Fair enough. I was just pointing out that netbooks have their uses, and just because his Steveness badmouths them and some people fallaciously consider them a desktop replacement doesn't mean they're pointless devices. The iPad will no doubt be a big success (if it isn't already), but netbooks will stick around and get better and that's great. I could even imagine getting an iPad AND a decent netbook - to me, they're simply different devices that could complement each other very well.
Last year I bought a netbook because I was going on vacation and needed a cheap way of storing a lot of video data. It was cheaper to buy the netbook than more SDHC cards. I have a hybrid camera that uses a format that takes up more memory than your typical flash camcorder.
An iPad would not get it done for the specific task I had in mind and I would buy the netbook again without hesitation. But now that I am using the netbook to surf the net, etc. I do believe that an iPad makes a lot more sense.
In other words, in the next while, I will have an iPad AND a netbook (well OK, not a decent one) and for the reason that you point out. To me, the best decision that Apple made is to keep the entry-point price of the iPad very reasonable. At $500 (probably $539 here in Canada) the base iPad is a very affordable device that makes sense as a compliment to other computing devices and mobile products. For a tech lover not too hard up for cash, it's too appealing a toy to pass up. If the iPad had gone a lot higher in price, it would have been difficult to justify buying it just for the novelty alone. It would have failed just as all the other tablets had.
Thanks but why would that be better than a MacBook 13" that runs flawlessly, no need for Kaspersky et al and all the associated problems? Is it simply price? Two inches hardly matters (no jokes please). If it is price you can get great MacBooks second hand that still run Leopard and some Snow Leopard. Heck I still have a base model iBook G4 12" that runs Leopard fine.
I have to say this was the case back in October. I needed something to take notes with while doing a psych internship. If price truly were an issue for me, I might have gone with a netbook, as a colleague did. But when comparing apples to netbooks, there was no comparison. The 13" MBP won out. No regrets or remorse. In fact, I'll be upgrading the HD and Boot Camping to Window as it has become a work machine also.
Seriously, You said something like "NetBooks with keyboards 93% normal size and even bigger", And my reply is "What is the point of a NetBook if it's not that smaller? What makes it so different from a Laptop?"
The answer is, IMHO, is that a keyboard too big is not portable and a keyboard too small is no good to use.
Many 10 inch netbooks come with perfectly good keyboards. The Dell Mini 10 has a keyboard 93% the size of a regular keyboard. The keyboard does NOT make it "not portable".
To paraphrase you, "What makes you so different from a Troll"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranReloaded
In any case I think you overreacted to a simple joke. Go get your netBook and be happy.
If it was a joke, I apologize.
And so far, so good. My kid's netbook does everything he wants it to do. Generally, he uses video chat while surfing the net while downloading content while fielding IMs. According to him, it is better performing than the old HP Pentium 4 that he used to use.
All at half the price of the entry level iPad, which is a MUCH less capable device (I got an incredible deal on it - a Dell Mini 10 with an Atom N450 chip, a six cell battery and Win7 (with access to so much software that the App Store looks sick) for $250). Had I opted to pay the price of the entry-level iPad, it could have been equipped with GPS, an HD screen, a huge hard drive, and a built-in TV tuner. Had I opted to spend as much as a high-end iPad, I have no idea of what else might have been available.
Soli the Troll keeps claiming that the iPad is faster than any netbook, but he has yet to back up his claims. I am sincerely interested in whether what he says has any basis in fact, given that the Dell was such an incredibly good deal.
Maybe the iPad is faster, but I sincerely doubt it. Even if it is faster, it is very limited in what it can do compared to a cheaper, high quality modern netbook.
It would be very interesting to see tests of $830 netbooks compared to the iPad, given that a $250 netbook is a more capable device.
Seriously, You said something like "NetBooks with keyboards 93% normal size and even bigger", And my reply is "What is the point of a NetBook if it's not that smaller? What makes it so different from a Laptop?"
The answer is, IMHO, is that a keyboard too big is not portable and a keyboard too small is no good to use.
The thing I see with netbooks and their "93%"-sized keyboards is that they have maximized the use of width of the body. The Dell Mini 10's keyboard literally runs from side to side. This is why they can be portable, and still have keyboards that are wide enough to be useful.
It would be like the current iPad reducing the thickness of the bezel to make it more compact, while retaining the same amount of useful screen space.
EDIT: Apple probably already have plans to do this and I'm expecting a C&D letter/e-mail any minute now...
