I'd say your original comment was the stupid one (if we are going to start throwing insults around)
I'm not surprised Adobe is upset that the iPad still doesn't support flash.
Boo frigging hoo. Flash gained popularity due to limitations in HTML - those limitations are no longer there.
Despite the protesting (I like the metric of the louder the protesting the more successful an Apple product will be - genius!), the iPad will be successful and there will be even more pressure on sites to ditch flash - at least as the only method for navigating them.
I see this as a good thing. I look back at the howls of protest on Apple dropping the floppy and adopting this crazy "USB" technology.
Well, the protesting for the floppy was ridiculous because even back then there weren't many individual files that fit easily on a floppy never mind doing any kind of useful project work off of floppies. People just wanted them because they have always been there.
I'm FINALLY starting to see PC's that are completely legacy free be the norm rather than the exception. USB has been well entrenched for almost 8 years (due to the iMac no less) and ps/2 ports (PS/2!) are still floating around out there. I still run across things that require serial and parallel ports (and new devices - not stuff hanging around for 9 years).
The bottom line, without companies like Apple pushing boundaries and taking chances there would be few others pushing technology forward. Just look at the stagnation in the PC industry - other than faster CPU's, bigger hard drives and more memory you hardly ever see anything radical from the PC manufacturers. If you look at the directions Apple has pushed the industry (and not just in computers, look at the mess of commercial digital music before iTunes) you should be embracing Apple's willingness to try to "move the puck" - even if you don't care about using their products.
There are plenty of other companies doing things the "traditional" way - go use their products. Stop trying to ridicule Apple for doing something different from everyone else. Thank goodness they don't pay attention to people like you and keep on doing their thing.
Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference).
Yes, because one mans fart app is another mans holy grail. I'm glad you are so plugged into the needs of everyone you can make such substantial and informed judgements about the quality of a whole ecosystem.
Quote:
Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped?
Well, I dunno - handicapped implies impeded, crippled, hobbled... and the App store has been the single biggest success for any kind of applications store on any platform. Ever.
In three years it's generated more revenue for mobile applications developers than all other platforms - some that have been in existence for over 10 years and are "open".
If that kind of success is what you consider "handicapped", to quote another movie "You keep using that word. I do not think it means, what you think it means."
Quote:
It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more?
It's hard to argue the theoretical - there is just as much a chance that it would be exactly the same or less. There is no way to know for sure. That's what makes baseless speculation on the Internet so much fun!
Quote:
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before.
Except it's not a "computer" in the traditional sense. It's more an appliance or unique platform. It's something new entirely.
Quote:
Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac?
No, because it's not going to happen. And it doesn't happen on the iPhone either. Yes, there are some cases where Apple has rejected apps like Google voice, but I suspect most of those have been because of agreements with AT&T. It will be interesting to see if things change with the iPad - esp. with wifi only models.
Quote:
On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network.
It wasn't just that - it was also the possible impact of crappy code on the user experience. Sadly there is far to many examples of bad code on Windows and even Mac OSX.
Quote:
On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone.
Huh? This never happened nor was it EVER implied, except in kooky threads like this on the Internet.
Quote:
On the iPad that's quite a stretch.
What's a stretch is your tortured logic. What's the point of wanting something different, and then complaining when it isn't like every other piece of equipment out there? If you don't like Apple's model, then don't buy it! Run to Android or whatever other system more floats your boat. But I (and millions of others) happen to like the direction Apple is going in true computing appliances.
It's about time someone focuses on the overall user experience and you can't do that without accountability from everyone. The App store enforces that. It's a good thing.
Quote:
's not the size. It's the function of the device. If all that's going to be allowed are apps that are allowed on the iPhone or productivity suites that are on par with iPhone tools, then the iPad will be less of a computer and more of an oversized iPod Touch.
Says someone who has yet to hold one in his hands, see the final version or see how developers react to it.
Your pretty cocksure about a whole lot of hypotheticals that rely on some pretty fantastic assumptions - esp. given Apple's track record over the last 10 years.
Quote:
I have no problem with that. But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.
It is an amazing platform coming to market.
The really wonderful thing is it will still be an amazing platform coming to market despite myopic people such as yourself not believing so
Quote:
I am concerned though that people seem to be thinking that this more a netbook replacement than a giant portable DVD player/net browser/e-reader all in one.
People will think what they want to - at their own peril. The iPhone morphed way beyond what even I imagined for it. With the advances in the iPad, in a year we are going to look back and go "damn!" for stuff that we can't even conceive of right now that will no doubt come popping out of the woodwork. Just like it happened with the original iPhone. When you give developers fertile ground with low barriers to entry, amazing thinks happen. They aren't even relying on lightening to strike twice since the iPad is an evolution of an existing, wildly successful model.
