Hacker News Reader

Comment by allertonm | Hacker News Reader

The author seems to assume that Apple is either unaware of the contradiction or aware of it with no plan to change. In other words, that the management of Apple is either stupid or blind. Recent history does not suggest that either is the case.

It seems more likely to me that Apple is very much aware of the contradiction but has plans to change this, but no intention of telling us about it yet.

Gotta wonder what that huge data centre they are building is for, eh?

View on HN

The author mentions the data center and it's likelihood as a solution. His point was that until that DC comes on line and is used as a solution it's disingenuous to call the iPad a post-pc device because it isn't, it's a peripheral.

If and when they fix that then you can start calling a post-pc device.

Meanwhile an Android pad really is a post-pc device right now no waiting.

What can you do with an Android pad that you can't do with an iPad bought unlocked from the store?

Transfer music and data from/to the device using your favorite OS and well-known applications, for one.

So, you can't sync your music with a Linux machine. That's it, really?

Watch 90% of the streaming video out there? Use your choice of fully functional browsers? Download and listen to Amazon MP3 store purchases? Run arbitrary software, even if it's competitive to the platform provider? Mount a usb flash drive?

I'm not sure that was the list that you were looking for, but there it is. How post-PC is it really if every time you have to do something Steve Jobs might not approve of you need to borrow someone's laptop?

The 90% of streaming video claim is utterly false - it's at least 54% and climbing very fast. If we're going to do this, let's at least not just make stuff up.

(http://www.loopinsight.com/2010/10/27/54-of-web-video-is-now...)

The closed platform argument is perfectly valid, but has nothing to do with whether we're moving into the world of Post PC devices or not.

It's pretty obvious that we're never going to get away from the PC era if we have to drag along all of the legacy.

Why not list things like "run windows apps" and "run gnome" for good measure?

I'm going to skip most of your comments, because if you're trying to equate "download amazon mp3s" with "run (binary emulated) windows apps (built for a different cpu)" you're clearly just looking to score points for the home team.

But as far as the "at least 54% of streaming video is html5" I had to laugh. Yes, I realize you linked to someone who said it was true so it must be. I take it, though, that you don't actually try to watch web video with nothing but an html5 client - or you'd never have felt comfortable repeating that. Statistics of course can be bent, and I'm sure what they're doing is weighting for volume - and since youtube has 18 zillion videos and supports html5 that's probably at least 40% of their number right there.

However, in the real world...

MeFeedia’s index includes over 33,000 publishers including Hulu, CBS, ABC, YouTube, Vimeo, DailyMotion and others.

  Hulu: Hulu requires Flash Player 10.0.32 or higher. Please download and install the latest version of Flash Player before continuing. (Indeed, yes, you can pay $8/mo for a dedicated ipad client)
  CBS: Should work on the iPad - sadly, it only gave me: This content requires Adobe Flash Player 9. Please click here to install it.
  ABC: This content requires Adobe Flash Player - Ver 10.1. Click here to get the latest version of Flash (iPad? Download an app!)
  Youtube: It works!
  Vimeo: It works!
  Dailymotion: claims html5 support but no video plays (FAQ: Why is the video not playing? You might need to update you browser's Flash plug-in)

So OK, 33% (or maybe even 50%-66%) of their main list supporting html5 is actually pretty good - and it's only 21% below their figure. The only problem? That list is slow pitch softball, every single provider on that list publicly supports iPad content in one way or another.

It almost makes you wonder, who paid for that survey?

Check a few more...

  FOX: We're Sorry! You need to update your flash player
  NBC: The NBC video experience requires flash
  Al Jazeera: We're Sorry! You need to update your flash player
  Comedy Central: To view this movie you need the Adobe Flash Player plugin. 
  Amazon Instant Video: You do not have a supported version of Adobe Flash, a requirement for watching Amazon Instant Video
  PBS: To view the full experience of this website, please download and install Adobe Flash Player 9.
  Metacafe: Needs flash
  IMDB: In order to play this video, you must have Flash 8 or higher installed on your computer
  Yahoo Video: Yahoo! Video requires a more recent version of the Adobe Flash Player.
  etc etc etc

Obviously, I could list those for pages. I think you get my point.

All tests done with Chrome + VP8 & Opera w/ gstreamer h.264. I couldn't find my iPhone charging cable.

Why isn't weighting for volume appropriate? Sure, fewer than 54% of sites may support HTML5 video. But who cares if those sites aren't where most of the videos are?

You're trying to claim that your handpicked list of sites which deliberately avoids sites that have publicly stated support for the iPad is a better methodology? Who's looking to score one for the home team now?

I'd take this seriously if you found any 3rd party support for your 90% claim.

And yes, I do actually use an iPad for almost all my web video watching. I don't use anything else at home. It works fine for almost all of the video I come across while browsing - in fact it seems more like 80% the other way.

Weighting for volume isn't appropriate because if I started up html5videosofmybackyard.com and placed 5 second clips in 10 bitrates each of the last 3 years of my backyard 24/7 the web wouldn't have magically become 25% less dependent on flash overnight.

I get it though. You really, really like your iPad. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you really, really like your MacBook Pro as well. It's cool, they are both nice gadgets. I am sure Apple appreciates your efforts as far as discounting any criticisms of the platform as invalid.

The lesson here is probably "don't ask questions you don't want the answers to".

Your argument actually shows that weighting by volume is a necessity if you're trying to represent people's experiences - which are driven by the likelihood that each given video they want to watch will play - not by the abstract number of videos in each format.

Some of your criticisms are valid - they're just minor and missing the point.

We're never going to move past the PC if we have to drag along all the legacy. Most of that legacy exists to solve incidental issues and complexity than offering end users with real capabilities. Far from not being what I wanted to hear, the things you list are all in that category.

You'll always be able to score points by saying 'but my PC does XYZ'. But the world in which we endlesskly drag along everything from the PC-era however crummy or hard to use isn't one I'd want to advocate for however much of an Apple hater I was.

Remember that some sites redirect to a different iPad version, and that the HTML5 video is only on that site, not the main one.

I'm not sure if that's true on any of those sites, as I'm not American, so haven't visited any apart from Youtube and Vimeo.

yawn

That's the best you can do? How I initially transfer over my big photo/music libraries when I buy a new toy is of vanishingly little significance to me. (BTW, Apple has a few well-known applications for this, like iTunes and iPhoto and Aperture. Perhaps you have heard of them?)

Talk to me about a superior user experience. Talk to me about a superior applications base. Talk to me about a more responsive, reliable device with better battery life. Then I'll be interested.

Install applications from the internet

Even if the author was right about the iPad not being a post-PC device, your assertion that it is just a peripheral is laughable hyperbole.

I don't make either assumption. I've staked quite a bit of my lively hood on building apps for Apple products. I wouldn't do this if I thought they were stupid or blind. I just don't buy the "Post-PC" device story they are telling with the iPad quite yet.

So what you are saying is that you don't believe it is true to call it a post-PC device now, but it will be true at some point in the future.

And your problem with this is? Just that they are saying it now? Don't understand the concern, honestly.

>The author seems to assume that Apple is either unaware of the contradiction or aware of it with no plan to change. In other words, that the management of Apple is either stupid or blind. Recent history does not suggest that either is the case.

If it had no intention of telling us about it, why call it a Post-PC device?

They wanted to create media hype among the crowd and the media and bloggers. Just like Motorola likes to bill the Xoom as an iPad killer because of the spec difference, Jobs want to posture the iPad as a PC killer because of the high sales. Truth doesn't enter into the conversation in either case and is kind of afterthought to the objectives behind such posturing. Only geeks like us would be arguing over such things.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com