Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'iPad' started by madis00n, Feb 3, 2010.
In a word 'No' ...far to expensive!
OP, you can buy one. (Not exactly, but a Tablet OSX).
Woof, Woof - Dawg
You wouldn't even be able to use the touch screen. Pointless.
No, I'm still not convinced of the need for tablet computers.
I don't know why you decided to pick $2,000 for your question. I'm sure you would have gotten some yes's at $1,000. I expect Apple to back port all the touch stuff they developed for the iPad and it will become part of OS X, possibly as early as 10.7. Of course that would coincide with the launch of a tablet OS X machine costing somewhere between $900 and $1300.
You should have a 3rd option - "HELLS NO!"
It hurts enough to pay a little over $2K for a MP. I'm surely not going to pay it for an underpowered tablet. I don't really want a tablet but at $599 it's a nice supplement to my MBP for time I don't need a MBP but I do need something bigger than my iPhone.
No and I suspect the majority of consumers would not either. This is probably one main reason why apple chose the price point and features. If they tried to squeeze in OSX onto a tablet they would have to rework the UI in a major way to encompass the ease of use that they're known for. OSX is not designed to be used with a stylus or touchpad and so it would require large amounts of updating.
no, i dont want something that runs the full osx.
i think apple did a good thing by adapting the iphone os.
but i wouldnt pay $2000 regardless of the OS
Absolute not, no way now how!
If it was a convertable tablet Macbook Pro with both OS X and iPhone OS.
Honestly no matter the price, 1000 or 2000, if Apple simply dumped an unmodified OSX on the current iPad hardware, it would be the biggest turd on the planet. I don't think I have even seen an official specification for amount of ram. Guessing it's 512mb as I once read once about the iPhone (total guess).
If you wish to find out what this is like, do a bit of research on the Archos 9 tablet. While not as powerful of CPU, it's a netbook tablet with Win 7 shoved on it. Even the rabid Archos fanboi's are ready to toss this int the trash and pretend it never happened.
Unless of course you enjoy flash video at 2 fps... the tablet locking up every few seconds as it tries to catch up since it has no ram to use with traditional programs. Top that off with the fact you can't read any of the menu's because they didn't modify it so you get to look at a high res screen that is 9", making all the text your reading look like fine print.
If it had an i7 processor, 8 gigs of RAM, a TByte of storage, 10 hours of battery and a holographic display, then yes. Otherwise, no. A desktop is better for desktop stuff.
No, nor would I pay $499 for one because the whole concept is absurd. Desktops are not designed for multi-touch tablet machines. Why can't people realise this?
Agreed. No way would I pay that much.
Exactly. If I had a free tablet with OSX on it, I would mess around with it for 10 minutes and then stick it in a closet.
This is why companies don't design products based on democracy or consumer polling.
The general public is very bad at quantifying what they really want. They mis-interpret what they want and share it in a way that is not accurate, a lot of the time.
Ill let the picture do the talking...
No, why the hell would I pay that much?
If you think theres a markup on MBP's, think about how big there would be if that device was $2000.
Where did you pull the $2000 price point from?
no, i would get an i5 27in iMac for that much money...
No, OSX as is would be a terrible on a touch interface, Apple could learn a lot (ironically) from what Microsoft did with 7 to make Snow Leopard better for a touch interface.
To be honest, there is one out there. youve probably heard of it, its been quoted alot since the tablet was released
ive been looking at them for years, seem to be exactly the same as theyve always been,
But for a meagre $2000 im sure you could get one!
Forget the poll - - vote with your wallet!