The Apple iPad...

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.
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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, ...
Click to expand...
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?
 
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?
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
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.
 
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.

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.
Click to expand...

Guess I'm just a dreamer.
 
Seriously? You join the forum for such comments? :) Or is this just your prelude to spam...
 
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
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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:

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
Click to expand...

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.

• Efficiently utilizes screen space with a scalable and customizable interface, effectively bridging the gap between "point and click" and touch interfaces. For instance, a portion of the interface could be dedicated to selecting processes -a la Dock-, while the rest of the interface would be dedicated to work space, allowing a user to interact with a stylus and a connected mouse and keyboard simultaneously. (I believe the iPad falls short in this area - things like the limited "dock", the crude scaling of iPhone apps, and the general toylike operation of the GUI)

• Is uncluttered and straightforward in the execution of programs, while being capable of handling multiple complex inputs and processes simultaneously. (Again, a better middle ground between desktop and haptic phone interfaces).

Hardware:

• Incorporates a processor capable of doing most of the work of a desktop with only minimal speed degradation. (Obviously, it would be way too hot to slap a contemporary quad-core processor in there, but there exist portable processors capable of much greater speeds than 1GHz, and without the limitations that come with an ARM-based design)

• Has the capability to record video, sound, and perform video conferences. The external camera could provide a variety of unique and useful applications, such as: reality augmentation, site planning, applied design, and educational implementations.

• Incorporates a variety of industry standard wireless communication interfaces, such as WiFi, bluetooth, RFID detection, GPS, etc.

• Provides the option of using memory expansion cards, such as SD, MicroSD, etc. These forms of storage have evolved to have incredibly high capacities for both their physical size and relative cost.
Click to expand...
 
Yea, it will be great until you have to reboot it every 15 minutes after it blue screens. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top