I'm not saying apps aren't important, just that they aren't the be-all, end-all for most people.
You claim to have a knowledge of the behavior of "most people" but then dismiss the "most people" who have bought their tablets because of Apps you derisively dismissed as silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherian
Take a look at the top 100 free apps and tell me "silly" is not a good word.
Let me paraphrase your own words, take a look at the top 100 paid Apps beyond games and entertainment, and tell me if they are all silly. In fact, if you go beyond your "I, myself, me" perspective, and take the time to read, or talk to a more expanded group of people beyond those you interact with in your office and immediate environment. you would be amazed at the obscure Apps (that would never be in the top one hundred) people have found to better their lives, their children, the handicapped, those with certain ailments, those in various professions, etc.
If you have difficulty finding links to them, let me know, I will be happy to assist you.
And yeah, just from the few people I know (I do not know "most people", like you do), quite a number of them too have found what you may dismiss as silly, to become a part of their profession and making money out of it. And, I also found quite a number of people who I do not know but have encountered them through the media and other internet sites to have done the same.
If you derisively dismiss these Apps that people found useful, it tells more about you than about them. You will be the one who would be dubbed not only as silly but also narrowminded.
They say, an individual is limited only by their dreams and their imagination.
Try pondering those words instead of being too anal on technical specifications. I do not know too many ordinary people who truly understand technical specifications or too anal about them. I happen to be one of the latter.
It always crashes after the Safari opened it and some extended use. The Activity Monitor shows that it uses about 50% of CPU when a video is playing. The memory usage keeps going up and close to 1000MB. A video will begin to crawl after extended play. I found that the video speed returns to normal after killing Flash Player and relaunched.
My observation is if a powerful PC have so many problems how could it become trouble free on a smartphone? How you can kill Flahs Player on a smartphone without a Activity Monitor?
My observation is if a powerful PC have so many problems how could it become trouble free on a smartphone? How you can kill Flahs Player on a smartphone without a Activity Monitor?
I disable flash on my dual core laptop and on my quad core desktop. If Flash is that important to somebody, then they should just go out and buy an Android tablet or something else, because Flash will NEVER ever be included on iOS. There's little use in whining about it, because that is not going to change.
A good example of how useless Flash is can be found at the very top of this page. When I scroll up to the very top of the page, there is a big grey rectangle, which happens to be an ad for something useless. Thankfully it is disabled and it doesn't show up on my macbook right now.
What get's me is how Apple hardcore fans talk about having a specific app to do something extremely well, but not one that half-ass gets the job done to save me time. I don't want to have to close my browser, open SkyFire, and wait for a video I can't navigate just to get around Mr. Job's raging hard-on against Flash. Flash could barely work and it STILL would be better than this one app at a time BS.
The thing that people forget is that Apple couldn't get Flash on the iPhone if they WANTED to because Adobe hasn't shipped a version that would work. Xoom was the poster child for Flash-on-a-tablet... AND IT DIDN'T SHIP WITH FLASH! I mean, come on; you should blame Adobe for being arrogant and lazy (i.e., not fixing issues with Flash on Mac, which naturally caused Apple to disregard them).
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeshuawatso
It reminds me of an argument fallacy people use to hate on Windows. They mention all the stuff a Mac does really well for an exuberant price and fail to see that a Windows desktop that does a mediocre job at several things is just enough to reach the "good enough" mark for most. Sad part, I'm a Linux fan, but I'm not a delusional pompous that can't recognize a fellow salesman (Jobs) and redirection is a tactic to keep people from seeing flaws in your product.
I rarely hear Mac people down talk Windows/Linux users; it's usually the other way around. The way I see it: some people have more money than time, so they prefer Macs because they get them good results with less wasted time. The diametric opposite of those people are Linux users, who love throwing their time at computers (it's basically their hobby) and are fine paying with time rather than money. Windows users tend to be in-between both those extremes.
It seems like you are one of those people who are looking for a desktop in a tablet. In that case, the iPad is not for you. Those people who do "get it", which is most people, will be using their iPads in creative ways and not whining about how it is not a desktop or that desktop software is more advanced or more powerful than tablet software. It is not meant to be. The iPad does things which no desktop can do, thanks to the multitouch surface and apps written around that.
You are correct, I am one of those types. I have been a table user for years, well before Apple decided to get into the market (or maybe back into it, the Newton was HUGE). I switched to my iPad as a replacement to a (laptop without a keyboard) Motion tablet, assuming that the productivity apps on iOS were good enough for the replacement. I was definitely wrong on that call. The first hurdle, pen input. It's easier to write than type, but Jobs made a defining point that pens aren't acceptable to Apple's standards of classy. Aftermarket pens mostly sucked and Apple's angle of incidence multi-touch method made things worse. Second hurdle: multitasking. iOS 4.2 wasn't out yet so I jailbroke to get all the other features I wanted back like mouse support, remote desktop, mirroring, file saving, and most importantly, real multitasking. Last hurdle: Tabbed browsing. After using Safari for a while, I began to notice that if I switched tabs, when I switched back, the tab would refresh itself. Not good when you're filling out forms, or viewing a document over a secure connection. This was by far the easiest fix; I bought iCab from the App Store. This browser blows Safari out the water.
After all that, I was sitting on the pot reading a book and it hit me: I'm trying way too hard to get a device to fit me and re-purpose it for something very few people would even think of re-purposing if for. All that time and money down the drain, when what I really wanted was another Motion tablet that I could use my finger instead of the pen all the time. However, that tablet cost $2k but these Android tablets coming out are getting pretty close to what I need it to do, without all the semantics and hassles of the iPad.
As far as music goes, using the iPad as a way to control my equipment was the first thought that popped in my head when I started playing with it. I could use the screen to control XY controllers for generators, mixer control, and even as a sequencer and controller. Sadly, I chose to develop a game to sell instead of my utilities and by the time I found time, a slew of developers hit the market with my ideas before me.
