Apple Corrects iPad Promo Video to Show No Flash Capability

[Anuba]

"The problem is, netbooks aren't better at open platform". HUH?
"The problem is, netbooks aren't better at physical keyboard". HUH?
"The problem is, netbooks aren't better at widescreen". HUH?
"The problem is, netbooks aren't better at removeable battery". HUH?

Is it really that hard to translate those features into benefits? It's not exactly technological gobbledygook.

An open platform is better because it doesn't restrict your software choices or limit you to one provider.

A physical keyboard is better because it's familiar and you don't have to look at the keys as you type.

A widescreen is better because you can watch movies without two giant black rectangles taking up much of the screen.

A removable battery is better because you're not screwed when the battery runs out and you're far away from a power outlet.

But you already knew that, and so will all customers except grandma.

Those aren't necessarily my opinions (I can see the benefits of a soft keyboard), just an attempt to decrypt the bleeding obvious.

 

[fobfob]

I was then looking for alternatives and found this video.

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

This concept is amazing. But people don't realise how much work would go into producing such a system. In addition, the technology is not there, yet.

Apple has chosen to bring a product to market that they know will *work* (ie. it is not experimental), and yes, they have leveraged their existing platforms to do it. Slightly cynical, perhaps. But like I say, they know the customer experience will be positive, even if it's not Star Trek level (or Courier) yet. Apple chose to release this product to get their foot in the door in this emerging market. They couldn't wait any longer.

Now, Apple could be accused of lacking innovation, especially with its huge cash reserves. Couldn't it just throw enough money at the problem, hiring thousands of programmers to get a brand new ground up OS and application suite ready for the iPad? This is a question I often think about when I see the glacial upgrade cycles on OSX and iPhone OS. With Snow Leopard, one could almost say progress is close to grinding to a complete halt (at least from the user's perspective). What is coming next, if anything?!

We can only speculate as to the reason. My guess is that Apple (or Jobs) feels that large software development projects often fail, and that it must be very tightly controlled. He/they may think that they can't find enough talented people to work on such labor intensive projects.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

I am referring to the actual site (interface). The site has amazing interaction without the use of Flash.

Granted, however some of the content is still in flash. Similar to NYT website where videos are encoded in flash. Not arguing that it is not a nice website at all.

 

[furi0usbee]

oh... the video is the part we can't see on the pad???

You are making my point.. just the video. They can dump flash altogether with a QT stream.

 

[Eidorian]

This concept is amazing. But people don't realise how much work would go into producing such a system. In addition, the technology is not there, yet.

Apple has chosen to bring a product to market that they know will *work* (ie. it is not experimental), and yes, they have leveraged their existing platforms to do it. Slightly cynical, perhaps. But like I say, they know the customer experience will be positive, even if it's not Star Trek level (or Courier) yet. Apple chose to release this product to get their foot in the door in this emerging market. They couldn't wait any longer.

I don't think we'll ever really know the complete roadmap to the keynote for the iPad.

Still Microsoft has some rather interesting experimental things, Natal/Courier/Surface, but Natal is the only one of those that has any sort of date on it.

The final frontier was made on Mac but you take a look at what Star Trek cards Microsoft has in play for experimental an it makes you wonder.

I think we're in sort of a chicken and egg situation right now. CES 2010 seemed very reactive to iSlate rumors but was it really a natural progression of things or was it just a me too prototype phase bracing for a $1,000 Apple Slate?

Now we have Apple playing Dell with a race to the bottom for tablet prices.

I think the major point is that Apple's "compromise" is shown on stage as magical and revolutionary. You look a little deeper and you start to see "compromise".

 

[gibbz]

Is it really that hard to translate those features into benefits? It's not exactly technological gobbledygook.

An open platform is better because it doesn't restrict your software choices or limit you to one provider.

It also can degrade the overall user experience with stability issues, etc. I don't think the devs mind too much given the enormous number of iPod touch/iPhone users.

A physical keyboard is better because it's familiar and you don't have to look at the keys as you type.

