We asked for the world's smallest Mac and instead got the world's largest iPod???
I couldn't have said it more succinctly.
As great as the iPad is as a piece of hardware and software, the fact that it's a closed down, locked down, "hold the user hostage", "treat the user like minor" type of device makes it utterly uninteresting to me and many others I know.
In short, as you put it: we wanted a small mac, even a small Mac with a touch interface, but we got an iPad/iPhone like appliance, that locks us out and tells us what we're allowed to do with it.
I have better ways to waste my hard earned money.
Even though a bit clumsier, for the same money I can make a dual-core, quad-thread NetBook Hackintosh with 640GB disk drive and 8GB RAM. Not as sexy, but a lot more useful, even more useful than a MacBook Air, which with its RAM and HD limits is rather crippled.
It's not thin-ness that matters, but compact size. We live in three dimensions, and Jobs focuses only on how to reduce one of them.
In short, I'm not surprised by these survey results, and I hope that sales for the device will be disappointing and force Apple to rethink its policies. Since Apple is doing well, Jobs goes back to the same evil closed-box policies that got him fired from Apple the first time around.
Only the downfall forced him to open the system up by basing NeXT's OS and lots of tools on open source and open standards. And for a while he was preaching that as a benefit of Mac OS X. Now he closes the doors again, and if the iPad becomes a success, you can bet that the iPads will get bigger, start to have keyboards, and eventually will replace the Mac, just like the Mac replaced the Apple II.
Result: if users don't revolt now, in five or ten years you'll be permanently locked out of your device. The Jailbreaking will only work for a while, and sooner or later the holes will be plugged, and the fun is over.
Think about it, and send relevant feedback to Apple. Maybe it's not too late to make them see the light, although chances are, it's hard to revert greed once it takes hold...
"Your typical netbook" isn't what the OP was comparing with the iPad. He siad that the iPad is better than any netbook on the market. I was wondering why he thinks that.
Regardless, the fact remains that the typical netbook leaves a lot to be desired. It is, typically, not good at anything and attempts to do everything that we have come to expect our computers to do.
The iPad, in contrast, I expect will be more limited in its list of activities that it allows but will do many of those very well indeed. If that list includes on it enough of the items that people in the real world use their netbooks for, only the iPad is better suited to those activities, I think you'll find that the iPad will carve out a very robust niche for itself.
It will not be all things to all people but a very good solution for enough people to be a sales success. For others who want to do something that falls outside of the iPad's range, naturally those folks will gravitate to other products. Nothing wrong with that.
I cannot believe that you guys fell into the same trap as almost all the other blogs and repeated the Retrevo garbage with no analysis!! They clearly cherry-picked their data presentation to provide a negative analysis.
In posts at other sites yesterday I pointed out that their own data also showed that the number of respondents who indicated "Yes I definitely want one" TRIPLED from 3% to 9%.
Mac Daily News took the time to look over the data and posted the article:
I cannot believe that you guys fell into the same trap as almost all the other blogs and repeated the Retrevo garbage with no analysis!! They clearly cherry-picked their data presentation to provide a negative analysis.
In posts at other sites yesterday I pointed out that their own data also showed that the number of respondents who indicated "Yes I definitely want one" TRIPLED from 3% to 9%.
Mac Daily News took the time to look over the data and posted the article:
As great as the iPad is as a piece of hardware and software, the fact that it's a closed down, locked down, "hold the user hostage", "treat the user like minor" type of device makes it utterly uninteresting to me and many others I know.
In short, as you put it: we wanted a small mac, even a small Mac with a touch interface, but we got an iPad/iPhone like appliance, that locks us out and tells us what we're allowed to do with it.
I have better ways to waste my hard earned money.
Even though a bit clumsier, for the same money I can make a dual-core, quad-thread NetBook Hackintosh with 640GB disk drive and 8GB RAM. Not as sexy, but a lot more useful, even more useful than a MacBook Air, which with its RAM and HD limits is rather crippled.
It's not thin-ness that matters, but compact size. We live in three dimensions, and Jobs focuses only on how to reduce one of them.
In short, I'm not surprised by these survey results, and I hope that sales for the device will be disappointing and force Apple to rethink its policies. Since Apple is doing well, Jobs goes back to the same evil closed-box policies that got him fired from Apple the first time around.
Only the downfall forced him to open the system up by basing NeXT's OS and lots of tools on open source and open standards. And for a while he was preaching that as a benefit of Mac OS X. Now he closes the doors again, and if the iPad becomes a success, you can bet that the iPads will get bigger, start to have keyboards, and eventually will replace the Mac, just like the Mac replaced the Apple II.
Result: if users don't revolt now, in five or ten years you'll be permanently locked out of your device. The Jailbreaking will only work for a while, and sooner or later the holes will be plugged, and the fun is over.
Think about it, and send relevant feedback to Apple. Maybe it's not too late to make them see the light, although chances are, it's hard to revert greed once it takes hold...
As if Apple would want to change what it has been doing so successfully the past few years. You make it sound like developing a robust, recession-proof methodology is an evil activity akin to committing some heinous crime against humanity.
If I buy an iPad which performs lots of tasks exceedingly well, what do I care how closed the system is? With my Touch, I rather like that I have had access to a ton of software at very low prices.
Frankly the average consumer couldn't care less about jailbreaking and the like. The average consumer wants something that works very well, that is enjoyable to use, etc.
By the way, if the iPad fails, as you clearly hope it will, it may well mean the death of the tablet form factor. Others have tried to bring along this form factor with no success and if Apple can't do it either, it might well be a long time before anyone else even tries.
Somehow, openness seems to be a virtue to some people, like a mantra. It's not. People want to do certain things. If what they buy can do these things, then they're satisfied. If it does it well, they're happy. If it also gives them pleasure when doing it, they're ecstatic.
Most people don't need what we think of as open computing. Most people buy very few programs, and do very little. If this does that for them, it may be all they'll need. It's too small for most people's main computer, but then, the definition of what someone's main computer is, is changing.
Who would have thought, just a few years ago, that so many people would be using a 13" notebook as their only machine? It certainly didn't occur to me.
So if all you do is to browse the web, IM, read and write e-mail, do some shopping, read books and magazines and watch some video and listen to music; then you may not need much more than this. Even if you do your school assignments, you may not need more. We'll have to see about printing, but that may not be a problem. We know it will work with networked printers, or printers with WiFi supposedly.
I have to assume, going by the way Apple advances their products, that more complex functions are not out of the question.
That is all true. Nonetheless, what is also true is the web runs on it and few are in any kind of hurry to change that. You can either have flash or have a lot of things just not load and pray that a miracle happens and everyone magically goes to HTML5 overnight.
Steve Jobs doesn't wait for change to happen on it's own, he initiates change and is typically quite successful at it. There are 75 million iPhone OS devices sold that utilize 50% of the mobile network bandwidth. Apple will sell about 75 million more iPhone OS devices this year (including the iPad). It's quickly reaching the point where web sites needlessly requiring Flash are only hurting themselves. YouTube is already working on a flash free version of their site. Advertisers will have to find some other solution if they want their ads to be seen by these 150 million iPhone OS users.
Specifically, the $10 charge got you iPhone OS 3.0, not just the BT firmware.
Plus, adding 3G to the iPad and not enabling is very much different since the BT module is part of the WiFI module, not extra HW being installed independently but sitting dormant.
This is about the morality and perception from the point of view of an owner. It is not about splitting some nano scale technical hair about which chip held what capability.
I can just see it now, a disgruntled and pissed off Touch owner being told -
'Hey, chill dude. Yes I know the iPhone users get the OS update for free, and you have to pay $10 for it just to be able to use the Bluetooth you already paid for, but it's not like it was on a separate chip man. That makes it OK, don't you see?'
Don't tell me it was all OK because Bluetooth wasn't in the original spec, I am familiar with that argument.
As great as the iPad is as a piece of hardware and software, the fact that it's a closed down, locked down, "hold the user hostage", "treat the user like minor" type of device makes it utterly uninteresting to me and many others I know.
In short, as you put it: we wanted a small mac, even a small Mac with a touch interface, but we got an iPad/iPhone like appliance, that locks us out and tells us what we're allowed to do with it.
I have better ways to waste my hard earned money.
Even though a bit clumsier, for the same money I can make a dual-core, quad-thread NetBook Hackintosh with 640GB disk drive and 8GB RAM. Not as sexy, but a lot more useful, even more useful than a MacBook Air, which with its RAM and HD limits is rather crippled.
It's not thin-ness that matters, but compact size. We live in three dimensions, and Jobs focuses only on how to reduce one of them.
