IdeaPad U1, What We Wanted the iPad To Be

Xanator writes "With the announcement of the iPad, the Lenovo IdeaPad U1 Hybrid appears to have gone unnoticed, but maybe we ought to pay it more attention. It's a netbook with a removable screen that turns it into a tablet (switching OS from Windows 7 to a tablet OS within 3 seconds), and it appears to offer what many of us wanted from the iPad. Quoting Engadget: 'When docked, the U1 looks and feels like any other laptop, with an Intel CULV processor and a 128GB SSD running Windows 7 Home Premium. You actually wouldn't know there's a slate hiding in there — until you pull it out and watch it switch to Lenovo's Skylight UI, a process that was smooth and quick for us. Lenovo says the goal is for the full switch to occur in under 3 seconds.'"

Comments

But what did Apple want?

[RobinEggs]

What We Wanted the IPad To Be

People keep talking as if Apple really missed the boat with iPad, but the truth is they only missed the boat for hard-core, tinker-happy nerds...and they've made a very specific point of missing that boat for at least the last decade. They're marketing to fanboys who want it to be trendy and 'just work', not to nerds.

So it's nice that this might be what you hoped for from the iPad. But why did you hope iPad would be what you wanted in the first place?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Lally Singh]

Mod Parent Up

The point is that a good tablet with more functionality than the iPad requires a good amount of research into how to do tablet UIs. The WIMP system is pretty terrible for tablet computing. That's why the iPad's an overgrown ipod touch, to avoid having to either do the research or be sucky.

Frankly, I'd love to see something designed for a stylus that also can take a few gestures usable for the hand holding that stylus.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[VShael]

People keep talking as if Apple really missed the boat with iPad, but the truth is they only missed the boat for hard-core, tinker-happy nerds...

I disagree. Most of my friends are not hard core tinker happy nerds. And they were all underwhelmed with the iPad. In fact, I don't know a single person who was actually impressed by it.

Not one.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[stephanruby]

They're marketing to fanboys who want it to be trendy and 'just work', not to nerds.

This is an over-simplification. Many of us were first in line for the first iPods and the first iPhones. How many of us will buy the first iPad? Seriously? The NetPad is just a new area for Apple. They're almost there, but not quite yet.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually Apple does cater to the hard-code tinker-happy nerds in one case: OS X. An easy-to-use but technically advanced UI built on top of cutting-edge APIs and a certified Unix core? OS X is a nerd dream come true. It's hard to reconcile the Jobs that created NeXT, ported it to Macs, and kept building more goodies on top with the hacker-hostile control freak Jobs that released the iPhone.

Of course by now we should have learned that Apple's not going to extend this hacker friendliness beyond OS X. But we can dream.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[iluvcapra]

Not being into this sort of thing, they probably didn't have an opinion one way or the other, and either didn't want to get into an argument with you, or were looking for cues from someone knowledgeable whom they knew, in order to decide what their opinion should be.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have no idea why this was marked as troll because it's fucking spot on.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[tgd]

I disagree. When my Mom asks me if I saw "that iPad thing" and the first thing she says is "it doesn't have a webcam!" then they've missed some boat, and its not a hard-core tinker-nerd boat.

I think they missed the boat for the meat of the market they were aiming for, and the webcam is a big part of that. Lack of a USB port, even if its limited to use to get photos onto it from a digital camera, is another.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jhol13]

I know some people will just "love" iPad ... but think, for a second, rationally.
What the heck it is for? You cannot put even USB stick into it! You cannot run any "office" software, no IDE, not even Web with flash or even Java ... well you can read a pdf ... wow.

There has to be a reason, for most people, to buy it, right? What it is? Price - no . Battery life - no. Connectivity - haha! Usablity - not even a test editor! Multitasking ... everyone remembers Microsoft idea of limiting this to three - can Apple pull out with one? I don't think so.

I admit, I'm nerd the worst kind, but ... your question: I won't buy it if it does not do a single thing I want. And nobody I know neither, nerd or not.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[rolfwind]

Agreed 100%. I also was more dismissive when I first saw the iPad, to the point where I wondered why it didn't have an add-on keyboard like always innovating's netbook (which this IBM slate seems to have copied in a way), but now I went through Apple's presentation days ago - I have to say this product might have a chance.

Yeah, you can do a "million more" things on a netbook/notebook/desktop - but why would Apple try to have a new product compete with their own line-up, let alone all that is already out there. Looking at the iPad, I would say it's not in competition with notebooks, not even small ones. It's in competition with the Amazon Kindle and other e-readers. I owned a Kindle for about 3 weeks -- while I appreciate the battery life e-ink gives, it was bad contrast, slow rendering, and gives a horrible web experience. And that is what the iPad is aiming at -- much like how the iPod came into a marketplace that already had years of mp3 players.

Idk if it will be successful, but I think the geeks dismissing it for the wrong reasons - the limited view of their own demographic, wants and needs.

While I won't get one for myself, I'm thinking of getting one for my father. He wants to email and surf basically - but he never extensively used a computer in his life beyond an ATM or digital watch - and he still stumbles with the most basic laptops. He's not a stupid man, but doesn't have the benefit of our generation. Even many people in their 30s and 40s are like that - I tried teaching my uncle to use a computer - he just got a laptop. But its frustrating for us both --- when you use computers all the time, you just don't consciously realize anymore how many quirks and rules you put up with to use the thing. He wants to email pictures he took with a digital camera - damn, teaching concept of file systems, file size, possible resizing, etcetera. Not an easy task for a newbie.

I think that's what the iPad is aimed at - making the computing experience as appliance like as possible. Push a button, the thing turns on. I thought the lack of keyboard would hurt it - but guess what - traditional tablets have been tried and none were successful yet. The first and second IBM video is extremely counter to this - just way too many active gadgets on the screen at once and touching that circle thing and dragging it is way too cumbersome (windows-like paradigm) instead of clicking something once and it doing what you want. The screen also seems way too big as a tablet, although the way it pops out is extremely cool.

If Apple succeeds here, it's because they're going into an untapped market - not because they're doing what everybody else is doing (hint: tablets have been long made -- nearly nobody wants). It could flop tremendously as well, but I think the halls of Slashdot, populated by people to whom computers are second nature, are the wrong opinions to go by.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[friedmud]

You can connect a camera to the iPad using either USB or SDCARD. Look at the bottom of this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/

Re:But what did Apple want?

[RobinEggs]

Yeah, I over-emphasized a bit with the phrase "hard-core, tinker-happy nerds" but I still think the underlying point stands. You and your friends are probably underwhelmed because iPad isn't such a great product, but my point is that the IdeaPad is way beyond what anyone should have hoped for from Apple.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[coolgeek]

Nobody was very impressed with the initial release of the iPod either. It was overpriced, bulky, and seriously, $400 for a music player? Like the iPod, the iPad will evolve.

Apple has succeeded in getting McGraw Hill signed on. Once you can buy textbooks for half the price, which publishers will happily do to make sure they destroy the used book market, every college student will have one. The iPad platform will evolve significantly before they graduate. When those students are in decision making positions, they will find problems that will be solved by the iPad, and buy more.

And that's just one of its growth paths.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[friedmud]

- Price - Yes! Compared to an E-Reader like a Kindle DX for the same price... I'll take a device that can do hundreds of things well over a device that can only do one.

- Battery Life - Yes! It gets 10 hours of battery... what more could you want from a device that does so much?

- Connectivity - Yes! Wifi and 3G (admittedly expensive). Also.. you can connect a camera to it using USB or SDCARD (bottom of this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/ )

- Usability - Definitely! Millions of people already intuitively know how to use one. Navigation is simple... interacting is simple. How would you make it more usable... and what the hell is a "test editor"?

- Multitasking - No. I agree here... I hope it comes in OS 4.0... but it's not a show stopper for millions of people currently using iPhone OS devices....

Re:But what did Apple want?

[electrostatic]

No built-in USB port! Plus no SD card reader. In addition to the no built-in camera and no flv support.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi! Nice to meet you. My name is Mike. I'm a software developer who lives in Canada. I like hiking, camping, and kayaking.

I was impressed with the iPad. Furthermore, my parents actually called *me* up and asked when they could get one. That floored me, because they're both in their 70s and have shown no interest in computers until now.

So there. Now you know 3 people who were impressed by the iPad.

You should really get out more.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Kenja]

I want to like the ipad, but without enough storage to use as a media player, a crippled web browser, no hardware keyboard for office apps and such limited developer access I really cant think of a use for it.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

What the heck it is for? You cannot put even USB stick into it! You cannot run any "office" software, no IDE, not even Web with flash or even Java ... well you can read a pdf ... wow.

Some of us read a _lot_ of PDFs and are sick of printing them out. The Kindle DX's PDF support was rudimentary.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[larry bagina]

iWorks will be available on day 1. The omni group is porting/rewriting all their business apps for the iPad. Even Microsoft is considering putting office on it. There are a lot of potential business uses for it and the software will either lead the way or follow the money.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Least you didn't drink ALL of Steve's Kool-Aid.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[__aaaaxm1522]

Tell me, when you and your mom video conference, do you often hold the camera in such a way so as to get a clear view of your nasal passages?

Because that's what video conferencing on a tablet would be like. If it's on your lap, it's POINTING UP YOUR NOSE.

But tell your mom not to worry - she will soon be able to enjoy nasal video conferencing, as a recent job post at Apple indicates that they're looking at an iPad w/a camera.

http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple_job_posting_hints_at_a_camera_in_future_ipads/

Mmmmm. Nostrils.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[choas]

My mom will be able to 'go onto the internet' through this.

She is not stupid, she doesn't like to 'start something up before using it'. You turn something on, it works.

This is meant for people who don't know or care what USB is.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, totally. I mean, it's got no wireless? And less space than a Nomad? Lame.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[HeronBlademaster]

You cannot run any "office" software

Did you miss the part where they showed off iWork for the iPad? That's technically "office" software, regardless of how well it works...

no IDE

There's no user-accessible filesystem, no user-accessible command-line, no multitasking, and it's a 10" touchscreen. "No IDE" is last on the list of "reasons this is not a developer-oriented device".

not even Web with flash or even Java

The lack of Flash (and Silverlight, for Netflix) is my wife's biggest complaint about the iPad.

Battery life - no.

10 hours isn't good enough for you? For a device aimed at the market it's aimed at, 10 hours is pretty good.

Connectivity - haha!

That would depend on what you mean by "connectivity". Internet connectivity? Sure - the 3G models will get you online just about everywhere. Device connectivity? That's a whole other ball game - but even so, there are already some devices you can hook it to, and if serial devices are possible, then anything is possible. Technically.

Usablity - not even a test editor!

Apple's touch interfaces are quite usable. I'm not sure what you mean by "test editor". Remember: not aimed at developers.

can Apple pull out with one? I don't think so.

Sure - as long as you remember that this isn't aimed at developers. I load a page in Safari, switch to the home screen, and open Pages to start a document. To the end-user, it's as if Safari is still running - after all, when they switch back to Safari, the same page is open, scrolled to the same place.

Sure, things like messenger and Skype won't be able to run in the background without jailbreaking, but then again, the device isn't really suited for that sort of thing.

You're right in that it doesn't do what you want, but to say it doesn't do what anybody wants is silly. So, to answer your first question:

What the heck it is for?

It's for the sorts of things you'd like to be able to do on the iPod Touch or iPhone if only it had a larger screen.

It's for reading ebooks on a device better than competing ebook readers.

It's for inventing new ways to interact with existing software. (And I don't mean it's for Apple to do that inventing.)

I'm not an Apple fanboy - I actually dislike them fairly strongly - and I'm a developer. But that doesn't mean I see the iPad as useless, it just means I realize that the iPad isn't for developing.

The only reason I'll be buying one is so that i can toy with new ways to use a 10" interactive display.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's my -1 Utterly Untrue mod?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

I admit, I'm nerd the worst kind, but ... your question: I won't buy it if it does not do a single thing I want. And nobody I know neither, nerd or not.

My prediction is that we are going to find out, once again, that nerds don't actually know a lot of people.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[marsu_k]

Connectivity - yes, you can get USB or SD! (provided that you want to purchase and carry extra dongles), and let us not forget that it's the ultimate platform for portable video (provided that your movie collection is in 4:3 format... hell I wouldn't be surprised to see a whole new selection of previously widescreen titles in iTunes, "perfected" for the iPad)

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jo_ham]

You just made his point very saliently. I know a lot of people who will buy one because it will do what they want.

It ships with iWork already on the app store, so it has a test [sic] editor right there if you want it - you can save iWork files as plaintext if you like. There will also doubtless be a plaintext editor with syntax highlighting like SEE or somesuch released on the App store when it actually ships. This "office" software (that you apparently can't run, according to you) can work with Word and Excel files, although ymmv depending on the features of the documents. iWork itself is not an MS Office killer, but it can work with Office formats, so you could compose something and save it in .doc format for later editing on your main machine with Office. I doubt we'll actually see a version of Office itself on there but you never know.

Mobile Safari, the browser used on the iPhone *does* support Javascript on the web - I assume that is what you meant, since you said "not even Web with flash or even Java", so I assume you are talking about javascript. It works on the iPhone OS, which the iPad runs so I see no reason that it would be disabled in the iPad version of Safari. Mouseover events are not supported, but then, there is no mouse on the iPad. Of course, there is no Flash, as is often discussed.

"Rationally" the iPad is clearly not for you, but you can't simply dismiss it as useless because it doesn't do the things you personally want and you can't think of any potential use for it.

It is very deliberately *not* a tablet PC - those exist already, and aren't really all that popular outside of niche applications.

I have no idea if it will take off, but it's not at all useless

Re:But what did Apple want?

[molarmass192]

I personally agree with the webcam, but show me the Kindle and/or Nook webcams, that's right, there are none. Also, we have to keep in mind that this is first gen hardware. As for the USB port, open this and scroll to the bottom, connector kits are available:

http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/

Re:But what did Apple want?

[__aaaaxm1522]

My mom doesn't use USB sticks (there's a bad joke in there somewhere). Neither does she write code in an IDE (seriously? You're concerned you can't build code on a tablet device). She doesn't care about Flash.

She reads books. She watches videos. She sends and receives email. She looks at pictures of her grandkids. She plays the occasional game (like the kind you find in the app store).

The iPad is a *perfect* device for this kind of person. Why would I buy it? Well when it's $10 more than a Kindle DX, why the hell wouldn't I buy it?

As for "office" apps, did you miss the bit in the Keynote about Apple releasing the iWork suite for it? If that's not good enough, then how about this: both *Microsoft* and *IBM* have been making noises about developing for the iPad (sources: http://www.t3.com/news/microsoft-hints-at-office-for-ipad?=43603 and http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/ibm_plans_to_design_apps_aimed_at_ipad/

You obviously don't get it. You want a full-featured computer. One that you can play WoW on, write some Java in Netbeans or Eclipse, maybe download a few torrents and re-encode them from DIVX to some other format.

You don't want an iPad. An iPad is a general purpose computing device meant for the 95% of the population that *doesn't* do all of that. Yes, they're out there and there are a *lot* of them. Way more than there are of us. And they'll want iPads, for the exact same reason that they're all buying iPhones over other manufacturer's phones.

My mom and sisters never complain that the iPhone doesn't multitask. They don't care that the iPhone isn't an open platform, or that you have to go through the Apple store to develop these things.

As the *only* techie in a decidedly non-techie family, I can tell you that the average person just doesn't give a crap about the stuff we geeks love.

You watch - the iPad is going to do *very* well, much to our combined consternation.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[postbigbang]

Demand goes way beyond the UI. It's the content. Ecosystems that are convenient to use. Media re-use capabilities. Connectivity. Lack of captivity to a single vendor or communications supplier. It's the experience, not simply the physical device.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Unequivocal]

Mod up. I agree - ipad is in a horserace with the ereaders. They have a shot at expanding this market into a e-magazine tool. I wouldn't count them out because it fails to meet the needs of netbook users.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, until they use one, much like the iPod. no one gave a shit until they used one and thought "this is how an mp3 player should be" these will just sneak their way in and one day they will be ubiquitous. Most that i've talked to have no other feelings than "hrmm, i'd like to check one out".

  Even from the ideapad demovideo , it is an awesome idea but look at how unresponsive the interface is (note when he tries to scrol and it dosent several times) and how crappy the screen is. it is a dog. i'd never buy that. the beauty of the iPad is that you never realize you're using a computer. it's just an incredibly tactile data/entertainment portal.

-S

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

There has to be a reason, for most people, to buy it, right? What it is? Price - no . Battery life - no. Connectivity - haha! Usablity - not even a test editor! Multitasking ... everyone remembers Microsoft idea of limiting this to three - can Apple pull out with one? I don't think so.

10 hours of battery life isn't enough?

I bet Apple will get away with single tasking. We were told by techies that all-app multitasking was a must for smart phones too, but somehow, Apple managed to sell a good pile of them.

But to the topic of the article, is this U1 really the answer? I thought the starting price was $1000. If Apple's price is too high for a tablet, then the U1 isn't it either.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[gad_zuki!]

>They're marketing to fanboys who want it to be trendy and 'just work', not to nerds.

Not having flash is the opposite of "just work."

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Firehed]

I'm rather intrigued by the price. Not that $500 is cheap (even if less than expected) nor would I end up with the $500 model should I get one, but because the 9.7" Kindle is $489. So for an extra $10, I get 4x the storage, a color screen, a fuller-featured OS, a plethora of applications, etc., etc., and it can still read ebooks quite capably. The eInk display on the Kindle is really a non-starter for me - I read text on a computer screen probably twelve hours a day, so it just doesn't bother me. Of course, I prefer audiobooks so that's a wash anyways.

I think the most desirable part for me is the option of getting a contract-free unlimited 3G data plan for half the cost of a 2-year-contract-required AirCard w/ 5GB bandwidth for my laptop. Not quite as useful as an aircard on a laptop just given the limitations of the device and the OS, but given the difference in cost...

Re:But what did Apple want?

[black88]

I am going to be buying one for the musical performance applications.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[nicknamenotavailable]

I disagree. Most of my friends are not hard core tinker happy nerds. And they were all underwhelmed with the iPad. In fact, I don't know a single person who was actually impressed by it.

How many of those friends have an iPhone?

If even a fraction of the people with iPhones will buy an iPad then it will be a success.

Apple is selling this as a new way to experience the internet. The hardware to accomplish this is not as impressive as the software.

Ideally - iPad software on something like the IdeaPad U1 would be great, but for now I think (for most people) a half-as-powerful Apple product has a better user-experience than a far superior (hardware-wise) product running another OS.

As for myself, if I had an iPad - then for me the priority would be to get an OS I can compile myself on it.
But I'm not most people.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[sh00z]

You cannot run any "office" software

That is incorrect. It'll run all of the iPhone software right out of the gate. This includes an excellent implementation of Documents to Go. I won't bother with links, but there's also WriteRoom, TextGuru, QuickSheet, MarinerCalc, etc. FileAid is a Free reader program that also supports OpenOffice.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

sorry, but i don't think you need to be a "hardcore, tinker-happy nerd" to use a webcam for video conferencing, or to want to utilize more than 1 application at the same time.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Petrushka]

the truth is they only missed the boat for hard-core, tinker-happy nerds...

Running software of your own choosing is being a hard-core, tinker-happy nerd? By that standard I don't think I know anyone who isn't a hard-core tinker-happy nerd. My 80-year-old aunt is scared of number-pads and doesn't know what folders are for, but by your standards she's a hard-core tinker-happy nerd. I think your criteria need adjusting.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree. Most of my friends are not hard core tinker happy nerds. And they were all underwhelmed with the iPad. In fact, I don't know a single person who was actually impressed by it.

Not one.

We are going to see, once again, that nerds don't know a lot of people.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like how when the iPhone was first announced. 2g network, No apps intended or wanted (just some webapps) and focusing on NOT being a business tool (no email outside of webmail, lose signal, lose your email). It was just an ipod + phone...

Take off the apple-colored glasses. Apple did it again, and soon will have a new iPad that will add many of the missing features... then another. Then another... Apple is a hardware company after all, why put out what people want when you can milk them over time.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you not see what I just posted? Yes it's not built in... but does have both USB and SD card support.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! Compared to an E-Reader like a Kindle DX...

That is what is so lame about the iPad: it has set the bar ridiculously low for what it's competing with. Other than its semi-novel display, the Kindle is pretty much the height of lameness. You've got a device there which ought to be able to do what any modern personal computer can do, and instead it's dedicated to this one thing. And that's fine for Amazon, but no one other than a total luddite is going to be able to even think about the damned thing without feeling dirty. So the iPad beats the Kindle!? Big fucking deal. That's like winning in the Special Olympics or having a better OS than Windows.

what more could you want from a device that does so much?

A device that does more. See any Mac for an example of what a computer ought to be able to do.

Connectivity - Yes! Wifi and 3G (admittedly expensive)

So I have to set up and access point and use an xterm, just to be able to "plug in" a keyboard or flash drive? Sorry, network connectivity is good (don't get me wrong, if it couldn't connect to a network, then I would be bitching about it even more), but they totally forgot the basics.

No USB. Apple-approved apps only. Lame.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Draek]

Or they simply didn't like it. Why is that concept so hard to believe?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

My mom, who does nothing more strenuous with her computer than send surf the web and e-mail with pics of the grandkids attached, thinks it looks fantastic. And for her, and the way she uses her computer, it probably is.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jedidiah]

Your mom will abandon the iNot the moment she can't play one of her Facebook games.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[santiago]

You post on Slashdot and they're your friends. They may not be hardcore tinker-happy nerds compared to you, but they are compared to the other 99% of the population. Their response is not indicative of how well the iPad will sell.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[davester666]

Unfortunately, marketing speak seems to be deeply attached to this device. It basically is two separate devices.

