Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
With all due respect: Your needs are important to you, but I don't think they are to the mass market. Apple will cater to the mass market.

It is Beta vs VHS all over again. The "superior-quality experience" Beta lost to the "more-convenient, more flexible" VHS.

In 10 years, nobody will even remember what eInk was.

Sorry!

*

Steve, apology accepted. Oh wait, you're not Steve, so no need to apologize, and for your benefit (and others inclined to do the same thing), avoiding "Sorry!" is a good thing, since it comes across as, at the very least, disingenuous.

Moving on...

Well, here's the thing. If Jobs' intent is to "Redefine Print Media," as the title of this thread posits, wouldn't that include those who read for hours at a time?

Barnes and Noble DOES cater to the mass market ... as does the vast majority of mass printed media. This mass market, this billion+ dollar industry, consists of millions of people who read for hours at at time. Jobs will want to cater to the same mass market, as you suggest, but:

There's quite a difference between beta/vhs and e-ink/lcd.

Beta/vhs is about content delivery -- how something gets to the TV screen -- invisible to the consumer.

E-ink/lcd is not invisible -- rather than delivery of the media, it's about consumption of the media, and therefore much more apparent, and important, to the consumer.

You're right again, that 10 years from now, no one will remember e-ink -- it could very well be called something else -- or be a completely different, superior technology that accomplishes the same purpose -- and more.

Or, we might all still be talking about e-ink.

Just to clarify, I want an LCD screen as well. Of course Apple must deliver that. But at the same time, if the delivery is LCD only, or OLED only, Apple must be content with not being the e-reader device of choice for those that read for hours at a time, those people that are the mass market for an e-reading device. And let's not forget something very, very important -- even if you or Steve or anyone else said that those who read for hours at a time aren't and will never be mass market, think again -- with printed media dying, these people will be forced to the internet for the content they crave.

And there is no doubt that there will be technology for them as easy on the eyes, if not easier, than e-ink. There is simply way too much money to be made to ignore them (me).

Back-lit text is too hard on the eyes. I wonder if the reason so many people claim to have no difficulty reading on an iPhone is only because the screen itself is so tiny. Blow the same display to three or four times that size and see whether dissatisfaction rates rise proportionately.

No one regularly watches movies 6 inches from the tv screen, or movie theater screen, or, for that matter, their computer screen. Unless they're legally blind, or close to it.

It's simply too bright for comfort. And, reading is a much more thought-intensive, brain intensive task than looking at static pictures or moving pictures. It's a much easier process for the brain to look at a 6 slice toaster and register -- 6 slice toaster -- than it is for the brain to read the words and then imagine how the object must look.

Imagine trying to study for hours at a time. Imagine trying to go to law school, using an LCD display, and trying to spend hours upon hours at the library, using your "textbooks" to prepare for the next exam.

It's simply not feasible.

It's little details like this why technology like e-ink will be incredibly important to e-readers.

Whether or not Apple is able to resolve this problem right out of the box remains to be seen. I'm hoping for the best and preparing for the worst.
 
How are you going to convince Apple, where all their software wizards spend 10+ hours a day staring at their Mac/MacBook LCD displays?

Plus Apple's typical customer likely has too short an attention span to read a book for more than 15, 30 minutes at a time. Commercial breaks happen more often than that.



For all we know, more people read ebooks on Apple tablets than on e-ink devices. The Kindle app for iPhone is near the top of the popularity charts, and there's also Stanza and a bunch of Bible readers. That could be several million ebook readers running on Apple hardware.

1. There's a huge difference between programming/working at a computer and reading for pleasure. And I don't think there's an ergonomics expert that believes staring at a computer at hours at a time is good, or even neither good nor bad, for the eyes -- unless they're in the pocket of some big business.

When it comes to being an e-reader, the most successful device is going to allow for and facilitate complete immersion -- whether you're reading the latest biography of Andrew Jackson or the latest Stephen King, you still want immersion. People that read textbooks want immersion -- little to no distraction -- they want complete concentration on the subject at hand.

Squinting isn't good for that.

