it seems like this keep coming up with ipad haters. I would like to know what makes that a bad thing if it is just a big ipod touch? But I just don't get it. you would never compare the ibook to the top end macbook pro. so why are you comparing the ipad with the ipod touch? Now yes it does look like the the ipod touch/iphone but that is nothing but product branding. Never has something been so different. The ipad is the first time we will see multi touch on a large screen this is something that has not been done before. The things you can do on the iphone are amazing. Just think about the ipad 9.7 inch screen. To compare it to the ipad touch is so disreapctful. the fact that it has large multi touch display makes it better then anything out now. And people are focusing on flash and multi tasking and not having a sd card. Please stop comapring it to the ipod touch just because it runs the same os And looks the same..
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Ipad being a big ipod touch argument
- Thread starter flyguy206
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
1) if someone doesn't care for or like the iPad, that does not make them a hater. Anymore than someone who likes it is instantly a fanboi
2) You want to argue against people comparing the iPad and the iPod Touch, yet the same people who whine about the comparison are freely comparing the iPad to simple eReaders like the Kindle. Why is it ok to compare two devices that REALLY only share ONE thing in common, but you don't want a comparison between two devices with a LOT in common?
3) Disrespectful to compare? I don't think disrespectful is the right word here.
Let me explain a few things.
First off, I have a Touch and love it. No question. It's awesome. HOWEVER, there are some things about it that I had HOPED for ages would have been addressed, such as a lack of multitasking. ditto for Flash. Those two issues notwithstanding, BEFORE the iPad came out, I had hopes that whatever tablet Apple created, it would be far more than JUST a "large touch". Right off the bat, a large touch isn't as useful for me because I can't/won't carry it around town with me, because it won't fit in my pocket or clip on my waistband. At home, I have all sorts of web enabled devices. Nine, to be precise. There's simply no need for a "large touch", given all the devices I've got already. Having said that, I might have been persuaded to part with some cash if an "insanely great, magical" device had included Flash, multitasking, HDMI, HD output, AMOLED, memory slot, etc, etc. Then I wouldn't feel like I would be buying a crippled device. The iPad doesn't really advance the technology much, IMO. IT'S JUST A LARGER, HEAVIER TOUCH, BASICALLY. And that's not what I need/want.
I sure as heck don't want to hold a 1.6 lb device in my hands for reading books at night. I have a perfectly good touch (under 4 ounces) to do that.
Here is an idea...Don't buy it and stop complaining. Find something else that fits your needs.
I do not like that Baskin Robbins puts too many chocolate chips in their mint chocolate chip ice cream. Should I spend all day on ice cream message boards complaining or should I just find a manufacturer I like better?
A larger iPod Touch is exactly what I need. I have an iPod Touch and don't use it that much because its small size makes web browsing painful, reading books annoying, and email/messaging cumbersome. Plus, the iPad has the capability of 3G, thereby making me finally independent of having a multitude of hotspot subscriptions or the frequent $9.99 daliy fees I have to pay for 20 minutes of web access in airports etc.
I don't care a whit about Flash, nor do I care about multitasking. I never, ever, expected the iPad would be any kind of computer replacement. It will be a good computer adjunct, and the thing will fit nicely in my laptop bag next to my MBP.
"Revolutionary?" "Magical?" No, not for me but its size and 3G capability make it worth the money to me. And I don't discount the possibility that the new interest in apps that it generates, and the the new media availability it ushers in ultimately may indeed make it as "revolutionary" as the iPod.
I don't care a whit about Flash, nor do I care about multitasking. I never, ever, expected the iPad would be any kind of computer replacement. It will be a good computer adjunct, and the thing will fit nicely in my laptop bag next to my MBP.
"Revolutionary?" "Magical?" No, not for me but its size and 3G capability make it worth the money to me. And I don't discount the possibility that the new interest in apps that it generates, and the the new media availability it ushers in ultimately may indeed make it as "revolutionary" as the iPod.
That's your choice. And if you did decide to go to a B&R forum and post your disappointment in how many chips are in their ice cream, that would be your choice and your privilege. And you wouldn't want other people to tell you that you had no business posting there.
Are you suggesting that only people who love and worship their Apple products with nothing negative to say should be allowed or encouraged to post?
