Of course it will. The iPad is a content portal (Apps, eBooks, Movies). The success of the App Store is huge and the best way to keep the momentum going is to expand it to include new devices.
Of course it will. The iPad is a content portal (Apps, eBooks, Movies). The success of the App Store is huge and the best way to keep the momentum going is to expand it to include new devices.
I also foresee the iPad helping to boost Mac sales the way other iDevices have. It's a win-win-win for Apple.
The iPad will display HD (and 720p is HD) in the correct aspect ratio for it. It may not use up the whole screen but so what as it didn't on most laptops before it.
It will NOT display 720p while watching a movie in HD format. When displaying 16:9 content, the vertical resolution is nowhere near 720. Pan and scan movies might display in 720, but that is not HD.
The 'Pad will NOT display HD. Either the sides are cut off, which is not HD, or the vertical resolution is much lower than minimum HD.
But I'd wager that somebody else will do it right, and offer a 1080p 16:9 screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005
Those "holes" haven't bother iPhone or iPod touch users much. By June, there could be about 100 million such users, most of whom use the web. It won't be much longer before most web sites that matter will be converting over.
Maybe someday the 'Pad will be OK for surfing. As of now, it is not even minimally acceptable, IMO.
I can forego the full web on my iPhone, but if I buy a tablet for web consumption, I expect it to meet some kind of a minimum standard.
The antique aspect ratio kills it for movies, and the lack of web video kills it for the web. For me.
Watching movies is only one of the uses for the iPad. Before HD TV people rented movies from the likes of Blockbusters to watch movies on their TVs. Even widescreen movies were ok if you didn't mind the black lines above and below the screen. The iPad isn't a replacement for your HD TV. If you are away, and you want to watch a movie where you don't have access to an HD TV--then this is an alternative.
But a better alternative would be a different tablet - one that does everything it 'Pad will do, AND will display standard modern content full-screen.
You've posted the same anti-iPad nonsense numerous times now. I doubt that you are incapable of reading or comprehending the many many responses that have talked about the logic for 4:3 aspect ratio (Hint: Portrait mode).
Therefore, one has to conclude that your obtuseness on this is 100% trolling. You are frankly adding nothing to the discussion -- please stop.
Any anti or pro iPad predictions at this point are simply that and in most cases are all nonsense on both sides of the fence. There is no way at this point anyone can know how well the iPad is going to do because it hasn't even been released.
Hell pre-orders haven't even started yet.
Any and all comments anti or pro have no factual data to back them up because right now there isn't any data.
Also what you deem logical or what appears to fit your needs may not work for someone else.
My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.
Your underlying assumption seems to be that Apple embraces dying technology. That is very different from the gloss applied by most folks here.
Apple uses very much the opposite of a razor and blades strategy. They charge a lot for the razor and sell the blades at cost to encourage the sales of more razors. Actually, they charge a lot for the razor and even more for its accessories.
Yes. That has been their traditional strategy. AI thinks that they have a new strategy, and when they emphasized (and keep emphasizing) the price of the 'Pad, it made me tend to agree that the strategy may be changing.
I was also impressed that in order to explain the lack of a camera in the iTouch, iSteve said that they were engineering it to meet a price point. This was the first time I've heard Apple say anything like that. Steve's statements, put together, are evidence that maybe a new strategy is in the offing.
Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!
[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]
Really?!?!
He's also going to wait for a 2.35:1 ratio which makes that 1080p have a horizontal pixel count of 2538 — which is nearly as many pixels wide as the 27" iMac — because letterboxing or cropping the image will apparently ruin the experience. I guess he's never watched a video outside of a movie theater.
There had to be a compromise somewhere regarding the screen aspect ratio. If Apple wanted to produce something to watch movies then the iPad would have been long and narrow. Knowing that people would be using the iPad for other media--online books, magazines, newspapers and browsing the Internet this appear to be the best compromise. But then none of us have had a chance to use the iPad yet--have we. See you all at the Apple STORE on April 3 or shortly thereafter.
IMO, a compromise wouild have been a compromise: Somewhere between 4:3 and 16:9. Just like the iPhone.
This was not a compromise, instead, it was an all-or-nothing kind of a deal. And it makes the device laughably insufficient for movie consumption. YMMV.
So are you gonna hold out for a tablet with a 2.35:1 ratio?
Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.
I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.
And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.
I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.
