It's funny how Jobs was trying to hide the fact that the iPad can't run Flash wen he was searching the web, and people laugh at him for it.
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
More like "Hey look everyone, the NYT doesn't provide its content following open (non-proprietary) Web standards. That sucks. The NYT really should give that some thought."
My mom wanted a new laptop for the rare times she's actually "out and about." Seemed a silly compromise to make (vs. a desktop computer) for her needs. And she wanted an iPhone, which is absolutely overkill for her needs (especially at $30/month for data). At first I was disappointed Apple didn't update their laptop line this week, but the more I think about it, the more an iMac/iPad combo (and a regular dumb phone) makes almost perfect sense for her. How many others are in her same position? Probably millions.
Even my wife, certainly an "average typical slightly technology averse" consumer, who loves her iPhone, came away with "meh. why do I need that when I have an iPhone?"
What I wish it was...
Ok... the basic design (appearance) of the thing is nice, but...
It should have a screen like on a laptop in addition to the tablet surface like on a MB except that it swivels around such that the device can be used as a tablet if desired. In clamshell mode, you can either display dual content or the tablet surface functions as a virtual keyboard. Talk about a nifty take on eBook reading...
It should run full OSX and have an iPhone OS mode. It needs at least one USB, an onboard HDMI or Display Port, iSight and probably a card reader, though an extra USB port would probably be a better option. A laptop hard drive approach would have also been nice... what's the deal with having a iSuperPodTouch with only 16gb of storage? This is something the Netbook folks learned by experience... the 16GB ss drives have now been nearly universally replaced with larger ssds or much cheaper laptop hard drives.
Also, is there a technogical constraint preventing the image from
going to the edge of the screen? It seems like wasted real estate to me.
I also do feel that a stylus input of some type would make a lot of sense. Consider the success of the Axiotron Modbook and the drawing capabilities it boasts... Apple had a chance to claim all that market in one move but elected not to do so.
iPad?? Give me a break! iSlate, iTablet, iBook, iRaq, iPlank, iThinkTherefore iAm... anything but iPad! Did Apple not know about the 2007 Mad TV spoof? What were they thinking!? It's a very unfortunate choice that, I hope, won't hurt the launch. It's kind of like launching the Chevy NoVa in Mexico and wondering why it didn't take
As it is, it looks cool but is probably not going to entice a bite out of me... I will survive just fine with my iPhone, iPT and "repaired" Delll Mini 10v for now. I won't be so bold as to predict a flop as have some on this forum as Apple has surprised us all before. That said, they left a lot of "obvious" features out, and that's, obviously, why the tone of these responses are so negative.
Ok... the basic design (appearance) of the thing is nice, but...
It should have a screen like on a laptop in addition to the tablet surface like on a MB except that it swivels around such that the device can be used as a tablet if desired. In clamshell mode, you can either display dual content or the tablet surface functions as a virtual keyboard. Talk about a nifty take on eBook reading...
It should run full OSX and have an iPhone OS mode. It needs at least one USB, an onboard HDMI or Display Port, iSight and probably a card reader, though an extra USB port would probably be a better option. A laptop hard drive approach would have also been nice... what's the deal with having a iSuperPodTouch with only 16gb of storage? This is something the Netbook folks learned by experience... the 16GB ss drives have now been nearly universally replaced with larger ssds or much cheaper laptop hard drives.
Also, is there a technogical constraint preventing the image from
going to the edge of the screen? It seems like wasted real estate to me.
I also do feel that a stylus input of some type would make a lot of sense. Consider the success of the Axiotron Modbook and the drawing capabilities it boasts... Apple had a chance to claim all that market in one move but elected not to do so.
iPad?? Give me a break! iSlate, iTablet, iBook, iRaq, iPlank, iThinkTherefore iAm... anything but iPad! Did Apple not know about the 2007 Mad TV spoof? What were they thinking!? It's a very unfortunate choice that, I hope, won't hurt the launch. It's kind of like launching the Chevy NoVa in Mexico and wondering why it didn't take
As it is, it looks cool but is probably not going to entice a bite out of me... I will survive just fine with my iPhone, iPT and "repaired" Delll Mini 10v for now. I won't be so bold as to predict a flop as have some on this forum as Apple has surprised us all before. That said, they left a lot of "obvious" features out, and that's, obviously, why the tone of these responses are so negative.
