No USB port?  No multi-tasking?

Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> No USB port?  No multi-tasking?

.... thanks for saving me $700.  Not on the fence but near it, and now turning
around ...

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> No USB port?  No multi-tasking?

> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?

  It's not supposed to be a laptop. It's supposed to be a multimedia viewing
platform. You browse the internet, watch videos, play music, read books and
play games. A conventional laptop is often too hard to use for some people
(especially elderly) and a touch screen which you can use with your fingers
is much easier. These people wouldn't even understand what "usb" or
"multitasking" is, nor would they really have any need for them.

  If you want usb and multitasking, buy a laptop. You'll be able to run
Windows programs as well (or install linux or whatever you want).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> No USB port?  No multi-tasking?
>
> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?

I suspect that Apple already has a 'new and improved' iPad, just waiting for the
'proper' time to release it--which would be a brilliant (and typical) marketing
ploy on their part. They *know* that their loyal fans (as well as bleeding-edge
techno types) will probably snap up this first one. If the price were not so
high, I'd probably get one too! IMO, whenever Apple releases some hot new thing,
it seems to be intentionally 'hobbled' to a degree--if that's the right word. In
other words, not quite at the level that they know to be its true potential.
Then later, an even *more* amazing version hits the market--increasing their
profits, naturally.  This first release--quite a nice one in itself--gives them
a chance to rake in a sizable sum, while judging the market to see what new
additions folks are clamoring for, etc.

A recent news headline has piqued my interest: "Will Apple's iPad be the
laptop-killer?" I would guess that that's a logical progression, the final iPad
iteration that Apple might be planning for the not-too-distant future.

Ken

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle wrote:
> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?

http://i.imgur.com/It9To.png

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Yes, we're traveling together,
   but to different destinations.

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
> A recent news headline has piqued my interest: "Will Apple's iPad be the
> laptop-killer?" I would guess that that's a logical progression, the final iPad
> iteration that Apple might be planning for the not-too-distant future.
> 
> Ken

It may not kill off laptops, but it may do a number on Flash.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> John VanSickle wrote:
>> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/It9To.png

http://boakes.org/pics/2005/ipad/ipad_tiger_400.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mmBw3uzPnJI/S2LuPgoyXKI/AAAAAAABARc/AxYACkUZA3k/s400/ipad_01.jpg

http://ipad.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/imat.jpg

http://img13.abload.de/img/1264961619514173oo.png

http://shanghaiist.com/attachments/shang_kenneth/apple-evolution.jpg

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle wrote:
> No USB port?  No multi-tasking?
> 
> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?

Technically, that is *exactly* what it is. They aren't even selling it as a 
laptop replacement, so you shouldn't put your expectations based on that. 
It's not *supposed* to be a full laptop replacement.

But many people don't *need* a computer. An iPad would be perfect for my 
mom. She only ever uses a web browser.

Post a reply to this message

On 4/4/2010 9:30 AM, Kenneth wrote:
> John VanSickle<evi### [at] hotmailcom>  wrote:
>> No USB port?  No multi-tasking?
>>
>> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?
>
> I suspect that Apple already has a 'new and improved' iPad, just waiting for the
> 'proper' time to release it--which would be a brilliant (and typical) marketing
> ploy on their part. They *know* that their loyal fans (as well as bleeding-edge
> techno types) will probably snap up this first one. If the price were not so
> high, I'd probably get one too! IMO, whenever Apple releases some hot new thing,
> it seems to be intentionally 'hobbled' to a degree--if that's the right word. In
> other words, not quite at the level that they know to be its true potential.
> Then later, an even *more* amazing version hits the market--increasing their
> profits, naturally.  This first release--quite a nice one in itself--gives them
> a chance to rake in a sizable sum, while judging the market to see what new
> additions folks are clamoring for, etc.
>
> A recent news headline has piqued my interest: "Will Apple's iPad be the
> laptop-killer?" I would guess that that's a logical progression, the final iPad
> iteration that Apple might be planning for the not-too-distant future.
>
> Ken
>
>
Bah.. Too bulky, I want the BSG one, you can fold up and stick in your 
pocket. ;) lol

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Uh, I mean the "Caprica" one.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> But many people don't *need* a computer. An iPad would be perfect for my
> mom. She only ever uses a web browser.

