Microsoft's Touted iPad Rival Courier Becomes Less Than Vapor

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft's Touted iPad Rival Courier Becomes Less Than Vapor

Posted by timothy on Thursday April 29, 2010 @11:47AM from the courier-dropped-it dept.

Kostya writes "The much discussed Courier two-panel tablet device from Microsoft is now even less than vaporware — now it's just plain dead. 'Microsoft execs informed the internal team that had been working on the tablet device that the project would no longer be supported.' While the Courier had never been officially announced as a supported product by Microsoft, it had generated a lot of discussion as what the iPad should have been."

401 comments

On the upside though... by Fluffeh · 2010-04-29 11:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

I bet you can BING some awesome reviews and success stories about this tablet anyhow.

*snicker*

--
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
1. Re:On the upside though... by teh31337one · 2010-04-29 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  It was an awesome concept. Sad to see it go :(
2. Re:On the upside though... by biryokumaru · 2010-04-29 12:04 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Ya, it would have been nice to see Bing come out as a good competitor to Google, competition really does push everyone to improve... sucks that it had to die...
  Oh, you meant the Courier? Ya, that thing was cool.
  
  --
  When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
3. Re:On the upside though... by Neon+Aardvark · 2010-04-29 12:11 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It's too wonderful and too practical a concept to be gone for long.
  
  --
  Azural - instrumentals
4. Re:On the upside though... by node+3 · 2010-04-29 12:28 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It's too wonderful and too practical a concept to be gone for long.
  Yeah, Microsoft finally canned it because it was so wonderful and practical...
  The video that went out right around the time the iPad was announced was a concept video. It was a rendering and not an actual product or even a prototype. Pure, unadulterated vaporware whose only purpose was to get some people disinterested in the iPad. And it appears to have worked. There are numerous Slashdot posts about how, "I don't want an iPad, I'm waiting for MS's Courier." This is one of Microsoft's oldest tactics, vaporware.
  The thing about vaporware is that it's vaporware for the very reason that's it's both wonderful and *not* practical. It's biting off more than you can chew, so of course it has to be wonderful (easy to do when it doesn't even exist), and it's not practical since if it were, it would either exist, or if it doesn't exist yet, it would be something you'd not want to show off until it's just about finished since someone else could presumably beat you to the punch (if it's so practical, after all).
5. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:30 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I'd like to take this opportunity to laugh in the faces of the Microsoft fanbots who actually thought this was a real product. Anyone with more than 2 brain cells to bang together saw it for what it was. Essentially, it was nothing more than a pathetic attempt by MS to try to distort the market for the iPad and blunt Apple's sales of their product. MS, you failed miserably. And now the "courier" no longer has a purpose so of course they are canning it.
  The fact that so many people were fawning over literally nothing than some canned videos and mock-ups is just pathetic. You may or may not like Apple but while Steve Ballmer is going on about how good something might eventually be should they decide to release it, Steve Jobs pulls his products out of his back pocket and says, "Check this out, pick it up at 11 AM tomorrow morning."
6. Re:On the upside though... by geekoid · 2010-04-29 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  Do you need me to squirt you a copy?
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
7. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:47 · Score: 0
  
  The people waiting for MS's Courier probably wouldn't have bought an iPad any way.
8. Re:On the upside though... by Joe+U · 2010-04-29 12:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Pure, unadulterated vaporware whose only purpose was to get some people disinterested in the iPad. And it appears to have worked.
  
  So, my choices went from iPad vs Courier to iPad vs nothing else on the market, and this helped Microsoft in some way.
9. Re:On the upside though... by erroneus · 2010-04-29 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  It won't stay gone. The dual screen thing is very good idea. People still like closing their books and will want to close their electronic tablets too. Why Apple didn't do that I have no idea, but it would make perfect sense. Hell, combine a partially open tablet book like that and a wireless charge pad and you have a perfect picture frame for your desk when it is not in use or being charged or sync'd. (I just thought of this but I am not so smart so I guarantee you someone else already thought of it...)
  Someone in China will make it and it will be available somewhere in the near future. I'm as sure of that as I am about iPhone knock-offs... already are some aren't there?
10. Re:On the upside though... by Pinky's+Brain · 2010-04-29 13:15 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It's perfect for note taking and portability ... it's a bit substandard for video viewing.
11. Re:On the upside though... by h4rr4r · 2010-04-29 13:24 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  How is it good? It doubles the cost while giving you a screen with a nice visible split in it. Books are closed because of the format, tablets do not need to act like books.
12. Re:On the upside though... by h4rr4r · 2010-04-29 13:25 · Score: 1
  
  One screen would be fine for that. I say this because I do that on my smartphone.
13. Re:On the upside though... by FlightlessParrot · 2010-04-29 13:42 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  But, but... Surely vaporware is ideal for Cloud Computing?
14. Re:On the upside though... by Ethanol-fueled · 2010-04-29 13:44 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Anyone with more than 2 brain cells to bang together saw it for what it was.
  
  And those of us with two brain cells were hopeful that each brain cell would finally have their own screen. I guess I could sniff some glue and kill off one of my two brain cells. That would make me a prime candidate for the iPad.
15. Re:On the upside though... by plover · 2010-04-29 13:48 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Because it doesn't have to play the movie across the split. Imagine opening the Courier up to an angle similar to a netbook, resting one half on the tabletop, with the other at a comfortable viewing angle.
  You watch the movie in 16:9 on the top screen only while the other screen is dark, conserving batteries and simply awaiting your touch in order to present a full playback menu.
  I suspect there would have been a "netbook mode" that would have had the lower screen acting as a touch-keyboard for more traditional computer-like use. This would simply have been another application in that mode.
  
  --
  John
16. Re:On the upside though... by The+Grim+Reefer2 · 2010-04-29 14:03 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  So, my choices went from iPad vs Courier to iPad vs nothing else on the market, and this helped Microsoft in some way.
  When they went from XP vs. OSX to Vista vs. XP and OSX it sure didn't do much for their reputation, or stock prices for that matter.
17. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:22 · Score: 0
  
  A menu on the bottom screen doesn't seem that impressive to me. A regular keyboard can replicate the same functionality (albeit not as well), or you can put a menu on the one touch screen (like on the iPad). A second screen to me seems like a big expense with little value added. Am I right, or am I right?
18. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:38 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, that's just what you need. Two screens. For anybody that thinks the iPad is too much weight to carry around at 1.5 pounds, what you really need is, "weight" for it, twice as much. The rest of the world will just use their iPad in landscape mode. The Courier was a stupid idea and the fanboys like you are doing a fine job providing the proof.
19. Re:On the upside though... by binarylarry · 2010-04-29 15:00 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  It was probably canned because Microsoft didn't want to be publicly owned again by Apple, Google and the other competitors out there.
  They've horribly failed at just about everything except their latest OS upgrade.
  
  --
  Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
20. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:07 · Score: 0
  
  ...and yet I am wondering why the Air, with only one screen still weighs in so low.
  Wouldn't a similarly designed "dual-view" iPad weigh damn near the same as the current iPad?
  Definitely far less than a current "notebook".
21. Re:On the upside though... by hairyfeet · 2010-04-29 15:22 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Yeah but you really ought to give MSFT credit, they have gotten bullshitting down to a fricking art form. For those not old enough to remember or who weren't into PCs at the time read The Yellow Road To Cairo to see how MSFT under old Darth Gates managed to pretty much grind innovation to a halt for FIVE years, while killing or nearly killing several competitors, all while selling not a damned thing at all besides screenshots and bullshit.
  Say what you want about old Billy boy, it takes some 50 pound brass balls to bullshit an entire industry for half a decade with nothing but a bluff. To keep a lie going THAT long, and get everyone to believe it? Man I'd hate to play old Bill in poker. Hell I'll admit he bluffed the shit out of me too, I didn't get OS/2 until it was practically on life support because I was waiting for the Cairo coolness. say what you want about old Bill, he is one cold calculating son of a bitch.
  It is a shame it turned out to be bullshit, but I figured it was, old Ballmer monkey just ain't got the bullshitting skills that Bill had. To pull off good vaporware you got to make the audience believe in the vapors not just throw out a press release or an occasional leak. Ballmer needs to go spend some time at the feet of his master before trying to pull that off again, he just ain't got the skills.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
22. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:23 · Score: 0
  
  The XBox team would like a word with you.
23. Re:On the upside though... by binarylarry · 2010-04-29 15:31 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Why so they can cry on my shoulder about getting owned by Nintendo?
  
  --
  Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
24. Re:On the upside though... by rAiNsT0rm · 2010-04-29 15:35 · Score: 1
  
  When Google was down briefly today, I thought of using Bing, and then couldn't bring myself to do it... That speaks volumes when you won't use a free service.
  
  --
  http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
25. Re:On the upside though... by KshGoddess · 2010-04-29 15:44 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  or because they've got a 54% estimated failure rate?
  
  --
  It's a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable. It's a lot wrong to say it's a suspension bridge.
26. Re:On the upside though... by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 15:54 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Imagine opening the Courier up to an angle similar to a netbook, resting one half on the tabletop, with the other at a comfortable viewing angle.
  You mean like the iPad can with a $30 case that ads no weight or bulk to the device?
  Oh yeah, that works pretty well.
  Only it costs half as much and has half the weight thanks to not having to need enough battery to power two screens for a reasonable period of time (since you can't expect users to just watch videos or mostly do other tasks with one screen off).
  Also I can't imagine what about the Courier design led you to think the center portion would be able to hold either screen aloft at any arbitrary angle.
  
  --
  "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
27. Re:On the upside though... by cgenman · 2010-04-29 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  The Gizmodo article on the wrong ways to make a tablet makes me sad. Most of the complaints about downsizing laptop OS's to work as tablets stem from all of the awful problems that are inherent in modern computing UI's. Norton antivirus popping up every 5 seconds and asking to update. Background applications constantly demanding attention. Crashing processes. Slow and clunky boot-up and shutdown. All of these things are huge limitations of modern desktops that we shouldn't have to put up with by now.
  Courier wasn't just going to be the iPad killer. It was going to be a computing OS that wasn't the hideous bloatware that we've come to know and hate.
  
  --
  The ______ Agenda
28. Re:On the upside though... by Taco+Cowboy · 2010-04-29 16:53 · Score: 1
  
  The dual screen thing is very good idea. People still like closing their books and will want to close their electronic tablets too.
  
  Someone in China will make it and it will be available somewhere in the near future.
  
  If someone can come up with a UI that is at least as finger-friendly as iPhone OS I can get someone in China to come up with the hardware.
  
  --
  Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
29. Re:On the upside though... by rtfa-troll · 2010-04-29 17:07 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  The dual screen thing is very good idea. People still like closing their books and will want to close their electronic tablets too....
  I like where you are going with this. So we have a device with a screen like an Ipad, but you can close it to protect the device. Then we have a second screen which can be used for input when the device is open. The only thing I see wrong is that even haptic input isn't that great. But, what if, instead of soft keys, we had hard keys, sort of mounted on a circuit board (a "board-key". if you like). Admittedly you'd lose the flexibility of dual screens but then again divided screens aren't always ideal, you could just have different sizes of single screens available depending on people's needs. It would then be a bit like a journal or a book that could take notes. Call it a "book-note" and you've got a really great marketing idea. You might even be able to sell them in the thousands.
  
  --
  =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
30. Re:On the upside though... by ipquickly · 2010-04-29 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  So the first info about the Courier I can find is dated September 22 2009.
  But OLPC already showed off a concept XO-2 back in May 2008.
  Funny that earlier - Steve Jobs offered to put OS-X on OLPC for free, but they "declined because it's not open source".
  Now, after "a deal with Microsoft" Both XP and Linux will be options.
  Makes me wish I hadn't gotten those two OLPC's. when I heard that.
  But if the XO-2 ever materializes (and it probably wont) I think I'll just wait for the Mac iPad duo.
31. Re:On the upside though... by node+3 · 2010-04-29 17:16 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Pure, unadulterated vaporware whose only purpose was to get some people disinterested in the iPad. And it appears to have worked.
  So, my choices went from iPad vs Courier to iPad vs nothing else on the market, and this helped Microsoft in some way.
  You don't seem to understand how vaporware works. If you actually had a competing product, you wouldn't need vaporware, you'd just promote the real thing you have to offer. But MS has nothing to offer.
  For at least for a short amount of time, potential iPad buyers were holding off for a Courier. For this tactic to work, MS never has to actually release Courier. All they have to do is slow iPad sales.
  There used to be a time when people would put off purchases, in favor of some vaporware MS product, for years, by which time the superior technology (that actually existed) would fail to gain traction and die, all without MS ever shipping anything. The market doesn't really work that way anymore, so at best it will buy them a few months. The fact that they didn't make the best use of those few months doesn't negate the potential upsides of this tactic.
  And besides, Courier helped make the iPad appear less interesting and less advanced than it is, this helped play a small role in the "iPad is lame" nerdfest, which is still active and is still benefitting Microsoft. It's hard for a real product to compete with a product that is completely made up, and once you're able to convince at least some people into accepting that this wonderful imaginary product is real, it sours one's impressions of real products that can, and do, actually exist.
32. Re:On the upside though... by TrancePhreak · 2010-04-29 17:30 · Score: 1
  
  If you're searching images or videos you should use bing. It really is better. Also, did Google ever do anything about serving malware through their image search?
  
  --
  
  -]Phreak Out[-
33. Re:On the upside though... by Khashishi · 2010-04-29 18:42 · Score: 1
  
  it's still pretty innovative, even if it's bullshit.
34. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 19:07 · Score: 0
  
  still the iPodTou^h^h^h^iPad sucksdonkeyassballscockbowls
35. Re:On the upside though... by James_Duncan8181 · 2010-04-29 20:17 · Score: 1
  
  "Also, did Google ever do anything about serving malware through their image search?"
  My shill-sense, it tingles.
  
  --
  "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
36. Re:On the upside though... by MikeFM · 2010-04-29 21:03 · Score: 1
  
  Not only can it run apps but it offers a selection of viruses and a genuine blue screen of death too! Brings back the memories but if it can't run http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorillas_(video_game) then forget it! Anyway I'll stick to my iPad. The idea of a hinged book-style tablet is horrible. It's not a 'real computer' as everyone bitches about the iPad but you have to hold it with both hands and it has a moving part to break. That and it'd run some gawd-awful OS from Microsoft. Why do that? If you want extreme geekness go for Android and if you want the damn thing to actually work go for iPhone OS. I've tried many others and they just sucked.
  