In short, I'm not surprised by these survey results, and I hope that sales for the device will be disappointing and force Apple to rethink its policies. Since Apple is doing well, Jobs goes back to the same evil closed-box policies that got him fired from Apple the first time around.
Only the downfall forced him to open the system up by basing NeXT's OS and lots of tools on open source and open standards. And for a while he was preaching that as a benefit of Mac OS X. Now he closes the doors again, and if the iPad becomes a success, you can bet that the iPads will get bigger, start to have keyboards, and eventually will replace the Mac, just like the Mac replaced the Apple II.
Result: if users don't revolt now, in five or ten years you'll be permanently locked out of your device. The Jailbreaking will only work for a while, and sooner or later the holes will be plugged, and the fun is over.
Think about it, and send relevant feedback to Apple. Maybe it's not too late to make them see the light, although chances are, it's hard to revert greed once it takes hold...
That's a pretty terrible post. You're mixing several issues and pulling some stuff directly out of your rear end, but hidden in there is a good point.
First of all, Steve Jobs wasn't fired from Apple for creating an 'evil closed-box policies' and he certainly isn't going to get fired now after turning Apple around from being virtually bankrupt to one of the most profitable companies in the industry. I know some Apple fans seem to yearn for the days when Apple was 'nice' and run like a Charity, but if you're going to be locked into something, it might as well be something that's going to last.
When you (and Tekstud) say "we wanted a small Mac", who's "we" in this instance. I don't want a small Mac, I have one. Why do I want a Core 2 Duo to makes notes on and read static text? I wanted an eReader that isn't crap and can do a few other things (iWork for one isn't bad, just think you can do observational experiments, make notes, capture data...).
Your exaggerations do you no credit either. You imply a Core i5 (4 threads) netbook with 640GBs HDD and 8GB of RAM for $499... I'd love to see that...
Your final point about this ecosystem eventually replacing the Mac and thus locking everyone either in or out, depending on your point of view, is actually a good point and is almost lost in the other drivel you posted to get to it. It's possible Apple are driving to that point, but there is a significant gulf between OS X and iPhone OS (whatever Apple claims) and we're at least a decade away from that kind of convergence, but it's an interesting thought, nonetheless. One you should have made at the start of your post and then stopped typing...
A 2007 survey by CompeteInc. found that only 15% of respondents indicated that they were 'very likely' or 'extremely likely' to
purchase an iPhone in June, 2007, just prior to its launch date, compared to 26%
in January just after it was announced. In addition, most consumers preferred two separate devices for their phone calls and music needs. Another survey by Harris Interactive found that the largest thing holding consumers back was the $499 pricetag for the iPhone. 40 percent of those interested said they would purchase one after the price came down a bit.
So it looks like the iPad is following a familiar pattern in terms of consumer reaction to impending Apple product releases.
What mobile device are you kids carrying around that plays Flash games?
HP mini 10 with Win 7. All for $249. The point is, this would be an awesome device for my kids but most, if not all the internet games the play are flash. A Little jailbreak here and they can tether off my iPhone while we travel. Works great. No matter what the iPad will not be able too do this for them. If it simply had flash, I could see buying two just for them.
Steve Jobs doesn't wait for change to happen on it's own, he initiates change and is typically quite successful at it. There are 75 million iPhone OS devices sold that utilize 50% of the mobile network bandwidth. Apple will sell about 75 million more iPhone OS devices this year (including the iPad). It's quickly reaching the point where web sites needlessly requiring Flash are only hurting themselves. YouTube is already working on a flash free version of their site. Advertisers will have to find some other solution if they want their ads to be seen by these 150 million iPhone OS users.
Youtube has been Flash free from almost the very beginning of the iPhone's release.
Yea and one needs to evaluate how much data they would be using, i.e, 250mg or unlimited 3G ATT plan plus the 3G is PER unit or iPad. With MifI 2200 currently from Sprint or Verizon, one could justify the WiFi only iPad, purchase a 250mg Verizon MiFi plan (currently 39.95) and have up to 5 devices connect to it wirelessly. You really have to evaluate your personal needs. My health care practice will likely purchase WiFi only iPads because we have wireless internet access within the offices and also my home for that matter. If I want to take my iPad where there is no internet access, I have the MiFi. Just my thoughts.
WOW they charge $40 for 250 MB MiFi data compared to AT&T charging $15 for 250 MB data on the iPad?
iPad 3G is not locked into any contract with AT&T, so you can turn it off if you don't need it and back on when you do, does that match MiFi options?
Did you know MiFi is among the world's easiest network components to be taken over by a hacker?
MiFi out of box security = FAIL
People need to lock those things down immediately or see their identity, their finances, their life stolen by some A HOLE.
HP mini 10 with Win 7. All for $249. The point is, this would be an awesome device for my kids but most, if not all the internet games the play are flash. A Little jailbreak here and they can tether off my iPhone while we travel. Works great. No matter what the iPad will not be able too do this for them. If it simply had flash, I could see buying two just for them.
The reason I bought my netbook was that it was cheaper than loading up on SDHC cards when I was vacationing. In that situation, the iPad simply would be the wrong device.
There is nothing wrong with this. The world would be a scary place if one company completely dominated a given market. Granted, that is essentially what happened with the MP3 market and the iPod but it's hardly Apple's fault that competitors dropped the ball.
Apple isn't trying to cover absolutely every base with the iPad. They are trying to bring to market a product that enough consumers will find worth buying to sell lots of units and make tons of cash. The most important aspect of the marketing of the device will be the user experience. If the first wave of buyers are pleased with the product, it will succeed. As long as Apple is clear about what can be expected from the device and then delivers, they'll be fine. One reason for not having the device run the full Mac OS is that this way, Apple can have more control over what is attempted with it in the wild. The form factor has its limits and Apple wants to manage those limits to avoid customer dissatisfaction. If in the process Apple loses some sales, I would imagine the company would prefer that to having customers whine about how inadequate the iPad is for performing certain functions.
The reason I bought my netbook was that it was cheaper than loading up on SDHC cards when I was vacationing. In that situation, the iPad simply would be the wrong device.
There is nothing wrong with this. The world would be a scary place if one company completely dominated a given market. Granted, that is essentially what happened with the MP3 market and the iPod but it's hardly Apple's fault that competitors dropped the ball.
Apple isn't trying to cover absolutely every base with the iPad. They are trying to bring to market a product that enough consumers will find worth buying to sell lots of units and make tons of cash. The most important aspect of the marketing of the device will be the user experience. If the first wave of buyers are pleased with the product, it will succeed. As long as Apple is clear about what can be expected from the device and then delivers, they'll be fine. One reason for not having the device run the full Mac OS is that this way, Apple can have more control over what is attempted with it in the wild. The form factor has its limits and Apple wants to manage those limits to avoid customer dissatisfaction. If in the process Apple loses some sales, I would imagine the company would prefer that to having customers whine about how inadequate the iPad is for performing certain functions.
In addition, running Mac OS X would require the Atom chip, which simply isn't low enough power for these devices. If you could see the giant battery on my daughter's Toshiba netbook, which is rated for 9 hours, but which actually delivers about 6 on average, people would see why that wasn't done.
In addition, people would try to run programs that require too much from the cpu and GPU, and then they would complain about performance and battery life. Developers writing apps for this will keep within the envelop because they want their programs to look good.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a version of Lightroom from Adobe for this, but not Photoshop.
Eventually, I expect an iMovie, but not a FCS.
Over the next two years or so this will be more capable, have more RAM, and more Flash, and we'll see even more sophisticated apps.
There's also no reason to believe that developers won;t be allowed to access the hardware as can be done with the iPhone/Touch since 3.0. I'm betting we'll see a lot of good stuff.
That's why it would be interesting. I didn't bring it up.
So far, the iPad looks great. The most fascinating new device since the iPhone. It will be popular. You have your prejudices. That's fine. But you're trying real hard to ignore what it can do.
It will not be popular because Tablets have never been very popular. Its not powerful, its not a full functioning computer, its nothing more then a large iPod Touch.
The list of feature that it lacks is larger then the features it has. Like I have said before all the fanboys were talking about how "Slate" computing was going to take over notebooks now the koolaid mix is simply to have something to kill the Kindle. For users that already own a notebook and smartphone this is a nothing product.
Comments
Ouch!
We asked for the world's smallest Mac and instead got the world's largest iPod???
I couldn't have said it more succinctly.
As great as the iPad is as a piece of hardware and software, the fact that it's a closed down, locked down, "hold the user hostage", "treat the user like minor" type of device makes it utterly uninteresting to me and many others I know.
