iPad Review
The packaging is minimal and sleek. Almost nothing comes inside the box: just a cable, power cube and some minuscule documentation that nobody will read. The iPad itself arrived fully charged. It is usable out of the box without any syncing, but I chose almost immediately to pair it with my laptop just to get all my apps and data on it. This syncing process took forever. It's kind of amazing how long it takes to sync 20 or so gigs of movies and mp3s. This isn't unique to the iPad of course, but I never really noticed it on the phone since I don't sync video there.
The UI and functionality is pretty much as expected: It's a big iPhone. There are some minor differences (like being able to drag different numbers of items to the sticky footer menu). The new calendar application is nice. But the star is the mail client. Reading mail on my iPhone has been the "Last Resort," but the speed and clean layout and usability of the iPad mail app makes me prefer it to my desktop. I need a faster way to mark spam, but that's not necessarily the end of the world. Writing mail on the iPad is a different story. More on that below.
The new photo app is decent, but if you have a large number of albums and events it gets tough to find specific stuff quickly. I can't figure out why the iPhone and now the iPad don't make use of folders. Their mac equivalents both let you create nicely nested hierarchies of albums or playlists, but those both get lost on their little cousins where screen real estate is even MORE important. The video app seems to do strange things with thumbnails: it seemed to want to give videos the same thumbnail icon if they share an "Album." This means navigating my home movies category is lame because all 15 or so videos have the same thumbnail. It shouldn't be that way.
My iPad has no 3G, therefore it has no GPS. But applications were constantly asking me for permission to use my location. This seems like an oversight: if you don't have a location sensor, don't ask! Even the built-in Map app asked me for information that it could not possibly have.
Finally, time to test Safari: I tested out Slashdot first, and it renders pretty well. There are a couple of minor layout glitches and a few trickier functionality problems. The problems are mostly the same as the iPhone, but having the larger screen makes it a lot more obvious. I'll probably get some tickets into the system this week to clean up these bugs.
When I started browsing the net at large I noticed a few interesting problems: The first is that a lot of websites are serving iPhone pages to the iPad. So you get a number of ridiculously minimalistic pages on the big bright screen. It's laughably annoying to see these teeny tiny menus. Most sites seem fine, but I was surprised at the number of mainstream sites that thought I needed this. The lack of Flash is MUCH more noticeable than I thought it would be. The good news is that YouTube seems to embed cleanly and in-place, so a lot of video oriented websites still work fine. But the lack of Flash hurts. Apple has made their position known on the subject, so I'm not expecting anything to change. The lack of a real scroll bar make sites that make use of frames for navigation not really work properly. At the end of the day, I was surprised at the number of sites that actually had SOME problem with them. Most worked fine, but when something fails, I noticed more than I do on the iPhone. I think this is simply a user expectation thing: on my phone I expect things NOT to work and am happy when they do. On the iPad I expect things to work as well as they do in Safari in my desktop, and am irritated when they don't.
I tried out a good number of apps. The NetFlix app is really nice, but it doesn't let me rate selections using their little star system. Since I'm OCD about that, this bugs me. Epicurious is a fantastically elegant little recipe system that really shines on the system. ABCs app works but meh. The Weather Channel has a nice little app, and several of my old favorites have ports that make at least some use of the big screen. I suspect it'll be a few months before we really see what the unit has to offer since many of the most popular apps haven't been ported yet. I'm thinking Facebook and even the Apple Remote are very overdue. But hey, the old versions work, they just look like crap.
Let me talk about User Accounts. An iPhone doesn't have them, which is fine because one phone sits in one person's pocket. But your laptop is passed around, and the user account system on a Mac is necessary in any place where you want multiple people sharing a computer with any regularity. The iPad needs it: since this machine wants to be seen in a public place and be handed around, my wife shouldn't have to keep logging out of Gmail and Facebook. And I shouldn't have to leave my iPad on the coffee table signed into my mail. And I shouldn't have to sign out every time I put it down, leaving a brick on the table unusable by guests.
