Support NeoGAF

[Buckethead]

Defending Flash is silly. It's like if someone were to defend the current design of the Xbox 360: "sure it sucks and fucks up your rig, but HEY ITS THERE... ACCEPT IT."

Change is needed.

And this is once again, me personally, but I don't think I'll look back on the iPad and be like "oh well that sucked I couldn't watch Hulu.com via the Safari app".
These things are minor inconveniences, but we all own a desktop or laptop. These experiences aren't our primary machines. We can view this content on those machines.

I'd love to watch Hulu on my iPhone or eventually my iPad, but really I'd rather have an app for it. I don't see the advantage of using a desktop experience on a mobile device.
I just don't get it. It's tailored for you, it's nice and clean without any of the puff on the main site.

The bigger and more important battle here is icon organization and also figuring out a multi-tasking solution for the iPad.

 

[Raistlin]

Defending Flash seems as silly to me like people defending the current design of the Xbox 360: sure it sucks and fucks up your rig, but "HEY ITS THERE... ACCEPT IT."

Change is needed.

I'm all fine with change, but not supporting Flash now is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The problem is the alternatives are not ready to completely replace Flash. That is simply a fact.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

From what people are saying I'll have to go with the unlimited it seems. I wish the cheap option wasn't such a tard pack as far as its limit. 250mb as the only other option is seriously ridiculous.

 

[maharg]

250M is plenty if you're usually in range of wifi.

 

[MThanded]

250M is plenty if you're usually in range of wifi.

True i think the main problem is its price in relationship to the unlimited plan. Its less yes but i think a more reasonable price would be 10.

 

[cjdunn]

I've been using column view since OSX first came out and can't stand any other view. It's the most universally consistent and feature rich view.

Agreed.

As to the data plans, I've turned on wifi 24/7 on my 3G and want to see how much it reduces data usage. Last billing cycle I used a 1GB. (That sounded huge but comes to about 1.4MB per hour -

Spoiler

a floppy disk's worth per hour, fuck I'm old

). At work, the wifi has this stupid web login scheme which not worth logging in repeatedly.

I doubt I'll make it under the 250MB limit.

 

[tokkun]

Defending Flash is silly. It's like if someone were to defend the current design of the Xbox 360: "sure it sucks and fucks up your rig, but HEY ITS THERE... ACCEPT IT."

The issue is that people have content - be it games, videos, sites, whatever - that they wish to consume that is only available in Flash. Perhaps you don't consume much Flash content, but many of the criticisms leveled at Flash could also be leveled at MP3. Would you like it if they decided to drop support for MP3?

It is rational for users to care about the device supporting the content they want to use it with. What is 'silly' is expecting users to care about some sort of political message associated with not supporting Flash.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

250M is plenty if you're usually in range of wifi.

But didn't that other person said that I can blow it off in a night of watching Youtube and browsing Gaf?

Would you like it if they decided to drop support for MP3?

Yes. Though Flash isn't as standard as MP3 is.

 

[maharg]

But didn't that other person said that I can blow it off in a night of watching Youtube and browsing Gaf?

Youtube will probably blow through it pretty quick, but gaf not so much. Especially if you use a small page size. Or that iphone gaf webapp thing. It's mostly avatars or gif-heavy threads that'll be a problem.

 

[mrkgoo]

The issue is that people have content - be it games, videos, sites, whatever - that they wish to consume that is only available in Flash. Perhaps you don't consume much Flash content, but many of the criticisms leveled at Flash could also be leveled at MP3. Would you like it if they decided to drop support for MP3?

It is rational for users to care about the device supporting the content they want to use it with. What is 'silly' is expecting users to care about some sort of political message associated with not supporting Flash.

What criticism of mp3?

To be honest, I'd probably lose a few songs that I bought from Amazon, but that'd be all. I probably wouldn't miss MP3 all that much. Of course, that's just me. Everyone else seems to use mp3.

I would no longer be able to listen to podcasts (though podcasts would probably adapt).

 

[Schlep]

Many web-desingers like using vectors since they still look good regardless of the resolution you are running at, or if you zoom on them, etc.

To each their own. I guess using a Mac as my main computer for well over a decade now has made me bitter with Flash. :lol

I'm not going to disagree with you there, but that has nothing to do with Flash. It's a tool, if someone uses it in a shitty way, that's on them. If you were around for the advent of the web, think back to how most sites used to handle frames :x It was TERRIBLE :lol

God don't remind me of that crap, haha. I've tried suppressing all memories of the web before 2001.

That's kind of my point though. It means Flash will still be around.

The idea isn't a sweeping change that happens, overnight, though. There will have to be a transition period between now and when the standards are finalized in 2012. Until then, most websites should be updated to at least support the growing mobile market, if not implementing the video tag for all browsers that support it. It's a grey area, so I don't fault web devs for not supporting the video tag, but I do fault them for not taking into consideration mobile browsers, and now the iPad.

While yes, it's proprietary, don't you have to update your browser fairly regularly? Isn't Safari proprietary? IE? Hell, Windows and Mac OS are proprietary

Sure, the individual programs are, but html5 is not proprietary. We would not have to wait on Adobe to create a new version of Flash if Microsoft were all of the sudden to rewrite Windows from scratch.

However, proprietary isn't automatically bad.

But in this case, it's an awful lot of power to give one company. Say tomorrow Adobe said, "You know what, Apple? We're pissed at you for not including Flash in the iPad. So guess what...we are no longer going to update Flash for Mac, and Flash 10.1 content will be incompatible with previous versions."

Unlikely? Obviously. Point is, though, that it could happen, and it's too much to let one company control almost all video content on the web.

 

[Technosteve]

I hate flash, as a video codec and as a web publishing tool.

On my old p4 2.8 with 1 gig of ram youtube in firefox would consume close to half my system memory. It would also freeze, and use 100% of system resources. All that to watch a video? A 6 year old computer should browse the web with out being brought down to it's knees because flash is eating up all of it's resources.

The only thing flash is good for is the proliferation of porntube websites :lol

 

[tokkun]

What criticism of mp3?

MP3 is subject to many licensing and patent disputes, and there are open source formats like Ogg that deliver similar quality in a completely free way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3#Licensing_and_patent_issues

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

I'm all fine with change, but not supporting Flash now is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The problem is the alternatives are not ready to completely replace Flash. That is simply a fact.

Apple is playing corp war with its customers as peons.

As undesirable as flash might be, right now you absolutely need it in order to enjoy the full content of the web.

In a few weeks they are showing 10.1, if it's good enough to run smoothly on Android, it'll mean the Dell Mini 5 will defacto be a better internet experience than the iPad.

 

[Schlep]

On my old p4 2.8 with 1 gig of ram youtube in firefox would consume close to half my system memory. It would also freeze, and use 100% of system resources. All that to watch a video? A 6 year old computer should browse the web with out being brought down to it's knees because flash is eating up all of it's resources.

Yeah, I have a Core Duo 2ghz MacBook Pro. I think it was the first version of the MBP line. I can barely watch video at 360p, let alone high definition. The computer is almost four years old, sure, but there's no reason for this to be the case. Just for reference, I can watch the 720p Avatar trailer full screen without a single hiccup. 1080p is a bit framey, but I wouldn't expect this system to be able to run it.

The only thing flash is good for is the proliferation of porntube websites :lol

Amen! haha.

In a few weeks they are showing 10.1, if it's good enough to run smoothly on Android, it'll mean the Dell Mini 5 will defacto be a better internet experience than the iPad.

A 5" screen at 800x480 will never be a better internet experience than a 9.7" screen at 1024x768, Flash or not.

It will be interesting to see what impact Flash has on the battery life of these Android devices, as well as the performance, obviously.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

A 5" screen at 800x480 will never be a better internet experience than a 9.7" screen at 1024x768, Flash or not.

It will be interesting to see what impact Flash has on the battery life of these Android devices, as well as the performance, obviously.

Having content>not having content.

Screen size is useless is the website you are attempting to access only has a blue lego block.

 

[DarkJC]

Having content>not having content.

Screen size is useless is the website you are attempting to access only has a blue lego block.

You act like the web is unnavigable without flash. I browse the web every day on my iPhone and don't run into blue legos at all, I don't see why it would be any different on an iPad.

It'll be interesting to see the performance of Flash on the Dell Mini 5.

