iPad discussion

The magic smoke.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
PlayingMonkey
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:45 pm UTC
Location: Somewhere but not here
Contact:

iPad discussion

Postby PlayingMonkey » Thu Jan 28, 2010 5:08 pm UTC

Since the latest and greatest of new Apple products ave been unveiled, I may as well start a topic to see peoples opinions of it. Will it change how we surf the web forever? Or will it just be a huge sham that will lose a huge market?

Personally, the lack of Flash support is a huge turnoff. Also there is no easy way to transport the thing, unless you got deep pockets (get the pun?)

Keep it clean, no huge mac v pc arguments please! :oops:

I put my opinions and analyzed the system specs on my blog. Read it if you like =] (yes i'm shamelessly self- promoting) :mrgreen:
I require something interesting here. Alas, I have no intelligence or patience to deal with it.

Quibop

Read my ridiculous blog http://randomlyevolving.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Jan 28, 2010 7:07 pm UTC

Without going into specifics, it's ultimately nothing I want since I have an iPhone, an eee 901A, a 13" Macbook, and a desktop. In theory I could carry it around with me since I carry a messenger bag to and from work, but there's no Wifi in my office, and I don't want to spring MORE for 3G (both from the standpoint of the device itself and the service). Other than that, I never even use the eee since my Macbook is small enough to carry around the house and on planes and such, and an iPad would replace that more than anything.

That said, I think it will sell reasonably well. People who were considering an iPod Touch for the app support might be convinced to step up to this.

User avatar
bocochoco
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 8:22 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby bocochoco » Thu Jan 28, 2010 7:37 pm UTC

Lets see, you can either buy a big iPod Touch with a huge bezel, or pay a little more for a big iPhone with a huge bezel..

The icons are so largely separated that it looks like they took the original iPhone OS and stretched it.
It fails to have multitasking, so I couldn't stream pandora while reading my email.
It doesn't have a camera on it at all. Why? Is it incapable of video chatting over wifi?
Like most Apple products, it doesn't have a user replaceable battery, so when it starts to go I'm screwed.

The iPad is the biggest disappointment I've had in a while. Way to start off the year Apple. I'll stick to my netbook and my Android phone with PDANet.
Image

User avatar
Cleverbeans
Posts: 1378
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:16 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Cleverbeans » Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:11 pm UTC

I guess it was only a matter of time before Steve Jobs made inroads in the feminine hygiene market. I don't see how they'll be more absorbant pad, but I guess the market will decide if they're any good. :twisted:
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." - Abraham Lincoln

User avatar
J the Ninja
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:08 pm UTC
Location: Portland, USA
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby J the Ninja » Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:41 pm UTC

As a happy owner of an iPod Touch and a MacBook Pro, I'm not sure what the heck I'd use it for. Maybe it would be nice if I had an Apple desktop instead of a laptop, and could use a more "full-size" mobile thing...except it doesn't multitask. Not to mention it won't run things like Final Cut or Photoshop, which a 13" MacBook Pro will. The conclusion I've come to is that it is not capable of truly replacing an iPod Touch or a MacBook, and thus is forced to live as a complement to both. That's a lot of money, not to mention yet ANOTHER device to keep synced. The main reasons I haven't bought a Mac Pro yet are: 1, I'm still working on my associates degree and don't truly need it yet, 2, I need my money for other things too, and 3, the kicker: I already have an iPod Touch, a cell phone, a MacBook, and a homebuilt PC. Now I have to keep a FIFTH device in the loop? NO WAY I am getting an iPad too and making it 6.

That said, I am interested to see what apps people can come up with. IMO, it's up to the app store devs now to come up with a real use for this thing. However, already, iWork is interesting. Just this morning, when OpenOffice and a classmate were letting me down with less than an hour until our presentation, I just grabbed my MacBook Pro w/Keynote out of my backpack, and did some of my most impressive graphics ass-kicking ever. I ADORE Keynote, but my love of it and my disdain for OO and PowerPoint go in another thread.
Shishichi wrote:Applies a sexward force to counter the sexpression effect that Forward Advection can apply to fluid density, particularly along sextainer boundaries. In this way, the sextribute attempts to conserve the overall fluid volume ensuring no density loss.
(he/him/his)

User avatar
bocochoco
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 8:22 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby bocochoco » Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:11 pm UTC

J the Ninja wrote:As a happy owner of an iPod Touch and a MacBook Pro, I'm not sure what the heck I'd use it for.

J the Ninja wrote:... The main reasons I haven't bought a Mac Pro yet are: ...

J the Ninja wrote:... I just grabbed my MacBook Pro w/Keynote out of my backpack ...



Wut?
Image

User avatar
J the Ninja
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:08 pm UTC
Location: Portland, USA
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby J the Ninja » Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:38 pm UTC

bocochoco wrote:
J the Ninja wrote:As a happy owner of an iPod Touch and a MacBook Pro, I'm not sure what the heck I'd use it for.

J the Ninja wrote:... The main reasons I haven't bought a Mac Pro yet are: ...

J the Ninja wrote:... I just grabbed my MacBook Pro w/Keynote out of my backpack ...



Wut?


http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/
http://www.apple.com/macpro/


Make sense now? Sorry for going a little heavy on the Apple terminology, I forget not everyone is quite the iNerd I am. :P
Shishichi wrote:Applies a sexward force to counter the sexpression effect that Forward Advection can apply to fluid density, particularly along sextainer boundaries. In this way, the sextribute attempts to conserve the overall fluid volume ensuring no density loss.
(he/him/his)

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby phillipsjk » Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:23 pm UTC

Does this even belong in hardware?

There is another thread discussing the iPad in # Board index ‹ Sound and Fury ‹ News & Articles
Apple launches iPad tablet

I checked the rules of this forum: it does not have to be a "computer" per se, but the forum mainly seems to focus on electronics/mods.
Did you get the number on that truck?

User avatar
PlayingMonkey
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:45 pm UTC
Location: Somewhere but not here
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PlayingMonkey » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:31 am UTC

I just thought this was the most appropriate forum. If someone wants to move/merge/delete it it's fine by me. I didn't see there was another thread about this.
I require something interesting here. Alas, I have no intelligence or patience to deal with it.

Quibop

Read my ridiculous blog http://randomlyevolving.blogspot.com/

stephentyrone
Posts: 778
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:58 pm UTC
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: iPad discussion

Postby stephentyrone » Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:25 am UTC

PlayingMonkey wrote:I just thought this was the most appropriate forum. If someone wants to move/merge/delete it it's fine by me. I didn't see there was another thread about this.


I think this forum is entirely appropriate. It is, after all, hardware. Hopefully this won't decay into religious wars territory.

I'm recusing myself from the discussion here, due to conflict of interest =)
GENERATION -16 + 31i: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum. Square it, and then add i to the generation.

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:48 am UTC

phillipsjk wrote:Does this even belong in hardware?

There is another thread discussing the iPad in # Board index ‹ Sound and Fury ‹ News & Articles
Apple launches iPad tablet

I checked the rules of this forum: it does not have to be a "computer" per se, but the forum mainly seems to focus on electronics/mods.

We could certainly discuss the hardware aspects here. For example, I find it interesting that Apple didn't disclose how much RAM is in the iPad, although they did say a fair bit about other internals. Also, it seems that a lot of people suspect the Apple A4 is based on a Cortex-A9MP - meaning it has a multicore processor (which, in turn, really makes me wonder why multi-tasking isn't happening).
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

User avatar
J the Ninja
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:08 pm UTC
Location: Portland, USA
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby J the Ninja » Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:55 am UTC

PhoenixEnigma wrote:
phillipsjk wrote:Does this even belong in hardware?

There is another thread discussing the iPad in # Board index ‹ Sound and Fury ‹ News & Articles
Apple launches iPad tablet

I checked the rules of this forum: it does not have to be a "computer" per se, but the forum mainly seems to focus on electronics/mods.

We could certainly discuss the hardware aspects here. For example, I find it interesting that Apple didn't disclose how much RAM is in the iPad, although they did say a fair bit about other internals. Also, it seems that a lot of people suspect the Apple A4 is based on a Cortex-A9MP - meaning it has a multicore processor (which, in turn, really makes me wonder why multi-tasking isn't happening).


