[psmith2.0]

Good question about being a standalone computer and backing up (via Time Capsule).

I have no idea, but that would be something they should consider allowing. I think it's clear to most that this could indeed be a certain type of user's sole computer (I can't think of a technical reason why it couldn't...is a "real Mac" required at any point?*), but it would be nice to have your music, contacts, bookmarks and photos (and anything else important) backed up to Time Capsule, in the event of iPad damage, loss or theft.


* The iTunes, App and iBooks Stores are all built into the iPad (so you can easily acquire content), you've got WiFi for any Internet and communcation needs and you've got a way to connect your digital camera and organize your photos...what else is needed for this to be someone's standalone computer? It seems to hit all the required marks, as far as I can tell. You'd have to enter all your bookmarks, contacts and calendar info manually, that first time...that would be the toughest, "worst" part. It's all gravy after that.

[ezkcdude]

To give some perspective on the iPad, I think it is worth your time to go back and visit the original AppleNova iPhone discussion here. Minds will be blown.

"It's too big."
"Uncomfortably large."
"Apple is cocky going after 1% market share." (sorry, Luca, but you said it)
"Average Joes won't buy this."

Point being...take some time...let the dust settle...don't be so quick to judge what may not be apparent now. Stop thinking of the iPad as a computer. It is not.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Good question about being a standalone computer and backing up (via Time Capsule). I have no idea, but that would be something they should consider allowing. I think it's clear to most that this could indeed be a certain type of user's sole computer (I can't think of a technical reason why it couldn't...is a "real Mac" required at any point?*), but it would be nice to have your music, contacts, bookmarks and photos (and anything else important) backed up to Time Capsule, in the event of iPad damage, loss or theft. * The iTunes, App and iBooks Stores are all built into the iPad (so you can easily acquire content), you've got WiFi for any Internet and communcation needs and you've got a way to connect your digital camera and organize your photos...what else is needed for this to be someone's standalone computer? It seems to hit all the required marks, as far as I can tell. You'd have to enter all your bookmarks, contacts and calendar info manually, that first time...that would be the toughest, "worst" part. It's all gravy after that.

I'll bet anything that when you first turn it on, you see that "plug into iTunes" icon, though. I bet connecting to a "real" computer will be required to finish setup.

To all the people who hate it for being too consumer-electronicsy: That's always been Apple's strength -- taking computers and making them more like consumer electronics or appliances, rather than some arcane "computery" thing. I've said it before: Everything that makes them a "bad" computer maker -- limited selection, locked-shut products -- makes them a great consumer electronics manufacturer, and it's only natural that things like the iPad would err in that direction.

I wouldn't hope for any major changes to the OS before launch...Apple wouldn't announce a product half-baked like that. The home screen did strike me as a bit weird and "spaced out" at first, but I've gotten used to it. It really is a mix of the iPhone springboard and a computer desktop (it looks like the springboard but you can have a desktop background), which is appropriate IMO. And I like that lake picture.

This is going to be absolutely huge with the netbook demographic. I think Apple's nailed it, even if it isn't as "revolutionary" as the iPhone (and why would it be? That was Apple's first multi-touch device, after all).

[Luca]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 * The iTunes, App and iBooks Stores are all built into the iPad (so you can easily acquire content), you've got WiFi for any Internet and communcation needs and you've got a way to connect your digital camera and organize your photos...what else is needed for this to be someone's standalone computer? It seems to hit all the required marks, as far as I can tell. You'd have to enter all your bookmarks, contacts and calendar info manually, that first time...that would be the toughest, "worst" part. It's all gravy after that.

There's more. If you have any existing music that you want on the iPad, you'll need a computer to sync them with iTunes. Same with any existing pictures or movies you might have.

I think it would make a great device for non-computer people since it combines the simple (if limited) iPhone OS with a comfortably large screen. But you run up against a lot of problems using it as your only computer, even if you're not an advanced user. Probably the most limiting is the lack of filesystem access and external storage or backup options. You really have to depend on other computers to get everything done. How do you print, for instance? It seems the only easy way is to email the file you want printed to someone who has a printer.

