Apart from geeks, most folks want access to the full web. Not just part of it.
the web and users of the web will be far better off when web sites no longer use flash.
Flash is buggy
Flash crashes browsers
Flash drains batteries
Flash is proprietary
The last one is the killer too - it means that Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Mozilla, etc. cannot fix the problems with flash. They are all dependent on another company to implement flash for them. Everything else they can do themselves.
And kids use flash primarily to play games. Why go to the web for games when you have the app store?
But we don't live in the future. In the present, for better or worse, Bazillions of folks go to flash sites every day. And "someday you won't care about that website - there will be something else, just as good" is hardly an answer to a kid who wants to play Farmville.
The problem is that you have to make the future happen. If Apple hadn't produced a computer with that "slow" GUI, and that "almost useless" mouse, we would all still be using text based machines. If Apple hadn't been the first major computer manufacturer to move to 3.5 floppies, we still might be using 5.25 disks. If they hadn't been the first to move to CD players, we would still be using floppies, and the consumer computer would never have happened on a large scale.
If they didn't first go to CD-R, then we would still be saving to floppies, the same thing for DVD, and a whole lot of other things.
Someone must take that first step. It just so happens to be Apple most of the time.
It's always hard on the first adopters. There's no argument about that. But, truthfully, while I would prefer to have seen Flash on my iPhone, just so that we would have the choice, if it could be done that way (the way I use "Click to Flash on my Mac Pro), I haven't missed it either. Occasionally, I don't see something, but not nearly as much as I expected. A lot of sites are using alternative methods in addition to flash if they detect you don't have it. We're going to see that happening much more often over time.
Look, if this product lacks several features you think you need or want, then buy something else that has them. Or, you can wait for the next version. Flash will likely not happen, but in a year from now, it won't matter as much.
If you're buying this mostly for kids, then I don't know what to say other than ask why are they playing those mind numbing Flash games in the first place? There are pretty good learning games. I used to buy them for my daughter when she was young, and it helped her learn to read by the time she was three. Nobody benefits from those Flash kids games, especially kids.
Much as I find the whining deafening around here I do think a camera would be good. Who knows if the first rev will feature one or not. I wouldn't be surprised. A camera on the iPad will perhaps be less useful than on the iPhone but I can see many situations in which it would be handy - or fun. To snap a photo of someone in order to put it into you address book would be an unnecessarily convoluted procedure without a built in cam. Need to scan a document? Take a picture. FrontRow fun for kids, video conferencing. etc.
Sounds like a "nice feature" not a "must have". Personally I'd rather take a picture on my iPhone and let mobileme update my contact info automatically. Of course not everyone is set up that way, but almost everyone does have some form of a camera with them and the iPad can accept camera input through USB or a SD card. I just don't understand why people find it so important. As you've stated there are situations where a camera would be nice, but none of those really represent how a camera would be a requirement.
He should have said "extremely limited multitasking". The distinction is quite important.
Multi tasking is great and very useful. BUT I believe you fail to see this in the right context. Most people don't use multitasking like you are I might do. Most people do one thing, then the other. I definitely fall into the power user group yet I rarely find the lack of true multi tasking a problem on the iphone. But forget 'us' for a second. For the majority of people the advantages of no multitasking and a super fast launching single function app environment is a very clear and easy to use user experience. It may not be ideal for 'power use' but its not meant to be used like that. For that Apple has a range of lap tops. Its like complaining that your MacBookPro has limitations when it comes to high end graphics work. Of course it does - that's why you have your MacPro buzzing in your office. 'Extremely limited multitasking' in the context of the iphone, or iPad has more advantages than disadvantages for the average user.
C'mon. Ever read while taking a crap? How about hanging it on the wall in your kitchen? It would be the coolest audio control center in your living room. I know nothing about the way you live but I do know you have the money and don't you just want one? Just a little?
I have an iPhone and 13" MBP for my pooping needs. The place between those two devices isn't big enough. No, if I needed it for work ro had a desktop or simple phone it might serve my purposes better. If they ever offer dynamic magazine and newspaper publishing I'll be first in line.
We're not talking about "netbooks" as a nebulous category. The OP said "any netbook", as in "even the best netbook".
And to use your listed criteria, many high end netbooks have plenty of CPU and RAM for Ubuntu or XP. The screens are bigger in many cases than the iPad, and at any rate, they use a modern aspect ratio. And they have bigger keyboards than the iPad, given that they exist widescreen 10 or 12 inch models.
So why is the "Pad better than any netbook?
To say that something may replace a netbook isn't saying that it is the same thing as a netbook.
