Rubbish. I've used other Windows tablets and haven't had problems. Still, they aren't as touch friendly as an iPad. But again, I'd sacrifice a bit of finger friendliness for the added advantage of a stylus in certain cases.
I'd sacrifice a bit of finger friendliness in order to run normal software that I can get anywhere, instead of being relegated to censored mini-apps unavailable except through a single vendor.
if the HP Mini can handle it, why can't the iPad using the same app?
Because compared to a netbook, the iPad is very anemic. It has hardly any RAM, and a cellphone-class CPU.
For content consumption, many modern netbooks are both better and cheaper than an iPad. And for other stuff, like archiving content, or running the coolest newest software, the iPad ain't even in the same league.
It is just a little appliance, and not a real computer like a netbook is.
In case you still don't know the MacBook Air's battery life is tested against a more stringent test that depicts a more accurate real life usage battery life.
Only Apple tells the truth about this stuff. Everybody else uses less stringent tests than Apple.
Then how useful is generic port like USB where you cannot use the drivers of the desktop OS, which means lot your devices suddenly become useless. The idea of WHQL is to make sure all devices work well with windows.
Several points:
Drivers for things like a multitude of different monitors can likely be eliminated, as can drivers for things like built-in drives.
Additionally, for external devices, drivers can be kept compressed, and installed only upon having a need. That is how Windows does it now.
And if a driver is missing, it can be downloaded automagically with Windows. That is how it is done now, for things that have a more recent vintage than the current version of Windows.
So paring down the OS is baked in to Windws already. There is no need to install lots of useless stuff.
Many would still be 16:10. The last good resolution.
Does anybody make that except one company?
And hey - Amazon does indeed sell narrow-screen 4:3 monitors! they have 18,921 computer monitors for sale. If you narrow that down by searching for 4:3, your choices go to 318. But what's that? Many of the 318 are not the old-fashioned narrow-screens! So there are even less.
Even if all the purported narrowscreens were really 4:3, that would only be .016% of the market.
But the reality is that the narrowscreen market is even smaller than that. Especially on modern computing devices. With one exception.
But if one is less myopic, and considers aspects of the real world other than one product form one company, the answer is different.
If one looks at the vast majority of screens produced in the last 5 years, one does NOT see any aspect ratio except one: 16:9.
4:3 is used infrequently on some bizarre niche products. It is also used on one popular product.
Go to Amazon. They sell 1,278 TV sets with 16:9 screens, and 131 with the old aspect ratio.
They sell 18,923 different computer monitors. They don't list 4:3 as a choice, so I assume that none of them have anything but the standard 16:9 aspect ratio.
It would be truly bizarre to buy a 4:3 computer monitor. I doubt that old-fashioned stuff is even still in production (except for some bizarre, niche products).
When the iPad was first announced, I was a little surprised that it was so large and had that aspect ratio -- I was hoping for a 7" display at 16:9.
Was I wrong!
After using an iPad, you realize that part of its magic is that its screen size and aspect ratio allows it to do most things well. A smaller screen with an aspect ratio tied to HD video would be far less useful.
Ever see a book in that handy, singleton 16:9 form factor, or a printed page or a photograph?
Ever try to type text on a 16:9 7" display with a virtual keyboard?
In portrait mode the keyboard is too narrow to touch type; in landscape mode the keyboard is so tall you can only see a small portion of what you are typing (the keyboard takes up half of the display).
Ever try to hand write on a on a 16:9 7" display with a stylus?
In portrait mode you can only write a few words per line; in landscape mode you can only write a few lines of text.
Ever try create a picture, a CAD diagram, a painting, a page layout, a story-board, a flow chart, take some notes, write a program, enter a signature... on a 16:9 7" display?
A computer screen is used for a lot more than watching videos.
2) It needs to maintain a good relationship with MS for the HP line of computers that use Windows
I believe that HP will also release a WebOS Tablet that is amed at the same audience as the iPad.
