# The Apple iPad...



## ElDiabloConCaca (Jan 27, 2010)

...has just been released and I'm surprised there wasn't a thread here on it already.

Biggest plus: 3G service at $30/month without a contract.  Nobody saw that one coming.


----------



## icemanjc (Jan 27, 2010)

I think it's a bit overpriced though at $499 for the cheapest model...


----------



## obeghain (Jan 27, 2010)

Hi all,

I'm currently looking around on info about the iBookStore and especially if it would allow us to share (as with iTunes) our own publications. If any of you have info on this (except the epub format), please share.

Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Olivier.


----------



## bbloke (Jan 27, 2010)

To be honest, I'm a little surprised by the hype in advance and I was assuming there had to be some major advances in features.  Otherwise, I couldn't really understand the market for the product.  

Personally speaking, if I want to have internet access in an extremely portable form, I'd use an iPhone or iPod touch.  If I want more computing power but also whilst on the move, I'd use a laptop.  The iPad seems bulky enough to not replace a laptop and yet not compact enough to totally replace an iPhone or iPod touch.

Steve Jobs did seem to suggest they needed to find the right niche, which was exactly my concern, but I'm still a little nonplussed by the iPad.  At first glance, it looks like an enlarged iPhone/iPod touch, so, while the applications may look a little glossier, I can't quite understand why this is supposed to be the breakthrough that is being proclaimed; surely we've seen the technology before?  

In my case, the iPad falls between the cracks but, for all I know, it could be exactly what others have been waiting for.  That said, I'm not meaning to be too negative, I just feel like "I don't get it."  I think I need to have a look at one in real life to judge for myself!


----------



## MisterMe (Jan 27, 2010)

obeghain said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm currently looking around on info about the iBookStore and especially if it would allow us to share (as with iTunes) our own publications. If any of you have info on this (except the epub format), please share.
> 
> ...


Sharing publications should be the least of your concerns. You can share files between your iPad and Mac or Windows PC. Publications will be in the new opensource epub format. Sharing via the iBookstore may be allowed, but it will not be necessary.

I'm looking for the new authoring apps that will allow me to create my own publications. By the time the iPad hits the market, I presume that authoring apps will be be available.


----------



## MisterMe (Jan 27, 2010)

bbloke said:


> ...  The iPad seems bulky enough to not replace a laptop and yet not compact enough to totally replace an iPhone or iPod touch.
> 
> ... "I don't get it."  ...


The iPad is not intended to replace anything. If you can't get your head around this simple concept, then you will never "get" it.


----------



## bbloke (Jan 27, 2010)

MisterMe said:


> The iPad is not intended to replace anything. If you can't get your head around this simple concept, then you will never "get" it.


I see you haven't lost any of your charm.

In my view, if I have devices that already perform similar functions and which are actually more suitable for most situations, then I remain to be convinced of the need for an additional device.  If Apple want to provide a new device to fit in between a laptop and an iPhone, for example, that niche should be clearly defined and exist within the market.  Perhaps it does, we shall see.


----------



## chemistry_geek (Jan 27, 2010)

Dear Apple/Mr. Steve Jobs,

The iPad a large iPod Touch with multi-touch gestures.  I don't see any compelling features that sets it apart from iPod Touch or a laptop.  Where's the built-in camera and microphone for video conversations?  Where's the built-in camera for taking pictures of people?  That would require 2 cameras on either side of the device.  Capturing movies?  Where's the microphone for voice commands and email dictation?  I want a personal digital assistant, just like Apple had shown in a video many years ago what might be possible in the future!  The iPhone/iPod Touch are perfectly suited for what they are currently, which is why everyone I see on NYC subways has one - small size, fits in the pocket, internet, email, movies, games in the palm of your hand.  If I'm going to watch movies, do email, and internet on a portable device with a decent-sized screen, it's going to be on a laptop/tablet PC/home/office computer.  Where's support for Open Office?  Where's the desktop?  Can I print documents at home or at the office?  Can I print to PDF?  I think Apple missed the mark on this one, there should be a way for stylus input so fine details can be captured, like they were with the Newton.

I work at a Biotech for treating oncology in New York City, which is owned by a large pharmaceutical company in Indiana.  We're getting new laptops/tablet PCs with a choice from Hewlett Packard.  The fact that I could write on the screen with a stylus is what drew me to choose the tablet PC.  I can take notes, draw chemical structures and diagrams, import them into Microsoft Word/Power Point, etc...  I'm sold!  Apple should have released the iPad that incorporated the earlier Newton technology.  The scientists at my company are losing their offices and cubicles to mobile work stations that can be occupied for up to 2 hours at a time when we relocate to the new site in Manhattan, and MOBILE is the new buzz-word.  Laptops/tablet PCs for everyone, choice of Blackberry or Apple iPhone (everyone wants the iPhone), no permanent desks, no permanent desk phone, no desk drawers, no filing cabinets, no paper trail, only a locker!

Recommendations for Apple: combine the iPad technology with Newton and please everyone.  The Newton wasn't a failure, just a little ahead of its time and pricey.  If I could have afforded one back then, I would have owned one.  Writing with a stylus is a big deal for some people, just like me using Hewlett Packard RPN calculators.  Once people get used to certain technologies and user interfaces, like writing, hand-recognition, RPN calculators, etc... they tend to choose and stay with what works best for them.  Apple, give people choices with your products, not choices between choosing Apple or other vendors.

Keep up the good work Apple, I think you're on the right track, and I'll wait for stylus input and the features I mentioned before purchasing an iPad.

Sincerely,
chemistry_geek


----------



## elizas (Jan 28, 2010)

Apple launches ipad .It helps in multitasking, it is a complete touch pad.Its very affordable starting with $499 only.It also like a electronics book.What else does one need. Great going apple.

Thanks 
Eliza


----------



## Giaguara (Jan 28, 2010)

Interesting to see the different reactions for the product.

Some love it and will get one, someone thought it is going too cheap... and then the various iPad jokes. Um, perhaps they could have named the product a bit different...

I guess I would fit to the category of too nerd to get hyped up and enthusiastic about it right now... as Cult of Mac put it: 



> As we predicted, the iPad is Steve Jobs&#8217; &#8220;computer for the rest of us.&#8221; It&#8217;s a natural successor to the original Mac, which introduced the GUI to PCs &#8211; and was derided by geeks as a &#8220;toy.&#8221; But look around, the GUI kinda caught on.
> 
> The iPad is not for geeks. It&#8217;s for ordinary people who want a lightweight computer and are sick of computer headaches. This is a machine you&#8217;d buy for your grandmother and not have to worry about tech-support.
> 
> ...



I'd be more comfortable with my mum using that than the other computers or gadgets I've got around (even if the only thing I could see her get interested in is Skype). 

At least for me, it won't replace the netbook (the only Dell I've ever enjoyed using.. light, cheap thing for mobile needs when I don't want to carry with or risk the MacBook Pro in less than safe areas); it won't replace Kindle (my other half has one - the only books I wouldn't mind reading with it are technical manuals that tend to be big, heavy, and expensive on paper or to print and carry around... if iPad had the same battery life as Kindle, yes, I would be interested... I read big books when I travel), it surely won't replace the analog books (I like leaving them around after reading them or when traveling, and seeing where they end up... DRM protected ebook files don't really bookcross). 

