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 SDK 3.2 Details: External Display, File Sharing System, No Multitasking
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, netbooks still present like every other computer in terms of their UI & OS, they're the last gasp of an archaic way to use and relate to computers.
Don't underestimate the power & revolutionary nature of the iPhone OS - Microsoft continue to rehash Windows without genuinely moving forward while Apple's 'new' OS is appliance-easy to use and represents a paradigm shift in the way we interact with these devices. I really don't see what functionality is missing from the iPad that most users need.
For those that say it's just a giant iPod Touch... almost, but the Touch is the anomoly being just a tiny iPad and not nearly so useful because of its little screen (and it's still selling by the bucketload).
I'm just amazed how people are missing the big picture here and letting their obsession with revision 1 tech specs and limited imagination dictate their response to this device.
The reason Apple fanbois bemoaned is because they watched too much Star Trek and Cameron's Avatar with too much expectations.
It proves that people who say 'fail' are representative of 'Dumb Amerikans'.
If they don't like it, then they should buy other competitors' tablets.
Whoever thought that Apple was going to include everything and the kitchen sink on the tablet is a short-sighted bonehead. To include everything would increase the price of $1,000 or higher. Their goal was to bring it down below $1,000 and be competitive with other tablets.
It's no wonder a bunch of fanbois are NOT fit to be CEO of any company. Imagine them trying to run this country.
Nukes would fly in an instant with their 'the world's not enough for me' attitude.
(shudder)
EDIT: IF they want the top of the line computer tech in their hands to play with, they should join the military/intelligence complex such as the NSA. These guys got the real goods ahead of the consumer market but albeit in the private sector.
Fanbois will have to wait another 10 to 20 years for a transparent Apple tablet with the capacity of a Power Mac desktop. It can be done, but it would take a lot of $$$ and R&D to pull it off. And many, many years. And by then the fanbois will be old.
You can either wait for your 'crackpot dream tech' in another decade or just dive in to take advantage of what they have now.
I'm quite sure they will add in the camera for the tablet but NOT. RIGHT. NOW. Next year, maybe. It's going to repeat and follow the iphone revision trend in a cycle.
It proves that people who say 'fail' are representative of 'Dumb Amerikans'.
If they don't like it, then they should buy other competitors' tablets.
Whoever thought that Apple was going to include everything and the kitchen sink on the tablet is a short-sighted bonehead. To include everything would increase the price of $1,000 or higher. Their goal was to bring it down below $1,000 and be competitive with other tablets.
It's no wonder a bunch of fanbois are NOT fit to be CEO of any company. Imagine them trying to run this country.
Nukes would fly in an instant with their 'the world's not enough for me' attitude.
(shudder)
EDIT: IF they want the top of the line computer tech in their hands to play with, they should join the military/intelligence complex such as the NSA. These guys got the real goods ahead of the consumer market but albeit in the private sector.
Fanbois will have to wait another 10 to 20 years for a transparent Apple tablet with the capacity of a Power Mac desktop. It can be done, but it would take a lot of $$$ and R&D to pull it off. And many, many years. And by then the fanbois will be old.
You can either wait for your 'crackpot dream tech' in another decade or just dive in to take advantage of what they have now.
I'm quite sure they will add in the camera for the tablet but NOT. RIGHT. NOW. Next year, maybe. It's going to repeat and follow the iphone revision trend in a cycle.
You do.
Examples...
1) You're a blogger. You've written a story in Pages on your iPad and you're about to publish it on your blog. You've three fields to fill in on the backend web application that posts to your blog - title, summary, full article.
So you go online, type in the title, switch to Pages and load up the article, copy the summary from the article and switch back to Safari. As Safari multitasks, you're ok, it's back on the same page. You paste the summary.
Next you need the article text so you switch to Pages and you have to reload the article again, you've lost your place in the article and forgot how much you cut for the summary!
Imagine you're writing a report and need to check back and forth with research papers on websites. Pages or whatever editor you're using would be up and down like a tart's knickers and never back where you left them.
2) You want to listen to Spotify while you surf.
3) You want to receive incoming VOIP calls whilst using the iPad for anything.
4) You want to check on a server so you pop open a terminal on your iPad and ssh in. But you then need to check a website for a command reference or look at stats or to cut a command from a tutorial. Switching back to your terminal, it's been closed by the iPad and you have to start again.
There's lots of reasons why multi-tasking is important for maintaining open network connections and just simple maintaining states during task switches that make it worth while. Responsive app starting and closing doesn't fix that.
The current "iPad" screen only delivers 1024 x 768 resolution thats not even 720p (1280 x 720)! At least the 13.3inch MacBook screen can deliver this, and thats relatively still tiny. Apple will have to add a 13.3inch screen in the future if they are pitching the "iPad" for watching movies as well. According to Steve it has to do it better then booth a smartphone and laptop in order to be worth it.