Good points here. Also, if the Slate were built on the WebOS, then any software venders would have to rejigger their software to work, which would delay the release of the Slate further, so it's not HP's fault alone. I think they're worried about Apple's success catching the attention of business and enterprise, so they're trying to nip that in the bud.
A bit of ammo for the HP Slate sales reps:
? USB port?so if you need a keyboard, you can plug one in!
? SD card slot for expandable memory and downloading photos & video.
? Runs Windows 7?Businesses are resistant to change, because change requires training and additional overhead. They'd much rather stick with what they're familiar with. "Everything that works on your Windows 7 desktop at work or at home will work on the Slate."
? The user-facing camera would be useful for video conferencing.
But there are some features of the Slate that leave me scratching my head:
? 16:9 aspect ratio? Businesses don't really have a need for that.
? Rear-facing camera w/ flash seems more like a consumer feature to me.
? But most significantly, as has been pointed out by other posters here, the Slate is essentially a keyboardless netbook?at twice the price.
I think you're right that the WebOS and the devices it powers will be targeted toward a consumer market.
Time will tell if this Slate is a win in the business market or not.
Ever try create a picture, a CAD diagram, a painting, a page layout, a story-board, a flow chart, take some notes, write a program, enter a signature... on a 16:9 7" display?
A computer screen is used for a lot more than watching videos.
Myopia is in the eye of the beholder!
.
If narrowscreen monitors are better, why doesn't anybody use them? Except for one product, even Apple has shitcanned that old-fashioned stuff.
And no, I have never used a 7 inch touchscreen of any aspect ratio. I use the smaller, not-4:3 touchscreen on my iPhone though. I do not wish it to be 4:3.
And besides, many of those undoable tasks cannot be done on an Ipad anyways - it is too weak and doesn't have full software packages available for it. Even if it did, it doesn't have enough RAM or CPU to handle that sort of stuff.
So given that the hardware is insufficient for the listed tasks, how does the narrowscreen on the iPad help? I mean, aside from making it magical.
I can't use VLC on my iPhone, due to iOS fragmentation, so I'll never be able to test it myself.
iOS fragmentation? Are you saying because you have older hardware you expect all the latest apps to run on your hardware? In which case, most of them can... If you have an iPhone 3G you can run iOS 4.1 ... It is somewhat slower, but you can run many apps.
VLC so far has not so good reviews, I haven't tried it. But OPlayer and CineXPlayer should at least give you more options for XVID and MKV. These are shaping up to be pretty solid given they do not even use specialised hardware acceleration APIs.
? But most significantly, as has been pointed out by other posters here, the Slate is essentially a keyboardless netbook?at twice the price.
By that logic, the iPad is less than a netbook at up to 3 times the price.
It doesn't have the RAM, it doesn't run regular full applications, it has a laughably small disk drive, no HDMI, no ability to output HD, no stereo speakers, and will not play nicely with the vast majority of content, especially web videos, like the local news stations.
You may have a valid criticism of the HP product, but if you apply the same criteria to the Apple product, it comes up short. Don't compare the iPad to a netbook. It is not in the same class.
And besides, many of those undoable tasks cannot be done on an Ipad anyways - it is too weak and doesn't have full software packages available for it. Even if it did, it doesn't have enough RAM or CPU to handle that sort of stuff.
Fair enough, then the question is do you think a 9" HP Slate at $799 is appropriate for "that sort of stuff"...? Or would one might as well get a $599 11" netbook.
iOS fragmentation? Are you saying because you have older hardware you expect all the latest apps to run on your hardware?
No. I'm saying that because of iOS fragmentation, VLC will run on some iOS products, but not on the vast majority of the iOS products that Apple is currently selling.
No. I'm saying that because of iOS fragmentation, VLC will run on some iOS products, but not on the vast majority of the iOS products that Apple is currently selling.
Look it up.
Huh? VLC is currently available for iPad. They only need to develop for one other version, iPhone/iPod touch. If this is a basis for "fragmentation" of iOS, that idea would be pretty thin, I'd say.
By saying "will not run on the vast majority of iOS products that Apple is selling", you just mean they haven't made an iPhone version. That's all. Your phrasing has a clear slant.