Finally let me talk about the device itself. It's heavy. I mean, surprisingly heavy. The specs say that it is 1.5lbs, which sounded very light on paper. For the first few minutes, I liked the heft; I felt that I was holding a solid, well-crafted item in my hands. But then I started trying to figuring out ways to type. I wrote a number of emails of moderate length and slowly realized that I just don't like typing on this thing. It's fine for URLs and names and passwords and a sentence here and there. But to actually sit down and write a thousand-word review well, there's just no way. I tried many different angles, but in order to hold it in your lap and type, you sorta need to prop it against your belly. Holding it up one handed made my arm kinda tired fairly quickly: unless I'm willing to squish my thumb against the center of the screen. When I do this, the center of gravity shifts and it's much more comfortable to hold, but there's a giant thumb blocking my screen, making it impossible to type. You can cradle it in your arm and type one-handed. That seems like the only way to use it while standing. But I just don't see myself writing anything lengthy. After a day of heavy usage, I felt a little sore. The size and shape is nearly perfect. But all that screen and battery sure feels heavy when it's spread out like this.
But I'll tell you what I like: Having a casual PC at arm's length for a quick lookup of something. Working within the screen size of the iPhone often makes simple internet tasks unwieldy, but provided whatever you need doesn't use Flash, this is a great little web browser. Fast and pretty.
Since the announcement of the iPad, I've wondered what its role could be. My first big question was whether it be a complete replacement PC for "Grandma." Like many of you, I'm occasionally called upon to do little tech support tasks on PCs that do very little, and I was hoping that this might be the solution. After just one day I know this is not going to work for them. The difficulty of using the keyboard. The missing Flash. And the lack of video camera for chatting with the grandkids make this device simply not ready for them.
My other big question is how much of a replacement PC it could be for a power user. Now I can work around Flash and rarely need a camera, but what is clear to me is that a huge percentage of my screen time is spent staring at iChat. While I don't usually need a camera or microphone, my iChat is connected to 4 different networks, and I simply can't do my job without the steady stream of co-worker notes and bot notifications that I rely on. I've yet to find an app that lives in the background and is capable of connecting to the 4 distinct networks that I use. (AIM, SSL'd Jabber and Non-SSL'd Jabber)
I'm not expecting a WoW client or anything, but Chat? Seriously, Apple: You're on iPhone 3.something-or-other and you can't give us a chat client? I can only hope that the end of the exclusive AT&T era means that Apple will no longer be tied to some secret back room deal that forced iPhones to try to shove users to the crap SMS network to pad a telco profit margin despite the fact that our devices are living on a Wi-Fi network.
So, what does Apple need to fix?
- Lose several ounces. PLEASE.
- Video Camera
- iChat
- User switching (or at least an Anonymous mode)
I used it for a day and a half and think that it will be an excellent couch companion PC. I'm also certain that on planes, long car rides, and vacations it will be a great little machine. The battery life is pretty dang amazing. But this is a 1.0 piece of hardware running 3.0 software. The size/shape is great. The speed is wonderful. And 2 years of Moore's law might make this a device to be reckoned with if Apple sells enough of them to continue heavy development on the software and hardware. This version isn't a replacement PC for anyone yet, but future versions might be. You probably want to save your cash until then.
Considering that the last time he passed comment on an Apple handheld, his prediction was pretty lame
I don't think this is the ultimate device for keyboard-focussed nerds, but (as usual) that's not who Apple is aiming at. I guess we'll have to wait and see how well it really does, but selling 300k in one day, in one country compares pretty well to the 3G and 3GS phones (which sold ~1M in 3 days, in 21 countries worldwide).
[Aside - not directed at the review]
perhaps it's just me, but the qualifier "just" in "just a bigger iphone/ipod touch" seems somewhat questionable. Does anyone here want to trade their HDTV for an SD model ? Thought so. With a TV, all you do is view it. On an iPad you'll interact with it - that 5x screen-estate isn't a "just", it's a "crucially", IMHO.
[/aside]
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
The lack of Flash is MUCH more noticeable than I thought it would be.
This is true. Just try browsing the web without plug-ins enabled; you find a need to enable them surprisingly often for Flash. You probably think that you don't visit so many video or flash game sites, but a lot of times slashdot links to articles that have videos, or you're reading about gaming news and it has a trailer or gameplay footage you want to see. However in this case you can't even turn Flash on when you want to.
