in the neck without a regular keyboard.
Your typical netbook will offer a vastly inferior browsing experience, be far inferior at displaying movies, be heavier, last not nearly as long, have significantly inferior battery life, be less engaging as a gaming platform, and cost more to load up with software, thanks to price gouging by major software developers on the PC side like Microsoft.
The last update to the OS the iTab will run off cost, if memory serves, around $10. A far cry from the more than $100 it cost me and many others to upgrade to Windows 7.
But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
You haven't actually used a netbook have you?
Browsers, take your pick: IE, Chrome, Safari, Firefox, etc. I prefer Chrome.
For video, how many file types can the iPad natively playback, h.264? Install VLC on a netbook, and playback just about anything.
Battery life - not that much of a difference, Asus has some of their EeePC's that get up to 9 hours on a 6-cell battery.
The iPad is thinner and lighter, but my netbook has 3 USB ports, VGA, ethernet, and 2 card readers, as well as audio in/out. Weighs less than 3 pounds.
Gaming on most netbooks are poor, but if you get one with Nvidia's Ion (9400m), it's the same exact GPU used by Apple is most of their computers.
Comments
Figures, you don't even own a Mac. I just had the Grab app open, and didn't quit it. No big deal on a robust desktop; could be draining on the iPad, though, should it have a Grab-like app, or any others that would use memory and drain the battery.
You would have to specifically tell it you wanted to keep an app running in the background. Default behavior would be to close the app.
This makes it impossible to accidentally leave an app running.
Come on. How can you not have a stylus? How am I going to write notes on a document? (And please don't say using the keyboard.) To me, the biggest advantage of a tablet is the ability to take notes directly on a document. That would be great for me in my MBA classes and in meetings. I don't know if Pages for iPad lets use your finger...I didn't see them mention that during the presentation. But even if it does, it seems like it would be sloppy. Finger -painting anyone?
Perhaps you could use this?-
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19512_7-10443415-233.html
No, you're being silly. Steve himself made the netbook comparison, and to be frank, a netbook absolutely blows away the iPad. A netbook will multi-task, it will run flash (which if you hadn't noticed is absolutely EVERYWHERE on the web), it will use any USB device, it has a webcam for Skype, and so on. Oh, and it's cheaper too.
The lack of multi-tasking is totally indefensible. You Apple fanboys simply have no ground to stand on here. Ever received an IM on your iPhone while you're in a Twitter client or playing a game? It's such fun to have to quit out, load the IM client, reply, quit the IM client, then reload whatever it is you were doing before. Then another IM arrives 2 minutes later. Aweseome stuff, it's like going back to 1980s computing. I've had multi-tasking since my first Amiga and it's an absolutely fundamental, completely essential thing to have.
And I won't get started on flash, except to say, watch the Steve presentation on apple.com. Note how Steve hastily trys to zip past the missing GIANT flash parts of websites which are completely broken on the iPad. Like it or not, flash powers much of the internet, and especially for the casual user which Steve wants to go after, they use it ALL the time.
Your typical netbook will offer a vastly inferior browsing experience, be far inferior at displaying movies, be heavier, last not nearly as long, have significantly inferior battery life, be less engaging as a gaming platform, and cost more to load up with software, thanks to price gouging by major software developers on the PC side like Microsoft.
The last update to the OS the iTab will run off cost, if memory serves, around $10. A far cry from the more than $100 it cost me and many others to upgrade to Windows 7.
But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
I'm sure there are tradeoffs for allowing multitasking, which I would rather not have to accept for the tiny minority who want it, so they can listen to Pandora, who will probably never buy an iPad in the 1st place.
You're trolling, right? Either that or you're just stubbornly refusing to apply any logic to the situation.
There is ZERO trade off for you if multitasking is allowed as an OPTION for advanced users and you choose not to enable it. There is a world of benefit beyond listening to Pandora in the background (but hey, that's a nice benefit in and of itself) for those willing to make the tradeoff.
OS X (even the mobile version on iPhones/iPods/iPads) is unix-based and designed from the ground up as a multiuser multitasking OS. The phone already supports multitasking for Apple apps. All we want is the OPTION to enable it for other apps.
Give an intelligent, coherent explanation of why having that as an OPTION is a bad thing for those of you who wouldn't enable it in the first place.
You're trolling, right? Either that or you're just stubbornly refusing to apply any logic to the situation.
There is ZERO trade off for you if multitasking is allowed as an OPTION for advanced users and you choose not to enable it. There is a world of benefit beyond listening to Pandora in the background (but hey, that's a nice benefit in and of itself) for those willing to make the tradeoff.
OS X (even the mobile version on iPhones/iPods/iPads) is unix-based and designed from the ground up as a multiuser multitasking OS. The phone already supports multitasking for Apple apps. All we want is the OPTION to enable it for other apps.
Give an intelligent, coherent explanation of why having that as an OPTION is a bad thing for those of you who wouldn't enable it in the first place.
If there were no trade-off, why, then has multi-tasking for 3rd-party apps been excluded? Surely the Apple engineers know what works best with the products they developed, no?
If there were no trade-off, why, then has multi-tasking for 3rd-party apps been excluded? Surely the Apple engineers know what works best with the products they developed, no?
It's a business decision, not a technical one.
There is no language called 'Indian.'
Scrapped already..?
My apology for being clueless - what language or languages are being used in India?
If there were no trade-off, why, then has multi-tasking for 3rd-party apps been excluded? Surely the Apple engineers know what works best with the products they developed, no?
If the best you can do is throw out "Apple knows best" type comments, then I say again, you're either trolling, or a mindless fanboy. Either way, it's pointless to continue with you. I'm sorry I took the bait in the first place.
It's a business decision, not a technical one.