In a tablet, it makes no sense. If you want one, they have attachable versions or you can use bluetooth.

A widescreen is better because you can watch movies without two giant black rectangles taking up much of the screen.

On a laptop, sure. If it were true widescreen, the thing would be too skinny and not optimized for the millions of other things it does.

A removable battery is better because you're not screwed when the battery runs out and you're far away from a power outlet.

When is enough enough? I would think that people wouldn't be out using this for more than 10 straight hours at a time and could handle simple power management.

But you already knew that, and so will all customers except grandma.
Those aren't necessarily my opinions (I can see the benefits of a soft keyboard), just an attempt to decrypt the bleeding obvious.

I realize many people will feel this way, not necessarily you, but they are missing the point of the device.

 

[ipadsad]

This concept is amazing. But people don't realise how much work would go into producing such a system. In addition, the technology is not there, yet.

Apple has chosen to bring a product to market that they know will *work* (ie. it is not experimental), and yes, they have leveraged their existing platforms to do it. Slightly cynical, perhaps. But like I say, they know the customer experience will be positive, even if it's not Star Trek level (or Courier) yet. Apple chose to release this product to get their foot in the door in this emerging market. They couldn't wait any longer.

Now, Apple could be accused of lacking innovation, especially with its huge cash reserves. Couldn't it just throw enough money at the problem, hiring thousands of programmers to get a brand new ground up OS and application suite ready for the iPad? This is a question I often think about when I see the glacial upgrade cycles on OSX and iPhone OS. With Snow Leopard, one could almost say progress is close to grinding to a complete halt (at least from the user's perspective). What is coming next, if anything?!

We can only speculate as to the reason. My guess is that Apple (or Jobs) feels that large software development projects often fail, and that it must be very tightly controlled. He/they may think that they can't find enough talented people to work on such labor intensive projects.

Seems like the tech IS HERE for this... to keep the price down, 1 screen instead of 2, obviously. I really thought apple could pull something like this off, perhaps simplified a bit. I think a lot of people were expecting something in this direction. When I think "magical"... this is what I picture. This would have been an extension of the iphone experience. I don't think it would have to be done from the ground up. I think the current pad hardware could kick ass if they wished (plus a stinking camera)...

Instead... maybe it is a race to the bottom? I wish they would just say that, rather than blow artificial sunshine up everyones arses...

 

[fobfob]

An open platform is better because it doesn't restrict your software choices or limit you to one provider.

Well that is not a restriction of iPhone/Pad OS anyway. And if you are talking about the OS itself, then most people would say a) who cares? or even b) well I'm happy with the Apple one anyway.

That is not a benefit that the mass market will recognise.

A physical keyboard is better because it's familiar and you don't have to look at the keys as you type.

Familiar? This is a new product category. People approaching the product already know that. They are expecting something different. But if familiarity is important, how about "it's the same as your iPhone".

This is not a significant benefit for most people.

A widescreen is better because you can watch movies without two giant black rectangles taking up much of the screen.

The benefit related to this feature is "movies look awesome". In this case, I agree with you. All other things being the same, a widescreen would make movies look better. This is a compromise of the iPad.

A removable battery is better because you're not screwed when the battery runs out and you're far away from a power outlet.

The market has already spoken on this one with the latest macbook offerings. Again, not a benefit the customers are looking for.

So it's not quite so easy is it? You have to look at the user experience, and what is going to appeal to people.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Yes, I'm an Articulate developer. And since Articulate is Windows-only, I obviously am not using ClickToFlash (which is an OS X plugin) while I'm doing my Articulate work (which I do on my Mac using Fusion).

So you develop Flash-based media, but detest Flash. Then you test it on Windows but not on the Mac? I don't know what to say about that. When I develop with Articulate, my clients want me to make sure it runs on BOTH platforms, so I'm always testing on both. They like the result because they value narrated, interactive media being able to reach the widest possible audience. But to each his own.

And why couldn't they go into one nice little container? Articulate seems to lump Flash, HTML and javascript into one nice little container just fine.