After just one day I know this is not going to work for them. The difficulty using the keyboard. The missing Flash. And the lack of video camera for chatting
So basically there's no good use for iPad. No big surprise there - just blatant stupidity from over-excited Apple fanbois.
No Flash. Less usability than a netbook. Lame
Please, enough of the iPad. I'm a Mac user, and I find the iPad a potential tool for some of my clients, but enough already.
... and for what? 48 hours of availability? It's going to take a lot longer than two days to decide if the iPad is well suited for its market niche or if its going to run into problems. Failure is much easier to measure, but determining success takes time.
I can't think of anything that has gotten this type of media hype
This weekend saw the delivery of iPads into hundreds of thousands of filthy hands. I managed to get my hands on a 32GB unit... I take that you count yourself amongst the unwashed masses, then?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that the iPhone, and therefore most likely the iPad, can get location without GPS via Skyhook and the known locations of wireless access points. So apps asking permission to use your location is not a bug.
If you don't have a GPS, it uses wifi-location. So its not ridiculous at all to ask; maybe you should
have tried it before complaining?
It works rather well, actually.
The keyword is the point that it isn't a replacement PC for anyone. I sincerely hope people realize that, so the flame wars can move on and debate about something else.
Oblivion Awaits
I don't think this ever will be, or is intended to be, a replacement computer, even for stuff as simple as writing emails. It's intended to be an entertainment device and sometime organiser. Reading the newspaper, watching TV, playing games, finding recipes. Stuff that we did before computers, just an electronic version of such stuff. If there's a big enough market for that, and I think there might be, this will do very well.
You do on the iPad, as GPS and 3G go hand-in-hand in the still unavailable 3G model. But Taco was confused by the Wi-Fi location finding system that does work on his non-3G model.
Has anyone tried it with a bluetooth keyboard? Does that integrate well?
Interesting that it gets the iPhone web pages... that would be irritating.
Also, any reports on how that second-monitor app works on it?
This seems like an oversight: if you don't have a location sensor, don't ask! Even the built-in Map app asked me for information that it could not possibly have.
google wardrives everyone's wifi while they update streetview; your unique 48 bit mac address uniquely identifies your location if you are on a recorded wifi hotspot.
slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
The post behind this joke. Here it is:
Apple releases iPod
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
I got an iPad 64GB and am using Safari a lot more. It's showing up multi-touch Safari's deficiencies.
In all other browsers, you can open a file on the device's file system. It's called the file protocol because the URL begins "file:". This allows offline prototyping of websites. I use it to define a "jump page" that's crammed full of all the hotlinks I normally use, organized to find them easily. Since we don't have the file protocol in multi-touch Safari, I have to put my jump page out to the actual Internet via iWeb and access it as an unpublished URL. In a sense, that makes sense, because I would only be able to use it if I were connected to the Internet, but it's not as private as keeping it on your own hard drive.
Also no View Source.
Also no default home page (short of saving the URL as an icon in the iPad's home).
Also no back arrow history (have to go back only one page at a time).
Also no Firefox allowed in the App store, which is what would REALLY force multi-touch Safari to get more usable.
I suppose you're trying to be funny, but let's do an experiment.
lift your arm up and hold it there for 30 minutes.
the iPad could weigh zero pounds, but it's still a tablet and so suffers from the "gorilla arm" phenomenon of being impossible to use for extended periods.
the iPhone would have the same problem, but it's designed to be used for a couple minutes and then put away in your pocket/purse.
It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
Good points, CmdrTaco.
I walked into the Apple Store in NYC on Saturday and bought one on a whim, in and out the door in 5 minutes. It's a nice piece of gear but my first thought was, holy crap this thing is heavy. From the iFixIt teardown we know that it's basically all battery under there, and the battery life is great. But if there was an 8-hour version it would balance better in your hand.
It would be 100% more fun to play with if it had a camera. There are so many photo editing/retouching possibilities already, and being able to take and then watch home movies on the iPad would be a lot of fun because of the large display. Alas, we will have to wait for that.