But, when there will be one around, I'll try it. Maybe it'll be something like iPhone was - I didn't want one - I barely use the phone, and hated the only operator iPhone had in Ireland, but now I have one (my other half's old one, with a pre-pay - does just fine). 
Hm... I guess there are a few applications that would work nice with it - GPS (I hate the small screens, and will definitely need a GPS as all the roads look the same), language etc learning (with handwriting recognition à la Newton would be awesome for learning to write in Japanese, Chinese or Arabic) with proper multimedia applications... 
Or for developing other multimedia learning uses (schools etc), or even pet applications (aquarium app for cats..)


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Jan 28, 2010)

I firmly believe that the iPad is intended to replace a laptop in many situations as well as be a supplement to the iPod/iPhone platform.

Think about it: there is no comfortable position in which to use a laptop OTHER than having the laptop sit at a desk, and then it's just a small desktop machine.  The portability of the laptop has been there -- but the usability has not.

You can't comfortably use a laptop on a couch (and anyone that claims to be able to would be under the age of 25 when your bones are still flexible and joints can be compressed for hours without soreness) in any position.  If you sit with it on your lap, then you must keep your legs together to support the laptop and tilt your head downward.  If you sit with it on the coffee table, then you're hunched over, extending yourself from the edge of the couch to the coffee table.

Even if you manage to find an acceptable position in which to use your laptop away from a desk-like surface, you're still stuck with a screen that is positioned both perpendicular to the keyboard _and_ very close to the keyboard -- in other words, you have to basically look at your hands to use the machine.  If you position the laptop ergonomically for your hands, then your head and neck suffer.  If positioned ergonomically for head and neck, the hands and wrists suffer.

So, even though certain people can get past that, you're still stuck with a fragile piece of equipment that must be babied.  The screen hinge is arguably the most fragile part of the laptop's structure, and, when in an open position, is extremely susceptible to being banged around and getting caught on stuff.  The laptop, in other words, when open and in a "usable" state, is extremely unwieldy.  It forms an odd shape that is neither portable nor easily moved.

There is no ideal way to actually _use_ a laptop, other than in a desktop fashion.

The iPad solves this, and hence, I have dubbed it "The laptop for couch potatoes."  It has no hinge and no fold-out or open-up parts, therefore it solves the unwieldy aspect of notebooks.  While the "keyboard" is still situated close to the screen (well, it _is_ the screen), you don't use it as you would a normal keyboard, and keyboard input as a whole has been reduced greatly with multi-touch gestures.  It is lightweight and wouldn't strain the muscles of a 4-year-old when used for lengths of time.  You still have to interact with your hands, but you're interacting in a much more natural way, and you can position the device relative to your hands, instead of positioning your hands to conform to the device.

This device also either supplements or can be used to completely replace a lot of multi-media products that have been shoehorned into vehicles in the last few years (portable DVD players/screens in the car to placate children, radios, CD players, etc.).

I sense a hit... not iPod-level nor even iPhone-level hit, but still a strong product (much stronger than the AppleTV).

I truly believe that Apple is going to have a decent hit with the lazy couch potatoes across the country and potentially the world.  Oh, what I wouldn't have given when I was in college to be able to carry around something like this to watch a movie on between classes, or to just whip out and start word processing instead of pulling out a laptop, finding a table and waking it from sleep.


----------



## nixgeek (Jan 28, 2010)

I have to say that I see the iPad as a harbinger.  Could it be that, at least on the consumer side, this could mean the beginning of the end for the Macintosh platform?  This is what Jobs has always wanted since the first Macintosh, especially when it's designed "for the rest of us".  I'm not too keen on the totalitarian nature of this device, but I can see where Apple wants to take personal computing in the years to come.


----------



## sgould (Jan 29, 2010)

I don't like the way these tablet devices use up screen space with an on screen keyboard.

Perhaps it would have been better if it had a keyboard that could be folded over the screen to protect it?

I was looking for a device to replace my Palm TX that has had repeated touch screen failures.  I need to produce construction sketches and send them to people as a record of what amendments were agreed.  The iPad is not it


----------



## lbj (Jan 29, 2010)

sgould,
why not?  I'm still on the fence about this device, but your description of needs sounds perfect for the iPad. You are touring a site with a client. You of course have a jpg, or pdf, or heaven forbid powerpoint blueprint/layout of the project. The client wants changes...a wall knocked out here, a window there.  You pull out your trusty iPad which you keep in a beautiful leather "flip" case. You draw the changes directly on the plans, save, and email to the client as he watches you...jaw dropped.


----------



## sgould (Jan 29, 2010)

I haven't seen a sketching program on the iPad.  I really would like one that works with something more precise than a finger. The Palm stylus was good enough.

I'll have to take more notice of the apps that are available.....


----------



## ScottW (Jan 29, 2010)

I'm buying one for each family member.  LOL. Seriously. I think I would get as much out of it as my 5 and 7 year olds.  And who wants to share?

Just think... RemoteTap, VNC access to your other systems, SSH access to remote servers, this is perfect for me, allowing me to be more mobile and do more than what the iPhone gives me on so little screen space. Nevermind books, etc.


----------



## sgould (Jan 30, 2010)

I'm still not sure how it would work for me.  I waited until it came out to see, but I think I'll give it a miss and buy an iPhone this week.  I need a new phone soon as my company phone (21 years - never paid for a call!!  ) will be going back when I retire from full time employment in the summer.

Choice was between an iPhone, a Palm Pre or an iPad.

Maybe I'll learn the apps on the iPhone first


----------



## simbalala (Jan 30, 2010)

I'd buy one just so I could easily sit in the sofa and read.


----------



## Rhisiart (Jan 31, 2010)

It's simply beautiful. However, for me it is a 'desirable' as opposed to be a 'must have'. 

I suppose if it was a choice between an iPhone or an iPad, I'd got for the latter and simply get a cheap pay-as-you-go phone. 

I find small screens a pain, and if I was going to pay out money which should be saved for my children's university education then I'd go for the iPad. 

Of course living in rural Wales means scarce mobile broadband coverage, which reduces the usefulness of many of iPad's features.


----------



## g/re/p (Jan 31, 2010)

No iPad for me, iPeriod!


----------



## MBellanie (Jan 31, 2010)

I don't know - seems like we're being overrun wioth gadgets. Is this really etter than a regular laptop? The fingertip technology seems somewhat like drawing in the sand to me. Give me a good keyboard instead.


----------



## MisterMe (Jan 31, 2010)

MBellanie said:


> ... The fingertip technology seems somewhat like drawing in the sand to me. Give me a good keyboard instead.


So you use the keyboard to draw? Interesting.


----------



## bbloke (Feb 1, 2010)

Charlie Brooker has published his take on the iPad.

(As ever with his articles, don't read if easily offended.)


----------



## MisterMe (Feb 1, 2010)

bbloke said:


> Charlie Brooker has published his take on the iPad.
> 
> (As ever with his articles, don't read if easily offended.)


How can one be offended by such ignorance. Brooker does not seem to know that Apple invented the laptop computer. The original PowerBook was the very first laptop.


