Although if MS was smart, they'd shut up about Apple being "closed" and port Office (at least Word, Excel and PowerPoint) over to the iPad.
I'm surprised they haven't got around to doing more than their early effort of SeaDragon on iPhone. Although since I recently upgraded to Office 2008 I can see that I'll be moving on to iWork soon. Luckily Office was under a Home User Programme.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper
I don't see any reason why Apple is choosing this extremely closed path other than to being control freaks.
Control of security, control of experience. Most consumers couldn't care less about the lofty ideals of open or closed. They just want a product that delivers them what they want. An end-to-end solution nearly always tops the cobbled together option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu
Oh what nonsense. Where are the open standards on the iPad? The thing doesn't even have an industry standard USB connector! So lets say someone comes over with their holiday snaps on a USB stick, or I take some work home on a thumb drive... what next? I'll just plug the USB stick in, drag the files to the desktop... oh hang on...
You've not looked at the iPad accessories on Apple's web site then? USB and SD card connectors - sure I'd rather have them built in but they are options.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu
Or here's another common useage scenario - a non techy person buys an iPad, believing the ads that it's netbook replacement. They go (in the UK) BBC iPlayer, or (in the US) Hulu. Oops, no flash. Two of the most popular sites in the world rendered utterly useless.
You don't have an iPod or iPhone do you? iPlayer has worked on them for years. The BBC made a H.264 (open standard) version of the iPlayer back in 2008 for Mobile Safari users. Personally I've been using it hooked up to TVs anywhere at home to get iPlayer anywhere in the house over WiFi.
Tekdud, why embarrass yourself further. The current sig is laughable enough. Apple would never ask you for your opinion. They have been successful exactly by ignoring the opinion of you and people like you. Steve never again wants to try to live off the Mac nerd community again. Anyone who reads these boards knows what a painful experience that is. Success is in selling 10 times as many devices to people who barely know that apple makes traditional computers. What you want and what will sell 50 million units a year are probably diametrically opposed. Much as I hate to admit it, the days of Macophiles driving anything at Apple are dead. Finally, computers for the rest of us actually means just that. You me and everyone else on AI are not the rest of us. We are big brother nerds who think that everyone should use computers like we do.
Pissing in the wind just ends up blowing back on you. You must be pretty damp by now.
Have to agree with that but on the other hand jobs want you to spend money on products that Re free. Example ABC LOST, free via flash (most cable/netwoks use it due to smaller size) vs $2.99 per episode at iTunes. YOU CAN WATCH ALL 5 seasons free online with 15 and :30 sec ads, 5 times vs 17 minutes on tv of ads. People are switching to online.
Remember the apple tv and negative press, just like the air, actually worse, everywhere I look I see a negative remark about it. I do t think it will sell well and it's to pricey for being locked down. I will get one in say rev 2 or 3.
You don't have an iPod or iPhone do you? iPlayer has worked on them for years. The BBC made a H.264 (open standard) version of the iPlayer back in 2008 for Mobile Safari users. Personally I've been using it hooked up to TVs anywhere at home to get iPlayer anywhere in the house over WiFi.
Oh boy.
Yes of course I have an iPhone, I've had to get it replaced 4 times due to it breaking all the time, but yes, I still have one. I like it but with huge caveats, and I'm thinking of switching to a Nexus One but haven't decided yet.
I am aware of the cut down iPlayer site for the iPhone, and that it only supports incredibly low-res super compressed video. That'll look good on the iPad, or do you expect the BBC to make a special high-res video feed just for a niche device? Are Apple really so arrogant? The BBC already push out iPlayer video in higher resolutions in Flash format, and I hardly think it's fair to expect them to do any more. This is Apple's problem, not theirs.
As an aside, those championing the death of flash in favour of HTML5, - would that video work on Internet Explorer 6? That's the browser most people use, so in the real world web video must work on it. If HTML 5 video won't work on it, that would mean compressing 2 video formats, which means more expense for the content provider. Why should they bear that cost? Again, this is Apple's problem to fix.
Like I said. Il probably get rev 2 but it's a fact that steaming entertainment is misty flash and for children, even more so.
Fact. Just this week many were saying Apple please dint give us a giant touch. Well they sort of did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul
Fact - iPhone has no multi-tasking, and does not support Flash, but is the best selling smartphone and probably will be for a long time. iPhone went against all the norms within the smartphone industry and it has been a very successful venture for Apple.
I do not know, if iPad will be successful, as much as I enjoy Apple, my opinion is still open, but what I do know, when companies try and sell to mass consumer, a product that uses the same old standard software that been used by everyone, because it is a habit, that product is general not always sucessful.
iPad does not support Flash because Flash is now/yesteryear, many people do not enjoy Flash because of pops-up ads etc., and Apple are looking to provide a product that is for the future.
Do you see USB suppport in future or do you see wireless connection to other components being used more and more. Apple are trying to influence the consumer and provide a more efficent way of undertaking day to day tasks.
Also why buy a iPad with USB ports, why not just hook onto your main computer? Surveies show many Apple buying consumers have 2-3 computers in their homes. Why duplicate effort, when you trying to provide a product that better than smartphone in terms of viewable, but not a duplicate to laptop (can anyone say netbook).
I personally think that iPad will be the next laptop computer once the technology gets smaller and we will be able to do many of our tasks from this device. I opinion is out, since I want to how the software develops for the iPad, little disappointed at common, you can use 140,000 apps from Apple store, since expect the apps to much better for iPad then iPhone. BUT saying that I will wiat to see what comes out.