Probably the same for most older adults across the globe. It's a sad fact that
home-computer technology (and Windows, which is usually the OS by default ) is
*way* too complex for typical Mom-and-Pop uses--overkill to the n'th degree. Not
to mention the hidden arcania of typical OEM virus-protection software, and the
glitches that sometimes occur with it. And all pushed on an unknowing public by
the manufacturers. When problems occur--of *any* kind--most folks are as lost as
a child in the wilderness (which also induces a kind of 'inferiority complex'
IMO, a feeling of helplessness in the face of daunting technology; I've seen
this in friends.) Whatever happened to the idea of an EASY-to-use computer?? If
Apple *does* keep the iPad as a relatively 'simple' way of doing everyday tasks,
they may have produced the long-awaited 'machine for the rest of us.' That in
itself would be a GREAT leap forward.

Now, if they would just lower the price... ;-)

Ken

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> But many people don't *need* a computer. An iPad would be perfect for my
>> mom. She only ever uses a web browser.
> 
> Probably the same for most older adults across the globe. It's a sad fact
> that home-computer technology (and Windows, which is usually the OS by
> default ) is *way* too complex for typical Mom-and-Pop uses--overkill to
> the n'th degree.

Well, my mom isn't a total computer noob. She uses whatever computer is 
currently available and around in the house, which means she regularly 
switches between Windows XP (sister's computer), OS X (dad's old laptop), 
and Debian/KDE (my computer). But she doesn't really use any program other 
than Firefox, or MS Office/OOo.org (only to read stuff she receives). Maybe 
the iPad's features would still be overkill :)

> Not to mention the hidden arcania of typical OEM
> virus-protection software, and the glitches that sometimes occur with it.
> And all pushed on an unknowing public by the manufacturers. When problems
> occur--of *any* kind--most folks are as lost as a child in the wilderness

The Mac is the only "OEM" computer in here :)

The crap OEMs fill Windows machines with is indeed a big problem, but I 
never had the chance of seeing it personally...

> Now, if they would just lower the price... ;-)

Funny how they claim the price is unbelievably low, and yet I read that they 
make an obscene profit (= the *cost* is *much* lower).

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> Well, my mom isn't a total computer noob. She uses whatever computer is
> currently available and around in the house, which means she regularly
> switches between Windows XP (sister's computer), OS X (dad's old laptop),
> and Debian/KDE (my computer). But she doesn't really use any program other
> than Firefox, or MS Office/OOo.org (only to read stuff she receives)...

Wow! Windows, OSX, Debian, Firefox--that's light-years ahead of most of my older
friends' abilities, who have a very hard time just slogging through Windows (and
whatever was initially installed on their systems.)

I started on a Mac, then switched to a Win machine. A cutting-edge friend of
mine (on a Mac) keeps me up-to-date on the Mac's OS workings. And he will
probably be the first person I know to get an iPad--then I'll be able to check
it out for free!

Ken

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
> Probably the same for most older adults across the globe.

On the other hand, the kids operate the computers as easily as the older 
generations operate the television.  Is this really a problem worth solving, 
in a corporate financial business-plan sense?

> It's a sad fact that
> home-computer technology (and Windows, which is usually the OS by default ) is
> *way* too complex for typical Mom-and-Pop uses--overkill to the n'th degree. 

The problem is that anyone only uses 5% of the capabilities, but it's always 
a different 5%.  Yes, firefox is easy to use. Now put that person in front 
of a complex and even slightly poorly designed web app, and watch what happens.

Dad wants to hook up a photo printer, to get pictures out of the digital 
camera, because you can't buy film cameras any more.  iPad? Sorry, you're 
screwed.

Mom wants to print out the cross-stitch pattern that her online subscription 
to the cross-stitch club provides. iPad? Sorry, you're screwed.

(These are both real examples with *my* parents, btw.)

People expect their home electronics to just *work*. You can do that by 
limiting their usefulness, or by getting so many people using the same thing 
that the bugs get shaken out.

I'll tell you the machine that Just Works - video game consoles.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
   open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Dad wants to hook up a photo printer, to get pictures out of the digital 
> camera, because you can't buy film cameras any more.  iPad? Sorry, you're 
> screwed.

> Mom wants to print out the cross-stitch pattern that her online subscription 
> to the cross-stitch club provides. iPad? Sorry, you're screwed.

> (These are both real examples with *my* parents, btw.)

  Arguing that a device cannot do something it was never even designed to
do in the first place is rather silly. You could as well make the same
argument from videogame consoles and it would be equally valid.

  The iPad is not a laptop. Don't expect it to work like a laptop.

> I'll tell you the machine that Just Works - video game consoles.

  You don't expect consoles to work like laptops. Why do you expect the iPad
to work like a laptop?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Dad wants to hook up a photo printer, to get pictures out of the digital 
>> camera, because you can't buy film cameras any more.  iPad? Sorry, you're 
>> screwed.
> 
>> Mom wants to print out the cross-stitch pattern that her online subscription 
>> to the cross-stitch club provides. iPad? Sorry, you're screwed.
> 
>> (These are both real examples with *my* parents, btw.)
> 
>   Arguing that a device cannot do something it was never even designed to
> do in the first place is rather silly. 

I'm not. I'm simply arguing the old chestnut that "all the old folks want is 
something to read email and surf the web."  (Not even adding the snark of it 
not supporting Flash anyway.)

I was answering the

 >> If Apple *does* keep the iPad as a relatively 'simple' way of
 >> doing everyday tasks,

comment, pointing out that it *isn't* capable of doing everyday tasks, any 
more than your TV or your PS3 is.

>   The iPad is not a laptop. Don't expect it to work like a laptop.

I'm not. I'm simply pointing out that I think it's too limited to do what 
people without a computer want to do with computers.  It's not a laptop, it 
doesn't work like a laptop, therefore it's not a suitable substitute to give 
to your grandparents in place of a laptop.

>> I'll tell you the machine that Just Works - video game consoles.
> 
>   You don't expect consoles to work like laptops. Why do you expect the iPad
> to work like a laptop?

Of course not. Are you suggesting that people too old to easily deal with 
the complexity of a laptop will be content with using a video game console 
because it's easier to use?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Yes, we're traveling together,
   but to different destinations.

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4bb8a025@news.povray.org...
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > No USB port?  No multi-tasking?
>
> > Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?
>
>   It's not supposed to be a laptop. It's supposed to be a multimedia
viewing
> platform. You browse the internet, watch videos, play music, read books
and
> play games. A conventional laptop is often too hard to use for some people
> (especially elderly)

I don't think the elderly fall into the apple fanboy demographics. Apple's
target audience is pretty much fixed, independent of the product they put
out. It could be a hearing aid or a diaper, and you'd still get the same
group of late 20s early 30s yuppies flocking to it.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Kenneth wrote:
> > Probably the same for most older adults across the globe.
>
> On the other hand, the kids operate the computers as easily as the older
> generations operate the television.  Is this really a problem worth solving,
> in a corporate financial business-plan sense?

Good question. Problem is, there isn't any kind of easily-understood *machine*
available for the segment of the global population that didn't grow up with
computer technology (albeit a decreasing minority.) It's currently a
one-size-fits-all situation...probably driven by financial statistics, as you
say. Families with kids are the lucky ones--the kids show their befuddled
parents how to work the thing!

> The problem is that anyone only uses 5% of the capabilities, but it's always
> a different 5%.

For 'technically-literate' folks, I would agree. But I wonder about all the
others (a majority? a minority?). For them, I would guess it's about the 'same'
5%--with a deviation of maybe 1% within that. Web surfing, e-mailing,
photo-printing, the occasional 'Mom-and-Pop' application, etc.

Hmm, the iPad doesn't even cover *that* small footprint, AFAIK.

> People expect their home electronics to just *work*. You can do that by
> limiting their usefulness, or by getting so many people using the same thing
> that the bugs get shaken out.

Pity the poor end-users--we are the guinea pigs in this ever-continuing
'experiment.' ;-)

Ken

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
> Good question. Problem is, there isn't any kind of easily-understood *machine*
> available for the segment of the global population that didn't grow up with
> computer technology 

That's a good way of phrasing it, yes.

Part of the problem is that a real computer is so reusable that you don't 
need a lot of the machines you used to have. Nobody is building the 
special-purpose machines that would make it easy to do one thing well. 
Except, as I said, video games or TiVOs and such specific devices. Anything 
sufficiently general-purpose to not need auxiliary machines isn't going to 
be easy to use.

> For 'technically-literate' folks, I would agree. But I wonder about all the
> others (a majority? a minority?). For them, I would guess it's about the 'same'
> 5%--with a deviation of maybe 1% within that. Web surfing, e-mailing,
> photo-printing, the occasional 'Mom-and-Pop' application, etc.

Yeah, OK. I kind of exagerated there. But there's always going to be 
mom-and-pop applications, or little children applications, etc. My brother's 
kids play with his iphone all the time.

> Hmm, the iPad doesn't even cover *that* small footprint, AFAIK.

Yeah.

> Pity the poor end-users--we are the guinea pigs in this ever-continuing
> 'experiment.' ;-)

It used to be fun, when there was new exciting stuff happening. Now it's 
just knee-deep manure you have to wade thru to find what you're looking for.
Or maybe that's just in the programming.


-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Yes, we're traveling together,
   but to different destinations.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:

> It used to be fun, when there was new exciting stuff happening. Now it's
> just knee-deep manure you have to wade thru to find what you're looking for.

An excellent way of putting it!  ;-)

Ken

Post a reply to this message

Saw this video last night on G4 about the iPad, made me laugh...

http://g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/exclusives/70387/Distended-Warrantys-iHate-Therefore-iPad-Music-Video.html

Post a reply to this message

"somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:

> I don't think the elderly fall into the apple fanboy demographics. Apple's
> target audience is pretty much fixed, independent of the product they put
> out. It could be a hearing aid or a diaper, and you'd still get the same
> group of late 20s early 30s yuppies flocking to it.

Hilarious!  I'm still laughing, because it's all *so* true.  (Although, I admit
that Apple's *systems*, whatever they are, are always far easier to use than an
equivalent Windows thing--if there even *is* an equivalent. And less glitchy.
Mainly, I guess, because Apple always keeps the thing as a complete *closed*
proprietary system--with more control over A-to-Z. So even 'the elderly'
probably have an easier time with it, whatever it is.)

With today's ever-increasingly-complex home computer technology, and a resulting
inability to understand it all, the lower age limit of 'those who are completely
lost and clueless' might be getting lower and lower. Soon, only kids will truly
understand what's going on!

There's an old phrase, "That kid is lucky; he was born with a silver spoon in
his mouth." Meaning, rich kids have an easier time in life.  But perhaps that
needs changing in the present environment: replace 'silver spoon' with 'USB
memory stick.' The ability to easily grasp technological change seems far more
important now.

Ken

Post a reply to this message

somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> Apple's target audience is pretty much fixed, independent of the product
> they put out.

  Not true. The vast majority of iPod and iPhone users don't own any other
Apple products nor could care less about them.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle wrote:
> No USB port?  No multi-tasking?
> 
> Is it me, or is this thing just an over-sized iPod?

But hey, it blends!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> No multi-tasking?

  Curiously, the next OS upgrade will support multitasking.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
>   Curiously, the next OS upgrade will support multitasking.
> 

That's one of the advantages that the Droid has now over the iPhone. 
I'll be happy when they add it.  If they add turn-by-turn directions to 
Google maps too, another feature of the Droid, I'll be extra happy!

Post a reply to this message

Kyle wrote:
> That's one of the advantages that the Droid has now over the iPhone. 

I saw an interesting article about this.  Phones generally don't do that 
sort of multitasking because you don't have any swap space, so if your app 
is written "knowing" how much RAM a phone has, it'll generally not get along 
well with others. Droid has a system call that says "I'm nuking you - 
package up what you need to recover your state."  So something like 
navigation would just package up the destination and options, and would 
throw away the tiles and the path data, until you popped it back up to the 
front, whereupon it would re-download the map and recalculate the path.

I'm not sure how Apple is going to make the multitasking work with legacy 
apps that don't implement something liek that.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Yes, we're traveling together,
   but to different destinations.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I'm not sure how Apple is going to make the multitasking work with legacy 
> apps that don't implement something liek that.

  I don't know either (yet), but it's possible that the multitasking will
work only with apps with specific support. (I'm guessing that it would be
in the realm of possibility that you could run *one* legacy app which
doesn't have multitasking support alongside several which do, which would
also be helpful because you could run the iPhone's own system apps in the
background while playing a legacy game or whatever. But as I said, I know
next to nothing about that at this point, so I'm just guessing.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> I'm not sure how Apple is going to make the multitasking work with 
> legacy apps that don't implement something liek that.
> 

I just checked with my sister who writes iPhone apps, and she doesn't 
know yet either.  LOL.  She's planning to learn the new OS and SDK over 
the next couple of weeks.  It's still all in beta at this point anyway.

Post a reply to this message