Apple's iPad

Bud

Bionic Poster
I agree the ipad is a revolutionary device that is way better then a netbook. I have an ipod touch and the ipad is not only bigger but better and the price is reasonable. The problem with a netbook is that you can't listen to music, watch tv shows and movies because there is no itunes, you can't play games and other apps because there is no app store. Also you can't watch videos in HD, read books as you can on an ipad with the ibook store; in addition netbooks are heavy and thick which makes it harder to travel with compared to an ipad. So an ipad is way better then a netbook, hands down.
Are you trying to be funny (as I certainly hope you're not that clueless)?

You can load itunes (assuming you'd even want to which not many people don't) on any laptop. I originally had it on my PC for my Nano. I later switched to an open source program called Sharepod which works much better and doesn't tie into the damned apple store.

You can also play games, watch HD movies, listen to music, etc., etc., etc. on a Netboook for half the price. It also weighs about the same as an ipad.

As far as content... a Netbook will do EVERYTHING that an ipad will do (plus a whole lot more).
 

quest01

Hall of Fame
Another problem I left out is the ipad has no viruses because its made by Apple while netbooks do because they run PC software. So think about it, do you want a device that just works or a PC that can crash your computer and kill it. The same will be said between the slate and ipad, slate will be littered with viruses.
 
Last edited:

eagle

Hall of Fame
Another problem I left out is the ipad has no viruses because its made by Apple while netbooks do because they run PC software. So think about it, do you want a device that just works or a PC that can crash your computer and kill it. The same will be said between the slate and ipad, slate will be littered with viruses.
There will always be a part of the population that buys one over the other and vice versa.

I however buy the product that suits me the best regardless of brand.

I'm neither a pc or mac loyalist. I will buy whichever I decide personally meets my own personal requirements.

The same goes for anything and everything I buy including tennis items.

So, one might write a laundry list of pros and cons that are important to them but it likely isn't the same as mine and will likely not influence what I buy.

r,
eagle
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
Another problem I left out is the ipad has no viruses because its made by Apple while netbooks do because they run PC software. So think about it, do you want a device that just works or a PC that can crash your computer and kill it. The same will be said between the slate and ipad, slate will be littered with viruses.
Are you for real? :-?
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
Except the ability to use it for long without recharging. Battery life is one of THE most important aspects of a mobile device. The greatest features are useless when the battery dies.
So you think the Slate will have less battery life than the ipad (8-10 hours)? :-?

I seriously doubt that... considering it's superior in every other detail.

- - - - - - - - - -

Meet the ipad killer:



 
Last edited:

southpaw

Rookie
Yeah, well backlit reading devices are harmful to your eyesight. That's why e-ink was invented.
That's a myth. Backlit devices do not damage eyesight; well, at least no more than any type of reading. It's true that reading on a sub par backlit device, like many computer monitors, can quickly fatigue the eyes. But so can reading bad print on low quality paper.

The major difference between e-ink and LCD displays, is the light source. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages. Reflected light can be difficult to get just right, but when it is right, reading is easier and less fatiguing than on a LCD screen. On the other hand, backlit devices contain their light source, so they can adjust themselves to compensate for the ambiet lighting.
 

Centered

Hall of Fame
I seriously doubt that... considering it's superior in every other detail.
Unknown dimensions
Unknown weight
Unknown battery life

Hmm.. And, is Windows really ideal for this sort of device? Is it designed for a finger-driven touch interface?

Is there a Pixel Qi screen on it?
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
Unknown dimensions
Unknown weight
Unknown battery life

Hmm.. And, is Windows really ideal for this sort of device? Is it designed for a finger-driven touch interface?

Is there a Pixel Qi screen on it?
We'll find all that out when it's closer to market.

It appears HP was waiting to see which features the Ipad contained so they could better it in every aspect.

I don't think any mainstream laptops/tablets/e-readers contain Pixel Qi screens, yet.
 
Last edited:

rovex

Legend
The battery life of the Slate is 5 hours. I also imagine it will be heavier than the Ipad considering it does pack more features.
 

eagle

Hall of Fame
Just like tennis gear or everything else, I say buy whatever is best for you.

You don't need to convince the other guy to buy what you like to validate your choice.

Competition also makes vendors design and build better products at competitive prices.

