So I hit the local Apple Store Genius Bar where I saw those rubber bumpers on their laptops. I asked the resident Genius who said they were used to make sure that the machines were running for updates overnight - something about their POS system that didn't support the "wake on LAN" function. I also grabbed one of the Snow Leopard Macs on display and went into preferences and sure enough there were settings for both battery behaviors and AC powered behaviors, imagine that.
Of course maybe some Macs don't have that functionality...
Wait. If the Macbook can be set to stay on even with the lid closed, then what is the need for the rubber bumpers? Why not just set the OS to ignore the lid?
Why is Apple's poor POS software the cause of the tacky rubber bumpers? Even if Apple's POS software is deficient, and is unable to wake on LAN, why not just set the laptops to stay awake?
The only answer I can think of is the MacBook CANNOT be configured properly. Someone here must know.
Wait. If the Macbook can be set to stay on even with the lid closed, then what is the need for the rubber bumpers? Why not just set the OS to ignore the lid?
Why is Apple's poor POS software the cause of the tacky rubber bumpers? Even if Apple's POS software is deficient, and is unable to wake on LAN, why not just set the laptops to stay awake?
The only answer I can think of is the MacBook CANNOT be configured properly. Someone here must know.
Hey Extremehater, you really think these are the exact same OSes like shoehorned Windows is on tablet? Care to explain how the iPhone's OS magically jumped from being idealized for a 3.5" display to a 10" display?
So many images to compare. What's funny is that one day you're going to buy an iPad and you'll have Teckstudian excuse as to how Apple listened to you. "They finally made it faster which I was asking for since day one. You're welcome."
WOW they changed the way the calendar looks. That is so innovative. Its still the iPhone OS. By the way can you multitask.......LOL....loser
WOW they changed the way the calendar looks. That is so innovative. Its still the iPhone OS. By the way can you multitask.......LOL....loser
One comparison out of everything. Your claim was that they made no changes, that it was merely slapped into the iPad form factor the same way Win7 gets put into desktops notebooks and tablets.
Not only have you failed again in spreading your FUD you've resorted to calling people "losers" who give you virtual mental beat downs. I'd say you're coming awfully close to getting yourself banned.
Haha, I agree. There is not even an iota of doubt about the fact that "Ipads" are going to be the "next best thing since sliced bread", lol.
It was obvious from the get-go. If you're really in touch with the pulse of the industry and where it's headed, it didn't have to take any time to sink in.
One comparison out of everything. Your claim was that they made no changes, that it was merely slapped into the iPad form factor the same way Win7 gets put into desktops notebooks and tablets.
Not only have you failed again in spreading your FUD you've resorted to calling people "losers" who give you virtual mental beat downs. I'd say you're coming awfully close to getting yourself banned.
You couldn't give me a beat down if I gave you a baseball bat. The problem is you are the one that is clueless and if I went back and posted half the crap you speculate it would only further prove my point.
The fact is the iPad runs the iPhone OS the only difference is SDK 3.2 which doesn't exactly qualify as an innovative OS or UI. Which by the way SDK 3.2 beta can not be used on either the iPhone or iPod Touch.
While SDK 3.2 provides a new UI its still running the same old iPhone OS that is a very weak OS for an multi function Tablet.
All this is doing is optimizing iPhone applications to run on the iPad correctly with a different look.
If you can't deal with me then put me on ignore the problem is you are too OCD to do so.
One comparison out of everything. Your claim was that they made no changes, that it was merely slapped into the iPad form factor the same way Win7 gets put into desktops notebooks and tablets.
Not only have you failed again in spreading your FUD you've resorted to calling people "losers" who give you virtual mental beat downs. I'd say you're coming awfully close to getting yourself banned.
Here you go shareholder. You have a Slate that actually has a full OS in fact the best on on the market today, and what do you know multitasking, USB ports a webcam and 400k ebooks available.
Isn't that odd a Tablet that can actually perform close to a notebook. I believe thats what you expected from the iPad. Your buddy Quadra sure did. In fact didnt he say Slate computing was going to take over notebooks. Well me might be right on that, the only problem it won't be the iPad, like he expected. However wow it might be a Kindle killer isn't that massive innovation.
An iPhone OS with a Beta SDK over it and you want to call that innovative.
This is great! You start a paragraph off stating how the only different is the software development kit, while ignoring the UI, apps all the way down to the frameworks and APIs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
The fact is the iPad runs the iPhone OS the only difference is SDK 3.2 which doesn't exactly qualify as an innovative OS or UI.
Then you finish that VERY SAME PARAGRAPH by stating how iPhone OS SDK 3.2 cannot be used for iPhone and iPod Touch apps. Do you really not see your disconnect?
Quote:
Which by the way SDK 3.2 beta can not be used on either the iPhone or iPod Touch.
Let's review this again. Your earlier post tried to say that iPhone OS in the iPad is the exact same OS as in the iPhone in the same way that Windows 7 is the exact same OS in a PC as it is in a tablet. Then you admit that it's different, in just the UI despite the obvious hard work to idealize it for a 10" touch display and the clear documentation that 3.2 is very specific to the iPad do to very radical changes in the foundation specific for the iPad. But here is the best part: You then conclude in that paragraph exactly what I've been saying about the iPad's OS being designed for the iPad, and not for the iPhone or Touch. Fraking brilliant!
PS: I've decided that putting you trolls on ignore just gives you a free pass to harass other posters. That isn't going to fly anymore, I'd much rather put you in your place as I do with every... single... post... I make.
This is great! You start a paragraph off stating how the only different is the software development kit, while ignoring the UI, apps all the way down to the frameworks and APIs.
Then you finish that VERY SAME PARAGRAPH by stating how iPhone OS SDK 3.2 cannot be used for iPhone and iPod Touch apps. Do you really not see your disconnect?
Let's review this again. Your earlier post tried to say that iPhone OS in the iPad is the exact same OS as in the iPhone in the same way that Windows 7 is the exact same OS in a PC as it is in a tablet. Then you admit that it's different, in just the UI despite the obvious hard work to idealize it for a 10" touch display and the clear documentation that 3.2 is very specific to the iPad do to very radical changes in the foundation specific for the iPad. But here is the best part: You then conclude in that paragraph exactly what I've been saying about the iPad's OS being designed for the iPad, and not for the iPhone or Touch. Fraking brilliant!
PS: I've decided that putting you trolls on ignore just gives you a free pass to harass other posters. That isn't going to fly anymore, I'd much rather put you in your place as I do with every... single... post... I make.
Yes lets review. SDK 3.2 does not support the iPhone or iPod Touch. What it does is optimize the apps so they can run correctly on the iPad. SDK also DOES NOT support multi-tasking.
At some point 'god knows when" the hope is it will support universal apps that can run on all three devices.
Clearly I have zero disconnect.
"You start a paragraph off stating how the only different is the software development kit, while ignoring the UI, apps all the way down to the frameworks and APIs."
SDK 3.2 is nothing more then a beta development kit. Your a bit too excited about it.
Maybe what would have been nice is a Tablet with a real OS, an truly innovative UI, a device that has something innovative like a webcam, USB 3.0 , flash support, multitasking.
You know this is 2010. Yet you are happy to have a fancy calendar. Which is fairly typical for a diehard fanboy.
Maybe what would have been nice is a Tablet with a real OS, an truly innovative UI, a device that has something innovative like a webcam, USB 3.0 , flash support, multitasking.
it's really terrible. Why would you dock it during watching video? and if it's for charging the battery, why couldn't you simply connect it with a cable? I don't charge my iPod nano with dock either.
I would dock it so that I don't have to hold it 2 hours for watching a movie. And charging the battery at the same time would be standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
If you want to exchange files with a computer, you will need a computer. What a revelation.
No. I would like to exchange files with an USB drive, a camera, iPod and so on without the need of a computer. That is what netbooks can do. And I see that the iPad tries to compete with netbooks.
and why do you need the overhead of 720p resolution on anything under 12-14"? Actually I think anything under 20" is just simple posturing, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt...
As I said you can carry 720p content around and watch it on your friends HD tv. For example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
No you don't. Dropbox? Mobile.me? That thing called the cloud?
And how do I get the files from an USB drive into the cloud? Without a computer, just an iPad?
And how do I get the files from an USB drive into the cloud? Without a computer, just an iPad?
You want the iPad to do things it is not intended for.
Would you use a piece of fine crystal to hammer in a nail?
The iPad is not designed to access web video. The iPad is not designed to dock on a bedside tray table and play a movie in landscape mode. The iPad is not designed to optimally display 16:9 content, or any content in HD. The iPad is not designed to play most common audio and video formats and codecs. The iPad is not designed to access external hard drives. The iPad is not designed to work as a common portable external hard drive. The iPad is not designed to output via HDMI to TV sets.