I bought my daughter a Toshiba NB205 which had come out two weeks earlier, and had received very good reviews at the time. That was in early July. It cost $400, and I bought the 2 Gb upgrade for $69. So we're talking a $500 machine essentially. She wanted it for her summer in school in the UK to use for Skype, IM, the web, writing assignments and other light weight stuff.
But the thing is horribly slow. I mean horribly. Despite having the fastest Atom chip, its difficult to use it's so slow. I've checked out others, and they're all the same, except that the cheaper ones were even slower.
So sure, it's got a lot of features, runs a PC OS and stuff, but whats it really good for? Not much. Can't play any useful games on it, she tried, and she's a serious gamer. I mean, serious! Even the web using Wifi is slow.
So the iPad can replace that without having all the features that slow it down so much. Ever seriously try to multitask on one of these? It's a joke!
But the thing is horribly slow. I mean horribly. Despite having the fastest Atom chip, its difficult to use it's so slow. I've checked out others, and they're all the same, except that the cheaper ones were even slower.
So sure, it's got a lot of features, runs a PC OS and stuff, but whats it really good for? Not much. Can't play any useful games on it, she tried, and she's a serious gamer. I mean, serious! Even the web using Wifi is slow.
Try some Flash video above 360p. 480p might work (never worked for me) but 720p is going to be out of the question.
That the other points listed are all subordinate, and as such, are unimportant in the final analysis.
Yeah, I get that. My question was, are you suggesting that's good, bad, whatever? It wasn't clear, since all you seemed to be saying was a profit-maximizing firm is simply maximizing profits using its pricing decisions.
I thought that there was something more subtle you were trying to get at there...... but I am sure I was mistaken.
There was probably a similar response when Amana introduced the Radarange in 1967. These days we call it a "microwave."
Can you imagine what the chefs were saying? "Can't use metal pots! Doesn't brown! $495! That's a deal-breaker for me."
The survey is of very limited significance and simply shows that there's a difference between fantasy and reality for any manufactured device.
You don't actually cook, do you? From a cooks point of view, a microwave is still a rather limited speciality device even now more than 40 years later. The microwave hasn't swept away the oven or the stove. It's great for warming things up, but for actually making stuff: the old school devices still rule roost.
Oddly enough, the "food geeks" in 1967 were probably interested in what they might get out of the original radar range. They just weren't unrealistic about it. They certainly weren't Amana brand partisans.
Part of these results show people losing interest in the iPad after they realize that it's not going to be what they imagined of it. Whip up the hype machine too much and some people are bound to be dissapointed in the end.
You don't seem to understand or realize that at launch the iPad has a built in ecosystem of 140,000 apps.
....
A lot of those 140K apps make up for the fact that there isn't a fully functional web browser on the device. They have taken the open device independent web and rolled the clock back to the 80s. That's hardly something to brag about.
It has 140K "apps" but is still missing a couple of really important ones.
The iTunes store is the same way. Sure it has plenty of stuff. But there is also plenty of stuff it doesn't have.
You don't actually cook, do you? From a cooks point of view, a microwave is still a rather limited speciality device even now more than 40 years later. The microwave hasn't swept away the oven or the stove. It's great for warming things up, but for actually making stuff: the old school devices still rule roost.
Oddly enough, the "food geeks" in 1967 were probably interested in what they might get out of the original radar range. They just weren't unrealistic about it. They certainly weren't Amana brand partisans.
Part of these results show people losing interest in the iPad after they realize that it's not going to be what they imagined of it. Whip up the hype machine too much and some people are bound to be dissapointed in the end.
My wife and I cook a good deal. We're considered to be "foodies", $10,000 range and all that kind of stuff. But still, the microwave does far more than warming things up.
If you don't know how to cook, a microwave does little, but if you do, it becomes an essential part of your equipment.
The iPad will have a big place in the computer world. But people who don't understand what it's about will dismiss it. Just as you're dismissing the microwave.
A lot of those 140K apps make up for the fact that there isn't a fully functional web browser on the device. They have taken the open device independent web and rolled the clock back to the 80s. That's hardly something to brag about.
It has 140K "apps" but is still missing a couple of really important ones.
The iTunes store is the same way. Sure it has plenty of stuff. But there is also plenty of stuff it doesn't have.
It's still a better browser than any of the other phones have. I notice how slowly they render pages with flash Ads and other junk. Some sites with embedded Flash crash some of those phones as well.
Speaking of a broken record....do you have a cushioned seat on that bandwagon?
I have no doubt the iPad will sell millions. There are a lot of people out there looking for a color screened eBook reader. Not me, I want a little more from the device than just browsing the web and reading books.