In short, as you put it: we wanted a small mac, even a small Mac with a touch interface, but we got an iPad/iPhone like appliance, that locks us out and tells us what we're allowed to do with it.
I have better ways to waste my hard earned money.
Even though a bit clumsier, for the same money I can make a dual-core, quad-thread NetBook Hackintosh with 640GB disk drive and 8GB RAM. Not as sexy, but a lot more useful, even more useful than a MacBook Air, which with its RAM and HD limits is rather crippled.
It's not thin-ness that matters, but compact size. We live in three dimensions, and Jobs focuses only on how to reduce one of them.
In short, I'm not surprised by these survey results, and I hope that sales for the device will be disappointing and force Apple to rethink its policies. Since Apple is doing well, Jobs goes back to the same evil closed-box policies that got him fired from Apple the first time around.
Only the downfall forced him to open the system up by basing NeXT's OS and lots of tools on open source and open standards. And for a while he was preaching that as a benefit of Mac OS X. Now he closes the doors again, and if the iPad becomes a success, you can bet that the iPads will get bigger, start to have keyboards, and eventually will replace the Mac, just like the Mac replaced the Apple II.
Result: if users don't revolt now, in five or ten years you'll be permanently locked out of your device. The Jailbreaking will only work for a while, and sooner or later the holes will be plugged, and the fun is over.
Think about it, and send relevant feedback to Apple. Maybe it's not too late to make them see the light, although chances are, it's hard to revert greed once it takes hold...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/18880..._is_fuzzy.html
"Your typical netbook" isn't what the OP was comparing with the iPad. He siad that the iPad is better than any netbook on the market. I was wondering why he thinks that.
Regardless, the fact remains that the typical netbook leaves a lot to be desired. It is, typically, not good at anything and attempts to do everything that we have come to expect our computers to do.
The iPad, in contrast, I expect will be more limited in its list of activities that it allows but will do many of those very well indeed. If that list includes on it enough of the items that people in the real world use their netbooks for, only the iPad is better suited to those activities, I think you'll find that the iPad will carve out a very robust niche for itself.
It will not be all things to all people but a very good solution for enough people to be a sales success. For others who want to do something that falls outside of the iPad's range, naturally those folks will gravitate to other products. Nothing wrong with that.
In posts at other sites yesterday I pointed out that their own data also showed that the number of respondents who indicated "Yes I definitely want one" TRIPLED from 3% to 9%.
Mac Daily News took the time to look over the data and posted the article:
"Retrevo survey shows likely iPad buyers tripled after Jobs? unveiling "
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/23957/
I cannot believe that you guys fell into the same trap as almost all the other blogs and repeated the Retrevo garbage with no analysis!! They clearly cherry-picked their data presentation to provide a negative analysis.
In posts at other sites yesterday I pointed out that their own data also showed that the number of respondents who indicated "Yes I definitely want one" TRIPLED from 3% to 9%.
Mac Daily News took the time to look over the data and posted the article:
"Retrevo survey shows likely iPad buyers tripled after Jobs? unveiling "
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/23957/
Yeah, we know that. I just posted another.
I couldn't have said it more succinctly.
As great as the iPad is as a piece of hardware and software, the fact that it's a closed down, locked down, "hold the user hostage", "treat the user like minor" type of device makes it utterly uninteresting to me and many others I know.
In short, as you put it: we wanted a small mac, even a small Mac with a touch interface, but we got an iPad/iPhone like appliance, that locks us out and tells us what we're allowed to do with it.
I have better ways to waste my hard earned money.
Even though a bit clumsier, for the same money I can make a dual-core, quad-thread NetBook Hackintosh with 640GB disk drive and 8GB RAM. Not as sexy, but a lot more useful, even more useful than a MacBook Air, which with its RAM and HD limits is rather crippled.
It's not thin-ness that matters, but compact size. We live in three dimensions, and Jobs focuses only on how to reduce one of them.
In short, I'm not surprised by these survey results, and I hope that sales for the device will be disappointing and force Apple to rethink its policies. Since Apple is doing well, Jobs goes back to the same evil closed-box policies that got him fired from Apple the first time around.
Only the downfall forced him to open the system up by basing NeXT's OS and lots of tools on open source and open standards. And for a while he was preaching that as a benefit of Mac OS X. Now he closes the doors again, and if the iPad becomes a success, you can bet that the iPads will get bigger, start to have keyboards, and eventually will replace the Mac, just like the Mac replaced the Apple II.
