What is the Ultimate Role of the Apple Tablet?

[Trek2100]

I bet some people probably criticized the telephone when it came out too. And later people put down the Edsel.

The mere fact that two different things are criticized says nothing about the validity of the criticisms.

And remember when cell phones first arrived on the scene? Who would want such a monstrosity? It cost a fortune and monthly bills were terribly high for only a small amount of minutes. It took many years to convince my wife we should get one for emergencies when traveling. Now, how did we ever live without them?

 

[skinnylegs]

I don't think you really know what it means to have more than one app running at once.

Actually, I know *exactly* what it means to have more than one application running at a time. I do it a all day long when I'm working on my iMac and I *still* can't multitask for the life of me!

I was hoping VOIP wasn't 'gonna be mentioned. As Michael Corleone once said, "Every time I try and get out they drag me back in!"

Bottom line, VOIP sucks even under the best of circumstances and anyone that says otherwise is either lying or has never experienced a decent phone connection. Sorry dude but VOIP is for people who are so broke they can't afford a real phone line whether it be a land-line or cellular.

Also, please be advised that the vast majority of people don't even know what Skype or VOIP refer to so why would that be a priority in a device such as this?

So what's your point once again?

I'm really not trying to rag on you personally but I wish people would understand that the vast majority of people could give a fat rat's arse about what geeks are complaining about.

 

[skinnylegs]

Also.....

The reality is that most of the features you geeks want will be available within a week or two after the iPad hits the market via Geo or some other Jailbreak dude.

Truth be told? My iPhone is Jailbroken and I have (among other things) eAlert, which flashes a small preview window of incoming emails. It's cool but it's certainly not a make-or-break deal. My *biggest* complaint with the iPhone is that it doesn't allow for a true wallpaper. So, I wrote an email to Apple requesting that they consider this feature and whadaya know, the iPad allows for true wallpaper! Who says that Apple doesn't listen to their consumers!

Anyway, my point is that there is a rhyme and reason to Apple's default UI. I get that. I also get that guys like me (and possibly you) can bend those rules just a little to satisfy our inner geek needs.

The revolution is upon us, brethren, and it is the iPad. Viva la revolucion!

 

[ChazUK]

[/snip]



Is there a reason that person couldn't simply call you using a phone?

Perhaps the person making the call wanted to save some money and use their internet connection to call via voip? What about if it was an international call?

Has everyone forgotten the onslaught against Verizon, where people were saying "lollerz, you can't call and use data at the same time!", yet we're all supposed to accept that a lack of multitasking (Ala, BACKGROUND PROCESSING) is not an issue?

One thing I will say, if people out there do not like the iPad due to te lack of muktitassking (background processing of 3rd party apps), why not invest in one of the alternatives due or which have been released?


Multitasking - overhyped until iPhone OS has it.

 

[gwangung]

Multitasking - overhyped until iPhone OS has it.

Probably also put as "Good or great to have, but not necessary."

 

[ChazUK]

Probably also put as "Good or great to have, but not necessary."

That all depends on what you expect from your devices.

 

[joe.pelayo]

Seriously?



Probably.



No thank you. Time for an end to the Flash-ruled Web.



Maybe, but "those price points" are actually remarkably low compared to expectations. HP will have a tough time pricing its Slate competitively (though expect a "subsidy" from Microsoft to save face).



Absolutely. This better be in iPhone OS 4.0 (which is what the iPad will likely ship with).



I know, huh, and because all those "other phones" had all those "other features" for years, the iPhone was a great big stinky dud in the marketplace.

Would you prefer Microsoft Silverlight?

 

[Mike Teezie]

Choose TWO:

Multitasking
Battery Life
Ultra thin form factor

 

[hitekalex]

Multitasking - overhyped until iPhone OS has it.

And when it will finally be introduced - Jobs will describe it on stage as "revolutionary breakthrough technology that takes already incredible iPhone OS experience to a whole new level". And you will see the media gushing about how revolutionary and innovative Apple's market leading technologies truly are.. Never mind that the competition will have been doing this for years.