As for the A4 its a System On a Chip (SOC), in other words it handles general processing and video. The Dual Core 2ghx PPC PA Semi chip is not a SOC so it runs circles around the A4 (http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/02/8780.ars). The PA Semi engineers at Apple could easily shrink its die size below 65nm if they wanted to and bring its power consumption much lower then 5-13watts. Being that the A4 is a single core ARM based chip it cant touch PA chip in terms of horsepower. My guess is since the iPhone runs on ARM Apple decided to go with an ARM based solution versus PPC in order to have two architectures to worry about. It was more of a business decision then a technical one.
Architecture wise PPC > ARM > x86 @ the same die size.
As for the A4 its a System On a Chip (SOC), in other words it handles general processing and video. The Dual Core 2ghx PPC PA Semi chip is not a SOC so it runs circles around the A4 (http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/02/8780.ars). The PA Semi engineers at Apple could easily shrink its die size below 65nm if they wanted to and bring its power consumption much lower then 5-13watts. Being that the A4 is a single core ARM based chip it cant touch PA chip in terms of horsepower. My guess is since the iPhone runs on ARM Apple decided to go with an ARM based solution versus PPC in order to have two architectures to worry about. It was more of a business decision then a technical one.
Architecture wise PPC > ARM > x86 @ the same die size.
uh yeah, that's macbook pro 13". it NEEDS a screen that's the right size. arbitrarily picking a size is pretty silly.
LOL! based on... nothing. oh right, your years of working with PA Semi. right. and your time with the iPad. so you can compare them directly. obviously, this is a very legitimate opinion.
everyone knows more gigahertz is faster!
What is it with all these people clamoring for a MacBook Pro refresh? I have a late 2008 15-inch and I love it! The performance is great. Plus they just refreshed the MacBook last year. Do people expect Apple to refresh stuff every couple of months? Sheesh!
I think that people are missing the point that the iPad is not intended to be a desktop/laptop replacement. It certainly wasn't presented as such. If someone needed to do work as serious as you are outlining, I can't imagine them trying to do it on an iPad. I see it as a fun device to read ebooks watch videos surf the web do a bit of email listen to music and get a bit of work done in a pinch, but not a replacement for your main computer, and I think that's the way it was presented. Also, I think we will be seeing multitasking sometime soon for both the iPhone and the iPad.
Seems to me that it's an entirely software based restriction. I really can't see how they can continue with not allowing multitasking so I'd guess it'll appear in iPhone OS 4.0 fairly soon.
But then I said that about iPhone OS 2.0 and 3.0. It's just frankly bizarre that if you want a multi-tasking media device you have to ask Nokia, Sony, Samsung, Blackberry, HTC, Palm et al. ie. all those mobile device companies that Apple says they are bigger than.
I too was hoping for a MBP refresh. When I didn't get one, I bought the current model online! Unfortunately, I'm kind of in the 'NEED' category of computer buyer as I recently broke my TiBook. However, I think it's extremely valid that people were pissed off by the lack of MBP refresh.
The reasoning behind my purchase of the June model? If this is the best Apple can do with the iPad, then I'm not expecting much out of a MBP refresh.
The reasoning behind my purchase of the June model? If this is the best Apple can do with the iPad, then I'm not expecting much out of a MBP refresh.
In fact is another ipod touch. No USB host?? No Flash???? Using was a presentation device someone come with a pen drive for presentation. Sorry no USB port...
Any device today have a usb port, my car radio have usb, my gps have usb. what apple is thinking of. What web experience it no flash? And i guess bluetooth is blocked to only headphones and headset. no file transfer or internet sharing.
Why apple continues with memory limitation. some day they will sell a macbook with 500 gb of hard drive. Want a bigger disk. buy another laptop. no sense. they are just thinking about money. what about a SD card reader like macbook pro? hum?
Could be a great device. But because of stupid limitations it doesn't.
With usb host and flash i could sell my macbook and use it as a simple task machine. but it such limitations i can't.
Any device today have a usb port, my car radio have usb, my gps have usb. what apple is thinking of. What web experience it no flash? And i guess bluetooth is blocked to only headphones and headset. no file transfer or internet sharing.
Why apple continues with memory limitation. some day they will sell a macbook with 500 gb of hard drive. Want a bigger disk. buy another laptop. no sense. they are just thinking about money. what about a SD card reader like macbook pro? hum?
Could be a great device. But because of stupid limitations it doesn't.
With usb host and flash i could sell my macbook and use it as a simple task machine. but it such limitations i can't.
That's it?
What a let down! Although the iPad is a truly cool device I will wait for the next one. Turns out most of the rumors nailed everything about it except for the price.