To me the iPad is like the first generation iPhone, it was a revolutionary piece of crap. When the 3GS came along I grabbed one knowing it was finally a great device. Same thing with the iPad...I'll buy the third version.
Funny, I thought it played videos, music, podcasts, allowed you to install thousands of apps (among them a production suite) among other stuff
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac
Agree with you. The iPad should do more than the iPhone, not less.
Less than the iPhone? Wha-?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
What mobile device are you kids carrying around that plays Flash games?
Why would anyone play Flash games when they have access to Myst, Civilization, Need for Speed, etc... ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichyS
Yup, the iPod Touch has really bombed without those apps.
Oh wait...
Good one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber
Flash, Americans lose interest in Super Bowl after the game. (Borrowed from another forum)
I ROLF'ed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones
It is amazing what the little fanboys here will believe in. They actually think the iPad is more than an iPod Touch. Not everything from Apple becomes popular.
It is amazing how many little trolls we are seeing over these forums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
If you're buying this mostly for kids, then I don't know what to say other than ask why are they playing those mind numbing Flash games in the first place? There are pretty good learning games. I used to buy them for my daughter when she was young, and it helped her learn to read by the time she was three. Nobody benefits from those Flash kids games, especially kids.
Educational games are nice but I rarely found good ones over here at South America. You may find this hard to believe, but I became #1 in History class just playing Total War games (Empire:Total War was horrible, by the way)
It's still a better browser than any of the other phones have. I notice how slowly they render pages with flash Ads and other junk. Some sites with embedded Flash crash some of those phones as well.
I'll do without it.
My iPhone gets a better SunSpider benchmark result than IE7 on my work desktop (Dual 2.8ghz Pentium D with 2GBs of RAM).
Comments
Plenty of choice in the App Store. And there's about to be a lot more.
What would I want to do with the OS to require Apple to not "lock" it away from me?
Use GoogleVoice App perhaps? Like all the other phones can use?
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/a...4_SANFRA539309
I hear soap does a good job of getting the taste of foot out of one's mouth.
Anything higher that 480p is officially considered to be hi def according to the broadcasting industry.
**** Got a cite for that wild claim?
Apart from geeks, most folks want access to the full web. Not just part of it.
the web and users of the web will be far better off when web sites no longer use flash.
Flash is buggy
Flash crashes browsers
Flash drains batteries
Flash is proprietary
The last one is the killer too - it means that Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Mozilla, etc. cannot fix the problems with flash. They are all dependent on another company to implement flash for them. Everything else they can do themselves.
And kids use flash primarily to play games. Why go to the web for games when you have the app store?
Everything you say is true.
But we don't live in the future. In the present, for better or worse, Bazillions of folks go to flash sites every day. And "someday you won't care about that website - there will be something else, just as good" is hardly an answer to a kid who wants to play Farmville.
The problem is that you have to make the future happen. If Apple hadn't produced a computer with that "slow" GUI, and that "almost useless" mouse, we would all still be using text based machines. If Apple hadn't been the first major computer manufacturer to move to 3.5 floppies, we still might be using 5.25 disks. If they hadn't been the first to move to CD players, we would still be using floppies, and the consumer computer would never have happened on a large scale.
If they didn't first go to CD-R, then we would still be saving to floppies, the same thing for DVD, and a whole lot of other things.
Someone must take that first step. It just so happens to be Apple most of the time.
It's always hard on the first adopters. There's no argument about that. But, truthfully, while I would prefer to have seen Flash on my iPhone, just so that we would have the choice, if it could be done that way (the way I use "Click to Flash on my Mac Pro), I haven't missed it either. Occasionally, I don't see something, but not nearly as much as I expected. A lot of sites are using alternative methods in addition to flash if they detect you don't have it. We're going to see that happening much more often over time.
Look, if this product lacks several features you think you need or want, then buy something else that has them. Or, you can wait for the next version. Flash will likely not happen, but in a year from now, it won't matter as much.
If you're buying this mostly for kids, then I don't know what to say other than ask why are they playing those mind numbing Flash games in the first place? There are pretty good learning games. I used to buy them for my daughter when she was young, and it helped her learn to read by the time she was three. Nobody benefits from those Flash kids games, especially kids.
**** Got a cite for that wild claim?
If you're going to respond with bad language, it's going to become difficult to do anything but delete you. Keep it down, and ask politely.
Much as I find the whining deafening around here I do think a camera would be good. Who knows if the first rev will feature one or not. I wouldn't be surprised. A camera on the iPad will perhaps be less useful than on the iPhone but I can see many situations in which it would be handy - or fun. To snap a photo of someone in order to put it into you address book would be an unnecessarily convoluted procedure without a built in cam. Need to scan a document? Take a picture. FrontRow fun for kids, video conferencing. etc.