So who wins? The consumer.

r,
eagle
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
To be fair... I demoed one today

I demoed an iPad today (the loaded version) at Best Buy for about 10-15 minutes. It's basically an overpriced entertainment machine used to consume content, only. It excels with games, ebooks, audiobooks and simple browsing. However, it's no laptop replacement and never will be.

Observations:
  • I didn't find it particular fast
  • The UI worked well
  • It was very user friendly downloading content
  • Fit/finish was very nice
  • Screen resolution is decent
  • Loved the integration of Google maps and the ease of use (panning and zooming)
  • It's solid as a rock but seems way heavier than it's claimed weight (especially with continuous holding). This things needs a stand (or propped up on your lap) if used for over 5-10 minutes
My overall impression of the machine was positive but I'd never consider purchasing one at the current price point (especially knowing Apple's reputation of much improving subsequent models). The most I'd pay for this machine is $400 (for the high-end model with 3G). If Apple lowered the price by a couple hundred dollars, they'd sell a ton more to those who've never been Apple fans.
 
Last edited:

fedifed

Rookie
I went to the apple store yesterday to check out the ipad.

Pros: The screen was big
Many Apps
Very fast
User-Friendly
Very easy to learn

Cons: A bit heavy
NOTHING ELSE
 

albino smurf

Professional
They need to get the flash thing worked out. It is holding back the entire print/interactive integration IMO. Until they get it together we are stuck with a print TV hybrid which is just scratching the surface of what is possible.
 

quest01

Hall of Fame
ipad>slate

The ipad is way better then the slate, its faster, it has more apps including games, gps nav, etc... it has itunes which includes thousands of songs, movies, tv shows, podcasts while with the slate you can't do anything besides browse the internet and check email. The slate doesn't have an app store or itunes which means you can't download music, movies, and play games. Also the ipad is lighter, thinner, more environmentally friendly which includes arsenic free display glass, BFR free, Mercury free, etc.. Also the ipad has no viruses because its made by Apple while the slate is made by PC's which are littered with viruses.

Also as someone stated the ipad has no multitasking well wait until the 4.0 update is released sometime in the fall for the ipad which includes 100+ features including multitasking.
 
Last edited:

Bud

Bionic Poster
The ipad is way better then the slate, its faster, it has more apps including games, gps nav, etc... it has itunes which includes thousands of songs, movies, tv shows, podcasts while with the slate you can't do anything besides browse the internet and check email. The slate doesn't have an app store or itunes which means you can't download music, movies, and play games. Also the ipad is lighter, thinner, more environmentally friendly which includes arsenic free display glass, BFR free, Mercury free, etc.. Also the ipad has no viruses because its made by Apple while the slate is made by PC's which are littered with viruses.

Also as someone stated the ipad has no multitasking well wait until the 4.0 update is released sometime in the fall for the ipad which includes 100+ features including multitasking.
The Slate isn't even out yet :oops:
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
They need to get the flash thing worked out. It is holding back the entire print/interactive integration IMO. Until they get it together we are stuck with a print TV hybrid which is just scratching the surface of what is possible.
Flash is not repeat NOT coming on the iPhone. Nothing to work out.

Here's a nice quote i found somewhere (for laffs)
I still maintain my stance regarding the main culprit in this debate, being that Flash should be set fire to and urinated on for the shi**y product it is, ...
A more serious quote from a review that attempts to explains the stance.
And yeah, it is that. Apple’s distaste for Flash is real, and as Jobs reiterated Thursday via a one-word answer to a question on the topic, Apple has “no” plans to let it on the iPhone.


Apple doesn’t want Flash-created apps on the App Store for a simple reason: It reduces the iPhone to a lowest-common denominator platform, and at that point Apple loses all control over the iPhone OS experience.


Once developers can create an app in one development environment—Adobe’s—and compile it to run on every smartphone known to humankind, many developers will decide to save themselves a boatload of money and stop developing native apps for the iPhone, Android, and other platforms. They’ll just develop once, for Flash, and let it run anywhere.