Exactly, and it's one that will hurt them in the long run.
Scrapped already..?
My apology for being clueless - what language or languages are being used in India?
Hindi is the official language.
Google it, but there seems to be about a dozen other recognized languages spoken there.
It's a business decision, not a technical one.
How so?
A couple of thoughts. One is that Apple nailed the most important detail, namely price.
The basic model with 16G and no 3G will still be quite useful for many of us. That Apple got the pricing right and still will deliver a good quality, decent-sized screen, is rather impressive.
The other thought is that this device could, potentially, help bring about a resurgence in the popularity of the desktop. A desktop system in combination with the iPad makes a lot of sense. More portable than a laptop and with better battery life. By not trying to be a computer that happens to work anywhere, the device eliminates some of the trade-offs that laptops impose on us. At the same time, it is a handy product that does a lot of what people were in fact using laptops for.
Compared to a PC netbook, this thing will look good. My netbook can barely deliver two hours of battery life and it has a significantly inferior display. It's running inferior technology (no LED backlighting or IPS) and a resolution of 1024X600 compared to the iPad's 1024X768. The iPad is more money but also a higher-quality device all around. Also, longer battery life means fewer charge cycles and that means the battery will take a lot longer to wear out and require replacing. Over the long haul, that could offset the initial higher price.
This device will be very successful because Apple gets it, especially when it comes to price. As a shareholder, I'm quite pleased.
Ouch, isn't there something wrong with your netbook? Most units I have seen recently will go for 6 to 10 hours, and have LED screens (though no IPS). Additionaly, I think that 3G option is not that expensive.
Netbooks are slower (and arguably of lower quality), but they do come with keyboard (which is extra cost for iPad) and much greater storage. They can also run software I do require and can't have for iPad at present (Lightroom, Office, comics reader) and will behave on the network (as in being able to copy files from and to shared network locations) and work with external storage.
Those things are big must for me. I'm sure iPad will gather it's army of satisfied owners, but such as it is, it is not for me
To be honest, netbooks are not my number either, but ULV units like http://www.asus.co.nz/product.aspx?P...wAK6XZ0pekc7aI do strike right notes for me.
Is it wrong to consider this device a "Kindle killer"?
Only if it manages to kill Kindle.
I don't think the price is particularly good either. Since this device is intended principally for the consumption of visual media, nothing less than the 64gb version is likely going to be adequate.
That's $699 to start with.
Case - got to have the case - what's that - another $30?
$729
Got to have the SD card adapter and the USB one - that's $20 each.
$769
Keyboard and stand - got some reports to catch up on - got to have the keyboard - That's $60.
$829
$1 - the cost of the bullet to shoot myself with when I realise I could have had a Macbook for only $170 more.
Ending of your post - priceless!
Doctors, nurses, construction foreman, fireman, clerks, waitresses, police officers, soldiers, mothers, farmers...(you get what I am saying)... need the ability to access and enter information quickly, on the run, without having to use a keyboard. Most dedicated profession-specific hardware/software are very expensive. Each ipad can be customized for any job description at a very low price or run it just the way it is.
It's true that most gear heads on this site will not need it, but for the average working person this will be phenomenal. No doubt it will sell well for as a novelty or for home use, but it will also sell well for the workers who work on their feet.
JoeG
But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
I don't play games, but I can't agree with some of your other points. What makes the iPad superior for movies? The display's aspect ratio is all wrong, being old-style 1.33:1. The average netbook has a 1.7:1 screen, close to the 1.78:1 (16:9) ratio of HDTV, and the nearly identical diagonal measurement means it's actually wider than the iPad display, so both factors combine to give you a bigger picture with less letterboxing. I can and have played 720p AVC videos back just fine on my Wind, using VLC. As for browsing, I don't consider being unable to view Flash animations as being a good thing. Sure, most of it is gimmickry sold to the site owners by Flash designers, but there's also useful stuff like some interactive features on the NY Times or zoomable previews of merchandise. I also personally consider a keyboard essential for Web browsing. I type and modify a lot of URLs by hand. It's different if you're just relying on bookmarks and clicking on links. Composing longer emails (either via IMAP in Mail or on a webmail site like Gmail or Yahoo) would also be a pain in the neck without a regular keyboard.
Can the 'Pad do that? That seems like a huge stretch for iOS.
TROLL
Nice signature, mate
I have to say, every time I've used my iPod touch today, my first impression has been that it's like a tiny iPad.
Your typical netbook will offer a vastly inferior browsing experience, be far inferior at displaying movies, be heavier, last not nearly as long, have significantly inferior battery life, be less engaging as a gaming platform, and cost more to load up with software, thanks to price gouging by major software developers on the PC side like Microsoft.
The last update to the OS the iTab will run off cost, if memory serves, around $10. A far cry from the more than $100 it cost me and many others to upgrade to Windows 7.
But apart from all of that, ya, sure, the average netbook has it all over the iTab. I mean as long as you don't intend to use either the netbook or iPad to browse, read, watch movies, or play games, well, in that case, the netbook is the better deal.
You haven't actually used a netbook have you?
Browsers, take your pick: IE, Chrome, Safari, Firefox, etc. I prefer Chrome.
For video, how many file types can the iPad natively playback, h.264? Install VLC on a netbook, and playback just about anything.
Battery life - not that much of a difference, Asus has some of their EeePC's that get up to 9 hours on a 6-cell battery.
The iPad is thinner and lighter, but my netbook has 3 USB ports, VGA, ethernet, and 2 card readers, as well as audio in/out. Weighs less than 3 pounds.
Gaming on most netbooks are poor, but if you get one with Nvidia's Ion (9400m), it's the same exact GPU used by Apple is most of their computers.