  --
  At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
37. Re:On the upside though... by MikeFM · 2010-04-29 21:07 · Score: 1
  
  As opposed to an actual laptop or an iPad with a real, removable, keyboard in a case made to hold both?
  
  --
  At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
38. Re:On the upside though... by tehcyder · 2010-04-29 22:08 · Score: 1
  
  The type of weenie who would seriously not buy an iPad (or anything else) because "there might be something better out in a few months" deserves to rot in the hell of their own indecision and loathsome need to be cool.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
39. Re:On the upside though... by delinear · 2010-04-29 22:16 · Score: 1
  
  You don't seem to understand how vaporware works. If you actually had a competing product, you wouldn't need vaporware, you'd just promote the real thing you have to offer. But MS has nothing to offer.
  Even that would have worked in Apple's favour in this case - since they didn't have enough iPads ready at launch, being able to delay some of the customer demand and still have those customers come back in a couple of months (and have the customers blaming MS' vapourware and not Apple's lack of product for the delay) would only help Apple.
40. Re:On the upside though... by delinear · 2010-04-29 22:18 · Score: 1
  
  It was probably canned because Microsoft didn't want to be publicly owned again by Apple, Google and the other competitors out there.
  They've horribly failed at just about everything except their latest OS upgrade.
  I wish I could be a horrible failure at just about everything I do and still be one of the most successful companies on the planet earning billions of dollars a year. Seriously, love or loathe them, they must be doing something right (or at least not as wrong as the competition).
41. Re:On the upside though... by delinear · 2010-04-29 22:24 · Score: 1
  
  To me, the second screen only makes sense if one of them uses e-ink. That way you get the best of both worlds, a nice screen for viewing rich media, web browsing, working, etc and a low energy screen with better readability for print which also doubles as extra space for the flashy screen to dump some menus and stuff.
42. Re:On the upside though... by delinear · 2010-04-29 22:26 · Score: 1
  
  If someone can come up with a UI that is at least as finger-friendly as iPhone OS I can get someone in China to come up with the hardware.
  Android+SenseUI looks like it does the trick.
43. Re:On the upside though... by fwarren · 2010-04-29 22:36 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Let me tell you about my first computer purchase.
  I was 17 years old and had a job at K-Mart. At the time, the Commodore-64 was around $500.00 and the Vic-20 was $150.00. So I decided to purchase a Vic-20.
  As it turns out, the K-Mart lay away program did not allow you to purchase electronics that way. I did not want to wait to come up with $150.00 money in my pocket would be spent before it was saved. There was a Federated store across that that I could purchase a Vic-20 for the same $150.00.
  So I got paid every Friday, and I would go on Saturday across town and make a $50 payment on my VIC. I had paid off $100 and had $50 to go. I got my paycheck on Friday night, and found out at the same time that the price on the VIC-20 had just dropped form $150.00 down to $100.00. The restock fee was $50.00 over at Federated. So my choices at that point were to a) go, ask for my money back, pay the restock fee and buy the computer outright with the money I had in hand. Total cost: $150.00. Or b) make my last payment, total cost $150.00.
  Essentially I had purchased a computer that went down in price by 33% the moment I bought it. It was a good lesson. That is ALWAYS the decision you make when you buy a computer. There is always something newer coming along at a lower price. Sometimes it is worth waiting 3 months before purchasing, sometimes you just as well buy it now and be using it for the next 3 months instead of waiting for the next 3 months.
  And generally speaking, waiting 3 months to purchase a Microsoft product that they are not already selling to stores 3 months before they ship. That my friend is always a bad idea.
  
  --
  vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
44. Re:On the upside though... by xtracto · 2010-04-29 22:48 · Score: 1
  
  Well... maybe they somehow expected you would buy a Zune :P
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
45. Re:On the upside though... by xtracto · 2010-04-29 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  The type of weenie who would seriously not buy an iPad (or anything else) because "there might be something better out in a few months" deserves to rot in the hell of their own indecision and loathsome need to be cool.
  Obsessive compulsive disorder. So, you feel the need to buy every single piece of new technology that comes out?
  I have to tell you, THANK YOU! It is because of guys like you that we all the non-worthy masses have the possibility to get cool technology at good prices. Because get yourself to endure all the "early adopters" issues (early beta quality [eg. Microsoft software], overpriced products [eg. cameras], non-relevant products [eg. HD-DVD], constrained products [eg. iPAD] etc.).
  Me? I will definitely wait for a product with decent price, decent features and from a less-undecent company. Personally I like ASUS, Samsung stuff (among others) so, I'll gladly waiting for my DR-950 and whatever alternative to iPad suits MY NEEDS.
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
46. Re:On the upside though... by NekSnappa · 2010-04-29 23:27 · Score: 1
  
  Damn! To think I just spent the last of my mod points on another story.
  
  --
  I want to shoot the messenger!
47. Re:On the upside though... by bjourne · 2010-04-30 00:35 · Score: 0
  
  So you are honestly accusing MS of releasing a concept video of how they are imagining their tablet pc to work as some kind of underhanded tactic to destroy ipad sales? Because consumers see how a really good tablet could work and so becomes less impressed by Apple marketing?
  
  --
  Football Odds
48. Re:On the upside though... by sg3000 · 2010-04-30 00:46 · Score: 1
  
  Wait a minute -- it can't be vaporware. Gizmodo said it was in the "late prototype" stage of development. Why would they lie? What would they have to gain?
  
  --
  Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
49. Re:On the upside though... by AkiraRoberts · 2010-04-30 00:50 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  You mean like the iPad can with a $30 case that ads no weight or bulk to the device?
  No weight and no bulk? What is it made out of, magic?
  
  --
  words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
50. Re:On the upside though... by mdwh2 · 2010-04-30 00:53 · Score: 1
  
  And for months, indeed up to 5 years, there was rumour, hype about the Apple tablet, Istale, Ipad, or whatever the new name of the week was. The use of vaporware to generate publicity was employed by Apple here far more than Microsoft (I hadn't even heard about the device, before now - hyped up vaporware is far more annoying than stuff that isn't hyped up).
51. Re:On the upside though... by BrokenHalo · 2010-04-30 00:58 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The type of weenie who would seriously not buy an iPad (or anything else) because "there might be something better out in a few months" deserves to rot...
  
  I disagree. If you want to call me a weenie anyway, go ahead, I've been called worse things.
  
  There is nothing wrong with holding back from a purchase if the product doesn't quite meet your requirements for functionality, coolness or whatever. For instance, I would have bought an e-book reader years ago while I was in the early stages of my undergrad degree, if any of the offerings available had met my requirements for displaying contents of my biochemistry and molecular biology texts at a useful resolution and in colour.
  
  However, since none of the manufacturers came up with a suitable gadget in time, I found myself stuck with lugging heavy books around. Sure, that is an opportunity lost, but I'm not rotting in any kind of hell as a result; I just put up with a certain amount of inconvenience. Big deal.
52. Re:On the upside though... by Goaway · 2010-04-30 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  Courier wasn't just going to be the iPad killer. It was going to be a computing OS that wasn't the hideous bloatware that we've come to know and hate.
  This alone should have tipped you off that it'd never happen.
53. Re:On the upside though... by DJRumpy · 2010-04-30 01:11 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect it had more to do with a few different things:
  MS doesn't like being left out of a potential revenue stream (iPods and Google are two key areas they 'lost')
  They wanted to hurt iPad sales in any way possible, including introducing vaporware they knew would never be realized
  They didn't want to appear to be caught with their pants down with no product ready, or even in the works
54. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 01:39 · Score: 0
  
  There are numerous Slashdot posts about how, "I don't want an iPad, I'm waiting for MS's Courier." This is one of Microsoft's oldest tactics, vaporware.
  Care to support this statement with another example of MS vaporware?
55. Re:On the upside though... by paiute · 2010-04-30 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  And my unicorn that shat Cadbuy Eggs was almost ready for presale.
  
  --
  If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
56. Re:On the upside though... by Joe+U · 2010-04-30 02:10 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  So they announce the end of the project when the iPad hasn't been out a full month yet. Wouldn't it make more sense to keep going for a year?
  Sorry, I think you're all tilting at windmills. Apple should worry about the project that Google has planned, not Microsoft.
  Microsoft doesn't sell hardware unless it drives OEM software sales. Google has no problems taking over Apple's market.
  Microsoft doesn't want Apple to fail. Microsoft wants Apple and Google to keep busy so they can keep selling to Dell, HP and other OEMs.
57. Re:On the upside though... by Joe+U · 2010-04-30 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  or stock prices for that matter.
  Up 21% in the past 5 years? They're not hurting, but they're not in huge growth anymore. Nope, MS is now a stable company at an affordable share price.
  Granted, Apple and Google are up record amounts, but I expect we'll see a correction for Apple at some point. Google is hard to predict.
58. Re:On the upside though... by nine-times · 2010-04-30 02:22 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Courier helped make the iPad appear less interesting and less advanced than it is, this helped play a small role in the "iPad is lame" nerdfest, which is still active and is still benefitting Microsoft.
  I think this is a key point. People get psychologically and emotionally locked into positions and they don't like to admit that they might be wrong. They don't even like to consider in their own heads that they might be wrong.
  So Microsoft can release a video of the Courier and get some people saying, "I'm not getting an iPad. The iPad sucks. I'm going to wait for the Courier." They'll tell their friends and family and random people online, and when Microsoft drops the Courier, those people won't go back and tell everyone, "Oh, I was wrong, maybe the iPad isn't so bad." They'll say, "I'm not getting an iPad. The iPad sucks. I'm going to wait for... something else."
59. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 02:57 · Score: 0
  
  You do realize that any MS hardware would have MS software on it right?
60. Re:On the upside though... by SuperKendall · 2010-04-30 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  No weight and no bulk? What is it made out of, magic?
  Yes.
  Try it and see.
  
  --
  "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
61. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 02:59 · Score: 0
  
  No. Screens are heavy.
62. Re:On the upside though... by DragonWriter · 2010-04-30 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  It won't stay gone. The dual screen thing is very good idea.
  Nor is it unique to Courier; IIRC, there's been at least a few dual-screen (one e-Ink, one LCD touch) working prototype tablets shown over the last year.
  Microsoft found themselves behind the game, and Courier seems to have been that most venerable of MS strategies -- an effort to give consumers reasons to delay buying decisions long enough to give Microsoft some time to catch up with the companies that are way out ahead in a new market that Microsoft wasn't ready to leverage its existing market dominance in other areas to dominate.
63. Re:On the upside though... by grumpyman · 2010-04-30 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah but you really ought to give MSFT credit, they have gotten bullshitting down to a fricking art form.
  LOL I think for this vapourware project, they only need to involve arts people and no need for any engineers.
64. Re:On the upside though... by hrimhari · 2010-04-30 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  They certainly took a lot of time to give up on the Zune... Hey, they did give up, didn't they?
  
  --
  http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
65. Re:On the upside though... by hrimhari · 2010-04-30 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  Steve! Who would have known!
  
  --
  http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
66. Re:On the upside though... by s73v3r · 2010-04-30 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  WinFS for one? Cairo?
67. Re:On the upside though... by scot4875 · 2010-04-30 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I think the best lesson to be learned from this story is: never buy technology on a payment plan.
  --Jeremy
  
  --
  Jesus was a liberal
68. Re:On the upside though... by Joe+U · 2010-04-30 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  Good point, they do seem to make an exception when it comes to consumer only products.
  Home/consumer not really their core though, and I don't see them suddenly deciding to step on the OEMs.
  Courier was a business-centric tablet, I never thought MS would actually bring it to market under their own brand. Instead they would use the prototype inspire Dell, HP and others to do something similar.
69. Re:On the upside though... by Tubal-Cain · 2010-04-30 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  Sure did. People uncertain about iPad-vs-Courier decide to put that on the back burner, and forget exactly what made them put it there in the first place. By the time it comes back to their attention, everyone has started jumping on the bandwagon and the decision has morphed to iPad-vs-Android-vs-OEM/Windows.
70. Re:On the upside though... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 07:47 · Score: 0
  
  [roughlydrafted.com]
  That's where I stopped reading.
71. Re:On the upside though... by Joe+U · 2010-04-30 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  Sure did. People uncertain about iPad-vs-Courier decide to put that on the back burner, and forget exactly what made them put it there in the first place. .
  People that stupid were already on line for the iPad. That is, unless a shiny ball bounced by.
72. Re:On the upside though... by TrancePhreak · 2010-04-30 09:34 · Score: 1
  
  It wasn't Google directly, but malware web code would detect a Google crawler and serve up some malware. It would not serve the malware unless it detected the crawler. Google is generally pretty good about pointing stuff like this out, it just seems like a hard problem to solve.
  
  --
  
  -]Phreak Out[-
73. Re:On the upside though... by hairyfeet · 2010-04-30 16:31 · Score: 1
  
  Well that just shows you are a bigot, if a web site can be ignored by you simply because of the name, unless you have a citation that shows they are nefarious? For if you would have bothered to read they back everything up, with links to all kinds of supporting evidence from screenshots to interviews and press releases from back in the day.
  for everyone else who is a geek or likes PC history, give the above link a read or look up "Yellow Road to Cairo" in Google. It doesn't paint any of the players back then in a really favorable light, but shows how through missteps and fumbles MSFT ended up going from a bit player to owning the desktop market, how Steve got ran out of his company, and how Sculley nearly killed Apple, with one stupid move after another. It really is a good read for those of us who lived it and wonder why companies that had better product ended up dead, or those that didn't go through it can find out why the landscape is now they way it is. Really good stuff.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Crap. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 11:50 · Score: 1, Insightful

The only tablet type device I've found mildly intriguing, and it's cut. That sucks.
1. Re:Crap. by peragrin · 2010-04-29 11:56 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  and your surprised?
  anytime MSFT does anything remotely awesome it gets canceled or morphed into a piece of shit.
  
  --
  i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
2. Re:Crap. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:22 · Score: 0
  
  They were probably one company out of dozens thinking the iPad was gonna come out near $1000 and they could sell millions of their own devices for $600-800 saying look at all the more stuff you can do with it. But for $500, there was no way to reap insane profits from it and the projects were killed.
3. Re:Crap. by Spatial · 2010-04-29 13:15 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  and your surprised?
  It's just fine, thanks for asking. :)
4. Re:Crap. by Ethanol-fueled · 2010-04-29 13:20 · Score: 1
  
  That's what I thought about Surface, but you too can own one if you have $12,000($15,000 for the dev model) if you have a company tax ID.
  
  I'm hoping that Microsoft will keep it going, making it available for consumer use and not screwing it up like Apple did the iPad.
5. Re:Crap. by h4rr4r · 2010-04-29 13:26 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  You can make your own or pay someone to do it.
  Look online, some even running OSes for grown ups.
6. Re:Crap. by plover · 2010-04-29 13:56 · Score: 1
  
  According to people who study such things, the XBox was originally released at near cost (or even below) in order to drive marketshare.
  The Courier could have been released the same way, at a price point lower than the iPad. Yes, we could all make jokes about the Courier Store, and Bing, and Zune, and all the rest of the stuff they'd do to cripple a great idea. But what if it was as open as any other PC platform? Sure, the app store might be lame, and high priced, and of the three dozen apps half are buggy nagware, and one gives you a virus. But if you could put your own OS on it, tell me you wouldn't buy it in a heartbeat over the iPad.
  
  --
  John
7. Re:Crap. by TheKidWho · 2010-04-29 14:09 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but Microsoft makes up the money in consoles by selling millions of games which each have an MS tax and very expensive dev licenses.
  Putting the Courier up against the iPad, you're looking at $4.99-$.99 apps and maybe a million or two sold in the year... Compare that to the 30 million+ xbox 360s out there, there is no way they could have sold this for near cost.
  Besides, 2 screens is a killer drain on battery life, and no matter what, this thing would have cost ~600 just to manufacture.
8. Re:Crap. by clarkn0va · 2010-04-29 17:02 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  It's just fine, thanks for asking. :)
  Lucky. I could never get the rc scripts to run right, and if you have to run it manually after every restart, well, then it's not really a surprise daemon at all, is it?
  
  --
  I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
9. Re:Crap. by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2010-04-30 14:51 · Score: 1
  
  MS aren't capable of pulling off such a concept properly and they know it. Besides, the concept isn't as advantageous as it may first seem. MS knows that, too.
I's not dead, it's resting .... by tomhudson · 2010-04-29 11:51 · Score: 1

In other news, Microsoft and Apple announce a new search engine licensing deal.
Aww by atomicthumbs · 2010-04-29 11:52 · Score: 0, Redundant

I kinda wanted one. Oh well.

--
http://pinopsida.com
Well.... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 11:53 · Score: 0

... darn.
Tablets are dead by Darkness404 · 2010-04-29 11:54 · Score: 4, Funny

Lets face it, 'tablets' are dead. You are essentially paying more for less. While there will always be a small niche market for tablets, there aren't any benefits for the general consumer when compared to a laptop, -especially- when they are running dumbed-down OSes.

Neither the iPad nor Courier have (or would have in the case of MS's canceled project) any real advantages when it comes to getting work done than a regular Netbook or Laptop. I can see the point of a low-priced tablet device, essentially a large, sturdy smartphone for a -low- price. But when it comes down to it, its quite stupid to pay more and get less of a product and that is what tablets currently are.

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
1. Re:Tablets are dead by Neon+Aardvark · 2010-04-29 12:07 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Er, the ipad is selling hugely. This is the start of the era of tablets, so no they are not dead.
  The advantage they offer over laptops and netbooks is a tactile natural way to consume media at your leisure i.e. while you're on the sofa.
  They won't replace laptops or desktops or anything else, but they're here to stay.
  
  --
  Azural - instrumentals
2. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:18 · Score: 0
  
  Like it or not, the mass market doesn't like computers, they like a small set of things you can do with computers (facebook, puzzle games, porn, emailing Aunt Nelly, terrible attempts at DTP.) The iPad is a device that exists to scratch those itches and only those itches, with a brand name that rightly or wrongly screams ease of use and bourgeo-luxury. It can be a far -worse- value equation than a laptop and be valued for its limits, in fact.
  Compare the popularity of automatic-transmission sedans and faux trucks (the new Explorer is a lifted Taurus, ffs) versus manual-transmission sporty compacts, games consoles versus entry-level gaming PCs, or proper restaurants versus buffets. The freedom to tinker comes with a compulsion to tinker, and unless you're an enthusiast already or your time has no value that's a negative.
3. Re:Tablets are dead by Darkness404 · 2010-04-29 12:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Er, the ipad is selling hugely
  
  At the moment. But will Apple really be able to carry the momentum once people start realizing theres nothing really -great- about the iPad?
  
  The reason why the iPod got marketshare so quickly was because it was the smallest media player for the space at the time and had a decent UI. The reason why the iPhone got marketshare because at the time it was the only way you could browse the web decently from a phone.
  
  But, I don't know if I'm simply blind to some hidden factor but I don't see the appeal of the iPad. I don't mind Apple products (I'm listening to an iPod touch on my desk at the moment) but I just feel like you are paying more to get less. For $500 I can get an iPad which will only run a very limited set of applications, eventually will have simi-multitasking, won't ever get you the full web, costs an arm and a leg to use common peripherals, etc. Or I could get a $500 laptop with a dual-core x86 CPU, run just about every OS under the sun, full multitasking, cheap 'apps', full peripheral support, replaceable battery, etc.
  
  I use my netbook or laptop while sitting on the sofa all the time, if I want to really "consume media" I fire up my HTPC and put on a movie. If I want to play a game I fire up my 360 or modified Wii.
  
  Some specialty devices I can understand, like e-ink e-readers because they have features (e-paper that is easy on the eyes) that other systems lack. With the iPad, what benefit are you getting for the cost?
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
4. Re:Tablets are dead by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2010-04-29 12:21 · Score: 1
  
  When I'm on the Can/train/bus/plane(assuming wifi enabled flight)/couch, I really don't want to do work but I might want to look up Wikipedia articles on obscure CPU architectures or the reign of Polpot.
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
5. Re:Tablets are dead by Skadet · 2010-04-29 12:22 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  [tablets don't have] any real advantages when it comes to getting work done than a regular Netbook or Laptop.
  
  Getting Work Done isn't the primary use of computers for a very large slice of the market. This is where you and many others fundamentally misunderstand the tablet space. Traditionally the market problem is that full computers are too much machine for the everyday user -- they want to check their Facebook, emails, read the news, and catch up on that show they missed last night on ABC. The iPad does all these things adroitly. Mom knows to touch the little "ABC" icon and then touch her favorite show. Actually, screw mom, I know that too, and I don't have to futz with Silverlight or Flash or Growl notifications popping up or emails dinging in the middle of a show.
  
  Open your mind. Not everyone uses a computer the way you do.
  
  --
  Sony ha
6. Re:Tablets are dead by Darkness404 · 2010-04-29 12:23 · Score: 1
  
  The freedom to tinker comes with a compulsion to tinker, and unless you're an enthusiast already or your time has no value that's a negative.
  
  Generally tinkering can -save- time. For example, it takes me 15 minutes to create some keybindings for some of my applications. I'm sure over a year's worth of use I've saved far more time than those 15 minutes it took me to create the keybindings in the first place. Not only that but I can make things that are completely my own, and that quite honestly gives me more value to them than the default. I don't -want- my computer/devices to look like others, act like others or really be any other device other than my own.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
7. Re:Tablets are dead by oldhack · 2010-04-29 12:23 · Score: 1
  
  "The advantage they offer over laptops and netbooks is a tactile natural way to consume media at your leisure i.e. while you're on the sofa."
  Funny, I didn't know I can throw up on empty stomach.
  
  --
  Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
8. Re:Tablets are dead by capnkr · 2010-04-29 12:26 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I generally just read a dead-tree book when I'm on the can.
  
  Laptops get too hot on the thigh skin, when your pants are down around your ankles...
  
  :D
  
  --
  "...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
9. Re:Tablets are dead by LurkerXXX · 2010-04-29 12:29 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Once upon a time, pet rocks sold hugely. More sales does not equate to a more useful product.
10. Re:Tablets are dead by spire3661 · 2010-04-29 12:33 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Wow are you reading the wind wrong. Tablets are going to come in like a tsunami. The mobile space is moving at lightning speed to provide enough software that the need for a desktop is GREATLY diminished. WE are at the very beginning of the mobile internet appliance era. Its happening now. Apple was extremely wise in NOT delivering an x86 tablet and it has very little to do with control and everythign to do with being good enough for the vast majority of people. I could hand my mother-in-law an ipad and an Acer Aspire Revo ($200 nettop) to feed it, and she would almost never have to use the desktop computer paradigm again.
  
  --
  Good-bye
11. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:34 · Score: 0
  
  You enjoy your computer being entirely your own. Do you enjoy your automobile being entirely your own, and having to special-order or fabricate all your parts and do your own maintenance? Do you enjoy your cooking being entirely your own, or do you like to relax with takeout or a frozen pizza?
  Sure, you might rearrange your spice rack and be five seconds quicker on the oregano, but it only matters because you're putting in the effort to begin with.
12. Re:Tablets are dead by noewun · 2010-04-29 12:36 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  At the moment. But will Apple really be able to carry the momentum once people start realizing theres nothing really -great- about the iPad?
  
  The very same thing was said about the iPod and the iPhone, and look where they are now.
  The era of the geek driving computer development is dead: people want easy to use features, and Apple is giving it to them. The era of clock speed, bus speed and VRAM capacity being important for selling computers is over as well. These things will still matter for select user bases--programmers, gamers, scientific use, graphic design, audio/video and other--but, for the vast number of average computer users for whom web, email, music, word processing and simple video are all that's really important, the iPad and its children are the future.
  It will be interesting to see what people are saying about the iPad this time next year, when Apple's sold 25 million of them.
  
  --
  I am a believer of momentum and curves.
13. Re:Tablets are dead by Skadet · 2010-04-29 12:37 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  won't ever get you the full web
  The problem I have with all these technophiles decrying the iPad's lack of flash is this: are you not the same group that beats down any flash site? FFS, slashdot is the place that puts [PDF WARNING] next to links. If anyone was going to complain about the lack of flash, this is the absolute last group of people I would have expected.
  
  I could get a $500 laptop with a dual-core x86 CPU, run just about every OS under the sun, full multitasking, cheap 'apps', full peripheral support, replaceable battery, etc.
  
  As I said in reply to the OP, the problem is that full PCs are simply too much machine for what many people want to do (watch a show, check facebook, etc). A $99 iPad would be a true game-changer, and I think something along those lines is the next step. At this price point, people (like you) get confused because of the price and say (as you did), 'but... look at the sweet box I could buy for $500, I don't get it!' The point is that my mom and my wife and many like them don't care in the least if they have a sweet box. They care if they can "like" timmy's facebook status.
  
  I use my netbook or laptop while sitting on the sofa all the time, if I want to really "consume media" I fire up my HTPC and put on a movie. If I want to play a game I fire up my 360 or modified Wii.
  Your geek factor (Look at me! HTPC! Check me out! Modded Wii!) is what's keeping you from seeing this market. Not everyone uses computers the way you do, and not everyone derives the same satisfaction from setting up their own rad HTPC setup. My wife is perfectly content to watch DVDs, out of a box, on her laptop. I thought that was madness when I first saw it. Fact is, people compute in different ways.
  
  --
  Sony ha
14. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:40 · Score: 0
  
  When the product is from Apple it does. No other company benefits from unquestioning hyperbole in the popular media over its products. Every. Single. Fucking. TV. Show. now has all their characters using MacBooks, iPhones, iPod's and now iPads. It is the fucking computer equivalent of a genital rash. Those who have it, spread it, and those that don't, fuck around until they get it.
15. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:42 · Score: 0
  
  Why bother saying anything here? The Slashdot nerdcrowd has decided, against all prior evidence, that they have some idea of what actual regular people want, and it has been further decided that people don't want the iPad. I mean, sure, these nerds have no expertise in marketing and have no idea what normal computer users are after, but they are the intellectual elite of the Internet! They must be right.
16. Re:Tablets are dead by geekoid · 2010-04-29 12:42 · Score: 1
  
  What you mean to say is YOU don't have a use for one.
  I've heard this same argument about net books, smartphones, and ebooks.
  While the iPad is a less then stellar attempt at a tablet, this is another story:
  http://wepad.mobi/
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
17. Re:Tablets are dead by geekoid · 2010-04-29 12:44 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  " I thought that was madness when I first saw it"
  please tell me she was watching 300.
  "That is madness"
  "This IS COMPUTING"
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
18. Re:Tablets are dead by maitai · 2010-04-29 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  The "average consumer" also wants to play flash based games. Especially their younger children which seem to be drawn to those sort of things.
  And they don't care if it's flash or not, just if it works or not.
19. Re:Tablets are dead by Low+Ranked+Craig · 2010-04-29 12:52 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I really fail to understand why people can't seem to get it. The big problem with tablets to date is that they run a version of a desktop OS that turns your finger or a stylus into a mouse and you still have to deal with various windows on the desktop, etc. Microsoft doesn't seem to get the point that the standard desktop OS does not translate well to a touchscreen device - there needs to be a complete re-factoring of the OS for the device, something that Apple seems to get. IMO windows tablets are annoying to use after awhile - I had a tablet PC for awhile and after the novelty wore off, I went back to my Thinkpad for anything other than casual web browsing.
  The whole "getting more work done" argument really doesn't make sense in the context of the iPad. Of course you're not getting "work" done on an iPad, or any touchscreen only device for that matter. You're not writing code, doing graphic design or doing serious number crunching on a touchscreen. (and really, you're not getting serious work done on a netbook with a 9" screen and a cramped keyboard either - you CAN get stuff done, but I wouldn't use one and I don't think a lot of people would either). That's not the point of the iPad. It is however the point of Windows powered tablets, but short of using them to drive a power point or a specialized application, like in a doctor's office, you're not getting serious work done with the majority of applications without a keyboard.
  Can an iPad replace a computer? Yes, if all you do is browse the internet, answer short e-mails, give a keynote presentation (that you developed on your desktop), play the occasional game, watch movies, and read books with it. I do not get the impression that Apple is selling the iPad as a computer replacement. Having said that I would much rather have an iPad than a netbook computer. I have a laptop and a desktop - I will use the iPad for the stuff I mentioned above, and I much prefer the form factor of a tablet for watching a movie, reading, etc. To me the $200-$300 premium over a netbook with a similar sized screen is definitely worth it.
  The iPad isn't for you - we get that. Once Apple release iPhone OS 4.0, the iPad is EXACTLY the device and OS I want for the intended purpose, and I'm perfectly willing to pay $600 for it, and if according to you that makes me stupid, so be it. I wear a nice watch too, but my $40 Timex ironman actually keeps better time. I guess that makes me stupider.
  