----------



## simbalala (Feb 1, 2010)

MBellanie said:


> Last edited by Giaguara; Yesterday at 02:33 PM. Reason: Removed unrelated link. No spam here thank you.


Ban the user.

This is the new method for spamming forums and blog comment areas. People get paid a dollar or so to write a short comment at least somewhat related to a topic and then a spam link is included with that comment.

They advertise on craigslist for &#8220;writers&#8221;.

Especially look for the post being the first one ever from the author.


----------



## bbloke (Feb 1, 2010)

MisterMe said:


> Brooker does not seem to know that Apple invented the laptop computer. The original PowerBook was the very first laptop.


Are you sure about that?


----------



## DeltaMac (Feb 1, 2010)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulmont_Magnum
Seems to pre-date the PowerBook by about 10 years?
Or, the Gavilan, among others...  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavilan_SC

I think we CAN say that Apple sold the PowerBook as a unit that was much lighter, and could actually be used in your lap...


----------



## g/re/p (Feb 1, 2010)

> god, the guardian really is pushing the advertorial, isn't it? Maybe everyone at the guardian has to write on the ipad this week in their own style. Delights to follow:
> 
> 'why i hate the ipad" by julie bindel
> 
> ...





:d


----------



## sgould (Feb 1, 2010)

I read the Charlie Brooker article this morning.  He's still planning to buy an "iBook"!!


----------



## lbj (Feb 1, 2010)

I thought it was an entertaining and funny read. Amazing how anyone can get up in arms over words devoted to a device.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 1, 2010)

Funny how a majority of these people (bloggers, journalists, etc.) have taken issue with so many features of the iPad without having, a) even seen one in person, less they were at the Expo, and b) used one.

Kind of like criticizing how a particular model of car handles on the street without having actually driven the car.


----------



## Qion (Feb 1, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> Funny how a majority of these people (bloggers, journalists, etc.) have taken issue with so many features of the iPad without having, a) even seen one in person, less they were at the Expo, and b) used one.
> 
> Kind of like criticizing how a particular model of car handles on the street without having actually driven the car.




The majority of my issues with the device are purely technical; what subjective qualities are these bloggers/journalists complaining about?


----------



## bbloke (Feb 1, 2010)

Hey, Qion, good to see you around.


----------



## Qion (Feb 1, 2010)

You too, bbloke.  (it's been a while, hasn't it?)


----------



## Rhisiart (Feb 1, 2010)

Qion said:


> The majority of my issues with the device are purely technical; what subjective qualities are these bloggers/journalists complaining about?


They've got to earn their crust. Sounds to me that Mr Brooker has caught the Apple bug, but can't bring himself around to admit it.

The iPad is still a bit of a luxury though (IMHO).


----------



## fryke (Feb 1, 2010)

I reeeeeeeeally don't get how most people don't see history repeating itself (I mean all those negative commenters and bloggers and reporters out there...). The iMac in 1998 was clearly a lackluster computer, underpowered and it didn't even have a floppy drive. The iPod clearly was MUCH too expensive, and who really _wanted_ to keep all their music on one portable device, anyway? The iPhone was a very expensive toy that didn't even have a keyboard and still claimed to be a "smart" phone. Clearly, all those devices were doomed. And now there's the iPad. Doomed as well. 

I'm looking forward to this. Although as a writer I'm not specifically addressed by the iPad, since I really _will_ miss a real keyboard, I'll still buy one. Either the cheapest version available - or the most expensive one. I'll have to see the Swiss pricing structure and 3G plans before I'll decide. But quite clearly, this device _will_ change the way I'll surf on my sofa and enjoy the web and RSS feeds. Whether I'll read books on it remains to be seen. I kinda like my Sony PRS-505 for that.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 1, 2010)

I think it just goes to show that Apple knows more about what you want than you do.


----------



## MisterMe (Feb 1, 2010)

DeltaMac said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulmont_Magnum
> Seems to pre-date the PowerBook by about 10 years?
> Or, the Gavilan, among others...  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavilan_SC
> 
> I think we CAN say that Apple sold the PowerBook as a unit that was much lighter, and could actually be used in your lap...


The Dulmont Magnum and Gavilan SC were certainly light portable computers. However, theirs was a form factor that is long gone. The first computer that sported the form factor that we recognize today as a laptop was the PowerBook 100.


----------



## bbloke (Feb 2, 2010)

MisterMe said:


> The Dulmont Magnum and Gavilan SC were certainly light portable computers. However, theirs was a form factor that is long gone. The first computer that sported the form factor that we recognize today as a laptop was the PowerBook 100.


There are certainly recognizable characteristics even within the earliest laptops, however.  If choosing to only look at later designs, it is worth remembering the NEC UltraLite, which first saw the light of day in 1988/1989.


----------



## nixgeek (Feb 4, 2010)

fryke said:


> I reeeeeeeeally don't get how most people don't see history repeating itself (I mean all those negative commenters and bloggers and reporters out there...). The iMac in 1998 was clearly a lackluster computer, underpowered and it didn't even have a floppy drive. The iPod clearly was MUCH too expensive, and who really _wanted_ to keep all their music on one portable device, anyway? The iPhone was a very expensive toy that didn't even have a keyboard and still claimed to be a "smart" phone. Clearly, all those devices were doomed. And now there's the iPad. Doomed as well.



I can understand why, though.  I personally see this device as the reincarnation of the original Macintosh concept.  It's exactly what Jobs wanted from the Mac's inception...an appliance.  Everyone had negative things to say about the original Macintosh, but the concept itself was remarkable.  Same thing with the iPad.  The product by itself in this iteration might be considered "doomed" (heck, I'm feeling very "meh" about the iPad since the announcement), but it will evolve, just as the original Macintosh did and as the iMac did.  Pretty much just like every Apple device did when it made its debut.

I'm starting to see where this product fits, but it still seems to duplicate what a lot of people already have.  I don't ever see myself buying an iPad, that's for sure, but that's me.


----------



## Qion (Feb 4, 2010)

nixgeek said:


> I can understand why, though.  I personally see this device as the reincarnation of the original Macintosh concept.  It's exactly what Jobs wanted from the Mac's inception...an appliance.  Everyone had negative things to say about the original Macintosh, but the concept itself was remarkable.  Same thing with the iPad.  The product by itself in this iteration might be considered "doomed" (heck, I'm feeling very "meh" about the iPad since the announcement), but it will evolve, just as the original Macintosh did and as the iMac did.  Pretty much just like every Apple device did when it made its debut.
> 
> I'm starting to see where this product fits, but it still seems to duplicate what a lot of people already have.  I don't ever see myself buying an iPad, that's for sure, but that's me.



I'm not seeing history repeat itself here, and I think it's for good reason. This is a product marketed directly for people who don't know anything about computing. While the iMac was for essentially the same market, it ran a fully functional operating system -not a phone interface-. In addition to this, they're borrowing heavily from a preexisting product; this is not something original, or even unique. It's a huge iPod with almost identical functionality.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 4, 2010)

Qion said:
			
		

> In addition to this, they're borrowing heavily from a preexisting product; this is not something original, or even unique. *It's a huge iPod with almost identical functionality.*


True, but infinitely more possibility.