Why oh why are Apple products judged by what they CANNOT do? A crystal vase cannot hammer in a nail, but it sure does look pretty!
No. I would like to exchange files with an USB drive, a camera, iPod and so on without the need of a computer. That is what netbooks can do. And I see that the iPad tries to compete with netbooks.
No, they aren't trying to "compete" with Netbooks. If you think that's what Apple is going after with the iPad, you are mistaken. A lot of people are.
As for what kind of I/O the iPad will support, we really just don't know yet.
No. I would like to exchange files with an USB drive, a camera, iPod and so on without the need of a computer. That is what netbooks can do. And I see that the iPad tries to compete with netbooks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
No, they aren't trying to "compete" with Netbooks. If you think that's what Apple is going after with the iPad, you are mistaken. A lot of people are.
Exactly. The iPad will not do half the things that a netbook will do, so it is no competition for a netbook. If you want to do the things that a netbook does, get a netbook. Don't get an iPad.
Why oh why do people judge Apple on what its products CANNOT do? That doesn't make any sense.
Why oh why do people judge Apple on what its products CANNOT do? That doesn't make any sense.
That is exactly what you are doing. You are on here everyday saying how much all products suck because they can't do this or that without any regard for the feasibility or usefulness of the function you are touting.
I don't think I've read one post from you stating what Apple's products excel at. These are the things the objective, non-trollish posters look for in a product. Does it do what I need it to do and do it better than the competition.
Why not? Is OSX not capable of doing a good job outputting through HDMI? Or is it some sort of a hardware problem?
I had no idea that Macs couldn't output through HDMI.
Will they output 1080p at all? Is there any way to avoid separate audio and video cables? Do you need to buy an Apple TV in order to watch HD content stored on a Mac's hard drive?
Or what? I had no idea. I've used the HDMI output several times since I got my new Dell. Its great how easy it is - plug it in and it just works.
Comments
Interesting that someone so obviously without any Mac knowledge poses as an expert in all things Apple.
Yeah - I too am surprised that the iSore's "Genius" didn't know the real reason why the MacBooks malfunctioned when the lids got closed.
So I hit the local Apple Store Genius Bar where I saw those rubber bumpers on their laptops. I asked the resident Genius who said they were used to make sure that the machines were running for updates overnight - something about their POS system that didn't support the "wake on LAN" function. I also grabbed one of the Snow Leopard Macs on display and went into preferences and sure enough there were settings for both battery behaviors and AC powered behaviors, imagine that.
Of course maybe some Macs don't have that functionality...
Wait. If the Macbook can be set to stay on even with the lid closed, then what is the need for the rubber bumpers? Why not just set the OS to ignore the lid?
Why is Apple's poor POS software the cause of the tacky rubber bumpers? Even if Apple's POS software is deficient, and is unable to wake on LAN, why not just set the laptops to stay awake?
The only answer I can think of is the MacBook CANNOT be configured properly. Someone here must know.
Wait. If the Macbook can be set to stay on even with the lid closed, then what is the need for the rubber bumpers? Why not just set the OS to ignore the lid?
Why is Apple's poor POS software the cause of the tacky rubber bumpers? Even if Apple's POS software is deficient, and is unable to wake on LAN, why not just set the laptops to stay awake?
The only answer I can think of is the MacBook CANNOT be configured properly. Someone here must know.
Dear god. You're an utter dick, aren't you?
Hey Extremehater, you really think these are the exact same OSes like shoehorned Windows is on tablet? Care to explain how the iPhone's OS magically jumped from being idealized for a 3.5" display to a 10" display?So many images to compare. What's funny is that one day you're going to buy an iPad and you'll have Teckstudian excuse as to how Apple listened to you. "They finally made it faster which I was asking for since day one. You're welcome."
WOW they changed the way the calendar looks. That is so innovative. Its still the iPhone OS. By the way can you multitask.......LOL....loser
kindles being given away for free and now this?
Haha, I agree. There is not even an iota of doubt about the fact that "Ipads" are going to be the "next best thing since sliced bread", lol.
WOW they changed the way the calendar looks. That is so innovative. Its still the iPhone OS. By the way can you multitask.......LOL....loser
One comparison out of everything. Your claim was that they made no changes, that it was merely slapped into the iPad form factor the same way Win7 gets put into desktops notebooks and tablets.
Not only have you failed again in spreading your FUD you've resorted to calling people "losers" who give you virtual mental beat downs. I'd say you're coming awfully close to getting yourself banned.
