You're disputing it, but changing the argument. You CANNOT argue that flash is not currently used on websites. The iPad will not display flash, therefore it is an incomplete experience when viewing the web. You can argue all you want that it's dying tech, but it irrelevant as an argument to my statement.
And Apple didn't develop anything. I swear it took more R&D for them to figure out how to stamp a pretty little apple logo on the chip than anything else...
You are changing your own argument too. You said browsing on the HP Slate will be "indisputably superior", not the most complete. If the iPad is better at browsing the non flash portion of the web (which is most of it), how can the HP Slate be considered "indisputably superior"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gFiz
hmm, that's one theory. The other could be that HP has 4x the computing market share, and those users might be more inclined to stay within their brand security, much the same as Apple user do.
People buy HP because it is cheap, there is very little brand loyalty (or security) there.
There'll be the iPad and 49 fragmented tablets. We'll see how long many of those 49 last, given their individual uptake (and hence scale).
And, if there's touch involved, careful with the IP, HP!
if they all run Flash who cares? all the flash enabled sites i go to look and act the same on my windows 7 and OS X computers. no need for custom written apps either. you just write once to flash and it works on your PC, Mac, tablet, etc
He in lies the problem of Apple showing and telling long before sales started. IMHO Apple should have come out of the box with a ready to sell product. The developers could have been under NDAs or in the dark if Apple really wanted to be secret, the flip from iPhone to iPad development isn't hard and if Apple had all their apps such as iWorks ready plus the 2 x App feature there would have been enough stuff to start with to keep interest until developers got up to speed. Coming out early was a gift for the wannabes and copy cats to confuse the public. Hopefully Apple will be so differentiated by the interface and apps as to make all these worries moot.
I think you over estimate the ease at which competitors can just copy the iPad. What they are doing is bringing out their products as fast as they can in order to cash in on a new wave started by the iPad. The trouble is that everybody will be comparing these new products to the the iPad which will play into the hands of Apple because for the most part they will not measure up. The problem for HP is first and foremost the AppStore. The closed iPhone OS with limited lack of multi tasking, etc, that people criticize will also play into Apple's hands. Personally I love the idea of the HP Slate. It runs a full OS, has access to ALL the web, and I presume the file system - so now all the very boring iPad naysayers across the web finally have a great alternative. It even looks like an iPad! Its not as if competition was not expected, not as if no-one else can make a decent product. I have no problem working on a PC but my preference is Mac. In terms of slates/pads I believe Apple has got it just right and people will flock to it. Personal computing is changing away from the large complex OS experience / large complex software experience to a much more streamlined experience with narrowly focussed dedicated apps.
hmm, that's one theory. The other could be that HP has 4x the computing market share, and those users might be more inclined to stay within their brand security, much the same as Apple user do.
You're not making much sense. They sell more PCs because Apple chooses not to compete in the low end of the market where there are razor thin margins and brand loyalty doesn't exist, just cheapness.
You're also ignoring the fact that Apple is worth nearly twice as much as HP. That means Apple can beat down HP on size alone.
Add to the fact that Apple makes products and offers services that do command brand loyalty and you have HP being nothing but a pawn that requires MS at every turn. Not exactly a great place to be.
No sacrifices? Let?s see how many Flash games are truly playable on that HP device that lacks a mouse. Because games are the long-term reason to demand Flash, not video.
On my laptop / imac my kids play flash games. On their iPods they play iPod games. Flash just isn't an issue.
Apple does not nor does anyone have a patent on any kind of gesture. Apple does not even have a patent on pinch-to-zoom/open/close gesture. They have patents on certain touch screen UI mechanisms and designs.
Thank you. I don't know why more people can't understand this. There are still people actually saying "Dude, there were touch screens around before Apple's iPhone. Blah, blah, blah".
I don't even try to respond to them anymore. Just have to .