You think 'now', netbooks, flash, etc. I look to the product which proppels me into the future.
P.S. you need to know difference between name calling and giving an opinion on your replies. If you review a lot of your replies seen troll-like in nature.
Have to agree with that but on the other hand jobs want you to spend money on products that Re free. Example ABC LOST, free via flash (most cable/netwoks use it due to smaller size) vs $2.99 per episode at iTunes. YOU CAN WATCH ALL 5 seasons free online with 15 and :30 sec ads, 5 times vs 17 minutes on tv of ads. People are switching to online.
Remember the apple tv and negative press, just like the air, actually worse, everywhere I look I see a negative remark about it. I do t think it will sell well and it's to pricey for being locked down. I will get one in say rev 2 or 3.
lol - so for ten dollars more than the Kindle DX (Black and white e-reader, 3G for purposes of downloading new books) this device "won't sell well". This is not 'locked down', it is carefully controlled to ensure it is stable, easy to use and provides a compelling user experience. Anyone can submit an application to the app store, there are simply rules to follow which ensure 1. Security, 2. Stability, 3. A consistent user experience.
Feel free to get revision 2, or 3 - i see an onboard SD card slot and a camera appearing in those two iterations, but neither of those enhance what this device is primarily designed to do. People talk about the faults with this device before they've even held it.
Flash is an issue, but it is an issue for Adobe to deal with until such time as they open the source and allow others to help with their issues.
More and better apps are sure to come to the iPad version 1. iWork shows what the device is capable of. There are already basic video and audio editing apps on the iPhone; these will be made awesome on the iPad.
It's up to the developers now.
You know with all the whoes and moans you have to wonder if the underground community is going to have a field day with this. On a jail phone can you not teether, multitasking, video on non 3gs, and play flash??
I wonder how much attention this wil get from the likes of Cyndia, Icy, osx86.
Very interesting times indeed. Ironically as mentioned before, just three days ago we begged for Not Releasing a giant iPod. Shoot, one reviewer said this will be like the Apple TV. Of course they are wrong but to think this is Jobs greatest feat? No way. His OSes are his greatest feats with Ives helping with design.
If though, the Microsoft "Courier" is not vapor. This will run voice to text, blackberry server and I'm sure exchange. Then they will have a possible hit on their hands. No time like the present. In fact, if the Courier comes out before the ipad I bet Apple opens up a lot more via software fixes. Also, I have yet to see the keynote but just read the audience moaned when AT&T was mentioned. True? Why. Can't you use any carrier? This reminds me of a funny and true story. Burning some time, my wife and I went to the mall, it's been years and saw this verizon dude whowas trying to sell me his service, whenhe sawthe iPhone, he said theycan jailbreak it in 5 minutes. I really do wonder why the underground will do with the pad.
I'd much sooner have a Win7 tablet than the iPad. It may not look at pretty but at least it would be able to multi-task, run flash, use Skype video chat, and install any application I like.
The iPad is a worrying step in home computing, a move from open platforms to an incredibly closed, restrictive platform. People accept limitations on smart phones because they are tiny and underpowered, but on a laptop/netbook type system, no chance. It's either open or not worth considering for a second.
Apple should have just sold it as a Kindle competitor (although not of course outside the US, where Apple will not sell ebooks at all). By going after the netbook market all the do is illustrate how incredibly primative and limited the iPad is. My first computer ever (a Commodore 64) was more open than an iPad.
I'm wondering just how many people out there actually *care* how "open" a device is - I'd love to compare that to the number of people who couldn't give a flying fudge about open devices. If I were to buy the iPad it's because it does something that I want it to do. I might buy it because it doesn't have a hinge to hold a keyboard, I might buy it because it (allegedly) has a 15 second cold boot or because it has (allegedly) a 10 hour life between charges (ideal for transatlantic flights. If I want to do something with it that can't be attained out-of-the-box, I'll go to the App Store and buy an app to give me the functionality and hey, that App may even be free.
Being Open isn't always a good thing. It "opens" the doors for all kinds of bad software, exploits, pain, hardship. When I switch something on, especially like this, I expect it to work and not be bogged down by a resource hogger that I installed from an open source site, because the beta release I installed still had a bug in it.
If you don't want the device because it's feature set isn't good... fine, don't buy it folks. I'm not overly stoked with the 4:3 aspect ratio, therefore making movies scale down to fit and have huge black bars *but* I do think if the device does what I want it to, when it arrives it will be a good purchase and with 140,000 apps to choose from, I think I'll be hard pressed to find something I can't do with it.
The iPad is a worrying step in home computing, a move from open platforms to an incredibly closed, restrictive platform. People accept limitations on smart phones because they are tiny and underpowered, but on a laptop/netbook type system, no chance. It's either open or not worth considering for a second.
People are not interested in open or closed at all. They are interested in tools that get the job done and tools that are extendible so they get tomorrow's job done. iPhone/iPad+AppStore fits that bill.
What differs Apple from Microsoft (and others) is that Microsoft is a technology company, focuses on technology itself and trying to create the best technology. Apple is a user experience company. For many technology companies, user experience is 'bolted onto technology', for Apple, the (fundamental) technology developments are driven by a vision of future user experience.
You know the guys on here talking incessantly about "closed" versus "open" systems aren't seeing the big picture.