Twitter users reacting to Apple's iPad after it launched on Saturday were overwhelmingly happy with the new device, with the biggest complaint being that the device can't replace their iPhone
my biggest complaint? that "this iPad is not a donut."
The fact that you have to use a (full) computer at times, it is not a stand-alone.
Why?
I could picture getting an iPad for my mother. She would use it to browse the web, watch my daughter's YouTube videos, receive email, and look at pictures. Why would she ever need to sync it to a computer?
Granted, she would not be able to upgrade the firmware, but lots of people never bother to do that.
The fact that you have to use a (full) computer at times, it is not a stand-alone.
For all intents and purposes and for the design Apple has set up it's clearly meant to be an accessory computing device. But that isn't what anonymouse was referring to.
It's also being obscured that while netbooks can be a primary computing device they are typically accessory computing devices and their poor attempt at trying to do everything their larger can do makes them as useful as a using a Swiss Army Knife to cut down a tree when a you have a single-funciton saw handy. Sure, it can do the job, but it's far from an ideal, or even a decent tool for the job.
I'd say Apple has clearly seen how people use netbooks and has removed all the other crap to make them great at doing those tasks. That is what the iPad tried to do, and succeeds and what other netbooks and tablets will copy.
PS: Another example of a stand alone computing device is the Archos 5. Because it runs Win7 is can technically be used as a primary computing device. Not sure who would want to.
was it ever marketed to be a replacement for the iPhone???
that is a really a dumb complaint.
Assume you really like the iPad.
Assume you take it always with you whenever you wear a jacket with a pocket large enough for it or have a small shoulder back with you.
Assume that when you have it with you, you use it for almost all the tasks you currently use the iPhone for.
Doesn't it then feel a little bid odd to also carry your iPhone with you, so to just use it to make calls with it?
I agree that taking a phone call while the iPad sits in a shoulder back doesn't quite work too well [EDIT: if you do not have a headset in your ears already]. Dialing neither. But maybe we just need an 'iPhone remote' for the iPad. Or an iPhone mini.
I agree that taking a phone call while the iPad sits in a shoulder back doesn't quite work too well. Dialing neither. But maybe we just need an 'iPhone remote' for the iPad. Or an iPhone mini.
Not as bad as you might think. You can use a remote headset to answer an iPhone call without taking the phone out of your pocket. You can also use voice dialing to make a call without taking the phone out of your pocket.
I don't know if those solutions would work with Skype on an iPad, though.
Not as bad as you might think. You can use a remote headset to answer an iPhone call without taking the phone out of your pocket. You can also use voice dialing to make a call without taking the phone out of your pocket.
You need two things, a remote (and the current headset with the remote + voice dialling goes some way to cover this) and you need to have a headset plugged into your ears (or at least dangling in front of you so you can put it into your ears reasonably fast).
If a remote existed that would double as a hand-holdable headset, this would solve both points.
Assume you take it always with you whenever you have wear a jacket with a pocket large enough for it or have a small shoulder back with you.
Assume that when you have it with you, you use it for almost all the tasks you currently use the iPhone for.
Doesn't it then feel a little bid odd to also carry your iPhone with you, so to just make calls with it?
I agree that taking a phone call while the iPad sits in a shoulder back doesn't quite work too well. Dialing neither. But maybe we just need an 'iPhone remote' for the iPad. Or an iPhone mini.
Why don't my car keys work as a phone?! So just because we carry something with us most places means it should replace our phone? Hey, if you want to use an iPad as a phone just use google voice or Skype.
You know you could get rid of your iPhone & get some incredibly small phone that does nothing but phone calls. If you had the iPad with 3G that wouldn't be a bad deal...hmmmm.
I swear these arguments get worse the more people try to defend the idea of an iPad as a phone.
You need two things, a remote (and the current headset with the remote + voice dialling goes some way to cover this) and you need to have a headset plugged into your ears (or at least dangling in front of you so you can put it into your ears reasonably fast).
If a remote existed that would double as a hand-holdable headset, this would solve both points.
Let's see - a hand-held remote with earpiece and microphone and keypad for dialing. Why not just carry a dumbphone?
Admittedly, if you went that route, you'd only have the iPad's $30 per month data service (or no charge at all if you use wifi all the time) instead of a monthly phone bill PLUS the iPad's charge, so there would be some savings, but I'd be surprised if very many people would do it.