  --
  I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
20. Re:Tablets are dead by jamie(really) · 2010-04-29 12:55 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I was ill for two days this week. I grabbed my iPad and watched some new shows that I've not had time to check out. ABC's iPad app let me watch Castle and V in 720p. Then I watched some movies on Netflix. I also bought the latest book from Steven Erikson using iBooks.
  It wasn't too heavy.
  It has a bigger screen than my netbook, and its stunning.
  It didn't get too hot like my netbook does when watching movies. I *hate* frying my balls.
  The wife's netbook can't watch 720p movies at all.
  I didn't have to have it plugged in, so I could move it about easily while I tried to get comfortable. Charged it overnight.
  When I was done puking, I wiped it clean with disinfectant.
  I'm not sick all the time, of course. The wife uses it and her iPhone. Her netbook hasn't been touched for months. The iPad is "just" a more usable iPhone for her. Its set up with her email, not mine (and she did it herself - amazing what she can do when I'm not around). I will be buying two more for our children.
21. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:56 · Score: 0
  
  People need to know the "best" way to do things. Seeing as you're posting on slashdot, you are obligated to teach your wife that watching a DVD on a laptop is only preferred if you have no TV/surround sound setup.
  If you weren't so cheap you would have a decent setup for your wife and you to watch TV and/or DVDs without "computing in different ways". Insert DVD, switch input to DVD Player and go!
  It is really that simple.
22. Re:Tablets are dead by Skadet · 2010-04-29 12:56 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The "average consumer" also wants to play flash based games. Especially their younger children which seem to be drawn to those sort of things. And they don't care if it's flash or not, just if it works or not.
  
  I hear you, although I think your first statement contradicts your last statement a little bit. I'd rephrase it, "the average consumer wants to play simple games." The app store has boatloads of popcap-like games, many of them free.
  
  True that they may not be able to play $THIS_SPECIFIC_GAME, no doubt. Although I've been thinking about how flash games would even translate to a touch-based interface. Would you have to just display a soft keyboard? It wouldn't be using the device's human interface well if it did. What about hover states? This is all very confusing.
  
  --
  Sony ha
23. Re:Tablets are dead by FlyingBishop · 2010-04-29 12:58 · Score: 1
  
  A $99 iPad would be a true game-changer, and I think something along those lines is the next step.
  Yes, if it cost one fifth of its present cost, it would be nice. It does not.
  
  My wife is perfectly content to watch DVDs, out of a box, on her laptop. I thought that was madness when I first saw it.
  (Emphasis added.) Odds are her laptop was cheaper than an iPad.
  Which doesn't, I should add, play DVDs. A casual TV watcher could have replaced their TV with a laptop last year between Hulu and (ordinary mail-order) Netflix.
  The iPad will never be there. The screen is too small.
24. Re:Tablets are dead by theJML · 2010-04-29 13:00 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  IMHO, Tablets like the iPad and Slate are what Netbooks tried (and are still trying) to be. Except that I'd be much more likely to carry a super thin battery efficient quick enough physical keyboard-less tablet than I ever would have been carrying around an underpowered netbook. If I needed what a netbook gives me over a tablet (a clamshell shape with a physical keyboard and laptop like experience) I'd just get a laptop. The netbooks are an example of a product looking for a market as is evident by the fact that they started as 7" screened almost palm-top's and now come in 12" sizes, larger than my ultraportable x40 full laptop.
  I, for one, am hoping that netbooks go away and tablets take their price point. Though I have to say that I'm glad they were there as they taught some of the laptop and chip makers how to make better battery life lower power devices still be useful (With combos like the Atom + Ion using low power, but offloaded 1080p playback). Perhaps they were a necessary evolutionary step on the road to a tablet, in that case, I'm glad they were here, and am glad I didn't waste any money on them.
  
  --
  -=JML=-
25. Re:Tablets are dead by jamie(really) · 2010-04-29 13:03 · Score: 1
  
  I agree. The iPad, however, doesn't.
26. Re:Tablets are dead by arb+phd+slp · 2010-04-29 13:12 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Once upon a time, pet rocks sold hugely.
  More sales does not equate to a more useful product.
  More useful than what? It's more useful than a Microsoft Courier or a Palm Folio.
  
  --
  There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
27. Re:Tablets are dead by Darkness404 · 2010-04-29 13:12 · Score: 1
  
  Do you enjoy your automobile being entirely your own,
  
  No, and I don't like my computer being entirely on my own.
  
  I do like though that I can change my car how I like it. If I want to I can change the seats, put in a different stereo system, put in a faster engine, put on snow tires, put a lift kit on it, etc. Essentially I can make my car how I want it or need it to be. With the iPad it is akin to getting a station wagon with everything welded shut, any 'upgrades' requiring special (expensive) service, and no way to do basic maintenance without calling a mechanic.
  
  Essentially that is what an iPad or any other Apple product is (unless you modify it). A station wagon with everything welded shut. Will it be useful for some people? Sure. But perhaps I don't like the sound system, prefer to replace some parts myself to save money, adjust the steering wheel and seat to fit my choosing, etc.
  
  I -enjoy- having control over my devices even if I don't generally deal with them. I generally don't change brake pads myself, but I like the fact they are standardized so there is competition for others in both brake pads and installation.
  
  What an open system (like Android, Linux, heck, even Windows and to some degree OS X) basically is, is a car that you can customize. Few things are 'welded shut' you are free to put in a new engine, free to put in a new interior, sound system, AC system, exhaust, etc. Its pre-built and will work when you first start it up, but when something goes wrong you can fix it for cheap or if you don't like it you can swap out components.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
28. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 13:15 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Actually, screw mom, ....
  Well, if you insist....
29. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 13:19 · Score: 0
  
  The iPad stays dead cool unless you leave it in the sun. Even my iPod gets toasty at times, but not the pad.
30. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 13:21 · Score: 0
  
  While the iPad is a less then stellar attempt at a tablet, this is another story:
  http://wepad.mobi/ [wepad.mobi]
  Slower, less storage and battery life than an iPad.
  Less than 1/4 the apps as the iPad.
  No decent data plan.
  Too big to use comfortably.
  Vaporware.
  Lame.
  CAPTCHA: Detest.
31. Re:Tablets are dead by Smurf · 2010-04-29 13:26 · Score: 2
  
  hahah you think the iPad will reach iPod or iPhone levels of sales? you must be an iTard.
  Yet again, when Apple announced the iPhone, people would mock "iTards" like the GP with phrases like "hahah you think the iPhone will reach iPod levels of sales? you must be an iTard."
  And still...
32. Re:Tablets are dead by h4rr4r · 2010-04-29 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  As a casual tv watcher I did that last year. Between Hulu and netflix I get any tv I need, and am able to watch more of it then before with the $50 cable plan.
33. Re:Tablets are dead by insertwackynamehere · 2010-04-29 13:32 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you, it has been duly noted by Apple that you do not appreciate them making millions off of products that you deem useless.
34. Re:Tablets are dead by MichaelSmith · 2010-04-29 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  If you run out of toilet paper an iPad would be next to useless.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
35. Re:Tablets are dead by ShogunTux · 2010-04-29 13:35 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Yeah. Tablets are dead. Long live suppositories!
36. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 13:42 · Score: 0
  
  I generally just read a dead-tree book when I'm on the can.
  Yes, but you'll switch when the "iWipe" app comes out.
37. Re:Tablets are dead by dangitman · 2010-04-29 13:46 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  I simply don't get this whole "reading on the can" thing. Do you people have some kind of bowel problem that causes you to take an inordinate amount of time to shit?
  
  --
  ... and then they built the supercollider.
38. Re:Tablets are dead by MightyYar · 2010-04-29 13:51 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, if it cost one fifth of its present cost, it would be nice. It does not.
  So really it comes down to cost, then?
  To you, $99 is the sweet spot. To others, it would be $50, and to others, it is apparently $500.
  I happen to be in your camp, but I recognize that this would be a pretty cool gadget for the right price. Also - try to put it in perspective. Most people are willing to spend $1200 or so per year on cable alone, let alone other sources of entertainment... $500 or $600 for another thing to stare at isn't that obscene.
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
39. Re:Tablets are dead by tverbeek · 2010-04-29 14:01 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Neither the iPad nor Courier have (or would have in the case of MS's canceled project) any real advantages when it comes to getting work done
  
  The fact that you only evaluate a computer in terms of "getting working done" demonstrates that your thinking is a little out of date. Granted, Microsoft seemed to think of the Courier primarily as a productivity tool, which may be related to the fact that they've killed it (outmoded thinking), but despite some token productivity apps for the iPad, that's not what it's for. It's for reading/playing/watching/surfing/chatting... in other words, everything but "getting work done".
  
  --
  http://alternatives.rzero.com/
40. Re:Tablets are dead by tverbeek · 2010-04-29 14:06 · Score: 1
  
  They're probably Americans. Have you seen what most people here eat? Of course they have bowel problems.
  
  --
  http://alternatives.rzero.com/
41. Re:Tablets are dead by DdJ · 2010-04-29 14:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Actually there are two senses in which it can view 720p video. I'm sure the person you're responding to meant the first.
  First, the H.264 playback engine caps out at 720p. Now, almost all playback engines cap out at some level. If you load 720p video files on a first generation iPod Touch, they won't play at all -- it's more than the device can handle. So don't say "of course it can play back a 720p file, every device can play back a 1080p file and just downscale it, that's no big deal". Because that isn't true.
  (And yes, there's an advantage to this, if the video doesn't have much going on on the side edges. You can "zoom in" to the video, making it go full screen with the edges clipped, and with a 720p data file you'll get more detail doing this. This could be the case for example if you've got a HD render of "The Philadelphia Story" with Grant/Hepburn, as it was actually filmed in 4:3, not 16:9.)
  But, second, the iPad has video-out capabilities. I picked up the "dock port to VGA" adapter for mine. When I hook it up to the HDTV in my living room, and run a little program I wrote that queries the OS for a list of attached screens and their display characteristics, know what? I have full access to full 720p resolution out that display port. So an iPad tucked behind an HDTV that it's connected to can indeed drive a full genuine 720p display.
  (But I'm sure that's not what the person you were responding to meant.)
42. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:10 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  For $500 I can get an iPad which will only run a very limited set of applications, eventually will have s[e]mi-multitasking, won't ever get you the full web, costs an arm and a leg to use common peripherals, etc.
  
  I'm going to call FUD. Name a platform that does not have a "a limited set of applications." You can't. That's an inherent limitation of any platform. Now you can argue that a platform doesn't run the applications you care about, but 185,000 isn't "limited" by any stretch of the imagination.
  Won't get you "the full web?" Perhaps I wouldn't be so peeved at you if this wasn't a direct quote from Adobe's talking points. I can only assume you're talking about the lack of Flash. Let's look at that shall we? Flash only just now supported mobile platforms, and the performance in both speed and battery life is debatable. Furthermore, why would you want to support a proprietary hack, when open standards already exist and are supported on both the desktop and mobile platforms. The big Flash sites, already support HTML5 and so the lack of Flash is not a problem. Face it dude. Flash is dead.
  Multitasking? Well it's in iPhone OS 10.4, and it would be shocking if on the next iPad update it didn't appear there as well. But let's look at the multitasking shall we? There's always been multitasking iPhone OS, it just wasn't always available to third party developers. And seriously, what is it you want your background app to do? Send you an update? Well that's polling. What you deride as "semi-multitasking" is doing exactly what you'd probably call "real multitasking" does. An app wakes up. It checks a status flag, and then goes back to sleep. I guess you'd prefer it if your background apps busy waited.
  What peripherals are you talking about? It handles bluetooth keyboards right out of the box. Mice are irrelevant, as mice aren't an appropriate input device for a multitouch system
  
  I use my netbook or laptop while sitting on the sofa all the time,
  So what? I'm typing this on a laptop on my couch too. But seriously, a netbook has always sucked. They're small and underpowered. There is nothing that a netbook does well.
  
  if I want to really "consume media" I fire up my HTPC and put on a movie. If I want to play a game I fire up my 360 or modified Wii.
  Well that's not exactly the targeted use case now is it? The same reason why you wouldn't use an iPad to watch a movie when you have an HTPC available, is the same reason why you don't use your netbook to watch a movie in your living room. (That is, assuming you could watch a movie on a netbook, but you can't. I've yet to see anything that a netbook does adequately, let alone well.) This is blatent strawman comparison.
43. Re:Tablets are dead by Digicrat · 2010-04-29 14:10 · Score: 1
  
  iPad-like tablets are useless to us tech folks, but as the sales show, their at least in the short term adequate enough for the masses to continue iPadding Jobs' wallet.
  The ideal device, which I still have yet to see as a real commercial product at a reasonable price, is a convertible netbook.
  A small laptop with 720p capabilities (like the newer netbooks), plus a stylus-friendly touchscreen, and the ability to fold it open all the way [or rotate and fold back if that's simpler] so it can be used as a tablet when the need arises [ie: watching a movie, reading on the go, making presentations, etc].
  Combine that with a sunlight-friendly screen, like the OLPC's Pixel Qi color ePaper-like display, and you've got a real winner.
44. Re:Tablets are dead by fullgandoo · 2010-04-29 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  And what from your list above, may I ask, can not be done on a laptop? And why is the laptop, which sits comfortably in your lap leaving your hands free, not more comfortable to watch movies?
  
  So you had a crappy Macbook Pro (I am assuming since you seem to be a genuine Steve Jobs nut hugger) which fried your balls. How does that justify spending even more money on crappy products?
45. Re:Tablets are dead by AK+Marc · 2010-04-29 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  IMHO, Tablets like the iPad and Slate are what Netbooks tried (and are still trying) to be.
  
