Apple iPad
apple.com
apple.com
I'm excited at the very distinct deviation this is taking from the keyboard/mouse/monitor paradigm in something other than a strictly portable device. I think the OS looks pretty damn good and I can't wait to try using one myself.
It seems like you'd have to try to read some things on it, type, and surf the web before you could have an informed opinion about how useful/useless it is. I'm looking forward to reviews by people who have had a chance to spend a few days with one of these things.
Wait and see, that's the only sensible thing at this point in time, and try one as soon as you can get your grubby hands on it to see what it really feels like and works like.
Then we get some real information. All this hype goes nowhere, not for making decisions anyway.
Judging it for good or bad via pictures isn't particularly sensible.
It worked fine, but it wasn't especially cheap and it only worked with a relatively late model Mac. And in 2001, this meant something like 95% of computer owners wouldn't be able to put any music on it.
Worked like a dream too using ubuntu NBR and a 3G capable sim card.
Currently it is on loan to the father of a buddy of mine that is stuck in a hospital on 'extended stay'. Surf the net and stay in touch with the family.
Until I've had a chance to try one out for a while without commitment I'll stick to the little form factor PC, especially because I'm not locked in to some 'phone os'.
But I don't think it will take very long before someone gets ssh running on this device.
http://www.delicious-monster.com/images/librarypage/screensh...
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/136360/thumbs/s-IBOOKS-...
I'm not saying he has a legal bone to pick or anything, just that he is allowed a tweet or two to hrmph about it.
It's DOA as far as I'm concerned. The companies that were supposed to launch it are stuck in infighting mode and meanwhile the iPad is here and defines the market.
They could have had a good run of it if they managed to steal apples' thunder by launching 6 months early.
Have apple make the hype and run off with the customers, that would have been a classic coup. As it is they might as well pull the plug.
So if I were making a tablet, the iPad we saw today would be what I'd consider best case scenario. Do you think the cell phone OEMs felt that way when they saw the first iPhone? My guess is their reaction was quite the opposite. Guys at RIM and Motorola were probably like "holy shit, I didn't know a phone could be this good at web surfing." They still weren't going to shut the company down and give the money back to investors due to pricing and single carrier, I'm sure, but they undoubtedly weren't happy because what they saw was probably a lot better (or at least different) than they expected.
So the point is, the iPad is what they've been planning around since the rumors started picking up steam forever ago. I think if the JooJoo or any other pad doesn't make it to market, it won't be because of what you saw today.
In effect, JooJoo could run the iPad success in sense it doesn't have to explain what it does - "it's like iPad, just <whatever>".
If iPad gets traction, I'm sure it'll provide an incentive for other companies to follow. JooJoo is perfectly positioned there because they (supposedly?) already have a working device.
Uh-oh.
"1024-by-768-pixel resolution at 132 pixels per inch (ppi)" Sounds like a nice display.
http://lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=75
They did look considerably better:
I have seen laptops with displays that are that bad, but it's not the norm, but it doesn't make sense to use them as the basis for IPS-TN comparisons.
Them being in the tablet gives hope that these IPS panels will eventually end up in the Macbook, MBAir, and MBPro.
Multi-tasking? Flash?
I think the question was asked by quite a few people.
> iPod demos and tech specs pages on Apple's website don't advertise what formats it doesn't play.
Usually a format list is complete, if a format is not there, you know it is not supported. But I do not think that it makes sense for the iPad to list all web technologies, as in, it supports html, css, xhtml, txt, javascript, flash, ... . Flash is not just a format.
> An iPhone demo wouldn't show dropped calls, at least not if it were easily preventable.
Now this is a tough point. Of course they would not show a misfeauture in the demo. Perhaps they were making a point that missing Flash is not a misfeature after all, and that web pages should be written without a Flash dependency.
But in the end, I might be completely wrong and it might have been a slip up after all, I wouldn't know.
You can safely assume that a device like that will list Flash as a capability if it has it at this point.
If it was on purpose, it almost has to be some sort of dig at Adobe. I can't rationalize that one, but perhaps.
I sold my macbook; gave away my ipod; and I'm never going back.
Why does Apple assume their users are idiots that can't be trusted to make an informed choice?
For casual multi-tasking, the speed of the flash memory means that well-written apps should be able to save and restore their state pretty quickly even if the operating system does quit the app when the user switches to a new one. More serious multi-tasking (where you would want side-by-side windows and other major UI changes) would definitely reduce battery life and make things much more complex.
Haven't users been making that tradeoff for years with laptops?
Not multiple applications in the AppStore sense of the word.
No mention of free-form annotation of documents/images? Another weird omission for a device seemingly built to free people from the limitations of traditional mobile interaction.
An iWork suite and kickstand/keyboard peripheral? That's positively Microsft-ian.
A tri-fold leather folio kickstand? Alright, now we've steered directly into Sharper Image territory.
Seriously, what in the world just happened?
TBH I was hoping for haptic feedback and a webcam, or host connections that would allow it to work as a generic console for other devices - which would have driven the entry price to $800 or more, but felt really revolutionary. Apple will do well out of this, but the competition is coming up a lot closer than with the iPhone, where it was unarguably the best of its kind for a long time.
Overall, I think the total amount we spend on communication is going up like mad. 10 years ago a sophisticated 5 person household had a landline phone, a mobile phone and a dial up account or maybe a DSL. Today they have the phone, 5 mobiles(some of them expensive ones including lots of 3g acess), a home broadband connection (network) and now they're looking at adding some other device/plan package (Tablet, netbook, etc.).
