If you have tiny hands. I can reach the left ctrl or alt without moving my hand at all. The right ctrl is off limits. Of course, the most common keys hit while holding ctrl are xcv, so an easy shift of all fingers puts them all right in line.
Again, if you have a study showing this is somehow better, I'm all for it. Until then, it falls in dvorak land with a lot of people that think it is better, with the rest of the world not even knowing there is a debate.
I'm beginning to prefer the OS X shortcuts for some common stuff I do, personally.
Ctrl+A, Cmd+A :: Select all. Pinky has to go to Ctrl, ring finger has to move over to A for this one. Cmd+A just requires that my thumb come off the space-bar.
Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V, Cmd+C/Cmd+V :: Copy/Paste. Again pinky has to go down to control, my entire left hand lifts off of the home-row for my index finger to either hit C or V.
It's a pretty minor thing all in all, but I have started to prefer the Mac Cmd shortcuts. Which kind of stinks seeing as how I make a living programming for and in Windows. :P
Some of this might be because of my keyboard though. It's one of those MS ergonomic models. Now I'm curious if I have the same level of comfort/annoyance on a regular keyboard while using the standard Ctrl shortcuts.
I highly question who they can convince to purchase this product that weren't already predisposed towards gotta have it gadgetry.
Me, I have zero need for a full featured laptop and will not buy a product that ties me to a specific store for ebooks. I got a touch just to have a easy device to use for email/web while visiting people, I wanted a similar device with a larger screen when I bought the touch. The ipad fits the bill and will do both of those things better and easier as well as let me easily read PDF's a full page at a time. I can also access both of the major ebooks stores with it as well as Apple's. Netbook screens are too small.
The only thing that bothers me even a bit about it is the lack of USB, but I can't recall the last time someone passed me a stick to transfer a file. Everyone I know uses online services to share files, Office Live or Google Docs.
Cabezone on
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I highly question who they can convince to purchase this product that weren't already predisposed towards gotta have it gadgetry.
Me, I have zero need for a full featured laptop and will not buy a product that ties me to a specific store for ebooks. I got a touch just to have a easy device to use for email/web while visiting people, I wanted a similar device with a larger screen when I bought the touch. The ipad fits the bill and will do both of those things better and easier as well as let me easily read PDF's a full page at a time. I can also access both of the major ebooks stores with it as well as Apple's. Netbook screens are too small.
The only thing that bothers me even a bit about it is the lack of USB, but I can't recall the last time someone passed me a stick to transfer a file. Everyone I know uses online services to share files, Office Live or Google Docs.
Of course there are a few people like you.
mrt144 on
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I highly question who they can convince to purchase this product that weren't already predisposed towards gotta have it gadgetry.
Me, I have zero need for a full featured laptop and will not buy a product that ties me to a specific store for ebooks. I got a touch just to have a easy device to use for email/web while visiting people, I wanted a similar device with a larger screen when I bought the touch. The ipad fits the bill and will do both of those things better and easier as well as let me easily read PDF's a full page at a time. I can also access both of the major ebooks stores with it as well as Apple's. Netbook screens are too small.
The only thing that bothers me even a bit about it is the lack of USB, but I can't recall the last time someone passed me a stick to transfer a file. Everyone I know uses online services to share files, Office Live or Google Docs.
AND with the dongle, it has USB... so if it turns out being important for you to have that functionality, buy the dongle. Done.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
There are equivalents in both, but he's saying that on OS X, all of them are accessed via Command+Something
In Windows or Linux, it could be ctrl or alt or win/super, and the hotkeys are all over the board. For example, Ctrl+W might kill the open window (if the application has that hotkey set) but it's Alt+F4 to close the application. In OS X, it's always Cmd+Something, and since the cmd button is used with the thumb (like an extension of the spacebar), it makes for less convoluted hand motions when hotkeying. You're probably going to disagree if you don't use OS X, but it's something you get used to really quickly and miss more than you'd think when using other OS's.
Command is the de-facto "This plus something does something" modifier in OS X by UI design standards, just as Alt is typically the modifier key
This is borderline silly goose territory. My main editor of choice is vim. I know more bloody keyboard shortcuts than I can even recount. Majority of which are at or near the home row. I could argue for days that this is so convenient it is frightening. I do not argue that it is somehow superior.
I meant you begin to miss the fact that most common shortcuts are used from the command key, not shortcuts themselves. It's just more intuitive and consistent across applications. And as much as I love vim and its keyboard shortcuts, there is no way anyone would use the word "intuitive" when describing it.
There is nothing intuitive about any keyboard shortcut. Period. There are quite a few that are familiar. To try and argue that command is somehow more intuitive is another silly goose claim.
If you want to argue that it is easier to type them. . . I'm not sure what that even means. I have never really had trouble with any of the key combos.
Main Entry: in·tu·i·tive
Pronunciation: \in-ˈtü-ə-tiv, -ˈtyü-\
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1645
1 a : known or perceived by intuition : directly apprehended <had an intuitive awareness of his sister's feelings> b : knowable by intuition <intuitive truths> c : based on or agreeing with intuition <intuitive responses> <makes intuitive sense> d : readily learned or understood <software with an intuitive interface>
2 : knowing or perceiving by intuition
3 : possessing or given to intuition or insight <an intuitive mind>
It's more intuitive to have all keyboard shortcuts be some variation of Command+Key, and utilize shortcuts that are consistent across applications (Command+, for Preferences, Cmd+W for Close Current Window, etc), than having keyboard shortcuts spread across Ctrl (Ctrl+C), Alt (Alt+F4), and Win/Super.
edit: I should also reiterate (which was already pointed out) that Windows and Linux have similar UI guidelines, specifically because it's more intuitive for the user, but they're mostly ignored or forgotten about.
There are equivalents in both, but he's saying that on OS X, all of them are accessed via Command+Something
In Windows or Linux, it could be ctrl or alt or win/super, and the hotkeys are all over the board. For example, Ctrl+W might kill the open window (if the application has that hotkey set) but it's Alt+F4 to close the application. In OS X, it's always Cmd+Something, and since the cmd button is used with the thumb (like an extension of the spacebar), it makes for less convoluted hand motions when hotkeying. You're probably going to disagree if you don't use OS X, but it's something you get used to really quickly and miss more than you'd think when using other OS's.
Command is the de-facto "This plus something does something" modifier in OS X by UI design standards, just as Alt is typically the modifier key
This is borderline silly goose territory. My main editor of choice is vim. I know more bloody keyboard shortcuts than I can even recount. Majority of which are at or near the home row. I could argue for days that this is so convenient it is frightening. I do not argue that it is somehow superior.
I meant you begin to miss the fact that most common shortcuts are used from the command key, not shortcuts themselves. It's just more intuitive and consistent across applications. And as much as I love vim and its keyboard shortcuts, there is no way anyone would use the word "intuitive" when describing it.
There is nothing intuitive about any keyboard shortcut. Period. There are quite a few that are familiar. To try and argue that command is somehow more intuitive is another silly goose claim.
If you want to argue that it is easier to type them. . . I'm not sure what that even means. I have never really had trouble with any of the key combos.
Main Entry: in·tu·i·tive
Pronunciation: \in-ˈtü-ə-tiv, -ˈtyü-\
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1645
1 a : known or perceived by intuition : directly apprehended <had an intuitive awareness of his sister's feelings> b : knowable by intuition <intuitive truths> c : based on or agreeing with intuition <intuitive responses> <makes intuitive sense> d : readily learned or understood <software with an intuitive interface>
2 : knowing or perceiving by intuition
3 : possessing or given to intuition or insight <an intuitive mind>
It's more intuitive to have all keyboard shortcuts be some variation of Command+Key, and utilize shortcuts that are consistent across applications (Command+, for Preferences, Cmd+W for Close Current Window, etc), than having keyboard shortcuts spread across Ctrl (Ctrl+C), Alt (Alt+F4), and Win/Super.
What? Just no. There is nothing intuitive about it. There isn't even a mnemonic to help learn them. At least vim has that going for it. Why does "gi" take you to your last insert, because the command is "go to your last insert." Why is yy copy? Because vim calls it yank. What do you type to paste? "p" of course.
Now... in the command key world. Why does cmd-w close a window? Because w is for window? But in firefox it only closes a tab? Because we had a lot of people get confused when they used alt-f4. Ok then, why does cmd-t open a tab? Because t is for tab. But cmd-w closes a window, and cmd-t opens a tab??
So, unless you are going to show that there is some theme other than, shortcuts are from the cmd button, I'm calling shenanigans on the intuitive call.
taeric on
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
Isn't that the thrust of the iPad, that you don't need stupid peripherals, except when you do?
There are equivalents in both, but he's saying that on OS X, all of them are accessed via Command+Something
In Windows or Linux, it could be ctrl or alt or win/super, and the hotkeys are all over the board. For example, Ctrl+W might kill the open window (if the application has that hotkey set) but it's Alt+F4 to close the application. In OS X, it's always Cmd+Something, and since the cmd button is used with the thumb (like an extension of the spacebar), it makes for less convoluted hand motions when hotkeying. You're probably going to disagree if you don't use OS X, but it's something you get used to really quickly and miss more than you'd think when using other OS's.
Command is the de-facto "This plus something does something" modifier in OS X by UI design standards, just as Alt is typically the modifier key
This is borderline silly goose territory. My main editor of choice is vim. I know more bloody keyboard shortcuts than I can even recount. Majority of which are at or near the home row. I could argue for days that this is so convenient it is frightening. I do not argue that it is somehow superior.
I meant you begin to miss the fact that most common shortcuts are used from the command key, not shortcuts themselves. It's just more intuitive and consistent across applications. And as much as I love vim and its keyboard shortcuts, there is no way anyone would use the word "intuitive" when describing it.
There is nothing intuitive about any keyboard shortcut. Period. There are quite a few that are familiar. To try and argue that command is somehow more intuitive is another silly goose claim.
If you want to argue that it is easier to type them. . . I'm not sure what that even means. I have never really had trouble with any of the key combos.
Main Entry: in·tu·i·tive
Pronunciation: \in-ˈtü-ə-tiv, -ˈtyü-\
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1645
1 a : known or perceived by intuition : directly apprehended <had an intuitive awareness of his sister's feelings> b : knowable by intuition <intuitive truths> c : based on or agreeing with intuition <intuitive responses> <makes intuitive sense> d : readily learned or understood <software with an intuitive interface>
2 : knowing or perceiving by intuition
3 : possessing or given to intuition or insight <an intuitive mind>
It's more intuitive to have all keyboard shortcuts be some variation of Command+Key, and utilize shortcuts that are consistent across applications (Command+, for Preferences, Cmd+W for Close Current Window, etc), than having keyboard shortcuts spread across Ctrl (Ctrl+C), Alt (Alt+F4), and Win/Super.
What? Just no. There is nothing intuitive about it. There isn't even a mnemonic to help learn them. At least vim has that going for it. Why does "gi" take you to your last insert, because the command is "go to your last insert." Why is yy copy? Because vim calls it yank. What do you type to paste? "p" of course.
Now... in the command key world. Why does cmd-w close a window? Because w is for window? But in firefox it only closes a tab? Because we had a lot of people get confused when they used alt-f4. Ok then, why does cmd-t open a tab? Because t is for tab. But cmd-w closes a window, and cmd-t opens a tab??
So, unless you are going to show that there is some theme other than, shortcuts are from the cmd button, I'm calling shenanigans on the intuitive call.
You misread his argument. He's arguing that it's more intuitive to have ALL shortcuts start with CMD. In Windows, this isn't true. Some start with Alt. Some with Ctrl. Some with Winkey. On the Mac, virtually all shortcuts are Cmd+something. Thus, when trying to figure out a shortcut, You know intuitively that it's going to be CMD-Something.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
You misread his argument. He's arguing that it's more intuitive to have ALL shortcuts start with CMD. In Windows, this isn't true. Some start with Alt. Some with Ctrl. Some with Winkey. On the Mac, virtually all shortcuts are Cmd+something. Thus, when trying to figure out a shortcut, You know intuitively that it's going to be CMD-Something.
Which does jackall for you. In windows/linux, I know if it starts with an alt, it is a command to the interact with the window. With ctrl, it is a command to the application, and with the meta key, it is a command to windows/linux. I like this setup. However, it is in no way shape form or fashion a superior "intuitive" thing. At best, you can say that "all commands start with command" is consistent. But that doesn't make it intuitive. Especially when it provides nothing to help you know what the commands will do.
Amusingly, the entire reason the iPad is likely to be a success is because it will be intuitive. You want to move a window? Simply press on it and drag it around. You want to start a movie playing? Press the "play" button that is right on it. To try and argue that anything about keyboard shortcuts is intuitive is to completely miss the point of why we even have the iPad.
taeric on
0
ZampanovYou May Not Go HomeUntil Tonight Has Been MagicalRegistered Userregular
You misread his argument. He's arguing that it's more intuitive to have ALL shortcuts start with CMD. In Windows, this isn't true. Some start with Alt. Some with Ctrl. Some with Winkey. On the Mac, virtually all shortcuts are Cmd+something. Thus, when trying to figure out a shortcut, You know intuitively that it's going to be CMD-Something.
Which does jackall for you. In windows/linux, I know if it starts with an alt, it is a command to the interact with the window. With ctrl, it is a command to the application, and with the meta key, it is a command to windows/linux. I like this setup. However, it is in no way shape form or fashion a superior "intuitive" thing. At best, you can say that "all commands start with command" is consistent. But that doesn't make it intuitive. Especially when it provides nothing to help you know what the commands will do.
Amusingly, the entire reason the iPad is likely to be a success is because it will be intuitive. You want to move a window? Simply press on it and drag it around. You want to start a movie playing? Press the "play" button that is right on it. To try and argue that anything about keyboard shortcuts is intuitive is to completely miss the point of why we even have the iPad.
A simplification of this argument:
You keep using this word, "intuitive." I do not think it means what you think it means.
I could make the argument that "intuitiveness" is defined by known/expected factors. I.E. CMD-Something shortcuts are more intuitive because it is known by the user that most shortcuts are CMD-Something.
However, I get your point and you're right--there's nothing really intuitive about shortcuts.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
I could make the argument that "intuitiveness" is defined by known/expected factors. I.E. CMD-Something shortcuts are more intuitive because it is known by the user that most shortcuts are CMD-Something.
However, I get your point and you're right--there's nothing really intuitive about shortcuts.
Granted, there isn't.
But there is comfort in their uniformity. Like in Windows, how nice it is that cut, copy and paste are the same in every application. It is very safe to assume that ctrl-c is going to copy what you have highlighted, no matter the app.
Now imagine if there were dozens of similar assumptions you could make across every app, and every single developer out there was forced to that standard (except for apple themselves; why oh why does xcode not act like all the apps it is used to develop? WTF apple!?!?)
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I could make the argument that "intuitiveness" is defined by known/expected factors. I.E. CMD-Something shortcuts are more intuitive because it is known by the user that most shortcuts are CMD-Something.
However, I get your point and you're right--there's nothing really intuitive about shortcuts.
Granted, there isn't.
But there is comfort in their uniformity. Like in Windows, how nice it is that cut, copy and paste are the same in every application. It is very safe to assume that ctrl-c is going to copy what you have highlighted, no matter the app.
Now imagine if there were dozens of similar assumptions you could make across every app, and every single developer out there was forced to that standard (except for apple themselves; why oh why does xcode not act like all the apps it is used to develop? WTF apple!?!?)
And this I don't argue with. There is great comfort in uniformity across applications. I just don't see any comfort in the fact that some are ctrl and some are alt.
Of course, when you've grown to learn more about a computer and understand window managers and such, the common distinction between ctrl and alt is also nice. Being able to alt-click a window and move it around because alt elevated it to a window action, is understandable. I point back to my distinction earlier. If you understand the statements "I want the app to do something," I want to manipulate the window," and "I want the system to do something;" then ctrl/alt/meta makes sense.
from what i hear a silverback's dongle is pretty commanding
Actually, gorillas have pretty small dicks, compared to body size.
Which is what was amusing me so much about calling the iPad a gorilla. Looks impressive at first, but it's just hiding the fact that it has a tiny dick.
Not that I think that once the intention of the guy who introduced the analogy, though.
Evander on
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
I still prefer the camel analogy.
The iPad is definitely a horse designed by committee.
I think Microsoft may have been wanting to move towards a unified shortcut key in the Win key, but discovered when it was introduced that too many people were holding onto their old keyboards that did not have the key, coders (and gamers to a lesser degree) who didn't want the win key (and you can still find keyboards that allow you to turn it off and on), and so many heavy users of shortcuts had already put in 10 years of ctrl and alt that they weren't going to relearn shortcuts and were only going to get upset if you changed them.
I actually think Apple intentionally hamstrung the iPad for one very important reason: the $499 starting price.
That number is the key marketing pull that this product has, though unfortunately because the iPad offers little else in this model. But it's the cornerstone of the ad campaign, and it's the thing that will get people into the Apple Store that would otherwise opt out for the cheaper Kindle or a netbook. No one is actually going to buy a 16gb/non-3G version of this product, but the entry price will get them inside the store.
The speculation regarding intentional hamstringing is probably only marginally legitimate, but if it is true than I think Apple has out-thought themselves on this one. So far with every other Apple product, innovation has been linear and standardized. They don't offer versions of their products that have fewer features than their counterparts; there's no iMac that is cheaper because it doesn't have a camera or slot drive or the full version of OSX. Every product gets better and offers more, and there's no looking back. Want to save money? Get less memory, or a smaller processor, or a smaller hard-drive. You're not going to be able to strip it down any more than that.
But the iPad is clearly a new philosophy, and the only attribute I can describe that philosophy as having is cynicism. The iPad is the first Apple product to be able to do less than other Apple products without a distinct advantage in another functionality class. Sadly, there's no clear reason to make any other conjecture than accusing Apple of cynical focus. Simply put, the iPad isn't better because Apple didn't want it to be better, end of story. It can be. It should be. It's more than capable of being. But it's not what Apple wants.
The thing that has me scratching my head though is, what does Apple want?
I think there were problems with the camera implementation.
Look at Youtube. It's clear that most of the silly geese out there couldn't hold a camera steady to save their lives.
Get a 1.5 lb book, hold it out in front of you, and try to hold it completely steady for 10 minutes. It's going to be pretty damn hard to do. They're going to have to have some very advanced image stabilization software for hand-held voice chat to be acceptable.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
For you to consume. A giant screen with little else, especially as a glorified iPod Touch, is an Apple branded video player with the side ability to go on the internet and download from the App Store. Except for maybe a way to finally get Grandma to finally kick the 10 year old Dell, I really don't see anybody using this for anything except video and the occasional bored-at-the-airport (or bored-in-class or bored-in-a-meeting) internet.
It's a question of whether the somewhat steep $499 is worth the price of admission to essentially Apple's "mobile big screen".
I think there were problems with the camera implementation.
Look at Youtube. It's clear that most of the silly geese out there couldn't hold a camera steady to save their lives.
Get a 1.5 lb book, hold it out in front of you, and try to hold it completely steady for 10 minutes. It's going to be pretty damn hard to do. They're going to have to have some very advanced image stabilization software for hand-held voice chat to be acceptable.
I think if you rested it in your lap and propped it up with your hands it'd be steady enough for some webcam chat.
I think there were problems with the camera implementation.
Look at Youtube. It's clear that most of the silly geese out there couldn't hold a camera steady to save their lives.
Get a 1.5 lb book, hold it out in front of you, and try to hold it completely steady for 10 minutes. It's going to be pretty damn hard to do. They're going to have to have some very advanced image stabilization software for hand-held voice chat to be acceptable.
I think if you rested it in your lap and propped it up with your hands it'd be steady enough for some webcam chat.
But then again, laptop lol.
they're just gonna come out with a dongle thats a headband with a camera on a stick pointed at you :P
I think there were problems with the camera implementation.
Look at Youtube. It's clear that most of the silly geese out there couldn't hold a camera steady to save their lives.
Get a 1.5 lb book, hold it out in front of you, and try to hold it completely steady for 10 minutes. It's going to be pretty damn hard to do. They're going to have to have some very advanced image stabilization software for hand-held voice chat to be acceptable.
I think if you rested it in your lap and propped it up with your hands it'd be steady enough for some webcam chat.
But then again, laptop lol.
they're just gonna come out with a dongle thats a headband with a camera on a stick pointed at you :P
So I can strap a dongle to my head to use my iPad... sounds hot.
Shorn Scrotum Man on
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
It's a question of whether the somewhat steep $499 is worth the price of admission to essentially Apple's "mobile big screen".
Exactly, but I don't that was Apple's intention. For the large majority of users, $499 (or higher) is kinda pricey for the ability to check your email from the sofa. We talk about the potential of the App Store products, but that's not what my grandma is going to care about. She's not going know or care what a Skype or Brushes or Topple is. She just wants access to Hotmail and FoodNetwork.com. I don't know if $499 is low enough to capture that market.
Conversely, better versions of the iPad reaching up to $830 are probably going to be both too expensive and not capable enough to deliver the experience more tech-savvy people are looking for. Not when the MacBook is $999 and netbooks are $299.
I'm pretty sure Youtube already has an HTML5 version of their page done and working.
And CNN has a mobile site with support for quicktime enabled video, as does NBC.