  Netbook is Notebook trying to make being underpowered sound cool. iPad is an iPod touch on steroids. One is a crippled version of something people are used to, and the other is an improvement over something people are used to. Which do you think will do better?
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
46. Re:Tablets are dead by timholman · 2010-04-29 14:19 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The era of the geek driving computer development is dead: people want easy to use features, and Apple is giving it to them.
  And beyond that, Apple is building a computing platform that is completely appropriate for 95% of users out there.
  I've been observing with great amusement the geek outrage over Apple's closed, locked-down ecosystem, starting with the iPod and iPhone, and culminating with the iPad, and I say: more power to Apple .
  To paraphrase Spider-man: "With great computing power comes great computing responsibility." Manufacturers have placed general-purpose computers into the hands of the masses, and what have we gotten in return? Mountains of spam, malware galore, and tens of millions of zombie boxes. A general-purpose programmable device has proven, overall, a disaster for the Internet. In the hands of typical non-technical users, they are just begging to be exploited, and that's exactly what happens to them.
  Steve Jobs has it exactly right. The overwhelming majority of people don't need a computer with a general purpose operating system. They need an iPad or something like it - an appliance that meets the needs of 95% of users, and is locked down so tightly that it is very hard to exploit via user stupidity.
  Personally, I don't want an iPad. I don't need an iPad, because I'm capable of managing a general-purpose computer. But the appeal of the iPad to the average consumer is blatantly obvious. Apple is going to sell a lot of iPads.
47. Re:Tablets are dead by Iskender · 2010-04-29 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  So you had a crappy Macbook Pro (I am assuming since you seem to be a genuine Steve Jobs nut hugger) which fried your balls. How does that justify spending even more money on crappy products?
  It's certainly nice if you get to live in a world where only Apple laptops get uncomfortably hot. Alas, the rest of us have to live in the real world.
  Oh and I'm running Ubuntu on some random ATX box that's over five years old, so I cannot provide you with another opportunity to talk about Steve Jobs. Sorry about that.
48. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:38 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, they do. Next question?
49. Re:Tablets are dead by MeNeXT · 2010-04-29 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  Geeks drive development because they spend on computers.
  
  --
  DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
50. Re:Tablets are dead by painandgreed · 2010-04-29 14:41 · Score: 1
  
  Adroitly
  adverb: deftly, skillfully, skilfully, ably
  Adjective: Someone who is adroit is quick and skilful in their thoughts, behaviour, or actions.
  Cute. I'll have to remember that one.
51. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:42 · Score: 0
  
  The problem I have with all these technophiles decrying the iPad's lack of flash is this: are you not the same group that beats down any flash site?
  Unless it's YouTube - Without Flash on an iPad it makes it harder to watch videos of hot girls shaking their booties!
52. Re:Tablets are dead by martin-boundary · 2010-04-29 14:44 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  The problem is that in a space like the web, appliances fail to keep up with the times. Yes, full fledged computers are more difficult to use for the average email/facebook junkie, but there's no realistic alternative.
  Appliances work well where the tech needed for accessing the content is guaranteed to not evolve for extremely long periods of time, eg television, or toasters.
  If however you use an appliance to access web services, you're stuck with a fixed time software snapshot, and as soon as the website you're accessing starts using some new tech that your appliance doesn't know, then you're screwed at worst, or you have service degradation at best.
  The logistics of updating web appliances don't make sense. To keep an appliance relevant, the manufacturer ideally needs a team to track every popular website and feed every customer an update whenever one of those sites evolves. That just doesn't scale, so you get bitrot in the appliance.
  The scalable solution is to have general purpose computing devices, so that the customer can decide how best to cope with a change whenever a website he needs makes a technical evolutionary change.
53. Re:Tablets are dead by Illogical+Spock · 2010-04-29 14:45 · Score: 1
  
  The question is not the lack of something, but the deliberated lack of something with the only objective of making more and more money. I compare Apple's way of doing things with the more draconian DRM you can imagine. DRM tries to stop you from using something you OWN in the way you want. Apple do the same, but does it with a HARDWARE. And this is unnaceptable to me.
  About the iPod, at the same time Apple was selling it by "X", you had a ton of much cheaper options if you just want to play music. Maybe not so "cool" - but I want to play music, not to participate in a coolness contest. In fact - at least here in Brazil - at some point the iPod's price was pratically the same as a Palm TX. And you need to agree that as outdated a Palm TX is, it plays MP3 as well as an iPod - and do a handfult of other things, too.
  The iPhone is maybe the only example of something really "different" - for some time. Now, you have a myriad of other options - options where you can use external batteries, install your own programs - or from third parties - withoud Steve Jobs personal approval, and do whatever the heck you want - and without any "jailbreak". I have an Android phone (again, replaceable battery, USB, totally open platform, etc, etc) for a small fraction of the iPhone's price, with the data plan I want and with no chains attached. And I get tons of FREE (as in beer) programs from both the Android Market and the Internet.
  In a nutshell: the question is not geeks X grandmothers nor slashdotters x fanboys, the question is the right of doing what I want, when I want and the way I want with something I've paid for X giving more and more money for someone that IS transforming the market indeed - in a place where you don't own anything, you pay for the (supreme) honor of using someone's elses device.
  What I really would like to see is if the iThings were made from Microsoft. Then, Redmond would be the devil (I'm not saying they aren't). But Cupertino? It's OK. It's cool...
  
  --
  --- Illogical Spock
54. Re:Tablets are dead by Dan+East · 2010-04-29 14:48 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  A $99 iPad would be a true game-changer, and I think something along those lines is the next step.
  I'm not an Apple historian, and this is an actual question, but has Apple ever sold a product at anything but a premium price? Any Apple product I can think over the last decade has cost far more than the median price of equivalent hardware by Apple's competitors.
  iPod Touches aren't $99, and they've been on the market for a number of years. Plus, if the iPad was $99, what would an iPod Touch sell for? $69? Never, ever, ever going to happen. I could see the iPad maybe selling for $399 eventually, but I would be very surprised if it ever sold for less.
  
  --
  Better known as 318230.
55. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:49 · Score: 0
  
  >modified Wii
  I think that pretty much explains your blindness to the iPad's virtues.
56. Re:Tablets are dead by fatwilbur · 2010-04-29 15:08 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Typical Apple fanboy.
  
  This is where you and many others fundamentally misunderstand the tablet space
  I'm sure you held this opinion before the iPad marketing machine went into effect, right?
57. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:08 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, that doesn't disagree with the parent. Still...
  
  its quite stupid
58. Re:Tablets are dead by UniLinuXP · 2010-04-29 15:11 · Score: 0
  
  You really should watch the launch video from when the iPad was introduced to the world. Jobs put up an image with an iPhone on the left and a laptop on the right. The iPad fit right in between the two... That is new space for a new product that isn't supposed to be a laptop replacement. There are so many narrow minded people commenting on this device. Think outside of the box if you are able too. And, if tablets are so bad, why then do people like you freak out over Android tablets? There are so many copy cats out there just trying to get a slice of Apple's awesomeness, but you seem to overlook that when you make this ridiculous comments. Whatever, we'll find you cowering behind your rock with a nice beige computer someday soon. That, I am sure of.
59. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:12 · Score: 0
  
  "It will be interesting to see what people are saying about the iPad this time next year, when Apple's sold 25 million of them."
  They'll be saying "thank god for that hack that lets me run windows/linux on my ipad!"
60. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:15 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  To be blunt: yes, you're blind to a number of factors :)
  1. Form factor - The difference between a 2-3lb clamshell device and a 1.5lb, 1" thick slate is huge. Using a slate feels more like holding a magazine than a computer.
  2. Apps/Sensors/Platform - This is many things rolled into one. There is a thriving community of people buiding apps for THIS platform. This cuts to the heart of the flash issue, too: flash ports are crappy ports, as a general rule. The beauty of the apps for iphoneos platform is that they are built from the ground up to take advantage of the platform's capabilities: multitouch, accelerometer, ambient light, microphone. While a netbook struggles to play PC games, the iPad runs apps that play to its strengths.
  3. Multitouch/UI: Like the iPhone and iPod touch, the iPad is built around multitouch. We sorta take the iPhone's UI innovations for granted at this point (what other multitouch devices can you name, pre-iphone?), but the iPad's larger size is even better suited to this UI. The other big change with the iPad is that most apps are orientation-agnostic: It works no matter which way you hold it. Another thing that will be "common sense" in a few years as slates flood the market, but remember where you saw it first ;)
61. Re:Tablets are dead by chuckwilson · 2010-04-29 15:19 · Score: 1
  
  I don't remember why, but there was some discussion here on Slashdot recently regarding BeOS. Many comments were about the fact that it's GUI was always responsive. Which is exactly what the iPhone/iPad does. Sure, it can't multitask, but it means that other system resources aren't held up doing something other than what you're telling it to do. So you get fast responsiveness. And it can't be understated how important that is to "average consumers." They are going to be pissed if they have to wait, end of story. Anything else -- who cares? As long as they can do simple shit without having to sit and stare while a computer thinks, they will love it. Don't get me wrong, I also think the iPad is retarded, for many reasons. I see no point in buying one. But there are lots of people who will buy it for the novelty of a responsive interface.
62. Re:Tablets are dead by abigor · 2010-04-29 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  Ha, they aren't intellectual elite at all. Just your typical power users who think they understand technology because they struggle along with desktop Linux.
63. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:29 · Score: 0
  
  The point is that my mom and my wife and many like them don't care in the least if they have a sweet box.
  I bet you and your dad do.
  Ba-dum! Tish!
64. Re:Tablets are dead by shadowrat · 2010-04-29 15:37 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The iPad is pretty gung-ho on html 5 so i'd say it's sort of ahead of the curve there. Additionally it's not like OS 3.2 is permanently burned into it's roms. if the whole interweb is html6 in 5 months you probably won't have to throw your ipad in the trash. Apple can and does upgrade the OS.
  
  I'm not really sure what's changed on the web in the past 5 years anyway. I can fire up an old xp laptop and still get to facebook. My iphone is going on 2 years old. The web hasn't left it in the dust. everything still works pretty much like the day i got it.
  
  I don't know many people who even keep the same computer for more than 3 years. Mom can buy a new ipad in 3 years. they will be half the price and 8x as fast. where's the problem?
  
  About the best argument against appliances i can think of is you will get swept up in political battles concerning flash. That and mom doesn't understand that all her apps won't port to an android tablet if that's the coolest looking thing in 3 years.
65. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:38 · Score: 0
  
  Tablets like the iPad and Slate are what Netbooks
  Wait a minute. If you are referring to the HP Slate, you do realize that it is precisely a netbook with a touch screen and the keyboard lopped off right? It is coming with a skimpy Atom proc and a bloated desktop OS in the form of Windows 7. IOW, doomed to fail.
66. Re:Tablets are dead by maitai · 2010-04-29 15:49 · Score: 1
  
  It still comes down to the "average customer" and it just working though. If web browsing is included in the list of things an "average customer" wants to do then playing a flash based game they run across or are told about (which is how my mother ends up playing the things, since they happen to be multiplayer and she likes playing with her grand kids) is also on that list (I don't know of any "average consumers" that even know what Flash is, but they know what the games they play over the interwebs are).
  "hover states" are not a requirement in Flash based application UI design. Using them is a design decision, same as with pure HTML websites that also require "hover states" in order to function. I personally consider the iPad not supporting "hover states" as not a deficiency of Flash (or HTML or GTK or QT or Cocoa) but a deficiency of the iPad itself. The touch screen PC in my kitchen and my Blackberry Storm 2 both handle "hover states" seamlessly so it's not simply a matter of it being a touch screen interface.
  Note, Cocao (which is used for both MacOS and iPhone development) supports "mouse hovers".
  Just to reiterate. "Hover states" are not a requirement of Flash, using them is a UI design decision made by the developer of the Flash application. Same stands with HTML, or Cocao.
67. Re:Tablets are dead by Skadet · 2010-04-29 15:57 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I was happily following along, then I read this:
  
  In a nutshell: the question is not geeks X grandmothers
  Followed by this:
  
  the question is the right of doing what I want, when I want and the way I want with something I've paid for X giving more and more money for someone that IS transforming the market indeed - in a place where you don't own anything, you pay for the (supreme) honor of using someone's elses device.
  I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the vast majority of the market couldn't care less, and they've said so with their wallets. It's a perfectly legitimate point of view for you to take -- I don't take issue with the validity of it. But "ok, so don't buy it" is also a perfectly legitimate response. iPad doesn't fit your needs; that much is certain. That's ok.
  
  As far as business is concerned however, you're in the minority. Aggregate iPod + iPhone + iPad sales prove that much.
  
  --
  Sony ha
68. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:57 · Score: 0
  
  *giggle* Linux sucks and is for neckbeards.
69. Re:Tablets are dead by apoc.famine · 2010-04-29 16:08 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you. I've wondered the same for some time. Do people have a "set shit time" or something? I know I don't. I go though life doing what I need to do, then wander to the can to take a shit when I feel that I've got one ready.
  
  I don't require mine to appear on command....
  
  --
  Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
70. Re:Tablets are dead by joebok · 2010-04-29 16:19 · Score: 1
  
  It will be interesting to see what fate awaits the iPad. I am an early adopter - obviously my various laptops can do everything the iPad can, some things (like producing as opposed to consuming) are very nearly impossible on an iPad. It is not a general purpose computer and if you buy one thinking that is what it is or what it will become, you will most definitely be disappointed.
  It is an attempt to make an appliance. And I think a pretty good one. A grandma could much more easily be brought to the digital age to see pictures of their grand kids on facebook with an iPad than anything else I've ever seen. (Of course, you have to have a real computer with iTunes to get it running in the first place - but never mind that...)
  For what it is, an appliance to consume entertainment of various kinds, I like it - it is great for my commute. I can read, listen, watch, play - whatever - all with one, easy to use, simple device. I could do that with my iTouch, but I like the larger screen of the iPad. I can't work so well with it (though I find it much easier to compose emails with it than any smartphone) - but who the hell wants to work all the time?
  I think that if the iPad succeeds, we will find it in high use by those who are now generally frustrated by computers. This isn't just the older folks - there are lots of people young and old out there who never built a computer with spare parts and who don't know or care what OS they have, etc. Those folks just might like the iPad if they try it. It may be that the geeks have to be excited enough to buy one, then bored enough to give it to their grandmas a few months later - when grandma hits the senior center with it, well, maybe we'll see another sales spike that will keep the iPads from following the way of the Newton.
71. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 16:21 · Score: 0
  
  Luckily, my anus hasn't been ripped open, as yours has. I guess you don't remember since the first time you got assraped was when you were a little boy.
72. Re:Tablets are dead by SashaMan · 2010-04-29 16:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Kudos to timholman and the mods. This post is a great (though perhaps rare) example of what I love about slashdot - a post that actually got me to change my opinion.
  While I've been bemoaning the locked down nature of where Apple is going, I think for the majority of internet users this is exactly what they need.
73. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 16:27 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Once upon a time, pet rocks sold hugely.
  More sales does not equate to a more useful product.
  More useful than what? It's more useful than a Microsoft Courier or a Palm Folio.
  which? An ipad or pet rock? A pet rock makes a good paperweight or doorstop. An ipad is too thin to be a doorstop.
74. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-29 16:31 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I've been observing with great amusement the geek outrage over Apple's closed, locked-down ecosystem, starting with the iPod and iPhone, and culminating with the iPad, and I say: more power to Apple .
  Oh, this won't end well.
  