I thought it was okay to type on. Just small enough to use thumbs, but large enough to put in your lap or on a table and touch type. It also makes a decent remote controller (VNC client) for a living room PC or media center.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Reading the newspaper, watching TV, playing games, finding recipes. Stuff that we did before computers, just an electronic version of such stuff.
But we like doing those on a computer. Now Apple is trying to introduce a new paradigm that's backwards from previous trends, where daily tasks are being pushed to our home computer. No wonder many (especially geeks) are resisting.
On the other hand, smart phones are increasingly being used as entertainment devices (a concept that always seemed strange to me), so maybe this isn't quite a shot in the dark -- maybe the new paradigm is already coming, and Apple is just ahead of the game. It certainly explains the design.
"My iPad has no 3G, therefore it has no GPS. "... Huh?
You don't need 3G to have GPS. Heck you don't have to have any cell phone connection to have a GPS. You need a GPS to have GPS.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
The original announcement said that there would be a Bluetooth keyboard available, although I haven't bothered to check if it's available now.
The standard iMac bluetooth keyboard works with the iPad.
Well, it was 2001. Some of our users were eating all their food out of gerber jars at the time.
My iPad has no 3G, therefore it has no GPS. But applications were constantly asking me for permission to use my location. This seems like an oversight: if you don't have a location sensor, don't ask!
If you're going to review a product, at least make an effort to understand its functionality and features. The iPad (and iPhone and iPod Touch) are capable of geolocation based on your wifi connection. My iPod Touch (1st gen) is able to locate me within about 50-100 meters of my actual location just from wifi information. It's actually quite impressive.
Given that this has been the case for quite a long time and is not a new development, there is no excuse for someone reviewing the product for Slashdot to be unaware of it. Also, given that you apparently are unaware of it, it puts pretty much every one of your opinions on the product into perspective - namely, that you are not sufficiently knowledgeable to be reviewing the product.
In other words, I stopped reading at that point. If I'm going to read a review on a product, I like it to be a vaguely informed view. It has nothing to do with you obviously knocking the device - I read all of Cory Doctorow's review and he blasted the product. I disagreed with the majority of his review, but I read it because it was an informed review. I stopped reading your review because you don't know what you're talking about.
I know I shouldn't, but I expect better from Slashdot...
Apple don't intend this to be a replacement for a laptop. You want a nice comfy keyboard, iChat and a camera? Apple make that: it's a MacBook Pro - no, seriously, it's a MacBook Pro.
A lot of people have said it feels heavy - OK, I'll accept that, not seen one, but sure it's heavy. So why does it need a camera? What you said about it being heavy is going to count double if I'm going to hold it at arm's length in front of me. Otherwise I'm either going to be in extreme close up (and trust me, I'm not the kind of person who does well in extreme close up) or a really nice view up my nose (and even Brad Pitt can't make that look good). Honestly, I'll pass on the camera - I also do work in places where cameras aren't allowed (defence and education).
Does gmail chat/facebook chat not work in the iPad browser? If it does, this is probably better for most than some proprietary chat client. Quite frankly, I'm inclined to place the unavailability of multi-task greater than iChat.
But what about when you want to quickly use some other app? Then you have to close your chat. It's things like this that demand multitasking.
Okay, let me provide a little clarification. The OS multitasks. Third party apps don't, because Apple has not provided an API. They have provided a push messaging API, however, so the OS can get a notification and flag a chat client so you know you have a new message, which will appear as soon as you switch back to the chat client. This is pretty much the same as Blackberry's push notification, except third parties use it, instead of just RIM. This is the right way to handle resource allocation and push notifications on devices with limited resources, limited bandwidth, and where UI responsiveness is important. So multitasking is not really related to the feasibility of implementing chat. Even if it was, that limitation has never applied to apps pre-installed by Apple.
As a side note, Apple is demoing the next version of the iPhone OS to developers on Thursday. The new version (by almost all accounts) provides third party apps the ability to run in the background, but it is questionable that Apple will accept a chat client app submission that does not use the push notification in any case.
