If your iPad 2 could can replace your computer, then you did not need a computer to begin with. The iPad is not more than an Internet appliance and entertainment device.
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 as primary computer
- Thread starter celo48
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To put my last, long-winded post more clear and succinct...
There's a clear hierarchy of functionality of computing devices. Looking at the max functionality on each platform (i.e.what the current ceiling is)
Desktops will always offer more power and functionality than laptops.
Laptops will always offer more power and functionality than netbooks.
Netbooks will offer more power and functionality than tablets, at least as long as they have full OS's and tablets don't.
Tablets have more power and functionality than smart phones and PDAs.
That's it in a nutshell. It's just the nature of the technology, size of the devices etc. The bigger the device, the more power and functionality it can offer. Acknowledging that hierarchy in no way is demeaning of end users.
Everyone has different work uses of computing devices and different personal uses of the devices. And that determines which slot on the hierarchy their primary computing device falls if they buy solely according to their needs and not hype etc.
For me my primary computer will always be a decently spec'd desktop in my office at work, and my secondary computer either a desktop or higher end laptop at home.
Primary travel computing device I'll probably be stuck with a laptop as I need at a bare minimum a full office suite, a file system of some sort (with ways to attach files to e-mails etc.) and USB drive support. But I'd love to get a tablet that can do those things since they're so much easier to carry around than a laptop since I won't buy a netbook or Macbook Air to just use on 10 or so business trips a year.
Others have more basic needs and can get by with just a low-end laptop, or even just a netbook or tablet. And there's nothing wrong with that, and nothing insulting in saying that people who can get buy with just a netbook or tablet don't need a full spec'd computer. That's just another way of saying they don't need a mid-level or above laptop or desktop for the type of tasks they do as they're paying for power and features they don't use.
There's a clear hierarchy of functionality of computing devices. Looking at the max functionality on each platform (i.e.what the current ceiling is)
Desktops will always offer more power and functionality than laptops.
Laptops will always offer more power and functionality than netbooks.
Netbooks will offer more power and functionality than tablets, at least as long as they have full OS's and tablets don't.
Tablets have more power and functionality than smart phones and PDAs.
That's it in a nutshell. It's just the nature of the technology, size of the devices etc. The bigger the device, the more power and functionality it can offer. Acknowledging that hierarchy in no way is demeaning of end users.
Everyone has different work uses of computing devices and different personal uses of the devices. And that determines which slot on the hierarchy their primary computing device falls if they buy solely according to their needs and not hype etc.
For me my primary computer will always be a decently spec'd desktop in my office at work, and my secondary computer either a desktop or higher end laptop at home.
Primary travel computing device I'll probably be stuck with a laptop as I need at a bare minimum a full office suite, a file system of some sort (with ways to attach files to e-mails etc.) and USB drive support. But I'd love to get a tablet that can do those things since they're so much easier to carry around than a laptop since I won't buy a netbook or Macbook Air to just use on 10 or so business trips a year.
Others have more basic needs and can get by with just a low-end laptop, or even just a netbook or tablet. And there's nothing wrong with that, and nothing insulting in saying that people who can get buy with just a netbook or tablet don't need a full spec'd computer. That's just another way of saying they don't need a mid-level or above laptop or desktop for the type of tasks they do as they're paying for power and features they don't use.
Last edited:
I'm selling my 64gig ATT iPad 2 for a 13.3 MBA.
It was a neat ride, but it's too limited while traveling.
It was a neat ride, but it's too limited while traveling.
iPads are internet appliances the same way high-end PCs are FPS game consoles
I understand what you are saying but it's still premised on 'functionality' being an abstract quantity which can be measured and then compared across devices. This, of course, is false (what are the units of measurement?). It's like trying to compare the functionality of a hammer with that of a screwdriver.
Someone will say "but obviously a screwdriver with two bits is more functional than a screwdriver with one bit" but this is meaningless without understanding the end user's needs. It also assumes, again, that an iPad and a desktop are fundamentally the same type of thing, differing only in this quantity of 'functionality'. I do not share this assumption.