What I do not understand is that people who clearly have specific reasons why they don't want to buy the device insist on pissing on it.
Like
I have no express need to buy a pet gorilla
but I am not here like "you know what, fuck gorillas, what the fuck was nature thinking, jesus"
pet gorillas won't be yet another control factor for the internet once they become popular
thus, fuck apple and their ways. If they were bigger, I hope they'd have a few lawsuits on their primate asses
"It's not crippled, it's just to test what the market needs! Besides, you can always upgrade by buying a new device and selling the old one on ebay to some sucker"
Posts
Ergonomic my ass!
Me, I have zero need for a full featured laptop and will not buy a product that ties me to a specific store for ebooks. I got a touch just to have a easy device to use for email/web while visiting people, I wanted a similar device with a larger screen when I bought the touch. The ipad fits the bill and will do both of those things better and easier as well as let me easily read PDF's a full page at a time. I can also access both of the major ebooks stores with it as well as Apple's. Netbook screens are too small.
The only thing that bothers me even a bit about it is the lack of USB, but I can't recall the last time someone passed me a stick to transfer a file. Everyone I know uses online services to share files, Office Live or Google Docs.
Of course there are a few people like you.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
It's more intuitive to have all keyboard shortcuts be some variation of Command+Key, and utilize shortcuts that are consistent across applications (Command+, for Preferences, Cmd+W for Close Current Window, etc), than having keyboard shortcuts spread across Ctrl (Ctrl+C), Alt (Alt+F4), and Win/Super.
edit: I should also reiterate (which was already pointed out) that Windows and Linux have similar UI guidelines, specifically because it's more intuitive for the user, but they're mostly ignored or forgotten about.
Is the iPad's slogan going to be: "There's a dongle for that." ?
What? Just no. There is nothing intuitive about it. There isn't even a mnemonic to help learn them. At least vim has that going for it. Why does "gi" take you to your last insert, because the command is "go to your last insert." Why is yy copy? Because vim calls it yank. What do you type to paste? "p" of course.
Now... in the command key world. Why does cmd-w close a window? Because w is for window? But in firefox it only closes a tab? Because we had a lot of people get confused when they used alt-f4. Ok then, why does cmd-t open a tab? Because t is for tab. But cmd-w closes a window, and cmd-t opens a tab??
So, unless you are going to show that there is some theme other than, shortcuts are from the cmd button, I'm calling shenanigans on the intuitive call.
CTRL+This argument or
ALT+The fact that I had nothing better to do so I read it
You misread his argument. He's arguing that it's more intuitive to have ALL shortcuts start with CMD. In Windows, this isn't true. Some start with Alt. Some with Ctrl. Some with Winkey. On the Mac, virtually all shortcuts are Cmd+something. Thus, when trying to figure out a shortcut, You know intuitively that it's going to be CMD-Something.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
Which does jackall for you. In windows/linux, I know if it starts with an alt, it is a command to the interact with the window. With ctrl, it is a command to the application, and with the meta key, it is a command to windows/linux. I like this setup. However, it is in no way shape form or fashion a superior "intuitive" thing. At best, you can say that "all commands start with command" is consistent. But that doesn't make it intuitive. Especially when it provides nothing to help you know what the commands will do.
Amusingly, the entire reason the iPad is likely to be a success is because it will be intuitive. You want to move a window? Simply press on it and drag it around. You want to start a movie playing? Press the "play" button that is right on it. To try and argue that anything about keyboard shortcuts is intuitive is to completely miss the point of why we even have the iPad.
A simplification of this argument:
You keep using this word, "intuitive." I do not think it means what you think it means.
PSN/XBL: Zampanov -- Steam: Zampanov
However, I get your point and you're right--there's nothing really intuitive about shortcuts.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
from what i hear a silverback's dongle is pretty commanding
Granted, there isn't.
But there is comfort in their uniformity. Like in Windows, how nice it is that cut, copy and paste are the same in every application. It is very safe to assume that ctrl-c is going to copy what you have highlighted, no matter the app.
Now imagine if there were dozens of similar assumptions you could make across every app, and every single developer out there was forced to that standard (except for apple themselves; why oh why does xcode not act like all the apps it is used to develop? WTF apple!?!?)
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
And this I don't argue with. There is great comfort in uniformity across applications. I just don't see any comfort in the fact that some are ctrl and some are alt.
Of course, when you've grown to learn more about a computer and understand window managers and such, the common distinction between ctrl and alt is also nice. Being able to alt-click a window and move it around because alt elevated it to a window action, is understandable. I point back to my distinction earlier. If you understand the statements "I want the app to do something," I want to manipulate the window," and "I want the system to do something;" then ctrl/alt/meta makes sense.
In Windows this is Control+Ape+Dongle. It's much more comfortable because it requires using the pinky and thumbs are too big.
well its hard to push the control button without an opposable thumb anyway
Actually, gorillas have pretty small dicks, compared to body size.
Which is what was amusing me so much about calling the iPad a gorilla. Looks impressive at first, but it's just hiding the fact that it has a tiny dick.
Not that I think that once the intention of the guy who introduced the analogy, though.
The iPad is definitely a horse designed by committee.
...A committee of orangutans?
Oh I think it has to be.
What do you Apple folks have to say about that?
"Who cares?"
I actually think Apple intentionally hamstrung the iPad for one very important reason: the $499 starting price.
That number is the key marketing pull that this product has, though unfortunately because the iPad offers little else in this model. But it's the cornerstone of the ad campaign, and it's the thing that will get people into the Apple Store that would otherwise opt out for the cheaper Kindle or a netbook. No one is actually going to buy a 16gb/non-3G version of this product, but the entry price will get them inside the store.
The speculation regarding intentional hamstringing is probably only marginally legitimate, but if it is true than I think Apple has out-thought themselves on this one. So far with every other Apple product, innovation has been linear and standardized. They don't offer versions of their products that have fewer features than their counterparts; there's no iMac that is cheaper because it doesn't have a camera or slot drive or the full version of OSX. Every product gets better and offers more, and there's no looking back. Want to save money? Get less memory, or a smaller processor, or a smaller hard-drive. You're not going to be able to strip it down any more than that.
But the iPad is clearly a new philosophy, and the only attribute I can describe that philosophy as having is cynicism. The iPad is the first Apple product to be able to do less than other Apple products without a distinct advantage in another functionality class. Sadly, there's no clear reason to make any other conjecture than accusing Apple of cynical focus. Simply put, the iPad isn't better because Apple didn't want it to be better, end of story. It can be. It should be. It's more than capable of being. But it's not what Apple wants.
The thing that has me scratching my head though is, what does Apple want?
Look at Youtube. It's clear that most of the silly geese out there couldn't hold a camera steady to save their lives.
Get a 1.5 lb book, hold it out in front of you, and try to hold it completely steady for 10 minutes. It's going to be pretty damn hard to do. They're going to have to have some very advanced image stabilization software for hand-held voice chat to be acceptable.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
For you to consume. A giant screen with little else, especially as a glorified iPod Touch, is an Apple branded video player with the side ability to go on the internet and download from the App Store. Except for maybe a way to finally get Grandma to finally kick the 10 year old Dell, I really don't see anybody using this for anything except video and the occasional bored-at-the-airport (or bored-in-class or bored-in-a-meeting) internet.
It's a question of whether the somewhat steep $499 is worth the price of admission to essentially Apple's "mobile big screen".
I think if you rested it in your lap and propped it up with your hands it'd be steady enough for some webcam chat.
But then again, laptop lol.
they're just gonna come out with a dongle thats a headband with a camera on a stick pointed at you :P
So I can strap a dongle to my head to use my iPad... sounds hot.
Exactly, but I don't that was Apple's intention. For the large majority of users, $499 (or higher) is kinda pricey for the ability to check your email from the sofa. We talk about the potential of the App Store products, but that's not what my grandma is going to care about. She's not going know or care what a Skype or Brushes or Topple is. She just wants access to Hotmail and FoodNetwork.com. I don't know if $499 is low enough to capture that market.
Conversely, better versions of the iPad reaching up to $830 are probably going to be both too expensive and not capable enough to deliver the experience more tech-savvy people are looking for. Not when the MacBook is $999 and netbooks are $299.
Apparently Google are planning a tablet running Chromium.
That could potentially be cool. Have there been any big announcements in regards to Chromium lately? I haven't heard anything since it was announced.
If Google hires Chris Claremont, I'm fucking done.
thus, fuck apple and their ways. If they were bigger, I hope they'd have a few lawsuits on their primate asses
"It's not crippled, it's just to test what the market needs! Besides, you can always upgrade by buying a new device and selling the old one on ebay to some sucker"