Like celebrity journalism, the Apple rumor mill is essentially a religious preoccupation. The rumors themselves, much like Gods and famous people, are as purposefully, stupefyingly dull as the phenomenon itself is fascinating. All cults have at their core an energetically defended "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" infinite loop, where anything that might modify the conditions on which the cycle depends is deliberately excluded from the process, denying any possibility of fulfillment in order that it may continue forever.
The obsession with the presumed camera cutout in the hypothetical case of the alleged iPad 3 resembles nothing so much as debate over the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin or an in-depth analysis of what Gwyneth Paltrow didn't eat today. The focus of the attention is as trivial as the need to pay attention is paramount.
Stripped of the boring and irrelevant details, all such behaviors are revealed as soldiers conscripted into a rag tag army against ontological despair. Whatever their nominal function, the true purpose of such infinite loops is merely to continue infinitely, and consequently any focus on their alleged content that might threaten that continuance must be repelled at any cost, lest the entire system collapse. But for its viciously self-defensive qualities, the human desire to worship would be the subject of a great deal more attention. Sadly, part of the syndrome is that the worshipful seldom hesitate to lie, cheat, or kill in defense of their proclivity, intuitively sensing that like some secretive sexual fetish, exposure to light would banish the narcissistic shame and therefore decrease the pleasure. Consequently, we continue to focus on what we worship and think very little about worship itself.
Of course dead heroes are always best: that which can't change can never disappoint. Fortunately, being a secular Saint, Steve Jobs hypothetical farts will always smell sweeter than any actual rose gardens. The iPad 3… Hallelujah! Never mind the suicidal underage human robots behind the curtain.
Likely all these seemingly trivial obsessions are essentially sexual in nature. Like sexuality, they enjoin a repetition compulsion that persists without consideration for the comfort of the individual or the health of societies. And (like sexuality) we secretly fear that being relived of our compulsion would only expose a purposeless existence, the only goal of which is more of the same. The primary purpose of the exercise is to protect the faithful from the essential pointlessness of the exercise.
Like Wiley Coyote, we dare not look down. To see the empty air beneath our furiously running in feet is to fall.
I'm sorry, but I happen to be an expert on cults and cult behaviour and this entire statement is pure nonsense.
Also, as a reasonably accomplished writer, it doesn't even seem to make sense to me. You use a lot of florid phraseology but the sentences don't even hang together and the content is essentially zero. It's almost like the kind of crap people write when they are stoned and think they have some great insight that they don't actually have.
... CF has its uses but aluminium has its uses, too. Ignoring cost, recyclability, consistency of results and thermal aspects, for the number of units needed, the ease of machine a precise size on a microscopic level, complex internal structures, and the rigidity of the material at certain thinnesses I think Aluminum will stick around.
It's worth noting that Apple has many patents around carbon fibre that are very innovative and basically "answer" all of the problems you mention, but I tend to agree with you anyway.
The reason I tend to agree is that the patents and rumours that have emerged over the last few years are very strongly indicative of the idea that Apple has gone so far as to make prototypes of carbon fibre iPads and even a few small production runs. Yet they haven't released a carbon fibre iPad and probably won't this year as well. That tells me that they are very serious about perhaps using carbon fibre, but that it hasn't (yet) passed muster.
Can you quantify the "many"? Otherwise, it's not a very meaningful statement.
The real people to ask are Apple.
#1: Apple has already stated that iPads are cannibalizing Mac sales (though it's better to eat your own than be someone else's dinner).
#2: There's a reason iOS 5 features the ability to be "PC Free." iPads are becoming primary computers. For you? No. For me? No (though I love mine!) but for others? Definitely.
You prefer a real keyboard. So do I. But consider how popular texting was on phones even before the era of smartphones. People (especially teens) were whipping out texts by tying them out on tiny numerical keyboards. Believe it or not, people are writing novels - actual novels - on iPads. The makers of Scrivener, excellent software for writing novels on the Mac, are developing an iPad version.
