"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"
See, I don't buy that, either.
Selling a crippled product that could potentially have much more utility will only speak of the market in the positive. To wit, if the product is a success, then it was exactly what the market wanted. If fails . . . who knows why? It could have been the lack of Flash, the memory size, the lack of multitasking, the inability to access the files, the inability to access servers . . . on and on and on.
It's like going fishing and only bringing one type of lure. Then, when you don't catch anything, you say the seas are empty.
Hm so my brothers seem to have concluded that the iPad is in fact brilliant and no other slate devices exist. In fact the whole argument I just had with them was pretty much a facsimile of things outlined here, with the same flaws and some outright ignorance such as what the benefits of an eInk screen are supposed to be.
Needless to say, the best market niche they could come up with is that somehow this is a useful device for people commuting on public transport. They can't see the obvious flaw that it's a large thing to carry, people take laptops to work, and the entire thing turns into an argument that current tablet notebooks would suit these people much better.
electricitylikesme on
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Hm so my brothers seem to have concluded that the iPad is in fact brilliant and no other slate devices exist. In fact the whole argument I just had with them was pretty much a facsimile of things outlined here, with the same flaws and some outright ignorance such as what the benefits of an eInk screen are supposed to be.
Needless to say, the best market niche they could come up with is that somehow this is a useful device for people commuting on public transport. They can't see the obvious flaw that it's a large thing to carry, people take laptops to work, and the entire thing turns into an argument that current tablet notebooks would suit these people much better.
Did you tell them that the iPad was the multimedia equivalent of the Slap-Chop?
Hm so my brothers seem to have concluded that the iPad is in fact brilliant and no other slate devices exist. In fact the whole argument I just had with them was pretty much a facsimile of things outlined here, with the same flaws and some outright ignorance such as what the benefits of an eInk screen are supposed to be.
Needless to say, the best market niche they could come up with is that somehow this is a useful device for people commuting on public transport. They can't see the obvious flaw that it's a large thing to carry, people take laptops to work, and the entire thing turns into an argument that current tablet notebooks would suit these people much better.
Did you tell them that the iPad was the multimedia equivalent of the Slap-Chop?
It does 101 things . . . . rather poorly.
But you see, people don't like reading things that sit in their lap. Clearly the way people want to read things is by holding something up and spreading it out...you know I don't even know what the fuck they were thinking when they came up with that. This was an argument which happened in a living room with 4 people using 4 laptops to browse the internet at the time it was going on. The lesson in why the iPad was dumb was happening right as we were discussing the very exact usage scenario they were trying to push.
It's become some new meme that I must be wrong, despite the fact that by and large I'm usually correct: the original netbook concept was stupid (7" screen, 4gb SSD?), eReaders were too expensive (the new ones are strongly making me consider getting one).
electricitylikesme on
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
edited February 2010
An iPad is worlds more functional/ergonomic than a netbook on a subway; there is no argument there. You can actually use it standing up without looking like a total idiot, and you have a much smaller risk of dropping the damn thing while using it.
For on the bed reading, the iPad is also better than a laptop. Lay on your back or side and hold it like a book; start reading. Sure, the exact same thing can be said of an eBook reader (as the owner of a kindle2 I can attest that it is a good form factor for this), but you also end up with a bunch of other added functionality for the slightly higher price (over the kindle DX, which is the closest analog in terms of screen real estate).
Honestly, I want to see one of my game books and a few of my reference manuals on this thing. If the 1024x768 screen can render a PDF page with two columns of text with charts and graphs easily, without having to scroll around the page, I am sold. Everything else is icing on the cake.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
An iPad is worlds more functional/ergonomic than a netbook on a subway; there is no argument there. You can actually use it standing up without looking like a total idiot, and you have a much smaller risk of dropping the damn thing while using it.
For on the bed reading, the iPad is also better than a laptop. Lay on your back or side and hold it like a book; start reading. Sure, the exact same thing can be said of an eBook reader (as the owner of a kindle2 I can attest that it is a good form factor for this), but you also end up with a bunch of other added functionality for the slightly higher price (over the kindle DX, which is the closest analog in terms of screen real estate).
Honestly, I want to see one of my game books and a few of my reference manuals on this thing. If the 1024x768 screen can render a PDF page with two columns of text with charts and graphs easily, without having to scroll around the page, I am sold. Everything else is icing on the cake.
All salient points.
I just have to wonder if there is a market for $500 e-readers, and if so, how many of them don't already have the cheaper readers.
That's kinda the whole problem with the iPad. While it's true that it does many things, considering its price and target demographic, what is the likelihood of someone spending that kind of money on a device whose function is already met better by devices they likely already own.
If I need power or advanced apps, I go to my laptop and hook it to my 22" HD monitor. If I need casual web-browsing around the house, the laptop still works. If I need on-the-go information, my iPhone gets the job done. I can see the usefulness of a third-tier device, but not at a price that is more expensive than a large HDTV.
ok, so I've been reading some comments that the device would be oriented towards people commuting in public transport, while I always thought that it would be marketed as a "living room" laptop, mostly for leisure. Mostly because to actually read on the public transport with this thing, you better live on the city of Utopia or it won't get 2 stations far without being stolen. It's just too huge and conspicuous.
hjga on
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
ok, so I've been reading some comments that the device would be oriented towards people commuting in public transport, while I always thought that it would be marketed as a "living room" laptop, mostly for leisure. Mostly because to actually read on the public transport with this thing, you better live on the city of Utopia or it won't get 2 stations far without being stolen. It's just too huge and conspicuous.
I live in manhattan, use public transport all the time while wearing expensive watches, carrying obvious laptop bags, and listening to a device on my person with 500 dollar earbuds, and I am fine.
People overstate the dangers of the big city. A tiny bit of wariness, and do whatever the fuck you want.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
ok, so I've been reading some comments that the device would be oriented towards people commuting in public transport, while I always thought that it would be marketed as a "living room" laptop, mostly for leisure. Mostly because to actually read on the public transport with this thing, you better live on the city of Utopia or it won't get 2 stations far without being stolen. It's just too huge and conspicuous.
I live in manhattan, use public transport all the time while wearing expensive watches, carrying obvious laptop bags, and listening to a device on my person with 500 dollar earbuds, and I am fine.
People overstate the dangers of the big city. A tiny bit of wariness, and do whatever the fuck you want.
Seriously. I'm far more worried and intimidated by the assholes in little back-water towns in the middle of nowhere than I am about all those evil urban folk.
ok, so I've been reading some comments that the device would be oriented towards people commuting in public transport, while I always thought that it would be marketed as a "living room" laptop, mostly for leisure. Mostly because to actually read on the public transport with this thing, you better live on the city of Utopia or it won't get 2 stations far without being stolen. It's just too huge and conspicuous.
I live in manhattan, use public transport all the time while wearing expensive watches, carrying obvious laptop bags, and listening to a device on my person with 500 dollar earbuds, and I am fine.
People overstate the dangers of the big city. A tiny bit of wariness, and do whatever the fuck you want.
Seriously. I'm far more worried and intimidated by the assholes in little back-water towns in the middle of nowhere than I am about all those evil urban folk.
Anecdotal evidence. I'm very glad you guys haven't been the victims of crime, but statistically speaking, it's a simple fact that the risk is much greater in urban areas.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
Anecdotal evidence. I'm very glad you guys haven't been the victims of crime, but statistically speaking, it's a simple fact that the risk is much greater in urban areas.
[CITATION NEEDED] :P
Maybe this is true where you live, but it's predominantly false where I live.
Crime among the country's twenty largest cities tended to be above the national average. It is, however, important to note that these statistics exclude the given city's suburbs and only reflect the crime rates within the jurisdiction of a given city's police department.
ok, so I've been reading some comments that the device would be oriented towards people commuting in public transport, while I always thought that it would be marketed as a "living room" laptop, mostly for leisure. Mostly because to actually read on the public transport with this thing, you better live on the city of Utopia or it won't get 2 stations far without being stolen. It's just too huge and conspicuous.
I live in manhattan, use public transport all the time while wearing expensive watches, carrying obvious laptop bags, and listening to a device on my person with 500 dollar earbuds, and I am fine.
People overstate the dangers of the big city. A tiny bit of wariness, and do whatever the fuck you want.
Seriously. I'm far more worried and intimidated by the assholes in little back-water towns in the middle of nowhere than I am about all those evil urban folk.
Anecdotal evidence. I'm very glad you guys haven't been the victims of crime, but statistically speaking, it's a simple fact that the risk is much greater in urban areas.
At least there will be witnesses.
mrt144 on
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
edited February 2010
Okay, so all that site tells me is Baltimore, DC, and Detroit suck. There are still TONS of other cities out there which rock, and when you are worried about being a .6% candidate for a violent crime (ALL of NYC, including Bronx, Brooklyn, etc.), then you worry waaay too much.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I live in Chicago on the near west side and I've never had a problem using my obviously expensive items on public transit. I'm actually looking forward to using an iPad on the CTA.
it's just a matter of being aware of your surroundings. most of the time the train cars are either A.) mostly empty or B.) full of morning/evening commuters using expensive devices themselves
I'm not going to use it on the red line at 3am, but people who live outside of cities really overstate the dangers of city living. crime may be more prevalent in the city, but compared per capita it's really not much more dangerous, and most people are smart enough to stay out of the areas where it is
I live in Chicago on the near west side and I've never had a problem using my obviously expensive items on public transit. I'm actually looking forward to using an iPad on the CTA.
it's just a matter of being aware of your surroundings. most of the time the train cars are either A.) mostly empty or B.) full of morning/evening commuters using expensive devices themselves
I'm not going to use it on the red line at 3am, but people who live outside of cities really overstate the dangers of city living. crime may be more prevalent in the city, but compared per capita it's really not much more dangerous, and most people are smart enough to stay out of the areas where it is
You realize this is the same sentiment you are rallying against right? Most people outside of the cities feel they are smart enough to stay out of the areas where crime is, by staying out of the city.
taeric on
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I live in Chicago on the near west side and I've never had a problem using my obviously expensive items on public transit. I'm actually looking forward to using an iPad on the CTA.
it's just a matter of being aware of your surroundings. most of the time the train cars are either A.) mostly empty or B.) full of morning/evening commuters using expensive devices themselves
I'm not going to use it on the red line at 3am, but people who live outside of cities really overstate the dangers of city living. crime may be more prevalent in the city, but compared per capita it's really not much more dangerous, and most people are smart enough to stay out of the areas where it is
You realize this is the same sentiment you are rallying against right? Most people outside of the cities feel they are smart enough to stay out of the areas where crime is, by staying out of the city.
Being scared is being smart.
mrt144 on
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I live in Chicago on the near west side and I've never had a problem using my obviously expensive items on public transit. I'm actually looking forward to using an iPad on the CTA.
it's just a matter of being aware of your surroundings. most of the time the train cars are either A.) mostly empty or B.) full of morning/evening commuters using expensive devices themselves
I'm not going to use it on the red line at 3am, but people who live outside of cities really overstate the dangers of city living. crime may be more prevalent in the city, but compared per capita it's really not much more dangerous, and most people are smart enough to stay out of the areas where it is
You realize this is the same sentiment you are rallying against right? Most people outside of the cities feel they are smart enough to stay out of the areas where crime is, by staying out of the city.
People outside the cities think the cities are monolithic places where crime and corruption ala Gotham run rampant.
Meanwhile, I would bet dollars to donuts the areas of New York City I live and work in have lower crime rates, lower gun violence, less domestic violence and less theft than most suburbs in the US of A.
So yeah, I will use my iPad at the local coffee shop, or on the 6 train. Hell; I'll even use it on the path when I go visit my friends in Jersey City.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I live in Chicago on the near west side and I've never had a problem using my obviously expensive items on public transit. I'm actually looking forward to using an iPad on the CTA.
it's just a matter of being aware of your surroundings. most of the time the train cars are either A.) mostly empty or B.) full of morning/evening commuters using expensive devices themselves
I'm not going to use it on the red line at 3am, but people who live outside of cities really overstate the dangers of city living. crime may be more prevalent in the city, but compared per capita it's really not much more dangerous, and most people are smart enough to stay out of the areas where it is
You realize this is the same sentiment you are rallying against right? Most people outside of the cities feel they are smart enough to stay out of the areas where crime is, by staying out of the city.
Why do you have so much trouble comprehending my posts?
what I was pointing out there is that "the city" (Chicago specifically), is a big place, and the relative "dangers" of the city will always depend on what part of it you're in. Overall, it isn't much more dangerous than any given suburb in the Chicagoland area, though that of course depends on what suburb you're talking about as well. Oak Brook is probably safer. Gary, Indiana is not. I feel Chicago, as a whole, is safe.
I thought the smiley made it somewhat obvious I was kidding. I live in Atlanta, far from the biggest city around, but big enough for city haters. My biggest complaint? I hate the morons that are afraid to use our transit. Is it somewhat sketchy at 11pm? Definitely, but in the mornings? You nailed it perfectly.
I thought the smiley made it somewhat obvious I was kidding. I live in Atlanta, far from the biggest city around, but big enough for city haters. My biggest complaint? I hate the morons that are afraid to use our transit. Is it somewhat sketchy at 11pm? Definitely, but in the mornings? You nailed it perfectly.
Well, okay then, sorry.
Yeah, there's plenty of people around here like that too. I used to work with a bunch of people that live nearby me. I took the train every day, they drove. I spent less time getting there and back, wasted less gas, and contributed less to the awful gridlock that is I-90. I never understood it.
I think the old horror stories of the CTA being nothing but a place to buy drugs, get mugged, or for the homeless to sleep (alright, they actually still do that) still resonate with a lot of people, but Chicago was way different then. 15 years ago my neighborhood was a shithole. The Cabrini-Green towers still stood just a few blocks away. It's not that city anymore. It's getting safer by the day, and that's been true for most American cities over the past few years.
I thought the smiley made it somewhat obvious I was kidding. I live in Atlanta, far from the biggest city around, but big enough for city haters. My biggest complaint? I hate the morons that are afraid to use our transit. Is it somewhat sketchy at 11pm? Definitely, but in the mornings? You nailed it perfectly.
Well, okay then, sorry.
Yeah, there's plenty of people around here like that too. I used to work with a bunch of people that live nearby me. I took the train every day, they drove. I spent less time getting there and back, wasted less gas, and contributed less to the awful gridlock that is I-90. I never understood it.
I think the old horror stories of the CTA being nothing but a place to buy drugs, get mugged, or for the homeless to sleep (alright, they actually still do that) still resonate with a lot of people, but Chicago was way different then. 15 years ago my neighborhood was a shithole. The Cabrini-Green towers still stood just a few blocks away. It's not that city anymore. It's getting safer by the day, and that's been true for most American cities over the past few years.
No problem. I could have made that way more obvious I agree with you.
And I can't defend our transit as faster. It is nice to be able to read on the way to work, though. And, if not faster, it is more consistent.
Anecdotal evidence. I'm very glad you guys haven't been the victims of crime, but statistically speaking, it's a simple fact that the risk is much greater in urban areas.
[CITATION NEEDED] :P
Maybe this is true where you live, but it's predominantly false where I live.
obbery and Motor Vehicle Theft
Robbery and motor vehicle theft are worst in big cities. The robbery rate for metropolitan areas is more than double that for small urban areas and almost 10 times that for rural areas. The motor vehicle theft rate in metropolitan areas is about 25% higher than in small urban areas and 80% higher than in rural areas.
An iPad is worlds more functional/ergonomic than a netbook on a subway; there is no argument there. You can actually use it standing up without looking like a total idiot, and you have a much smaller risk of dropping the damn thing while using it.
For on the bed reading, the iPad is also better than a laptop. Lay on your back or side and hold it like a book; start reading. Sure, the exact same thing can be said of an eBook reader (as the owner of a kindle2 I can attest that it is a good form factor for this), but you also end up with a bunch of other added functionality for the slightly higher price (over the kindle DX, which is the closest analog in terms of screen real estate).
Honestly, I want to see one of my game books and a few of my reference manuals on this thing. If the 1024x768 screen can render a PDF page with two columns of text with charts and graphs easily, without having to scroll around the page, I am sold. Everything else is icing on the cake.
All salient points.
I just have to wonder if there is a market for $500 e-readers, and if so, how many of them don't already have the cheaper readers.
That's kinda the whole problem with the iPad. While it's true that it does many things, considering its price and target demographic, what is the likelihood of someone spending that kind of money on a device whose function is already met better by devices they likely already own.
If I need power or advanced apps, I go to my laptop and hook it to my 22" HD monitor. If I need casual web-browsing around the house, the laptop still works. If I need on-the-go information, my iPhone gets the job done. I can see the usefulness of a third-tier device, but not at a price that is more expensive than a large HDTV.
All this is where the whole thing falls down. How long does one ride the subway? How much better is browsing the net going to be on a large slate rather then say, an iPhone? On top of the fact that at their destination they're probably going to not use it and instead use a laptop?
Hell, I'm posting this from my bed right now, which is another situation where I wouldn't use an iPad...because the screen on my laptop stands up already, and it's easy to type on. So scratch that.
This is the big question, where does it fit that a cheaper eReader does not given all the limitations on doing absolutely anything else?
All this is where the whole thing falls down. How long does one ride the subway? How much better is browsing the net going to be on a large slate rather then say, an iPhone? On top of the fact that at their destination they're probably going to not use it and instead use a laptop?
You also have to account for in that situation that the iPad doesn't replace the laptop in terms of productivity, unless you're running the iWorks suite. But if I'm using commute time to work on just about any type of creative development or departmental correspondence, the iPad isn't going to get the job done.
What it seems like is that Apple is depending or assuming that people buying the iPad have a subset of unrelated computing needs that only need to be met to a certain extent. And that's just really weird. The market they're aiming for is "people who like e-readers, but also want to browse the web, but do not want or need to be able to use the internet for productivity."
So I'm guess the iPad is for people like my parents. All they use their computer for is checking email and shopping on Amazon.
Or at the very least a sign it was going to have a camera at some point.
Edit: Beat'd
this is the second device that ALMOST had a camera, then didn't.
Do it once, I'd believe it was to gimp it in favor of an upgraded model down the road.
do it TWICE in a few months? I think there are supplier issues afoot here.
Oddly enough, I'd make my conclusions in the exact opposite order. new iPod Touch was what, early last fall? 4 months should be enough to resolve supplier issues. More than enough.
Although I'm actually guessing it's a price consideration thing. Bean counters. Price targets were missed, either on the shell, or the screen, or somewhere else -- and something had to go. The camera strikes me as a good point for a sacrificial lamb. Of all things, the camera is ALWAYS the easiest to take out. The screen, chips, etc. must all remain relatively static. But the camera is a seperate module.
Keep in mind two things:
- It was reportedly a design issue, not a supply issue, that kept the camera out of the iTouch. They wanted to keep it thin, but the camera module was too deep, and the case had to be redesigned. So they nixed the camera. No such problem exists in the iPad, it's already thick enough.
- According to the reports, the camera space for the iPad is the same dimensions of the one that fits the camera on the Macbook. This shouldn't be a supply problem then, you already have your suppliers.
In the link I posted they literally take one of the Macbook cameras and it fits exactly into the iPad camera slot perfectly. It's the same damn camera.
The only difference between this and a normal CD is you can use your finger to point and click instead of a mouse.
I'm not really seeing how the iPad is going to be a whole lot better in the 'ease of use' category.
Have you used an iPhone? Serious question here. The learning curve for the iPhone OS is far far shallower than that of a desktop OS. I've seen 3 year olds get around on the iPhone just fine. I think you'll find that the iPhone OS is far more easy to use and learn than a desktop OS, from the perspective of a new user.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
Yeah, the iphone OS is very intuitive. I've seen the same thing with kids and heard the same from so many people. I maintain that the ipad's strength will be as a computing appliance. I suppose I'll go out on a limb and say it will be a surprising success, despite everyone expecting (and many actively hoping) that it will fail. And not just because people 'think it's cool', but because there's a big niche to be filled by the first good computing appliance.
Ego on
Erik
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
The only difference between this and a normal CD is you can use your finger to point and click instead of a mouse.
I'm not really seeing how the iPad is going to be a whole lot better in the 'ease of use' category.
Have you used an iPhone? Serious question here. The learning curve for the iPhone OS is far far shallower than that of a desktop OS. I've seen 3 year olds get around on the iPhone just fine. I think you'll find that the iPhone OS is far more easy to use and learn than a desktop OS, from the perspective of a new user.
I don't personally own one but I fooled around with one a coworker owns for a while. It was a whole lot of 'click the icon, type in text'
Posts
See, I don't buy that, either.
Selling a crippled product that could potentially have much more utility will only speak of the market in the positive. To wit, if the product is a success, then it was exactly what the market wanted. If fails . . . who knows why? It could have been the lack of Flash, the memory size, the lack of multitasking, the inability to access the files, the inability to access servers . . . on and on and on.
It's like going fishing and only bringing one type of lure. Then, when you don't catch anything, you say the seas are empty.
Needless to say, the best market niche they could come up with is that somehow this is a useful device for people commuting on public transport. They can't see the obvious flaw that it's a large thing to carry, people take laptops to work, and the entire thing turns into an argument that current tablet notebooks would suit these people much better.
Did you tell them that the iPad was the multimedia equivalent of the Slap-Chop?
It does 101 things . . . . rather poorly.
But you see, people don't like reading things that sit in their lap. Clearly the way people want to read things is by holding something up and spreading it out...you know I don't even know what the fuck they were thinking when they came up with that. This was an argument which happened in a living room with 4 people using 4 laptops to browse the internet at the time it was going on. The lesson in why the iPad was dumb was happening right as we were discussing the very exact usage scenario they were trying to push.
It's become some new meme that I must be wrong, despite the fact that by and large I'm usually correct: the original netbook concept was stupid (7" screen, 4gb SSD?), eReaders were too expensive (the new ones are strongly making me consider getting one).
For on the bed reading, the iPad is also better than a laptop. Lay on your back or side and hold it like a book; start reading. Sure, the exact same thing can be said of an eBook reader (as the owner of a kindle2 I can attest that it is a good form factor for this), but you also end up with a bunch of other added functionality for the slightly higher price (over the kindle DX, which is the closest analog in terms of screen real estate).
Honestly, I want to see one of my game books and a few of my reference manuals on this thing. If the 1024x768 screen can render a PDF page with two columns of text with charts and graphs easily, without having to scroll around the page, I am sold. Everything else is icing on the cake.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
All salient points.
I just have to wonder if there is a market for $500 e-readers, and if so, how many of them don't already have the cheaper readers.
That's kinda the whole problem with the iPad. While it's true that it does many things, considering its price and target demographic, what is the likelihood of someone spending that kind of money on a device whose function is already met better by devices they likely already own.
If I need power or advanced apps, I go to my laptop and hook it to my 22" HD monitor. If I need casual web-browsing around the house, the laptop still works. If I need on-the-go information, my iPhone gets the job done. I can see the usefulness of a third-tier device, but not at a price that is more expensive than a large HDTV.
I live in manhattan, use public transport all the time while wearing expensive watches, carrying obvious laptop bags, and listening to a device on my person with 500 dollar earbuds, and I am fine.
People overstate the dangers of the big city. A tiny bit of wariness, and do whatever the fuck you want.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Anecdotal evidence. I'm very glad you guys haven't been the victims of crime, but statistically speaking, it's a simple fact that the risk is much greater in urban areas.
Maybe this is true where you live, but it's predominantly false where I live.
But more seriously, in the U.S....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Large_cities
At least there will be witnesses.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
it's just a matter of being aware of your surroundings. most of the time the train cars are either A.) mostly empty or B.) full of morning/evening commuters using expensive devices themselves
I'm not going to use it on the red line at 3am, but people who live outside of cities really overstate the dangers of city living. crime may be more prevalent in the city, but compared per capita it's really not much more dangerous, and most people are smart enough to stay out of the areas where it is
You realize this is the same sentiment you are rallying against right? Most people outside of the cities feel they are smart enough to stay out of the areas where crime is, by staying out of the city.
Being scared is being smart.
Meanwhile, I would bet dollars to donuts the areas of New York City I live and work in have lower crime rates, lower gun violence, less domestic violence and less theft than most suburbs in the US of A.
So yeah, I will use my iPad at the local coffee shop, or on the 6 train. Hell; I'll even use it on the path when I go visit my friends in Jersey City.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Why do you have so much trouble comprehending my posts?
what I was pointing out there is that "the city" (Chicago specifically), is a big place, and the relative "dangers" of the city will always depend on what part of it you're in. Overall, it isn't much more dangerous than any given suburb in the Chicagoland area, though that of course depends on what suburb you're talking about as well. Oak Brook is probably safer. Gary, Indiana is not. I feel Chicago, as a whole, is safe.