Originally Posted by ezkcdude "Apple is cocky going after 1% market share." (sorry, Luca, but you said it)

That was years ago and you're quoting me out of context. At the time, the iPhone was $500 with a contract. Expecting to get a significant percentage of the entire cell phone market with something that costs $500 is a bit crazy. I don't know what the iPhone's market share is now (probably more than 1%), but since then they've dropped the price a lot, making it more accessible. In the meantime, plans for non-iPhones are now more in line with the iPhone's plan, making it seem like less of a premium. Pretty much everything these days requires an extra $30/mo for data, but in 2007 it seemed outlandish to require an unlimited data plan.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Luca I don't know what the iPhone's market share is now (probably more than 1%)

It's closer to 3% than 2%.

[thegelding]

13%...or is that just 13% of 2009 sales?

either way...the iPhone has been good for Apple

I assume (could be wrong), the iPad (especially version 2) will be good for Apple.

g

[Robo]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude To give some perspective on the iPad, I think it is worth your time to go back and visit the original AppleNova iPhone discussion here. Minds will be blown.

This gem from page two is my favorite:

Originally Posted by *Joe* It WILL fail. Firstly, who are Apple targetting with with phone? It is too big to be fashionable, it is too expensive to make business sense, it is not proactical for the sms generation (it takes longer to type out an sms on a touch screen than to use a numeric keypad). I just don't see who will buy this phone. Every touch screen phone I have ever seen has had a nery limited market, the motorola a1000 was a massive flop, the sony ericsson p800, p900, p910, never sold very well. This phone is too bulky to just be a phone, it is the sort of thing business people would use, but big business will go with established solutions, either Blackberry (very cost effective) or offers running PocketPC (outlook connectivity, and an established system). I don't see many carriers in europe picking up that phone either, it is expensive, has no clear target audience, and they will have no way to make back their money in the required time (typical contract length is 12 months here, 18 months is long and 24 months is unheard of). Not to mention that it doesn't suppport any 3G data services, so using it for music downloads is out of the question, it also means even less appeal in the european and asian markets (the biggest global cellular markets). I love the convenience of being able to download music on the move at the touch of a button from my provider. Becuase it's a 3G network the songs download very fast. For many european users the iPhone will be a downgrade of functionality, purely because it does not support 3G networks. I honestly think that the iPhone is Apple's biggest mistake since the newton, I will stick with my Sony Ericsson w850i thanks

I think a mistake a lot of people made was that they thought the price was somehow outside of Apple's control. It might not have taken over the world at $599, but that's why they dropped it to $399.

There were also people who were really upset that they didn't talk about Macs at Macworld, for some reason.

I'm glad I can stand by what I wrote:

Originally Posted by Me! I love it. This keynote blew me away. The iPhone really is going to be the iPod for the next half decade. Hell, in some ways it's going to be the new Macintosh, too. The iPhone is huge for Apple, and I have no problems with it being the centerpiece of the keynote. If it was up to Apple, "MacWorld" would be called "AppleWorld," anyway.

The iPhone did strike me as a bit large -- mainly wide -- when I first got it, but I've gotten used to it and would now have it no other way. (Now, if that screen was just a little bigger...)

[psmith2.0]

I just read a little piece at AppleInsider, where various analysts and pundits are being asked their impressions. One guy makes a good point about how we've not seen it properly "unleashed" yet, and that so much of its success will lie in the hands of the developer community (because that's what made the iPhone kick it up to a new level). I'm guessing not all developers will put in the time and effort to tweak their stuff for this display, but I bet you that those with the top 50-100 sellers will. And then, on top of that, all the brand new stuff that will come.

And not just app developers either. Steve said yesterday that they would be starting today with talks and deals with other publishers and media.