Quote:
But let's not pretend it's going to be able to do all that my old laptop did.
I don't think any has implied that - Apple certainly hasn't, they were very clear about where they see the iPad.
Quote:
This is no productivity machine.
Careful grasshopper - productivity is in the eye of the beholder.
Quote:
Even the iWorks Touch package is just a sop to sell the "productivity" aspect. Is anybody really going to write papers or edit spreadsheets or make whole presentations on here?
Why not? If I had a proper fold out keyboard for my iPhone like I had with my Palm Pilot, I would be taking notes on it in meetings instead of paper or my (ugh) work laptop. We already know the iPad will have keyboard support. Right now it looks like it can easily do 80% of what the average office work (and I count myself in that category) can do these days. It will be interesting to see just how far it can be pushed.
Quote:
In a pinch, maybe. But most will do it on a real computer and use this thing for last minute changes or to display their work.
Again, I think you are seriously lacking in imagination. I guess we will see when it ships (when it ships - that has a nice ring vs. all the previous vaporware in this category from other manufacturers).
Quote:
Agreed. And smart move by Apple. If they added anymore functionality they would have cannibalized their macbook sales. Amazing. The company that wanted to give you one device in your pocket (instead of an iPod and a phone) now wants you to have two in your briefcase (iPad and Macbook)
But see, I rarely need a Macbook when I am on the go. When I go on travel, I no longer take a notebook with me - my iPhone does almost everything I need. An iPad will definitely do everything I need and then some. I regret buying my MBP now - although I will still have uses for it, if I do get an iPad my MBP will see *allot* less action.
Quote:
Is the attitude really necessary? Keep your fanboy in your pants.
It's not being a fanboy, it's a fact. There are far more non-technical users who haven't been touched by computing, or are barely using "computers" (just like my father) than there are of you and I.
Steve acknowledged as much several years back when he declared the desktop wars over and MS the winner. He's right. I think the success of the iPod woke Apple up to a new and untapped market that is orders of magnitude larger than traditional computers (desktops, laptops, netbooks, etc.) Everything with the iPhone, the SDK, the iPod Touch and now the iPad is marching relentlessly to domination of this sector. The debut of the Apple designed A4 CPU in the iPad is huge. Now not only will vendors not be able to re-create Apple's software ecosystem easily, they won't be able to slap some off-the-shelf parts together and get 90% the way towards what Apple is doing. Here is where Apple will really step away from the pack and start to leave them in the dust. The gap will just widen more dramatically with each generation. The tight integration of Apple's hardware and software will become even more of a self-reinforcing loop than it already is.
Meanwhile you can't even call Google on the phone to get support for Android? And that's a threat? Once Android hits geek saturation, where is it going to grow to? Users like my father certainly won't be buying one!
Nokia could only make non-smartphones and that business alone would make them more profits on phones than Apple. Hardly a dead dinosaur.
You can get a 3G for $99.
How much longer are most people going to accept "non smartphones"?
No one has ever survived by clinging to the bottom - and if they manage to, it's never pretty.
Quote:
They'll always have their market. Nobody is going to give an iPod Touch or an iPhone to an 8 or even a 10 year old.
Ha! You haven't seen the crazy yuppie parents around me! I see kids with them in restaurants all the time (and I'm surprised how many end up being iPhones and not "just" iPod Touches)
Quote:
And that network gaming feature on an Nintendo DS is a big draw for kids. Ultimately though, with kids it's what other kids have that determines the popularity of a device.
With the opening up of the dock connector, I am really surprised that many of the case/sleds with arcade style buttons haven't caught on. Probably has something to do with restrictions on the input manager that don't allow keyboards Perhaps with the debut of the keyboard on the iPad this will trickle back to the iPod and iPod touch and finally allow broad support for accessories like these. If so, the DS is truly toast.
Quote:
I have yet to see a group of grade schoolers huddle together with their iPod Touches. If I was 10 today, I'd want a DS over an iTouch. Teenagers? Different story altogether.
For right now, sure. But trends change. Kids are fickle - just ask any parent
I do appreciate the iPad for what it is: a really awesome media consumption device. Which for most of the population these days, is a fairly satisfactory replacement for a computer.
media consumption devices aren't in and of themselves very interesting. If they were, existing products from companies like Creative would be far more popular.
The iPad is much more than a simple media consumption device. That's what makes it so interesting.