Sounds good, but the develop-once-run-anywhere philosophy is something that makes more sense to bean counters and development-environment vendors than it does to platform owners and discriminating users. In the ’90s we were told that Java apps would be the future of software, because you could write them once and deploy them anywhere. As someone who used to use a Java-based Mac app on an almost daily basis, let me tell you: it was a disaster. Java apps didn’t behave like Mac apps. They were ugly and awful and weird, but hey, at least they ran on the Mac.
http://www.macworld.com/article/150539/2010/04/apple_world.html
 

albino smurf

Professional
OK so Java apps sucked. I still maintain that Flash support would be a great thing for the print industry transitioning to interactive, true interactive, not videos plugged into pages. There are a lot of weird attitudes about Flash that I don't understand. Perhaps you could explain since you posted quotes about peeing on it.

Maybe the solution is for Adobe to make a new output for Flash, like an enhanced QT. I don't know but there is a lot of creative juice being left in the cold by this continued holdout.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
alb,
I've been glancing through a lot - a boatload of reviews - there's almost nothing else in the tech news nowadays. Each and everyone's review of the iPad. lol.

There are arguments going both ways. So its hard for me to take a stance either way. Someone did comment that over the next few months things will settle down - people moving to Andriod because of the "freedom" issue, and people standing by Apple due to the experience issue.

There is a post by John Gruber that explains much better. He talks of how Adobe can exercise control on Apple when they come out with new features since Flash is being used to convert /generate iPhone apps. It's best to read his posts rather than my trying to repeat it. Steve Jobs says that that post does explain their stance.

I don't know if I mentioned earlier but some have expressed concerns that Flash eats up battery and CPU and that's going to be a big issue on a mobile device that has restricted resources. That's also why they dont want app written in / using higher level languages like Lua Python etc on the iPhone - another source of discontent among programmers.

Again, it appears Apple doesn't want the user experience hampered - they want people to write native apps for iPhone - not generic apps to run on Andriod , iPhone etc which do not behave like iPhone apps.

In the end, no one is being forced to buy an iPhone or an Apple product.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Sounds like a good antitrust case can be made against Apple. If Microsoft could be hauled into court for bundling Explorer or preventing other apps to work, so can Apple for anti-competitive strategies. Saying that nobody is forced to buy anything is not an argument.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
No sir, this is not the same as anti-trust. No one is stopped from developing apps for iPhone.
The languages and tools are available to all. And free of cost.

Won't work.
 

Lakoste

Professional
My wife has one and likes it. I don't think it's that bad but I prefer my laptops.

I really don't see the huge deal with no flash honestly, and I'm pretty sure my wife hasn't even complained about it once after I told her about the youtube and pandora apps.
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
My wife has one and likes it. I don't think it's that bad but I prefer my laptops.

I really don't see the huge deal with no flash honestly, and I'm pretty sure my wife hasn't even complained about it once after I told her about the youtube and pandora apps.
What does she use it for most of the time?
 

Lakoste

Professional
What does she use it for most of the time?
Facebook, music, movies/tv shows (she has the Netflix app), she has a blog on tumblr, news/gossip sites, email. She is also learning how to cook :), so she has a bunch of apps for that. She still prefers real books however and refuses to buy any on the ipad.

Not the type of woman to be going on addictinggames.com and being bummed that she can't play her favorite flash game.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
A few hours back i did see an article in which author suspects that Adobe is planning to sue Apple, although they are not talking of it up-front at all. May take a couple weeks for that to happen.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Interesting piece.
http://counternotions.com/2010/04/13/suicidal/

Here's a comment:

What Apple rejects is the notion that you write an app on another platform, say in Flash, and port it to the iPhone and expect it to work. Why? because Apple has had a decade of hell wherein it couldn’t innovate fast enough and couldn’t even transition to another OS or CPU architecture in a timely manner because ISVs like Adobe, Microsoft, Avid, Quark, etc., couldn’t be bothered with Apple-specific support. They tried to slow down Apple to Wintel level of ineptitude and commoditization, to guard their own interests.


Why should Apple’s innovation curve and platform maintenance costs be indexed to some 3rd party like Adobe that has repeatedly treated Apple customers with apathy and disdain over a decade? Can Flash developers create native content for, for example, Microsoft or Sony game boxes? Where’s the outrage?


If Flash developers need to vent off at all they should look no further than Adobe that has been telling them that they can use CS5 to create apps for the iPhone when it damn well knew that’s not what Apple wished or would allow.
 
G

gandalf64

Guest
iPad

I quite like the iPad - especially the big screen with touch interface is great. And now i'm spoiled: don't want to go back to the iPod anymore.

Why is this better than a laptop or netbook? Here is one reason: I like to do some reading in bed before going to sleep. I now take the iPad and can read news and browse the web; something you cannot conveniently do with a laptop - and not with an iPhone either.

Or another reason (since this is a tennis forum): I am playing a very realistic tennis game that runs on iPhone and iPad. (It's "Tennis Bundle" check it out on www.personalapplets.com). The touch interface makes the game very life-like, something that you cannot achieve on a lap-top or net-book, and especially on iPad with large screen the graphics are beautiful.
 

southpaw

Rookie
Apple is making a massive mistake here.

Personally, I am glad to see they didn't support flash. That said, not supporting flash on mobile devices is one thing. But, the recent section 3.3.1 changes to their terms of service, is suicide for Apple.

The language they use is too broad and if they enforce it to the letter, the collateral damage will ultimately sink the app store. If that happens, and developers start moving away from the app store, the ipad, iphone and all iFutureProducts will gradually move into a niche market, much like Macs did in the 90's.

The best tennis analogy I can come up with is this. Imagine that the USTA (Apple) and Wilson (Adobe) were having a feud. So, the USTA added a new rule prohibiting Wilson sponsored players from competing in the USOpen. No Fed, Del Potro, or Djokovic. The tournament would suffer a little, but there would be enough good players left willing to fill the empty slots. Wilson would also suffer; promising young players would be more likely to sign with Babolat or Head.
Now imagine that the USTA felt that wasn't strict enough, and came out with a new rule stating that if a player had touched any Wilson racquet at any point in their entire life, they would be banned from the USOpen. As a player, how would you prove to the USTA that you had never touched a Wilson racquet. How could you even be sure? Would you even want that hassle?

If Apple enforces this new rule, many of the existing apps, including top ten apps from large publishers, will be removed from the app store.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
The best tennis analogy I can come up with is this. Imagine that the USTA (Apple) and Wilson (Adobe) were having a feud. So, the USTA added a new rule prohibiting Wilson sponsored players from competing in the USOpen. No Fed, Del Potro, or Djokovic. The tournament would suffer a little, but there would be enough good players left willing to fill the empty slots. Wilson would also suffer; promising young players would be more likely to sign with Babolat or Head.
Now imagine that the USTA felt that wasn't strict enough, and came out with a new rule stating that if a player had touched any Wilson racquet at any point in their entire life, they would be banned from the USOpen. As a player, how would you prove to the USTA that you had never touched a Wilson racquet. How could you even be sure? Would you even want that hassle?

If Apple enforces this new rule, many of the existing apps, including top ten apps from large publishers, will be removed from the app store.
Although i am not supporting 3.3.1 and i don't totally understand it, and different people seem to interpret it in different ways, and we *don't* yet know how Apple will implement it. ... I just hope they see some light and lighten up. Anyway, i dont think the analogy is totaly correct.

Any mobile app can be rewritten using Obj-C or C or C++, so any player using a Wilson may switch over to another racket.

Perhaps (off the cuff), if US Open decides that they want only wooden rackets to be used, then players cannot play with graphite even in qualifier rounds. All rackets will be inspected to see they are 100% wood.

Perhaps i am going a bit far in saying: we could draw an analogy with dope-testing. If you've used it anytime during the season -- off you go. ;-)
 

Lakoste

Professional

Thought this was funny especially considering my wife wanted to print something out today and couldn't figure it out.

Like everything else though, there was an app for that.
 

Bud

Bionic Poster

Thought this was funny especially considering my wife wanted to print something out today and couldn't figure it out.

Like everything else though, there was an app for that.
How difficult/easy is it to connect the iPad directly to a network or print sharing device?
 

Lakoste

Professional
How difficult/easy is it to connect the iPad directly to a network or print sharing device?
Honestly, it isn't that seamless. I downloaded the app Print n Share for her, it seemed to have gotten the best reviews? It actually is a really great app that is easy to use even for her, but my one huge problem with it is that you need to install a software on your computer so the app can access all the printers on the network.

So if my wife wants to print something at home its not a big deal at all, but if she is somewhere else (chances are slim she'll need printing I know, but the iPad is marketed for its portability) then she has to reinstall the software or she can't print.

If someone has a better app that is also easy to use and doesn't require extra software I'd totally buy that for her. Not sure if its even possible since the whole printer driver issue.
 