As ezkcdude just said, we need to let the dust settle a bit because we're really not seeing this thing at full force yet (it's not on the street, nor are all the content deals and app developments in place). I truly think, come April-May (and certainly by mid-summer), this thing will be so popular and really showing its worth.

It's just kinda hazy right now. Some folks are reeling from "all the stuff is isn't", and then it's such an early announcement, with nothing to sink our teeth into for another 60 days, that there's going to be this unavoidable lull. And, as mentioned earlier, this isn't their first Multi-Touch product, so, automatically, it's not being seen the same way as the original iPhone unveiling.

But that doesn't mean it won't soar to some great heights all on its own. I think they had to announce it yesterday (or thereabouts) to gauge ramp-up and allow for various deal-making timeframes.

When this thing is on the street, and you can get really cool full-screen apps and you can buy all kinds of books and magazines and certain developers and communities are really pushing new, exciting ways to go about learning and textbooks and trade books, I think a lot of minds will be changed.

I think the biggest step is to come off the initial blow of this not being "a real computer" (but I think that was misplaced, wishful thinking all along). Six months from now - July 27 - I bet it'll be a whole new situation. I really do. And I think the app developers will be leading that charge, followed by all the publishers and other partnerships that simply aren't in place yet.

That's going to represent a boatload of good, legit content and purpose, and I think it'll all really start to "click" come springtime.

Sure...nobody's going to be able to get on via 3G and AT&T, but that's a whole different thread/concern...



But beyond that, I think this will all shake out in a really well.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by thegelding 13%...or is that just 13% of 2009 sales?

I think that's sales. They have nearly 3% of the global marketshare.

[Wrao]

It's hard to keep track of this thread. But another thing did just occur to me about the iPad's possible success(and demographic). For the first time in Apple's history, pretty much ever, everyone knew that this was coming. I was overhearing people talking about it at the market, at the bank, at the gym, at the park. Mostly, adults, parents and people who I would have never expected to know anything at all about any form of computer-related 'rumor'.

Meanwhile, the nerds all 'knew' about it, but they never seemed to be buzzing in quite the same way.

Maybe there actually is something to the notion that the iPad just simply isn't 'for' us, at all. It's for our parents, or our young children, or basically anyone who is 'new' to technology, or otherwise uninterested in tech and only interested in what it can do for them. Maybe it is going to be the Wii of the computing world... (I know I said otherwise in this thread, but as I've been thinking about it...)

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by Luca There's more. If you have any existing music that you want on the iPad, you'll need a computer to sync them with iTunes. Same with any existing pictures or movies you might have. I think it would make a great device for non-computer people since it combines the simple (if limited) iPhone OS with a comfortably large screen.

Well, those were the people I was talking about, and had in mind...ones who aren't already deep-seated, set-habits computer types. And they're not going to have any existing digital music because they've never had a computer. This would be all fresh and new, and they'd be buying their stuff from the iTunes store. If they have CDs they wanted to digitize and get on there, then they could get a friend to help them, I'm sure. iTunes is everywhere, on Macs and PCs, so they shouldn't have too hard of a time getting some help with that?

Same would go for pictures, although if you don't have a computer (again, if you're kinda new to this and you're coming into it totally green), you're not going to have any digital photos to transfer. This would be a good time to treat yourself to a simple little point-and-shoot digital camera, if you thought you wanted to get into that.

Originally Posted by Luca But you run up against a lot of problems using it as your only computer, even if you're not an advanced user. Probably the most limiting is the lack of filesystem access and external storage or backup options.

That's why I was hoping Apple would realize this, and make it work with Time Capsule.

Originally Posted by Luca You really have to depend on other computers to get everything done. How do you print, for instance? It seems the only easy way is to email the file you want printed to someone who has a printer.

True, but not everyone prints. I'm 16 years in the graphics field, in some form or another. 10 of those years, I never owned a printer. I have a hand-me-down Canon i560 right now and I can't tell you the last time I printed anything. I e-mail, send PDFs, etc. I don't print receipts and statements because I save them as files or PDFs, or they're kept online at my bank or whatever company I'm dealing with.