Well, okay then, sorry.
Yeah, there's plenty of people around here like that too. I used to work with a bunch of people that live nearby me. I took the train every day, they drove. I spent less time getting there and back, wasted less gas, and contributed less to the awful gridlock that is I-90. I never understood it.
I think the old horror stories of the CTA being nothing but a place to buy drugs, get mugged, or for the homeless to sleep (alright, they actually still do that) still resonate with a lot of people, but Chicago was way different then. 15 years ago my neighborhood was a shithole. The Cabrini-Green towers still stood just a few blocks away. It's not that city anymore. It's getting safer by the day, and that's been true for most American cities over the past few years.
No problem. I could have made that way more obvious I agree with you.
And I can't defend our transit as faster. It is nice to be able to read on the way to work, though. And, if not faster, it is more consistent.
You certainly proved your point...
Or at the very least a sign it was going to have a camera at some point.
Edit: Beat'd
this is the second device that ALMOST had a camera, then didn't.
Do it once, I'd believe it was to gimp it in favor of an upgraded model down the road.
do it TWICE in a few months? I think there are supplier issues afoot here.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Or it's possible that they used that form factor because it was simply inexpensive to do so
This is what I think.
There's no way Apple can hit that $499 number and still have a product with a camera, larger memory, blah blah blah . . .
All this is where the whole thing falls down. How long does one ride the subway? How much better is browsing the net going to be on a large slate rather then say, an iPhone? On top of the fact that at their destination they're probably going to not use it and instead use a laptop?
Hell, I'm posting this from my bed right now, which is another situation where I wouldn't use an iPad...because the screen on my laptop stands up already, and it's easy to type on. So scratch that.
This is the big question, where does it fit that a cheaper eReader does not given all the limitations on doing absolutely anything else?
You also have to account for in that situation that the iPad doesn't replace the laptop in terms of productivity, unless you're running the iWorks suite. But if I'm using commute time to work on just about any type of creative development or departmental correspondence, the iPad isn't going to get the job done.
What it seems like is that Apple is depending or assuming that people buying the iPad have a subset of unrelated computing needs that only need to be met to a certain extent. And that's just really weird. The market they're aiming for is "people who like e-readers, but also want to browse the web, but do not want or need to be able to use the internet for productivity."
So I'm guess the iPad is for people like my parents. All they use their computer for is checking email and shopping on Amazon.
Oddly enough, I'd make my conclusions in the exact opposite order. new iPod Touch was what, early last fall? 4 months should be enough to resolve supplier issues. More than enough.
Although I'm actually guessing it's a price consideration thing. Bean counters. Price targets were missed, either on the shell, or the screen, or somewhere else -- and something had to go. The camera strikes me as a good point for a sacrificial lamb. Of all things, the camera is ALWAYS the easiest to take out. The screen, chips, etc. must all remain relatively static. But the camera is a seperate module.
Keep in mind two things:
- It was reportedly a design issue, not a supply issue, that kept the camera out of the iTouch. They wanted to keep it thin, but the camera module was too deep, and the case had to be redesigned. So they nixed the camera. No such problem exists in the iPad, it's already thick enough.
- According to the reports, the camera space for the iPad is the same dimensions of the one that fits the camera on the Macbook. This shouldn't be a supply problem then, you already have your suppliers.
I'M A TWITTER SHITTER
The only difference between this and a normal CD is you can use your finger to point and click instead of a mouse.
I'm not really seeing how the iPad is going to be a whole lot better in the 'ease of use' category.
Have you used an iPhone? Serious question here. The learning curve for the iPhone OS is far far shallower than that of a desktop OS. I've seen 3 year olds get around on the iPhone just fine. I think you'll find that the iPhone OS is far more easy to use and learn than a desktop OS, from the perspective of a new user.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
What does that even mean?
Which is why they're intended to be plugged into proper computers in order to sync and do other general things, like updating itself.
And truth be told, the only surprising successes from Apple have been things that fit inside pockets. Am I forgetting something?
Wait, are you saying that the iPad . . . . . . divides by zero?
I don't personally own one but I fooled around with one a coworker owns for a while. It was a whole lot of 'click the icon, type in text'
Even Linux does that these days.