And this wouldn't have to be any more complicated for the end user at all. Good grief, you click the Publish button and Articulate does its thing. Whether via Flash, HTML5 or Web Voodoo, you wouldn't know the difference (nor need to).

Have you looked at the HTML5 draft? If so, are you honestly believing that it can cover ALL of the bases that Flash covers? Cross platform, all the main browsers? Today? Because if you want to deliver that kind of experience for owners of these iDevices, it needs to be that way today (since Flash is NOT permitted to be there).

Sorry, for some of us "good enough" isn't good enough. Why should I have to endure Flash-based mediocrity in my Web experience just because I choose to use a Mac? I'm sick of it. Apparently Apple is sick of it too.

Again, until your previous post, I did not know the world had anointed you king of decisions about what is good and bad about technologies. Congratulations. We'll all try to remember to check with you first when we are trying to evaluate such decisions in the future. Perhaps Arn can set up all the threads from this day forward so that only YOU can post your opinion, saving us all a lot of time in talking about our own take on things?

Apple does not seem sick of Flash on their computers. Just on these 3 devices. I can even understand their power concerns on the 2 little iDevices, but this one makes almost no sense to me. But again, apparently others like me are not supposed to have an opinion... just check with you and get yours... and- apparently- that is the ONE opinion that matters.

And you don't seem to have a problem with the fact that you are effectively shackled to a Flash-based Web (I guess since it's controlled by Adobe and not Apple you're just fine with it, since only Apple is evil?).

I'm not the one who is trying to force an opinion to be THE opinion. My take is that Flash should be an OPTIONAL tool for users of this device... each deciding for him/herself if they want to drain their batteries a little quicker or not. I like Apple MORE than I like Adobe. I have many more Apple products than I have Adobe products. But it makes sense to me that something as ubiquitous as Flash should be on this device, than to make something as unsupported as its DRAFT "replacement" the only way to even approximate the experience Flash delivers today.

It will be great when and if HTML5 solutions can ever fully supplant Flash, and the entirety of the web has embraced the change. But today is NOT that day. And years from now will probably still NOT be that day. Between now and then, it would be nice to be able to use such a commonly available feature of the web on this ultimate internet device, rather than see the blue lego at site after site (with no option to do anything about it). Short of that, it would be nice to the have the OPTION to use Flash if we each want to on this device. But apparently you disagree because YOU feel differently, so that is apparently the only way things should be.

 

[ipadsad]

So you develop Flash-based media, but detest Flash. Then you test it on Windows but not on the Mac? I don't know what to say about that. When I develop with Articulate, my clients want me to make sure it runs on BOTH platforms, so I'm always testing on both. They like the result because they value narrated, interactive media being able to reach the widest possible audience. But to each his own.



Have you looked at the HTML5 draft? If so, are you honestly believing that it can cover ALL of the bases that Flash covers? Cross platform, all the main browsers? Today? Because if you want to deliver that kind of experience for owners of these iDevices, it needs to be that way today (since Flash is NOT permitted to be there).



Again, until your previous post, I did not know the world had anointed you king of decisions about what is good and bad about technologies. Congratulations. We'll all try to remember to check with you first when we are trying to evaluate such decisions in the future. Perhaps Arn can set up all the threads from this day forward so that only YOU can post your opinion, saving us all a lot of time in talking about our own take on things?

Apple does not seem sick of Flash on their computers. Just on these 3 devices. I can even understand their power concerns on the 2 little iDevices, but this one makes almost no sense to me. But again, apparently others like me are not supposed to have an opinion... just check with you and get yours... and- apparently- that is the ONE opinion that matters.



I'm not the one who is trying to force an opinion to be THE opinion. My take is that Flash should be an OPTIONAL tool for users of this device... each deciding for him/herself if they want to drain their batteries a little quicker or not. I like Apple MORE than I like Adobe. I have many more Apple products than I have Adobe products. But it makes sense to me that something as ubiquitous as Flash should be on this device, than to make something as unsupported as its DRAFT "replacement" the only way to even approximate the experience Flash delivers today.