While the size and form factor of the iPod dictates that at some point it will hit a brick wall in terms of usability for certain tasks, the iPad pretty much demolishes that wall and is, in essence, "future-proofing" itself for some time to come.


----------



## g/re/p (Feb 4, 2010)

To attract more seasoned power users, the specs will have to be beefed up quite a bit, which will increase the price considerably.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 4, 2010)

I agree -- but I don't see the iPad currently being marketed toward anyone near "power user" level.

It carries an "iName" moniker, which means it's a consumer-level machine (iMac, iBook [deprecated], iPhone, iPod, etc.).  The "power user" machines are typically the MacBook *Pro* and the Mac *Pro*.

I wouldn't expect the iPad to entice power users, nor do I think it's even supposed to.  I think it's supposed to attract casual consumers of information, being positioned as a gaming, communication and news/literature consumption device... hardly "power user" tasks.

There are rumors of a future iPad or "Mac Pad Pro" that may run a more full-fledged operating system -- even full-blown OS X.  Now _that_ would be a "supplemental device" I think power users can wrap their heads around.


----------



## Qion (Feb 5, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> There are rumors of a future iPad or "Mac Pad Pro" that may run a more full-fledged operating system -- even full-blown OS X.  Now _that_ would be a "supplemental device" I think power users can wrap their heads around.



Good.


----------



## nixgeek (Feb 5, 2010)

Qion said:


> I'm not seeing history repeat itself here, and I think it's for good reason. This is a product marketed directly for people who don't know anything about computing. While the iMac was for essentially the same market, it ran a fully functional operating system -not a phone interface-. In addition to this, they're borrowing heavily from a preexisting product; this is not something original, or even unique. It's a huge iPod with almost identical functionality.



The original Macintosh in 1984 was marketed the same way as the iPad.  It was the "computer for the rest of us" that makes computing simple for people.  I'm not saying that it's exactly like the original Macintosh, but the concept of the "computer for the rest of us" is.  This is also the appliance that Jobs wanted the Mac platform to be all along.  Remember that in 1984, the Mac only had a floppy disk and it was a monotasking OS.  Apple made the original Mac so closed that they didn't want you opening the device and doing what you wanted with it like the Apple II series.  The iPad (for now) is a monotasking device that is introducing a new way for people to compute that does not use today's traditional computing concepts which, to be honest, still escapes people as the CLI did back in the 80s.  The only difference is that it's an interface that people have been using for some time in the iPod touch and iPhone, and people do like it.  But, like the original Macintosh, it is a VERY closed system even without taking into consideration the DRM side of things.  For some, this is undesirable, but for others, it's perfect.  I consider myself part of the former, though.


----------



## Qion (Feb 5, 2010)

nixgeek said:


> The original Macintosh in 1984 was marketed the same way as the iPad.  It was the "computer for the rest of us" that makes computing simple for people.



I appreciate your reply, nixgeek. Perhaps I'm being shortsighted as to the evolution of this product, or maybe even Apple's intention in creating such a closed environment. 

I would like to see this product receive upgraded internal components and a more usable, open interface in the future. Maybe this iPad is a stepping stone to that. If it is, I do still have serious reservations as to the nature of releasing such a product with such limited functionality, especially when it was completely within Apple's means to introduce something more professionally effectual.


----------



## MisterMe (Feb 5, 2010)

Qion said:


> ...
> 
> I would like to see this product receive ... a more usable, open interface in the future. Maybe this iPad is a stepping stone to that. ... I do still have serious reservations as to the nature of releasing such a product with such limited functionality, ...


It bears reminding you that the dominant UI when the original Macintosh was introduced was the MS-DOS/PC-DOS command line. Where is it today?


----------



## Qion (Feb 6, 2010)

MisterMe said:


> It bears reminding you that the dominant UI when the original Macintosh was introduced was the MS-DOS/PC-DOS command line. Where is it today?



Yes, I understand that things evolve, but this device not limited by technical knowledge or ability. We have the technology to create a different interface, but Apple chose to pursue $$$ instead.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 6, 2010)

> We have the technology to create a different interface, but Apple chose to pursue $$$ instead.


Isn't that what Apple exists solely for -- to try and make money?  They make "insanely great" things to achieve that goal, but the ultimate goal is making money.

Apple has the technology to do just about anything -- but just because something _can_ be done doesn't make it a good idea to actually _do_ it.  More features doesn't make a better machine.  What fits one person's lifestyle to a tee may not for another.

The Mac Pro _could_ have been smaller.  The iMac _could_ have had two optical drives.  The Mac mini _could_ have taken a standard, 3.5" SATA hard drive.  Apple _could_ have included Blu-Ray support.

http://gizmodo.com/5462344/77-ipad-updates-that-may-or-may-not-please-the-critics?skyline=true&s=i

First place facetiously but accurately depicts this.

I don't expect that everyone will be happy with the iPad -- technologically advanced people it just may not appeal to.  But _having a product appeal to you_ and _understanding the appeal of a product_ are still different things.  I'm a techie, and the iPad _does_ appeal to me (at the very least out of curiosity)... at the same time, I can understand the non-appeal to others (and vice-versa -- if I wasn't interested in a product, I can still see the appeal it has to others).

I guess what I'm getting at is that while the iPad doesn't solve _everyone's_ problems, it would be massive "fail" to lack the ability to see the broad, mass appeal and market penetration the iPad could have and the appeal it would have to those people.  Techie people are the minority, and we never have the opportunity to say something like, "if a product doesn't appeal to a techie, then the product will fail."  We just don't number enough to matter with consumer-oriented products advertised to the "normal" people out there.  The techies couldn't stop the iPhone; there's no reason to believe the techies can stop the iPad.


----------



## Qion (Feb 6, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> I guess what I'm getting at is that while the iPad doesn't solve _everyone's_ problems, it would be massive "fail" to lack the ability to see the broad, mass appeal and market penetration the iPad could have and the appeal it would have to those people.  Techie people are the minority, and we never have the opportunity to say something like, "if a product doesn't appeal to a techie, then the product will fail."  We just don't number enough to matter with consumer-oriented products advertised to the "normal" people out there.  The techies couldn't stop the iPhone; there's no reason to believe the techies can stop the iPad.



Right, and I've said before that it's probably melodramatic to expect a business to operate for any other reason. I'm romanticizing the idea of an Apple that creates products out of passion and the pursuit of making something as good as it can possibly be. Maybe that Apple never existed in the first place.


----------



## andychrist (Feb 7, 2010)

I'm with Diablo, Fryke and MisterMe on this one.

The iPad is neither replacing _nor duplicating_ any of Apple's current offerings.  

I keep hearing all these complaints that it's just a blown-up iPod touch.  My reaction:  

Hurray, a blown-up iPod touch!  With all the same apps and then some, running on a super fine tuned processor!   And at only half the price of a MacBook!  And with optional 3GS with GPS!  For only $15 or $30/mo., ONE HALF the going rate of any other stand alone data plan!  NO CONTRACT!    I'll save $860 in two years alone, this device will MORE than pay for itself!   And AT&T and Apple have agreed to allow VoIP applications, I don't need a voice plan!  Oh, and I can use it anywhere in my home with the same bluetooth keyboard I bought for my desktop!  And the charger draws ONLY TEN WATTS, I can throw it in the front basket of my bike and hook it up to a small solar power pack on my rear rack, when I reach my campground there will still be TEN HOURS of juice left!  And I get 5 bars there in the middle of nowhere with AT&T; T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon have NO COVERAGE where I vacation.