2. I would question your idea of Apple's "typical" customer. They seem quite educated, to me, and probably read quite a bit. But even if not, and especially if not, then Apple is most definitely looking to *redefine* their typical customer to include avid readers. I don't buy the argument that the average avid reader has such a short attention span. Of course, maybe I should. If average is only 15 or 30 minutes, then I must be incredibly above average -- very special, indeed. :cool:

Commercial breaks have nothing to do with reading. We're talking about reading, right?

3. The Kindle/Stanza apps are indeed very popular. But then, so were black and white television sets and transistor radios -- when there weren't any other choices available for the consumer.
 
If Jobs' intent is to "Redefine Print Media," as the title of this thread posits, wouldn't that include those who read for hours at a time?

Only if that turned out to be a majority of the potential market. But I would not be surprised if attention spans have been getting shorter and shorter in the general population, and that's one of the ways "print media" is getting redefined.

Used to be that good "travel media" was a faster horse.
 
I think doubling as an eBook reader is pretty much a MUST these days.
I would definitely buy a Tablet if it doubles as an eBook reader,
but only if it will also double as a notepad (for note taking), and have
a full computer OS (for Office documents). It doesn't have to have the
latest, greatest Mac OS, but it needs to have some type of Mac OS (kind of
the way the netbooks have XP)


Yeah, especially the report yesterday that rumored an iPhone OS in the Tablet! :mad:

.

I want something that you can take notes as well.

I have meetings and like to take notes on paper. Kind of old school but I don't have a laptop, just a desktop and if something like this was applied to a low-cost tablet, I might get one.

I don't really need a laptop. Too expensive and I don't see myself working on one since I do all my work at a desk or home office.

For instance, I can see myself writing notes on a tablet and it converts to text some how afterwards for managing my calendar, etc.

Other options for me would be, internet, email, calendar, and others of course.
 
My thought all along on this is that the Tablet will be the Ultimate E-Book.

I'd imagine that the introduction will go something like this...

10" tablet, with or without 3G, 802.11 n standard. Geared for students / avid readers. Book to be finger or stylus highlightable. "page folding", highlight / cut and paste / summary abilities from the get go.

All major text-book houses on board for launch. Purchase or rental available (Semester rental). Perfect for colleges... Huge list of colleges for initial program already ready to implement. High schools across the country ready to implement too.

One more thing... iPublisher. Professors, students, authors, poetry groups, etc... ready to work with iWork, MS Word, etc. Integrate graphics, photos, etc. Publish via iTunes store. Like podcasts, but for print media. Clubs, fan groups, class notes, etc... all instantly downloadable via wifi or 3g. Subscriptions available. Professional magazines already on board.

-Will revolutionize print media. All e-reader formats supported (including Amazon's Kindle media)... Amazon makes money off of books, we make it off of hardware.

In fact, I believe that is one of the primary goals of Apple's new tablet computer. And if you're connected via Wi-Fi, you can also watch live video from news content providers like CNN, MSNBC, Fox News Channel, BBC News, etc. The recently rolled-out iPhone/iPod Touch apps for CNN and ESPN Radio is a preview of what we'll see on the Apple tablet computer.
 
It's the same crazy notion of industry change. With ipods and itunes, they went to change the game of music. Today, we buy singles, online, for $1.29 with no DRM. Even 5 years ago, I'd say you were out of your mind to think that Apple would outsell Wal*Mart in music.

Then the iPhone. It's still years ahead of most phones, and while it's not doing any one thing that's all that unique, it has completely changed the mobile market from a smattering of smart phones to an expectation that your phone can use the internet reasonably. Remember number-key navigation? Yuck.

Now, I think it's all about being the book-reader's friend. It's an industry, and that's what Apple tackles. They are out to change print because they have a proven distribution method, ease of use, and the ability to sign large publishing houses, newspapers, and textbook makers based on the fact that those companies will finally have a distribution path.

The New York Times doesn't have a distribution path with the ability to reach as many readers as Apple. Think about that... thus, why not totally change the game in their favor? We own a Kindle, and it's a good device. Is it worth a damn when looking through the "store"? Hell no. And that is where everyone has missed, and Apple has gotten so right over the last 5 years.