Sounds like a "nice feature" not a "must have". Personally I'd rather take a picture on my iPhone and let mobileme update my contact info automatically. Of course not everyone is set up that way, but almost everyone does have some form of a camera with them and the iPad can accept camera input through USB or a SD card. I just don't understand why people find it so important. As you've stated there are situations where a camera would be nice, but none of those really represent how a camera would be a requirement.
Yep. When you're right, you're right.
He should have said "extremely limited multitasking". The distinction is quite important.
Multi tasking is great and very useful. BUT I believe you fail to see this in the right context. Most people don't use multitasking like you are I might do. Most people do one thing, then the other. I definitely fall into the power user group yet I rarely find the lack of true multi tasking a problem on the iphone. But forget 'us' for a second. For the majority of people the advantages of no multitasking and a super fast launching single function app environment is a very clear and easy to use user experience. It may not be ideal for 'power use' but its not meant to be used like that. For that Apple has a range of lap tops. Its like complaining that your MacBookPro has limitations when it comes to high end graphics work. Of course it does - that's why you have your MacPro buzzing in your office. 'Extremely limited multitasking' in the context of the iphone, or iPad has more advantages than disadvantages for the average user.
C'mon. Ever read while taking a crap? How about hanging it on the wall in your kitchen? It would be the coolest audio control center in your living room. I know nothing about the way you live but I do know you have the money and don't you just want one? Just a little?
I have an iPhone and 13" MBP for my pooping needs. The place between those two devices isn't big enough. No, if I needed it for work ro had a desktop or simple phone it might serve my purposes better. If they ever offer dynamic magazine and newspaper publishing I'll be first in line.
**** Got a cite for that wild claim?
SDTV = 4801/576i
EDTV 480p/576p
Can you guess what comes next?
We're not talking about "netbooks" as a nebulous category. The OP said "any netbook", as in "even the best netbook".
And to use your listed criteria, many high end netbooks have plenty of CPU and RAM for Ubuntu or XP. The screens are bigger in many cases than the iPad, and at any rate, they use a modern aspect ratio. And they have bigger keyboards than the iPad, given that they exist widescreen 10 or 12 inch models.
So why is the "Pad better than any netbook?
To say that something may replace a netbook isn't saying that it is the same thing as a netbook.
I bought my daughter a Toshiba NB205 which had come out two weeks earlier, and had received very good reviews at the time. That was in early July. It cost $400, and I bought the 2 Gb upgrade for $69. So we're talking a $500 machine essentially. She wanted it for her summer in school in the UK to use for Skype, IM, the web, writing assignments and other light weight stuff.
But the thing is horribly slow. I mean horribly. Despite having the fastest Atom chip, its difficult to use it's so slow. I've checked out others, and they're all the same, except that the cheaper ones were even slower.
So sure, it's got a lot of features, runs a PC OS and stuff, but whats it really good for? Not much. Can't play any useful games on it, she tried, and she's a serious gamer. I mean, serious! Even the web using Wifi is slow.
So the iPad can replace that without having all the features that slow it down so much. Ever seriously try to multitask on one of these? It's a joke!
But the thing is horribly slow. I mean horribly. Despite having the fastest Atom chip, its difficult to use it's so slow. I've checked out others, and they're all the same, except that the cheaper ones were even slower.
So sure, it's got a lot of features, runs a PC OS and stuff, but whats it really good for? Not much. Can't play any useful games on it, she tried, and she's a serious gamer. I mean, serious! Even the web using Wifi is slow.
Try some Flash video above 360p. 480p might work (never worked for me) but 720p is going to be out of the question.
That the other points listed are all subordinate, and as such, are unimportant in the final analysis.
Yeah, I get that. My question was, are you suggesting that's good, bad, whatever? It wasn't clear, since all you seemed to be saying was a profit-maximizing firm is simply maximizing profits using its pricing decisions.
I thought that there was something more subtle you were trying to get at there...... but I am sure I was mistaken.
There was probably a similar response when Amana introduced the Radarange in 1967. These days we call it a "microwave."
Can you imagine what the chefs were saying? "Can't use metal pots! Doesn't brown! $495! That's a deal-breaker for me."
The survey is of very limited significance and simply shows that there's a difference between fantasy and reality for any manufactured device.
You don't actually cook, do you? From a cooks point of view, a microwave is still a rather limited speciality device even now more than 40 years later. The microwave hasn't swept away the oven or the stove. It's great for warming things up, but for actually making stuff: the old school devices still rule roost.