So yes, I get it. That's why I'm selling my iPad and switching to an Android tablet if one ever releases.
Fair enough, but your point was irrelevant since it failed to address his original point that the Android browser does or does not support HTML better than Safari. He wasn't challenging the layout engine, he was challenging the hole browser. You could have easily made the counterpoint that HTML5 is better supported on iOS, that CSS3 transitions and translations are hardware supported, or that the javascript engine is better. I'm not saying this is all true, I don't have any evidence to prove either direction, but pointing out to someone that they have the same layout engine isn't a counterpoint to an argument about spec support.
The argument is valid too. Chrome and Safari are both webkit based browsers, yet neither one of them are compliant with ALL of the HTML5 specification. They each implement things differently. WebGL is still not supported in a released version of Safari, and Chrome still doesn't support Form list.
He didn't provide any support for his claim, but that's okay, right?? I mean, I just pointed out that they use the SAME CODE TO DO THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT BROWSERS DO, but that's not relevant?? Right.
You are correct, I am one of those types. I have been a table user for years, well before Apple decided to get into the market (or maybe back into it, the Newton was HUGE). I switched to my iPad as a replacement to a (laptop without a keyboard) Motion tablet, assuming that the productivity apps on iOS were good enough for the replacement. I was definitely wrong on that call. The first hurdle, pen input. It's easier to write than type, but Jobs made a defining point that pens aren't acceptable to Apple's standards of classy. Aftermarket pens mostly sucked and Apple's angle of incidence multi-touch method made things worse. Second hurdle: multitasking. iOS 4.2 wasn't out yet so I jailbroke to get all the other features I wanted back like mouse support, remote desktop, mirroring, file saving, and most importantly, real multitasking. Last hurdle: Tabbed browsing. After using Safari for a while, I began to notice that if I switched tabs, when I switched back, the tab would refresh itself. Not good when you're filling out forms, or viewing a document over a secure connection. This was by far the easiest fix; I bought iCab from the App Store. This browser blows Safari out the water.
After all that, I was sitting on the pot reading a book and it hit me: I'm trying way too hard to get a device to fit me and re-purpose it for something very few people would even think of re-purposing if for. All that time and money down the drain, when what I really wanted was another Motion tablet that I could use my finger instead of the pen all the time. However, that tablet cost $2k but these Android tablets coming out are getting pretty close to what I need it to do, without all the semantics and hassles of the iPad.
As far as music goes, using the iPad as a way to control my equipment was the first thought that popped in my head when I started playing with it. I could use the screen to control XY controllers for generators, mixer control, and even as a sequencer and controller. Sadly, I chose to develop a game to sell instead of my utilities and by the time I found time, a slew of developers hit the market with my ideas before me.
So yes, I get it. That's why I'm selling my iPad and switching to an Android tablet if one ever releases.
So, you think GarageBand is useless because it's not ProTools, but are finding Android tablets to be "getting close to what you need", even though they don't have much of anything in the way of sound creation tools?
I keep hearing this from Android boosters-- what Apple is offering in the way of apps isn't any good because they don't do more, so Android, which does almost nothing, is the better choice. Because of the openness!
The thing that people forget is that Apple couldn't get Flash on the iPhone if they WANTED to because Adobe hasn't shipped a version that would work. Xoom was the poster child for Flash-on-a-tablet... AND IT DIDN'T SHIP WITH FLASH! I mean, come on; you should blame Adobe for being arrogant and lazy (i.e., not fixing issues with Flash on Mac, which naturally caused Apple to disregard them).
I agree, but Apple's "it has to work perfectly before anyone touches it" mantra doesn't help the two get the problem resolved either. I don't blame just Apple, I blame Adobe too for not giving us jailbreakers Flash at least until Apple and Adobe both get over themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by illimiter
I rarely hear Mac people down talk Windows/Linux users; it's usually the other way around.
Apple made an ENTIRE ad campaign based on talking people down about Windows. Hardcore fans who love Apple like they love God are notorious for trolling and shitting on any technology from Apple, then praising that technology when Apple adopts it. Don't forget the Intel debacle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by illimiter
The way I see it: some people have more money than time, so they prefer Macs because they get them good results with less wasted time.
I don't think so. Macs are rarely productivity churners and they're riddle with incompatibilities, but if all you need is a browser and a all-in-one media manager, then they're a great, albeit expensive, way to go. The minute that more productivity is needed, mac users who aren't used to the platform yet are unproductive scramblers trying to find an alternative; the Mac app store may change this though. Thanks to Apple going to bed with Intel, Boot Camp can turn these people into workhorses pretty quickly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by illimiter
The diametric opposite of those people are Linux users, who love throwing their time at computers (it's basically their hobby) and are fine paying with time rather than money. Windows users tend to be in-between both those extremes.
No argument for either one of these explanations. Although Linux admins that manage mainframes and servers don't like wasting time, so they go with Linux for reliability. Your description fits desktop Linux thumpers to the T though. It's one of the reasons I think Linux does so well in Latin America and other non-linear separable time views. It's a culture thing, so it's quite ethnocentric of us to say our time views are better than another based on the computer or operating systems we use, but interesting nonetheless.
He didn't provide any support for his claim, but that's okay, right?? I mean, I just pointed out that they use the SAME CODE TO DO THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT BROWSERS DO, but that's not relevant?? Right.
He made a point and you made an irrelevant point. It's like someone asking what time is it, and you respond with a picture that says the sky is blue. You're point isn't invalid, but if failed to address the person's statement you are countering. The easiest thing you could have done was ask for a citation backing up the claim.
So, you think GarageBand is useless because it's not ProTools, but are finding Android tablets to be "getting close to what you need", even though they don't have much of anything in the way of sound creation tools?
I keep hearing this from Android boosters-- what Apple is offering in the way of apps isn't any good because they don't do more, so Android, which does almost nothing, is the better choice. Because of the openness!