It's a mistake to think that your tastes and preferences are representative of everyone else.
iPads are definitely becoming primary computers. For most? No. But for many, yes.
You prefer a real keyboard. So do I. But consider how popular texting was on phones even before the era of smartphones. People (especially teens) were whipping out texts by tying them out on tiny numerical keyboards. Believe it or not, people are writing novels - actual novels - on iPads. The makers of Scrivener, excellent software for writing novels on the Mac, are developing an iPad version.
It's a mistake to think that your tastes and preferences are representative of everyone else.
iPads are definitely becoming primary computers. For most? No. But for many, yes.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a longer form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile? Heck, capability to skip to parts of a longer document often isn't there on iPads, though maybe not all programs are limited like that. Swiping through a 200 page document with 200 swipes to get to the end is a clear waste of time, the same if you need to go to any particular portion.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a longer form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile? Heck, capability to skip to parts of a longer document often isn't there on iPads, though maybe not all programs are limited like that. Swiping through a 200 page document with 200 swipes to get to the end is a clear waste of time, the same if you need to go to any particular portion.
Hey. Cling to your truck if it works for you. See you in the rear view mirror.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a long form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile?
For interests sake and because you asked, I am currently writing two novels (roughly 80,00 words each at the moment), and a non-fiction title (120,00 words), on the iPad (exclusively on the iPad), using thumb typing in portrait mode by which means I get about 40-50 wpm.
Yes, I can type much faster on the keyboard, but the portability of the iPad trumps sitting at my desk. Writing (for me) happens on planes trains and automobiles and I don't have the luxury of running home to my computer. My productivity (writing wise), has actually gone up by a large amount since I switched entirely to the iPad.
I find most writers use laptops over desktops for the same reason but I never found laptops to be a good solution given that my main computer was a desktop and laptops don't sync.
The iPad is just a slightly different portable computer with it's pros and cons like any other. Before the iOS devices came along did a large part of my writing on a Pocket PC device. The iPhone trumped that on the first day I used it, and the iPad trumped the iPhone when it arrived a year or so later.
I think you have this point backwards. For gaming it will probably be best to downgrade to a lower resolution put for better frame rates, but for HD movies it'll be better and for reading (anything) it will blow you away. Consider the difference between the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 displays when it came to crisp and clear text. I couldn't go back after I saw the Retina Display.
Yeah the display will be good and an improvement but is that enough to get people to upgrade? Personally, not for me. I can see a lot of people upgrading though but likely cause its Apple rather than this is the thing they've been waitiing for.
My iPad 2 screen is fantastic, plenty good enouhg for me. I'm sure a comparison will make me jealous but is that alone enough to make everyone shell out $500-$900 for a new gadget that does pretty much exactly the same?
Not convinced, from the rumors, that there is enough new functionality to justify my cash.
Hey. Cling to your truck if it works for you. See you in the rear view mirror.
5 years. Maybe less.
A laptop is a truck? You're using a tired vehicle metaphor? Is the Internet a dump truck too?
I'm not arguing about five years from now, I'm arguing now. Five years from now, most of the software drawbacks should be shaken out, just like how Apple has added features every year to address limitations in their system. However, right now, a lot of stuff I try to do on an iPad still feels clumsy, or seemingly obvious features that are missing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
For interests sake and because you asked, I am currently writing two novels (roughly 80,00 words each at the moment), and a non-fiction title (120,00 words), on the iPad (exclusively on the iPad), using thumb typing in portrait mode by which means I get about 40-50 wpm.
Yes, I can type much faster on the keyboard, but the portability of the iPad trumps sitting at my desk. Writing (for me) happens on planes trains and automobiles and I don't have the luxury of running home to my computer. My productivity (writing wise), has actually gone up by a large amount since I switched entirely to the iPad.
I find most writers use laptops over desktops for the same reason but I never found laptops to be a good solution given that my main computer was a desktop and laptops don't sync.