Don't get me wrong, Apple's been doing an impressive job and at the pace they are going, they will be #1 very quickly (at least in revenue)
Regs, Jarkko
At least in revenue? .... At least in revenue? ... for crying out loud dude, these companies all exist for the same reason .... to show a profit. What other criteria means diddly squat?
So do I, on my iPhone, it's a bit hard on the small screen but it's definitely playable and you can do pretty much everything.
Fight, do jobs, bank, collect from businesses, enter the daily draw, upgrade, accept people into your family, buy things, post on your wall, it's all their and a lot more fun than planting carrots in Farmville.
But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.
I'm not going to bother responding to your complete post because others have already done so but I think I can offer a different slant on this whole iPad thing. You see, I think the biggest competitor to Apple out there is .... Apple itself. Let me explain.
Go back in time to a few days before the iPhone was launched in 2007. There were no smartphones, as we know them today ... no multi-touch devices ... a completely different landscape from today. Then Apple comes along and introduces .... not the iPhone, but the iPad.
The marketplace would have hailed this iPad thingy as the most revolutionary device since sliced bread. Sales would have skyrocketed. Imagine, reading a book or surfing the net at the beach, listening to music, showing off photos of your kids, watching videos ... all on the same device. Sales would have skyrocketed.
Now fast forward 18 months or so to another Apple "special event" where Apple states that the hugely successful iPad was being followed up by the iPhone. People would have been amazed yet again, to see all that wonder in a device that fit in your pocket and again .... sales would skyrocket.
The point is ... That Apple has set the bar so high with the iPhone, mostly because it was so far ahead of every other phone out there, it was such a giant leap forward ... that everyone, including Apple themselves ... are having difficulty repeating that much separation over present day offerings. Does that make the iPad a disappointing device? Not necessarily. I just think the level of separation between the Apple iPhone/touch etc. and the iPad is not as great as the first iPhone was with it's competition at the time.
In those days Apple was only competing with the Nokias and Rims of the world. .... Now Apple has to compete with Apple, and that is a much stronger competitor. .... I think, in time, the iPad will find it's legs and will surprise a lot of us.
A surprising amount of people seem to be hung up on market share for some reason
Which would explain why a lot of businesses fail every year. ...Well, when you can deposit market share in the bank ... I'll be interested, until then ... as Rod Tidwell would say ..."Show me the money".
Anant corrected your Apple numbers above, but I'm not sure why you're comparing it to 8.46B EUR for Nokia. Nokia's own spokesperson only used 8.18B EUR for their devices and services comparison. The remaining NAVTEQ and network divisions were not included. Not that it really matters.
The 8.46B was the original calculation by Anant for Apple's revenue. I was trying to point the difference in the figures given by Anand, and the SEC figures that I could find. Funnily enough, the two sources have totally different figures for iPhones and iPods, but exactly the same figure for MBs.
Anand gave the link to the figures he used and thank you for that. Like I said, I couldn't find the actual document and had to rely on a synopsis of it. Facts are what I was looking for and now I have them.
Just shows that almost anyone can claim almost anything and be proven right (and wrong at the same time). And this is not meant as a stab or discredit at the claim(s), just an observation.
An open system allows me to install whatever I like. Sure it's nice if people can pick apart the source, but as a non programmer all I want is the ability to install flash, firefox, photoshop, 3ds max etc etc. That's the key part, I install what I want on my hardware. Simple concept really.
And why on earth did you bring up the UK's network of spy cams? What am I expected to do about them? Seriously, what do you think I should do? Please try to at least be a little rational when arguing.
Try and be rational yourself, when you mention big Brother theory, you being very rational ..NOT. Why do you visit this site. I never gone onto a Microsoft news site to make negative comments, since I do not like using MS and what is the point, since already know that I will never use MS and do not like their software.
Btw you talk about calling people names..Hmm may want look in mirror, noticed you written a few childish ones yourself.
I know you do not have much to do during your evenings at moment (winter season) because it is so wet, cold and windy in UK right now, but maybe try use your energy for some good instead of getting your 'thrills' by thinking that your arguments in this thread will change the world, YOU make no difference with your comments to change our minds, since you come with destructive approach.
Btw: You can do something about spy cams, you and UK people just like film 'V for Vendetta'
With intelligent arguments like that, I can see why Apple decided against supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity.
Why yes - yes they did - thank you for pointing that out - we neophytes need people like yourself to point us toward the wisdom that is FLASH! - oh Glory - Glory to the almighty adobe.
The problem with Steve Jobs' definition of mobile devices is where do you draw the line? Are we going to see the CEO of Toyota going to stand up next week and make similar claims? After all, cars are mobile too. And full of electronics.