You didn't read my post did you? My bar for an Android tablet AND the iPad was that of my Motion Computing tablet PC. You've grossly confused two replies in one. I was referring to GarageBand being a mediocre app compared to more professional tools that I set the bar to compare, and agreeing to Apple ][ that that bar is idiotic. If I'm bright enough to know the pro tools AND how to use them in a professional environment, them I'm more than intelligent enough to understand that a 1GHz tablet with 256MB of RAM isn't going to be a replacement for a professional workstation.
The very post you replied to was in regard to trying to fit the iPad to something it's not, and that an Android tablet may have been the better choice all along. It's not an Apple fault, but a confession of fault of mine for convincing myself that I could change the device into something I knew it couldn't be, and the consequences of such decisions.
The part about using it for music at the end of the post was my REAL WORLD interpretation on what the device could be used for, which Apple ][ was politely informing about its uses in the professional environment; I was agreeing. He/She's first words of that post about comparing GarageBand to professional audio software being idiotic is right on, but I didn't add enough emphasis of sarcasm in the post he/she was replying to, so he/she took the comment literally. Next time, I'll use a smiley face.
You didn't read my post did you? My bar for an Android tablet AND the iPad was that of my Motion Computing tablet PC. You've grossly confused two replies in one. I was referring to GarageBand being a mediocre app compared to more professional tools that I set the bar to compare, and agreeing to Apple ][ that that bar is idiotic. If I'm bright enough to know the pro tools AND how to use them in a professional environment, them I'm more than intelligent enough to understand that a 1GHz tablet with 256MB of RAM isn't going to be a replacement for a professional workstation.
The very post you replied to was in regard to trying to fit the iPad to something it's not, and that an Android tablet may have been the better choice all along. It's not an Apple fault, but a confession of fault of mine for convincing myself that I could change the device into something I knew it couldn't be, and the consequences of such decisions.
The part about using it for music at the end of the post was my REAL WORLD interpretation on what the device could be used for, which Apple ][ was politely informing about its uses in the professional environment; I was agreeing. He/She's first words of that post about comparing GarageBand to professional audio software being idiotic is right on, but I didn't add enough emphasis of sarcasm in the post he/she was replying to, so he/she took the comment literally. Next time, I'll use a smiley face.
Doesn't change my point. You're saying you prefer nothing over something, if that something doesn't meet an arbitrary standard of professionalism.
Of course the iPad doesn't replace a workstation. A laptop doesn't replace a rendering farm, does that mean I forgo the laptop that can process video files in favor of a netbook that can't?
I'll take the functionality that's available now, thanks, with the expectation that it will improve over time. GarageBand looks like a great audio sketchbook and very useful for quick edits, mixes and recordings. Just like the other Apple productivity apps are great on the go solutions for text entry, presentation creation, movie editing, etc.
The option is to not do those things at all. To each his own, I guess, but this is starting to sound like Android apologetics rather than a rational evaluation of capabilities.
This article is genuinely defensive and terribly written. The shots at the Android app market are particularly perplexing, because the market has been growing very rapidly and almost all of the top iPhone apps have or will shortly have Android variants.
It also doesn't mention that the battery is the same size as the iPad 2's and is rated at 10 hours for video like the iPad 2, and it has a superior screen to the iPad 2. If anything, the screen is the highlight. It's the world's first PLS screen in consumer electronics, which is the evolutionary success to the IPS screen in the iPads. PLS screens are 15% cheaper, 10% brighter, and have better viewing angles.
MacRumors reported in February that Apple wanted to use the PLS panel in the iPad 2, but they ultimately didn't. Samsung holds 30 patents on the screen so it is the world's only manufacturer.
Also, Flash is still "soon" for Honeycomb, but the beta is out now and it's GPU-accelerated.
what ever fanboy. I hope when this tablet comes out & the review says the ipad 2 beats it hands down. Then please eat you words! Don't forget its Apple ipad that reinvented the tablet & made it how it is today. The rest is just copying/trying to play catchup!!! You also seem to missed the point, its not the spec's. Its what you do with it that counts.
And how did they get it that thin? Without the unibody structure?
They don't have the magnets though … and the smart cover. And the Apps. And the integrated user interface.
Good to see iPad 2 has a little friend to play with. It'll make iPad 3 only better.
They were able to do it so fast because. THEY ARE NON WORKING PROTOTYPES NOT AVAILABLE UNTIL JUNE, they are probably dissecting the iPad 2 to see how to fit it all in.
There's still number of people who do want full web experience, and having Flash is still part of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
I'm not going to say that everyone wants what I want, but it is equally silly saying that "noone wants Flash anyway". I would be surprised not to find that, at this point of time, majority still want Flash support.
Silly seems to be a popular word in this thread. Yes, it is silly to suggest that no one wants Flash. You, Asheran and quite a number here seem to suggest that you cannot have a full web experience without Flash. That should be proof enough to prove your point.
Just as it is equally silly to imply even in the remotest sense that since "you and your kiln cannot live without Flash" to use a hyperbole (another popular word here) that others cannot live without Flash. I've got news for you, I read quite a few people who actually turns off any script that lead to Flash (some even go to the extreme in turning off any image). That this ability to turn off annoying pop ups, and all sorts of "Flashy" images is popular is evident in the option being included in the preferences of many browsers.
Thanks to John Huber, who posted a method (from another source) of either disabling Flash completely or partially. I am able to experience and experiment with same websites I visit, where the Flash is partially. And, here's a very nice juicy advantage if you have no yet found it. Many of the disabled media were advertisements or whistles and bells.
Also, it is equally even more silly to suggest that majority still want Flash support. If you have proof of this, be helpful and post it here to be investigated. Or, are you just parroting an Adobe mantra. Or, are you just projecting that since "Flash play such an important part of your life, you cannot live without it", the majority of humanity must feel the same need -- to live by the Flash and wither to death from not having to have a full web experience without Flash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asherian
Flash is still very useful. I was out condo shopping last weekend with my iPhone and was checking out competing condo sites, some of which are Flash-based websites. Staring at a giant empty box is infuriating to me. Give me the choice if I'd like to use Flash, even if it would hurt my battery.
