Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
This reminds me of when I turned 16... I was so thrilled by the prospect of driving, that I would have bought anything with four wheels and a seatbelt. Fortunately, my dad held back the reigns until I came across a Toyota 4WD pick-up. Best purchase of my life (I'm 30 now, & it still sits in my garage next to my BMW 330Ci.) My point?

Everyone seems to be so blinded by the next APPLE GADGET, that they say ludicrous this like "I don't need a camera" "Flash? a gimmick!" "Ability to run multiple apps? Useless!!" Seriously, if that's what you have to tell yourselves in order to justify buying it, so be it. But don't make fools of yourselves saying the most BASIC of hardware offered in the cheapest products, and software to support all the high end websites is not necessary.

Grow some balls, tell apple how you feel. I'm sure they read these boards for feedback. This release was a HUGE let-down. Any saying otherwise is a lie.

(Again, a HUGE Apple fan. 32GB 3Gs, 27" iMac, multiple iPods.)
 
For all the hate going around about this thing, here is a humble reminder from October 2001. Not saying it will have the same effect, but let's see what happens down the road.
 
Most of the complaints and wish lists about the iPad can easily be explained id we remember that Apple has to take into consideration marketing, revenue, availability of components, and the risks of bringing a new product to market.

1. Multitasking- Obviously Steve Jobs was concerned about the speed of the device and the capabilities of the new A4 processor. The easy solution is to leave out multi-processing. And if they have multiprocessing to allow us to run everything we run on a macbook on the iPad, then why would we buy a macbook...? Apple wants people to buy both a macbook AND an iPad.

2. Camera- This is a first gen product... Apple needs to keep the price low therefore certain hardware features like a camera, SD card slot, USB port, etc. have to be left out. Once the iPad is a success, Apple can better negotiate higher volume & therefore lower prices from manufacturers allowing them to add more hardware features. On a first gen product Apple doesn't have the negotiating power to get lower prices because they can't guarantee the volume of sales. Apple has a long history of flop products....

3. 4:3 screen- again, volume pricing of parts. If the iPad is a success, then expect to see a range of different sizes in years to come. This is what happened with the successful iBook & iMac. And if you look at the less successful MacBook air, they have not made it available in different form factors.

4. Better apps- this is why Apple announced the iPad 60 days before releasing it. 60 days gives iPhone developers a headstart to redevelop their apps for the new device.

5. Flash- Apple has always hated proprietary formats (at least ones they didn't create) this is their way to force internet apps to html5.

All in all great 1.0 product. But 2.0 will be even better!
 
...i'll wait for:

1) Flash support within the browser (yes, flash sucks, but it's necessary today)

Don't worry
1 year later ; add camera
2 years later add flash

However.. the deal was broken when I found out it doesn't do flash... Seriously.. still? Flash is used in several of my common website visits. And its used everywhere for embedded content. How can you sell an internet device that doesn't have flash capability?

8. No inbuilt flash player so where's the ultimate internet experience?

Everyone seems to be so blinded by the next APPLE GADGET, that they say ludicrous this like "I don't need a camera" "Flash? a gimmick!"

Look people, here's the dealio. Flash ain't coming to Apple's new mobile devices. Not because it's not technically feasible - but because Apple doesn't want it in there. Look at Flash Player on the Mac - it's a complete pile of crap, and Apple has no control over it. I can't watch a crummy YouTube video without my MacBook fans going into catastrophic failure mode. You think Apple likes having its user experience crippled by some other vendor? And even if Flash Player for OS X were good, it still wouldn't change the fact that Flash-heavy sites are a scourge. Good luck pinching swiping and zooming your way around a site with a 100% Flash interface. The simple fact is Adobe simply can't be allowed its stranglehold on the Web with Flash.

Purging Flash from the Web is a painful necessity. No single vendor should have that much control over the Web. Remember IE 6 and the damage that did to the Web? We're still suffering from it all these years later. The Web should be about open standards, period - not any single proprietary technology controlled by a single vendor.

Like a heroin addict going to rehab, weaning the Web off Flash will be horrible, but worth it in the long term.

Go, go HTML5! Die Flash die!

And if companies aren't smart enough to realize that they're missing millions and millions of iPhone/iPod/iPad-using eyeballs by hosting Flash-exclusive websites and provide a standards-compliant alternative, well, then they deserve to flop.