  Manufacturers have placed general-purpose computers into the hands of the masses, and what have we gotten in return? Mountains of spam, malware galore, and tens of millions of zombie boxes.
  The only difference is that when the same thing happens to the iPad -- and it has happened to iPhones -- you'll have a proprietary monoculture that's wirelessly connected, even over a cell network (so always, always on), and it will be the sort of thing that is that much more difficult for us geeks to deal with. A desktop computer, if something goes wrong, you may not be able to fix it, but we can. Something goes wrong with your iPad, you can either jailbreak it or take it to Apple.
  Now, you can get most of the supposed advantages you're talking about with Android. A centralized app store, a pretty UI, but the sanctioned ability to get apps through other means if you really want it. Keep in mind that the average user isn't likely to do that, any more than they're likely to jailbreak their iWhatever, but I'd much rather have the option than not.
  The irony is that we've had just such a geek paradise for most of a decade -- any popular Linux distro is going to have a large repository of free apps, all of which have gone through some sort of quality control, and are delivered securely. Users can install third-party apps, but it's a channel that geeks avoid and ordinary users won't necessarily understand.
  
  The overwhelming majority of people don't need a computer with a general purpose operating system.
  The overwhelming majority of people don't need a computer at all.
  But to the extent that they "need" a computer, they need certain things which tend to work well on a general-purpose computer, with a real, actual keyboard.
  
  They need an iPad or something like it - an appliance
  Here's where I'm confused: The appliance thing was tried, extensively, in the late 90's. Remember WebTV?
  Why do you think this will be any better?
  
  Apple is going to sell a lot of iPads.
  That much is certain. What I find puzzling is that you seem to be happy about this.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
75. Re:Tablets are dead by gyrogeerloose · 2010-04-29 16:32 · Score: 1
  
  I do like though that I can change my car how I like it. If I want to I can change the seats, put in a different stereo system, put in a faster engine, put on snow tires, put a lift kit on it, etc. Essentially I can make my car how I want it or need it to be.
  
  Yes, but do you actually do any of those things? Probably not, and it's the same deal with most computer users who don't frequent site such as Slashdot. The ability to customize something is great, but only if you're actually going to customize it. The majority of people don't; that's why people buy a lot more minivans than they do kit cars.
  Apple is a niche computer company. After having it's ass handed to it by Microsoft and the PC clone makers back in the Nineties, it's learned that it can't go head to head with them in the commodity computer market. Instead, it's carved out it's own markets serving people who just want a computer to do the simple things they need it for. That's not to say you can't still get a powerful computer from them, only that it's not where they're making their real money any more.
  
  --
  This ain't rocket surgery.
76. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 16:38 · Score: 0
  
  At the moment. But will Apple really be able to carry the momentum once people start realizing theres nothing really -great- about the iPad?
  Yes, 300,000 of them realized that the first day, and within a week, a million people all understood there's nothing really great about the iPad.
77. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-29 16:39 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  The problem I have with all these technophiles decrying the iPad's lack of flash is this: are you not the same group that beats down any flash site?
  Generally not, no. Slashdot is not one groupthink overmind, we are individuals, and we disagree a lot, just like you and I are doing right now.
  I have a somewhat subtler position: I hate Flash and I want it to die, but this is not the way. Flash is being banned from the iPad for bullshit reasons -- Jobs' rant was one of the least technically-informed pieces of garbage I've seen on the topic, and that's straight from the fucking top. It's being banned because it's a third-party framework/library/language/whatever, and Apple can't have any of those, except when they can.
  Even if they were consistent about it, it's the wrong decision. Just like freedom of speech means freedom to say things I don't like, an open system means the right of others to develop software I don't like. Flash on the iPad would suck, but Python on the iPad would rock.
  The only legitimate reason for keeping Flash off the iPad would be open standards, and do you really expect me to take Apple seriously when they talk about openness now?
  
  full PCs are simply too much machine for what many people want to do (watch a show, check facebook, etc).
  They're also dirt-cheap and capable of doing that. They also tend to come with a keyboard, thus enabling you to actually post to Facebook effectively -- the iPad just isn't that much fun to type on.
  
  A $99 iPad would be a true game-changer,
  You know what? So would a $20 laptop. What makes you think this will actually happen?
  Oh no, others will hit the $99 mark, maybe.
  
  people (like you) get confused because of the price and say (as you did), 'but... look at the sweet box I could buy for $500, I don't get it!'
  laptop I could buy for $500.
  
  The point is that my mom and my wife and many like them don't care in the least if they have a sweet box. They care if they can "like" timmy's facebook status.
  Again, sadly, even Facebook works better on an actual laptop.
  
  Your geek factor (Look at me! HTPC!
  Even Apple sells HTPCs now. I'm surprised people haven't picked more of them up.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
78. Re:Tablets are dead by noidentity · 2010-04-29 16:43 · Score: 1
  
  But will Apple really be able to carry the momentum once people start realizing theres nothing really -great- about the iPad?
  Or maybe the over-confident you will realize that this is what makes the iPad great.
79. Re:Tablets are dead by gyrogeerloose · 2010-04-29 16:47 · Score: 1
  
  And, if tablets are so bad, why then do people like you freak out over Android tablets?
  Of course, the answer to that is simple: it has nothing to do with tablets actually being bad and everything do to with who's making the tablet in question. If, instead of Apple launching the iPad, Google had launched a device identical to the iPad in every way and called it the gPad, you can bet all those same people would be singing it's praises to high heaven.
  
  --
  This ain't rocket surgery.
80. Re:Tablets are dead by mgblst · 2010-04-29 16:58 · Score: 1
  
  I've been observing with great amusement the geek outrage over Apple's closed, locked-down ecosystem, starting with the iPod and iPhone, and culminating with the iPad, and I say: more power to Apple .
  Haven't you learnt from the problems in the past, when one company becomes to powerful. First there was IBM, and then there was Microsoft. As much as I love Apple products, I still don't want to see them in this position.
81. Re:Tablets are dead by cgenman · 2010-04-29 16:59 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The era of the geek driving computer development is dead: people want easy to use features, and Apple is giving it to them. The era of clock speed, bus speed and VRAM capacity being important for selling computers is over as well.
  You're cra
  [no I don't want to update Java]
  zy. The modern des
  [Fine, update Acrobat]
  ktop and laptop computer is basically per
  [shuddap Norton]
  fect for users. There
  [Yes, allow Acrobat to change this computer]
  really isn't any way th
  [What? So what if the HP driver crashed? I'm not printing]
  e modern computer system could
  [What do you mean the system needs to restart in 10 seconds?]
  be any
  
  --
  The ______ Agenda
82. Re:Tablets are dead by mgblst · 2010-04-29 17:00 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The problem I have with all these technophiles decrying the iPad's lack of flash is this: are you not the same group that beats down any flash site?
  Damn, when are you morons going to realise, THERE IS MORE THAN ONE PERSON ON THIS SITE. And we all have different opinions. Look at yourself, you clearly have a different opinion to the person you are responding to.
  Why do you feel the need to group all these technophiles with one brush stroke. Most of use here to hate flash. So shut the fuck up, and wake up.
  Personally, I think the iPad is a great idea, and can't wait to get one, but also understand why some people don't like the direction that we are heading.
83. Re:Tablets are dead by SteeldrivingJon · 2010-04-29 17:05 · Score: 1
  
  " A $99 iPad would be a true game-changer, and I think something along those lines is the next step. "
  Ah yes, the iPad shuffle. No screen.
  
  --
  September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
84. Re:Tablets are dead by chaboud · 2010-04-29 17:15 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  If you can't, given a multi-touch surface and five seconds, come up with at least one decent way to pull off hover, you're either an idiot or a liar. I get the sense (with Steve, at least), that these reasons are carefully-chosen loads of crap to sway the masses. The Apple UI guys have been all about multi-touch and moving actions. Did they run out of steam?
  Highly unlikely. It's fine to say "they own the sandbox," but don't buy into hand-wavy sophistry.
85. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 17:18 · Score: 0
  
  Geordi La Forge was not carrying around a NetBook on the Starship Enterprise. He was carrying around a tablet. This is just the beginning.
86. Re:Tablets are dead by rtfa-troll · 2010-04-29 17:32 · Score: 1
  
  I'm glad the post changed your mind because mostly it's correct. By packaging everything up and taking away user decisions (contrast with Microsoft's UAC) they've made something which is very useful to people who otherwise wouldn't be able to cope. However, you shouldn't confuse the good (a simple system with a defined use) with the bad (deliberate censorship and DRM) which is riding on top of it. Both Android and the N900, whilst they aren't yet as well done as the iPhone/iPad OS show that the Apple style control of the appliance interface is possible without the Apple style control of the user and the way the user uses the device.
  Criticising Apple for too much lock down is not contradictory with thinking that a locked down default may be be a good idea.
  
  --
  =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
87. Re:Tablets are dead by JohnBailey · 2010-04-29 18:04 · Score: 1
  
  If you run out of toilet paper an iPad would be next to useless.
  Be fair.. It would make a pretty good scraper.
  
  --
  It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
88. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 18:10 · Score: 0
  
  Manufacturers have placed general-purpose computers into the hands of the masses, and what have we gotten in return? Mountains of spam, malware galore, and tens of millions of zombie boxes. A general-purpose programmable device has proven, overall, a disaster for the Internet. In the hands of typical non-technical users, they are just begging to be exploited, and that's exactly what happens to them.
  Steve Jobs has it exactly right. The overwhelming majority of people don't need a computer with a general purpose operating system. They need an iPad or something like it - an appliance that meets the needs of 95% of users, and is locked down so tightly that it is very hard to exploit via user stupidity.
  
  Ah, the totalitarian argument. It was put forth by the Catholic Church against the Protestant literacy programs. (The Catholic Church was right: millions of people were killed in the religious wars that ensued.) It was put forth by the feudal nobility, who wanted to check mob rule. (They were right, too. Remember the guillotine?) And it is still the argument of the Chinese ruling party, who are afraid of repeating the developments in Russia.
  And yet despite the drawbacks of democracy, independence and freedom, I can't help but prefer them over the convenience of totalitarian rule.
89. Re:Tablets are dead by ekhben · 2010-04-29 18:19 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  If you can't, given a multi-touch surface and five seconds, come up with at least one decent way to pull off hover, you're either an idiot or a liar.
  I didn't see even one decent way to pull off hover, and I'm sure you took more than 5 seconds to post that. Which are you?
90. Re:Tablets are dead by JohnBailey · 2010-04-29 18:39 · Score: 1
  
  Geordi La Forge was not carrying around a NetBook on the Starship Enterprise. He was carrying around a tablet. This is just the beginning.
  And Doctor Who carries a sonic screwdriver.. Your point?
  
  --
  It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
91. Re:Tablets are dead by macserv · 2010-04-29 18:44 · Score: 1
  
  Premium design and development warrant a premium price. While Apple does keep their premium in place, they increase the specs rather than lowering prices. It's true that the iPod Touch hasn't dropped in price, but Apple has doubled its capacity and RAM, with significant improvements to its performance and feature set.
  That said, if Apple thinks it's important enough to hit a price point, they do. Few people thought we'd see a $99 iPhone when we were all forking out six bills for the device at launch.
92. Re:Tablets are dead by dem0n1 · 2010-04-29 18:44 · Score: 1
  
  If web browsing is included in the list of things an "average customer" wants to do then playing a flash based game they run across or are told about (which is how my mother ends up playing the things.
  which is how my mother ends up getting infected with malware.
  
  --
  Why save your soul when you can sell it for a profit?
93. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 19:04 · Score: 0
  
  Are you feeling obsolete?
94. Re:Tablets are dead by timholman · 2010-04-29 19:28 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The only difference is that when the same thing happens to the iPad -- and it has happened to iPhones -- you'll have a proprietary monoculture that's wirelessly connected, even over a cell network (so always, always on), and it will be the sort of thing that is that much more difficult for us geeks to deal with. A desktop computer, if something goes wrong, you may not be able to fix it, but we can. Something goes wrong with your iPad, you can either jailbreak it or take it to Apple.
  Now, you can get most of the supposed advantages you're talking about with Android. A centralized app store, a pretty UI, but the sanctioned ability to get apps through other means if you really want it. Keep in mind that the average user isn't likely to do that, any more than they're likely to jailbreak their iWhatever, but I'd much rather have the option than not.
  So why does the closed Apple ecosystem bother you when you freely admit that the Android ecosystem is a viable alternative to those who wish to hack their handheld devices? Apple is not forcing Android out of the market - on the contrary, Android is doing very nicely. But that Apple monoculture has clearly been a boon to developers and consumers alike, far more so than Android to date.
  If Apple was the only choice for smartphones, I'd be unhappy too. But Apple is only one player of many in that market. How does Joe Average's choice of the Apple monoculture diminish Android in any way?
  
  The irony is that we've had just such a geek paradise for most of a decade -- any popular Linux distro is going to have a large repository of free apps, all of which have gone through some sort of quality control, and are delivered securely. Users can install third-party apps, but it's a channel that geeks avoid and ordinary users won't necessarily understand.
  And yet the iPad will probably sell more units in the first year than all the installed Linux desktop distros in the U.S. It's not just the concept, it's the implementation. Apple takes ideas that have been tried by others, and makes them mainstream and popular. I have nothing against Linux (I use it myself for part of my work), but even at its best you can't begin to compare it with Apple's ease of use.
  
  But to the extent that they "need" a computer, they need certain things which tend to work well on a general-purpose computer, with a real, actual keyboard.
  Like what? Games? Books? Music? Movies? Occasional word processing? Web surfing? You've got all of that in spades with the iPad, plus a real, actual external keyboard if you want one.
  What "certain things" do 95% of consumers need that an appliance like the iPad won't satisfy? And please don't list programming as one of them! Like I said: 95% of consumers.
  
  Here's where I'm confused: The appliance thing was tried, extensively, in the late 90's. Remember WebTV?
  Why do you think this will be any better?
  Because like so many markets that Apple has chosen to enter, they have figured out how to do it right. Apple did not create the MP3 player, the smartphone, or the appliance computer. But their genius is in figuring out how to make them reliable and easy to use. We saw it with the iPod and iPhone, and now we're seeing it with the iPad.
  