As mentioned, look at CineXPlayer and OPlayerHD. Arguably better than VLC, and, wow, works on the extremely fragmented ecosystem of just 3 products ~ iPad, iPhone and iPod touch.
If narrowscreen monitors are better, why doesn't anybody use them? Except for one product, even Apple has shitcanned that old-fashioned stuff.
And no, I have never used a 7 inch touchscreen of any aspect ratio. I use the smaller, not-4:3 touchscreen on my iPhone though. I do not wish it to be 4:3.
And besides, many of those undoable tasks cannot be done on an Ipad anyways - it is too weak and doesn't have full software packages available for it. Even if it did, it doesn't have enough RAM or CPU to handle that sort of stuff.
So given that the hardware is insufficient for the listed tasks, how does the narrowscreen on the iPad help? I mean, aside from making it magical.
Simple!
The iPad:
-- is a mobile device
-- the screen is used for input as well as output
Every one of the tasks I mentioned I can do, and have done, on an iPad!
There are apps for all of these, and much, much, more if one opens his mind and looks...
The CPU, GPU and RAM are quite well suited to these tasks... and the screen is proportional to the needs of the user:
No. I'm saying that because of iOS fragmentation, VLC will run on some iOS products, but not on the vast majority of the iOS products that Apple is currently selling.
Look it up.
The VLC for iPhone release is imminent, and it's likely to run on all iPhones and iPod Touches ever released, including the first generation. So that's two products that the developer needed to develop. Or they could build it as a universal app and the same product, downloaded from the same link, sharing the same code, would run on every iOS product ever released.
Fair enough, then the question is do you think a 9" HP Slate at $799 is appropriate for "that sort of stuff"...? Or would one might as well get a $599 11" netbook.
I don't know. I've not read many reviews of the new HP Slate.
I don't know if it is powerful enough to be a satisfying real computer or not. I don't know if it is necessary for a tablet to be powerful or not. I'm very interested in the category, but I am seldom an early adopter.
But I do know that I have wanted a cool tablet for years. And I know what my reaction was to the iPad. I found it sorely lacking in functionality.
I bought my kid a Dell Mini 10 for $250 (on sale) within days after the iPad was announced. It blows away the iPad WRT capability, power and functionality. No magic. Just a nice little laptop for cheap. And the battery lasts all day, in case anybody wanted to chime in with that stuff.
And he can set up his Palm Pre Plus to be a mobile hotspot, so it can be used anywhere, anytime.
He's much happier than if he got an iPhone and an iPad instead.
Just use CineXPlayer or OPlayer on iPhone and iPad. Plays XVID and MKVs. Sorted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appl
Here's the first few reviews from the iStore:
Customer Reviews
does not work
by kon646
Installed it, connected to itunes as directed, loaded files in the shared files window on my MBP, synced.....nothing. iPad VLC app shows no files loaded.
Should be called ALN (Audio LAN Client)
by John Fischetti
I have high hopes for this app, but unfortunately every video i've thrown at it only plays audio.
The video files i've tried are around 700x300px, .avi files averaging around 1.2 - 1.4 gb in size
mkvs make the app crash!
by Xatanas
I love the idea of VLC on the iPad, but after adding different mkvs, the app simply crashes. I tried various combinations and even uploading only them one by one and letting each alone in the app to no avail. Sorry it's just not good enough.
By saying "will not run on the vast majority of iOS products that Apple is selling", you just mean they haven't made an iPhone version. That's all. Your phrasing has a clear slant.
Agreed. They need to make different version for the different fragments of iOS. The software works only with certain less-popular versions of iOS.
But the majority of iOS users are stuck with the wrong fragment of the OS, so they are out of luck, and cannot use VLC, or any other software written exclusively for certain fragments of iOS.
Comments
... Someone on another forum brought up the fact that the HP Slate, Running Windows 7 and iTunes...
... could be used as the "pc" to initially set up an iPad...
Slate to iPad: Who's your Daddy?
That would be a rather funny image.
Rubbish. I've used other Windows tablets and haven't had problems. Still, they aren't as touch friendly as an iPad. But again, I'd sacrifice a bit of finger friendliness for the added advantage of a stylus in certain cases.
I'd sacrifice a bit of finger friendliness in order to run normal software that I can get anywhere, instead of being relegated to censored mini-apps unavailable except through a single vendor.
if the HP Mini can handle it, why can't the iPad using the same app?
Because compared to a netbook, the iPad is very anemic. It has hardly any RAM, and a cellphone-class CPU.
For content consumption, many modern netbooks are both better and cheaper than an iPad. And for other stuff, like archiving content, or running the coolest newest software, the iPad ain't even in the same league.
It is just a little appliance, and not a real computer like a netbook is.
In case you still don't know the MacBook Air's battery life is tested against a more stringent test that depicts a more accurate real life usage battery life.
Only Apple tells the truth about this stuff. Everybody else uses less stringent tests than Apple.
Then how useful is generic port like USB where you cannot use the drivers of the desktop OS, which means lot your devices suddenly become useless. The idea of WHQL is to make sure all devices work well with windows.
Several points:
Drivers for things like a multitude of different monitors can likely be eliminated, as can drivers for things like built-in drives.
Additionally, for external devices, drivers can be kept compressed, and installed only upon having a need. That is how Windows does it now.
And if a driver is missing, it can be downloaded automagically with Windows. That is how it is done now, for things that have a more recent vintage than the current version of Windows.
So paring down the OS is baked in to Windws already. There is no need to install lots of useless stuff.
Many would still be 16:10. The last good resolution.
Does anybody make that except one company?
And hey - Amazon does indeed sell narrow-screen 4:3 monitors! they have 18,921 computer monitors for sale. If you narrow that down by searching for 4:3, your choices go to 318. But what's that? Many of the 318 are not the old-fashioned narrow-screens! So there are even less.
Even if all the purported narrowscreens were really 4:3, that would only be .016% of the market.
But the reality is that the narrowscreen market is even smaller than that. Especially on modern computing devices. With one exception.
But if one is less myopic, and considers aspects of the real world other than one product form one company, the answer is different.
If one looks at the vast majority of screens produced in the last 5 years, one does NOT see any aspect ratio except one: 16:9.
4:3 is used infrequently on some bizarre niche products. It is also used on one popular product.
Go to Amazon. They sell 1,278 TV sets with 16:9 screens, and 131 with the old aspect ratio.
They sell 18,923 different computer monitors. They don't list 4:3 as a choice, so I assume that none of them have anything but the standard 16:9 aspect ratio.
It would be truly bizarre to buy a 4:3 computer monitor. I doubt that old-fashioned stuff is even still in production (except for some bizarre, niche products).
When the iPad was first announced, I was a little surprised that it was so large and had that aspect ratio -- I was hoping for a 7" display at 16:9.
Was I wrong!
After using an iPad, you realize that part of its magic is that its screen size and aspect ratio allows it to do most things well. A smaller screen with an aspect ratio tied to HD video would be far less useful.
Ever see a book in that handy, singleton 16:9 form factor, or a printed page or a photograph?
Ever try to type text on a 16:9 7" display with a virtual keyboard?
In portrait mode the keyboard is too narrow to touch type; in landscape mode the keyboard is so tall you can only see a small portion of what you are typing (the keyboard takes up half of the display).
Ever try to hand write on a on a 16:9 7" display with a stylus?
In portrait mode you can only write a few words per line; in landscape mode you can only write a few lines of text.
Ever try create a picture, a CAD diagram, a painting, a page layout, a story-board, a flow chart, take some notes, write a program, enter a signature... on a 16:9 7" display?
A computer screen is used for a lot more than watching videos.
Myopia is in the eye of the beholder!
.
.
I think HP released this tablet because:
1) It made a commitment to MS
2) It needs to maintain a good relationship with MS for the HP line of computers that use Windows
I believe that HP will also release a WebOS Tablet that is amed at the same audience as the iPad.