Haha, I agree. There is not even an iota of doubt about the fact that "Ipads" are going to be the "next best thing since sliced bread", lol.
It was obvious from the get-go. If you're really in touch with the pulse of the industry and where it's headed, it didn't have to take any time to sink in.
One comparison out of everything. Your claim was that they made no changes, that it was merely slapped into the iPad form factor the same way Win7 gets put into desktops notebooks and tablets.
Not only have you failed again in spreading your FUD you've resorted to calling people "losers" who give you virtual mental beat downs. I'd say you're coming awfully close to getting yourself banned.
You couldn't give me a beat down if I gave you a baseball bat. The problem is you are the one that is clueless and if I went back and posted half the crap you speculate it would only further prove my point.
The fact is the iPad runs the iPhone OS the only difference is SDK 3.2 which doesn't exactly qualify as an innovative OS or UI. Which by the way SDK 3.2 beta can not be used on either the iPhone or iPod Touch.
While SDK 3.2 provides a new UI its still running the same old iPhone OS that is a very weak OS for an multi function Tablet.
All this is doing is optimizing iPhone applications to run on the iPad correctly with a different look.
If you can't deal with me then put me on ignore the problem is you are too OCD to do so.
One comparison out of everything. Your claim was that they made no changes, that it was merely slapped into the iPad form factor the same way Win7 gets put into desktops notebooks and tablets.
Not only have you failed again in spreading your FUD you've resorted to calling people "losers" who give you virtual mental beat downs. I'd say you're coming awfully close to getting yourself banned.
Here you go shareholder. You have a Slate that actually has a full OS in fact the best on on the market today, and what do you know multitasking, USB ports a webcam and 400k ebooks available.
http://www.redmondpie.com/apple-ipad...c-war-9140405/
Isn't that odd a Tablet that can actually perform close to a notebook. I believe thats what you expected from the iPad. Your buddy Quadra sure did. In fact didnt he say Slate computing was going to take over notebooks. Well me might be right on that, the only problem it won't be the iPad, like he expected. However wow it might be a Kindle killer isn't that massive innovation.
An iPhone OS with a Beta SDK over it and you want to call that innovative.
The fact is the iPad runs the iPhone OS the only difference is SDK 3.2 which doesn't exactly qualify as an innovative OS or UI.
Then you finish that VERY SAME PARAGRAPH by stating how iPhone OS SDK 3.2 cannot be used for iPhone and iPod Touch apps. Do you really not see your disconnect?
Which by the way SDK 3.2 beta can not be used on either the iPhone or iPod Touch.
Let's review this again. Your earlier post tried to say that iPhone OS in the iPad is the exact same OS as in the iPhone in the same way that Windows 7 is the exact same OS in a PC as it is in a tablet. Then you admit that it's different, in just the UI despite the obvious hard work to idealize it for a 10" touch display and the clear documentation that 3.2 is very specific to the iPad do to very radical changes in the foundation specific for the iPad. But here is the best part: You then conclude in that paragraph exactly what I've been saying about the iPad's OS being designed for the iPad, and not for the iPhone or Touch. Fraking brilliant!
PS: I've decided that putting you trolls on ignore just gives you a free pass to harass other posters. That isn't going to fly anymore, I'd much rather put you in your place as I do with every... single... post... I make.
This is great! You start a paragraph off stating how the only different is the software development kit, while ignoring the UI, apps all the way down to the frameworks and APIs.
Then you finish that VERY SAME PARAGRAPH by stating how iPhone OS SDK 3.2 cannot be used for iPhone and iPod Touch apps. Do you really not see your disconnect?
Let's review this again. Your earlier post tried to say that iPhone OS in the iPad is the exact same OS as in the iPhone in the same way that Windows 7 is the exact same OS in a PC as it is in a tablet. Then you admit that it's different, in just the UI despite the obvious hard work to idealize it for a 10" touch display and the clear documentation that 3.2 is very specific to the iPad do to very radical changes in the foundation specific for the iPad. But here is the best part: You then conclude in that paragraph exactly what I've been saying about the iPad's OS being designed for the iPad, and not for the iPhone or Touch. Fraking brilliant!
PS: I've decided that putting you trolls on ignore just gives you a free pass to harass other posters. That isn't going to fly anymore, I'd much rather put you in your place as I do with every... single... post... I make.
Yes lets review. SDK 3.2 does not support the iPhone or iPod Touch. What it does is optimize the apps so they can run correctly on the iPad. SDK also DOES NOT support multi-tasking.