Jobs must have known that the world's press would take his sound-bite and repeat it without explaining his non-standard definition. It's clever but misleading.
The problem with Steve Jobs' definition of mobile devices is where do you draw the line? Are we going to see the CEO of Toyota going to stand up next week and make similar claims? After all, cars are mobile too. And full of electronics.
Jobs must have known that the world's press would take his sound-bite and repeat it without explaining his non-standard definition. It's clever but misleading.
Toyota? - the same company that just recalled 3M of their 'mobile devices' - lol
The problem with Steve Jobs' definition of mobile devices is where do you draw the line? Are we going to see the CEO of Toyota going to stand up next week and make similar claims? After all, cars are mobile too. And full of electronics.
Jobs must have known that the world's press would take his sound-bite and repeat it without explaining his non-standard definition. It's clever but misleading.
Now, that's a fair point. What makes it somewhat credible, however, are two facts: One, Nokia has decided to enter the mobile computing market itself, and two, the line between 'phones' and 'laptops' is blurring.
It is still some technological distance to a laptop that can physically transport me to work, or a car that can do an Excel spreadsheet. When we get there, Toyota can make the claim too, why not!
With intelligent arguments like that, I can see why Apple decided against supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity.
<<
>> you say >> <<supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity>>
You say this utopian statement but this was never and will never be a fact , there is no world wide anything.
Well It's a bloody f..ing war out here. Even google stabbed apple in the back for no reason at all and now google will reaped what it sowed by making apple a sworn blood enemy, just like adobe.
So a little history as I see it dude Apple was attacked and abused and shut out of almost everything for decades. MSFT and minions made sure that if a company supported anything apple they company lost msft biz or at least got restricted <<for example intel is still doing this today with AMD >>
MSFT while trying to choke APPLE to death still made sure that it made money off of APPLE, Even today MSFT attacks APPLE one day and the next day improves APPLE branded office SW. As time went on the mere thought of gates being displeased was enough to pull all apple support. Many companies even with no threat hated apple and never supported any thing apple. Verizon goes of its way to not support apple. Look my friend 3 f..ing days ago VERIZON gives a freeWIFI service to all its broadband clients >>EXCEPT OF COURSE MAC-OS>>WVerizon has acted anti-apple for yrs .My point is that because APPLE was forced to rely on its own in house SW people fro every little thing.
So APPLE today creates all its SW . One great example of this >APPLE made sure that everything APPLE is plug and play.EVERYTHING !! So after that many of the walls MSFT threw up against APPLE disappeared. Plug and play as opposed to hours or days of paid tech support to get $60 dollar crap printer to print, non apple clients can't grasp plug and play .
Some yrs ago a odd thing happened the arrogant APPLE SW team need faster support from ADOBE to upgrade ADOBE'S shitty SUITE OF SW <<pre element days >> ADOBE HAD PROMISED AND 18 MONTHS LATER STILL DID NOT FiX BUGS OR PLUGINS. See dude ADOBE was/is as arrogant as APPLE.
ADOBE felt APPLE owed a very large debt to ADOBE, Because of the yrs and yrs of ADOBES APPLES support,
APPLE SOLD TONS OF COMPUTERS > Because of PHOTOSHOP. Every ADOBE update spurred MAC sales. So up yo a point ADOBE is correct.
Still APPLE felt like ADOBE was a large threat with its slow updates . So apple created FINAL CUT PRO , Along with smaller minor SW apps that crossed over into ADOBE world . ADOBE still had not made elements just yet .
Once as APPLE went down this road ADOBE tried to punish apple. In the world of SW this was a magical moment, APPLE cutting loose it main graphic partner. APPLE after that wanted ADOBE blood. Adobe to this day has not bowed, So today with apple millions upon millions of mobile devices being sold from laptops tonanos' Adobe does not sit at APPLE TABLE and comfer what they will add next . ADOBE is on the outside of the fsatest growing comapny on the planet . ADOBE is smaller today .And if Adobe does not MAKE all its programs SNOWY lean and mean ASDOBE WILL Further lose market share .QUICKTIME>X has morphed into a FLASH killer ;
So i said fuck flash, Instead of what i wrote above, Go get CLICK TO FLASH and dis=able all flash banners on your web pages !!.Go to HULU and see how fast it load's ,and just ignore flash ads and simply click on the flash word where the player is. Its fun to screw the google ad people.
Even with this re write it is still kinda poor writing ;I am sorry for that, I even forgot why i wrote all this .
So anyway dude why not stop all your complaining and be ONE OF US , Your valid points are lost if you act so one sided about openness when nothing will ever be open .