Yes. Even a magazine is too heavy, but usually you can rest it on your chair/lap until you need to turn the page. Now you have this gadget that needs lots of user input/interaction...hello gorilla arms. It isn't the ability to lift and hold the device or media, it is the need to continuously hold it and interact with it for long periods of time that becomes the problem. Sure, you can life a 20lbs or even 30lbs dumbbell a few times with one arm. But can you hold it there for 10 to 15 minutes with no effort? It is the reason why we don't have touch screen monitors for work and we continue to use keyboards and mice. Keyboards and mice simply take less muscle effort.
Now from the article:
Finally let me talk about the device itself. It's heavy. I mean, surprisingly heavy. The specs say that it is 1.5lbs, which sounded very light on paper. For the first few minutes, I liked the heft; I felt that I was holding a solid, well-crafted item in my hands. But then I started trying to figuring out ways to type. I wrote a number of emails of moderate length and slowly realized that I just don't like typing on this thing.
I saw this a mile away. The reason an "pad" device will never work is because of weight. Even a plain plastic clip board is annoying without a desk or surface to support it. Similarly it is why devices the size of a cell phone will continue to dominate. You can comfortably hold your phone in your hand and it isn't going to feel heavy because there is no lever force. All of the weight is in your hand. Now you have this pad device in your hand but you need to hit a point on the opposite side with your hand that's not holding the device. That "tap" will feel a lot heavier than it is because of physics. Now you need to do this a 100 or 200 times? 10 minutes? Nevermind, it'll be worth it to get the laptop in 1 or 2 minutes and not have to use so much energy just to hold the device.
Sorry everyone, it is going to continue to be phone size devices or laptops and full size keyboards for a while.
Of course the ipad will have a convenient stand at the Apple store so you don't actually have to hold it. You have to admit, they do know how to sell something.
But there is a solution to the ipad input, and Apple is not going to like it. It involves using your thumbs instead of your index finger similar to a gameboy. Apple is never going to like this because it isn't "friendly" enough. Just like their one-button mice and cmd clicking.
Its perfect to embed into a table at an internet cafe.
At the bottom he says: You probably want to save your cash until then. That is awefully confident and cocky. Like everything else in life, everyone has different computer needs and habits. I personally, love my iPad, and have convinced 2 other ppl to purchase iPads since I got mine. The iPad fits my needs perfectly. I have been waiting for an device from apple to fill the voice between the phone and the laptop, and this is it. 1.5 isn't a lot when you consider how much weight you would always be lugging around to get more functionality than your phone having to carry your full fledged laptop around all the time. Is this the best iPad that can be, hell no. Hardware revisions by Apple are always thoughtful, whether we think they get all our requests/demands in, or not. But quite frankly, if everyone found the iPad so unusable that you needed to save your cash until then, then Apple would make no money off iPad G1, and they would have no interest or motivation to make iPad G2. Apple is a company first and foremost with share holders. They have to strike a balance between what the consumers want and what the share holders want. If Apple made such bad decisions, they would not be the 3rd richest company in America currently. Apple is apparently pleasing enough ppl in the world. To think that they can do it with fewer items sold than Microsoft is quite frankly, astonishing. I personally bought the iPad G1, thinking it would be a nice toy, but wanted to support them, because I know if they are motivated to make iPad G2, G3 etc, it will get infinitely better than this first one. Do I like my iPad? Yes. Do I think it's for everyone? No. However, if I show you how I use it, and you like it to then why shouldn't you buy it? Are there things I wish were different in this iPad? Yes. But quite frankly, as human beings with our own thoughts and desires, no product is exactly the way we all think it should be. People still bitch and moan about Windows 7, they still bitch and moan about iPhone 3GS et al. If you like it, get it. If you don't like it, don't get it, but don't let someone else to tell you to save your cash. Read their (lack of) usability points, go play with one, and make the decision yourself.
What if you get an e-mail from a business associate asking for a price of one of your widgets? You would have to memorize what the quantity was, go to your spreadsheet app, and pull that price from the list and memorize it. Then you have to go back and write it in the e-mail. Room for error? I think so.
That might be how you'd do it. Me, I'd use copy and paste.