Result: if users don't revolt now, in five or ten years you'll be permanently locked out of your device. The Jailbreaking will only work for a while, and sooner or later the holes will be plugged, and the fun is over.
Think about it, and send relevant feedback to Apple. Maybe it's not too late to make them see the light, although chances are, it's hard to revert greed once it takes hold...
As if Apple would want to change what it has been doing so successfully the past few years. You make it sound like developing a robust, recession-proof methodology is an evil activity akin to committing some heinous crime against humanity.
If I buy an iPad which performs lots of tasks exceedingly well, what do I care how closed the system is? With my Touch, I rather like that I have had access to a ton of software at very low prices.
Frankly the average consumer couldn't care less about jailbreaking and the like. The average consumer wants something that works very well, that is enjoyable to use, etc.
By the way, if the iPad fails, as you clearly hope it will, it may well mean the death of the tablet form factor. Others have tried to bring along this form factor with no success and if Apple can't do it either, it might well be a long time before anyone else even tries.
Most people don't need what we think of as open computing. Most people buy very few programs, and do very little. If this does that for them, it may be all they'll need. It's too small for most people's main computer, but then, the definition of what someone's main computer is, is changing.
Who would have thought, just a few years ago, that so many people would be using a 13" notebook as their only machine? It certainly didn't occur to me.
So if all you do is to browse the web, IM, read and write e-mail, do some shopping, read books and magazines and watch some video and listen to music; then you may not need much more than this. Even if you do your school assignments, you may not need more. We'll have to see about printing, but that may not be a problem. We know it will work with networked printers, or printers with WiFi supposedly.
I have to assume, going by the way Apple advances their products, that more complex functions are not out of the question.
Sorry hmurchison is a moderator/admin and you are not allowed to ignore him or her.
What? Why can't I ignore a moderator? And who made him a moderator? I don't need to to read hmurchison's anti Blu-ray propaganda.
That is all true. Nonetheless, what is also true is the web runs on it and few are in any kind of hurry to change that. You can either have flash or have a lot of things just not load and pray that a miracle happens and everyone magically goes to HTML5 overnight.
Steve Jobs doesn't wait for change to happen on it's own, he initiates change and is typically quite successful at it. There are 75 million iPhone OS devices sold that utilize 50% of the mobile network bandwidth. Apple will sell about 75 million more iPhone OS devices this year (including the iPad). It's quickly reaching the point where web sites needlessly requiring Flash are only hurting themselves. YouTube is already working on a flash free version of their site. Advertisers will have to find some other solution if they want their ads to be seen by these 150 million iPhone OS users.
Specifically, the $10 charge got you iPhone OS 3.0, not just the BT firmware.
Plus, adding 3G to the iPad and not enabling is very much different since the BT module is part of the WiFI module, not extra HW being installed independently but sitting dormant.
This is about the morality and perception from the point of view of an owner. It is not about splitting some nano scale technical hair about which chip held what capability.
I can just see it now, a disgruntled and pissed off Touch owner being told -
'Hey, chill dude. Yes I know the iPhone users get the OS update for free, and you have to pay $10 for it just to be able to use the Bluetooth you already paid for, but it's not like it was on a separate chip man. That makes it OK, don't you see?'
Don't tell me it was all OK because Bluetooth wasn't in the original spec, I am familiar with that argument.
I couldn't have said it more succinctly.
As great as the iPad is as a piece of hardware and software, the fact that it's a closed down, locked down, "hold the user hostage", "treat the user like minor" type of device makes it utterly uninteresting to me and many others I know.
In short, as you put it: we wanted a small mac, even a small Mac with a touch interface, but we got an iPad/iPhone like appliance, that locks us out and tells us what we're allowed to do with it.
I have better ways to waste my hard earned money.
Even though a bit clumsier, for the same money I can make a dual-core, quad-thread NetBook Hackintosh with 640GB disk drive and 8GB RAM. Not as sexy, but a lot more useful, even more useful than a MacBook Air, which with its RAM and HD limits is rather crippled.
It's not thin-ness that matters, but compact size. We live in three dimensions, and Jobs focuses only on how to reduce one of them.
In short, I'm not surprised by these survey results, and I hope that sales for the device will be disappointing and force Apple to rethink its policies. Since Apple is doing well, Jobs goes back to the same evil closed-box policies that got him fired from Apple the first time around.