It's not the e-ink. It's the ease that the device can ring up more sales after you own it. The iPod w/ iTunes is EASY to buy music, despite having so many "free" outlets. The iPhone is EASY to buy apps, despite having smartphones been around for so long, and now apple has over 90% rev of all mobile apps. Now, it's time for someone to make it EASY TO CONSUME PRINT MEDIA.

Thus, I'll be the first to present, the iBook.


Steve?! :eek::)
 

You have to remember that what Steve (actually) said is that "people don't read anymore" (which in itself is a bit disturbing, seeing as it is coming from one of the worlds most celebrated technologists).

Which should give some very interesting insights into any future Apple electronic reading devices.
 
Steve, apology accepted. Oh wait, you're not Steve, so no need to apologize, and for your benefit (and others inclined to do the same thing), avoiding "Sorry!" is a good thing, since it comes across as, at the very least, disingenuous.

You are correct, that was disingenuous. I apologize.

Moving on...

Well, here's the thing. If Jobs' intent is to "Redefine Print Media," as the title of this thread posits, wouldn't that include those who read for hours at a time?

Barnes and Noble DOES cater to the mass market ... as does the vast majority of mass printed media. This mass market, this billion+ dollar industry, consists of millions of people who read for hours at at time. Jobs will want to cater to the same mass market, as you suggest, but:

There's quite a difference between beta/vhs and e-ink/lcd.

Beta/vhs is about content delivery -- how something gets to the TV screen -- invisible to the consumer.

It was also about presentation. Beta had superior resolution in both video and sound. It certainly was visible to the consumer. VHS had inferior, but "good enough" A/V resolution but much longer recording/playing time-- long enough for most all movies.

And "good enough" presentation + convenience; won out over superior presentation.

The point I was trying to make, clumsily, is that the mass market is not homogeneous, many will trade quality for convenience.

If Apple uses E-Ink only in this device it will limit the marketplace to consumers with high-end reading needs (like yourself). The device would not be practical for use outside, video, surfing the web, etc.

If Apple uses LCD it will have a market that satisfies many reading needs as well as a much larger market of casual computer needs (surfing, email, A/V consumption, etc.),

If Apple uses both E-Ink and LCD, it will, likely, price the device out of the range of both markets.


E-ink/lcd is not invisible -- rather than delivery of the media, it's about consumption of the media, and therefore much more apparent, and important, to the consumer.

You're right again, that 10 years from now, no one will remember e-ink -- it could very well be called something else -- or be a completely different, superior technology that accomplishes the same purpose -- and more.

Or, we might all still be talking about e-ink.

Just to clarify, I want an LCD screen as well. Of course Apple must deliver that. But at the same time, if the delivery is LCD only, or OLED only, Apple must be content with not being the e-reader device of choice for those that read for hours at a time, those people that are the mass market for an e-reading device.

I read for hours at a time: books and digital content. I don't believe that I spend 60-minutes of every hour staring at the letters on the page. Sometimes, I pause, look away, and let my mind digest what I have just read. Other times, I see something that piques my interest, and will annotate that, or suspend reading, while I research the item by searching the current document, another document, or the web. Usually, I open another window so I don't lose my place in the original document. So, for me, an hour of reading includes lots of breaks from ingesting words from the printed (displayed) page.

Also, I like to read in bed, at night. Even a small screen like the iPhone gives a better experience than fumbling with a book light, or turning on room lights/lamps and disturbing your partner.

An LCD screen performs acceptably, for both types of reading.


And let's not forget something very, very important -- even if you or Steve or anyone else said that those who read for hours at a time aren't and will never be mass market, think again -- with printed media dying, these people will be forced to the internet for the content they crave.

That is another issue.

And there is no doubt that there will be technology for them as easy on the eyes, if not easier, than e-ink. There is simply way too much money to be made to ignore them (me).

Back-lit text is too hard on the eyes. I wonder if the reason so many people claim to have no difficulty reading on an iPhone is only because the screen itself is so tiny. Blow the same display to three or four times that size and see whether dissatisfaction rates rise proportionately.