I'd prefer multi-user over multifinder
For this device, I'd much rather have multiple user accounts than multitasking. For a family, we will all have different bookmarks, email accounts, even favorite apps.
I'd love to see the ability to "slide to unlock" then press a photo of my self and enter my password. It should also have locked down accounts. I don't want my six year old deleting apps accidentally.
as for "multifinder" I already multitask on my iphone. I listen to itunes while using other apps. I'm annoyed at games that don't allow this. Many games include an itunes controller in the app.
I'm also happy enough with push notifications. Switching apps does not take long. Nearly every app I use keeps state between launches.
For this device, I'd much rather have multiple user accounts than multitasking. For a family, we will all have different bookmarks, email accounts, even favorite apps.
I'd love to see the ability to "slide to unlock" then press a photo of my self and enter my password. It should also have locked down accounts. I don't want my six year old deleting apps accidentally.
as for "multifinder" I already multitask on my iphone. I listen to itunes while using other apps. I'm annoyed at games that don't allow this. Many games include an itunes controller in the app.
I'm also happy enough with push notifications. Switching apps does not take long. Nearly every app I use keeps state between launches.
Just because a device has USB and a SD card reader those not make it a full-blown computer/Mac.
The Nintendo Wii has an SD card and 2 USB, and is not quite viewed as a computer to most people. USB is just a standard peripheral connector that would enable the media device to work with other USB devices. Most modern camera, phones, TVs, music players, stereos, cars has it.
SD or some sort of memory card read will give the device more native way to add more storage or have non-nonsense way of bring files over to such device where there is a lack of network. A lot of media devices that are not computers have this. Granted with a USB port, an SD reader may be redundant.
But adding these 2 to the iPad wont make it compete with a mac anymore than a Wii or a PS3 or a PSP to compete with a Mac.
A good example.
Just last week I was taking a vacation to Shanghai and I was taking pictures with my Sony camera. Afterwards I was looking over the pictures in the preview mode, and I was thinking, 'it sure would be great if I could view these pictures on my iPhone.' Sure I had my macbook with me; but I didn't want to stop and take out my laptop, power it up, login, grab a memory card read, plug everything up, and transfer the pictures look at it, then shutdown, re-pack everything...
the Ipad almost does it... with an extra need of an external/additional dock-to-USB adapter. If it had one, it one less then for me to pack and potentially lose while on vacation.
As far as watching movies, it feels that it falls a little short... wish it would be divx certified, so I can play a wider range of video file format. MP4 is catching on, luckily, but how much more would license fees cost for adding divx to the device? Or allow a developer to create a divx player, if Apple does not want to do it themselves?
My thoughts
This device is not for your typical mac/pc user or geek (most of us on these forums). As details of it emerged I realised that the iPad is for most people who need a computer but don't actually need its full power, or people who are buying their first machine or even students. I mean, if you surf the web, check your email, open a few documents, organise your calendar, read ebooks, look at your photos etc then its actually a pretty good device at a decent price. Why buy a macbook to do these things? Take my wife for example (who has a macbook) - she does the above things and this device is perfect for her. The main thing is its simple to use and she doesn't need the power or complexity of OSX.
On the other hand, for people like me who don't use our machines professionally but do video editing or use aperture and the like, and own iphones/smartphones, we don't really need an iPad. The power users definitely don't. Obviously everyones situation is different but I can kind of see what apple are trying to do here. This device is probably not for your typical mac user, more suited to novices or new users. For most of them it will be all the computing power they'll ever need. Do they really care about 3G, GPS, gigabytes, RAM, multitasking, flash support and the like? Do they even know about these things?
I think many of us who are already mac users are thinking "well I dont really need it but I might get it anyway" because of the price (relative to apple). If it was the price of a laptop I wouldn't even consider it, but actually I am.