 

[dmacdonald]

Comparing things...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/danielmacdonald/4314509570/sizes/l/

 

[Luis Ortega]

What is the Ultimate Role of the Apple Tablet?

To be the latest fanboy accessory.

 

[pr5owner]

Choose TWO:

Multitasking
Battery Life
Ultra thin form factor

why set standards so low? so you can rip yourself off? i prefer all of them plus more, how about this?

Multitasking with expandable memory up to 8GB?
battery life, again expandable to what you choose (15hrs?)
thin enough to fit comfortably in my messenger bag or backpack or whatever
USB Ports, HDMI Ports
SDHC Card reader capable of reading 32GB SD Cards
1080p playback capable
16:9 widescreen format 1366x768 (not crappy 4:3 xga res)
upgradable storage? 640GB-1TB sound good?
around $500-$550

oh wait, i just described my netbook

What is the Ultimate Role of the Apple Tablet?

To be the latest fanboy accessory.

so true..... it will never be anything more than just something shiny to show off.

 

[LagunaSol]

oh wait, i just described my netbook

Awesome, it sounds like you have found the perfect product for your needs (and - bonus! - you already own it). So why keep whining about the iPad, which is clearly a different type of product for a different type of buyer? You just like the sound of your own endless griping?

so true..... it will never be anything more than just something shiny to show off.

Your range of vision appears to be about 6". Fortunately for us we don't have to rely on someone like you to create new technological approaches.

But hey, keep whining about fanboys, shiny things, and your awesome netbook if it makes you feel better. Even netbook makers see these low-profit, unsatisfying (to most consumers) devices as a dead end, but I'm sure you know better! 10 years from now you'll be like the guy sticking with DOS while the rest of the world has moved on to GUIs. Wait, no you won't - you'll own an iPad and declare that you always saw such a device as the wave of the future.

Would you prefer Microsoft Silverlight?

I would prefer HTML5 - proprietary standards (Flash, Silverlight) have no business on the Web.

 

[EthanNixon]

So, tell me again why you want one? I'm not trying to be smart but I've racked my brain to come up with a need ever since it was rumored. If I don't take it anywhere then between my iPod, iPhone, iMac and MBP I certainly do not need it at home. Oh, my bad, its not about need. Its about having the latest gadget. Yeah, that's me, Mr. Gadget. All you have to do is ask my wife. Actually, it would be good for her and she could use it in her woman cave. It's so easy to use a cave woman can do it. She really does have a woman cave with her own recliner, HDTV, satellite HDDVR and DVD player. She hates computers but with the touch screen it would be easy for her to shop the web. Uh, maybe I won't tell her about the iPad.

I am mainly buying it for a casual computing device that can be used by anyone who visits my house. There have been so many times I want to show someone a video or photos from trips, but they are difficult to see on the iPhone. I don't want to force them to come into my computer area to watch or view a few images or movies. With the iPad, I think I would be able to show them my website, pictures, and videos very quickly and efficiently. The screen will be big enough so people with bad vision can clearly see it better than an iPhone and they will be able to actually move around the UI with much more ease.

It may sound like a small usage to fill, but I am sold on the iPad as a device to consume between my iPhone and computer. It serves its purpose perfectly for me, as long as it execute like it has in the videos.

Something isn't stupid just because you don't use it.
I multitask all the time with my iphone. I use IM+, safari, and listen to music at the same time, and also get notified when new mail comes in. With 3G and IM+ it takes a while to connect and disconnect, when you launch it, so I use backgrounder to put it in the background, which solves that issue, EXCEPT then I don't get any notifications from the push service so I have to keep checking it. That's the BIGGEST limitation of the iphone OS for me, and besides that I don't need any multitasking.

Sorry, I missed your comment earlier.

I didn't mean to call the concept of an IM session stupid, I just haven't used it in years. It befuddles me that people can't just text message or call people today. I find it more and more that people are afraid to call now, I am not sure why at all. I always get these one word or two word random text messages asking me to call them. Why not call me? Sorry, I am going into a rant.