Why don't my car keys work as a phone?! So just because we carry something with us most places means it should replace our phone?
97% of the time I use my iPhone, I am not using the phone functionality. An iPad can replace these 97% of usage (assuming one has the iPad with oneself). My car key is used 99% of the time as a car key. My iPhone is not. My point is that the iPad makes a lot of the functionality of the iPhone redundant.
Quote:
You know you could get rid of your iPhone & get some incredibly small phone that does nothing but phone calls. If you had the iPad with 3G that wouldn't be a bad deal...hmmmm.
Exactly my point, that is where a 'phone remote' for the iPad or an iPhone mini would fit in.
Why do you, "have to use a (full) computer at times"?
Updating OS
Backing up data
Printing
Saving files externally
Sure, there are some people that don't or won't, and one could get away with never ever connecting to a full computer, but the first thing that comes to mind, how do you start is out of the box without doing so.
Then what do you do when your iPad gets full books, music and videos that you bought, or you plain lose it.
Just perusing the iPad User's Guide and 'computer' comes up 136 times. There is a good important reasons for it too. I think that it is rather misleading to imply in any manner that the iPad could be used as a stand-alone device.
Apple never intended the iPad to be a stand-alone. Apple has made it quite clear in this regard. And attempting to qualify it as such only confuses those that probably don't need to be misguided.
Bottom line, the iPad as a device is downright inexpensive. The applications, materials you purchase, add or create on it are priceless. Backing up is paramount. Why screw anybody's head by telling, misleading or encouraging them otherwise.
Comments
What sort of a silly Troll is this?
[...]
Am I missing your point? Do you have a point? Or are you just Trolling?
I suggest that the conversation be limited to the topic at hand, rather than being an insult-fest directed towards people you disagree with.
Troll? Hell no...
Well, that's because he's trolling, but he'd prefer we not point it out.
Fair enough. I was just pointing out that netbooks have their uses, and just because his Steveness badmouths them and some people fallaciously consider them a desktop replacement doesn't mean they're pointless devices. The iPad will no doubt be a big success (if it isn't already), but netbooks will stick around and get better and that's great. I could even imagine getting an iPad AND a decent netbook - to me, they're simply different devices that could complement each other very well.
Last year I bought a netbook because I was going on vacation and needed a cheap way of storing a lot of video data. It was cheaper to buy the netbook than more SDHC cards. I have a hybrid camera that uses a format that takes up more memory than your typical flash camcorder.
An iPad would not get it done for the specific task I had in mind and I would buy the netbook again without hesitation. But now that I am using the netbook to surf the net, etc. I do believe that an iPad makes a lot more sense.
In other words, in the next while, I will have an iPad AND a netbook (well OK, not a decent one) and for the reason that you point out. To me, the best decision that Apple made is to keep the entry-point price of the iPad very reasonable. At $500 (probably $539 here in Canada) the base iPad is a very affordable device that makes sense as a compliment to other computing devices and mobile products. For a tech lover not too hard up for cash, it's too appealing a toy to pass up. If the iPad had gone a lot higher in price, it would have been difficult to justify buying it just for the novelty alone. It would have failed just as all the other tablets had.
It would actually be nice to be able to make phonecalls on it.
I have this vision of holding up my iPad to my ear...Not
Those complaining SHOULD have waited for the 3G model. Sheeze, it amazes me the levels of idiotic complaints that people have.
Now...I'm angry that Apple didn't put a phone in my MacBook Pro.
Type all you want, but you're still wrong to say it can't be used as such.
The fact that you have to use a (full) computer at times, it is not a stand-alone.
Thanks but why would that be better than a MacBook 13" that runs flawlessly, no need for Kaspersky et al and all the associated problems? Is it simply price? Two inches hardly matters (no jokes please). If it is price you can get great MacBooks second hand that still run Leopard and some Snow Leopard. Heck I still have a base model iBook G4 12" that runs Leopard fine.
I have to say this was the case back in October. I needed something to take notes with while doing a psych internship. If price truly were an issue for me, I might have gone with a netbook, as a colleague did. But when comparing apples to netbooks, there was no comparison. The 13" MBP won out. No regrets or remorse. In fact, I'll be upgrading the HD and Boot Camping to Window as it has become a work machine also.
Troll? Hell no...
Seriously, You said something like "NetBooks with keyboards 93% normal size and even bigger", And my reply is "What is the point of a NetBook if it's not that smaller? What makes it so different from a Laptop?"