It will be great when and if HTML5 solutions can ever fully supplant Flash, and the entirety of the web has embraced the change. But today is NOT that day. And years from now will probably still NOT be that day. Between now and then, it would be nice to be able to use such a commonly available feature of the web on this ultimate internet device, rather than see the blue lego at site after site (with no option to do anything about it). Short of that, it would be nice to the have the OPTION to use Flash if we each want to on this device. But apparently you disagree because YOU feel differently, so that is apparently the only way things should be.

Everyone in favor of options... raise your hand... Who doesn't want options? I want to watch an episode of 24 on my iphone 3gs on FOX.COM, but I can't... I get the blue lego of arrogance instead... thanks steve, for protecting me... Wonder if I could buy it on itunes, then use a wire to transfer it to my phone?

 

[poe diddley]

no flash on ipad is the dumbest, most idiotic idea i've heard of.

wtf?

is it because it's going to be on at&t's crap network and they're afraid it'll even further weaken it? that's my bet.
there's no reason whatsoever that the hardware can't run Flash.
has to be something dumb like at&t's network.
bah.
when will they learn? at&t sux and we've been trying to tell them for years.

 

[ipadsad]

no flash on ipad is the dumbest, most idiotic idea i've heard of.

wtf?

is it because it's going to be on at&t's crap network and they're afraid it'll even further weaken it? that's my bet.
there's no reason whatsoever that the hardware can't run Flash.
has to be something dumb like at&t's network.
bah.
when will they learn? at&t sux and we've been trying to tell them for years.

My thought on the lack of camera also... they could limit it to wifi, but they know it will be jailbroken and people will start using 3g bandwidth... just a guess as to why they also crippled it by leaving out a camera.

 

[avatar1632]

Turning off Flash/plugins in desktop Safari/Firefox isn't an accurate test. Most sites that cater to the iPhone/iPod Touch use the user-agent string to determine that the user is using one of those devices and then displays the content created for them. The same will, in all likelihood, also be true for the iPad.

The price is the killer...sadly... macsales.com

OK, everyone turn off flash if you know how and go to these sites for a preview of the ipad web experience....

http://cache0.techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/comscore-video-metrix-feb.png

I wonder if disney is redesigning in html5 as we speak... they are stevos' buddies...

Just disabled plugins in safari, went to disney and got a blank page... not even a redirect... MAGICAL!

AOL's index page works... the games don't... MORE MAGIC!!!!

Hulu... NOOOOO... This is beyond magic!!!

Foxs' index page loads... However, NO SHOWS ON FOX FOR YOU!!!! OK... THIS IS PLAIN FANTASTICAL!!!

Ultimate web browsing experience???? TRY IT FOR YOURSELF!!!! SAFARI MENU: Safari, preferences, security.. disable plugins...

 

[localoid]

...Now we have Apple playing Dell with a race to the bottom for tablet prices.

Apple would have a big advantage in that race to the bottom. In theory, Apple could still make good profits off the iPad users it can "train" to pay for content and apps.

 

[fobfob]

Now we have Apple playing Dell with a race to the bottom for tablet prices.

Interesting take. Maybe they *are* working on the Next Generation (to keep the Star Trek theme ) Courier style product in the background. But if so, it will orphan the iPad when it comes out. But like you say, by then the iPad will be the bargain basement product, maybe even like one of those kiddy computers.

But the problem is, until slates are ready to completely take over from laptops (and since laptops have already entered desktop space, that means slates are ready to replace your desktop, assuming the proper docking, external monitors and accessories are in place), I don't think consumers are willing to spend laptop or desktop type money on slates. That squeezes the acceptable price points down quite a long way.

In a few years, we will be there. Then Apple will have to release a full OSX compatible slate type computer, or something with a whole new touch integrated OS. But to make that product window, they would have to already be working on it.

I think the major point is that Apple's "compromise" is shown on stage as magical and revolutionary. You look a little deeper and you start to see "compromise".