The iPad is just a slightly different portable computer with it's pros and cons like any other. Before the iOS devices came along did a large part of my writing on a Pocket PC device. The iPhone trumped that on the first day I used it, and the iPad trumped the iPhone when it arrived a year or so later.
IMO the iPad is absolutely perfect for writing.
Why not only use a laptop instead of a desktop and an iPad? I'd think that simplifies the whole system.
It is disappointing that computers don't sync together better. I never understood why no one ever solved that problem, the technology industry only had, what, twenty years to solve that?
Fatal flaw with this article, it says the case is more tapered, which would coincide with reports of the iPad 3 getting a larger battery. Umm, if the case retains the same dimensions but you increase the taper then you are decreasing the total volume. How would that allow for a larger battery?
Fatal flaw with this article, it says the case is more tapered, which would coincide with reports of the iPad 3 getting a larger battery. Umm, if the case retains the same dimensions but you increase the taper then you are decreasing the total volume. How would that allow for a larger battery?
Because they used the wrong word. Tapered means narrrower at one end. They should have said the edges are beveled, or rounded more than the iPad 2, to compensate for the fact that the back has to be slightly thicker—perhaps.
Kids don't know enough hardware terminology these days. No shop classes anymore, no hanging out at the garage talking to the mechanics. Shame, really.
We don't KNOW what Apple has been or is interested in. We KNOW only what they released.
I didn't think I was being vague in presenting my argument. In no way have I declared that anyone told me what was going on. It's just a no-brainer that Apple would have no interest in technology that takes the iPad in a negative direction. Something that requires a lot more power and adds significant weight is clearly unacceptable.
I think it is reasonable to use straightforward logic in assessing all the rumours that come along. This is a rather obvious one. A screen technology that would cause serious side effects is just not something Apple would consider. Isn't that rather obvious.
When it was claimed that Apple was going with two backlights in order to use Samsung and/or LG screens, it was rather clear that something just didn't add up. Now, it seems, the rumour of the day is that it's the Sharp technology, I presume IGZO, that has made it into the new iPad. I think the options are that or not upgrading the resolution after all.
What I would not consider believable is that Apple would conjure up an iPad 3 that is at least as heavy as the iPad 1 if not heavier. Not going to happen.
I'm not arguing about five years from now, I'm arguing now.
And you're right - for you. For the needs of others now, you're wrong. Your next statement is a perfect example of why:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Why not only use a laptop instead of a desktop and an iPad? I'd think that simplifies the whole system.
You're thinking based on your tastes and preferences rather than understanding the tastes and preferences of others.
If a laptop is what works for you, use it. Nobody is saying you have to keep up with technology if you prefer the old way. Apple has said that iPads are already cannibalizing Mac sales. It's already happening NOW, as in today. Actually, scratch that. Apple reported that in an earnings call based on numbers from 2011, so it was happening in 2011. Here's an article from 2010 talking about the original iPad beginning to cannibalize Macbook sales. In 2010. That's over a year before now, rather than five years from now. And, again, there's a reason Apple created iOS 5 to be "PC Free." People are replacing their Macs and PCs with tablets. It's happening now whether you understand it or not.
I'll be honest, I didn't understand it either until I owned an iPad 2. I bought it for a client web project and thought it would be little more than a neat toy. Boy was I wrong. I still use my Mac desktop at home (my beloved Mini!) but I haven't touched my laptop since shortly after buying an iPad. I could type faster on my laptop, but in all other ways, I find the iPad so much more enjoyable to use, and it's more compact (especially in use versus how much space a laptop takes up when opened).
What I would not consider believable is that Apple would conjure up an iPad 3 that is at least as heavy as the iPad 1 if not heavier. Not going to happen.
This is just my opinion, but, I don't think Apple has to chase weight reduction with the next iPad. I can easily imagine an iPad 3 (or 2s?) that is as heavy as an iPad 2 if it achieves other goals. If the iPad 3 is the same weight but with an 8 megapixel camera, a retina display and even slightly more horsepower without sacrificing battery life, I'll be thrilled.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a longer form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile? Heck, capability to skip to parts of a longer document often isn't there on iPads, though maybe not all programs are limited like that. Swiping through a 200 page document with 200 swipes to get to the end is a clear waste of time, the same if you need to go to any particular portion.
