Ya, that whole "it's just a big iPhone" thing is overused and warn out and really makes no sense. It's like saying a 65 inch television is just like a 52 inch one, but bigger. And your point?
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.
Apple Announces Two Million iPads Sold
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ya, that whole "it's just a big iPhone" thing is overused and warn out and really makes no sense. It's like saying a 65 inch television is just like a 52 inch one, but bigger. And your point?
Sounds like a bitter Android developer
Sigh - one more time... I will buy as long as Apple innovates... So far, very good. But they must continue to innovate or die.
What is wrong with people? I know a few who bought the Wi-Fi model just because they could not wait for 3G to ship and then bought the 3G model. Scary - tomorrow Apple will ship a shiny paper weight in the name of simplicity and a promise to ship a 3G paperweight in 3 months and 6-8M people will still end up buying it
It's becoming a game of how swiftly and overwhelmingly can you fool people with traps! Masters of foolery shall sell the most goods and make the most profits - LOL the days of real innovation seem to have taken a hiatus!
Sigh - one more time... I will buy as long as Apple innovates... So far, very good. But they must continue to innovate or die.
Yep 12 hours is the routine
Yep makes me laugh every time I see some one tied to a charger. I wanted to fully discharge it to calibrate the battery, turned the screen up to 100% and played 'Avatar' 3 times before it was finally drained..
Yep makes me laugh every time I see some one tied to a charger. I wanted to fully discharge it to calibrate the battery, turned the screen up to 100% and played 'Avatar' 3 times before it was finally drained..
Again you are missing the point. Apple has never called the iPad a computer. They don't call it a netbook. It's not what Steve Jobs say, it what the device can do. Could they add flash support? Technically they could, but it would take the device out of their design parameters.
I have used a netbook and an iPad. It's true, I can do more on a netbook. Of course I don't like doing ANYTHING on a netbook. Screen is to small, keyboard is too small, resolution is to small, and the biggest flaw the screen is a non standard aspect ratio making it pretty much useless for anything. While the iPad does "less," I actually enjoy using it because it does what it does well. Polish, User Experience, Perception. A swiss army knife can do a lot of things, but if you need to fillet a fish, and have a swiss army knife and a fillet knife, you'll use the fillet knife every time.
I did. It's buggy. Likely needs some software updates to make it nice and smooth.
As for apps...I haven't used Windows in about a decade, but I'm PRETTY sure there are some apps available for Windows 7.
Not true. The Apple TV is that paper weight, and it's only selling at "hobbyist" levels, even at a much lower price point than the iPad.
Except Sony isn't trying to convince me their 65" TV does different things to the 52".
BONUS: Both TVs will allow me to watch Porn.
EDIT: I forgot the obvious point: The "Big iPhone" analogy works because it's true. (Well, Big iPod Touch, actually. At least the iPhone makes calls.)
I agree to an extent! Just look at what Apple have done to the UK smartphone market. We used to be able to get cool smart phones, for free, on reasonably priced, relatively short contracts. Courtesy of the iPhone, we're now stuck with 18-24 month, expensive contracts, AND we're expected to pay something for the phone too! Yeah, thanks Apple for making everything more expensive for us just so you can maintain your 40% margin. This is the problem with Apple becoming too successful. Other companies try to emulate them, which means we all lose out because we all end up having to pay more for our tech. We should be encouraging the race to the bottom, not fighting it!
The issue now is that given the success of the iPad - and I can picture it now - other companies will be removing features from their tablet devices because they see Apple being successful without them, so they might as well save themselves a few pennies by taking them out. I really hope it doesn't come to that, but we have already witnessed how the success of Apple devices can actually cripple the market rather than advancing it.
Does the two million include the one i pre-ordered? It still says it will ship in 'June'. June is a long month.
Oh yeah, like the critical need to play Farmville on Facebook.
YES, IT'S CRITICAL lol
So what *exactly* has Apple innovated in terms of the iPad? I keep asking this repeatedly but don't seem to get any convincing replies. It looks shiny and opens windows fast, the experience is magical, look they are selling etc. are not the kind of replies I am interested in hearing.
So Sigh, nth time - try and give me convincing, practical reasons as to why the iPad is Magical and Revolutionary and why according to Jobs it is going to replace the PC when it can't even start up and do its thing without being attached to the PC. (That was a starting point, a hint if you will.)
Of course it's not "magical", but, well, it just works.
If you read Engadget.com regularly, you'll see that they've been tracking the progress of all kinds of competitor tablets, starting from months before the Apple iPad was even announced.
You already know the fate of some of them, like the HP Slate and the MS Courier.
Others haven't yet seen the light of day and likely never will.
Still others have been reviewed by Engadget (like the Asus Pad, the JooJoo, etc.) and I think you'll find that there is a common theme to many of the reviews. Hint: look for terms like "buggy" and "needs more work" and "disappointed".
While people bash the iPad as being overpriced junk, Apple's competitors are falling all over themselves trying to make their own tablets, and the ones that actually exist are (a) not substantially cheaper than the iPad, and (b) have serious shortcomings in their user interfaces!
Substitute "magical" for "the only one on the market that actually works"!
If you read Engadget.com regularly, you'll see that they've been tracking the progress of all kinds of competitor tablets, starting from months before the Apple iPad was even announced.
You already know the fate of some of them, like the HP Slate and the MS Courier.
Others haven't yet seen the light of day and likely never will.
Still others have been reviewed by Engadget (like the Asus Pad, the JooJoo, etc.) and I think you'll find that there is a common theme to many of the reviews. Hint: look for terms like "buggy" and "needs more work" and "disappointed".
While people bash the iPad as being overpriced junk, Apple's competitors are falling all over themselves trying to make their own tablets, and the ones that actually exist are (a) not substantially cheaper than the iPad, and (b) have serious shortcomings in their user interfaces!
Substitute "magical" for "the only one on the market that actually works"!
Not sure you could get a smart phone as good or desirable as an iPhone for less than say £30 a month ? Even the N95 a few years ago was £30 a month although there were yearly contracts. The phone was never close to being as good as an iPhone. Think you have a selective memory.
The fact that they've built one at all, could maybe be considered innovative considering all the difficulties that their competitors are having trying to build a similar device that actually provides a responsive user interface that doesn't crash and suck battery life. Refer to my previous post (which really just refers to reports and reviews from Engadget -- a decided non-Apple-biased site).
But even if you argue "that's not innovative!" -- does it have to be? I refer back to one of the early posts that said "comparing the iPad to an iPod touch is like saying a swimming pool is basically just a big bathtub". It's true, and you can argue that there's no real innovation in taking a small container of water and making a big container of water. But yet the very fact that you made the container bigger makes it all the more useful. It opens up a whole new world of possibilities.
So go ahead, call the iPad "nothing but a large iPod touch" -- but that's the point. It's like an iPod touch, only bigger! And that's a good thing.
Convince you? Why bother trying? Like trying to convince a fish that flying is faster and more fun than than swimming.
Well but that Apple TV wasn't a revolutionary and magical product, now was it? I mean they don't even market it and I must say that the Apple TV however limited has its place in the living room. I own one - one click and I can rent a movie, watch it and forget it - all without having to go to the PC, while using the same remote control of my home theater system. I can put photos and movies on it from iTunes wirelessly - and show them to guests on the TV. Etc.
Sure the potential of ATV is artificially limited - it could a lot more ala the upcoming GTV but that's besides the point. Apple TV actually serves a need that nothing else in the Apple ecosystem does. iPad? Not so much.
And yet still more than yours did.
At least mine did not require viewing through Fanboi goggles for making sense.