No one regularly watches movies 6 inches from the tv screen, or movie theater screen, or, for that matter, their computer screen. Unless they're legally blind, or close to it.

It's simply too bright for comfort. And, reading is a much more thought-intensive, brain intensive task than looking at static pictures or moving pictures. It's a much easier process for the brain to look at a 6 slice toaster and register -- 6 slice toaster -- than it is for the brain to read the words and then imagine how the object must look.

Imagine trying to study for hours at a time. Imagine trying to go to law school, using an LCD display, and trying to spend hours upon hours at the library, using your "textbooks" to prepare for the next exam.

It's simply not feasible.

I have to challenge you here.

In my days at IBM I did a lot of reading and researching technology information. This was, likely, as difficult to navigate and absorb as the law and case precedents.

The hitch was, that most of the information was on microfiche (cards containing microfilm slides).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Microfiche_card.JPG

What you would do is find the card with the desired document pages, insert it into a film reader, put your eyes up to the machine's eyepiece (like scuba goggles) and turn knobs to scroll vertically and horizontally to the desired page. When you found the page, you were presented with blurry white letters on a blurry black background with lots of artifacts. It was like an XRay or a poor-quality film negative.

You could print (make an photographic copy of) a page but that took time, so you often just wrote notes on a notepad. You would then repeat the process with other microfiche cards until you had gathered all the information you needed.

Was it tedious and eye-straining? Certainly!

Was it feasible? Yes... because that's where the content was-- there was no alternative.

I managed to survive this period of my IBM career, with promotions.

I suspect that today's law student will avail himself of the best tools at his disposal to get the job done.

If one of those tools is LCD (because that's where the content is), then he will, likely, use LCD.

Is it optimal? No!

Is it feasible... It better be or we are in danger of running out of lawyers :D





It's little details like this why technology like e-ink will be incredibly important to e-readers.

Whether or not Apple is able to resolve this problem right out of the box remains to be seen. I'm hoping for the best and preparing for the worst.
 
Your current apps won't be very usable on a device which is not sitting on a table/lap and also without a keyboard and mouse.

Try it. Load a VNC or Remote Desktop app on your iPhone, connect to your Mac/PC, and see how many hours of work you can get done with your current desktop apps just from the iPhone.

Since I have a Windows Mobile phone with a slide-out keyboard and stylus, using RDP to connect to the system is not nearly as bad as trying to use an Iphone. ;)
 
Since I have a Windows Mobile phone with a slide-out keyboard and stylus, using RDP to connect to the system is not nearly as bad as trying to use an Iphone. ;)

The reality is that it's a very small number of people who require full desktop like access from a pocket device.

From a tablet there will be higher expectations.
 
the untapped market

cough cough.
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/8171841/

Gizmodo stole my ideas ;)

But seriously, print media is definitely the untapped market that I thought was a strong possibility for this baby. Apple also have the distribution vehicle sorted, and have all the necessary tech to make this work really well.

I'm excited about this one, this could be an absolute killer device. Will be interesting to see what sort of resolution the screen will be.
 
firewood said:
Your current apps won't be very usable on a device which is not sitting on a table/lap and also without a keyboard and mouse.

Try it. Load a VNC or Remote Desktop app on your iPhone, connect to your Mac/PC, and see how many hours of work you can get done with your current desktop apps just from the iPhone.


Since I have a Windows Mobile phone with a slide-out keyboard and stylus, using RDP to connect to the system is not nearly as bad as trying to use an Iphone. ;)

I have an iPhone 3GS and a home-made stylus. The latest iPhone OS allows you to double-tap 3 fingers and get into a super-zoom mode.

But even with this, some apps just don't work.

The apps I have the biggest investment in are FCS, Photoshop and AV related plugins. It would be ideal to use these for tweaks to existing content (created on a more powerful machine). But it just doesn't work.