It's not like it was ever a hardware issue. Here's some quick specs from my first-gen, non-jailbroken iPod Touch, courtesy of the iStat app:
IMG_0009.PNG


Notice how Mail and the music player are still running in the background, plus the usual swarm of daemons?
Shishichi wrote:Applies a sexward force to counter the sexpression effect that Forward Advection can apply to fluid density, particularly along sextainer boundaries. In this way, the sextribute attempts to conserve the overall fluid volume ensuring no density loss.
(he/him/his)

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby phillipsjk » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:09 am UTC

Okay, point taken. The other thread is a bit of a flame-war.

*hides* 8)
Did you get the number on that truck?

User avatar
PlayingMonkey
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:45 pm UTC
Location: Somewhere but not here
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PlayingMonkey » Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:31 pm UTC

PhoenixEnigma wrote:
phillipsjk wrote:Does this even belong in hardware?

There is another thread discussing the iPad in # Board index ‹ Sound and Fury ‹ News & Articles
Apple launches iPad tablet

I checked the rules of this forum: it does not have to be a "computer" per se, but the forum mainly seems to focus on electronics/mods.

We could certainly discuss the hardware aspects here. For example, I find it interesting that Apple didn't disclose how much RAM is in the iPad, although they did say a fair bit about other internals. Also, it seems that a lot of people suspect the Apple A4 is based on a Cortex-A9MP - meaning it has a multicore processor (which, in turn, really makes me wonder why multi-tasking isn't happening).


I heard anywhere from 256 to 512 MB. I agree it's really weird.

Also the lack of camera is kinda dumb. I mean they have a mic so it could run skype, but of it's lack of camera is kinda stupid. Imagine having a video conversation anywhere or something. They might fix that later.

also, no flash support is kinda dumb. Anyone know if it has java?
I require something interesting here. Alas, I have no intelligence or patience to deal with it.

Quibop

Read my ridiculous blog http://randomlyevolving.blogspot.com/

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby phillipsjk » Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:14 pm UTC

As far as I know, they prohibit anything that allows you to run unsigned applications. The banned a C(omodore)64 emulator for that reason.
Did you get the number on that truck?

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: iPad discussion

Postby ash.gti » Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:18 pm UTC

PlayingMonkey wrote:also, no flash support is kinda dumb. Anyone know if it has java?


Flash on laptops drains batters super quick, also does flash even work on an arm processor?
I can see why they wouldn't put it on there.

Java, on the other hand, I don't see why they don't include some sort of java support on the iPhone OS. It would be kinda nice, plus it has hardware support for java (see arm's jazelle) unless they made a completely new arm processor that doesn't include the jazelle extensions, which would be odd, but not totally unbelievable.

I wana know more about the A4. I haven't seen any good tech specs on it other than its clock speed. Since it's running other iPhone apps, its gotta be an arm processor, or they have a rosetta like emulation layer running, but highly unlikely. I know Apple does have a licensee to developer arm processors, and since they bought that other company out 2 years ago that was all about processor design, the A4 doesn't surprise me, I just wish there was more public knowledge of it.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

stinch
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: iPad discussion

Postby stinch » Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:31 pm UTC

The Nokia N810 runs on ARM and shipped with flash support. The performance is so bad you can't actually use it for anything but flash can run on ARM.

User avatar
lulzfish
Posts: 1214
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:17 am UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby lulzfish » Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:42 pm UTC

Flash is closed and owned by Adobe, Apple doesn't have much of a choice in Flash support, that's why the iStuff doesn't support it either.
Flash is holding the Internet back and I hate it.

spedione
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:16 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby spedione » Sat Jan 30, 2010 2:16 am UTC

It's been stated by Adobe several times that Apple is the only thing keeping Flash off of the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.

User avatar
lulzfish
Posts: 1214
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:17 am UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby lulzfish » Sat Jan 30, 2010 2:49 am UTC

spedione wrote:It's been stated by Adobe several times that Apple is the only thing keeping Flash off of the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.

Ah, because of the "no running foreign code" thing?
That kinda makes sense. Well, I'm off to go blame Adobe for similar problems on non-Apple devices. Cheerio.

