Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Ok, So what were people really expecting?

glocke12

glocke12

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 7, 2008
999
7
With all of the negativity surrounding this device, one really has to wonder what people were expecting.

While I wouldnt call this product a huge fail, I do not think it is revolutionary at all, and I do think that Apple could have put a little more thought into it. I look forward to checking these out in an Apple store, but will probably wait for the inevitable price drop and revision B to come out.

Im a big Apple fan, and I was excited about the release of this, as I envisioned the following:

1) Having a device that would perform several iphone type functions on a scale that was larger than an iphone, and smaller than my MBP. This includes reading and sending emails from different spots in my house, responding to text messages, etc.

2) A device that was a kindle type ereader, but was not a kindle.

3) A mobile device larger than an iphone, smaller than my MBP that would allow me to share photos and videos with others when Im out visiting.

4) A mobile device larger than an iphone, smaller than my MBP for general web browsing.

In regards to points 3&4, for those of us that are older, (over 40) with not so great eyesight web browsing on the iphone can be challenging. Two years ago using the iphone for browsing was not diffucult, but just within the past year Ive noticed a change in my eyesight for the worse that makes surfing the web on the iphone challenging at times.

What the ipad does not have that prevents me from rushing out and buying one:

1) No multitasking

2) No flash support. Like it or not, and whether or not there is something better around the corner, flash is here NOW and will probably be here for a little while longer. This means no hulu watching in bed, or anywhere else, no myspace, and no access to many other websites.

However, if the ipad sells well, maybe this will force flash based websites to use different coding.

3) No front facing camera. While not a must have for me, it is very surprising that it does not have one.


So, to the naysayers, what were you all expecting?
 
I'm not a naysayer - in fact, I'm very interested in purchasing one, but I have to admit that the term "tablet" was a bit misleading.

To me, the "Apple Tablet" would've been something along the lines of a Axiotron Modbook - to save resources, I could see it running either a stripped-down version of OS X, or the iPhoneOS, but still able to run OS X programs and have a somewhat familiar GUI.

For someone like me, who only owns a desktop computer (Mac Pro) and an iPhone, it would make the perfect, lightweight laptop replacement.

As it turned out to be, though, I'm still interested in it, because I've been considering a Kindle recently. An iPad would certainly do more at just a bit higher price than a DX. Ability to read e-books AND run my existing library of iPhone apps and games? Call that a win. (I can just imagine Assassin's Creed on a 9" screen...)

If I had no interest in getting a Kindle though, there wouldn't be nearly the drive for me to get one.

Can't wait!
 
I was expecting a book reader, and a bigger, scaled up iPod Touch. That's what I got and I can't wait to purchase one!
 
I think people were naive to think that Apple would actually release a tablet with full Mac OSX on it. Common sense says they would never do that.
 
There are conflicting requirements at work here. A device that is small cheap and light will not run OS X particularly well. A device without a keyboard, devoting up to half the screen to a virtual keyboard will not provide a very compelling OS X experience. Perhaps what Apple could do with this is provide an OS X mode when the iPad is in the keyboard dock. But I don't think I'd want to navigate regular OS X without the benefit of a keyboard. Ever try to get something done in windows without a mouse? I have dozens of times when ps2 ports mysteriously stopped working and the only way to make them work was to reboot. OS X would be frustrating to use without a real keyboard.

Another thing. The A4 chip is not an Intel chipset. It is ARM based. Even if the jailbreakers or osx-86 community wanted to, full OS X won't install on the iPad.

One question I have is whether Apple might release an "iPad Pro" based on an intel chipset some time down the road, possibly with internal usb, and an sd card slot.

I have mixed feelings but I plan to buy one. I must admit I'm somewhat disappointed because I really want to carry OS X around with me on such a device. But I might be able to "live with" the iPad as is and I might wind up actually liking it better than I would have liked an OS X/Intel based model that was heavier, cost $999, and might have only 4 hours of battery life. To me the jury is out until I get my hands on one. I plan to replace my netbook with an iPad, not because it is so much better but because I can use it in more body postures than I can use a traditional L shaped device that really demands a seated upright operating position. Once I am able to screenshare into my Macbook from my iPad, I'll get a better feel for the suitability of "straight OS X" to a tablet form factor.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

I wanted something that was actually better than a netbook. Multitasking, flash, video camera - things that are very doable.
 
glocke12 said:
So, to the naysayers, what were you all expecting?
Click to expand...

