Yes, look where the apple tv is today - 6.5 million units sold, the biggest single selling device of it's type. Don't believe the media, the average owner of this device loves it - that it is 'crippled' is the fault of copyright owning content providers.
And an extension of the largest media platform on the planet, what a terrible idea. It will never catch on.
Seriously?!
I agree that the AppleTV has been a success in the nascent and lackluster media extender market but things have changed since it's arrival and the AppleTV has not. This last year the popular PS3, 360 and TiVo have stepped up their game to offer a lot of the features the AppleTV came with. Popcorn Hour and other media extenders are becoming popular, for good reason.
Unless you specifically want iTS access the AppleTV now offers little benefit over these other appliances. They aren't as simple as the AppleTV but the AppleTV fails in other areas they excel in. Favour is tipping toward them more each day.
I expect Apple to release another AppleTV this year. They can't drop the living room and the current model is using some old tech. The iPad's HW and OS (not the UI) looks like a pretty good and inexpensive fit for the next AppleTV.
I'd like to see an SDK for apps and an option for direct file access but I am not holding my breath on either of these.
it's funny that so many people here find it on themselves to attack what Bill Gates said just because it's not towing the apple line.
it's just his opinion.
If that's what was happening, it might be "funny." I don't think it's necessarily fun and games to point out that tablet computing is something Gates has taken a couple of swings and awful misses at. It's all well and good for him to say that tablet computing the future, and he really, really believes in it. But when he's the head of the world's most powerful technology company, which after a decade of trying has utterly failed to fulfill that vision, then I think it's totally appropriate to point that out, especially when he sees so fit to criticize Apple's approach. Maybe he's afraid that Apple will succeed where Microsoft has failed?
I love that Gates's reaction to the iPhone is that "Microsoft didn?t aim high enough." That's almost like saying, "Oh yeah, we could have done that ... (yawn) ... we just didn't feel like it."
Never mind having the user-centric vision to create a beloved device, the technical skill to make it work, and the cool factor to make people want it. Cause, you know, Microsoft has all of that covered.
Your need for 'newness' makes you miss the bigger picture (as usual). Carrying the new interface over from the iPhone / Touch guarantees that millions of users are already familiar with the device. When launching an entirely new device that is bound to meet with a certain degree of resistance (cough cough). Besides, the interface must be one of the most successful ever so why change it?
The Windows interface is one of the most successful ever. Would you want it on a tablet? If not, how does your argument make sense?
I have no need for newness that I am aware of, unless the newness yields an improvement of some sort. The 'Pad is new, for example, and yet that doesn't compel me to like it, because it doesn't seem to do anything (that I want to do) better than my existing choices.
And yes, the built-in army of app-buyers seems to be the reason why Apple chose to recycle the iTouch OS. The 'Pad is perfect for linking folks to the iSore.
But as a net-surfing and media consumption and computing appliance, it leaves a lot to be desired. Meh. I'll wait for someone else to do it right.
I find it hypocritical that a marketing guy that never really invented anything except DOS says "no biggie" to something he doesn't really know anything about.
Actually Gates didn't "invent" DOS, he bought (stole) it for pennies on the dollar from a developer in either Oregon or Washington state - changed it a bit then licensed it to IBM and that started the Microsoft eventual dominance. The guy he bought it from basically got screwed and went out of business I think. Saw a documentary on tv about the start of MS and Gates.
If that's what was happening, it might be "funny." I don't think it's necessarily fun and games to point out that tablet computing is something Gates has taken a couple of swings and awful misses at. It's all well and good for him to say that tablet computing the future, and he really, really believes in it. But when he's the head of the world's most powerful technology company, which after a decade of trying has utterly failed to fulfill that vision, then I think it's totally appropriate to point that out, especially when he sees so fit to criticize Apple's approach. Maybe he's afraid that Apple will succeed where Microsoft has failed?
i don't see how microsoft has failed in regards to tablet computers. i don't think they have tried to make any. we have to differentiate that apple is a hardware company, and outside of the xbox and zune, microsoft is a software provider. i don't think adobe has offered a very good tablet solution, or corel either, but they make software that could be utilized on a tablet very well.
microsofts biggest problem is it's business partners. it should be hp, dell and other companies have failed to offer a MS based tablet like this.
it's one thing to point out that MS hasn't done it, it's another for people to make the same old ms sucks, steals and so on apple v. ms argument.