Here's a scenario. On my main computer I have created a Photoshop or Pages image that consists of a cutout (bezier shape) of a single soccer player. I copy this to a clear layer on top of the original image. Then I blur the bottom image and the player stands out,

Later, out at the team party, I notice that I incorrectly drew part of the cutout, cropping the players arm. I want to correct this with my multitouch Tablet. I need to add 10, or so, bezier points to correct the image.

If the Tablet can run the original app (Photoshop or Pages), I would use that.

If not, I connect to my home computer using VNC.

In either case, the app is unworkable. Why?

Because the app is designed to use the mouse in combination with multiple, concurrent, key presses to determine the action to take on a specific bezier point. (select a point, add a point, delete a point, change point type, move the point).

Zooming, panning and a stylus, to a large extent, mitigate the problem that the points are very small... but how do you manipulate the cursor and the keys at the same time?

The interface was designed for concurrent use of a mouse (or graphics tablet) and the keyboard.

Most of the AV software packages use similar interfaces.

So, unless the software developer (Adobe, Apple) changes the UI, [parts of] the application are unusable on a multitouch device.

Now, recognizing this, Apple could make the Tablet UI configurable so that a combination of touches could be used to generate the key/cursor combination that the app expects. That would work.

But, it is thinking inside the box. Say, I want to do a free transform on a shape... I could do it the way it is currently done, dragging little handles one at a time...

But I have MultiTouch... why not just drag the edges with both hands.

At some point in the near future, some developer (Adobe, Apple, Autodesk) will create a Photoshop equivalent that will exploit MultiTouch. Then, everything we do today will seem dated, tedious and unproductive.

That's what I want on a Touch device!

*
 
Of course an Apple tablet would be a perfect platform for eBooks and print media. I’ve held off buying a Kindle because it seemed obvious that Apple would move in this direction. With iTunes you already get music, TV, movies, and games – books and print media was the only thing missing.

The iPhone OS seems an obvious choice too. Why reinvent the wheel when you already have perfected a touch sensitive OS?

The thing is, Apple has had the technology to produce this tablet for several years now – and the public has been begging for a tablet since before the iPhone. Why has Apple waited so long to produce this device? I guess some would argue that the tablet would eat into the iPhone and iPod Touch sales – and of course it would take some time to acquire deals with publishers; but I think there is more to it than that. I believe that Apple will be releasing a suite of cloud computing programs along side the tablet. This will give the device the abilities and full computing power that many want from the Leopard OS but keep the lower spec requirements and lower power consumption of the iPhone OS.
 
You are correct, that was disingenuous. I apologize.

It was also about presentation. Beta had superior resolution in both video and sound. It certainly was visible to the consumer. VHS had inferior, but "good enough" A/V resolution but much longer recording/playing time-- long enough for most all movies.

And "good enough" presentation + convenience; won out over superior presentation.

The point I was trying to make, clumsily, is that the mass market is not homogeneous, many will trade quality for convenience.

If Apple uses E-Ink only in this device it will limit the marketplace to consumers with high-end reading needs (like yourself). The device would not be practical for use outside, video, surfing the web, etc.

If Apple uses LCD it will have a market that satisfies many reading needs as well as a much larger market of casual computer needs (surfing, email, A/V consumption, etc.),

If Apple uses both E-Ink and LCD, it will, likely, price the device out of the range of both markets.

I read for hours at a time: books and digital content. I don't believe that I spend 60-minutes of every hour staring at the letters on the page. Sometimes, I pause, look away, and let my mind digest what I have just read. Other times, I see something that piques my interest, and will annotate that, or suspend reading, while I research the item by searching the current document, another document, or the web. Usually, I open another window so I don't lose my place in the original document. So, for me, an hour of reading includes lots of breaks from ingesting words from the printed (displayed) page.

Also, I like to read in bed, at night. Even a small screen like the iPhone gives a better experience than fumbling with a book light, or turning on room lights/lamps and disturbing your partner.

An LCD screen performs acceptably, for both types of reading.

That is another issue.

I have to challenge you here.

In my days at IBM I did a lot of reading and researching technology information. This was, likely, as difficult to navigate and absorb as the law and case precedents.