Again, if someone's coming into this new and fresh - no digital music or photos to transfer or worry about - I don't know how much they'd need, or miss, a printer? Are they going to write a letter in Pages, print it and mail it? Probably not. They'll just e-mail. It's standard, accepted communication now.

If someone's never owned a computer (much less all the other stuff that often goes with it), I can't see them being that hot and wound-up over printing.

Besides, aren't there iPhone apps for this very thing? Allowing you to print from your iPhone? Why couldn't that be put to use here? More and more wireless printers are coming out. And, beyond that, doesn't AirPort allow for this too? Someone will figure out a way. In fact, I'm sure "printing from the iPad" (with iWork being part of it now) will be something ironed out and available.

If someone doesn't have a computer, but wanted to get into a bit, just to surf and e-mail and maybe buy and explore a little music or get some eBooks...why in God's name should they be faced with the prospect of buying an iMac, Mac mini or MacBook first, and then buying an iPad to replicate/simplify it all? That just seems cruel...they're wanting this iPad because it lets them avoid all that shit and hassle in the first place!

"What do you mean I can't just buy this iPad and take it home and use it? But I don't have another computer...that's why I'm buying this thing! Really? Why?"

Good question.

Apple could lose a lot of those "toe-in-the-water" potential buyers if they tie this thing too hard to docking/syncing/real computers.

Sure, make that be part of it for those who do have iMacs and MacBooks and already have digital music and photo collections. It's just a big iPod touch in those situations. But also make it where it doesn't have to rely on all that so that, in theory, Grandpa Fred (with help from his grandson or whoever) could buy one, along with an AirPort Express or Time Capsule, come home, open it all up and not need an existing computer. Why complicate it and ruin a potentially good thing like that? Newbies are struggling with all this enough...why make them buy two computers, just to make a simple tablet functional?

I hope that's not how it turns out.

[BuonRotto]

Originally Posted by Brad I actually had exactly this discussion yesterday with a coworker who was upset about iPad's lack of visible filesystem. When pressed to answer why, he gave examples like "I want to save all the different files for a project in the same folder" and "I want to put things I've worked on today in the same folder". When you look at those requirements and don't assume a visible filesystem, though, the problem can easily and much more intuitively be solved using something like smart folders, creation/access metadata, and arbitrary tagging. You can almost get exactly that today in the current Finder.

This is precisely what content management apps and meta-apps are for. Here at work we have just implemented NewForma which is simply a way to track, search and access any media related to a project. It has filesystem access, but it's mostly driven by indexing and search, with tagging and even sharing/collaboration tools. Its UI is relatively archaic, but the idea is there. The company is selling as an add-on to Outlook, but it's kind of a Trojan horse in that regard. It's for business use but the consumer equivalent seems easy enough to grasp.

[BuonRotto]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 True, but not everyone prints.

I like to photograph and draw, but I send my prints out to MPix, who do a better job than I can for those times I print a keeper. True, I print a lot less than I used to, but it seems like wireless printing would still be great for those occasions.

[psmith2.0]

How, exactly, do those iPhone printing apps work? I've not used any, but what's the basic deal/consensus about them? If you go to the App Store and type in "printing", you'll see quite a few pop up. If they work well on the iPhone, wouldn't they work for the iPad?

[screensaver400]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 How, exactly, do those iPhone printing apps work? I've not used any, but what's the basic deal/consensus about them? If you go to the App Store and type in "printing", you'll see quite a few pop up. If they work well on the iPhone, wouldn't they work for the iPad?

They probably would, but I'd like to see OS-level support. In those other apps you have to open it just to print. They're kind of like hacks.

[ezkcdude]

Why did I say the iPad is not a computer? I'm simply taking cues from Apple. AFAICT, they do not refer to it *ever* as a computer. And that's not by accident. It is a device. When Paul said "people don't get it", I think what they don't get right now is precisely this. If you see the iPad as a "computer", you don't get it.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by screensaver400 On another point... Does anyone think the next iPhone or the one after it will do cell service like iPad? One price for iPod touch, $100 more for iPhone, no contract, unlocked.