Comments
I'd say your original comment was the stupid one (if we are going to start throwing insults around)
I'm not surprised Adobe is upset that the iPad still doesn't support flash.
Boo frigging hoo. Flash gained popularity due to limitations in HTML - those limitations are no longer there.
Despite the protesting (I like the metric of the louder the protesting the more successful an Apple product will be - genius!), the iPad will be successful and there will be even more pressure on sites to ditch flash - at least as the only method for navigating them.
I see this as a good thing. I look back at the howls of protest on Apple dropping the floppy and adopting this crazy "USB" technology.
Well, the protesting for the floppy was ridiculous because even back then there weren't many individual files that fit easily on a floppy never mind doing any kind of useful project work off of floppies. People just wanted them because they have always been there.
I'm FINALLY starting to see PC's that are completely legacy free be the norm rather than the exception. USB has been well entrenched for almost 8 years (due to the iMac no less) and ps/2 ports (PS/2!) are still floating around out there. I still run across things that require serial and parallel ports (and new devices - not stuff hanging around for 9 years).
The bottom line, without companies like Apple pushing boundaries and taking chances there would be few others pushing technology forward. Just look at the stagnation in the PC industry - other than faster CPU's, bigger hard drives and more memory you hardly ever see anything radical from the PC manufacturers. If you look at the directions Apple has pushed the industry (and not just in computers, look at the mess of commercial digital music before iTunes) you should be embracing Apple's willingness to try to "move the puck" - even if you don't care about using their products.
There are plenty of other companies doing things the "traditional" way - go use their products. Stop trying to ridicule Apple for doing something different from everyone else. Thank goodness they don't pay attention to people like you and keep on doing their thing.
GREAT POST, i couldn't have said it any better!!!
Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference).
Yes, because one mans fart app is another mans holy grail. I'm glad you are so plugged into the needs of everyone you can make such substantial and informed judgements about the quality of a whole ecosystem.
Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped?
Well, I dunno - handicapped implies impeded, crippled, hobbled... and the App store has been the single biggest success for any kind of applications store on any platform. Ever.
In three years it's generated more revenue for mobile applications developers than all other platforms - some that have been in existence for over 10 years and are "open".
If that kind of success is what you consider "handicapped", to quote another movie "You keep using that word. I do not think it means, what you think it means."
It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more?
It's hard to argue the theoretical - there is just as much a chance that it would be exactly the same or less. There is no way to know for sure. That's what makes baseless speculation on the Internet so much fun!
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before.
Except it's not a "computer" in the traditional sense. It's more an appliance or unique platform. It's something new entirely.
Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac?
No, because it's not going to happen. And it doesn't happen on the iPhone either. Yes, there are some cases where Apple has rejected apps like Google voice, but I suspect most of those have been because of agreements with AT&T. It will be interesting to see if things change with the iPad - esp. with wifi only models.
On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network.
It wasn't just that - it was also the possible impact of crappy code on the user experience. Sadly there is far to many examples of bad code on Windows and even Mac OSX.
On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone.
Huh? This never happened nor was it EVER implied, except in kooky threads like this on the Internet.
On the iPad that's quite a stretch.
What's a stretch is your tortured logic. What's the point of wanting something different, and then complaining when it isn't like every other piece of equipment out there? If you don't like Apple's model, then don't buy it! Run to Android or whatever other system more floats your boat. But I (and millions of others) happen to like the direction Apple is going in true computing appliances.
It's about time someone focuses on the overall user experience and you can't do that without accountability from everyone. The App store enforces that. It's a good thing.
's not the size. It's the function of the device. If all that's going to be allowed are apps that are allowed on the iPhone or productivity suites that are on par with iPhone tools, then the iPad will be less of a computer and more of an oversized iPod Touch.
Says someone who has yet to hold one in his hands, see the final version or see how developers react to it.
Your pretty cocksure about a whole lot of hypotheticals that rely on some pretty fantastic assumptions - esp. given Apple's track record over the last 10 years.
I have no problem with that. But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.
It is an amazing platform coming to market.
The really wonderful thing is it will still be an amazing platform coming to market despite myopic people such as yourself not believing so
I am concerned though that people seem to be thinking that this more a netbook replacement than a giant portable DVD player/net browser/e-reader all in one.
People will think what they want to - at their own peril. The iPhone morphed way beyond what even I imagined for it. With the advances in the iPad, in a year we are going to look back and go "damn!" for stuff that we can't even conceive of right now that will no doubt come popping out of the woodwork. Just like it happened with the original iPhone. When you give developers fertile ground with low barriers to entry, amazing thinks happen. They aren't even relying on lightening to strike twice since the iPad is an evolution of an existing, wildly successful model.