Only the downfall forced him to open the system up by basing NeXT's OS and lots of tools on open source and open standards. And for a while he was preaching that as a benefit of Mac OS X. Now he closes the doors again, and if the iPad becomes a success, you can bet that the iPads will get bigger, start to have keyboards, and eventually will replace the Mac, just like the Mac replaced the Apple II.
Result: if users don't revolt now, in five or ten years you'll be permanently locked out of your device. The Jailbreaking will only work for a while, and sooner or later the holes will be plugged, and the fun is over.
Think about it, and send relevant feedback to Apple. Maybe it's not too late to make them see the light, although chances are, it's hard to revert greed once it takes hold...
That's a pretty terrible post. You're mixing several issues and pulling some stuff directly out of your rear end, but hidden in there is a good point.
First of all, Steve Jobs wasn't fired from Apple for creating an 'evil closed-box policies' and he certainly isn't going to get fired now after turning Apple around from being virtually bankrupt to one of the most profitable companies in the industry. I know some Apple fans seem to yearn for the days when Apple was 'nice' and run like a Charity, but if you're going to be locked into something, it might as well be something that's going to last.
When you (and Tekstud) say "we wanted a small Mac", who's "we" in this instance. I don't want a small Mac, I have one. Why do I want a Core 2 Duo to makes notes on and read static text? I wanted an eReader that isn't crap and can do a few other things (iWork for one isn't bad, just think you can do observational experiments, make notes, capture data...).
Your exaggerations do you no credit either. You imply a Core i5 (4 threads) netbook with 640GBs HDD and 8GB of RAM for $499... I'd love to see that...
Your final point about this ecosystem eventually replacing the Mac and thus locking everyone either in or out, depending on your point of view, is actually a good point and is almost lost in the other drivel you posted to get to it. It's possible Apple are driving to that point, but there is a significant gulf between OS X and iPhone OS (whatever Apple claims) and we're at least a decade away from that kind of convergence, but it's an interesting thought, nonetheless. One you should have made at the start of your post and then stopped typing...
purchase an iPhone in June, 2007, just prior to its launch date, compared to 26%
in January just after it was announced. In addition, most consumers preferred two separate devices for their phone calls and music needs. Another survey by Harris Interactive found that the largest thing holding consumers back was the $499 pricetag for the iPhone. 40 percent of those interested said they would purchase one after the price came down a bit.
So it looks like the iPad is following a familiar pattern in terms of consumer reaction to impending Apple product releases.
What mobile device are you kids carrying around that plays Flash games?
HP mini 10 with Win 7. All for $249. The point is, this would be an awesome device for my kids but most, if not all the internet games the play are flash. A Little jailbreak here and they can tether off my iPhone while we travel. Works great. No matter what the iPad will not be able too do this for them. If it simply had flash, I could see buying two just for them.
Steve Jobs doesn't wait for change to happen on it's own, he initiates change and is typically quite successful at it. There are 75 million iPhone OS devices sold that utilize 50% of the mobile network bandwidth. Apple will sell about 75 million more iPhone OS devices this year (including the iPad). It's quickly reaching the point where web sites needlessly requiring Flash are only hurting themselves. YouTube is already working on a flash free version of their site. Advertisers will have to find some other solution if they want their ads to be seen by these 150 million iPhone OS users.
Youtube has been Flash free from almost the very beginning of the iPhone's release.
Yea and one needs to evaluate how much data they would be using, i.e, 250mg or unlimited 3G ATT plan plus the 3G is PER unit or iPad. With MifI 2200 currently from Sprint or Verizon, one could justify the WiFi only iPad, purchase a 250mg Verizon MiFi plan (currently 39.95) and have up to 5 devices connect to it wirelessly. You really have to evaluate your personal needs. My health care practice will likely purchase WiFi only iPads because we have wireless internet access within the offices and also my home for that matter. If I want to take my iPad where there is no internet access, I have the MiFi. Just my thoughts.
WOW they charge $40 for 250 MB MiFi data compared to AT&T charging $15 for 250 MB data on the iPad?
iPad 3G is not locked into any contract with AT&T, so you can turn it off if you don't need it and back on when you do, does that match MiFi options?
Did you know MiFi is among the world's easiest network components to be taken over by a hacker?
MiFi out of box security = FAIL
People need to lock those things down immediately or see their identity, their finances, their life stolen by some A HOLE.