The hitch was, that most of the information was on microfiche (cards containing microfilm slides).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Microfiche_card.JPG

What you would do is find the card with the desired document pages, insert it into a film reader, put your eyes up to the machine's eyepiece (like scuba goggles) and turn knobs to scroll vertically and horizontally to the desired page. When you found the page, you were presented with blurry white letters on a blurry black background with lots of artifacts. It was like an XRay or a poor-quality film negative.

You could print (make an photographic copy of) a page but that took time, so you often just wrote notes on a notepad. You would then repeat the process with other microfiche cards until you had gathered all the information you needed.

Was it tedious and eye-straining? Certainly!

Was it feasible? Yes... because that's where the content was-- there was no alternative.

I managed to survive this period of my IBM career, with promotions.

I suspect that today's law student will avail himself of the best tools at his disposal to get the job done.

If one of those tools is LCD (because that's where the content is), then he will, likely, use LCD.

Is it optimal? No!

Is it feasible... It better be or we are in danger of running out of lawyers :D

Thanks for the clarification regarding the Beta/VHS differences. I had not realized that Beta was noticeably better to the naked eye. And I agree with you that many times convenience does win out over quality -- that’s why we seem to have so many more “convenience” stores that price their items two or three times higher than regular grocery stores -- and get away with it.

I guess I would still argue that reading on LCD, versus something that isn’t back-lit, simply is not convenient, and indeed, causes fatigue.

I think what we’re arguing here isn’t whether or not a better technology will be implemented to resolve this issue -- I think we can both safely agree on that -- but rather, we’re arguing whether or not LCD is merely good enough for the mass market to the extent that people will begin to move to digital print in market-changing numbers.

I hate to say it, but LCD probably will be good enough. I actually agree with your observations reading the marketplace -- its multi-function capabilities will soften the blow of a less than ideal reading screen.

It will be interesting to see how Bezos counters with the Kindle -- assuming he doesn’t decide to bow out gracefully.

Still, we’re not touching on proprietary file formats, Amazon’s controversies, and how accepting the public will be to digital media if the content they’re permitted to purchase remains locked to only one kind of reading device.

I read another post, a bit later on, talking about the reasons for Apple to introduce the tablet now, and offered that the advantages of cloud computing may be a big reason. I’d argue that maybe, simply, print media may be wiling to make concessions more quickly, earlier, than those foolish, stubborn and greedy music media conglomerates.

It would be nice if that were the reason.

It would be nice to see DRM-free, or something close to it, that allows for reading on multiple devices, right out of the box.

One can hope.

I wonder how the cloud might (or even if it could) change the DRM debate. If everything is in the cloud, would publishers have an easier time allowing their content to be read on open formats? The learning curve is steep. Needs a bit of imagination to fully understand, and I sure don’t, yet.

BTW, I’m old enough to remember and use microfiche -- although it was on its way out during my college years (early 90s).

You say that today’s law student will get the job done. I argue that, while with microfiche there was no alternative, as you say (the original documents they pictured were not also available in the library), books will still be available for a long time to come.

And the more that I think about it, the less likely I believe this tablet will help the serious research student (or even undergraduate). How man times did I have books spread across a large library table? Too many times to count.

That was the best way to keep useful information immediately accessible. How will students adapt to just one (or even two) tablets, when a dozen books at a time are needed? Will true functionality be there, in the tablet, right out of the box, to easily, conveniently manage a dozen books? Will it still be too cumbersome?

Will students want to haul around multiple tablets?

Interesting to think about.

Eh, not really such an important debate at the moment. The goal right now is to get this device in the grubby little hands of everyone, not just academics -- the college market will, ultimately, be a secondary priority.

Thanks for the food for thought.
 
....Because the app is designed to use the mouse in combination with multiple, concurrent, key presses to determine the action to take on a specific bezier point. (select a point, add a point, delete a point, change point type, move the point).

Zooming, panning and a stylus, to a large extent, mitigate the problem that the points are very small... but how do you manipulate the cursor and the keys at the same time?

The interface was designed for concurrent use of a mouse (or graphics tablet) and the keyboard.