This device is not for your typical mac/pc user or geek (most of us on these forums). As details of it emerged I realised that the iPad is for most people who need a computer but don't actually need its full power, or people who are buying their first machine or even students. I mean, if you surf the web, check your email, open a few documents, organise your calendar, read ebooks, look at your photos etc then its actually a pretty good device at a decent price. Why buy a macbook to do these things? Take my wife for example (who has a macbook) - she does the above things and this device is perfect for her. The main thing is its simple to use and she doesn't need the power or complexity of OSX.
On the other hand, for people like me who don't use our machines professionally but do video editing or use aperture and the like, and own iphones/smartphones, we don't really need an iPad. The power users definitely don't. Obviously everyones situation is different but I can kind of see what apple are trying to do here. This device is probably not for your typical mac user, more suited to novices or new users. For most of them it will be all the computing power they'll ever need. Do they really care about 3G, GPS, gigabytes, RAM, multitasking, flash support and the like? Do they even know about these things?
I think many of us who are already mac users are thinking "well I dont really need it but I might get it anyway" because of the price (relative to apple). If it was the price of a laptop I wouldn't even consider it, but actually I am.
"The main thing is its simple to use and she doesn't need the power or complexity of OSX."
The above basically nails it. This is one step closer to a computer appliance, which is the holy grail of the computer makers. Yes it is limited by not having multitasking, for example. But I bet not having multitasking makes it easier to make a computer that never ever ever crashes. I don't know if they have gotten there, but maybe they are closer. All of these limitations are very intentional so that it works better and faster and easier. Apple knows what it left out and probably has a good reason for why they did.
This isn't really for use computer geeks. We already have laptops, desktops, and an iPhone or an iTouch (and in my case a Kindle as well). This doesn't add much. But for the next person thinking about getting their first laptop, I bet they are going to look at this instead. And you might not rush out and get this, but when your laptop is dead two years from now and the iPad is a little better, you might go this route instead.
There are still a good number of people who don't use computers that much. I think Apple is hoping that this device appeals to those folks and gets them into the game.
And they probably figure the fanboys will buy it anyway even though they don't need it (or at least the well to do ones, which makes up a good portion of the mac community).
The above basically nails it. This is one step closer to a computer appliance, which is the holy grail of the computer makers. Yes it is limited by not having multitasking, for example. But I bet not having multitasking makes it easier to make a computer that never ever ever crashes. I don't know if they have gotten there, but maybe they are closer. All of these limitations are very intentional so that it works better and faster and easier. Apple knows what it left out and probably has a good reason for why they did.
This isn't really for use computer geeks. We already have laptops, desktops, and an iPhone or an iTouch (and in my case a Kindle as well). This doesn't add much. But for the next person thinking about getting their first laptop, I bet they are going to look at this instead. And you might not rush out and get this, but when your laptop is dead two years from now and the iPad is a little better, you might go this route instead.
There are still a good number of people who don't use computers that much. I think Apple is hoping that this device appeals to those folks and gets them into the game.
And they probably figure the fanboys will buy it anyway even though they don't need it (or at least the well to do ones, which makes up a good portion of the mac community).
It's a game changer in a very big way, the next few months will prove it. If you don't think it is then you simply don't understand what it represents.
If Apple get the ecosystem and content for this right, and they will, then it may actually come close to the success of the iPod.
If Apple get the ecosystem and content for this right, and they will, then it may actually come close to the success of the iPod.
You don't need that many pixels. It is called scaling
. If you did you wouldn't be able to watch 1080i on a 720p tv now would you?guilty. :X
I'll whine now, but wouldn't be surprised if I played with one in the Apple retail store, and end up buying one if not for myself, but as a gift to others.
Made me laugh...my thoughts exactly.
I wonder how many of us will buy one "for our wife" because she doesn't need the power and complexity, but find ourselves sitting on the couch with it.
Maybe I better plan on buying 2. Guess I'll get myself the 64GB just in case. 3G too.