HP mini 10 with Win 7. All for $249. The point is, this would be an awesome device for my kids but most, if not all the internet games the play are flash. A Little jailbreak here and they can tether off my iPhone while we travel. Works great. No matter what the iPad will not be able too do this for them. If it simply had flash, I could see buying two just for them.
The reason I bought my netbook was that it was cheaper than loading up on SDHC cards when I was vacationing. In that situation, the iPad simply would be the wrong device.
There is nothing wrong with this. The world would be a scary place if one company completely dominated a given market. Granted, that is essentially what happened with the MP3 market and the iPod but it's hardly Apple's fault that competitors dropped the ball.
Apple isn't trying to cover absolutely every base with the iPad. They are trying to bring to market a product that enough consumers will find worth buying to sell lots of units and make tons of cash. The most important aspect of the marketing of the device will be the user experience. If the first wave of buyers are pleased with the product, it will succeed. As long as Apple is clear about what can be expected from the device and then delivers, they'll be fine. One reason for not having the device run the full Mac OS is that this way, Apple can have more control over what is attempted with it in the wild. The form factor has its limits and Apple wants to manage those limits to avoid customer dissatisfaction. If in the process Apple loses some sales, I would imagine the company would prefer that to having customers whine about how inadequate the iPad is for performing certain functions.
WOW they charge $40 for 250 MB MiFi data compared to AT&T charging $15 for 250 MB data on the iPad?
iPad 3G is not locked into any contract with AT&T, so you can turn it off if you don't need it and back on when you do, does that match MiFi options?
Did you know MiFi is among the world's easiest network components to be taken over by a hacker?
MiFi out of box security = FAIL
People need to lock those things down immediately or see their identity, their finances, their life stolen by some A HOLE.
What are you talking about? Are you calling 3G MiFi?
$130 extra for 3G is a rip-off. The chip and antenna probably cost $0.50. Hell, the chip is probably just disabled in the non-3G.
Yeah because the slot for the SIM card is included in the non-3G version. Sorry but your comment fails due to lack of research.
The reason I bought my netbook was that it was cheaper than loading up on SDHC cards when I was vacationing. In that situation, the iPad simply would be the wrong device.
There is nothing wrong with this. The world would be a scary place if one company completely dominated a given market. Granted, that is essentially what happened with the MP3 market and the iPod but it's hardly Apple's fault that competitors dropped the ball.
Apple isn't trying to cover absolutely every base with the iPad. They are trying to bring to market a product that enough consumers will find worth buying to sell lots of units and make tons of cash. The most important aspect of the marketing of the device will be the user experience. If the first wave of buyers are pleased with the product, it will succeed. As long as Apple is clear about what can be expected from the device and then delivers, they'll be fine. One reason for not having the device run the full Mac OS is that this way, Apple can have more control over what is attempted with it in the wild. The form factor has its limits and Apple wants to manage those limits to avoid customer dissatisfaction. If in the process Apple loses some sales, I would imagine the company would prefer that to having customers whine about how inadequate the iPad is for performing certain functions.
In addition, running Mac OS X would require the Atom chip, which simply isn't low enough power for these devices. If you could see the giant battery on my daughter's Toshiba netbook, which is rated for 9 hours, but which actually delivers about 6 on average, people would see why that wasn't done.
In addition, people would try to run programs that require too much from the cpu and GPU, and then they would complain about performance and battery life. Developers writing apps for this will keep within the envelop because they want their programs to look good.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a version of Lightroom from Adobe for this, but not Photoshop.
Eventually, I expect an iMovie, but not a FCS.
Over the next two years or so this will be more capable, have more RAM, and more Flash, and we'll see even more sophisticated apps.
There's also no reason to believe that developers won;t be allowed to access the hardware as can be done with the iPhone/Touch since 3.0. I'm betting we'll see a lot of good stuff.
That's why it would be interesting. I didn't bring it up.
So far, the iPad looks great. The most fascinating new device since the iPhone. It will be popular. You have your prejudices. That's fine. But you're trying real hard to ignore what it can do.
It will not be popular because Tablets have never been very popular. Its not powerful, its not a full functioning computer, its nothing more then a large iPod Touch.
The list of feature that it lacks is larger then the features it has. Like I have said before all the fanboys were talking about how "Slate" computing was going to take over notebooks now the koolaid mix is simply to have something to kill the Kindle. For users that already own a notebook and smartphone this is a nothing product.