I believe the TM2t runs right around 1000.00. Specs on mine are 4GB of memory, 12.1 multi touch HD LED screen, 500GB 7200rpm drive, Wireless N with BT, Intell SU7300 which is 1.3 DUO and I believe its a 6cell battery. I believe it has a 4550 ATI GPU.
So its pretty nice for the Tablets on the market today.
I believe its the Dell Tablet that is 2-3k and honestly I dont see anything special about it to justify that price.
So, to sum up. It's a TM2t is a notebook/convertible. With a Keyboard. Running full Win 7 in 4 gigs of ram. 6 cell battery, weighing in at 4.7 pounds and costing $900-$1000 USD.
This might be a 'competitor' of the White MacBook, but not the iPad. Weight, battery life and cost don't compare.
if they all run Flash who cares? all the flash enabled sites i go to look and act the same on my windows 7 and OS X computers. no need for custom written apps either. you just write once to flash and it works on your PC, Mac, tablet, etc
That isn't true. Flash being operated by a mouse and keyboard can't work the same with finger as input. There are many examples of games and other Flash apps that simply won't work without a rewrite to account for the input variance, something Adobe is still working on now, in March 2010, with Flash 10.1.
For example, even on something as simple as Flash-based video player the controls don't function properly for a touchscreen. You can click the play/pause button just fine, but to move the slider you need to click and hold, which you can't do with a finger-based tablet.
So, to sum up. It's a TM2t is a notebook/convertible. With a Keyboard. Running full Win 7 in 4 gigs of ram. 6 cell battery, weighing in at 4.7 pounds and costing $900-$1000 USD.
This might be a 'competitor' of the White MacBook, but not the iPad. Weight, battery life and cost don't compare.
Yeah, I just went to HP's site and checked that out. That's a laptop, man. Okay, it's got a complicated mechanical hinge (that seems really failure-prone to me, but what do I know) but that is a laptop.
Here's the test: Can you imagine holding it with one hand to read as you sit on a plane or train, like you would book? If the answer is no, then it's not a handheld device.
my iphone 3GS gets about 3 hours of constant surfing. i saw the youtube video and the Slate looks very nice. Neither the iPad or Slate is perfect and the Slate seems to be a bit slower but i'll take the functionality of the slate compared to a crippled giant ipod for the same price.
I need to get my hands on both devices before I call one 'crippled' or 'functional'. I have had VERY bad experiences with Win CE devices in the past, therefore I don't hold out much hope for Win 7 on a 'slate'.
The key words you used are 'same price'. I doubt very much that HP will be able to match the iPad price point successfully. Stripping out the hardware costs of the iPad (at about, what? $265 without 3g estimated) . Microsoft Win 7 adds between $85 and a $100 per unit. It is really tough for HP to compete.
Not a single person outside the GEEKS forums even know what flash is. HP is aiming at the geek community, which must be like 2% of the world population. Apple is aiming at the other 98%... And when these guys buy an iPad, if they can't see a website they will blame the owner of the website, not the iPad. Whenever I can't see a website written for IE, I blame the owner of the website, not the browser I'm using. It works like that for most people.
Flash or not flash.... who on their right mind ponders this things? And HP touting that, it shows that it is ran by geeks, out of touch with the real world.
In the few cases where it's clear a user is actually interacting with the device, responsiveness is super sluggish. I call unrefined and ugly on the UI, even though the vast majority of the interactions look faked.
How does Flash provide access to the whole web, when only 75% of videos use Flash?
No doubt Youtube dominates that 75% and its videos are also available in h.264.
If you think about it, Flash is used pretty much exclusively for four things on the Web today:
1. Video
2. Advertising
3. Casual games
4. As an alternative to HTML and CSS for designing Web pages.
The visitors to this forum who argue against Flash are mostly talking about these categories which can be replaced with markup technologies. However there are some of us who program in Flash for business and scientific applications for which there is currently no substitute to Flash. For example you cannot create a realtime dynamic graph, pie chart, angled line, polygon and many other primitive graphic elements in HTML 5. So we still need Flash. If you want your application to be used on a touch interface don't rely on hover or drag for that device.
Yeah, I just went to HP's site and checked that out. That's a laptop, man. Okay, it's got a complicated mechanical hinge (that seems really failure-prone to me, but what do I know) but that is a laptop.
It seems Apple is not track to rebuild another market from the ground up. All these other tablets have been PCs with a desktop OS and resistive touchscreen, but now it looks like a truly portable device with a mobile OS is the going to be the way to go.
However there are some of us who program in Flash for business and scientific applications for which there is currently no substitute to Flash. For example you cannot create a realtime dynamic graph, pie chart, angled line, polygon and many other primitive graphic elements in HTML 5. So we still need Flash. If you want your application to be used on a touch interface don't rely on hover or drag for that device.
It seems Apple is not track to rebuild another market from the ground up. All these other tablets have been PCs with a desktop OS and resistive touchscreen, but now it looks like a truly portable device with a mobile OS is the going to be the way to go.
Well, that's what Jobs said on the announcement, right? A new category... then came the pundits saying it was not enough.... then came the companies like HP throwing out me too products... then came the pundits saying how these mee too products where way better than the apple ones... then will come the sales and quarterly reports... then the pundits will scratch their heads...
The visitors to this forum who argue against Flash are mostly talking about these categories which can be replaced with markup technologies. However there are some of us who program in Flash for business and scientific applications for which there is currently no substitute to Flash. For example you cannot create a realtime dynamic graph, pie chart, angled line, polygon and many other primitive graphic elements in HTML 5. So we still need Flash. If you want your application to be used on a touch interface don't rely on hover or drag for that device.
I have no idea how viable they are right now, but I've seen plenty of charts examples with HTML5.
More to the point, if it's for a business or scientific application then having it on the World Wide Web likely isn't required so making a bonafide C-based app in iPhone OS or Android would seem to be a better choice.
Comments
You're disputing it, but changing the argument. You CANNOT argue that flash is not currently used on websites. The iPad will not display flash, therefore it is an incomplete experience when viewing the web. You can argue all you want that it's dying tech, but it irrelevant as an argument to my statement.
And Apple didn't develop anything. I swear it took more R&D for them to figure out how to stamp a pretty little apple logo on the chip than anything else...
You are changing your own argument too. You said browsing on the HP Slate will be "indisputably superior", not the most complete. If the iPad is better at browsing the non flash portion of the web (which is most of it), how can the HP Slate be considered "indisputably superior"?
hmm, that's one theory. The other could be that HP has 4x the computing market share, and those users might be more inclined to stay within their brand security, much the same as Apple user do.
People buy HP because it is cheap, there is very little brand loyalty (or security) there.
There'll be the iPad and 49 fragmented tablets. We'll see how long many of those 49 last, given their individual uptake (and hence scale).
And, if there's touch involved, careful with the IP, HP!
if they all run Flash who cares? all the flash enabled sites i go to look and act the same on my windows 7 and OS X computers. no need for custom written apps either. you just write once to flash and it works on your PC, Mac, tablet, etc
He in lies the problem of Apple showing and telling long before sales started. IMHO Apple should have come out of the box with a ready to sell product. The developers could have been under NDAs or in the dark if Apple really wanted to be secret, the flip from iPhone to iPad development isn't hard and if Apple had all their apps such as iWorks ready plus the 2 x App feature there would have been enough stuff to start with to keep interest until developers got up to speed. Coming out early was a gift for the wannabes and copy cats to confuse the public. Hopefully Apple will be so differentiated by the interface and apps as to make all these worries moot.