It's ironic that a company that is endlessly excoriated for proprietary ways (Apple) is being savaged by the masses for pushing us away from proprietary ways (Flash). Ironic indeed.
 
I'm not sure why people are raving on about how amazing this device is and how it's going to 'revolutionize' the world.

Is it a laptop? No.

Is it a netbook? No.

Is it a graphics tablet? No.

So what is it exactly?

It's an enlarged iPod Touch. Enlarged in physical size and speed. That's it. It will have some extra new software available for it (like iWork) that you cant get now.

Can it be used properly without already having another computer to feed resources to it? No.

If i dont have my own computer, can i put existing resources onto the iPad? No.

Can it replace an existing netbook, or graphics tablet, or notebook so i dont have to have multiple devices? No.


Don't get me wrong, it LOOKS great. It's visually pleasing. Hey, i like the iPod Touch. It's a great device. But i don't see how taking an existing product and making it huge in size, is "revolutionary" and "amazing".

Making the iPod Touch gigantic takes away all the compact, portable advantages that make it so successful. There is nothing new here (besides software.)

If i take any other popular and successful product, like a N95 or a Sony PSP or even a Sidekick, and make them all 5 times bigger than what they are now, wack on some new software and release it as a new product, will they too be this crazy new amazing revolutionary device that will "change the world"?

Apple took an existing product and made it huge. That's it.

Oh and please, its getting really old labeling anyone who doesn't praise the iPad as some amazing work of genius as an 'Apple Hater'. I have many apple products and if i didn't like the products i simply wouldn't own them.

+1

I'll second that, good post summary.
 
That's funny. I'm a professional journalist, and I was meeting with other members of our regional press group today. We all think this is a great alternative to lugging a notebook. For the real work that journalists do and the amount of time we spend on the road, this is perfect.

So are you planning to iPad 'touch' type or adding the physical keyboard accessory. If the latter, then you've just reinvented the netbook. See?

This is what I term 'Technology Devolution'. Taking something apart and then rebuilding it so that it looks the same as before with a small design innovation.

An iPad + keyboard is even less than a netbook or Macbook. Look at what you don't get in that reinvented combination- connections, removable media drives etc..

Design Devolution:mad:
 
Good luck pinching swiping and zooming your way around a site with a 100% Flash interface. The simple fact is Adobe simply can't be allowed its stranglehold on the Web with Flash.

Actually, if Flash pages were designed with Flash's best feature in mind (resolution independent scalability) you could easily pinch swipe and zoom. It's what Flash was designed for- but few realize that.:eek:
 
5. Flash- Apple has always hated proprietary formats (at least ones they didn't create) this is their way to force internet apps to html5.
What in the world makes you think a few million iPad users is going to enable Apple to 'force internet apps to html5' when there are over 1.7 billion other web users worldwide?
 
Wow, talk about a major disappointment. :rolleyes:

I had already saved up enough $$$ to buy the mid level non-3G model to supplement my MBP while traveling. I don't need to be connected all the time so I don't need 3G.

I am not paying $600+ for a product which is basically an enlarged iPod Touch. It barely has any more functionality than the Touch, aside from the iWork suite and a larger screen. I would be better off (as would many others) with a $300 netbook and get it to work with OSX.

High price and limited functionality are not good bedfellows.

+1

I'll second that, good post summary.

I'll +2 that post.

Fantastic breakdown of why it is useless to so many people.
 
I've been screwed too many times on 1st gen Apple products. I've basically paid to "beta test" the newest Apple device only to find the 2nd gen fixes the majority of the problems for far less money.

That being said, I love this idea but....

...i'll wait for:

1) Flash support within the browser (yes, flash sucks, but it's necessary today)

2) Real apps - not iPhone apps that have been up-rez'd. Wait 6 months - there will be plenty of iPad-tuned applications.

3) A front facing video cam/camera - come on... this is an obvious feature for the iPad - video conferencing (iChat), facial recognition, etc. I can't believe they left this out.

4) SD card slot. Apple has them on the iMacs. Give us one way to get things on/off and, give us a way to increase storage as it gets cheaper - SD is obvious. At the rate SSD prices are going down, don't lock us in to the tiny storage that is affordable today (64GB is puny for a media device). An SD slot could be used to expand storage as it becomes cheaper. Btw, the camera adapters are a JOKE.