But let's not pretend it's going to be able to do all that my old laptop did.
I don't think any has implied that - Apple certainly hasn't, they were very clear about where they see the iPad.
This is no productivity machine.
Careful grasshopper - productivity is in the eye of the beholder.
Even the iWorks Touch package is just a sop to sell the "productivity" aspect. Is anybody really going to write papers or edit spreadsheets or make whole presentations on here?
Why not? If I had a proper fold out keyboard for my iPhone like I had with my Palm Pilot, I would be taking notes on it in meetings instead of paper or my (ugh) work laptop. We already know the iPad will have keyboard support. Right now it looks like it can easily do 80% of what the average office work (and I count myself in that category) can do these days. It will be interesting to see just how far it can be pushed.
In a pinch, maybe. But most will do it on a real computer and use this thing for last minute changes or to display their work.
Again, I think you are seriously lacking in imagination. I guess we will see when it ships (when it ships - that has a nice ring vs. all the previous vaporware in this category from other manufacturers).
Agreed. And smart move by Apple. If they added anymore functionality they would have cannibalized their macbook sales. Amazing. The company that wanted to give you one device in your pocket (instead of an iPod and a phone) now wants you to have two in your briefcase (iPad and Macbook)
But see, I rarely need a Macbook when I am on the go. When I go on travel, I no longer take a notebook with me - my iPhone does almost everything I need. An iPad will definitely do everything I need and then some. I regret buying my MBP now - although I will still have uses for it, if I do get an iPad my MBP will see *allot* less action.
Is the attitude really necessary? Keep your fanboy in your pants.
It's not being a fanboy, it's a fact. There are far more non-technical users who haven't been touched by computing, or are barely using "computers" (just like my father) than there are of you and I.
Steve acknowledged as much several years back when he declared the desktop wars over and MS the winner. He's right. I think the success of the iPod woke Apple up to a new and untapped market that is orders of magnitude larger than traditional computers (desktops, laptops, netbooks, etc.) Everything with the iPhone, the SDK, the iPod Touch and now the iPad is marching relentlessly to domination of this sector. The debut of the Apple designed A4 CPU in the iPad is huge. Now not only will vendors not be able to re-create Apple's software ecosystem easily, they won't be able to slap some off-the-shelf parts together and get 90% the way towards what Apple is doing. Here is where Apple will really step away from the pack and start to leave them in the dust. The gap will just widen more dramatically with each generation. The tight integration of Apple's hardware and software will become even more of a self-reinforcing loop than it already is.
Meanwhile you can't even call Google on the phone to get support for Android? And that's a threat? Once Android hits geek saturation, where is it going to grow to? Users like my father certainly won't be buying one!
Nokia could only make non-smartphones and that business alone would make them more profits on phones than Apple. Hardly a dead dinosaur.
You can get a 3G for $99.
How much longer are most people going to accept "non smartphones"?
No one has ever survived by clinging to the bottom - and if they manage to, it's never pretty.
They'll always have their market. Nobody is going to give an iPod Touch or an iPhone to an 8 or even a 10 year old.
Ha! You haven't seen the crazy yuppie parents around me! I see kids with them in restaurants all the time (and I'm surprised how many end up being iPhones and not "just" iPod Touches)
And that network gaming feature on an Nintendo DS is a big draw for kids. Ultimately though, with kids it's what other kids have that determines the popularity of a device.
With the opening up of the dock connector, I am really surprised that many of the case/sleds with arcade style buttons haven't caught on. Probably has something to do with restrictions on the input manager that don't allow keyboards
I have yet to see a group of grade schoolers huddle together with their iPod Touches. If I was 10 today, I'd want a DS over an iTouch. Teenagers? Different story altogether.
For right now, sure. But trends change. Kids are fickle - just ask any parent
I do appreciate the iPad for what it is: a really awesome media consumption device. Which for most of the population these days, is a fairly satisfactory replacement for a computer.
media consumption devices aren't in and of themselves very interesting. If they were, existing products from companies like Creative would be far more popular.
The iPad is much more than a simple media consumption device. That's what makes it so interesting.
Don't get me wrong, Apple's been doing an impressive job and at the pace they are going, they will be #1 very quickly (at least in revenue)
Regs, Jarkko
At least in revenue? .... At least in revenue? ... for crying out loud dude, these companies all exist for the same reason .... to show a profit. What other criteria means diddly squat?
Fight, do jobs, bank, collect from businesses, enter the daily draw, upgrade, accept people into your family, buy things, post on your wall, it's all their and a lot more fun than planting carrots in Farmville.