You obviously didn't read the hundreds of threads that preceeded the iPad announcement. You obviously haven't taken the time to read the hundreds of threads since the announcement.
 
I wanted it to project holograms of princess leia and R2D2 and then be able to toss it down on the ground and then jump on to hoverskate to work/school.
 
skubish said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

I wanted something that was actually better than a netbook. Multitasking, flash, video camera - things that are very doable.
Click to expand...


Ditto
 
A little more innovative OS. The rumors coming out before the release is that the OS was snappy and unique! Well, yeah, if you count the fact you can't have backgrounds on your iPhone. To be honest, the iPad OS has what I would want in iPhone OS 4.0: 3D-like GUI, desktop background, etc.

But I'm not sure the iPad OS works for a device its size. But I'll wait until I get my hands on it first before I completely judge it.
 
People were expecting a device to exceed their unrealistic expectations.

Seriously, the hype about the ipad was so high that the only result was going to be a let down.

With that said, I do believe apple made some serious missteps.
While this subject matter has been beat to death, I'll put down a couple of my opinions.

  • No flash
  • No multitasking
  • Not OSX

While you can make arguments defending the omission of multtasking and/or OSX. People have been doing logical back flips trying to justify apple's stance on flash. Seriously it doesn't make sense and it only hurts its adoption.
 
I had heard a rumor of a tacticle keyboard, apparently apple had a patent for a keyboard that would rise above the screen and have indented keys, and then the keyboard would go away and the screen would become flat. The other thing I expected was os x, the lack of features didn't bother me as much as the operating system. I wanted a touch screen device that could act like a laptop only be slightly more portable. I have heard you can't run full blown os x on a touch screen, and I think ok if that is true create a special os for the tablet.
 
maflynn said:
While you can make arguments defending the omission of multtasking and/or OSX. People have been doing logical back flips trying to justify apple's stance on flash. Seriously it doesn't make sense and it only hurts its adoption.
Click to expand...

I think that is probably the one thing that may come back and bite Apple. I can see Adobe teaming up with the other slate makers and just attacking iPhone OS over its lack of flash.

Plus, Apple is taking a big risk especially with WinMo7 being introduced in a few weeks. Ballmer can easily take a good jab at Apple over their lack of flash spport while WinMo7 has full flash support (supposedly).

That being said, while this could end up being the biggest problem for Apple, it's also the easiest to fix. A software update would be all that's needed to allow flash. And Apple can even make it an option so those who really don't need it can keep it turned off.
 
Apple's not to blame for the unreasonable and unwarranted expectations some people have imposed upon the iPad. It's a little surprising, particularly coming from some people who have defined themselves as "power users," given Apple's history. Maybe it's the consequence of Apple's secrecy in combination with the incorrect belief these people seem to possess that they're kindred spirits with Steve Jobs and Jonathon Ives.

To be clear, I'm not saying that everyone should buy this device or that everyone should love it. No one is obligated to. It's a matter of choice, choice that can consist of anything from finding this device useful to simply cool or not.

Also, there's a distinction between disappointment in a product announcement and disappointment in an actual product. If Apple and its product pipeline remains consistent, the sentiments of disappointment expressed on this board will undergo a drastic and extreme reversal the moment the first Macrumors member receives one.

What is clear is that anyone who's disappointed by it, or any Apple product announcement, at the very least has only themselves to blame. First for creating these expectations with so little evidence. And secondly for ignoring the history Apple product releases, particularly those products that are aimed at a broad user base.
 
I was expecting a media device that would serve as a platform to extend the online content paradigm that Apple created with iTunes.

My MacBook Pro, and the Apple laptops I'll have in the future is a great computer but relatively crappy media device. The iPhone is a great phone, but relatively crappy media device. So, I don't need a computer, nor a phone, I need a media device that's smaller than a Macbook and larger than an iPhone.
 
Hmac said:
The iPhone is a great phone, but relatively crappy media device.
Click to expand...

When I crap the iPhone is my best option for a media device. I expect the iPad to be a better media device in that setting. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back