I'm arguing the point that he never had an idea, design or suggestion for something to be produced ever. Your original point was that he never designed or engineered anything, which is what I doubt. After over 30 years of being in business, I am quite sure he did get involved in something. He may not have programmed any single line of code, but that doesn't mean that he never had any input or ideas on products that was given to his goons and prototyped.
I never said he never had an idea, talk about spinning the argument. He never has engineered anything, and when the OP was making the claim that Gates was a marketing guy when he actually engineered DOS, is bullshit..
And while "most consumers" might not be impressed with the iPad, far more consumers are impressed with the iPad than they are with any Windows tablet that's ever been produced or announced. And that's what's important.
Why? Are you participating in some sort of contest?
Do you cheer on your favorite brand of soda pop too?
What the heck do you care about the relative impressions of these two product categories?
What is the point of deleting a user's account if they are allowed to come back with another name? It makes things worse because longtime posters won't be aware of the new alias they previously had ignored and new posters won't be able to read their posting history to get a sense of the their thread derailing habits. It's a clean slate that hurts everyone but the offender.
Sincerely,
Concerned AI Posters.
While I tend to agree, and in the particular case of teckstud I think what he's done already justifies a total IP ban on the guy ....
To play devil's advocate, I think the idea behind deleting his posts is:
a) no one wants to read that crap anyway.
b) makes the whole site look bad to have all that petty junk in the archives
c) gives the violator (teckstud) a chance to "start anew."
Lots of angry trolls do clean up their acts eventually. Mostly they do this by passing puberty, getting a real job, and generally just "growing up." Wisdom is forced onto fools by age etc. It's also a learning experience for most of those types. teckstud has learned how to fake knowledge of all sorts of things through his experiences here and you can see some of the things that were taught to him by some of the posters here showing up in his arguments now. Eventually he may pick up enough material to make intelligible posts although his attitude still sucks.
But just because this appeasement strategy hasn't worked with teckstud, doesn't mean might not be a good strategy overall.
Actually Gates didn't "invent" DOS, he bought (stole) it for pennies on the dollar from a developer in either Oregon or Washington state - changed it a bit then licensed it to IBM and that started the Microsoft eventual dominance.
Sort of. He bought the rights to a 16-bit CP/M clone from a small company called Seattle Computer Products. The purchase price is generally quoted at $50,000. The author of the code, Tim Paterson, ended up working for Microsoft and never had any complaints, that I have ever heard about.
Very well said. Bill is a geek. He thinks like a geek, looks like a geek, and acts like a geek -- consequently other geeks understand his approach and are comfortable with it.
Are you claiming that 90% or so of desktop/laptop users are geeks?
Or would you allow that many more types of folks, other than geeks, also are comfortable with the MS "approach"?
I have a list as long as my arm for potential applications on the iPad which are not possible on the iPhone.
There are so many new and exciting applications on the way. And so much better than swiss cheese.
I'd appreciate seeing your list.
I assume that it does not contain applications that are easily possible on a laptop.
I honestly wonder how and why the 'Pad can do things better than a small laptop. iSteve boasted that it did (in a roundabout manner) and then failed to give a single example. Indeed, he claimed that the 'Pad would have to some things better than a laptop in order to be viable, but then utterly failed to make his case that the 'Pad was superior in any manner.
So what is on your list? I'd love to check it out.
Other than "A computer on every desk" this man's vision of the future has never come true. He's done well with Office and Windows but not at predicting future tech trends. Late to the browser wars (though they caught up with anti-competitive moves), late to the MP3, etc.