Agreed. It was way too earnest. Johnny Ive in the promo video is simply way over the top. I hope it's only for show and not indicative of how these people talk at work.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

1.) Physical Keyboard
OF course a laptop has one. The iPad is new breed of tablet and no need for physical input. The work done on this device will not warrant it and is silly to include on the list. If you want one, you can attach a bluetooth one or the dock.

Is this the reason why will be selling a keyboard and dock option. Even Steve Jobs admitted it during the keynote. Sometimes you just need something tactile and familiar.

2.) Widescreen
Widescreen in a laptop makes sense. In a handheld device, not so much. The iPad would be too damn skinny and wouldn't be optimized for the plethora of other things the device does, all which require screen real estate.

Not a big issue for me, I could care less on this one.

3.) Webcam
I think maybe the angle is an issue. This I will concede because I can see the value in a webcam.

The orientation of the iPad would render any webcam on it as a drawback as it would not be at an optimal angle, unless you plan on keeping it in portrait view during use. Again not a big deal for me.

4.) Card Reader
There is an adapter for that

I cannot believe that the iMac and MBP has a SD Card read and could not include a built-in one. Come on, an adapter for this luxury. is just trying to screw the iPad user. What happens when the iPad is docked and you want to insert an SD card, yep forget it.

5.) USB, LAN, expansion ports
Again, this isn't supposed to be a laptop. It is supposed to be a standalone device. LAN negates its point, and there is a USB adapter for that when needed.

Not a big deal, not sure why one would want a USB or LAN on this device. It is supposed to be wireless and a USB port (USB Thumb Drive ). Again not a big deal.

6.) Removable Battery
10 hours+ of battery life is more than enough for most people.

Sure last time I checked 10 hours was not an entire day which really is 24 hours. Unless Steve Jobs means a working day of 8 hours, which is just a marketing spin. Again not a big deal, I can live with a built-in battery. I have had many iPods, Laptops and even NetBooks and never needed the urge to replace the battery. If I do not to replace it, I am better off buying a new computer as technology has evolved that much more.

7.)Flash Support
I won't be baited into a flash/no flash argument here. However, Apple's position is that omitting a proprietary plugin that routinely crashes the browser and hogs resources in OS X makes for a better browsing experience. Before giving me a cute photo with a bunch of blue symbols, check this one out too.

This should really be a user activated option. The complaining will stop once a user can opt to activate it or not.

8.) Video Out
This supports Apple composite and component out cables.

Not sure why could not offer a miniDisplayPort or HDMI. Again one has to buy another dock to extract video to an external screen.

9.) Open platform
It is Apple's position that acting as the intermediary allows for a more stable experience for users and a sound distribution method for devs. Looks at income stats for iPhone devs vs. Android or Microsoft.

Well the iPad is targeted as a web surfing dream. To me it seems that only wants the user to experience the web as they see fit. Options are good, when the web changes provide those options, don't alienate something because it does not agree with your methodology, think about the customers.

10.) Multitasking
The final product isn't confirmed, but even if it just as it is on the iPhone, most multitasking isn't needed as background processes. Quick app switching works fine. I will concede the ever popular pandora example, but given that the iPod app will likely still be able to run in the background, who cares?

Not even sure why multi-tasking is not included, at least make it an option for the end-user to activate or not. I hope iPhone OS X 4.0 allows for multi-tasking user activation option.

11.) Storage
Yet again, this is a new type of device, not a laptop. For most people 16GB works fine for the purpose of this device.

Seems there was no 16GB iPod Touch 3G was because those NAND chips were allocated for the iPad. Regardless storage is not a hugh factor on this device. I am fine with 32GB and above.

12.) Touch screen
This should be expanded to note the amazing multitouch technology that Apple has. This alone is one of the biggest reasons that Jobs claims the iPad works as a new category of device doing things better than a smart phone or a laptop. The way in which users interact with the iPad, i.e. with the internet, email, photos, music, games, ebooks, and any other applications is the point Steve is trying to make.