When we queue and then dispatch tasks or Todo or whatever you wish to call them there's a workflow that exists. The concern is moving from Point A to wherever the end result is.
The question is, "does anyone really care about open versus closed systems?"
I don't.
A products's merit is wholly based on how easy or efficient it makes from going from Point A to completion of a task. I care not if the system is closed or open and why should I? Neither is inherently supeior to the other.
Some of you have clearly never been in Sales before. You will get nowhere by proclaiming something to be open or closed without providing persuasive data that supports your claims. Consumers don't care. They're used to aligning with systems that produce favorable results regardless of open or closed natures.
Whoa! What a great and intelligent post! I saw that one fly over 50% of the posters (posers?) in this thread...
The iPhone has multi-tasking (very good multi-tasking, in fact, as it runs a sibling of Mac OS X based on the Mach kernel). There is a (fully pre-emptive multitasking) Unix OS in any Mac, iPhone, iPod Touch, Apple TV and future iPad.
What iPhone OS does is limit the actual multitasking to a few Apple-provided apps. It does that because it trades off the user experience of having multiple apps running with the user experience of having a long battery life (and app speed).
It would be possible for Apple in the future to open up multitasking to apps that have been reviewed on their effect on energy consumption while running in the background.
Most probably by launch date someone fledgling developer will release a mind-blowing app that IS a totally different future and the world will say "Wow, that's the most incredible thing I've ever seen - I get it now!"
Microsoft Courier (that concept video) - it's just an app - everything it does and more will be in the app store by September running on an iPad.
iPad is a platform that allows developers to 'be magical', not just Apple.
None of these companies listed can do squat about it - they can't even beat the iPhone gen 1 OS from 2007- and it's now 2010, and if that's not bad enough there is a new reason to freak out - for the first time Apple has released a product that is cheap enough for their users to buy into.
I am aware of the cut down iPlayer site for the iPhone, and that it only supports incredibly low-res super compressed video. That'll look good on the iPad, or do you expect the BBC to make a special high-res video feed just for a niche device? Are Apple really so arrogant? The BBC already push out iPlayer video in higher resolutions in Flash format, and I hardly think it's fair to expect them to do any more. This is Apple's problem, not theirs.
Things may have changed as I'm away touring Africa/Asia/Middle East over the past 6 months (my iPhone is slightly scratched but performing well in these relatively harsh environs)
I thought the iPhone/iPod version of iPlayer was better, perhaps because of the lower bandwidth which works better for those of us who live in the sticks (Gloucestershire) - soit actually plays without stalling.
I'm not totally against Flash but it's not a driving feature for any product I buy. There are plenty of ways around these things.
We were warned at work last week against using IE6 on the Internet 'unless it's vital' because of security concerns; shame we can't actually upgrade these machines whilst we're away.
Interestingly this article on the BBC website talks about TVs getting Flash. I hope they go with something more efficient and open but who knows.
It's amazing how well this Apple-related site attracts so many Apple haters.
Haters, take your potshots at Apple, its so-called fanboys and the iPad now, because like others have posted, the iPad is a game-changer.
The haters are so green with envy they can't see straight.
Apple is not perfect, but it's the best thing going in the technology industry right now.
Actually the iPad may not be a game-changer, but with Apple's successes lately it's foolhardy to discredit it, especially without even trying it first.
Wrong. If you watch tv and don't dvr, also lacking on atv, you spend 17 minutes of commercials. If you go to watch Heros NCIS, Lost, numb3rs, those shows are on the site the following day wi 4-7 :15-:30 spots. Apple wants you to buy them from iTunes and the networks said no to all you can eat as the iPod destroyed the record business.
Simple. Apple wants you to pay for something that is free. If you have children, almost all the sites are flash due to how small the file is, even the MLB app on the iPhone is a flash incarnation. Apple fears if they allow flash, they will lose sales of free products plus flashes ability to make some really great games.
Maybe on the next gen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill
Well, since you resurrected the topic of flash on this thread, I'll take that as an invitation..
My head's swimming from all the iPad bashing that's been going on this week. Flash seems to be one of the salient points of discussion. Some have alluded to the notion that flash is omitted from iPhone and iPod Touch (and now iPad) because of performance issues, and Adobe's inability (or reluctance) to fix those issues. Others might argue that it's Apple's responsibility to address the performance issues, or their fault that they haven't been fixed.
I believe it's now a moot point. It's no longer an issue of addressing flash's poor performance on the Mac/iPhone OS. That ship has sailed. The situation now is that Apple is trying to kill flash as a relevant internet protocol, and I believe they will succeed. Apple is selling millions of web surfing products every quarter that don't do flash. That number is about to increase, and substantially I think.
This is a giant pissing contest between Apple and Adobe, and I personally support Apple in their quest. Some of you might disagree, and that's all well and good. I support open internet standards, and flash isn't one.
As to why all the flash hatred here? That's easy. Flash is a dog on the Mac, and always has been. This is first and foremost an Apple centric website, and we Mac users have been relegated to second class citizenship by Adobe for a long, long time. And we're tired of it. Adobe might not have found themselves in this predicament if they had cleaned up the flash on Mac situation long ago, but they didn't. They gambled that Apple wouldn't regain a position of relevance in the industry, and they chose poorly. And now they will pay for it.
We need to know how this will work. So far there is only mention of a 'shared folder'. Is this just a drop box or will the iPad have access the the full file system on the computers? ie will it allow any volume on the computers to be shared? If that is the case then cool.
But what if a friend comes over with an iPad and shows you some pictures. How do we get the pictures transferred from his iPad to mine, when A) The iPad doesn't support Bluetooth file exchange, and the pictures on the iPad are not stored as regular files but as the cached libraries as are used for music in the iPhone? What if we are in a neutral environment where there is no WiFI and we want to exchange images, music, PDF's etc between iPad to iPad or iPhone?
With WiFi: Middle-ware, DropBox, Email, somewhere in the cloud.
Without WiFi: SD card or USB stick. "I think" it will recognize the card or USB stick, and allow you to write to it ("Export to...). It already does importing, so that end is tied up.
Uhm yes... I am aware that Apple has only announced "getting" photos using the adapter... but this is only a software issue, so I think it's doable as an OS update.
Wow, this place really has some of the nastiest, most unpleasnt fanboys around. When you have to resort to playground name calling, you've automatically lost your argument. Sorry.
It certainly has one of the nastiest HateBoys around. As I wrote in another forum it seems that Apple's keynotes are not watched primarily by fans anymore but saddos who dont like the company. It would be as if Apple fans logged into to watch Balmer, brought the internet to a crawl, and then criticised his Windows 7 release. We didnt, because being sane, we didnt care. We are not going to buy it, so we dont care.
And why are you here anyway? I know why I am here and not on the HPInsider site - which I amsure ir rocking - it is because I prefer the Mac, and Apple products to the competition.
Quote:
Nothing I have said is ignorant, it's all, shock horror, actually based on facts.
Not so much ignorant, and utterly irrelvent to what this device is. You are ignoring the brilliant design, the remarkable cost, and simple useage, the integration of the software and whining about trivialities which most people dont care about.
Quote:
Fact - Flash is everywhere on the web. iPad does not support flash, therefore Job's claim of the iPad beind a great way to browse the web is simply untrue.
Fact. Flash is mostly used for popup adds. Which provide no benefit to the user. Where it is used as a movie player - a relatively recent usage of Flash - the provider can provide the movies in another form if he wants to. In other cases I cant think of how the abscence of flash stops me enjoying forums, newspapers, blogs, using goggle, wikipedia etc. I can think of nothing except the iPlayer which already runs on the iPhone. As the New York times has shown NewsPapers will probably produce an app for each newspaper - this is exactly what their business model would suggest - paid content. Advertisements are not working anyway.
Quote:
Fact - Multi-tasking has been standard in computers since the late 1980s. For a new computer not to have it, is an incredible omission.
Its not a computer, of course. it is an appliance for consuming the web, and photos etc. where each application is full screen. Funny enough that is more of a Windows model than a Mac model. I think this will change with some applications allowed - with user permission - to run in the BG, however the user needs to be alerted that something has happened. So it is a UI issue.
Quote:
Fact - USB is an interface common to virtually all computing devices. The iPad does not have a USB port.
It is not a computer. Get over it.
Quote:
Fact - You evidently have no argument, just cheap insults. Good night!
You evidently have no idea what this is for. And I dont understand why you are even here.
Here is what happened - from an outsider's point of view .
A company releases a product.
Fans of company discuss the product, not all of them happy.
All very sane.
but then people like kotatsu - who dont have to buy the product, who doesnt even have to know about the product, who hate the company wich produced the product - are HOPPING MAD at the product even existing and expressing their hatred on the Web. Is this in any way sane?
Any chance Apple is working on a software fix - if you will, that will allow iChat to work well, and not drain battery life on the next up-dated iPad. Oh, the update when they show off the newest model that NOW has a camera for video conferencing and such.
Love my Apples (and pears, bananas and most other fruits), but not really a techno geek. So does iChat currently rely on Flash at all? If not, does whatever it does use, suck up battery life, and if so, might that be one of their concerns?
Hell take out something else, and put in an extra battery and just call it "iPad Pro" or "iPad Maxi" hell call it Maxi-Pad, I don't care, just give it a camera!
Yes it will cost me. Let me the consumer decide if I want to pay that much, for a tool that fits my needs. Don't decide for me, what I need, and DON'T design it as such, and tell me (and MILLIONs of others) that this IS the way it is going to be. Apple isn't so big, that they can start dictating how it should or is going to be.
I am sure, it is one HUGE rush of power for Steve, knowing he can pretty much design, produce and sell what HE wants, and what HE thinks is best for everyone, but hey, he DOESN'T live my life, pay MY bills, put cloths on my kids or food on my table, he IS NOT GOD!
Now before you get all over me, remember, I have a TON of Apple gear, and hundreds of shares of stock that I bought MANY, MANY years ago (VERY CHEAP when I purchased it)
Apple will up-date the iPad, and each up-date will be bigger (sort-of) and better then the last (which is a business move - get them hook, wait until they have used it long enough to really know what they will be willing to pay a premium for, and come out with an up-date, with SOME of what they want, and then more of what they want in the next up-date and so on).
It's been like this foe years, and I don't see it changing anytime soon.
So folk, go out and buy the iPad, get use it it, let folks know what you'd like Steve and company to fix or add to it, and get ready for the newest model(s) to have what you need, so you'll buy another one.
Steve the "Oz" Jobs would have it no other way.
It is how Apple will live long into the future, and grow as it does live on.
I am sure, it is one HUGE rush of power for Steve, knowing he can pretty much design, produce and sell what HE wants, and what HE thinks is best for everyone, but hey, he DOESN'T live my life, pay MY bills, put cloths on my kids or food on my table, he IS NOT GOD!
He can design what you like, and you can buy what you like.
The camera was probably an issue with how it integrated with the iPad, or with the weight of the device. I dont see it as a loss. In fact holding the slate up to take a camera would be a bit weird i think. A front facing camera would make sense (in that case an optional viewfinder on the back)
Comments
Although if MS was smart, they'd shut up about Apple being "closed" and port Office (at least Word, Excel and PowerPoint) over to the iPad.
I'm surprised they haven't got around to doing more than their early effort of SeaDragon on iPhone. Although since I recently upgraded to Office 2008 I can see that I'll be moving on to iWork soon. Luckily Office was under a Home User Programme.
I don't see any reason why Apple is choosing this extremely closed path other than to being control freaks.
Control of security, control of experience. Most consumers couldn't care less about the lofty ideals of open or closed. They just want a product that delivers them what they want. An end-to-end solution nearly always tops the cobbled together option.
Oh what nonsense. Where are the open standards on the iPad? The thing doesn't even have an industry standard USB connector! So lets say someone comes over with their holiday snaps on a USB stick, or I take some work home on a thumb drive... what next? I'll just plug the USB stick in, drag the files to the desktop... oh hang on...
You've not looked at the iPad accessories on Apple's web site then? USB and SD card connectors - sure I'd rather have them built in but they are options.
Or here's another common useage scenario - a non techy person buys an iPad, believing the ads that it's netbook replacement. They go (in the UK) BBC iPlayer, or (in the US) Hulu. Oops, no flash. Two of the most popular sites in the world rendered utterly useless.
You don't have an iPod or iPhone do you? iPlayer has worked on them for years. The BBC made a H.264 (open standard) version of the iPlayer back in 2008 for Mobile Safari users. Personally I've been using it hooked up to TVs anywhere at home to get iPlayer anywhere in the house over WiFi.
Would you prefer I add it to my signature then?
Tekdud, why embarrass yourself further. The current sig is laughable enough. Apple would never ask you for your opinion. They have been successful exactly by ignoring the opinion of you and people like you. Steve never again wants to try to live off the Mac nerd community again. Anyone who reads these boards knows what a painful experience that is. Success is in selling 10 times as many devices to people who barely know that apple makes traditional computers. What you want and what will sell 50 million units a year are probably diametrically opposed. Much as I hate to admit it, the days of Macophiles driving anything at Apple are dead. Finally, computers for the rest of us actually means just that. You me and everyone else on AI are not the rest of us. We are big brother nerds who think that everyone should use computers like we do.
Pissing in the wind just ends up blowing back on you. You must be pretty damp by now.
90% of the web is not flash btw.
Have to agree with that but on the other hand jobs want you to spend money on products that Re free. Example ABC LOST, free via flash (most cable/netwoks use it due to smaller size) vs $2.99 per episode at iTunes. YOU CAN WATCH ALL 5 seasons free online with 15 and :30 sec ads, 5 times vs 17 minutes on tv of ads. People are switching to online.
Remember the apple tv and negative press, just like the air, actually worse, everywhere I look I see a negative remark about it. I do t think it will sell well and it's to pricey for being locked down. I will get one in say rev 2 or 3.
You don't have an iPod or iPhone do you? iPlayer has worked on them for years. The BBC made a H.264 (open standard) version of the iPlayer back in 2008 for Mobile Safari users. Personally I've been using it hooked up to TVs anywhere at home to get iPlayer anywhere in the house over WiFi.
Oh boy.
Yes of course I have an iPhone, I've had to get it replaced 4 times due to it breaking all the time, but yes, I still have one. I like it but with huge caveats, and I'm thinking of switching to a Nexus One but haven't decided yet.
I am aware of the cut down iPlayer site for the iPhone, and that it only supports incredibly low-res super compressed video. That'll look good on the iPad, or do you expect the BBC to make a special high-res video feed just for a niche device? Are Apple really so arrogant? The BBC already push out iPlayer video in higher resolutions in Flash format, and I hardly think it's fair to expect them to do any more. This is Apple's problem, not theirs.
As an aside, those championing the death of flash in favour of HTML5, - would that video work on Internet Explorer 6? That's the browser most people use, so in the real world web video must work on it. If HTML 5 video won't work on it, that would mean compressing 2 video formats, which means more expense for the content provider. Why should they bear that cost? Again, this is Apple's problem to fix.
Fact. Just this week many were saying Apple please dint give us a giant touch. Well they sort of did.
Fact - iPhone has no multi-tasking, and does not support Flash, but is the best selling smartphone and probably will be for a long time. iPhone went against all the norms within the smartphone industry and it has been a very successful venture for Apple.
I do not know, if iPad will be successful, as much as I enjoy Apple, my opinion is still open, but what I do know, when companies try and sell to mass consumer, a product that uses the same old standard software that been used by everyone, because it is a habit, that product is general not always sucessful.
iPad does not support Flash because Flash is now/yesteryear, many people do not enjoy Flash because of pops-up ads etc., and Apple are looking to provide a product that is for the future.
Do you see USB suppport in future or do you see wireless connection to other components being used more and more. Apple are trying to influence the consumer and provide a more efficent way of undertaking day to day tasks.
