Author Topic: Ipad (Read 17928 times)

msiegel · « **Reply #50 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 15:26:34 »

Quote from: onowak;154612

this may be their part of their plan...

considering that steve carefully scripts and rehearses product launch presentations, i believe showing off the missing plugin, on two different websites, was intentional.

didjamatic · « **Reply #51 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 15:28:24 »

Supporting flash would allow people to easily write apps/games for the ipad/ipod/iphone that iSteve won't get paid for.

ricercar · « **Reply #52 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 15:30:03 »

Quote from: msiegel;154632

showing off the missing plugin, on two different websites, was intentional.

100%

onowak · « **Reply #53 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 15:35:54 »

ricercar,

yes, there are a lot of flash designers "writing" bad flash software. i totally agree. it doesnt help things that adobe confuses the issue with Flash 5, Flex Builder, and FlashBuilder development playtforms. but the language and the platform is great for cross-platform, multimedia browser apps. it really has a lot going for it in spite of adobe.

but come on: to say actionscript 3 is "inferior" to c++? LOL. they are totally different tools! that sounds like ignorance. c++ is great. i love it too. but i wouldnt want to dev a rich internet app with it.

but i suppose if all you have is a hammer in your toolbox - everything looks like a nail, yes?

lmao.

-0.

ch_123 · « **Reply #54 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 15:49:03 »

Quote from: sethstorm;154566

Show Image

...and if you thought the other ones were bad, here's this.

You sir, are my hero.

As for all this stuff of no flash, and only being able to run one app at a time - product line rationalization folks...

Superfluous Parentheses · « **Reply #55 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 16:36:05 »

Quote from: onowak;154637

but come on: to say actionscript 3 is "inferior" to c++? LOL. they are totally different tools! that sounds like ignorance. c++ is great. i love it too. but i wouldnt want to dev a rich internet app with it.

but i suppose if all you have is a hammer in your toolbox - everything looks like a nail, yes?

The problem with flash is not AS3. AS3 is OK; it looks even more disgusting than ecma 262 3rd edition, but I know of no parts that can't be made to work safely and relatively efficiently. The problem at the moment is twofold:

1. Some programmers don't know how to use the language/platform well.
2. There's a lot of room yet for the common flash players/plugins to get more efficient and stable. IMHO the move to class-based inheritance based on the 4th edition previews might have delayed real improvements not just in flash but also in common ecmascript VMs in browsers.

sethstorm · « **Reply #56 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 16:46:59 »

Quote from: ch_123;154641

You sir, are my hero.

As for all this stuff of no flash, and only being able to run one app at a time - product line rationalization folks...

...and most likely, the kid is pictured in that photo.

Apparently it's Apple's MO to say "...you're not the target audience, so STFU." when hearing complaints about missing features(that end up there anyway).

My conclusion: Rip out the screen down to the panel interfaces and sell the remaining bits. Then be happy with your new IPS touchscreen as it serves a purpose not approved of by Steve.

hyperlinked · « **Reply #57 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 17:06:41 »

Quote from: didjamatic;154634

Supporting flash would allow people to easily write apps/games for the ipad/ipod/iphone that iSteve won't get paid for.

Sort of... one of the touted features of Flash CS5 is that you can compile iPhone apps in AS3.
http://cs5.org/?p=359

I don't think they're making a killing off the of App store or iTunes. As ricer pointed out, they want to sell hardware. It makes no sense for them to allow for free apps if they're trying to hit the jackpot by selling Apps... not that they aren't making plenty of dough as it is.

onowak · « **Reply #58 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 17:56:26 »

if you look at a 3month history of adobe's stock - you'll see a nice cliff around the time of the ipad announcement, basically erasing the gains of the last 90 days.

-0.

elbowglue · « **Reply #59 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 18:09:25 »

That is funny ****. Lol!

elservo · « **Reply #60 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 18:18:19 »

I'm glad that this thing is getting hated. Hopefully this ends up failing and Apple goes back to making OSX their top priority. That won't happen, but it certainly would be nice if it did.

msiegel · « **Reply #61 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 18:55:28 »

come on elservo, join the drm ruled world of the future

msiegel · « **Reply #62 on:** Fri, 29 January 2010, 20:23:25 »

adobe's view on ipad's lack of flash

SCTony · « **Reply #63 on:** Sat, 30 January 2010, 23:03:16 »

Lol from The Inquirer- Ipad is a car without a motor

msiegel · « **Reply #64 on:** Sat, 30 January 2010, 23:27:13 »

jobs *is* a genius...

and i can only hope the ipad succeeds -- both for apple's sake, and because it will spur competition, opening the floodgates of the market for linux based alternatives

kishy · « **Reply #65 on:** Sat, 30 January 2010, 23:46:31 »

Oh I really hope you're just playing devil's advocate here...

msiegel · « **Reply #66 on:** Sat, 30 January 2010, 23:57:37 »

agreed.

apple positioned itself to take the step for this new platform, and i say more power to them

kishy · « **Reply #67 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 00:08:12 »

I think it's a bit more like this:

Apple had the potential to do something good and intentionally crippled the product so much that they've shot themselves in their own stupid feet (something they're good at and have done numerous times in the past, one example of which being the Mac TV I already presented, another being the iPod itself, another being their original tablet flop...and there are more).

Multitasking, Flash, I/O, software compatibility, storage capacity...everything that makes portable computing (in any capacity) feasible, enjoyable and productive has been stripped from the thing.

hyperlinked · « **Reply #68 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 01:01:25 »

Quote from: kishy;154952

I think it's a bit more like this:

Apple had the potential to do something good and intentionally crippled the product so much that they've shot themselves in their own stupid feet ...

Actually I think it's actually more like this: Different people have different experiences and competencies. They see things you miss and miss things you see. It's ok if they have a different opinion of something than you do. You don't have to keep ramming it back at them when they don't completely agree with you on a subjective matter.

The iPad is obviously not designed to make Kishy happy and they're never going to make Kishy happy even when they send shock waves through the niche table industry by opening the pricing of the iPad at $499 because I have a feeling that had they priced it at $4.99, Kishy would still find reason to say it sucks.

You have to allow that the iPad brings the potential for innovation. Things that are innovative are not always smashing successes and they're not even always good products. Something can suck and be innovative at the same time. Sometimes the best thing a new product can do is try something different and fail spectacularly, but leave behind lessons and strategies that the eventual victors will utilize to succeed. That's why some of us can be fans of innovation without being total fans of the actual product that contains an innovation.

I can guarantee you there are a lot of people smarter than you and me combined who think the iPad is ridiculous and are eagerly following it nonetheless.

ak_nala · « **Reply #69 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 06:54:10 »

The iPad is still two months away from shipping, but there are already repercussions. Let the eBook wars begin.

kishy · « **Reply #70 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 09:13:05 »

Quote from: hyperlinked;154959

Actually I think it's actually more like this: Different people have different experiences and competencies. They see things you miss and miss things you see. It's ok if they have a different opinion of something than you do. You don't have to keep ramming it back at them when they don't completely agree with you on a subjective matter.

The iPad is obviously not designed to make Kishy happy and they're never going to make Kishy happy even when they send shock waves through the niche table industry by opening the pricing of the iPad at $499 because I have a feeling that had they priced it at $4.99, Kishy would still find reason to say it sucks.

You have to allow that the iPad brings the potential for innovation. Things that are innovative are not always smashing successes and they're not even always good products. Something can suck and be innovative at the same time. Sometimes the best thing a new product can do is try something different and fail spectacularly, but leave behind lessons and strategies that the eventual victors will utilize to succeed. That's why some of us can be fans of innovation without being total fans of the actual product that contains an innovation.

I can guarantee you there are a lot of people smarter than you and me combined who think the iPad is ridiculous and are eagerly following it nonetheless.

Very true, I do see what you're saying. However from my perspective it just seems crippled. Perhaps you're right and they do it to stimulate the industry's innovation engine, though in my eyes it needs nothing of the sort. What we need is the quality and reliability of what already exists to be improved, not new stuff to be created without need or use.

And yes, you're right, I'd have beef with it even at $4.99. My view is a crippled product is a crippled product regardless of price. Difference is I'd buy one at 4.99 so I could take it apart and see what could be repurposed into more worthy projects (at least projects that I view as more worthy, again since this is subjective).

FWIW, if it had the stuff it's lacking that I listed above (at the same price as current for the 16GB), I'd be saying how great it is and what an excellent price it is.

ricercar · « **Reply #71 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 11:10:51 »

Quote from: kishy;154952

Multitasking, Flash, I/O, software compatibility, storage capacity...everything that makes portable computing (in any capacity) feasible, enjoyable and productive has been stripped from the thing.

1999 vintage VADEM Clio tablet running Windows CE

Multitasking - yes.
Flash - no.
I/O - yes, serial, PCMCIA, IRDa.
software compatibility - With what? YMMV. Clio has Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Access.
storage capacity - yes, 16M built-in, 32 GB CF.

You forgot

Wifi (dealbreaker if missing), which is a Yes, with PCMCIA/Cardbus.
Touchscreen Stylus - yes
Portable - yes, <1.5 pounds, <1" thin
Physical keyboard - Yes
Battery life - my four batteries deliver 2.5, 6, 9, and 11 hours CONTINUOUS use. YEs, I have a internet tablet that works 11 hours on one charge.

I use it for email, surfing

eBay
Geehkack
HPCfactor
UMPCportal
Slashdot
ArsTechnica
Anand
BBC news
CNN
LA Times
Macintouch
MSNBC
New York Times
San Jose Mercury News
Washington Post

Flash? Who needs Flash?

$25 used - $119 new on eBay.
~$200 all decked out with WiFi and CF, same as an 8 GB iPod touch but has 8" screen

Why pay more?

kishy · « **Reply #72 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 11:19:24 »

ricercar, yes, I did forget a couple things, and I definitely agree with what you listed.

From what you've said compared to the known capabilities of the iPad, the $25 10-11 year old Clio stomps it.

Plus, IMO, it looks better too.

exia · « **Reply #73 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 12:21:57 »

i might consider getting this as a netbook replacement and ebook reader.

i am considering the kindle dx because it has eink but the technology is moving ahead at a snail's pace, the ipad might be a good inbetween device till things mature.

Ulysses31 · « **Reply #74 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 12:37:56 »

I don't think a device that is already lagging behind the competition can spur innovation. There are already products ready to be released to manufacturing that will make this look like the joke that it is. They haven't been released yet because the industry players were obviously taking a "wait and see" approach to size up the competition before releasing their own products. There are also plenty of high-speed full-colour e-paper technologies already commercially available, which don't have the flaw of being hard to read in bright light like I suspect the Ipad would be (glossy screen is assumed). Mirasol corporation in particular has an array of impressive products that are truly innovative and worth some attention.

http://www.epapercentral.com/spotlight-on-mirasol-qualcomms-full-color-epaper.htm

The CPU they're using BTW isn't designed by Apple. It's an ARM design, same as in about 7 other CPUs already on the market for a similar purpose. It's produced by P.A. Semi which Apple acquired so as to eliminate the possibility of any future "jail-breaking" of their devices, by having more control over what the CPU can run.

ch_123 · « **Reply #75 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 12:47:58 »

Chinese innovation? You mean they'll get better at copying stuff?

exia · « **Reply #76 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 13:21:22 »

with $499, one can buy 3 X 24" LCDs or one measly ipad. decisions decisions....

msiegel · « **Reply #77 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 13:59:20 »

Quote from: ricercar;155066

1999 vintage VADEM Clio tablet

neat keyboard

ricercar · « **Reply #78 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 14:24:30 »

Yah, that keyboard is unique. Scissors over individually-cut, swiftly-mobile rubber domes the same color as my office floor. :-( I've been planning a Cherry hack, but so far nothing works that's as portable and durable as the built-in. The display support/hinges are TOUGH, made of aluminum. They inspire carrying at fast speeds with much bumping and sliding at the destination.

Absolutely no one has mentioned the (lack of) screen protection on the iSteve. I can't be the only person to think it's going to be scratched up regularly, its mass lending to impact with far more force than an iPod Touch gets. Aftermarket case makers will make zillions of dollars, especially if there are 2-5 iSteve generations with the same form factor.

msiegel · « **Reply #79 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 14:54:12 »

Quote from: webwit;155099

Yeah I think they are moving ahead in all territories including innovation.. fast!

then let us look forward to our lower cost (yet somewhat toxic) ChyPads

ricercar · « **Reply #80 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 14:59:13 »

Quote from: exia;155100

with $499, one can buy 3 X 24" LCDs or one measly ipad. decisions decisions....

With three 24" displays you still need to buy a portable computer with pair of graphics cards to get on the net. That's nowhere near as easy to lug around as an iSteve, and this would double the price.

EDIT:
The definitive review: iPad versus Etch-a-Sketch!

kishy · « **Reply #81 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 19:17:10 »

Shall we coin this "iDundancy"?

msiegel · « **Reply #82 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 20:47:21 »

i suspect we've fallen into some kind of psychological trap...

i've said the name enough times that it's devoid of any other connotations... and visually compared the thing to iphone enough, to never expect to make phone calls on it...

next it will start seeming essential somehow, and really low cost
XD

msiegel · « **Reply #83 on:** Sun, 31 January 2010, 21:22:31 »

at last, it's iPad's target customer!

XD

ricercar · « **Reply #84 on:** Mon, 01 February 2010, 07:58:24 »

Pshaw. We are large. We contain multitudes.

D-EJ915 · « **Reply #85 on:** Mon, 01 February 2010, 12:20:43 »

seeing osaka and hearing that voice made me cringe

ricercar · « **Reply #86 on:** Mon, 01 February 2010, 14:07:50 »

Quote from: ripster;155344

I'm waiting for the video ads.

First Ad :

>

News:

Author Topic: Ipad (Read 17928 times)