Apple tablet launch: live coverage
guardian.co.uk
guardian.co.uk
(My personal reaction to this approach was not entirely positive (e.g. guaranteed access to data and security of same?), but I take their point.)
P.S. Or wired input accessories. Wireless just seems more intuitively in line with the design and form factor.
Also, this was before the stronger rumors circulated about it hosting the iPhone version of their OS, although I was speculating/suspecting about just how locked up it would be. And without Flash (Gruber, et al.), its "general" browsing and online document editing potential will be limited.
If the tablet supports keyboards, people will think of it as half a laptop. The keyboard will be denigrated as an unofficially-required-but-not-included peripheral. Everyone will get stuck on the usability annoyances of lugging around a tablet with separated keyboard and 'how do you prop up the screen'. (Chance of integrated kick-stand is around 0)
Further, devs will get keyboards and write software that assumes people have them too, exacerbating the above.
A pen is iffy. I don't think Apple wants anyone thinking of the tablet as another-pen-based-mistake. Not while finger-on-iPod is such a smashing UI success. But the upside to a stylus is pretty huge (maybe they'll attempt to re-brand it as something else; a 'brush' perhaps).
But I think physical keyboards are right out.
Just an example: I don't think it would harm the iPhone now if Apple started to sell pens. It would have hurt the iPhone when it started.
(*the most common usability complaint I hear RE: Android, is apps that don't expose functionality through on-screen UI, iphone-style, but via the 'menu' button)
As for pens, Apple may be content to let third parties handle that. User expectations don't get confused, but much of their power can still be harnessed.
I agree that physical keyboards are out, though.
http://i.gizmodo.com/5458341/ipad-keyboard-dock-because-even...
http://i.gizmodo.com/5458292/the-apple-tablet-is-here-and-it...
It's always the same: During the event you get live transcripts from the usual suspects, maybe an unofficial audio or video stream that sounds and looks as if it were transmitted live from hell. After the event, with maybe ten to twenty minutes delay, the Apple website will be back up and after a few hours (four or so) you can watch the webcast provided by Apple. But maybe don't try that in the first four hours or so if you want decent quality.
We’ll tell you about the event as quickly as it unfolds
"This is where all of our live content for today’s Apple event will live. To make things perfectly clear, Apple won’t let us film inside the event. However, CrunchGear and a special surprise guest will offer a full play by play. Feel free to turn on your headphones at work and listen to the news as it happens or watch us live complete with coverage from San Francisco before and after the event.
We will start streaming live at 12:30pm EST/9:30am PST and the event begins at 1pm EST/10am PST."
http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/01/27/crunchgear-live-at-the-...
the liveblog sites are too overloaded for me to get much more than that.
Still, the more I find out about the device, the less interested I am. It looks like it's just going to be a huge iPhone. Fun, but not useful. And while I miss almost nothing about my previous smartphones before the iPhone, I do miss the ability to be able to install whatever I wanted. Locked devices foster an entirely different application ecosystem -- one that's not super useful for programmers, I find.
Obviously Windows and Linux desktop metaphors are inappropriate for a device of this size (the main reason they haven't taken off in this space previously), but to my mind the front end is only a shell anyway, no?
This isn't meant to rain on Apple's parade, though. Rather, kudos to them for pushing into new territory and bringing the future that extra step closer.