Gee, let me see here... $30 unlimited data... VOIP over 3G just okayed in SDK...

Uh, YES.

[chucker]

If they wanted to be consistent about it, they'd have to merge iPod touch and iPhone and call the thing iPad nano.

[Kickaha]

Hmm, maybe I'm just not looking in snarky enough areas, but...

has anyone else noticed the distinct *LACK* of bitching about it not having a removable battery??

Kewl.

[julesstoop]

People are obviously sort of getting used to the fact that lithium polymer doesn't have it's usability sweet spot at removability.

[bassplayinMacFiend]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Hmm, maybe I'm just not looking in snarky enough areas, but... has anyone else noticed the distinct *LACK* of bitching about it not having a removable battery?? Kewl.

Apple will have Rev A completely obsoleted long before the battery hits 80% levels.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Hmm, maybe I'm just not looking in snarky enough areas, but... has anyone else noticed the distinct *LACK* of bitching about it not having a removable battery?? Kewl.

It doesn't have FireWire!

[Robo]

I agree, of course. Apple's especially been pushing the iPod touch as a "pocket computer" for months now. For just $199, that's hard to ignore.

[rdlomas]

The big disappointment to me is that they decided to scale up from an iPhone OS instead of scaling down and simplifying from full blown OS X.

Things like wide codec support, flash on some video sites, potential DVD/CD player/recorder add-on, compatibility with a huge catalog of existing apps would all be fantastic, but won't happen with the iPad approach of "blowing up" the iPhone OS.

The iPad was starting to look like a great computing device for my 68 year old Aunt/Uncle, but it's just slightly too locked down and feature restricted to be their only computing device....or really ANYone's only computing device.

Great extra "toy" around the house, but that's about it for Rev A it looks like.

Edit: Yes, I realize that apps would have to be made "touch compatible", however most iPhone apps are going to have to be modified anyways. The wide codec support and a few expandability options would be the very minimum benefits of approaching the development from a "simpler OS X" approach.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by rdlomas The big disappointment to me is that they decided to scale up from an iPhone OS instead of scaling down and simplifying from full blown OS X.

They're the same under the hood, so I assume you mean Mac OS X features such as a hierarchical user-exposed filesystem, and the ability (need?) to fiddle with the inner bits.

iPhone OS *IS* a simplified and stripped down Mac OS X.

Things like wide codec support, flash on some video sites, potential DVD/CD player/recorder add-on, compatibility with a huge catalog of existing apps would all be fantastic, but won't happen with the iPad approach of "blowing up" the iPhone OS.

Hmm. I think a catalog of 144k apps in the App Store isn't too shabby.

DVD/CD add-on is an intriguing idea, but it would be for... what, really? Playing a single CD or DVD? Or ripping it into the iTunes ecosystem? If the latter, they'd rather sell it to you, obviously, but that's an intriguing idea.

Flash needs to die, sorry.

Wide codec support... would like to see this expanded, obviously, but since it's using QuickTime X under the hood, there's no technical reason why this isn't possible.

The iPad was starting to look like a great computing device for my 68 year old Aunt/Uncle, but it's just slightly too locked down and feature restricted to be their only computing device....or really ANYone's only computing device. Great extra "toy" around the house, but that's about it for Rev A it looks like.

Eh, I dunno. Give it a way to back up the data, and maybe print to a USB or networked printer, and this would work for a large number of consumers, I'm thinking. If it had the former, I'd be pre-ordering for my Dad already.

[psmith2.0]

rdlomas, we can't make such sweeping, blanket assessments without knowing everyone's lifestyle or usage needs (and we don't). I know plenty of people who'd be well-served with an iPad, as is.

If all you do is surf (Facebook, news, eBay, etc.), e-mail, listen to music, blog and things like that, how is an iPad too locked-down or feature-restricted?