See, there are millions of poor schmucks like me who don't need a powerful machine outside the office, but who do need to stay connected; who, say, would like to read/surf/game/etc. in bed and would just love an iPod touch if only the screen were large enough to enjoy for more than a few minutes at a time; and who maybe commute or travel for long enough periods that WiFi alone will just not cut it.  For us, the iPad revolution is a godsend.


----------



## Qion (Feb 7, 2010)

andychrist said:


> I'm with Diablo, Fryke and MisterMe on this one.
> 
> The iPad is neither replacing _nor duplicating_ any of Apple's current offerings.
> 
> ...



Guess I'm just a dreamer.


----------



## MBellanie (Feb 10, 2010)

Just speaking figuratively...


----------



## fryke (Feb 11, 2010)

Seriously? You join the forum for such comments?  Or is this just your prelude to spam...


----------



## chemistry_geek (Feb 17, 2010)

If anyone read my post on the first page, it looks like Microsoft is going to fulfill the features I mentioned.

As an Apple fan boy and an Apple stock holder, THIS is exactly what the iPad should have been WITHOUT the split the screen:

http://gizmodo.com/5365299/courier-first-details-of-microsofts-secret-tablet

BE SURE TO CLICK THE PLAY BUTTON TO SEE THE MOVIE.

The Microsoft Courier combines multitouch gestures with pen input and handwriting recognition - gee, sounds an awful lot like combining iPod Touch/iPhone interface with Newton pen input handwriting recognition technology.  I have say again, I think Apple missed the mark on the iPad.  I don't see Apple selling a lot of these.  I give credit for the hard work to create the device, but the Microsoft Courier is going to really bridge the gap between Tablet PC, iPod Touch, and conventional laptop.  If the Borg were to release the Courier NOW and it sync'd with my Mac like my iPod Touch does, I'd buy the Courier over the iPad in a heartbeat.

C'mon Apple, give people what they want, the mobile device market is going to get fiercely competitive in the near future and I'd like to see you win.

Sincerely,
Chemistry_geek


----------



## andychrist (Feb 17, 2010)

Um... You do know that the Courier is not real, don't you?


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 17, 2010)

Jurassic Park and Star Trek make dinosaurs and warp-speed space travel look very real and believable.  That video makes the ultimate tablet with incredible power and flawless handwriting recognition look very real and believable.

None of them are, though. 

The iPad is real, and is based upon a real idea and a real vision with a real business plan.  The Courier tablet is an incredible stretch of the imagination.

Not only is the iPad _real_, but it's also _realistic_.  Try selling what Microsoft was advertising for $499.  Hell, try selling what Microsoft was advertising for $1,000.

*If* Microsoft makes that tablet, I will agree... it is much more than the iPad is.  I'd have to see it to believe it.


----------



## Qion (Feb 17, 2010)

chemistry_geek said:


> If anyone read my post on the first page, it looks like Microsoft is going to fulfill the features I mentioned.
> 
> As an Apple fan boy and an Apple stock holder, THIS is exactly what the iPad should have been WITHOUT the split the screen:
> 
> ...



Thank you! It seems like you're the only person that gets this besides me. 

I wrote this in a recent thread, and it seems that the "Courier" is almost exactly what I was talking about. Fantastic. 




			
				Qion said:
			
		

> Interface:
> 
>  Can be used with the hands, job-specific input mechanisms (stylus, RFID debit card, bluetooth camera, etc.), or a traditional keyboard and pointing mechanism. This alone would allow a great level of operability and usefulness for a diverse group of consumer and professional needs. It would not have to be necessarily overcomplicated; simply, open to individual preference.
> 
> ...


----------



## ScottW (Feb 17, 2010)

Yea, it will be great until you have to reboot it every 15 minutes after it blue screens.


----------



## chemistry_geek (Feb 20, 2010)

The Micorsoft Courier is real, the Wall Street Journal had  an article earlier this week about that device and others that are/will be competing with the iPad.


----------



## MisterMe (Feb 20, 2010)

chemistry_geek said:


> The Micorsoft Courier is real, ....


Where can I buy it?
How much does it cost?


----------



## chemistry_geek (Feb 20, 2010)

MisterMe said:


> Where can I buy it?
> How much does it cost?



It's still in development.  The Wall Street Journal had a huge write-up about the Apple iPad and the competition gunning for it.   Microsoft was specifically mentioned as having an independent laboratory/firm working on an iPad competitor.

The mobile market is going to get very interesting in the near future.  I think that the features I mentioned previously would be excellent not only for business users, but for college students.  Having both iPod Touch/iPhone multi-touch gesture input in addition to Newton handwriting technology, the personal digital assistant would help businesses and college students get a lot more accomplished and in an organized manner.


----------



## andychrist (Feb 20, 2010)

"Although early designs leaked onto blogs last year, it's unclear whether the company will introduce the gadget," the report said.


----------



## MisterMe (Feb 20, 2010)

chemistry_geek said:


> It's still in development.  The Wall Street Journal had a huge write-up about the Apple iPad and the competition gunning for it.   Microsoft was specifically mentioned as having an independent laboratory/firm working on an iPad competitor.
> 
> The mobile market is going to get very interesting in the near future.  I think that the features I mentioned previously would be excellent not only for business users, but for college students.  Having both iPod Touch/iPhone multi-touch gesture input in addition to Newton handwriting technology, the personal digital assistant would help businesses and college students get a lot more accomplished and in an organized manner.


The technical name for this is _vaporware_.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Feb 21, 2010)

I have to agree -- while the Courier, *if* and when it comes to market, may capture the audience that the iPad failed to capture (read: the minority "power user" market), as of right now, the Courier doesn't exist except as a concept on paper.

The iPad was pulled out of Jobs' back of tricks and displayed to an audience -- it's an actual product.  It would be unfair to compare something on paper to something that's real.

You can build a pretty bad-ass rocket ship... but I can _always_ draw a better one on paper.  Drawings and concepts don't count until they're real, and comparisons between real and concept products is unfair.


----------



## willar27k (Mar 9, 2010)

Hey, Qion, good to see you around.


----------



## Qion (Mar 11, 2010)

willar27k said:


> Hey, Qion, good to see you around.



Sorry, have we spoken before?


----------



## fryke (Mar 12, 2010)

I'm still unsure whether I should get the smallest, most inexpensive WiFi-only model of the iPad or the maxxed out version with 3G. I guess it'll make sense to me to _get_ 3G, else I'll still have to log around the MacBook Air or my netbook with that USB 3G stick. But do I need 64 GB on the iPad? I'll have my _music_ on my iPhone, so I don't need that on the iPad. Some movies, maybe, but not a big selection at all times... So it'll be more about additional software, and I don't think my Pages documents will take up _that_ much space...  I guess the 16 GB 3G model might be it.