And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
1) There is no wasted real estate when you scale the content.
2) You are throwing around and interchanging terms like SD and HD as if the content and displays are designed in unison, when they aren't, not to mention that iPad isn't an SD panel.
3) a ratio is a distraction for you? Seriously? Most CE, especially when it comes to video, is designed to be a distraction, a time waster or time replacer.
4) Instead of taking a myopic view of the world-o-tech by being surprised by it, perhaps you should look at it from an objective viewpoint for once. Apple doesn't have 16:9 on their iPhone or Touch yet people have been watching video on that 3.5" display for years now so I think watching video on a 10" display will work out just fine.
5) good luck in the future trying to find and anamorphic phone display with 1080p because letterboxing or scaling is bad.
Don't put words in my mouth. Only jackasses do that.
I added the details to the comments you made. Don't be made because I pointed out that many movies use a 2.35:1 aspect ratio which makes even the widescreen TVs require letterboxing.
Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.
I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.
And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
so go watch hd on tv and GTFO....who cares whiny baby..go buy something THAT DOES NOT EXIST except in your own head. Maybe you can find a company that will build JUST FOR YOU, a magical unicorn sparkly device for you lil princess. Because we all know the world revolves around you...
Comments
Of course it will. The iPad is a content portal (Apps, eBooks, Movies). The success of the App Store is huge and the best way to keep the momentum going is to expand it to include new devices.
I also foresee the iPad helping to boost Mac sales the way other iDevices have. It's a win-win-win for Apple.
The iPad will display HD (and 720p is HD) in the correct aspect ratio for it. It may not use up the whole screen but so what as it didn't on most laptops before it.
It will NOT display 720p while watching a movie in HD format. When displaying 16:9 content, the vertical resolution is nowhere near 720. Pan and scan movies might display in 720, but that is not HD.
The 'Pad will NOT display HD. Either the sides are cut off, which is not HD, or the vertical resolution is much lower than minimum HD.
But I'd wager that somebody else will do it right, and offer a 1080p 16:9 screen.
Those "holes" haven't bother iPhone or iPod touch users much. By June, there could be about 100 million such users, most of whom use the web. It won't be much longer before most web sites that matter will be converting over.
Maybe someday the 'Pad will be OK for surfing. As of now, it is not even minimally acceptable, IMO.
I can forego the full web on my iPhone, but if I buy a tablet for web consumption, I expect it to meet some kind of a minimum standard.
The antique aspect ratio kills it for movies, and the lack of web video kills it for the web. For me.
You're not just an obtuse troll, but a crass one too. So what else is new.
You reply to trolls? Please go away. Please killfile me immediately.
I will not tolerate personal insults on this forum.
Watching movies is only one of the uses for the iPad. Before HD TV people rented movies from the likes of Blockbusters to watch movies on their TVs. Even widescreen movies were ok if you didn't mind the black lines above and below the screen. The iPad isn't a replacement for your HD TV. If you are away, and you want to watch a movie where you don't have access to an HD TV--then this is an alternative.
But a better alternative would be a different tablet - one that does everything it 'Pad will do, AND will display standard modern content full-screen.
You've posted the same anti-iPad nonsense numerous times now. I doubt that you are incapable of reading or comprehending the many many responses that have talked about the logic for 4:3 aspect ratio (Hint: Portrait mode).
Therefore, one has to conclude that your obtuseness on this is 100% trolling. You are frankly adding nothing to the discussion -- please stop.
Any anti or pro iPad predictions at this point are simply that and in most cases are all nonsense on both sides of the fence. There is no way at this point anyone can know how well the iPad is going to do because it hasn't even been released.
Hell pre-orders haven't even started yet.
Any and all comments anti or pro have no factual data to back them up because right now there isn't any data.
Also what you deem logical or what appears to fit your needs may not work for someone else.
The antique aspect ratio kills it for movies, and the lack of web video kills it for the web. For me.
So are you gonna hold out for a tablet with a 2.35:1 ratio?
IBut I'd wager that somebody else will do it right, and offer a 1080p 16:9 screen.
Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!
[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]
Really?!?!
My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.
Your underlying assumption seems to be that Apple embraces dying technology. That is very different from the gloss applied by most folks here.
Apple uses very much the opposite of a razor and blades strategy. They charge a lot for the razor and sell the blades at cost to encourage the sales of more razors. Actually, they charge a lot for the razor and even more for its accessories.