Most of the AV software packages use similar interfaces.

So, unless the software developer (Adobe, Apple) changes the UI, [parts of] the application are unusable on a multitouch device.

Now, recognizing this, Apple could make the Tablet UI configurable so that a combination of touches could be used to generate the key/cursor combination that the app expects. That would work.

But, it is thinking inside the box. Say, I want to do a free transform on a shape... I could do it the way it is currently done, dragging little handles one at a time...

But I have MultiTouch... why not just drag the edges with both hands.

At some point in the near future, some developer (Adobe, Apple, Autodesk) will create a Photoshop equivalent that will exploit MultiTouch. Then, everything we do today will seem dated, tedious and unproductive.

That's what I want on a Touch device!

*
Regarding how easy and intuitive it is to cut-and-paste on the iPhone, (more so than on any existing desktop OS) I can only imagine that other software companies will soon be innovating MultiTouch

solutions as well. Jaadu VNC works surprisingly well on the iPhone, in regard to responsiveness, great zoom capabilities, and keyboard command facility. I'll gladly pay the extra cash (which will likely amount to

less than upgrade charges for most desktop apps) for a new set of MultiTouch apps for an upcoming tablet.
 
This new tablet will redefine the industry like the iphone did. Look at the phone market now.. many companies have followed in the iphone path, some even surpassing the iphone.
I think you'll see apple lead once again and other companies will swoop in and add their contribution and a few will take it beyond apple's vision to a whole new level.
 
I hate to say it, but LCD probably will be good enough. I actually agree with your observations reading the marketplace -- its multi-function capabilities will soften the blow of a less than ideal reading screen.

It will be interesting to see how Bezos counters with the Kindle -- assuming he doesn’t decide to bow out gracefully.

I may be wrong here, but as I understand it Bezos (Amazon) makes its money on the content, the eBooks. The kindle was just a way to deliver the content. The free iPhone Kindle app from Amazon allows you to sample/buy/read Kindle books on the iPhone.

Still, we’re not touching on proprietary file formats, Amazon’s controversies, and how accepting the public will be to digital media if the content they’re permitted to purchase remains locked to only one kind of reading device.

I just purchased a Kindle book for my iPhone, on my iPhone. I buy the Kindle book through Amazon (not iTunes) and the content is downloaded to the iPhone.

It appears that I can read the single-copy on several iPhones. This is similar to the way the iTunes app store handles a single-copy app purchase-- it can run on multiple iPhones (maximum of 5, I think). Also purchased music and videos can run on multiple iPhones.

However, there doesn't appear to be a Kindle reader for Mac or Windows, so the Kindle books will only work on iPhones and iPod Touches (and, assumably the coming Tablet). I don't have a Kindle device, so I don't know if a single-copy Kindle book is portable across the iPhone and Kindle platforms. If you have a Kindle and an iPhone, you might give it a try.


I read another post, a bit later on, talking about the reasons for Apple to introduce the tablet now, and offered that the advantages of cloud computing may be a big reason. I’d argue that maybe, simply, print media may be wiling to make concessions more quickly, earlier, than those foolish, stubborn and greedy music media conglomerates.

It would be nice if that were the reason.

It would be nice to see DRM-free, or something close to it, that allows for reading on multiple devices, right out of the box.

One can hope.

Based on my experience, above, we may be close.

I wonder how the cloud might (or even if it could) change the DRM debate. If everything is in the cloud, would publishers have an easier time allowing their content to be read on open formats? The learning curve is steep. Needs a bit of imagination to fully understand, and I sure don’t, yet.

BTW, I’m old enough to remember and use microfiche -- although it was on its way out during my college years (early 90s).

You say that today’s law student will get the job done. I argue that, while with microfiche there was no alternative, as you say (the original documents they pictured were not also available in the library), books will still be available for a long time to come.

And the more that I think about it, the less likely I believe this tablet will help the serious research student (or even undergraduate). How man times did I have books spread across a large library table? Too many times to count.