5) Wireless synch. Let me synch over my wireless network. Better yet, let me synch over the internet. Really? A 32 pin iPod/iPhone tether? That's awful. The idea is that the iPad is wireless... give me a magsafe charger and that's it. See "future possibilities" below - get rid of the wires.

6) GPS. How is this missing? Like the front facing camera and an SD slot - I suspect cost/price impact. So many apps use location services... this cripples the device.

7) Lose the dock/keyboard accessory - the iPad supports bluetooth. Apple sells bluetooth keyboards. The camera accessory and the dock accessory are both so un-Apple-like - so is the cover - since when does Apple make accessories? I remember Palm Pilots having a similar keyboard dock - it was just lame. It feels like Apple is hedging that the on-screen keyboard wont work... let people buy a laptop if they want a real keyboard. Make a good enough synch system and nobody will need a keyboard.

Future possibilities:

1) Wireless displays - Put the iPad down near a larger display/computer monitor. Watch movies, use it as a desktop computer... Use a bluetooth keyboard with it at the same time...use the iPad as a giant trackpad/pointing device.

2) Induction charging - no wires... Palm Pre does it. So does my electric toothbrush. Wireless guys... come on, keep up Apple.

This thing has serious potential. I'll buy it when the potential is realized. I'm done beta testing for Apple.

I agree with most all the comments you wrote. However, I would also add what I mentioned in my prior post too.

1. It MUST have CDMA support for Verizon/CDMA carriers. I would like a data plan, but there is NO GSM at all in my area so I am stuck with WiFi only.

2. No "cloud" streaming. Meaning you are limited to 64GB which as you state is very small for a media device and 16GB is a down right joke period. They need to roll out what everyone thought they would with their data center they are building and that is "cloud" based iTunes, movies, photos, etc. That way you can simply stream them and not worry about the amount of storage it has.
 
Hummm.... interesting comments from some.

I think people need to keep this in perspective. What's really cool about this and makes it MUCH better than other tablets is the details they've put into the UI and re-doing all the applications to take advantage of the larger screen.

And it's not just a bigger iPhone. It has real apps on it like iWork and therefore we can assume it will have others soon. The cool thing is the apps aren't just a "here it is... a bigger version of the iPhone apps" but apps built to take advantage of the larger format.

The price points are good. I'm sure there will be a 2.0 version before the end of the year that rocks even more.



I say cool and another great addition!

You're right! It's not just a bigger iPhone, it's a bigger iPod Touch- iPad cannot dial out. The UI is no different than that of the Touch. Sure, they added iWork, but don't you think that will also be available for use on iPhones and iPod Touch? Grant it not that I would want to. And games- The most interactive game system to date is the Nintendo Wii. Controller is 6 inchs long and fits in one hand. I'm sure people are going to loooove interactive gamming on a controller as big as a textbook. Games caught on well in App store due to iPhone and iPod Touch being hand held size and very portable. I'd like to see you get a hip holster for iPad!

Point being- Nothing Innovating Here! It's an update to iPod Touch.
 
What in the world makes you think a few million iPad users is going to enable Apple to 'force internet apps to html5' when there are over 1.7 billion other web users worldwide?

Aren't you forgetting about the, oh, dozen or so iPhone/iPod touch users? And as far as I know, no current smartphone platform excels at Flash, if it does Flash at all.

Mobile computing is the future, and if mobile computing (rightfully) turns its back on Flash, Flash will start to fade away on the Web. Simple logic.
 
Look people, here's the dealio. Flash ain't coming to Apple's new mobile devices. Not because it's not technically feasible - but because Apple doesn't want it in there. Look at Flash Player on the Mac - it's a complete pile of crap, and Apple has no control over it. I can't watch a crummy YouTube video without my MacBook fans going into catastrophic failure mode...And even if Flash Player for OS X were good, it still wouldn't change the fact that Flash-heavy sites are a scourge. Good luck pinching swiping and zooming your way around a site with a 100% Flash interface. The simple fact is Adobe simply can't be allowed its stranglehold on the Web with Flash.

Purging Flash from the Web is a painful necessity. No single vendor should have that much control over the Web. Remember IE 6 and the damage that did to the Web? We're still suffering from it all these years later. The Web should be about open standards, period - not any single proprietary technology controlled by a single vendor.

Like a heroin addict going to rehab, weaning the Web off Flash will be horrible, but worth it in the long term.

I'm glad someone with a brain finally commented on the Flash problem.
 
Again, NO CAMERA.