As for those of us who do not plan to purchase this unit we were left with empty hands. No iPhone OS 4.0. No MBP refresh. Nothing else Steve?
What a let down! Although the iPad is a truly cool device I will wait for the next one. Turns out most of the rumors nailed everything about it except for the price.
As for those of us who do not plan to purchase this unit we were left with empty hands. No iPhone OS 4.0. No MBP refresh. Nothing else Steve?
USB port, SD card and flash player
That features are so expensive could put ipad behind $1500
I am talking about basic...
On second thoughts...
Having slept on this, I think I want to revisit my initial disappointment. Put it this way - the iPad isn't an iPhone on steroids, and it's not meant to compete with the iPhone. But it IS an iPod Touch on steroids, which is what I've wanted mine to be. Try two angles on the same concept:
Every since I started with my iPod Touch I've been thinking - why doesn't someone invent a decent keyboard with a slightly angled dock, so that I can type straight into the iPod which I can then sync easily with my iMac at home. I don't need this for heavy duty, but taking notes in meetings, working on the train and so on, shoving in a bag, it would be fine. In other words, iPodTouch + Keyboard could replace (for my very portable needs) a netbook. And this is what this is intended to be, except that I would not even need to take the keyboard with me, because it could stay on my desk. I'd love USB, but iDisk is fine for the kind of stuff I have in mind. And if I can transfer my apps, then Shapewriter comes across and that would be pure genius on the iPad.
Other angle: working on an iMac, who hasn't thought - now, if I could just take the monitor of the stand and take it with me... Now you can.
And that's what they're working towards. Now, it needs shed loads more memory, multi-tasking, and all that, and I probably won't buy until there's a load more under the hood - BUT the concept is clear, and I think they are heading in quite an interesting direction. I think I get it - this really is the future of mobile computing
Having slept on this, I think I want to revisit my initial disappointment. Put it this way - the iPad isn't an iPhone on steroids, and it's not meant to compete with the iPhone. But it IS an iPod Touch on steroids, which is what I've wanted mine to be. Try two angles on the same concept:
Every since I started with my iPod Touch I've been thinking - why doesn't someone invent a decent keyboard with a slightly angled dock, so that I can type straight into the iPod which I can then sync easily with my iMac at home. I don't need this for heavy duty, but taking notes in meetings, working on the train and so on, shoving in a bag, it would be fine. In other words, iPodTouch + Keyboard could replace (for my very portable needs) a netbook. And this is what this is intended to be, except that I would not even need to take the keyboard with me, because it could stay on my desk. I'd love USB, but iDisk is fine for the kind of stuff I have in mind. And if I can transfer my apps, then Shapewriter comes across and that would be pure genius on the iPad.
Other angle: working on an iMac, who hasn't thought - now, if I could just take the monitor of the stand and take it with me... Now you can.
And that's what they're working towards. Now, it needs shed loads more memory, multi-tasking, and all that, and I probably won't buy until there's a load more under the hood - BUT the concept is clear, and I think they are heading in quite an interesting direction. I think I get it - this really is the future of mobile computing
I had such high hopes for this product! What a disappointment.
I needed something similar to this, and I have already saved up the cash for the mid level non-3G model. Sorry, I am not dropping $600+ on what is essentially a enlarged iPod Touch, a device that I already have.
Limited functionality and a high price aren't good bedfellows.
I needed something similar to this, and I have already saved up the cash for the mid level non-3G model. Sorry, I am not dropping $600+ on what is essentially a enlarged iPod Touch, a device that I already have.
Limited functionality and a high price aren't good bedfellows.
Interesting signature you have. That's quite a lot of Apple devices you have.
Your comment is like a fat person at a buffet saying the cooks better start using more butter.
If you don't like a company's product, don't buy it. You are not going to hurt Steve's feelings at all. I guess that Apple didn't make the iPad for you.
If they had asked everyone what features it should have, it would have: 2 USB ports, Firewire 800, SD slot, audio in/out, expandable RAM, OS X, larger storage, and an Intel processor.
Do you recognize those specs? They're from the MacBook Pro spec sheet.
If you want a laptop, go buy one. If you don't want an iPad........ then don't buy it.
I haven't read through all of the posts so apologies if this has already been discussed, but what would be really cool is if the ipad could be plugged into an existing computer and simply be used as a touchscreen input device. Imagine using a sophisticated program like photoshop where you could manipulate images and controls directly on the ipad while viewing your results on your 30" monitor.
Multi user support?
I'm puzzled. This iPad thing, it's supposed to be something between your laptop and your iPhone/iPod, right?