Are you claiming that 90% or so of desktop/laptop users are geeks?
Or would you allow that many more types of folks, other than geeks, also are comfortable with the MS "approach"?
Or what?
i almost think he is enforcing the typical stereotype, that the ms crowd is an ugly bunch, not as suave, smooth, or good looking as those that buy apple. keyword trendy.
i base that off "looks like a geek"
although, if you've ever gone to any mac user group swap meets, i think you would find the mac crowd looks exactly like the pc enthusiast crowd, just more white in their beards.
I expect Apple to release another AppleTV this year. They can't drop the living room and the current model is using some old tech. The iPad's HW and OS looks like a pretty good and inexpensive fit for the next AppleTV.
Completely agree. I very much see the iPad as a way into the living room. In the home it is the natural location for the pad.
i don't see how microsoft has failed in regards to tablet computers. i don't think they have tried to make any. we have to differentiate that apple is a hardware company, and outside of the xbox and zune, microsoft is a software provider. i don't think adobe has offered a very good tablet solution, or corel either, but they make software that could be utilized on a tablet very well.
microsofts biggest problem is it's business partners. it should be hp, dell and other companies have failed to offer a MS based tablet like this.
it's one thing to point out that MS hasn't done it, it's another for people to make the same old ms sucks, steals and so on apple v. ms argument.
Microsoft's most recent effort to built a tablet-specific Windows OS was the Origami (UMPC) project a few years ago. The OEMs aren't building good products around UMPC because the OS isn't up to it. This OS software and OEM model is the one Microsoft brought to the dance, it's the one that made them their billions, and the one a lot of people think that Apple ought to emulate. You can't very well say that Microsoft is now excused for it failure to deliver on Gates' vision, and the OEMs can now be blamed.
Comments
Yes, look where the apple tv is today - 6.5 million units sold, the biggest single selling device of it's type. Don't believe the media, the average owner of this device loves it - that it is 'crippled' is the fault of copyright owning content providers.
And an extension of the largest media platform on the planet, what a terrible idea. It will never catch on.
Seriously?!
I agree that the AppleTV has been a success in the nascent and lackluster media extender market but things have changed since it's arrival and the AppleTV has not. This last year the popular PS3, 360 and TiVo have stepped up their game to offer a lot of the features the AppleTV came with. Popcorn Hour and other media extenders are becoming popular, for good reason.
Unless you specifically want iTS access the AppleTV now offers little benefit over these other appliances. They aren't as simple as the AppleTV but the AppleTV fails in other areas they excel in. Favour is tipping toward them more each day.
I expect Apple to release another AppleTV this year. They can't drop the living room and the current model is using some old tech. The iPad's HW and OS (not the UI) looks like a pretty good and inexpensive fit for the next AppleTV.
I'd like to see an SDK for apps and an option for direct file access but I am not holding my breath on either of these.
it's funny that so many people here find it on themselves to attack what Bill Gates said just because it's not towing the apple line.
it's just his opinion.
If that's what was happening, it might be "funny." I don't think it's necessarily fun and games to point out that tablet computing is something Gates has taken a couple of swings and awful misses at. It's all well and good for him to say that tablet computing the future, and he really, really believes in it. But when he's the head of the world's most powerful technology company, which after a decade of trying has utterly failed to fulfill that vision, then I think it's totally appropriate to point that out, especially when he sees so fit to criticize Apple's approach. Maybe he's afraid that Apple will succeed where Microsoft has failed?
Never mind having the user-centric vision to create a beloved device, the technical skill to make it work, and the cool factor to make people want it. Cause, you know, Microsoft has all of that covered.
Your need for 'newness' makes you miss the bigger picture (as usual). Carrying the new interface over from the iPhone / Touch guarantees that millions of users are already familiar with the device. When launching an entirely new device that is bound to meet with a certain degree of resistance (cough cough). Besides, the interface must be one of the most successful ever so why change it?
The Windows interface is one of the most successful ever. Would you want it on a tablet? If not, how does your argument make sense?