Good points here. Also, if the Slate were built on the WebOS, then any software venders would have to rejigger their software to work, which would delay the release of the Slate further, so it's not HP's fault alone. I think they're worried about Apple's success catching the attention of business and enterprise, so they're trying to nip that in the bud.
A bit of ammo for the HP Slate sales reps:
? USB port?so if you need a keyboard, you can plug one in!
? SD card slot for expandable memory and downloading photos & video.
? Runs Windows 7?Businesses are resistant to change, because change requires training and additional overhead. They'd much rather stick with what they're familiar with. "Everything that works on your Windows 7 desktop at work or at home will work on the Slate."
? The user-facing camera would be useful for video conferencing.
But there are some features of the Slate that leave me scratching my head:
? 16:9 aspect ratio? Businesses don't really have a need for that.
? Rear-facing camera w/ flash seems more like a consumer feature to me.
? But most significantly, as has been pointed out by other posters here, the Slate is essentially a keyboardless netbook?at twice the price.
I think you're right that the WebOS and the devices it powers will be targeted toward a consumer market.
Time will tell if this Slate is a win in the business market or not.
Ever try create a picture, a CAD diagram, a painting, a page layout, a story-board, a flow chart, take some notes, write a program, enter a signature... on a 16:9 7" display?
A computer screen is used for a lot more than watching videos.
Myopia is in the eye of the beholder!
.
If narrowscreen monitors are better, why doesn't anybody use them? Except for one product, even Apple has shitcanned that old-fashioned stuff.
And no, I have never used a 7 inch touchscreen of any aspect ratio. I use the smaller, not-4:3 touchscreen on my iPhone though. I do not wish it to be 4:3.
And besides, many of those undoable tasks cannot be done on an Ipad anyways - it is too weak and doesn't have full software packages available for it. Even if it did, it doesn't have enough RAM or CPU to handle that sort of stuff.
So given that the hardware is insufficient for the listed tasks, how does the narrowscreen on the iPad help? I mean, aside from making it magical.
I can't use VLC on my iPhone, due to iOS fragmentation, so I'll never be able to test it myself.
iOS fragmentation? Are you saying because you have older hardware you expect all the latest apps to run on your hardware? In which case, most of them can... If you have an iPhone 3G you can run iOS 4.1 ... It is somewhat slower, but you can run many apps.
VLC so far has not so good reviews, I haven't tried it. But OPlayer and CineXPlayer should at least give you more options for XVID and MKV. These are shaping up to be pretty solid given they do not even use specialised hardware acceleration APIs.
? But most significantly, as has been pointed out by other posters here, the Slate is essentially a keyboardless netbook?at twice the price.
By that logic, the iPad is less than a netbook at up to 3 times the price.
It doesn't have the RAM, it doesn't run regular full applications, it has a laughably small disk drive, no HDMI, no ability to output HD, no stereo speakers, and will not play nicely with the vast majority of content, especially web videos, like the local news stations.
You may have a valid criticism of the HP product, but if you apply the same criteria to the Apple product, it comes up short. Don't compare the iPad to a netbook. It is not in the same class.
And besides, many of those undoable tasks cannot be done on an Ipad anyways - it is too weak and doesn't have full software packages available for it. Even if it did, it doesn't have enough RAM or CPU to handle that sort of stuff.
Fair enough, then the question is do you think a 9" HP Slate at $799 is appropriate for "that sort of stuff"...? Or would one might as well get a $599 11" netbook.
iOS fragmentation? Are you saying because you have older hardware you expect all the latest apps to run on your hardware?
No. I'm saying that because of iOS fragmentation, VLC will run on some iOS products, but not on the vast majority of the iOS products that Apple is currently selling.
Look it up.
No. I'm saying that because of iOS fragmentation, VLC will run on some iOS products, but not on the vast majority of the iOS products that Apple is currently selling.
Look it up.
Huh?
By saying "will not run on the vast majority of iOS products that Apple is selling", you just mean they haven't made an iPhone version. That's all. Your phrasing has a clear slant.