Who the hell in this thread is suggesting an iPad is the best tool to write a novel??! Nobody. What percentage of people are writing novels? The obvious point is that iPads may be able to replace MOST tasks that MOST people do on a computer. There are some things tablets won't be as good at for a very long time. But those things tend to be more specialized or professional niches, and don't represent the usage of the majority of people. Nobody is going to argue with you that a virtual keyboard would work well to write a novel- it obviously wouldn't, and I'd rather repeatedly slam my face against a wall than attempt that. I'm not sure what the point of your post was, as you're making a straw-man statement that is blatantly obvious and that nobody is going to disagree with. I'm a designer, but I'm not going to suddenly start whining that the iPad isn't an ideal tool for serious design jobs- because nobody is stating that it is, I'm not planning to use it as such, and it isn't positioned as such a tool.
EDIT: Holy shit, someone is suggesting that. I stand corrected, I guess there is someone out there.
For interests sake and because you asked, I am currently writing two novels (roughly 80,00 words each at the moment), and a non-fiction title (120,00 words), on the iPad (exclusively on the iPad), using thumb typing in portrait mode by which means I get about 40-50 wpm.
Yes, I can type much faster on the keyboard, but the portability of the iPad trumps sitting at my desk. Writing (for me) happens on planes trains and automobiles and I don't have the luxury of running home to my computer. My productivity (writing wise), has actually gone up by a large amount since I switched entirely to the iPad.
I find most writers use laptops over desktops for the same reason but I never found laptops to be a good solution given that my main computer was a desktop and laptops don't sync.
The iPad is just a slightly different portable computer with it's pros and cons like any other. Before the iOS devices came along did a large part of my writing on a Pocket PC device. The iPhone trumped that on the first day I used it, and the iPad trumped the iPhone when it arrived a year or so later.
IMO the iPad is absolutely perfect for writing.
I'm going to completely disagree with you there, and would rather stick a fork in my eyeballs than attempt to write a novel on an iPad. I mean.. what about text selection? Moving the cursor? All these things are significantly slower and more cumbersome on a touchscreen. There's not many things that I can say categorically are much WORSE on a tablet, but writing a novel is one of the few exceptions. As for xyncing, you heard of dropbox? There's a million syncing solutions out there. I'm as much a tablet champion as the next guy, and do believe they're the future of computing with the iPad leading the pack by a large margin, but writing a novel is still something that would work 10x better on a Macbook Air. Thumb-typing a novel in portrait mode? I mean, really? How is that even possible? At least in landscape you don't have to bear the weight of the thing- but in portrait? Jesus.
The iPhone 4 almost uniformly performed lower than the 3GS in GPU benchmarks despite faster hardware, and it was because the GPU had to put up with so many more pixels. I think its pretty certain the iPad 3 will have a better GPU to cope unlike the 3GS-4, but the improvement won't be as much as it would have been if they stayed with the same resolution, since again its putting up with way more pixels, and in this case more pixels than even 150+ watt desktop GPUs have to handle. So the resolution alone isn't great for gamers, but rather everything else will benefit more than games.
I have a theory that gaming will remain at 1024x768 but iPad 2X will use optimised Lanczos-equivalent ~upscaling~ ala Xbox360.
It's the best of all worlds... Definitive 3D graphics improvement, while still driving both the Retina resolution as well as full 1080p output including Airplay Mirroring(?) to AppleTV3.
I have done some tests and will post soon. Gotta finish some work first.
Comments
Like Wiley Coyote, we dare not look down. To see the empty air beneath our furiously running in feet is to fall.
Good Stuff. Very perceptive, and very well written.