Again, you and nikon are providing anecdotal experiences. Can you provide us with those Flash only sites please. Pretty please????
But here are some very important considerations:
Most if not all computing devices (mobile computers, desktops, laptops, etc.) can view Flash-free sites.
There are now almost two hundred million iOS devices (assuming all are still in service) and if projections of analysts are correct, definitely more than two hundred million iOS devices
From Apple data those iOS device owners have been willing to shell out more than $2 billion dollars just for Apps alone.
As important, those iOS device owners have been shown to be willing to pay premium price for iOS devices
Unless jailbroken, none of those iOS devices can view whatever is to be viewed in Flash-exclusive websites.
Unless something very significant happens in the consumer market, it is unlikely that Apple/Steve Jobs would include Flash anytime soon in the iOS devices
Confronted with these considerations, would any website creator, who wants to make a profit, simply turn a blind eye on those "premium consumers" who have shown willingness to open their wallets to products, services, they find useful -- however silly "some people who live by the Flash" find these Apps and choices to be?
And here's a more compelling consideration: How many website creators who are among the most visited sites do not have Flash alternatives or even special Apps devoted exclusively or to reach those iOS devices?
Facebook?
YouTube?
Twitter?
Wikipedia?
Craigslist?
Flickr?
Major newspapers and magazines and mass media in the US?
BBC?
Porn sites? I am not an expert on this, but I read an article that the porn industry is among to the more pioneering in adopting new technologies and frontiers. They understand that many of those iOS consumers may be no different from the others, and a significant amount are porn consumers, not widthstanding Apple/Steve Jobs policies. They may not be able to get their Apps approved, but they can always make the websites accessible to all those horny iOS consumers.
Even before the controversy raised by Apple/Steve Jobs excluding Flash in iOS devices, some of the most influential sites do not use nor do they need Flash to reach their target readers.
Open-source CMS softwares, such as Joomla, used by millions of websites, both by amateurs, professionals and for profit sites all over the world, come without Flash (it is up to the webmaster to decide whether to include flash modules). Aware of the ascendance of iOS devices, some template makers created website layouts specifically for iOS like the iPhone/iPod touch. No need to make a special one for the iPad -- open your iPad, type the site name and in an instant they open in the Safari (flash free) of the iPad, even faster than it would in more powerful laptop.
Thus, to put a more apt use of "silly", it is only a silly and plain stupid webmaster, who wants to reach as much target audience or make a profit to ignore such a significant "premium consumer population". And this is not even about reaching everyone, when it comes to profit-oriented sites. It may seem elitist but those "premium consumer popular", whether they are in the minority have been willing to pay premium price, and made Apple highly profitable since Steve Jobs came back. That developers are flocking to the iOS devices is a testament that some, if not many are making money also, along with all those third party accessories creators.
That many find the Apple ecosystem compelling is that it seems every company that matters seem to copy Apple innovations, after Apple have shown that even an old technology that proved to be a yawner to consumers then caught their fancy. For whatever reason or magic, Apple/Steve Jobs and their team have pave the way. Everyone else are "copycats". Oh sure they try to up the ante, but it becomes a pissing contest with others to prove that they have the bigger "p----"
An even more compelling people who may in their deepest thought know that they are unlikely to persuade Apple products consumers and diehards, still spend so much time invading "Apple centric" sites, and shouting as loud as they can, see my "p----" is bigger, more powerful than yours!
And here are these equally crazy Apple diehards: Yeah, but what can you do with "p----"?
And the Apple/Steve Jobs haters/detractors retort back: Don't change the topic. Didn't you get the fact that I have a bigger "p----"? And some crazy Apple diehards get ensnared: No, I have a bigger more powerful "p----" than yours!
Oh wait a minute, I am one of those crazies. Such a silly world we live in.
iMovie: Don't know. Didn't really like it on the Mac, iPhone 4, and, what I've demoed, the iPad 2. Maybe if I owned an iPad 2 and not the original iPad I would have a better opinion, but then again I set the bar to Xpress, Premier, and Final Cut, so iMovie is like the Mac equivalent to Windows Movie Maker; it'll get the job done and it's free with you computer purchase, but don't expect any Hollywood productions from it.
GarageBand can't hold a candle to ProTools, Cubase, or even FruityLoops on the desktop. A stripped down iPad variant is just as useless. Cool, yes. True multi-track recording on a single mic input, not even a pipe dream. Now, if someone were to create a device that allowed multiple analog inputs, converted them to digital, and transmitted them via bluetooth (a mixer with bluetooth is what I'm describing), then maybe I could see how GarageBand iPad edition would be remotely useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeshuawatso
Sad part, I'm a Linux fan, but I'm not a delusional pompous ......
I saw a dumb video on engadget and they were showing both tablets, but they couldn't even be powered on. What's the use of showing a video of two blank screens with nothing on them?
It has one function, to turn any parts and/or finished product that was the old samsung 10.1 tablet into expensive junk.
precisely, samsung are horrible also at supporting their products...and let's not go into the software side at all, good luck with finding out who's gonna support this tablet, non existent google customer support, or non existent samsung support.
You dont need customer support if your products are working correctly.
Obvious the case for the need in customer service says something about Apple.
Notice how easily your statement can be turned around?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
How do tout a better screen for a device that does not yet exist against one that does exist?
I think Galaxy tab is the only competitor from the android side of the house, though I feel like samsung must have copied something in the fabrication process if they were able to get the size and weight down so fast.
You cant do that in 2 weeks. Samsung obviously was in the middle of developing their next generation Galaxy Tab when Apple announced their iPad 2. The more likely case is that this next generation Galaxy Tab was pulled ahead one generation earlier to be on the market.