Clearly waiting for ver 2.0 to make $ALE$.

Horrible.


It's not bcuz we need or use the camera every second of our lives (although some would argue) it is the PRINCIPLE of the thing. At some point, during conception, someone had to ask, "Camera?" Then someone else said, "Nah." B.S. that it would drive up the cost. Hardware is CHEAP. We're talking camera's that are in EVERYTHING now-a-days. CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP. They clearly want/need a "gimmick" for the second version. Much like video on iPhones & MMS texting... remember that fiasco? Or has everyone's memory gotten that short? Revolutionary my ass...
 
Strangely, it works fine on Windows.

Strangely, watching 1080p videos in h.264 works fine on my Macs.

Hmm, 1080p video runs great. Yet low-res video in Flash brings my system to its knees. Seems the problem is with Flash Player for OS X. Flash Player by...Adobe.

And it's not too bad on my MBP in Firefox either.

I doubt "not too bad" is what Apple is hoping for regarding their users' Web experience vs. that of Windows users. You think Apple enjoys watching Adobe make the Mac platform look like crap compared to the competition?

Flash is the IE 6 of our day. It just gotta go.
 
Aren't you forgetting about the, oh, dozen or so iPhone/iPod touch users? And as far as I know, no current smartphone platform excels at Flash, if it does Flash at all.

Mobile computing is the future, and if mobile computing (rightfully) turns its back on Flash, Flash will start to fade away on the Web. Simple logic.
I agree with you in the longer term, but iPad is not going to hasten the demise of Flash significantly on its own, even if it does sell a few million. And in the meantime, a lot of people would like to be able to use it. I'd happily live without it though - I avoid doing business with companies that think their website needs to be entirely Flash. It's just useful from time to time.
 
Quite a disappointing product after so much anticipation. It's a neither here nor there product.

Looks cool but in terms of functionality, I would rather stick to my iPhone and macbook. Unless the price drops to $200, I may then consider buying this product and using it to surf the web occasionally and also using it as one of those photo frame thingies that display photos.
 
I agree with you in the longer term, but iPad is not going to hasten the demise of Flash significantly on its own, even if it does sell a few million. And in the meantime, a lot of people would like to be able to use it. I'd happily live without it though - I avoid doing business with companies that think their website needs to be entirely Flash. It's just useful from time to time.

Why do you keep choosing to ignore the iPhone/iPod touch platform? We're talking about a lot more than a "few million" users. And since no other smartphone platform that I'm aware of currently runs full Flash, you have a significant amount of Web-viewing action where Flash is irrelevant.

I don't like getting the "You need the Flash plugin" message when I try to visit a site on my iPhone either. I just shrug and move on.

I didn't much enjoy the days of "You need IE 6 for Windows to view this site" either. Fortunately the Web realized the disastrous error of its ways and moved on. Hopefully we can do the same with Flash.
 
How much cost a camera? Come on, just a 2megapixels, for the chat + flash and multitasking, and it would be a perfect device. Anyway, even it is realy cheep, ill wait until i recive my scolarship.

What I see in the next year is a bunch of applications and games much more interactive than the iphones, plus portable version of photoshop and dreamweaver, and maybe they will run a Windows XP or Vista on it. We will wait and see, but i expected more, its nice product, but for the crappy marketing tricks and ********s, they left us with a device with corted funcionality, which should be there, just like evreything else.
 
Why do you keep choosing to ignore the iPhone/iPod touch platform? We're talking about a lot more than a "few million" users. And since no other smartphone platform that I'm aware of currently runs full Flash, you have a significant amount of Web-viewing action where Flash is irrelevant.
Because it's made little difference so far eliminating Flash as far as I can tell. Unless you have a link to show otherwise of course.

I see you chose the word 'currently' very carefully, considering every other significant smartphone platform will have it in the near future:

http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3842291
 
Because it's made little difference so far eliminating Flash as far as I can tell. Unless you have a link to show otherwise of course.

The Anti-Flash Liberation Movement is still young. ;)

I see you chose the word 'currently' very carefully, considering every other significant smartphone platform will have it in the near future:

I chose the word "currently" because that was an accurate description.

We'll see how wonderful "Flash in the hand" is once these devices can actually run it.
 
Limitations of iPad as a replacement computer?

G'day all.

I've got a MacBook Pro, but have never had an iPhone, iPod or other iThing, so I don't have a feel for how limiting the jail and the lack of multitasking would be.