----------



## andychrist (Mar 12, 2010)

Yeah Fryke the 16 GB + 3G makes sense to me too. Along with the keyboard dock and case.   What I don't understand is that the USB Power Adapter is sold separately, where as on the iPad Keyboard dock page, Apple says:

Connect the dock to an electrical outlet using the iPad 10W USB Power Adapter (included with your iPad) to charge the iPad battery.

So do you have to buy a whole extra USB Power Adapter just to get the 6' cable, or is that cable included with the adapter that comes with the iPad?


----------



## fryke (Mar 12, 2010)

The cable only comes with the Power Adapter bought separately. However: You already might have a fitting one around from a MacBook or something. You can also get one of those standard power cables that have that connector that looks like the number "8" or the letter "B". Those fit in Apple's power adapters, although they don't look as nice. But they're certainly cheaper.
I'll go with my Apple wireless keyboard, I guess, instead of the keyboard-slash-dock thing. More freedom.


----------



## Rhisiart (Mar 13, 2010)

Qion said:


> Sorry, have we spoken before?


I think he was quoting bbloke


----------



## ScottW (Mar 16, 2010)

Ordered my iPad when the store opened the other morning. Can't wait to get it. Like anything, I think Apple will use this as a "test market" product. What do people like or hate about it. Look at the iPod, man, it has come a long ways since it's introduction. Genius is building of the already successful iPhone market place and that will just drive more developers.

Remember back in the day... the old argument still rings true today... 

Q: WHY DON'T YOU USE MAC? 
A: Not enough applications!

LOL - In your face Microsoft, Google.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Mar 16, 2010)

I think Steve's put enough thought into the iPad such that Apple is not going to position it as a "test market" product, which they've already done with the AppleTV.

While the AppleTV remains a "niche" market product, or a "test" market product, leveraged to let Apple gauge interest in many different media things: streaming vs. downloading, subscription vs. a la carte purchases, movies vs. TV shows, etc., I highly doubt that the iPad (with all the fanfare surrounding it and the hype leading up to its introduction) would be positioned as such nor thought of in the same category as the AppleTV.

I think Apple's betting pretty big on the iPad.  The iPad (and iPhone and iPod touch) have a pretty big app store market backing it up, and Apple has already spent time and money developing apps specifically for the iPad form factor that integrate nicely with the desktop versions of those products (iWork, etc.).  The AppleTV (admitted by Apple to be a "test" more than an actual product) didn't have any of this -- it simply hooked into the same store that was behind iTunes, and the only time and money spent on the AppleTV was, well, the AppleTV itself... no revolutionary input system, no revolutionary operating system, no revolutionary store behind it.  It remains (and will remain for the forseeable future) as a "test" or perhaps a product that gauges interest in the types of content people consume, the manner in which they consume it, and the price they're willing to pay for said content.

The iPad is awesome, I'll agree with you there -- but I don't agree that it will be poised as a "test market" product.  I think the market is there, the app store backing is there, and all that needs to be done now is to ship the damn thing and watch people go ga-ga over it, much like the iPod and the iPhone.


----------



## ClemsonJeeper (Apr 13, 2010)

Brought it on a trip to NYC this past weekend.  Was great having it on the road trip.  Didn't even need to worry about bringing the charger.


----------



## ClemsonJeeper (Apr 13, 2010)

Should be interesting to see if the prices of apps come down though.  Paying 10$ for the same thing on the iPad when the iPhone version is 1$ is pretty lame.


----------



## fryke (Apr 14, 2010)

It sure depends on the app... I happily will pay 10$ for something like Pages or a really great task manager that integrates with MobileMe somehow. I might pay 10$ for a game that keeps me happy for longer periods of time. Not for novelty stuff that fades into nothingness (or the third or eighth page of apps...) after a short time. It's a market, though. I guess we'll see a price range after some time.

I'm so looking forward to playing Strategery (epic maps, of course) on my iPad. When I'll finally be able to get one, that is.

---

About the "competition" thing: I don't think this market is really defined yet. Apple seems to have defined where _they_ see the tablet form factor. Previously, we've seen "full featured" PCs in tablet form. Those have found their niche(s), but those niches are muuuuuuuuch to small to make tablets a mass market. Apple's approach is quite simple: Let's do a tablet when it makes sense. We'll add other things later, now we'll just let it do what we can let it do well. Sure: Competition adds "Flash playback" and USB host stuff. Direct printing etc. All the things the iPad seems to be lacking. But currently, these are the same arguments we've heard about "iPhone killers". Their cameras have more megapixels, they play Flash content (well, Flash "lite")... But the core stuff was done much better on the iPhone.

I'm sure that in three years, tablets will do things they currently don't. But right now, Apple has

1.) a tablet on the market (well, the US)
2.) at a very decent pricepoint compared to the competition
3.) with a very snappy-feeling operating system and
4.) an application store that's already been proven to work.

The competition consists of

1.) vapor ware,
2.) more vapor ware and
3.) devices that feel outdated next to the iPad.

Hence, the iPad has a window of opportunity that's probably big enough to create the market that hasn't been defined yet. It currently hasn't got multitasking? We know it'll get iPhone OS 4 in Autumn. The Flash thing is overrated, anyway, but I'm sure while the blogosphere will continue to bitch about the lack of Flash on the iPhone OS, the market will decide it doesn't matter, just like it has for the iPhone and iPod touch so far. If Apple ends up one or two steps ahead of the competition this time next year - and I believe it will - we'll all be all too happy about a less expensive, front-face camera swingin' 2nd gen iPad (maybe with a smaller 7" sibling) coming to market - at a time when Flash's influence has gone down further.

And remember: SOME of the "lacks" can be solved in software, too. Theoretically, Apple could

- add real multitasking
- add Flash playback
- add a printing system

without much problem in iPhone OS 5 in 2011. The question is: Will they _have_ to. The original Macintosh System didn't have real multitasking for a long time. Eventually, Mac OS X solved this. (This forum was among the first larger communities to be built around that new system that FINALLY brought pre-emptive multitasking to the Mac.) _There_ Apple should've been quicker, but with the iPhone OS, I guess it's simply much more important to get things right the first time. It's not like the current iPhone models have battery-life to spare. If Apple can give us features when they're _ready_, I'm for it. I'm soooo glad they did copy&paste the right way instead of adding it in _some_ form and replacing it later with the "real" way. The whole _world_ is growing to love multitouch, but that's a _big_ paradigm shift in how we use our computing systems. Apple's in a unique position to define how these things work and how we think about them. You can say it's all just a big splash, but imnsho: Apple _is_ revolutionising the computer world for the third time, just like they say in their signature piece of their press releases:

_"Apple ignited the personal computer revolution with the Apple II, then reinvented the personal computer with the Macintosh. [...] Apple leads the digital music revolution with its iPods and iTunes online store, has reinvented the mobile phone with its revolutionary iPhone and App Store, and has recently introduced its magical iPad which is defining the future of mobile media and computing devices."_

It may be PR. But it's the way we're going to think back about the beginning of the 21st century at some point.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 14, 2010)

I finally got a chance to play with the iPad thanks to a coworker who got one as an early Mother's Day present.  I didn't get to play too much with it, but I wanted to see how it felt.  To me, it felt no different than using my iPhone.  I launced a few of the apps and they do look nice.  She had deleted a bunch of apps, but I used the notepad application to test out the on-screen keyboard.  Touch typing is definitely possible in landscape mode, but it's not the most optimal IMO.  Since I have to hit the character key as I do in the iPhone, it slows me down a bit.  But general touch-typing is not too bad...I could get used to it.