Also why buy a iPad with USB ports, why not just hook onto your main computer? Surveies show many Apple buying consumers have 2-3 computers in their homes. Why duplicate effort, when you trying to provide a product that better than smartphone in terms of viewable, but not a duplicate to laptop (can anyone say netbook).
I personally think that iPad will be the next laptop computer once the technology gets smaller and we will be able to do many of our tasks from this device. I opinion is out, since I want to how the software develops for the iPad, little disappointed at common, you can use 140,000 apps from Apple store, since expect the apps to much better for iPad then iPhone. BUT saying that I will wiat to see what comes out.
You think 'now', netbooks, flash, etc. I look to the product which proppels me into the future.
P.S. you need to know difference between name calling and giving an opinion on your replies. If you review a lot of your replies seen troll-like in nature.
Have to agree with that but on the other hand jobs want you to spend money on products that Re free. Example ABC LOST, free via flash (most cable/netwoks use it due to smaller size) vs $2.99 per episode at iTunes. YOU CAN WATCH ALL 5 seasons free online with 15 and :30 sec ads, 5 times vs 17 minutes on tv of ads. People are switching to online.
Remember the apple tv and negative press, just like the air, actually worse, everywhere I look I see a negative remark about it. I do t think it will sell well and it's to pricey for being locked down. I will get one in say rev 2 or 3.
lol - so for ten dollars more than the Kindle DX (Black and white e-reader, 3G for purposes of downloading new books) this device "won't sell well". This is not 'locked down', it is carefully controlled to ensure it is stable, easy to use and provides a compelling user experience. Anyone can submit an application to the app store, there are simply rules to follow which ensure 1. Security, 2. Stability, 3. A consistent user experience.
Feel free to get revision 2, or 3 - i see an onboard SD card slot and a camera appearing in those two iterations, but neither of those enhance what this device is primarily designed to do. People talk about the faults with this device before they've even held it.
Flash is an issue, but it is an issue for Adobe to deal with until such time as they open the source and allow others to help with their issues.
More and better apps are sure to come to the iPad version 1. iWork shows what the device is capable of. There are already basic video and audio editing apps on the iPhone; these will be made awesome on the iPad.
It's up to the developers now.
You know with all the whoes and moans you have to wonder if the underground community is going to have a field day with this. On a jail phone can you not teether, multitasking, video on non 3gs, and play flash??
I wonder how much attention this wil get from the likes of Cyndia, Icy, osx86.
Very interesting times indeed. Ironically as mentioned before, just three days ago we begged for Not Releasing a giant iPod. Shoot, one reviewer said this will be like the Apple TV. Of course they are wrong but to think this is Jobs greatest feat? No way. His OSes are his greatest feats with Ives helping with design.
If though, the Microsoft "Courier" is not vapor. This will run voice to text, blackberry server and I'm sure exchange. Then they will have a possible hit on their hands. No time like the present. In fact, if the Courier comes out before the ipad I bet Apple opens up a lot more via software fixes. Also, I have yet to see the keynote but just read the audience moaned when AT&T was mentioned. True? Why. Can't you use any carrier? This reminds me of a funny and true story. Burning some time, my wife and I went to the mall, it's been years and saw this verizon dude whowas trying to sell me his service, whenhe sawthe iPhone, he said theycan jailbreak it in 5 minutes. I really do wonder why the underground will do with the pad.
Strange days indeed.
Oh the fanboys are out already I see.
I'd much sooner have a Win7 tablet than the iPad. It may not look at pretty but at least it would be able to multi-task, run flash, use Skype video chat, and install any application I like.
The iPad is a worrying step in home computing, a move from open platforms to an incredibly closed, restrictive platform. People accept limitations on smart phones because they are tiny and underpowered, but on a laptop/netbook type system, no chance. It's either open or not worth considering for a second.
Apple should have just sold it as a Kindle competitor (although not of course outside the US, where Apple will not sell ebooks at all). By going after the netbook market all the do is illustrate how incredibly primative and limited the iPad is. My first computer ever (a Commodore 64) was more open than an iPad.
I'm wondering just how many people out there actually *care* how "open" a device is - I'd love to compare that to the number of people who couldn't give a flying fudge about open devices. If I were to buy the iPad it's because it does something that I want it to do. I might buy it because it doesn't have a hinge to hold a keyboard, I might buy it because it (allegedly) has a 15 second cold boot or because it has (allegedly) a 10 hour life between charges (ideal for transatlantic flights. If I want to do something with it that can't be attained out-of-the-box, I'll go to the App Store and buy an app to give me the functionality and hey, that App may even be free.
Being Open isn't always a good thing. It "opens" the doors for all kinds of bad software, exploits, pain, hardship. When I switch something on, especially like this, I expect it to work and not be bogged down by a resource hogger that I installed from an open source site, because the beta release I installed still had a bug in it.
If you don't want the device because it's feature set isn't good... fine, don't buy it folks. I'm not overly stoked with the 4:3 aspect ratio, therefore making movies scale down to fit and have huge black bars *but* I do think if the device does what I want it to, when it arrives it will be a good purchase and with 140,000 apps to choose from, I think I'll be hard pressed to find something I can't do with it.
The iPad is a worrying step in home computing, a move from open platforms to an incredibly closed, restrictive platform. People accept limitations on smart phones because they are tiny and underpowered, but on a laptop/netbook type system, no chance. It's either open or not worth considering for a second.