I have seen a few ipads in the last couple days, they look really cool but I think an iphone does the exact same thing. ipad or new generation iphone over the summer?
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
No sir, this is not the same as anti-trust. No one is stopped from developing apps for iPhone.
The languages and tools are available to all. And free of cost.

Won't work.
Maybe not anti-trust, but there are laws against anti-competitive practices.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Maybe not anti-trust, but there are laws against anti-competitive practices.
Where is the anti-competitiveness : they are only specifying the language an app should be in. Adobe is not barred from creating native apps for iPhone.

An analogy could be some of the open-source licenses (e.g. GPL). if you use an OS library, your app may have to be open-sourced as well. If you don't like the terms, don't use it.
 

eagle

Hall of Fame
Good discussions.

Buy one if it meets your needs. Don't if it doesn't.

No need to convince others of your decision.

It's an exercise in futility.

r,
eagle
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Where is the anti-competitiveness : they are only specifying the language an app should be in. Adobe is not barred from creating native apps for iPhone.

An analogy could be some of the open-source licenses (e.g. GPL). if you use an OS library, your app may have to be open-sourced as well. If you don't like the terms, don't use it.
Open source is non-profit. Big difference. I agree though that it is a gray area.
 

southpaw

Rookie
Where is the anti-competitiveness : they are only specifying the language an app should be in. Adobe is not barred from creating native apps for iPhone.

An analogy could be some of the open-source licenses (e.g. GPL). if you use an OS library, your app may have to be open-sourced as well. If you don't like the terms, don't use it.
If I can jump in, the apps will be native. There is no run time or interpreter, these aren't flash files. They are compiled as native apps. From what I can gather on how it works, the flash code will be translated into c and compiled into arm.

This sort of stuff is done all the time. For example, lots of console games are written with a scripting language controlling a c++ engine. It's not uncommon for developers to use tools that output Objc/c++/c source code that can be copied or imported into xcode and compiled. Under these new rules, none of that will be allowed. Insane.
 

Centered

Hall of Fame
Personally, I am glad to see they didn't support flash.
I've read HTML 5 is supposed to be a replacement for Flash. That may be a bad thing because it will be more difficult to block animated advertising. I'm not sure. I haven't read about HTML 5, specifically, yet.

Imagine that the USTA (Apple) and Wilson (Adobe) were having a feud.
Apple feuded with Microsoft. Microsoft, after all, released a truly terrible version of Microsoft Office. Remember Word 6? It was so bad that Microsoft was forced to start selling Word 5.1 again.

Microsoft let their Mac software molder for years and began coming out with releases that were not only late but which didn't have feature parity. The company is also famous for ripping off Apple. But, despite Microsoft's behavior, Apple made a deal to make Internet Explorer the default Mac browser (back when Microsoft was murdering Netscape).

Apple cares about money more than it cares about feuds. The IE deal happened under Jobs.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Open source is non-profit. Big difference. I agree though that it is a gray area.
my dear friend that is a huge misconception.

You can very well write an application using an open-source language like python or ruby or perl and make money. In fact there are plenty. Many companies use mysql which is open-source for their online apps.

Most (if not all) of linux is open-source, and yet commercial apps are written on it.

All opensource means (generally) is that the source is to be kept open. I can modify mysql or something you wrote that was opensource, but i cannot close the source.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
This sort of stuff is done all the time. For example, lots of console games are written with a scripting language controlling a c++ engine. It's not uncommon for developers to use tools that output Objc/c++/c source code that can be copied or imported into xcode and compiled. Under these new rules, none of that will be allowed. Insane.
Yes i agree, it seems paranoid. First of all as you mention, now allowing embedding of interpreters spells doom for games that use gaming engines (from what i read).

OTOH, how can Apple from a binary tell what originally created the code ? Can they actually do so ?

There's a good article i read the other day that i wanted to link, but the link contains the S word for crap. So it will get filtered out. Basically, it opined that Jobs does not want crappy apps in his app store, and there's no way he can specify that. He wants app designed specifically for iPhones, apps that adhere to the Mac User Interface guidelines, apps written by people who understand the Mac philosophy and have invested in learning Obj-C.

http://tinyurl.com/y5fyv37

(original is http://flyosity.com/apple/steve-jobs-doesnt-want-s*it-in-his-app-store-and-neither-do-i.php)
 
Last edited:
Top