Comments
I'm not saying apps aren't important, just that they aren't the be-all, end-all for most people.
You claim to have a knowledge of the behavior of "most people" but then dismiss the "most people" who have bought their tablets because of Apps you derisively dismissed as silly.
Take a look at the top 100 free apps and tell me "silly" is not a good word.
Let me paraphrase your own words, take a look at the top 100 paid Apps beyond games and entertainment, and tell me if they are all silly. In fact, if you go beyond your "I, myself, me" perspective, and take the time to read, or talk to a more expanded group of people beyond those you interact with in your office and immediate environment. you would be amazed at the obscure Apps (that would never be in the top one hundred) people have found to better their lives, their children, the handicapped, those with certain ailments, those in various professions, etc.
If you have difficulty finding links to them, let me know, I will be happy to assist you.
And yeah, just from the few people I know (I do not know "most people", like you do), quite a number of them too have found what you may dismiss as silly, to become a part of their profession and making money out of it. And, I also found quite a number of people who I do not know but have encountered them through the media and other internet sites to have done the same.
If you derisively dismiss these Apps that people found useful, it tells more about you than about them. You will be the one who would be dubbed not only as silly but also narrowminded.
They say, an individual is limited only by their dreams and their imagination.
Try pondering those words instead of being too anal on technical specifications. I do not know too many ordinary people who truly understand technical specifications or too anal about them. I happen to be one of the latter.
CGC
My observation is if a powerful PC have so many problems how could it become trouble free on a smartphone? How you can kill Flahs Player on a smartphone without a Activity Monitor?
My observation is if a powerful PC have so many problems how could it become trouble free on a smartphone? How you can kill Flahs Player on a smartphone without a Activity Monitor?
I disable flash on my dual core laptop and on my quad core desktop. If Flash is that important to somebody, then they should just go out and buy an Android tablet or something else, because Flash will NEVER ever be included on iOS. There's little use in whining about it, because that is not going to change.
A good example of how useless Flash is can be found at the very top of this page. When I scroll up to the very top of the page, there is a big grey rectangle, which happens to be an ad for something useless. Thankfully it is disabled and it doesn't show up on my macbook right now.
What get's me is how Apple hardcore fans talk about having a specific app to do something extremely well, but not one that half-ass gets the job done to save me time. I don't want to have to close my browser, open SkyFire, and wait for a video I can't navigate just to get around Mr. Job's raging hard-on against Flash. Flash could barely work and it STILL would be better than this one app at a time BS.
The thing that people forget is that Apple couldn't get Flash on the iPhone if they WANTED to because Adobe hasn't shipped a version that would work. Xoom was the poster child for Flash-on-a-tablet... AND IT DIDN'T SHIP WITH FLASH! I mean, come on; you should blame Adobe for being arrogant and lazy (i.e., not fixing issues with Flash on Mac, which naturally caused Apple to disregard them).
It reminds me of an argument fallacy people use to hate on Windows. They mention all the stuff a Mac does really well for an exuberant price and fail to see that a Windows desktop that does a mediocre job at several things is just enough to reach the "good enough" mark for most. Sad part, I'm a Linux fan, but I'm not a delusional pompous that can't recognize a fellow salesman (Jobs) and redirection is a tactic to keep people from seeing flaws in your product.
I rarely hear Mac people down talk Windows/Linux users; it's usually the other way around. The way I see it: some people have more money than time, so they prefer Macs because they get them good results with less wasted time. The diametric opposite of those people are Linux users, who love throwing their time at computers (it's basically their hobby) and are fine paying with time rather than money. Windows users tend to be in-between both those extremes.
It seems like you are one of those people who are looking for a desktop in a tablet. In that case, the iPad is not for you. Those people who do "get it", which is most people, will be using their iPads in creative ways and not whining about how it is not a desktop or that desktop software is more advanced or more powerful than tablet software. It is not meant to be. The iPad does things which no desktop can do, thanks to the multitouch surface and apps written around that.
You are correct, I am one of those types. I have been a table user for years, well before Apple decided to get into the market (or maybe back into it, the Newton was HUGE). I switched to my iPad as a replacement to a (laptop without a keyboard) Motion tablet, assuming that the productivity apps on iOS were good enough for the replacement. I was definitely wrong on that call. The first hurdle, pen input. It's easier to write than type, but Jobs made a defining point that pens aren't acceptable to Apple's standards of classy. Aftermarket pens mostly sucked and Apple's angle of incidence multi-touch method made things worse. Second hurdle: multitasking. iOS 4.2 wasn't out yet so I jailbroke to get all the other features I wanted back like mouse support, remote desktop, mirroring, file saving, and most importantly, real multitasking. Last hurdle: Tabbed browsing. After using Safari for a while, I began to notice that if I switched tabs, when I switched back, the tab would refresh itself. Not good when you're filling out forms, or viewing a document over a secure connection. This was by far the easiest fix; I bought iCab from the App Store. This browser blows Safari out the water.
After all that, I was sitting on the pot reading a book and it hit me: I'm trying way too hard to get a device to fit me and re-purpose it for something very few people would even think of re-purposing if for. All that time and money down the drain, when what I really wanted was another Motion tablet that I could use my finger instead of the pen all the time. However, that tablet cost $2k but these Android tablets coming out are getting pretty close to what I need it to do, without all the semantics and hassles of the iPad.
As far as music goes, using the iPad as a way to control my equipment was the first thought that popped in my head when I started playing with it. I could use the screen to control XY controllers for generators, mixer control, and even as a sequencer and controller. Sadly, I chose to develop a game to sell instead of my utilities and by the time I found time, a slew of developers hit the market with my ideas before me.
So yes, I get it. That's why I'm selling my iPad and switching to an Android tablet if one ever releases.
