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.
iPad App Highlights: Air Display, CoPilot Live HD, and BeejiveIM
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes. The Air Display is a great. I was blown away at the usefulness of the app. $9.99. What a deal.
CoPilot Live, but not well, in San Diego
CoPilot is fine looking program, and I wish that I could rely on it. However, its maps for San Diego, CA, are woefully poor. The first direction it gave me was to turn onto a non-existent street extension and thus off a cliff and into a canyon. Other times it has provided incorrect street names, advised wrong turns onto one-way streets, given routes that unnecessarily divert and then loop back, and more. They say they'll correct whatever errors they are notified of, but there are so many that they obviously need a new base of maps for this area.
CoPilot is fine looking program, and I wish that I could rely on it. However, its maps for San Diego, CA, are woefully poor. The first direction it gave me was to turn onto a non-existent street extension and thus off a cliff and into a canyon. Other times it has provided incorrect street names, advised wrong turns onto one-way streets, given routes that unnecessarily divert and then loop back, and more. They say they'll correct whatever errors they are notified of, but there are so many that they obviously need a new base of maps for this area.
Of course you can. You don't need Internet access; you just need Wifi. I haven't seen a Mac portable without Wifi since the G3 days. Certainly every single Intel MacBook has everything it needs.
No GPS in the Wi-Fi model? What? You mean Apple PURPOSELY limited and screwed over their user base to try and force sales of the more expensive model? Really? I'm flabbergasted! 
I sure do love my camera in my iPod Touch...oh wait.
I sure do love my camera in my iPod Touch...oh wait.
Airdisplay looks real cool. Two problems for me:
1. I use a PC
2. I don't use Wifi at work or at home, my PC is hard wired to the network.
I hope Apple allows them to make use of the USB, then we can plug the ipad into the Dock and use this app rather then dealing with Wifi! And of course, hurry up and come out with a PC version of the app!
1. I use a PC
2. I don't use Wifi at work or at home, my PC is hard wired to the network.
I hope Apple allows them to make use of the USB, then we can plug the ipad into the Dock and use this app rather then dealing with Wifi! And of course, hurry up and come out with a PC version of the app!
No GPS in the Wi-Fi model? What? You mean Apple PURPOSELY limited and screwed over their user base to try and force sales of the more expensive model? Really? I'm flabbergasted!
I sure do love my camera in my iPod Touch...oh wait.
The GPS chip and the 3G chip is one and the same. This isn't Apple trying to rip you off. Would you prefer Apple to try to find a manufacturer that doesnt build a GPS chip into the 3G chip just so poor you don't feel ripped off? Educate yourself before a troll attempt. Leads to better trolls.
Finally got around to watching the video. Looks really impressive. Certainly the first app I'll be buying if I buy an iPad.
(Must resist urge to buy iPad.)
This would be great with that Apple Patent, a short while ago, for location based apps. Have it installed on your computer so when a iPad is in your wi-fi network it sees the apps. imagine a meeting version that allows a shared screen.
Apple should buy these guys out build this sort of thing in to OS 5 just wait a few months. I could imagine some really great desktop/pad crossover apps if iPad apps had an API to claim a small piece of screen real estate, plus well processor sharing as well, on my main machine then use multi tasking to switch between them.
Like a 3D rendering program control and navigation on the Pad rendering engine on the Mac or many Macs.
Oops sorry for getting carried away.
I'd rather have my X-rays read on a real computer, simply because it proves to me that my doctor isn't such an idiot that he the best OS he can figure out is a phone OS. But that's besides the point.
Yes, let's all take notes on the virtual keyboard of an iPad. That'll be fast. Get me a laptop any day.
I have a netbook. Big and mobile. I know there isn't a situation I will ever encounter that I won't be able to take care of either because of my USB port, Flash, multitasking, etc. (these are three things I need to see in an iPad before I even consider one).
I've tried iPads in the Apple store various times, trying my best to have an open mind each time, and each time I was severely unimpressed. In a device that I'm going to need a separate carrying case for (since my pockets obviously won't cut it), I need to have more features than my portable device has, or else there's no sense in making that backwards leap in portability. I've looked as hard as I can, and I'm not seeing any new features whatsoever, just retooled apps that require literally one less tap to complete a function (look at the Mail app, for example. On the iPhone, you would go into a message, read it, hit the back button, and tap on the next message. On the iPad, you go into a message (assuming you don't want to read the first message), read it, and tap on the next message in the sidebar. Basically, you're saving yourself the pain, effort and terror of having to hit the "back" button. Woohoo).