I currently own an iPod Touch and to be honest, the iPad is pretty much a larger version of the touch. Granted, it will be able to do things a bit better due to the screen size and upgraded internals, but I don't think its a stretch or even disrespectful to say the iPad is a larger version of the touch. I'm really considering selling my Touch and my Kindle and buying an iPad and a nano. I think some of the complaints are from people who expected more, but this could have also resulted in a higher price. I think you are being too sensitive, and must realize that everyone has their own opinion and the iPad just like any other product isn't for everyone.
The HP TouchSmart line has been around and does Multi-touch on a much larger scale. Also, Lenovo has a multi touch thinkpad (12.1"). Those are a couple examples of where the tech already exists. The iPad will be a good product (maybe even great), but its hardly first.
The HP TouchSmart line has been around and does Multi-touch on a much larger scale. Also, Lenovo has a multi touch thinkpad (12.1"). Those are a couple examples of where the tech already exists. The iPad will be a good product (maybe even great), but its hardly first.
maybe u need glasses, or different glasses? I'm 62 and I have zero problems reading my touch. (i use reading glasses)
the way it effortlessly zooms on web pages makes it "ok" for light web browsing.
reading a book on it? I PREFER it to real books, because it is light in weight, easy to see, clear text, LIGHTED so I don't need to burn a 200 watt bulb like when reading "real" books. Since I got the Kindle app I have avoided "real" books.
seriously, I think u just need the proper reading glasses.
I think an iPad, a Nano, a MacBook, and an iMac/Mac Pro makes perfect sense. Each device doing what it does best. The disappointment is going to come from people who have unrealistic expectations and/or try to make any one of those devices do more than what it was designed for.
On the flip side of this discussion is a situation that is common to many iPhone/Touch users which makes the iPad very appealing and very distinct from the iPhone/Touch
A lot of users, myself included, have found ourselves using the iPhone not as a phone or a media device but as a computer. By no means do I mean to imply that this is a desktop/laptop replacement. Instead, the iPhone is actually a great portable, instant on device for accessing data on the go in the many situations where using a laptop to do so is inconvenient, cumbersome, and perhaps overpowered for the task.
Why are laptops inconvenient, cumbersome, and overpowered for many mobile tasks? Laptops can be inconvenient and cumbersome because they generally aren't instant on and accessing the programs requires navigating by trackpad to the desired program and waiting for them load, not ideal for casual data entry or reference. They require a flat surface for data entry, whether a desktop or a laptop. They are also overpowered in that most of their power isn't necessary for many typical mobile tasks. Most users don't buy laptops because of their "power" but because they are the only viable mobile computing device available to them. It wouldn't be an inaccurate observation to state that many laptop users bough their laptops for this reason, with many laptop features lost to them and unnecessary for the uses they want.
Enter the iPhone, an instant on portable device that I don't need a desk for and can use in a standing position with easy access to programs that I can navigate with a finger by design. They're pretty great for a lot of situations, and yet lacking primarily because of their screen size. For my aging eyes they're difficult to read on and I can't do much else on it aside from reviewing data. I can't edit presentations for instance. And I would never consider reading a book on one. If I really need to review data in detail or edit a spreadsheet I have to use my desktop/laptop, which is frustrating because a device like seems almost ideal for doing just that. I can almost use it as a mobile computer. I can almost use it as a complete laptop replacement, although I would still prefer a desktop for tasks where desktops excel, such as editing movies or typing reports.
All it needs is a larger screen to be more useful in ways that an iPhone/Touch could never be.
A lot of users, myself included, have found ourselves using the iPhone not as a phone or a media device but as a computer. By no means do I mean to imply that this is a desktop/laptop replacement. Instead, the iPhone is actually a great portable, instant on device for accessing data on the go in the many situations where using a laptop to do so is inconvenient, cumbersome, and perhaps overpowered for the task.
Why are laptops inconvenient, cumbersome, and overpowered for many mobile tasks? Laptops can be inconvenient and cumbersome because they generally aren't instant on and accessing the programs requires navigating by trackpad to the desired program and waiting for them load, not ideal for casual data entry or reference. They require a flat surface for data entry, whether a desktop or a laptop. They are also overpowered in that most of their power isn't necessary for many typical mobile tasks. Most users don't buy laptops because of their "power" but because they are the only viable mobile computing device available to them. It wouldn't be an inaccurate observation to state that many laptop users bough their laptops for this reason, with many laptop features lost to them and unnecessary for the uses they want.
