Printable View
People, people, people.... you have to remember WE are NOT the target audience for something like the iPad... the target is the millions (apparently 2 million and counting) out there that just want a simple interface, surf the web, read/send email and listen to their music. People like us don't get it because we aren't supposed to. And I'm sure that Jobs is fine with that.
-tg
While i agree that we are not the target audience for this device i cant help but think those that are in the target audience are being conned and in the end they are not buying it for any functionality at all really but because it is by Apple & Shiny.Quote:
the target is the millions (apparently 2 million and counting) out there that just want a simple interface, surf the web, read/send email and listen to their music.
Actually they aren't being conned, they just can't admit that they are buying it because it apple, shiny and fashionable, so they try to 'explain' how great and functional it is too (even though it's not).
The only part about it I'd feel conned about is the "thousands of pre-existing apps" .... which were originally for the iPhone and look like carp on the iPad.
-tg
LOL Hack! I totally agree!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hack
-Max
The iPatch will cost $200, and will only work with Apple's iHook and iPegLeg, sold separately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hack
Also overtime, the black dye will evaporate, so you'll have to either buy a new iPatch or send it into Apple to redye it for $50 + shipping.
REALLY?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by techgnome
I'd have to say that there is something decidedly fishy about that statement, (though I must admit that it does make me almost consider thinking about getting one of these). Frankly, I hear plenty of people carping about the iPhone, so I'm not all that surprised to hear that people are carping about the iPad, as well. After all, you fish for carp with balls of dough, and Apple fishes for iUsers with balls of dough (and brains of jell-o, but that's different).
If you guys don't want or see the point of an iPad that's fine. But it's nonetheless a great device. There are no other slates like it, and there will be no other slate with an app store as large (or IMO a slate as good, Apple have had years of experience from the iPhone). Once I get mine I'll use it often, I'll be able to travel around and have a fully functional computer-like device, no it isn't capable of doing any of my work, but it covers everything else.
Sure, they expect you to pay $499 - $699 (+$130 for the 3G model) for a WiFi iPad (16/32/64GB), for the ability to do those things on a multi-touch 9.7" slate that you can carry around anywhere.Quote:
Right so basically it's great for doing all those things that i already do on my computer !
And how much do they expect me to pay again to be able to do all those things that i can already do on my computer ?
It's an amazing piece of tech, but even the consumers that buy it would return it if it didn't do anything they wanted.Quote:
While i agree that we are not the target audience for this device i cant help but think those that are in the target audience are being conned and in the end they are not buying it for any functionality at all really but because it is by Apple & Shiny.
I see it, it's in the upper left, beside the P, and above the line of the I, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Icyculyr
Ok, I'm not an early adopter, and I certainly have my quirks (even sat phones don't work so well in many of the places I go), but I do have a question for you: You mention that it "covers everything else". What do you expect to actually use it for? I realize that there are dozens of apps out there, but what will you use? I used to program for PDAs, but I was hard pressed to figure out what was actually useful. I heard that the most popular PDA program was one that blanked the screen so that it could be used as a mirror. I don't know if that is a true story, but it certainly fit well with my experience. I ended up with only two apps that I was actually using, other than games, and one of those two was utterly superflous. When I got rid of the PDA, I moved one of the programs to a computer, where I can still use it, and the other one I simply abandoned. I was using it because it was there, not because it was necessary.Quote:
But it's nonetheless a great device. There are no other slates like it, and there will be no other slate with an app store as large (or IMO a slate as good, Apple have had years of experience from the iPhone). Once I get mine I'll use it often, I'll be able to travel around and have a fully functional computer-like device, no it isn't capable of doing any of my work, but it covers everything else.
So what apps do you expect to actually use? How often? And why?
Lol ^_^Quote:
I see it, it's in the upper left, beside the P, and above the line of the I, right?
Well, with the Apple apps:Quote:
Ok, I'm not an early adopter, and I certainly have my quirks (even sat phones don't work so well in many of the places I go), but I do have a question for you: You mention that it "covers everything else". What do you expect to actually use it for? I realize that there are dozens of apps out there, but what will you use? I used to program for PDAs, but I was hard pressed to figure out what was actually useful. I heard that the most popular PDA program was one that blanked the screen so that it could be used as a mirror. I don't know if that is a true story, but it certainly fit well with my experience. I ended up with only two apps that I was actually using, other than games, and one of those two was utterly superflous. When I got rid of the PDA, I moved one of the programs to a computer, where I can still use it, and the other one I simply abandoned. I was using it because it was there, not because it was necessary.
So what apps do you expect to actually use? How often? And why?
I'll use Safari very often to do the same things I do on my computer (facebook, reading articles or threads on forums, checking out game sites, making theoretical computer builds on NewEgg and whatever else etc.), except I can do them anywhere. If I want to sit outside in the sun, watch some TV, sit on the sofa, have something to eat, I can.
I'll also check Mail frequently, I rarely ever send e-mails, just read them.
I'll use Photos to have a look and play around with my photos from time to time.
I'll use Calendar often to check what I've got to do etc... or add new events.
I'll use Address Book, Maps, and the like when the time comes. For example, I'm not going to use Address Book everyday, I'm going to use it when I need to add someone's contact details. Maps, obviously when I'm travelling in an unfamiliar area.
I'll listen to music often on my iPad instead of my iPhone with exception to the rare occasion that the iPad would be impractical in such an occasion (I.E headphones, walking around somewhere, unless they were bluetooth and the iPad was in a sling).
I'll watch movies on my iPad when the TV is impractical, I.E when I'm not at home :p. Likely when I'm waiting around for something, I.E on a plane.
I'll use Notes often to make notes, shopping lists, to-do's and jot down idea's.