No multi-tasking! How OS 7.x-like (or more like Apple II-like, really)! Apple appears to have used the time machine to go back in time and create a totally crappy OS environment for their new product! Wow! Giant iPod Touch Apps! A whole 64GB of space available on the top model! Wow! It's SO innovative! They could have released this zombie with iPhone V1.0 and it would have failed that much sooner.... Newton 2.x.
Multiuser sounds like a big step forward. Unless Apple wants everyone to have an iPad instead of sharing or it's too SCARY for people.
I think listening to music while in the background would be a big step forward.
Apparently they were thinking of how to make a device actualy, you know, USEABLE!
I keep banging on about this but the problem is people aren't thinking. You've got an OS X machine in your posession so try this: Fire up your favourite productivity app that you'd want to use on a tablet. Resize it to roughly a 9 to 10 inch diagonal. Now place a finger on the screen as if you're touching the UI... I'm fairly willing to bet you won't be able to access every element in that UI cleanly. Actually, a better example, set the screen to 1024 x 768 and try the same test wth the airport icon. On my 17" MBP I can just about get away with that. On a 10" screen? No chance.
Applications MUST be designed to work with the hardware they're running on. It's why Windows tablets have sucked so badly, the OS hasn't been optimised properly for styli let alone touch (Windows 7 is better) and the apps need a mouse to use properly. Make a tablet that just runs OS X and OS X applications and you've got a device that's a) horrible to use and b) pointless as it would cost about the same as a MBP.
The ONLY way a tablet makes sense is to build it around a slim OS with a custom built UI and apps. Apple would have been nuts to do anything other than base it on the iPhone OS and anyone that thought otherwise was deluding themselves. Will it work and find a market? I think it will, but either way it was the right decision to go this route as a desktop OS X powered tablet would have been a massive let down in the real world.
Can I add one more category to your list? Those of us who've been using computers for so long that we remember the days of tape drives, use 'em in work daily and come home looking to relax, do the tasks you've already listed but, most of all, want something that puts the FUN back in computing! That's one of my main, in fact THE main reason I'm seriously considering this as my next home PC - it just looks like it's going to be fantastic and really enjoyable to use, not to mention a complete break from my work environment. Plus I've already got a whole device full of apps to run on it!
No multi-tasking! How OS 7.x-like (or more like Apple II-like, really)! Apple appears to have used the time machine to go back in time and create a totally crappy OS environment for their new product! Wow! Giant iPod Touch Apps! A whole 64GB of space available on the top model! Wow! It's SO innovative! They could have released this zombie with iPhone V1.0 and it would have failed that much sooner.... Newton 2.x.
Actually it was System 7 in 1991 that brought cooperative multitasking to the Mac, eliminating kludges like MultiFinder and Switcher. And for the hardware and processing power of the time, it was about as good as it got (considering the PC world was just transitioning to Win 3.1 at the time). For a cool $6500 you could have yourself a sweet 17lb SE/30 with 1MB of RAM and a 40MB hard drive and multitask to your heart's content.
Fast-forward 20 years and yes, everything old is new again. Now partly due to the limitations of a low-power portable chip, the touch OS is presently better suited to single apps running one at a time, but with essentially instantaneous close and reopen...all in a sleek 1.5lb portable slate smaller than a legal pad for $499. As the hardware and OS evolves there will surely be some form of "multitasking" and I feel certain that someday the touch OS and the Mac OS will merge together installed on future MacPads.
But I have to ask, how many different things can a user focus their attention on at one time? Must the device display multiple open windows to web-browse, email, watch video, and IM, when the human using it can only truly perform one of these things at a time? Are the audio alerts, badges, and popup push notifications not enough to indicate a need to switch to another app? I'm certainly used to this on my iPhone and don't expect it to display multilayered windows and multiple running apps like my Mac does. And while I suspect that the hardware probably does have some capability to multitask and display layered windows of several apps, Apple has wisely limited it for now, so that people do not launch a mess of apps without ever quitting any of them, dragging performance to a crawl and diluting the overall experience.