Enter the iPhone, an instant on portable device that I don't need a desk for and can use in a standing position with easy access to programs that I can navigate with a finger by design. They're pretty great for a lot of situations, and yet lacking primarily because of their screen size. For my aging eyes they're difficult to read on and I can't do much else on it aside from reviewing data. I can't edit presentations for instance. And I would never consider reading a book on one. If I really need to review data in detail or edit a spreadsheet I have to use my desktop/laptop, which is frustrating because a device like seems almost ideal for doing just that. I can almost use it as a mobile computer. I can almost use it as a complete laptop replacement, although I would still prefer a desktop for tasks where desktops excel, such as editing movies or typing reports.
All it needs is a larger screen to be more useful in ways that an iPhone/Touch could never be.
maybe u need glasses, or different glasses? I'm 62 and I have zero problems reading my touch. (i use reading glasses)
the way it effortlessly zooms on web pages makes it "ok" for light web browsing.
reading a book on it? I PREFER it to real books, because it is light in weight, easy to see, clear text, LIGHTED so I don't need to burn a 200 watt bulb like when reading "real" books. Since I got the Kindle app I have avoided "real" books.
seriously, I think u just need the proper reading glasses.
I see just fine, thanks. Best laser-enhanced eyes money can buy, and a literal fleet of reading glasses to accommodate my presbyopia.
I also have both Kindle and B&N apps and I'm convinced that, for me, ebooks are a preferable paradigm. HOwever, your amazement that not everyone shares your enthusiasm for the small size of the iPod Touch as an ebook reader is puzzling. Do we all have to see things the way you do? Or can we have our own preferences without being labeled as..."unenlightened"... by you?
It's just personal preference. Can't you just shrug your shoulders and move on?
it not what you need but that does not make it a big ipod touch. The fact is we never had a large multi touch display so we don't know what we will be able to do with it and how things will change with it. what people are not getting is that a large multi touch display is something new and advance.
Valid point.
And I understand where you're coming from. Without using one though, I would have to determine, for myself of course, how awkward the iPad is to type and truly be mobile.
In other words. The iPhone/iPod touch is great because you can freely move around. Hold in one hand and type with the same hand (thumb typing). You won't have that same mobility with the iPad. It will really take two hands - one to hold and the other to type. No?
So while you can definitely be mobile and take it "anywhere" - it doesn't have the same portability/ease of a smaller one handed device. This would and is true of any tablet or portable computer.
That being said - for me, since I wouldn't be likely to bring the iPad out of the house much (except perhaps when travelling) - I don't see much of a difference between having the iPad and a macbook pro (for my usage) in terms of portability. It's just as easy for me to move around the laptop as it would be to move around the iPad. And if I plan to type a lot - I would prefer a physical keyboard - so that means docking the iPad anyway.
Yes - with the iPad you have both the ability to dock AND take it mobile.
So again - are those that are so excited about having a larger iPod Touch (for argument sake) and thinking how "easy" it will be to have these apps and be mobile - I can only assume you mean mobile as in take it easily around. Because it's definitely a two-handed device
And I understand where you're coming from. Without using one though, I would have to determine, for myself of course, how awkward the iPad is to type and truly be mobile.
In other words. The iPhone/iPod touch is great because you can freely move around. Hold in one hand and type with the same hand (thumb typing). You won't have that same mobility with the iPad. It will really take two hands - one to hold and the other to type. No?
So while you can definitely be mobile and take it "anywhere" - it doesn't have the same portability/ease of a smaller one handed device. This would and is true of any tablet or portable computer.
That being said - for me, since I wouldn't be likely to bring the iPad out of the house much (except perhaps when travelling) - I don't see much of a difference between having the iPad and a macbook pro (for my usage) in terms of portability. It's just as easy for me to move around the laptop as it would be to move around the iPad. And if I plan to type a lot - I would prefer a physical keyboard - so that means docking the iPad anyway.
Yes - with the iPad you have both the ability to dock AND take it mobile.
So again - are those that are so excited about having a larger iPod Touch (for argument sake) and thinking how "easy" it will be to have these apps and be mobile - I can only assume you mean mobile as in take it easily around. Because it's definitely a two-handed device
It isn't hating to dislike it, or make comparisons.
