Hacker News Reader

Comment by nickpp | Hacker News Reader

Let me sum them up for you: there isn't any.

Just like the iPhone when it appeared, there really is no rival to the experience iPad offers, to its hardware+software+touch combo.

The closest it MAY come, could be Android, someday. Again, just like with the iPhone.

View on HN

Chrome OS is intended to run on hardware not entirely dissimilar to the iPad (get rid of the keyboard, put in a touch screen), with similar types of on-line connectivity.

Chrome OS will be to the iPad what Android is to the iPod.

Can Chrome OS run games, or music-making applications (synthesizers, drum machines), or really anything that isn't in a web page?

That's a good question, and I get where you are coming from with it. The iPad/phone/touch devices let you run local apps that can take more efficient advantage of the hardware the software is running on. But from what I can tell, the vast majority of apps are simply portals to data on the internet anyway -- in some cases just exact reproductions of the mobile version of some site (Wolfram Alpha anybody). And as Google has demonstrated, pretty advanced apps can be built on the web, that work great on the phone (and has the nice side benefit of circumventing Apple's ridiculous approval process).

I think that if you look strategically where Google is heading (faster Javascript, native apps - which I think now supports ARM, embedded flash, etc.), running stuff embedded in a web page shouldn't really be any less efficient than running a local app.

The good short-term rebuttal is that Apple can do it now, with local apps.

Longer term, if the development ecosystem for web-based apps gets sophisticated enough, it won't really matter if you own an iPhone, iPad, Chrome OS device, Android phone, whatever...because the app will be pulled off of a website completely circumventing Apple's walled garden.

Your two examples, games and music-making apps, are already widely available over the web right-now. So yes, a Chrome OS box can run those things.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/open_source/sho... http://armorgames.com/ http://aviary.com/tools/Myna#googtrans/auto/en http://blog.soundseller.eu/2009/11/online-audio-editor-aviar... http://vimeo.com/8525101 http://blog.soundseller.eu/2010/03/spectrum-visualization-wi...

Why not Android on a tablet? (Or, to put it another way, why does Chrome OS exist?)

Because with small screens and underpowered chips web technologies can't cut it right now for many tasks, hence Android. This will become less and less true over time, and bigger screens, faster chips, new tech like WebGL and Apple convincing the public that a tablet doesn't need to be the same as their old computer all help it happen faster and make Chrome OS more compelling long term.

and most of all it's a status symbol.

Which is exactly what you want if you're going for the high-margin high-end of the market.

The iPhone was huge because it was such a huge leap and unexpected departure from previous phones. It created awe and generated desire from the moment it was unveiled. It was obvious to those who get tech that the iPhone would be huge.

People who underestimated the iPhone are now overcompensating by being bullish on the iPad because they fail to understand that these are not the same thing. The unveiling of the iPad did not engender any of the feelings of awe that iPhone's did. Apple unveiled the worst tablet device they possibly could have. It was completely predictable. Every usage we've seen of the iPad has involved someone contorting his body to accommodate the device.

The iPhone offered a users things they didn't think were possible with a phone, and these were things they clearly wanted. The iPad offers users nothing they can't do using a laptop. It is an attempt at forcing a style of usage onto users that is clearly undesirable.

People will try to hype this thing and pretend they like it for as long as possible, but one can only sustain a lie for so long. This will be the end of the aura that Apple has been building for the past decade. It is clear as night and day.

I don't know if it will be a hit or not, but I started becoming uncomfortable when the biggest touted "feature" in the keynote appeared to be the number of people's credit cards that Apple had on file. That didn't sound like a typical Steve "bicycle for the mind" Jobs thing to repeatedly dwell on. Certainly doesn't excite me as a gadget consumer.

I watched the keynote and can't say that I heard it repeatedly dwelled upon. Where was it mentioned?

Screenshot of slide:

http://obamapacman.com/2010/01/official-steve-jobs-apple-ipa...

They mentioned it in one slide, did they mention it anywhere else? That was my point.

It was obvious to those who get tech that the iPhone would be huge.

There were a lot of people who claim to "get tech" who were not bullish on the iPhone.

People who underestimated the iPhone are now overcompensating by being bullish on the iPad because they fail to understand that these are not the same thing.

I knew from the first moment the iPhone was a potential game changer, yet I'm also bullish on the iPad. (In fact, I just got back from the store and I'm about to attempt my first sync in about 30 seconds.)

The iPad is the best example to date of a relatively new category: mobile ultra-light touch tablet. As it is now, it cannot replace a laptop. However, if you extrapolate what Apple did with the iPhone in 3 releases to what they will do with iPad, then it becomes obvious that they will be able to replace and better the use case for most netbooks by then.

People who now underestimate the iPad don't get it: It's the Ecosystem! That's the key point that makes the iPhone the best deal, and where Android is playing catchup. (And it appears to be doing a good job at it.) Right now the iPad can leverage the same ecosystem. That's a powerful combination that a lot of techies don't get.

"It created awe and generated desire from the moment it was unveiled."

interestingy enough, I heard a lot of people saying the exact opposite: that the iphone was a flop, and on, and on. Actually, a lot of 'gurus' still say that kind of stuff today (specially a lot of high profile Nokia fanboys/evangelists)

No, that's my whole point. People who didn't get the iPhone don't understand technology, even though they may claim to. You have to look at their records to judge whether they actually get it or not. If it wasn't obvious to you that the iPhone would be great, then your opinion on the iPad or other technology really has no value.

Who cares about the "experience" if it doesn't run vim and has no sd card slot?

Those people who don’t use vim and don’t need a SD card slot? I.e. most people?

Hell, I'd dare to say most hackers don't use VIM or need a SD slot on their tablet.

I don't think hackers will use a tablet to do some serious work. For that we have already our computers. I use Vim, but it's the last thing I could think about speaking of a tablet.

The iPad (and all his wanabe rivals) have a different target than hackers.

Yes you can access an sd card (search the apple.com for iPad Camera Connection Kit) and no you don't need to run vim on the iPad.

Who would buy an ugly connection kit that sticks out of the device for an overpriced tablet? Okay, I forgot about the normal Apple user.

VIM: Fuck your experience, use me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com