#DeleteChrome
Steve Wozniak has already come up with a solution for this problem. He bought 250 iPads and used a hinge on the left side to join them together. That way he can just turn to the next iPad to quickly get to the next page. Genius!
though. Many of the people into ereaders are excited about it:
http://www.mobileread.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=170
I already know it's not a notebook computer. But a similiar sized Kindle DX casts $489. Yeah, it has a e-ink screen, but the contrast (dark gray on light gray) is awful. But the battery life is fabulous. This has pretty good battery life but tell me how the screen is for reading. Please.
I've never liked being strapped to a desk. Don't get me wrong, I love technology through and through, but having to sit down to harness it is a real bummer. It's not good for your physical health to be sitting down so much! At least with the iPad there's a larger chance of tapping into some tech from a more natural position like on the couch or at the kitchen table. Or even at the john.
Look, I know we all like cool new gadgets, and certainly the iPad is the latest and greatest. As the review points out, it still isn't clear what it is for. My personal main gripe would be that you can't write on it as if it were paper, more specifically a pad of paper. What characterizes flat things about the size of the iPad that have the word "pad" in their names? You write on them with some kind of stylus, be it a pen, a pencil, a piece of plastic, a crayon, whatever. This, of course, implies robust handwriting recognition, which would be truly revolutionary in the form factor and price point of the iPad.
Watching video and listening to music are both well-covered by other cheaper (and arguably better and more convenient) devices. The author above wishes the iPad were better for email, but that will probably take a few years to get right on the iPad, if they get it right at all. I get the impression that somebody pushed the iPad through the pipeline because they thought it would be a damn cool device, not because it would be ideal for any specific, well thought out use cases. They made it because they could. That seems more like dumb and wasteful consumerism rather than intelligent revolutionary innovation.
no USB ports, no flash-card reader...these are things that would be very trivial to add from both a cost and engineering perspective, yet are still lacking
Because adding those things would prevent it from being smooth and sleek. Jobs hates ports on devices for aesthetic reasons and he has final say on design. Thus, Apple products have the bare minimum needed for the device to function. Didn't you ever wonder why so many Apple products have the batteries are sealed inside? If a battery compartment door would spoil the lines, you're dreaming if you expect something as hideous as a USB port.
You might. There are a lot of people who outright hate the way current computing platforms work. You just don't see this articulated in forums frequented by tech enthusiasts, because tech enthusiasts are, basically by definition, people who like the way computers work...
And having played with an iPad, I have to say, even a fair number of tech enthusiasts will probably find they like the way this works better. I mean, really, managing window clutter and file system hierarchies, interacting the the computer via a device that provides only a single point of interaction, messing around with software installation and uninstallation, waiting around for the computer to respond, having to sit at a desk (even with laptops) for non-akward ergonomics.
How good is the user experience with current computing devices, really? Are you sure you wouldn't rather have a little super-responsive nearly zero-maintanence device with 10 hours of battery life?
This space unintentionally left unblank.
My question to this whole deal is why does the iPad not run true OSX?
Do we seriously need to go through this again? I'll say what countless others have said before: "the iPad isn't for you". "Code and work", like it's a dev machine? With an on-screen keyboard? That's just a cry for help.
I would have bought one the first day if it was a real tablet that ran all of the software i need.
And I would have not bothered with a pre-order and keeping my nose pressed against the living room window waiting for UPS on Saturday morning if it were what you wanted. I've got a Macbook for when I want to run OS X. I've got an iPad for when I'm not trying to write the next great American novel (or more realistically in my case, writing the next great iPhone/iPad/Mac app).
I recently tried to convert my main work laptop to Ubuntu, I spent a good 2 months using it before going back to Windows 7. My laptop is designed somewhat poorly in that it's heat sinks are in the armrest before the keyboard. One thing I noticed about the Linux version of flash is how CPU hungry it is, simple sites like Youtube, or any site with flash video playback would consume an entire core on my laptop. I spent some time researching why and everything I've seen so far indicates that Adobe has just implemented it poorly on Linux. Some posts indicate its implemented just as poorly on OSX, using WAY more CPU than it does on Windows. So while in Linux not only would my laptop get hot, but it would kill it's battery in a heartbeat. Considering these poor implementations I can understand why Apple has taken the stance it has against flash. Using flash or not isn't a deal breaker when it comes to the web for me, but I found it EXTREMELY annoying under Linux. I think it's actually a good thing that Apple is pushing more for alternatives away from flash.
[insert crying here...]
I gave some thought to why there's no video camera. I mean, it seems obvious that this thing should have a camera, right? And the teardown shows exactly where the camera was supposed to go.
I bet the software wasn't ready yet. Apple couldn't get the software ready in time for launch so they pulled the camera out. If they had left it in then they would have to open up its functionality to Skype and every other app writer who wants to put out video chat functionality. By putting the camera (in iPad 2nd generation) and the software on the same schedule, Apple makes video chat part of the core functionality of the device and gets to lock out every other video chat app.
Now the question remains as to why the software wasn't ready, seeing as how iChat would seem to be a fairly easy port to the iPad. Maybe they have something new and cool in mind for video chat? Or maybe there were some carrier restrictions. In any case, be thankful that they couldn't include the camera or right now you'd be at Starbucks trying to read Slashdot on your laptop while listening to some hipster having a video conversation with his hipster friend at the Starbucks on the other side of the street.
Oh pulleeze. The keyboard on the iphones suck. I can attest to this from personal firsthand experience and really bizarre looking Slashdot posts. Citing the fact that the ipad has a keyboard much like the iphone is only going to be convincing to those that have already been completely converted.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I finally figured it out! You have to tap the vertical margin or the make-believe stack of pages. Tapping anywhere near the center does nothing or goes in to text selection mode. It still does the page curl.
Gotta love this "intuitive" UI.
Everyone wants to call it a fucking computer; it's not. It's not a laptop. It's not a replacement for a laptop or a desktop.
It's something to grab on the couch to look up a movie in IMDB, check the weather for tomorrow, send/check a simple email, play a simple game and so on. Sure, you CAN do all those things with a netbook/laptop/desktop, but not as conveniently or attractively as an iPad seems to make them.
Yes, you can even do them on phones, but the iPad makes it easier to do without going blind.
The haters seem obsessed with what it's not without seeing the value of what it is. Sometimes the value in something is not in what it is but in what it is not.
Now if I can only convince my wife it's something I need...
While I don't have any empirical data or specs to back up this claim, I strongly suspect the greatest contributors to the overall weight of the iPad are the glass screen and the battery. So, the only way to substantially reduce the weight would be to go with a plastic screen and a smaller battery. If they did that everyone would bitch about scratches and poor battery life.
Taco may have skipped this issue, but other reviewers haven't:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/193389/ipad_as_ereader_glaring_problems_promising_apps.html?tk=twt_strohmy
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/ipad_ebooks_kindle_for_ipad_ibooks.php
Based purely on my iPhone (also known as "the precious"), I would skip the iPad and get a Kindle if reading is your primary goal. If you want to do all sorts of stuff, and read books too, then you may be happier with the iPad.
I have never found back-lit LCD's to be good for reading. The Kindle battery life and comfortable reading, plus wireless that works pretty much everywhere, make it a great device for people who read. I emphasize that because few people actually read. I've read about studies indicating that only 10% of people who buy books read them to the end. I read almost all my books to the end. I like to read, thus I am in the minority of readers.
Most people like the idea of reading, but rarely actually read. These people are in the majority. They often buy books, but not in the quantity of the people who read. I certainly see them buying more iPads than Kindles, but how many books are going to actually be purchased by them? Kindle owners buy books all the time - a blog I follow linked to a short book being sold by a community member for $4 on Kindle, and a few days later the author thanked the community for downloading and reading his book in measurable volume.
I think the iPad will be similar to iTunes and the Wii. Most people store their own mp3's on their iPods and the attach rate on the Wii is the lowest of all consoles. So the hardware manufacturer will make a killing, but the content publishers are not necessarily in the same boat. That's why RIAA/MPAA focus more on P2P and game publishers invest in Xbox 360 games.
IMHO, the publishers that are working to damage their relationship with Amazon are going to be going back, tails between legs, begging for forgiveness. Meanwhile, an entirely new publishing model will be sprouting to compete with them, because the thing we people who read don't like is buying a $500 device that reduces the distribution costs for the publishers, and then still paying the same amount as the printed version. There's a whole new P2P market being created by this foolishness.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
Yeah, it has a e-ink screen, but the contrast (dark gray on light gray) is awful.
It also happens to not cause nearly as much eye-strain, as well as working in bright light.
I read this eye-strain justification a lot, but truth be told, at the end of a work day, there are very few people out there that feel the effects of eye-strain compared to those that don't.
Sure, there are enough to justify a product that avoids the eye-strain, but its still a minority. Most people still leave work and go home to sit in front of a computer and read blogs, watch youtube, etc for hours without suffering any eye-strain.
I'll suggest that the typical user probably doesn't know what windowed multi-tasking means, and doesn't see the need for doing more than on thing at a time. Lots of people seem to maximize their apps on Windows, for example, and I've seen advice to design primarily for that.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
What is your point? There are many things in life that aren't available if you don't have the funds. This isn't the peoples pad, it is an Apple product. It is designed for elitist snobs like myself.
Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
I've written up a considerably more detailed summary of the iPad's present shortcomings right here.
But eyestrain definitely isn't one of them; the Kindle is where you get eyestrain. That screen is darned near unreadable, with its low contrast, and the achingly slow change from one page to the next; the way it completely fails in readability as the light dims; the inability to show color... the Kindle is an awful reader, with the single exception of battery life.
I can read for many hours on the Kindle *app* on the iPod touch, because the screen is so much better than the actual Kindle. The iPad is worlds better yet, and I know I'll be reading constantly on it.
Which is not to say the iPad doesn't need work. I honestly think it is the least well thought out product Apple has put out. Oh, very well marketed, of course, but it needs a lot to even begin to stay in people's hands after the "new" wears off. Right now, unless you're a reader... it's just too feature poor.
I definitely expect competition to arise from the likes of Android plus a tablet design with a decent feature set that trumps the iPad -- and that won't be difficult to do, considering that the iPad is missing quite a bit. At that point, we'll probably see a significant iPad upgrade. It's just too bad it didn't come out of the chute with a decent feature set already in place. The saving grace is, as always with this whole line of hardware, the apps. Presuming there will be as wide a selection of them as those for the iPod (which work, but look kind of poor), the software functionality of the iPad combined with the responsiveness is its one and only strength. For an iPod/iPhone owner, though... we've already got a lot of that, and it fits in our pockets. Which is why the iPad will see a lot of table-sitting time.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Note that there's an X11 server available for the iPad in the Appstore. That way you can run any application you like over wifi.
Except what you typically do at a computer isn't reading. You are typically looking away a lot, gazing at images, or gazing away from the monitor. Reading is something different. Reading is sitting there entirely engrossed in what you are reading never really looking away for extended periods of time. For that type of reading something like a Kindle is IMO far better. I have a Safari Books Online subscription, and I'll occasionally try to read extensively at my computer. Most of the time I end up just pulling out my Kindle DX and bringing up the mobile version of their site to read it on there. There is a level of distraction trying to read at my computer, and there is a level of discomfort reading on a high contrast black on white screen. Contrary to the low contrast "problem" people like to complain about with the Kindle. I find the images low contrast but still with crisp letters and very easy to read.
I emphasize that because few people actually read. I've read about studies indicating that only 10% of people who buy books read them to the end. I read almost all my books to the end. I like to read, thus I am in the minority of readers.
Most people like the idea of reading, but rarely actually read. These people are in the majority. They often buy books, but not in the quantity of the people who read. I certainly see them buying more iPads than Kindles, but how many books are going to actually be purchased by them? Kindle owners buy books all the time - a blog I follow linked to a short book being sold by a community member for $4 on Kindle, and a few days later the author thanked the community for downloading and reading his book in measurable volume.
What? You read about studies. You like to read -- why not read the actual studies? Does this alleged majority that only reads 10% of books read the same number of books? Do you know that they don't read 10% of the books they start, but they start 20x as many books as people who read 100% of books and thus actually read twice as much? Were these figures adjusted for page count?
A blog you follow mentions a book that Kindle users downloaded in "measureable volume"? And this proves your point? And how do you know that the downloaders read the book. Oh wait, they are Kindle users -- of course they read it.
Y'know, most people like the idea of being better read than everyone else. . .