The answer is, IMHO, is that a keyboard too big is not portable and a keyboard too small is no good to use.
Many 10 inch netbooks come with perfectly good keyboards. The Dell Mini 10 has a keyboard 93% the size of a regular keyboard. The keyboard does NOT make it "not portable".
To paraphrase you, "What makes you so different from a Troll"?
In any case I think you overreacted to a simple joke. Go get your netBook and be happy.
If it was a joke, I apologize.
And so far, so good. My kid's netbook does everything he wants it to do. Generally, he uses video chat while surfing the net while downloading content while fielding IMs. According to him, it is better performing than the old HP Pentium 4 that he used to use.
All at half the price of the entry level iPad, which is a MUCH less capable device (I got an incredible deal on it - a Dell Mini 10 with an Atom N450 chip, a six cell battery and Win7 (with access to so much software that the App Store looks sick) for $250). Had I opted to pay the price of the entry-level iPad, it could have been equipped with GPS, an HD screen, a huge hard drive, and a built-in TV tuner. Had I opted to spend as much as a high-end iPad, I have no idea of what else might have been available.
Soli the Troll keeps claiming that the iPad is faster than any netbook, but he has yet to back up his claims. I am sincerely interested in whether what he says has any basis in fact, given that the Dell was such an incredibly good deal.
Maybe the iPad is faster, but I sincerely doubt it. Even if it is faster, it is very limited in what it can do compared to a cheaper, high quality modern netbook.
It would be very interesting to see tests of $830 netbooks compared to the iPad, given that a $250 netbook is a more capable device.
The fact that you have to use a (full) computer at times, it is not a stand-alone.
Why do you, "have to use a (full) computer at times"?
Troll? Hell no...
Seriously, You said something like "NetBooks with keyboards 93% normal size and even bigger", And my reply is "What is the point of a NetBook if it's not that smaller? What makes it so different from a Laptop?"
The answer is, IMHO, is that a keyboard too big is not portable and a keyboard too small is no good to use.
The thing I see with netbooks and their "93%"-sized keyboards is that they have maximized the use of width of the body. The Dell Mini 10's keyboard literally runs from side to side. This is why they can be portable, and still have keyboards that are wide enough to be useful.
It would be like the current iPad reducing the thickness of the bezel to make it more compact, while retaining the same amount of useful screen space.
EDIT: Apple probably already have plans to do this and I'm expecting a C&D letter/e-mail any minute now...
Twitter users reacting to Apple's iPad after it launched on Saturday were overwhelmingly happy with the new device, with the biggest complaint being that the device can't replace their iPhone
my biggest complaint? that "this iPad is not a donut."
yeesh.
The fact that you have to use a (full) computer at times, it is not a stand-alone.
Why?
I could picture getting an iPad for my mother. She would use it to browse the web, watch my daughter's YouTube videos, receive email, and look at pictures. Why would she ever need to sync it to a computer?
Granted, she would not be able to upgrade the firmware, but lots of people never bother to do that.
The fact that you have to use a (full) computer at times, it is not a stand-alone.
For all intents and purposes and for the design Apple has set up it's clearly meant to be an accessory computing device. But that isn't what anonymouse was referring to.
It's also being obscured that while netbooks can be a primary computing device they are typically accessory computing devices and their poor attempt at trying to do everything their larger can do makes them as useful as a using a Swiss Army Knife to cut down a tree when a you have a single-funciton saw handy. Sure, it can do the job, but it's far from an ideal, or even a decent tool for the job.
I'd say Apple has clearly seen how people use netbooks and has removed all the other crap to make them great at doing those tasks. That is what the iPad tried to do, and succeeds and what other netbooks and tablets will copy.
PS: Another example of a stand alone computing device is the Archos 5. Because it runs Win7 is can technically be used as a primary computing device. Not sure who would want to.
was it ever marketed to be a replacement for the iPhone???
that is a really a dumb complaint.
Assume you really like the iPad.
Assume you take it always with you whenever you wear a jacket with a pocket large enough for it or have a small shoulder back with you.
Assume that when you have it with you, you use it for almost all the tasks you currently use the iPhone for.
Doesn't it then feel a little bid odd to also carry your iPhone with you, so to just use it to make calls with it?
I agree that taking a phone call while the iPad sits in a shoulder back doesn't quite work too well [EDIT: if you do not have a headset in your ears already]. Dialing neither. But maybe we just need an 'iPhone remote' for the iPad. Or an iPhone mini.
I agree that taking a phone call while the iPad sits in a shoulder back doesn't quite work too well. Dialing neither. But maybe we just need an 'iPhone remote' for the iPad. Or an iPhone mini.
Not as bad as you might think. You can use a remote headset to answer an iPhone call without taking the phone out of your pocket. You can also use voice dialing to make a call without taking the phone out of your pocket.
I don't know if those solutions would work with Skype on an iPad, though.
It would actually be nice to be able to make phonecalls on it.
You can if you use google voice!
Very stupid complaint (replacing the iPhone I mean). Who in their right mind would want to use an iPad as a phone REPLACEMENT?! Wow!
The upside would be that police would have a much easier time knowing if people are talking on their phone or texting while driving.
Not as bad as you might think. You can use a remote headset to answer an iPhone call without taking the phone out of your pocket. You can also use voice dialing to make a call without taking the phone out of your pocket.
You need two things, a remote (and the current headset with the remote + voice dialling goes some way to cover this) and you need to have a headset plugged into your ears (or at least dangling in front of you so you can put it into your ears reasonably fast).
If a remote existed that would double as a hand-holdable headset, this would solve both points.
Assume you really like the iPad.
Assume you take it always with you whenever you have wear a jacket with a pocket large enough for it or have a small shoulder back with you.
Assume that when you have it with you, you use it for almost all the tasks you currently use the iPhone for.
Doesn't it then feel a little bid odd to also carry your iPhone with you, so to just make calls with it?
I agree that taking a phone call while the iPad sits in a shoulder back doesn't quite work too well. Dialing neither. But maybe we just need an 'iPhone remote' for the iPad. Or an iPhone mini.
Why don't my car keys work as a phone?! So just because we carry something with us most places means it should replace our phone? Hey, if you want to use an iPad as a phone just use google voice or Skype.
You know you could get rid of your iPhone & get some incredibly small phone that does nothing but phone calls. If you had the iPad with 3G that wouldn't be a bad deal...hmmmm.
I swear these arguments get worse the more people try to defend the idea of an iPad as a phone.
You need two things, a remote (and the current headset with the remote + voice dialling goes some way to cover this) and you need to have a headset plugged into your ears (or at least dangling in front of you so you can put it into your ears reasonably fast).
If a remote existed that would double as a hand-holdable headset, this would solve both points.
Let's see - a hand-held remote with earpiece and microphone and keypad for dialing. Why not just carry a dumbphone?
Admittedly, if you went that route, you'd only have the iPad's $30 per month data service (or no charge at all if you use wifi all the time) instead of a monthly phone bill PLUS the iPad's charge, so there would be some savings, but I'd be surprised if very many people would do it.
Why don't my car keys work as a phone?! So just because we carry something with us most places means it should replace our phone?
97% of the time I use my iPhone, I am not using the phone functionality. An iPad can replace these 97% of usage (assuming one has the iPad with oneself). My car key is used 99% of the time as a car key. My iPhone is not. My point is that the iPad makes a lot of the functionality of the iPhone redundant.
You know you could get rid of your iPhone & get some incredibly small phone that does nothing but phone calls. If you had the iPad with 3G that wouldn't be a bad deal...hmmmm.
Exactly my point, that is where a 'phone remote' for the iPad or an iPhone mini would fit in.
Let's see - a hand-held remote with earpiece and microphone and keypad for dialing. Why not just carry a dumbphone?
Because the iPhone is a much nicer phone than a dumbphone (not least the Address Book integration, the whole UI, the Visual Voicemail).
Why do you, "have to use a (full) computer at times"?
Updating OS
Backing up data
Printing
Saving files externally
Sure, there are some people that don't or won't, and one could get away with never ever connecting to a full computer, but the first thing that comes to mind, how do you start is out of the box without doing so.
Then what do you do when your iPad gets full books, music and videos that you bought, or you plain lose it.
Just perusing the iPad User's Guide and 'computer' comes up 136 times. There is a good important reasons for it too. I think that it is rather misleading to imply in any manner that the iPad could be used as a stand-alone device.
Apple never intended the iPad to be a stand-alone. Apple has made it quite clear in this regard. And attempting to qualify it as such only confuses those that probably don't need to be misguided.
Bottom line, the iPad as a device is downright inexpensive. The applications, materials you purchase, add or create on it are priceless. Backing up is paramount. Why screw anybody's head by telling, misleading or encouraging them otherwise.