I just play Mafia Wars too much!
It's the only explanation I can come up with for such blind devotion to a proprietry, closed system.
fuck flash
What other criteria means diddly squat?
A surprising amount of people seem to be hung up on market share for some reason
But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.
I'm not going to bother responding to your complete post because others have already done so but I think I can offer a different slant on this whole iPad thing. You see, I think the biggest competitor to Apple out there is .... Apple itself. Let me explain.
Go back in time to a few days before the iPhone was launched in 2007. There were no smartphones, as we know them today ... no multi-touch devices ... a completely different landscape from today. Then Apple comes along and introduces .... not the iPhone, but the iPad.
The marketplace would have hailed this iPad thingy as the most revolutionary device since sliced bread. Sales would have skyrocketed. Imagine, reading a book or surfing the net at the beach, listening to music, showing off photos of your kids, watching videos ... all on the same device. Sales would have skyrocketed.
Now fast forward 18 months or so to another Apple "special event" where Apple states that the hugely successful iPad was being followed up by the iPhone. People would have been amazed yet again, to see all that wonder in a device that fit in your pocket and again .... sales would skyrocket.
The point is ... That Apple has set the bar so high with the iPhone, mostly because it was so far ahead of every other phone out there, it was such a giant leap forward ... that everyone, including Apple themselves ... are having difficulty repeating that much separation over present day offerings. Does that make the iPad a disappointing device? Not necessarily. I just think the level of separation between the Apple iPhone/touch etc. and the iPad is not as great as the first iPhone was with it's competition at the time.
In those days Apple was only competing with the Nokias and Rims of the world. .... Now Apple has to compete with Apple, and that is a much stronger competitor. .... I think, in time, the iPad will find it's legs and will surprise a lot of us.
A surprising amount of people seem to be hung up on market share for some reason
Which would explain why a lot of businesses fail every year. ...Well, when you can deposit market share in the bank ... I'll be interested, until then ... as Rod Tidwell would say ..."Show me the money".
Anant corrected your Apple numbers above, but I'm not sure why you're comparing it to 8.46B EUR for Nokia. Nokia's own spokesperson only used 8.18B EUR for their devices and services comparison. The remaining NAVTEQ and network divisions were not included. Not that it really matters.
The 8.46B was the original calculation by Anant for Apple's revenue. I was trying to point the difference in the figures given by Anand, and the SEC figures that I could find. Funnily enough, the two sources have totally different figures for iPhones and iPods, but exactly the same figure for MBs.
Anand gave the link to the figures he used and thank you for that. Like I said, I couldn't find the actual document and had to rely on a synopsis of it. Facts are what I was looking for and now I have them.
Just shows that almost anyone can claim almost anything and be proven right (and wrong at the same time). And this is not meant as a stab or discredit at the claim(s), just an observation.
Regs, Jarkko
Well done for completely missing the point.
An open system allows me to install whatever I like. Sure it's nice if people can pick apart the source, but as a non programmer all I want is the ability to install flash, firefox, photoshop, 3ds max etc etc. That's the key part, I install what I want on my hardware. Simple concept really.
And why on earth did you bring up the UK's network of spy cams? What am I expected to do about them? Seriously, what do you think I should do? Please try to at least be a little rational when arguing.
Try and be rational yourself, when you mention big Brother theory, you being very rational ..NOT. Why do you visit this site. I never gone onto a Microsoft news site to make negative comments, since I do not like using MS and what is the point, since already know that I will never use MS and do not like their software.
Btw you talk about calling people names..Hmm may want look in mirror, noticed you written a few childish ones yourself.
I know you do not have much to do during your evenings at moment (winter season) because it is so wet, cold and windy in UK right now, but maybe try use your energy for some good instead of getting your 'thrills' by thinking that your arguments in this thread will change the world, YOU make no difference with your comments to change our minds, since you come with destructive approach.
Btw: You can do something about spy cams, you and UK people just like film 'V for Vendetta'
"....and notes that quite a few pundits expected Apple's iPad to be a flop"
this was also said about the iPhone though right ?
fuck flash
With intelligent arguments like that, I can see why Apple decided against supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity.
With intelligent arguments like that, I can see why Apple decided against supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity.
Why yes - yes they did - thank you for pointing that out - we neophytes need people like yourself to point us toward the wisdom that is FLASH! - oh Glory - Glory to the almighty adobe.
NOT!
Jobs must have known that the world's press would take his sound-bite and repeat it without explaining his non-standard definition. It's clever but misleading.
The problem with Steve Jobs' definition of mobile devices is where do you draw the line? Are we going to see the CEO of Toyota going to stand up next week and make similar claims? After all, cars are mobile too. And full of electronics.