 

[Eric S.]

I am mainly buying it for a casual computing device that can be used by anyone who visits my house. There have been so many times I want to show someone a video or photos from trips, but they are difficult to see on the iPhone. I don't want to force them to come into my computer area to watch or view a few images or movies. With the iPad, I think I would be able to show them my website, pictures, and videos very quickly and efficiently.

I can understand that use, but couldn't a laptop be used for basically the same purposes? I mean, if you have a laptop, that is, I guess I don't see the need for an iPad to complement it.

 

[EthanNixon]

I can understand that use, but couldn't a laptop be used for basically the same purposes? I mean, if you have a laptop, that is, I guess I don't see the need for an iPad to complement it.

I don't have a laptop at the moment, but it could be used for the same thing. However, the iPad would better suit to be passed around and whatnot. The iPad better suits a laptop or a phone for what I want and I think that is what it was intended for, sharing.

 

[cyberddot]

I'm glad I ditched my iPhone, I mean...with only work and personal email, various social websites, a wired home phone line (small town with poor cell reception at home), a mailbox and a front door, I felt the cell phone was juuuust a bit redundant. Friends and family are concerned that I may be losing touch with reality...<cough>

The iPad's Ultimate Role for me is as a single plane computer for all the uses intended by Apple, as well as those intended by the thousands of app programers. I'll have no buyer's remorse.

I realized when I decided to make the choice to buy a station wagon that gets 50+ mpg, can burn biodiesel made in America (without aftermarket modifications) and has no bank of batteries, that what I want is definitely not what most Americans want.

 

[sigamy]

Not sure if anyone is still reading this but here are my thoughts on the iPad and this class of device...

I'm torn on the multi-tasking debate. I can definitely see some benefits to it, as others have mentioned--IM, internet radio, pausing a game to check something on the web, etc.

So, back to the device and what it is for. You have to step away from being a geek or a gadget person when looking a features that are in or out.

You have to think about Jobs and Apple's overall goal. Their goal is to design computing devices that are invisible. Think about that really hard. If you have ever written a user facing piece of computer software you know how hard that is to do.

I heard Leo Laporte say this on MacBreak podcast and I agree with him-- This is the device Apple has been thinking about for 30 years. This was the goal of the original Macintosh. An appliance. As easy as a toaster or telephone (old style analog home phone guys). It would do multiple things but be extremely easy to operate. The computer for the rest of us.

Think about a 1970s-80s era home telephone (not cellphone, not smartphone) and how simple the UI is yet how powerful the device is. They had 12 buttons and yet you could reach any one in the world. Pick it up, dial tone. No boot up, no login, no searching files/folders. Pick it up and press 7 (now 10) digits and make a connection to someone far away or right next door.

Think about your car. Learning to drive is difficult for 16 year olds but they soon get it. The UI is strange but extremely simple and effective. Key, steering wheel, pedals, turn signal, mirrors, gear box. Master a few basic things and a car can take you anywhere, until you hit an ocean.

This is what Apple wants to do for computing devices. It must kill Apple and Jobs that the Finder even still exists. Disk Utility, Settings, Terminal? Forget it. I'm thinking this is the stuff Jobs looks at and feels like a failure.

Apple has developed near zero configuration wireless networking, system wide desktop search, zero admin incremental backup, etc. These are core utilities to help take the computing away from computers.

So, now we have the iPad. To me, this is the future of media consumption in the world. In 2007 Jobs said that someday all phones will work like the iPhone. He was right. We are near to that now. Touch based devices that are powerful yet simple.

In 5-7 years time, devices similar to the iPad will be common in homes, schools, and vertical markets.

This is the perfect replacement for the newspaper, magazine, and book. It will be fun and great for photos, video and music. If you are over 35 you probably remember sitting in your room listening to LPs and reading the jacket. Kids will be able to do that again now, with all the additional benefits of digital music. Best of both worlds.