1) a hand held tablet, running some custom OS/UI developed by Lenovo, for which there is not much third party software that will work on it. The only feature that makes it semi-unique would be that it has a connector that makes it act as an LCD display [and possibly touchscreen].

2) a small 'netbook' keyboard/cpu/hd base, with a connector for an external display, which is handled by (1).

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Enderandrew]

If the primary purpose of the iPad is something to read eBooks on and casually surf the web, I assume most users will expect there to be Flash support. They may learn it is a niche device and get past the lack of Windows or Mac apps.

When Apple launched the first generation iPhone, they were determined to hit a window and a price point. Doing so, they were missing several key features. By the time the 3G-S rolled around, I bought one without too many regrets. But in many ways, it is the phone that they should have launched with originally.

I expect the iPad may go through a few revisions before they can squeeze in everything it really should have at the price point they want.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

The first sentence is spot on. The second sentence is tragically wrong. Understanding what Apple gets right is critical to emulating their success. It is not being a "fanboy". Most people do not understand the design process, but do know good design when they see it. Not understanding what works and what doesn't has nothing to do with a list of features. The lenovo tablet points to this immediately; it is a clever design that adds nothing to what has already been marketed. It is hamstrung by a tablet OS that is very poorly designed. I think a year from now, when the second wave of iPad applications hit, many nay-sayer developers will be trying to figure out how to copy what Apple has done.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Enderandrew]

Windows 7 supposedly has support for multi-touch gestures. Part of the Aero Snap features were developed more with a touch interface in mind than a mouse.

Watch how in Minority Report windows are tossed to the left and right with Tom Cruise's fingers.

I have yet to use Windows 7 with a touch interface, but I suspect it may not be as horrible as you suggest.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[masmullin]

- Price - Yes! Compared to an E-Reader like a Kindle DX for the same price... I'll take a device that can do hundreds of things well over a device that can only do one.

Yet it cannot do the one thing the kindle dx does terrifically... spare your eyes from the backlit causing eyestrain when reading for hours and hours.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Enderandrew]

Asus makes a convertible/hybrid notebook/tablet today for $450. It is cheaper than the Kindle, has a larger screen than the iPad, a faster processor, 10 times the storage, and far more functionality.

It also boasts a 10 hour battery, not to mention a webcam.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPod doesn't work for ANYONE... fanbitch or not.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[peragrin]

at twice the price for the same specs I sure hope your right.

yea the levono idea pad is $999 with 16 gb of Flash in stead of $499 for the ipad. for the extra $500 you get a keyboard, poorer quality screen, weaker viewing angles, and zero 3rd party apps. Why don't you get all your facts before you start to speak.

I won't get the ipad not because it isn't exactly what I want, but because one of the things I want it for it can't do(flash games)

Re:But what did Apple want?

[EvanED]

The point is that a good tablet with more functionality than the iPad requires a good amount of research into how to do tablet UIs.

No it doesn't. Take the iPad and make it possible to load 3rd party apps that haven't gone through Apple's approval process. Voila, a good tablet with more functionality than the iPad.

Add a little slot for a sytlus; voila, a good tablet with (IMO) more functionality than the iPad.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[peragrin]

that's just it the specs on the ipad, are not only comparable, but apple has a better screen for half the price of the ideapad.

I have been looking for just such a tablet for years from anybody. the ipad is the fastest, with most memory, best screen, and best interface of them all and is half the price of everything else on the market and that is planned to come to market.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Polumna]

Do yourself and your parents a favor and google "Notion Ink Adam." Unless you're married to the iTunes store, I literally cannot come up with one single reason to get an iPad instead... Assuming the thing comes out, it's just better in every way and for every conceivable purpose.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[friedmud]

I've never understood this bit myself. I stare at a backlit computer screen for upwards of 9 to 10 hours a day... how is a couple of hours of reading on an iPad going to do any worse?

I currently use my iPhone for HOURS every night. I read books... I surf the net... I play games... I check and write email. All of this on a tiny backlit screen that I have to hold fairly close to my face. The iPad is going to be a 1000 times better at all of those things.

I'm not alone in this either... I know tons of people with iPhones that use them constantly and I never hear anyone complain about the "backlit screen hurting my eyes"...

Further... I _want_ a backlit screen... so I can read it in places that don't have great light... like dark airplanes and subway tunnels. Like in bed with the lights off at night so my wife can sleep. And in a ton of other places that don't suit a reflective screen.

I'm convinced that this is a myth. I hope Mythbusters picks it up and runs with it sometime.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

People keep talking as if Apple really missed the boat with iPad, but the truth is they only missed the boat for hard-core, tinker-happy nerds...

Yeah, we think different.

That said, I'm fairly interested in how the iPad will do. I like tech. Outside of cellphones, appliances tend not to do as well full computers, though they can have solid niche markets. Right now I kinda think of iPad as alongside Minitel, Kindle, and electronic typewriters in the 80s.

What Apple didn't do, and what there was some expectation of, was produce a kickass tablet-defining device. They came out with a (very good) computerized tablet rather than a tablet computer. We're still looking for a tablet computer.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[EvanED]

Other than its semi-novel display...

Don't undersell the eink readers; you can drop the "semi-".

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hardcore nerd here as well, and I think the Lenovo U1 is a terrible idea, and the iPad is the harbinger of things to come.

I'll establish my credentials first: Gen X, 10 years as a professional developer (C#/.NET, I also know my way around a half dozen scripting languages and ObjC). My home PCs consist of 4 OS X machines (2 laptops, 1 imac, 1 dell mini 9), a Toshiba M200 tablet running Windows 7, and a linux-based router and NAS (both thoroughly rooted and running all my infrastructure services). My personal laptop dual boots OSX/Win7 as well as having VMs for 7, 2008, and Ubuntu

Bottom line: you'd be stretching the truth to call me any kind of fanboy. I take what works, and I could give a crap about what brand name is on it. I've also used Windows XP and Windows 7 extensively on a tablet PC platform, and have strong opinions on the matter.

Now, I think the Lenovo U1 is a terrible idea. Why? Loss of continuity. Removing the slate portion from the laptop disconnects you from the OS and storage on the main machine, meaning you don't have access to your documents unless they were already stored online. In a few more years when "the cloud" is pervasive this won't be a big issue, but right now it's a dealbreaker. A possible solution to this would be to have the basestation continue to act as a fileshare after the screen is detached, but I haven't seen any indication that it will function this way. It's also been slammed for a limited viewing angle, the linked article reports that the image onscreen "basically disappeared at 45 degrees off axis".

The single smartest thing the iPad did was to use iPhoneOS instead of unadulterated OS X.

For starters, the device will launch with 140,000+ applications. "But windows has millions of apps", you say. Sure, but your average nontechnical user is not going to have access to even a tiny fraction of them. If you're very lucky, they might manage to install firefox instead of IE. All of the iPad's apps are accessible to users on day one.

Second, the iPhoneOS/iPadOS is just phenomenally easy to understand and use. I'm not the first person to point this out, of course, but it bears repeating. The "smart device" UI is so much more direct and accessible than the desktop UI we've been accustomed to using. I don't think the desktop is going anywhere, I wouldn't dream of doing software development on anything less, but I think there's a whole class of devices that don't require it.

Finally, the screen. Personally, I had my fingers crossed that they would announce a partnership with Pixel Qi to license their switchable backlight LCD tech. Didn't happen. Failing that, the decision to use IPS was an excellent one. It provides near-180 degree viewing from any orientation, exactly what's needed for a tablet, which can be used equally well for landcape or portrait orientation.

The decision to Hardcore nerd here as well, and I think the Lenovo U1 is a terrible idea, and the iPad is the harbinger of things to come.

I'll establish my credentials first: Gen X, 10 years as a professional developer (C#/.NET, I also know my way around a half dozen scripting languages and ObjC). My home PCs consist of 4 OS X machines (2 laptops, 1 imac, 1 dell mini 9), a Toshiba M200 tablet running Windows 7, and a linux-based router and NAS (both thoroughly rooted and running all my infrastructure services). My personal laptop dual boots OSX/Win7 as well as having VMs for 7, 2008, and Ubuntu

Bottom line: you'd be stretching the truth to call me any kind of fanboy. I take what works, and I could give a crap about what brand name is on it. I've also used Windows XP and Windows 7 extensively on a tablet PC platform, and have strong opinions on the matter.

Now, I think the Lenovo U1 is a terrible idea. Why? Loss of continuity. Removing the slate portion from the laptop disconnects you from the OS and storage on the main machine, meaning you don't have access to your documents unless they were already stored online. In a few more years when "the cloud" is pervasive

Re:But what did Apple want?

[InlawBiker]

My wife wants one. It can be used anywhere in the house for -

- Facebook
- Email
- IM
- Light browsing
- Looking up recipes
- Light reading

And it's easy to use.

I don't want one, but that doesn't mean I'm dense enough to think *nobody* wants one. I think Apple's biggest obstacle is that a lot of people already own phones or Touches that can do all of this.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Corporate Drone]

Most of my friends are not hard core tinker happy nerds. And they were all underwhelmed with the iPad. In fact, I don't know a single person who was actually impressed by it.

Not one.

The "magic" of the iPad, if there is such a thing, is not in its tech specs; it's in the types of apps that can be brought to market, given the new platform's capabilities. Could it be stuffed with more toys? Of course. However, here's the deal: the iPad will take off, based partially on fanboi sales, and partially on "mom and pop" sales -- mark my words, this is the "notebook computer" your parents (or grandparents) want, since it'll be so easy to use, and so difficult to muck up.

Once it's done gaining a beachhead, the iPad will then start to sprout additional hardware capabilities. Eventually, it'll come close to what "we" want it to be.

To use a WWII analogy, this is D-Day: a tough landing to make, and not one that will appear particularly impressive, but one that will provide the opportunity for future growth and expansion. Other tablets are taking an "Operation Market Garden" approach -- high risk, with a win-big-or-fail-impressively payoffs, which will fade away and be largely forgotten, once the iPad strategy proves itself effective.

Will I buy an iPad v1? Hell, no! But, maybe, come Christmas buying season, if there's a v2 that has added enough features, while giving the software and book markets time to catch up... yeah, maybe then I'll plunk down my cash.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Xtravar]

Exactly. That's what everyone's missing - it's an appliance, not a computer. When it comes to traveling, I would prefer traveling with an iPad rather than a laptop. I don't need fancy capabilities and a large paperweight that dies after 4 hours of usage. Heck, with 10 hours battery life, I could go somewhere for a weekend and not even have to bring a charger. It's going to have a minimally-sized case with minimal auxiliary components to carry with it.

And it's only $500! For a decent PC tablet, it looks like the price is much more (for a much less streamlined experience). Not to mention, I don't want yet another computer to maintain with updates, optimizations, and malware protection.

I'm pretty excited, and the price is chump change for programmer's salary. The only thing I'm apprehensive about is AT&T - it would be nice to just use it with my existing iPhone data plan.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry to break it to you fanboi, but there is no USB on the iPad. The USB "feature" you keep harping about is a power adapter. The iPad only has a 30-pin connector on it. With an adapter, you can charge your iPad with a USB cable.

Presumably the camera connectivity kit will offer generic USB connectivity, but the spec does not claim that.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Ma8thew]

Yout seem to be a pretty transparent poll. I'm amazed two people modded you up, given your basic factual errors. Apple announced and demoed office software at their event, it has 10 hour battery life watching video. Even if in real use it gets half that, it's still pretty amazing. And usability? It means something different than what you think it does.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Xtravar]

Now to act like a fanboy, even though I ripped Apple in the previous thread I posted in.

without enough storage to use as a media player

It's a portable device; you don't need every single piece of media you have on it. If you're at home, watch your media on something else.

a crippled web browser

What does Flash do for you when you're traveling/away from home/etc? Usually I'm looking up restaurants and using Google Maps. If I'm at the gym, I'm reading news articles on my iPhone. If you're away from home with a focus on doing something else, what use is Flash, really? It has some merit for video, which is being addressed with HTML5, but you don't seriously want to use interactive Flash games when you're on the go.

no hardware keyboard for office apps

Again, if I'm away from home and want a simple device to surf the web/email/etc on, I don't want to haul around extra peripherals.

limited developer access

The SDK is a free download and you just need to pay $99 a year to put unlimited of your own personal apps on it, as long as they keep with the iPhone pricing.

That said, the first thing I'd do is jailbreak it so I can use the unix terminal and all sorts of GNU apps.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[PopeRatzo]

Asus makes a convertible/hybrid notebook/tablet today for $450. It is cheaper than the Kindle, has a larger screen than the iPad, a faster processor, 10 times the storage, and far more functionality.

It also boasts a 10 hour battery, not to mention a webcam.

And don't forget, it also has an SD slot!

Not to mention you can actually use the software you want instead of having to want the applications you are allowed to have.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jeff4747]

You are asking for a laptop replacement.

The iPad is not a laptop replacement, nor is it supposed to be. "Real work" will still require a laptop or desktop.

It's meant to be used when you're watching a movie on the couch and wanna look up something quickly on IMDB. It's meant to have a recipe on it's screen when you carry it into the kitchen. It's meant to be a competent e-book reader (obviously purpose-built e-book readers will be better at this). It's meant to be an easy way to check the weather when you're heading out the door.

Think of it as a device to insert the Internet more into your life. Not a device you walk over to to 'look something up'. It's just there, ready for you to use it.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[iluvcapra]

I'm pretty skeptical that human beings form useful opinions about anything, not just iPads :)

IMHO, 90% of what one believes is their honest, independent opinion of X is really just the opinion you adopted so that you could maintain your peer relations. For something like an iPad, which almost no one has actually seen with their own eyes, and over which no one's opinion is of any consequence and nothing is really at stake either way, the proportion of peer-correlation of ones opinion over genuine independent judgement tends to 100%.

It's like religion or politics: since there is no verifiably correct position, and especially since your opinion has almost zero effect on the outcome, you'll tend to choose your position on the basis of friends it makes you, and the fact that so little is at stake will make you adhere to this opinion all the stronger.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hee hee. I know at least three people in my workcenter that can't wait to buy theirs.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[iluvcapra]

And just to bring it home: what people say they believe should basically be ignored most of the time. What matters is what actions they take: how they vote, how they spend their money and time, how they behave around mixed company...

Re:But what did Apple want?

[westlake]

everyone remembers Microsoft idea of limiting this to three - can Apple pull out with one? I don't think so.

The geek forgets that running three activities under SUGAR was [and remains] the practical limit for the OLPC. Release notes

The mobile device with very limited resources can become unresponsive or will simply crash under stress.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[h4rr4r]

anyone know what this wonder-device is called?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Joe Tie.]

The problem is that they made something that will disappoint both technies and average people. When a normal person sees a computer media tablet thing, they're going to expect hulu and the like.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[shaper]

Anecdote, meet anecdote:

I want one. Every single person I have shown it to wants one.

Every one.

(and yes, I did show it to more than one person.)

Re:But what did Apple want?

[roman_mir]

I always wait for VShael (62735) to express his opinion, so I would know what mine is.

--

personally I never had an ipod, an iphone, an imac etc, never will have ipad, itouch, icrotch, ismack or icry. Then again, I don't own any mp3 players or phones with cameras.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[imerso]

Hi, I'm imerso, and I'm impressed by the iPad. I will buy one for me. Oh... and I program computers for a living (20+ years experience).

Re:But what did Apple want?

[momerath2003]

The original iPod wasn't bulky, but quite the opposite. The form factor was one of its selling points. It was the first gigabyte-order music player to be the size of a deck of cards, since it used a 1.5" drive instead of the 2.5" drives that other HD-based music players had at the time.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[qopax]

I think they're talking about the T91 and T101H

Re:But what did Apple want?

[prockcore]

You can connect a camera to the iPad the same way you can connect a camera to iPhoto. It's not a webcam, it can pull photos and that's it.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[prockcore]

I notice you compare the price with the kindle, but don't compare the battery life with it. Kindle battery life? 4 days with wireless on, 2 weeks with it off. Makes that 10 hours kinda pokey in comparison.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't browse the web while listening to music on the damn thing. You can't watch movies in a decent resolution on it, you can't stick a thumb drive in it ... Basically anyone who wanted a nice portable device already owns a macbook or an iPod or both. I think they missed the boat for pretty much everyone except people who want a shiny status symbol that's less functional than their other gadgets. In other words, they'll sell approximately eleventy hojillion of these things.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[game kid]

But, but...HTML5 will replace Flash! And it has, like, video!! It's...it's like, object, but for VIDEO!!!!!!

[/fanboy]

Re:But what did Apple want?

[c_forq]

Your last sentence is the key there. Kind of like how Duke Nukem Forever is the better in every way than all existing games, assuming it is ever released.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Weezul]

Mac OS X is lovely for technical people, all the power minus the headaches. We've wanted that same operating system delivered sanely in a tablet form factor. Android does not exactly cut it given the limitations of Java. Nokia's N900 comes extraordinarily close, presumably thinner Maemo 6 based tablet's will eventually rock. Apple however has been the one that delivered the pleasent but powerful desktop OS.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[uniquename72]

That's a growth path that doesn't (and won't) exist.

1) Textbooks don't magically become half-priced by going online, just like regular books don't.
2) Students already don't have lots of $$, and could spend half the price for a Kindle.

Your point about the iPod is almost a good one, except that, when the iPod came out, it did what every other mp3 player did, only better. Once the price came down, it was the clear go-to device for music. Other features were added after customers were locked in.

The iPad fills no niche at all. It can't do 90% of what I need a netbook to do, leaving it as an overpriced ebook reader (which is, of course, why you chose that as your "one growth path" example).

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

9/8 is a fraction. So is 1/1,000,000,000. How could anything *but* a fraction of the people with iPhones buy iPads, smart guy?
And how are you going to compile yourself? Are you open source, or did you program yourself?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[llamafirst]

I also was more dismissive when I first saw the iPad, to the point where I wondered why it didn't have an add-on keyboard like always innovating's netbook (which this IBM slate seems to have copied in a way), but now I went through Apple's presentation days ago - I have to say this product might have a chance.

People can see the official iPad keyboard dock at the bottom of this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/

Re:But what did Apple want?

[dgatwood]

You can't understand the complaints about the lack of a camera because your view of the iPad's potential is way, way too narrow. You see it as a pad that sits in your lap. We see it as a highly portable device that could be used anywhere:

• With a built-in camera and the right software, the iPad would be the ultimate video conferencing device. Hang one on every wall of your house, and it could follow you from room to room. Granted, the price would have to come way down, but economies of scale have a tendency to cause that to happen over time.
• When not in use, they double as high-end digital picture frames that can periodically download new photos from your iPhoto library.
• Sans the camera, a waterproof version could be used for watching TV while you take a bath (or, for you perverts, with a camera).
• Use them on an airplane over the in-flight Wi-Fi to video conference with work or family. Maybe even mount one to the back of every airline seat and also use them for in-flight movies.
• Use the camera to detect gestures above the screen so that you can perform tasks without getting your greasy fingerprints on it.
• Place them conspicuously around businesses as security cameras, showing the webcam footage live on the screen and simultaneously feeding it back to a central server.
• Use face recognition to identify users. You might display different music libraries for different people who pick it up. You might lock the device if you don't recognize the person. You might play the sound of a dog barking when the cat stands on your screen. And so on.
• Use the camera to detect when the user is getting pissed off and display Clippy. :-D

The list goes on and on.

The other point you're missing is that for many people, this device has the potential to eliminate the need for owning a computer, and a webcam is apparently considered a key feature in a computer these days. Why? I have no idea; in ten years, we'll all probably have iPad-like devices hanging from our walls and we'll wonder what we were thinking with all these stupid webcams. But apparently some people think it is important for the time being, so I guess it's important to humor them....

Re:But what did Apple want?

[AaronW]

What it doesn't say is whether it's host mode or not. My guess is it does not do host mode since it is designed to plug into a computer.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[neuroklinik]

They're marketing to fanboys who want it to be trendy and 'just work', not to nerds.

I'm a hardcore geek. Been writing code since 1980, own tons of hardware running a huge variety of operating systems... probably have a better handle on computer fundamentals than 99% of Slashdot's audience... and I'm incredibly excited about the iPad.

It's going to be funny, again, watching all of the pundits blather on about how Apple's "really blown it this time", that the iPad is nothing but an oversized iPod Touch and a horrible "closed system"... and all the while Apple will be making money hand over fist selling millions of these things to the common man who actually use them... for work, for entertainment, for play.

Stop assuming that everybody wants technology to work the same way you do. Stop thinking that Apple's success stems from their customers' stupidity or ignorance... and that if they'd only see things your way, their lives would be so much better.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[th3rmite]

I use my ipod touch as a mini computer more than as a music player. The ipad is EXACTLY what I want, a somewhat larger ipod touch that you can do some light typing on. I also think the price is fairly reasonable for something that won't look horrendous sitting on my living room desk (boo for small apartments).

Re:But what did Apple want?

[indiechild]

Since when do Apple products "impress" with their hardware features? It's all about usability and great software.

My geek friends were all initially underwhelmed by the official iPad announcement. But now we're warming up to it. We see the possibilities provided by the software.

As for non-techie friends, they're all eager to try it when it's released.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[JonathanBoyd]

I'm curious about which device you're referring to - I'm guessing the T101 since it has a bigger screen, but the battery is only 5 hours, it's heavier, the interface isn't optimised for touch input to the same extent, the screen is lower res and lower quality generally and it only has 10x the storage if you count online storage. Performance-wise, I wouldn't be surprised if they were equivalent (or if the iPad was even ahead) given that Windows 7 probably has more overhead and Apple seem to have done a fair bit of optimisation for the iPad.

Neither device has better specs overall - they're just different.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Rakshasa Taisab]

I thought all geeks would celebrate the death of Flash.

And now we have a device as high-profile being released that doesn't have Flash.