Fair enough, but your point was irrelevant since it failed to address his original point that the Android browser does or does not support HTML better than Safari. He wasn't challenging the layout engine, he was challenging the hole browser. You could have easily made the counterpoint that HTML5 is better supported on iOS, that CSS3 transitions and translations are hardware supported, or that the javascript engine is better. I'm not saying this is all true, I don't have any evidence to prove either direction, but pointing out to someone that they have the same layout engine isn't a counterpoint to an argument about spec support.
The argument is valid too. Chrome and Safari are both webkit based browsers, yet neither one of them are compliant with ALL of the HTML5 specification. They each implement things differently. WebGL is still not supported in a released version of Safari, and Chrome still doesn't support Form list.
He didn't provide any support for his claim, but that's okay, right?? I mean, I just pointed out that they use the SAME CODE TO DO THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT BROWSERS DO, but that's not relevant?? Right.
You are correct, I am one of those types. I have been a table user for years, well before Apple decided to get into the market (or maybe back into it, the Newton was HUGE). I switched to my iPad as a replacement to a (laptop without a keyboard) Motion tablet, assuming that the productivity apps on iOS were good enough for the replacement. I was definitely wrong on that call. The first hurdle, pen input. It's easier to write than type, but Jobs made a defining point that pens aren't acceptable to Apple's standards of classy. Aftermarket pens mostly sucked and Apple's angle of incidence multi-touch method made things worse. Second hurdle: multitasking. iOS 4.2 wasn't out yet so I jailbroke to get all the other features I wanted back like mouse support, remote desktop, mirroring, file saving, and most importantly, real multitasking. Last hurdle: Tabbed browsing. After using Safari for a while, I began to notice that if I switched tabs, when I switched back, the tab would refresh itself. Not good when you're filling out forms, or viewing a document over a secure connection. This was by far the easiest fix; I bought iCab from the App Store. This browser blows Safari out the water.
After all that, I was sitting on the pot reading a book and it hit me: I'm trying way too hard to get a device to fit me and re-purpose it for something very few people would even think of re-purposing if for. All that time and money down the drain, when what I really wanted was another Motion tablet that I could use my finger instead of the pen all the time. However, that tablet cost $2k but these Android tablets coming out are getting pretty close to what I need it to do, without all the semantics and hassles of the iPad.
As far as music goes, using the iPad as a way to control my equipment was the first thought that popped in my head when I started playing with it. I could use the screen to control XY controllers for generators, mixer control, and even as a sequencer and controller. Sadly, I chose to develop a game to sell instead of my utilities and by the time I found time, a slew of developers hit the market with my ideas before me.
So yes, I get it. That's why I'm selling my iPad and switching to an Android tablet if one ever releases.
So, you think GarageBand is useless because it's not ProTools, but are finding Android tablets to be "getting close to what you need", even though they don't have much of anything in the way of sound creation tools?
I keep hearing this from Android boosters-- what Apple is offering in the way of apps isn't any good because they don't do more, so Android, which does almost nothing, is the better choice. Because of the openness!
The thing that people forget is that Apple couldn't get Flash on the iPhone if they WANTED to because Adobe hasn't shipped a version that would work. Xoom was the poster child for Flash-on-a-tablet... AND IT DIDN'T SHIP WITH FLASH! I mean, come on; you should blame Adobe for being arrogant and lazy (i.e., not fixing issues with Flash on Mac, which naturally caused Apple to disregard them).
I agree, but Apple's "it has to work perfectly before anyone touches it" mantra doesn't help the two get the problem resolved either. I don't blame just Apple, I blame Adobe too for not giving us jailbreakers Flash at least until Apple and Adobe both get over themselves.
I rarely hear Mac people down talk Windows/Linux users; it's usually the other way around.
Apple made an ENTIRE ad campaign based on talking people down about Windows. Hardcore fans who love Apple like they love God are notorious for trolling and shitting on any technology from Apple, then praising that technology when Apple adopts it. Don't forget the Intel debacle.
The way I see it: some people have more money than time, so they prefer Macs because they get them good results with less wasted time.
I don't think so. Macs are rarely productivity churners and they're riddle with incompatibilities, but if all you need is a browser and a all-in-one media manager, then they're a great, albeit expensive, way to go. The minute that more productivity is needed, mac users who aren't used to the platform yet are unproductive scramblers trying to find an alternative; the Mac app store may change this though. Thanks to Apple going to bed with Intel, Boot Camp can turn these people into workhorses pretty quickly.
The diametric opposite of those people are Linux users, who love throwing their time at computers (it's basically their hobby) and are fine paying with time rather than money. Windows users tend to be in-between both those extremes.
No argument for either one of these explanations. Although Linux admins that manage mainframes and servers don't like wasting time, so they go with Linux for reliability. Your description fits desktop Linux thumpers to the T though. It's one of the reasons I think Linux does so well in Latin America and other non-linear separable time views. It's a culture thing, so it's quite ethnocentric of us to say our time views are better than another based on the computer or operating systems we use, but interesting nonetheless.
He didn't provide any support for his claim, but that's okay, right?? I mean, I just pointed out that they use the SAME CODE TO DO THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT BROWSERS DO, but that's not relevant?? Right.
He made a point and you made an irrelevant point. It's like someone asking what time is it, and you respond with a picture that says the sky is blue. You're point isn't invalid, but if failed to address the person's statement you are countering. The easiest thing you could have done was ask for a citation backing up the claim.
So, you think GarageBand is useless because it's not ProTools, but are finding Android tablets to be "getting close to what you need", even though they don't have much of anything in the way of sound creation tools?
I keep hearing this from Android boosters-- what Apple is offering in the way of apps isn't any good because they don't do more, so Android, which does almost nothing, is the better choice. Because of the openness!
You didn't read my post did you? My bar for an Android tablet AND the iPad was that of my Motion Computing tablet PC. You've grossly confused two replies in one. I was referring to GarageBand being a mediocre app compared to more professional tools that I set the bar to compare, and agreeing to Apple ][ that that bar is idiotic. If I'm bright enough to know the pro tools AND how to use them in a professional environment, them I'm more than intelligent enough to understand that a 1GHz tablet with 256MB of RAM isn't going to be a replacement for a professional workstation.