But if you are using language with the intent to belittle the product "it is just a big ipod", then you are hating and probably hoping to wind people up.
Obviously there is huge commonality with the ipod touch, and there is nothing wrong with that. I wish Apple made a whole size range of these tablets. I would love a 5" screen tablet whatever you want to call it; Touch XL, iPad nano.
I disagree. And if you are insulted that people refer to it as "just" a big iPod - then that's your issue. That doesn't mean someone is a hater.
The Kindle is JUST an eReader
The MacBook pro is JUST portable Mac with a smaller screen
The iPod touch is JUST an iPhone without 3G
The iPhone is JUST an iPod with 3G
Would people who write the above be haters? No.
iPod Touch:
Impaired usability due to small screen size vs enhanced usability due to one-handed portablity.
iPad:
Impaired usability due to decreased portability vs enhanced usability due to larger screen size.
Different people are going to put different values on each of those two arguments. Because our needs/wants/expectations are all going to be different, we should all try not to impose our own values on others for the side of the "Big iPod Touch" they come down on.
Well you sort of just proved my point. To each their own. And those that buy/promote one aren't fanbois by default and those that don't aren't haters.
We all have different use cases. Expectations and/or functionality which would either make the iPad (or any device) worth investing in or not.
The OP is taking offense and making sweeping generalizations about people that refer to the iPad as just a big iTouch. Who cares if that's what people want. And who cares how or why they compare it. If the device works for you - GREAT. Perhaps the larger iTouch is exactly what some people need or want or expected. And others wanted more. Neither "party" is right or wrong.
The need to label people is the problem here. You're a hater, you're a fanboi. Nonsense and childish namecalling.
the more i think about the ipad the more i see that this thing is going to be game changing. The mpb is portable but the ipad is more personal that is the thing that makes the ipad great. Lets say you are having a cookout and you have some pics you want to show a family member grab the ipad and let them look for themselves it will be so much more personal for a person to use the ipad then using a laptop.
How about you apply that sentiment to the rabid Apple fans who will go off-topic at a moment's notice to complain about someone's postings that fail to heed the "party line" that all things-Apple are the most wonderous things in the universe? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, you know. Seems only positive Apple comments are "allowed" here. Anything else is seen as heresy. btw...I didn't labeled you or anyone else "unenlightened".I have just about every strength reading glasses made, starting at 1.25. <g> mostly I use the 1.25's for reading my large LCD monitors, and 3.25 for viewing my touch or storm2. 1.75's work pretty well in stores, for reading labels, but I can get by with any of the strengths for that--all that's needed is an adjustment in "arm length".
I agree and don't see it as a problem because a lot of people seem to want to buy a bigger iPod touch.
This discussion is comical because you are arguing about something you can't control ---- What Apple puts in a new device. If we all wrote down our feature wishlist, very few would be the same.
You all know that Apple's history with new device roll-outs shows that they never take a kitchen sink approach to features --- throw in everything you can think of to make everyone happy. They are the most measured consumer electronics company around. They typically only include the features that will get high volume use and that they can integrate in with the software to provide a nice user experience.
Future iterations of the iPad will likely include some of the things many of you would like to see but some things you may never see -- you know how Apple is. I bet that some of you will not be happy until you turn the iPad into a MacBook (usb, video out, sd card, trackpad on the back, some type of keyboard, etc, etc.). Then you would complain that there is no difference between the iPad and a laptop.
My advice: See it (iPad) for what it is - not a laptop or desktop replacement but a new category of mobile appliance. If it fits your needs buy it, if not --- there's always Android.
You all know that Apple's history with new device roll-outs shows that they never take a kitchen sink approach to features --- throw in everything you can think of to make everyone happy. They are the most measured consumer electronics company around. They typically only include the features that will get high volume use and that they can integrate in with the software to provide a nice user experience.
Future iterations of the iPad will likely include some of the things many of you would like to see but some things you may never see -- you know how Apple is. I bet that some of you will not be happy until you turn the iPad into a MacBook (usb, video out, sd card, trackpad on the back, some type of keyboard, etc, etc.). Then you would complain that there is no difference between the iPad and a laptop.
My advice: See it (iPad) for what it is - not a laptop or desktop replacement but a new category of mobile appliance. If it fits your needs buy it, if not --- there's always Android.
- Status