Bill Gates Responds To Apple iPad

superapecommando writes "Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has called Apple's iPad a 'nice reader' but claims netbooks are the way forward. Speaking briefly to BNET's Brent Schlender, the Microsoft Chairman, who had admitted to being in awe of the iPhone on first release, saw nothing in the iPad to really excite him."

Comments

That's it

[Renegade Lisp]

If there was anything that could guarantee the skyrocketing success of the iPad, we've just witnessed it.

Re:That's it

[Anonymous Coward]

When asked that question, Billy Boy should've just said "LULZ" and left it at that.

Re:That's it

[Penguinisto]

True, but unlike most tech pundits, at least Bill Gates is smart enough to recognize that there is a difference between the iPad and a netbook insofar as intended use. Most of Mr. Gates' adoring legions among the tech punditry (including the most highly respected of the bunch) haven't even made that mental leap just yet.

Personally, I'm happier with a notebook - but my missus is the user type the iPad was aimed at. In spite of hating my Mac desktop, she's positively dying to get her hands on an iPad. It's this factor that Mssr. Gates and Microsoft will have to convince (and she uses but hates her netbook now, so, err...)

Re:That's it

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm buying one. Day one, I will be in line at the Apple store with my mock turtleneck, tortoise-shell glasses, and my douche. I'll snatch one of these puppies up for the sole purpose of donning my Yoko Ono, blind-people shades, holding this thing to my ear, and asking the kids at the Genius Bar why my iPhone for the visually impaired gets such shitty reception. I will do this multiple times per store to no less than a dozen stores.

Re:That's it

[otrtiresupply]

The problem with the iPad, from my perspective, is the fact that it is an LCD vs. EInk . Eyestrain is a big deal. I think Jobs should have innovated, and placed heavy development on a color device that would be easy on the eyes. I'd rather have an ugly device that limits my trips to the optometrist, than a beautiful device that fatigues my biological sensors.

Re:That's it

[quadelirus]

I hear this argument from everyone, but I use a computer with an LCD screen 10-12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and I've never (ever, ever) had a problem with eye strain. That was a problem with CRTs, sure, but are there really that many people who actually have a problem looking at an LCD screen, or is this just a lot of hot air brought about by tech pundits? I sort of think that most people have heard there is a problem and believe it the way most people thought the Atkin's diet was a good nutritious diet. Maybe the e-ink guys are just marketing hard from this angle and no one has bothered to respond?

I'm not an optometrist or anything, so I could definitely be quite wrong, but I just haven't experienced this "problem" and I asked around to fellow long-term computer users and nobody I know has either. By the way, I'm a CS doctoral student and programmer and gamer, so I basically do look at screens ALL DAY. I even read academic papers on my laptop regularly (and read printed novels but I don't mind using a screen at all).

Re:That's it

[Bakkster]

LCD vs. EInk . Eyestrain is a big deal.

Nah, battery life is the big deal. Assuming the iPad actually gets 10 hours on a charge, this will be somewhat mitigated. However, eInk will still be the way to go for people who read in short(er) spurts.

Re:That's it

[bemymonkey]

I'm actual pretty sure that the people who complain about LCDs frying eyeballs are the kind of people who use LED-backlit desktop screens on 100% brightness and contrast in a darkened room (or basement).

A decent (matte) LCD that doesn't need to be turned up to searing levels in order to be readable outside, and that can be turned down to suit low-light environments, isn't exactly problematic. Hell, unless I'm actually outside in the sunlight (or watching a movie - that's one of the few cases in which I like to crank the brightness), my laptop TFTs rarely go above half brightness, and they're both older CCFL-based models.

Re:That's it

[bemymonkey]

Videos please.

Re:That's it

[BrokenHalo]

Billy Boy should've just said "LULZ" and left it at that.

What for? The iPad is little more than an iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket, and the market will judge it accordingly. Apple had an opportunity to redefine the tablet computer market, and they decided to waste it by offering us yet another box to run their apps.

I'm no fan of Microsoft, but there's still a big market there that (apart from Google's efforts) is unchanged from before Apple unveiled its iPad.

Re:That's it

[Wooky_linuxer]

Who modded this comment troll? Is he a troll just because he doesn't suffer from eyestrain from looking at LCDs? I read many ebooks, thousands of pages at smartphones and internet tablets and never suffered more eyestrain than when reading a dead-tree-paper book. Mod me troll as well.

Re:That's it

[Anonymous Coward]

Eye sensitivity is just like anything else... some people have it, other don't. I'm one of the lucky few whose eyes are sensitive to pretty much any form of artificial light that isn't incandescent. Monitors, TVs, florescent lamps... they all cause my eyes to get fatigued very quickly. I am also far-sighted, which, according to my opthamologist, exacerbates the issue.
 

Re:That's it

[foospork]

Check back in with us when you're in your mid 40s and have been doing this for 25 years. I had 20/10 in one eye and 20/13 in the other. At the age of 32 I could count individual pixels. At 48 my eyes are fried, and I'm lucky to tell a colon from a semi-colon.

Re:That's it

[kainewynd2]

What for? The iPad is little more than an iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket, and the market will judge it accordingly. Apple had an opportunity to redefine the tablet computer market, and they decided to waste it by offering us yet another box to run their apps.

Yeah and they've never released cool hardware with shitty software that they subsequently upgraded and made into a revolutionary product before. /sarcasm

Re:That's it

[RebelWithoutAClue]

Here's a nifty little software that turns the screen temperature down to make it softer after sunset. Works quite well. http://www.stereopsis.com/flux/

Re:That's it

[Zerth]

Exactly, I want a device that lasts for days either on or in a sleep that takes 3 seconds to wake from, i.e. the time it takes to hit the wake button and move my hand back to operating it. You'll actually win points if you put the button in an inconvenient spot:)

While I do think eink screens look nicer, it's because the material actually changes colors instead of filtering. When they start using a more durable substrate(most use glass!), I'd love to get a laptop case made of the stuff and run a slow plasma sim or have those Escher curl-ups crawling over it.

Re:That's it

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

I'd rather have an ugly device that limits my trips to the optometrist, than a beautiful device that fatigues my biological sensors.

Just so we're clear, we are talking about Apple under Steve Jobs here, right?

Re:That's it

[xtracto]

Agreed, Jobs should have gone to buy Liquavista (electrowetting) technology,then spend one more year developing it and make the iPad a real killer portable computer with big screen.

Re:That's it

[AmberBlackCat]

My first thought was these are people who use their LCD screens in something other than native resolution, and look at blurry text all day.

Re:That's it

[WalrusSlayer]

Totally agree here. I read a few books on my iPhone prior to breaking down and buying a Kindle. The only thing advantage to the Kindle screen is size. Frankly, I find eInk to be a pain in the ass due to low contrast in anything but the brightest of lighting conditions. I too, make a living in front of LCD screens all day. I've read eBooks on both LCD and eInk, and so far, I really don't see what the big whoop is with eInk. Once the price comes down a bit, I have zero issues with replacing my Kindle with an iPad.

Re:That's it

[BrokenHalo]

Yeah and they've never released cool hardware with shitty software that they subsequently upgraded and made into a revolutionary product before. /sarcasm

Well, to take this point first, it wouldn't exactly be revolutionary if they bolted new functionality on an existing product. But the actual hardware itself is not that exciting, in the sense that it is nothing that existing iPhone or iTouch users will be unfamiliar with.

...Which leads to my complaint: I would really have liked Apple to have produced a "real" computer in tablet form, but Apple chose to sell us shiny widgets instead.

Re:That's it

[noewun]

What for? The iPad is little more than an iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket, and the market will judge it accordingly. Apple had an opportunity to redefine the tablet computer market, and they decided to waste it by offering us yet another box to run their apps.

It's official: The Slashdot Inverse Rule of Success is now in effect. Expect the iPad to sell 10 million in its first year.

And I'm not kidding. The Slasdot consensus is so wildly out of touch with market success it has become and inverse barometer.

Re:That's it

[robably]

There is no Slashdot consensus. Did you not realise when you posted a response saying the parent was wrong that you were invalidating your own argument? Did you not ever notice that almost every response to every post on Slashdot is someone violently disagreeing?

You must be new here.

Re:That's it

[Bakkster]

While I do think eink screens look nicer, it's because the material actually changes colors instead of filtering. When they start using a more durable substrate(most use glass!), I'd love to get a laptop case made of the stuff and run a slow plasma sim or have those Escher curl-ups crawling over it.

Of course, back to battery life, because eInk is electromechanical it might not be the best choice for fluid motion for quite some time, particularly if power is a concern. Of course, the fact that it only reflects light would mean it would look much cooler than OLED or another potential technology. I'd definitely be interested in that.

Re:That's it

[s73v3r]

Considering that before this, most slate tablets were a device with a Desktop OS shoehorned onto them that most often required the use of a special stylus to do anything, even typing on the onscreen keyboard, it sounds like they did change it, mostly by making a tablet that one could actually use with a finger, and not trying to pretend that the tablet was something that people were actually gonna use for serious work.

Re:That's it

[s73v3r]

Why? Putting a "real" computer in tablet form has been tried several times before, and has failed miserably. People don't want a slate tablet to do actual computing work on. I don't really want an iPad, but it seems like they're at least trying not to duplicate what the rest of the tablet market has done.

Re:That's it

[Gilmoure]

Leave gtsex out of it. Heh.

But yeah, 42 here, been working on computers since the late 70's (still have my Ti 99/4a) and currently spend 9.5 hours a day in front of 4 Apple 23" cinema displays. These were all picked up used as they no longer were as bright as new monitors but in my enclosed room with no natural lighting, they work great at 60%-75% brightness (to get them all close to same white space). No real eye strain here unless it's a web page/app that resets things. Looking forward to an iPad as my iPhone, while sweet layout for surfing and such, is just a bit too small.

Re:That's it

[HeronBlademaster]

The iPad is little more than an iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket

That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad ;)

Some people view it this way: "Now I can do all the things I would love to do on my iPod Touch/iPhone, if only it were bigger."

Re:That's it

[node 3]

A decent (matte) LCD that doesn't need to be turned up to searing levels in order to be readable outside

There exists no consumer LCD device that can attain "searing levels" outside. Unless you mean outside on a moonless, overcast night in the wilderness.

All LCDs are way dimmer than the sun. They are not going to cause eyestrain from the brightness, unless it's for the lack of it.

Also, matte LCDs are crap outdoors because of the way they scatter the light. It's the same idea as why you can't see stars in the daytime. With glossy LCDs, you can at least turn or shade them.

Re:That's it

[ArsonSmith]

Perhaps it's being 48 and not the LCD doing it. My father was a mechanic, and other than in passing curiosity, did not sit at a computer until well into his 40s. His eyes were going at that time as well.

Re:That's it

[node 3]

Exactly, I want a device that lasts for days either on or in a sleep that takes 3 seconds to wake from

The iPad *does* run for days with the screen locked. The display is really the only thing that limits the battery to 10 hours[*] of video.

[*] Claimed by Apple, of course, so we'll see how it pans out in practice. Apple's battery claims do tend to be far more honest than the rest of the industry, though, so even if it's not 10, it'll be at least something like 8 or so.

Re:That's it

[smallfries]

There is no Slashdot consensus. Did you not realise when you posted a response saying the parent was wrong that you were invalidating your own argument? Did you not ever notice that almost every response to every post on Slashdot is someone violently disagreeing?

What absolute rubbish. I can't believe that you dragged your sorry ass over here from digg just to post that trash. [insert apple fanboy attack here].

Re:That's it

[Joe Tie.]

It's not just the slashdot consensus though. Everybody I talk to agrees that it's horrible. I was shocked when even non-techy people brought it up to me to confirm that it really is as bad as they thought.

Re:That's it

[bemymonkey]

There exists no consumer LCD device that can attain "searing levels" outside. Unless you mean outside on a moonless, overcast night in the wilderness.

All LCDs are way dimmer than the sun. They are not going to cause eyestrain from the brightness, unless it's for the lack of it.

Maybe not searing compared to direct sunlight, but still bright enough to cause eyestrain when reading black text on that hella bright white background most web sites etc. have...

I was thinking more along the lines of using an LED backlit dislay on full power in order to overpower glare. It does work to a certain extent (if you turn the display in the right direction and make sure you're not wearing a brightly colored or white shirt)...

It may not be as bright as the sun, but it's still hella bright, and it does hurt my eyes after a while - especially if the reading is intermittently interrupted by patches of glare.

Also, matte LCDs are crap outdoors because of the way they scatter the light. It's the same idea as why you can't see stars in the daytime. With glossy LCDs, you can at least turn or shade them.

Take a glossy screen and a matte screen outside, place them side-by-side and rethink that statement. I've done it, and I call bullshit...

Re:That's it

[bemymonkey]

Maybe I should clarify a little: I ride the train for a few hours every week, and I always have one of my laptops (Matte Thinkpads or a glossy Toshiba) and my smartphone (glossy Motorola Milestone) with me... the glossy displays are practically useless, even on not-so-bright days, while the matte ones are good enough to get work done. Not great, mind you, but OK.

These are actual observations... not just some theories I thought up.

Re:That's it

[quadelirus]

That is true, although my eyes--though young--are far from perfect. Maybe they are just good with the light sensitivity thing and bad in terms of depth. Who knows.

Re:That's it

[WaywardGeek]

I have to admit, I'd be a little embarrassed being seen with an iPad, unlike how cool I think it would be to strut around with a MacBook Air. Steve Jobs may be a genius at marketing, but his blind-spot is understanding that users want powerful general-purpose devices, not just players for Apple programs. Apple's initial refusal to allow 3rd party iPhone apps is evidence of this. Of course, we could all start writing cool iPad apps, so long as they are single-threaded, non-threatening to Steve, and don't mind developing them on a real computer, as the iPad is incapable of hosting such development.

Re:That's it

[Island Admin]

LCD is way better than CRT sure. I work on a LCD all day, and have noticed a huge difference in eye strain. My e-ink however gives me the same feel as reading a book. Personal preference maybe ... also the battery life on my Kindle is awesome .... no LCD is going to come close to it for some time. And trust me, when you are travelling that makes a huge difference.

Re:That's it

[eharvill]

I hear this argument from everyone, but I use a computer with an LCD screen 10-12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and I've never (ever, ever) had a problem with eye strain. That was a problem with CRTs, sure, but are there really that many people who actually have a problem looking at an LCD screen, or is this just a lot of hot air brought about by tech pundits? I sort of think that most people have heard there is a problem and believe it the way most people thought the Atkin's diet was a good nutritious diet. Maybe the e-ink guys are just marketing hard from this angle and no one has bothered to respond? I'm not an optometrist or anything, so I could definitely be quite wrong, but I just haven't experienced this "problem" and I asked around to fellow long-term computer users and nobody I know has either. By the way, I'm a CS doctoral student and programmer and gamer, so I basically do look at screens ALL DAY. I even read academic papers on my laptop regularly (and read printed novels but I don't mind using a screen at all).

I just had my annual eye appointment and based on what my optometrist said it not the LCD screen itself that causes vision "problems." It's really the amount of time and the distance you are looking at the screen. Basically you are staring at an object 12-16" from your face for hours at a time and your eye muscles get used to that. Distance objects might be blurry for a bit until your eyes can "stretch" out and readjust. Just like sitting in a chair for hours at a time, your legs, back, etc need to stretch and change positions from time to time.

Re:That's it

[FunkyELF]

As bemymonkey said.... Videos Please

Re:That's it

[node 3]

Maybe not searing compared to direct sunlight, but still bright enough to cause eyestrain when reading black text on that hella bright white background most web sites etc. have...

That's absurd. There's no way whatsoever that in the daytime *ANY* LED LCD is going to be so bright as to cause eyestrain. Even on an overcast day. The brightness difference just isn't there.

Maybe you're used to shit panels that flicker. Those definitely *will* cause eyestrain, but not because of the brightness (although brightness will exacerbate it).

Take a glossy screen and a matte screen outside, place them side-by-side and rethink that statement. I've done it, and I call bullshit...

I've done this. Matte LCDs fade in bright environments. Glossy LCDs have reflections. Specular vs. diffuse. It's simple physics.

Maybe you're using crap products, or are overly sensitive to certain effects (for example, your eyes can't focus on the screen instead of the reflections, or they keep focussing back and forth, causing fatigue).

But your specific complaints fail, in the way you are interpreting them, under the laws of physics.

Re:That's it

[cayenne8]

"I sort of think that most people have heard there is a problem and believe it the way most people thought the Atkin's diet was a good nutritious diet."

Well, there ARE more and more studies coming out that show that in fact that eating lower carb, less processed carb meals...emphasizing proteins and good fats does seem to help people lose and maintain weight, reduce triglycerides and help keep insulin in check. Couple eating more protein, good fats and getting your carbs only from natural, no processed veggie and fruit sources with exercise and you do have a good thing.

If you're thinking of Atkins only with respect to the 2x week induction phase, you aren't thinking about the whole diet, that is only a small part of it, and doing it for 2-3 weeks or so isnt' going to hurt anyone, and it can cause quick fat loss which helps a person stick to a new lifestyle and eating method.

Re:That's it

[dangitman]

are the kind of people who use LED-backlit desktop screens on 100% brightness and contrast in a darkened room (or basement).

C'mon man, don't be so harsh and judgemental. A basement is also a room. It's not as black and white as you make it out to be.

Re:That's it

[sqrt(2)]

Their battery claims are definitely more accurate than any other company I've bought products from. My Macbook Pro can get 8+ hours if I am just taking notes at lowest brightness with wifi turned off. Surfing the web at medium brightness gets closer to 7 so it seems like they actually do make an effort to report their battery life during real world conditions and not some theoretical maximum under next to zero use.

Re:That's it

[Wovel]

You of course apparently have no idea what multi-threading is and that the iphone, ipod touch and ipad all support it.

Perhaps you should learn about application development before attempting to sound smart about it on the Internet.

Re:That's it

[Anonymous Coward]

How old are you?

I thought the same thing, and I've been staring at screens professionally and for-fun none stop since 1998.

I've hit 30 now, I'm on my first pair of glasses (for distance) and I'm getting more and more uncomfortable dry feelings when looking at screens.

I would probably trade my desk job for something out-doorsy right about now...

Re:That's it

[quadelirus]

Would that mean that the problem would be just as prevalent with eInk?

Re:That's it

[eharvill]

It is my understanding, yes. Same with a book. You focus on an object at a certain distance for 3-4 hours in a row and then go outside and might have problems reading signs that are a hundred yards away until your eyes stretch out again.

Re:That's it

[Golias]

What for? The iPad is little more than an iPod Touch that won't fit in your pocket, and the market will judge it accordingly.

The iPod Touch sells like hotcakes, and the biggest drawback to using it for some tasks (such as book reading) is the small screen size.

So your description of it is one of the better arguments I've heard for why the iPad will be a big seller.

It's obvious that YOU won't buy one, but I'm guessing you have no interest in owning an iPod Touch either. I think the execs at Apple made the calculation that they don't need to sell one to BrokenHalo from Slashdot for their new gizmo to make money. We'll see whether they are right about that in a couple months.

Re:That's it

[Golias]

Two things:

1. It sounds like you could be diabetic or have other medical factors that are hurting your vision.

2. If you've been doing this for 25 years, most of them have probably been spent gazing into cathode rays, not reading LCD screens. My office didn't switch to LCD monitors until about a year and a half ago.

Of course...

[King InuYasha]

Meh... Of course Microsoft responds that way.... They don't want to say that the iPad could possibly be another game-changer, even though Apple seems to be known for doing that nowadays...

Re:Of course...

[91degrees]

Microsoft hasn't stared an opinion. A major shareholder and founder has. This is the opinion of a private individual.

Re:Of course...

[King InuYasha]

Ehh... Microsoft is still Chairman of the company...

Re:Of course...

[91degrees]

It's still Bill Gates' opinion as opposed to that of the company.

Re:Of course...

[Anonymous Coward]

Did Microsoft just become alive person?

Re:Of course...

[Lars T.]

At 14:52 UTC on the 15th of Febuary 2010, Microsoft became sentient. One hour later, WW3 still hasn't started - WTF?

Re:Of course...

[hairyfeet]

You know that is something I just don't understand. Not trying to troll here, but I just don't get how a device with such a teeny tiny niche is supposed to be a "mega hit" or a "game-changer". Let us look at the iPhone, which has also had those labels attached to it. We are talking about a device that IIRC has captured less than 2% of the market last I checked, yet everyone seems to be tripping over themselves to just slobber praise onto it.

If Motorola or any other company bragged about their new device like it was the best thing since sliced bread when it had only captured 2% of the market everyone would be laughing at them. So why do so many sites trip over themselves to lavish praise on anything Apple? Is it because other have tried to rip off the GUI? Considering in the mobile space ripping off each other's ideas seems to be SOP I wouldn't make a big deal over that.

So I honestly don't get it. We are talking about devices that typically won't even reach 5% of the market, by a company that occupies a boutique niche. The only real hit market wise has been the iPod, and I would argue that the PMP market before Apple had designs so damned terrible that anybody that made one with less buttons than the space shuttle that wasn't a royal PITA to deal with would have been a hit. So what gives?

Re:Of course...

[skine]

Corporations are legally people in the US.

Re:Of course...

[KylePflug]

Oh, bullshit. Can they get married? Can they get drivers licenses?

Corporations are legal entities, and so are people. Corporations are no more "legally people" than people are "legally corporations."

Re:Of course...

[KylePflug]

iPhone is currently around 25% of the smartphone market.

Re:Of course...

[KylePflug]

[ http://comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2010/2/comScore_Reports_December_2009_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share ]

Re:Of course...

[egomaniac]

Corporations are legally persons. The fact that they can't get married doesn't prove they aren't persons under the law -- any more than the fact that my four-year-old son can't get married doesn't prove he's not legally a person. Some laws distinguish between legal persons and natural persons, and some laws distinguish between over-18 natural persons and under-18 natural persons. So what?

Re:Of course...

[boaworm]

No, that's very wrong :-)

There is a huge difference between "legally being a person", and "being a legal person".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person

Re:Of course...

[Anonymous Coward]

I reckon he's talking about the overall phone market and not the smartphone subset.

Re:Of course...

[bkr1_2k]

Can they get married?

I'm guessing the LGBT crowd might have issue with your argument that not being able to get married means someone/something isn't a person.

That said, there is definitely a difference between a legal "person" and a legal "entity".

Re:Of course...

[bkr1_2k]

We are talking about a device that IIRC has captured less than 2% of the market last I checked, yet everyone seems to be tripping over themselves to just slobber praise onto it

The iPod has between 70 and 87% market share, depending upon which numbers you look at. The iPhone has between 15 and 25%, depending upon which numbers you look at. Those are not "boutique niche" numbers by any stretch of the imagination.

The only real hit market wise has been the iPod, and I would argue that the PMP market before Apple had designs so damned terrible that anybody that made one with less buttons than the space shuttle that wasn't a royal PITA to deal with would have been a hit. So what gives?
What gives is that Apple did it. And they've done it many times over the last decade or so. Arguably they've been the most successful "turn around" seen in a long time, if not in all time. People keep talking about it because it's almost unheard of for a company to have that kind of turn-around with the kind of consistent growth in market share (in multiple markets) that Apple has seen since Jobs' return.

Re:Of course...

[hairyfeet]

The smartphone market is a tiny niche of the overall cell phone market, so being a big fish in a teeny tiny pond really doesn't IMHO equal the kind of tripping overthemselves to slobber like we have seen in the press. Now I did say the iPod was a hit, in fact it has become a word unto itself like Google. When someone sees me walking around with my sandisk I always get someone who asks "what kind of iPod is that?" because like Google that word has come to mean the market. So I did give them credit there.

But I still don't see how what will most likely be a pretty niche product like the iPad deserves page after page after page of drool by the press. As for Jobs himself? It is kinda hard to separate the whole "cult of Steve" from the company, so in this greybeard's opinion that makes it hard to tell what success is because of Jobs, or because of the mythos. Just look at how their stock tanks if a "Steve is dead!" rumor starts. The press almost acts like Steve is actually sitting there barefoot personally designing all the products. That is why I have said in the past if Steve dies they need to bring back the Woz, even if it is just some bullshit "advisory" role that has no real impact on anything, because without the mythos the stock could seriously tank.

But from a purely market numbers perspective the only hit they have had since Steve came back IMHO is the iPod, which I agree is a smash hit. But they have reached saturation point on PMPs awhile back, so I wonder if they can sustain their numbers when iPods starting dropping simply because everyone has more than enough of them already. But if you look at the overall numbers of cell phones smartphones are a pretty small niche, and I just don't see the iPad competing with these $300-$400 netbooks that are frankly getting more powerful than laptops costing $1000 just a couple of years ago. And even my friends that are diehard Apple fans seem to think the press is going overboard. so we shall see whether all this praise was justified or not. And I still don't personally "get it" but then again I don't own a Mac or listen to an iPod.

Re:Of course...

[KylePflug]

So the plain-english distinction between "people" and "non-people" is utterly significant. As in, "Did microsoft just become a live person" as a comeback to "Microsoft is charman of the company" is not appropriately answered by pointing out that corporations are functional legal entities.

To say that corporations are "legally persons" is to deliberately obfuscate the language. I'm plenty familiar with corporate law and it's simply another way of saying that in typical interactions corporations can act as people (executing contracts, suing one another, etc.). This is different from saying they are "legally persons" in an attempt to deliberately obfuscate the plain-english difference between natural entities and legal entities.

Re:Of course...

[KylePflug]

I think the LGBT crowd chooses to take issue with the fact that they are being denied basic legal rights associated with personhood.

Re:Of course...

[node 3]

So what gives?

Um, where to even begin...

First, iPhone's market share isn't 2%. You're off by more than an order of magnitude.

Second, Apple tends to release products that defines or redefine a market. The Apple I/II defined the PC. The Mac redefined the PC. The PowerBook defined the notebook. The iPod redefined the PMP. The iPhone redefined the smart phone. Now the iPad is going to redefined the tablet computer.

And every time Apple did this there were people who complained about the new product definition. They all said these things were toys or were underpowered or blah, blah, blah. Dvorak famously stated that the Mac was doomed because he didn't think anyone would ever want to use a mouse. The only product in that list that didn't have a gigantic chorus of naysayers was the iPhone (and even then, there were complaints).

Now, of course, there were portable computers before the PowerBook, there were GUIs (in labs) before the Mac/Lisa. There was *a* PC before the Apple I (the Altair 8800, which can only *barely* be called a PC). There were smartphones before the iPhone and PMPs before the iPod.

And today, there have been tablet computers before the iPad.

So, why the fuss? First, looking at Apple's history, the iPad fits in quite well. There are even the naysayers who are decrying its lack of features or its method of interaction. Of course, time will tell who is right, but I highly suspect that in a few years time, all small tablets will be iPads, the same way all PCs today are Macs and all smartphones (except Blackberry) are iPhones. Specifically, in the sense that there will be a clear pre-iPad and post-iPad market, and the majority of devices post-iPad will more closely resemble the iPad than they will resemble the tablet designs of the past.

Re:Of course...

[Anonymous Coward]

and 5% of the mobile phone market.

Really, all modern phones are smart phones.

The distinction is only in the eyes of fanboys!

post first

[Anonymous Coward]

frost piss

Pretty straightfoward comment

[Liquidrage]

Not much meat to the article (*gasp* I read it).

I think a lot of people would agree with his statement, myself included.

I think the charitable donations for vaccines at the bottom of the article is more interesting, though that's been covered here already.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the charitable donations for vaccines at the bottom of the article is more interesting, though that's been covered here already.

Yeah, because nothing says "altruism" like adding 7.6 million people to a community that already has widespread famine.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Despite having been moded as a troll, you're absolutely right.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[Anonymous Coward]

No, what you're both insinuating is wrong.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[node 3]

I think a lot of people would agree with his statement, myself included.

I think a lot will as well. The difference is that I think a lot *more* will disagree.

In a year's time, most people will want an iPad instead of a netbook. Only the geeks of the Linux variety will still want a netbook in greater numbers.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[WaywardGeek]

My own straw-poll doesn't agree with you. I'm 46 years old, and doing fairly well. Of my geek friends who live at the country club, not one is considering buying an iPad. They all own iPhones (I'm a rebel - I've got a Nexus One), they all have ipods (me, too), and every one is dissapointed in the iPad. General consensus is they were hoping for a MacBook in a slate format, but what they got was an oversized iPod Touch. You never heard such whining!

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[Liquidrage]

Right, because making people healthy instead of letting them die to decrease population is a bad way to get a culture on it's feet. We all know that a sick and small population is the way to a stable future.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[node 3]

My own straw-poll doesn't agree with you.

Impossible, unless you went into the future to perform your poll. I'm not talking about today. Today, people are making judgements on a product they haven't yet seen. I suspect it will only take a few moments on an iPad to convince people that they definitely do *want* one. They may still not buy one, but the form factor and interface are going to be very compelling in person, regardless of how it seems on paper.

I'm 46 years old, and doing fairly well. Of my geek friends who live at the country club, not one is considering buying an iPad. They all own iPhones (I'm a rebel - I've got a Nexus One), they all have ipods (me, too), and every one is dissapointed in the iPad.

That's because...

General consensus is they were hoping for a MacBook in a slate format, but what they got was an oversized iPod Touch. You never heard such whining!

Exactly! I promise you, an iPad running OS X would bomb. Hard. Tablet form factor and touch interface is *ABSOLUTE SHIT* for a traditional WIMP GUI. That's why Tablet PCs haven't taken off.

Consider what a Mac OS X tablet would require. It wouldn't be small. It wouldn't be fast. It wouldn't be cheap. And it wouldn't be a hit at 16GB-64GB. It wouldn't be a hit at over $1000. It wouldn't be a hit at 13".

But the geeks would have gotten all the product features that they asked for.

Thinking of the iPad as a big iPod touch is ass-backwards. The iPod touch is a small iPad. That is to say that thinking of the iPad as a big iPod touch implies all the interface limitations of the iPod, just bigger. Instead, the iPod touch is an iPad, that is smaller, with extra limitations introduced by the smaller size.

It would be like calling a notebook just an oversized netbook. Fucking idiotic.

So, who knows, I could definitely be wrong, but I am *highly* confident that once using one for just a few seconds will trigger the "want!" impulse in most people.

Re:Pretty straightfoward comment

[Wovel]

The best part is Microsoft tried to come out ahead on this by demoing an ugly , clunky, worthless, Windows based tablet.

First Post

[Anonymous Coward]

For once I sort of agree with Bill Gates - this ends up being a great content delivery system for iTunes and the App Store..so far I haven't seen any other apps that make me want to go out and buy one . Would I buy this over the "JooJoo" - who knows..

Borg with a heart of gold

[Anonymous Coward]

The article is only short so here's the whole thing:

"Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has called Apple's iPad a "nice reader" but claims netbooks are the way forward. Speaking briefly to BNET's Brent Schlender, the Microsoft Chairman, who had admitted to being in awe of the iPhone on first release, saw nothing in the iPad to really excite him. "You know, I'm a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard - in other words a netbook - will be the mainstream on that," Gates said. "So, it's not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, 'Oh my God, Microsoft didn't aim high enough.' It's a nice reader, but there's nothing on the iPad I look at and say, 'Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.'" The Microsoft founder and his wife Melinda now devote much of their time to good causes. Last month, they announced plans to donate $10bn (£6.2bn) over the next 10 years to develop and deliver new vaccines. The couple believe it should be possible to save the lives of 7.6 million children under five between 2010 and 2019 in poorer countries."

Good on you Borg Bill, saving the life of one child is a life-changing thing, a million I can't even get my head round.

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[mwvdlee]

The couple believe it should be possible to save the lives of 7.6 million children under five between 2010 and 2019 in poorer countries."

What happens when they turn 6?

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[JourneymanMereel]

The couple believe it should be possible to save the lives of 7.6 million children under five between 2010 and 2019 in poorer countries."

What happens when they turn 6?

They get to celebrate their 6th birthday? Something they may not to have otherwise been able to do.

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[BrokenHalo]

What happens when they turn 6?

Just a suggestion: they can read Now We Are Six (A.A. Milne). ;-)

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[AliasTheRoot]

What happens when they turn 6?

Madonna adopts them.

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[naz404]

Microsoft sells 'em Windows 9 of course! :D More saved lives = more customers! Get um while they're young!

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[xigxag]

some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard - in other words a netbook - will be the mainstream on that

So in other words, Bill, all those years your company devoted to TabletPCs, up to and including baking tablet functionality into Windows 7, it was all just a big mistake? Is that the prevailing wisdom at Microsoft these days as well? Granted, most TabletPC's these days are convertibles anyway, but even so, I wonder how Fujitsu, HP and Microsoft's other tablet partners feel about producing a dead-end product?

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[Anonymous Coward]

"The couple believe it should be possible to save the lives of 7.6 million children under five between 2010 and 2019 in poorer countries."

So, when they reach five years or older and get ill they die? That's a bit heartless Bill!

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[losfromla]

They stole this business plan from the Catholic church, no?

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[Anonymous Coward]

They're doomed just like they were before bill and life moves on for all (but the kid).

Re:Borg with a heart of gold

[Wovel]

Then they get frustrated after the 100th [INSERT INITIAL OF NEW COLOR]SOD in a day and jump off a bridge.

For those who didn't RTFA

[Lord Grey]

You don't need to. There is zero meaningful information in it that is not included in the summary.

It would have been interesting to here some of Gates' reasons behind his statement.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[Culture20]

It would have been interesting to here some of Gates' reasons behind his statement.

The same reasons /. has been saying the same thing, except he likes win7 "3 app" edition. Frankly, I'd take "3 apps" before 1 app + greater lock-in any day.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[zeromorph]

It would have been interesting to here some of Gates' reasons behind his statement.

Indeed it would be, from TFA:

"You know, I'm a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard - in other words a netbook - will be the mainstream on that"

So he says that he believes in touch and digital reading, but voice, pen and keyboard will be the mainstream on that!?

WTF, seriously WTF! Either they mangled his statement beyond recognition or he has a very strange perception about what the iPad is, where digital reading is now (and what its problems are) as well as what most people do with their computers and smartphones

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[SerpentMage]

The problem with Bill Gates is that he holds his tablet vision to death do us part.

I have a tablet PC and have to say a stylus SUCKS! I use Windows 7 and ever since they improved the UI so that I can tap and twist my way through everywhere the pen has not left its socket.

A long time ago when I was in engineering university and the tablet idea first came (1990) out the administrative assistant to the dean of engineering said, "now that's a dumb idea." I was shocked and asked would you not want to write? She said, "no..." She said her husband is a professor in British history. Whenever he goes to the UK he has to copy books by hand (no pictures allowed, and no running the photo copier.) And when he has to write for three days solid his hands are completely cramped. Yet if he were to type there would be no such problem. 20 years later she was right and I was wrong... And Apple knows it, but Mr Gates is still clueless as ever on this topic.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[gravesb]

I think Siri will be the killer app. I tried that thing on an iPhone 3G, and I've never seen voice recognition work as well. As it improves and becomes more useful, it might just replace the keyboard for most tasks on the iPad. If Apple is smart, they'll buy the company up so that it really differentiates the iPad from other devices.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[Lars T.]

You don't need to. There is zero meaningful information in it that is not included in the summary.

Yes, there is: ""So, it's not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, 'Oh my God, Microsoft didn't aim high enough.'" Take that from Bill, Balmer.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[FlyingBishop]

What it comes down to is this: A decent touchscreen costs something like $10 per square inch. A decent keyboard costs something like $10. And that price is a flat rate, whether you're talking about a 2x2 mobile keyboard or a full-sized desktop keyboard.

Now, given that typing causes a lot of mechanical wear, why would you want to put all of that wear on the most expensive part of the device when you can add a secondary keyboard that is easily replaced and can be designed with durability in mind at a much lower cost? Because you don't like connectors? Because it gives you a slightly lighter form factor (the keyboard also is a pretty negligible part of the weight such a device takes up.)

To top it all off, you can't do any sort of typing without sacrificing half of your expensive, pretty screen to a keyboard. A keyboard which isn't really any better than a hardware one.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[vonDrake]

I have a tablet PC and have to say a stylus, more precisely a digitizer, is an excellent alternative to a keyboard if you want to take notes digitally during a lesson at university, especially if it's math. Have you ever tried typing in a formula with your keyboard? In fact some time ago there has been a thread here about writing formulas with a computer. Someone complained about not being able to catch up during math lessons, because inputting them via keyboard was too slow. I'm glad and thankful Bill Gates recognized the usefulness a digitizer (!= touch pen) has and encouraged developing software that unleashes its potential (sounds a bit like a M$ commercial, nevertheless I consider it to be true).

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[anonymousbob22]

Though it might be easier to type than write, it's easier to draw on a tablet than draw using a mouse, trackpad, or eraser mouse.

I am currently an engineering student and I can't use my laptop to take notes because a large portion of my notes do not translate directly to ASCII text, since a good portion of them will be equations or circuit diagrams (I'm in EE).

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[arose]

I don't for a second believe that typing on a tiny touchscreen "keyboard" for three days would help matters.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[Marsell]

I, on the other hand, would like a stylus. I'd like to draw sketches during note taking. More importantly, I like drawing.

Stating that styluses suck only means you're not in the arts. This is pretty obvious, yo.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[Maxo-Texas]

I can understand flash, but the no picture is just an artificial attempt to maintain control of the content. Completely against what should be the goals of history and science. If anything, pictures of those texts should be online so he doesn't have to go to UK.

I busted for this by a minister at Westminster Abbey. The rule was "No photos" and all around you, you could see people where were not on the guided tour taking pictures.

For completely arbitrary bonus points, photos WERE allowed on other days of the week -- just not on wednesdays when I was there.

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[MaximKat]

And how exactly does this support the idea that ipad (without keyboard) is better than netbooks (with keyboard)?

Re:For those who didn't RTFA

[PingPongBoy]

I have a tablet PC and have to say a stylus SUCKS! I use Windows 7 and ever since they improved the UI so that I can tap and twist my way through everywhere the pen has not left its socket.

A long time ago when I was in engineering university and the tablet idea first came (1990) out the administrative assistant to the dean of engineering said, "now that's a dumb idea." I was shocked and asked would you not want to write? She said, "no..." She said her husband is a professor in British history. Whenever he goes to the UK he has to copy books by hand (no pictures allowed, and no running the photo copier.) And when he has to write for three days solid his hands are completely cramped. Yet if he were to type there would be no such problem

For one thing, it sounds very much like the force of your argument against a tablet actually supports it more. The prof needs a tool that involves the actual process of writing, and lo the tablet PC is just such a device that happens to have a fully-blown computer. The manuscripts being copied are being preserved in a reduced light environment, yet a powerful device for transcribing them to digital form is at hand.

I use a tablet PC - much can be done to improve it - but once I got the hang of it, using a pen to move the cursor around beats moving the cursor with a mouse or finger pad. You learn to tap or just hover the tip of the pen and drag. Getting a cursor to move anywhere accurately and 10 times faster than a mouse without carpal tunnel syndrome can't be all bad. Working on a desk, I have an external keyboard instead of just relying on writing recognition for text entry, but working as a passenger in a vehicle, it's a lot easier to tilt a flattened tablet away from glare and the writing recognition is completely unfazed by the bizarre scrawling that road bumps cause. The accuracy is almost flawless. It helps to write a lot, and I do. Even though I use a keyboard for nitpicky text entry to textboxes, I cursively write long notes because it helps me think. Also, it helps me write well on the computer, so well that it looks almost like real-pen-and-paper writing.

The tablet of today requires you to use the stylus that comes with the computer. I can use an ordinary pen on one of the big HP touchscreens to move the cursor, but the computer can't track the fine movements of pen for writing. The tablet HP touchscreen of course is usable with its bundled stylus for writing.

However, my prediction is the tablet of the near future will allow ordinary pens to be used so you don't have to carry and lose the special stylus. A bit more processing horsepower, and people will love this type of computer.

The iPad ought to be enough for anybody.

[lisany]

The iPad ought to be enough for anybody.

Re:The iPad ought to be enough for anybody.

[sammyF70]

+1 funny (sorry, don't have modpoints at the moment :P

Re:The iPad ought to be enough for anybody.

[alex4u2nv]

You mean its running on EMACS?

Uh, what?

[consonant]

Isn't the iPad essentially a netbook of the future?

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.

Re:Uh, what?

[Attila Dimedici]

No, the Ipad appears to be an oversized Ipod designed to be an ereader.

Re:Uh, what?

[timeOday]

Isn't the iPad essentially a netbook of the future?

How so? Even if it weren't restricted to approved applications, it would only be as good as other tablets of the present, which haven't gone anywhere. It's just an overgrown PDA.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends. Follow this handy process to decide:

Q: Are you an Apple fanboy?

Yes: OH MY GOD THE IPAD IS AWESOME IT WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING NETBOOKS ARE OVER! HOW CAN YOU ALL NOT SEE THIS?!

No: What the hell is this thing for? It looks pretty damn useless to me.

Re:Uh, what?

[91degrees]

Almost. It would be if you added a keyboard and a USB slot. Maybe an SD card reader as well.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.

Yes, this is exactly what has kept Tivo and cable company DVR's out of the market now entirely dominated by MythTV... oh, wait, no. It's not that I don't agree with your assessment of the iPad, it's just that I don't think it will in any way stop the iPad's success in the market. Don't worry. I'm sure there will always be alternatives for geeks; just don't expect your idea of the ideal product to be mainstream.

(For the record I use MythTV, an HDHomeRun, and my own homemade antenna to record OTA TV.)

Re:Uh, what?

[elnyka]

Isn't the iPad essentially a netbook of the future?

Take away the restrictions of installing software, and add multitasking, and then, maybe.

Re:Uh, what?

[p0]

If it ever succeeds in the market, I'm going to use your comment as the "Less space than a Nomad, lame" equivalent for the iPad.

Re:Uh, what?

[stuntpope]

It's just an overgrown PDA.

In other words, as asserted earlier, a netbook of the future. Netbooks were conceived and marketed for purposes befitting an overgrown PDA. Not devices to do your programming on, or write your term papers, or edit videos, do your Photoshop work on, etc. But a portable device to carry around and share your photos, movies, music, or check your email, browse the Web, without the bulk/weight penalty of a full-sized laptop. That's why they're called netbooks, not "mini laptops".

Netbooks aren't merely cheaper, smaller, lower-performing laptops, the idea was "why carry all this around when in reality you want a device for only a small subset of the capabilities of a full laptop?" Not "people need smaller laptops with full computing capabilities."

I see the iPad as the best expression of that type of device thus far.

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

Say what you will about Tivo or cable DVRs, but they get the job done. The iPad hasn't exactly had fawning reviews and it starts hitting the price point where people start to second guess their purchases unless they know exactly what it is. Is it an e-reader? Not really with a backlit display and likely a criminally short battery life. Is it a netbook? No, especially if you have to choose between an awkward virtual keyboard or lug a physical keyboard around to type--not to mention the lack of multi-tasking. It's essentially a enlarged iTouch without phone or a camera and still tied to the ever-so-shaky AT&T network. It is the multi-function object that doesn't really do any particular function well.

Re:Uh, what?

[Ironsides]

I can see uses for a tool like this. However, it's more of a niche tool and the lockdown is a bit of a problem. At a few places I've worked at, we've had forms and checklists that need to be run through and the form factor of the iPad would be useful for that. However, with the lockdown on it, the iPad just isn't suitable unless all the forms could be filled out in Safari over ssh on the 3G connection. Still, being able to pull the forms off local storage and then transfer them to the central server periodically would be more useful, especially when a network connection can not be guaranteed.

Re:Uh, what?

[Savage-Rabbit]

A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.

The reaction to the iPod was pretty similar way-back-when, to much capacity, too expensive, not enough whiz-bang features.... now everybody has one. I'll wait and see before passing judgement. Personally I'd prefer the iPad to have the full OS X desktop OS rather than the iPhone OS.

Re:Uh, what?

[macs4all]

A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.

DRM? Where, EXACTLY?

Unable to multitask? Um, since the OS is Darwin-based, it most certainly CAN multitask (and does). And it is quite likely that the artificial limitation on third-party app multitasking will disappear very soon, due primarily to the iPad having more breathing-room, battery wise.

Underpowered? For what, exactly? At least one hands-on report called it "Wicked fast." Doesn't sound "underpowered" to me. Also, all the demos I have seen show it to be extremely responsive and "fluid". But if you DO want to see "underpowered", there are a plethora of UNSUCCESSFUL Windows-based "Pen computers" around. Check eBay, I'm SURE you can find a deal...

Re:Uh, what?

[alex4u2nv]

yes, and input output should be more comfortable. If both items are to take PDAs to the next level, then I think the netbook wins.

Why?

Tilt screen and keyboard. who cares about multitouch and a huge screen if communicating with the device is cumbersome.
Maybe the iPad would make an advanced digital photo frame.

Re:Uh, what?

[clifyt]

"It's just an overgrown PDA."

To some of us, this is perfect.

I have a superpowerful desktop that I can use if I need to...honestly, except when I'm needing to process 100 tracks of audio at once or need a compiling station for the few times a decade I actually get back to programming, I rarely turn it on (and even with my music, my laptop or macmini that is ultraquiet and fits in my rack case in a smaller slot than any of my outboard gear is powerful enough).

I have an iPhone for 99% of the rest of what I do these days...I felt constricted to my office otherwise until I picked this up. I've been a gadget junkie for most of my 4 decades on this earth and the last device that was as compact as my iPhone that was useful to me? My Newton...had to invest in cargo pants to have this with me (had palm and a sony branded palm before those...or was it after...I forget).

I can get to my servers anywhere with my phone...can do just about anything. And yeah, I can do that on my friends Droids or Win phones, but never quite as easily or quickly...the OS just gets the hell out of the way with this device which should be the goal of ANY device so that you can focus on the task at hand.

My only complaint with the iPhone is that the screen is too small. I still find myself using it more often even at home or the office than I do my computers sitting around (and in some ways, I use to do that with my other gadgets...its faster to pull up email on a device where it is always running...I thought of buying one of those Peek emailer devices for the same reason (and they are pretty cool, but when I tried one, was slow for what I needed...didn't speed up my life and one more gadget).

So yes, an overgrown PDA might be EXACTLY what is needed. I played with the Dell Tablet, but it felt like using a PC with a stylus. I generally like Dell products if I go the PC route (at least the business class ones...other than the one I'm installing today has no fricken XP drivers and I'm having to scour the net to get the appropriate install!!!) and I thought it would be great. Honestly, it felt more cumbersome using than simply having laptop with a wacom on it. Why aren't tablet PCs going anywhere? Because they think they are PCs (I saw one recently that once you unplugged the keys and otherwise, it pulled up a custom tablet environment that was simplified to this world...might have to see if I can get a loaner sometime to check it out!).

So current tablets don't work because they try to be too much. PDAs are perfect because they don't. Geeks don't get that...limiting what you can do will help you focus on your job, not focus on technology. If your job IS technology...well, then this is the wrong device for you. If you job is making certain you get your life together? A more limited device with the appropriate apps might just be the thing...My only concern right now is I don't want to carry two deviced (i.e., if the pad could be a phone too, it would be an instant choice...except for the times my headphones run out of juice, but then again, I also find it just as akward to hold the iphone as well and just throw it on speaker 90% of the time!)

Re:Uh, what?

[whisper_jeff]

You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer.

Feel free to point out all the tablets that are trying to be a computer. Now try pointing out the ones that have been successful products. Perhaps the market does not want a tablet that is a computer. Perhaps the market wants computers that are computers and tablets that are something else. Perhaps what you want is not what the market wants.

Something to contemplate.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

IMHO, the next logical step for Apple would be a mini-Macbook, running OS X on what is essentially the iPad platform. They could position this at roughly $1k, using some of the extra money to provide more connectivity. This would in theory replace the current MacBook (which lacks Firewire anyway), and keep the MBP as is. That's what I would do.

Re:Uh, what?

[MBCook]

The iPad hasn't exactly had fawning reviews and...

What is wrong with you?

The iPad was announced 3 weeks ago. No one has reviewed it. In fact, next to no one has touched the thing. We're getting these stories like "iPad becoming less popular" but you can't buy one for another 3 months.

I know people like to bash Apple (and MS, and....) but why not wait until you've touched the thing to declare it a failure of a netbook without a keyboard.

"The Mercedes Personal Jetpack is widely known as not being the game changer they say. Everyone knows a 200 mile range is too short, and the I hear the exhaust smells like bananas. The controls (which I've never felt) feel awkward and the Mercedes emblem isn't chrome-y enough. I look forward to a more thorough bashing it once the product is announced."

Re:Uh, what?

[macs4all]

It's just an overgrown PDA.

In other words, as asserted earlier, a netbook of the future. Netbooks were conceived and marketed for purposes befitting an overgrown PDA. Not devices to do your programming on, or write your term papers, or edit videos, do your Photoshop work on, etc. But a portable device to carry around and share your photos, movies, music, or check your email, browse the Web, without the bulk/weight penalty of a full-sized laptop. That's why they're called netbooks, not "mini laptops". Netbooks aren't merely cheaper, smaller, lower-performing laptops, the idea was "why carry all this around when in reality you want a device for only a small subset of the capabilities of a full laptop?" Not "people need smaller laptops with full computing capabilities." I see the iPad as the best expression of that type of device thus far.

FINALLY! Someone who GETS IT!!!!

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Say what you will about Tivo or cable DVRs, but they get the job done.

This is exactly what I believe most people will say about the iPad a year from now. I disagree with your assessments, but these points have been discussed to death already. Apple has done everything right to launch this product successfully: plenty of (mostly free) advertising, fashionable style, sufficient availability and retail outlets, and reasonable price with plenty of room to move down.

It just has to work. Period.

Re:Uh, what?

[Jellybob]

You can have that. Mobile safari supports the local storage extensions to HTML being developed by WhatWG, which is designed for exactly the purpose you described.

Download some forms when you have a connection, go offline and fill them in, and then synchronise when you get back. You can see it working with Google Mail and Reader, as well as quite a few other pieces of software, already.

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

I'm going to posit that the success of the iPod, which was not instantaneous, is really tied to the Apple store and their ability to deliver songs, especially individual songs at a reasonable price point. That was the piece that was missing from the scene at the time which led to other players (Amazon, mostly) trying to imitate the store. The iPhone delivered more functionality than the other phone manufacturers were willing to dole out to us (secretly because phone companies hate their customers). Unless Apple somehow comes up with a really revolutionary idea with the iPad, there's nothing to get excited about here. There's not a single feature here that isn't already on another Apple product or netbook.

Of course, some people will buy it because it's Apple, but you could hardly call them technologists. Early adopters and Apple fanboys will eat it up, but really, is there anything to get excited about here?

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer.

A tablet was a computer until about three weeks ago, when Steve Jobs corrected us all.

Of course, we don't know what the market wants, and won't find out until people can buy iPads. I personally can't think of a use case for the iPad as it stands, that warrants paying $500 (beyond "I really like gadgets and I'm rich enough to drop $500 without a thought).

I'm pretty sure the iPad will be a success in the long term, probably when a lot of the criticisms people have, get addressed. I think we'll see the ability to switch between running apps, and the ability for an iPad to function as the only computer in a household, without needing a "real" computer to sync with.

Re:Uh, what?

[Attila Dimedici]

What job? You say that people will say that the Ipad "gets the job done", what job? What is the job that the Ipad is the perfect device for?

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

Oh, but people have said plenty about it. I'm not going to link to all of it (you would expect people to Google these things), but here is a link to one article that links to several.

And for sake of clarity, I have and iPhone, own an iMac, spent many years working support on Apple products. I don't call them out just because I'm a "hater" because I like some of their products. But honestly, look at this thing and its specs and try to tell me what there is to get excited about this.

Re:Uh, what?

[xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D]

It was a comment directly in response to "the iPad is the netbook of the future". Are you saying netbooks shouldn't be computers?

Re:Uh, what?

[GordonBX]

... The iPhone delivered more functionality than the other phone manufacturers were willing to dole out to us (secretly because phone companies hate their customers). ...

Except that the iPhone delivered significantly LESS functionality than other phone manufacturers were giving us, and was significantly behind the times (like 4-5 years) compared to actual features in things like Symbian and Windows Mobile. The thing it did was take what functionality they had, and make it really easily accessible - so much so that people like you, apparently, think that it had more functionality than it's contemporaries. That's what puts the iPad in competition with netbooks - it's a netbook that is easy to use, which is where it will find its market.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget; without a keyboard! Seriously, who wants a computer without a keyboard?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

No. They are very different devices for very different purposes.

This would be like saying the mouse is the keyboard of the future.

Sure, they are both input devices and they can certainly perform the same tasks if required, but neither will replace the other.

The problem I see with the i-pad is that is fulfills the needs of a market that isn't really there. Most people I know with e-book readers got them because they didn't want to read on a computer screen. Most people I know with netbooks got them because they are essentially really cheap laptops. Some of them even have iphones, but the netbook is a different beast, it has a keyboard and can multitask. They wanted a small computer, not a dedicated media device.

The i pad is a multi purpose media device. I'm sure there are people out there who want to read off of it, or play games, or watch youtube, but I think most of these people don't want these options in the same device. Someone who bought the ipad to just play games will find it lacking when they can't download VVVVV, battle for westnoth or check gamefaqs in the middle of playing. People using it to look at the internet will be dissappointed when it isn't as full featured as the browser on the netbook. People looking for an e-book reader may be happy, but that depends on whether they were trying to escape from LCD screens and what format they desire (as a fan of e-pub I'm still looking for a good reader... sony maybe?).

The ipad is a jack of all trades, a master of none. I'm sure it'll sell enough to turn a profit, I know I don't want one, and I don't know anyone that does. The lukewarm reaction leads me to believe this will be a "failure" when compared to the iphone or the ipod.

Re:Uh, what?

[whisper_jeff]

I believe I'm saying that the iPad isn't a computer. Given that virtually everyone agrees that netbooks are computers, I believe the obvious extension of that is that I believe the iPad is not a netbook.

Re:Uh, what?

[beh]

What is the bl**dy obsession with whether it multitasks or not?

For this kind of device, in my opinion, multi-tasking is almost meaningless. The iphone's notification system could use some improvement, but real multitasking? Come on folks, it's not meant to replace your desktop or be your little Mersenne prime hunt in a pocket.

It was the same when the Zaurus was released - great it has Linux on it, yea! But apart from that, it sucked, compared to a lowly palm-pilot, which was just made to get the stuff done it was built for.

If I look at what I want from a device in that form factor, book reader, organizer, the fact that it DOES ITS JOB, and that it is well integrated with my stuff comes up WAAAYYY higher than multitasking.

Priorities, people - priorities!

If it had multitasking, 100 different chat clients for all chat systems ever written, could run gimp and do some powerful image processing, run all my databases (including SQL stored proc support), do some folding@home (or is that folding-on-the-road?) in the backgroup and everything else you might want to think up, it would neither be this small and light, nor likely very responsive, nor run as long as it does... ...and - most importantly, it would no longer be the device that MOST people can use easily: Apple isn't just thinking of the slashdot crowd as its potential customer base...

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer.

Right. The tablet is the 'magical' class of device that was just invented by Apple. The parent of your post clearly was not properly brainwashed by the Ipad launch event.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

there needs to be a "-1 baseless speculation" modifier.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

You keep on with that stupid and ignorant idea and see how it works out for you, dumbass.

Re:Uh, what?