Oddly enough, the "food geeks" in 1967 were probably interested in what they might get out of the original radar range. They just weren't unrealistic about it. They certainly weren't Amana brand partisans.
Part of these results show people losing interest in the iPad after they realize that it's not going to be what they imagined of it. Whip up the hype machine too much and some people are bound to be dissapointed in the end.
Try some Flash video above 360p. 480p might work (never worked for me) but 720p is going to be out of the question.
Which device are you talking about?
You don't seem to understand or realize that at launch the iPad has a built in ecosystem of 140,000 apps.
....
A lot of those 140K apps make up for the fact that there isn't a fully functional web browser on the device. They have taken the open device independent web and rolled the clock back to the 80s. That's hardly something to brag about.
It has 140K "apps" but is still missing a couple of really important ones.
The iTunes store is the same way. Sure it has plenty of stuff. But there is also plenty of stuff it doesn't have.
You don't actually cook, do you? From a cooks point of view, a microwave is still a rather limited speciality device even now more than 40 years later. The microwave hasn't swept away the oven or the stove. It's great for warming things up, but for actually making stuff: the old school devices still rule roost.
Oddly enough, the "food geeks" in 1967 were probably interested in what they might get out of the original radar range. They just weren't unrealistic about it. They certainly weren't Amana brand partisans.
Part of these results show people losing interest in the iPad after they realize that it's not going to be what they imagined of it. Whip up the hype machine too much and some people are bound to be dissapointed in the end.
My wife and I cook a good deal. We're considered to be "foodies", $10,000 range and all that kind of stuff. But still, the microwave does far more than warming things up.
If you don't know how to cook, a microwave does little, but if you do, it becomes an essential part of your equipment.
The iPad will have a big place in the computer world. But people who don't understand what it's about will dismiss it. Just as you're dismissing the microwave.
Which device are you talking about?
Netbook. Sorry, copied wrong text.
A lot of those 140K apps make up for the fact that there isn't a fully functional web browser on the device. They have taken the open device independent web and rolled the clock back to the 80s. That's hardly something to brag about.
It has 140K "apps" but is still missing a couple of really important ones.
The iTunes store is the same way. Sure it has plenty of stuff. But there is also plenty of stuff it doesn't have.
It's still a better browser than any of the other phones have. I notice how slowly they render pages with flash Ads and other junk. Some sites with embedded Flash crash some of those phones as well.
I'll do without it.
Netbook. Sorry, copied wrong text.
Flash video take some while to get started up, and then often jerks around. but that's true for most video on the thing that's bigger than 480 x 320.
Speaking of a broken record....do you have a cushioned seat on that bandwagon?
I have no doubt the iPad will sell millions. There are a lot of people out there looking for a color screened eBook reader. Not me, I want a little more from the device than just browsing the web and reading books.
To me the iPad is like the first generation iPhone, it was a revolutionary piece of crap. When the 3GS came along I grabbed one knowing it was finally a great device. Same thing with the iPad...I'll buy the third version.
Funny, I thought it played videos, music, podcasts, allowed you to install thousands of apps (among them a production suite) among other stuff
Agree with you. The iPad should do more than the iPhone, not less.
Less than the iPhone? Wha-?
What mobile device are you kids carrying around that plays Flash games?
Why would anyone play Flash games when they have access to Myst, Civilization, Need for Speed, etc... ?
Yup, the iPod Touch has really bombed without those apps.
Oh wait...
Good one.
Flash, Americans lose interest in Super Bowl after the game. (Borrowed from another forum)
I ROLF'ed.
It is amazing what the little fanboys here will believe in. They actually think the iPad is more than an iPod Touch. Not everything from Apple becomes popular.
It is amazing how many little trolls we are seeing over these forums.
If you're buying this mostly for kids, then I don't know what to say other than ask why are they playing those mind numbing Flash games in the first place? There are pretty good learning games. I used to buy them for my daughter when she was young, and it helped her learn to read by the time she was three. Nobody benefits from those Flash kids games, especially kids.
Educational games are nice but I rarely found good ones over here at South America. You may find this hard to believe, but I became #1 in History class just playing Total War games (Empire:Total War was horrible, by the way)
It's still a better browser than any of the other phones have. I notice how slowly they render pages with flash Ads and other junk. Some sites with embedded Flash crash some of those phones as well.
I'll do without it.
My iPhone gets a better SunSpider benchmark result than IE7 on my work desktop (Dual 2.8ghz Pentium D with 2GBs of RAM).
Now that's funny...