Well, my iPhone is personal and therefor it has my applications , my email, my music and my bookmarks. At home, I have aMacbook at the living room table for casual browsing the web, check my email and so on and so on. This Macbook could be replaced with a iPad, it really seems to be a perfect candidate for the job. But, We are more than one person in my home, so my girlfriend also has an account on the Macbook for her apps and her email, just as she keeps her email and her apps on her iphone.
Now here is what puzzles me, it seems the iPad does not have multi user support. No accounts, so it seems that in my case there would be the need for two iPads to replace my single Macbook?
Yes, we could use webmail, that's for sure but why would I want to do that?
The iPad seriously needs user accounts for multi user usage.
Just my 2c.
I'm puzzled. This iPad thing, it's supposed to be something between your laptop and your iPhone/iPod, right?
Well, my iPhone is personal and therefor it has my applications , my email, my music and my bookmarks. At home, I have aMacbook at the living room table for casual browsing the web, check my email and so on and so on. This Macbook could be replaced with a iPad, it really seems to be a perfect candidate for the job. But, We are more than one person in my home, so my girlfriend also has an account on the Macbook for her apps and her email, just as she keeps her email and her apps on her iphone.
Now here is what puzzles me, it seems the iPad does not have multi user support. No accounts, so it seems that in my case there would be the need for two iPads to replace my single Macbook?
Yes, we could use webmail, that's for sure but why would I want to do that?
The iPad seriously needs user accounts for multi user usage.
Just my 2c.
Getting back to the subject at hand, I find it fascinating that the iTab released with OS3.2 with 4.0 right around the corner (at least that's what we expect). That means that
(a) Apple did not show the product in the best light. I assume 100% that OS4.0 will have a good bit of functionality that will greatly improve the iPad
(b) Developers are going to dive into 3.2, learn to program the thing, and then *very quickly* need to absorb another whole OS release
For instance, I have my fingers crossed that 4.0 will have some improved form of 3rd-party multitasking, at least for the iPad if not the iPhone. Think how much flak the iPad is getting for not having multitasking.
One aspect of the iPad that I was *very* disappointed with was the seemingly unimproved way that applications are organized on the home screens. I mean, it seems to work *exactly* like a larger iPod Touch, save for the ability to work in landscape mode. I thought it actually looked bad, seeing the sparsely populated icons on the large screen. They *have* to be able to do better than that. But not in OS3.x.
I guess that they really wanted to release now rather than wait for the next OS, and being Apple they wouldn't get up there and say "don't worry, you'll all get features X, Y, and Z when OS4.0 comes out", because they haven't announced or shown 4.0 yet.
And so the iPad enters the world in a weird lull just before a new OS release, hampered by limitations of the current OS. I will withhold full judgment of the device until I see what new capabilities 4.0 brings it.
(a) Apple did not show the product in the best light. I assume 100% that OS4.0 will have a good bit of functionality that will greatly improve the iPad
(b) Developers are going to dive into 3.2, learn to program the thing, and then *very quickly* need to absorb another whole OS release
For instance, I have my fingers crossed that 4.0 will have some improved form of 3rd-party multitasking, at least for the iPad if not the iPhone. Think how much flak the iPad is getting for not having multitasking.
One aspect of the iPad that I was *very* disappointed with was the seemingly unimproved way that applications are organized on the home screens. I mean, it seems to work *exactly* like a larger iPod Touch, save for the ability to work in landscape mode. I thought it actually looked bad, seeing the sparsely populated icons on the large screen. They *have* to be able to do better than that. But not in OS3.x.
I guess that they really wanted to release now rather than wait for the next OS, and being Apple they wouldn't get up there and say "don't worry, you'll all get features X, Y, and Z when OS4.0 comes out", because they haven't announced or shown 4.0 yet.
And so the iPad enters the world in a weird lull just before a new OS release, hampered by limitations of the current OS. I will withhold full judgment of the device until I see what new capabilities 4.0 brings it.
I think it's a beautiful device. I might get one just for the awesome calendar and iWork.
This isn't something you'll buy instead of a Mac or phone. It's in addition to. Is it necessary? Absolutely not. But it's damn cool and we all know the best purchases are superfluous. They're also the products that leave the most margin, which is good for Apple as a company.
$499 is not expensive at all for the iPad. Sure, I could buy a netbook or a somewhat powerful PC for that money, but I don't want to. Not everything revolves around price.
When I buy something I want that something to make me happy when I use it. The experience comes first. Specs are secondary.
This isn't something you'll buy instead of a Mac or phone. It's in addition to. Is it necessary? Absolutely not. But it's damn cool and we all know the best purchases are superfluous. They're also the products that leave the most margin, which is good for Apple as a company.
$499 is not expensive at all for the iPad. Sure, I could buy a netbook or a somewhat powerful PC for that money, but I don't want to. Not everything revolves around price.
When I buy something I want that something to make me happy when I use it. The experience comes first. Specs are secondary.