Jobs must have known that the world's press would take his sound-bite and repeat it without explaining his non-standard definition. It's clever but misleading.
Toyota? - the same company that just recalled 3M of their 'mobile devices' - lol
Just shows that almost anyone can claim almost anything and be proven right (and wrong at the same time).
Not really. In this instance, there is only one right set of numbers. Period. You don't get to pick.
The problem with Steve Jobs' definition of mobile devices is where do you draw the line? Are we going to see the CEO of Toyota going to stand up next week and make similar claims? After all, cars are mobile too. And full of electronics.
Jobs must have known that the world's press would take his sound-bite and repeat it without explaining his non-standard definition. It's clever but misleading.
Now, that's a fair point. What makes it somewhat credible, however, are two facts: One, Nokia has decided to enter the mobile computing market itself, and two, the line between 'phones' and 'laptops' is blurring.
It is still some technological distance to a laptop that can physically transport me to work, or a car that can do an Excel spreadsheet. When we get there, Toyota can make the claim too, why not!
With intelligent arguments like that, I can see why Apple decided against supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity.
<<
>> you say >> <<supporting the world wide standard for online video and interactivity>>
You say this utopian statement but this was never and will never be a fact , there is no world wide anything.
Well It's a bloody f..ing war out here. Even google stabbed apple in the back for no reason at all and now google will reaped what it sowed by making apple a sworn blood enemy, just like adobe.
So a little history as I see it dude Apple was attacked and abused and shut out of almost everything for decades. MSFT and minions made sure that if a company supported anything apple they company lost msft biz or at least got restricted <<for example intel is still doing this today with AMD >>
MSFT while trying to choke APPLE to death still made sure that it made money off of APPLE, Even today MSFT attacks APPLE one day and the next day improves APPLE branded office SW. As time went on the mere thought of gates being displeased was enough to pull all apple support. Many companies even with no threat hated apple and never supported any thing apple. Verizon goes of its way to not support apple. Look my friend 3 f..ing days ago VERIZON gives a freeWIFI service to all its broadband clients >>EXCEPT OF COURSE MAC-OS>>WVerizon has acted anti-apple for yrs .My point is that because APPLE was forced to rely on its own in house SW people fro every little thing.
So APPLE today creates all its SW . One great example of this >APPLE made sure that everything APPLE is plug and play.EVERYTHING !! So after that many of the walls MSFT threw up against APPLE disappeared. Plug and play as opposed to hours or days of paid tech support to get $60 dollar crap printer to print, non apple clients can't grasp plug and play .
Some yrs ago a odd thing happened the arrogant APPLE SW team need faster support from ADOBE to upgrade ADOBE'S shitty SUITE OF SW <<pre element days >> ADOBE HAD PROMISED AND 18 MONTHS LATER STILL DID NOT FiX BUGS OR PLUGINS. See dude ADOBE was/is as arrogant as APPLE.
ADOBE felt APPLE owed a very large debt to ADOBE, Because of the yrs and yrs of ADOBES APPLES support,
APPLE SOLD TONS OF COMPUTERS > Because of PHOTOSHOP. Every ADOBE update spurred MAC sales. So up yo a point ADOBE is correct.
Still APPLE felt like ADOBE was a large threat with its slow updates . So apple created FINAL CUT PRO , Along with smaller minor SW apps that crossed over into ADOBE world . ADOBE still had not made elements just yet .
Once as APPLE went down this road ADOBE tried to punish apple. In the world of SW this was a magical moment, APPLE cutting loose it main graphic partner. APPLE after that wanted ADOBE blood. Adobe to this day has not bowed, So today with apple millions upon millions of mobile devices being sold from laptops tonanos' Adobe does not sit at APPLE TABLE and comfer what they will add next . ADOBE is on the outside of the fsatest growing comapny on the planet . ADOBE is smaller today .And if Adobe does not MAKE all its programs SNOWY lean and mean ASDOBE WILL Further lose market share .QUICKTIME>X has morphed into a FLASH killer ;
So i said fuck flash, Instead of what i wrote above, Go get CLICK TO FLASH and dis=able all flash banners on your web pages !!.Go to HULU and see how fast it load's ,and just ignore flash ads and simply click on the flash word where the player is. Its fun to screw the google ad people.
Even with this re write it is still kinda poor writing ;I am sorry for that, I even forgot why i wrote all this .
So anyway dude why not stop all your complaining and be ONE OF US , Your valid points are lost if you act so one sided about openness when nothing will ever be open .
NOTHING
peace
9
lostplay