The iPad is a perfect "kitchen computer". Organize life with the Calendar and Address book, research with Web and Maps and dare I say it, store recipes and pay bills (key applications on every new computing platform over the past 30 years).

You will read the morning paper on it, the kids will take it to school, read and use interactive learning software on it, at home they'll play a game on it, then at bed time you will read a book, check email or watch a movie. It will be the computer that isn't a computer.

 

[DMann]

Err...Aiden, I'm quite surprised to read that. So basically you never seem to have used an iPhone.

Yet, that has never stopped him from making uninformed assumptions in the past, nor has it presently.

....the iPhone OS saves your application in the state you quit it without even prompting for permission (like, say Firefox does when quitting). So actually the App will be perfectly in the state you left it, though it quitted.

Yes, this renders multi-tasking for email, messaging, notes, etc., unnecessary - all email, texts, notes, web pages remain intact. (Safari multitasks up to eight pages)

Music and Voice Memos run in the background (multi-task) as do Mail, Safari, and push notifications. Hopefully, certain radio apps such as Pandora, MLB, etc. will gain multitasking abilities in OS4.

So I guess the whole 'multitasking'-discussion is a non-issue, as basically all the people bitching about multitasking fail to prove, why that should be possible in the first place.

Considering the speed benefits maintained by not having to swap out and fragment memory, combined with the speed of app switching and preservation of previous content, the iPhone OS solution seems to have the advantage here.

And after leaving that blunt statement: Does iPhone OS really force quit the App or is receiving a call an instance of multitasking, that Apple allowed?

If an incoming call is answered, then the app will close and immediately reopen once the call has ended. If you happen to be playing a game with a high score, you can choose not to accept the incoming call, send it to voice mail, continue with the game, and tend to the call afterward. Hopefully, developers will allow options for saving games in the future.

 

[seedster2]

The ultimate role of the iPad is to fill a void between the 500 to 900 price range while simultaneously locking users into consuming through iTunes while raking in huge profits.

 

[AidenShaw]

Err...Aiden, I'm quite surprised to read that. So basically you never seem to have used an iPhone.

...and you've never used Windows Mobile or one of the other OSs that have a stack-oriented paradigm (the app stays open, and you can return to the open app), right?

Several people here have commented that it's up to the Iphone app to save its state, and that not all of them do. (And even that ignores apps like IM clients that should be able to be active in the background. Nice that Apple supplied apps can background, too bad for the rest.) I agree with the people who think the current Apple phone OS restrictions are acceptable for a phone, but quite limiting for a larger device like the Apple pad.

No comment on the "blah, blah, blah" background noise.

The ultimate role of the iPad is to fill a void between the 500 to 900 price range while simultaneously locking users into consuming through iTunes while raking in huge profits.

That's what I said, but in a softer tone.

 

[applesupergeek]

...and you've never used Windows Mobile or one of the other OSs that have a stack-oriented paradigm (the app stays open, and you can return to the open app), right?

Several people here have commented that it's up to the Iphone app to save its state, and that not all of them do. (And even that ignores apps like IM clients that should be able to be active in the background. Nice that Apple supplied apps can background, too bad for the rest.) I agree with the people who think the current Apple phone OS restrictions are acceptable for a phone, but quite limiting for a larger device like the Apple pad.

No comment on the "blah, blah, blah" background noise.

That's what I said, but in a softer tone.

Back with your usual misinformed comments. Currently ipad is on 3.2 iphone OS X, modified for it, there is no indication that with 4.0 some multitasking is not going to be implemented, although multitasking is already implemented (as Dmann amongst other have described how), albeit in form suitable for a mobile device in it's current technological capabilities, without impacting such crucial aspects as speed, memory management, power management etc...

You just want to have something to whine about again and project your misery on apple's products.

The new catch phrase for the constant whiners is multitasking.

As if running an im in the background is that big a deal, as if you can't be notified via push notification and then go there have your chat. You ll have to have up and running some video or pages and do im as well.

