No comments yet.

Thanks a lot for good words.

Congrats Misha!!!

Congratulations Misha, and welcome to the neighborhood!

Mazel Tov!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMmwAZ1sTag

I very much agree with the fact that techies will probably not like the iPad very much. But for someone who is a tech noob, who doesn’t multitask, who has no idea what flash is (besides HTML 5 is coming) and just wants to use it as a coffee table book/magazine replacement and mobile multimedia device with 10 hour battery life, at 500 bucks, it wont get any better. I know for my family, Alina will love it, and it will be a great toy for me to fool around with, and I’m sure v2.0 will be much, much better… but that’s just me, a guy stuck between being a techie and a noob.

Right. It seems that for myself I have zero need for something like this.

But for those who shy away from computers for various reasons Apple is hiding all the OS abstractions (such as file system) and making it a device that just works.

It does make sense. Now they just need to get the message through to their targeted audience.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1928558
I myself also have zero need/interest in iPad. But I would’ve given it a nod if it was an advance in technology of some sort, like an OLED screen. But’s it’s literally just a big iPod Touch. We’ll see how it pans out. If there’s a market for it, I’ll be sure to take a note.

Well Alex, when the iPhone/iPod touch came out, the tech wasn’t anything new or major (except multi-touch on a phone, maybe) it’s the apps that really set it aside, the 3rd party factor. I think that having a multi-touch capable larger screen will take advantage of people being creative and making iPad specific apps ( if they get magazine subscriptions for example, it’s possible on an iPhone, but think about being able to hold it like a page, and having screen real estate to make it look like the magazine does). I guess I’m hopefull of course, but I think that 3rd party apps will probably make the device the new catagory of electonocs apple hopes it can be.

That’s not a very good argument, I think. There were many really revolutionary things about the iPhone itself and how it all came together. There was nothing like that before.

On the other hand a tablet sized computer that doesn’t run a full OS? And 3rd party apps? As far I remember Mac OS and Windows have plenty of 3rd party apps. What’s so revolutionary about a device that has all it’s 3rd party apps yet to be written?

Again, I do understand how it makes sense for people who are afraid of computers — you can’t really screw a thing up since you have no control over it. So yeah, it’s great for those. I’m sure Apple knows what its doing as it proved once and again. It’s just not that exciting for some of us this time around.

Like somebody said — it’s a consumption device, not a production device. And when I use the computer I mostly produce. But in a grand scheme of things that’s probably more of an exception than a rule. It’s just that you’re preaching to the wrong circle of people.

First of all I hope you guys are enjoying this dicussion as much as I am Second I am not preaching, I am using my unique position of being a consumer, not a producer, who understands a little about production I think most people who wish that the iPad could multi-task or could run flash missed the point. The iPad is not a netbook, its not a notebook, it’s a new class of technology, so to say that it doesnt do what netbooks do is to say that you cant use your desktop as a gps device in your car, they are two different types of technology, and one shouldnt judge the iPad based on not being able to do something it wasnt meant to. Besides if multi-tasking on a smart phone would have been the most important thing, the Palm Pre would have been the best phone because it truly does multi-task, but i’m sure you’ll agree iPhone is better. The iPhone is not the best at any of the things that it does, like I said, no flash, not multi-tasking, not the best camera, not the fastest, not the most ergonomic, not the longest battery life, and yet its unique, and in my opinion the best. The reason i think its 3rd party apps that set it aside is simple. I’m not a developer, and i could be wrong, so i hope you guys can correct me on the points i’m about to make. Usually when developing a mobile app for a phone other then an iPhone, the developer must choose either to make his app more or less compatible with all smartphone OS’s (such as Symbian, Windows Mobile, Palm OS etc..) making changes when necessary, but is limited by the individual OS’s strenghts and more importantly weaknesses, because i’m sure some OS’s do some things that other’s cant. The other choice is the developer has to make a version of the same app that best suites each OS, which i’m sure takes time. In either case, most of this hard work goes under appreciated. The difference in iPhones case, is that the app is created using the source code, made to work perfectly with the OS, and has a very rewarding distribution model (ie profit makes a happy developer). Another issue is that when a program is ported from a full OS to a mobile platform, it usually is not done in the best way possible, either because the mobile platform cant support the app in the way in which it was meant to be run in a full OS, or because the developer see’s no profit in making a meaningful port because for Mobile Win and Palm OS most apps can be cracked, pirated, and otherwise freely distributed (that can also be done for a cracked iPhone, but more so done for Palm OS and Mobile Win.) When I mentioned 3rd party apps, i meant that you have a situation in which a developer can develop an app that perfectly runs on the platform for which he is designing the app. I obviously have not programed for an iPhone, but it is my understaning that its fairly easy. I also think that the distribution model created by apple truly encourages developers to push themselves to create the best possible apps, and reap the rewards, without having the fear that someone will hack it, and distribute it for free (in this case a closed OS is actually beneficial, it think).

I very much agree that this device is made for people who are not very computer litterate, who are tech-phobic, who think computers are to complex of a technology. Those people actually make up a huge majority of the population (not all of us can be developers ) You are also very right, i think, that this is a consumption device. Notebooks, netbooks, and tablet PC’s are commonly used for buisness. Remember when the iPhone came out, it was more entertainment, and less buisness (no exchange support) as opposed to a blackberry or Treo which were buisness devices that could also do some entertainment. The net/notebooks and tablet pc’s are the Blackberry’s, they were designed for buisness, they just happen to do entertainment. How useful are file systmems and other capabilities of full OS’s to watch a movie or listen to a song, or read a book or play a game. Most full OS’s have too much info and too many options then needed to use it as an entertainment device which the iPad is designed to be. It’s simplicity, the lack of file systems is what sets it apart from Net/notebooks, the fact that you dont need a full OS to do the things you would on an iPad. You guys, just like more techies need a full OS to be able to change the codes and registries of the OS files to make it run the way you want it, most people just want it to run. iPad will be the game changer, a new category, that does entertainment, and may eventually (through 3rd party apps ) do buisness. That is why there is no need for multitasking. You wont be editing a keynote or a numbers presentation while watching a movie will you

P.S. I am not preaching, there is no point, I fully understand that I can’t change your view point on the subject. I am also not arguing. My intention is to have a fun open discussion. I welcom all criticism, and I hope you guys will have some critism/coment/question as I will be glad to read it. I just hope my rant will give you guys a glimps into what a non-programer/developer thinks of a device such as this. I am also really sorry my post is so long

Wow, dude, as they used to say — a wall of text crits you for 20,000. You die.

“Preaching” was probably a bad choice of wording on my part.

We’re not in disagreement. You make several very good points, especially with regard to the rich ecosystem for developers. There really was nothing like that. I’ve created little apps for a lot of different platforms, but never put any effort into selling anything, so I never did.

Here, with app store though with the same amount of effort (none) I was able to sell over 200 copies of my little app. It’s a tiny number compared to the other developers, but it’s huge when compared to 0.

So again, I’m happy to read your arguments, but we’re on the same page.

There are people who this device is targeted at and it has a potential to get extremely popular. I’m just not a part of that targeted group. That’s all.

A small request: please, more paragraphs, makes it easier to read.

Here’s another good explanation of Apple trying to achieve (same idea as I posted originally). Just look at the chart in the beginning of the article.

No comments yet.