The only legitimate multitasking behavior I've seen mentioned is listening to 3rd party audio streams (besides iTunes) while working in other apps. Otherwise, no matter how you slice it, jumping from email to web to IM to facebook to maps to video requires you to move from one window to another, refocus your attention, then back to the original task. What difference does it make if you can "see" all these windows or if they are all "running" behind a frontmost window if they open/close instantly to their previous state?
Exactly. Better yet, people like your Mom can use it when they're "in" too. For people who mostly just read e-mail and surf the web, an iPad is all they might need. It's funny reading the posts by people on this site who "won't buy this" and think that by extension nobody will and iPad=fail. people who are posting to forums like macrumors.com are not the typical user, nor really the target market for the iPad. Most regular people don't even know what "multitasking" means.
As for multitasking, I think it would make the performance of the iPad less predictable, and possibly more sluggish. The iPad is meant to be a quick-on / quick-off internet device - good for doing what it does, but not intended at all to replace either an iPhone or a laptop for people who "need" one of those devices. It's its own thing. Also, I bet when people actually have one to play with in their hands, they'll be more likely to want one. I wasn't too excited about the iPhone... then I tried an iPod Touch in a store, and was hooked.
Another big deal is gaming. There is nothing like the iPad anywhere for gaming... it has no competition there. There's a group of people who will want one simply for that.
I do wish it had Flash support... but I have selfish reasons for that. I make/sell a flash-based product! (Though am looking at ways to implement what I do in iphone/pad compatible formats)
Nonsense. GPS apps need to run in the background so I can stream music or do other things until it's time to make a turn. Location-aware apps need to know where I am so that they can provide me with information corresponding to my location (or, like google latitude, tell other people where I am). Third party telephony apps (such as VOIP) need to be able to maintain the connection while I do other things (just like the built in phone app allows me to do other things while on a call). iPad apps which drive external screens need to be allow me to have one app driving an external screen while I do other things on my iPad itself. And pretty much everything that relies on "notifications" would be better served by actual multitasking, particularly where those things don't naturally rely on the network.
This device is a joke. i can't view my videos and music from a usb drive. I can't copy my files created to usb drive to share.
Apple is making this devices so closed to itunes $$$$$. Technology must be democratic. Apple is getting more and more closed and must people don't realize that. they are just thinking about money.
That i this machines don't have expandable memory like most of the phones and pda's. want more memory buy another one. That concern about environment is just ridiculous. Thats because the lank of usb, the bluetooth internet and so on. I don't want a iphone i have a ipod touch and ipod touch can't access over bluetooth to internet of my Sony Ericsson why????? The ipod touch have the hardware but is limited by software rhrhrhrhr!. Stupid limitations.
And about flash. if apple permits flash on iphone and ipad the older iphones will not be supported for sure. want flash buy the new iphone 4G or ipad 2G.
For me apple is Mac OSX that they do it right. Just think about the lack of firewire on macbook. the lack of sd cards on iphone. etc... Apple is getting worst then Microsoft. But people continue to buy i*** and saying that is great.
If this device was from HP....the reactions never be the same.
Apple is making this devices so closed to itunes $$$$$. Technology must be democratic. Apple is getting more and more closed and must people don't realize that. they are just thinking about money.
That i this machines don't have expandable memory like most of the phones and pda's. want more memory buy another one. That concern about environment is just ridiculous. Thats because the lank of usb, the bluetooth internet and so on. I don't want a iphone i have a ipod touch and ipod touch can't access over bluetooth to internet of my Sony Ericsson why????? The ipod touch have the hardware but is limited by software rhrhrhrhr!. Stupid limitations.
And about flash. if apple permits flash on iphone and ipad the older iphones will not be supported for sure. want flash buy the new iphone 4G or ipad 2G.
For me apple is Mac OSX that they do it right. Just think about the lack of firewire on macbook. the lack of sd cards on iphone. etc... Apple is getting worst then Microsoft. But people continue to buy i*** and saying that is great.
If this device was from HP....the reactions never be the same.