People are not interested in open or closed at all. They are interested in tools that get the job done and tools that are extendible so they get tomorrow's job done. iPhone/iPad+AppStore fits that bill.
What differs Apple from Microsoft (and others) is that Microsoft is a technology company, focuses on technology itself and trying to create the best technology. Apple is a user experience company. For many technology companies, user experience is 'bolted onto technology', for Apple, the (fundamental) technology developments are driven by a vision of future user experience.
You know the guys on here talking incessantly about "closed" versus "open" systems aren't seeing the big picture.
When we queue and then dispatch tasks or Todo or whatever you wish to call them there's a workflow that exists. The concern is moving from Point A to wherever the end result is.
The question is, "does anyone really care about open versus closed systems?"
I don't.
A products's merit is wholly based on how easy or efficient it makes from going from Point A to completion of a task. I care not if the system is closed or open and why should I? Neither is inherently supeior to the other.
Some of you have clearly never been in Sales before. You will get nowhere by proclaiming something to be open or closed without providing persuasive data that supports your claims. Consumers don't care. They're used to aligning with systems that produce favorable results regardless of open or closed natures.
Fact - iPhone has no multi-tasking
The iPhone has multi-tasking (very good multi-tasking, in fact, as it runs a sibling of Mac OS X based on the Mach kernel). There is a (fully pre-emptive multitasking) Unix OS in any Mac, iPhone, iPod Touch, Apple TV and future iPad.
What iPhone OS does is limit the actual multitasking to a few Apple-provided apps. It does that because it trades off the user experience of having multiple apps running with the user experience of having a long battery life (and app speed).
It would be possible for Apple in the future to open up multitasking to apps that have been reviewed on their effect on energy consumption while running in the background.
Microsoft Courier (that concept video) - it's just an app - everything it does and more will be in the app store by September running on an iPad.
iPad is a platform that allows developers to 'be magical', not just Apple.
None of these companies listed can do squat about it - they can't even beat the iPhone gen 1 OS from 2007- and it's now 2010, and if that's not bad enough there is a new reason to freak out - for the first time Apple has released a product that is cheap enough for their users to buy into.
No more Apple Tax Jokes now, huh!
I am aware of the cut down iPlayer site for the iPhone, and that it only supports incredibly low-res super compressed video. That'll look good on the iPad, or do you expect the BBC to make a special high-res video feed just for a niche device? Are Apple really so arrogant? The BBC already push out iPlayer video in higher resolutions in Flash format, and I hardly think it's fair to expect them to do any more. This is Apple's problem, not theirs.
Things may have changed as I'm away touring Africa/Asia/Middle East over the past 6 months (my iPhone is slightly scratched but performing well in these relatively harsh environs)
I thought the iPhone/iPod version of iPlayer was better, perhaps because of the lower bandwidth which works better for those of us who live in the sticks (Gloucestershire) - soit actually plays without stalling.
I'm not totally against Flash but it's not a driving feature for any product I buy. There are plenty of ways around these things.
We were warned at work last week against using IE6 on the Internet 'unless it's vital' because of security concerns; shame we can't actually upgrade these machines whilst we're away.
Interestingly this article on the BBC website talks about TVs getting Flash. I hope they go with something more efficient and open but who knows.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcintern..._products.html
Haters, take your potshots at Apple, its so-called fanboys and the iPad now, because like others have posted, the iPad is a game-changer.
The haters are so green with envy they can't see straight.
Apple is not perfect, but it's the best thing going in the technology industry right now.
Actually the iPad may not be a game-changer, but with Apple's successes lately it's foolhardy to discredit it, especially without even trying it first.
Simple. Apple wants you to pay for something that is free. If you have children, almost all the sites are flash due to how small the file is, even the MLB app on the iPhone is a flash incarnation. Apple fears if they allow flash, they will lose sales of free products plus flashes ability to make some really great games.
Maybe on the next gen.
Well, since you resurrected the topic of flash on this thread, I'll take that as an invitation..
My head's swimming from all the iPad bashing that's been going on this week. Flash seems to be one of the salient points of discussion. Some have alluded to the notion that flash is omitted from iPhone and iPod Touch (and now iPad) because of performance issues, and Adobe's inability (or reluctance) to fix those issues. Others might argue that it's Apple's responsibility to address the performance issues, or their fault that they haven't been fixed.
I believe it's now a moot point. It's no longer an issue of addressing flash's poor performance on the Mac/iPhone OS. That ship has sailed. The situation now is that Apple is trying to kill flash as a relevant internet protocol, and I believe they will succeed. Apple is selling millions of web surfing products every quarter that don't do flash. That number is about to increase, and substantially I think.
This is a giant pissing contest between Apple and Adobe, and I personally support Apple in their quest. Some of you might disagree, and that's all well and good. I support open internet standards, and flash isn't one.
As to why all the flash hatred here? That's easy. Flash is a dog on the Mac, and always has been. This is first and foremost an Apple centric website, and we Mac users have been relegated to second class citizenship by Adobe for a long, long time. And we're tired of it. Adobe might not have found themselves in this predicament if they had cleaned up the flash on Mac situation long ago, but they didn't. They gambled that Apple wouldn't regain a position of relevance in the industry, and they chose poorly. And now they will pay for it.
We need to know how this will work. So far there is only mention of a 'shared folder'. Is this just a drop box or will the iPad have access the the full file system on the computers? ie will it allow any volume on the computers to be shared? If that is the case then cool.