I also remember someone saying that it was heavier than it looked, but I didn't find it to be heavy at all.  Pretty much the weight I expected it to be.

Overall, testing it out confirmed that this is not a device for me.  My netbook and my iPhone pretty much cover my needs for portability.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Apr 14, 2010)

All I can say is that if you don't like the iPad, then something must be wrong with you.

I had thought more highly of you in the past than I do now after reading that.

Hehe... In all seriousness, these are two reactions that I expected.  I love my iPad -- it's like the device I never knew you needed. I no longer have to lug a laptop bag to work, and I don't have to charge it in the middle of the day. It does everything I need it to in a much more portable package.

Still, I understand the non-need that others think it is. It's not for everyone -- almost everyone, but not everyone. It doesn't have a real keyboard, so typing on it is not going to be exactly the same... But then again, expecting it to would be more than a tad oblivious (for lack of a better term).  Kind of like expecting a 3D movie to be exactly like real life.

Lack of a true, accessible filesystem may be an issue for some, too. I liken this to posts of frustration from PC to Mac switchers that find little differences that they must adjust their habits and muscle memory to match.

Nixgeek: given a free iPad, would the utility of such a device be of more value to you then? Would the iPad be able to fill a need somewhere? I guess what I'm asking is whether you find the device itself lacking in utility, or whether it's justifying the cost of the iPad that is your barrier of entry.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 15, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> All I can say is that if you don't like the iPad, then something must be wrong with you.
> 
> I had thought more highly of you in the past than I do now after reading that.
> 
> ...



LOL! 

My issues with the iPad (as well as the iPhone and iPod touch) are more philosophical, but I wanted to approach the device with an open mind.  From a practical sense, it seemed to already duplicate a lot of what I had now, so the wow factor just wasn't there for me.  Again, I had limited use of the iPad so I only played around with what was there.  Given the opportunity to install applications that I would find useful (like some music-creation apps for example), I'm sure I would have enjoyed it more.

The touch-screen keyboard was a lot better than I expected, especially for touch typing.  However, there were times it slowed me down when I needed non-alphanumeric characters.  I'm sure that with time this would change, bu for now, I would say that touch typing is doable, but not optimal.

If I were given a free iPad, I would probably feel the way I do about my iPhone.  Full disclosure: I didn't really want an iPhone, but I did not have a choice since I couldn't leave AT&T at the time and, in reality, nothing available on AT&T was nearly comparable with the iPhone.  However, I became familiar with it and had apps on it that I found useful.  I still honestly do feel a bit "cramped" when using it.  Flexibility is very important to me in gadgets just as they are in computers and in the gadgets department I feel that Apple could still do more.  Maybe this will change when Apple releases iPhone OS 4 as well as the rumored 4th-gen iPhone.

Now, would I sell it?  No.  It could definitely be something to use for the family for trips and such, just like a portable DVD player (especially with the NetFlix app) or my kids' DS systems are.  But for me personally, I'm good with what I have now.


----------



## mfb496 (May 1, 2010)

The microphone is right next to the headphone jack.


----------



## mfb496 (May 1, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> I firmly believe that the iPad is intended to replace a laptop in many situations as well as be a supplement to the iPod/iPhone platform.
> 
> Think about it: there is no comfortable position in which to use a laptop OTHER than having the laptop sit at a desk, and then it's just a small desktop machine.  The portability of the laptop has been there -- but the usability has not.
> 
> ...



I totaly agree! I tell people you must have a need for it in order to buy it or your wasting your money.I had a purpose(protable 720p video).All my videos ive converted for Appletv plays excellent on it.actually it plays it better than my appletv.Try lugging a mac book pro around with you in a nap sack for over a year,its no bargain.This mainly what i carried it around for.The ipad to me is perfect for what i use it for and believe its stronger than the appletv.The appletv cannot play 720p video at 29fps but the ipad can go figure.


----------



## madi123 (May 6, 2010)

he App Store isn't exactly the problem&#8212;it's the way Apple runs and limits the App Store. Let's say, for example, that Apple added one simple section to the App Store. I'll leave it to the Apple Geniuses to come up with a more marketable name, but for our purposes, let's call it the Restricted section.

Now let's say that Apple continues to run the App Store the way it always has, but rather than reject applications that it feels may confuse the user (like they claimed Google Voice* or Google Latitude might), or applications that allow users to access naughty pictures, or even applications that it hasn't had time to vet for the App Store proper, they put those applications in the Restricted section. Before a user is able to install applications from the Restricted section, that user has to agree that the application may confuse their feeble minds, offend their delicate sensibilities, or even slow down their device. Is this such a problem?

(*Incidentally, even if we accept Apple's reasons for rejecting the Google Voice application on the iPhone, what reason is there to likewise reject it for the iPod touch and, presumably, the iPad? Neither have phone functionality out of the box, and now the non-phone devices actually outnumber the iPhone.)

Even better, it could work like the package manager it actually is and allow users to add their own trusted repositories as sources for other applications. Same disclaimers apply, but Apple is even further removed from culpability&#8212;they're not even hosting the apps.

The point is, users should at least be allowed to flip some switch, somewhere on the machine, that says, "Hey computer, I'm an adult, and I take responsibility over how I use this machine."
==============


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 6, 2010)

Failing to understand why Apple doesn't want "unsupported" apps or "restricted" apps is failing to understand the vision of the entire App store.

Apple doesn't want their devices crashing or performing poorly, under ANY circumstances -- whether it's because of a bug in _their_ software or a bug in _someone else's_ software.  Like it or not, but the contents of the App Store reflect directly upon Apple in most people's eyes, no matter where the app came from.  Tech heads and geeks and extremely computer-savvy people are a small minority -- a mere and tiny fraction -- of the population of App Store users.  Sure, we may like to think that we're a lot larger group than we actually are, but we're not, and failing to see that is simply pulling the wool over our own eyes.  The large majority of App Store users don't even know what the hell a "repository" is, nor do they know that, in the case of repositories, some apps can come from one place while others come from a different place.

The argument could be made that, "Hey, non-tech people can just ignore or simply not use that section of the App Store!"  Well, sure they could... but that goes back to the misunderstanding of what Apple's goals and visions are for the App Store.  Apple does not want that.  They want a seamless, error-free and slick implementation that _anyone_ can wrap their head around without much guidance, and that no part of the device would be considered "off-limits" to someone who can't understand it.  Implementing something that would make someone feel unsure of using just isn't in the cards... how stupid is grandma going to feel when she asks someone about the "restricted repository" and the answer is, "just don't use that because [I can't explain it] [You won't get it] [That's not for you] [There's nothing in there that you want anyway]?"

Apple is not in the business of catering to the 0.01% (my statistic, straight from my arse) of users that want some kind of completely open, transparent, modifiable, unrestricted, uncensored and limitless network-enabled, media consuming device.