Someone buying it and expecting more...that's one thing (they made an uninformed purchase). But if you know that's all you need...why not? $499 for this, vs. $999 for a MacBook you're not going to install Office or whatever onto?

[zippy]

Originally Posted by rdlomas Things like wide codec support, flash on some video sites, potential DVD/CD player/recorder add-on, compatibility with a huge catalog of existing apps would all be fantastic, but won't happen with the iPad approach of "blowing up" the iPhone OS.

I was hoping for more of a complete Mac OS X route myself at first, but now I see the benefits of just scaling up the iPhone/iPod Touch OS X.

The problem with using more of a full blown OS X, IMO, is that a device like the iPad requires a completely new methodology for developing apps in order to be completely successful. If you went that way, you'd ebable developers to take the lazy approach and simply port the existing apps, with a few token modifications for using a finger instead of a mouse. This is similar to the problem that plagued/s many Wii developers. To make the most of the device, you truly need to accept it's method of interaction and write accordingly. This is also why the tablet concept has been a failure in all it's previous implementations.

But by using the iPhone OS, and scaling it up a bit, you get people to start from the ground up on the UI. That appears to be what Apple did with it's iWork apps. I see no reason other app developers could not do the same thing. Is there any technical reason why many of the apps you use and love on your Mac could not be rewritten using the iPad SDK?

[torifile]

Originally Posted by rdlomas The big disappointment to me is that they decided to scale up from an iPhone OS instead of scaling down and simplifying from full blown OS X.

What do you even mean "scale up from an iPhone OS" vs. "scaling down OS X"? How would you "scale down" Mac OS X to a touch centric device? At best, it'd be a side scale. The iPhone OS was designed from the ground up for a touch experience. It was the best decision possible. What would you do with menu bars, etc, on the iPad? That's just silliness.

BTW, iPhone OS IS full-blown OS X. Just iPhone OS X, not Mac OS X.

Things like wide codec support

You mean like AAC, Protected AAC, MP3, MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3, and 4), Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV or H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Low-Complexity version of the H.264 Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; H.264 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Baseline Profile up to Level 3.0 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats?

What doesn't it support? Flash, wmv/a, ogg, flac?

flash on some video sites

Again? Really? Flash is proprietary. Apple won't do that and no one should want that. Yes, it'd be convenient, but HTML5 is a much better solution long-term. Anyone with any sense of perspective realizes that. Believe me, hulu and other flash oriented sites will shift eventually.

potential DVD/CD player/recorder add-on

Are you nuts? You want dongles all over the place? There are any number of other ways of getting data on to the device. Physical media is on its way out.

compatibility with a huge catalog of existing apps would all be fantastic, but won't happen with the iPad approach of "blowing up" the iPhone OS.

You mean the 140k apps you can get for the iPhone right now isn't enough for you? And those are all touch centric already rather than trying to make a mouse driven UI work on a touch device.

The iPad was starting to look like a great computing device for my 68 year old Aunt/Uncle, but it's just slightly too locked down and feature restricted to be their only computing device....or really ANYone's only computing device.

Maybe so. I disagree to some extent but it's not, as a rev. a, positioned to be a computer replacement.

Great extra "toy" around the house, but that's about it for Rev A it looks like.

Can I come to your house where toys cost $500? It's a new product category. Just because it doesn't do photoshop and cook eggs doesn't mean that it's a toy.

[rdlomas]

Originally Posted by torifile Just because it doesn't do photoshop and cook eggs doesn't mean that it's a toy.

Wow. Excuuuuse me for disagreeing with you.

I call it a "toy" because it seems mainly positioned for gaming and media consumption. Basically it's intended for entertainment, thus I personally refer to it as a toy.

It may well turn out to be a fantastic toy. Sheesh. You guys need to relax. Just because some of us disagree with you doesn't mean you need to load up on sarcasm.

[rdlomas]

Originally Posted by torifile It's a new product category.

What exactly *is* this new product category in your opinion?