The very post you replied to was in regard to trying to fit the iPad to something it's not, and that an Android tablet may have been the better choice all along. It's not an Apple fault, but a confession of fault of mine for convincing myself that I could change the device into something I knew it couldn't be, and the consequences of such decisions.
The part about using it for music at the end of the post was my REAL WORLD interpretation on what the device could be used for, which Apple ][ was politely informing about its uses in the professional environment; I was agreeing. He/She's first words of that post about comparing GarageBand to professional audio software being idiotic is right on, but I didn't add enough emphasis of sarcasm in the post he/she was replying to, so he/she took the comment literally. Next time, I'll use a smiley face.
You didn't read my post did you? My bar for an Android tablet AND the iPad was that of my Motion Computing tablet PC. You've grossly confused two replies in one. I was referring to GarageBand being a mediocre app compared to more professional tools that I set the bar to compare, and agreeing to Apple ][ that that bar is idiotic. If I'm bright enough to know the pro tools AND how to use them in a professional environment, them I'm more than intelligent enough to understand that a 1GHz tablet with 256MB of RAM isn't going to be a replacement for a professional workstation.
The very post you replied to was in regard to trying to fit the iPad to something it's not, and that an Android tablet may have been the better choice all along. It's not an Apple fault, but a confession of fault of mine for convincing myself that I could change the device into something I knew it couldn't be, and the consequences of such decisions.
The part about using it for music at the end of the post was my REAL WORLD interpretation on what the device could be used for, which Apple ][ was politely informing about its uses in the professional environment; I was agreeing. He/She's first words of that post about comparing GarageBand to professional audio software being idiotic is right on, but I didn't add enough emphasis of sarcasm in the post he/she was replying to, so he/she took the comment literally. Next time, I'll use a smiley face.
Doesn't change my point. You're saying you prefer nothing over something, if that something doesn't meet an arbitrary standard of professionalism.
Of course the iPad doesn't replace a workstation. A laptop doesn't replace a rendering farm, does that mean I forgo the laptop that can process video files in favor of a netbook that can't?
I'll take the functionality that's available now, thanks, with the expectation that it will improve over time. GarageBand looks like a great audio sketchbook and very useful for quick edits, mixes and recordings. Just like the other Apple productivity apps are great on the go solutions for text entry, presentation creation, movie editing, etc.
The option is to not do those things at all. To each his own, I guess, but this is starting to sound like Android apologetics rather than a rational evaluation of capabilities.
This article is genuinely defensive and terribly written. The shots at the Android app market are particularly perplexing, because the market has been growing very rapidly and almost all of the top iPhone apps have or will shortly have Android variants.
It also doesn't mention that the battery is the same size as the iPad 2's and is rated at 10 hours for video like the iPad 2, and it has a superior screen to the iPad 2. If anything, the screen is the highlight. It's the world's first PLS screen in consumer electronics, which is the evolutionary success to the IPS screen in the iPads. PLS screens are 15% cheaper, 10% brighter, and have better viewing angles.
MacRumors reported in February that Apple wanted to use the PLS panel in the iPad 2, but they ultimately didn't. Samsung holds 30 patents on the screen so it is the world's only manufacturer.
Also, Flash is still "soon" for Honeycomb, but the beta is out now and it's GPU-accelerated.
what ever fanboy. I hope when this tablet comes out & the review says the ipad 2 beats it hands down. Then please eat you words! Don't forget its Apple ipad that reinvented the tablet & made it how it is today. The rest is just copying/trying to play catchup!!! You also seem to missed the point, its not the spec's. Its what you do with it that counts.
WTF
How did they do that? So fast!
And how did they get it that thin? Without the unibody structure?
They don't have the magnets though … and the smart cover. And the Apps. And the integrated user interface.
Good to see iPad 2 has a little friend to play with. It'll make iPad 3 only better.
They were able to do it so fast because. THEY ARE NON WORKING PROTOTYPES NOT AVAILABLE UNTIL JUNE, they are probably dissecting the iPad 2 to see how to fit it all in.
LOL
There's still number of people who do want full web experience, and having Flash is still part of that.
I'm not going to say that everyone wants what I want, but it is equally silly saying that "noone wants Flash anyway". I would be surprised not to find that, at this point of time, majority still want Flash support.
Silly seems to be a popular word in this thread. Yes, it is silly to suggest that no one wants Flash. You, Asheran and quite a number here seem to suggest that you cannot have a full web experience without Flash. That should be proof enough to prove your point.
Just as it is equally silly to imply even in the remotest sense that since "you and your kiln cannot live without Flash" to use a hyperbole (another popular word here) that others cannot live without Flash. I've got news for you, I read quite a few people who actually turns off any script that lead to Flash (some even go to the extreme in turning off any image). That this ability to turn off annoying pop ups, and all sorts of "Flashy" images is popular is evident in the option being included in the preferences of many browsers.
Thanks to John Huber, who posted a method (from another source) of either disabling Flash completely or partially. I am able to experience and experiment with same websites I visit, where the Flash is partially. And, here's a very nice juicy advantage if you have no yet found it. Many of the disabled media were advertisements or whistles and bells.
Also, it is equally even more silly to suggest that majority still want Flash support. If you have proof of this, be helpful and post it here to be investigated. Or, are you just parroting an Adobe mantra. Or, are you just projecting that since "Flash play such an important part of your life, you cannot live without it", the majority of humanity must feel the same need -- to live by the Flash and wither to death from not having to have a full web experience without Flash.
Flash is still very useful. I was out condo shopping last weekend with my iPhone and was checking out competing condo sites, some of which are Flash-based websites. Staring at a giant empty box is infuriating to me. Give me the choice if I'd like to use Flash, even if it would hurt my battery.
Again, you and nikon are providing anecdotal experiences. Can you provide us with those Flash only sites please. Pretty please????
But here are some very important considerations:
- Most if not all computing devices (mobile computers, desktops, laptops, etc.) can view Flash-free sites.
- There are now almost two hundred million iOS devices (assuming all are still in service) and if projections of analysts are correct, definitely more than two hundred million iOS devices
- From Apple data those iOS device owners have been willing to shell out more than $2 billion dollars just for Apps alone.
- As important, those iOS device owners have been shown to be willing to pay premium price for iOS devices
- Unless jailbroken, none of those iOS devices can view whatever is to be viewed in Flash-exclusive websites.
- Unless something very significant happens in the consumer market, it is unlikely that Apple/Steve Jobs would include Flash anytime soon in the iOS devices
Confronted with these considerations, would any website creator, who wants to make a profit, simply turn a blind eye on those "premium consumers" who have shown willingness to open their wallets to products, services, they find useful -- however silly "some people who live by the Flash" find these Apps and choices to be?And here's a more compelling consideration: How many website creators who are among the most visited sites do not have Flash alternatives or even special Apps devoted exclusively or to reach those iOS devices?
Facebook?
YouTube?
Twitter?
Wikipedia?
Craigslist?
Flickr?
Major newspapers and magazines and mass media in the US?
BBC?
Porn sites? I am not an expert on this, but I read an article that the porn industry is among to the more pioneering in adopting new technologies and frontiers. They understand that many of those iOS consumers may be no different from the others, and a significant amount are porn consumers, not widthstanding Apple/Steve Jobs policies. They may not be able to get their Apps approved, but they can always make the websites accessible to all those horny iOS consumers.
Even before the controversy raised by Apple/Steve Jobs excluding Flash in iOS devices, some of the most influential sites do not use nor do they need Flash to reach their target readers.
Open-source CMS softwares, such as Joomla, used by millions of websites, both by amateurs, professionals and for profit sites all over the world, come without Flash (it is up to the webmaster to decide whether to include flash modules). Aware of the ascendance of iOS devices, some template makers created website layouts specifically for iOS like the iPhone/iPod touch. No need to make a special one for the iPad -- open your iPad, type the site name and in an instant they open in the Safari (flash free) of the iPad, even faster than it would in more powerful laptop.
Thus, to put a more apt use of "silly", it is only a silly and plain stupid webmaster, who wants to reach as much target audience or make a profit to ignore such a significant "premium consumer population". And this is not even about reaching everyone, when it comes to profit-oriented sites. It may seem elitist but those "premium consumer popular", whether they are in the minority have been willing to pay premium price, and made Apple highly profitable since Steve Jobs came back. That developers are flocking to the iOS devices is a testament that some, if not many are making money also, along with all those third party accessories creators.
That many find the Apple ecosystem compelling is that it seems every company that matters seem to copy Apple innovations, after Apple have shown that even an old technology that proved to be a yawner to consumers then caught their fancy. For whatever reason or magic, Apple/Steve Jobs and their team have pave the way. Everyone else are "copycats". Oh sure they try to up the ante, but it becomes a pissing contest with others to prove that they have the bigger "p----"
An even more compelling people who may in their deepest thought know that they are unlikely to persuade Apple products consumers and diehards, still spend so much time invading "Apple centric" sites, and shouting as loud as they can, see my "p----" is bigger, more powerful than yours!
And here are these equally crazy Apple diehards: Yeah, but what can you do with "p----"?
And the Apple/Steve Jobs haters/detractors retort back: Don't change the topic. Didn't you get the fact that I have a bigger "p----"? And some crazy Apple diehards get ensnared: No, I have a bigger more powerful "p----" than yours!
Oh wait a minute, I am one of those crazies. Such a silly world we live in.
CGC
iMovie: Don't know. Didn't really like it on the Mac, iPhone 4, and, what I've demoed, the iPad 2. Maybe if I owned an iPad 2 and not the original iPad I would have a better opinion, but then again I set the bar to Xpress, Premier, and Final Cut, so iMovie is like the Mac equivalent to Windows Movie Maker; it'll get the job done and it's free with you computer purchase, but don't expect any Hollywood productions from it.
GarageBand can't hold a candle to ProTools, Cubase, or even FruityLoops on the desktop. A stripped down iPad variant is just as useless. Cool, yes. True multi-track recording on a single mic input, not even a pipe dream. Now, if someone were to create a device that allowed multiple analog inputs, converted them to digital, and transmitted them via bluetooth (a mixer with bluetooth is what I'm describing), then maybe I could see how GarageBand iPad edition would be remotely useful.
Sad part, I'm a Linux fan, but I'm not a delusional pompous ......
Oh I think you are!
and that is the reason they don't mention battery life.
Its 10 hours.
As of now, it's vaporware.
I saw a dumb video on engadget and they were showing both tablets, but they couldn't even be powered on. What's the use of showing a video of two blank screens with nothing on them?
It has one function, to turn any parts and/or finished product that was the old samsung 10.1 tablet into expensive junk.
precisely, samsung are horrible also at supporting their products...and let's not go into the software side at all, good luck with finding out who's gonna support this tablet, non existent google customer support, or non existent samsung support.
You dont need customer support if your products are working correctly.
Obvious the case for the need in customer service says something about Apple.
Notice how easily your statement can be turned around?
How do tout a better screen for a device that does not yet exist against one that does exist?
http://www.oled-display.net/smd-show...ips-technology
I think Galaxy tab is the only competitor from the android side of the house, though I feel like samsung must have copied something in the fabrication process if they were able to get the size and weight down so fast.
You cant do that in 2 weeks. Samsung obviously was in the middle of developing their next generation Galaxy Tab when Apple announced their iPad 2. The more likely case is that this next generation Galaxy Tab was pulled ahead one generation earlier to be on the market.