You don't have to agree with Apple's App Store policies and methodologies and visions, but one needs at least to understand them before agreeing or disagreeing with them.  One can't make a valid argument against Apple without having understanding first.  That's like arguing against gravity or trying to make water flow uphill: a lack of understanding of basic physics means one cannot even be part of the discussion lest the things that come out of one's mouth have no bearing on the issue(s) at hand.

Once a person understands the theory behind a device, that device becomes much more usable and utilitarian.  Instead of spending time trying to force it to do something it wasn't meant to do, one can use their understanding of the device to be productive.  I am of the firm belief that a smart person can use the tools presented to them to conquer problems, while the opposite of a smart person is continually frustrated with the tools presented to them.  Apple is making a killing by providing tools that do not befuddle many people at all, and the ones that are frustrated by those tools are the ones trying to implement them in situations where they were never meant to be used.

Instead of thinking, "Hey, why can't Apple just put something more complex in there to satisfy me," one _should_ be thinking, "Hey, how can this complex thing be simplified so that the majority of people using this device could easily understand it?"  I hardly think a disclaimer saying, "The following section of the App Store is for very smart people only.  It is complex and contains stuff you have never seen before.  It may crash your phone; it may not.  If you are not a tech-head, geek, nerd, computer scientist or otherwise blessed with extreme understanding of complex things, you should stay out" would bolster the usability of the product.


----------



## SmoothLake (Jun 10, 2010)

Getting one? but a little over-price, yeah... 
Can't decide yet, will need to see it go toe-to-toe with competition...


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Jun 10, 2010)

Over priced?

Before the iPad came out, people were speculating that it would cost close to $999.

$499 was a complete surprise, and anyone who says otherwise is lying.


----------



## macrylinda1 (Aug 18, 2010)

bbloke said:


> To be honest, I'm a little surprised by the hype in advance and I was assuming there had to be some major advances in features.  Otherwise, I couldn't really understand the market for the product.
> 
> Personally speaking, if I want to have internet access in an extremely portable form, I'd use an iPhone or iPod touch.  If I want more computing power but also whilst on the move, I'd use a laptop.  The iPad seems bulky enough to not replace a laptop and yet not compact enough to totally replace an iPhone or iPod touch.
> 
> ...


Sharing publications should be the least of your concerns. You can share files between your iPad and Mac or Windows PC. Publications will be in the new opensource epub format. Sharing via the iBookstore may be allowed, but it will not be necessary.

I'm looking for the new authoring apps that will allow me to create my own publications. By the time the iPad hit the market, I presumed that authoring apps will be be available.

___________________


----------



## fryke (Aug 20, 2010)

I just spent five days camping with my girlfriend. We both brought along our iPads. We had enough battery power for all five days, using mine mainly to watch some TV shows in the evenings, hers for playing some games and both for accessing the web, mail etc. through the day. Of course we didn't spend all of our time on the iPads, but it was great to have these devices with us without requiring a power outlet. We couldn't have done that with our notebooks, and the iPhones (which held up nicely as well when set to 2G and in flight mode as often as possible) wouldn't have been as great an experience for watching TV shows as well as accessing the 'net. The iPads made perfect sense.

The iPad also makes sense whenever you're out and about and don't _know_ whether you'll need a computer. You don't log along your notebook if you're unsure you'll ever use it, but you'll simply have the iPad with you, because it's much lighter and slimmer than a notebook or even a netbook.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Aug 20, 2010)

You had me believing until "girlfriend."  Then your story lost all credibility.

Everyone knows geeks can't get girlfriends.



Nice story -- I experience the same thing... sometimes, even under medium to high use, I can get my iPad to last a full work week.  The battery life is nothing short of amazing.  I throw my iPad in the back of my car when out on tech calls for that "just in case" scenario.  Coupled with Jaadu VNC and RDP apps, even if I need a full-blown computer, I can just remotely access and control any of my Mac, Windows or Linux computers from home.

A little ingenuity, creativity and a fast internet connection make up for the lack of a true filesystem and other "shortcomings" (for lack of a better term) or limitations of the iPad... however, I feel that the iPad has neither "shortcomings" nor limitations at all.


----------



## fryke (Aug 20, 2010)

The one thing I _really_ don't get is that they don't push the use of MobileMe more. I'd love to be able to open and save RTF and Pages documents. Wouldn't need a file system other than that one.


----------



## Ferdinand (Aug 20, 2010)

Can't you get Pages on your iPad?
And if you download the iDisk app you can open, edit and save Pages documents.

Isn't that possible?


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Aug 20, 2010)

While you can open word processing documents with Pages from your iDisk (or Dropbox, etc.), you cannot "save" them back into your iDisk.

Pages and Numbers for the iPad have limited export capabilities.  You can share documents via the iWork cloud-based service, or email them via Mail.  You cannot, as far as I know, open a document from your iDisk, modify it, then save it back to your iDisk.

Essentially, once a document is "imported" into Pages or Numbers for the iPad, it's stuck there and is relegated to being "exported" in whatever export formats/methods those programs support (usually iWork and email).


----------



## Ferdinand (Aug 20, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> While you can open word processing documents with Pages from your iDisk (or Dropbox, etc.), you cannot "save" them back into your iDisk.



That is really a major flaw in the iOS system, because why bother having iWork on your iPad if you can't even save your work back to your iDisk/dropbox or wherever.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Aug 20, 2010)

It's not a major flaw (at least in my opinion), because it's not something that's inherently _broken_.  It just requires a creative workaround.

I understand that true, collaborative editing can't take place with the iPad... yet.  You can work around it, but you would be creating multiple copies of the document as collaborative (or sequential) editing took place -- your coworker writes a document and puts in on iDisk.  You download from iDisk on your iPad and edit with Pages.  You then send the edited document back to the co-worker via the "Mail" export function, who edits it again, and sticks it back on iDisk.  You download... ad infinitum.

So, not "flawed," but definitely "kludgy" at the moment.


----------



## Ferdinand (Aug 20, 2010)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> So, not "flawed," but definitely "kludgy" at the moment.



Yes that's true. Well, it is obviously not as much of a "business product" as Apple would like it (and is marketing it) to be.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Aug 20, 2010)

I haven't seen much from Apple in the way of marketing directly toward business -- while I've heard a lot of anecdotes and some interest from the business sector, I have yet to see a TV spot specifically aiming the iPad toward business use.

Apple does have a little page on business use:

http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/

It mainly focuses on Exchange compatibility and calendaring/contacts.  There is a small blurb about the iWork suite on that page -- so I do understand where you're coming from.

Is the iPad's iWork suite the end-all, be-all of business productivity on the iPad?  Not yet -- but what alternative is there at this point in time?  Everything has growing pains, methinks.


----------



## memiles47 (Jan 28, 2011)

I may be a little slow on the band wagon here but I have no problem opening pages, getting the document I want from iDisk, editing and sending it right back to iDisk with edits intact.


----------



## fryke (Jan 28, 2011)

On the iPad? Oh, yeah, they changed that with some update. Nice. (Works only with documents saved in iWork '09, though. Older documents need not apply.)


----------