As a rule, they don't really care that much about providing cheap additional services. They care about cannibalising other stuff. This isn't likely to replace anything. Apple is a good partner for avoiding skype-over-3G, tethering or some other antisocial behaviour.
If this thing does sell, coupling it with 29.95/unlimited 3G on AT&T should do wonders for the network.
That whole 'service' is a non-option in the US. At least until the iPhone is available elsewhere and AT&T's network load lessens.
They've dragged their feet for 3 years to update the network for the wildly successful iPhone. I doubt the iPad will push them any faster.
The main point for me is how Apple did come up with a such low resolution (1024x768@132ppi) for a screen that you hold so close to your eyes? The technology is there for much higher density screens. I was expecting Apple to lead the way.
There is nothing that machine do better than any laptop out there (notebook, laptops, etc.) And it’s the keypoint of the Steve keynote.
It’s a luxury machine designed to spend (and possibly waste) time and money by being entertained and by buying more, more and more instant gratification items without having a direct control of your expenses.
Kudos to Apple to be the best player in this category but it’s not a tool for people creating stuff.
1024x768 is the smallest standard 4:3 resolution to fit a doubled iPhone screen, which is 320x480, doubled to 640x960. Hardware support for pixel doubling could be faster and use less power than scaling a textured 3D quad. But regardless of how the scaling is performed, an integer multiple will probably look better than scaling to an arbitrary size.
One undesirable artifact of doubling the iPhone screen on a 1024x768 screen is that it would have borders all around the edges. And this is precisely what we see on their demo page. http://www.apple.com/ipad/app-store/
If I were Google/Palm, I'd work hard to get official, viable 3G->WiFi AP tethering working by the time the iPad ships. Then advertise it far and wide.
I understand Apple/AT&T want the revenue from an additional data subscription, but the option of saving $130 up front + $30/mo. is a pretty strong case against going all Apple, at least for me.
I guess the real need it is filling will be "I really want to buy something right now, but I already own everything I need".
I have a difficult time seeing the iPad fulfilling those needs -- Apple Mail is a far cry from full-fledged Outlook.
This device is not "for" me.
I was expecting them to dominate the textbook market with live-updates to etextbooks at an affordable price, annotations, social annotations, digital bookmarks, etc. If tertiary students are having to spring $100ish/book and buying x books/year, then blowing $500 on something to cart around campus might be an easier decision.
No real play at sketching or note taking either? Might not be as easy as it should be (always gave up on handwriting recognition with an old Dell handheld) but they could've included it I'm sure.
And after seeing a proof of concept of a multimedia version of Sports Illustrated, I was positive that Apple would take a crack at magazines and newspapers with an app-type store that handled subscriptions, editions, upgrades, premium/sealed sections, easy sales and links direct from magazines, etc.
The price is good and I actually could make use of this (replacing my iPhone for basically browsing the net at home on the couch or in bed, playing Freecell, etc) but I am very surprised that there's not more to it.
In my experience those people are reasonably well served by sitting down at a PC with a webcam.
You just don't hear much about them because, well, video conferencing is far less fun than it sounds.
You have to leave some features for the next release.
Can't wait for WWDC '10 to see a new OS with a better interface (at least for the iPad).
Is this going to be another thing with Apple like the single mouse button? Seems like they are really trying to stick to their guns. I mean, why would anyone want to use more than one app at a time right?
My suspicion is that next year's iPad will be the one to push the concept over the top for me. Though it's already compelling as an ebook reader and part time laptop replacement, one more iteration will seal the deal.
Jobs never saw a consumer market he didn't like. Certainly if I was given the option to go with the Kindle or an iPad, my choice would be clear - I want the device with more functionality. The Kindle DX is the same price as the iPad, with a slightly smaller screen.
Kindle killer? Time will tell.
Edit: At the Kindle DX price point the iPad does not provide 3G access though. And that's one of the biggest selling points for Amazon's device.
The Kindle has proven to be far superior to smartphones and laptops for reading large amounts of text. The iPad will be more versatile, but i'm not sure that's as important, since laptops and iPhones are already pretty versatile.
EDIT: Also, are there any new on support for arbitrary pdfs under iBooks? I have a gazillion articles for which the iPad would be perfect.
No handwriting recognition though.
Why would anyone (edit: a user who buys a below $1k machine) be inclined to purchase a netbook or even a 13" PC instead of this?
If your browser doesn't support Flash, you are still getting a more fragmented web experience than the person running Windows XP on her $250 netbook.
Does this add options to the market? Yes. Is it a game changer? Not even close.
The iPhone was a game changer because it redifined the market and got more people interested in smartphones, changing the entire cell phone industry.
In particular, as a developer, I'm excited about the opportunity to have solid multitouch on a bigger screen.
The first example that comes to mind is the fact that numerous games and other apps aren't possible on the iPhone/touch because the screen isn't big enough, such as two-player games on the same screen.
They will not buy the iPad except for perhaps personal use at home.
Some may want to type more than a sentence at a time, and some advanced power users may want to do wacky things like IMing while checking a website.
I have a $700 Dell Latitude E4300 (13" PC). It blows away the ipad in capabilities.
The App Store may not allow language interpreters, but as long as Bespin plays well with Safari and JavaScript, Bespin is just another valid webapp. And with a $30 unlimited 3G plan, I can code wherever I want (ok, wherever AT&T lets me). And to be very generous, the lack of multitasking would reduce coding distractions.
I'm extremely looking forward to trying this out!
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/frantic_steve_jo...