So we are now celebra^W... whining?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[dfghjk]

That says a lot about you, doesn't it?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[couchslug]

"But why did you hope iPad would be what you wanted in the first place?"

So we could have a geek-friendly device yet become Cool People by owning an Apple product.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anubis IV]

How in the world did you get +5 Insightful? And while making a claim for rationality at that! Let's break apart your comment, most of which is patently incorrect.

USB stick: You're kinda correct. Apple offers an adapter that provides USB. Source.

Office software: iWork (source) was announced and demonstrated at the keynote speech where they introduced the iPad and will be out on day one. Microsoft has indicated that they are considering the Office Suite for it (source). As others said, Omni Group is developing their software as well (source). The fact that you missed all of this doesn't speak well for your personal knowledge on the subject, since it's been covered quite a bit.

IDE: You're probably correct. Apple doesn't like interpreted code running on the iPhone (and presumably the iPad), so it'd be pretty hard to have an IDE that did anything useful. Then again, it wasn't exactly made for that sort of purpose (it's essentially a media consumption device, not a full-fledged media creation device). Also, IDEs are extremely niche. Not important to about 99% of the people buying it.

Flash and Java: You're right. Java I'm personally iffy on, but good riddance to Flash, I say. With YouTube already serving up h.264 videos with HTML5 and Hulu rumored to be prepping the same (source), I don't see this is an issue. And if you're a Flash application developer who doesn't want to learn Objective-C, Adobe put out a Flash-to-iPhone compiler months ago which should work with the iPad.

Price: $499 for the base iPad model, vs. $489 for the Kindle DX, which was about half the price the analysts were predicting, yet it does much more than the DX. Besides the obvious and numerous software advantages, the hardware is better (3.3GB vs. ~15.5GB usable space, better CPU, 3G only vs. 802.11a/b/g/n and 3G), with the DX's only redeeming factor being its eInk display (which is only useful for B&W text display). I fail to see how the iPad compares unfavorably in terms of price. I'd say it lands somewhere between "great bargain" and "perfectly reasonable".

Battery Life: The iPad gets 10 hours of actual use when watching video, which is the worst-case. It also gets "140-something" hours when just listening to music (source), and it can be in standby for about a month. That compares very well against a laptop, and decently against the DX, given the DX's different needs.

Connectivity: Seriously? It's got better connectivity than the Kindle and better than most laptops out there. 802.11a/b/g/n, EDGE, and 3G for the iPad. You're talking out of your ass if you say it lacks connectivity.

Usability: I don't know what you mean by "test editor", but if you mean a simulator for use on a dev machine, there is one, and it's already out for developers. As for usability in general, you're kidding, right? Even though there are always some that disagree, general consensus is that the iPhone is extremely usable (You've actually held one at some point, right? As a geek, it's worth handling and studying simply because of what it accomplishes).

Multitasking: You're kinda correct. The iPhone and iPad do multitasking, but it isn't available to third-parties, just first-party software (e.g. my mail gets checked and text messages get received while I'm playing games). Regardless, it's basically a straw man since push notifications meet the needs for most third party apps, while improved speed on

Re:But what did Apple want?

[masmullin]

Its because you are not concentrating on a single thing when you are staring at your monitor at work. Your concentration and eye focus are jumping around constantly.

If you are like me, use a computer similar to this

- look at code for a few moments, read the code, unfocus eyes and puzzle the code out in your mind. switch to req document, read req document for a few min, unfocus as puzzle code vs reqs. Move to caller function, read that code for a few moments, move to grand-caller-function, jump back to original function, make a code change, switch to command prompt start compile off, switch to browser and surf for a moment while the compile occurs. switch back to cmd prompt and see that the code is done.... load and test code.

notice how often I switch my eyefocus and concentration, every small task gives me the opportunity to refocus my eyes and refocus my concentration.

When you read a novel, you stare at the words and concentrate solely on them, the only eyefocus/concentration refocusing you do is when you turn the page.

Give reading a novel on your monitor a try... I have and cannot go for more than 15min. My eyes started watering and I had to give myself a good eyerub.

The only problem with my eyes is that I have slight colourblindness. I've never needed glasses, I have 20/20 vision, and I dont have ADD or any concentration problems. But I do have a hard time concentrating.

Perhaps you have a higher tolerance for eyestrain than I do... I normally dislike looking at my cellphone for long periods of time and have never read a book on it. I read blogs on my phone, but this is a different concentration and eyefocus paradigm. consuming a lot of small amounts of text is different than reading long texts.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[dfghjk]

"What does Flash do for you when you're traveling/away from home/etc? Usually I'm looking up restaurants and using Google Maps. If I'm at the gym, I'm reading news articles on my iPhone. If you're away from home with a focus on doing something else, what use is Flash, really? It has some merit for video, which is being addressed with HTML5, but you don't seriously want to use interactive Flash games when you're on the go."

That's quite a pathetic Flash apology. I guess Flash does nothing for you when you don't have any use for it, that's true. If you have a focus on something else, why do you need an iPad at all? BTW, google maps uses Flash.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[masmullin]

But I do have a hard time concentrating. should read

But I do have a hard time concentrating on reading text you have to dedicate yourself towards (technical documentation, etc).

Re:But what did Apple want?

[masmullin]

we may dislike flash... but how else will we get our streaming porno?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know anybody who likes you either. Not ONE.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree. When my Mom asks me if I saw "that iPad thing" and the first thing she says is "it doesn't have a webcam!" then they've missed some boat, and its not a hard-core tinker-nerd boat.

WTF would a mobile device with a video camera pointed at the user be useful for?

Call me a luddite, but I like my cameras fixed, and adjustable, not mobile and unadjustable, TYVM.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[lakeland]

I'm thinking of buying one so I guess I'm qualified to answer.

I'm viewing it as an entertainment device. Compared to my iphone it is:
* Less portable
* Faster
* Much bigger screen
* Better resolution
* Possibly other things I don't know/care about

Now I'd say most people out there like being entertained so that sounds to me like it will appeal to a lot of people. The things you've asked for, like Office software... well I don't know what kind of nerd you are but I don't find Office software at all entertaining.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[nitehorse]

If you'd ever used an iPhone or iPod touch, you would know that the iPod app keeps playing in the background when you switch away. So yes, you CAN browse the web while listening to music. Unless you meant "you can't browse the web while streaming Pandora", which is true. But that's not what you said. :)

So unless Apple has broken this functionality without stating that they have, your first complaint is completely invalid. The screen is higher resolution than DVD, and DVD-quality video is clearly the most popular option in the US right now, so the screen is capable of showing better-than-DVD-quality video... so, no, it's not 720p, or 1080p, but it's still going to look pretty damn good.

Of the issues you raised, the only really valid one is that you can't use a USB thumb drive with it, but that's hardly a dealbreaker.

That said, Slashdot approval has been pretty much inversely related to Apple product success in the past, so it looks like the iPad will do extremely well based on the comments here...

Re:But what did Apple want?

[iluvcapra]

It says I keep my mouth shut unless I have first-hand knowledge or something to gain or lose, or at least something entertaining to say :D

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Paradyme]

Then again, I don't own any mp3 players or phones with cameras.

Sorry, Sir! I will get off your lawn momentarily!

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jhol13]

What? The price is $499 and the display is not good enough for reading books (if you compare to Kindle, which is $259) and there are cheaper, more capable, netbooks.

Ten hours is ridiculous as netbooks can do 9-12 hours and do much more (I'd never say iPad can do "so much" as it can do hugely less). How long can Kindle run?

The camera cannot be connected without docking station. Are you going to carry that around?

I meant text editor. BTW, I do not "navigate" my netbook nor do I "know how to use it", "or interact", I run programs on it.

iPhone is a phone, it can live with the limitations. iPad is a PC - except it isn't.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Sepodati]

Exactly the reason I'll be getting my parents one.

I just bought my mother-in-law a Dell laptop. If it had been six months later, I'd have gotten her one of these, too.

For me, though, the iPad fills no need. I already have an iPhone and a Netbook, so what's the point?

-John

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jhol13]

Comparing to Kindle DX is silly as iPad just does not compete with reading books, the display is not good enough for that.

Connectivity is shit as you cannot do ethernet or USB (without docking station). Every netbook I know as wifi and bluetooth/usb to a 3G phone, or you just plug 3G stick to USB port.

"Modern technology" ... there is nothing new compared to similarly priced netbook (for example Samsung).

Your last note "should be trivial to figure uses for it" - and yet you fail to name a single one where it is better than a cheap netbook.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Grandpa, you can come out of the cave now. They have fire! And women!

Re:But what did Apple want?

[jhol13]

when they switch back to Safari, the same page is open, scrolled to the same place.

But it has not updated the content, you have to wait for it to do it. After reading the page you wait for it download e-mail. I'm certain Apple will enable multitasking sooner than later.

This certainly is not competing with e-book readers as the screen is hugely worse (and 10 hours is not enough).

Wouldn't "toying" be much easier on a normal tablet with IDE? After all, it is cheaper and has "interactive display".

Re:But what did Apple want?

[StuartHankins]

Meh. Always another company slashing its wrists a bit more and driving down the prices. It's gutted and commoditized the PC industry to the point that no one really seems to care about delivering high-quality components anymore. Brands I trusted have caused me more and more problems because if they can cut another corner and shave another dime off the price they will do it.

I am willing to pay more if the product is dependable. Yes, my time is worth that much to me, and worth that much to my employer. It's one reason I replaced my HP laptops with a MacBook Pro... after 2 hard drives went belly up (1 in one model, 1 in another), the wireless card failed, and I saw the laptops coming in from the field -- lines on the screens, *ALL* of the network cards failed on an entire HP notebook series, etc... screw that. These were corporate models, not the cheapies. Dead USB ports, dead power adapters, dead batteries, you name it. It was enough chaos that we considered changing vendors (we're a 100% HP company, with more than 300 thin clients / laptops / desktops and more than 50 servers, an HP SAN etc).

And HP is pretty much considered to be a good vendor.

The difference is that the iPad works for some nonzero number of people. I want Flash, so it's not for me. I want to draw on the screen, so it's not for me. I don't care about the rest -- I have plenty of networked storage for instance and I wouldn't plan on using it for more than @ work and home.

So you're comparing a notebook to the iPad? They're not the same device, even though there is some crossover. When you understand that you'll see why there is room for both in the market.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your guess is incorrect, and you fail at reading comprehension. The linked site says you can plug in a camera via USB with an adapter and import photos, which means the iPad is indeed usable as a USB hosting device. :)

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Enderandrew]

A standard notebook shouldn't be compared to the iPad. But a hybrid notebook where you can turn the screen around, lay it flat, and turn it into a tablet is another story.

Asus has at least two models. The one I looked at recently has a 10" screen (better than the iPad) comes with Windows (but you can install Linux if you like), has a webcam, 160 GB of storage (as opposed to 16 GB), faster processor, support for peripherals, and can do more overall.

It is effectively a notebook and a tablet, for less money and available today.

Apple and HP both use the same hard drive vendors. Apple often makes better laptop cases, but it isn't like Apple's Western Digital HDDs are better than HP's Western Digital HDDs.

I keep hearing how the iPad will have superior construction. My iPhone fell out of my case, less than 3 feet from the ground. I've got a bad scratch on the screen and an actual deep gouge on the back of the case. Given that the iPad looks to have the same type of case, I wouldn't say the case is exactly superior construction.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[HeronBlademaster]

But it has not updated the content, you have to wait for it to do it. After reading the page you wait for it download e-mail.

I don't understand what you're getting at... why would switching back to Safari require waiting to download e-mail?

I suspect you really mean that if I start a page load in Safari, then switch away, that the load stops. This is true. However, most people will likely be using wifi, and there's no flash or Java support, so page loads are going to proceed relatively quickly for just about whatever page you're visiting.

In other words, I don't see that as a problem for most use cases. Even when I'm on a desktop I only rarely switch to another application while a page loads.

This certainly is not competing with e-book readers as the screen is hugely worse (and 10 hours is not enough).

I haven't tried either the Kindle or the iPad myself, but I've read widely varied opinions on the subject; some people find the Kindle's screen too slow, while others don't mind. Some find the lack of color sucky, while others don't mind. Some find the web browsing on the Kindle to be less than optimal, while others don't mind.

"Hugely worse" is a function of what you're talking about. Power usage? Sure, the iPad's screen is comparatively worse. Color? The iPad's screen wins hands-down. Viewing angle? Probably a tie. UI? The iPad easily wins. Web browsing? Again, the iPad wins easily (at least versus the Kindle).

As for whether the iPad's screen is actually better for reading a book for long periods of time, I don't know; I'd have to try it, but I suspect you don't know either ;) What I do know is that I don't mind reading web pages on my iPhone at all, even for an hour or more, so I have no reason to suspect I'll dislike reading on the iPad.

As for battery life, how is 10 hours not enough? Just plug it in when you go to bed, and it'll be ready when you get up in the morning. After all, it's not "10 hours idling", it's "10 hours of use". Chances are you're not going to actually be using the iPad more than 10 hours a day. How many people who own a Kindle actually use their Kindle for 10 hours in a single day?

Wouldn't "toying" be much easier on a normal tablet with IDE?

Why would I want to run an IDE right on the tablet? A 10" touchscreen is a terrible interface for an IDE; first of all, it's way too small. Second of all, if I'm going to be compiling something, I want to be doing it on my quad core Core i7 desktop with 12GB of RAM, not on my tiny ARM-based tablet.

So that's a silly argument for choosing a "normal" (read: non-Apple) tablet.

After all, it is cheaper and has "interactive display".

Sure, if "cheaper" were my only concern. But if I'm going to buy a device so I can toy with multitouch interfaces, I'm not going to choose based on price alone. (And perhaps I shouldn't have said the only reason I'd buy one is to toy with the interface, though it's true from a personal standpoint. From a professional standpoint, I have contacts who want to pay me to write some iPad apps for them.)

See, my wife will want to use the device, whatever I buy, and to be quite frank, neither Windows nor Linux is really... intuitive... on a touchscreen. Apple has put a lot of work into the UI on the iPad (as well as the iPod Touch and iPhone) and it really shows. That's useful even from the perspective of someone developing for the device.

Besides, we're talking a price difference of maybe $200, and you're going to have a hard time convincing me a $300 Windows- or Linux-based touchscreen tablet compares favorably to the iPad. It's silly to quibble over $200 using ridiculously flimsy arguments like "but the other one can run an IDE!"

Let's take, for example, the TouchBook by Always Innovating, w

Re:But what did Apple want?

[fafalone]

The main deal breakers for me seem to be things that I can't imagine really only matter to techies:
-Multitasking. You're telling me I'm supposed to be reading on this screen for hours and can't receive instant messages or listen to music at the same time?
-Flash. Regardless of merit, it's required for the full internet experience.
Those limitations are fine for a phone, but absolutely unacceptable for a device the size of the iPad. Those things are just too important and too basic. I just don't see these not mattering.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Rexdude]

It's NOT an 'IBM slate'. It's over 5 years since IBM exited the consumer PC/laptop business by selling it off to Lenovo. What you see here is entirely Lenovo's, IBM had nothing to do with it.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[harlows_monkeys]

and they've made a very specific point of missing that boat for at least the last decade. They're marketing to fanboys who want it to be trendy and 'just work', not to nerds

They don't have to market to nerds. Nerds buy Macs without needing to be marketed to. That's why Macs are significantly overrepresented among top geeks.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anubis IV]

The display isn't as good as E-ink for strictly B&W text-based reading, granted, but saying "the display is not good enough" is just nonsense. The ppi on the iPad is 132, which compares extremely well against typical desktop monitors that usually run at 72 to the low 100s ppi and compares evenly against netbooks which operate in the low-100s through around 140 from what I could find, meaning that the text renders crisp and clear (Kindle, for comparison, runs at 167 ppi). Couple that with the subpixel rendering Apple uses and wide viewing angles and it comes out extremely well (plus, it's better in low-light situations), and is easily good enough for reading at length. I know several people that have the Kindle app or other eBook apps on their iPhones (which has 163 ppi) and have read full books on it already. Most of them loved it and plan to do so more in the future, from what I've heard.

Ethernet...seriously? CAT5 is the floppy disk of our era when it comes to mobile computing. We're three generations into mainstream Wifi now. The last time I had to use CAT5 on a laptop was 2003. Let it go already. As for USB, you do not need a docking station, as you would know if you had actually read the link I provided earlier instead of stopping when you found a point to contend. There's an adapter for it, as I said, and as the link I provided corroborates. The docking station does provide USB though, but that wasn't what I was referring to.

And let me see if I understand your argument correctly. You're saying "connectivity is shit" because the iPad has to use an adapter for one interface (USB isn't even that important for mobile computing these days...I can't remember the last time I needed my USB port on my laptop while I was out, whereas I use wireless Internet every single time I'm out), while in the same paragraph saying that netbooks are better because they either need to use an adapter for a more important technology or else need to be wired together with a completely separate device in order to achieve the same functionality. Well, gee, guess you're right...the one is clearly better than the other.

"Nothing new"? Oh, where to start...? Lithium polymer batteries, A4 chip, and the extremely high resolution capacitance touchscreen, just off the top of my head. No competitors currently match the iPad on any of those since the first two are Apple-created technologies that are ahead of everything else for now, while the third could be matched currently (I believe), but simply hasn't been for whatever odd reason. If you'd like to further demonstrate your lack of nerd credentials, feel free to continue.

Regarding your last sentence, you missed the point entirely. You previously asked what it's used for, and I said that it should be trivial to figure out uses for it if you actually gave any honest consideration to the matter. Why then would I need to point out where it's better than $RANDOM_COMPETING_PRODUCT if I was merely suggesting that it has plenty of uses? Whether it has unique and novel uses is a separate matter that's entirely orthogonal to my earlier statements, though I do believe there are plenty of those as well.

But if you'd like examples of where it's better, I'd be happy to cite a few examples. For instance, eBook reading: cheap netbook displays generally provide poorer pixel density on TN panels, whereas the iPad's provides good pixel density with an IPS panel, meaning better color reproduction (8-bit vs. 6-bit) and wider viewing angles. Office software: despite your claims to the contrary earlier, it does, in fact, exist on the iPad, and it can be used much more easily since you can manipulate diagrams by hand, moving them in and out of text or pinching to zoom/shrink for things like word wrapping and the like. Web surfing is better on it, since the UI for it is simply more natural to use than a mouse (much in the same way that FPS games just work better with a mouse and keyboard than on the consoles, the same is tru

Re:But what did Apple want?

[choas]

She doesn't know what facebook is.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Hurricane78]

Because healthy people don’t feel the irrational urge to “believe” in something, as if it was a religion.

Without the huge viral hype machine (you can bet that half the people you hear saying how great it was, were paid by Apple), and the US being so deprived of modern phones, the iPhone would never have been a success anywhere.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

-Price: No. Those devices are cheaper.

-Battery life: Apple press release are not field tests. I would wait to see what regular users get. Your Unbribdled enthusiasm will wamr Jobs cocles for sure.

-Connectivity: any other devoice of this size has cameras and card readers embedded. SO what is Apple's excuse about this?

-Usability: no Flash. Do you call that usable?

I think your rose tinted glasses need replacing buddy.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[VShael]

I don't know anybody who likes you either. Not ONE.

That doesn't bother me. But if I had been promoting myself at a conference which was viewed all over the world, then it might.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[VShael]

Hey Mike.
Sorry, I don't know you or your fine folks.

If I was counting online testimonials, then I'd not have said "no one".

I was talking about people in the physical world (meatspace) who have more than a passing acquaintance with me. (ie. I have gone for a social beer with them on more than one occasion)

Re:But what did Apple want?

[VShael]

How may of those friends have an iPhone?

3. But 2 of those are work phones, which were provided with heavy subsidy.
Only one friend outright bought the iPhone, and he waited until the 3GS model.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[nicknamenotavailable]

How may of those friends have an iPhone?

3. But 2 of those are work phones, which were provided with heavy subsidy.
Only one friend outright bought the iPhone, and he waited until the 3GS model.

Alright, so those friends do know what the iPad will be about.

I have 3 friends with iPhones who like them and 2 friends who got rid of theirs.
I personally dislike the iPhone, but I probably will get an iPad sooner or later.
It all depends on how much tinkering and development will be allowed without
Apple's blessing.

I'm impressed by the iPad, not because of its specs or software. I'm impressed
because it is a work of art with microchips inside of it.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[cybernanga]

- Connectivity - Yes! Wifi and 3G (admittedly expensive). Also.. you can connect a camera to it using USB or SDCARD (bottom of this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/)

Unfortunately the iPad Camera Connection Kit appears to be very similar to the iPod one, which means you will only be able to copy existing images and video from your camera to your iPod, buy you won't be able to use the camera 'live' so to speak, meaning you can't use the iPad for taking pictures, or any kind of video / webcam stuff.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[mean pun]

That's why the iPad's an overgrown ipod touch, to avoid having to either do the research or be sucky.

What do you mean, avoid do[ing] the research? What do you think Apple has been doing before they launched the iPod touch? And do you really think the iPad UI didn't require a lot of research, even above the research for the iPod touch? It's very easy to make a UI that you have to fight all the time, it's very hard to make a UI that is so smooth you don't even notice it.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Carewolf]

Connectivity - yes, you can get USB or SD! (provided that you want to purchase and carry extra dongles)

And you are happy with only being able to store pictures on your device. Apple does not support the file-system interface, only a picture transfer interface. So the dongles are really just what they are advertised as: Connectivy for cameraes. There is no real USB or SD storage support, and there never will be, as overpriced higher models with more internal storage is where Apple makes a profit; or take their more charitable reason, because they don't want to support the FAT filesystem which is the standard.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[AmiMoJo]

For pen/stylus input to work they need to come up with a less smooth screen. When writing on paper there is a fair bit of friction between the pencil/pen but on a shiny touch screen it just slides all over the place.

Once someone comes up with a pad that is as good as a bit of paper for note taking I think the market will be huge. There were tech demos in the late 60s where people could draw a rough shape with a light pen (remember those? no? then get off my lawn!) and the computer to translate it into a nice diagram with straight lines, boxes and text. Something like that combined with handwriting recognition and a good screen would be a real killer app.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or they simply didn't like it. Why is that concept so hard to believe?

Once upon a time people told Vince MacMahon they wanted the XFL form of football.

Beware of market research.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Scroatzilla]

Personally, I inherited an old laptop that I figured I would just stick a free OS on it and surf the web. I love the web, and it is my main form of entertainment.

However, what I've discovered is that consuming web content often stretches beyond just "surfing"-- especially the ability to download useful software. So half the time I'm annoyed because the natural extension of consuming web content goes beyond what my crappy laptop can do.

That said, for "free" I still have a couple of USB ports; can still route the audio and video to an external media center; still do some decent basic audio recording; still look at Flash-based web sites; still hook into my network and listen to my audio on my choice of software, in multiple formats.

I think that the iPad is a rip-off because I'm guessing that people (non-nerdy techie normal whatever) will discover that it doesn't meet *their* needs, either-- there are certain capabilities that folks take for granted that won't be there. Unless they buy that weird port adapter thing. Which kind of sucks because they already laid out a few hundred bucks as it is.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Silas is back]

Awesome post, totally agree, thanks!

Re:But what did Apple want?

[gad_zuki!]

The death of flash arrives after a standardized alternative has been put in place (what codec does video use, bueller, bueller?) Where is it? Who is using it?

It DOESNT HAPPEN when some DRM obsessed corporation decides its a challenger to its app store.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple seems to walk both sides of the fence. They want to have the image of this big jolly happy friendly company that makes friendly shiny things but yet they claw back on anything that makes their devices easier and nicer to use but will undercut their bottom line. Forcing people to go through iTunes and lacking flash are to of these manifestations and it just plain sucks for the marketplace.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[noidentity]

Not having flash is the opposite of "just work."

Funny, on all my machines, lacking Flash is a big part of them "just working."

Re:But what did Apple want?

[mdwh2]

How many of those friends have an iPhone?

If we go by market figures, less than 5%.

If even a fraction of the people with iPhones will buy an iPad then it will be a success.

A fraction of a small fraction ... well sure, I'm sure Apple will make money from it. They've always preferred to make money by selling expensive products to a niche, rather than better value products to a larger market. Good luck to them. But if the sales are only a fraction of the Iphones' total sales, it won't be anything worthy of special media attention, especially not the disproportionate hype that the vaporware is getting write now.

Apple is selling this as a new way to experience the internet.

New way? What new way is this?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[JAlexoi]

What!?!?!?! Why were the same "tinker-happy nerds" so happy with iPhone!?!?!?!?! Maybe because, iPhone actually brought some innovation to the market?

Re:But what did Apple want?

[JAlexoi]

I know people who where impressed by the price of the device...

Re:But what did Apple want?

[JAlexoi]

A) Price is definitelly the "killer" feature of iPad
B) Battery life is too low for a device that dos so LITTLE! There are laptops that do 8-9 hours.
C) Connectivity - oh nice, basically connecting the device to ANYTHING external will render the device not portable. But on this I am not definite, so I put connectivity in the unknown section
D) Usability - we'll see when it comes out.
E) Multitasking iPad is not iPhone. iPhone may skip multitasking, iPad must have multitasking for add-on apps.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Goaway]

you can bet that half the people you hear saying how great it was, were paid by Apple

Yes this is definitely a rational and sane worldview!

Re:But what did Apple want?

[nicknamenotavailable]

If we go by market figures, less than 5%

Yes, a whole 75 million iPhones.

New way? What new way is this?

Jobs is better at explaining it than I. Just watch the keynote.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[mdwh2]

Source please? Last figures I saw were about a mere 40 million.

Anyhow, you do realise that the market for mobile phones is about a billion every year? Of course, you probably don't, since you're an Apple fan. Yes, I'm sure Apple can make some money in their niche market, but it's nothing particularly notable.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[nicknamenotavailable]

Source please? Last figures I saw were about a mere 40 million.

Anyhow, you do realise that the market for mobile phones is about a billion every year? Of course, you probably don't, since you're an Apple fan. Yes, I'm sure Apple can make some money in their niche market, but it's nothing particularly notable.

The 75 million figure is for "iPhone" OS devices from a slide that Jobs showed at the iPad event. This figure includes iPod touch devices, not just phones(I had to double-check).

I'm not a Apple fan, but I do think OS X is much better than Windows. One of the reasons I tell people to get a Mac is cause then I end up helping them with their computer once a year at most, not every month.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[ThePhilips]

IOW, Apple is bad at creating new markets: because first of all they want to sell a product. They are OEM, they are content providers. It's all snappy and smooth and intergrated - except number of missing features and the feature to allow users to add features themselves.

MSFT is good at it, because they want to be a platform supplier, eternal irreplaceable proxy between OEMs, content providers and end users. But the products - allowing OEMs and content providers greater degree of freedom - always seem to lack integration and usability. Because there are too many 3rd parties involved.

I thought by now people understood the difference between the two. But the iPad pre-release hype seem to suggest otherwise...

Re:But what did Apple want?

[ThePhilips]

2) a small 'netbook' keyboard/cpu/hd base, with a connector for an external display, which is handled by (1).

Dock station with its own integrated keyboard/cpu/hdd?? Because the way you put it, it is a dock station.

PC components should be really falling low in price now to allow that.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[walshy007]

It's hard to reconcile the Jobs that created NeXT, ported it to Macs, and kept building more goodies on top with the hacker-hostile control freak Jobs that released the iPhone.

Jobs has always been very hostile to all forms of user choice, as demonstrated here I loved the apple 2, but the mac was just rediculous.

Apple and more specifically jobs has never been tinker happy at all, he has always been about an extremely controlled experience that suits his taste. example

It's hard to reconcile the Jobs that created NeXT, ported it to Macs

Ah but you see, jobs has always been an extremely good businessman that tries to get the most out of his employees, Mach/BSD already existed when NeXTStep was being made, they essentially just made a new user interface. The openness came from the code they utilized that other people had made, so no surprise.

He only concedes control when it is necessary for a business move that will bring great advantages (adopting existing unix technologies etc) The moment he thinks it would bring significant profit to disabling all user choice in os x, it would occur. But thankfully I doubt that would ever happen.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Xest]

Anything that makes their favourite entity appear 'not perfect' is hard for a fanboy to believe.

Don't hate them for it, they're just easily controlled and can't help the fact they'll irrationally defend the undefendable even though they owe nothing to said entity, because said entity has in fact exploited them for high profits.

I suppose it's like the abused wife going back to her wife beater husband, there's just some emotional attachment there they can't let go of.

Re:But what did Apple want?

[Xtravar]

You must be using a different Google Maps than I, since every instance of it I've ever used is HTML + Javascript. Yes, their coders are that good that they can fool the layman into thinking they use Flash.

So, not quite sure what your point was. My point was that the only real technical reason to have Flash is for Flash games, most of which have iPhone equivalents/ports anyway.

Unoticed?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fark a few WEEKS ago had a link and they called it the "iPad killer" that came out a year before the iPad.

I thought all of you guys saw that?

Re:Unoticed?!?

[MaskedSlacker]

You must be new here--they can't even catch articles that dupes of other /. articles. You expect them to catch a dupe of an article on another site?

I dont think any really cares about other tablets

[peter303]

Until they get their hands on Apple's first. Else its mainly dueling hypotheticals. Apple will setting a standard for better or worse for the others.

nice, but

[orient]

Lenovo will, certainly, build a more affordable and compatible/open device than Apple. Their advantage will be the price, but Apple has the advantage of their OS and well known applications.

Re:nice, but

[El Lobo]

But Apple has the advantage of their dumbed down and artificially limited OS and well known censured third partyapplications.

There, fixed that for ya.

Re:nice, but

[ircmaxell]

I would have been MUCH happier if they put Android as the 2nd OS instead of their own proprietary system. That way, you could switch from a primary os (Win7, Linux, BSD, etc) to the secondary, and still have all the capabilities of the system. It looks quite interesting as is, and I'd say I'd have to see it in person before holding other judgments...

Re:nice, but

[sootman]

> Lenovo will, certainly, build a more affordable and compatible/open device than Apple.

"Certainly"? Really? You're positive that this device, which is basically two whole computers, one of which is also a giant touchscreen, will come in under $499?

Re:nice, but

[Bearhouse]

but Apple has the advantage of their OS and well known applications.

Eh? The Lenovo runs Windows 7 and their Skylight UI is based on Linux.
So urm, right, definite advantage for Apple on choice of apps, then...

Re:nice, but

[orient]

Comparing features (avalable software) side by side, Lenovo's device will have a better features/price ratio.

Re:nice, but

[Trepidity]

For apps to work well in the Skylight UI I'd expect they'd have to be customized for it, wouldn't they? I can't imagine it'd be that enjoyable to run a normal GNOME or KDE app with a bunch of menus and checkboxes and whatnot on a tablet.

Re:nice, but

[Ethanol-fueled]

But...but...the iPad is four times as powerful as the iPhone!

Re:nice, but

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

But Apple has the advantage of their dumbed down and artificially limited OS and well known censured third partyapplications that has been far more succesful in ways that less limited and more open OS's (like Android) hopes to one day be..

There, fixed that for ya.

Re:nice, but

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an interesting definition of 'affordable'. The usual one just refers to bottom line price.

Re:nice, but

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty bad when a Chinese company is producing products and platforms that are more open than what an American competitor is putting out.

Re:nice, but

[sidnelson13]

You want choice, you can always go for one of these. I find it weird that I don't see as much coverage for this nice little product from a small company as I see for speculative, unfinished and proprietary products like this.

Re:nice, but

[Attila Dimedici]

That looks like a nice device at about the right price point.

Re:nice, but

[Anonymous Coward]

Flamebait? Flamebait?!

Fuck you, you turtleneck-wearing hipster. Im'a slap the clove right outta your mouth, motherfucker.

Re:nice, but

[iluvcapra]

Comparing features side-by-side, a swiss army knife has a better feature/price ratio over a K-BAR, but I know which one I'd rather have in a barfight ;)

Re:nice, but

[hatten]

I wonder if it's gonna be possible to put linux/linux on it. Or I mean, I wonder how long time it will take before somebody releases a howto.

Re:nice, but

[Totenglocke]

It's still running Linux as the secondary OS, which means that people will modify it to fix any shortcomings it may have.

Re:nice, but

[ircmaxell]

Eih, a resistive touch screen... Swap it for a capacitive one (I don't care about multi-touch as much as responsiveness) and I'm sold...

Still, for $400 with keyboard ($300 without keyboard), it looks quite nice!

Re:nice, but

[choas]

I have one acronym for you: UI

Re:nice, but

[Anonymous Coward]

Wake me when Apple or Google outpace Nokia and or Motorola.

Until then, they're an insanely tiny market.

Re:nice, but

[jo_ham]

Steve Ballmer called. He wants to know if you want cash or cheque? He says he'll throw in a free chair if you want. Literally.

Re:nice, but

[jo_ham]

That is the argument that is often dismissed by people arguing *against* Apple - if you price up a Mac on features/price as was often the case - firewire, built in wireless, bundled software, gigE, bluetooth KB+mouse, webcam then the argument was always turned to bottom line price (back in the days before pretty much everything shipped with all those pieces on the motherboard as extra gravy - Apple were one of the first to ship computers with ethernet and wireless as standard, for example, and include FW even on the lowest models).

Not saying it's a bad argument - I'm sure that a tablet PC + netbook that share the same screen will have more features than the iPad, which is not even a tablet, but it cuts both ways. I can't imagine that it's going to be cheap though.

Re:nice, but

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Yes, 40 million iPhones and 20 million iPod Touches is an insanely tiny market. It's so tiny that that iPhone doesn't even show up on a potential developer's radar.

Re:nice, but

[sootman]

Good call, except the typical argument against Macs is that they're "overpriced", which is arguable if you go feature by feature. But the GP here (the first time around) was strictly saying "affordable".

"Most affordable" (lowest price) is not always the same as "best value" (number of good features per dollar). And most people forget, it is possible for a tool to do FEWER THINGS, BETTER. If I had to do some construction, I'd rather have a $10 straight screwdriver, a $10 philips, and a $10 pair of scissors rather than a $30 Swiss Army knife.

Re:nice, but

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Makes me wonder if that guy would have posted that if Slashdot didn't reward memes with the word 'Insightful'.

Re:nice, but

[Anonymous Coward]

Except the ipad is not running their OS's GUI, it's running a smart phone GUI. All that extra screen, for nothing more than bigger web pages and larger area for watching a subset of popular media formats. Oh, and not enough RAM to have a substantial video cache, at native screen resolution, no slot for more, and not even the same SIM as all their other products.

The Lenovo physical design crushes the ipad physical design like a bug. Even if iphone OS gives a better GUI experience, we're stuck with inferior hardware just to run it? Nice, Steve. Way to lob that one into the dirt.

Worst Product Management fiasco of the early 21st, so far.

Re:nice, but

[Jeff DeMaagd]

But that is different from your previous comment:

"Lenovo will, certainly, build a more affordable and compatible/open device than Apple."

Compatible yes, but more affordable than iPad, no.

And more affordable is not equal to better features/price ratio, they are different things.

Last I heard, Lenovo's is going to have a base price of $1000.

Re:nice, but

[Anonymous Coward]

so they married a linux device and a windows device... if they get divorced which one gets the child processes?

We wanted a hybrid? really?

[spikeb]

I didn't. The iPad is pretty much what I wanted, only it runs a closed source OS and has a closed ecosystem, and no SD card slot.

Re:We wanted a hybrid? really?

[Draek]

We wanted an affordable tablet PC with the ability to install your own OS on it (and from there an open ecosystem logically follows) plus some way to attach a decent keyboard when needed. Lenovo gave us the former and, while making an hybrid is a strange way of giving us the latter, it'll do nicely for me.

Re:We wanted a hybrid? really?

[friedmud]

If you're looking to connect a camera with that SDCARD slot... that is possible... see the bottom of this page: http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/

But if you were looking to expand the storage space of the device itself... sadly that's not possible... although certain applications may be able to use the SDCARD slot to store things.... don't know.

Re:We wanted a hybrid? really?

[jo_ham]

Tablet PCs like that already existed long before the iPad. Why didn't you buy one of those?

The iPad also has a decent keyboard accessory - it's essentially an identical version to the bluetooth Apple keyboard I'm using right now, but with a dock built in to mate with the iPad. If you hate the MacBook Pro keyboard then you won't consider it "decent" but it is full size - just lacks a numberpad (like the one I'm using right now).

Re:We wanted a hybrid? really?

[Draek]

Because existing Tablet PCs are anything but "affordable". And I'm glad the iPad does have a decent keyboard, though my comment was rather aimed at explaining why didn't I just buy a PDA or similar device, for screens bigger is better of course, but small ain't so bad. Small keyboards, however, are just as hellish as the input mode they're trying to replace and so they don't satisfy my needs either.

Is the prupose of the video

[enryonaku]

to demonstrate how the UI is laggy and the touch unresponsive?

Re:Is the prupose of the video

[confundido]

Yes. Not to mention cumbersome, and trying to do too many things at once. The lady felt like she was fighting it instead of using it. And people think the iPad is underwhelming? No thanks, I'll pass.

Looks like one of these

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/03/02/touch-book-tablet-netbook-with-arm-cpu-10-hour-battery-detachable-screen/

I definitely have some interest in an arm netbook, but the weight of having 2 batteries kind of kills it for me

Nice headline

[sootman]

Who is "we"? I'm pretty happy with what the iPad is. Also, I'm happy to pay half the cost of an IdeaPad, and get it 8 months sooner.

Re:Nice headline

[plague3106]

Wow, you're the first person I've heard that's said anything more than "meh" about the ipad.

Re:Nice headline

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is "we"? I'm pretty happy with what the iPad is. Also, I'm happy to pay half the cost of an IdeaPad, and get it 8 months sooner.

Well then I'm sure you're thrilled to get a tablet with multitouch, a full hardware keyboard, and a full operating system,

Oh, I'm sorry, you only care if it has an Apple logo slapped on it? I'm sorry...

Re:Nice headline

[Anonymous Coward]

You think a full operating system is a plus? I think you're missing half the point of the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad.

People want media devices that don't require software installations, start menus, and right-click-everything for basic movie, photo, music, and web-browsing functionality. Ya know, 90%+ of what people *actually* do with computers.

Re:Nice headline

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is "we"? I'm pretty happy with what the iPad is. Also, I'm happy to pay half the cost of an IdeaPad, and get it 8 months sooner.

Well then I'm sure you're thrilled to get a tablet with multitouch, a full hardware keyboard, and a full operating system, RIGHT NOW, except $50 cheaper, with a hardware keyboard, a full operating system, and a 250 GB Hard drive.

Oh, I'm sorry, you only care if it has an Apple logo slapped on it? I'm sorry... (Stupid Slashdot ate the link code the first time... let's see if it works this time)

Re:Nice headline

[jo_ham]

Have you been living under a rock?

He's seriously the first person, on the internet or in the real world who has said more than "meh" in your presence?

My own experience has been mixed - about 30% have been very positive, about 50% have been "meh" and about 20% have been "no way, it's stupid".

On slashdot alone though, a lot of "meh" and a lot of "why doesn't it do [thing that netbook does]?"

Re:Nice headline

[black88]

Me too. Since I am a performing musician, I am definitely going to be getting an iPad for many synthesizers and music apps available in the app store, and I don't really care that it's not RMS's wet dream of "open" and "free" standards.

Even geeks desire usability. It just depends on the use case scenario.

Re:Nice headline

[Anonymous Coward]

You think a full operating system is a plus? I think you're missing half the point of the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad.

People want media devices that don't require software installations, start menus, and right-click-everything for basic movie, photo, music, and web-browsing functionality. Ya know, 90%+ of what people *actually* do with computers.

In a phone or music player, yes, I agree with you completely.

In a 'computing device' for web surfing, being unable to INSTALL FLASH? (Yes, I know, flash sucks, it's evil, I hate it, blah blah blah... but I need my Hulu, damnit).

Two words: FUCK. THAT.

Re:Nice headline

[Anonymous Coward]

but you're a little apple fanbitch. No one cares.

Re:Nice headline

[masmullin]

To be fair, he said he was happy with a non-existent device.

Re:Nice headline

[harlows_monkeys]

Wow, you're the first person I've heard that's said anything more than "meh" about the ipad

Then you haven't listened very hard. The people who have actually used it are usually pretty enthusiastic about it, as they get what its for, and it looks like it's going to be fantastic at that.

Re:Nice headline

[Hurricane78]

I see that a lot with Apple customers:
First they fall for the viral hype machine. (Apple has tons of people, doing nothing else, than posting positive comments everywhere 24/7.)
Then they notice that it wasn’t worth the price at all and is actually pretty crappy.
And then they try to defend their bad decision, so they don’t have to call themselves the idiots that they were.

Hey, we’re only human. Everyone falls for such advanced psychological marketing once in a while.
But at least don’t make it even worse by letting others getting caught in it too.

Re:Nice headline

[plague3106]

Nope, but i suspect you've been sucking Jobs dick.

Seriously there was even a story on msnbc talking about the underwhelming response to the iPad. And another one asking people to stop (and this was only the day after) with the feminine product jokes.

I think your own experience is being surrounded by other fanboys.

Re:Nice headline

[jo_ham]

I wish. I am surrounded by Windows-lovers.

Still, lots of positive response, mixed with negative response. You know, the usual when you talk to a large number of people about a product - not everyone will like it, not everyone will hate it, some will be nonplussed.

And my sexuality and the extramarital affairs of the CEO of Apple really have nothing to do with this, other than lowering the tone. Grow up.

Yes, but does it...

[richdun]

catch run-on sentences in article summaries? Or perhaps stories that are over a month old?

The iPad will be successful

[Anonymous Coward]

For no other reason than because it is from Apple. Apple could slap their logo onto a plate of old cheese and the media would fall all over itself calling it a revolution in computing.

Argh!

[girlintraining]

Slashdot, goddamnit, you should be required to put the following text on articles like this --

WARNING: This story reads like an advertisement.

Because it is. If you were being fair and unbiased, you'd post links to all the other vendors' offerings and comparing them to the iTampon, so we could have a discussion about the state of the art, rather than one vendor's offerings. Boo. Hiss. Shaaaaaame. :\

Hardware only?

[Spazed]

Yes, it has some stats that are much higher than the iPads, but it is aimed at solving completely different users.

Look at the six panel layout of the homescreen, why waste the screen with six tiny apps when you can do so much more full screen? Why focus on a Dashboard knock off that you can carry around when people have shown that isn't what they really want in a mobile computing device. Look at what apps get used on smartphones the most often, it isn't the little one off stocks/weather/recording features, they are games and content viewing apps.

TL:DR; It isn't the size of the boat, it's how you sail the ocean.

Re:Hardware only?

[cynyr]

because you can maximise any app you want? or dare i say it, write your own and not vet it via the Applestore. P.S. Know of a way to search the appstore without an apple device or iTunes? I might be interested in the iPad if i knew it had apps that i "need" but the lack of flash is killing it for me.

Really what is the point?

[hilldog]

How are people going to use this anyway? As a big e-reader? game pad? movie player? Right now it all looks cool and shiny but who is going to spend a thousand dollars - or $999 as the article reads - for this? I love cool and shiny but I don't see adding this to my life unless I had a pressing reason to do so and touch screen isn't the reason.

Re:Really what is the point?

[icydog]

Well, it is a laptop too. If you were in the market for a $1000 laptop, and assuming this machine has similar specs to what a similarly-priced laptop could do (seems like it does), why wouldn't you buy one of these?

Re:Really what is the point?

[Totenglocke]

Or if you were in the market for a $300-$400 netbook and wanted an iPad (base price $500), this fills both roles nicely. I'm personally waiting for HP's new tablet (sorry, "slate"), but if that is too expensive or fails to impress, I'd definitely give this a look.

I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[bwalling]

I don't want all the bother of a computer. I already have that. For a tablet/slate, I just want to run a few apps/games and get online. I want it to be easy. I don't really want to mess with the file system. I don't want a browser that's vulnerable to malware. I don't want to have to mess with drivers. I don't want to have to manually drag and drop or copy my music or pictures from my computer to my tablet (or worse, dick around with file sharing over a network). I just want the damn thing to do apps, games and Internet without any fuss. I bet the iPad will do that and do it well. I just wish some of the competitors actually understood that concept.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Draek]

For a tablet/slate, I just want to run a few apps/games and get online. I want it to be easy. I don't really want to mess with the file system. I don't want a browser that's vulnerable to malware. I don't want to have to mess with drivers. I don't want to have to manually drag and drop or copy my music or pictures from my computer to my tablet (or worse, dick around with file sharing over a network). I just want the damn thing to do apps, games and Internet without any fuss.

Good for you. I don't.

I just wish some of the Apple fans on this website understood that concept.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[IndustrialComplex]

Good for you. I don't.

I just wish some of the Apple fans on this website understood that concept.

What would we fight about then?

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[black88]

I for one am neither a fan nor detractor of Apple, and yes I do understand what you are saying, but why must your opinion be so forcefully stated, as if by holy fucking writ RMS came down from Mt. Fucking Sinai to declare that any other use case scenario other than that of the oss/free software community is tantamount to a sort of mortal sin against a very narrow definition of "free", "open" and "accessible".

Does every goddamn device you purchase have to be totally open, with root filesystem access and hackability? Maybe for yourself, and those who get off on this sort of thing, but you must realize that there are far more people like me than there are of you, and in this particular fight, I personally do not care that the iPad is proprietary, I would just like a device that does what it says on the box without any effort.

I plan on getting an iPad for performing music live, as the app store has plenty of awesome synthesizer and looping apps.

To close, I do realize that we are all centers of our subjective universes, but the solipsistic nature of many of these posts just makes me want to fucking cry about the nature of western civilization, as the old standards of debate and discussion have been rendered moot by a sort of back and forth playground childishness.

So, congratulations for not wanting an iPad, now unless you have something reasonably constructive to add to this discussion, could you please kindly shut the fuck up.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Anonymous Coward]

The concept that you want a tablet that is a computer? Trivial. Very unimaginative, but trivial to understand. We're with you there, now what else do you have to show us? Your tablet-ready antivirus? Your flash-blocking plug-in? Your USB 3G dongle? Your 15 min battery life, your 3 lbs. external battery or your truly portable heat dissipator? When you're done, please be sure to tally the total and let us know how much you spent trying to put that laptop in a portable disguise.
Sure we understand you, but if you want to stay stationary on a road labeled "Future" don't complain when you get trampled trying to reboot!

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[masmullin]

I don't want all the bother of a computer. I already have that. For a tablet/slate, I just want to run a few apps/games and get online. I want it to be easy. I don't really want to mess with the file system. I don't want a browser that's vulnerable to malware. I don't want to have to mess with drivers. I don't want to have to manually drag and drop or copy my music or pictures from my computer to my tablet (or worse, dick around with file sharing over a network). I just want the damn thing to do apps, games and Internet without any fuss. I bet the iPad will do that and do it well. I just wish some of the competitors actually understood that concept.

I dont want to have to dick around with my computer, for that matter... whats your point?

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[jaymz666]

I want something that I can sit on the nightstand and pull up a VPN connection to restart an app server at 3am over the VPN, something the iPad sure as hell can't do.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Well get a fucking macbook then. Or a windows or linux laptop or tablet. It's not like there aren't plenty of offerings out there that will satisfy your nerd/hacker needs. You don't use the same tool for every problem, nor do you market one solution for every possible consumer - that's just stupid.

I just wish some of the whiners on this website understood THAT concept.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Anonymous Coward]

I do want all the power of a computer. I like that. For a tablet/slate, I just want to have the same freedom as a computer. I want it to be configurable. I need access to the file system. I don't want a browser that's vulnerable to malware. I want to be able to configure my hardware, turn off bits I don't like, try different drivers. I want to be able to manually drag and drop or copy my music or pictures from my computer to my tablet (or at least be able to use nfs/samba). I just want the damn thing to do apps, games and Internet without any restrictions. I the iPad won't do that all. I just wish apple or anybody else actually understood that concept.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[uniquename72]

Adding the functionality to please both groups of users would be trivial. THAT'S why the iPad fails.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this modded "insightful" instead of "troll"? Lots of people have made their arguments for both sides. That has nothing to do with being an "Apple fan." The fact that this is your main point (and that you're being a confrontational asshole about it) paints you troll-colored.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[foqn1bo]

What makes you so fucking special?

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[barbaricpenguin]

iPad will have VPN support. I can use my work VPN with my iPhone. iPhone has ssh clients, and they should work on the iPad. So you should be able to do all that with an iPad.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Rossman]

Uh, do you work for Apple, or are you just....not that bright?

"don't want to mess with the filesystem" - wait, what? who does that these days, and not only that, how is it a requirement of a Windows computer? at no point is this ever required.
"don't want a browser vulnerable to malware" - you can choose any browser you want on Windows, no-one is required to use IE.
"don't want to mess with drivers" - honestly, when was the last time you had to do this? Since XP and later generally shit just works.
"(or worse, dick around with file sharing over a network)" - uh, since when is this complicated. i open explorer, i click another computer on my network, get prompted for a username, i enter it, and it works - it's so simple it's not even funny, and it's pretty comparable to networking on OSX as a matter of fact.

Your "arguments" aren't really valid, it's as though the last time you used Windows was back at version 3.11. Either that or you just enjoy spreading FUD in service to the mighty Steve Jobs. I'm getting so tired of people parroting arguments against Windows that haven't been valid for many, many years.

Re:I don't want a tablet that's a computer

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want all the bother of a computer. I already have that. For a tablet/slate, I just want to run a few apps/games and get online. I want it to be easy. I don't really want to mess with the file system. I don't want a browser that's vulnerable to malware. I don't want to have to mess with drivers. I don't want to have to manually drag and drop or copy my music or pictures from my computer to my tablet (or worse, dick around with file sharing over a network). I just want the damn thing to do apps, games and Internet without any fuss. I bet the iPad will do that and do it well. I just wish some of the competitors actually understood that concept.

Sounds like a certain someone works for Apple? Wow, that sounded just like the kind of spiel Steve Jobs might give us haha

Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

But why did you hope iPad would be what you wanted in the first place?

Something more than a larger over priced iTouch?

The Lenovo has a keyboard and the ports for connecting things like cameras.

Apple lost a sale. I'm going to Lenovo - much more value too.

Re:Here's why.

[Firehed]

FYI, the iPad supports a hardware keyboard and has an adapter for connecting cameras, etc. Not the same thing of course, but it does give the benefit of not requiring the space of a physical keyboard that you may only use 15% of the time.

Apple has more or less created a new category with the iPad; most of the people that are complaining about it seem to really want laptops with touchscreens. Which is fine - get one. But don't waste time complaining to Apple that their device that's not intended to do what you want doesn't do what you want. They won't listen.

Re:Here's why.

[Maniacal]

I don't want a laptop with a touchscreen. Well, maybe that would be cool. What I really want is a pad that is useful at work

There was an article recently about how Apple doesn't care about marketing to businesses. Business use is more of a collateral win. I'm sure it'll do quite well because of the folks to buy anything apple and because it's a cool consumer device.

The Leveno pad part of the U1 has some cool user stuff for media but I look at it as a great replacement for my laptop at work. I'm sick of dragging my laptop to meetings and would love to just grab the screen and go. If it can give me the ability to take notes with a stylus or something all the better. If I could connect it to the projectors in our conference rooms I'll do somersaults and it usually takes an act of congress to get me to attempt a somersault.

Re:Here's why.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

You want what's unlikely to succeed. Traditional desktop OSs don't work well on a decent sized touchscreen-only tablet. That is what most people want. Along with an OS that was specifically designed for the product. Anything that runs Windows 7 will either be a usability joke because of the hacked interface to fit a small screen and the lack of power to do basic things, or unpractical because it will be large enough to provide the full power of a laptop system including a large screen for a mediocre desktop experience (don't forget your stylus and to work on those arm muscles).

Re:Here's why.

[peragrin]

you do realize that the levono idea pad is going for $999 with 16 gig of flash instead of $499 for the 16gb version of the ipad?

Or are you just another moronic apple hater who refuses to do proper price comparisons of actually equal hardware specs?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/04/lenovo-ideapad-u1-hybrid-laptop-by-day-unhinged-tablet-by-nigh/

Just to prove my point. Apple fscked over every other tablet maker when they announced $499. they can't do it for that price point let alone with a custom tablet OS with a decent UI and various 3rd party software packages readily available.

Re:Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

Video camera is standard in iphone. There is simply no technical reason why a front facing camera in not included in their latest and much larger product.
Battery life is a pathetic 10 hours max. Again how friggin' large is the product? It *is* an itouch with a bigger screen, giving it 10x the internal volume. That 10x should have been used for power and ram.

New category? It's exactly an itouch with a larger screen. It does less than my iphone and/or macbook.

I *suppose* that's a new category. Just not a good one.

Re:Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple lost a sale. I'm going to Lenovo - much more value too.

Have fun with all that cool software you're going to find for the Lenovo Skylight UI. I'm sure there will be a huge ecosystem rivaling Apple's App Store for it in no time at all.

Re:Here's why.

[PopeRatzo]

you do realize that the levono idea pad is going for $999 with 16 gig of flash instead of $499 for the 16gb version of the ipad?

First of all, notice that the article says that the Ideapad they are reviewing has 128gb SSD. Don't try to compare an older model Ideapad with an Apple product that came out last week.

The Lenovo that's described in this article is actually a computer that runs the software that you choose instead of being a delivery system for Apple and their strategic partners.

One is a computer and the other is a digital picture frame with some fancy accessories.

And, any vendor in 2010 that sells a handheld or laptop device without a slot for an SD card is just saying "fuck off" to their customers. Apparently though, there is a portion of market that likes it when a company says "fuck off" to them, sort of like the people who line up for the Soup Nazi.

Re:Here's why.

[h4rr4r]

Except for Archos.

Or even the TouchBook.

That is ok though applefanboi, you can feel proud for your consumer choices. The things you own do truly make you unique, just like all the other little hipster douchebags who own them.

Re:Here's why.

[peragrin]

a 128 gig SSD is going for $300+ on newegg. Levono doesn't pay retail however adding $150- 200 to the device means it is going to be a lot more expensive.

I do agree with SD card point though. I am divided on the issue of Flash. i want it for flash games. however if apple keeps flash off of the device for two or three years it will give HTML 5 video a chance.

Re:Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Something more than a larger over priced iTouch?
> WTF is an "iTouch"???

Obviously a nickname for "iPod Touch." No, I don't get it either.

Re:Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently though, there is a portion of market that likes it when a company says "fuck off" to them, sort of like the people who line up for the Soup Nazi.

People lined up and took the Soup Nazi's abuse because it was the best soup they'd ever tasted.

I have my beefs with Apple, and with many of their strategies. However, I still buy their products because they make the best damn Unix workstations in the world.

Re:Here's why.

[PopeRatzo]

However, I still buy their products because they make the best damn Unix workstations in the world.

Computers stopped being Apple's core business a long time ago.

I think we can start counting down to the days when Apple stops making any devices, computers or otherwise, that will allow you to install your own software or create programs of your own without their permission.

They seem to be more and more wedded to this notion of "locked-down" devices, and I believe it's only a matter of time until that extends to their desktop and laptop products. Personal computing is just not a core business of Apple any longer.

How long since they've come out with a really new personal computing product that broke new ground?

How old is OSX now? The biggest thing Apple has done in personal computing hardware in the past decade has been to start using vanilla Intel processors instead of PPC. That's hardly revolutionary.

As a long-time owner and user of Apple computers, from the Apple II to the shiny macbook pro sitting on my desk and the mac pro sitting under it, the best I can hope for is that Apple spins off its personal computing division and lets them go in their own direction,without having to follow the dictates of what is becoming primarily a consumer electronics company whose main goal is to deliver protected content.

Re:Here's why.

[ColdWetDog]

Computers (Personal Computers) stopped being a core business of pretty much anybody these days. There is little money in it and not much innovation by anybody. Apple is clearly getting into the consumer electronic end of things - computing appliances if you will.

That's fine, there certainly appears to be a market for it. However, I don't see Apple dropping the MacBooks or the Mac Pro anytime soon. They do make money off them, they have largely recouped the R&D and marketing costs. They will continue doing what everyone does - improve processors, screens, batteries and other bits and pieces but I will hazard a bet that in 5 years, those computers look and act a whole bunch like the current models.

If Apple just kept to those machines, it would be a much weaker company.

Re:Here's why.

[blackpig]

"I'm sure there will be a huge ecosystem rivaling Apple's App Store for it in no time at all."

There is, its called the "Internet" The whole thing, not just the bits Steve lets you access.

Re:Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently though, there is a portion of market that likes it when a company says "fuck off" to them, sort of like the people who line up for the Soup Nazi.

You missed the point of the episode. It was really good soup.

Re:Here's why.

[bondiblueos9]

"I have no idea why this was marked Troll because is was spot on."

Re:Here's why.

[Silas is back]

There is, its called the "Internet" The whole thing, not just the bits Steve lets you access.

Yes, and it's all perfectly adapted to the UI of the IdeaPad, optimized to run on its hardware!

Re:Here's why.

[mdwh2]

It's nothing new at all (and especially as the vaporware hasn't even been released yet). Tablets exist. Most people don't care about them, preferring to either go for smaller phones, or more functional and cheaper netbooks. No one cares about the Istale either, except for the fact that it's Apple means that the media bow down and give them tonnes of free hype.

Re:Here's why.

[mdwh2]

The Ipad isn't going for anything right now, because it's not yet released - it's vaporware. If and when it is, we can compare prices to the available competition. Otherwise I might as well write how the new AmigaPad is going to be much better at only $399.

Though it would still be way more expensive than any netbook.

For the same price: iPad + MacBook Pro + 2 iPods

[gig]

Lenovo was talking $1999 for this, and there is no availability date.

For the same price you can get an iPad, a MacBook Pro, an iPod touch, and an iPod shuffle. Then you have a desktop OS, a tablet OS, a pocket tablet OS, and a microscopic music player. You have 3 screens. All 4 items work simultaneously. The Mac is carved out of a block of aluminum and feels like it. All you bookmarks and contacts and music and photos sync between all of the devices automatically. The 3 devices with browsers all run HTML5 apps, and the Mac also runs BSD, Java, Python, Perl, PHP, Ruby, as well as Mac apps. A single iPhone app purchase puts the app on both tablets. A $50 Mac app runs other Intel operating systems in a window at full speed and with 3D graphics.

Just because you are a nerd that doesn't mean you don't have actual work to do. The action is in the software, not some convertible geegaws.

PDF Viewer performance

[kmahan]

What I want to know is "how good is the pdf viewer"?

I'm interested in a pad that can rapidly display technical PDFs that are 1000+ pages long full of tables and drawings. i.e., hardware datasheets and schematics.

It needs to have decent searching and a fast page-to-page display capability.

Any idea if the IdeaPad or the iPad has demonstrated this ability?

Re:PDF Viewer performance

[greensoap]

Yes! I also want a stylus, shocking I know, so that I can hand-write annotations/comments in a PDF. Also, I want to be able to quickly bookmark a PDF while reading it. Why you ask? Because I am tired of printing out 30pg. pdfs just to mark them up with comments and stick tabs. I know I can do it on a screen with mouse and keyboard, but it is way faster with old fashion pen and post-its.

On a related question, does anyone have any experience using a wacom tablet display for this kind of purpose? I know that $1800 seems like overkill and a waste of an computer artist's dream device, but I am pretty sure that it might pay for itself with print costs and efficiency over the life of the device. If the iPad could do this, I think it would be a hit in the business world, though I did read an article claiming Apple doesn't about the business market so I have that going against my dream device...

Re:PDF Viewer performance

[masmullin]

I want a reflective screen option (eink-pixel qi) as I have to concentrate very hard when reading technical pdfs, and my eyes start to go buggy after 15min of LCD viewing.

Re:PDF Viewer performance

[jo_ham]

The Preview app in OS X itself is pretty speedy with PDFs - much better and faster that the official Adobe PDF reader for Mac. Preview is the best and fastest PDF viewer I have used in fact, but it is not perfect, especially with complex PDFs that have embedded things in like data entry fields and so on. It also sometimes has graphical glitches - but I have only ever seen this with PDFs created by InDesign CS, so it may be unique to the output from that particular app.

It uses Quartz in OS X for doing this, which is also used by the iPhone, so PDFs on there display exactly the same.

Your best bet would be to see how your PDFs, especially 1000+ page ones, behave in Preview - that is pretty much exactly what they will do on the iPad (but with a 1Ghz cpu). Take a USB stick down to an Apple store and have a go if you have one nearby (unless you already have a Mac).

I know I can take a huge PDF (200+ pages, so not as big as yours) and leaf through it very quickly with no screen lag in OS X in Preview. There is obviously going to be a performance hit on a 1Ghz cpu, but I can tell you the app itself is not cripplingly slow, sluggish or bloated like the Adobe PDF reader is.

Re:PDF Viewer performance

[vsound1]

I use hp tx 2500z, although i had to throw off their crappy softwares and install my own. It can do most of them, but its just that a little heavy for tablet. It all cost $750. (3gb, 250gb, amd turionx2, fingerprint, webcam, mic, 8cell btry, IR remote, card reader).

Re:PDF Viewer performance

[edmcw]

Given that I can do that already with my iPhone, I'm pretty sure the iPad can handle the job just fine. There's an excellent PDF reader for the iPhone called GoodReader, which handles huge documents effortlessly. At this point, I'd rather read PDFs on my iPhone than on the desktop.

Irrelevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

Availability of the U1 is unknown, so comparisons to the iPad aren't particularly fair or relevant. It seems quite likely Apple is taking a similar avenue for product development, too, while doing a better job of it--such as using capacitive touch, LED backlighting, a better battery, a proven touch UI, zillions of apps, and very possibly Mac OS X-based. I'm far less concerned about malware hidden in an Apple product, too, compared to a Lenovo product.

LOL! The Standard iPad Damage Control Meme

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPad is the laughing stock of the computer world.

It has become the poster child for joke overhyped products.

Most of the Apple Hipster Douchebag Starbucks iPhone crowd are distancing themselves from the stench of the epic iPad fail.

Apple is in full scale panic mode over Jobs "most important thing he's ever done" unveiling fiasco. Leaking various hints of hardware changes, getting the hardcore Apple friendly blogsphere to try to salvage the device, rumors of pre-launch price drops.

Yeah, keep parroting that silly meme that it is somehow a tiny group of "hard-core, tinker-happy nerds" who aren't going to buy a piece of shit product like the iPad.

Re:LOL! The Standard iPad Damage Control Meme

[N!NJA]

The iPad is the laughing stock of the computer world.
It has become the poster child for joke overhyped products.
Most of the Apple Hipster Douchebag Starbucks iPhone crowd are distancing themselves from the stench of the epic iPad fail.

agreed. the only tablet worth my money is the HP tm2t! that's a real computer, not an overpriced toy.

Re:LOL! The Standard iPad Damage Control Meme

[bemymonkey]

No trackpoint? Optimized for fingers-on-screen type usage? Meh, overpriced toy. ;)

I'm not exactly going to rush out and buy an iPad, but I'm sure that enough people will for Apple to call it a huge success... People without a netbook or smartphone just might be intrigued.

What *some* people wanted the iPad to be...

[kayak334]

I don't know about you, but a netbook that turns into a tablet is about the last thing I wanted the iPad to be. Do i want a more clumsy way of doing things I already (don't) do on a netbook? Not really. I want a paradigm shift in the way we use computers. The Lenovo device to me, looks like more of the same, with a worse way of doing it. The iPad looks like something we haven't really thought of on this scale. So, in conclusion, the iPad is what I wanted the iPad to be.

Re:What *some* people wanted the iPad to be...

[Totenglocke]

You wanted an blown up iPod Touch? I sure didn't - I wanted a computer (as did every other person, nerd and non-nerd alike, that I know of who's heard of the iPad). You love the iPad, I'm assuming that you'll get the dock for it? Well that's how you can look at this - the U1 tablet and then the netbook part of it is a dock that also gives you a full OS as well. I'd prefer a straight tablet, but this seems to be the best of both worlds (iPad and a real computer) with the added bonus of not having to deal with Apple's artificial limitations on what you can do with it / what you can run on it.

Re:What *some* people wanted the iPad to be...

[kayak334]

At the risk of sounding condescending and snobby...

I really think that people are not able to envision the future use of the iPad, which causes them to not like it. Right now in their brains it doesn't do what they want it to do, and they aren't sure what it even does.

I think, given some time, it will become more clear that it is a "game-changing" device for the future of computing.

I realize I'm in the super-minority here and sound like a fanboy (I actually gave away the only Mac i've ever purchased, to my sister, but I do have an iPhone). I also think that giving people "more of the same" is exactly what we don't need.

Again, I'm not saying anyone is "stupid" or something ridiculous like that, or that i'm some sort of visionary. I honestly just think it's a matter of the product getting into the hands of people before they actually like it.

Re:What *some* people wanted the iPad to be...

[Totenglocke]

The iPad WOULD be a game changer if Apple hadn't screwed up the software side of it. If Apple fixes the software (possibly in the 2.0 release with updated hardware too), then the iPad will be a great device. However, it's limited to doing the exact same things as an iPhone / iPod Touch because of Apple's choices with the OS and apps.

I own an iPhone 3GS and it's fantastic - however, a blown up version of it where the only improved functionality is a bigger screen for watching movies / reading books is NOT worth another $500-$830 (and that's not even including charges if you get 3G service for it).

I'm not trying to insult you, but I think you just haven't fully realized how horribly limited the iPad is on the software side. I was very excited about it before it came out, still pretty excited after I saw the announcement, and then got progressively less excited the more I found out about the details and the more I realized that it doesn't do a single thing that my iPhone doesn't already do.

Re:What *some* people wanted the iPad to be...

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. I just have assumed we are going to see the same evolution as we did with iPod and iPhone.

First releases are somewhat limited hardware and toned down (no apps on the first iPhone), subsequent releases build on the simplicity and add truly amazing technology.

Also, I think its important to realize that just because it runs all of the apps that an iPhone does, doesn't mean it has the same functionality. People are going to design apps for the iPad specifically, and those will bring with them increased functionality and use that the iPhone can't deliver.

Still not what I wanted

[TwiztidK]

This is still not what I wanted the iPad to be. I wanted a slate form-factor, laptop comparable specs, non-proprietary ports (USB), a stylus interface, and a slick, new OS. I got a big iPod Touch and a laptop that turns into a big iPod Touch; I don't think I'll buy either.

Watch the sleekness

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm going to show you how nice this is, just watch how seamlessly it flips on its... ...Well, just a second... ... Ok hang on... let me flip it manually... ...Oh wait, its not an iPad... ...Oh well, it looks nice sideways, doesn't it?... Check out my iPad killer!!!!!!"

Hate to nit-pick

[Anonymous Coward]

a netbook with a removable screen that turns it into a tablet

Technically, this should be a netbook with a removable keyboard. All of the guts are behind the screen if they keyboard detaches. If you take a standard netbook and remove the screen, you have either a useless lcd or a headless computer.

Not even close.

[SirWinston]

Dockable keyboard to switch from slate to laptop has been done long before, cf. the venerable Compaq TC1100, so that clearly isn't a killer feature (although I, and most long-term tablet enthusiasts, loved it and missed it when it was dropped from newer-gen Tablet PCs). Very nice, but no iPad killer, especially at the higher price.

The two OSes thing I also don't see as a killer feature. I realize the idea was probably, "Hey, an ARM CPU is needed to extend the battery life in slate mode, but anyone using a full-size laptop wants a full-size Windows 7--let's combine 'em for the best of both worlds!" Sorry Hannah fucking Montana, but you can't have the best of both worlds without getting the worst of both worlds, too, plus an even higher cost to include all that extra hardware. If I wanted a Win 7 machine, I'd want it to run the same Win 7 apps in slate mode too. If I wanted an ARM slate, I'd have made the decision to be satisfied with available apps and wouldn't want the OS changing every time I docked the keyboard. And if I really wanted the features of both, for the price (another article states "Lenovo said they're hoping to get the IdeaPad U1's price under $1000 for a May or June release") I could buy both an iPad and a full laptop, and have two fully functional devices each better suited to its purpose than one hybrid.

Sorry, there's still no mythical iPad killer. If this chimera were priced within $100 of the iPad it might be a contender, but not a sure thing. At somewhere just south of $1000 it's not even an also-ran compared with the iPad, it's a never-ran.

Re:Not even close.

[Totenglocke]

Sorry, there's still no mythical iPad killer.

True, but that's not a failure on the part of other devices. It's a failure on Apple's part to make the iPad something everyone WANTS to buy. This is the first fumble I've seen out of Apple in a long time - hopefully they'll fix it in a year when the iPad 2.0 goes on sale.

Re:Not even close.

[EvanED]

Dockable keyboard to switch from slate to laptop has been done long before, cf. the venerable Compaq TC1100...

I have a convertible tablet (and love it), and clearly you didn't look at the article very carefully. This isn't a convertible tablet per se, but rather is a notebook with a removable screen. Thus when using it in slate mode you get something that looks around the iPad's form factor, rather than the full thickness of a tablet.

Re:Not even close.

[SirWinston]

I'm NOT talking about a convertible swivel-tablet. The TC1100 and some other early Tablet PCs were fully slate form factor models, with a detachable keyboard as an option. When attached, it was just like a laptop; when detached, it was a slate. They were slightly thicker than the Lenovo of course, but that has less to do with using an x86 processor in the slate section instead of ARM, than with the technology of 5+ years ago. You could easily stick a ULV Core 2 in a slate today and get a form factor identical to the Lenovo or iPad, with the battery life being the only casualty. Is circa 10 hours battery life instead of 5 or so worth the inconvenience of changing OSes in the middle of use and so much added expense that I could've bought an iPad AND a laptop? Not many people will think so.

If it were within $100 of the iPad, the Lenovo would be a cool alternative for techies--but still an alternative, not "the real thing" most end users will want. At an estimated $999, it's an expensive miss. Again, for that much I could have a decent laptop and an iPad, or an iPad and a touchscreen netbook, or an iPad a desktop and a netbook, or an iPad an eReader and a netbook, or an iPad a 32" flatscreen and a desktop, or...you get the point. iPad's pricing is a game-changer here.

Re:Not even close.

[EvanED]

The TC1100 and some other early Tablet PCs were fully slate form factor models, with a detachable keyboard as an option. When attached, it was just like a laptop; when detached, it was a slate

Oh, my mistake. I took a scan over this site to see what the TC1100 was, and (a little ironically given how I phrased my first post) I didn't look closely enough at the site to see that the keyboard could actually be removed and not just folded back (like it looks like in the second photo). My apologies.

Lenovo's Skylight UI

[damn_registrars]

So apparently even though IBM couldn't keep up development on an operating system, Lenovo decided to give it a go anyways. It will be interesting to see how this pans out for the company that bought IBM's personal computer division...

Re:Lenovo's Skylight UI

[the linux geek]

IBM owns and develops several operating systems (i, AIX, z/OS, z/VM, z/TPF). I'm not really sure what you're referring to.

Re:Lenovo's Skylight UI

[Reason58]

IBM owns and develops several operating systems (i, AIX, z/OS, z/VM, z/TPF). I'm not really sure what you're referring to.

OS/2

Re:Lenovo's Skylight UI

[damn_registrars]

To be more verbose I should have specified "operating system for personal computers"; where they have two notable retractions OS/2, and the lesser-acknowledged PC-DOS. While you mentioned several significant operating systems that indeed IBM does still develop, they are almost entirely irrelevant to the operation of a personal computer.

Wow! Two Operating Systems to Maintain!

[SuperKendall]

The U1 seems like a cool idea. But two operating systems to maintain, with all of the loss of application fidelity that entails?

Count me out. And what is really the difference when I can just also carry a bluetooth keyboard with an iPad. What if someone makes an iPad case with bluetooth keyboard built in? Then how is the U1 really superior?

Screen is a rather crucial part

[Pretbek]

FTFA:
"Unfortunately, the screen itself was pretty abysmal".

I dunno, but that would ruin the entire device for me, no matter what clever functionality or packaging it harbors. The screen is such an important part, because it is in your face all the time.

Touchscreen looks bad/choppy

[kuzb]

Watch the videos where he's trying to do navigation. It seems like this is exactly what Apple doesn't want - lag and unreposonsiveness.

Cute; but...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

It is always nice to see one of the PC OEMs take a break from shoving intel reference designs into ugly boxes at lowest possible cost(don't get me wrong, this is their highest virtue, is what has made computers accessible to so much of the world, and is certainly what I prefer to buy; but it really isn't very interesting to watch) and go out on a limb a bit.

That said, the concept doesn't really "click" with me. First, there is just the fact that complexity without very good reason is the enemy. If you hold price constant, increased complexity will tank your quality. If you hold quality constant, increased complexity will spike your price. The U1, compared to an ordinary netbook, has the disadvantage of two batteries(one primary, one embedded in the screen/tablet thing), two system boards(ditto, though the tablet one should be a lot smaller), and a potentially unreliable combination mechanical/electrical connector right at the hinge(when docked, the tablet unit will need to receive power, video, and data from the primary unit). This connector/hinge will have to survive numerous matings and unmatings and openings and closings without getting flaky or frustrating. If it rattles, or has to be docked two or three times to get it to go back into notebook mode, or has to be docked just right or whatever, that will be hugely annoying. I'm not saying that this will be impossible to get right, just that it will either drive up cost substantially, or not be done in a way that will still be endurable six months after purchase.

Second, and ultimately much trickier, is the question of the relationship between the main unit and the tablet unit. TFA, and other articles, suggest that Lenovo has made an attempt to have some useful interaction between the two. If you are browsing a webpage on the main when you tear the tablet off, the page will be loaded in the tablet's browser, that sort of thing. I'd assume the same would go for a few common document types. That worries me. It is exactly the sort of thing that would work perfectly in sci-fi world, where people are constantly passing wireless screens from person to person, and human computers can interact with alien spaceships, and whatnot. Real world, though, it is going to get ugly. The main unit is running Windows 7. The tablet is running on an ARM core, so it is almost certainly running CE or Linux. This means that, for a subset of all common tasks, tearing off the tablet will provide almost seamless continuity, with the right wedge of helper software and a bit of luck. Open a PDF, peel off the tablet, read happily, hurray! However, the set of document types and system activities that are equally supported between full windows and linux or WinCE is far smaller than the total set of document types and system activities. Worse, the set has ragged edges.

Consider, you open a PDF, tear off the tablet, read happily. It all works perfectly. Then, one day, it fails with some cryptic error. Whoops. That PDF had one of the newer PDF DRM schemes, and Adobe supports Reader on Windows more aggressively than whatever Lenovo has baked into the tablet. There goes your happy workflow. And, unless you are at least a little techy, and paying attention, you won't even understand why one thing worked and another didn't. Similar things can be imagined with regard to web pages, or word documents. Simply opening whatever URL was open in the foreground session of IE in the browser of the tablet should be trivial enough. Keeping cookies in sync might even be doable. However, there is surely a subset of sites that will absolutely freak out and refuse to provide anything resembling a continuous session when a user suddenly disappears from IE8 on Win7 and reappears on a completely different browser(and quite possibly IP, unless some funky network stack trickery is going on). Most likely, you'll just be kicked back to the login screen, and have to log in again using the tablet touch-keyboard, which will really break your flow. I'm sure some sites will work just fine, a

Re:Cute; but...

[Pyrus.mg]

So basically what your saying is that the iPad-killer is a flying car?

Obligitory Plug

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/home/index.htm detachable touchscreen, 10 hr battery life, extensible as all hell, and all for $400...

Re:Obligitory Plug

[nurd68]

Yeah, I've been wanting one of these for awhile.

You can do most of that...

[SuperKendall]

What the heck it is for? You cannot put even USB stick into it!

But you can put an SD reader into it... perhaps you can write to it too (not sure on that point).

You cannot run any "office" software,

Pages/Numbers run on it... they read MS word/excel files.

no IDE

Now that's an interesting statement because it is wrong in two ways.

One, you are stating "no IDE exists for the Ipad" - there is an IDE - just not one running on the device.
Two, you are stating "You cannot run an IDE on the iPad". Why not? That is just software. Furthermore, you forget it's an inherently networked device that can if it wishes send files off to be compiled (if you cannot compile them on the device). Or you can even VNC back to your home system, or a combination of the two things.

not even Web with flash

You mean "Web with flashblock included". Yes thanks!
Did you need flash for video? Most sites with flash players just feed the iPhone/iPad h.264 video directly. And of course you were not being so silly as to claim you needed flash games instead of native ones.

well you can read a pdf

Don't knock it until you try it...

There has to be a reason, for most people, to buy it, right? What it is? Price - no

Whats amusing to me is that just before launch most people were predicting a 1k launch and were only going to buy it if it cost "half as much".

So, price - Yes.

Battery life - no

Holy Mackerel! It lasts 10 hours playing h.264 video! Do you also claim other netbooks are lame because they sport far more woeful battery figures?

Connectivity - haha

I can only assume you laugh with delight at the prospect of FINALLY being able to pay a reasonable price for a data plan with no commitment?

Usablity - not even a test editor!

DOES NOT COMPUTE

Multitasking ... everyone remembers Microsoft idea of limiting this to three - can Apple pull out with one?

What you, and the rest of the people who can't get past this point forget is that to the user changes of applications without changing application state are equivalent to unlimited multitasking.

When an application starts up in under a second exactly where a user last left it, that application is multitasking as far as the user is concerned. Background processing? You see, we have these things called "servers" these days...

I admit, I'm nerd the worst kind

A true nerd would not be so woefully ignorant or unimaginative.

Re:You can do most of that...

[Joe Tie.]

Most sites with flash players just feed the iPhone/iPad h.264 video directly.

Eh? I've seen that on youtube and dailymotion. In something like two years of using the iphone, those are the only ones I've ever seen that happening with. Some, possibly. But nowhere even close to "most".

Re:You can do most of that...

[llamafirst]

What you, and the rest of the people who can't get past this point forget is that to the user changes of applications without changing application state are equivalent to unlimited multitasking. Background processing? You see, we have these things called "servers" these days...

Surely you must know there are many cases this just doesn't work for. I'd love to be able to use Pandora and NewNewsWire more effectively on iPhone.

On Mac OS X desktop:
# Launch the Pandora app/service.
# switch to Mail app on my Mac to read mail for a long time
# I hear music!

On iPhone:
# Launch the Pandora app/service.
# switch to Mail on my iPhone.
# No music! (Pandora was forced closed)

"having these things called servers" doesn't fix this.

And although I love NetNewsWire on Mac, it's poorly performant on iPhone because it can't do it's "catching up on the news feeds and fetching articles and pictures" in the background like it does on my mac.

Re:You can do most of that...

[icebraining]

I never really got that limitation - why would they stop you from multitasking? I mean, I can have a music player and the GMail applications running in the background in my E65 while I play a game or surf the web, with a much slower CPU.

It is designed for a stylus

[SuperKendall]

Frankly, I'd love to see something designed for a stylus that also can take a few gestures usable for the hand holding that stylus.

Welcome to iPad.

You can use a stylus with the iPhone today.

And with touch point recognition you can also do gesture recognition in any app.

It's just that you also have an option to only use you finger too... which is more direct, more natural, and you won't lose your finger (unless possibly you work in a meat processing plant. But then you have the key to a replacement right there).

Re:It is designed for a stylus

[Enderandrew]

The iPad can't recognize hand gestures without a camera.

The iPhone at $99 has a camera. The iPad at $499 (and up!) does not. Penny cell phones are coming with cameras built in. Apple did certainly miss the boat there.

Re:It is designed for a stylus

[EvanED]

It's just that you also have an option to only use you finger too... which is more direct, more natural...

It's more natural for some things, but I dare you to take it to class, open up a note taking program, and take notes on the iPad then come back to me and say that's more natural than using a stylus.

Re:It is designed for a stylus

[SuperKendall]

The iPad can't recognize hand gestures without a camera.

Yes it can, if your hand is touching the screen.

Which is good since camera-based hand gestures as a practical control mechanism don't really work very well is real life, especially on small devices (they are OK in games but even then pretty limited).

You can far more easily recognize touch gestures, especially more complex gestures than you could with a camera and it requires far less CPU to do so.

Re:Wow! Two Operating Systems to Maintain!

[Reason58]

The U1 seems like a cool idea. But two operating systems to maintain, with all of the loss of application fidelity that entails?

Count me out. And what is really the difference when I can just also carry a bluetooth keyboard with an iPad. What if someone makes an iPad case with bluetooth keyboard built in? Then how is the U1 really superior?

Even better, someone should attach the keyboard directly to the iPad. You could also have it fold up to protect the screen when it is not in use. And if you have a keyboard on it then it wouldn't be much more space to add some kind of mouse capability. Maybe like a touch pad of some sort. I think we may be on to something huge. Game changer.

Fujitsu

[EkriirkE]

Fujitsu's Stylistic series has been around forever and is/does what the iPad is/does plus a plethora more.

Nothing novel or revolutionary has happened here, move along...

$1,000 and overcomplicated?

[Croakus]

Sorry, but I did not want the iPad to be overcomplicated and overpriced. The U1 looks like it'll break first week. And good luck getting it fixed. It's not like Lenovo has stores just down the road where I can take their proprietary machines. I'd take an iPad in a heartbeat over this.

LOL! The standard Apple Hater Pattern

[SuperKendall]

1) Hate on new Apple product.
2) Apple product sells incredibly well, crowds out rest of market
3) Look like idiot for not realizing what would make Apple product a success.

I can see you post AC, in an attempt to avoid step 3... but you know. You will always know how stupid you are being now, just as you were stupid for all of the other Apple successes you similarly decried as being so pointless and "Full of Fail"

Perhaps when you keep claiming devices are full of "Fail" when they are not, the true source of failure originates elsewhere...

I already have my idea pad/ipad

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I just picked up an Asus 1201N which is bascially a netbook on steroids. It's not a normal netbook it can do full 1080P video and play 3D games like WOW becuase it is a dual core Atom and has Nvidia ION graphics. Personally I think it is a much better device than the iPad. You can do all of the same things with it that you can do with the iPad and much more for $480.You can watch videos (including flash videos for free on hulu) read books from the Kindle store or wherever else you can buy ebooks with a PC. You can play free flash games online. It has a built in physical keyboard the 12 inch screen is plenty for surfing the web you can use whatever browser you want Chrome Safari, Firefox. You can run linux on it. You can play lots of older 3D games for example HL2 plays really well. You can stick the SDHC card in from your camera while on a trip and DL your pics for storage and viewing in Picasa. It's light weight low power and energy effecient. It has regular old USB ports so you can plug stuff in you already have. You can program on it I use eclipse on mine all the time. You can do 3d modeling with Blender or knock out an illustration in Inkscape or use all sorts of great open source and free software on it. You can use many thousands of great commercial Windows apps including Microsoft Office I even do some light music production on mine in EnergyXT. I know no Apple fanboys will be convinced but I really think it is superior to the limited, proprietary, and locked down iPad. Only drawback I see is the battery life but of course since it's removable you can just cary two. I love mine and feel no need to get an iPad or this Idea Pad either which is cool but I am betting is going to be close to 1k price wise. Here are the specs

dual core 1.6 ghz atom
Nvidia 9400M/ION graphics will play full 1080P video and World of Warcraft
2 GB ram
250 GB HD
12.1 inch led backlit display
HDMI and VGA out
3 USB ports
1 SD slot
Audio in and out
~5 hours of battery life more like 4.5 in real world
Webcam
wireless b/g/n

Re:I dont think any really cares about other table

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the benefit over a $300 netbook again? You can't get confused when you accidentally open an application other than the browser?

Tinkerer's Sunset

[npsimons]

People keep talking as if Apple really missed the boat with iPad, but the truth is they only missed the boat for hard-core, tinker-happy nerds...and they've made a very specific point of missing that boat for at least the last decade. They're marketing to fanboys who want it to be trendy and 'just work', not to nerds.

Too true. Obligatory links:

If wishes were iPhones
Tinkerer's Sunset

The above posts are from the same guy who wrote Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain this to you, a brilliant little piece that really explains the philosophy behind Free software (oblig. quote: "Free software doesn't have "end users". That's kind of the point.")

iPad: No docking. Less flexibility than an IdeaPad

[nick357]

Lame...

Not full, half

[SuperKendall]

Well then I'm sure you're thrilled to get a tablet with multitouch, a full hardware keyboard, and a full operating system,

Existing tablets don't have full operating systems. They have operating systems mutilated to work via touch.

If gimped devices and OS's float your boat, by all means go ahead and try to make it work for you. I intend to buy the device built from scratch to be a tablet, not something that pretends a stylus is a mouse.

Re:Not full, half

[cynyr]

just to let you know the iPad is running darwin, you know the OS behind MacOSX, and if i remeber rightly the same windowing toolkit as OSX.

Applications !

[Macka]

Gartner's reported recently that 99.4% of all mobile applications sold in 2009 were for the iPhone. As we all know the iPad will run all of these. Now I know that a good number of the iPhone apps available today are a bit mediocre, but there are a lot that aren't. And the iPad Keynote already demonstrated how developers are taking these apps to the next level on the iPad by making good use of the extra cpu/gpu power, the larger viewable area and a larger touch interface for improved hands on manipulation of application elements (especially games).

It's applications that sell hardware and operating systems and attract a sizeable user base. The iPad won't be an overnight success - give it several months to a year to get going. Next christmas they'll be flying off the shelves like got cakes.

Smart Dock is Smart Idea

[buckhead_buddy]

Not saying this is good or bad, unlike the iPad, It looks like two separate computers. The touch screen looks like the weakest part of the implementation, but I like this idea for a smart tablet dock. Your dock has the facility to backup your tablet's data; that seems much simpler than syncing through iTunes.

But in the video the netbook / keyboard base still maintains power when the screen is undocked; I'd think it'd quickly go to sleep instead.

How the base will react if someone else docks their tablet into the wrong base. Will it die? Will it enter a locked security state? Will it switch over to host the new tablet's data without problem?

The quick reloading of the web page is neat, but it is not the same page with local mods. The Flash banner ad at the top of the page doesn't load. And if you were on Slashdot entering your comment when you undocked, you'd lose all the words in your well-constr

No way!

[countertrolling]

A touchpad? No trackpoint?? Forget it!

HP tm2t

[N!NJA]

more affordable?! from Lenovo?! you're are kidding, right? HP has been making Tablets for years and, unlike Lenovo's, they have been truly affordable. compare the tablets below. both are current and have similar specs.

- Lenovo Thinkpad X200 Tablet ($1,500).
- HP tm2t ($950).

and HP is cooking up another Tablet to be released this summer. this new one will be a slate (ie, no physical keyboard). it was briefly showed by Ballmer during the last CES. no doubt the iPad will sell like hotcakes. Apple's hype can sell fridges to Eskimos! however, if there's a company with any chance of competing with Apple on this category, this company is HP! period!

i'm glad Apple got into this market. competition is great. it will lead to cheaper tablets from all manufacturers.

For The Love Of God Apple Hipster

[Anonymous Coward]

For the love of God, please tell us you promise to post your very own iPad 'unboxing' vid right here on Slashdot so the entire community can laugh our asses off at your retarded ass clutching this joke of a device.

Come on...promise us!

Home automation

[CompressedAir]

I know it isn't a huge market, but the iPad is huge news in the home automation touchscreen market. Official solutions sell for over $1k, and you'd be hard pressed to make your own (ebay'd touchscreen, plus a fanless computer mounted in the wall) for less than the cheapest iPad.

Make a wall cradle for it with speakers, and you have control, audio, pictures (for when not in use), not to mention if you can make it show you a weather report in the morning or something.

Indigo Touch is impressive enough that I had long planned to buy iPod touches and wall-mount them, the iPad just makes that idea even better.

OB Rick Mercer

[Anonymous Coward]

Rick Mercer presents, the iSlab.

Got a message for you

[SuperKendall]

Apple is not getting off your damn lawn. Sorry.

Look out Apple, the Android Tablets are comming

[EEPROMS]

I have seen a few Android based tablets on the web the MSI tablet being one of the better ones. The first thing you notice is they generally all have a webcam and USB and SD card slots both missing on the iPAD (cough iTunes lockin anyone). The reason I think Android is the real competitor in the tablet market is the OS was designed as a touch screen OS and has an app-store presence without the intentional lockin. Also the price mentioned for Android tablets are lower (same cpu/hardware basically as the iPAD but more connectivity, WTF apple) so I can only see the most style centric and shallow consumers wanting one.

How about many more applications, not just known

[SuperKendall]

Their advantage will be the price, but Apple has the advantage of their OS and well known applications.

The problem that the U1 has is that it's either just a Windows notebook, or a Touch Device that is currently even more closed down than the iPad (where's the Skylight OS API?), and even when they do open that up (or if you can develop for it already in a way I missed) you have only a handful of applications that are built to work specifically around touch input.

Meanwhile, the iPad has almost 150k applications (certainly that many by the time the iPad releases), many of which will see updates to take advantage of the larger screen real-estate of the iPad. And far more applications that would actually work well with the documents you would in all likelihood be producing on the U1!

What makes you so sure it will be locked down?

[mosb1000]

Speaking of that, has anyone actually confirmed that the iPad will need to be jail-broken to run apps that aren't from the app store? You know, the reason iPhones need to be jail broken is because they are tied to ATTs network and ATT doesn't want to be bogged down trying to support people who messed up their phones by installing bad software on them. Is there actually any good reason to believe this may be the case for iPad? Apple doesn't lock down their desktop computers.

Always Innovating

[xav_jones]

Always Innovating has something very similar shipping already. ARM-based with 10 hours of battery life when you include the keyboard section -- plus it's open source.

Re:Always Innovating

[jDeepbeep]

Always Innovating has something very similar shipping already. ARM-based with 10 hours of battery life when you include the keyboard section -- plus it's open source.

Interesting. Thank you.

Pretty sure that would work.

[SuperKendall]

The PDF viewer for OS X / iPhone is pretty heavily optimized, and I'm pretty sure is memory mapping the files to read in pages. Have you tried said document on a Touch or iPhone? That would tell you much I think...

wanted?

[jDeepbeep]

it offers what many of us wanted from the iPad
--snip--
running Windows 7 Home Premium.

I couldn't make it further than this.

Re:wanted?

[Enderandrew]

I run Windows 7 at home on a dual-boot box. I don't mind it.

That being said, you can solve that problem with an openSUSE install DVD in a matter of minutes.

Re:wanted?

[alfredo]

Windows? No way. It has to run a Nix of some type to make me interested.

Dongle argument is without thought

[SuperKendall]

Connectivity - yes, you can get USB or SD! (provided that you want to purchase and carry extra dongles

Oh, it's SO AWFUL to have to carry a dongle around. Except that you could simply attach that USB dongle to the end of the USB CABLE you also have to carry...

The SD dongle argument makes a little more sense, but it's one tiny adaptor you keep with your camera charger which again, you have to remember to carry already...

The dongle argument somehow glosses over the sets of things we already must carry when using any devices that would use the dongles, as if those had no space or weight to them.

Re:Dongle argument is without thought

[marsu_k]

Actually, yes, it is so awful. In my opinion, which I think I'm entitled to. Apart from external hard drives (the kind with external power supplies), printers and other peripherals that are not meant to be portable, I mostly use USB with my trustworthy and tiny memory stick. It's attached to my keychain and conveniently available when I need it. Needing that extra dongle (or worse, having it attached to the stick) would be very inconvenient.

But if reading /. has taught me anything, arguing with you about anything Apple does is a pointless exercise in futility.

Re:Dongle argument is without thought

[SuperKendall]

printers and other peripherals that are not meant to be portable

Then why not send them information over the network instead of via USB stick? Or treat the SD dongle as a USB stick, my normal USB stick is not a "stick" at all, but an SD card plugged into a compact lexar reader pretty much all the time. About the size of any USB stick but more flexible.

But if reading /. has taught me anything, arguing with you about anything Apple does is a pointless exercise in futility.

If it's any consolation, I find the inability for other people to see there are valid alternate means of completing a task to be equally frustrating.

Re:Dongle argument is without thought

[gad_zuki!]

>Oh, it's SO AWFUL to have to carry a dongle around.

It absolutely is, especially for a portable device. Everything I own that uses a dongle quickly becomes useless. This dongle isnt going to be something you can easily replace either. It wont be at the kmart at 2am when you need one. Oh, but it'll be at the Apple or AT&T store for $19.95.

The purpose of standardized protocols like USB is so we can plug shit into other shit. Apple's anti-standard anti-user attitude will be their undoing. Theyre making MS look like a hippie commune.

Re:Dongle argument is without thought

[gad_zuki!]

>Then why not send them information over the network instead of via USB stick?

Why not admit that Apple isnt perfect?. Seriously, you're all excuses. You're like a parody of a fanboy. How embarrassing for you.

Re:Dongle argument is without thought

[Anonymous Coward]

My workplace standardized on new Dell E6400 laptops.

For someone who interacts with networking and voice equipment, not having a serial port built into the laptop is a fucking crime. And no, I don't always have the dongle with me.

Case in point: Brought some test switches into the room, oh no can't connect to my laptop without walking to my desk, grabbing the dongle out of my bag and walking back to the room.

With the older Dells, you just plugged in the cable.....

AppleTV

[mosb1000]

Ever heard of the AppleTV?

Realist, not Hipster

[SuperKendall]

For the love of God, please tell us you promise to post your very own iPad 'unboxing' vid

Why? I find them idiotic.

I use devices that work well. There's nothing "hipster" about using a device for practical reasons. The Apple Hater in you is so blind, you can never see the sheer utility of the products.

I'll let you have the last word because Apple Haters speak will speak endless on the imaginary flaws in Apple Devices and the people that use them. But again, when the iPad succeeds you'll have to live with your own failure... I am pretty convinced this is the root of the Apple Hater, the constant knowledge of how wrong they are, and the inability to understand why they were not right THIS TIME... failure after failure must be very wearying on the soul I would think. Of course, I would not know...

Re:Realist, not Hipster

[walshy007]

I use devices that work well. There's nothing "hipster" about using a device for practical reasons

There is when there are better devices out there for cheaper that do more and more efficiently. Don't get me wrong, apple do what they do well, marketing, shiny cases, and extremely controlled (limited) experiences.

I'm guessing that most people who dislike apple just hate the crazy amount of marketing anything apple gets, I loved apple when the apple II was their main product, ever since the control freak steve jobs took over though, the company lost something, flexibility.

Convertible tablets

[gmuslera]

This IdeaPad U1 is nice, but you have a basically different computer when you have the keyboard than when not. A better approach are convertible tablets, like i.e. from the same manufacturer IdeaPad s10-3t, you can turn the capacitive touchscreen to make it look like a tablet, is the same OS in both cases, 10 hours of battery, and a reasonable price. Is definately bulkier than the iPad, but have several advantages over it.

Re:Convertible tablets

[Enderandrew]

Most people here seem to insist you need a new OS and new UI for the tablet, but I expect most users will want to take their Windows apps with them in the tablet mode.

Windows 7 added multi-touch gestures for precisely this reason.

I'm pretty sure we all noticed it

[Kalewa]

The reason I'm not paying any attention to the U1 is because apparently Lenovo doesn't want me to. Around CES there was a bunch of buzz about it, but then Lenovo completely let it drop off the radar. No pricing, no release data, no live demo units at CES. It's like they were trying to kill it. Bummer too, because it's not a bad concept. I can only assume they had some kind of massive hardware or software problems, and decided to keep it under wraps a little while longer.

Re:I'm pretty sure we all noticed it

[rsmith-mac]

There was a live demo unit, it just wasn't on the floor. It was in their cubicle suite down in South Hall.

What you want to do

[Anonymous Coward]

You can see the different points of views, with tablets/netbooks like this one, the manufacturers basicaly tell you "Here is the hardware, do what you want with it, surprise us"

On the other side Apple tells us "Here is the hardware, do what I tell you what to do with it, nothing more"

I think I'll go with the first one, I mean you may be able to put any distro of linux on the tablet side, and maybe a hackintosh in there.

What about the "Touch Book" by Always Innovating?

[walterbyrd]

It runs Linux. I think it's been shipping since last summer.

http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/

Tinkerers Sunrise

[SuperKendall]

Times have honestly never been better for hackers and those wanting to experiment with stuff.

Sure some devices are locked down and some laws are silly. But the silly laws are slowly dissipating or becoming irrelevant - it's illegal to break DRM on digital music but now you don't have to (and that is thanks to Apple).

The world of hackable devices has never been vaster. People are hacking video game consoles, the Touch, the iPhone, Android devices, etc. etc. What has confused people is these hacked devices don't always work well with manufacturer services like updates or network (like hacked XBoxes and Live) - but if you care about that, then you were NEVER a tinkerer! A true tinkerer doesn't care what you can or cannot do with manufacturer updates after they start getting into things.

People were all worried about the same issues when cars started getting computers in them. "Oh", they said, "We'll not be able to fix our own cars". Well now you can use diagnostic software on an iPhone and install custom ECU's for power management if you like. People work on cars just like they used to.

Tinkering always faces transition points and this is one of them, for computers. But it doesn't mean Tinkerers will ever vanish, it just means the tools they use operate at a higher level and are more sophisticated. Just like the rest of mankind, tinkerers also rise with the increasing tide of technology...

And Tinkerers are the ones that really move us forward.

active digitizer

[TheTick21]

If the ipad had an active digitizer I would be interested. All I want is a freaking cheap slate to take notes on. I HAVE several laptops (and a tablet), but if I could just have ONE powerful laptop and one small slate I would be much happier. As it is I still have no idea what the ipad would actually be good for.

Re:I dont think any really cares about other table

[jwietelmann]

It doesn't really matter. People who love the iPad argue that it's a consumer-oriented appliance and that their parents will love the simplicity (and they're right). People who hate it argue that it does even less than a netbook (and they're right).

There may not be enough Apple fans and their parents to make this product super-successful, but I don't think that's the point. With the iPad, Apple got book publishers into iTunes and print periodicals into the app store. Even if the device itself fails, they've won, as they will inevitably find other ways to profit from their new content partners.

We do, you don't

[SuperKendall]

Good for you. I don't.

I just wish some of the Apple fans on this website understood that concept.

All of us do. All of us, always have. Who among us has ever said that all other tablets SHOULD die? That all other computers will vanish?

There is no lack of understanding that these other devices are right for some people. But what I *do* see, is plenty of people essentially demanding the iPad fail and that there is not a single person who could possibly want one.

If all the Apple Haters did was say "can't see using the device personally but it might work for someone" that would certainly be a sounder position than most espouse, and even possible lead to more rational discussion than flamewar. But when people like you state categorically that the only people to buy an iPad have more money than sense, don't be surprised when you are in fact smacked upside the head with a load of common sense.

Re:We do, you don't

[Draek]

There is no lack of understanding that these other devices are right for some people.

Really? then why do so many of you ask from Apple's competitors to mimick their design philosophies? why do so many of you belittle those who dare not to follow in Jobs' opinion on what computing should be like?

Bullshit. There is very much a lack of understanding that for some intelligent, mature and decent people a non-Apple product may be the right choice over an Apple one. Want an example? read the post I replied to.

You may want to wait on that...

[SuperKendall]

True, but that's not a failure on the part of other devices. It's a failure on Apple's part to make the iPad something everyone WANTS to buy.

Someplace in Australia was taking pre-orders. They closed off the list because the demand was too high...

I seriously think anyone who thinks it is not desirable as is, should probably clam up until the device ships and we know for sure. Otherwise I predict a lot of people are going to be tasting shoe leather for an awfully long time.

Re:You may want to wait on that...

[Totenglocke]

Just because people buy it because "OMFG! It's from APPLE!!!", doesn't mean that they will LIKE it. I think it will sell a lot (at least at first, and mostly to fanboys and the uninformed masses), but I think most of them will quickly lose interest in it due to it's lack of advancement over an iPhone / iPod Touch which you can carry with you everywhere you go.

The iPad has amazing potential, it's just that Steve Jobs needs to realize that locking down a phone (which is understandable because you want the phone part to be reliable) is very different from locking down a computer (which an iPad IS a computer, it's just that the software prevents you from using it as more than a media device). If Apple lightens the frack up and allows handwriting (for all apps) and say an iPad only non-certified app store where Apple just checks to make sure the programs aren't malicious, then I see the iPad being an amazing device. Hopefully Apple does some major reworking of the software side in the next year.

A few notes on the U1

[timothy]

I played w/ the same device briefly at CES, was also impressed by it in general.

- Yep, the screen (on the pre-production unit) was pretty bad. It was fine when perfectly on-axis, but not so bright that I'd necessarily see it doing well in some of the environments for which tablets have been touted in the past (doctors' rounds, etc.)

- The latching / locking mechanism broke while I was watching a sales rep demo how easily it locks back into place; hopefully, they pay a lot of attention to this "moving parts" aspect, because the convertability is great, but it would suck to spend a thousand bucks and then get to keep both pieces ;)

- the switching ability (presto change-o, you're using Linux! And alakazam, you're back to Windows!) was impressive, but left me wondering: what if I wanted to run Ubuntu (say) on the x86 processor, and keep Skylight on the tablet part? I couldn't get other than a vague (but discouraging) answer from the mostly well-informed people in the demo booth; I think the fellow I was talking to mostly was an engineer, but wasn't directly involved in the OS integration part. To me, it would be no great tragedy if it became mostly a 2-computer-1-case solution (that is, with no special integration between the pieces, except for sharing the display), but it was quite cool to see browser windows in one OS automagically opened in the other when the tablet was removed or replaced. Not sure if that was true w/ things like PDFs, word processing docs, etc. (I wonder if Word and OpenOffice could be coaxed into that same sort of hand-off.)

timothy

Ha Ha

[SuperKendall]

Even better, someone should attach the keyboard directly to the iPad

The thing you are missing is that a real tablet is one where the keyboard is always possible to be an afterthought, not a necessity.

That is the game changer.

Even though I talked about ways to add a keyboard for those who think they cannot do without, I don't ever intend to use one with an iPad for the uses I have planned...

The last time I saw this much negative commentary

[nessus42]

The last time I saw this much negative commentary for an Apple product it was for the iPod mini. The majority of people on Slashdot claimed no one would want a music player that cost just as much and held fewer songs.

By this metric, the iPad will be a rousing success.

|>ouglas

I agree

[Anonymous Coward]

No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

That is the competitor, but there are real issues

[SuperKendall]

The reason I think Android is the real competitor in the tablet market is the OS was designed as a touch screen OS and has an app-store presence without the intentional lockin.

Those are excellent points. I totally agree that a real tablet is one where the software is focused from the ground up at being used on a touchscreen, not software that basically still thinks there is a mouse...

However, Android as a tablet computer has two problems:

1) Software gap. The actual number of software on Android is of course growing, but the gap between that and iPod software is not really shrinking, I'm pretty sure it's still expanding, and I think the growth of that gap is also expanding.

2) (worst problem). Look at that MSI picture. Notice anything? Like the buttons on the top right? This is the real downfall of Android on tablets, the need for physical buttons are OK on a handheld device but on something the size of a tablet it is going to be really annoying to have to keep reaching over for that menu key, or worse yet while you are holding the device you'll accidentally be hitting some of those keys while you are in an app.

I honestly don't know how Android on any table can work around that problem, since all Android devices require those keys (keys on every side? Urk). And yes, I do think even the single button to app switch on the iPad imposes a similar issue, it's just not as bad because you only press it when exiting applications, not while using them, and the button is physically very hard to accidentally press.

As to the cost, it's pretty impossible to say it will offer as much as an iPad when they state the specifications are "flexible". That also means, at least six months until after the specs are not "flexible" before you can buy one. Basically they are holding that back to launch in case the iPad takes off, but by that time Apple will have achieved another huge increase in applications and it will be too late. You can't compete by not showing up to the game!

QuickOffice, iWork, and Xcode...

[Anonymous Coward]

I know some people will just "love" iPad ... but think, for a second, rationally.
What the heck it is for? You cannot put even USB stick into it! You cannot run any "office" software, no IDE, not even Web with flash or even Java ... well you can read a pdf ... wow.

There has to be a reason, for most people, to buy it, right? What it is? Price - no . Battery life - no. Connectivity - haha! Usablity - not even a test editor! Multitasking ... everyone remembers Microsoft idea of limiting this to three - can Apple pull out with one? I don't think so.

I admit, I'm nerd the worst kind, but ... your question: I won't buy it if it does not do a single thing I want. And nobody I know neither, nerd or not.

iPad has QuickOffice, iWork, and Xcode IDE.

There are two office suites and an IDE...

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPad has two office suites: QuickOffice, which works with Microsoft Office documents, as well as iWork which also works with Office documents in addition to its own formats.

The official IDE from Apple is Xcode using objective-c, though Novel offers solutions using C# and .Net.

You can plug USB into it, but it requires an adapter.

Wikipedia?

[dsinc]

I'm currently looking to buy one of those e-reader gizmos; I was hoping Apple would come up with something better than the Kindle - but it didn't happen - for me - because the Kindle still rules with free access to Wikipedia. Don't know about others, but I'm a very heavy user of Wikipedia (physicist, history nerd); a color screen, various apps etc - those are just niceties for me (BTW: I own two MacBooks which pretty much delight me, as I've been a Unix guy since the Eighties); I couldn't care less about additional data plans, 3G and stuff - the free access to Wikipedia weighs very heavily in favor of the Kindle, as maligned as it may be. Again: this is just me, your personal situation is certain to be different.

Re:Wikipedia?

[masmullin]

well the iPad does have a webbrowser... I assume said browser can surf to wikipedia

-1000

[hackingbear]

Where is your reference? all sources, like this, have it estimated at $999, which is not bad for 1.5 laptops given that the regualr laptop itself costs ~ $700.

Re:For the same price: iPad + MacBook Pro + 2 iPod

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally someone who makes sense.

And frankly the Lenovo hardware will feel rubbish compared to the Macbook Pro and surely the iPad. Apple builds nice hardware...

CmdrTaco approves?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then it must be guaranteed to fail.

Same problmes as the iPad, expect more so

[NatteringNabob]

Too heavy, too short battery life, and not as readable as a dedicated eBook reader for reading, not powerful enough, screen too small to be a decent laptop, and not as portable as a 3G cell phone if all you need to do is get directions or something. The problem with all the 'touch pad' like products is that they fill a much needed gap in the computer products. landscape.

I didn't want expensive and slow as molasses.

[guidryp]

That thing is some kind of Frankenstein monster of bad ideas grafted together.

Watch the hands on demo video, then watch any iPad hands on demo video.

The Lenova is brutally slow. I would tear out my hair in frustration. The iPad flys and glides.

Windows tablets have been failures because windows is aimed at desktop/mouse/keyboard experience, tacking on a superfluous touch interface does nothing for that.

I plan to try an iPad because the interaction looks so slick that it is actually fun.

It is an appliance but it appears to be a find instant on joyful net browsing appliance.

Even geeks have to realize there is a place for appliances.

Others

[SuperKendall]

Eh? I've seen that on youtube and dailymotion. In something like two years of using the iphone, those are the only ones I've ever seen that happening with. Some, possibly. But nowhere even close to "most".

Name some you are thinking of...

Break and College Humor are two popular examples where I can see video just fine on an iPhone.

I've found it more the exception than the rule when I can't use a video site on the iPhone...

"It Just Works"

[ShagratTheTitleless]

Apple keeps using that phrase. I do not think it means what they think it means.

No problem

[SuperKendall]

It's more natural for some things, but I dare you to take it to class, open up a note taking program, and take notes on the iPad then come back to me and say that's more natural than using a stylus.

Honestly for note taking I'd rather do a mixture of light typing with key concepts, and draw out diagrams with my hand than use a stylus. I hardly ever take notes with a physical notepad anymore in classes or anywhere else because I hate the labor of writing each character by hand when I could have it in a single press.

But as I said the point is rather moot since if pure writing suits your needs better you can ALSO use a stylus with the iPad, and treat it as a purely digital pad (which is still very useful).

Isn't a choice between two great systems better?

Re:No problem

[EvanED]

But as I said the point is rather moot since if pure writing suits your needs better you can ALSO use a stylus with the iPad, and treat it as a purely digital pad (which is still very useful).

The downside of that is that the iPad doesn't have any home for those styluses: which means it's up to you to make sure you have it around and don't lose it.

I realize this is part my problem, but I am terrible when it comes to not losing pens and pencils; I'd imagine I'd be pretty bad at keeping the stylus around. But at the same time, the iPod would do nothing to help. If it were designed with a stylus in mind, it could have a slot for it, like my x61 tablet, or like the Nokia N900 I just ordered. Then, I'd have a perfect place to get into the habit of putting it when I was done using it.

Re:No problem

[EvanED]

If it were designed with a stylus in mind, it could have a slot for it, like my x61 tablet, or like the Nokia N900 I just ordered

And I forgot to say that this could take next to no space. The N900 has a stylus you can (optionally) use for heaven's sake, and it's the size of an iPhone.

(And yeah, I'm talking about writing the whole thing, and you can type without a stylus.)

I love the IdeaPad U01

[WillAffleckUW]

I really love the IdeaPad U01 and when I switch it to Windows I

Blue Screen of Death

Frak!

Look, I'm going to be brutally frank with you - it's not for uber-geeks - it's for everyone else that just want something that works.

Google and Apple...

[Anonymous Coward]

...can't fart without over hyped media publicity.

Mistaken

[SuperKendall]

Just because people buy it because "OMFG! It's from APPLE!!!"

But you miss the point. They do not, will not buy it because of that - or if they do, only insofar as they know that Apple can actually come through on promises made in the presentation about how exactly it will function.

As with the iPhone, people will buy it or not based on the functionality it can deliver, not because of a logo. There are plenty of examples of cases through history where a strong brand could not carry a mediocre product to success, and Apple is not immune from this simple an unassailable fact that no amount of marketing can make people buy something that is not useful in some way to them.

The funny thing is I'm sure you feel exactly the same way, and it's why you and others are so sure the iPad will fail - but that again is because you yourself refuse to look past the Apple logo in exactly the way you claim buyers are.

If anyone else had made a device just like this, Microsoft or Sony or Nokia, I would say it would do well also. But none of them appear to be brave enough to do so.

If Apple lightens the frack up and allows handwriting (for all apps)

Why? Most people hate handwriting. For those that still linger on it I'm sure the handwriting apps will be there to comfort them. And if they did the Newton 2.0 jokes would be endless. No good has come to the platform that tried to make the vagaries of human handwriting a primary platform for input. Even Palm had to introduce Graffiti to keep real handwriting under control, until the despicable Jot come along to take down the whole company.

and say an iPad only non-certified app store where Apple just checks to make sure the programs aren't malicious,

Well that's pretty much what they ARE doing. How do you think 140k apps get in the store anyway? The review process is very light, focusing on (probably) some degree of security but also simply making sure the application actually does about what it says (or does anything at all). How can you claim you want a "non certified app store" and then proceed to list an item of certification an app must pass to be in the store? The Android app store does not do this, at all - don't you think any app store should?

Hopefully Apple does some major reworking of the software side in the next year.

They will continue to refine all aspects of app development as they have since launch. In the meantime, there are *140k* applications ready to work on the iPad, many as I said with updates coming down the pike before launch. How anyone can see a pretty solid hardware device with that much software support as anything but a pretty obvious platform for success right out of the gate - well it is beyond me.

Re read the post yourself...

[SuperKendall]

Really? then why do so many of you ask from Apple's competitors to mimick their design philosophies?

Because to us those philosophies produce nicer devices that we find more useful. Can you not see the difference between someone who is asking for something they like, vs. someone who ridicules what they do not?

Why do so many of you belittle those who dare not to follow in Jobs' opinion on what computing should be like?

Because we are constantly told by those same people we are stupid for thinking the way we do? It's hard not to belittle someone that calls you an idiot, because obviously they are intolerant and that is a shot back that gets to them most easily since someone putting themselves out is superior is generally the most insecure.

Bullshit. There is very much a lack of understanding that for some intelligent, mature and decent people a non-Apple product may be the right choice over an Apple one. Want an example? read the post I replied to.

Read it. Read it carefully. I will summarize:

I don't... I already .... I just want .... I want .... I don't really ..... I don't .... I don't .... I don't .... I just want .... I bet .... I just wish SOME...

That is every single sentence in the post you replied to. Where is there anything about YOU in there? Or in fact did you just read it in? Where is there anything but a desire for more Apple like choices for him, since you have the whole rest of the world offering choices of systems that YOU like? Where did he say anything about other systems being bad in any way? He just said what HE WANTED. Is that so awful? Well I guess it must be since you and others like you wish to see this non-uniformity stamped out.

Re:Re read the post yourself...

[Draek]

Because to us those philosophies produce nicer devices that we find more useful. Can you not see the difference between someone who is asking for something they like, vs. someone who ridicules what they do not?

Both still fail to recognize that those alternate philosophies produce nicer devices that *others* find more useful.

Because we are constantly told by those same people we are stupid for thinking the way we do? It's hard not to belittle someone that calls you an idiot, because obviously they are intolerant and that is a shot back that gets to them most easily since someone putting themselves out is superior is generally the most insecure.

Yeah, sure. Calling anybody who dares suggest the iPhone isn't the best smartphone on the market a "geek out of touch with reality" is taking a shot at their intolerance. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

That is every single sentence in the post you replied to. Where is there anything about YOU in there?

The "competitors actually understood that concept" part, showing proof of my first point: intolerance for philosophies that produce useful products for somebody-who-is-not-you. And given his phrasing implies that it's a lack of understanding driving such a philosophy, rather than simply aiming at a different market, would arguably make it qualify for a straight-up insult, but that's kinda depending on personal interpretation.

Re:Re read the post yourself...

[SuperKendall]

Both still fail to recognize that those alternate philosophies produce nicer devices that *others* find more useful.

Why should we have to "recognize" that? He didn't mention the other way being wrong or right - only you assume which way is meant! Does he also hate elephants, because obviously he forgot to mention how awesome the giant wrinkled things really are?

It's easy to accuse someone of hate when you add the words yourself instead of going by what they SAID.

Yeah, sure. Calling anybody who dares suggest the iPhone isn't the best smartphone on the market a "geek out of touch with reality" is taking a shot at their intolerance.

Well honestly who says that? For me it's the best choice, obviously not for you. But only Apple Haters think people say that, real Apple users don't say that. They just say the iPhone works FOR THEM. I have plenty of friends with blackberries and other devices, the things work for them and that is fine.

The "competitors actually understood that concept" part, showing proof of my first point: intolerance for philosophies that produce useful products for somebody-who-is-not-you

And again, It's NOT ABOUT YOU. It's just about what that person wants, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to send you back for a third reading because the full text your subconscious would not allow you to paste is:

"I just wish some of the competitors actually understood that concept."

Do you see that key word "some"? That I highlighted myself in my summary before? How is asking for just SOME other makers of devices to share the philosophy a desire to alter the whole market?

He didn't even use the word "most".

I'll let you have the last word, but I will say this - Not everything is about you, directed at you, or for you. Some day I hope you can learn that. I don't see the need to read your words further though since at this point you are simply tilting at windmills, so I'll just let you carry on with your imagined enemies while I continue onward.

Re:Re read the post yourself...

[Draek]

Why should we have to "recognize" that? He didn't mention the other way being wrong or right - only you assume which way is meant!

Not really, it was fairly clear.

Well honestly who says that? For me it's the best choice, obviously not for you. But only Apple Haters think people say that, real Apple users don't say that.

Read up on any Slashdot story involving the iPhone, *ever*. If you haven't seen them, you simply aren't looking. Or its your subconscious won't allow you to parse them.

Do you see that key word "some"? That I highlighted myself in my summary before? How is asking for just SOME other makers of devices to share the philosophy a desire to alter the whole market?

I already explained why, if you can't understand it it's not my problem.

You tell us why it's so hard to believe

[SuperKendall]

Or they simply didn't like it. Why is that concept so hard to believe?

Because a lot of us have talked to a lot of people that do like it. Why is THAT so hard for YOU to believe? Many people like you in fact simply cannot believe there is anyone that likes the device whatsoever despite obvious counterexamples of people posting here.

The truth is very probably more in the middle with a ton of people being indifferent until they get direct experience. So both sides are way, way more likely to be projecting feelings of the average user until real people have them.

Until that point I look at anyone saying "everyone loves it" and "everyone hates it" with equal suspicion. But here, there are far more people simply stating "EVERYONE HATES IT".

Re:You tell us why it's so hard to believe

[Draek]

Because a lot of us have talked to a lot of people that do like it. Why is THAT so hard for YOU to believe?

So the fact that some people like it means that nobody could dislike it, and anybody who claims as such is doing so for reasons unrelated to the iPad itself.

Logic 101, take it.

Re:You tell us why it's so hard to believe

[cynyr]

Wake me up when i can hold one myself, let alone when i can run my own software on it.

Re:You tell us why it's so hard to believe

[SuperKendall]

So the fact that some people like it means that nobody could dislike it

Wrong. Read what I said again. I said that most people right now are indifferent so if you claim EVERYONE hates it or likes it, you are wrong.

Obviously some people hate it, and some love it. The thing is that I personally realize both of those types exist but most people are in the middle. Most people on Slashdot seem to be of the mindset there simply is no-one outside the "Hate" camp (which is irrational for anything actually).

Backwayround thinking

[chilvence]

As someone who has pined for a decent affordable PC based tablet for years (so I can switch between doodling in painter and mucking about with classic Command and Conquer with a stylus, as God always intended from the beginning) I have to say this is the worst idea I have ever seen in the history of tablet PC's. Why would anyone want to use the in house built operating system over a standard, established OS? The only people who've ever gotten away with that is Apple! It's the worst case scenario of the crapware that gets shoveled into brand name laptops, only this time it isnt just plastered into the OS, it is an OS in itself!

Instead of doing something intelligent, like combining the guts of the computer into the tablet part and having a super cool detachable keyboard/disc drive dock/heat induction leg warmer module, so you have a dual purpose machine that plays nice with all existing software you can name, they have come up with a hideous schizoid machine with two identities, which will no doubt be hastily stiched together with even more sub-useful crapware... and only because they have approached the idea from the wrong angle!

If you want a convertible dual purpose tablet, its probably because you would like to have a tablet, but haven't convinced yourself you can live without the keyboard yet. So how can you get any more straightforward than a tablet that acts as a tablet most of the time but then quickly and painlessly reverts back to a laptop when you realise you want to type a novel out in word?

Oh well, I guess sometimes the most obvious solution is too obvious for some...

A lot of people simply...

[wfolta]

People keep talking as if Apple really missed the boat with iPad, but the truth is they only missed the boat for hard-core, tinker-happy nerds...

I disagree. Most of my friends are not hard core tinker happy nerds. And they were all underwhelmed with the iPad. In fact, I don't know a single person who was actually impressed by it.

Not one.

A lot of people simply have no imagination. And that's the value added by Steve Jobs: he's always drawn to where (he believes) people will WANT to be once they realize how things could be. He may be dramatically wrong -- and unlike other companies, there's no hiding behind focus groups and polls that seemed to indicate a demand -- but it's rather refreshing.

This whole iPad discussion feels to me like a repeat of the people who saw no need for computers, who couldn't imagine using a stupid mouse and icons instead of typing, who could care less about sub-audiophile MP3 players, who saw no reason to replace their VHS library with (more expensive) DVDs, who thought text messaging was stupid when you may as well make a call once you pick up your phone, ..., who thought a phone without a physical keypad is going to flop, etc.

The poster you were replying to generalized in the wrong direction: it's not super-techies who are disappointed with the iPad, it's people who cannot imagine interfacing with a computer outside of the standard desktop paradigm. (Laptops are desktops with the keyboard attached via a convenient hinge. The form factor, UI, and how you interface with it is basically the same.) I have a laptop with 5 operating systems on it and all the development tools that I might need, but I will certainly get an iPad for several reasons -- none of them involving writing my own Python or typing a dissertation.

Unconditional Love

[meehawl]

1) Hate on new Apple product.

Love on new Apple product?

I've yet to see SuperKendall greet any new Apple offering with anything less than perfect adulation. Seriously, can you think of a single Apple product you thought was a stinker? Because there have been a few you know. Can you bring yourself to name even one?

What not admit some flaws are acceptable?

[SuperKendall]

Why not admit that Apple isnt perfect?. Seriously, you're all excuses. You're like a parody of a fanboy. How embarrassing for you.

The difference between you and I is that I am OK with things not being perfect - I never said Apple was perfect, just that I could work with what is there.

Meanwhile for people like you, for anything Apple produces only perfection suffices, and any small deviation from the arbitrary ideal you set forth (always after Apple produces a product of course so you can choose things Apple is not offering) means they have failed utterly.

Your approach strikes me as far more a parody of reason than my own, eminently practical, one. I find that when people use words like "embarrassing" they have backed themselves into a corner, and are projecting...

We shall see who is embarrassed in about a year.

yes, JUST what I wanted from the iPad

[tyme]

A device that costs twice as much, doesn't work half the time (did anyone watch the videos?) and has a bizarre collection of user interface metaphors to cover the jury-rigged hodge-podge of processors and operating systems.

When it is first undocked from the main body, you can see that it appears completely unresponsive to touch from the user. Oddly, after a few swipes with the finger go unregistered by the device, the video abruptly comes to an end. Later on, in the next video down the page, we can see that the device is sluggish and crude (it doesn't seem to support any of the obvious multi-touch gestures, using a drag control to resize images rather than pinch or stretch gestures) and the voice over claims that this is because it keeps dropping it's 3G connection (so that they can't show us the Really Cool[TM] demo that would have knocked our socks off, put the iPad to shame, and justified the $2000 price tag).

Sure, the iPad may not be the second coming, but, with competition like this, Apple has nothing to worry about.

What a joke.

Many To One

[SuperKendall]

Surely you must know there are many cases this just doesn't work for.

I know there are a few.

Specifically I know there is exactly one.

Because any time the subject comes up, the ONLY thing mentioned is Pandora. Given the sample size, this is very likely to be the singular result.

But I can still listen to music using the iPod feature, so being practically minded I simply do that if I *must* listen to music while I read email.

Frankly, I think of it as a pretty contrived example since as I said there are many paths to music, but the truth remains that for most real-world background processing, the concept of state saving plus server processing on the background is equivalent to multi-tasking - or close enough for most people.

Just has to be said...

[macinit]

The negative rants about the iPad can honestly be taken with a grain a salt. Just consider the source: people whom, admittedly don’t like Apple in the first place therefore had made up their minds long before the product’s specs were even released. At any rate, it’s rather foolish to bet against a company that has had nothing but an ever increasing sales record since Jobs took back the helm. Conveniently and dishonestly that fact is left out of all the dire predictions floating around the net. The same irrational predictions followed the iPhone as well which, naturally, didn’t come close to being true. The ‘ranters’ pretty much lost all their creditability over the years which means it’s time to just tell them to STFU!

Re:Just has to be said...

[Anonymous Coward]

The positive rants about the iPad can honestly be taken with a grain a salt. Just consider the source: people whom, admittedly will buy anything from Apple and therefore had made up their minds long before the product's specs were even released. The same people that bought an iPod years ago claimed it was the best audio device ever but oddly had NEVER used a different device and probably 50% of them could not even name another company that made an MP3 player. Many people blindly purchase Apple products and claim it does exactly what they need, nothing more and nothing less. Oddly, those same people are the first in line buying version x+1 because of "new" functionality. Why buy version x+1 if you claimed version x has everything you need?

Re:Just has to be said...

[macinit]

Incorrect, the source in this case is Apple's successful track record in the industry, not a bunch of 15 year olds yelling on message forums. See the difference? And about the x+1 logic of yours, are you saying you're still using Windows 3.0 or old version of Linux from the mid 90's? I'd hate to hear that too you bought an x+1 release and upgraded, then would be forced to make fun of you according to your rules. I wish you presented a good argument, but clearly you didn't come to table prepared.

So why is this better then tablets of yesterday ?

[leroyk]

I had a tablet. I far as I can see this is a faster cousin with the same core benefits. Zero apps. No one wrote applications to take advantage of the first tablets. Who is going to write apps for this generation ? Show me some apps and maybe I will bite. I sold my Acer one year later. Show me the apps !

Re:For the same price: iPad + MacBook Pro + 2 iPod

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, but what you can't do with that setup is decide to take your current session from laptop form to tablet form. The lenovo can do that. Do some work on the laptop, then decide you want to browse on the couch in tablet mode and poof, you're there with your browser happily going without you having to manage another device and open all your tabs again. The Lenovo is somthing new and truly innovative (though it's not quite there yet), not some evolutionary fake-innovative device. Stop being an apologist.

Preproduction? There's still time to fix it then

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, no curves. IBM design had the bento box (look it up) from day 1, and curves were ever so subtly introduced later on, but not by the bucketloads either. If you want curves, go get the cheap plastic Apple wannabes. Let the people who dig the iPad get the iPad, and the rest of us The Edge that is not Apple: bold sharp edge design, not toilet seat curves that remind you of an Apple product that was shaped like the fruit that bears its name.

Misleading Headline

[devjj]

FTFA:

How's the touch experience? Well, the resistive 11.6-screen supports multitouch, (Lenovo wasn't saying where it came from) and though it was responsive, it was far from flawless; we had to double tap a few times to make sure our touches registered. It's also a little bit loose, although we expect that'll be cleared up by the time the U1 ships. The on-screen keyboard is big enough for entering a URL here or there, but you're not going to want to type an email on it. Unfortunately, the screen itself was pretty abysmal, with terrible horizontal and vertical viewing angles -- it basically disappeared at 45 degrees off axis.

That's what we wanted the iPad to be?

People like you deride nerds at their own peril

[Anonymous Coward]

The history of tech gadgets is closely linked to the chorus of "all told you so" from the people that know what they are ralking about.

Lets take iPhone and iPod products for example.

Nerds warned about the following and many other failings as Apple devices hit the market.

- Storage space was insuficient.
- DRM was restrictive and anti costumer.
- Why don't they have a radio?
- Why don't they have a voice recorder.

Slowly but surely Apple has listened to this (and many other complaints) that arose from techie sources, the most controversial being letting DRM lose from the iTunes shop.

Techies are so influential that shops like Amazon launched their MP3 shop without DRM from the start (book and magazine publishers should take a clue).

Only a braindead company would not design for geeks. At the end you will have to anyway because geeks know the field and what they are talking about, this knowledge eventually benefits people that only care about style and conrumerist statements.
 

That is missing the point.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much the shitiest phones have cameras, most netbooks do as well, as do many laptops.

Ditto for card readers (phones are fiddlier, but many have overcome that problem and provide easy access to the memory card, so transfering data by means of a small card adpator is a piece of cake).

UNiversally netbooks and laptops have USB connectors, most phones will connect via USB to a computer as well.

So if you re dropping a new device trying to steal users from both groups of devices, don't you think it is a bit supid to launch a device with less ratrher then more functionality?

Jobs is betting that people will find the content via the net, but one of the main uses for these devices is communicating with people (or did Apple missed the whole social networking thingy? Does Jobs have a twitter account?), for that purpose you need to be able to transfer data generated by you (your pictures, your documents, etc).

If we were talking about a less capable device then people would not mind, but everybody can see it for what it is: a computer, and people have nowadays certain expectations about how a computer should work, these include a camera and card readers.

Re:For the same price: iPad + MacBook Pro + 2 iPod

[Anonymous Coward]

except that they were talking 999$ not 1999$, which doesn't even get you 1 MacBook. And they've announced that it will be released in June.
Please read sources more carefully before commenting OK? Thanks. Bye

Nope, the reverse is true

[mdwh2]

Nonsense. And on the contrary, it's only among geeks that Apple has any kind of significant following. On places like here on Slashdot, Apple are raved about all the time (indeed, this very story - a "story" that is just speculation, over a non-notable vaporware product, that hasn't even been released) is a perfect example of that. Most actually released tablets don't even get one single story.

In the real world, most people use Windows, they use phones other than the Iphone, and they don't give a shit about the Istale or whatever it is it's called this week.

Re:Nope, the reverse is true

[mdwh2]

Ah, look at the poor liddle mod who got mod points today!

Hey, here's an idea - how about you come back when you actually have some basic facts to argue with. The only troll here are the idiots who can only respond with their mod points, foaming at the mouth because someone dared to point out a fact that disagrees with their Apple world view.

Proof once against that the moderation system doesn't work when it comes to Apple stories.

The Ipod Fallacy

[mdwh2]

Ah yes, it's the Ipod Fallacy, a classic logical fallacy of those enveloped by the RDF.

"The Ipod wasn't impressive to start with, yet it became very popular, therefore this new Apple device which is unimpressive will also be popular!"

If you say so. What's the current market share of Macs, or Iphones, btw? The Ipod is a one hit wonder - good enough for a company, sure, but it's a fallacy to assume that therefore every Apple product is now going to have the same success.

Mod parent down

[mdwh2]

Mod parent down, -1 makes up facts out of nowhere.

Mod parent down

[mdwh2]

Mod parent -1, doesn't understand basic logic, but still gets pro-Apple mods to mod down anyone who dares point this out.

Mod parent down

[mdwh2]

Mod parent down, -1 actually thinks that most of the market cares about Apple, when the vaporware hasn't even been released yet!

Not the same windowing toolkit

[SuperKendall]

Yes the iPad (and iPhone) run Darwin, and share a lot of the same frameworks used in OS X.

The windowing toolkit is different though, that's where the UITouch classes come in (like UIView), which are not on the Mac.

I've done both, although GUI programming on the two platforms shares a similar base philosophy in structure, the classes you work with are pretty different.

Exactly!

[SuperKendall]

Wake me up when i can hold one myself, let alone when i can run my own software on it.

That is exactly what I said. Many people will be indifferent until they can try it.

And you can run any software you want on it simply by joining the developer program, or jailbreaking it.