I think you over estimate the ease at which competitors can just copy the iPad. What they are doing is bringing out their products as fast as they can in order to cash in on a new wave started by the iPad. The trouble is that everybody will be comparing these new products to the the iPad which will play into the hands of Apple because for the most part they will not measure up. The problem for HP is first and foremost the AppStore. The closed iPhone OS with limited lack of multi tasking, etc, that people criticize will also play into Apple's hands. Personally I love the idea of the HP Slate. It runs a full OS, has access to ALL the web, and I presume the file system - so now all the very boring iPad naysayers across the web finally have a great alternative. It even looks like an iPad! Its not as if competition was not expected, not as if no-one else can make a decent product. I have no problem working on a PC but my preference is Mac. In terms of slates/pads I believe Apple has got it just right and people will flock to it. Personal computing is changing away from the large complex OS experience / large complex software experience to a much more streamlined experience with narrowly focussed dedicated apps.
hmm, that's one theory. The other could be that HP has 4x the computing market share, and those users might be more inclined to stay within their brand security, much the same as Apple user do.
You're not making much sense. They sell more PCs because Apple chooses not to compete in the low end of the market where there are razor thin margins and brand loyalty doesn't exist, just cheapness.
You're also ignoring the fact that Apple is worth nearly twice as much as HP. That means Apple can beat down HP on size alone.
Add to the fact that Apple makes products and offers services that do command brand loyalty and you have HP being nothing but a pawn that requires MS at every turn. Not exactly a great place to be.
No sacrifices? Let?s see how many Flash games are truly playable on that HP device that lacks a mouse. Because games are the long-term reason to demand Flash, not video.
On my laptop / imac my kids play flash games. On their iPods they play iPod games. Flash just isn't an issue.
Apple does not nor does anyone have a patent on any kind of gesture. Apple does not even have a patent on pinch-to-zoom/open/close gesture. They have patents on certain touch screen UI mechanisms and designs.
Thank you. I don't know why more people can't understand this. There are still people actually saying "Dude, there were touch screens around before Apple's iPhone. Blah, blah, blah".
I don't even try to respond to them anymore. Just have to
I believe the TM2t runs right around 1000.00. Specs on mine are 4GB of memory, 12.1 multi touch HD LED screen, 500GB 7200rpm drive, Wireless N with BT, Intell SU7300 which is 1.3 DUO and I believe its a 6cell battery. I believe it has a 4550 ATI GPU.
So its pretty nice for the Tablets on the market today.
I believe its the Dell Tablet that is 2-3k and honestly I dont see anything special about it to justify that price.
So, to sum up. It's a TM2t is a notebook/convertible. With a Keyboard. Running full Win 7 in 4 gigs of ram. 6 cell battery, weighing in at 4.7 pounds and costing $900-$1000 USD.
This might be a 'competitor' of the White MacBook, but not the iPad. Weight, battery life and cost don't compare.
if they all run Flash who cares? all the flash enabled sites i go to look and act the same on my windows 7 and OS X computers. no need for custom written apps either. you just write once to flash and it works on your PC, Mac, tablet, etc
That isn't true. Flash being operated by a mouse and keyboard can't work the same with finger as input. There are many examples of games and other Flash apps that simply won't work without a rewrite to account for the input variance, something Adobe is still working on now, in March 2010, with Flash 10.1.
For example, even on something as simple as Flash-based video player the controls don't function properly for a touchscreen. You can click the play/pause button just fine, but to move the slider you need to click and hold, which you can't do with a finger-based tablet.
So, to sum up. It's a TM2t is a notebook/convertible. With a Keyboard. Running full Win 7 in 4 gigs of ram. 6 cell battery, weighing in at 4.7 pounds and costing $900-$1000 USD.
This might be a 'competitor' of the White MacBook, but not the iPad. Weight, battery life and cost don't compare.
Yeah, I just went to HP's site and checked that out. That's a laptop, man. Okay, it's got a complicated mechanical hinge (that seems really failure-prone to me, but what do I know) but that is a laptop.
Here's the test: Can you imagine holding it with one hand to read as you sit on a plane or train, like you would book? If the answer is no, then it's not a handheld device.
my iphone 3GS gets about 3 hours of constant surfing. i saw the youtube video and the Slate looks very nice. Neither the iPad or Slate is perfect and the Slate seems to be a bit slower but i'll take the functionality of the slate compared to a crippled giant ipod for the same price.
I need to get my hands on both devices before I call one 'crippled' or 'functional'. I have had VERY bad experiences with Win CE devices in the past, therefore I don't hold out much hope for Win 7 on a 'slate'.
The key words you used are 'same price'. I doubt very much that HP will be able to match the iPad price point successfully. Stripping out the hardware costs of the iPad (at about, what? $265 without 3g estimated) . Microsoft Win 7 adds between $85 and a $100 per unit. It is really tough for HP to compete.
Nothing is perfect.
Not a single person outside the GEEKS forums even know what flash is. HP is aiming at the geek community, which must be like 2% of the world population. Apple is aiming at the other 98%... And when these guys buy an iPad, if they can't see a website they will blame the owner of the website, not the iPad. Whenever I can't see a website written for IE, I blame the owner of the website, not the browser I'm using. It works like that for most people.
Flash or not flash.... who on their right mind ponders this things? And HP touting that, it shows that it is ran by geeks, out of touch with the real world.
How does Flash provide access to the whole web, when only 75% of videos use Flash?
No doubt Youtube dominates that 75% and its videos are also available in h.264.
i'm convinced that flash is just another animated GIF, alas, more elaborate.
If you think about it, Flash is used pretty much exclusively for four things on the Web today:
1. Video
2. Advertising
3. Casual games
4. As an alternative to HTML and CSS for designing Web pages.
The visitors to this forum who argue against Flash are mostly talking about these categories which can be replaced with markup technologies. However there are some of us who program in Flash for business and scientific applications for which there is currently no substitute to Flash. For example you cannot create a realtime dynamic graph, pie chart, angled line, polygon and many other primitive graphic elements in HTML 5. So we still need Flash. If you want your application to be used on a touch interface don't rely on hover or drag for that device.
Yeah, I just went to HP's site and checked that out. That's a laptop, man. Okay, it's got a complicated mechanical hinge (that seems really failure-prone to me, but what do I know) but that is a laptop.
It seems Apple is not track to rebuild another market from the ground up. All these other tablets have been PCs with a desktop OS and resistive touchscreen, but now it looks like a truly portable device with a mobile OS is the going to be the way to go.
However there are some of us who program in Flash for business and scientific applications for which there is currently no substitute to Flash. For example you cannot create a realtime dynamic graph, pie chart, angled line, polygon and many other primitive graphic elements in HTML 5. So we still need Flash. If you want your application to be used on a touch interface don't rely on hover or drag for that device.
Ever heard of Javascript?
It seems Apple is not track to rebuild another market from the ground up. All these other tablets have been PCs with a desktop OS and resistive touchscreen, but now it looks like a truly portable device with a mobile OS is the going to be the way to go.
Well, that's what Jobs said on the announcement, right? A new category... then came the pundits saying it was not enough.... then came the companies like HP throwing out me too products... then came the pundits saying how these mee too products where way better than the apple ones... then will come the sales and quarterly reports... then the pundits will scratch their heads...
The visitors to this forum who argue against Flash are mostly talking about these categories which can be replaced with markup technologies. However there are some of us who program in Flash for business and scientific applications for which there is currently no substitute to Flash. For example you cannot create a realtime dynamic graph, pie chart, angled line, polygon and many other primitive graphic elements in HTML 5. So we still need Flash. If you want your application to be used on a touch interface don't rely on hover or drag for that device.
I have no idea how viable they are right now, but I've seen plenty of charts examples with HTML5.More to the point, if it's for a business or scientific application then having it on the World Wide Web likely isn't required so making a bonafide C-based app in iPhone OS or Android would seem to be a better choice.
Ever heard of Java?
What flavor do you recommend?