At some point 'god knows when" the hope is it will support universal apps that can run on all three devices.
Clearly I have zero disconnect.
"You start a paragraph off stating how the only different is the software development kit, while ignoring the UI, apps all the way down to the frameworks and APIs."
SDK 3.2 is nothing more then a beta development kit. Your a bit too excited about it.
Maybe what would have been nice is a Tablet with a real OS, an truly innovative UI, a device that has something innovative like a webcam, USB 3.0 , flash support, multitasking.
You know this is 2010. Yet you are happy to have a fancy calendar. Which is fairly typical for a diehard fanboy.
Maybe what would have been nice is a Tablet with a real OS, an truly innovative UI, a device that has something innovative like a webcam, USB 3.0 , flash support, multitasking.
This one looks interesting:
http://www.slashgear.com/notion-ink-...ds-on-0969281/
Others too:
http://mashable.com/2010/01/27/9-upc...he-apple-ipad/
it's really terrible. Why would you dock it during watching video? and if it's for charging the battery, why couldn't you simply connect it with a cable? I don't charge my iPod nano with dock either.
I would dock it so that I don't have to hold it 2 hours for watching a movie. And charging the battery at the same time would be standard.
If you want to exchange files with a computer, you will need a computer. What a revelation.
No. I would like to exchange files with an USB drive, a camera, iPod and so on without the need of a computer. That is what netbooks can do. And I see that the iPad tries to compete with netbooks.
and why do you need the overhead of 720p resolution on anything under 12-14"? Actually I think anything under 20" is just simple posturing, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt...
As I said you can carry 720p content around and watch it on your friends HD tv. For example.
No you don't. Dropbox? Mobile.me? That thing called the cloud?
And how do I get the files from an USB drive into the cloud? Without a computer, just an iPad?
And how do I get the files from an USB drive into the cloud? Without a computer, just an iPad?
You want the iPad to do things it is not intended for.
Would you use a piece of fine crystal to hammer in a nail?
The iPad is not designed to access web video. The iPad is not designed to dock on a bedside tray table and play a movie in landscape mode. The iPad is not designed to optimally display 16:9 content, or any content in HD. The iPad is not designed to play most common audio and video formats and codecs. The iPad is not designed to access external hard drives. The iPad is not designed to work as a common portable external hard drive. The iPad is not designed to output via HDMI to TV sets.
Why oh why are Apple products judged by what they CANNOT do? A crystal vase cannot hammer in a nail, but it sure does look pretty!
No. I would like to exchange files with an USB drive, a camera, iPod and so on without the need of a computer. That is what netbooks can do. And I see that the iPad tries to compete with netbooks.
No, they aren't trying to "compete" with Netbooks. If you think that's what Apple is going after with the iPad, you are mistaken. A lot of people are.
As for what kind of I/O the iPad will support, we really just don't know yet.
No. I would like to exchange files with an USB drive, a camera, iPod and so on without the need of a computer. That is what netbooks can do. And I see that the iPad tries to compete with netbooks.
No, they aren't trying to "compete" with Netbooks. If you think that's what Apple is going after with the iPad, you are mistaken. A lot of people are.
Exactly. The iPad will not do half the things that a netbook will do, so it is no competition for a netbook. If you want to do the things that a netbook does, get a netbook. Don't get an iPad.
Why oh why do people judge Apple on what its products CANNOT do? That doesn't make any sense.
Why oh why do people judge Apple on what its products CANNOT do? That doesn't make any sense.
That is exactly what you are doing. You are on here everyday saying how much all products suck because they can't do this or that without any regard for the feasibility or usefulness of the function you are touting.
I don't think I've read one post from you stating what Apple's products excel at. These are the things the objective, non-trollish posters look for in a product. Does it do what I need it to do and do it better than the competition.
"The iPhone doesn't have an animated wallpaper"
"Macs doesn't have HDMI ports"
"The iPad doesn't have Flash"
...and on and on and on and...
"Macs doesn't have HDMI ports"
They don't? I had no idea.
Why not? Is OSX not capable of doing a good job outputting through HDMI? Or is it some sort of a hardware problem?
I had no idea that Macs couldn't output through HDMI.
Will they output 1080p at all? Is there any way to avoid separate audio and video cables? Do you need to buy an Apple TV in order to watch HD content stored on a Mac's hard drive?
Or what? I had no idea. I've used the HDMI output several times since I got my new Dell. Its great how easy it is - plug it in and it just works.