 

[Vic]

The only thing flash is good for is the proliferation of porntube websites :lol

Although I look down on Flash these days, I agree with this all the way; co-signed.

 

[border]

It's funny -- the iPhone browser doesn't even support Flash, yet even a Flash object on a page makes the thing choke to death more often than not. In some ways it makes me think the Apple approach is right -- if you must do Flash, do it in a dedicated app that's not trying to render a page and download 20 other objects.

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

It's funny -- the iPhone browser doesn't even support Flash, yet even a Flash object on a page makes the thing choke to death more often than not. In some ways it makes me think the Apple approach is right -- if you must do Flash, do it in a dedicated app that's not trying to render a page and download 20 other objects.

Exactly. This s why people are getting their panties in a twist. When the guy from Adobe showed all the sites that didn't work in mobile Safari, someone showed all the available dedicated apps.

Alternatives are there

 

[D4Danger]

Exactly. This s why people are getting their panties in a twist. When the guy from Adobe showed all the sites that didn't work in mobile Safari, someone showed all the available dedicated apps.

Alternatives are there

buying parts of the Internet ftw, right

 

[Tobor]

75 million non-flash devices and rising, quickly. It will be over 100 million devices by the end of the year. Stick with Flash and you're not reaching a significant audience. It's as simple as that. Remove the Flash or limit it to IE and you reach everybody.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

Not for ever site you visit, but for the things that Flash touts most (stuff like Youtube, Hulu) isn't a dedicated app in a lot of ways a better alternative? Does the Pandora app suck? If I had an iPad and wanted to watch something on Hulu i'd have no problem just hitting the Hulu app button, in fact I'd prefer it because it'd probably be streamlined and better optimized.

 

[border]

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

Like I just said, Flash frequently locks up the iPhone browser whenever it gets embedded into a blog or message board post -- and that's with a browser that refuses to display Flash in the first place! If I have to chose between viewing in a separate app or not viewing at all, then yes, the app is a preferable solution.

Obviously part of the problem is the context too though -- blogs and message board threads can have tons of images and text. Trying to load all that along with a flash applet makes it choke like a cheap hooker. I've never actually tried to browse uncluttered YouTube pages in the iPhone Safari browser, because why would I when I have the YouTube app?

 

[mAcOdIn]

I think the ipad looks great yet kinda underwhelming, it's a good transitional piece of tech is how I'd classify it. Not having flash hurts the web, period, there's lots of shit that uses flash I like and I shouldn't need 50 apps or hope a developer makes one in the first place because my browser is gimped.

But, I view this as transitional, ultimately I'd like the device to either be more powerful itself and be a fully functional OSX tablet or have wireless speeds fast enough to basically have it have your home computer do all the work but from where technology is today the ipad does look to be a good start. I'm actually thinking of buying one myself depending on how their bookstore works, and assuming the screens as nice as I think it is, which it probably is as I'll be honest, E-ink is nice but I read lots of text on this old cheap LCD I've had for years and it's just fine, I can handle LCD's for text, CRT's not so much, but LCD's are fine.

I hate Apple's closedness regarding their content but at the same time the sheer proliferation of their devices and the interoperability they share with each other is starting to render that moot. So while before with just the iphone I'd thought it silly to expect app versions of so much shit, considering that they can now target the iphone, ipod touch and the ipad with one app I find it hard to fathom a developer not making an app for it. And while we are in this tablet infancy I'm starting to think that maybe Apple's approach isn't all that bad, for the time being.

So I'm really looking forward to trying one of these in person.

 

[mrkgoo]

Not for ever site you visit, but for the things that Flash touts most (stuff like Youtube, Hulu) isn't a dedicated app in a lot of ways a better alternative? Does the Pandora app suck? If I had an iPad and wanted to watch something on Hulu i'd have no problem just hitting the Hulu app button, in fact I'd prefer it because it'd probably be streamlined and better optimized.

Application-based computing, it's the future, I tell ya.

 

[defel]

After thinking about this a little more I think I see where Apple is coming from. My Mum is a complete idiot when it comes to technology, so much so that even a laptop with a touchpad, the keyboard, all the shortcuts and all the options confuse the fuck out of her. The iPad is really is made for people like her. I could put it in front of her, show her which button "starts up the internet" and since a touchscreen works intuitively I doubt she would have any problems using it. Often we get caught up in the fact that the iPad does not do everything that a laptop or netbook does, but maybe thats missing the point. Perhaps there are things that the laptop or netbook dont do well enough and there is no doubt in my mind that usability is something all PCs lack. The iPad does nothing that would ever justify a purchase from me, but if Apple can tap the mainstream I think the iPad does fulful its duty.

 

[Karma]

Youtube will probably blow through it pretty quick, but gaf not so much. Especially if you use a small page size. Or that iphone gaf webapp thing. It's mostly avatars or gif-heavy threads that'll be a problem.

Just tested it. I opened secondapps.com/neogaf and navigated to this thread. Opened the first 3 pages and it used 5.2 MBs.

edit:

Tested a 1 minute 23 second clip on youtube and it used around 5 MBs.

 

[mAcOdIn]

After thinking about this a little more I think I see where Apple is coming from. My Mum is a complete idiot when it comes to technology, so much so that even a laptop with a touchpad, the keyboard, all the shortcuts and all the options confuse the fuck out of her. The iPad is really is made for people like her. I could put it in front of her, show her which button "starts up the internet" and since a touchscreen works intuitively I doubt she would have any problems using it. Often we get caught up in the fact that the iPad does not do everything that a laptop or netbook does, but maybe thats missing the point. Perhaps there are things that the laptop or netbook dont do well enough and there is no doubt in my mind that usability is something all PCs lack. The iPad does nothing that would ever justify a purchase from me, but if Apple can tap the mainstream I think the iPad does fulful its duty.

That's why I think it's still a good device even though I find it underwhelming. As a self proclaimed "power user" that's built about 10 computers for myself, installed and torn through countless windows installations and solved myriads of hardware issue I'm pretty disappointed that the ipad is not a PC. That said, if it was a device that basically just works, all the apps just work and I never had to fuck with shit it actually could become something I could use. So it being a glorified ipod touch instead of a pint sized computer does hurt it's overall adaptability and would by default keep it form replacing my main machine even I don't like fucking with shit at some points in my life. 3 years ago I'd have gone through 4 windows installs in a year, currently this version of Vista has been installed since SP1, similarly I'd have fought tirelessly to get software that was problematic to work on my system now I just drop it if it's problematic. I'm becoming tired of having to work for my computer instead of having it work for me and have started to adapt.

I'm also hardware agnostic, I don't have an Apple PC, I'd like one but the price for something that wouldn't be a step back from my Windows machine is a little too cost prohibitive for someone just coming off being unemployed , the iPad is more in my price range and can fill a niche I've wanted filled which is a portable computer. I have a Blackberry cellphone, Ipod Nano and Windows PC. The Blackberry is not as good a smart phone as the iPhone but I always felt that it was the better "phone" between the two, fuck the first droids and winmobile, I forsook all the apps and shit because the phone experience took priority over the more flexible winmobile and iPhone phones on the market. I've been feeling for a while that I'd do the same approach on my first portable computer, whether it be a tablet, netbook or laptop. Lets be honest, I can't build any of them myself and I really have 0 interest in having to solve some kind of software conflict or whatnot on the road, so while the Windows tablets looked to be the best out of sheer horesepower and flexibility I find myself turned off by them. A netbook would be a little more useful than an iPad but not as useful as a full fledged tablet or notebook but because it's less useful it'd also kinda force my habits to be less damaging, less storage space means I won't experiment with directshow filters or particularly care about having the newest driver that happens to bork something. I also think starting over is kind of a good idea in a sense that you leave behind some of the things that can happen on PC's like the silly EVE Online update that gets rid of your boot.ini file, can an itouch app even get that much access to the system?

So my money's in play, I'm interested, and I think the dumbing down of the device might really be it's saving grace.

 

[fireside]

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

Most of the websites that the Adobe blogger featured actually have mobile pages that don't use Flash that are automatically loaded on the iPhone. Is that acceptable?

 

[mAcOdIn]

Most of the websites that the Adobe blogger featured actually had mobile pages that don't use Flash. Is that acceptable?

I want to add, that outside of flash games or flash video sites that I have always hated flash on websites, if you use flash for navifuckinggation I fucking hate you. Flash has a purpose yes, video and games, but the sites that use it for stupid main entrances and shit mixed with audio and the like fucking piss me off. Save that kind of interactive shit for the Matrix not wasting my time on a slower mobile device.

So I agree, if it's a game, it probably would be better served by being an app proper, if it's youtube we're talking about or Hulu, an app would be better, sure some places wont do an app and we'd have to live without that and it is a loss, I won't try and spin the lack of flash as a positive, but I don't think it's a big negative either.

So I agree with you and mobile versions of those sites are an acceptable consequence. I'm running Wimax here at home and the speeds are way better than some 3G connection and flash still sucks fucking ass on many sites, I don't want to see it on a 3G network in all honesty. Maybe in 10 years we'll look back at our relatively slow wireless speeds and laugh about how we couldn't always handle flash but for now I can live without it.

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

buying parts of the Internet ftw, right

A large amount of those apps are free

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

Yes, for every site I visit. That's what I REALLY meant, why have safari when you can use the app store, right?

Id rather use an ad free-ish app, than an ad heavy site/flash site.

 

[mrklaw]

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

I kind of agree with you, but at the moment you have a bunch of bookmarks. Icons/bookmarks, whats the difference?

Caveat to this is that they'd need to implement some kind of folder/organisation method so you could eg put your media streaming sites/apps in one place.

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

What?! What did he use it for?

http://www.viddler.com/explore/engadget/videos/1059/0

 

[mrklaw]

I think the ipad looks great yet kinda underwhelming, it's a good transitional piece of tech is how I'd classify it. Not having flash hurts the web, period, there's lots of shit that uses flash I like and I shouldn't need 50 apps or hope a developer makes one in the first place because my browser is gimped.

But, I view this as transitional, ultimately I'd like the device to either be more powerful itself and be a fully functional OSX tablet or have wireless speeds fast enough to basically have it have your home computer do all the work but from where technology is today the ipad does look to be a good start. I'm actually thinking of buying one myself depending on how their bookstore works, and assuming the screens as nice as I think it is, which it probably is as I'll be honest, E-ink is nice but I read lots of text on this old cheap LCD I've had for years and it's just fine, I can handle LCD's for text, CRT's not so much, but LCD's are fine.

I hate Apple's closedness regarding their content but at the same time the sheer proliferation of their devices and the interoperability they share with each other is starting to render that moot. So while before with just the iphone I'd thought it silly to expect app versions of so much shit, considering that they can now target the iphone, ipod touch and the ipad with one app I find it hard to fathom a developer not making an app for it. And while we are in this tablet infancy I'm starting to think that maybe Apple's approach isn't all that bad, for the time being.

So I'm really looking forward to trying one of these in person.

Apart from the obvious - its a consumer oriented consumption device, not a 'full' computer, and also the fact that full OSX isn't touch optimised (which is my main criticism of windows touch), I think there will be solutions to cover these cases.

eg some kind of hybrid VNC client or remote desktop app which can present your home computer's desktop on your ipad, giving you access to full computing via touch.

combine that with 'rich' apps with fuller functionality and I think you'll be able to get a decent amount of real computing done on the ipad

 

[Vennt]

Really? Having to get an app for every site you visit is an acceptable solution? Are you friggin kidding me? :lol

Every site you visit? - That's quite an exaggeration.

I browse hell of a lot on my iPod Touch and for the sites I visit the content is pretty much split into 4 categories:

* Sites that are fine as they are in Safari
* Site that detect the user-agent and have an iPhone/Touch specific version (i.e. BBC iPlayer)
* Sites that have a free App Store custom content viewer (Sky News, Sky Football, F1-Insider etc.)
* Sites that just plain don't work / are flash heavy.

The sites in the last category are in the extreme minority and disappearing fast, and I have not had to buy a single App to enhance my browsing experience.

 

[bosx2]

I wait, till the chinese copy it it and sell it for the half price...

 

[SnakeXs]

I wait, till the chinese copy it it and sell it for the half price...

:lol

wut

 

[tino]

I hate flash, as a video codec and as a web publishing tool.

On my old p4 2.8 with 1 gig of ram youtube in firefox would consume close to half my system memory. It would also freeze, and use 100% of system resources. All that to watch a video? A 6 year old computer should browse the web with out being brought down to it's knees because flash is eating up all of it's resources.

The only thing flash is good for is the proliferation of porntube websites :lol

Not only that, you usually uses 1/3 of the resource if you play the same video with another player on the same system. I usually use Firefox plugin to download the flv file and play it on Windows Media Classic. With minimal interface and the "always on top" option, I can play the video and browse the internet at the same time! And it doesn't bring the machine down for fuck's sake.

Just look at the rendering speed difference between Adobe reader and Foxit and you know Adobe programmers are morons.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Just tested it. I opened secondapps.com/neogaf and navigated to this thread. Opened the first 3 pages and it used 5.2 MBs.

edit:

Tested a 1 minute 23 second clip on youtube and it used around 5 MBs.

It probably reloads all the avatars and images instead of caching them.

I'm looking forward to getting a 32gb wifi only version. It'll be lighter and easier to use (I'm thinking for presentations and times when I have to pitch ideas and films to potential investors), and probably not as prone to cracking and crashing as my 2.5 year old macbook is.

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

Every site you visit? - That's quite an exaggeration.

I browse hell of a lot on my iPod Touch and for the sites I visit the content is pretty much split into 4 categories:

* Sites that are fine as they are in Safari
* Site that detect the user-agent and have an iPhone/Touch specific version (i.e. BBC iPlayer)
* Sites that have a free App Store custom content viewer (Sky News, Sky Football, F1-Insider etc.)
* Sites that just plain don't work / are flash heavy.

The sites in the last category are in the extreme minority and disappearing fast, and I have not had to buy a single App to enhance my browsing experience.

I see you're from the UK, have you thought of importing yours?

 

[Vennt]

I see you're from the UK, have you thought of importing yours?

No point, I'm not likely to get one until April, and they'll be in the local Apple store by then, they've just announced the UK launch date as March for the WiFi version, and April for the 3G model.

 

[The Fronde]

I wait, till the chinese copy it it and sell it for the half price...

iPad clone arrived three months before iPad

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

No point, I'm not likely to get one until April, and they'll be in the local Apple store by then, they've just announced the UK launch date as March for the WiFi version, and April for the 3G model.

Nah price wise I mean. I think it was £432 for a 32GB 3G version, compared to an unannounced UK price

 

[Vennt]

Depends on the price differential, I will pay the extra to have a local support point and peace of mind, but if that "extra" is ridiculous then I'll look at importing.

Mainly because UK customs have stung me before on goods from the US, ending up paying more sucks big-time, as has happened because the Shipping & Duty outweighed the savings.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I still can't play Chess on Facebook on my iPod. Chess.com, whose engine it is, has an app for their native site, but the people I play with are on Facebook.

And that's without doing a heavy amount of browsing by iPod.

 

[RoH]

I'm I the only one that see's 3G support as not being very useful for this device? I Have a phone a Desktop and a Laptop. The only thing that really needs 3G is my phone and Laptop, and I only use the 3G on my laptop for emergencies. I just really don't see a situation where I'm gonna be "OMG I just need to get on the net right to do XYZ" on this device, odds are it will be used in an environment with WIFI, or it will be in a bag until you get to a spot to sit down and pull it out.

 

[sc0la]

I still can't play Chess on Facebook on my iPod. Chess.com, whose engine it is, has an app for their native site, but the people I play with are on Facebook.

And that's without doing a heavy amount of browsing by iPod.

The scrabble app has integrated facebook connectivity. Other apps could do the same I assume.

 

[mrklaw]

Charlie Brooker's take on the ipad: link

and Stephen Fry's : link

both interesting reads, and I agree with both.

I'm I the only one that see's 3G support as not being very useful for this device? I Have a phone a Desktop and a Laptop. The only thing that really needs 3G is my phone and Laptop, and I only use the 3G on my laptop for emergencies. I just really don't see a situation where I'm gonna be "OMG I just need to get on the net right to do XYZ" on this device, odds are it will be used in an environment with WIFI, or it will be in a bag until you get to a spot to sit down and pull it out.

agreed.