Then blame the OP for starting the thread!
I get your point though. Desktops and laptops are what is really meant when people say "computers." Netbooks too I suppose since they are just low end laptops.
Tablets and smartphones/PDAs are computing devices. They share some tasks in common with computers, but aren't full on computers.
The difference is functionality. You ask me to quantify it--I'd simply say functionality objectively is things like processing power, storage space and other hardware specs. Which in turn influence the types of software packages available. All that stuff can be quantified easily.
Subjectively, functionality is things like ease of use for your specific work tasks. And that's all of course individual needs and preferences and can't be quantified.
I do agree with you that tablets are not (currently) the same type of thing as desktop and laptops. Which is why I say an iPad (or any current tablet) could never be my primary machine as I do need a reasonably high end desktop for processing power and a big hard drive to store my files to do my work.
But hey, again the OP was essentially asking us for how we view the iPad as a replacement for our primary computer. And Steve Jobs invited such discussion with his stupid "post pc world" comments.
That said, I do 100% think that tablets CAN become the same category of devices. All it takes is upping the processor power a bit, putting on a fuller OS (that's built from the ground up around touch interface, not just shoehorning a desktop OS onto a tablet) and other relatively easy tweaks.
Hard part will be keeping the device slim and keeping battery life high. I'd give up some thinness and weight and a couple of hours of battery life for tablet I could do more work on personally as I'm still just not sure I really need this kind of consumption tablet I got hyped into buying. I'm enjoying it now, but I really use it for little more than reading the news and playing some simple games. So I have some buyer's remorse as I'm not sure I need a tablet and a laptop and maybe should just stick with a laptop until a Tablet comes out that can replace my laptop (with a desktop being my primary pc still).
You're mixing two things together with that statement: 1. Functionality. 2. What functionality an end user needs.
And that's the point of this thread. A computer has more functionality than a tablet. That's indisputable (just like the screwdriver with more bits offers more functionality than one with only 1 bit). But, you're right that not everyone needs the functionality of a computer and can get buy with an iPad, just like not everyone needs a screw driver with a ton of bits.
But that doesn't change the fact that objectively a computer offers more functionality than a tablet, or a screwdriver with a bunch of bits offers more functionality than a standard flat head screwdriver with a fixed end. Whether an individual needs the added functionality is a different matter.
You can do more types work with a computer than an iPad due to the extra power, software packages etc., just like you can do more work with a screwdriver with multiple bits than a single flat head screw driver. That's just objective fact.
Subjective is choosing which level of functionality you need for your tasks, and that varies by what you need to do with them. Bob Villa needs a screw driver with a ton of bits (along with a gazillion other tools). Someone that doesn't do any work around the house can get by with a single screw driver and maybe a hammer. Someone that just checks e-mail, surfs the web etc. can get buy with an iPad or netbook as their primary PC. Someone that does complex computing work that requires lots of power, memory, hard drive space, software packages etc. cannot.
Last edited:
I'm the same. Cept I have an air not a pro. The iPad is just easier to just lay around a surf
I'm the same. Cept I have an air not a pro. The iPad is just easier to just lay around a surf
That's just it for me.
I love the tablet form factor for things like laying around and reading the news, reading PDFs and surfing the net. E-books I prefer on the Kindle as it's smaller and easier to hold and easier on the eyes. All that stuff stinks to do on a laptop or desktop--and that's why I bought a Kindle and an iPad.
But I dislike the current tablets for most everything else and prefer to use my desktop or laptop. Just most other tasks are easier with a keyboard and mouse, easier with a traditional file system, require software I can't get on the iPad or other current tablets etc.
So that's where my desire for someone to really get a tablet PC form factor right, or come up with a docking solution discussed earlier.
That would be the best of both worlds for me--tablet form factor for laying around reading, surfing the net etc., stick it in a dock or pair it with a keyboard case etc. and do at least the relatively lite tasks I currently do on my laptop (and leave the heavy work for my desktop).