Yes. That has been their traditional strategy. AI thinks that they have a new strategy, and when they emphasized (and keep emphasizing) the price of the 'Pad, it made me tend to agree that the strategy may be changing.
I was also impressed that in order to explain the lack of a camera in the iTouch, iSteve said that they were engineering it to meet a price point. This was the first time I've heard Apple say anything like that. Steve's statements, put together, are evidence that maybe a new strategy is in the offing.
Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!
[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]
Really?!?!
He's also going to wait for a 2.35:1 ratio which makes that 1080p have a horizontal pixel count of 2538 — which is nearly as many pixels wide as the 27" iMac — because letterboxing or cropping the image will apparently ruin the experience. I guess he's never watched a video outside of a movie theater.
There had to be a compromise somewhere regarding the screen aspect ratio. If Apple wanted to produce something to watch movies then the iPad would have been long and narrow. Knowing that people would be using the iPad for other media--online books, magazines, newspapers and browsing the Internet this appear to be the best compromise. But then none of us have had a chance to use the iPad yet--have we. See you all at the Apple STORE on April 3 or shortly thereafter.
IMO, a compromise wouild have been a compromise: Somewhere between 4:3 and 16:9. Just like the iPhone.
This was not a compromise, instead, it was an all-or-nothing kind of a deal. And it makes the device laughably insufficient for movie consumption. YMMV.
Any and all comments anti or pro have no factual data to back them up because right now there isn't any data.
Fact: The iPad has a 4:3 aspect ratio, while most movies are widescreen.
Fact: The 'Pad will not display in HD, which has become very common.
Fact: The 'Pad will not display flash video, and therefore will not display the vast majority of 'web video.
Fact: For what I want, the 'Pad is fatally deficient.
So are you gonna hold out for a tablet with a 2.35:1 ratio?
Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.
I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.
And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
Do you have any idea how utterly silly that statement sounds?!!? Are you even serious!?!
[CENTER]"A 10 INCH 1080p HD RESOLUTION SCREEN"[/CENTER]
Really?!?!
I think that a 12 inch screen would be better. As of now, I'm staring at a 15 inch 1080p screen.
What is ridiculous about having full HD in a tablet?
He's also going to wait for a 2.35:1 ratio
Don't put words in my mouth. Only jackasses do that.
Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.
I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.
And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
1) There is no wasted real estate when you scale the content.
2) You are throwing around and interchanging terms like SD and HD as if the content and displays are designed in unison, when they aren't, not to mention that iPad isn't an SD panel.
3) a ratio is a distraction for you? Seriously? Most CE, especially when it comes to video, is designed to be a distraction, a time waster or time replacer.
4) Instead of taking a myopic view of the world-o-tech by being surprised by it, perhaps you should look at it from an objective viewpoint for once. Apple doesn't have 16:9 on their iPhone or Touch yet people have been watching video on that 3.5" display for years now so I think watching video on a 10" display will work out just fine.
5) good luck in the future trying to find and anamorphic phone display with 1080p because letterboxing or scaling is bad.
Don't put words in my mouth. Only jackasses do that.
I added the details to the comments you made. Don't be made because I pointed out that many movies use a 2.35:1 aspect ratio which makes even the widescreen TVs require letterboxing.
Naw. 16:9 is fine as a compromise. Even something with a compromise ratio between SD and HD would be OK, like 16:10. But the antique 4:3 is not remotely OK for me, given that I'd want a tablet to watch movies with. 4:3 leaves a lot of wasted real estate when watching normal video content, and results in a sub-HD tiny picture.
I used to have a 4:3 CRT "HD" TV. It too was fatally compromised when watching HD cable. I now have a proper HD set, which is MUCH better. The height of the screen is about the same as the old one, but it is the proper width now. Going back to 4:3 is not a direction for me.
And frankly, I'm pretty surprised that Apple has introduced technology that is deader than dead. They are known for deleting older, but still viable technologies. This time around, they revived a dead one.
so go watch hd on tv and GTFO....who cares whiny baby..go buy something THAT DOES NOT EXIST except in your own head. Maybe you can find a company that will build JUST FOR YOU, a magical unicorn sparkly device for you lil princess. Because we all know the world revolves around you...
You reply to trolls? Please go away. Please killfile me immediately.
I will not tolerate personal insults on this forum.
JUST GET OVER IT AND