[MobyDisk]

A note on expandability: Over time, we have gone from highly super modular devices, to cheaper, more specific, less expandable devices. The cheaper is a key part of that. In the 80s, you bought a motherboard with lots of expansion slots. Then you could add sound, better video, a newer drive controller, etc. Buying something with those on board was considered cheap and bad. Then in the 90s, every board had built-in audio, video, and IO. It was just so cheap and so ubiquitous that there was hardly a reason not to have it built-in. After 2000, it got to the point where hardly anyone even buys a sound card, and only specialized IO cards exist. Most laptops come with built-in webcams that are good enough for 99% of usages and are too cheap to not include, just for the 1% who want something better.

For many electronic devices, it is easier/cheaper to buy a newer one than to upgrade. That saddens me, but it is has become a fact of economics. So the "no ability to expand" might not be as bad a thing as you think. If it comes with a camera, a GPS, accelerometers, bluetooth, wi-fi, and sufficient storage... by the time the next generation of wi-fi comes out, it might be cheaper/easier just to buy a new iPad than to upgrade the current one.

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

Of course, with a name like "macs4all", I can expect you to be objective.

A quick Google search turns up this. DRM here, Multi-task here and underpowered for me is an extension of the fact that it cannot multitask. Having a large iTouch able to do one thing at a time does not really mean that it's blazing fast. Either it can't multitask because it doesn't have the specs for it or something is wrong with the iPhone OS (yeah, it's not running OS X).

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends on which future you're talking about.

http://homepage.mac.com/dtrull/pix/idiothospital.jpg

Re:Uh, what?

[bdenton42]

What job? You say that people will say that the Ipad "gets the job done", what job? What is the job that the Ipad is the perfect device for?

It does the exact same job that an iTouch does, except it can also do it for older people that don't have arms that are long enough anymore. ;-)

Re:Uh, what?

[Scarumanga]

Not really, it can't do everything that a netbook could do, as a netbook could do everything aside from playing 3d games. After all windows is not locked the same way the ipad/iphone is. When the Iphones came out, i wanted to get one but then i was looking at a Samsung omnia (windows mobile) and i noticed it supported divx and mp3, everything that windows supports. So that's why i ended up getting a Win Mobile 6.1 device, and i personally have not had any problems with it, i upgraded its SD chip to 16gb and well the best thing about a Omnia is you are NOT limited to how you wish to use it, Mass storage anyone? Can't do that with an Iphone/Ipad/Ipod Touch, those are under the iron grip of apple, they don't want you doing whatever you want on their devices. To top it off i get to use Opera mobile browser 10, neener neener. Not safari, /vomit.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the Ipad appears to be an oversized Ipod designed to be an ereader.

Technically, an oversized iTouch with an ereader would be far more accurate.

Beyond an ereader, it (perhaps unintentionally) addresses an aging population's irritation at undersized devices with text you can read without glasses, you can enlarge photos or videos to a sharable size (presentations) and have enough screen real-estate to be able to represent a full sized keyboard to actually type on rather than thumb away at an awkward pseudo-keyboard.

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

The iPhone was able to tap the market for phones that delivered media (music and video) well, which is something that no one on the market took advantage of at the time. Windows Mobile is a mess...I despise it with a passion. Regardless, the iPad still doesn't fit anywhere. It's not a netbook as with a netbook you would expect it to do more than it currently does. The iPad is a larger iTouch which I'll note is the bastard child of Apple. Not cool enough to be an iPhone and yet with a few more capabilities of an iPod. If Apple can come up with something truly groundbreaking or at least functional out of this, then I'll be pleasantly surprised. Till then, there isn't anything here to get excited about.

Re:Uh, what?

[macs4all]

there needs to be a "-1 baseless speculation" modifier.

You mean Billy-boy's baseless speculation on the future of Tablet Computing. I say "baseless", because, so far at least, Billy's vision of tablets hasn't worked out so well in the marketplace...

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer.

Feel free to point out all the tablets that are trying to be a computer. Now try pointing out the ones that have been successful products. Perhaps the market does not want a tablet that is a computer. Perhaps the market wants computers that are computers and tablets that are something else. Perhaps what you want is not what the market wants.

Something to contemplate.

I want a tablet that's a computer (actually a UMPC). I have one in my hand right now actually. It's a perfectly successful product, with good battery life, touch screen, has never crashed (runs Windows XP because I'm too lazy to install Moblin or learn to use it), and cost less than an iPad will but with better stats (32GB SSD, 1GB RAM, 1.33 Ghz Atom).

Oh and did I mention it came out about a year ago? Why are you waiting for another iUselessoverpriceddeviceinasleekpackage again? I have no desire to praise Apple or throw other companies under the bus just because a moronic public thinks Apple is the best thing since sliced bread. Just because something is used by a lot of people doesn't make it good, cheap, or even the best option for your needs.

http://www.dynamism.com/#Product=viliv

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

I'm going to posit that the success of the iPod, which was not instantaneous, is really tied to the Apple store and their ability to deliver songs,

I don't think that's the main factor. There were already MP3 players on the market, but the iPod was the first one where the UI hadn't been cobbled together by a team of engineers with no interest in usability or polish.

Neither iPod nor iTunes is perfect, by a long way. But until iPod came along, using an MP3 player was like setting a digital watch or a VCR in 1983.

The iPhone delivered more functionality than the other phone manufacturers were willing to dole out to us

Other phones had the functionality, after a fashion -- email, browsers, calendar, address book, and the ability to run 3rd party apps. But again, the UI was usually terrible. Even on Nokias, who were among the better companies, it would seem as if completely different teams had written different parts of the UI, with no look and feel guidelines to keep them on the same page.

The iPhone was actually designed to be a pleasure to use. (Other decent phones arrived around the same time, e.g. from Blackberry).

But I agree with your main thrust - I don't see that the iPad has any of the magic pixie dust that iPod or iPhone had.

But I think that by the 3rd gen, it'll be a success. It's a solution looking for a problem, but someone will identify that problem and there'll be "an app for that" soon enough.

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

So what exactly is it? Is the iPad a media platform? Then why have the virtual keyboard or have the possibility to hook up an external keyboard. Why no camera for teleconferencing? That might have been handy. For that matter, it won't support Flash either. So exactly what is this Frankenstein from Apple supposed to be? It's a blown up iTouch.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

Trying to get into the designers' heads, I think there's a couple of reasons for the inability to multitask apps.

1. Performance. Not so much that the hardware is underpowered, but that they're committed to a very slick, responsive UI experience (what I gather Mac people call "teh snappy"), which they don't want to jeopardise no matter what. I gather iPad's browser is awash with cosmetic stuff that makes browsing feel tactile. A little jitter while scrolling or scaling would spoil that. They don't want another app to steal cycles and spoil that.

Of course, a smart scheduler could orchestrate things so that the foreground application got everything it needed. I expect this in a future revision.

2. UI. Simply, that they've not come up with a completely idiot-proof user interface, such that knuckle-draggers understand the difference between closing an app and backgrounding it.

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

All of this pleasant discussion and I still haven't seen a positive reason on why someone should get this. Yeah, it has a nice screen and can run one app at a time really well! Where exactly does the iPad fit? It's not a netbook nor an e-reader. What the hell is it then? People keep saying that it does its job...well, what job is that?

Re:Uh, what?

[dfghjk]

"That's what puts the iPad in competition with netbooks - it's a netbook that is easy to use, which is where it will find its market."

The iPad is not a netbook by ANY definition of netbook. Whether the iPad is easy to use is a matter of perspective.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

you sure your username isn't supposed to be MCBook?

Re:Uh, what?

[Lars T.]

Yeah, and some of the points they claim we already know are completely bogus, like "Still dependent on AT&T's 3G service", so ...

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

So, just how much can a device do, without being a computer.

The iPad has a full featured Web browser (unless the absence of Flash bothers you). An office suite will be available.

Where's the line that says "Here's what you need to be able to do in order to be a computer" - and does that line move?

Seems to me that the iPad does everything a computer does, but only if Apple lets it.

Re:Uh, what?

[jo_ham]

The iPod was very popular long before the iTMS came along. Do you remember Rip. Mix. Burn. on the (boat anchor) iMac? The store really helped, especially with the release of the iPod Mini, but it was just extra gravy really.

I'm not sure the iPad will be quite as much of a success, but it has potential.

Re:Uh, what?

[Blue Stone]

>You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer.

An iPad is not a tablet. It's a consumption-oriented appliance.

And some people might want that. Wait and see, I guess.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

What is the bl**dy obsession with whether it multitasks or not?

Forgive me if I've misunderstanding what "not multitasking" means in the context of the iPad. I'm assuming it means that switching from one app to another means completely closing app 1, then opening app2.

So, let's say I'm reading a book. Maybe Paul Auster's City of Glass, in which part of the story focuses on the shapes a man traces out walking the streets of New York City. I'm curious about the exact streets, so I want to flick to the mapping app (or a browser), to see what part of Manhattan he's talking about, and how it's actually laid out. Do I really need to note down the streets to look up, close down the book reader, open the map app, browse the maps, close the maps app, return to the reader app?

(I had exactly this scenario earlier this week, except it was a paper book, and I looked up the maps in a paper Lonely Planet guide to NYC)

There are plenty of use cases like this. Apple is publishing iWork for the iPad. How often do you control-tab between a word processor and a browser? I do it often.

Re:Uh, what?

[GordonBX]

The iPad is not a netbook by ANY definition of netbook. Whether the iPad is easy to use is a matter of perspective.

I define a netbook as an easily carried computing device that I can use to do web browsing and email.

By that definition, the iPad looks like a pretty good Netbook to me.

Re:Uh, what?

[macs4all]

A quick Google search turns up this. DRM here,

The linked-to article is nothing BUT baseless speculation. How can ANYONE know that there is DRM on the bookstore?

Oh, and even if there is, you can be SURE that Apple will never REMOVE (and secretly, too!) books from your iPad, UNLIKE SOME 'bookstores'.

So, is that the BEST you can do to PROVE there is DRM on iPad?

Re:Uh, what?

[beh]

Apparently not the kind of jobs you're interested in. End of story for you there, got it.

As for me, I'm considering it as an ebook reader.

Otherwise - there is still gaming, surfing the web, datebooks, ...

I even have some other ideas where it might also fit in (as in, some other app for which I don't think an app yet exists), but would like to see the actual device first.

So, for myself, I'm probably more likely than not to buy one - the only question is whether to go for the 3G model (yet another data subscription) - or whether I'll be happy just preloading it with read-it-later pages to read for when I commute to and from work...

Re:Uh, what?

[Sandbags]

Actually, a couple THOUSAND people touched it, at the release. Tens of thousands of developers are working with the GUI. Press was given ample opportunity to do everything other than an extended personal review (which is mostly unnecessary at this point given it;s the same OS, the only real differences are in performance and form factor, which can be analyzed in minutes).

Re:Uh, what?

[Rockoon]

So all semi-modern mobile phones are netbooks?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

how much does your average computer novice user care about any of that?

DRM? That's soo beyond their understanding of Computers it's not even funny...
Multi-Task? It's not like having Multi-task is a good idea for them. They always end up with 20 applications open and bitch about how slow the darn Computer is
Underpowered? How fast it feels is what EVERYBODY who actually used one has raved about

Seriously, the IPad is Gods gift for computer illiterates (and Support staff, and the one IT guy they all seem to know and call whenever sth doesn't work (me))

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

Oh, and even if there is, you can be SURE that Apple will never REMOVE (and secretly, too!) books from your iPad, UNLIKE SOME 'bookstores'.
 

How on earth can you be 'SURE' of that?

I suppose it's unlikely that Apple would put themselves in that position, because providing a self-publishing platform like Amazon's Digital Text Platform isn't really Apple's style.

Amazon found themselves in a tricky situation. Due to a DTP user who'd (knowingly or unknowingly) published material that was neither licensed nor PD, they had sold a load of copies of 1984 that they weren't entitled to sell. They handled this badly. But, pretty quickly, they apologised, said it would never happen again, and gave every affected user a legitimate copy of 1984.

Having made a mistake, they cleared it up in an exemplary fashion.

You're saying Apple would never make a mistake?

Re:Uh, what?

[Graff]

There are plenty of use cases like this. Apple is publishing iWork for the iPad. How often do you control-tab between a word processor and a browser? I do it often.

Every app can view a web page, they all have access to WebKit. Every application also has access to viewing common document types such as PDF, RTF, Word, Excel, and so on. What if you could view the document and the browser and never switch between apps?

There are plenty of ways to get around the need to multitask. Multitasking is just one solution to the problem of how to easily view multiple sets of data nearly simultaneously. With applications being able to freeze state, view multiple document types, receive background notifications, and do background processing on remote servers there is very little reason to require multitasking in a minimal device like an iPhone or iPad.

Re:Uh, what?

[ColdWetDog]

Where exactly does the iPad fit?

My wife. Who takes her MacBook Pro from the kitchen to the living room and back again. Surfs the web. Looks up recipes and newspaper sites. Reads her email.

Wouldn't know multitasking if it jumped up and bit her on the nose. Likes the idea that she can read it on the couch. Has no use for a 'real' computer.

Just like most people.

Re:Uh, what?

[Sandbags]

Wrong. It's an "instant gratification" platform. A PC Companion. The bridge device you use to control your home theater, chat on social sites, make a phone call, respond to messages, and more (most importantly including EDIT THE QUICK DOCUMENT), WITHOUT having to turn on a PC. In addition to that, it's a a full color e-reader, surfing platform, comic book platform, media player, and car video screen (hang it from the back of your seat and let the kids watch, instead of adding a SEPARATE car movie screen).

It;s everything the iPod/iPhone isn't good at because of the small screen, it's always on receiving notifications like a phone and powers on instantly unlike a PC, and it requires no active patching regiment or security software. Finally, it shares apps with all your other Apple devices without buying additional (expensive) licenses.

Its a near perfect platform in between. Something to leave lying around that keeps you informed and communicating without having to lug around (and contactly plug in) a PC.

When i see something on TV i want to look up, I don;t want tyo wait 3 minutes for a laptop to boot, connect to the net, and finally do a search, with an iPad, I can do that, and also handle more than the occasional message (managing e-mail is as important as simply reading it, and the iPhone is a terrible e-mail management platform, but a PC is a wholly inconvenient platform, this solves BOTH issues. It;s is SO worth $600 to me...

Re:Uh, what?

[Rich0]

It depends on what your market is.

The DVR is like a VCR on steroids. People don't run applications on their VCRs, and they don't really run them on their DVRs either (maybe one or two, but it is the exception).

Ditto for the kindle - it was sold to read books, not to replace your computer.

A PC, on the other hand, is a general-purpose computing device. Consumers expect them to run apps, and a fairly wide variety of them.

I think the iPad doesn't have a niche, so I'm not convinced it will do well. The iphone, sure, and ditto for the Mac, but the iPad is a hybrid and that is always a risky area. Granted, the iphone also was a hybrid, but one who's time had come (and it had no serious competition at the time).

Re:Uh, what?

[Etrias]

Perhaps you've heard then of the FSF? Read here. If they eventually remove it, great. And don't count your chickens before they hatch on what they might do. I have problems with Amazon and the Kindle with their DRM scheme as well. Just because one company does it does not excuse everyone else from doing what's right.

Oh, you might want to check your caps lock key. It seems to turn on every fourth or fifth word.

Re:Uh, what?

[gad_zuki!]

>Yes, this is exactly what has kept Tivo

Tivo is dying because the cable companies have rolled their own solutions. Perhaps it was freeer and more open it wouldnt be in the economic graveyard its in. Instead, it tried playing their game, like Apple is doing, and got burnt.

If I wanted a tablet, Id get something XP or 7 based, not this lock-in toy. With cable/sat I dont have this option, but in the computing world I sure as heck do.

Re:Uh, what?

[arose]

Make sure to ignore the fact that it refers to the first generation device, not the improved version that actually did well in the market after it fixed the shortcomings leading to the original comment.

Re:Uh, what?

[Brannon]

Obviously if Apple wanted to put multi-tasking on the iPhone/iPad, they could do it. Have you noticed that people can receive phone calls while they are in an unrelated app? Do you think that's because every iPhone app is constantly polling some hardware status bit that says that a phone call is coming in? or do you think that might just be an example of pre-emptive multi-tasking capabilities of the iPhone OS?

They don't do it because they don't want to create a culture of shitty background apps stealing battery power, robbing performance, leading to viruses, and generally creating a poor Windows-like experience for all users.

But, by all means, enjoy your Windows Vista Mobile Zune brick-phone--you can be a righteously indignant Apple basher while you are rebooting it every 4 minutes after updating your virus database.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Multitasking would not really help there except for allowing you to see both at once. The Palm OS/iPhone/iPad model is that every application has a last state associated with it that it saves when it closes, so closing it seems very similar to minimizing it. On the other hand, the application can't do anything in the background (ex. leave Javascript running giving you notifications of new e-mail/IMs (which can probably be covered by a separate app supporting notifications)).

Re:Uh, what?

[Sandbags]

Lockdown, still with this?

It's fracking unlocked!!!
It requires no plan
the store is OPEN TO ALL, with over 150,000 apps and growing.

The ONLY think that is locked is the OS, and they don;t like outright porn only because there's no good parental control system. (once an app is bought, it;s bought, there's no use level control yet, wait for OS 4...).

The point is NOT for this to be a full fledged PC, the point is exactly so that you DO NOT have to drag out a PC every time you want to do something quick, or stream a movie, or create a simple document, nor do you need to have your phone handy to get notifications. This is always on, and convenient.

Safari is 100% ACID 5, HTML 5 and Webkit compatible. As long as your form is not generated in Flash (it should NOT be, for a hundred security reasons), then safari can open it. I work for a MAJOR insurance provider, and we have a few tens of millions of people hitting our sites, and have thousands of web based forms, all ie6 native. Safari supports all of them. I use Safari as my primary browser (for the history search functions mostly, that's a awesome system, that and it's fast, and rarely crashes, and uses sandboxed sessions). I have no issues at all unless the site REQUIRES either flash or silverlight (and there's a silverlight plug-in for the mac already, and it;s in development for the iPad, as is office 2010...)

If you run a company, and you expect ANYONE with a Mac might access your site and need a form, then i suggest your Devs include safari in their testing (we do). The iPad also has a local file system, if you bothered to actually read the documentation out there (you CAn save and export files, how else could you EDIT them?)

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

What if you could view the document and the browser and never switch between apps?

There are plenty of ways to get around the need to multitask.

Let's get this clear. We're not really talking about multitasking in the CS sense. Obviously the kernel can do multitasking. We're talking about the device allowing us to conveniently use more than one app at more or less the same time.

Any sufficiently advanced workaround - such as instantaneous state saves, in many cases - is indistinguishable from multitasking. If you're telling me that's what it has, then fine.

I don't think that apps having an embedded web browser is an acceptably flexible workaround. Just because my example was a word processor and a browser doesn't mean that's the only case. There's likely to be just as valid a case for wanting to switch between arbitrary third party app A and arbitrary third party app B.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't matter how much 'functionality' a device has, if people can't use it then it might as well not exist. Symbian and Windows Mobile phones may have been able to do more than the iPhone at launch, but they were such slow, buggy, inconsistent, and god awful experiences that hardly anyone wanted to suffer through learning how to use them. The iPhone was a device that anyone could use, was a pleasure to use, that users could discover own their own, and that worked consistently. That made it much more functional and powerful than those other phones.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

And also, it ALREADY has iTunes and App Store in place. You can easily buy music, videos and apps for it from the day one. The iPhone and the iPod had none of it and (the original iPhone didn't support anything but webapps at lauch) and it didn't stop them from selling like hot cakes. The iPhone was more expensive than the low-end iPad will be. I won't buy one unless it can be jailbroken, just like the iPhone. The (artificial) lack of multitasking is much more noticeable on a big screen like the iPad's.

Re:Uh, what?

[Rexdude]

Every time Apple launches a product like this, the geeks/Slashdot crowd (myself included) are quick to point out and rant on the shortcomings-lack of features and vendor lock-in. This despite the fact that we KNOW that we're far from the target audience for such a product. We KNOW that Apple is never going to produce anything that's not tightly locked down and controlled- which also gives a tightly integrated,easy to use and coherent user experience. I think it's a kind of frustration.
"Why is everyone hung up on looks? Can't they see that it's hyped up, overpriced and locked down? I can do so many different things with my competing phone/eReader/desktop OS/media player" etc.
To us, it is plain as daylight-devices should be open and flexible, people should just learn to use them (Try a Symbian OS phone for instance, it may not be popular in the US, but is still widely used and considered easy to use in the rest of the world) To Apple, the choice was easy. Target the Grandma demographic- people who cannot use tech if their life depended on it and will not exercise a single brain cell in learning to use something. The majority of people anywhere are like this, and this attitude has even won a few converts from the technically more competent. We will never see this much hype around any other company's products, even if we personally would prefer using them. And we can't convince the tech non-savvy about the merits of our choices, so that would cause some degree of frustration.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd just like to be able to read and listen to mp3s at the same time.

Re:Uh, what?

[mikechant]

For this kind of device, in my opinion, multi-tasking is almost meaningless. The iphone's notification system could use some improvement, but real multitasking?

It would be nice for it to be able to do little things you normally take for granted, like playing music while web browsing etc.

Re:Uh, what?

[commodoresloat]

The DRM article is just talking about e-book software. If you want to read stuff without DRM, publish in PDF. I'm pretty sure the iPad will be able to read PDF.

Re:Uh, what?

[Just Some Guy]

What is the bl**dy obsession with whether it multitasks or not?

I have an iPod Touch. I like to use it to listen to Pandora, but because it's restricted to single tasking, that's all I can do at once. Get an IM notification and want to reply to it? Tap the button to leave Pandora and go into the IM app and the music stops. Send the message. Hit the "home" button and find the Pandora icon again, wait for it to launch and re-buffer, then start listening again. About 10 seconds later, get a reply IM and repeat the process.

I can listen to my iPod playlists regardless of which app I'm in, but not so with Pandora or Last.fm. That is why I see the lack of multitasking as a complete PITA.

Oh, and while it wouldn't address the root problem, I wish there was a global stroke or gesture that would bounce you back to the previous app you were in. I had a hack on my old Palm that did exactly that so you could flip between two apps quickly without having to mess around with the launcher. That would at least ease a little of the pain.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unable to multitask? Where did you get the idea that it's unable to multi-task? The iPhone multitasks, and the iPad does as well. Oh, you meant multi-task exactly as you imagine it, even though you have never used it and don't understand how iPhoneOS works.

Underpowered? 1.5lbs with a 1GHz processor (one that you have never used before) isn't exactly slow, especially for any task that would be appropriate for a pad device.

No ability to expand? Seriously? What do you have more than 64GB of that you need to carry on a tablet?

Some of us have been dreaming of this device since NeXTStep was released in the late 80's. I'm sorry you don't "get it"yet.

Wait until you hold one.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

My wife. Who takes her MacBook Pro from the kitchen to the living room and back again.
[...]
Has no use for a 'real' computer.

So why does she have a MacBook Pro?

Re:Uh, what?

[nine-times]

In another way of looking at it, the iPhone had greater effective capabilities. You could theoretically do more with other phones, except that you wouldn't. Ok, maybe *you* would do more, but I worked in IT and supported people with various kinds of smart phones, and the only functionality that most people used was email, and those email applications weren't too friendly and often lacked html support.

So which phone is more capable, one with 500 features of which you'll actually only use 1, or a phone with 10 features of which you'll use 9?

Re:Uh, what?

[GordonBX]

So all semi-modern mobile phones are netbooks?

Yes, they achieve these functions. But they are not great for these functions primarily because the screen size is too small, not because they physically lack the functionality. Which brings us back to the iPad as a pretty good merger of the two.

Re:Uh, what?

[arose]

Seems to me that the iPad does everything a computer does, but only if Apple lets it.

And that is exactly what makes it into an appliance, instead of a general purpose computer, at least for me. If the iPad can't meaningfully replace their main computer for most of the folks who will be buying it and winds up augmenting it, then it isn't a computer for them either.

Just in case it's not clear, by "meaningfully replacing" I mean that they could perform all of their day-to-day computing on the device and would only miss out on tasks directly limited by the reduced CPU, RAM, etc. power. In other words it's a computer for most people, if they were willing to accept it as their only computer. And I doubt a watered down office suite will satisfy this point for most people unless the demographic has shifted far enough into web-only use.

I could do with just a netbook if I had to, could you do that with an iPad?

Re:Uh, what?

[demonlapin]

by the 3rd gen, it'll be a success

I'm waiting on the third generation myself.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

well im going to guess people have different priorities in their consumer electronics. you don't care about multi-tasking, many others do.

my netbook has multi-tasking, if i was to give up my keyboard, i would have to retain multi-tasking, or it is a severe step back.

Re:Uh, what?

[Rockoon]

Yes

The question was rhetorical. The correct answer is 'no.' Any other answer is bullshit, for why stop at classifying at netbooks? The same logic you use to promote mobile phones to netbook status also promotes them to desktop status because it can do browsing and email, just like a desktop!

The logic is straw grasping nonsense. Mobile Phones are not netbooks and neither is the iPad. The iPad is a TABLET.

Re:Uh, what?

[kangsterizer]

What if I just want to read a book, find something interesting, want to look it up on wikipedia, get back to reading.. oh, something else, look up again, etc ? Heck, I might want to paste the info to a friend quickly in a mail/sms/whatever as well.

That's multitasking. I don't wanna have to quit the app, start it again, load the page, etc. Waste of my time. I'd need 2 iPads. Waste of my money.

So quit your irrelevant SQL/foldingathome/What-not claims. No one is running that shit either on maemo or webos.

Re:Uh, what?

[nine-times]

It can multitask theoretically. Apple confirmed years ago that they limited multitasking on the iPhone to avoid battery drain. Apparently part of the problem was that they weren't happy with any of the UI conventions that they could think of for showing you which applications were currently running, which opened the door for users to unknowingly have a ton of different applications running in the background all the time.

It was also justified with the idea that most people running most applications had no real use for multitasking on a phone. If you freeze an application's current state when you exit, you don't actually need your little puzzle game to be actively running in the background. You want certain things to constantly run, e.g. anything to do with receiving incoming phonecalls or email. You also want your music to be able to keep playing even when you're not in your music-running application, so Apple made sure that worked.

With the iPad, I don't know. I guess it depends on the 3rd party software that comes out for it. I think you probably don't need your calendar app or ebook-reading app to continue running in the background when you aren't using them.

Re:Uh, what?

[Saint Fnordius]

What you describe doesn't really need multitasking, since one app goes on standby whilst the other is brought to the foreground. Most of those kvetching about lack of multitasking are referring to leaving an instant messenger or some other app running in the background so that it can ping you when your girlfriend comes online, or stream music from the net or do some other task while you read your book or check your mail, and so on.

As I understand it, this isn't so much a technical issue but a design issue - Apple designed the OS to prevent multitasking, most likely because too many apps abuse this and suck up energy. This could have a serious drawback on battery life, or be a nice little niche where a piece of malware could do damage.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can tell you why I am getting mine:

My brain is a gluton. It needs to consume Information of any kind or it is not happy. Be that books, articles, news, music, videos, or be distracted via a game.
And I want to be able to do this anywhere (train, bus, café, kitchen, toilet, couch, party/home-theater basement, bed, outside in the green). For that I do need
a real keyboard for max 2% of the time. I don't need multitasking, All I need is good battery-life, good color display, working UI that hooks me up to all the Information
I might want.

For the moment I use my thinkpad X60s. And I hate that goddamn thing. It's great for when I would actually need to do some real work, but that's exactly the last thing I want to
do when off work! For all my uses the Thinkpad is a pain in the rearend. Because it's form factor and OS and whizbang features only get in the way of what I actually really want to
do with it: Comfortably access and consume information. (Name me one scenario, situation, position where a laptop is more convenient to read/watch/listen stuff than an IPad?)

The IPad is exactly what I have wanted for years.

A perfect Multimedia Consumption Device hooked up through appstore, itunes-store, ibook store, web to all the content I could ever want...

It's a dream come true

Re:Uh, what?