Regardless of this whining I will side not with your personal opinion but with a team of computer scientists, programmers, and engineers at apple who have for reasons of power management, speed, security, user interface have wisely chosen the implementation they have. This is not an appeal to authority, this is an appeal to expertise, if common sense isn't all that common to you to understand it as a lot of people, forum members included, have already.

Yet, that has never stopped him from making uninformed assumptions in the past, nor has it presently.

Hear, hear.

 

[puffnstuff]

I was all for it for the people who aren't really computer savy and want something easy to use so they can hop on and check their facebook or what ever.

BUT! It's so closed you can't rely on the device itself like a netbook .

 

[skinnylegs]

Not sure if anyone is still reading this but here are my thoughts on the iPad and this class of device...

I'm torn on the multi-tasking debate. I can definitely see some benefits to it, as others have mentioned--IM, internet radio, pausing a game to check something on the web, etc.

So, back to the device and what it is for. You have to step away from being a geek or a gadget person when looking a features that are in or out.

You have to think about Jobs and Apple's overall goal. Their goal is to design computing devices that are invisible. Think about that really hard. If you have ever written a user facing piece of computer software you know how hard that is to do.

I heard Leo Laporte say this on MacBreak podcast and I agree with him-- This is the device Apple has been thinking about for 30 years. This was the goal of the original Macintosh. An appliance. As easy as a toaster or telephone (old style analog home phone guys). It would do multiple things but be extremely easy to operate. The computer for the rest of us.

Think about a 1970s-80s era home telephone (not cellphone, not smartphone) and how simple the UI is yet how powerful the device is. They had 12 buttons and yet you could reach any one in the world. Pick it up, dial tone. No boot up, no login, no searching files/folders. Pick it up and press 7 (now 10) digits and make a connection to someone far away or right next door.

Think about your car. Learning to drive is difficult for 16 year olds but they soon get it. The UI is strange but extremely simple and effective. Key, steering wheel, pedals, turn signal, mirrors, gear box. Master a few basic things and a car can take you anywhere, until you hit an ocean.

This is what Apple wants to do for computing devices. It must kill Apple and Jobs that the Finder even still exists. Disk Utility, Settings, Terminal? Forget it. I'm thinking this is the stuff Jobs looks at and feels like a failure.

Apple has developed near zero configuration wireless networking, system wide desktop search, zero admin incremental backup, etc. These are core utilities to help take the computing away from computers.

So, now we have the iPad. To me, this is the future of media consumption in the world. In 2007 Jobs said that someday all phones will work like the iPhone. He was right. We are near to that now. Touch based devices that are powerful yet simple.

In 5-7 years time, devices similar to the iPad will be common in homes, schools, and vertical markets.

This is the perfect replacement for the newspaper, magazine, and book. It will be fun and great for photos, video and music. If you are over 35 you probably remember sitting in your room listening to LPs and reading the jacket. Kids will be able to do that again now, with all the additional benefits of digital music. Best of both worlds.

The iPad is a perfect "kitchen computer". Organize life with the Calendar and Address book, research with Web and Maps and dare I say it, store recipes and pay bills (key applications on every new computing platform over the past 30 years).

You will read the morning paper on it, the kids will take it to school, read and use interactive learning software on it, at home they'll play a game on it, then at bed time you will read a book, check email or watch a movie. It will be the computer that isn't a computer.

I have read hundreds of posts on this very topic and you, my friend, have hit the nail squarely on the head.

OK, so maybe I've read *thousands* of posts.

 

[0092762]

I didn't mean to call the concept of an IM session stupid, I just haven't used it in years. It befuddles me that people can't just text message or call people today. I find it more and more that people are afraid to call now, I am not sure why at all. I always get these one word or two word random text messages asking me to call them. Why not call me? Sorry, I am going into a rant.

Maybe the other person is in a place where they can't talk loud, like a train or a bus. It befuddles me why one would use SMS while IM is free and can reach people on the computer as well as people on their phones. When I get the 2nd or 3rd revision ipad, I won't be buying a 3G version as it's utterly pointless when you can use the iphone's 3G that you're already paying for.