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Sat Jan 30, 2010 3:52 am UTC

Talking about the iPad in a void is a little difficult. For instance, are the tradeoffs Apple appears to have made better then, say, the ones Archos made with the Archos 9 PCtablet? The iPad gives better battery life, 3G, and probably a better user interface, but the Archos has multitasking (with a "real" OS), more connectity and I/O options, and more storage for the dollar. Is Apple's combination a better fit for most people?
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

User avatar
LinuxPenguin
Posts: 486
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:37 am UTC
Location: Earth. (it's the pretty blue one)
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby LinuxPenguin » Sat Jan 30, 2010 9:36 pm UTC

I'll chime in here. I've read the specs on it, and i have to say, it looks pretty sweet for me. The lack of flash is a bit annoying, but not really a big deal to me. The lack of multitasking is also slightly irritating, but not a deal breaker to me. It looks like a great travel companion for me, as it gives me a way to offload pics from my digital camera, get on the innerent, email, and multimedia.

I plan on snagging a wifi model as soon as they ship.
 Mac User (Running OS X, Linux, and Chrome OS)

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby phillipsjk » Sun Jan 31, 2010 2:06 am UTC

I forgot you can install (GNU/)Linux on Mac hardware; http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2083&p=1638086#p1638086 (My Oldworld Powermac is still collecting dust).

Are you planning on "Jail-breaking" the thing?
Did you get the number on that truck?

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Axman » Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:47 am UTC

It doesn't have USB or SD; you can't use it to manipulate photos.

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:20 am UTC

Axman wrote:It doesn't have USB or SD; you can't use it to manipulate photos.

Unless you want to buy the Apple branded-and-taxed camera kit, of course. Which, IIRC, is basically an SD card reader and USB cable. You had better hope it's compatible with either your card or camera, too. Even with that, I'm not sure what kind of manipulation options you'd have . . .

EDIT: Word is the A4 is pretty much marketing speak. It's basically an ARM Cortex-A9 MPCore CPU and an Mali GPU, with an Apple logo. No word on how many cores or which version of Mali, although a lot of rumors seem to be single core and Mali 55?
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Endless Mike » Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:25 pm UTC

PhoenixEnigma wrote:
Axman wrote:It doesn't have USB or SD; you can't use it to manipulate photos.

Unless you want to buy the Apple branded-and-taxed camera kit, of course. Which, IIRC, is basically an SD card reader and USB cable.

Until a dozen companies put out identical items.

Yeah, it should have these built in, but I don't think there's anything stopping other companies from making the peripherals.

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Axman » Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:31 pm UTC

It's not as if there aren't alternatives and won't be many, many more in the future. The only reason to get an iPad is if you want access to the apps and media backends. From a hardware perspective, the point is moot; there's no particular reason to consider it.

LikwidCirkel
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:56 pm UTC
Location: on this forum (duh)
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby LikwidCirkel » Mon Feb 01, 2010 6:26 pm UTC

I read a blog (I think on Slashdot) addressing the criticism and pointing out who the target market is, and I'm mostly inclined to agree.

See.. for us nerds and people who are comfortable with desktop computers, the iPad might not have much to offer, but you probably aren't the target market.

Where it shines is in the fact that it has an interface that is so unbelievably dummy-proof that your dog could use it. More realistically, your Gramma could probably figure it out in 5 minutes, and that's just not the case with full-fledged desktop environments, (desktop OSX, Windows, Desktop Linux etc.).

Realize that it might actually be appealing to people who don't like - or don't regularly use computers because they're unnecessarily complicated (which they ARE for the majority of users). Although I have no need or use for it myself, I'm actually glad to see devices emerge with stupidly simple interfaces.... it's something that's long been needed in the computing world.

The advantage of Apple-only approved apps, is again one of simplicity. Say a user wants a program to do X. In many other computing worlds, including mobile systems like Android, the immense number of available apps adds unnecessary confusion and complexity to the experience.. and that is exactly what Apple wants to avoid.