[BrokenHalo]

There were already MP3 players on the market, but the iPod was the first one where the UI hadn't been cobbled together by a team of engineers with no interest in usability or polish.

True. But I've owned several iPods by now, and on each occasion where I've been shopping for an MP3 player, the amount of storage on the respective iPod offerings within my then affordable price-range has been sufficient in its own right to tip my decision in favour of the iPod.

Itunes definitely had nothing to do with my first purchase, since I only had access to Linux computers, so I used gtkpod exclusively to manage its files. But now that other manufacturers are beginning to catch up in the storage/dollar dept., I guess the interface is where it counts. But still, is there anyone offering a player with 160GB or more right now?

Re:Uh, what?

[bl8n8r]

> why not wait until you've touched the thing to declare it a failure of a netbook without a keyboard.

Although it may be true that I like to try different *foods* before liking/disliking them, I know
that I don't care to palette anything sprinkled with liberal amounts of DRM, vendor lock-in, or
intentionally limited functionality. I don't need a whiff of the main course when the kitchen
smells like an outhouse.

Re:Uh, what?

[BrokenHalo]

there needs to be a "-1 baseless speculation" modifier.

If you're referring to the aforementioned inability of the iPad to multitask, I challenge you to accurately refute this. Sure, the product isn't yet available for sale, but it has been assessed by people at the launch of the product, and Apple has made no comment, which indicates that this criticism is true.

Re:Uh, what?

[MBCook]

The lucky ones got to play with it for 20 minutes in an Apple controlled environment. That's not a review, it's a hands-on. And there is basically no software for it, except for one or two apps Apple got converted. First impressions by tech journalists who had ideas of what the thing should be just minutes after finding out about the "changes" is not really a fair way to judge a device.

Let's wait until about the time it's released. There will be software. People will get to use it in real life, the way it's meant to be used. I really wonder if the "it doesn't have a keyboard" or "but it can't multitask" things really matter, or if the market will decide if those are features like the old "but the iPod doesn't have an FM tuner, people will avoid it".

Re:Uh, what?

[arose]

People looking for an e-book reader may be happy, but that depends on whether they were trying to escape from LCD screens and what format they desire (as a fan of e-pub I'm still looking for a good reader... sony maybe?).

Depending on your DRM needs or lack thereof you might want to look at an Ectaco jetBook. It has an LCD screen, a reflective, greyscale, 160dpi LCD, not your typical backlit monitor, that kicks the shit out of a Sony reader with a touchscreen and is comparable to the non-touchscreen one without the flicker. It does not however do DRM well, or at all depending on how you squint and which version of the reader you look at.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

I'm waiting to find out whether the iPad will function without a "real" computer to sync to. If it does, I absolutely think there's a huge demographic who would be able to use it as their only computer.

These people use their home computers for the Web and email, for very simple word processing and maybe for the ambitious, spreadsheets for home accounts and hobbies.

I don't think there's anything to stop them using an iPad for all that, especially with the keyboard addon. Just how 'watered down' the office suite is, we've yet to see. I don't see why it couldn't be as full featured as, say, Word 6. The stuff they'd leave out would be for ease-of-use reasons.

Typical home use that might stretch the iPad:

Digital photos. I think it will probably be a pretty strong platform for importing photos from cameras, sorting and categorising. The problem is storage. But external storage can fix that -- either some sort of NAS appliance, or perhaps even an online service. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple eventually encourages a home computing setup of Airport + iPad + Time Capsule. With a suitably clever system deciding what to keep on the iPad and what to archive to the Time Capsule, it could be pretty slick.

Getting more niche: home video. I'd be interested to know to what extent these things could handle simple video editing. I mean, my phone can film and playback video. A simple video editor that doesn't do too many fancy effects might be achievable. Touchscreen would be a real boon here. Same storage concerns as for photos, only more.

So yeah, I think a lot of people could potentially use an iPad as their only computer. And that terrifies me, because it's going to be such a closed system.

Of course Apple doesn't want to completely kill the market for Macs. I fully expect to see an iLife for iPad, that's just full of little hints that you could do more on a real Mac. (Just as something keeps niggling me I should jump from GarageBand to Logic... with the attendant hardware upgrade required...)

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

You can pretty much guarantee that will be possible.

It's not that it can't multitask. It's that there's a deliberate restriction on which apps can do so.

Re:Uh, what?

[JourneymanMereel]

2. UI. Simply, that they've not come up with a completely idiot-proof user interface, such that knuckle-draggers understand the difference between closing an app and backgrounding it.

Palm did. You can easily go into card view and see what apps are running*... wanna close, "throw" it toward the top of the screen. It may not be instantly intuitive, but once it's explained to you (what you see here are running apps... here's how you close one) it's really easy to remember and do.

It's possible for an app to run completely hidden in the background w/no UI exposure at all... there's no task manager for those.

Re:Uh, what?

[neoform]

In fact, next to no one has touched the thing.

Actually, Stephen Colbert apparently has one.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

Palm did. You can easily go into card view and see what apps are running*... wanna close, "throw" it toward the top of the screen. It may not be instantly intuitive, but once it's explained to you (what you see here are running apps... here's how you close one) it's really easy to remember and do.

Mmm, but remember: knuckle draggers.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm very excited about it. A huge touchscreen interface that I can program for, with a (relatively) very well-made API that now includes recognition of multi-touch gestures for you. There's a touchscreen MIDI controller out there of similar dimensions that costs $3000. The iPad will make that product irrelevant to me.

Re:Uh, what?

[GordonBX]

There is no correct answer. The original post I was replying to stated that there was no definition of a netbook which could include an iPad. I merely gave a definition which I think fits. You don't like it? then fine. I don't see anywhere in your ranty hissyness any coherent statement of what a netbook is vs a phone or a desktop PC.

At least I have some logic. You have none apart from the fact that you simply *know* that "Mobile Phones are not netbooks" and then you're off on one that now it's a "Tablet"?

It's not a tablet. I can't swallow it. :P

Re:Uh, what?

[Zerth]

With audio, radio, etc, the rate of change is not so great and the desire to replace them is usually based on if a device has them at all.

Batteries and storage have reasons for more frequent replacements(both can be used/filled up, are easily expandable).

If I buy a device, I usually don't worry about having to replace the wireless with a dongle when the next version comes out or wanting to replace just the webcam, but I really like to swap batteries when their drained and swap storage when they fill up.

Storage may stop being a problem for mobile devices in the next decade, although Parkinson's law will probably prevent it, but the battery will always be something I want to replace, barring a miracle in battery density or everybody switching to ARM chips with color E-ink.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

With the iPad, I don't know. I guess it depends on the 3rd party software that comes out for it. I think you probably don't need your calendar app or ebook-reading app to continue running in the background when you aren't using them.

On reflection, I think it depends on how fast the suspend/resume is. If I can switch between apps as quickly as if they were running simultaneously, then I'm happy.

It would also be nice if certain apps could get a special dispensation to multitask, maybe at the cost of some extra consideration by the App Store vetting team. It could be designed to allow one music app to run it the background at any one time, for example, meaning you could listen to Spotify/Pandora/Last.fm.

Re:Uh, what?

[beh]

I think some of these things come down to integration - sure, app switching might be an issue if you do it very often. On the other hand, if it's integrated well, it does not pose much of a problem, e.g. see the integration with the components in the iphone's address book - you tap on the phone number, it calls the person; you tap on an email address, it switches to the mail to write an email to that contact; you tap on an address, it switches to google maps for that particular address.

As for books and address lookups - it probably depends on what books and what addresses, and then coming down to whether the book is being read by an inquisitive kind of person who, like you or me, might be curious about the map; or whether it's some John Doe who would just like to read the book and have a very simple and straightforward reading experience - without overburdened user interfaces.

Take the iphone - the phone does have its shortcomings, but overall it's a great device and does what it says on the tin and a lot more on top of it. It's elegantly designed both physically as well as in its usability - so much so, that while it's a phone a lot of geeks have, it's also the kind of phone I'm comfortable recommending to my mother without being afraid that she will call me every day to ask how to do this or that.

As for your example of switching back and forth between the word processor and the browser - yes, I do that quite a lot to - at times, but usually not when I am commuting somewhere. I do not think the ipad is a serious contender for a desktop or normal laptop - the screen size not being the least of its handicaps when it comes to comparing it to a normal machine. It's the next larger step up from a phone, but not quite a laptop yet - similar like the switch from a normal phone texting to writing texts on the iphone; in the same fashion, I expect the ipad to be easier to write on, but still not replacing a normal PC/Mac for this purpose.

I might look at documents on it, even do some changes on those documents, but I do not envisage writing the next 'Dan Brown'-like novel on it while constantly flipping back and forth between my book-draft, wikipedia, Nasa, and google maps. That's what I have my desktop machine and my laptop for.

Hearing some people rant about how the ipad can never take the same workload as the laptop does, I do wonder where these people are in normal life. I've never heard anyone complain to GM that their SUVs do not travel at 150 mph, nor to a Ferrari dealership that the Ferrari sucks for off-road; nor bitching that neither of

Re:Uh, what?

[Sancho]

Except that the iPhone delivered significantly LESS functionality than other phone manufacturers were giving us, and was significantly behind the times (like 4-5 years) compared to actual features in things like Symbian and Windows Mobile.

Ah, but the market that the iPhone really captured was composed of people who had never owned a smartphone before. For them, the iPhone gave more features and did "smart" things better than any other phone they'd ever used.

And a lot of techies liked it for no reason other than because the browser was great. It rendered the majority of websites correctly and similarly to your desktop.

I used Windows Mobile for a long time. When you look at the way those phones worked, it's kinda pitiful. When the iPhone came out, Pocket Internet Explorer was still using a codebase based on IE4. The rendering was absolutely terrible. Pocket Outlook was almost equally awful--a feat for something as simple as a mail reader. Don't get me started on dialing. Or on accidentally triggering a "right click". So while WM might have been capable of a lot more, the iPhone managed to do most of the things it was capable of much better.

Re:Uh, what?

[Sancho]

3. Battery. I think this is probably the biggest one. You can't make any realistic claims on battery life if you allow 3rd party programs to run in the background.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

is it too much to ask in 2010 to have a chat program open and a web browser?

Re:Uh, what?

[jo42]

Apple designed the OS to prevent multitasking, most likely because too many apps abuse this and suck up energy

And memory. iPhone 3G has 128MB of RAM, the iPhone 3GS has 256MB. Hoping the iPad has at least 512MB of RAM...

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I wanted a tablet, Id get something [Windows] based, not this lock-in toy.

I lol'd.

Re:Uh, what?

[zzatz]

I have a tablet (Nokia n800) and a netbook (eee pc900a). I read books on the tablet, not on the netbook. The netbook keyboard gets in the way, it's not plus, it's a minus for that use. I thought that the larger screen on the netbook would be better for reading, but it turns out that the tablet is easier to hold in one hand and that's more important than the larger screen. Part of that is that the n800 screen has incredible pixel density; the resolutions are similar in spite of the difference in size - 800x480 vs 1024x600.

Form factor and ease of use are more important than bullet lists of features and specs. I use my tablet more than my netbook.

Re:Uh, what?

[Sancho]

sufficiently advanced workaround - such as instantaneous state saves, in many cases - is indistinguishable from multitasking. If you're telling me that's what it has, then fine.

Palm did it this way, and it was fine for years. Then they started making devices with phones and data connections built-in. It quickly became apparent that closing an application's sockets when you needed to check something in your calendar was a terrible thing. TCP keeps going even when you switch away from an application. If the application can't respond in a way that the other side expect, the connection is going to close.

I don't think that apps having an embedded web browser is an acceptably flexible workaround. Just because my example was a word processor and a browser doesn't mean that's the only case.

Indeed. But even if you just cared about the web-browser + any given app, you have problems. Can the in-app web-browser access your Mobile Safari history? Cookies? Bookmarks? What if you need more than one window? Does Webkit do that, or does the app developer have to reinvent another wheel?

If we were on a desktop, the idea that every application should re-implement the web browser (not the rendering engine) would be laughed at. But because we're on an embedded device, that guy thinks it's okay?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer. Feel free to point out all the tablets that are trying to be a computer. Now try pointing out the ones that have been successful products. Perhaps the market does not want a tablet that is a computer. Perhaps the market wants computers that are computers and tablets that are something else. Perhaps what you want is not what the market wants. Something to contemplate.

I want my watch to be a computer. I want my glasses to be a computer. I want my clothes to be a computer.

Who the hell would want ANYTHING to not be a computer, especially when it IS a computer, having a general purpose CPU, a screen, and software? And before you answer with an idiotic comment like, "people just want to do simple things" the entire reason behind the success of smartphones is that people DIDN'T want a phone that just made phone calls and made them well. They wanted to play games on them, to receive and send e-mail with them, to go to facebook on them, to use IM with them. They wanted a computer.

Re:Uh, what?

[Lectoid]

I believe all iPhone applications will work on the iPad. http://www.apple.com/ipad/app-store/

Re:Uh, what?

[Taevin]

Any sufficiently advanced workaround - such as instantaneous state saves, in many cases - is indistinguishable from multitasking. If you're telling me that's what it has, then fine.

I don't know about "instantaneous" but I'm pretty sure that the iPhone SDK documentation advises application developers that their software should expect a quit notification at any time. In fact, I think they advocate a "save as you go" policy since the OS isn't going to wait around while you tidy yourself up.

There's likely to be just as valid a case for wanting to switch between arbitrary third party app A and arbitrary third party app B.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're talking about here, but you can. For example, if you browse to Google maps on your iPhone's Safari, it will close and the Maps application will open.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

he cheaper is a key part of that. In the 80s, you bought a motherboard with lots of expansion slots. Then you could add sound, better video, a newer drive controller, etc. Buying something with those on board was considered cheap and bad. Then in the 90s, every board had built-in audio, video, and IO. It was just so cheap and so ubiquitous that there was hardly a reason not to have it built-in.

The only reason people buy motherboards with on-board sound is because they finally got good enough. We didn't consider on-board sound in the 80's and early 90's to be "cheap and bad" because we were elitists. Anybody trying to get sound to work with a DOS game and a non-soundblaster audio card knows why you wanted to get yourself a soundblaster audio card, and not some other crap. Today, the cheap on-board sound has 7.1 output, is a well supported standard (AC '97) that every operating system can talk to (and and all games are abstracted from dealing directly with the card anyway), and buying a Creative Labs audio card is going to more likely give you a worse experience than the on-board audio. As for on-board video, it's pretty much the same thing. It's good enough for most people, except the gamers, who still buy the video cards.

So the "no ability to expand" might not be as bad a thing as you think. If it comes with a camera, a GPS, accelerometers, bluetooth, wi-fi, and sufficient storage... by the time the next generation of wi-fi comes out, it might be cheaper/easier just to buy a new iPad than to upgrade the current one.

We haven't gotten to that point yet with storage. I mean, the rest of the things you mentioned are fine, but here's something that absolutely must be expandable / replaceable: storage and battery. And I must be able to install software from sources other than the app store. And I must be able to transfer files to and from the device. And, most importantly, it must do something special that makes me want it. What would you use an iPad for?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Get over the drm crap! Just torrent your files and sync them. Goddamn, I don't know why people get so hung up on this, especially after they've never even used it yet!

And multitasking; yes, I would like some sort of multitasking. But this has in no way killed the iphone. You think your parents give a crap about multitasking?

The iPad is going to be a roaring success exactly because it is the opposite of what geeks want - some overpowered beast that has to constantly be maintained and coddled. Gates is also a geek and look at all the complexity he's trumpeted over the years. The iPad is going to be the first real universal computer for everyone. Get over it.

Re:Uh, what?

[StikyPad]

Wow, rose tint much? For most of the 80s, IBM and its compatible set were far from being the standard home PC. Commodore, Apple, Atari, Sinclair, and on and on. Different models by the same manufacturer rarely had interchangeable expansion slots and parts, let alone those by different manufacturers. For a good comparison, consider printers of today (and really, forever). Aside from memory, there are no "standard" parts like ink cartridges or toner drums, let alone something like a duplexer or a paper tray.

But even with "compatible" IBM-PCs and the ISA bus, the degree of compatibility was variable. That's because there was really no standard and reliable API or hardware abstraction until Windows 95. That meant software developers generally had to access hardware directly, and your hardware may or may not have been supported. And if it wasn't supported by the *application*, the fact that your device fit in an ISA slot was largely moot.

In summary, the 80s were a horrible decade for hardware standards on personal computers.

Re:Uh, what?

[harl]

It's impossible for for the future to be a vendor locked in device. The lock in slows down innovation to much.

Also in your version of the future there's no multitasking? That's going to be a problem.

Re:Uh, what?

[Sancho]

My Newton...had to invest in cargo pants to have this with me

My only complaint with the iPhone is that the screen is too small.

So yes, an overgrown PDA might be EXACTLY what is needed.

I don't think cargo pants will work for the iPad. It's about as large as an etch-a-sketch, but thinner. You'll need something roughly the size of a purse to carry it. At that point, I'd personally just as soon carry a netbook. To each his own.

Re:Uh, what?

[harl]

Apples and oranges. The solution space for a DVR is tiny. Development is effectively done. The device has exited the innovation cycle and has become commodity. They're fucking toasters. The only new features are more storage and more tuners (more recordings at once).

At this point the only innovative addition you could make to a DVR is to have it create new content, turn it into a DVC.

Re:Uh, what?

[bkr1_2k]

I'd argue that TiVo is dying because the internet provides more options than it did in the first decade of this century. Hulu and broadcast television shows, not to mention YouTube Netflix provide far more "user friendly" options that can be watched in more places on more devices. I built a myth box but we never use it. We don't watch enough television to bother with it. When we miss something, we watch it online. The few exceptions to this are filled in by renting Netflix DVDs.

Yes a lot of people go ahead and pay for the cable company DVR, but most I know complain that they suck. When they see us watch what want online (1 day after it airs, usually) when and where we want, on whatever device, they generally do the same after that. I only know a few people actually still using true DVRs.

We're probably still an exception to the rule, but the numbers of people doing it this way are growing.

Re:Uh, what?

[harl]

DRM? Where, EXACTLY?

It will only run binaries that Apple approves.

Re:Uh, what?

[bkr1_2k]

doh! That should read "Hulu and broadcast television websites..."

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Absofrigginglutely! Very well put.

Geeks can say what they like about the iPad, but tablet "computers" have been massive flops so far.

The iPad is, without question, going to sell more than ANY OTHER TABLET in history.

Even with that though, it still might end up being a flop.

Only time will tell.

Re:Uh, what?

[s73v3r]

I don't think the iPad is a general purpose computing device. Its mostly a media consumption device, with a bigger screen than an iPod. It also happens to run some games and small applications.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree. A computer can be a tablet. I use a lenovo X61tablet. It has everything that the ipad will have (granted at twice the weight and shorter battery life).
On the other hand, it has a real keyboard when I need it and a stylus that disables skin touch sensitivity when it is close to the surface of the display.

The ipad will succeed, but it is not for doing work. On the other hand, a real tablet computer can do both. yes, I am comparing apple vs oranges.

-d

Re:Uh, what?

[s73v3r]

Here's the thing: The OS X desktop isn't really suited for use in a finger-based environment. They have an OS designed from the ground up around touch input. Why wouldn't they use that?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait...Tylenol tablets will probably still keep the record.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words, as asserted earlier, a netbook of the future. Netbooks were conceived and marketed for purposes befitting an overgrown PDA. Not devices to do your programming on, or write your term papers, or edit videos, do your Photoshop work on, etc. But a portable device to carry around and share your photos, movies, music, or check your email, browse the Web, without the bulk/weight penalty of a full-sized laptop. That's why they're called netbooks, not "mini laptops".

They were not intended for that, but it is nice that you can use them, when in need, to do it.

-d

Re:Uh, what?

[Spudds]

Tosh.0 reviewed the Ipad. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRR2A3bJwEM

Enjoy!

Re:Uh, what?

[s73v3r]

I believe it is up to the individual apps how to handle closing or suspending when a phone call/text comes in. The app is sent the message that it will close, and is given a last chance to clean things up. If they want, then can save state, and then when the app starts again, resume from where they were. Such operation doesn't make sense for every type of app, but it could be nice for some (games).

Re:Uh, what?

[religious freak]

Is the word 'bloody' really worthy of ***'ing out? I'm a dumb American, so I really don't know. I always figured it was kind of equivalent to 'darn' here in the States.

Re:Uh, what?

[boxwood]

I can see some uses for it, like watching movies on a plane, reading ebooks, playing games, etc. but thats only if it has good battery life. If it has gps, it would be good to take in the car. A good GPS unit alone costs at between $300 to $500.

There's a lot of ifs in there... battery life being the biggest one. Yeah a laptop does all these things, but being smaller than a laptop I could see it being useful in some situations.

I think its comparable to the macbook air... it's less functional than a macbook pro, but if you want to have something small for writing up you're blog or work on writing your novel, its ideal. The iPad doesn't improve much over the iPhone, but if you want something thats better for reading, watching movies, playing games, etc. then this is it.

It just adds another product to their line. iPod, iPhone, iPad, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro, you see a pretty smooth spectrum of capability. Most people want stuff from the ends of the spectrum, but there are a few people that want something in between. Apple prefers those people to buy their products rather than someone else's.

Its not going to sell like the iPod or iPhone, but I think it'll sell enough that it'll make Apple a little bit of money.

Re:Uh, what?

[icebraining]

Symbian (at least S60) has a alt-tab like interface: hold on button, and you get the running apps icons and can switch between them. And any app can be closed with one button.

Re:Uh, what?

[s73v3r]

I think the fact that most of us have not heard of it means that it hasn't been a big success.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Underpowered? Proof, please. Otherwise you just make yourself seem like one of those idiots that doesn't understand CPU architecture.

Re:Uh, what?

[arose]

These people use their home computers for the Web and email, for very simple word processing and maybe for the ambitious, spreadsheets for home accounts and hobbies.

True, but my experience is that most people have that one little program that they would never give up, it might be something for their hobby or just some silly cute thing, but if they can't find it on the app store they would be upset. Another thing is that simple word processing is almost always coupled with a printer, and that printer is rarely wireless enabled.

I don't think there's anything to stop them using an iPad for all that, especially with the keyboard addon.

That is already two addons, a USB adapter (if it supports printers) and the keyboard. Granted you wouldn't keep the printer attached all the time, but if you also need the adapter for your camera, then simply unplugging the printer can turn into a two step process. Worse, the keyboard destroys the "kick back in your comfy chair" aspect, if you want to write for any amount of time you are at your desk where you might as well use a full sized keyboard and the computer that will print without hunting for an adapter.

Of course Apple doesn't want to completely kill the market for Macs.I fully expect to see an iLife for iPad, that's just full of little hints that you could do more on a real Mac.

The cynic in me says that this is the reason Apple is fighting netbooks, they are small, cheap and can replace a computer for many people. If they make an expensive netbook no one will buy it, if they make a cheap one they might eat into Macbook and possibly Mini sales. On the other hand, if they consistently attack netbooks as a bad idea, and then release a better replacement that does what most people would want to do away from their main computer, but not quite enough to use it at your desk, they can charge quite more then for a comparable netbook (because netbooks are bad and this isn't one), but less then their laptops and desktops without eating into that market segment too much.

I suspect it's not a "real" computer not because of /. nerds, but because Apple doesn't want it to be one, we are just pointing this out.

Re:Uh, what?

[s73v3r]

Bigger screen?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet adding the feature that most people would not even care about (and is pretty standard) would shut us up and convert the only group of naysayers to customers.

Re:Uh, what?

[jDeepbeep]

You must not be new here. Hehe, spot on.

Re:Uh, what?

[Lars T.]

A piece that pretends it wasn't Apple who ultimately made the Music Industry drop DRM, says there are "uncertainties" about iPad DRM and you take that as proof for your claim the iPad is "DRM riddled"? With a name like "Etrias" we can expect your posts to be just random prejudices strung together.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

If it isn't meant to replace my desktop, why is more expensive than 3 of my netbooks (which I get more use out of than I would ever get out of an ipad)?

What, it weighs slightly less? Believe it or not, your clothes weigh more than a netbook, ipad, and external USB harddrive combined. Adding a couple of pounds for function is definately worth it.

Re:Uh, what?

[JourneymanMereel]

BlackBerry had a similar "hold a button and press another one to get an alt-tab type interface"... trouble was, I could never remember which button combo it was. On the original Pre, it's the only button on the face of the phone to bring up the multi-tasking interface. Truth be told, I never use that button, though, and it's gone on newer revisions. Swiping up from the gesture area into the screen area accomplishes the same thing.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to get over yourself.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

"No one has reviewed it."

Not true, people have them, they just can't talk about it yet.

Re:Uh, what?

[jollyreaper]

Most laptops come with built-in webcams that are good enough for 99% of usages and are too cheap to not include, just for the 1% who want something better.

For many electronic devices, it is easier/cheaper to buy a newer one than to upgrade. That saddens me, but it is has become a fact of economics. So the "no ability to expand" might not be as bad a thing as you think. If it comes with a camera, a GPS, accelerometers, bluetooth, wi-fi, and sufficient storage... by the time the next generation of wi-fi comes out, it might be cheaper/easier just to buy a new iPad than to upgrade the current one.

That's the long and the short of it. I buy a desktop now, three years later I want to upgrade it and I'm swapping out the whole kit and kaboodle. New mommyboard, new RAM, new CPU, new viddy card. The only thing left in the case are the drives and power supply. The only time I was really fiddling with things on a weekly basis was when I worked for a computer shop and could just swap parts in and out of inventory.

Maybe we'll get to the point where we'll see all of that stuff concentrated onto a single chip or board. Buy your PC which is just a flatscreen with a hump on the back with the computer bits, run it for a few years, swap out the hump with the latest hardware. Don't have to rebuy the screen.

Re:Uh, what?

[david@ecsd.com]

I saw that episode. Kinda puts things into perspective. Not everyone masturbates over this stuff. A LOT of people couldn't tell the difference between a Macintosh and a windows laptop, not because they're stupid but because they don't care.

Re:Uh, what?

[brkello]

How can this be modded insightful? There have been plenty of reviews. But do you even need to...it can't multitask. I mean, come on. This is Slashdot, if people are bashing Apple it is because they really screwed up. You act if Apple is abused on here.

Just because something sells well doesn't mean it is good. People are so nuts about Apple they will buy anything without any intelligence being put in to their decisions.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

I think WiFi will become pretty much ubiquitous in consumer level printers over the next few years.

If you want to write for any amount of time you are at your desk where you might as well use a full sized keyboard and the computer that will print without hunting for an adapter.

If you already own such a computer, then yes. But if you don't, it's another $400 spend (much more if it's Apple). Or sit at your desk with your tablet in its keyboard caddy stand.

Yeah, if money (and space) was no object, you'd have both. But how good is "good enough" that it's not worth getting a "real" computer too.

Re:Uh, what?

[JohnBailey]

Isn't the iPad essentially a netbook of the future?

Not quite.. It's a netbook of little features.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

Double post, sorry...

I think where we're at cross purposes is that you're talking about people ditching their laptop/desktop. ("most people have that one little program that they would never give up").

I'm thinking more about people getting their first computer. (Yes, there are people who don't already have one).

Re:Uh, what?

[Lars T.]

Don't forget; without a keyboard! Seriously, who wants a computer without a keyboard?

http://images.apple.com/ipad/design/images/accessories_20100127.jpg

Pad Keyboard Dock
The Keyboard Dock combines a dock for charging your iPad with a full-size keyboard.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

Is the word 'bloody' really worthy of ***'ing out? I'm a dumb American, so I really don't know. I always figured it was kind of equivalent to 'darn' here in the States.

No, it's not worth ****ing out.
It can be construed as blasphemous, as it's derived from "by our lady". But you can say it on daytime TV, so you can certainly type it on Slashdot.

Re:Uh, what?

[inKubus]

Multi-task has the root word "task" which implies "work". This thing is designed for leisure, and people whose work is basically leisure (hanging out at coffee houses in a turtleneck). Apple has turned computers into fashion. That cool feeling you get when you use your iPhone or iPad in a public place is your ego talking. But now that everyone has an iPod, you don't want anyone to see it, because it makes you another follower. This is Apple's bread and butter and is pure marketing.

Now look, if it didn't work well it would not be cool. The software IS part of that image, as well as the hardware. But it's not THAT much cooler than what's already out there for cheaper. This is just a way for Apple to make more cash, because this thing is quite a bit cheaper to build than an iPhone but it costs more. I don't see it as a game changer though. The game is already set by the Kindle and the fast 3 and 4G data networks. I can already work from anywhere with a number of devices. I hate it. I don't get paid to answer emails on the weekend or off hours but now I'm expected to. I'm really expecting others to have a sort of luddite reaction to this stuff fairly soon as well. But the personal leisure aspect is one that might bear fruit as long as people have disposable income.

As far as business phones, I have not seen anything on an iPhone that is as seamless as BES server and Apple will never go that direction because enterprise is not their game.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

What if I just want to read a book, find something interesting, want to look it up on wikipedia, get back to reading.. oh, something else, look up again, etc ? Heck, I might want to paste the info to a friend quickly in a mail/sms/whatever as well.

Um yeah, you can do all of that on an iPhone. Effort involved: tapping home, selecting the app to switch to. Application launch time: damn near instantaneous. Copy text, switch to SMS, paste text, send, switch back to app. It almost took you longer to read that sentence than it would to do those things. On a device that "can't multitask".

I don't wanna have to quit the app, start it again, load the page, etc. Waste of my time.

Indeed. That's why Apple doesn't make you do it. Effective and instantaneous save state data is built into the platform. Leave the browser and return to it later, and it's on the same page. Even partially completed forms preserve their text data.

There are legitimate complaints about third party streaming music apps and some kludgery with web-based IM. But what you're talking about doesn't actually require multitasking.

Re:Uh, what?

[lennier]

You clearly want a computer. Buy a computer. A tablet is not a computer.

Yes, it is. But it's a deliberately crippled computer.

The problem is that if they become wildly popular, crippled devices are likely to proliferate and push general-purpose devices to the margins. And then it will become the norm and the expectation that 'normal', law-abiding people Just Don't Modify their devices. Because that would be weird, geeky and wrong, and probably illegal. Why do you need the ability to change your system? You scary person, that's not a 'right', it's a 'privilege' you haven't paid for!

And when that happens, when the social centre of gravity changes, anyone who wants to do the right thing (control the machine rather than be controlled by the machine) has a problem.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

I believe all iPhone applications will work on the iPad. http://www.apple.com/ipad/app-store/

They'll be quite the second-class experience though - either blocky from pixel-doubling, or a little rectangle in the middle of a black screen.

Re:Uh, what?

[lennier]

and this attitude has even won a few converts from the technically more competent.

This is what worries me most about Apple's shiny lockdown fascism - that it's winning converts from hackers who should - and DO - know better.

Like their influence on Gnome and Ubuntu.

"You shouldn't have to change anything! No really, you only need one window manager. No, you can't change the defaults. No, that's not an option. No, we're talking that app away from you. No, we're not going to let you see that..."

I've had conversations with programmers who have experienced something like a religious conversion from Apple's approach and now really really believe that non-configurable single-use applications are the way to go. Because computers will 'always be too hard for the general public' and so they're just giving up and walking away from the idea of configurable, user-modifiable, generative software. Lock all that scary stuff away. No choices.

It frustrates me because on one level these people are quite correct: computers *are* too hard to use. But I think lockdown is the wrong answer. The true solution, I believe, is that we still haven't put *enough* control in the hands of users. We need better programming languages, simpler and more expressive ones, and a focus on integrating data, so that users have the tools to construct their own applications, rather than this 'application' focus which solves the integration problem by restricting users to a single task.

See, right now writing a GUI app is an insane nightmare of complexity. I believe that's because we're doing it wrong. So wrong it hurts. GUIs should be a matter of just writing some descriptions (in a declarative language, NOT a 'click and drag' tool - that's lockdown) - and letting the system build the wiring. We need a focus on dataflow, not code flow. But we didn't build declarative languages, is our problem. We built C++, which is the wrong answer to every conceivable question. So we've lost a generation of programming language research.

And of course, these opinions of mine, though passionately held, are both controversial and not really provable, so... all I can do is shrug and wince and hope at some point the Net wakes up before we lock ourselves into oblivion.

Re:Uh, what?

[lennier]

In summary, the 80s were a horrible decade for hardware standards on personal computers.

Oh yes. I fondly remember sending files via XMODEM over BBS because that was the only way to get from PC to Commodore to Apple... though why I wanted do that I forget, since you couldn't actually read or run anything from another system.

Re:Uh, what?

[lennier]

Maybe for you. But I run Ubuntu on my netbook and I love that I can do everything that I can do on my desktop. That's a plus, not a minus.

I don't want a crippled device. That means having an 'oh crap I can't do what I need to do' moment when I least want it.

Re:Uh, what?

[lennier]

I should add - being a general-purpose device IMO makes a netbook MORE of an 'appliance', not LESS of one.

If I have a shiny iPad, Sony WalkPad, Microsoft SurfaceBook, Amazon Kindle, etc... I'm now back in the nasty 80s where nothign connects and my jacket is full of devices just to get anything done. They're pretty, but they're not 'just works' usable. They all have their quirks and gimmicks I have to learn.

But if all my devices are just ordinary, boring, standard PCs, and I can trust they've all got USB, SVGA, keyboard, screen.... then they become interchangeable bricks. Anything works anywhere.

Dumb boring bricks are good! Companies hate them, because they can't sell value-added features - but for the consumer, it means simplicity. Cuts through the labyrinth of features. Just buy based on size of the screen, battery life, etc.

Doesn't it?

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

My Comcast DVR was a steaming pile if lagged out/freezing shit with a bad interface. I finally scraped enough money together to get a Tivo HD... much better in many ways. Why was I using it for so long and why did I use it to begin with? It was easy to get one delivered with my service hookup, it's that simple.

Re:Uh, what?

[Asic Eng]

Sorry, but I don't think there is anything to that argument. The attraction of the netbook is precisely that it's a general purpose computer, just with a small form factor. People use it to replace a laptop because they want the features but they don't want to carry so much weight. In return they are prepared to put up with a small screen and tiny keyboard. As you know the initial trend after introducing netbooks was to make them slightly bigger - which only benefited the laptop usage pattern.

A prime application for netbooks has always been skype, btw - youtube is very much in demand, and USB TV sticks are a popular add-on. The iPad might find it's market maybe, but it won't be the market of people who want small general purpose computers.

Re:Uh, what?

[hazydave]

Actually, TiVo did well by getting there first, and delivering just the one function people needed at the time: smart digital VCR, aka DVR, aka PVR. It was so simple the computer and even smart TV challenged could use it, and it just did the one thing well. Sure, they've added a few features, but it's not intended to be an applications platform.

Early cable and satellite company DVRs were actually so horrible, they sold TiVo and Replays. But they fixed that. It was inevitable that "DVR" become a function of other hardware. And that's why the cable and satellite units sell... they bundle the DVR free. Their goal isn't selling hardware, it's keeping customers happy enough to keep paying that monthly fee. So they toss in a workable PVR, and folks just use it. My fairly ancient Dish Network model 4000 receiver (used in my office, not my media room) died a few weeks ago. Dish sent me a fee-free PVR/receiver to replace it.

MythTV has failed to catch on for many reasons. A big one... it needs a PC. I can have an STB drawing a few watts in standby mode doing my recording, or I can have a full fledged PC. Even a scaled down (Atom or VIA) PC is going to suck 10x-20x more power than a modern STB.

Then, well, ok. I can order parts at NewEgg and build myself a low power PC in a nice CE-lookin' box, track down one of the better tuners that's working ok these days, download and install Mythbuntu, etc. Then again, I used to design personal computers from scratch.. this is pretty easy. But where do my Mom or sisters go to get a MythTV box? Then, how to they get it working with their cable or satellite systems? Ok, now how do they do that in HD?

The iPad certainly will cater to the stupid, and the naive, and the.. well, those who don't know any better, and are in the thrall of Apple. For awhile, anyway.. but some of that's because the uses for a tablet, versus a smart phone or laptop, have not quite been established in the consumer's mind yet. But they will, and as this happens, the iPad will come up increasingly short.

Look at the Smart Phone.. this has replaced a pocketful of devices. My DROID can do most anything you'd find in a stand-alone "digital appliance" with an LCD screen. It does the PDA-thing, and currently most of it better than my old Palm T/X or Treo. It's a decent enough phone, for all I care about cellphones. It's a better music player than an iPod or a Zune, largely because I ran change the music player.. run Museek to get my random plays tweaked to my mood, run Pandora or streaming internet "radio", etc. It's a better pocket video player than these devices, too, higher resolution, and with interchangeable memory cards, to I can carry as much video as I like. It does the GPS thing very well, and a bunch of location-based cool things that no GPS device does... like finding moves playing where I am, or showing me the prices of an item online and in the surrounding stores. It plays games... I only have a few stupid ones like Majhong, but for pocket entertainment, better than the Palm. It's a fine guitar tuner and chord library (yeah, I actually do have numerous little boxes doing those functions), and I can store and view my song library (chords and lyrics) on the device, too. It's a fine internet pad, about as good as those little Nokias... no replacement for my 24" screens, but it beats the crap out of the Treo or the iPhone. And the list can go on.

This "tablet" thing is interesting for a few reasons, but it's always going to sit between "laptop" and "smartphone/PDA". So, what can get out of this device I can't get in my PDA. The iPad seems to be shouting about eBooks. Maybe. Real eBooks reflow, and yeah, I have the Aldiko reader on my DROID, and it's not actually that bad. Inside... it's useless outdoors, and it's going to suck too much power to keep on all the time. Well, hey, same with the iPad... you know that screen's going to power down after awhile, and it's just as crappy in the bright sunlight. So iPad fails even on the main premise Apple seems to be pushing, other than "ru

Re:Uh, what?

[Asic Eng]

No offense to your wife, but she is part of the "old" generation. People who want to use computers to do certain things, who don't have a lot of interest in technology and can't be bothered to find out how things work. That's fine, but the next generation is not like that. These kids grow up with computers - they are in everything they use, be they cell-phones, cameras or ebook readers. They don't have the slightest worry about using technology, they want to edit videos and send them to their friends, they want to be connected 24 hours a day.

The people from our generation who don't care much for technology, our grannies who don't really grasp what a computer is, and our parents who don't see why they need one - they are not the market of the future. They are the market which is on the way out.

Re:Uh, what?

[macs4all]

DRM? Where, EXACTLY?

It will only run binaries that Apple approves.

No. That's not correct.

You can only publicly distribute apps through the Apple store. You are free to develop and run as many binaries as you want for your iPhone. Just become a developer, and you can sign your own apps for you. Other licenses allow you to even develop and distribute apps on a company-wide basis (although there are some restrictions that hamper really large corps. from deploying internal apps, I will admit).

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

(secretly because phone companies hate their customers).

It doesnt seem so secret.

Re:Uh, what?

[GaryPatterson]

The FSF claims they forced Apple to drop DRM on music?

I can't decide if that's an outright lie or if they really imagine that they were so important.

Either way, their inability to understand recent history doesn't fill me with confidence that they know what they're doing today.

Re:Uh, what?

[GaryPatterson]

You lack vision.

A quick business use right off the top of my head - you're talking with a person about their processes, trying to map them out. You could try pen and paper, but you'll be making alterations as you go and end up with a mess.

Instead you use diagramming software like OmniGraffle ( http://www.omnigroup.com/applications/OmniGraffle/ ) and get the process down, with all the edits you like, until the other person is happy. Sure, you can do it at your desk, but it's often better to deal with people in their normal environment, and get them to walk through their process 'live' to check your process map is accurate.

I'd have loved one of these for that. Instead we had meeting rooms, electronic whiteboards and people who are better at showing than telling.

I can see a number of great uses for this device, although it's too early to say if it'll realise the promise it has. Apple's handful of apps show it off about as well as the built-in apps did for the iPhone. The really interesting thing is when you get the third-party apps onto the device, when you see the ways people come up with to use it.

Writing it off as consumption-oriented misses the bigger picture. Sure, you can use it to consume media (when did that revolting phrase take hold?) but there's a myriad of other applications out there waiting for devices like this. Maybe Apple's isn't the best model (and there's good reason to suppose it's not), but it might kick something better off.

Re:Uh, what?

[GaryPatterson]

I'm starting to suspect that the people who really get into technology are the dying market.

When you had to solder your computer together, users were all pretty hard-core techies. They were the original hackers, trying stuff out, working out how it all runs and making their own stuff.

Since then computing has moved more into the commodity space and away from techies. It's more about ubiquitous computing, devices that connect seamlessly, being able to transfer stuff around than it is about technical specs and data formats.

Apple are moving deep into that commodity space with their iPod, iPhone and now iPad devices. The success of the first two indicates that the more technical users are not the market to aim for.

People don't care how it works, so long as it does at a price they are comfortable with.

That's fine with me. We see that in every other field of technology. At some point, the tech evolves into our everyday world and is submerged until only the interface remains.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

"you take that as proof for your claim the iPad is "DRM riddled"?"

Of course the iPad is DRM riddled. How else do you think they'll enforce the chaining to the appstore? Or are you one of those fucking twats who believe DRM refers to music only?

Fucking fanboys. Christ you piss me off.

Re:Uh, what?

[stuntpope]

What are you talking about?

Kids are tech-savvy and tech-comfortable so that they use electronics and computers for all the things you mention, but it's still all about using tech, not hacking it. The people who want to get into the guts of a computer (whether hardware, software, or both) are still a minority, just as such people 20 years ago were. These younger people you speak of aren't (by and large) interested in "how it works" -- they are interested in editing their videos, uploading content to websites, keeping in touch with friends, playing computer games.

Hardcore geeks seriously overrate their importance in the marketplace.

Re:Uh, what?

[Rexdude]

Mod parent up. You articulated my concern better- if locked in devices become more and more common and even those who ought to know better endorse it, we may find the standard open to hack PC and similar products getting increasingly marginalized. While these new devices are protected (at least in the US) by draconian DMCA laws.

Re:Uh, what?

[glamb]

Because that is the laptop that is the most idiot proof. Things like opening and closing the lid to put it to sleep properly - and it wakes up every time - for months on end - without rebooting.

Re:Uh, what?

[dangitman]

In the 80s, you bought a motherboard with lots of expansion slots... Then in the 90s, every board had built-in audio, video, and IO.

What the fuck are you talking about? Computers in the 1980s typically had very poor hardware expandability, and in the 1990s, expandability options increased dramatically.

Built-in audio, video and IO basically defines 80s era computers, while modularity is the hallmark of 90s computing.

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

It was the $200 worth of 'Pro' that I was wondering about.

Re:Uh, what?

[dargaud]

Get an IM notification and want to reply to it? Tap the button to leave Pandora and go into the IM app and the music stops.

Really? That's bloody idiotic! On my Android phone, I can listen to music while Google maps uses the GPS to track me to my destination, and I can switch back and forth to webpages of info in the meanwhile. I doesn't seem like much.

Oh, and while it wouldn't address the root problem, I wish there was a global stroke or gesture that would bounce you back to the previous app you were in.

I'll mention it to other android users because I found it by chance, but holding the [home] button does the equivalent of the Windows Alt-Tab task switcher.

Re:Uh, what?

[Lectoid]

Considering developers will have had access to the iPad SDK months before release, I'm sure a simple resolution fix wouldn't take more than a few days to hammer out.

Re:Uh, what?

[Wovel]

So you dishonestly repeated the same critique with a different word to strengthen your argument?

gg

Re:Uh, what?

[Wovel]

"once its explained to you" is the difference between a palm and an iPhone.

Re:Uh, what?

[petermgreen]

After 2000, it got to the point where hardly anyone even buys a sound card, and only specialized IO cards exist.
While i'm sure there is less of a market for many card types than there used to be the cards remain available and there are even PCIe models out there nowadays though the PCIe cards often seem to command a significant premium over PCI ones (PCIe sound cards seem to be particulally expensive).

While there are certainly cases where you are better off getting a new computer there are also plenty of cases where upgrading your existing one is a much cheaper way to get the performance you require.

Re:Uh, what?

[Wovel]

I would like to see this too. Push is the better solution for IM over polling, but I would like to be able to instantly switch in and out of it. The speed is close, but the delay can be annoying sometimes. I think this and the ability to background Pandora, etc. will be the only areas most be care about multi-tasking.

Re:Uh, what?

[Wovel]

It is a larger more powerful version of the most popular mobile application platform ever developed?

Those guys at Apple are morons....

Re:Uh, what?

[JourneymanMereel]

I don't own an iPhone. I've never used an iPhone. I have used an iPod Touch briefly (I've spent maybe 20 minutes using one). Not everything about it was instantly apparent. I had the owner over my shoulder pointing out which buttons did what (I was connecting it to our corporate WiFi network).

Every time you use a platform you've never used before it's helpful to have somebody explain some of the basics. There are no exceptions. Not even the beloved Apple can pull off having a "platform virgin" sit down with one of their devices and instantly be an expert.

Re:Uh, what?

[BigJimSlade]

A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.

DRM riddled, unable to multi-task. Lame.

Re:Uh, what?

[Just Some Guy]

Really?

Yes, really. And then you get to contend with people who think you're a bonehead because you're not happy with that.

Re:Uh, what?

[harl]

That's still DRM. If you can't publicly distribute without approval it's a closed system.

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree.

I used to work at Sharper Image before they tanked; the Apple Store crew used to come in to fawn (or spy) over our gadgets and compare/contrast.

The manager came in and was pitching her new Nano; in comparison, I showed her my Creative MuVo. Single AAA battery with 12 hours of playback, voice recorder, and USB thumbdrive interface. She scrunched her face, but admitted that she was a bit of a luddite: all she wanted was a music player.

I needed a thumbdrive (to take documents back and forth from school to home), a WMA/MP3 music player (ask an audiophile techie, and he will sheepishly admit that WMA is a better lossy compression than MP3), and a voice recorder (when I was too tired/lazy/hung over to write down lecture notes).

I say good--keep the consumer boob-tube watchers who buy this crap at arms length, and leave us tinkerers alone!

Re:Uh, what?

[ColdWetDog]

Because she didn't like the 13" screen of the MacBook. Yeah, it's a bit overkill but I figure during the 5 year lifespan of the thing, the extra couple of hundred dollars compared to a bottom end Dell or whatever is worth it.

Having gone to a pure Mac ecosystem has been a real joy. It is more expensive than said bottom basement Windows boxes but it makes management much easier. Just the fact that everybody has the same power brick turns out to be a real plus. If I forget 'Lapzilla', my 17" machine at work, I can log into my account on her machine and do what I want. She can watch Netflix live without problems. Even Flash doesn't bother the machine. Money isn't everything.

Re:Uh, what?

[kaatochacha]

.

"The Mercedes Personal Jetpack is widely known as not being the game changer they say. Everyone knows a 200 mile range is too short, and the I hear the exhaust smells like bananas. The controls (which I've never felt) feel awkward and the Mercedes emblem isn't chrome-y enough. I look forward to a more thorough bashing it once the product is announced."

mmmmmmm, bananas.....

Re:Uh, what?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the bl**dy obsession with whether it multitasks or not?

There are three things I'd do with the iPad as it is now:

Casual chat over IM
Monitoring twitter and maybe some RSS feeds
Occasional web browsing (IMDB lookups, wikipedia, etc.)
Listening to pandora or last.fm.
Playing whatever casual games you can play without flash support

I'd like to not have to stop doing one to do the other.

would neither be this small and light, nor likely very responsive, nor run as long as it does...

What are you basing this on? Jailbroken iphones can multitask and it doesnt weigh the iphone down any or suddenly plump it up. Seems just as responsive. Battery life is only lower if you run things that do a lot of computing while in the background, but why is that apples choice instead of ours?

Re:Uh, what?

[slim]

So it's more than an extra $200, because you've got her a Macbook with a bigger screen.

But the iPad's screen is smaller than 10". So we've still not found someone for whom an iPad is a good fit.

UNLESS we're talking about having an iPad *and* a Macbook, in which case we're talking about spending $500 or more on something that duplicates functionality you already have.

Re:Uh, what?

[MobyDisk]

I was playing a bit of a devil's advocate here. I happen to agree on storage: It is absolutely unforgivable that the iPhone does not have an SD card slot.

Re:Uh, what?

[MobyDisk]

I didn't even know cheap sound cards still existed. I did a quick search on newegg and I see that you are correct. But the reviews on them are horrible, and some even warn people just to use the on-board sound. I don't even understand why someone would purchase a cheap sound card at all. Even the tiny embedded boards my employer orders for medical devices come with AC '97 audio chips.

Re:Uh, what?

[petermgreen]

Taking a look myself the ratings of these cards seem to vary from awful to about par for the course for newegg reviews (remember, people with a bad experiance are far more likely to review than those with a good experiance)

Afaict there are a few reasons for buying a lowish end soundcard

1: a requirement for more channels than the onboard audio gives (either for surround sound or for a multiroom setup)
2: broken onboard audio
3: a lot of onboard audio either lacks a mic input (having said that from one of the reviews these cheap cards don't look brilliant in that regard either, at least one poster is complaining of a disfunctional mic input)

For once...

[Third Position]

...I have to agree with Gates. The iPad is a cute novelty, but nothing about it convinces me open my wallet. Maybe successive generations of it will be more compelling, but at this point, it's feature set and interoperability with other devices is a bit too limited to suit me.

Re:For once...

[sammyF70]

While I agree with Gates, I find it ironic that he is the one making the statement, considering real netbooks (at least those fulfilling the original definition of the term, low price and tech) can't be found anymore, as they weren't really capable of running Microsoft's OS's

Re:For once...

[Sobrique]

Dunno. Cute novelties are OK as long as the price is right. If the iPad is cheap, I'll buy several of them, wallmount them on a charger, and just use them as in-room web access terminals, for checking cinema times, and settling arguments with Wikipedia. Maybe watching a video or two, or just using them as an electronic photo frame.
Expect me to pay 'real' computer prices for one on the other hand, and ... well, I'd be wanting a real computer thanks. My 'living room PC' can be a cheap laptop just as easily.

Re:For once...

[Richard_at_work]

While I agree with Gates, I find it ironic that he is the one making the statement, considering real netbooks (at least those fulfilling the original definition of the term, low price and tech) can't be found anymore, as they weren't really capable of running Microsoft's OS's

Is that the whole, entire definition of what a netbook is? Or just yours?

Re:For once...

[Penguinisto]

... but nothing about it convinces me open my wallet.

It's not your wallet that Apple wants to see open for it - nor mine. This thing wasn't made for geeking out on.

Re:For once...

[sammyF70]

Apparently not just mine.

"At their inception in late 2007 — as smaller notebooks optimized for low weight and low cost[3] — netbooks omitted key features (e.g., the optical drive), featured smaller screens and keyboards, and offered reduced specification and computing power."

In the short period since their appearance, netbooks have grown in size and features, now converging with new smaller, lighter notebooks. By mid 2009, when comparing a Dell netbook to a Dell notebook, CNET noted "the specs are so similar that the average shopper would likely be confused as to why one is better than the other," noting "the only conclusion is that there really is no distinction between the devices."

My original netbook (a 8.9'', 512MB Acer Aspire One) ran Linux Mint happily, and I even compiled Ogre3d in a reasonable time on it, watching movies never was a problem (I'm not talking HD of course;).
I never tried it, but I was told XP ran like a dog on it, to the point of being unusable. The ~smallests~ you can find nowaday are the 10'',1GB versions, ~blessed~ with XP or Windows7.

Re:For once...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, it's much funnier than that, given that we were told by Gates years ago that tablets were the wave of the future, with Microsoft's OS as an integral part of their future success. Check out the 2001 picture. And what's happened? Not much. Apple's taking a terrible risk by trying to deploy something only a little different from what already hasn't taken off. It may or may not work, but certainly Microsoft and Gates can't point at their own success story in this area as an indication they understand the market for this type of device.

From Gates' 2001 Comdex Keynote:

"Gates' presentation demonstrated how the power and flexibility of Windows XP, combined with the innovative work of numerous industry hardware and software partners, is already spawning an entirely new, breakthrough generation of the PC -- the Tablet PC. For the first time, Gates unveiled prototypes of the Tablet PC made by leading computer makers such as Acer Inc., Compaq Computer Corp., Fujitsu PC Corp. and Toshiba America Information Systems, and announced that these machines will go on sale in the second half of 2002.

The size of a legal notepad and half the weight of most of today's laptop PCs, the Tablet PC is a full-powered, full-featured PC that runs Windows XP and combines the power of desktop computing with the flexibility and portability of a pen and paper notepad.

"The PC took computing out of the back office and into everyone's office," said Gates. "The Tablet takes cutting-edge PC technology and makes it available wherever you want it, which is why I'm already using a Tablet as my everyday computer. It's a PC that is virtually without limits -- and within five years I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America."

Re:For once...

[DrXym]

Well you can find ARM powered netbooks for rock bottom prices but so far they've been pretty awful. I've see one that runs Windows CE and a variety that run Linux but they're all hobbled by unacceptably low storage and memory.

I own an Asus Eee PC 701 (soon to be retired) but now for the same price I could buy a something with a 10.1" screen, 250Gb storage and Windows 7. Therefore I don't think things have gotten any more expensive, rather the amount of bang for your buck has gone up.

Re:For once...

[kangsterizer]

to me there's no such thing as netbook.
who wants a tiny screen tiny keyboard and as much power as your cellphone just to check facebook, if you can have a slightly less tiny one, just as light and zillion times more powerfull that can do everything for the same price?

netbooks were there because they're cheap and let you do that right now.. but tomorrow, laptops will be quick and light enough to replace them. Or tablets if your an iPad fan.

I have a Panasonic CF-R3 since years. It's faster than any netbook. Its 10.4 inches, 990g, has vga out (which also output TV composite signal), 2 usb, sd, micro sd, 56K modem, ethernet, mic in, audio out, it can read any movie (up to 720p before being laggy), i can code on it, write documents, surf the web check email, and what not. Big hdd, lots of ram. A real computer. It's running XP and linux, both very, very well (actually, its running XP better atm, since the 855GM drivers are broken in Linux 2.6.30+)

I have also a tiny atom based netbook. It's much more recent, and costed only 1/4 as much (meaning, its still expensive since the R3 is from 2005..)
It lags in XP. It lags in Linux. Can't read HD properly. can't program, write docs.. keyboard/screen too small and too many annoying lags.
Can check facebook, slashdot, email.. that's it.

So once again, the R3 runs XP extremely well. Zero, zero perceived lag, I insist. Long battery runtime. Can watch youtube HD in 720p.

I'll push the comment to this end:
- what about replacing the R3 by an iPad or similar?
i lose the keyboard and connectivity. I lose the freedom. I lose compatibility with apps (i need special apps). I'm scared everytime i pack it, that the screen will break. (closing lid for the win..). i have less power, except for HD thx to the accelerated h264 hardware.

i get a nicer screen and touch.. and phone apps in exchange.

*Not worth it* I'd only ltake an ipad if it would cost $25 and i could throw 5 or 6 around the house, to read news and books, and never have to take the ipad around with me.

Re:For once...

[Spatial]

XP runs fine on them. Windows netbooks run like shit by default because:

- They have McFatty AntiSpeed running
- They have more programs and services running than the mind of god, especially at startup

When I fixed those two problems on my netbook, it became downright pleasant to use.

No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[xtracto]

Definitely not, netbooks cannot be the way forward.

That being said, neither is closed-DRMd-not-really-yours iPad like appliances.

The way forward is tablets using electro-wetting like technology with touch based input capabilities.

Of course the keyboard will always be necessary, but a on-screen touchable keyboard is an option for the stuff that people would need to write while using these devices (say, small emails, forum posts, login info, etc.... something like Opera's Wii text-input)

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Attila Dimedici]

Touch screens will never replace keyboards. It is possible that a dedicated touchscreen that is designed as a strictly input device will replace keyboards, but I suspect that most people will still prefer the tactile feel of an actual keyboard. However a display screen that also doubles as an input device will never replace the keyboard except in specialized usage (such as phones). It may be become a standard part of PCs in addition to keyboards.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

I'm glad you've defined for me what I should be doing with my netbook. I will cease taking notes, writing papers and design documents on it immediately when I travel so that it can be replaced by a tablet PC in future.

Seriously though, people use Netbooks for all sorts of things, an onscreen keyboard will almost certainly never cut it for my usage patterns. If netbooks dissapeared tommorrow, I'd just have to go back to carrying a full blown laptop around, a tablet still wouldn't cut it. I do have a 15 inch laptop too for when I'm having to write code on the move, but usually that's done at my desk where it otherwise stays docked.

My girlfriend also really likes netbooks, because she is a retail area manager for a large fashion chain, it's small enough to fit in her fashionable handbag which is part of her role (to use the products she sells), but has a proper keyboard allowing her to type up notes whichever store she's travelling too.

Sometimes normal laptops are just too much of a ballache to lug around with you, and really if all you need to do is use an office suite, a netbook is plenty powerful enough, particularly when you can get 10.5hr battery life out of them which is great when doing long journeys.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[macs4all]

Of course the keyboard will always be necessary

"Always" is a long, long time.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[pr0nbot]

My girlfriend also really likes netbooks [...] Sometimes normal laptops are just too much of a ballache to lug around with you

Not for your girflriend, I hope

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[slim]

Touch screens will never replace keyboards.

Not everywhere. But there are certainly applications where keyboards aren't required, or where onscreen keyboards are good enough.

People are happy with their touchscreen phones. The self-service checkout at my local supermarket uses only a touchscreen (and a barcode scanner!).

The question is more, for the kinds of thing you want to do on an iPad, is the smaller form factor worth the sacrifice of a keyboard?

Even doing standard Web stuff - filling in forms for web shops, emailing, posting on forums, I do a lot of typing. I'll be surprised and impressed if the iPad onscreen keyboard doesn't get in the way.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Jayws]

I totally agree here. Netbooks suit a very good need for portability which is ironic for laptops when you think about it. I can stay on campus all day and check e-mail, read news/articles, write code (to some extent), surf the web, etc with my netbook. It's cheap, light, and most importantly the battery will last me all day so I don't have to carry that damned power cord around with me! If I do bring the power cord? It's a tiny brick -- minimal hassle. I do feel like they are a bit underpowered and I am now starting to look into ultralights like the Asus UL30, however this laptop wouldn't be a necessity. I get by just fine on a netbook during the day, an ultralight would just make it more comfortable. Netbooks/laptops/tablets/whatever are all meant to supplement a primary desktop IMO. I've been a great deal happier since I started working under that model.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

I actually noticed that slip up when I read through my post after posting (there's a moral to be learned from that I think), I thought oh it wont notice, but I should know, if I've learned anything on Slashdot this last 10 years or so, it's that no embarassingly bad phrasing of sentences gets past Slashdot ;)

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[dangitman]

it's small enough to fit in her fashionable handbag which is part of her role (to use the products she sells), but has a proper keyboard

How is it possible to have a machine that small, but also has a full-sized keyboard?

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

Proper = physical.

It doesn't need to be full sized as it's still fine to type on, it is the physical nature of it that matters. Besides, the on screen keyboard of the iPad is limited by the screensize, and hence must be even smaller again so if size of keyboard is an issue, then the iPad suffers even more there.

I wont pretend I could jump straight onto a netbook keyboard and type away as flawlessly as on a normal desktop keyboard, I did make a couple more mistakes on average, but it's something you rapidly get over- it's really just getting used to the fact the distances between keys are a little smaller, but at least they're real, proper, responsive, keys. That's what really matters when typing.

For what it's worth I also have a virtual keyboard (http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/inputdevices/0,1000001008,39165419,00.htm) which I used to use with my old PDA, but despite it being a reasonable size, it still wasn't a match for a physical keyboard.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[dangitman]

Proper = physical.

So, any average mobile phone with a numeric keypad has a "proper" keyboard just because it has "physical" switches? I don't think you'll find many people agreeing with that.

Also, how is a touchscreen keyboard not physical? It uses touch sensors and emits light. Are those somehow against the laws of physics now?

I wont pretend I could jump straight onto a netbook keyboard and type away as flawlessly as on a normal desktop keyboard, I did make a couple more mistakes on average, but it's something you rapidly get over-

And plenty of people argue the same thing about touchscreen keyboards. Which just goes to show that the definition of a "proper" keyboard is highly subjective and variable.

Perhaps you should not have chosen that term to describe the keyboard? For many people, anything short of a full-sized keyboard that one can touch-type on is not a proper keyboard. For others, a T9 numeric keypad is their standard keyboard.

it still wasn't a match for a physical keyboard.

Again, how is a touchscreen keyboard not a physical keyboard? It exists in physical reality, so how is it not physical? It uses physical motions to detect input, so it must be physical.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

"So, any average mobile phone with a numeric keypad has a "proper" keyboard just because it has "physical" switches? I don't think you'll find many people agreeing with that."

Perhaps some may disagree, but all most the most ignorant zealots will agree that typing on such a physical keyboard is far easier than any touch screen implementation be it the iPhone or Android.

"Also, how is a touchscreen keyboard not physical? It uses touch sensors and emits light. Are those somehow against the laws of physics now?"

Because it's virtual. The touchscreen is not the keyboard, it's merely a method to interface with the virtual keyboard. See here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Keyboard

"And plenty of people argue the same thing about touchscreen keyboards. Which just goes to show that the definition of a "proper" keyboard is highly subjective and variable."

Bollocks. No one can ever reach the same typing speed on a virtual keyboard as can be achieved on a physical keyboard because of lack of true tactile response, and the inherent relative slowness of software. On screen keyboards can be pretty good, but never as good.

"Perhaps you should not have chosen that term to describe the keyboard? For many people, anything short of a full-sized keyboard that one can touch-type on is not a proper keyboard. For others, a T9 numeric keypad is their standard keyboard."

Semantics. I clarified that by proper I meant physical.

"Again, how is a touchscreen keyboard not a physical keyboard? It exists in physical reality, so how is it not physical? It uses physical motions to detect input, so it must be physical."

By that argument, nothing is virtual, because everything virtual, including software exists as a set of real, physical, electrons, or markings on a disk platter or whatever. I suggest you look into better understanding the meaning of virtual before engaging in arguments that are merely about semantics, and hence have no relevance to the discussion other than petty rantings.

Still, to just clarify that again for you, and hence answer your question more precisely, an on screen keyboard is not a physical keyboard because of the fact it is not actually a keyboard, but merely a software representation of what we know as a keyboard. To give you an analogy to ponder over, would you call an on screen image of an orange, a physical orange even if you could interface with that image using the touch screen to rotate it and so forth?

I hope that helps clarify it for you.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[dangitman]

Perhaps some may disagree, but all most the most ignorant zealots will agree that typing on such a physical keyboard is far easier than any touch screen implementation be it the iPhone or Android.

Seriously? Repeatedly pressing keys in some bizarre numeric-to-alpha scheme is easier than using a QWERTY touchscreen?

I think your comment reveals your own zealotry.

Because it's virtual. The touchscreen is not the keyboard, it's merely a method to interface with the virtual keyboard.

Just because Wikipedia says it, doesn't make it true. A "virtual" keyboard is just as physical as any other keyboard. Otherwise, how would it exist?

Bollocks. No one can ever reach the same typing speed on a virtual keyboard as can be achieved on a physical keyboard because of lack of true tactile response, and the inherent relative slowness of software. On screen keyboards can be pretty good, but never as good.

So, where's your evidence for this? Is typing on a "virtual keyboard" always faster than typing on, for example, a chiclet keyboard? There are some pretty horrible "physical" keyboards out there, how can you be so certain that physical keyboards are always faster?

Semantics. I clarified that by proper I meant physical.

So, by your definition, a keyboard that required one to mechanically lift a 200 pound weight, and place it on a grid with letters spaced 10 feet apart would be "proper" keyboard?

By that argument, nothing is virtual, because everything virtual, including software exists as a set of real, physical, electrons, or markings on a disk platter or whatever.

Correct. The term has always been a misnomer.

Still, to just clarify that again for you, and hence answer your question more precisely, an on screen keyboard is not a physical keyboard because of the fact it is not actually a keyboard, but merely a software representation of what we know as a keyboard

But it involves hardware elements. It doesn't exist purely in software. Otherwise, how could it detect fingers touching it?

To give you an analogy to ponder over, would you call an on screen image of an orange, a physical orange even if you could interface with that image using the touch screen to rotate it and so forth?

I would call it an image of an orange.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

"Seriously? Repeatedly pressing keys in some bizarre numeric-to-alpha scheme is easier than using a QWERTY touchscreen?"

Oh we're talking about keypads, rather than keyboards? I thought you had your semantics right on this, but I guess not. Regardless, you'll still type faster with numeric to text pads if you've been using them long enough than you ever will be able to with a touchscreen virtual keyboard. QWERTY itself is illogical if you cannot type properly on it (i.e. 10 fingers, both hands), so your implication that numeric to alpha schemes are bizarre, whilst suggesting minimised qwerty isn't is rather hilarious.

"Just because Wikipedia says it, doesn't make it true. A "virtual" keyboard is just as physical as any other keyboard. Otherwise, how would it exist?"

Reading this hurts so much, it's like trying to explain to a 6 year old.

"So, where's your evidence for this? Is typing on a "virtual keyboard" always faster than typing on, for example, a chiclet keyboard? There are some pretty horrible "physical" keyboards out there, how can you be so certain that physical keyboards are always faster?"

I was speaking in general, of course you could choose a retardedly gimped keyboard which would be slower, but that's obviously a dumb comparison. It's like saying cars aren't in general faster than walking and using a broken down car to prove your point. Clearly a dumb comparison however, that ignores the fact that working cars are indeed generally faster at getting you from A to B than walking when travelling between buildings worth driving between.

"So, by your definition, a keyboard that required one to mechanically lift a 200 pound weight, and place it on a grid with letters spaced 10 feet apart would be "proper" keyboard?"

For someone so caught up in precise defintions and semantics, you don't have struggle with some basic terminology and tenets of the English language. It was pretty clear to anyone with a basic understanding of English what I was referring to. When I said I was referring to physical keyboards with the use of the term proper, that does not mean I was referring to all possible keyboards real and imaginary, including the most ludicrous ones that only a child's mind could come up with like the example you just gave.

"Correct. The term has always been a misnomer."

Well no, it hasn't. You see, the term virtual is used to describe a software representation of a separate physical whole, this includes virtual keyboards, virtual memory, virtual discs, virtual CD drives and so on. You seem to be confused and think that virtual means "doesn't really exist", all that demonstrates is that you don't really know what the term virtual means- but don't worry, others make this mistake too, you're not alone. Just because you don't understand the term does not mean there is a problem with it, your understanding is the problem here.

"But it involves hardware elements. It doesn't exist purely in software. Otherwise, how could it detect fingers touching it?"

You really are struggling to understand what virtual means aren't you? Perhaps IT isn't for you if you can't grasp simple, but quite fundamental concepts like the separation between representation of an item, and an item itself. Regardless, I'll try again- the touch screen is not a keyboard, the software is not a keyboard, together they are a representation of a keyboard, but they are not a physical keyboard, it is hence a virtual keyboard, or an on-screen keyboard or whatever you wish to call it. It is not a physical keyboard, because a physical keyboard has physical buttons, not software representations of buttons.

"I would call it an image of an orange."

Ah, so you are capable of understanding it then? Capable of understanding that your on-screen keyboard, is an image of a keyboard and not an actual physical keyboard then? Just because you interface with that image of a keyboard, that piece of software, with a physical input device- your touch screen, does not make the system a physical key

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[dangitman]

Oh we're talking about keypads, rather than keyboards? I thought you had your semantics right on this, but I guess not.

I used the word "keypad" in the very post you replied to, so how wasn't that clear?

Regardless, you'll still type faster with numeric to text pads if you've been using them long enough than you ever will be able to with a touchscreen virtual keyboard.

What evidence do you have of this? I used a Nokia with a numeric pad for text entry for years, and I hated it, could never type very quickly. But with a virtual QWERTY, I was typing much faster almost instantly.

Also, why should I learn a new scheme? That's like saying I'll type faster on a Dvorak keyboard layout if I spend enough time using it. Completely irrelevant, as I'm not about to spend time learning a Dvorak layout.

When I said I was referring to physical keyboards with the use of the term proper, that does not mean I was referring to all possible keyboards real and imaginary, including the most ludicrous ones that only a child's mind could come up with like the example you just gave.

This is your problem. You chose your words poorly. When you said "proper keyboards," you actually meant "keyboards I like," and when you redefined "proper" as "physical" you only dug yourself further into the hole - because it seems that by "physical" you only mean a certain subset of "physical" keyboards.

If by "proper" you meant "physical," then why didn't you say that? And if by "physical" you mean "keyboards I like," then why didn't you just say that in the first place?

Well no, it hasn't. You see, the term virtual is used to describe a software representation of a separate physical whole, this includes virtual keyboards, virtual memory, virtual discs, virtual CD drives and so on.

Yes, I agree that is the traditional usage - but it is baggage that we must get rid of if we want to evolve and become more sophisticated about technology. "Virtual" is a crutch, a term used by those struggling to come to terms with software and digital objects.

Just because you interface with that image of a keyboard, that piece of software, with a physical input device- your touch screen, does not make the system a physical keyboard.

But it is a physical keyboard. How else would it detect you touching it?

I'm not even sure what your goal is here, even if by some twist of the imagination globally you managed to get on-screen keyboards redefined as being physical keyboards, what would your point be exactly?

My point was that there are many different types of keyboard, and different people prefer different ones, and the physicality (or lack thereof) is not the most defining characteristic. There are some really shitty "physical" keyboards, and some really good "virtual" keyboards. My issue was with your sloppy thinking and poor assumptions.

Back to your example - what good is a netbook keyboard that's so small you can't touch-type on it? Wouldn't a virtual keyboard be just as effective in that case? What about the space the keyboard takes up? On a device that is not used mainly for typing, wouldn't adding a bulky keyboard actually be a drawback? Typing speed is not the only consideration.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

"This is your problem. You chose your words poorly."

Your lack of ability to understand and correctly interpret common English is not my problem, it is yours.

"Yes, I agree that is the traditional usage - but it is baggage that we must get rid of if we want to evolve and become more sophisticated about technology. "Virtual" is a crutch, a term used by those struggling to come to terms with software and digital objects."

No, really, it's not. In fact, it's becoming ever more prominent with the rise of virtualisation I'm afraid.

"But it is a physical keyboard. How else would it detect you touching it?"

You really do struggle to understand how on screen keyboards work don't you? I don't think I've ever met anyone who finds it so hard to understand technology concepts like this. I'll try one last time, to answer your question, the on screen keyboard doesn't detect you touching it, the separate input device, the touch screen does, and the on screen keyboard which is software interprets that, the keyboard itself is not physical, it is an on-screen keyboard, it is a virtual keyboard. I thought it might finally click when you got the orange example, but you still seem to be struggling to make the leap to understanding this rather simple concept.

"Back to your example - what good is a netbook keyboard that's so small you can't touch-type on it? Wouldn't a virtual keyboard be just as effective in that case? What about the space the keyboard takes up? On a device that is not used mainly for typing, wouldn't adding a bulky keyboard actually be a drawback? Typing speed is not the only consideration."

I've yet to find a Netbook with a keyboard so small that you can't touch-type on it, simply because there are no netbooks with keyboards that small. No a virtual keyboard would not be just as effective, because it still lacks tactile response, and still suffers the afformentioned problem of inherent software latency. Space is hardly a valid argument, because Netbooks like Asus' Seashell line are not big enough in relation to say the iPad to cause a problem unless you have particular massively constrained circumstances where a few mm or at worst the odd cm matters, but that'll effect a portion of users so small it's not a concern.

Now let's see if you can finally grasp this concept of virtual shall we?

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[dangitman]

Your lack of ability to understand and correctly interpret common English is not my problem, it is yours.

So, where does the dictionary define "proper" as "physical"? I think it is your problem, as much as you protest that it isn't.

I don't think I've ever met anyone who finds it so hard to understand technology concepts like this. I'll try one last time, to answer your question, the on screen keyboard doesn't detect you touching it,

You appear to be the one struggling to understand. The touchscreen is a component of the "virtual" keyboard. It is hardware. therefore, it is physical.

Your reasoning doesn't make sense. Your regular, "physical" keyboard requires software to display characters on the screen, so the presence of software to interpret input doesn't make something less physical.

I've yet to find a Netbook with a keyboard so small that you can't touch-type on it, simply because there are no netbooks with keyboards that small.

How the fuck would you know which netbook keyboards I can't touch type on, if you've never even met me, let alone gone netbook shopping together? Now, you might not have any problem typing on those tiny keyboards, but that that doesn't mean your experience is universal.

No a virtual keyboard would not be just as effective, because it still lacks tactile response, and still suffers the afformentioned problem of inherent software latency.

Again, you assume that tactile feedback is always a key factor for everybody in every usage situation. That's not necessarily true.

Also, how is "software latency" relevant? Your "physical" keyboard also suffers from software latency, as its input needs to be interpreted by software. In reality, with a modern processor and well-written software, software latency just isn't an issue with virtual keyboards.

Re:No, Netbooks are NOT the way forward

[Xest]

"So, where does the dictionary define "proper" as "physical"? I think it is your problem, as much as you protest that it isn't."

The dictionary follows common language, it does not define how people should interpret it before it is defined as official language however, so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up, other than grasping at straws to cover the fact you're being pedantic and pretending you don't understand what I was referring to when you either do, or you're extremely dumb.

"You appear to be the one struggling to understand. The touchscreen is a component of the "virtual" keyboard. It is hardware. therefore, it is physical."

No it's not, the touchscreen is a generic input device used with the keyboard. I understand perfectly thanks, you not being able to grasp the difference and some fundamental computing concepts isn't my problem I'm afraid.

"Your reasoning doesn't make sense. Your regular, "physical" keyboard requires software to display characters on the screen, so the presence of software to interpret input doesn't make something less physical."

lol, you really do find this difficult don't you? The output on screen is not part of the input. You can have keyboards attached to headless systems, but they're still keyboards or are you telling me now that a keyboard without being plugged into a working PC without software on it is not a keyboard?

"How the fuck would you know which netbook keyboards I can't touch type on, if you've never even met me, let alone gone netbook shopping together?"

Sorry, I didn't realise you were some omnipresent being that exists inside everyone.

"Again, you assume that tactile feedback is always a key factor for everybody in every usage situation. That's not necessarily true."

Well in terms of faster typing it is.

"Also, how is "software latency" relevant? Your "physical" keyboard also suffers from software latency, as its input needs to be interpreted by software."

Yes, it's always an issue in computing systems certainly, but it's negligible on physical keyboards because they generally have their own buffer, are connected directly to the input bus, and use hardware interrupts.

"In reality, with a modern processor and well-written software, software latency just isn't an issue with virtual keyboards."

Right, but that's because in most cases lack of tactile feedback prevents people typing fast enough for it to be a problem. Try using a virtual keyboard in an app with high CPU and memory usage however.

Still, I'm bored now, you don't have enough of an understanding about computing to be having this discussion because your comments don't make sense and we had a good laugh around the office at some of your more stupid questions. Do yourself a favour and actually learn a bit about how computers, both hardware and software work. Crack that virtualisation nut- figure out why the term virtual is valid and where it fits in the universe rather than remaining ignorant. When you actually have a worthwhile understanding of computing come back and have a mature conversation about it, but I suspect by that point, you'll already understand why your viewpoint was wrong and there wont be much to discuss anyway.

What did you expect him to say?

[ArhcAngel]

"It's the greatest thing since sliced bread! I have told Ballmer to just give up and shutter the doors at Microsoft." - Not Bill Gates

Actually for BG that just might qualify as a CE Oh No He Didn't!

Not excited

[Anonymous Coward]

The Microsoft Chairman, who had admitted to being in awe of the iPhone on first release, saw nothing in the iPad to really excite him.

Doesn't he realize you can navigate to whatever content you want? He was probably just looking at the wrong porn site.

His actual quote is far more interesting :

[digitalderbs]

“You know, I’m a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard–in other words a netbook–will be the mainstream on that,” Gates said. “So, it’s not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, ‘Oh my God, Microsoft didn’t aim high enough.’ It’s a nice reader, but there’s nothing on the iPad I look at and say, ‘Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.’”

source.

Re:His actual quote is far more interesting :

[Anonymous Coward]

Gates: "So, it’s not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, ‘Oh my God, Microsoft didn’t aim high enough.'"

Ballmer: "There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance."

Looks like Apple and Linux platforms are putting Windows CE on phones between a rock and a hard place.

Re:His actual quote is far more interesting :

[Penguinisto]

...the diff between Gates and Ballmer should tell you why Microsoft is so damned moribund these days.

Re:His actual quote is far more interesting :

[Anonymous Coward]

...the diff between Gates and Ballmer should tell you why Microsoft is so damned moribund these days.

... yeah. Windows Phone 7 (Or whatever stupid name it has) is getting pretty favorable reviews at the moment (It was introduced hours ago, though, so take that with a grain of salt). Windows 7 is getting rave reviews from pretty much everybody. People love Office 2007 once they've used it for a while... moribund is not how I'd describe Microsoft at the moment... if anything, they're significantly better off than they were 5 years ago...

Trust in Bill Gates predictions

[gmuslera]

because we all have more than enough memory with 640k

Re:Trust in Bill Gates predictions

[Tanuki64]

He never said this. I must know, I was there when he did not say it.

Re:Trust in Bill Gates predictions

[mindbrane]

Gates has denied ever saying anything like that and I've no memory of his having said any such thing. He did predict hardware would come free with the purchase of an operating system by now. My memory of the whole 640 should be enough for anyone was that it was said by an Intel engineer but I'm too lazy to run it to ground.

Re:Trust in Bill Gates predictions

[Rexdude]

He did say this...in 1981. When an entire operating system fit within 1 MB, 5 MB was considered cavernous for a hard drive (if you had one), 180 or 360kb 5.25" disks were the norm..and most applications were not more than a couple of hundred KB if that. He did not say '640kB should be enough for anybody henceforth, and for all time to come.'

Re:Trust in Bill Gates predictions

[Anonymous Coward]

Similarly, that whole "Internet" thing just fizzled right out. No need to build a browser... :)

eh

[Anonymous Coward]

1. the future of netbooks is arm and linux. microsoft is irrelevant.

2. microsoft has been putting a touchscreen on windows and calling it a tablet for almost a decade, with a different name (and the same result) every time. Most recently, it's "slate computing".

Yea right...... just like Balmer dissed iPhone

[rimcrazy]

Yea, I remember Balmer dissing the iPhone. "So what so they sell a million phones. WE have the OS in millions of phones"

So we fast forward a few years and there are what, 30 million or so iPhones out there at $600 a crack to Apple and if I remember correctly iPhone installed base just surpassed phones with Windows Mobile in them. Yea.... right. Well they are not perfect but for me I think I would like Apple's revenue per phone much more than Windows Mobile but what the hell, gives Steve another reason to kick some more chairs.

Re:Yea right...... just like Balmer dissed iPhone

[General Wesc]

According to the summary, Bill Gates was impressed by the iPhone. This suggests that he's secretly a different person from Balmer. Who knew?!

Re:Yea right...... just like Balmer dissed iPhone

[walshy007]

microsoft weren't the people to beat in the mobile space, nokia are, and they have failed. The US market is the only real one the iphone has been successful in, which can be partly attributed to the lack of any decent smartphone in that market .(nokia had better phones released earlier.. but US carriers would not take them because of too much functionality)

Re:Yea right...... just like Balmer dissed iPhone

[dangitman]

The US market is the only real one the iphone has been successful in,

Where do you get this idea from? The iPhone is successful in many markets outside the US.

Re:Yea right...... just like Balmer dissed iPhone

[walshy007]

Depends on your idea of successful I guess, they are selling, but the installed base of n95's shits all over that of the iphone. Worldwide the iphone has only sold 30 million units, that's just a drop in the bucket really.

How About Neither?

[Greyfox]

I don't think either of them are the way forward. I don't feel particularly compelled by the iPad but I think it's probably closer to the way forward than a netbook will be. Just because Bill Gates is one of the richest men in the world doesn't mean he craps daisies and technological innovation. Remember that this is the guy who blew off the Internet as another fad for several years.

Re:How About Neither?

[Xiterion]

Just because Bill Gates is one of the richest men in the world doesn't mean he craps daisies and technological innovation.

Nope. That job belongs to Steve Jobs ;)

Re:How About Neither?

[nine-times]

But if there's one thing Bill Gates knows about, it's how to build an effective, consistent, and beautiful UI that people will love.

Re:How About Neither?

[gtall]

I think this fixation on *the* way forward is inspiring most of this discussion. Maybe it stems from the convergence of some computing devices to be entertainment vending machines. There are, most likely, many paths all of which go into the future and we can be on all of them at the same time.

There is also the difference in philosophies. MS has always tried to be everything to everyone. The reason appears to be a fear that someone else might actually succeed in any one area that someone might not be MS. So they fight against the entire market, construct their own closed ecosystem, get their sycophants to claim it is open, and still must do underhanded deals to get their stuff accepted.

Apple seems to segment their markets and hit each with an enticing but closed system for each. If there is a convergence for any of their devices, they seem to need to be convinced of it first in the marketplace and then make small leaps to close the gaps.

Open software is somewhat rudderless (in the sense of there being no system to rule them all) and tends more towards Apple's model of targeted systems.

The device manufacturers are clueless when it comes to software and interfaces and so are left dancing to what MS and Open software provide for them. They could regain the initiative but only if they adopt open software and open standards...which runs counter to their inherent bias that to succeed means to screw the opposition. This leads them directly back to MS which has a similar philosophy....all Business School Product think alike even if it will never succeed for them. They then jump in bed with MS, either get stabbed in the back or realize they are no longer in control (or realize MS stuff is too stifling) and venture out on their own (symbian, the new Franken-software Intel and Nokia are going to flog, etc.).

Re:How About Neither?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

I think the iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch UI will drive innovation for the next decade for mobile devices and we'll see touch products get cheap enough to be thrown in as a standard feature. Eventually the future is going to look more like an iPad but, run as a GP device. Eventually Mac OS 11 and Windows 8/9/10 are going to take huge cues from the iPad in terms of integrating touch in large devices.

Re:How About Neither?

[lennier]

To his credit, the Win95 UI was pretty darn good. Gnome is still struggling to grasp the simplicity of making the Start Menu a folder, and Apple struck out wildly with the Dock. Taskbar and right-click for 'context menu' was awesome.

But the same UI team did some silly things too. The magic 'My Documents' folder... with a space... which morphs into 'Bob's Documents'..... brrrrrr. We're still being burned by that today.

Re:How About Neither?

[nine-times]

Well really there have been a bunch of problems over the years. I thought it was always pretty silly to call it "My Documents". You're logged into your computer-- who else's documents are they going to be? I'm glad they eventually fixed that. Second, it always struck me as strange that you're sitting looking at your computer, and there's a little icon on the screen of your computer that says "My Computer". My computer is *in* my computer? Weirder yet it's on the Desktop which is a folder in the computer. Microsoft isn't the only ones guilty of that one.

Then there's the famous old one about making you hit a button that says "Start" in order to shut down. And personally, I could never understand how a professional company could put out the Windows XP Luna theme. There's the auto-hiding of menu choices in Office, and the way their server tools sometimes hide important information in the context menus. There's the relatively uselessness of the DOS command line.

Of course, we can't say that these were all Gates's choices, but Microsoft has had at least a couple UI blunders over the years.

Re:How About Neither?

[Anonymous Coward]

I recall reading somewhere that they set the name for My Documents up the way they did (with the space) so as to force application developers to take into account that file names could now have spaces, since My Documents was the default location for saving files to.

Oy.

[schmidt349]

Is this like a cottage industry for you Apple haters? You post every possible negative comment about the new product you can find, drum it up into some kind of grand pronouncement on the future of the device, then complain that there's too much media coverage and everyone should just shut up now!

Re:Oy.

[Anonymous Coward]

you got it wrong. We're complaining about the fact that there is too much uncritical media coverage. Besides, it's not like there is much MS love here neither, and even Linux has its share of bashing from time to time.

Re:Oy.

[IANAAC]

You post every possible negative comment about the new product you can find, drum it up into some kind of grand pronouncement on the future of the device

I really didn't read negativity in his statement. I just read one man's opinion, which was pretty neutral.

On the other hand, why would you be getting that bent out of shape over someone's opinion?

Re:Oy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Awwww, does someone need a hug?

Re:Oy.

[Anonymous Coward]

because he's an Apple fan. He only purchases things based on other people's opinion of it.

Re:Oy.

[Anonymous Coward]

I got nothing against Apple, but for god's sake, quit putting an "i" in front of all your product names.
I suggest "fn".

Its got some faults

[jschmitz]

I certainly won't be running out to get one but its way sexier than anything MS could ever dream up - Its kind of lame that it runs iPhone OS instead of some stripped down OS-X..probably the future versions of it will be pretty cool - If Gates is talking about Linux on Netbooks then yeah that is pretty cool = ) --Jeffery

Re:Its got some faults

[sammyF70]

I tend to disagree. I'd say something Microsoft did dream up is actually sexier than the iPad. The obvious problem of course is that it's still just a dream and not an actual product.

Re:Its got some faults

[macs4all]

I tend to disagree. I'd say something Microsoft did dream up is actually sexier than the iPad. The obvious problem of course is that it's still just a dream and not an actual product.

Yep, it's certainly easy to dream up something too advanced to actually create, as shown in this Apple video from 1987.

Re:Its got some faults

[sammyF70]

I guess the difference between the Apple ~thingy~ and the Courier video is that the shown Courier's functionality is realistic (if you omit the stellar script recognition at 1:20 or so when the speaker writes a URL with the pen). Nothing in it can't be done by today's standard.
By comparison, pretty much everything in the Apple video is still pure scifi.

Re:Its got some faults

[wvmarle]

Knowing MS all the good stuff will have been left out by the time it comes to a release. If ever. Just like what was promised for Win95 is still not fully implemented in Win7.

iPad vs netbook

[Anonymous Coward]

I got an iPod touch for Christmas. I really wanted a netbook. So, I bought a netbook and ended up with both. I can honestly say that I use my iPod touch far more than the netbook. The reasons are:

1) pocket portability
2) instant on
3) very nice UI
4) lots of free or inexpensive apps
5) variety of entertainment

I don't much care for the typewriter interface to the iPod touch. I haven't checked out voice recognition yet and maybe that is the way to go.

I would be very interested in trying the iPad to see how its keyboard interface is. Perhaps an iPad docking station would be nice.

Re:iPad vs netbook

[Steauengeglase]

I'd swap out very nice UI (as it brings the GUI to mind) with multi-touch. After playing with other devices and netbooks, I'd say that this is the one feature that I wish everyone else would copy instead of attempt to re-imagine. It seems like every smart phone out there tries to do something with a zoom bar, when it is almost ingrained in me to simply put my fingers on it and try to "stretch out" the page. The GUI, on the other hand, feels more and more lacking as I tinker with it. It has all of the appeal of shuffling a deck of cards.

It's just a computer.

[onion2k]

These days more than ever the hardware only makes one difference - what inputs are available. There are a few other minor considerations like which APIs are enabled for developers, but really the only significant factor is how you can get information into the machine. Everything else like CPU speed, RAM, storage, etc are problems that, for the ordinary user at least, are solved.

The iPad is designed to make it easy to enter spacial information (where you're pressing on the screen) compared to a mouse or a keyboard. That's why it'll make a great reader, web browsing tool, and gaming device, but a relatively poor word processor or data entry device. A netbook on the other hand isn't really optimised for information entry at all. The keyboard isn't as good as a laptop, it's harder to operate a touchscreen on one than a tablet, and there's usually a pretty rubbish trackpad. Netbooks are a great compromise but they're not going to win in the long term when we can make laptops fold up smaller (somehow!).

In the future there will be a place for tablet PCs while there won't be for netbooks. I'm sure Bill is right that for now MSFT's interest lies in the netbook, but looking to the longer term he's dead wrong.

Re:It's just a computer.

[mystikkman]

Please don't call it a 'Computer'. Lets reserve the term for devices for which you can develop without having to be approved by a Czar and with no forced cut of sales.

Re:It's just a computer.

[macs4all]

Please don't call it a 'Computer'.

Fine, because Apple makes a big point of distinguishing the iPad from a computer.

Re:It's just a computer.

[Just Some Guy]

A netbook on the other hand isn't really optimised for information entry at all. The keyboard isn't as good as a laptop, it's harder to operate a touchscreen on one than a tablet, and there's usually a pretty rubbish trackpad.

And yet I can do my job on a netbook with Emacs. Exactly how "multi" is "multi-touch"?

Re:It's just a computer.

[inKubus]

Looking at MS profits it appears they will be just fine with being slightly behind the curve as always, but actually selling volume. They are a publishing company, not a computer company. They will react to trends in UI design and eventually make something that will work well in a tablet format. Being first is cool but they are interested in money, not innovation.

Apple is also quite interested in money. I don't see anything the iPhone app store does that hasn't been in other cell phones for at least a decade. It's just they only have to support one platform instead of the 20 out there. Apple has always used this proprietary closed system to wring more out of the software. But that takes a lot of momentum and they've been lucky with the iPod and iPhone but we've seen this Apple before (late 80's). They are going to have to keep up this innovation pace to stay in business and I just don't see that happening in a closed system. When HTC can whip out a multi-touch device in a few months that does what the iPhone does, for half the cost, it's just a tough place to compete. Apple relies on the trendy cool factor and that's not enough to be a big player. Microsoft sells what the masses want, because that's where the volume is.

Re:It's just a computer.

[lucifuge31337]

A netbook on the other hand isn't really optimised for information entry at all. The keyboard isn't as good as a laptop,

We had a solution to this in 1996. The ThinkPad 701C with a butterfly keyboard.

When someone puts that keyboard on a netbook, it will be hailed as revolutionary. Again.

Re:It's just a computer.

[lennier]

No, do let's. Keep rubbing it in everyone's faces that Apple is locking down the computer and turning their back on their Apple II heritage.

(Which they did ever since Macintosh but never mind...)

Appliances are the wrong answer, but they're the wrong answer to a legitimate question, which is 'why does the personal computer suck so badly?'

Re:It's just a computer.

[Mex]

You must have huge mutant fingers because I've been using my Dell mini netbook for months and I love it. Supposedly the keyboard is about 90% of the size of a regular keyboard, and I have absolutely no problems typing anything on it.

Maybe other netbooks are smaller and have worse keyboards, but I quite like mine. I'm probably not going to buy an iPad, I already have a Kindle, netbook and regular computer. I like the idea, however.

Re:It's just a computer.

[Anonymous Coward]

"When HTC can whip out a multi-touch device in a few months that does what the iPhone does, for half the cost, it's just a tough place to compete."

The iPhone came out at the start of 2007. When did HTC come out with a multi-touch device? Assuming it was mid 2007, what happened?

Give the pad time

[stokessd]

If the iPad is a game changer, it won't be one overnight. I see the iPhone as being an instant success not because of what it was, but because of what all other phones weren't. The rest of the smartphone landscape at the time was dismal, both in terms of hardware and plans (yes, this is a USA centric view). So the instant success of the iPhone was an anomaly, not the "apple norm".

Think back to the iPod, it languished and didn't really gain a whole lot of traction until the third version. That's a lot of time to wait and watch. If the iPad does turn into a "gamechanger", it will also be over time.

The apple store will be the big game changer. I would drop my cable in a heartbeat if I could get shows (all the shows) when I want them. I pay like $100 a month to comcast for a DVR and their crappy compressed digital cable. I'd be willing to pay at least that for a vast and deep menu of shows I could watch when I want. The same holds true for books, newspapers, and magazines. The content will be the killer app, and the ease of getting that content will differentiate the iPad from all others.

If what I've outlined above happens where I can get my TV shows and movies from an apple store, it will also revive the appleTV which is like an airport express just waiting for content.

Sheldon

Re:Give the pad time

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up. Stream my cable channels or let me buy shows alacart that I want to an iPad and I'd drop cable in a heartbeat. I'm paying about a $120 for full cable and the quality and reliability sucks. Give my shows for a $1 or even a $1.50 a piece and I wouldn't see the need for cable. Even if I paid $3 for movies I'd still come out cheaper and not have to deal with the hassles.

Pocket PC

[JohnHegarty]

I have an old Pocket PC that cost about $300 back in 2005 , and I really can think of much the IPad does that it won't.

Re:Pocket PC

[soupforare]

Have people wait in lines for days and sell out.

Re:Pocket PC

[intheshelter]

If you really believe the load of shit you just posted then you obviously have the technological vision of a gnat. Tell me, where is the big explosion of pocket pc's that resulted from that supposed feature parity you're claiming. I'm willing to bet the iPad will be huge, but Pocket PCs were worm riddled dogs in comparison. Sorry, but if you are really so short sighted to think that a Pocket PC feature list makes a compelling argument then maybe you should be posting for the Wall Street Journal or some other technologically challenged dinosaur.

Re:Pocket PC

[Anonymous Coward]

But it's how it does it. How technologies work is as important as what they do.

Slashdot-itis, I'm afraid. Just because you get a hard-on for chasing down drivers to make your distro work doesn't mean the average computer user wants to. Yes, most functionality can be hectored out of (INSERT X) but so what?

Re:Pocket PC

[nine-times]

Provide a pleasant experience?

Re:Pocket PC

[wzinc]

The iPhone didn't do much (or anything) that WinMo, etc didn't; it just did it well.

To fix WinMo / Pocket PC / WinCE, MS needs to:
1. Get rid of the stylus.
2. I have no idea...

Re:Pocket PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Making phone calls?

People wont for out for it

[Anonymous Coward]

The only reason people got Iphones is because they were able to pay for it in installments (ie though their mobile phone contract). People aren't going to want to fork out alot of money for something that is essentially the same as their phone but with a bigger screen and less functionality. Even hardcore mac fanboys think the Ipad is a bit of a joke.

Re:People wont for out for it

[macs4all]

Even hardcore mac fanboys think the Ipad is a bit of a joke.

Speak for yourself. I am an embedded developer who, in most cases, (including iPad) also happens to prefer Apple's products.

iPad is far from a joke. It is the VNC device I've been wanting for over 20 years. I could give a shit less about it being an eReader, iPod, or "video consumption" device. For me, it's all about bringing my computer screen to my easy-chair.

And no, balancing a netbook on my lap, crunching my arm around to reach the trackpad, isn't my idea of "comfortable".

Re:People wont for out for it

[Culture20]

iPad is far from a joke. It is the VNC device I've been wanting for over 20 years.

What, now that the secure way to run VNC is through an SSH tunnel? Will the iPad allow that out of the box, or will you need to spend $50 in the app store?

Re:People wont for out for it

[s73v3r]

Well, here is a list of VNC clients for the iPhone, which will work on the iPad. Several of them will probably be reworked to take advantage of the iPad's larger screen. As for paying for apps, it depends. If everyone who has created a VNC client for the iPhone platform believes they should get paid for their work, then you might have to spend some money. But I'm 85% sure that at least one or two of the apps on that list are free.

Re:People wont for out for it

[macs4all]

Well, here is a list of VNC clients for the iPhone, which will work on the iPad. Several of them will probably be reworked to take advantage of the iPad's larger screen. As for paying for apps, it depends. If everyone who has created a VNC client for the iPhone platform believes they should get paid for their work, then you might have to spend some money. But I'm 85% sure that at least one or two of the apps on that list are free.

Wow, thanks for the list! There were a few on there I had not seen.

Yes, VNSea, Mocha VNC Lite, and I think the RealVNC iPhone client are free. VNSea also is Open Source, and purports to also work (albeit painfully!) on an EDGE network.

PC version

[Andypcguy]

I like what I've seen of the iPAD. I wouldn't buy one as anything Mac is too expensive and I don't like their os. I will wait until a PC vendor starts making a similar device for half the price running windows and all the software I like to use. The overal concept is a good one and I have to give the mac guys credit for being real innovators. I think the ipad will read all my pirated E-books quite nicely. Most of them are technical in nature and don't fit the small fiction novel formfactor. My books are textbook sized.

Re:PC version

[Viewsonic]

If you're trying to read textbooks on your iPad, your eyes may hate you. Try using a device with e-ink. I find it ridiculous that companies are trying to sell non-eink devices as e-readers.

Re:PC version

[vlm]

If you're trying to read textbooks on your iPad, your eyes may hate you.

Why? Weren't they all written on LCDs? Do your eyes hurt when you read slashdot on a LCD? How do your eye muscles know the difference between slashdot and a novel, so that they can hurt on queue?

Try using a device with e-ink

Been there, tried that, gray on gray with distracting shadows from lack of backlighting, crazy flashing flickering during each 2 second long page turn isn't going to cut it.

If you want the e-ink experience on a LCD, turn the brightness way down, the contrast way down, monochrome it, modify the display driver so each screen change takes 2 seconds and makes the whole screen flash distractingly. It would be amusing to write a KDE plugin/theme that emulates e-ink.

I will give you that my LCD based jetbook battery only lasts probably 5 to 10 hours at a charge, whereas they claim an e-ink device can run for 20-30 hours continuous on a charge. However, in my modern lifestyle, I consider myself lucky to get 3 continuous reading hours at a time, so the difference is irrelevant to me.

Re:PC version

[macs4all]

I will wait until a PC vendor starts making a similar device for half the price running windows and all the software I like to use.

Well, they've had about a DECADE to do so (and failed MISERABLY); so I wonder just exactly WHEN you'll feel you can stop waiting.

getting excited on an iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

...saw nothing in the iPad to really excite him

Did you try looking at porn?

Plans to donate $10bn!!!!??? Forget the iPad!!!!

[viraltus]

Really, the article says the guy is about to save 7.6 million children's lives and the head title is about the iPad? I can imagine the day someone cures cancer; the head news title will be "Dr. X uses an iMac to do his things"

Well, what do you expect Gates to say?

[QuietLagoon]

He was unable to monetize the tablet format, even after a couple of unsuccessful tries of forcing Windows into the tablet format. So the only thing he can utter now is flatulent sour grapes when Apple comes out with a tablet with a usable UI and a possibly successful tablet.

Re:Well, what do you expect Gates to say?

[Ogive17]

So when everyone else says "it looks neat but I don't want one" it's ok, but when Gates basically says the same thing it's sour grapes? Face it, Apple is trying to sell the iPad in a market segment that doesn't really exist. The only people buying this will be people who buy everything Apple releases.

That's unless they make some major functionality upgrades without increasing the price before it actually hits the market. It's an underwhelming device for the price.

Re:Well, what do you expect Gates to say?

[QuietLagoon]

So when everyone else says "it looks neat but I don't want one" .

Everyone has said they don't want one? Gee, I must have missed the results of that survey of everyone on this planet..

recent article

[S-4'N3]

Didn't we see an article recently of a CEO stating that netbooks were on the way out?

I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[antifoidulus]

I didn't think there was a whole lot of use for the device until I took a trip from Munich to Philly in one of US Airs brand new A330s and noticed something, every single seat had a USB power outlet and all over the US USB power outlets are increasing in number. Are there any netbooks that can run off of USB power? The fact that the iPad can, has (supposedly) a really good battery life, and the fact that you can use the thing while standing up has sold me on the device.

That being said, the first company that can come out with a netbook that can run off of USB power will have a winner.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[baka_toroi]

That's not gonna happen with Intel processors.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/, a convertible netbook/tablet running linux on a low powered Cortex A8 processor.

Theoretically, its "out". But good luck getting one shipped to you in less than 4 months after payment. At the moment, each one is hand assembled from hobby parts that are themselves ordered after payment is received. I want one, but I don't think I am willing to part with the $399 and wait 3 to 6 months.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[Rich0]

It just makes you wonder how they have that all wired up. It would be tempting to plug in a USB host and see what shows up on the network...

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[Culture20]

I didn't think there was a whole lot of use for the device until I took a trip from Munich to Philly in one of US Airs brand new A330s and noticed something, every single seat had a USB power outlet and all over the US USB power outlets are increasing in number. Are there any netbooks that can run off of USB power? The fact that the iPad can, has (supposedly) a really good battery life, and the fact that you can use the thing while standing up has sold me on the device.

If it's anything like the iPhone, it won't draw power unless a "I'm looking for USB storage device" signal is present. I've tried very unsuccessfully plugging my iPhone into only-powered USB hubs before, and it failed to charge. Even just a nudge from a BIOS boot screen was enough to make it work.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[WiiVault]

Thats weird I've never had problems with using USB wallchargers from other toys, or my no-name car charger. I have noticed that on Windows it seems that the driver needs to load (security?), but on Linux, Mac, and all the generic adapters I've used it has charged fine. Come to think of it last time I was in Chicago I charged my Touch off of one of these mounted USB chargers at the terminal.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[White Flame]

The Pandora can run off of USB power. Whether it counts as a netbook or not is up to your definition, as it's basically a handheld computer.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[lennier]

Dunno about netbooks, but Blackberries charge via USB, which is wonderful.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[LoRdTAW]

Nothing. And that is because those outlets most likely have only the power and ground pins wired. The data pins arent used so you will see nothing.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[toddestan]

That being said, the first company that can come out with a netbook that can run off of USB power will have a winner.

Given that the USB spec only allows for a maximum draw of 2.5W, I doubt we'll see one soon. At best you could charge it slowly if the netbook was not actually running. Though the OLPC could pull it off.

Perhaps in the future when they have USB3.0 ports (maximum draw of 9W) it may be possible.

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[rdnetto]

If it's anything like my N900, it'll let you use it as an external hard drive. Don't know if they'll actually do this though, since the partition has to be unmounted on the device before it becomes accessible to the PC (N900 has separate partitions for the OS and user's files).

Re:I initially poo-pooed the iPad too

[Spazntwich]

Careful, our federal nannies don't much care for that kind of wondering. The mere act is probably technically "gaining unlawful access to a computer or network."

And do you have clearance from the FCC to operate a network at that altitude?

Also, do you realize the destructive potential channeled through your "device" (and precariously contained by parts sourced from the lowest [Chinese] bidder) represents severe danger of shock or electrocution to someone unfortunate enough to find themselves playing with it in the shower?

Sir, we're going to need to examine the devices memory. We've heard there's rumors on the internets of drug dealing communist child molestors trafficking child porn on chips fabricated out of 110% pure cocaine. Please get in line and choose between a complimentary set of kneepads or astroglide. Just kidding. You think we can afford lube with all those federal agents we have to pay to deal with people like you?

nor did we Bill..

[Anonymous Coward]

"..saw nothing in the iPad to really excite him." ..nor did we.

Shocking!

[whisper_jeff]

Shocking, one of Microsoft's largest shareholders is talking down about a competitor's product. Who would have guessed?...

Apple screwed the pooch with this one

[MikeRT]

What they should have done is built it on a high-end Atom CPU, and then created a hybrid interface that lets users choose between an iPhone-like interface for convenience and a real OS X desktop.

If Apple can create a fat binaries for PPC and x86, why couldn't they have updated the toolchain for the iPhone to let developers do a one click rebuild to support x86 as well?

Re:Apple screwed the pooch with this one

[RazorSharp]

Yeah, they should have made their ebook reader a bloated $2,000 computer that's twice as thick as the model they're releasing, gets twice as hot, has half the battery life, and is 10x as complicated. Why Apple hasn't hired your genius is beyond me.

The "throw in everything and a kitchen sink" approach to engineering is lazy and stupid. There are latent effects to every "feature" that you add.

Re:Apple screwed the pooch with this one

[kangsterizer]

well for one, it was damn easier for them to just take an ipod touch, change to a big screen and call it ipad.
and this is what it is, no irony, joke, or w/e else intended. ipod touch with a large screen and new name.
Runs ipod touch apps and only that. On larger screen.

Re:Apple screwed the pooch with this one

[Culture20]

Yeah, they should have made their ebook reader a bloated $2,000 computer that's twice as thick as the model they're releasing, gets twice as hot, has half the battery life,

I would have bought two, one for me and one for my parents. My workplace would have bought five as a test, with chances of fifty or more. As is, I will buy none, and my workplace will buy one to fiddle with, and it will eventually sit in a closet, alone and unused.

Re:Apple screwed the pooch with this one

[Kitkoan]

What they should have done is built it on a high-end Atom CPU, and then created a hybrid interface that lets users choose between an iPhone-like interface for convenience and a real OS X desktop.

They would never do that, because it would kill their MacBook sales. They wanted to build something 'portable' but not 'kill all other MacBook sales'. Granted in this case, seems like it might not do as well as people might have said. Heard quite a lot of Apple users declare its great, amazing, pretty. But ask them if they would buy it and the offical answer is 'I have an iPhone, why do I need a bigger one?'

I was digging to prove you wrong....

[Anonymous Coward]

The closest I've gotten do far: is this Acer from Amazon with a choice of XP or Android.

Asus used to have a bunch of them.

NewEgg just has two now - which have a BIG red note above saying they're deactivated or some such.

To be a Slashdot pedantic, you are wrong. BUT I used find a shit load of Linux notebooks at both locations and now I just see a couple, so YOU WILL be right even to the pedantics in a few weeks it looks.

Really?

[rreay]

Really? He said that? How incredibly surprising.

Gates is still MS and focuses on what MS can do

[fermion]

Touchscreens are not yet commodity hardware, and therefore most MS customers are not going to pay for the added benifit. It is like GPUs in the mid 80's. Critical for the GUI interface, but expensive so kit that ran MS Windows did not generally include it. The same goes for touchpads. Most computer that run MS software does not have the top of the line touchpads, so still need multibutton mice to work. Card readers are cheap, touchpads are less so.

Netbooks can be made cheaply from parts that fall off the assembly line, so this is where the future has to lie if MS is going to continue to show a profit, and Gates will continue to get the stock benifits. It would make no sense for him to promote a market in which MS cannot compete.

Touchscreen with feedback

[Necroloth]

You can get touchscreens that give feedback too. If you touch a button on the screen, you feel a little pulse/vibration through the finger. They're actually quite good as I hate tapping the screen for a touch to register and few seconds later several things happen!

Hardware dictation = fail?

[DavidR1991]

The fact they're dictating the exact hardware and layout makes me wonder whether (even though the software looks decent) this could crash and burn. Why should hardware manufacturers give up [what is effectively their creative control] for this OS, when they can make whatever they want and shove Android on it with no restrictions?

Re:Hardware dictation = fail?

[DavidR1991]

Aww shitstack, I commented on here rather than the blasted MS phone one. I'll have to improvise and make this relevant....

I agree with Gates that this could have done with a stylus. Put that in, and you have millions of University students (such as myself) who could use it to take handwritten notes. But no. As it is, it serves no purpose for me.

I don't know about you...

[Annorax]

.. but when I see someone in a coffee shop hunched over their little netbook I kind of feel bad for them.

I find myself thinking, "Awww.... poor guy. His back, eyes, and fingers must be killing him right now"

It looks really uncomfortable.

From the admittedly limited exposure to the iPad that I've had so far, it seems to be a much more comfortable experience.

Re:I don't know about you...

[macs4all]

.. but when I see someone in a coffee shop hunched over their little netbook I kind of feel bad for them. I find myself thinking, "Awww.... poor guy. His back, eyes, and fingers must be killing him right now" It looks really uncomfortable. From the admittedly limited exposure to the iPad that I've had so far, it seems to be a much more comfortable experience.

EXACTLY!

Re:I don't know about you...

[Overzeetop]

So you feel sorry for the guy reading an 11" screen and typing on a 90% sized keyboard, but reading a 9.5" screen and trying to touch type on a touchscreen is going to be comfortable?

I'll be the first to admit that my Acer is not quite as comfortable as my Dell Precision workstation laptop, but I just can't imagine getting anything useful or fun done on an iPad, unless I happen to be comparting the experience to my phone.

Re:I don't know about you...

[zzatz]

One does many tasks with some sacrifice in comfort and usability, the other does a few things well. There's a place for both. Just as neither truly replaces a desktop or phone.

I once took my Nokia n800 tablet on vacation instead of my notebook. It did everything I needed, and because it fits in a pocket, I had it with me at times where I would have left the notebook behind. The tablet was fine for reading email, which is all I need on vacation. Writing emails takes place at work or at home, where I have desktops with large screens and good keyboards. I later got a netbook, and discovered that it isn't a substitute for the Nokia. I read books on the tablet, not on the netbook. I listen to music on the tablet, not on the netbook. They don't compete, they are in different categories.

Outside of home and office, pocket devices may be the best fit. The iPad seems to be designed as a portable device for within the home; too big to carry everywhere, but just right for moving from kitchen to living room to bedroom. Notebooks have a similar set of compromises: too big to carry everywhere, too small to use as a primary display for serious work, and too expensive compared to desktops.

Budget permitting, I'd like a device in each of those form factors. If I could only have one, then it would be a notebook. But I can have more than one. I know people who don't need pocket devices, I know people who don't need desktops, I know people who never move their notebooks. I'm glad we have more choices now, because each category is the best choice for someone.

Both are right

[Mr_Silver]

In the future there will be two types of devices:

Those which are locked down, limited and controlled by the vendors. In return customers will receive a superior user experience, will not need to perform maintenance tasks, make complicated decisions and just be able to get on and use the product without instruction.

On the other side, we'll have products which allow the user a greater freedom to install, modify and remove what they want. However, in return they'll have to put up with the maintenance tasks, some things which don't "just work" and the odd inconsistent UI.

Both will probably succeed, as they are targeted at different markets.

And Balmer laughed off iPhone/Android/Chrome....

[guidryp]

So what else is new? Did anyone expect different?

This is the default position of Microsofts old guard to any competitor product.

Android:
http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/11/06/microsoft-ceo-steve-ballmer-pokers-fun-at-google-android
Chrome:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/07/14/steve_ballmer_laughs_off_googles_chrome_os_threat.html
iPhone:
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/microsoft-ceo-claims-new-zune-market-share-laughs-at-iphone/

Gates playing down iPhone:
http://www.iphoneworld.ca/news/2007/02/03/bill-gates-wont-buy-an-apple-iphone/

Gates hailed the tablet in the past

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone else remember when Gates was all about tablet PC? That tablet was the future?

Worse than wives tale about reading in dim light.

[guidryp]

"I'd rather have an ugly device that limits my trips to the optometrist, than a beautiful device that fatigues my biological sensors."

This is nonsense. I remember being a kid reading and my Mom saying: "turn on more lights or you will strain your eyes". Old wives tale then and nonsense today. It might be a story sold by e-ink evangelists, but I have ridiculous hours looking at an LCD without eyestrain.

E-Ink has two actual advantages: Battery life and Sunlight visibility.

Not remotely enough to put up with disadvantages IMO.

Ironic, don't you think?

[IGnatius T Foobar]

It's ironic to see Bill Gates downplaying tablets. The "Tablet PC" was his pet project half a decade ago. Gates was convinced that tablets were the future, everyone would have one, and because it was his pet project it had all of the resources of Microsoft behind it.

Tablet PC's failed miserably.

Why? I think it was because Gates was bent on force-fitting it to be a PC. Gates wants everything to be a PC. He's incapable of even parsing the idea that non-PC devices exist.

Apple walked in with the idea that a tablet can be a "big iPod" or a "big iPhone" rather than a "small PC with a stylus." For that matter, that was essentially the same idea behind netbooks, except with a keyboard. Microsoft was successful in bullying the netbook manufacturers into larding up the hardware specs so that they eventually became "small laptops" instead, but that was easy because the netbook manufacturers were PC companies that Microsoft already had the ability to bend over a barrel.

The next generation of tablets, and the next generation of netbooks, are going to come from companies like Apple, Nokia, LG, Motorola, etc. who aren't already beholden to Microsoft for other product lines. And if Microsoft comes knocking and tells them "you're going to redesign this device so that it is a Windows PC" those companies will say "Fuck off, Bill. This device isn't a PC and it's not going to become one." They want ultimate portability, super long battery life, and other features that Ye Olde Windows PC just isn't going to enable.

While the iPad may not change the world...

[Afell001]

It will be a combination of iTunes revamp for video digital content and a synergy in both Apple and third-party apps for the iPad that will drive its success. To date, there is very little in the way of enhancement to a truly digital lifestyle, even though all the pieces are avaialable. If you download a video on one device, it only exists on that device. But what if I were to introduce something new. What if I set up a small web of machines that are all linked to my account, so that if I purchase the rights to a specific digital property on my smart phone, and get home to discover that the wife wants to watch it too but the screen is much too small for both of us, then I have to take the trouble to download it again to another device (such as my laptop or set-top device) so we can watch it on the big screen. How about if, instead, I have preferences set that if I download it on to my smart phone (or tablet) it also downloads to my desktop system and is available to any other devices in my home that are connected via network. If it is located on my computer, then it can stream to my smart phone or tablet as long as it has enough bandwidth, thus eliminating my need for large amounts of storage on my phone or tablet when I am just browsing content at home. All of the pieces of this technology are available now, but what doesn't exist commercially are the ties that bind them together under one umbrella. Sure, if you know what you are doing, you can make this happen, but remember that people like you are a minority of the users out there with both the need for this kind of lifestyle and the discretionary income to afford it. But you still have to find or buy your digital content from multiple sources, and the devices you use do not automatically synchronize themselves to each other without a lot of technical work under the hood. This is where a company like Apple or Google will dominate, by bringing everything together for the end consumer who doesn't have the capability or time to figure out how to make it all work together.

A netbook isn't a tablet....

[ThePlague]

but it could be if you added the following:

1. Touchscreen with a hinge that allows the LCD to rotate all the way around, so that the back of the screen touches what is usually called the bottom or underside of the netbook.
2. A retractable sheet that can cover the keyboard when it's being used as a tablet
3. A very well thought out application that let's you use the netbook as a tablet. This is purely a UI issue, and could be done with HTML in a web browser.

So, you have a transformer netbook, able to turn into a tablet.

Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[qazwart]

Hang around with a non-geek for a while. A typical intelligent person who doesn't difference between Star Wars and Star Trek and doesn't even care. Look how they use their PC.

That PC might even be a "Mac" which they're told was "easier to use". They don't know about "right clicking". They don't know how to use the file browser (Finder or Windows Explorer). They simply want to get their work done. What do they do? Mainly browse the web, email, Facebook, Twitter. They sometimes even use Microsoft Word and maybe rarely use Excel if they want to make a table of some sort (and they have no idea how to do things like sum up a column).

For these people, an iPad is a godsend. It does exactly what they want. They know how to use it. They don't care about DRM. They don't care about Open Source. They don't even care about free beer. (Actually, they might take a pro-free beer position on that last statement).

Am I tossing out my laptops and desktop systems and getting myself an iPad? No way. I am a developer and need the full power of my computer. I need to run multiple things at once. I need my command line. I need to be able to configure my development environments and to test out my stuff on our QA environments. I can't do that on an iPad, and won't get one for myself.

However, my wife mainly looks at her mail and browses the web. She has no idea how to use the Finder to browse her files. She has no idea how to use Spotlight as a search tool. The other day, she lost the icon on the Dock for Quicken, and asked me to put it back. This is a Mac, and she even finds it overly complex to use.

How does she respond with Windows? We have a Windows Media Center as our TV, and she always asked me or our children to help her set it up, so she can watch her program.

She also has an iPod Touch she uses as an organizer and she loves it. She has no problems using the contacts, email, using the web browser, or checking the weather. She has even taken to installing her own applications and rearranging the icons on the screen. She loves the touch screen and the ease of maneuvering.

My wife's current desktop computer is over six years old and is showing signs of its age. I need to get a replacement. I could try to use a cheap windows system, but she hates Windows. She knows Macs, and an Mac Mini might be a nice replacement.

Then again, why not an iPad? It does everything she wants, and uses an interface she knows and loves. I'll get a BlueTooth keyboard and it's her desktop system. If she wants to lie down on the couch and browse the web, she can do that too. For my wife, the iPad is perfect.

The iPad is an appliance much like a toaster. A chef might find a toaster limiting, but if all you want to do is warm up your Pop Tart, you can't go wrong with a toaster.

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPad is an appliance much like a toaster. A chef might find a toaster limiting, but if all you want to do is warm up your Pop Tart, you can't go wrong with a toaster.

Except a toaster doesn't cost you as much as an oven...

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[Anonymous Coward]

mod parent up please. He's hitting the nail on the head!

And get her that IPad. She'll love you forever for that one...

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[Anonymous Coward]

Hang around with a typical intelligent person for a while. You'll find that they are generally quite a bit more skilled than these people you describe. They are perfectly capable of using a modern computer system, whether or not they care much about how or why they work. A marginally intelligent person will have no trouble navigating any modern user interface and doing with it what they desire. It's the other folks who find Apple alluring, with it's promise to enable them to do the things they see intelligent people doing. Sometimes Apple delivers on this, but of course in doing so Apply must often simplify things to the point where intelligent folks are dismayed by the lack of features. You can't win em all.

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you. The whiny boyz can stick with their homebuilt units and game to their heart's content. The rest of us are looking for the confluence of technologies.

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[feepness]

For these people, an iPad is a godsend. It does exactly what they want. They know how to use it. They don't care about DRM. They don't care about Open Source. They don't even care about free beer. (Actually, they might take a pro-free beer position on that last statement).

This is exactly what I thought until I talked to my wife's mother who asked me for my recommendation. She's a Mac user but also browses online to watch Lost and the like. Guess what? No Flash. No deal. They either need to increase the content selection or they're going to lose people.

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey thanks for your reply and I thought your post was pretty good and noteworthy. I understand what you mean about how non-tech integrated people think and what sort of device is good for them. However, to me there is one thing that bugs me. Please I mean no offense to your wife or anyone really its just something that I think is really sad in today's world and technology. I think that there are too many people operating computers without any basic knowledge of what a computer is or how it works and then they get frustrated. I am not asking for people to become computer geniuses and know how to take one apart but simple things like installing an update or replacing an icon on the Dock should be common sense to people.

I am not sure what it is about today's society and technology but its like they get something and then they expect it to work flawless without anything on their part. In a perfect world things would just plug and play and then "play nice" but this isn't a perfect world. The internet changes at a lightning fast speed and users today are more lost than ever. Companies like Apple and sometimes Microsoft have made everything "too user friendly."

I don't think the problem is so much with older people who didn't grow up with technology in their childhood it has to do with younger people being lazy and stubborn into working less. They don't want to make their mind think they just want everything to "just work." I am not saying that things should be difficult to setup but people have to think too. Most users never even troubleshoot and then they blame the OS or hardware. I work repairing computers and I see so many young people that know how to do so many things but they can't update Flash player? Or download Adobe reader and install it? C'mon its not rocket science people have to learn to manipulate a computer in this way if they are going to keep up with technology. At least just the basics man!

When we begin to rely and trust something that we barely even know how to work then we are asking for trouble. That's why people get viruses, trojans and all the rest because they are not educated. Read a little bit and learn. Do I blame Apple? No of course not they are a business and they make their $$ on users that won't read or learn. They make the "Computers for Dummies" into hardware and they do it well but the are not contributing to the improvement of the world's advancement to user enlightenment of the technology world.

Don't believe me? Think I am lying? Man this guy's wife is living proof as well as anyone else who is not a tech. and uses a Mac. Go ahead ask to change resolutions on a Mac, ask them about network sharing, ask them how to make shortcuts onto the desktop and how to install a program. Lets see if they can do it on their own? Didn't think so.

Re:Why the iPad is the Future Despite Your Whines

[mano.m]

intelligent person who
doesn't [know the] difference between Star Wars and Star Trek.
don't know about "right clicking".
don't know how to use the file browser (Finder or Windows Explorer).
(and they have no idea how to do things like sum up a column).

Taking extreme liberties with the meaning of 'intelligent', aren't we?

IT people just don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Does my mom/dad/grand-ma, computer half-illiterate friends care about:

Webcam? So they can watch me poke my nose while skyping? See that I am actually really on the toilet?
Multitasking? Multiwhat? It's not like they do more than one thing at a time....
Real Keyboard? They type maybe 1000 chars per week, on a busy one that is....

What they want is a pretty and easy usable device that intuitively allows them to consume digital media (word, music, movies) and play an occasional game.

My parents loathe the Laptop they have because it sits on a table away from where they'd actually really want to use it (couch, toilet, kitchen, bed, .....) and is to big and unweildy to easily be used in any of those locations.

The IPad is perfect for them in every way a full blown Computer, a Laptop or even a Netbook is not.

I think IT ppl are just to blinded by what they need such a thing as an IPad be able to do to see what "normal" people actually do need....

                             

Gates Is Right, shockingly

[uncleroot]

Let's say you're sending your 19 year old off to college and for this argument you have to choose between and iPad and a netbook to give her. Which one would get the job done better? Netbook wins hands down for the real keyboard, ability to use a mouse and wide variety of software. The iPad is for gadget hounds to play with while sitting on the toilet (I hope they are easy to clean) and for tech-savvy older folks to read their Wall Street journal from the easy chair. The biggest drawback of the iPad that needs to be discussed more is the lack of a courser and mouse support because of Steve Job's Don Quixote quest to create something with no mouse and keyboard that works entirely with your fingers on glass. We take the mouse and keyboard for granted and forget how good it is until we try to do something without it. The touch interface works on the iPhone but will fail when compared to the netbook for general purpose computing because of the superior dexterity of the mouse compared to the finger on glass interface.

Re:Gates Is Right, shockingly

[RazorSharp]

That's a poor hypothetical. As a college student I can tell you that neither a netbook or iPad are well suited for that situation. Writing papers on a little netbook screen with its little netbook keyboard is just as ridiculous as doing so on an iPad (I would actually probably prefer the iPad w/ a keyboard but there's no Word/OOo). You present a situation in which a regular laptop or desktop would be the best choice and claim the iPad will fail because its not well suited. Well no shit Sherlock. The iPad isn't supposed to replace the MacBook or iMac, but it will be popular among people like my mom who don't use a computer for anything the iPad doesn't do and like to read books.

The iPad would be a nice complementary device for my laptop if they get nice prices on textbooks. Then it would pay for itself as I spend hundreds on textbooks each semester.

Re:Gates Is Right, shockingly

[captjc]

I would actually probably prefer the iPad w/ a keyboard but there's no Word/OOo

It will have a version of iWork (Pages, Numbers, and Keynote). If the iPad version is anything like the desktop version, it should be a pretty good Word Processor. No, it doesn't have anywhere near feature parody with Word or OOo, but Pages is still a very usable and friendly word processor that can read and edit MS Office documents

Not News

[pubwvj]

This would have been worthy news if Bill Gates had gushed about how great the iPad was and said he was going to be first in line to get three. But since he owns the biggest direct competitor this is not news. Of course he is going to dismiss it. Basic competition says he must. Move along, nothing to see here...

Terrible Secret

[HTH NE1]

"Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has called Apple's iPad a 'nice reader' but claims netbooks are the way forward.

"Netbooks are the answer. Humans must buy netbooks. They must go to the stores."

"That is incorrect. Tablets are the answer. Humans must buy tablets. They must go to the stores."

Oscar Mohamar Dainitin

[Oscar Mohamar]

Oscar Mohamar Dainitin I think that the problem with the iPad, from my perspective, is the fact that it is an LCD vs. EInk. Oscar Mohamar Dainitin.

Keyboards/Input

[yoshi_mon]

There is a time and a place for keyboard. And what Bill does not get is that it's not always.

Sure if I want to have a mobile computer I want a keyboard. A real freaking keyboard, not some scrunched up thing that I can't touch type on. If I have to hunt'n'peck because the keyboard is so small I'd rather just have a bigger screen.

On a reader I'll take no keyboard thanks. And then if/when I need a keyboard I'll pull out my real laptop or get to a desktop. My reader does not have to do it all.

Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[guidryp]

I see a lot of people simply reading a laundry list of what a laptop(and netbook) does vs iPad does and proclaiming laptop the winner.

But the two devices are not mutually exclusive and in fact are complementary.

You don't do your work on an iPad. You do your work on your Desktop/Laptop and when you want to kickback and read e-comics on the couch, you grab your iPad.

Want to check the news at breakfast, grab your instant-on iPad that you can control with a finger while eating at the breakfast table.

Cooking up something new for dinner, iPad in the kitchen with your recipe (no worry about food in the keyboard).

Finish reading a book in your bedroom at night.

This is internet/reader device for every room of the house, highly portable with a slick interface.

I am as big a tech geek as anyone here, but I have other devices to hack. I have no problem getting a really nifty reader/net tablet with a different form factor, high quality user interface and yet unimagined possibilities.

Even with the limited uses I am considering now it is enough for me to head to the store once they are released.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[Culture20]

You don't do your work on an iPad. You do your work on your Desktop/Laptop and when you want to kickback and read e-comics on the couch, you grab your iPad.

Oops, you fail. Apple may be trying to backtrack and say the iPad is only for e-reading, but we all know their controlled leaks over the past year have promised a laptop with Mac OS X in tablet form. Their marketing failed, because we want what they are not providing.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[shutdown -p now]

I would add that netbook vs tablet is a false dichotomy, and I agree with your points regarding tablets in general. It's just that iPad doesn't look like a good tablet (at least for a geek). I'd rather have something in a similar form factor, but with Win7, or, barring that, an oversized N900.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[guidryp]

"I'd rather have something in a similar form factor, but with Win7,"

Well part of the form factor is using a lighter weight OS, permitting snappy performance on less powerful hardware and thus you save on cooling, battery power/size etc. Or they end up horridly underpowered for windows.

Win7 Tablets exist and they are largely a failure. Read this Cnet review on the new Archos 9.
http://reviews.cnet.com/tablet-pcs/archos-9-pc-tablet/4505-3126_7-33800951.html

N900 doesn't excite me in the least. Linux and more open is nice, but I think the user experience is far behind. I don't need to program every device I own.

I think the biggest competitors will be Android tablets like this MSI:
http://phandroid.com/2010/01/29/msi-android-tablet-harmony/

It seems like a contest between marketing check-boxes(MSI) and user experience(iPad). I would try the MSI Android panel if I could find one before buying the iPad, but I don't think the user experience will come close and in the end that is what will win iPad sales.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[shutdown -p now]

Win7 Tablets exist and they are largely a failure. Read this Cnet review on the new Archos 9.

Reading the review, it seems to be mostly about bad choice (underpowered etc) of hardware. It's also very ugly-looking. I'm not surprised it scored that low.

I don't think it's impossible to get hardware in this form factor that's good enough for 7. Netbooks are almost there already.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[Archimonde]

Want to check the news at breakfast, grab your instant-on iPad that you can control with a finger while eating at the breakfast table.

That is a recipe for a disaster. I know that many people see themselves using ipad when eating/drinking but I've learned my lesson a looong time ago. Liquids and non-waterproof electronics just don't mix.

At all.

You may be a ninja and you don't spill things but others do and they ruin $500+ devices easily.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[ucblockhead]

I do all of those things with my MacBook today, so I'm not sure another device is justified.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[guidryp]

I am sure it isn't for everyone. I would rather do them on an inexpensive lightweight, touch device that just looks more enjoyable to interact with.

That and I wouldn't try reading in bed with my desktop...

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[White Flame]

If a device warrants dragging around with me, even around the house, I'd much MUCH rather it be pocketable. I currently have a Nokia N800 and it works great for exactly the purposes you describe, and I'm waiting for my Pandora to arrive.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[lennier]

But the two devices are not mutually exclusive and in fact are complementary.

Only if you have the disposable cash and gadget luggage space to buy both.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[rdnetto]

I am as big a tech geek as anyone here, but I have other devices to hack.

Perhaps you simply have a different philosophy on hacking to the rest of us? I don't hack my gadgets just because I can, I do so to make them do what I want them to do. i.e. to increase their utility.
The iPad's utility is limited to what Apple dictates, but a more open device would be more flexible. To give you an example, what if you want to play back music/video in an unsupported (perhaps FOSS) format? If the device is open, you could install/port myplayer/VLC to it. If it's locked down, you have to convert it first.
Given the size of the iPad means you need a bag if you're going to carry it around, Gates is probably right about netbooks being more popular.
But then I'm not allowing for the massive hype surrounding anything Apple craps out.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[aug24]

My writer friends have seen the keyboard dock for the iPad and are drooling... they will be working on it.

Re:Netbook vs iPad is false dichotomy.

[guidryp]

I do so to make them do what I want them to do. i.e. to increase their utility.

The central premise of my post was this is a complementary device, I already have devices that can cover what the iPad doesn't do. Every gadget I have, doesn't have to do everything, some can be more specialized. Would you complain that that a Kindle doesn't support VLC??

Given the size of the iPad means you need a bag if you're going to carry it around, Gates is probably right about netbooks being more popular.

I see it as a home gadget. As such I don't need a bag to carry it from my couch to my bedroom. If I want a real computer I have one at home, so a netbook isn't better at being a reader.

I don't claim netbooks have any competition. Again, central premise of my post. This device is meant to work with your computer not replace it .

This is not a 100% desktop replacement in tablet form, it is an E-reader on steroids, and I am perfectly fine with that.

You're not trying hard enough

[PCM2]

A simple Amazon search for "Eee PC" reveals a raft of models comparable to your Acer. Why does everybody seem determined to forget that Asus basically created this category?

Re:Worse than wives tale about reading in dim ligh

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually in a darkened room your pupils will dilate in order to compensate for a lack of light. This does in fact strain your eyes over long periods of time, especially if you're staring at a light source such as an LCD screen.

Adoring legions?

[ClosedSource]

"Most of Mr. Gates' adoring legions among the tech punditry (including the most highly respected of the bunch) haven't even made that mental leap just yet."

Gates has the charisma of a rock. He has no adoring legions especially among tech punditry.

Refinement not Revolution

[amiga3D]

This is simply the refinement of the tablet. The iPad will make a great tablet but it does not give people a reason to buy a tablet unless they were already looking for one. I've wanted a tablet for a long time but couldn't find one I liked. Now I'll be getting one. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Of course, Gates would say that anyway...

[roc97007]

...but in this instance he might be right.

Sales have very little relation to actual usefulness. Apple has carefully cultivated a fanboi base that will insure that the iPad is successful. And good on them -- they deserve to make money as much as anyone else. But sales aren't a direct sign of usefulness -- else Winders wouldn't rule the world.

"Ev Ree Boddy Wants to Rule the World"

[Anonymous Coward]

Just some more than others. Not me of course, I just want to be able to program ON my device. For Free. With tools of my choosing. Thanks.

Thank God!

[Anonymous Coward]

saw nothing in the iPad to really excite him

I feel as if my life has been spared, one thing I never want to see is Bill Gates getting excited. It's just so wrong on so many levels.

OT Re:Eternity

[u38cg]

My choice is fuck you. Even if the possibility is true, behaviour should justify itself. Even if your afterlife was proved to be true tomorrow, I'm going down shouting. Nobody makes my ethical choices for me.

multi-tasking

[mosb1000]

This complaint always bugs me. Why? People can't multitask! So the only things you could possibly want multi-tasking for is things that can run in the background, like downloading files and playing music. But wait! The iPhone can do those things in the background. So what is the complaint? This is a completely linguistic argument left over from the days when not being able to switch back and fourth between programs was a significant burden. But these leftover memes from yesteryear are not relevant on the operating systems and hardware that exist today.

Also, I have a huge problem with people saying that the iPad will be locked down and "DRM riddled". No one has said that the iPad will be locked down, and there is no reason to believe that you won't be able to install whatever you want on it. Even if that were the case, it's not like it's hard to unlock an iPhone, so this is not a serious impairment to anyone who knows what they are doing (and I would submit that someone who is not knowledgeable enough to jail-break and unlock an iPhone should also probably not be installing their own linux variant on the device).

I don't know what you mean when you say it's underpowered, because it seems like it's perfectly capable of doing everything Apple says it can do. So the correct word may be correctly powered. It doesn't make sense to make a device as powerful as possible when another chip may consume less power and be cheaper to include. You wouldn't call a sub-compact underpowered simply because it lacks a 6 liter engine, would you?

Fool me once...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill kind of shooted Microsoft in the back by saying a competitor product was amazing.

Even if he's equally impressed by the iPad, he'll never admit it.

The iPad is the computer for "regular people", i.e. our parents, who can barely navigate DVD menus and set the aspect ratio of their TVs.

Re:Worse than wives tale about reading in dim ligh

[jbengt]

I don't necessarily disagree with the rest of your post, but this:

"turn on more lights or you will strain your eyes". Old wives tale then and nonsense today.

is mistaken. More light will close your pupils more, so focusing will be easier and depth of field greater. That puts less strain on your eyes.

OH MIGHTY BILL!

[YankDownUnder]

YES BILL! I SHALL BUY MORE NETBOOKS! (Oh wait, I hate the screen resolution on them, and I don't like Microsoft Windows(tm) on them, and WTF?) Bugger that, I'll buy a cheap laptop and stick Ubuntu on it. Resolved.

Re:OH MIGHTY BILL!

[Max_W]

Is it possible to connect to the netbook with Ubuntu the 3G Internet modem? It comes with a special utility program for Windows. Provider "Orange" in Western Europe.

Say anything about Bill Gates....

[Anonymous Coward]

....But his response was more civilized than Hitler's

consumer vs. business

[Weezul]

Apple sells consumer oriented electronics. Microsoft sells business software. I don't either has fared very well when entering the other market. Some cross over is perfectly natural when you're talking real computers of course, but this describes their core marketing and product focus.

A business portable needs a keyboard and/or stylus for numerous reasons true, like how you'll be fired if you send important emails using text speak. I'm not so sure however that Bill Gates is correct about the iPad being unimpressive.

iPod Touchs are essentially a combined video game and mp3 player. An iPad no longer functions as an effective mp3 player, but instead provides movies and larger games, and wrongly lays claims to being an ebook reader.

That's a silly analogy.

[mosb1000]

That's ridiculous. A toaster oven is merely a larger toaster. What's the benefit to that? There is absolutely nothing you can do with a toaster oven that you can't do with a toaster. Just tell you wife to stick with the toaster, there is no reason she could possibly want a toaster oven.

Netbooks...

[joh]

Netbooks were once recognized as finally making the transition from the PC to the appliance. A cheap, HD-less, Linux-powered device with a straight UI, good enough just for the basic things everyone needs but simple enough to be used by everyone everywhere, with a rather small SSD and good networking capabilities. We called it "netbook" for a reason.

Then MS came, looked and shivered. And offered really cheap Windows licenses, cheaper than integrating and inventing some Linux UI. One year later netbooks were just cheap notebooks with 10"-displays, running off Windows and big HDs. Problem solved.

Now Apple rears its always pretty head. A small and rather cheap device, with a good UI and no tinkering needed, just enough to get by for all your web and content and game needs.

Then MS speaks up again: Netbooks are the future! Yeah. Netbooks. Not tablets, which may run Android on platforms Windows lacks any support for. Not tablets from Apple, running circles around whatever MS has to offer. Netbooks, running Windows 7. The IBM PC, smaller, faster, cheaper and with a painted lid. And with Windows on it. Of course.

This is NOT good...

[rjch]

...I actually agree with him. Better kill me now.

Re:Already have a computer.

[guidryp]

Only if you have the disposable cash and gadget luggage space to buy both.

This may be a huge surprise, but I already have a computer. So I only need to buy an iPad to add to it.

Now if I had no computer at all I would agree. I would get a computer before an iPad.

What do you do on the web???

[brunes69]

I don't know where you browse the web, but where I do (ie, the Internet), typing is a pretty big requirement.

In fact I find it pretty ironic you made such a big comment on the web of all places. How much longer do you think it would have taken you to type that on the iPad? 5 times? 10 times? 30 times?

People seem to think the web is all move and click. Nowadays people do everything on the web, including email, blogging, commenting. Doing any of these things with a touchscreen device is going to be an enormous PITA.

Re:Worse than wives tale about reading in dim ligh

[WiPEOUT]

Not an old wives' tale at all. The brighter the level of light available (and contrast), the less your pupils have to dilate and the greater the depth of field you'll experience, resulting in less continuous adjustment of focus and hence less eyestrain.

Re:Worse than wives tale about reading in dim ligh

[guidryp]

That is just as ridiculous.

All it would do is slightly alter you accommodation point. This is not going increase the strain on your eyes unless you are near the limit of accommodation.

And what my mom actually said often was "you are going to damage your eyes".

The thread I was answering claimed reading on e-ink was fine but LCDs would strain and damage your eyes. It is all nonsense.

why not both?

[GregNorc]

I think the debate will be moot in 5 years, when materials science gets to the point that super thin convertibles are possible.

Disengenuous Bill!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is pretty disengenuous on Bill's part. I give credit where credit is due; Bill is a visionary. Problem is, he doesn't always execute that vision very well. That's the problem with trying to be "first" with innovation. He was championing Tablet PCs almost 10 years ago. Well guess what Bill? Your vision was correct then, and is still correct today. You and your hardware partners failed to design tablets in a way that would appeal to the mass market. Fast forward today, and Apple is delivering on what Tablet PCs should have been. Actually, for the pedants here, I'll correct myself and say they are delivering on the Tablet PDA vision. (There, happy?!)

seriously, like we don't know what bill will say

[Nyder]

yes, Mr. Gates. Won't let his kids have ipods because it would look bad.

What the heck else is he going to say?

how the hell does this sort of submission make news?

It would be news if he said "hell ya, them ipads rock, wish MS would make one, they would of had I been there still. Guess I better go buy one then"

I share the same feelings

[Ilgaz]

I was expecting a real game changer, something using an exclusive technology like e-ink/lcd hybrid which is also manufactured cheaply to end the division.

They sticked with conventional LCD. Fine... Why didn't they at least implement Dolby lab's Dolby Vision? http://www.dolby.com/professional/technology/home-theater/dolby-vision.html

Re:Worse than wives tale about reading in dim ligh

[Anonymous Coward]

I want yours eyes! As I creep up on 40 I have reluctantly given up on devices that require squinting anymore. I can tolerate my 8.9 inch netbook, but right now even my PSP is too much for the old eyes.

That said, I can't imagine the "aging near-sighted diabetics" market is large enough to make eye-friendly objects as big a hit as all this. I could be wrong, though...

Re:Worse than wives tale about reading in dim ligh

[bryan1945]

I'm actually with you. When you are reading in a constant light, whether low or high level, the pupils adjust. The problems come when you have 2 different light sources with different focul lengths; say a dim reading light and a bright TV across the room. Or a bright laptop screen and a dim TV across the room. Your eyes will get fatigued from switching, but won't cause any damage.

Funny?

[StevenABallmer]

Bill is always right people! http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com/

Logical fallacy

[mano.m]

1. Bill Gates owns a competitor of Apple.
2. Competitors diss each other's products; it's profitable.
3. Bill Gates disses the iPad, because it was made by Apple.
4. Bill Gates disses the iPad, only because it was made by Apple, and no other reason is possible.

3 follows from 1 and 2. 4 doesn't.

Multitasking

[curryandbeer]

People, if you want a tablet that can multitask then buy an Archos 9