I'll use iBooks to buy and read books when good ones come out in my country. Only the US has good books at the moment, other than a few old freebies they include.
And, obviously, when travelling or staying with friends I'll use most of these a lot more frequently.
Although I like the ability to, I don't really buy music from iTunes. I have bought plenty of movies, apps, and if there are some good books in Australia in the future, probably a few of those too.
I have little use for Pages, Keynote, and Numbers at the moment. But, if the need ever arises, I have a fully functional presentation program, word processor, and whatever number does, graphs or something. If anyone ever emails me a word, excel or powerpoint document, I can open it on my iPad.
In terms of third party apps (excluding games), I'll use iMockups for creating mockups of websites (I could even show a client a mockup for their website), applications or iPhone/iPad apps.
I'd also use Brushes and Sketchbook Pro time to time for fun, and any fun little utility apps.
The US has a lot more apps that aren't available in Australia... like Netflix, I'd get that in a heart beat. Hopefully the Netflix site will go international at some point.
In terms of games, there are too many to list. From RPGs to FPS, puzzles, board games, heaps of games... even online games.
I'm willing to fork out plenty of money for one, it has value for me. It's a remarkable device, but nonetheless if you don't like it, then it has no value for you. With iOS 4.0, multi-tasking and app folders will make it even greater.
Splutters !!!!Quote:
Sure, they expect you to pay $499 - $699 (+$130 for the 3G model) for a WiFi iPad (16/32/64GB), for the ability to do those things on a multi-touch 9.7" slate that you can carry around anywhere.
Its not that amazing on a technical level there is nothing in the IPad that is particularly ground-breaking.Quote:
It's an amazing piece of tech, but even the consumers that buy it would return it if it didn't do anything they wanted.
What is amazing is Apple's ability to package lots of tech that already exists into a nicely designed package and convince a few million people that they need one !
It's not ground-breaking, but it's still amazing. You've got a piece of hardware with up to 64GB of storage, a 1GHz A4 chip, in a device that is about half an inch thin that weighs ~700g (~1.5 pounds), with up to 12 hours of battery life at lowest brightness (which is comfortable to view), that is multi-touch. The competition for this doesn't even exist yet, and the competition that does come out will likely fail miserably, Apple has had years of experience with the iPhone, thus they are able to produce this very well the first time.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
Apple doesn't need to convince anyone they need an iPad, because, every one of those two million people (in about two months) that bought an iPad, could have taken it back if they didn't like it.
So you,
- Browse the web
- check Mail
- Look at Photos
- use Calendar
- Address Book
- Listen to music
- watch movies
- make notes,
- Read books
So nothing that cant already be done on a laptop, which supports the fact that they are being bought for there design rather then any practical use.
No, it doesn't support that "opinion". It's being bought for its form factor. You can do all of those things on a desktop computer, does that mean it's impractical to do them on a laptop? -- no. The iPad is capable of doing all of those things very well, just in a different way (touch).Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
And so does my convertable laptop (touch too) ... and with 500GB storage (not just 64) ... AND it can do two things at the same time. Like rub its belly and pat its head. iPad still can't do that.Quote:
The iPad is capable of doing all of those things very well, just in a different way (touch).
Also, just because some one hasn't returned their iPad (and to be honest, we don't know how many of those 2mil have been returned) doesn't mean that it isn't gathering dust somewhere. Plus that 2mil sales is going to include some amount that were bought for reviews and are now gathering dust somewhere.
Touch screens are nothing new. They've been around since the 80's at least. So once again, nothing truly ground breaking there. Just like most things now a days, there's no new advances being made... all that's changing is the cost of the technology and the marketing that surrounds it. And not every one likes the iPhoney-interface. I've tried using my wife's iTouch... and it only reinforced why I don't have one.
-tg
So do the Nexus One and HTC Evo 4G cell phones, and they are drastically smaller. Isn't that more amazing?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Icyculyr
I had my hand surgically replaced with the one from Inspector Gadget... after a recent upgrade, my thumbnail now actually gives me a thumbnail view of the web and I can use my palm to navigate with (complete with tactile feedback!). Now THAT is amazing.
-tg
I can certainly understand why someone would want to be able to do those things with a more mobile, instant on, device than a laptop. It doesn't suit me for a variety of reasons, but I do recognize that there are other people out there with less demanding needs, and it IS a step in the right direction, just not a big enough step for me.
Roughly speaking, I don't want the ability to do those things anywhere. I don't want to deal with e-mail when I'm out and about, I don't use a calendar, since my brain still has sufficient memory for that app, I don't make notes in that fashion, I don't want to see a movie on a 10" screen, and I don't listen to music when I'm mobile. But I know other people who do any or all of those.
There would be a use for such a device for me, but the iPad is too heavy, the battery life is too short, the cost is marginal, and the keyboard is inadequate. That might surprise people, but the use I have in mind is: Coding while hiking. If I could get a reasonably durable, sub-16oz system that ran .NET with great battery life (or possibly a solar charger), then I would seriously consider it. I happen to be a good, and fairly fast, touch typist, so keyboards are kind of important to me. The thought that an on-screen, 10", keyboard would be considered adequate for any normal person is kind of laughable, but I recognize that it is unlikely to get a normal keyboard for a device as small and light as that. Perhaps a projection keyboard could be added? Still, I would get by with the smaller, cramped keyboard, and the necessary hunt-and-peck style of coding, if the weight and power was right.
Yes, I can see how there would be a huge market for people who hike and code. Simultaneously. While chewing gum.
That sentence pretty much sums up how i feel about smart phones & tablets as a whole. They are improving but they are not quite what i would like them to be yet, but that is probably due to me reading far to much Science Fiction.Quote:
I can certainly understand why someone would want to be able to do those things with a more mobile, instant on, device than a laptop. It doesn't suit me for a variety of reasons, but I do recognize that there are other people out there with less demanding needs, and it IS a step in the right direction, just not a big enough step for me.
When they make a device with which i can view the Web through my Contact Lenses, control it with a few simple facial gestures or hand twitches and have storage that is so small that it come in-built into my clothes and is clever enough to converse with me then i will be starting to get somewhere :0)
ala Johnny Mnemonic and the Minority Report....Quote:
When they make a device with which i can view the Web through my Contact Lenses, control it with a few simple facial gestures or hand twitches and have storage that is so small that it come in-built into my clothes and is clever enough to converse with me then i will be starting to get somewhere :0)
-tg
Ah yes, the Minority Report 'touch screens'. That would work great for about 20 seconds after which your arms will hurt so bad that you'd want to kick Tom Cruise in the face. :)
"... control it with a few simple facial gestures or hand twitches..." There's already stuff like that. You may want to contact Stephen Hawking and ask him where he bought his wheelchair :D
Fighter pilot helmets already have HUDs that track eye movement to perform functions, such as calculating what you're looking at based on the the position of your iris relative to the eye.
Yes sort ofQuote:
ala Johnny Mnemonic and the Minority Report....
If you have ever read any Vernor Vinge, then you will have seen what i am talking about in some of his books.
One day the real world will catch up :0)
Yep, my argument wasn't a laptop couldn't, but simply that the iPad is just another way of doing those things. There are many benefits to an iPad, just because it's a touch screen and so small.Quote:
And so does my convertable laptop (touch too) ... and with 500GB storage (not just 64) ... AND it can do two things at the same time. Like rub its belly and pat its head. iPad still can't do that.
Also, the iPad has 64GB of flash storage, not hard drive storage. Multi-tasking in iOS 4 for iPad will be out in the fall.
I don't believe those numbers include iPads bought and returned. Do you think anyone would spend between $499 and ~$860 and leave it gathering dust rather than take it back if they didn't like it or have no use for it?Quote:
Also, just because some one hasn't returned their iPad (and to be honest, we don't know how many of those 2mil have been returned) doesn't mean that it isn't gathering dust somewhere. Plus that 2mil sales is going to include some amount that were bought for reviews and are now gathering dust somewhere.
But multi-touch hasn't been around for that long, and particularly not with an IPS LED-backlit display on a 9.7" mobile device that you can hold in one hand. Well, if you don't like the iOS interface, fair enough.Quote:
Touch screens are nothing new. They've been around since the 80's at least. So once again, nothing truly ground breaking there. Just like most things now a days, there's no new advances being made... all that's changing is the cost of the technology and the marketing that surrounds it. And not every one likes the iPhoney-interface. I've tried using my wife's iTouch... and it only reinforced why I don't have one.
What I said was said in its whole context, not the snippet you quoted. It's not comparable, the iPad is a slate not a phone. You'd have a horrible experience trying to use those in comparison to the iPad (except maybe for listening to music w/ your headphones on while walking around somewhere).Quote:
So do the Nexus One and HTC Evo 4G cell phones, and they are drastically smaller. Isn't that more amazing?!
Some people who have hundreds of events in their calendar need one :pQuote:
I don't use a calendar, since my brain still has sufficient memory for that app
Erm, you'd have to go for a much smaller screen if you want lighter. The battery life is very long? How can you call ~10 hours short?Quote:
here would be a use for such a device for me, but the iPad is too heavy, the battery life is too short, the cost is marginal, and the keyboard is inadequate. That might surprise people, but the use I have in mind is: Coding while hiking. If I could get a reasonably durable, sub-16oz system that ran .NET with great battery life (or possibly a solar charger), then I would seriously consider it. I happen to be a good, and fairly fast, touch typist, so keyboards are kind of important to me. The thought that an on-screen, 10", keyboard would be considered adequate for any normal person is kind of laughable, but I recognize that it is unlikely to get a normal keyboard for a device as small and light as that. Perhaps a projection keyboard could be added? Still, I would get by with the smaller, cramped keyboard, and the necessary hunt-and-peck style of coding, if the weight and power was right.
I'm also a fast touch typist, and I find the iPad's keyboard (albeit not everyone will) to be perfectly adequate for typing. As good as a physical keyboard? Not quite, but I can type quite fast on it.
Summary: My point is the iPad is capable of doing all those things very well. Everyone has different preferences, thus not everyone will like the iPad, they will likely find something else that suits them better.
The only thing I can't do on the iPad is work, which I also can't do on a laptop. So, for me, the better choice is the iPad. It's always connected via 3G, I can do all the same things I'd on a laptop (except for the occasional flash video), it has a better price, better battery life, its instant on etc...
No Icyurulcer, come back from the dark side!
Haha lol... what's with the Icyurulcer name? lol?Quote:
No Icyurulcer, come back from the dark side!
Oh u saw wut I did thar?
Ok. Here's the whole paragraph, for context's sake.
So your point is that it is very small, 700 grams, 1GHz CPU, 64GB memory, up to 12 hours batter. And, like I said, Nexus One And Evo 4G have all that, packed in an even smaller and lighter device, plus they have USB, and can multitask... so... I'd say they are even more amazing then.Quote:
It's not ground-breaking, but it's still amazing. You've got a piece of hardware with up to 64GB of storage, a 1GHz A4 chip, in a device that is about half an inch thin that weighs ~700g (~1.5 pounds), with up to 12 hours of battery life at lowest brightness (which is comfortable to view), that is multi-touch.
Anything that comes and runs Windows (even Win 98) can beat it easily on functionality and flexibility. And since iPad doesn't have any specially exceptional hardware traits, that will be matched too. The only thing that the iPad will have over the competition is it's army of devoted fags... I mean fans.Quote:
The competition for this doesn't even exist yet, and the competition that does come out will likely fail miserably, Apple has had years of experience with the iPhone, thus they are able to produce this very well the first time.
omfg I rofled so hard :lol:Quote:
The only thing that the iPad will have over the competition is it's army of devoted fags... I mean fans.
No, but I'm assuming it's something rude... so... don't be rude.Quote:
Oh u saw wut I did thar?
No, my point is that its very thin and light with a lot of power, you added the "small" part to suit your argument. The iPad with a small screen already exists, and it's called an iPhone... it's the screen real estate that you get from the iPad's large screen that makes it so great (of course, combined with the great apps Apple have made, as well as the third party ones making use of that extra space).Quote:
So your point is that it is very small, 700 grams, 1GHz CPU, 64GB memory, up to 12 hours batter. And, like I said, Nexus One And Evo 4G have all that, packed in an even smaller and lighter device, plus they have USB, and can multitask... so... I'd say they are even more amazing then.
And, 10 hours of battery life, powering a 1024x768 9.7" LED-backlit IPS display is much better than up to 7 hours of video from the Nexus One's 3.7" 800x480 AMOLED TFT display.
Also, the A4 is much better than the 1GHz SnapDragon processor in the Nexus One. And, what exactly can you do with USB in the Nexus One thats so great?
The Nexus One can't actually run any computer-like apps (because of its small screen), only ones similar to that of the iPhone. The iPad will get iOS 4 and be able to multi-task better than any other device like itself, with no significant impact to performance or battery life.
I'm not even going to bother, that is the most ridiculous statement I've ever seen anyone say about the iPad.Quote:
Anything that comes and runs Windows (even Win 98) can beat it easily on functionality and flexibility. And since iPad doesn't have any specially exceptional hardware traits, that will be matched too. The only thing that the iPad will have over the competition is it's army of devoted fags... I mean fans.
Our argument is the same, that for a supposed revolutionary product the Ipad is just another way of doing things that you can already do, and the only real distinguishing feature is it's design.Quote:
Yep, my argument wasn't a laptop couldn't, but simply that the iPad is just another way of doing those things.
My Point is that Tablets in general as far as i am concerned have failed to show what they are for. For me they fall half way between a computer and a smart phone and fail miserably to offer anything that either one of those to products dont already cater for.Quote:
Summary: My point is the iPad is capable of doing all those things very well. Everyone has different preferences, thus not everyone will like the iPad, they will likely find something else that suits them better.
The Ipad is just the latest and most high profile of these devices that manages to fail badly.
Not quite, you and a lot of others seem to argue it's a failure, useless, or rubbish. I'm merely saying it's a good device that can do all of those things very well (some even better).Quote:
Our argument is the same, that for a supposed revolutionary product the Ipad is just another way of doing things that you can already do, and the only real distinguishing feature is it's design.
It does the exact same things (more or less), just better than any smartphone (even the iPhone, because of the large screen real estate) and very comparable to the laptop, but it's also much more mobile.Quote:
My Point is that Tablets in general as far as i am concerned have failed to show what they are for. For me they fall half way between a computer and a smart phone and fail miserably to offer anything that either one of those to products dont already cater for.
If it failed badly, people would not buy it, and those that did would return it. It does exactly what people want, because they buy, continue to buy, and keep their iPads.Quote:
The Ipad is just the latest and most high profile of these devices that manages to fail badly.
No my main argument is it's not clearly not as good as the hype. Its clearly not useless its just that personally i think it doesn't offer anything new or even any single thing which makes me say oh i need one of them.Quote:
Not quite, you and a lot of others seem to argue it's a failure, useless, or rubbish
Maybe but i cant carry it in my pocket !Quote:
It does the exact same things (more or less), just better than any smartphone (even the iPhone, because of the large screen real estate)
People go and watch Sex and the City 2 at the cinema, that doesn't mean that it is not still dreadful and a failure as a movie.Quote:
If it failed badly, people would not buy it, and those that did would return it. It does exactly what people want, because they buy, continue to buy, and keep their iPads.
Fair enough, FYI no product can live up to Apple hype. I follow Mac forums, this thing was "rumoured" to have tactile feed back and a lot of other things that didn't come through lool, some even said it would run full OSX.Quote:
No my main argument is it's not clearly not as good as the hype. Its clearly not useless its just that personally i think it doesn't offer anything new or even any single thing which makes me say oh i need one of them.
Although, iPhone 4 did surprise me, it's some impressive tech.
Maybe you need to get better pants. I can recommend some, it has a built in pocket at the back just for your iPad. // LOLZQuote:
Maybe but i cant carry it in my pocket !
I agree with you there LOL, but you can evaluate a piece of technology before you buy it much better than you can a movie (trailers are made of all the best parts). Plus, you can't take a movie back.Quote:
People go and watch Sex and the City 2 at the cinema, that doesn't mean that it is not still dreadful and a failure as a movie.
Unless you have these :pQuote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
:D You're right, USB sucks and theres no need for it. How about easy access and data transfer, tethering, or even this http://www.walyou.com/blog/2010/06/1...rds-nexus-one/Quote:
And, what exactly can you do with USB in the Nexus One thats so great?
First, you just read that in the release info and have no idea how it will actually work. The fact that just because of that you are certain that it will be the best shows your subjectivity and devotion to Apple. And how ever it turns out in terms of flexibility and multitasking, I seriously doubt it will be better than tablets running Windows 7, Linux or even an Android version, if not for anything else then for the fact that Apple only allows you to install software that they approve of.Quote:
The iPad will get iOS 4 and be able to multi-task better than any other device like itself, with no significant impact to performance or battery life.
Yeah, right. You'll be looking like you're having a seizure.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
Give it time. The screen isn't where the weight is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Icyculyr
Easily, I already did...by typing it out. My cell phone battery lasts about a week. That's what I'm looking for.Quote:
The battery life is very long? How can you call ~10 hours short?
Could be. Is there a fat-fingered option?Quote:
I'm also a fast touch typist, and I find the iPad's keyboard (albeit not everyone will) to be perfectly adequate for typing. As good as a physical keyboard? Not quite, but I can type quite fast on it.
:DQuote:
Yeah, right. You'll be looking like you're having a seizure.
Maybe, but by then so will everyone else so it will be ok !
In fact it will be that good, that everyone will think that Looking like you are having a Seizure will be cool :D
Poor people with actual seizures. Medics wont be able to tell who is really having one.
It DOES have tactile feedback. When you touch it, you can tell you are touching it. That's tactile feedback! What more would you want from a touch screen? When you touch it, would you want it to touch you back, or just give you mild electric shocks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Icyculyr
First thats not what I said, mine was a genuine question, I don't know what you can do to with it... so tell me?Quote:
You're right, USB sucks and theres no need for it. How about easy access and data transfer, tethering, or even this http://www.walyou.com/blog/2010/06/1...rds-nexus-one/
Easy access and data transfer, like with the iPad when you connect it to iTunes?
Ok and Nexus One users can do that hack to unlock additional functionality for USB, iPad users can jail break.
First, you're wrong, I actually know what I'm talking about. I've watched both the iOS4 keynote and the iPhone 4 keynote (including demos of multi-tasking and a thorough explanation of how it works), I know exactly why it doesn't significantly drain battery life or impact performance, like other devices.Quote:
First, you just read that in the release info and have no idea how it will actually work. The fact that just because of that you are certain that it will be the best shows your subjectivity and devotion to Apple
You say that but have you ever even looked at Apple's multi-tasking?Quote:
And how ever it turns out in terms of flexibility and multitasking, I seriously doubt it will be better than tablets running Windows 7, Linux or even an Android version
That doesn't reflect multi-tasking. If you have a problem with that, jail break it or don't buy in the first place, no one's making you.Quote:
if not for anything else then for the fact that Apple only allows you to install software that they approve of.
But a "controlled" app store is better than an open one, you get way less rubbish. And according to SJ's at the iPhone 4 Keynote, they have 15,000 app submissions (including updates) every week, 95% of those are approved, the 5% that are not approved are for good reasons.
What stops you from knowing if an app in the Google Marketplace is malicious? What about all the rubbish in there?
Hmm, where is it then? I can only think of the battery.Quote:
Give it time. The screen isn't where the weight is.
Aaa lol ok, that's a long time.Quote:
Easily, I already did...by typing it out. My cell phone battery lasts about a week. That's what I'm looking for.
No but the keys are almost the same size as a regular keyboard.Quote:
Could be. Is there a fat-fingered option?
Tactile feed back as in, when you touch the "A" key on the keyboard, you feel it like you do on the real thing. You can feel the edges around the key, but on a flat screen? As I said, no Apple product can live up to its hype loolQuote:
It DOES have tactile feedback. When you touch it, you can tell you are touching it. That's tactile feedback! What more would you want from a touch screen? When you touch it, would you want it to touch you back, or just give you mild electric shocks?
Oh yes. A specialized cable and software, real easy and flexible. The one thing I hated about my iPad mini (which I lost :( ) was the cable and iTunes. With USB you can use a standard cable that pretty much anyone has, and you don't need any software for it, the OS can handle it just fine by itself.Quote:
Easy access and data transfer, like with the iPad when you connect it to iTunes?
Again, you know what they told you. Real-life use is very different from keynote speeches and presentations. I've only seen a couple of presentations that reflected the actual experience, most were by Microsoft. Win98, blue screen of death and everything :DQuote:
First, you're wrong, I actually know what I'm talking about. I've watched both the iOS4 keynote and the iPhone 4 keynote (including demos of multi-tasking and a thorough explanation of how it works), I know exactly why it doesn't significantly drain battery life or impact performance, like other devices
Again. No real-life use there for either of us, just presentations. And if you want to go by track record, all other options (Windows, Linux, Android, Symbian...) have much more experience with it when it comes to mobile devices.Quote:
You say that but have you ever even looked at Apple's multi-tasking?
And I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of apps in Apple Store are all exceptional and great. No rubbish? And how do you get around that? Same as for any other software, reviews, popularity etc.Quote:
But a "controlled" app store is better than an open one, you get way less rubbish. And according to SJ's at the iPhone 4 Keynote, they have 15,000 app submissions (including updates) every week, 95% of those are approved, the 5% that are not approved are for good reasons.
What stops you from knowing if an app in the Google Marketplace is malicious? What about all the rubbish in there?
Like manga?
You can read it on the computer, too. No problem with that.
I assume you probably get it online, if you're going to use an iPad, so here's a downloader I made a while back specifically for use with onemanga.com, just click (or search the 13 items) for "Manga Downloader": http://yamstudio.bravehost.com/
That doesn't bother me, if it bothers you then to each his own. FYI I think Apple's working on wireless syncing :DQuote:
Oh yes. A specialized cable and software, real easy and flexible. The one thing I hated about my iPad mini (which I lost ) was the cable and iTunes. With USB you can use a standard cable that pretty much anyone has, and you don't need any software for it, the OS can handle it just fine by itself.
They didn't just say: "our multi-tasking is better" they explained why, and it makes perfect sense. It's not a complex demo like that of an OS, it's one feature in an existing OS. And the Keynote is targeted towards developers, so they are very thorough in explaining how everything works and how easy it is to implement in an existing app.Quote:
Again, you know what they told you. Real-life use is very different from keynote speeches and presentations. I've only seen a couple of presentations that reflected the actual experience, most were by Microsoft. Win98, blue screen of death and everything
Multi-tasking on iOS 4 (watch up to the 25-30 second mark on the video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e7K1oP9YVg
The reason it doesn't drain the battery significantly is because the app isn't really running in the background like on other devices, the app is programmed to support particular types of multi-tasking for whatever that app needs, fast app switching (resuming where you left off) being the quickest to implement.
The seven different types of multitasking available:
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/04/...ing-iphone-40/.
They will cover everything an app needs to run in the background, without having a significant impact on battery life or performance.
You don't need examples of real-life use when the feature itself is so simple, you double tap to activate, find the app you want, and switch.Quote:
Again. No real-life use there for either of us, just presentations. And if you want to go by track record, all other options (Windows, Linux, Android, Symbian...) have much more experience with it when it comes to mobile devices.
And, I do actually have iOS 4.0 on my iPhone 3GS. I'm a developer, so I do have real-life usage, and I find myself using multi-tasking all the time even though it's only the Apple apps that actually support it, all my other apps don't, but it's still better because it's in my multi-tasking menu (faster to get to what I want, rather than flicking through pages).
Thats true, reviews, popularity, etc., show which apps are good or not. But that wasn't my point, my point was, how many of those 50k apps that are unfiltered are really rubbish, malicious, or don't do as they are advertised?Quote:
And I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of apps in Apple Store are all exceptional and great. No rubbish? And how do you get around that? Same as for any other software, reviews, popularity etc.
You don't get those in the App Store, you do have useless apps but only to an extent because of Apple's control.
And what about malicious apps? Can they exist?
iOS 4 will be out soon, so there will be some demos on YouTube of it.
You're right about malicious apps, but as they keep pouring in some are bound to get through. Still it provides some protection. But to me that too is a reflection on what Apple thinks of it's customers and its big-brothery politics.
You're too stupid to change the batter yourself;
memory cards?! what if you break something putting them in?;
accessing files and folders directly?! you'll delete something important and mess up, no here's this crappy iTunes to do everything from;
don't you worry about bad software, we'll check em out and tell you what you can use.
I'd take that as a serious insult to my intelligence. Nobody is controlling the software I use on any other device or computer, I have full freedom of choice and I'm doing just fine even though there are millions of viruses, worms, trojans around on top of just bad software.
That's a hoot. So, they are using preemptive multitasking. That was what killed off the original Apple OS. The fact that you can't run other programs in the background defeats the purpose of multitasking. After all, a single person can't truly multitask, as they can only interact with one program at a time, though they might switch rapidly between programs. The purpose of multitasking is so that the computer can do multiple things at one time by taking advantage of the slow meatbags operating it. By using preemptive multitasking, they have completely removed the purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Icyculyr
I'm talking about Google's Marketplace not the App Store. You won't find a malicious app in the App Store, Apple looks through your entire app and makes sure it's not malicious, falsely advertised, that it doesn't crash, etc.Quote:
You're right about malicious apps, but as they keep pouring in some are bound to get through. Still it provides some protection. But to me that too is a reflection on what Apple thinks of it's customers and its big-brothery politics.
You would, because you are a techie, the majority are not, they have no idea what's what. I'm also a techie, I like Apple because of how they are, I use iTunes to manage all my media and I like it because it's faster, more convenient and easier IMO. If you hate iTunes, that's fine, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.Quote:
You're too stupid to change the batter yourself;
memory cards?! what if you break something putting them in?;
accessing files and folders directly?! you'll delete something important and mess up, no here's this crappy iTunes to do everything from;
don't you worry about bad software, we'll check em out and tell you what you can use.
I'd take that as a serious insult to my intelligence. Nobody is controlling the software I use on any other device or computer, I have full freedom of choice and I'm doing just fine even though there are millions of viruses, worms, trojans around on top of just bad software.
And whilst you may be able to do just fine on the computer, the App Store is totally different, how would you ever know if an app was stealing your information? You couldn't. Someone could write a really great and popular game thats doing something malicious like stealing information in the background and you'd never know.
If I thought for a second there could be malicious apps on the App Store I'd stop downloading/buying, and so would the majority of iPhone users. Why have the potential for these issues to exist when they don't have to?
What exactly do you not like about iTunes?
You can't run other apps in the background, only the part of that app that needs to run, actually runs. What's the difference between an app that runs in the background doing a task, or an app that doesn't run in the background but the task is being done by the OS? Aside from improved battery life and performance?Quote:
That's a hoot. So, they are using preemptive multitasking. That was what killed off the original Apple OS. The fact that you can't run other programs in the background defeats the purpose of multitasking.
Correct, multi-tasking in this context refers to the computer being able to do multiple tasks at the same time, which now you can on iOS 4.Quote:
After all, a single person can't truly multitask, as they can only interact with one program at a time, though they might switch rapidly between programs.
iOS 4 is able to do multiple things at one time, you just can't see multiple windows at the same time -- there's a big difference and that's due to the size of these devices.Quote:
The purpose of multitasking is so that the computer can do multiple things at one time by taking advantage of the slow meatbags operating it. By using preemptive multitasking, they have completely removed the purpose.
That's not what you described in the earlier post. If the OS allows multiple processes to run simultaneously, with each getting a slice of time (or a core), then you have preemptive multitasking. That would mean that your app really IS running in the background. If your app gets suspended when it is not visible, that is pseudo-multitasking, at best. At this point, you've pretty much claimed it both ways.
So basically, I want to have an app that performs a single calculation that will take an hour. Will it take an hour even if it has been hidden, or will it stop running? In other words, if I start that app running, then switch to a different app, will the calculation ever finish?
Isn't it? I'll clarify below.Quote:
That's not what you described in the earlier post. If the OS allows multiple processes to run simultaneously, with each getting a slice of time (or a core), then you have preemptive multitasking. That would mean that your app really IS running in the background. If your app gets suspended when it is not visible, that is pseudo-multitasking, at best. At this point, you've pretty much claimed it both ways.
It will continue running and finish the calculation, assuming, that the developer has programmed it to do so.Quote:
So basically, I want to have an app that performs a single calculation that will take an hour. Will it take an hour even if it has been hidden, or will it stop running? In other words, if I start that app running, then switch to a different app, will the calculation ever finish?
This is explained well: The sixth, is related to your question.
Quote:
iPhone 4 will add seven different multitasking services for developers, each tuned to solve different multitasking scenarios. One, demonstrated by Pandora’s Internet radio streaming app, will allow apps like it to play music in the background, with playback controls available even at the lock screen.
A second example involves VoIP (Voice over IP), which enables apps like Skype to continue to receive calls even when it is not the foreground app.
A third mechanism is background location, which can be used by direction apps such as TomTom or social media apps like Loopt. Rather than constantly polling GPS (something that kills the battery rapidly) the new system calculates location from cellular sites
A fourth and fifth enhancement relates to Apple’s existing push notification service and a new “local notifications” service that allows apps to post reminders or other events without using Apple’s servers.
A sixth feature, task completion, will enable an app to start a job and continue working on it after the user leaves the app. And example given cited an app posting photos to Flicker, which continued working after the user left that app.
The seventh multitasking mechanism is fast app switching, which “allows you to restore the state of an app when you switch out and back,” is the easiest to implement, essentially freezing the progress of an app such as a game while the user handles another task in another app.
That does sound suitable.
Indeed, even with apps that don't support multitasking (even though Fast App Switching should be adopted very quickly, which is one of the most important to me) it's much faster to get back to them, since they stay in the little multitasking menu bar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I still wouldn't buy the iPad. I might consider buying the iPhone though.
I want the next generation iPad to get the Retina display :p
That would require a resolution twice as high as 1024x768 which is 2048 x 1536, I wonder if Apple will do that.
I would disagree. Would you say that a controlled Internet is better than an Open one ? i wouldn't, i know that i am happy i live in England rather than somewhere like China were they get a filtered view of the Web. I am happy for there to be rubbish out there on the web, i dont have to visit if i dont want, but i would like the option.Quote:
But a "controlled" app store is better than an open one, you get way less rubbish.
The problem with an App store being Controlled is that it has to be controlled by someone ( in this case apple) and then various prejudice can come in to play as in what is let and what is blocked. Just the fact that they only allow programs written in very specific languages is one of those things that i dont understand. I have heard the supposed logic behind it but it makes little sense to me and will just piss off developers.
Apple seem to want to control every bit of your experience on the product you have bought from them, even after you have paid for it, and while you are right that the average user wont care, it bothers me !
It depends who controls it and what rules are applied to content allowed, would I prefer an internet without any malicious software or spyware? -- yes!Quote:
I would disagree. Would you say that a controlled Internet is better than an Open one ? i wouldn't, i know that i am happy i live in England rather than somewhere like China were they get a filtered view of the Web. I am happy for there to be rubbish out there on the web, i dont have to visit if i dont want, but i would like the option.
The problem with an App store being Controlled is that it has to be controlled by someone ( in this case apple) and then various prejudice can come in to play as in what is let and what is blocked.
Apple only rejects apps that aren't "good enough" for the App Store. Apps that are malicious, apps that don't work as described, apps that are poorly coded, apps that crash, etc.
I don't entirely understand what you mean, if you want a program to work on a target OS it must be written in a language that that OS understands.Quote:
Just the fact that they only allow programs written in very specific languages is one of those things that i dont understand. I have heard the supposed logic behind it but it makes little sense to me and will just piss off developers.
If you're talking about Apple changing the developer terms to prevent Adobe from using their Flash to iPhone app feature, the reason is mainly because of two things, first, that such a feature produces poorer quality code than one done individually, the second, Apple would be dependent on Adobe to update their Flash to iPhone app feature to include new APIs and features offered in updates to the iPhone OS, thus increasing the time it takes for a developer to update their app.
Also, I'd suspect that if someone is using flash to create a working app across multiple OSes, that they might not bother updating their app just to improve it on the iPhone (as it's also distributed in other formats).
Fair enough, but they do it for your own good. If Apple had an unrestricted App Store, would you be happy? Never being able to know if some app you were downloading was malicious?Quote:
Apple seem to want to control every bit of your experience on the product you have bought from them, even after you have paid for it, and while you are right that the average user wont care, it bothers me !
I use the web everyday and i cannot remember the last time i got a virus or installed a malicious program.Quote:
It depends who controls it and what rules are applied to content allowed, would I prefer an internet without any malicious software or spyware? -- yes!
While no-one likes Spyware or Malware like crime you are never going to eliminate it completely so as long as it doesn't effect me to much then i dont care.
Edit - to be honest if all they did was check the programs for Virus's and Malware then i wouldn't mind as they are then acting as unofficial virus protection, but unfortunately they dont.
What is not good enough ? also from what i understand recently they blocked all apps with any nudity from the app store, what is to stop them next from blocking bad language or something else. If i were an apple user i would find it very worrying that apple is deciding what is suitable for me.Quote:
Apple only rejects apps that aren't "good enough" for the App Store. Apps that are malicious, apps that don't work as described, apps that are poorly coded, apps that crash, etc.
It is not the OS that understands the language its the compiler / runtime.Quote:
I don't entirely understand what you mean, if you want a program to work on a target OS it must be written in a language that that OS understands.
Yes i am and i think that it is disgraceful behaviour really. It again shows Apple's monopolistic behaviour to there own devices. They are actually starting to behave more Microsoft then Microsoft !!Quote:
If you're talking about Apple changing the developer terms to prevent Adobe from using their Flash to iPhone app feature, the reason is mainly because of two things, first, that such a feature produces poorer quality code than one done individually, the second, Apple would be dependent on Adobe to update their Flash to iPhone app feature to include new APIs and features offered in updates to the iPhone OS, thus increasing the time it takes for a developer to update their app.
They get to control whether or not you can watch Flash movies or run flash apps on your device, not you, and personally i think that Apples reasons are a bit disingenuous as the latest version of Android can run Flash fine.
What Apple are saying is they dont like Flash therefore you shouldn't like Flash, and in fact we (apple) are going to take that decision for you by banning Flash.
Ah well that not right is it, if i create an application that that runs across OSes then firstly i am likely to have a bigger user base so i have more incentive to update, and also the whole point of being OS independent is that you compile only once and install everywhere, so unless you are suggesting that people who write Flash apps are lazy and just dont update for any OS than that point is just wrong.Quote:
Also, I'd suspect that if someone is using flash to create a working app across multiple OSes, that they might not bother updating their app just to improve it on the iPhone (as it's also distributed in other formats).
You're right, but you're a techie. The majority of the world have no idea about this kind of stuff, if there was a virus in the App Store and word got out about it, it'd damage the iPhone's reputation and kill the App Store.Quote:
I use the web everyday and i cannot remember the last time i got a virus or installed a malicious program.
While no-one likes Spyware or Malware like crime you are never going to eliminate it completely so as long as it doesn't effect me to much then i dont care.
Most users have anti-virus to protect them (at least they feel protected), I've not got anything on my Mac, or in Windows since I've been using my Mac, but I also don't download anything fishy.
Truthfully, you wouldn't really be able to tell if an app on the app store is malicious, that's why Apple HAS to do it this way.
Quote:
Edit - to be honest if all they did was check the programs for Virus's and Malware then i wouldn't mind as they are then acting as unofficial virus protection, but unfortunately they dont.
They don't just rejects apps for the fun of it, they only reject falsely advertised apps, malicious apps, poorly coded apps, apps that have poor UI's, apps that crash, apps that are memory hogs, etc.Quote:
What is not good enough ?
It's a very rare case where an app is rejected for other reasons outside of the above.
For example, the guy that made the app that enables you to wirelessly sync your iPhone with iTunes had that app rejected, I imagine because Apple are working to add such a feature themselves, and having that as well would just confuse people. And I'm sure there are, of course, other reasons why. (It may have not worked so well, who knows, except the jail breakers of course)
Quote:
It is not the OS that understands the language its the compiler / runtime.
Nonetheless, the reasons why they won't let it exist are fair. If Apple allowed such a thing, and the Flash to iPhone compiler became popular then they are risking several problems as I said, when new APIs come out (such as OS 4) developers using the Flash to iPhone compiler would have to wait for Adobe to update it, and as SJ's said, compiling one code to another produces poorer quality code than the real thing, those are reasons enough, particularly from a business perspective.Quote:
Yes i am and i think that it is disgraceful behaviour really. It again shows Apple's monopolistic behaviour to there own devices. They are actually starting to behave more Microsoft then Microsoft !!
Quote:
They get to control whether or not you can watch Flash movies or run flash apps on your device, not you, and personally i think that Apples reasons are a bit disingenuous as the latest version of Android can run Flash fine.
The iPhone has still been around a long time before the latest version of Android. Also, I've yet to see a thorough examination of how well it works, what kind of bugs it has, what effect it has on the battery life, does it run as smoothly as on the computer (at least not choppy).Quote:
What Apple are saying is they dont like Flash therefore you shouldn't like Flash, and in fact we (apple) are going to take that decision for you by banning Flash.
Apple is against Adobe, they've yet to be able to bring them a smartphone that runs flash well (according to Apple). Apple prefers HTML5 because its open source, and HTML5 is able to provide the same experience at least on the video side of things, but with better battery life (IIRC).
My point is, when they develop a good program that works well across multiple platforms, why would they go out of their way and spend time updating their app to support new features, that only the iOS will take advantage of?Quote:
Ah well that not right is it, if i create an application that that runs across OSes then firstly i am likely to have a bigger user base so i have more incentive to update, and also the whole point of being OS independent is that you compile only once and install everywhere, so unless you are suggesting that people who write Flash apps are lazy and just dont update for any OS than that point is just wrong.
Of course, it'd depend on how good their app is (how much money it's making), obviously if it was raking in heaps of cash then they'd update it quickly... but again what if Adobe don't update their compiler for a month or two? iOS 4 has 1500 new APIs, who knows how long it could take to update that.
Truthfully I'd like Flash on the iPhone, only so I have it, I don't really use flash often, if at all. But then again, maybe I wouldn't.
If Adobe ever make flash work really really well, Apple might change their mind, since having no flash on the iPhone is, to a certain market (techies) a big draw back. But then again, most video will be HTML5 eventually, Apple is pushing really hard :p
Like many of your other arguments, this one is also of the type "Steve told me this". How much source code of flash applications did you see, how well do you know flash and can you make a decision for yourself if it's bad code or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Icyculyr
You really are just blindly listening to what they tell you, buying into their marketing and story telling, and not allowing yourself to consider even a little bit that they might have ulterior motive for what they are doing.
Personally, I'd be offended by such a statement if I were a flash developer.
You can rationalize their practices all you want and describe them as "protection" of users and such, but the truth is, it is censorship, plain and simple. And I can't think of a single example in history where censorship ended well.