As mentioned, look at CineXPlayer and OPlayerHD. Arguably better than VLC, and, wow, works on the extremely fragmented ecosystem of just 3 products ~ iPad, iPhone and iPod touch.
If narrowscreen monitors are better, why doesn't anybody use them? Except for one product, even Apple has shitcanned that old-fashioned stuff.
And no, I have never used a 7 inch touchscreen of any aspect ratio. I use the smaller, not-4:3 touchscreen on my iPhone though. I do not wish it to be 4:3.
And besides, many of those undoable tasks cannot be done on an Ipad anyways - it is too weak and doesn't have full software packages available for it. Even if it did, it doesn't have enough RAM or CPU to handle that sort of stuff.
So given that the hardware is insufficient for the listed tasks, how does the narrowscreen on the iPad help? I mean, aside from making it magical.
Simple!
The iPad:
-- is a mobile device
-- the screen is used for input as well as output
Every one of the tasks I mentioned I can do, and have done, on an iPad!
There are apps for all of these, and much, much, more if one opens his mind and looks...
The CPU, GPU and RAM are quite well suited to these tasks... and the screen is proportional to the needs of the user:
.
No. I'm saying that because of iOS fragmentation, VLC will run on some iOS products, but not on the vast majority of the iOS products that Apple is currently selling.
Look it up.
The VLC for iPhone release is imminent, and it's likely to run on all iPhones and iPod Touches ever released, including the first generation. So that's two products that the developer needed to develop. Or they could build it as a universal app and the same product, downloaded from the same link, sharing the same code, would run on every iOS product ever released.
Fair enough, then the question is do you think a 9" HP Slate at $799 is appropriate for "that sort of stuff"...? Or would one might as well get a $599 11" netbook.
I don't know. I've not read many reviews of the new HP Slate.
I don't know if it is powerful enough to be a satisfying real computer or not. I don't know if it is necessary for a tablet to be powerful or not. I'm very interested in the category, but I am seldom an early adopter.
But I do know that I have wanted a cool tablet for years. And I know what my reaction was to the iPad. I found it sorely lacking in functionality.
I bought my kid a Dell Mini 10 for $250 (on sale) within days after the iPad was announced. It blows away the iPad WRT capability, power and functionality. No magic. Just a nice little laptop for cheap. And the battery lasts all day, in case anybody wanted to chime in with that stuff.
And he can set up his Palm Pre Plus to be a mobile hotspot, so it can be used anywhere, anytime.
He's much happier than if he got an iPhone and an iPad instead.
Here's the first few reviews from the iStore:
Customer Reviews
does not work
by kon646
Installed it, connected to itunes as directed, loaded files in the shared files window on my MBP, synced.....nothing. iPad VLC app shows no files loaded.
Should be called ALN (Audio LAN Client)
by John Fischetti
I have high hopes for this app, but unfortunately every video i've thrown at it only plays audio.
The video files i've tried are around 700x300px, .avi files averaging around 1.2 - 1.4 gb in size
mkvs make the app crash!
by Xatanas
I love the idea of VLC on the iPad, but after adding different mkvs, the app simply crashes. I tried various combinations and even uploading only them one by one and letting each alone in the app to no avail. Sorry it's just not good enough.
Dunno. I guess you have little faith in Apple's methods of rating software. The reviews are what they are.
I can't use VLC on my iPhone, due to iOS fragmentation, so I'll never be able to test it myself.
The bonus is, you could actually test out Oplayer Lite on your iPhone. For the low, low price of.... Free.
Then perhaps you could get back to us on any challenges you might have with certain MKV or XVID files or other formats?
We await your feedback.
By saying "will not run on the vast majority of iOS products that Apple is selling", you just mean they haven't made an iPhone version. That's all. Your phrasing has a clear slant.
Agreed. They need to make different version for the different fragments of iOS. The software works only with certain less-popular versions of iOS.
But the majority of iOS users are stuck with the wrong fragment of the OS, so they are out of luck, and cannot use VLC, or any other software written exclusively for certain fragments of iOS.