Like celebrity journalism, the Apple rumor mill is essentially a religious preoccupation. The rumors themselves, much like Gods and famous people, are as purposefully, stupefyingly dull as the phenomenon itself is fascinating. All cults have at their core an energetically defended "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" infinite loop, where anything that might modify the conditions on which the cycle depends is deliberately excluded from the process, denying any possibility of fulfillment in order that it may continue forever.
The obsession with the presumed camera cutout in the hypothetical case of the alleged iPad 3 resembles nothing so much as debate over the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin or an in-depth analysis of what Gwyneth Paltrow didn't eat today. The focus of the attention is as trivial as the need to pay attention is paramount.
Stripped of the boring and irrelevant details, all such behaviors are revealed as soldiers conscripted into a rag tag army against ontological despair. Whatever their nominal function, the true purpose of such infinite loops is merely to continue infinitely, and consequently any focus on their alleged content that might threaten that continuance must be repelled at any cost, lest the entire system collapse. But for its viciously self-defensive qualities, the human desire to worship would be the subject of a great deal more attention. Sadly, part of the syndrome is that the worshipful seldom hesitate to lie, cheat, or kill in defense of their proclivity, intuitively sensing that like some secretive sexual fetish, exposure to light would banish the narcissistic shame and therefore decrease the pleasure. Consequently, we continue to focus on what we worship and think very little about worship itself.
Of course dead heroes are always best: that which can't change can never disappoint. Fortunately, being a secular Saint, Steve Jobs hypothetical farts will always smell sweeter than any actual rose gardens. The iPad 3… Hallelujah! Never mind the suicidal underage human robots behind the curtain.
Likely all these seemingly trivial obsessions are essentially sexual in nature. Like sexuality, they enjoin a repetition compulsion that persists without consideration for the comfort of the individual or the health of societies. And (like sexuality) we secretly fear that being relived of our compulsion would only expose a purposeless existence, the only goal of which is more of the same. The primary purpose of the exercise is to protect the faithful from the essential pointlessness of the exercise.
Like Wiley Coyote, we dare not look down. To see the empty air beneath our furiously running in feet is to fall.
I'm sorry, but I happen to be an expert on cults and cult behaviour and this entire statement is pure nonsense.
Also, as a reasonably accomplished writer, it doesn't even seem to make sense to me. You use a lot of florid phraseology but the sentences don't even hang together and the content is essentially zero. It's almost like the kind of crap people write when they are stoned and think they have some great insight that they don't actually have.
... CF has its uses but aluminium has its uses, too. Ignoring cost, recyclability, consistency of results and thermal aspects, for the number of units needed, the ease of machine a precise size on a microscopic level, complex internal structures, and the rigidity of the material at certain thinnesses I think Aluminum will stick around.
It's worth noting that Apple has many patents around carbon fibre that are very innovative and basically "answer" all of the problems you mention, but I tend to agree with you anyway.
The reason I tend to agree is that the patents and rumours that have emerged over the last few years are very strongly indicative of the idea that Apple has gone so far as to make prototypes of carbon fibre iPads and even a few small production runs. Yet they haven't released a carbon fibre iPad and probably won't this year as well. That tells me that they are very serious about perhaps using carbon fibre, but that it hasn't (yet) passed muster.
Can you quantify the "many"? Otherwise, it's not a very meaningful statement.
The real people to ask are Apple.
#1: Apple has already stated that iPads are cannibalizing Mac sales (though it's better to eat your own than be someone else's dinner).
#2: There's a reason iOS 5 features the ability to be "PC Free." iPads are becoming primary computers. For you? No. For me? No (though I love mine!) but for others? Definitely.
You prefer a real keyboard. So do I. But consider how popular texting was on phones even before the era of smartphones. People (especially teens) were whipping out texts by tying them out on tiny numerical keyboards. Believe it or not, people are writing novels - actual novels - on iPads. The makers of Scrivener, excellent software for writing novels on the Mac, are developing an iPad version.
It's a mistake to think that your tastes and preferences are representative of everyone else.
iPads are definitely becoming primary computers. For most? No. But for many, yes.
Samsung makes components. What's your point?
He has sort of become the new slapppy. I'd say pay him no heed at this point.
You prefer a real keyboard. So do I. But consider how popular texting was on phones even before the era of smartphones. People (especially teens) were whipping out texts by tying them out on tiny numerical keyboards. Believe it or not, people are writing novels - actual novels - on iPads. The makers of Scrivener, excellent software for writing novels on the Mac, are developing an iPad version.
It's a mistake to think that your tastes and preferences are representative of everyone else.
iPads are definitely becoming primary computers. For most? No. But for many, yes.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a longer form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile? Heck, capability to skip to parts of a longer document often isn't there on iPads, though maybe not all programs are limited like that. Swiping through a 200 page document with 200 swipes to get to the end is a clear waste of time, the same if you need to go to any particular portion.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a longer form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile? Heck, capability to skip to parts of a longer document often isn't there on iPads, though maybe not all programs are limited like that. Swiping through a 200 page document with 200 swipes to get to the end is a clear waste of time, the same if you need to go to any particular portion.
Hey. Cling to your truck if it works for you. See you in the rear view mirror.
5 years. Maybe less.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a long form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile?
For interests sake and because you asked, I am currently writing two novels (roughly 80,00 words each at the moment), and a non-fiction title (120,00 words), on the iPad (exclusively on the iPad), using thumb typing in portrait mode by which means I get about 40-50 wpm.
Yes, I can type much faster on the keyboard, but the portability of the iPad trumps sitting at my desk. Writing (for me) happens on planes trains and automobiles and I don't have the luxury of running home to my computer. My productivity (writing wise), has actually gone up by a large amount since I switched entirely to the iPad.
I find most writers use laptops over desktops for the same reason but I never found laptops to be a good solution given that my main computer was a desktop and laptops don't sync.
The iPad is just a slightly different portable computer with it's pros and cons like any other. Before the iOS devices came along did a large part of my writing on a Pocket PC device. The iPhone trumped that on the first day I used it, and the iPad trumped the iPhone when it arrived a year or so later.
IMO the iPad is absolutely perfect for writing.
I think you have this point backwards. For gaming it will probably be best to downgrade to a lower resolution put for better frame rates, but for HD movies it'll be better and for reading (anything) it will blow you away. Consider the difference between the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 displays when it came to crisp and clear text. I couldn't go back after I saw the Retina Display.
Yeah the display will be good and an improvement but is that enough to get people to upgrade? Personally, not for me. I can see a lot of people upgrading though but likely cause its Apple rather than this is the thing they've been waitiing for.
My iPad 2 screen is fantastic, plenty good enouhg for me. I'm sure a comparison will make me jealous but is that alone enough to make everyone shell out $500-$900 for a new gadget that does pretty much exactly the same?
Not convinced, from the rumors, that there is enough new functionality to justify my cash.
Hey. Cling to your truck if it works for you. See you in the rear view mirror.
5 years. Maybe less.
A laptop is a truck? You're using a tired vehicle metaphor? Is the Internet a dump truck too?
I'm not arguing about five years from now, I'm arguing now. Five years from now, most of the software drawbacks should be shaken out, just like how Apple has added features every year to address limitations in their system. However, right now, a lot of stuff I try to do on an iPad still feels clumsy, or seemingly obvious features that are missing.
For interests sake and because you asked, I am currently writing two novels (roughly 80,00 words each at the moment), and a non-fiction title (120,00 words), on the iPad (exclusively on the iPad), using thumb typing in portrait mode by which means I get about 40-50 wpm.
Yes, I can type much faster on the keyboard, but the portability of the iPad trumps sitting at my desk. Writing (for me) happens on planes trains and automobiles and I don't have the luxury of running home to my computer. My productivity (writing wise), has actually gone up by a large amount since I switched entirely to the iPad.
I find most writers use laptops over desktops for the same reason but I never found laptops to be a good solution given that my main computer was a desktop and laptops don't sync.