Yes, books will be around for quite a while. But, as now, they will be instantly out of date. I too, remember having technical manuals spread across a library table or the living room floor :) Electronic media can mitigate some of that because it can be:

1) up to date
2) cross-referenced with links that allow you to drill-down across multiple documents.

When at my computer, I handle the need by opening multiple windows, then multiple displays on a single computer, then multiple side-by-side computers (there is software that allows you to control multiple Macs with a single kb & mouse and move information between them). If that doesn't get the job done, I can share screens of multiple Macs (we have 7 in our house).

Now, back to the Tablet. If Apple is smart, they will offer the Tablet as not only a stand-alone device, rather a device that can be used with other devices (other Tablets, Computers, iPhones). And the Tablet can act as a peripheral to the other devices, and vice versa,

That was the best way to keep useful information immediately accessible. How will students adapt to just one (or even two) tablets, when a dozen books at a time are needed? Will true functionality be there, in the tablet, right out of the box, to easily, conveniently manage a dozen books? Will it still be too cumbersome?

Will students want to haul around multiple tablets?

Interesting to think about.

Lets assume because of: up-to-date media and drill-down across multiple cross-linked documents, you can replace 10 hard-copy books with 3 electronic tablets.

In the library, you could check out tablets, the way you currently check out books. In the Dorm, or at home, you could borrow tablets from others for an intense research session.

Now, this is totally off the wall (well, maybe it's on the wall):

I would like to see the tablets have the surface be totally display area with a very thin, uniform, bezel (say 1/8") around the edge. This would allow multiple tablets to be arranged, contiguously in a matrix, say 4 x 6, 10" tablets. These could be laid on a table (horizontally) or mounted on a wall (vertically). Apple already has software that allows you to control these as 24 individual displays, 1 big display, or any combination in between. Horizontally, we have a MultiTouch light table... Vertically we have a video wall.

So, after you've done all your research, stored your results on your tablet, made it into a Keynote preso with a few videos.... You take your Tablet to the well, conference room, board room, whatever. You start your preso app on your Tablet and it appears on the video Wall(s) spread around the room. All controlled by your hinky-dinky little tablet.


Eh, not really such an important debate at the moment. The goal right now is to get this device in the grubby little hands of everyone, not just academics -- the college market will, ultimately, be a secondary priority.

Thanks for the food for thought.
 
As medical student, this could be hugely useful to me both during and after training. Imagine being able to pull up patient records on a tablet like this.. wow.
 
This new tablet will redefine the industry like the iphone did. Look at the phone market now.. many companies have followed in the iphone path, some even surpassing the iphone.
I think you'll see apple lead once again and other companies will swoop in and add their contribution and a few will take it beyond apple's vision to a whole new level.

Though arguably Microsoft is working on a better tablet right now. And they have shown everyone exactly what they are working on whereas with apple all we know is its been discussed.

I could see Microsoft having the better tablet, but because its Apple, they'll get the money.
 
Though arguably Microsoft is working on a better tablet right now.
And they have shown everyone exactly what they are working on whereas with apple all we know is its been discussed.

I could see Microsoft having the better tablet, but because its Apple, they'll get the money.

There's something mind-feckingly wrong with this post.
 
Though arguably Microsoft is working on a better tablet right now. And they have shown everyone exactly what they are working on whereas with apple all we know is its been discussed.

I could see Microsoft having the better tablet, but because its Apple, they'll get the money.

This would be funny, if it didn't explain why Microsoft makes so much money - people gullible enough to believe anything Microsoft says.

  • It's not very good now, but the next version will be better.
  • If you think your iPhone is great, wait 'till you see Windows Mobile.
  • We've got a two screen tablet, look, here's an animation.
Microsoft have been actually producing (as opposed to concept animations) a tablet OS for 10 years and it sucks so badly that nobody buys it. Even the Surface (big-arse table), which Mac users actually like, won't boot unless you connect a keyboard and mouse (sigh). Microsoft is full of great ideas, they just have no clue how to put them together into something that actually works.

And sadly, a lot of people (90% ?), time and time again (no matter how badly they are let down), would still rather pay $100 less for something that doesn't work, than pay $100 more for something that does.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.