  What I find puzzling is that you seem to be happy about this.
  And what I find puzzling is why you (and so many others) are unhappy about it. How does the existence of the iPhone and iPad diminish the utility of Android or Linux in any way, shape, or form? We've still got our general-purpose computers, and Apple's success hasn't hurt them in the slightest. Nothing has been taken away from you. I am no more unhappy with Apple for creating a closed information appliance than I am with my TV manufacturer for creating a TV that is equally "closed". I can buy a consumer TV, or I can hack together my own MythTV box. How does one choice diminish the other?
95. Re:Tablets are dead by i_liek_turtles · 2010-04-29 19:32 · Score: 1
  
  Why does everyone keep bemoaning the lack of a keyboard with the iPad when it has one as a peripheral?
96. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 20:28 · Score: 0
  
  "Use the desktop computer paradigm" -- this is what goes for insightful nowadays (especially funny since in the same sentence he was planning to use a desktop computer...).
  Meh, I'll just go back to working on my laptop paradigm.
97. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 20:35 · Score: 0
  
  Get a job at Apple, hippy!
98. Re:Tablets are dead by cfeedback · 2010-04-29 20:40 · Score: 1
  
  The overwhelming majority of people don't need a computer with a general purpose operating system.
  The overwhelming majority of people don't need a computer at all.
  Can someone explain to me how a comment with this statement in it can be +4 informative? I may be new here but this has to be one of the most idiotic things I've ever read on slashdot--which says a lot.
99. Re:Tablets are dead by gnasher719 · 2010-04-29 21:16 · Score: 1
  
  At the moment. But will Apple really be able to carry the momentum once people start realizing theres nothing really -great- about the iPad?
  
  I'll tell you what's the difference between me, you, and iPad users: 90% of all current laptop / netbook owners would actually be happier with an iPad. They will be able to do more with it and enjoy it more. What's important is not what _the device_ can do, but what _the user_ can do with the device. 90% of all people can do more with an iPad. Me and you, we are not in the 90%.
  
  You are in the 10% who are better off with a laptop. Unfortunately, you don't have the brains to figure out that you are in a minority. That Apple can become richer and richer and make 90% of the customers happy with a product that is of no use to you and that isn't made for you (BTW they also make some very, very nice things that are aimed at you). I'm in the 1% who has figured it out, and I'm also in the 1% who enjoys writing software not for geeks, but software that normal people can use.
  
  But I shouldn't really be telling you this. I think Apple will make sure that iPads don't appear in any "computer sales" statistics so that all the netbook makers never figure out why their sales are dropping. Like Ford never came up in the statistics for "worlds 10 largest manufacturers of horse buggies".
100. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 21:39 · Score: 0
  
  That much is certain. What I find puzzling is that you seem to be happy about this.
  I don't know about the GP but for a start I'm happy about this because this is our insurance, as geeks, that
  we'll keep having our paradise. The real threat was MS and their dominance. This is over.
  You can't design an "IE only" website anymore: well, you can, but you're losing a huge part of
  your potential customers: iPhone, iPad, Macs.
  There.
  What a lot of Linux nerds/geek don't realize is that everytime Apple wins, MS looses.
  I don't give a crap about all the "Google vs Apple" "fights": it's just a diversion. A diversion
  hiding the fact that the real looser is MS here.
  And that is very good.
  There's still work: Apple has only 8% of the desktop.
  But SmartPhones are rocked by Apple and Linux (Nokia / Google, it's all Linux now baby).
  That new iPad craze, more power to it: I won't buy one, I don't give a sh!t. But this
  has the potential to eventually kill that mediocre piece of proprietary crap that Flash is
  (die Adobe, really) and push open standards (HTML 5).
  People CANNOT anymore not take into account the "non-MS systems".
  And as a Linux nerd, I welcome this wholeheartedly.
101. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 22:40 · Score: 0
  
  Er, the ipad is selling hugely. This is the start of the era of tablets, so no they are not dead.
  Whatever you think if the iPad, it's not a tablet. A rich media device with connectivity and a tablet form factor, maybe, but it's not a tablet because it's not a computer (because it's not turing complete).
102. Re:Tablets are dead by tehcyder · 2010-04-29 22:43 · Score: 1
  
  Why are you so impressed with GP's post? It's just a re-hashing of the standard geek/slashdot opinion that computers should only be used by highly intelligent computer enthusiasts and that the vast majority of people are too stupid to be trusted with anything more complicated than turning on a TV.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
103. Re:Tablets are dead by tehcyder · 2010-04-29 23:02 · Score: 1
  
  An ipad is too thin to be a doorstop
  Just cut it in half diagonally and use it as a door wedge.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
104. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 23:06 · Score: 1
  
  I've said this before and I'll say it again, just because it's locked down for 95% of the market, doesn't mean there can't be an option to open it up for those who know what they're doing. I don't care if my mum buys an iPad and it's locked down because it'll do everything she wants. What I do care about is that I can't buy one to do what I want. Now you may say "there are plenty more products out there, don't buy an Apple", to which I would respond "don't put posts about a locked-down technical product on a site with a highly technical user base and then act surprised that some users bemoan that they can't do more with the device". I have no problem with the iPad being advertised as the best thing ever in the general media, but for this audience it has some serious flaws and it's only natural that we point them out.
105. Re:Tablets are dead by Bertie · 2010-04-29 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  It's great. It's the one place you know you're not going to be disturbed. That time is yours and yours alone. And what's more, if you're doing it work, you get the added bonus of feeling like you're sticking it to the Man.
106. Re:Tablets are dead by xtracto · 2010-04-29 23:11 · Score: 1
  
  Yup, Apple is using the same "red ocean, white ocean" tactic that Nintendo used in the last console generation.
  Apple does not care about us (slashdot tards), they care about the 95% of potential customers who find computers complicated.
  Computers can be used to achieve a HUGE number of things. The problem is the majority of people do not know HOW to achieve them.
  Apple products allow people to achieve a relatively small number of things, but they make it *really* easy to achieve them. So that 95% of people will be able to achieve those things which were only virtually possible doing a computer.
  Oh, and I really hate Apple closeness policies... but then again I am posting in slashdot :)
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
107. Re:Tablets are dead by xtracto · 2010-04-29 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, that should have read "red ocean, blue ocean".
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
108. Re:Tablets are dead by tehcyder · 2010-04-29 23:13 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I simply don't get this whole "reading on the can" thing. Do you people have some kind of bowel problem that causes you to take an inordinate amount of time to shit?
  
  I find it's a great way of getting some time away from the wife and kids.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
109. Re:Tablets are dead by xtracto · 2010-04-29 23:14 · Score: 1
  
  You forgot a [Cancel or Allow] in addition to each of your interruptions :)
  I hope you are not still using XP!
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
110. Re:Tablets are dead by icebraining · 2010-04-29 23:17 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  How does one choice diminish the other?
  If PCs become less dominant and are taken over by appliances, there will be less choice and they'll cost more.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
111. Re:Tablets are dead by xtracto · 2010-04-29 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  The funny thing is, the guy avoided using his 42'' TV, which was IN FRONT OF HIS FUCKING BED just to make a point that the iPad is oh-so more useful...
  I really love Apple fanboys :)
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
112. Re:Tablets are dead by tehcyder · 2010-04-29 23:19 · Score: 1
  
  The netbooks are an example of a product looking for a market
  
  So all those people who buy netbooks don't actually know what to do with them? They just keep them as coffee table ornaments?
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
113. Re:Tablets are dead by icebraining · 2010-04-29 23:19 · Score: 1
  
  But this has the potential to eventually kill that mediocre piece of proprietary crap that Flash is (die Adobe, really) and push patent-encumbered open standards (HTML 5).
  FTFY.
  Remember, Apple only supports H.264.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
114. Re:Tablets are dead by icebraining · 2010-04-29 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  And, still, it hasn't. iTard.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
115. Re:Tablets are dead by Dog-Cow · 2010-04-30 00:13 · Score: 1
  
  I think having hover would suck, but it's still trivial to do on an i. Tap to pop up the menu and hold the finger down and slide to make the choice. Absolutely trivial and easy using gestures that are already common on these devices.
116. Re:Tablets are dead by RoadNotTaken · 2010-04-30 00:18 · Score: 1
  
  um, maybe not word processing...
117. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 00:20 · Score: 0
  
  I guess at least a part of this is also going to be bragging rights in getting it first. That was a big part in the initial iPhone sales, now it's more weighted towards the experience.
118. Re:Tablets are dead by Dog-Cow · 2010-04-30 00:20 · Score: 1
  
  Except, of course, for the fact that the iPhone, and by extension the other i, have been supported by YouTube since they were introduced.
119. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 00:22 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  timholman and the mods
  I caught them at CBGB's back in the 70's. They were awesome.
120. Re:Tablets are dead by delinear · 2010-04-30 00:24 · Score: 1
  
  I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the vast majority of the market couldn't care less, and they've said so with their wallets. It's a perfectly legitimate point of view for you to take -- I don't take issue with the validity of it. But "ok, so don't buy it" is also a perfectly legitimate response. iPad doesn't fit your needs; that much is certain. That's ok.
  
  While your comment is also perfectly valid for the market at large, do you think the general readership of this website reflects the market at large, or the niche "want to do more" group? Given the nature of this website it's perfectly natural for the users here to ask why it can't do more, saying "don't buy it" doesn't help at all, unless you think companies should never listen to the opinions of their potential customers.
121. Re:Tablets are dead by indiechild · 2010-04-30 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  This is one of the best posts I have read on Slashdot for a long time. Thanks for taking the time to voice your insight.
122. Re:Tablets are dead by indiechild · 2010-04-30 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  huh, what direction would that be? There's plenty of competition out there, Google will (hopefully) be coming out with their own devices that will run Flash. Everyone will be happy.
123. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 00:54 · Score: 0
  
  I'm not an Apple historian, and this is an actual question, but has Apple ever sold a product at anything but a premium price?
  Yes.
  http://www.apple.com/iphone/buy/
  Note the $99 iPhone 3G on the right.
124. Re:Tablets are dead by thesandtiger · 2010-04-30 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  As to the "the appliance thing was tried" argument you make - tech improves.
  For example, laptops and portable computers were tried for a couple of decades and never really took off until they became powerful enough to handle most people's tasks, cheap enough to fit into any budget, and portable in that they didn't weigh 10+ lbs.
  In the case of a web consumption appliance, this one isn't tied to your home, is certainly portable, has a better UI, and is more or less affordable. WebTV wasn't any of those things, if I remember right, and the web itself wasn't really mature enough that it merited an appliance class of gadget when it came out, IMO.
  Personally, I think there's plenty of room for open devices, closed devices, whatever kind of devices. Apple's product meets some people's needs, great. Android products meet other people's needs, great. What's the point of having a holy war over it?
  
  --
  Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
125. Re:Tablets are dead by Cro+Magnon · 2010-04-30 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  Despite the name, I've never had a laptop that was "comfortable" in my lap. And if the Macbooks "fry my balls", the non-Apple laptops would fry my balls, burn a whole in me and burn the chair under me as well.
  
  --
  Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
126. Re:Tablets are dead by Smurf · 2010-04-30 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for proving my point.
  First, the annual moving averages in your graph shows iPhones already reaching more than half of the sales of iPods. That is, iPhone sales are already in the same order of magnitude as iPod sales.
  Second, the trend of those annual moving average lines shows iPods reached a stable point long ago, while iPhone sales are continuously growing, which means that iPhone sales will most likely pass iPod sales in less than a year.
  Third, the sales of iPhones almost reached those of iPods in 2009q4 and 2010q2. 2010q1 was Oct-Dec of 2009 (those are Apple's financial quarters). That quarter, as all q1 quarters, was greatly affected by huge sales of iPods as Christmas gifts.
  Fourth, the iPod sales in that graph include the iPod touch, which arguably is closer to the iPhone than to the older iPods. Taking that into account, sales of iPhone OS devices surpassed classic iPod devices long ago.
  Fifth, you took that plot from this article from the Guardian, and the whole point of that article is "WTF! How did Apple sell so many iPhones?"
  All five points were derived from the plot that you gave me. Boy, did that backfire on you!
127. Re:Tablets are dead by nine-times · 2010-04-30 02:40 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I'll let you in on a secret about Apple's pricing: They don't like to change it.
  Apple basically chooses prices based on marketing concerns and then builds the hardware to meet the price. The cheapest Apple laptop today is $1000, which has been roughly the price point for their cheapest laptop for *years*. It may have been $1200 or something, but they haven't dropped the price much. For the last several years, the most expensive iPods have been right around $400. Now a $400 iPod today has a lot more storage and features than a $400 iPod from 5 years ago, and they've introduce new lines to the series, but someone in Apple's marketing department decided that MP3 players should cost a maximum of $400, and so Apple keeps packing more features and storage into them and selling them at the same price.
  This is a good example of what "marketing" really is. People talk about marketing like it's "the art of bullshitting someone to think your product is better than it is," but marketing has a lot to do with product development. There is a market for $400 iPods, but there is not much of a market for $7,000 iPods. Someone has to decide the price points and feature set, and those are dependent on each other.
  When Apple announced the iPad, Jobs made a big point of the $500 price point, which leads me to think that's the price their marketing people (or Jobs himself) settled on as the target price. I'd bet that in a few years, $500 may be the high-end price of the iPad, but the cost will remain around that point ($300-$500). I'm not looking forward to the $99 iPad shuffle.
128. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 02:48 · Score: 0
  
  [...] The iPad is "just" a more usable iPhone for her. Its set up with her email, not mine (and she did it herself - amazing what she can do when I'm not around). I will be buying two more for our children.
  Be careful not to buy too much iPads, ore you might reach your lifetime limit for iPads.
129. Re:Tablets are dead by Hognoxious · 2010-04-30 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  This is the start of the era of tablets, so no they are not dead.
  Just as well, because you just made me soak my keyboard.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
130. Re:Tablets are dead by mobby_6kl · 2010-04-30 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  The downside there is that you have to hold the ipad with at least one hand, thereby greatly reducing the range of possible activities you can engage in.
131. Re:Tablets are dead by Dog-Cow · 2010-04-30 03:23 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  And apparently neither are you. The iPad is a tablet. It is Turing complete. You are just a jealous idiot.
132. Re:Tablets are dead by grumpyman · 2010-04-30 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  The era of the geek driving computer development is dead
  I have to respectfully disagree on the statement. The era of geek driving computer development is not dead (think about the advance stuff on HPC, virtualization...etc.), but instead, the era of user-design driven, consumer electronic appliances has begun. "Thing" that has a CPU inside does not imply that it is a "computer". iPad/iPhone are appliances not a general purpose computer. They have a few specific intended purpose and that's about it. It' just like an advance washing machine with an ARM inside and a LCD display. Slashdotters: we have to stop assuming anything with a CPU is a general purpose computer.
133. Re:Tablets are dead by mr_lizard13 · 2010-04-30 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  But, I don't know if I'm simply blind to some hidden factor but I don't see the appeal of the iPad. I don't mind Apple products (I'm listening to an iPod touch on my desk at the moment)
  
  You don't see the appeal? - the album art will be waaaaay bigger than on that iPod touch you've got!
  