Here's the thing. The Mom-in-Law has used PC for years. These days, she does mostly:

a) e-mail (and won't stop opening malware-filled messages...)

b) browsing

c) a bit of word processing

d) listening to jazz and old big-band music

e) viewing of pictures and videos that others send to her

f) small tweaking of photos.

I had her talked into getting a MacBook (possibly Pro) for her next "PC", but now she thinks she's in love with the iPad. I have to admit that **I** want one, but for me it would be a toy, a secondary device. For her it would be her primary window on the world.

So, how limiting is the single-tasking for somebody who clicks URLs in e-mails, copies and pastes stuff between web pages and e-mails and word processor docs?

Could she listen to her music (on the iPad) while browsing or reading her e-mail?

Does a video resume where it stopped if you interrupt to check mail?

Would iPad allow reading of books from sources other than the Apple bookstore? Amazon? Project Gutenberg? Other?

- K
 
7) Lose the dock/keyboard accessory - the iPad supports bluetooth. Apple sells bluetooth keyboards. The camera accessory and the dock accessory are both so un-Apple-like - so is the cover - since when does Apple make accessories? I remember Palm Pilots having a similar keyboard dock - it was just lame. It feels like Apple is hedging that the on-screen keyboard wont work... let people buy a laptop if they want a real keyboard. Make a good enough synch system and nobody will need a keyboard.

I agreed with most of what you said, but not this one. I agree with the first half of the first sentence ("lose the dock/keyboard accessory"), but nothing past that.

1) From having used various devices in the last few years, virtual keyboards aren't good enough to typing fast in a meeting/class. You need a physical keyboard for that. Otherwise, you'll be struggling to keep up with the meeting/class.

2) Saying that people who want that should buy a laptop (or netbook) is asinine. You don't need a laptop nor netbook for that, you just need a physical keyboard. And having a built-in keyboard on a netbook is, in my experience, a waste of weight. The ONLY place it's useful is in a meeting/class. When you're on the go, it just gets in the way and makes the device awkward. The ideal form factor for netbook sized devices is: slate tablet, with the ability to use external keyboards. Laptops are dinosaur devices for dinosaur people (too big, too heavy, too expensive, etc.). Netbooks are just a smaller/cheaper version of that mindset. Mid-size tablets (with the option for external keyboards) are the right choice.

3) While bluetooth is nice, and should definitely be supported, it is "not good enough". There's battery issues, etc. The right answer, for me, is a folding USB keyboard. I bought one for use with my mobile devices, and it's perfect. It doesn't get in the way when I'm on the go (because it's in my gadget bag), and it gives me a FULL size keyboard when I'm in a meeting (unlike, say, the Apple BT Keyboard, which is not full size, nor is it as small as my USB keyboard when it's folded in half -- the Apple BT Keyboard is full-of-fail, if you want to use it as a mobile device keyboard).

4) the problem with the keyboard-dock is that it only allows you to use the built-in keyboard. It should let you use any keyboard you want, and just have a USB port on the front (and an Apple Display Port on the back). Then you can use it with a mobile USB keyboard, or with your desktop KVM switch, etc.

The iPad should have a keyboard-less dock with USB ports that support USB keyboards. I know that some of the attachments have USB capability (like the one in the camera kit), but ... it's not clear to me if the software on the device is capable of supporting the HID profile of USB (HID = Human Interface Device ... keyboards and mice/trackpads).

If the camera kit's USB adapter supports that, and there's a dock that has a USB-Host port (not just a USB-Client adapter for syncing with your Mac/PC), then great. But I haven't seen specs that say it, just comments speculating it.

Apple should ditch the keyboard-dock, and release a KVM-switch compatible dock (which can also be used as a replacement for the keyboard-dock, if you just hook up any available USB keyboard). They should also release a KVM-switch compatible cable/dongle, so that you can put power, display, and keyboard attachments on it, and put it into a landscape oriented stand (and thus do all of those same things in landscape orientation instead of portrait orientation).
 
Because it's made little difference so far eliminating Flash as far as I can tell.

Flash will never be eliminated.

But the future new cool web sites will notice that they will get 100's of millions more mobile users visiting if they don't use flash, and eventually most people will move on to these new cool site. Only aging stone-age throw-backs will continue to use crufty old legacy Flash-only sites (same as happened to usenet).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.