That's not to say, however, that Apple couldn't allow more open-ness for power users who actually want that kind of thing, but it should not be open by default. In reality few will care, because the hackers already have versatile computers, and people who buy the iPad will be looking for a very straightforward user experience.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Endless Mike » Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:55 pm UTC

LikwidCirkel wrote:The advantage of Apple-only approved apps, is again one of simplicity. Say a user wants a program to do X. In many other computing worlds, including mobile systems like Android, the immense number of available apps adds unnecessary confusion and complexity to the experience.. and that is exactly what Apple wants to avoid.

If that's the case, they've already failed miserably.

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby phillipsjk » Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:58 pm UTC

Working around censorship is not a "straightforward user experience."

The average person will be negatively effected by the restrictions as well. Apple gets veto power over what you can do with the device. That does not stop with telling you what apps you are allowed to run.
Did you get the number on that truck?

LikwidCirkel
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:56 pm UTC
Location: on this forum (duh)
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby LikwidCirkel » Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:32 am UTC

Don't take me too seriously.. I'm more or less just trying to see how people respond to certain slants.

Ok, how about this?

On the topic of viruses and malware avoidance, I hope we can all recognize that the end-user is very often the weak point of entry for an attack. Isn't it possible that the more "open" a system is, with more contributing parties, the more susceptible it is to being compromised?

Having a single entity controlling content would most likely make the system a heck of a lot easier to keep relatively secure, wouldn't ya think?
A lot of people are just looking for media, and toys, essentially, so they might not really care who it's really coming from, or that the device is big-brother limited. In a way Apple protects them from the big bad world. haha.

I'm not really condoning Apple's policies.. All I'm saying is that are reasons why such things might be desirable to a particular segment of customers. There are a lot of different demographics out there, and companies try to market shit to everyone.

Guys like me, and many people on here build computers and hack away.. because we understand how. Just because I've got no need or desire for the device or the associated media control doesn't mean that there aren't people out there who actually like that kind of thing, and would benefit from it.

User avatar
phillipsjk
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:09 pm UTC
Location: Edmonton AB Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby phillipsjk » Tue Feb 02, 2010 6:41 pm UTC

Somebody pointed out (forget where) that it would be interesting to see how well the App Store would stand up to being inundated with malware authors. The registration fee may discourage some, so the exploits will likely be very targeted to avoid arousing suspicion. If Apple reviews the code, the malware authors can get around that by having the app phone home for instructions every month. In other words, "lock-in" may only provide the illusion of security.
Did you get the number on that truck?

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Tue Feb 02, 2010 11:32 pm UTC

LikwidCirkel wrote:Don't take me too seriously.. I'm more or less just trying to see how people respond to certain slants.

Ok, how about this?

On the topic of viruses and malware avoidance, I hope we can all recognize that the end-user is very often the weak point of entry for an attack. Isn't it possible that the more "open" a system is, with more contributing parties, the more susceptible it is to being compromised?

Having a single entity controlling content would most likely make the system a heck of a lot easier to keep relatively secure, wouldn't ya think?
A lot of people are just looking for media, and toys, essentially, so they might not really care who it's really coming from, or that the device is big-brother limited. In a way Apple protects them from the big bad world. haha.

I'm not really condoning Apple's policies.. All I'm saying is that are reasons why such things might be desirable to a particular segment of customers. There are a lot of different demographics out there, and companies try to market shit to everyone.

Guys like me, and many people on here build computers and hack away.. because we understand how. Just because I've got no need or desire for the device or the associated media control doesn't mean that there aren't people out there who actually like that kind of thing, and would benefit from it.
Just for the heck of it, I'll play devils advocate to your devil's advocate.

I don't think we can draw a correlation between system openess and security. GNU/Linux, by it's nature, is extremely open, but it generally considered quite secure. OpenBSD likewise. A Microsoft-only system, on the other hand, is closed- and single-source, but probably wouldn't be regarded as secure.

That said, the level of control Apple keeps over the apps the can be installed makes it much harder for people to install things they shouldn't. It's not really very different then a normal OS with a decent and properly set up user control system, except there's no way around it.

I've been trying to figure out the demographic that is going to go for this - I'm sure it will sell decently, but to who? It's not going to be (many) people's only computing platform - it's being pitched as a third platform, which is where it makes sense to. It's not a real replacement for a smart phone, or a laptop (or desktop, for that matter), and I think the vast majority of people are better servered by having those first. Which implies that most people getting an iPad already have at least a passing level of computer literacy and can handle a full OS. So why limit what they can do on the iPad?