Seems that even though multi-touch is great and all with gestures, it just seemed that Steve Schiller was having a hard time with iWork mobile. If someone is in a hurry, iWork would be painfully slow to manipulate any data. iWork the way it stands presently for iPad is a gimmick to the possibilities for developers. Honestly using it in everyday applications, you might as well just work on it on your Mac.

Somethings seem fine during a demonstration at a keynote, however it will not do well in real world applications.

So far the iPad has a good start, it just needs to refine some of its feature set and support.

 

[ipadsad]

Turning off Flash/plugins in desktop Safari/Firefox isn't an accurate test. Most sites that cater to the iPhone/iPod Touch use the user-agent string to determine that the user is using one of those devices and then displays the content created for them. The same will, in all likelihood, also be true for the iPad.

True... But, to be fair... I used my iphone 3gs too, and the results weren't much different. Disney went to a mobile site, so at least a page was visible... however, all the flash games and video were still broken (of course). The page is the gateway... the content matters (to me).

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

You are making my point.. just the video. They can dump flash altogether with a QT stream.

So you want companies to dump Flash encoded videos for QT, just so it may work with iPhone OS X.

All depends on what the developers want.

 

[Anuba]

In a tablet, it makes no sense. If you want one, they have attachable versions or you can use bluetooth.

Right, it makes no sense on a tablet but you're missing the point -- if a physical keyboard is valuable to the customer, it makes the tablet all the more unappealing.

On a laptop, sure. If it were true widescreen, the thing would be too skinny and not optimized for the millions of other things it does.

Why would it be narrower, why not just taller? Widescreen is beneficial to both orientations. In portrait you see more of a webpage (some of them are mighty long), in landscape you get the movie in higher resolution and from corner to corner. The only downside is that it would be slightly larger and heavier, but it's not exactly a behemoth to begin with.

When is enough enough? I would think that people wouldn't be out using this for more than 10 straight hours at a time and could handle simple power management.

It's about freedom, about not having to worry about power householding along the lines of "hmmm, I can't watch this movie now because I can't recharge for a while and I can't be out of power in three hours because I need the tablet for this and that". Anytime you create something thinking that "it's all people will realistically need" and then present it to people, you'll quickly discover that "realistic" is a relative term.

I realize many people will feel this way, not necessarily you, but they are missing the point of the device.

I think the iPad is just fine (except the Flash issue), just playing devil's advocate for the most part.

 

[fobfob]

Seems like the tech IS HERE for this... to keep the price down, 1 screen instead of 2, obviously. I really thought apple could pull something like this off, perhaps simplified a bit. I think a lot of people were expecting something in this direction. When I think "magical"... this is what I picture. This would have been an extension of the iphone experience. I don't think it would have to be done from the ground up. I think the current pad hardware could kick ass if they wished (plus a stinking camera)...

Sorry, I need to do this comment more justice. I went back and looked again at the Courier demo and I totally agree with you. A lot of what is shown there is already possible using the iPhone OS and technology. Not only that, it could easily be incorporated in, say OS 4.0 without breaking existing apps.

The display technology shown in the mockup photos looks fake though. Is it supposed to be oled? I've never seen any colour display that paperlike.

I note that they use a stylus and thus rely on handwriting, rather than text entry. But I also note that they don't actually show any handwriting recognition. So again, nothing revolutionary. Not even I can read my handwriting, and I don't relish seeing it on a computer anytime soon, so I think I'm happy with that part staying away

 

[Chaos123x]

Why Fan Boy?

Because your looking a apple like everthing they do is perfect.

No matter how bad a decsion they make you find a way to justify it.

Not having flash is bad move.

Why are you defending apple?

Are you a fan boy?

 

[TMay]

This concept is amazing. But people don't realise how much work would go into producing such a system. In addition, the technology is not there, yet.

Apple has chosen to bring a product to market that they know will *work* (ie. it is not experimental), and yes, they have leveraged their existing platforms to do it. Slightly cynical, perhaps. But like I say, they know the customer experience will be positive, even if it's not Star Trek level (or Courier) yet. Apple chose to release this product to get their foot in the door in this emerging market. They couldn't wait any longer.