Why do I need to base my purchasing decisions off everybody else? I was probably the last person in the world to not have an iPod, because I would always buy something better. I still don't have a FaceBook account because there's no value in one for me. I didn't have Google Talk set up until four years ago because email did what I needed. And on the flipside, I have a Mac because it's better. I prefer Audi because it's better (just a matter of actually being able to afford one...). And I have a netbook because it's better. The point is, whenever I need something I typically do not like to settle for anything less than the best of what suits my needs, no matter what other people buy. In some ways, I'm still kicking myself for buying an iPod, because by going iPod I lost DVR capability, video input, storage space, removable battery, screen real-estate, etc., and to top it off I'm now locked into the Apple ecosystem, meaning I'll likely be buying iPods until I die. But I digress.
Well, would you consider a 15" TV and a 46" TV "similar items?" I would. What added functionality do you get out of the 46" TV that you don't get on the 15"?
Doctors have been dying for electronic charts for ages. Many of them tried tablet PCs but found them too heavy and awkward. You're talking about the display and navigation of information. The underlying OS couldn't possibly matter less.
Your beginning with an off-base and unfunny jab doesn't bode well for the rest of your comment.
For quick notes, it will be. Compared to cracking open a netbook and balancing it on one hand while typing with the other, it's much faster and easier. I can't imagine a meeting and presentation requiring lengthy note-taking, but you could always use a keyboard if that were the case.
Genuinely curious what your "need" for Flash is.
Okay. So an iPad's not for you. That doesn't in any way invalidate the millions of people who are impressed.
Why?
As a loyal Audi customer, I submit to you this question: why? Does a cheaper car not do the same job? At the same time, isn't an A6 just a bigger A4? Why would anyone want an A6?
I can't speak for the person you asked, but yes, I do consider televisions to be similar items to each other. I consider compact sedans to be very similar to full-size sedans, and 13" notebooks to be similar to 17" notebooks. That doesn't mean there aren't important differences.
A 46" TV and a 15" TV have completely different use scenarios, and the larger screen enables a great deal that while technically possible on the small one, is not practical. For example, high definition (worthless on a 15" screen at more than 24") and navigable application user interfaces (non-giant text is illegible on small screens at living room distances).
A larger, higher-resolution screen displays offer greater possibilities. You can do everything on a 13" notebook display that you can on a 30" Cinema Display, but that doesn't mean there's not a reason to go bigger. One very simple thing you can do on a tablet that you can't on a smartphone is display a whole page of text legibly. That in itself is immensely valuable.
Yeah, I'm a 65816 level member "troll". Maybe you should educate yourself on WTF an OPINON is and learn that not everone's opinion will agree with your own. Apple could easily include a GPS chip in both the Touch and iPad if they so chose. Not every GPS chip is a 3G chip, after all. I suppose you'll tell me next that the missing camera from the iPod Touch was part of the 3G chip in the iPhone....
I'm sorry, I was unaware that my opening comment had to be funny.
Generally when I'm in a meeting, I'm sitting at a conference table. I do not need to balance a notebook on my hand, I place it on the table. And even if I were, say, in an auditorium, I would be sitting, thus being able to place my laptop on my lap.
Also, it's not about the extent of the notetaking. You want to be able to catch as much of what the presenter is saying, and if you're pecking at virtual keys you'll miss more of the presentation than if you just bang a couple bullets out on a real keyboard.
Flash is the current standard for web-based multimedia consumption. It's that simple. I don't want to encounter a situation where I am unable to view something, important or not, just because one man says I won't like the user experience. Maybe my idea of "the best user experience" is everything working seamlessly, not being able to not charge for a week.
I already answered that in the post you quoted. It doesn't fit in my pocket. I need a seperate carrying case for my MBP since it won't fit in my pocket, but I don't mind because it gives me more functionality than my phone.
Of course a cheaper car does the same job. But no other car does the job as well as an Audi. There may be faster cars, there may be safer cars, there may be more comfortable cars, and there may be better styled cars. But no car has a better mix of these elements than Audi does.
I see you're trying to draw an analogy between Audi and the iPad, and I avoided this in my post because it doesn't work. The Audi would be better compared to the TV example. I don't need to carry either the Audi nor the TV with me wherever I go, so (money aside) there is little reason for me to not get the biggest/best one I can afford. However, by increasing the screen size of an iPod, I lose functionality in the form of portability-- and, on top of that, there's no real gain. At least with a larger Audi, I get more space for people, cargo, headroom, shoulder room, what have you, plus a larger engine and more features (nav, etc).
See the above. I know I won't be able to fit a notebook in my pocket, and I accept that, thanks to the level of usability I get in exchange. So as long weight/price isn't an issue, I might as well get the largest MBP I can. Since my TV will be on my wall, and I can accept I won't be bringing it with me, I might as well get the largest I can. Since my car will bring me places no matter the size, I might as well get the most comfortable/most feature-filled one I can. But something with a phone OS that offers exactly the same level of functionality of a phone should go in my pocket.
Well, what are larger displays used for? Besides Pro apps, multitasking. Neither one of those is something you're using your iPad for, is it?
I don't exactly see that as being valuable. Is it really that difficult to scroll a tiny bit to see more of a page? As in, I-need-to-spend-$500-for-this-functionality difficult? As in, I'm-going-to-tote-around-another-device-and-another-1.5lbs-so-I-don't-have-to-flick-my-finger-as-often difficult?
Only when you try for humor and fail. It sets a tone immediately, that people who use the device are idiots and that it is a toy. As I said, it does not bode well for the balance. You were biased and dismissive from the start.
It seems fairly clear that you don't see the point because you don't want to see the point, protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
And what's stopping you from using a real keyboard? Then not only do you get to type, but you can leave the keyboard behind for those many occasions when you're not seated at a table and want to type a quick note or look something up or catch up on some reading.
You pretend the lack of a clamshell configuration and foldaway keyboard is an unmitigated negative. It is not. Having something you can hold in your hand or rest against anything has proven to be hugely convenient for many people, myself included.
I'll ask again, what scenario is that? Because as I understand it, you're talking about a device meant to be useful in places where full-fledged computers aren't. No device=no Flash, and you can view it when you get back to a computer somewhere, just like you'd do without a tablet.
If your expectation is a 1:1 recreation of a desktop computer in a portable format, such a device already exists: a notebook.
And maybe your idea of "the best user experience" isn't shared by everyone.
That doesn't answer anything. Why does an iPad need an additional carrying case beyond what you'd already be carrying?
No, what you see is that you are trying to avoid it in a conclusory manner. You don't see the point, therefore there can't be a point is a self-defeating and circular argument.
I am not blown away by the iPad, either, but the truth is that there are faster devices, there are more full-featured devices, and there are more portable devices, but no device has a better mix of those elements than a tablet does.
There is a real gain. You get more space for text, images, controls, what have you, plus a larger battery. You only get a larger engine in the car because it weighs more--there is substantial overlap throughout the line. The same is true of features--most everything available in the A6 is available in the A4.
Why?
Larger displays are used for presenting more information. As evidenced by the frequent whining about OS X's lack of a "maximize" button, many people don't want to multitask. Monitor size has little to do with how many programs you have running and a great deal more to do with how spread out you are. I know I typically run the same number of programs on my notebook whether or not the 23" external display is attached.
People generally want to see more of the picture, watch bigger video, not have to scroll to see a page on a document, be able to read legibly at a greater distance, or to have a "big picture" view of layout content. In other words, the exact same reasons why more screen space on a tablet is better than a smartphone.
It's the same with the cars--some people want a roomier cabin, and others look at the resulting car as an inefficient, spacewasting behemoth. It's all about personal priorities. You honestly believe that millions of people have been saying "my smartphone gives me everything I need on the go, but it's just too small to replace my laptop" for years without reason?
It's not the scrolling, but the cropping, that is the issue, and yes, people do complain about having to pan around to read a page of text.
Is a larger passenger cabin worth an extra $10,000? Because that's the difference between an identically equipped A4 and A6 (and the A4 actually has the performance edge). Is moving from a 24" display to a 30" display worth doubling the price? Is a netbook's slight price drop worth the severe performance sacrifice over a 13" notebook?
Using your logic, looking the other way when you don't care, the answer is no. And yet there are strong markets for all of them.
The fact that you don't personally value it does not preclude the fact that others do. I can't see any portability problems with the iPad, and that seems to be the extent of your complaint--that you can get the same thing pocket-sized. For whatever reason, you're unable to see that the pocket-sized part is not a plus for many people, but a minus, and that even in its first few months, much more powerful software is being developed that would be impractical on the smaller screen.
Your needs may be better met by a different type of product, but your continued insistence that no one gets a benefit out of a tablet is indefensible.
$9.99 .... + $699 Ipad --> cheaper compared to a dedicated display?
24" full HD Led LCD monitor = $180