It's annoying having to own a Desktop, Laptop, Tablet and Kindle to get form factors I like for all the tasks I need to do with my computing devices. But that's the best I can do right now while I wait and see if technology catches up with my needs and whether the tablet market moves in that direction (even if it's just some small niche of the tablet market while iPad like ones are the dominant force).
I use my iPad a lot, but I would have to say that my iMac is my primary computer as that's the one that I use for my "serious" stuff. iPad is more of my, most used toy.
I couldn't just have an iPad. However, my MacBook Pro is basically becoming a server unit left in one spot, and the iPad is becoming the mobile device.
To be honest, the initial question is flawed. One really can't use an iPad as a primary computer any more than one can use a bicycle as your primary automobile. A bicycle simply isn't an automobile. However, if you ask the question "Do you use a bicycle as your primary form of transportation?", then the question becomes much more accurate. A tablet is a computerized device, but in truth its not a real computer in the classical sense of the word.
So the original question would have been better phrased something like, "Do you use an iPad as your primary web surfer, or media browser, or social media tool, etc.?"
So the original question would have been better phrased something like, "Do you use an iPad as your primary web surfer, or media browser, or social media tool, etc.?"
And you can do more work with an iPad+automobile+circular saw than with an iPad, therefore the former apparatus has more functionality. But who cares about that kind of comparison, since it's ridiculous? So too is the comparison iPad vs. desktop: saying a desktop is 'more functional' than a tablet presumes that they are intended for the same task or circumstance and that the affordances of the desktop are greater. I submit this is not true, since they are not intended for the same tasks or circumstances. Like I already said, it's like asking which of a hammer or a screwdriver is more functional. The recourse to specs misses what the tool is intended for, since those specs will be irrelevant at the point of application. It's why a spatula with a built-in FM radio is not 'more functional' than a spatula - it's just stupid. To be clear, the iPad can increase in functionality, but not simply by aping desktop attributes.
EDIT: Thus, I agree with TheWheelMan completely with his excellent bike/auto analogy (though I'm not sure what he means by 'real computer in the classical sense of the word'.
And what's with people using 'real' to mean 'legitimate' or whatever? It's just a weasel word (no offense) that avoids making an argument.
To ask myself some of those types of questions:
Primary web surfer: No. I post too much on forums and thus need a keyboard.
E-mail: No, easier to do on PC.
Media browser: No. Video is on the bigscreen TV, music on iPod, car stereo, home stereo etc.
E-book reader: No. Prefer my kindle
PDF reading: Yes--for reading on a machine anyway. Still read more printouts as they're easier to flip through and mark up.
Newspapers/Magazines: Yes. I love these on the iPad and they get the vast majority of my iPad time.
Calendar/Planner: Yes. My old palm pilot was on it's last legs, so I've switched to Google calendar and the iPad as my portable calendar device.
Notetaking: Yes for short notes in meetings. No for any longer notes as I can't type fast enough on the screen keyboard for thorough notes.
Gaming: No. Play some simple games here and there, but my Xbox 360 is my main gaming device.
Work: No--other than reading PDFs, short notes and the calendar features as noted. Nothing else I've found worth bothering with vs. sticking with the PC.
Where we differ is that I see a tablet as another type of computing device. Just not a full on desktop or laptop. At least that's what I think a tablet should be for me to really need to own one.
So I don't see it as ridiculous comparison like comparing a computer and a buzz saw. It is like comparing a bicycle and car--those are both transportation devices. The bike is just MUCH more limited in functionality. A tablet and a PC are both computing devices. The Tablet is just much more limited currently.
Currently is the key word there. A bicycle will never close the gap on the car in terms of functionality as it lacks an engine and other key components. But a tablet has a lot more in common with a computer--a processor, ram, memory for storage, and operating system etc.
So right now they're a good ways apart, but as technology improves, hopefully (for me anyway) they'll get close together in what they can do. There's no reason someone can't make a Tablet PC with a great touch optimized interface that runs software 100% compatible with the desktop versions, has a file system, usb drive support etc.
