Makes Snow Leopard look slightly dated and a bit dull in comparison, although a rumoured UI change as been on the cards for a while now. Don't get me wrong the Mac OS is cool, but I would like to see some of that new candy in OS 10.7. What they have done with iWork and everyday Mac apps like address book and calendars is beautiful.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hands-On Impressions of Apple's New iPad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I hope some of those UI tweaks make it to the iphone in the future, such as the photo navigation and desktop backgrounds.
I can't believe there isn't multitasking though. Yeah I suppose you can defend the lack of multitasking on the iPhone (though I disagree), but it's ridiculous to not have it on a tablet device.
I suppose they might add it in 4.0 but why even bother showing it with 3.2 if 4.0 is so close and is adding those critical features? Perhaps this is a sign that the iPhone/iPad isn't getting multitasking any time soon.
I can't believe there isn't multitasking though. Yeah I suppose you can defend the lack of multitasking on the iPhone (though I disagree), but it's ridiculous to not have it on a tablet device.
I suppose they might add it in 4.0 but why even bother showing it with 3.2 if 4.0 is so close and is adding those critical features? Perhaps this is a sign that the iPhone/iPad isn't getting multitasking any time soon.
What are you talking about with tablet makers? Apple didn't exactly make a tablet, they built a hybrid between an iPhone and an underpowered tablet. Most tablets have much more functionality than the iPad, so essentially what you are saying is that added functionality leads to a bad product? I don't think so..
Apple has done a few things right with this by creating something that is sexy, thin, and light but it lacks in the functionality that many other tablet makers allow. There is no ability to run background apps, you cant use a stylus to write notes(students), and you are limited to apps just from the app store. Oh, and as a side note; not everyone is giving it "rave" reviews. So far from what I have read, the reviews are pretty neutral (engadget, techcrunch, and gizmodo). I also feel like a lot of people/bloggers/nerds/tech-savy people are asking the same question. "Why do we need this?"
at the end of the day though, I will probably end up buying one to put on my nightstand, and chances are it will never leave it.
I guess I still haven't made up my mind about this.
So if this uses an Apple proprietary chip, what does this mean for all my native Mac apps? Will they still run?
Also, no flash + integrated graphics = failure for any type of presentation or demos. Keeping my Macbook Pro.
Also, no flash + integrated graphics = failure for any type of presentation or demos. Keeping my Macbook Pro.
Sound Familiar?
I know there are ravening hordes who hate the name iPad but what first came to my mind was the PADD from Star Trek. I cannot help but think that there were more than a few people at Apple who thought the same way and who were possibly inspired by it
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/PADD
I know there are ravening hordes who hate the name iPad but what first came to my mind was the PADD from Star Trek. I cannot help but think that there were more than a few people at Apple who thought the same way and who were possibly inspired by it
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/PADD
Well at this point it's not for me, but the best thing is that with every update it will improve. It's like iPhone OS 1.0, look where it's now. The same will be with iPad.
Interesting, but I will pass for now.
No camera, no flash, an iPod Touch on steroids, Even the 3g functionality is data only (according to the spec sheet).
I could live with some of these, but I really wanted a full OS X not a portable OS X Still the price is good, and the new iWorks apps look excellent.
O well.....
No camera, no flash, an iPod Touch on steroids, Even the 3g functionality is data only (according to the spec sheet).
I could live with some of these, but I really wanted a full OS X not a portable OS X
Still the price is good, and the new iWorks apps look excellent.O well.....
Wow, Engadget says its running OS 3.2 -- if that's true then why is everyone complaining about no multitasking, that wouldn't come until 4.0, right?
Edit: Maybe we will get some clues from those downloading the SDK.
Edit: Maybe we will get some clues from those downloading the SDK.
After looking at more of the hands on pics, it's looks like the large bezel is there so you don't activate the touch functions merely by gripping it.
Screw Flash. It needs to be purged from the Web. No single vendor should have a proprietary lock on any aspect of the Web. Period.