I have no need for newness that I am aware of, unless the newness yields an improvement of some sort. The 'Pad is new, for example, and yet that doesn't compel me to like it, because it doesn't seem to do anything (that I want to do) better than my existing choices.
And yes, the built-in army of app-buyers seems to be the reason why Apple chose to recycle the iTouch OS. The 'Pad is perfect for linking folks to the iSore.
But as a net-surfing and media consumption and computing appliance, it leaves a lot to be desired. Meh. I'll wait for someone else to do it right.
I find it hypocritical that a marketing guy that never really invented anything except DOS says "no biggie" to something he doesn't really know anything about.
Actually Gates didn't "invent" DOS, he bought (stole) it for pennies on the dollar from a developer in either Oregon or Washington state - changed it a bit then licensed it to IBM and that started the Microsoft eventual dominance. The guy he bought it from basically got screwed and went out of business I think. Saw a documentary on tv about the start of MS and Gates.
The trouble with the ignore filter is that the comments show up in the replies. The best defence is for users to ignore the trolls.
If the moderators were watching the threads 24/7 it would be easy to filter out stupid thread hoggers but its difficult.
Lifetime bans are very severe but surely you can ban someone for a week with warnings?
[EDIT]In reference to hillstone's comment - use of the term fanboy or derivative thereof should automatically effect a one week ban.[/EDIT]
LOL. I think if they banned members for saying fanboy half the forum would have been banned by now.
lol... I actually just posted on my personal blog about why people need to give iPad a break:
"4 Reasons why people need to chill out and give the iPad a break" - http://bit.ly/cfuRWY
What are your thoughts?
I think that spam has no place here.
If that's what was happening, it might be "funny." I don't think it's necessarily fun and games to point out that tablet computing is something Gates has taken a couple of swings and awful misses at. It's all well and good for him to say that tablet computing the future, and he really, really believes in it. But when he's the head of the world's most powerful technology company, which after a decade of trying has utterly failed to fulfill that vision, then I think it's totally appropriate to point that out, especially when he sees so fit to criticize Apple's approach. Maybe he's afraid that Apple will succeed where Microsoft has failed?
i don't see how microsoft has failed in regards to tablet computers. i don't think they have tried to make any. we have to differentiate that apple is a hardware company, and outside of the xbox and zune, microsoft is a software provider. i don't think adobe has offered a very good tablet solution, or corel either, but they make software that could be utilized on a tablet very well.
microsofts biggest problem is it's business partners. it should be hp, dell and other companies have failed to offer a MS based tablet like this.
it's one thing to point out that MS hasn't done it, it's another for people to make the same old ms sucks, steals and so on apple v. ms argument.
What a turd-brain.
<plonk>
I'm arguing the point that he never had an idea, design or suggestion for something to be produced ever. Your original point was that he never designed or engineered anything, which is what I doubt. After over 30 years of being in business, I am quite sure he did get involved in something. He may not have programmed any single line of code, but that doesn't mean that he never had any input or ideas on products that was given to his goons and prototyped.
I never said he never had an idea, talk about spinning the argument. He never has engineered anything, and when the OP was making the claim that Gates was a marketing guy when he actually engineered DOS, is bullshit..
And while "most consumers" might not be impressed with the iPad, far more consumers are impressed with the iPad than they are with any Windows tablet that's ever been produced or announced. And that's what's important.
Why? Are you participating in some sort of contest?
Do you cheer on your favorite brand of soda pop too?
What the heck do you care about the relative impressions of these two product categories?
Dear Mods,
What is the point of deleting a user's account if they are allowed to come back with another name? It makes things worse because longtime posters won't be aware of the new alias they previously had ignored and new posters won't be able to read their posting history to get a sense of the their thread derailing habits. It's a clean slate that hurts everyone but the offender.
Sincerely,
Concerned AI Posters.
While I tend to agree, and in the particular case of teckstud I think what he's done already justifies a total IP ban on the guy ....