Now, Apple could be accused of lacking innovation, especially with its huge cash reserves. Couldn't it just throw enough money at the problem, hiring thousands of programmers to get a brand new ground up OS and application suite ready for the iPad? This is a question I often think about when I see the glacial upgrade cycles on OSX and iPhone OS. With Snow Leopard, one could almost say progress is close to grinding to a complete halt (at least from the user's perspective). What is coming next, if anything?!

We can only speculate as to the reason. My guess is that Apple (or Jobs) feels that large software development projects often fail, and that it must be very tightly controlled. He/they may think that they can't find enough talented people to work on such labor intensive projects.

The Courier is a digital dayplanner. It's not a tablet, though it does have some tablet characteristics. Niche market, and vaporware until it arrives, which at best the rumors put late this year.

Funny how it was leaked right before CES. What a coincidence!

Seriously, you've made up this scenario regarding Apple and Steve Jobs without any background information or rumors to support it.

The iPad was shown at the point of development because it was going to FCC for approval. You know what everybody else knows to this point and that is that the iPad was available in quantity to test (at the announcement) and that most observers considered the result very fast and polished.

Certainly there is a long life cycle ahead of the iPad and so development will continue.

What exactly is wrong with Snow Leopard's development cycle? Please elaborate. Also, you must be aware that there is solid sourcing to OSX 10.7 in development and probably available to developers as an early beta at WWDC this year.

Seriously, you sound like a concern troll, and worse, you need to get some facts to back your concerns and allegations.

 

[furi0usbee]

Like flash or not. That is not the question.

Apple should have worked with Adobe to get flash on the iPad/iPhone/iPod. Let the user decide if they want the hassles that come with Flash.

Nobody on here can say it's better with no flash than to offer the choice. Choice is flash.

I don't care if you are Anti-Flash, you can't be opposed to a company offering a technology that apparently millions of people want. Flash on Apple mobile products should be available. If you don't like it, turn it off.

 

[gibbz]

I cannot believe that the iMac and MBP has a SD Card read and could not include a built-in one. Come on, an adapter for this luxury. is just trying to screw the iPad user. What happens when the iPad is docked and you want to insert an SD card, yep forget it.

You make a solid point. I didn't consider that.

This should really be a user activated option. The complaining will stop once a user can opt to activate it or not.

I like this idea

Not sure why could not offer a miniDisplayPort or HDMI. Again one has to buy another dock to extract video to an external screen.

I agree they are getting a bit greedy with of these adapters, remotes, etc.

Not even sure why multi-tasking is not included, at least make it an option for the end-user to activate or not. I hope iPhone OS X 4.0 allows for multi-tasking user activation option.

I agree. Now if OS 4.0 doesn't support it, then I think people should be mad.

So far the iPad has a good start, it just needs to refine some of its feature set and support.

I think given the history of the iPhone, they will.

 

[ipadsad]

Sorry, I need to do this comment more justice. I went back and looked again at the Courier demo and I totally agree with you. A lot of what is shown there is already possible using the iPhone OS and technology. Not only that, it could easily be incorporated in, say OS 4.0 without breaking existing apps.

The display technology shown in the mockup photos looks fake though. Is it supposed to be oled? I've never seen any colour display that paperlike.

I note that they use a stylus and thus rely on handwriting, rather than text entry. But I also note that they don't actually show any handwriting recognition. So again, nothing revolutionary. Not even I can read my handwriting, and I don't relish seeing it on a computer anytime soon, so I think I'm happy with that part staying away

The displays seem to be a mock up, and I didn't expect oled to be in the pad (nobody makes 'em that big, too expensive, and a little young for the market... it's more the extension of the iphone UI and flow that grabs me... it just works... I figured the pad would be a further refinement of the iphone UI and hardware to a certain degree... but it seems they put all their energy into iwork and just made a big 'ol ipod touch... seems like they were either lazy or... something?