Ninja Scooter
Member
otake said:
Personal? No. Did Adobe sleep with his wife or something? Did Bill Gates have a personal vendetta against Sony and BluRay? Its business.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Apple iPad revealed
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
Personal? No. Did Adobe sleep with his wife or something? Did Bill Gates have a personal vendetta against Sony and BluRay? Its business.
SuperPac said:
ACtually I think a lot like that too, but that's because I have an extensive background of poor internet. I had dialup for the longest time, and even when I came here, I was using my housemates internet which was a 256kbps connection. I got used to never watching any video, and avoiding flash sites like the plague. I would go to a site, see a 'loading site for Flash' and just click elsewhere. Flash is, as the name implies just that to me - flash for the sake of flash.
There's no denying there's useful stuff to be had, and I'm not saying it's right to be backwards about connection speeds like me, but it's just the way I have grown to use the internet.
Marty Chinn said:
I think you might underestimate (or overestimate) the 'average' person. The average person probably has a really crap computer.
I was pondering the concept of how the iPhone in particular has changed websites. Sure, there were always 'mobile' sites, but they seem more prevalent now. Or maybe I have the wrong perspective and I'm just seeing them more because I HAVE a mobile device that I actually want to use to access the internet. I appreciate the mobile sites in many instances, but like FLash, I think the sites should always give access to their regular site. It's funny that a huge selling point of Mobile Safari is that it is the 'full' internet, yet a lot of sites are optimising to be iPhone friendly. It's like WAP sites all over again. A little better, because they think about interface with a touch screen.
Will we see iPad penetration such that websites will design iPad-friendly sites? Sounds against the whole point to me, but little links aren't generally conducive to optimal browsing (although I've gotten pretty damn good at it on my iPhone).
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
mAcOdIn said:
I fully admit there isn't a ton to talk about at the moment. There are new apps or accessories being shown off, but that's about it at the moment. But this Flash argument has gone on long enough.
On two occasions in this thread, I've already suggested that someone start a "Flash: Live or Die" thread and move the discussion there. Instead, we have the same people on both side of the argument continually going round and round about the subject. No one is going to change anyone else's mind on the topic, and clearly some of the Flash supporters have already made up their mind on the iPad. So why continue to have a (mostly) pointless discussion in this thread?
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
It's pretty easy to make a flash menu also fall back to clicks. Most people just don't bother. I find I am constantly struggling against clients that want to use flash to make stupid unusable interfaces. Like "oh can we just make this open a new window on rollover?" WTF yes we can, but that is the worst idea ever.
Restaurants seem to be the absolute worst. So many fucking ridiculous bad ideas. :lol
I just went to this one website that has a stupid animated flash splash page that you have to click on to get the the HTML content. No HTML link anywhere. They are literally blocking people access to their site that has no flash content other than the animated logo. A simple noflash script that displays a jpg could of solved this. But no.
shantyman said:
Why should I as a consumer care about the technical details? Why does the reasoning behind it matter to me. All consumers care about is the end product, why Flash sucks is Adobes and Apples' problem. I want a device that satisfies my needs and 90% of the population use flash every day.
It's a problem. If it doesn't affect you, good for you.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
I go back to thinking of Firefox. Mozilla could have put ActiveX in Firefox somehow and made all sites made for IE work in Firefox, but they didn't. Shit was broken in the browser for years, but Mozilla did the right thing sticking to their principles and now everything good on the web works in Firefox because Firefox supports and forced web standards adoption.otake said:
People say "Flash is everywhere and everyone has the plugin" right now, but with every device from Apple or anyone else that doesn't have it, it becomes less true, and the burden of having to support the plugin lessens until it eventually goes away.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/15/apple-set-to-deploy-fairplay-digital-rights-management-on-ipad-ebooks/
The Los Angeles Times reports that Apple is planning to bring back its FairPlay digital rights management (DRM) technology for use on eBooks made available through its iBookstore for the iPad.
Veteran iTunes customers will recognize the locks as FairPlay, a digital rights management software that once limited how many times digital songs can be copied onto different computers. (Apple phased out FairPlay a year ago, and now sells unfettered tunes.)
Next month, Apple will be dusting off those digital cuffs for books, according to sources in the publishing industry.
According to the report, many but not all publishers are likely to take advantage of the FairPlay technology in order to combat piracy of their content. O'Reilly Media, publisher of technical books and an outspoken critic of DRM, is one publisher likely to eschew such an implementation. Apple has remained silent about its DRM plans for its eBook content, although it is clear that control over content usage is highly desired by most publishers.
Apple's iBooks application and iBookstore will take advantage of the open EPUB standard for electronic books, but such files can also include a wrapper such as FairPlay to restrict usage of the material. Adobe has also deployed a DRM solution for EPUB content known as Content Server, but Adobe's and Apple's solutions would not be compatible with each other, allowing Apple to pursue its own integrated eBook ecosystem much as it did with FairPlay-wrapped iTunes music and the iPod before making the shift to DRM-free music last year.
The Los Angeles Times reports that Apple is planning to bring back its FairPlay digital rights management (DRM) technology for use on eBooks made available through its iBookstore for the iPad.
Veteran iTunes customers will recognize the locks as FairPlay, a digital rights management software that once limited how many times digital songs can be copied onto different computers. (Apple phased out FairPlay a year ago, and now sells unfettered tunes.)
Next month, Apple will be dusting off those digital cuffs for books, according to sources in the publishing industry.
According to the report, many but not all publishers are likely to take advantage of the FairPlay technology in order to combat piracy of their content. O'Reilly Media, publisher of technical books and an outspoken critic of DRM, is one publisher likely to eschew such an implementation. Apple has remained silent about its DRM plans for its eBook content, although it is clear that control over content usage is highly desired by most publishers.
Apple's iBooks application and iBookstore will take advantage of the open EPUB standard for electronic books, but such files can also include a wrapper such as FairPlay to restrict usage of the material. Adobe has also deployed a DRM solution for EPUB content known as Content Server, but Adobe's and Apple's solutions would not be compatible with each other, allowing Apple to pursue its own integrated eBook ecosystem much as it did with FairPlay-wrapped iTunes music and the iPod before making the shift to DRM-free music last year.
ffs.
why do you need DRM on books? what do other stores use currently, is DRM widespread?
And does this mean that apple might prevent you from viewing books bought from other services on the ipad? This is more of a concern to me than fairplay within the ibook store, as I'd want to borrow epub books from the local library
why do you need DRM on books? what do other stores use currently, is DRM widespread?
And does this mean that apple might prevent you from viewing books bought from other services on the ipad? This is more of a concern to me than fairplay within the ibook store, as I'd want to borrow epub books from the local library
mrklaw said:
Well if they follow their iTunes music model then no, the DRM only prevents stuff bought on the store from going elsewhere, not from you putting your own files onto the device. Not 100% sure that's the case here, but it's just my guess that open epub format stuff will go into iTunes and sync to the iPad just fine.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
mrklaw said:
Considering they made a big deal out of supporting epub, I don't think you have to worry about them not playing fair with books from other stores. I have no idea what the state of DRM is in the other stores right now, but doesn't the Kindle use a proprietary format? Nook uses epub though, I do know that.
Marty Chinn
Member
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Amazon uses a proprietary format. Its DRM can be stripped though.
Fantastic, I'm not sure what's that's got to do with the many ways in which plugins are used as extensively around the Internet to make the web be the web, as much as Javascript and CSS are necessary to that same end.Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
I read the comments as apps are the preferred method to Flash, not simply the overall preferred solution. I'm fully aware you're just trying to punt the argument until HTML 5 comes along. The problem is that HTML5 is at least a year or two from ratification, at the rate things are going, and it's going to be another few years before site owners at large properly embrace it in their site design and content setup. You have a large gap to fill with a proposed solution that isn't really any better than the existing alternative, and worse in some ways.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
This is just completely ridiculous how some of you are trying to make flash into some unworkable monster when it's running on Macs, when In fact every flash site I go to runs pretty much perfectly even on my lowly macbook. From some of the testing I've done, performance difference is negligible when running on similar hardware, and it's been like that ever since Apple has switched to intel from their previous crappy processors.
I've probably seen more problems and headaches with all kinds of javascript libraries on various browsers, than I've seen with Flash. To go back to Safari, one Flash related crash I've had on it in months has resulted in crash of a plugin space alone, not the whole browser.
As for HTML5, that's still a complete joke in what you can do audio/visually compared even to Flash a few years ago, much less the latest one.
I've probably seen more problems and headaches with all kinds of javascript libraries on various browsers, than I've seen with Flash. To go back to Safari, one Flash related crash I've had on it in months has resulted in crash of a plugin space alone, not the whole browser.
As for HTML5, that's still a complete joke in what you can do audio/visually compared even to Flash a few years ago, much less the latest one.
The only reason Apple doesn't support flash is because it's not in their overall benefit to use it.
So short term or long term, they have goals and reasons for not supporting flash, and having a few unhappy customers is a worthy cost to fit in line with those goals.
That is all.
So short term or long term, they have goals and reasons for not supporting flash, and having a few unhappy customers is a worthy cost to fit in line with those goals.
That is all.
VGChampion
Member
I'm fine with the DRM. It will probably go away after awhile just like it did with the music. It's better to take precautions and slowly strip it away then start with nothing and have it all taken away because the publishers are losing too much to piracy.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
AT&T to sell 3G capable iPad in stores?
One of our AT&T connects down south just hit us up with some pretty interesting info... According to them, AT&T stores will be selling the 3G version of the Apple iPad, complete with built-in display. We're told that the general plan is to convert one or two existing netbook display sections in each corporate AT&T location into a pretty substantial iPad display area.
One of our AT&T connects down south just hit us up with some pretty interesting info... According to them, AT&T stores will be selling the 3G version of the Apple iPad, complete with built-in display. We're told that the general plan is to convert one or two existing netbook display sections in each corporate AT&T location into a pretty substantial iPad display area.
Technosteve
Banned
LovingSteam said:
Free iPad with life time service to the AT&T Cabal fucking fantastic business plan =/
This is like saying that if you get stabbed in the stomach that you shouldn't care how it happened so you can stop the guy holding the knife from doing it again.otake said:
Reasons why are always important, it's how you keep a bad situation from getting worse. What you suggest is that the reason why the situation is how it is should be outright ignored or denied because the symptom is more important than the disease.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
My dad bought a computer today, and I helped him get it set up and got rid of all of the pre-installed crap. When he forgot his Dell store password and had to open a separate browsing instance to go to his e-mail, he talked about how he didn't like the new tabs in Internet Explorer. He didn't understand them. Shit gets lost. He just goes back to the start menu and finds Internet Explorer again to open a new window. I replied that tabs are easy, because they're just like real folder tabs. He still doesn't care. He's not wrong or dumb for not caring.
After coming home and seeing this thread again, I started realizing how the way he went to the start menu for a new instance of the browser was just like hitting the single home button on an iPhone. I also realized that while the iPhone Safari fake tabs need extra motions to get to another tab compared to a computer browser's tabs, it's easier to follow. Opera's big tab thumbnails work similarly.
After coming home and seeing this thread again, I started realizing how the way he went to the start menu for a new instance of the browser was just like hitting the single home button on an iPhone. I also realized that while the iPhone Safari fake tabs need extra motions to get to another tab compared to a computer browser's tabs, it's easier to follow. Opera's big tab thumbnails work similarly.
Pristine_Condition
Member
otake said:
You might wanna edit that before Vennt sees it.
Plus, you're wrong...because there are plenty of people who can have genuine, well-thought-out reasons for wanting to see an end to the propagation of Flash content on the internet and in it's place, more open, standards-based, and especially more searchable content.
The lack of flash sucks but isn't that bad, I'd say the iPad has more glaring problems than Flash. Flash is annoying in the sense that you seemingly got no good option outside of windows. Could Apple have done more to get a competent Flash player? I dunno, but from a business standpoint if I assumed that they've been trying for years to get it good on Safari and still aren't happy I could see why they'd be reluctant to try on their mobile platforms. If anyone could make the flash plugin like anyone can make a browser it might not be a big deal but reality may mean that there simply is no good outcome regarding flash and Apple products. If Adobe has to keep their source and has to develop the plugin on their own time and priority we'd probably be disappointed, we're disappointed without it as well, it's just one of those no win situations in most likely hood.
The e-book DRM thing we did already know, although I think this is the first time Fairplay was mentioned, so that's news but not. Regarding DRM on books, I don't think it's as big a deal as it was with music. I of course prefer no DRM, like I assume most here, but most of the big stores have it, it's an almost inevitability. Of the DRM Apple's was probably the best in terms of not being an ass, although B&N's seems kinda cool as well, but no one has to support Apple's store if they don't want to, just buy from another. Unlike the music situation of years ago there actually are options on the book side, even if none of them are ideal yet. But, like I was saying, unlike music I don't think ebooks lend themselves to being on every device you own like music does. I assume most wouldn't want to read a book on their phone, I don't, I'm not going to load it on my music player, I can probably read it on the PC in time through Apple's software. One of two things should ultimately happen and that's a basic monopoly, either some company wins in the book space and all devices have to support it's DRM or the content providers stop pussy footing around and create their own standard AND DRM and make all the competing stores support that, I prefer the latter but I don't see it happening, so whether Amazon, B&N or Apple win's is of no relevance to me, just someone needs to win already.
DRM sucks, but really only because we have so many devices, WMA doesn't work right on Apple, Fairplay didn't work right on WMA devices, linux always got shafted, if there was just one DRM that worked across all platforms it'd be almost as if there was no DRM, but because we have to be cognizant of what DRM solutions each of our devices use it has become a much bigger hassle than it needed to be. I think Apple was more villain than Microsoft in this regard but less so than say Sony was but ultimately they all sucked.
But we're really getting to an age in computing where I think we need less options in devices, operating systems and hardware, kill all the smart phone OS's but one, kill all the desktop OS's but one, kill all the music player OS's but one, just hurry up and consolidate that shit. There's no reason to assume that every content provider is going to support webOS, BBOS, Apple's OS, Android, Linux(and all it's iterations), OSX, Windows and whatever custom OS some device manufacturer comes up with, until we get some consolidation in that space we're always going to be pissed that something doesn't transfer from one device to another. At least Apple is doing that right on their mobile devices, if Apple also controlled the desktop market we'd be in a better position at least in terms of app portability and DRM, maybe not a better spot overall as they're actually MORE restrictive than Microsoft is. God, I wish those two would hurry and meld their strategies together into something better because they're both only half right.
The e-book DRM thing we did already know, although I think this is the first time Fairplay was mentioned, so that's news but not. Regarding DRM on books, I don't think it's as big a deal as it was with music. I of course prefer no DRM, like I assume most here, but most of the big stores have it, it's an almost inevitability. Of the DRM Apple's was probably the best in terms of not being an ass, although B&N's seems kinda cool as well, but no one has to support Apple's store if they don't want to, just buy from another. Unlike the music situation of years ago there actually are options on the book side, even if none of them are ideal yet. But, like I was saying, unlike music I don't think ebooks lend themselves to being on every device you own like music does. I assume most wouldn't want to read a book on their phone, I don't, I'm not going to load it on my music player, I can probably read it on the PC in time through Apple's software. One of two things should ultimately happen and that's a basic monopoly, either some company wins in the book space and all devices have to support it's DRM or the content providers stop pussy footing around and create their own standard AND DRM and make all the competing stores support that, I prefer the latter but I don't see it happening, so whether Amazon, B&N or Apple win's is of no relevance to me, just someone needs to win already.
DRM sucks, but really only because we have so many devices, WMA doesn't work right on Apple, Fairplay didn't work right on WMA devices, linux always got shafted, if there was just one DRM that worked across all platforms it'd be almost as if there was no DRM, but because we have to be cognizant of what DRM solutions each of our devices use it has become a much bigger hassle than it needed to be. I think Apple was more villain than Microsoft in this regard but less so than say Sony was but ultimately they all sucked.
But we're really getting to an age in computing where I think we need less options in devices, operating systems and hardware, kill all the smart phone OS's but one, kill all the desktop OS's but one, kill all the music player OS's but one, just hurry up and consolidate that shit. There's no reason to assume that every content provider is going to support webOS, BBOS, Apple's OS, Android, Linux(and all it's iterations), OSX, Windows and whatever custom OS some device manufacturer comes up with, until we get some consolidation in that space we're always going to be pissed that something doesn't transfer from one device to another. At least Apple is doing that right on their mobile devices, if Apple also controlled the desktop market we'd be in a better position at least in terms of app portability and DRM, maybe not a better spot overall as they're actually MORE restrictive than Microsoft is. God, I wish those two would hurry and meld their strategies together into something better because they're both only half right.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
TBH as long as safari lets me open a few neogaf threads in separate 'things' (tabs, windows, don't care), then I'm happy.
I'd like spotify to be able to run in the background while I'm browsing too. If they don't fix that in OS4.0 I'll cancel my subscription (which I'm sure would make apple happy), as its almost unusable for me as it is (doesn't even work with the headphone remote controls)
I am hoping a revised neo gaf app in landscape mode will let us open three or four threads side by side, with independant scrolling on each. Then you could load up each column with different threads using pop over menus *drool*mrklaw said:
it's basically a couple of frames side by side, don't know if it could be done with the web app APIs though, I don't need neo gaf to be full page unless I am in the photography thread.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
scola said:
Is there a reason you wouldn't just use Safari to connect to GAF? The web app is great for surfing GAF on my iPhone, as it scales it nicely, but with the iPad, I can just come straight to the site.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Preview of the Wired tablet edition can be found here.
Not sure if that's new or not, but they do specifically mention the iPad, so thought it was worth adding. Looks interesting.
Not sure if that's new or not, but they do specifically mention the iPad, so thought it was worth adding. Looks interesting.
Mecha_Infantry
Banned
scola said:
IT'S going to be windows rather than tabs on the ipad
Mecha_Infantry said:
yeah thats a shame. Do you think it'll work like iphone? I.e the tabs won't be loading in the bakground for easy browsing, it'll just be like having temporary bookmarks, and they'll only load when you open the tab/page/whatever?
that'd be pretty shitty for a heavy browser session which I would be using this for 90% of the time.
Mecha_Infantry
Banned
mrklaw said:
Looks like it'll be like that from the pics of the browser, although I find the bkground tabs never load until I go back to an active window
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
This is certainly a reasonable price to quote for daily service.justjohn said:
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
cjdunn said:
:lol :lol @20-30 per month!!! Yea, good luck on that. I would wager that even $10 isn't going to be too successful. Make it $5 and they will be good.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Tobor said:
Hmm $14.00 per month.
SuperPac
Member
Tobor said:
$9.99/month...that's not bad. Although I'd like a trial week to see if I like it first before actually being charged for it. I think the problem, however, is that newspapers are going to be competing with websites that offer news/opinions/etc. for free or are ad-supported. If it was $10/month and it wasn't just the paper as-is but actually highlighted/suggested stories it thought I'd like based on my browsing preferences, then it becomes more worthwhile to me as a service. Just the paper itself with share buttons on stories...that's the paper. Which I already don't buy.
A digital newspaper is never going to be a good value for me. I mainly read them while I'm eating, cooking, or... using the john. None of those times am I going to want to risk getting my $499+ iPad messy. I think that's true of a lot of people, they read the paper over breakfast.
The pricing all depends on the kind of content we get, really. I don't see how they can successfully make the electronic version identical to the content in the print versions. I don't know how they're going to manage that but if the content is sufficient (vids, interactive content etc) then $10 isn't so bad imo.. maybe even $15, but 20-30 dollars and you need to show me something incredible.
Technosteve
Banned
print wants the same price for the digital as the print edition get the fuck out of here. The only edition i used to buy was the sunday 5 dollars edition, and that was only because it was a family habit. How about 10 dollars for just weekend edition and i use google reader to read the rest of week.
- Status