The iPad is just a slightly different portable computer with it's pros and cons like any other. Before the iOS devices came along did a large part of my writing on a Pocket PC device. The iPhone trumped that on the first day I used it, and the iPad trumped the iPhone when it arrived a year or so later.
IMO the iPad is absolutely perfect for writing.
Why not only use a laptop instead of a desktop and an iPad? I'd think that simplifies the whole system.
It is disappointing that computers don't sync together better. I never understood why no one ever solved that problem, the technology industry only had, what, twenty years to solve that?
A laptop is a truck?
Yup.
Yup.
OK, why use obsolete metaphor to express it? Isn't that complaining about someone being out of date using an even more out of date expression?
Fatal flaw with this article, it says the case is more tapered, which would coincide with reports of the iPad 3 getting a larger battery. Umm, if the case retains the same dimensions but you increase the taper then you are decreasing the total volume. How would that allow for a larger battery?
Because they used the wrong word. Tapered means narrrower at one end. They should have said the edges are beveled, or rounded more than the iPad 2, to compensate for the fact that the back has to be slightly thicker—perhaps.
Kids don't know enough hardware terminology these days. No shop classes anymore, no hanging out at the garage talking to the mechanics. Shame, really.
Was it Steve or Jonny that told you that.
Thought so.
We don't KNOW what Apple has been or is interested in. We KNOW only what they released.
I didn't think I was being vague in presenting my argument. In no way have I declared that anyone told me what was going on. It's just a no-brainer that Apple would have no interest in technology that takes the iPad in a negative direction. Something that requires a lot more power and adds significant weight is clearly unacceptable.
I think it is reasonable to use straightforward logic in assessing all the rumours that come along. This is a rather obvious one. A screen technology that would cause serious side effects is just not something Apple would consider. Isn't that rather obvious.
When it was claimed that Apple was going with two backlights in order to use Samsung and/or LG screens, it was rather clear that something just didn't add up. Now, it seems, the rumour of the day is that it's the Sharp technology, I presume IGZO, that has made it into the new iPad. I think the options are that or not upgrading the resolution after all.
What I would not consider believable is that Apple would conjure up an iPad 3 that is at least as heavy as the iPad 1 if not heavier. Not going to happen.
I'm not arguing about five years from now, I'm arguing now.
And you're right - for you. For the needs of others now, you're wrong. Your next statement is a perfect example of why:
Why not only use a laptop instead of a desktop and an iPad? I'd think that simplifies the whole system.
You're thinking based on your tastes and preferences rather than understanding the tastes and preferences of others.
If a laptop is what works for you, use it. Nobody is saying you have to keep up with technology if you prefer the old way. Apple has said that iPads are already cannibalizing Mac sales. It's already happening NOW, as in today. Actually, scratch that. Apple reported that in an earnings call based on numbers from 2011, so it was happening in 2011. Here's an article from 2010 talking about the original iPad beginning to cannibalize Macbook sales. In 2010. That's over a year before now, rather than five years from now. And, again, there's a reason Apple created iOS 5 to be "PC Free." People are replacing their Macs and PCs with tablets. It's happening now whether you understand it or not.
I'll be honest, I didn't understand it either until I owned an iPad 2. I bought it for a client web project and thought it would be little more than a neat toy. Boy was I wrong. I still use my Mac desktop at home (my beloved Mini!) but I haven't touched my laptop since shortly after buying an iPad. I could type faster on my laptop, but in all other ways, I find the iPad so much more enjoyable to use, and it's more compact (especially in use versus how much space a laptop takes up when opened).
What I would not consider believable is that Apple would conjure up an iPad 3 that is at least as heavy as the iPad 1 if not heavier. Not going to happen.
This is just my opinion, but, I don't think Apple has to chase weight reduction with the next iPad. I can easily imagine an iPad 3 (or 2s?) that is as heavy as an iPad 2 if it achieves other goals. If the iPad 3 is the same weight but with an 8 megapixel camera, a retina display and even slightly more horsepower without sacrificing battery life, I'll be thrilled.
There's a difference between texting with rampant character substitution, short hand and abbreviations, and making a longer form post, like yours.
I also don't see how typing on a virtual keyboard is efficient for novel writing. One thing I find is if I'm watching where I put my fingers, auto correct often changes words before I notice it, resulting in even more inefficiency, having to correct changes that didn't have to be made. If it takes an extra month to write a novel, then is it really worthwhile? Heck, capability to skip to parts of a longer document often isn't there on iPads, though maybe not all programs are limited like that. Swiping through a 200 page document with 200 swipes to get to the end is a clear waste of time, the same if you need to go to any particular portion.
Who the hell in this thread is suggesting an iPad is the best tool to write a novel??! Nobody. What percentage of people are writing novels? The obvious point is that iPads may be able to replace MOST tasks that MOST people do on a computer. There are some things tablets won't be as good at for a very long time. But those things tend to be more specialized or professional niches, and don't represent the usage of the majority of people. Nobody is going to argue with you that a virtual keyboard would work well to write a novel- it obviously wouldn't, and I'd rather repeatedly slam my face against a wall than attempt that. I'm not sure what the point of your post was, as you're making a straw-man statement that is blatantly obvious and that nobody is going to disagree with. I'm a designer, but I'm not going to suddenly start whining that the iPad isn't an ideal tool for serious design jobs- because nobody is stating that it is, I'm not planning to use it as such, and it isn't positioned as such a tool.
EDIT: Holy shit, someone is suggesting that. I stand corrected, I guess there is someone out there.
For interests sake and because you asked, I am currently writing two novels (roughly 80,00 words each at the moment), and a non-fiction title (120,00 words), on the iPad (exclusively on the iPad), using thumb typing in portrait mode by which means I get about 40-50 wpm.
Yes, I can type much faster on the keyboard, but the portability of the iPad trumps sitting at my desk. Writing (for me) happens on planes trains and automobiles and I don't have the luxury of running home to my computer. My productivity (writing wise), has actually gone up by a large amount since I switched entirely to the iPad.
I find most writers use laptops over desktops for the same reason but I never found laptops to be a good solution given that my main computer was a desktop and laptops don't sync.
The iPad is just a slightly different portable computer with it's pros and cons like any other. Before the iOS devices came along did a large part of my writing on a Pocket PC device. The iPhone trumped that on the first day I used it, and the iPad trumped the iPhone when it arrived a year or so later.
IMO the iPad is absolutely perfect for writing.
I'm going to completely disagree with you there, and would rather stick a fork in my eyeballs than attempt to write a novel on an iPad. I mean.. what about text selection? Moving the cursor? All these things are significantly slower and more cumbersome on a touchscreen. There's not many things that I can say categorically are much WORSE on a tablet, but writing a novel is one of the few exceptions. As for xyncing, you heard of dropbox? There's a million syncing solutions out there. I'm as much a tablet champion as the next guy, and do believe they're the future of computing with the iPad leading the pack by a large margin, but writing a novel is still something that would work 10x better on a Macbook Air. Thumb-typing a novel in portrait mode? I mean, really? How is that even possible? At least in landscape you don't have to bear the weight of the thing- but in portrait? Jesus.
The iPhone 4 almost uniformly performed lower than the 3GS in GPU benchmarks despite faster hardware, and it was because the GPU had to put up with so many more pixels. I think its pretty certain the iPad 3 will have a better GPU to cope unlike the 3GS-4, but the improvement won't be as much as it would have been if they stayed with the same resolution, since again its putting up with way more pixels, and in this case more pixels than even 150+ watt desktop GPUs have to handle. So the resolution alone isn't great for gamers, but rather everything else will benefit more than games.
I have a theory that gaming will remain at 1024x768 but iPad 2X will use optimised Lanczos-equivalent ~upscaling~ ala Xbox360.
It's the best of all worlds... Definitive 3D graphics improvement, while still driving both the Retina resolution as well as full 1080p output including Airplay Mirroring(?) to AppleTV3.
I have done some tests and will post soon. Gotta finish some work first.