As for multitasking, I suspect this is an iPhone 4.0 feature that will also carry over to the iPad, and will be covered in a separate event. Hopefully soon. Note to Apple: Android isn't sitting still, and MS should have its iPhone OS clone ready for show soon too - time to jump to the next level.
As for multitasking, I suspect this is an iPhone 4.0 feature that will also carry over to the iPad, and will be covered in a separate event. Hopefully soon. Note to Apple: Android isn't sitting still, and MS should have its iPhone OS clone ready for show soon too - time to jump to the next level.
Wonder how soon until the iPad lands on about.com's list of failed Apple products?
http://weirdnews.about.com/b/2010/0...tablet-the-next-iphone-or-a-big-tech-flop.htm
http://weirdnews.about.com/b/2010/0...tablet-the-next-iphone-or-a-big-tech-flop.htm
Nice 1st gen product with good pricing.
On the hardware side, I would love a camera too but we don't have that (yet) with the iPhone either. I think once one gets it, they both do.
On the software side, I would love background apps. Like the camera, only a matter of time.
Going back to the beginning of the presentation, I find it interesting that Apple defined themselves as a mobile (computing) company. While of course that's a huge part of their business, it short changes all the iMac, MacPro, Mac Mini and AppleTV owners. I hope 2010 has good things in store for that side of the house too.
On the hardware side, I would love a camera too but we don't have that (yet) with the iPhone either. I think once one gets it, they both do.
On the software side, I would love background apps. Like the camera, only a matter of time.
Going back to the beginning of the presentation, I find it interesting that Apple defined themselves as a mobile (computing) company. While of course that's a huge part of their business, it short changes all the iMac, MacPro, Mac Mini and AppleTV owners. I hope 2010 has good things in store for that side of the house too.
Laugh. Please do. Because in a year's time counting from April 2010, things will look much, much different, in an Apple-like, everyone-has-an-iPad/wants-an-iPad kinda way.
And you know this is *exactly* what will happen.
It feels to me like Apple is milking the cow here (iPhone success).
Trying to think if iPad fits for the average computer user and that's because of its price at $499.
As a "desktop" computer though it seems crippled (needs a host, no multitasking, no camera, limited hd)
It's rather exciting though to look at the iPad OS as the base for the next MacOS of multitouch Macs.
If the iPad comes in 2 months time, does this mean that we don't get multitasking and front face camera anytime soon for the iPhone? :/
Trying to think if iPad fits for the average computer user and that's because of its price at $499.
As a "desktop" computer though it seems crippled (needs a host, no multitasking, no camera, limited hd)
It's rather exciting though to look at the iPad OS as the base for the next MacOS of multitouch Macs.
If the iPad comes in 2 months time, does this mean that we don't get multitasking and front face camera anytime soon for the iPhone? :/
See the blatant similarity between the iPad and the iPhone was a huge mistake by Apple today (in my eyes). The device looks amazing, has great specs (except for the lack of camera), and is priced fairly right. However, the software looks like a desktop running the iPhone OS. The small clock on the locked screen looks pathetic along with the little unlock slider. The app icons on the desktop and dock look just as bad, like they weren't made to run on the device. I think they should have changed the OS to be slightly different at least. A new home screen, bigger/scalable icons, and the ability to put more than 4 apps in the dock would've gone a long way to avoid all of the "bloated iPhone" talk.
Bottom line is that (IMO) the iPad just looks unfinished and unpolished.
It's a shame the screen resolution is so low - 1024x768? If I'm going to be viewing my high definition images I'd like it to be on a screen that has a higher resolution than circa 1999 monitors.
I'll not even mention the lack of:
(apart from just then).
I mean, really, any of the above appear regularly on the latest two-bit shiny-shiny from China. It's not such a stretch for Apple to take the hit of a few dollars in profit to provide them to their consumers is it?
I'll not even mention the lack of:
camera(s)
HD/HDMI output
flash (it's a key part of many websites folks, and will be around for a long time)
USB
Multitasking
(apart from just then).
I mean, really, any of the above appear regularly on the latest two-bit shiny-shiny from China. It's not such a stretch for Apple to take the hit of a few dollars in profit to provide them to their consumers is it?