I'm sure there are some people who this is a good fit for. I think it could be really neat, with the right apps, in a school enviroment. It might pair well with a "dumb" phone. But as someone looking for something to replace or supplement my laptop right now, the iPad is pretty low on the list.
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

hooktail154
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 7:21 pm UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby hooktail154 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:13 pm UTC

Originally, when the iPhone was being developed, Apple went to Adobe and said "Hey, do you wanna port flash to this thing?", to which Adobe replied "No, we think it'll never catch on"

Your grudge should not be held against Apple for the lack of flash, but Adobe.

Fortunately for them, Adobe can't be too ashamed, seeing as Verizon also turned down Apple for the service contract on the iPhone. Worst. Business Decision. Ever.

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Axman » Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:27 pm UTC

The reason Apple does not want Flash on their devices is because if you make an App with Flash you can sell it on every other Flash-capable platform, which is almost everything.

Every year at CanSecWest there is a competition to gain superuser access to the leading Apple, Linux, and Microsoft OS, and ever since Vista, the only way to crack Microsoft (and Linux but this was discovered later) has been via Flash. OS X is a surprise loser in these competitions, it goes down on day one.

Of course, there are many, many applications that weaken a platform's security, and their ubiquity in Windows likely makes it the least secure in the wild; still, in a vacuum, that closed platform is very secure.

And I'm not sure it was a bad idea for Verizon. They begrudged Apple for the exclusivity pact (they would not have been able to carry other smartphones) and AT&T essentially had to buy every iPhone from Apple--who over-charged them for the devices by scads--leaving Apple with a huge wad of cash and AT&T with a very red streak that took years to climb out of.

User avatar
GrawSith
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:46 pm UTC
Location: Down-frickin'-under.
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby GrawSith » Wed Apr 07, 2010 8:55 am UTC

I was very "meh" toward the iPad until I saw that it makes a pretty good games console. $500 for a locked-down tablet computer? No way. $500 for a games console with it's own marketplace built-in (and games from $1.99)? Sold.

As long as game developers fill the App Store with good, high-quality games (and not crummy ports or Flash ripoffs), I'd be happy to buy one.

Corun
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 11:57 am UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Corun » Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:25 pm UTC

GrawSith wrote:As long as game developers fill the App Store with good, high-quality games (and not crummy ports or Flash ripoffs), I'd be happy to buy one.


Problem is, most of the games on the iPhone don't hold my attention for more than 5 minutes. Though the iPad has the screen real estate to do some much more interesting things, particularly with RTSs.
"So long and thanks for all the fish" - In memory of Douglas Adams

Kaneda
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 3:47 am UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Kaneda » Sun Apr 18, 2010 7:31 pm UTC

Does anyone know if the iPad would be able to run something like Photoshop?

I'm not really sure if it is more like a giant iPod or a tablet Macbook?

Also, going on a tangent, would it be possible to get some kind of waterproof case that allows the touch screen to be used? I'm thinking iPad + Hot tub would be cool :D

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: iPad discussion

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Sun Apr 18, 2010 7:43 pm UTC

Kaneda wrote:Does anyone know if the iPad would be able to run something like Photoshop?

I'm not really sure if it is more like a giant iPod or a tablet Macbook?

Also, going on a tangent, would it be possible to get some kind of waterproof case that allows the touch screen to be used? I'm thinking iPad + Hot tub would be cool :D


J the Ninja wrote: Not to mention it won't run things like Final Cut or Photoshop

It runs iPhoneOS. In terms of application support, it's exactly the same as an iPhone or iPod Touch. You, uh, might want to read the thread.

As for a waterproof case, I'd suspect it might be possible (combining a silcone case and one of those conductive screen protectors, basically), but getting it on/off might be tricky, and I'd expect it to be pretty expensive (based on the cost of waterproof camera cases, which is the closest thing I can think of).
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

Kaneda
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 3:47 am UTC

Re: iPad discussion

Postby Kaneda » Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:06 pm UTC

Oops, missed that post.
I read most of the thread ;)


Return to “Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests