The Truth Behind Apple's iPad

Status
Not open for further replies.

ominous prime

Distinguished
Sep 18, 2009
406
0
18,790
3
I completely agree with you Tuan. Apples use of the iphone operating system completely crippled the iPad. Really loved; "The iPad is a console" summed it up in four words.
 

kravmaga

Distinguished
Dec 10, 2009
74
0
18,630
0
Tell that to all the bozos oozing of smug who even right now are picturing themselves sitting in a snob cafe sipping on a cup of something I can't even pronounce with a modern jazz track in the background while reading the latest gazette on an iPad.

The focus group for this thing was never the productive cross section of the bell curve.
 

cua8er

Distinguished
Jan 4, 2010
18
0
18,510
0
haha, first to comment......i wouldn't buy one, kinda pointless when u have an ipod and a macbook....
 
G

Guest

Guest
Im equally dissapointed. No USB so that you can share documents and presentations. No infrared eye to cannot be used as a remote controll. Flimsy instable docking solution. Biggest mistake, no OSX. Screen resolution seems also totally wrong. As an eBook you will get very tired eyes with the backlight screen and too limited battery capasity. This 1st edition will be given a pass by me. Maybe if some of these issues are corrected it might be a chance to get this one. As is now it's just a iTouch with a bigger screen and the advantage of the new aps is not too bad but how do you import the photos from your camera when on the road? Oh, you need another computer, right!
 

demonnn

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2009
461
0
18,790
3
I this is pretty useless. it's just an ipodtouch/iphone with larger screen. There is no reason to get it if you have either of those two devices. The only thing good on iPad will be internet browsing , like iphone . It's great
 

snotling

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2002
532
0
18,980
0
Must be something they whipped up in a few months when they figured they could not "NOT do it" without the whole world throwing tomatoes at them.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I have to wonder why you would watch a movie on a iPad rather then your TV?
As a country that has embraced big screen TV's. I cannot imagine anyone tying themselves to Apple and iTunes for content. Except for the Apple cult users. The other downfalls with it are a weak CPU, no full OS which probably means no Flash. What exactly is thing going to bridge? This looks more like hardware trying to sell Apps. Another way for Apple to bring you into their ecosystem. I am not buying.
 

dheadley

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2006
171
0
18,680
0
I know it lack a bit of the wow factor people were expecting, but I think Apple hit a homerun again with this device business wise. People come up with all kinds of things to knock it for, like
lack of a camera
for photos or video conferencing, but really lets get serious here. Who in the world would try to use something this big to take a picture? No one with half a brain is the correct answer.

As for the video camera camera for video conferencing, I'd like to know how many people actually use their web cams to video conference? Counting the four computers in our house plus friends and family computers that I get asked to look at now and then, I see maybe 30 computers on a regular basis. Maybe half of them have a webcam that came with them, but I only know of three people that have ever used them, and two of those are on my wifes and mine computers to talk to each other while I am on the road.

I mean come on people, if you were going to video conference with this thing the far better way would be to have a camera in the dock so that you don't give the people on the other end motion sickness from you trying to hold the iPad up in front of you the whole time.

The 1gz processor is too slow
which i don't understand at all. The main things that this thing needs to do is play back 720p video, surf the web and play some iPhone games. If you look at the specs on the PowerVR designs they are way more than capable of doing 1080p video and 3d gaming. This thing isn't going to play Crysis for crying out loud.

This thing is not intended to replace a laptop or a desktop, so stop trying to compare it to one. It is designed to do just what it does, give the Touch experience to people that need more screen to look at.

Think of the Medical apps on the iPhone, they will be way better when done with the SDK for this device and the extra resolution and space. I can see this hiting big in that community.

You aren't going to use this while driving your car, or walking down the street like you do with your smartphone. It's not intended to work that way.

This is for: laying around on the couch, sitting in a coffee shop, studying at the library, relaxing in your dorm room or taking the place of your textbooks in class. You will carry it in your backpack if it ever leaves the house in the first place. Personally I don't even think I would get one with 3g at all. Everywhere I named above probably has Wifi (except for home, most are probably free).
 

razorblaze42

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2009
150
0
18,680
0
I respectfully disagree with the majority. Since it’s competitively priced against the Kindle DX, but has more functionality, I think it’s promising. Could it be better? Sure, but it’s a start in the right direction. I can see this replacing a netbook in a lot of cases where the users only want to surf the web or send/check emails. I’m sure it will evolve very quickly.
 

tikrjee

Distinguished
May 26, 2009
159
0
18,710
5
[citation][nom]cua8er[/nom]haha, first to comment......i wouldn't buy one, kinda pointless when u have an ipod and a macbook....[/citation]
Much like the iPad, the fail is strong with this one.
This would've been great if Asus didn't have an Eee Tablet with 32GB SSD for $485 on Newegg. But as stated at the beginning of the article, it's an oversized iPod Touch with optional 3G.
They did beat what I anticipated for a price tag ($999 for the 32GB), and the new processor has potential. Stick that thing in the next iPod Touch, give me flash support, and I'll buy it.
A 'multimedia' tablet without flash support, handwriting recognition, and multitasking... sacrifices made to achieve the $499 price point. Maybe the $999 would've been worth it for improved functionality? Not even a camera for video conferencing! Huge misses on Apple's part!
Sure it's sexy (like the iPod Touch), but it's not practical anymore. As Tuan pointed out, it's big draw was it's ability to do so much and fit in the pocket. If they want to market something bigger, it has to be more than an increase in surface area. You must bring more productivity.
I'd pay $999 if it had all the things it's missing. Gladly, too. I would've actually bought an Apple product for once in my life.
 

tikrjee

Distinguished
May 26, 2009
159
0
18,710
5
[citation][nom]razorblaze42[/nom]I respectfully disagree with the majority. Since it’s competitively priced against the Kindle DX, but has more functionality, I think it’s promising. Could it be better? Sure, but it’s a start in the right direction. I can see this replacing a netbook in a lot of cases where the users only want to surf the web or send/check emails. I’m sure it will evolve very quickly.[/citation]
If they were marketing the iPad as an e-Book and then some, yes it would be great. But they're marketing as a portable computing device that can handle e-books. It is a start, and for once, I hope Apple gets it right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS