Support NeoGAF

[SuperPac]

Computers are essential lifestyle accesories. Netbooks and laptops are becoming the new desktops where their sales go up as people use them instead of having a desktop in the home because it can do both.

I agree with this, especially the bolded part. Though I think this goes back to something Jony Ive said in the promotional video. This is a computer that fits *you*. You tilt it, you have a keyboard only when you need it and not when you don't, it's got a small footprint, it's light, fast boot-up, long standby life, syncs all your content, you don't have to buy iPhone Apps twice (though I'm sure in some instances you will).

And, what the vast majority of people use computers for in their lives, this WILL fit them. Flash, multithreading, Wacom-level input, camera, a completely open software distribution system - these are not things that are needed in order to fit most people. These are things that are needed to fit tech/computer geeks. That is not who this computer is for. Just like you can do a crapload more things while playing a PC game than you can playing a console game. But console games outsell PC games and the Wii, perhaps the most limited console in terms of geek lust-able features, is the #1 console in the US.

 

[mrkgoo]

I see how this works: people buy most of their stuff from the iTunes store: music, movie rentals.

I know what concept you are trying to tout. That will work for that consumer-base.

However, I thought at this time period people don't have money?

I don't know by shoving down people's throats to absolutely love it is a good idea. Seems like you people loving it are sold on the fact that everyone has to love it, too.



I am nice. I just told him please read instead of bursting into rage.

I don't know what you mean by us lovig it being sold by the fact that everyone else has tO love it as well, but I'm merely sold on the fact that I'm impressed with what it can do, no what it can't.

 

[GodfatherX]

i know this is going to sound dumb to some, but I really wish this thing also had rf

let me explain, this device will find itself on your lap while in your living room watching tv ect, so why not add a rf transmitter and build a sleek remote app?people already spend $100s on high end remotes, and it would be a minimal cost

 

[Marty Chinn]

=$$$
!= $499

Can people stop talking about wacom tablets in light of the iPad? You know what you can get - Brushes. Someone has used it on a fuckiong iPhone to create covers for the New Yorker 3 times, so it's not the inability of the iPad to act as a wacom that's holding "artists" back.

I think we're not in sync. Ok fuck Wacom sensors, that wasn't my point. My point was let's not ignore what it doesn't have with such things as a writing input interface. That's the core of my point. Be it through wacom sensors, or some other technology that gets the job done, some sort of stylus interface that gives the end user a great writing interface experience. I'm not even talking about art here. I'm talking about stylus writing to take notes, annotate documents and a number of other revolutionary things that could be brought by merging the pen into a portable computer that acts more like a notepad than the name iPad suggests.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I am on the fence. I do use my iphone a whole hell of a lot on the couch, in bed, on the shitter, ect. More screen, a better processor and more memory (have they said how much RAM is in this thing?) would improve my lounge browsing experience, but how much better?

Need to see how GAF looks on this thing. :lol

 

[Vennt]

Very good analysis. I'm not a fan of the "walled garden" approach either. You have some people in this thread railing against Flash for its non-web-standard, closed, proprietary nature, and then touting the App Store in the same post. What?

I think the iPad would make a really nice $499 compliment for a home with wireless internet. Throw it on the coffee table and let guests have at it for casual browsing. But it really needs to be fully compatible with the internet. As it is now, not as it will be in five years, not as anti-Flash activists want it to be. I don't want to have to explain to my buddies/family/wife's friends why it can't browse Hulu, ESPN, Netflix, and all the other sites that use flash.

I guess as a counterpoint that is exactly why I can see it as the ultimate couch browser for me, Living in the UK I can't get that content anyway. (It's region restricted)

How I'd love Hulu & Netflix, but it just isn't going to happen, however I couldn't live without BBC iPlayer and 4OD, and they will work on an iPad/iPod Touch.

 

[border]

It's even easier and fun to browse the web with a thumb-ball. Or to play a P&C adventure game. And as someone who's tried playing Myst and Beneath A Steel Sky on an iPhone, laptop with trackpad, and thumb-ball, the latter obliterates the competition.

Trackballs are just garbage. Great if you like them and perhaps better than a trackpad, but touch is just too easy and approachable since it removes the cursor entirely. I think most people prefer touch......and I'm not sure if anyone would describe a trackball as legitimately "fun". It's functional and compact, but you're constantly reminded that you would rather be using a mouse. Adding moving parts to a small, expensive device does not strike me as an exceedingly good idea either.

 

[clav]

Easily the biggest hang up. I simply have no idea how that didn't happen given that apple puts cameras on just about everything.

A mic but no camera? Really strange.

You would think the first thing in development of the iPad was to take an existing macbook pro and remove the keyboard, attach a capacitive touchscreen, and see how it runs in OS X.

Then you would have another group that took an iPhone and made it bigger which ultimately became the resulting product.

I would think the people in Cupertino considered all the factors before releasing the iPad in its final form.

It still puzzles me how running OS X wouldn't have been a good option. Perhaps to aim at a $500 price tag would have been difficult with the hardware Apple wanted to put in.

I don't know what you mean by us lovig it being sold by the fact that everyone else has tO love it as well, but I'm merely sold on the fact that I'm impressed with what it can do, no what it can't.

That's how consumers are impressed with products.

You can consider the same attitude toward its competitors, too.

 

[Mr. Dobalina]

Still a little surprised by the lack of a front-facing camera.

Gotta save something for version 2, along with an SD slot.

 

[mrkgoo]

i know this is going to sound dumb to some, but I really wish this thing also had rf

let me explain, this device will find itself on your lap while in your living room watching tv ect, so why not add a rf transmitter and build a sleek remote app?people already spend $100s on high end remotes, and it would be a minimal cost

You don't need rf for that.

It isn't hard to see why apple would want to support their own product environment, and the ipad can control your mac or apple tv.

 

[Karma]

"Slightly better viewing angle"? Really?

The difference between 160 degrees and 178 degrees is way bigger than the number difference on the spec sheet makes you think. You're also ignoring the enormous benefits in color reproduction and image quality.

Again, viewing angle on a device you hold in your hand means very little if anything.

Color reproduction and image quality are important but I will have to see this enormous difference for myself. I dont think many of us have actually seen a IPS display side by side with OLED or LCD. Have you?

 

[Shogmaster]

Can people stop talking about wacom tablets in light of the iPad? You know what you can get - Brushes. Someone has used it on a fuckiong iPhone to create covers for the New Yorker 3 times, so it's not the inability of the iPad to act as a wacom that's holding "artists" back.

You're clearly not an artist or designer, so please STFU about what holds artists back on the iPad. Just because some privileged twat did some covers with the iPhone don't mean it's a viable fucking medium for the rest. You try to get real jobs with iPhone/iPad finger paintings and see how far that gets you in the real world.

 

[SuperPac]

i know this is going to sound dumb to some, but I really wish this thing also had rf

let me explain, this device will find itself on your lap while in your living room watching tv ect, so why not add a rf transmitter and build a sleek remote app?people already spend $100s on high end remotes, and it would be a minimal cost

I use my iPhone as a remote for my Apple TV and iTunes library. I believe there's a remote app on the iPhone for TiVos. So clearly this is possible without RF.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Again, viewing angle on a device you hold in your hand means very little if anything.

Color reproduction and image quality are important but I will have to see this enormous difference for myself. I dont think many of us have actually seen a IPS display side by side with OLED or LCD. Have you?

IPS is LCD.

I'm using TN and PVA monitors side-by-side right now. Enormous quality difference. Even when this dual-monitor option was provided to the developers here, they noticed that one was better than the other even though they were just looking at code most of the time. On the TN panels, light blues look grey, gradients turn blocky, colors warp, and the perceived brightness is worse.

Right now at home when I'm told "hey look at this" and turn my head to look at a MacBook screen, I can't see shit because the colors are inverted because I'm looking at it an angle. It's just big grey, purple, and green mess. Sharing content on the iPad would be much better.

 

[maharg]

I think it's pretty likely that capacitive multitouch (or something like it) is the future of portable computing devices as far as mouse-like input is concerned. And I think that'll be true in both netbooks and tablets. Trackpads just waste too much space.

Does anyone else feel like the ipad is going to be a bit fragile? I know a lot of people with cracked screens on their iphones from falls that wouldn't have even hurt a normal phone. If the ipad also uses the same glass surface, I can only imagine it being even more prone to damage.

 

[Gary Whitta]

Gotta save something for version 2, along with an SD slot.

Damn I never thought of that, that seems like a dumb omission now too!

I still want one

 

[clav]

I feel the biggest problem is it that people are going to ask, how is this any different from my existing iPod Touch/ iPhone, which is much cheaper and provides more/same functionality?

The only feature here is touting is size. If you need the size, then go for it, otherwise, we're not impressed.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

claviertekky:

On the subject of "photo editing" I think you may be selling the potential of the device short.

I'm a pro photographer and I'd love to be able to use one of these in the field as a capture/viewing device. In the earlier tablet speculation thread, I detailed my experiences demoing the Samsung Q1 for use in this capacity and found it a bit cumbersome and with a terrible viewing screen, but still useful.

The iPad is much lighter than the Samsung, so it could be easily clamped to a tripod or monopod if needed, (so could the Samsung, but it was unwieldy) and the screen should be much better.

When you are in the field on a photoshoot, it's nice to have a light, tethered viewing/capturing device for you or your client to view your photos as you shoot. If the camera manufacturer came out with a capture app, or better yet, if Apple came out with a iPad version of Aperture, that would make this an awesome little platform for that. As a photographer, I do 95% of my "editing" just finding the shots I want to keep, and which ones I want to throw away, and labeling and filing the images with the appropriate metadata. Doing this during the photoshoot is ideal, improves quality control, and workflow. More complex Photoshop tasks can be done later on a bigger, faster machine with a calibrated monitor, if needed. Most of the time though, I end up just handing my RAW files to the AD and calling it a day.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

I think it's pretty likely that capacitive multitouch (or something like it) is the future of portable computing devices as far as mouse-like input is concerned. And I think that'll be true in both netbooks and tablets. Trackpads just waste too much space.

Does anyone else feel like the ipad is going to be a bit fragile? I know a lot of people with cracked screens on their iphones from falls that wouldn't have even hurt a normal phone. If the ipad also uses the same glass surface, I can only imagine it being even more prone to damage.

if iphones look ugly when their screens crack, i don't even wanna see this ipad...

 

[Mr. Dobalina]

You're clearly not an artist or designer, so please STFU about what holds artists back on the iPad. Just because some privileged twat did some covers with the iPhone don't mean it's a viable fucking medium for the rest. You try to get real jobs with iPhone/iPad finger paintings and see how far that gets you in the real world.

Clearly. It's also not anywhere NEAR the intended market for this device and to try and cater to that market would increase the price uncecessarily. There are 1000 touch sensors in the iPad - which is perfectly fine for it's indended use and to use with some basic art apps like Brushes. What it's not good for is pixel-level precision, for which the core audience would have ZERO use for, so why cater to that niche?

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I have to laugh at the people who are talking about the photo-editing capabilities while running down the advantages of a stylus.

This is not a serious art computer, no matter how nice the screen looks. That screen is that good for watching video (and for that, I am sure it rocks). They did not do anything to accommodate artists-- as has been pointed out, that's very niche.

 

[Burger]

Ok. I was wrong there.

Why would you photo edit at a low resolution though?

What are you talking about ? How do you edit a photo at full resolution ?

If I take a photo at a resolution of 3968 x 2232, where do I find a monitor big enough to edit that ?

Or were you just typing stuff without thinking about it ?

 

[clav]

claviertekky:

On the subject of "photo editing" I think you may be selling the potential of the device short.

I'm a pro photographer and I'd love to be able to use one of these in the field as a capture/viewing device. In the earlier tablet speculation thread, I detailed my experiences demoing the Samsung Q1 for use in this capacity and found it a bit cumbersome and with a terrible viewing screen, but still useful.

The iPad is much lighter than the Samsung, so it could be easily clamped to a tripod or monopod if needed, (so could the Samsung, but it was unwieldy) and the screen should be much better.

When you are in the field on a photoshoot, it's nice to have a light, tethered viewing/capturing device for you or your client to view your photos as you shoot. If the camera manufacturer came out with a capture app, or better yet, if Apple came out with a iPad version of Aperture, that would make this an awesome little platform for that. As a photographer, I do 95% of my "editing" just finding the shots I want to keep, and which ones I want to throw away, and labeling and filing the images with the appropriate metadata. Doing this during the photoshoot is ideal, improves quality control, and workflow. More complex Photoshop tasks can be done later on a bigger, faster machine with a calibrated monitor.

Thank you for sharing that with me.

I still have yet to own a DSLR, so I still do not know much about photography.

Wouldn't you prefer using photoshop with a touchscreen display on a nice chair?

I can see if you just wanted to relax on the couch and view your photos there. However, wouldn't that require resizing through iTunes and ultimately killing the original photo?

What are you talking about ? How do you edit a photo at full resolution ?

If I take a photo at a resolution of 3968 x 2232, where do I find a monitor big enough to edit that ?

Oh so, for photo editing, screen resolution doesn't matter then. I didn't know that. I thought a higher resolution screen would show more pixels. I had a friend contemplating to buy a Dell touchscreen monitor, but didn't buy it since it didn't do 1080p, and he's a photographer.

Or were you just typing stuff without thinking about it ?

Dude. What's your problem?

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

What does the 256MB limits mean? Does it limit the amount of time your browser the web or how much stuff you can download?

Sorry, even though we have two of the high end Wacom tablets here in the office and people have Wacom tablet laptops, I admit I don't know much about the technology other than it's fuck awesome stuff. I assumed the Wacom sensors are part of the reason that the pen stylus interface is so accurate and useful to artists. Thus in applying it to a tablet like artists here already have, it would make for a more accurate writing interface.

Why would the general public need a professionally accurate interface for drawing? They'll just buy a stylus if they want and it'll be fine.

 

[border]

Let's ignore the iPod because I think we all agree nothing will match it. iPhone on the otherhand is a much more possible reality. Claiming even just 10% of marketshare isn't unreasonable if we're talking about the narrow scope of portable computers. Even maybe just limiting it to netbooks, I think it's not an unfair market to aim for.

10% of the netbook market? Doable. 10% of the tablet market? They'll have it by June

So when you say it won't be as successful as the iPhone, are you saying it won't sell as much as 10-13% of the netbook market then? Even that doesn't seem entirely fair since even detractors seem to recognize that iPad is not a netbook, but I guess there has to be some metric.

I think a lot of people do as its been affecting sales of other types of computers. If that wasn't the case, laptop and desktop sales wouldn't be down, they would be more closer to the norm and the market would be expanded due to netbooks. That isn't what is happening, so clearly the people are opting for a netbook only type situation.

That scenario can be explained in any number of ways -- "netbook only users" being a pretty unlikely explanation IMO. How many people do you know that only own a netbook? How many people are sitting at home browsing Facebook on an 8" screen.....trying to construct a Powerpoint presentation with a trackpad?

The more reasonable explanation is that people aren't buying new desktops because they don't need to. There's no reason to get a new PC. Vista flopped and Windows 7 is just Vista 2.0.....people see no purpose in upgrading. That's why sales are down. Netbooks are cheap and add something new to the equation......plus it'd be hard for them to show anything but sales growth, considering where they were just 18 months ago.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I guess as a counterpoint that is exactly why I can see it as the ultimate couch browser for me, Living in the UK I can't get that content anyway. (It's region restricted)

How I'd love Hulu & Netflix, but it just isn't going to happen, however I couldn't live without BBC iPlayer and 4OD, and they will work on an iPad/iPod Touch.

Not sure about Hulu, but Netflix has already said they're exploring bring instant view to the iPhone via an app. I'm sure this will only increase their interest in doing so. It would be a killer app for sure.

 

[Seth C]

I agree with this, especially the bolded part. Though I think this goes back to something Jony Ive said in the promotional video. This is a computer that fits *you*. You tilt it, you have a keyboard only when you need it and not when you don't, it's got a small footprint, it's light, fast boot-up, long standby life, syncs all your content, you don't have to buy iPhone Apps twice (though I'm sure in some instances you will).

And, what the vast majority of people use computers for in their lives, this WILL fit them. Flash, multithreading, Wacom-level input, camera, a completely open software distribution system - these are not things that are needed in order to fit most people. These are things that are needed to fit tech/computer geeks. That is not who this computer is for. Just like you can do a crapload more things while playing a PC game than you can playing a console game. But console games outsell PC games and the Wii, perhaps the most limited console in terms of geek lust-able features, is the #1 console in the US.

Consoles (Wii included) are also the cheapest point of entry for what they do...this is not. Just sayin'.

 

[Reginald P. Linux]

Wether people like it or not is free to discuss, but if you're gonna throw around anti-competitive you should have some ammo and recent proof.

OK: http://appreview.tumblr.com/post/151630613/cannot-duplicate-the-functionality-of-a-built-in-app

Your app cannot substantially overlap or replace built-in functionality. You can’t make a phone-call app or an email client or an MP3 player or a podcast downloader.

This is a slippery slope, and we have too few data points to understand the nuances of this rule. Generally, stay out of Apple’s way and don’t compete directly with a built-in app.

 

[Vennt]

I guess I just don't see this as a content creation system, more a content consumption system. You can't entirely remove input features, so some form of input, catered by an on-screen keyboard and multi-touch is as much as you need for the uses it's being designed for.

Trying to lambast it for what it isn't is as pointless as trying to defend it as something that it isn't, it is what it is, and for some it will fill that need nicely, for others something different will be required, trying to argue a round peg into a square hole is stupid, regardless of your reasons, pro or con, for doing so.

 

[mrkgoo]

You would think the first thing in development of the iPad was to take an existing macbook pro and remove the keyboard, attach a capacitive touchscreen, and see how it runs in OS X.

Then you would have another group that took an iPhone and made it bigger which ultimately became the resulting product.

I would think the people in Cupertino considered all the factors before releasing the iPad in its final form.

It still puzzles me how running OS X wouldn't have been a good option. Perhaps to aim at a $500 price tag would have been difficult with the hardware Apple wanted to put in.

Yes, I think so. THe A4 is described as a "System on a chip". It has the graphics, the cpu, IO, memory management on the one chip (If I understand correctly). Not sure how well that would run a desktop OSX environment. The point is somewhat moot, though, because as you say, they did their research and decided a big iPhone was a better idea than a smaller touchscreen Mac, and so they designed chip more for the former.

That's how consumers are impressed with products.

You can consider the same attitude toward its competitors, too.

I agree, and I think it's a sound business strategy.

 

[Shogmaster]

On the subject of "photo editing" I think you may be selling the potential of the device short.

I'm a pro photographer and I'd love to be able to use one of these in the field as a capture/viewing device. In the earlier tablet speculation thread, I detailed my experiences demoing the Samsung Q1 for use in this capacity and found it a bit cumbersome and with a terrible viewing screen, but still useful.

The iPad is much lighter than the Samsung, so it could be easily clamped to a tripod or monopod if needed, (so could the Samsung, but it was unwieldy) and the screen should be much better.

Umm... Q1 was about same weight as iPad @ 1.7 lbs. Q1 Ultra was 1.52 lbs.

Clearly. It's also not anywhere NEAR the intended market for this device and to try and cater to that market would increase the price uncecessarily. There are 1000 touch sensors in the iPad - which is perfectly fine for it's indended use and to use with some basic art apps like Brushes. What it's not good for is pixel-level precision, for which the core audience would have ZERO use for, so why cater to that niche?

See? You're still clueless. It's not only about XY precision. It's also about pressure sensitivity and tip feel. iPad doesn't give you either.

 

[Raistlin]

Interesting little article:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/28/adobe-on-flash-and-the-ipad-apple-is-continuing-to-impose-rest/



The crux of the info comes from Adobe Flash Blog:

It looks like Apple is continuing to impose restrictions on their devices that limit both content publishers and consumers. Unlike many other ebook readers using the ePub file format, consumers will not be able to access ePub content with Apple's DRM technology on devices made by other manufacturers. And without Flash support, iPad users will not be able to access the full range of web content, including over 70% of games and 75% of video on the web.

If I want to use the iPad to connect to Disney, Hulu, Miniclip, Farmville, ESPN, Kongregate, or JibJab -- not to mention the millions of other sites on the web -- I'll be out of luck.

So, it appears the eBooks are DRM'd. Basically, it's iPad or nothing if you purchase content from the iTunes store. Didn't we already go through this with iTunes music? I thought maybe Apple had learned something from that situation.

Obviously the other interesting part of the quote are the supposed percentages of Flash content. Disregarding the games stuff (I doubt many people care all that much about Flash games), if the numbers are correct ... this really puts things into perspective. 75% of video on the web, not playable.







As for those that assumed it was a problem with the processor itself (the ARM core):

Yep, that sounds about right -- and Adobe goes on to point out that the Open Screen Project is bringing Flash to all sorts of other devices. Considering the Nokia N900 runs Flash 9 extremely well on a 600MHz ARM Cortex A8-based TI OMAP 3 processor (and the Palm Pre, which uses the same chip, will be able to run Flash 10.1 when webOS 1.4 comes out) we don't see any reason other than politics that the iPad can't do it on that fancy new 1GHz dual-core Cortex A9-based A4 chip. Turns out people might think "the best way to experience the web" might involve a little Hulu, you know?

 

[clav]

I agree, and I think it's a sound business strategy.

That depends on your attitude. Are you giving other companies a chance?

Yes, I think so. THe A4 is described as a "System on a chip". It has the graphics, the cpu, IO, memory management on the one chip (If I understand correctly). Not sure how well that would run a desktop OSX environment. The point is somewhat moot, though, because as you say, they did their research and decided a big iPhone was a better idea than a smaller touchscreen Mac, and so they designed chip more for the former.

I thought it was just a rebranded 1 GHz ARM processor, similar to the Nvidia Tegra used in other small electronics.

 

[Gary Whitta]

Oh man yeah, Neflix streaming app on this thing would be AWESOME.

 

[ChoklitReign]

Adobe says Steve Jobs is the reason the iPad doesn't have Flash

Edit: Ninja'd by Raistlin

 

[Shogmaster]

I thought it was just a rebranded 1 GHz ARM processor, similar to the Nvidia Tegra used in other small electronics.

Not quite. It's similar to next gen Tegra coming out soon, not the current Tegra running pre Cortex core.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I guess I just don't see this as a content creation system, more a content comsumption system. You can't entirely remove input features, so some form of input, catered by an on-screen keyboard and multi-touch is as much as you need for the uses it's being designed for.

Trying to lambast it for what it isn't is as pointless as trying to defend it as something that it isn't, it is what it is, and for some it will fill that need nicely, for others something different will be required, trying to argue a round peg into a square hole is stupid, regardless of your reasons, pro or con, for doing so.

I think this is the problem for some people. Apple has traditionally been the computer of choice for creative types. Strangely enough using mostly "evil" adobe applications. :lol

This thing is more like an ipod (or a big ipod touch ). You don't make music on your ipod, you play it. You are not going be coding websites and photoshopping things on this, you are going to be viewing them.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

This thing seems to be shakign out (based on desires expressed here) as a media player/limited browser above all else.

THought of that way, I still have criticisms and think it will fail until upgraded (too expensive, too limited) and I am disappointed that it's not more.

 

[Burger]

Oh so, for photo editing, screen resolution doesn't matter then. I didn't know that. I thought a higher resolution screen would show more pixels. I had a friend contemplating to buy a Dell touchscreen monitor, but didn't buy it since it didn't do 1080p, and he's a photographer.

When I started my career I was editing photos on a CRT screen with the resolution of an iPad. This was with a unwieldily puck digitiser, a slow ass computer, little RAM etc.

Now you can do the same on a tiny piece of kit that is vastly more powerful and sits in your hands. I'm sorry if I'm the only one who thinks that's fucking amazing.

Sure, now I use a 24" iMac to edit photos. That's the steady march of technology.

 

[SuperPac]

Obviously the other interesting part of the quote are the supposed percentages of Flash content. Disregarding the games stuff (I doubt many people care all that much about Flash games), if the numbers are correct ... this really puts things into perspective. 75% of video on the web, not playable.

75% of video on the web is Flash-based. How much of the web video 'market' is YouTube though? What's the % not counting YouTube. My guess is it's lower than 75%.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

Stupid question I suppose, but is there any chance amazon's video streaming or download store would work on this thing? And by "on this thing" I mean without the assistance of another computer

What about Amazon music?

 

[mrkgoo]

IPS is LCD.

I'm using TN and PVA monitors side-by-side right now. Enormous quality difference. Even when this dual-monitor option was provided to the developers here, they noticed that one was better than the other even though they were just looking at code most of the time. On the TN panels, light blues look grey, gradients turn blocky, colors warp, and the perceived brightness is worse.

Right now at home when I'm told "hey look at this" and turn my head to look at a MacBook screen, I can't see shit because the colors are inverted because I'm looking at it an angle. It's just big grey, purple, and green mess. Sharing content on the iPad would be much better.

I never noticed this more than when I've been trying to watch content on my laptop (LED backlit MBP) compared to my housemates older white macbook. Can't see crap. I've heard the newer ones are better though.

Damn I never thought of that, that seems like a dumb omission now too!

I still want one

I thought the volume rocker was initially an SD slot. Sounds like a great idea, but Apple were never going to add additional storage options for their mobile devices that have a pricing structure based on storage capacity. That said, they do offer an SD dongle attachment to allow you to plug SD cards and download photos.

I feel the biggest problem is it that people are going to ask, how is this any different from my existing iPod Touch/ iPhone, which is much cheaper and provides more/same functionality?

The only feature here is touting is size. If you need the size, then go for it, otherwise, we're not impressed.

Indeed, after seeing little else truly breakthrough (iBooks is one), there isn't much else to go by other than size, in terms of functionality. But size do the screen is a huge deal. Apps themselves will change now that you can actually incorporate more screen real estate. YOu can incorporate more complex gestures. Apps move from being 'toys' and novelties to things that are actually a bit more productive.

Oh so, for photo editing, screen resolution doesn't matter then. I didn't know that. I thought a higher resolution screen would show more pixels. I had a friend contemplating to buy a Dell touchscreen monitor, but didn't buy it since it didn't do 1080p, and he's a photographer.

Well, it does kind of matter, but for most photographers colour and gamma accuracy play a bigger part in photo editing. Resolution can be fixed by being able to zoom in.

 

[mrkgoo]

Stupid question I suppose, but is there any chance amazon's video streaming or download store would work on this thing? And by "on this thing" I mean without the assistance of another computer

What about Amazon music?

Amazon music is sure to play fine. But to be able to download it from the Amazon store? I'd say fat chance (meaning no chance. What does fat chance mean anyway?).

 

[SnakeXs]

OK: http://appreview.tumblr.com/post/151630613/cannot-duplicate-the-functionality-of-a-built-in-app

Yeah that's totally not something telecomm related at all right, and again the SDK just changed yesterday altering VOIP restrictions. Google Voice isn't quite VOIP, but to say that Apple cares more about a Google Voice app than AT&T is silly.

Nice try though.

 

[border]

Yeah, if there's anything depressing about this announcement it's that Apple still seems really committed to AT&T.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Wouldn't you prefer using photoshop with a touchscreen display on a nice chair?

Meh. Not really. Maybe if I was just fucking around. But when I'm using Photoshop, it's mostly for money, so it's real work, on a real fast workstation, with a great monitor, and a room with controlled lighting. Like I said though in my edit, I rarely have to photoshop stuff for clients. They have artists who do that all day long for a living, probably for less money than I'd charge. I just shoot, ideally.

Oh, and just for the record, I've owned three Wacom devices, and I even took a very expensive workshop where it was required, but I never really got into using them. I just end up using my mouse for the stuff I do. I know that sounds strange to a lot of people, but that's me.

I can see if you just wanted to relax on the couch and view your photos there. However, wouldn't that require resizing through iTunes and ultimately killing the original photo?

No. And especially if it was an iPad version of Aperture, like I'd want in an ideal iPad world. Aperture is a completely "lossless" environment. Your original RAW files stay untouched no matter what you do.

I wasn't really talking about that kind of thing though.

I'm talking about being on location shooting photos, and as I shoot, the images immediately go to a laptop running Aperture or PhaseOne software or something like that. The images pop up on screen right as I shoot them. I can then look at them and see things in better detail than I can see on the camera back, and make corrections. Or my client can be watching them as they pop up, and offer suggestions, or put stars on the shots they like, or say, "Hey, we got the great shot we were looking for, let's move on to the next one..." It's this kind of thing I'd like to be able to do with an iPad instead of a laptop.

 

[Khanage]

What do Indie Gaming's All-Stars think of Apple's iPad? - Brandon Boyer / Boing Boing

It's a good read! Can't wait to see what these developers can pull off on the iPad.

 

[Raistlin]

75% of video on the web is Flash-based. How much of the web video 'market' is YouTube though? What's the % not counting YouTube. My guess is it's lower than 75%.

That may be true. I think the issue however, regardless of absolute numbers, is the fact that some very popular sites are in fact Flash. Beyond YouTube, look at the quick list Adobe gave: Disney, Hulu, Miniclip, Farmville, ESPN, Kongregate, or JibJab. Obviously there are tons of others as well.

I really don't understand why people are trying to underplay the prevalence of Flash content on the web ... well, I can guess why. This is no different than pretending it's just fine that iTunes doesn't support some really popular codecs.

 

[mrkgoo]

Meh. Not really. Maybe if I was just fucking around. But when I'm using Photoshop, it's mostly for money, so it's real work, on a real fast workstation, with a great monitor, and a room with controlled lighting. Like I said though in my edit, I rarely have to photoshop stuff for clients. They have artists who do that all day long for a living, probably for less money than I'd charge. I just shoot, ideally.

Oh, and just for the record, I've owned three Wacom devices, and I even took a very expensive workshop where it was required, but I never really got into using them. I just end up using my mouse for the stuff I do. I know that sounds strange to a lot of people, but that's me.



Not if it was an iPad version of Aperture, like I'd want in an ideal iPad world. Aperture is a completely "lossless" environment. Your original RAW files stay untouched.

I wasn't really talking about that kind of thing though.

I'm talking about being on location shooting photos, and as I shoot, the images immediately go to a laptop running Aperture or PhaseOne software or something like that. The images pop up on screen right as I shoot them. I can then look at them and see things in better detail than I can see on the camera back, and make corrections. Or my client can be watching them as they pop up, and offer suggestions, or put stars on the shots they like, or say, "Hey, we got the great shot we were looking for, let's move on to the next one..." It's this kind of thing I'd like to be able to do with an iPad instead of a laptop.

You mean like set up an iPad, perhaps on a stand, shoot directly to it, and do things like zoom in and see your focus/exposure etc?

I suppose you mean separate from tethering to a laptop?

By chance have you played with the DSLRemote app? I thought that was kind of a neat novelty, but they don't support my current camera, and it was required that you r camera be tethered to a computer anyway, so lost a bit of functionality there (as in, if you were tethering, why not just use your laptop).

A higher res version of that app could be interesting. Set up your camera, and remote shoot, while looking at large full-res images on your iPad (walking around).

 

[mrkgoo]

That may be true. I think the issue however, regardless of absolute numbers, is the fact that some very popular sites are in fact Flash. Beyond YouTube, look at the quick list Adobe gave: Disney, Hulu, Miniclip, Farmville, ESPN, Kongregate, or JibJab. Obviously there are tons of others as well.

lot of the flash video sites don't work outside of the US due to licensing reasons. Userbase is also an important number, as opposed to just number of sites that utilise it.