To play devil's advocate, I think the idea behind deleting his posts is:
a) no one wants to read that crap anyway.
b) makes the whole site look bad to have all that petty junk in the archives
c) gives the violator (teckstud) a chance to "start anew."
Lots of angry trolls do clean up their acts eventually. Mostly they do this by passing puberty, getting a real job, and generally just "growing up." Wisdom is forced onto fools by age etc. It's also a learning experience for most of those types. teckstud has learned how to fake knowledge of all sorts of things through his experiences here and you can see some of the things that were taught to him by some of the posters here showing up in his arguments now. Eventually he may pick up enough material to make intelligible posts although his attitude still sucks.
But just because this appeasement strategy hasn't worked with teckstud, doesn't mean might not be a good strategy overall.
Actually Gates didn't "invent" DOS, he bought (stole) it for pennies on the dollar from a developer in either Oregon or Washington state - changed it a bit then licensed it to IBM and that started the Microsoft eventual dominance.
Sort of. He bought the rights to a 16-bit CP/M clone from a small company called Seattle Computer Products. The purchase price is generally quoted at $50,000. The author of the code, Tim Paterson, ended up working for Microsoft and never had any complaints, that I have ever heard about.
Very well said. Bill is a geek. He thinks like a geek, looks like a geek, and acts like a geek -- consequently other geeks understand his approach and are comfortable with it.
Are you claiming that 90% or so of desktop/laptop users are geeks?
Or would you allow that many more types of folks, other than geeks, also are comfortable with the MS "approach"?
Or what?
I have a list as long as my arm for potential applications on the iPad which are not possible on the iPhone.
There are so many new and exciting applications on the way. And so much better than swiss cheese.
I'd appreciate seeing your list.
I assume that it does not contain applications that are easily possible on a laptop.
I honestly wonder how and why the 'Pad can do things better than a small laptop. iSteve boasted that it did (in a roundabout manner) and then failed to give a single example. Indeed, he claimed that the 'Pad would have to some things better than a laptop in order to be viable, but then utterly failed to make his case that the 'Pad was superior in any manner.
So what is on your list? I'd love to check it out.
Are you claiming that 90% or so of desktop/laptop users are geeks?
Or would you allow that many more types of folks, other than geeks, also are comfortable with the MS "approach"?
Or what?
i almost think he is enforcing the typical stereotype, that the ms crowd is an ugly bunch, not as suave, smooth, or good looking as those that buy apple. keyword trendy.
i base that off "looks like a geek"
although, if you've ever gone to any mac user group swap meets, i think you would find the mac crowd looks exactly like the pc enthusiast crowd, just more white in their beards.
I think that spam has no place here.
So I can't post a link to an article on my personal blog (which by the way, has zero adds on it), about a topic relevant to this thread?
I don't even think you read it.
I expect Apple to release another AppleTV this year. They can't drop the living room and the current model is using some old tech. The iPad's HW and OS looks like a pretty good and inexpensive fit for the next AppleTV.
Completely agree. I very much see the iPad as a way into the living room. In the home it is the natural location for the pad.
i don't see how microsoft has failed in regards to tablet computers. i don't think they have tried to make any. we have to differentiate that apple is a hardware company, and outside of the xbox and zune, microsoft is a software provider. i don't think adobe has offered a very good tablet solution, or corel either, but they make software that could be utilized on a tablet very well.
microsofts biggest problem is it's business partners. it should be hp, dell and other companies have failed to offer a MS based tablet like this.
it's one thing to point out that MS hasn't done it, it's another for people to make the same old ms sucks, steals and so on apple v. ms argument.
Microsoft's most recent effort to built a tablet-specific Windows OS was the Origami (UMPC) project a few years ago. The OEMs aren't building good products around UMPC because the OS isn't up to it. This OS software and OEM model is the one Microsoft brought to the dance, it's the one that made them their billions, and the one a lot of people think that Apple ought to emulate. You can't very well say that Microsoft is now excused for it failure to deliver on Gates' vision, and the OEMs can now be blamed.