Right now I feel it was a mistake to buy a tablet, as having a tablet AND a laptop just feels redundant to me. I'd much rather just have a tablet and a desktop, but right now I just can't do work while traveling on any available tablets so I have to live with a 3 device solution and the inherent redundancy.
But we just have to agree to disagree as you and I have different views of what a tablet SHOULD be. To be clear, I'm not arguing what the iPad (or other existing tablets) currently are, just where I think they can go (or at least where a segment of the tablet market should go)
I think it tablets (at least some of them) should be computers--just a different type of one--and think they SHOULD be able to replace a laptop as it's stupid to have a laptop and a tablet as they're just different levels of portable computing devices to me. The only reason I have both currently is I don't have room for a desktop at home and use the laptop as as desktop replacement. Otherwise I'd have a desktop and a laptop and not consider buying a tablet right now as I'm not owning 3 computing devices.
You think it should be a considered a different category of device, and I respect that though I disagree with it. If I can't do some serious computing on it that I usually do on a desktop or laptop, then I'm not sure I need a $500+ device just to use for simple games, web surfing and e-reading as that can all be done on a laptop though the form factor isn't so great.
So I guess I just have some buyer's remorse and should think harder about whether I want to keep it or just sell the thing and wait for the next wave of true Tablet PCs. I'll probably keep it (and just quit annoying myself posting on here about it) as it is a nice toy and it wasn't that much money to me anyway.
I've got to credit Apple though. They've got millions of people, including an Apple hater like me, to shell out $500+ on a gadget that really doesn't do a single damn thing we couldn't already do on our desktops, laptops or smartphones etc.
Anyway, that's the last I'll say in this thread as I don't want to come across trollish as I know I'm a misfit here since I dislike Apple and I'm disenchanted with my iPad 2 a bit now that I've had it a couple of weeks and the newness has warn off And this isn't the most appropriate place for such rants given this is a fan site rather than a multiplatform tech site.
Last edited:
I only added that bit to take into account that what was meant by computer ten years ago or whatever (a traditional desktop system) is itself changing. There are laptops that have desktop-like power, and people who, for all intent and purposes, don't need a computer more powerful than a notebook, netbook, or a tablet, who might consider any of those devices a computer. I took the OP's question, however, to define the word "computer" as the full-blown desktop configuration, ie, "the classical sense of the word."
Hope that made sense?
Heck, I still remember the days of the Radio Shack brand Tandy systems, the Commodore 64, and the Apple II systems, the early PC days when they were considered by many as a sophisticated toy, a video gaming system that kids could actually learn stuff with. I wonder how many back then foresaw how computers would become so prevalent in our lives now?
Macworld reports on Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak's keynote session at Storage Networking World in California. Wozniak was questioned about how tablets would change the computer industry.
“The tablet is not necessarily for the people in this room,” Wozniak told the audience of enterprise storage engineers. “It’s for the normal people in the world,” Wozniak said.
“I think Steve Jobs had that intention from the day we started Apple, but it was just hard to get there, because we had to go through a lot of steps where you connected to things, and (eventually) computers grew up to where they could do ... normal consumer appliance things,” Wozniak said.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1131426/
“The tablet is not necessarily for the people in this room,” Wozniak told the audience of enterprise storage engineers. “It’s for the normal people in the world,” Wozniak said.
“I think Steve Jobs had that intention from the day we started Apple, but it was just hard to get there, because we had to go through a lot of steps where you connected to things, and (eventually) computers grew up to where they could do ... normal consumer appliance things,” Wozniak said.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1131426/
Guess I'll have to hope that MS or someone else nails a tablet for the business/work world then.
Love the iPad for personal use, but as I've said ad nauseum I really want one that's more work functional for my work flow while also being a good news reader, video watcher etc.
Last edited:
Agreed, the ball and chain to iTunes all the time for everything from activating the device to updating the software is the weak link in the armor. Apple must do better and I'm confident they will with iOS 5 and beyond. If we're entering a post-PC era (and I truly believe we ARE) we've got to start removing the last few strings holding us to that era.