But what if a friend comes over with an iPad and shows you some pictures. How do we get the pictures transferred from his iPad to mine, when A) The iPad doesn't support Bluetooth file exchange, and
With WiFi: Middle-ware, DropBox, Email, somewhere in the cloud.
Without WiFi: SD card or USB stick. "I think" it will recognize the card or USB stick, and allow you to write to it ("Export to...). It already does importing, so that end is tied up.
Uhm yes... I am aware that Apple has only announced "getting" photos using the adapter... but this is only a software issue, so I think it's doable as an OS update.
First generation iPad has it's downsides, but if you look at the competition... oh, wait...
Excellent remark.
Wow, this place really has some of the nastiest, most unpleasnt fanboys around. When you have to resort to playground name calling, you've automatically lost your argument. Sorry.
It certainly has one of the nastiest HateBoys around. As I wrote in another forum it seems that Apple's keynotes are not watched primarily by fans anymore but saddos who dont like the company. It would be as if Apple fans logged into to watch Balmer, brought the internet to a crawl, and then criticised his Windows 7 release. We didnt, because being sane, we didnt care. We are not going to buy it, so we dont care.
And why are you here anyway? I know why I am here and not on the HPInsider site - which I amsure ir rocking - it is because I prefer the Mac, and Apple products to the competition.
Nothing I have said is ignorant, it's all, shock horror, actually based on facts.
Not so much ignorant, and utterly irrelvent to what this device is. You are ignoring the brilliant design, the remarkable cost, and simple useage, the integration of the software and whining about trivialities which most people dont care about.
Fact - Flash is everywhere on the web. iPad does not support flash, therefore Job's claim of the iPad beind a great way to browse the web is simply untrue.
Fact. Flash is mostly used for popup adds. Which provide no benefit to the user. Where it is used as a movie player - a relatively recent usage of Flash - the provider can provide the movies in another form if he wants to. In other cases I cant think of how the abscence of flash stops me enjoying forums, newspapers, blogs, using goggle, wikipedia etc. I can think of nothing except the iPlayer which already runs on the iPhone. As the New York times has shown NewsPapers will probably produce an app for each newspaper - this is exactly what their business model would suggest - paid content. Advertisements are not working anyway.
Fact - Multi-tasking has been standard in computers since the late 1980s. For a new computer not to have it, is an incredible omission.
Its not a computer, of course. it is an appliance for consuming the web, and photos etc. where each application is full screen. Funny enough that is more of a Windows model than a Mac model. I think this will change with some applications allowed - with user permission - to run in the BG, however the user needs to be alerted that something has happened. So it is a UI issue.
Fact - USB is an interface common to virtually all computing devices. The iPad does not have a USB port.
It is not a computer. Get over it.
Fact - You evidently have no argument, just cheap insults. Good night!
You evidently have no idea what this is for. And I dont understand why you are even here.
Here is what happened - from an outsider's point of view .
A company releases a product.
Fans of company discuss the product, not all of them happy.
All very sane.
but then people like kotatsu - who dont have to buy the product, who doesnt even have to know about the product, who hate the company wich produced the product - are HOPPING MAD at the product even existing and expressing their hatred on the Web. Is this in any way sane?
Can anyone explain the HateBois?
Love my Apples (and pears, bananas and most other fruits), but not really a techno geek. So does iChat currently rely on Flash at all? If not, does whatever it does use, suck up battery life, and if so, might that be one of their concerns?
Hell take out something else, and put in an extra battery and just call it "iPad Pro" or "iPad Maxi" hell call it Maxi-Pad, I don't care, just give it a camera!
Yes it will cost me. Let me the consumer decide if I want to pay that much, for a tool that fits my needs. Don't decide for me, what I need, and DON'T design it as such, and tell me (and MILLIONs of others) that this IS the way it is going to be. Apple isn't so big, that they can start dictating how it should or is going to be.
I am sure, it is one HUGE rush of power for Steve, knowing he can pretty much design, produce and sell what HE wants, and what HE thinks is best for everyone, but hey, he DOESN'T live my life, pay MY bills, put cloths on my kids or food on my table, he IS NOT GOD!
Now before you get all over me, remember, I have a TON of Apple gear, and hundreds of shares of stock that I bought MANY, MANY years ago (VERY CHEAP when I purchased it
Apple will up-date the iPad, and each up-date will be bigger (sort-of) and better then the last (which is a business move - get them hook, wait until they have used it long enough to really know what they will be willing to pay a premium for, and come out with an up-date, with SOME of what they want, and then more of what they want in the next up-date and so on).
It's been like this foe years, and I don't see it changing anytime soon.
So folk, go out and buy the iPad, get use it it, let folks know what you'd like Steve and company to fix or add to it, and get ready for the newest model(s) to have what you need, so you'll buy another one.
Steve the "Oz" Jobs would have it no other way.
It is how Apple will live long into the future, and grow as it does live on.
I am sure, it is one HUGE rush of power for Steve, knowing he can pretty much design, produce and sell what HE wants, and what HE thinks is best for everyone, but hey, he DOESN'T live my life, pay MY bills, put cloths on my kids or food on my table, he IS NOT GOD!
He can design what you like, and you can buy what you like.
The camera was probably an issue with how it integrated with the iPad, or with the weight of the device. I dont see it as a loss. In fact holding the slate up to take a camera would be a bit weird i think. A front facing camera would make sense (in that case an optional viewfinder on the back)