  --
  "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
134. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 04:14 · Score: 0
  
  Lets face it, 'tablets' are dead. You are essentially paying more for less. While there will always be a small niche market for tablets, there aren't any benefits for the general consumer when compared to a laptop, -especially- when they are running dumbed-down OSes.
  
  That's the same argument you could use about laptops vs. desktop. You pay more for a laptop, get less power. Of course, you get more mobility, flexibility, etc, but you could argue that for tablets vs. laptops as well.
135. Re:Tablets are dead by DJRumpy · 2010-04-30 04:21 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the point is, that if you can unlock it, so can the folks who write all the malware. Locked down for everyone makes that much less likely. I equate this to enabling remote access to a server. Although I may know how to use it, so will a hacker, and that will be a primary vector that they will try when attempting to exploit it.
136. Re:Tablets are dead by DJRumpy · 2010-04-30 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  It's hardly that difficult. Restoring your iPhone to factory is as easy as clicking a button, and any support forum will typically tell someone that first thing before suggesting they just take it to an Apple store. The restore is actually pretty painless.
  It's also a bit disingenuous to compare something like an iPAd with WebTV. WebTV was painful and for good reason. Browsing the web is an intimate exercise. It is typically not a group action, and watching someone type is about as exciting as watching paint peel. Doing both in a room with the TV 10 feet away was just not very useful. I think there is a definite need for an iPad in certain sectors, or folks wouldn't have been trying various iterations of such for the last decade or two and failing. I think it was simply an idea that didn't have a realization, or the technology to back it up and make it 'useable'. I think the iPad accomplishes that.
  Although I'm perfectly fine with a smart phone, and a laptop or desktop, some folks may want something in between, or they may not have a choice of both, and the iPad is a perfect answer for them.
137. Re:Tablets are dead by Areyoukiddingme · 2010-04-30 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not so sure. Five years ago, you were dead on. But between then and now, social networking websites took off. People post on those things. A lot. That requires input, not passive consumption. Are there really still THAT many hunt-and-peck typists that using a virtual keyboard and one finger is going to be acceptable for those users? And will those hunt-and-peck typists be willing to cut down their pecking count from two thumbs to one finger? The iPad is too big for typical mobile phone dual-thumb input. Email also requires typing, or it's only half useful. Ok, it doesn't take a lot of typing to forward a chain letter, but again, is that all any "consumer" uses email for anymore?
  This is where I think most of the Slashdot outrage comes from. The promise of the Internet, inherent in the very design of its most basic protocol, was that everybody gets to participate. It is not meant to be stared at passively for hours on end. It's meant to engage the user, as an active participant. Yes the whole blog thing didn't work so well, but Facebook is working very well because of the participation, not because of consumption. Slashdot has a visceral reaction against any policy, device, law, custom, rule, or club that limits participation. Slashdotters produce. The very act of posting is the production of something, and despite complaints about the proliferation of pithy one-liners, there are still lots of multi-paragraph posts. I wouldn't even try to post this from an iPad with one finger. It would take too long.
  The iPad is inherently a consumption device, and almost exclusively a consumption device. It's hard to do anything with it that isn't mostly passively looking at it. Was that a big market? Definitely. Television was the definitive proof of the size of that market. Is it still a big market? Yes. Somebody is still watching Lost and American Idol. Is it as big as it once was? Maybe not. The moaning and complaining about the permanent drop in television ratings indicates something is different. Is the contraction of the consumption-only market going to suddenly reverse? I don't think so.
  Will this bother Apple? Probably not. Apple is content to aim for and capture about 10% of whatever market it enters. The iPod is an oddball exception in Apple history. So Apple will be just fine selling iPads. And there's probably room in the market for the usual suspects out of Taiwan and Korea. They may even end up in the majority, as they so often do. But is the iPad the "start of something", as another poster alleges? No. It's a reversion to the old ways, and an old something, and the trend is the other way.
  People want to participate. Lolcats don't caption themselves, you know.
138. Re:Tablets are dead by DJRumpy · 2010-04-30 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  Assuming Apple allowed flash onto the iPhone, and users happily started consuming sites like YouTube, and http://www.jimcarrey.com/ and Hulu.com
  Who do you think would look bad when the battery life took a severe nose dive? Who would be the first to slam Apple (aside from ./)
  What happens when a security hole in Flash infects millions of iPhones, and there isn't a damn thing Apple could do about it, who do you think would end up looking bad in 'Joe Users' eyes?
  It is not only about open standards. There are a slew of reasons Flash sucks and a slew of reasons it's now allowed on the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.
139. Re:Tablets are dead by Skadet · 2010-04-30 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  I wouldn't even try to post this from an iPad with one finger. It would take too long. The iPad is inherently a consumption device, and almost exclusively a consumption device
  Your points about a participatory internet are well taken; however, it's clear you haven't used an iPad for any reasonable length of time. I regularly compose and post multiple paragraphs of text from it, using the same typing techniques I use on my laptop. It is very much -not- a one-finger or even two-thumbs device.
  
  --
  Sony ha
140. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  this has to be one of the most idiotic things I've ever read on slashdot
  How so? Please explain.
  I didn't mean to say that the overwhelming majority of people couldn't use a computer. But think about what "need" implies.
  I need food. I need shelter. I could even argue that I need sex.
  I don't need a computer.
  Now, I want a job and an education, and I need a computer for that, especially the kind of job and education I want. But that's still not a need, it's a want.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
141. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'd much rather have patented but otherwise open standards, with multiple open source implementations, than patented and proprietary defacto standards, with a single proprietary implementation.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
142. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Restoring your iPhone to factory is as easy as clicking a button,
  Assuming that's reliable, you've now restored it to its original unpatched, vulnerable state. The second it gets online again, congratulations! You're re-infected.
  
  It's also a bit disingenuous to compare something like an iPAd with WebTV.
  WebTV was a poor example, but there were other "internet appliances" -- a box with a modem, had a keyboard and a monitor built-in. For some reason, they never took off.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
143. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 07:57 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know about the GP but for a start I'm happy about this because this is our insurance, as geeks, that we'll keep having our paradise. The real threat was MS and their dominance.
  What? No, the new threat is Apple and their dominance. Also Google and their dominance.
  I'd much rather live in a world that was Windows everything, but at least allowed open development, than a world that's iPad-everything.
  
  You can't design an "IE only" website anymore: well, you can, but you're losing a huge part of your potential customers: iPhone, iPad, Macs.
  We didn't need Apple for that -- IE is below 80% now, and most of that is due to Firefox. What website is dumb enough to write off 20% of their users?
  
  What a lot of Linux nerds/geek don't realize is that everytime Apple wins, MS looses.
  What does MS loose? Do they loose the hounds? Please, learn the difference between lose and loose -- it's embarrassing.
  But no, MS owns stock in Apple, so every time Apple wins, so does MS. They've certainly had business arrangements in the past, including Office for Mac, which even includes some unique features (Entourage) which aren't available on Windows.
  
  this has the potential to eventually kill that mediocre piece of proprietary crap that Flash is (die Adobe, really) and push open standards (HTML 5).
  As the other poster says, Apple only supports H.264. Other browsers only support Ogg Theora. I love HTML5, but as it stands, it's only marginally better than Flash.
  But for every website that does this, there's something which would work perfectly well as a web app, or as a standalone-but-portable app, which will be written for iPhone/iPad only. It will never be ported to another platform, because Apple has disallowed any hope you have of using cross-platform toolkits, Flash or otherwise. And it will cost money, because even free apps cost money for developer licenses and Mac workstations to develop on.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
144. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  Apple's product meets some people's needs, great. Android products meet other people's needs, great. What's the point of having a holy war over it?
  Because it's already a war in the marketplace, and if Apple wins, life will be a lot less pleasant for developers and geeks everywhere. End-users, too, but they won't see the effects as directly.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
145. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 08:19 · Score: 1
  Assuming Apple allowed flash onto the iPhone, and users happily started consuming sites like YouTube, and http://www.jimcarrey.com/ [jimcarrey.com] and Hulu.com
  So let's see... Of those, YouTube is natively supported, and has HTML5 in the works. Hulu is going HTML5, specifically for the iPad.
  But that's beside the point. I should've paid closer attention -- the complaint was about the "full web", which won't show up on the iPad for other reasons. (HTML5 currently doesn't specify a codec, but the iPad only supports H.264.) I was talking about the recent post by Steve Jobs, and the recent decision by Apple to block all incarnations of Flash, forever, even as an app development tool.
  I'm kind of glad it's not in the browser, sure, but the rationale they use to ban it includes a move they've made that essentially bans frameworks, libraries, etc.
  
  There are a slew of reasons Flash sucks
  I agree. The fact that it sucks is not sufficient reason to ban it. That's Apple making my decisions for me.
  
  a slew of reasons it's now allowed on the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.
  So far, here's the reasons I've heard:
  
  Battery life. If I want to sacrifice my battery life to flash, that should be my choice. If it's a PR issue, make it explicit: "Touch here to enable this plugin." followed by "Flash will drain your battery life massively. Continue?"
  You just mentioned security -- seems Apple could do the exact same thing about this that they could do about any other insecure app, plugin, or entity on the iPhone. For that matter, Chrome is developing the ability to sandbox plugins, so this isn't much of an excuse.
  Not open. I'd agree if the iPhone/Touch/Pad was in any way open, but it's not. Ironically, the phone which is open (Android) is getting Flash after all.
  Platforms take control away from Apple and give it to an intermediary. True, but I don't see why that's a bad thing. As a developer, I'm a lot more inclined to trust Adobe than Apple.
  It'll lead to inefficient apps. Then judge them on their actual efficiency, rather than assuming a priori that all Flash apps will automatically be inefficient.
  It's not designed for touch. You know what? Neither was the Web. Neither was HTML5. For that matter, neither was Objective C, nor the Mach kernel. What makes you think it can't be redesigned to work well with touch?
  You don't need it. You don't need iFart, either. Maybe we should ban that?
  I haven't seen a good reason to keep Flash off the phone entirely. I'm going to guess the real motivation is that control -- Apple doesn't want developers to be able to easily port their apps to other phones.
  Again: I am glad Flash is not in the iPhone's browser, and I'm glad that this is helping it die. But it has some unfortunate casualties. There was a point I could hope to develop a nice, cross-platform app framework that would work on the iPhone, Android, Symbian, whatever -- now I can cross anything Apple off that list.
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
146. Re:Tablets are dead by toriver · 2010-04-30 09:11 · Score: 1
  
  Remember, Apple only supports H.264.
  As will Microsoft, in IE 9.
  You pimply nerds need to realize your precious little Ogg-Vorbis-Theora plaything is dead.
147. Re:Tablets are dead by toriver · 2010-04-30 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  This is perhaps also a BMW thing: BMW will never produce a car to compete with low-end cars like the Fiat 500 simply because it would dilute their brand. People buy expensive BMW cars precisely because they are expensive. It's called "flaunting your wealth".
  Then again, Macs are not that horribly more expensive than a PC with the same-ish hardware specs (but less bundled software) despite what old myths and Microzombies claim.
148. Re:Tablets are dead by DJRumpy · 2010-04-30 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  Actually it doesn't revert completely. It restores it to the latest OS version you've downloaded, but with factory settings. It doesn't revert it to the original OS version. Once you sync it for the first time, it will push your apps, and songs back, or you optionally have the ability to restore from your last backup as well.
149. Re:Tablets are dead by toriver · 2010-04-30 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  Last I heard HP had canceled the Slate, so they too realized what you realized. :)
  (or they pondered what you were pondering just to get a Pinky and the Brain reference in there.)
150. Re:Tablets are dead by SashaMan · 2010-04-30 10:50 · Score: 1
  
  No, that's not what either timholman or my post said. As a personal example, my partner is an interventional radiologist and the chief of radiology at one of the major hospitals in Austin TX. My sister is an OB/GYN. Both of them are very smart and do things every day that are leaps and bounds beyond what I am, or could be, capable of.
  That said, a general purpose computer is NOT the right tool for either of them. It's not that they are too stupid. Quite the opposite, it's that they have better things to do than worry about malware and driver incompatibilities, etc. etc. While I don't necessarily think an IPad would be good for them now, once Apple figures out a better keyboard setup to work with the IPad, it probably would be.
151. Re:Tablets are dead by SanityInAnarchy · 2010-04-30 15:13 · Score: 1
  
  Actually it doesn't revert completely. It restores it to the latest OS version you've downloaded, but with factory settings.
  In other words, it restores it to something stored in writable memory. What's to stop the malware from overwriting that latest version?
  
  Once you sync it
  Even more places for the malware to hide.
  
  --
  Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
152. Re:Tablets are dead by David+Jao · 2010-04-30 20:33 · Score: 1
  
  And yet the iPad will probably sell more units in the first year than all the installed Linux desktop distros in the U.S. It's not just the concept, it's the implementation. Apple takes ideas that have been tried by others, and makes them mainstream and popular. I have nothing against Linux (I use it myself for part of my work), but even at its best you can't begin to compare it with Apple's ease of use.
  Let's get some perspective here. Microsoft made 14 billion dollars last year to Apple's 9 billion dollars. Netbooks still outsell iPads 3 to 1. If you're going to give Apple credit merely for marketplace success, then you must acknowledge that Windows and PCs deserve at least equal credit.
  
  Apple is not forcing Android out of the market
  Oh really? Then why did Apple sue HTC over Android? What is this lawsuit, if not an attempt to force Android out of the market?
  
  And what I find puzzling is why you (and so many others) are unhappy about it. How does the existence of the iPhone and iPad diminish the utility of Android or Linux in any way, shape, or form?
  The existence of the iPhone and iPad contribute to the existence of Apple, which has outright declared (patent) nuclear war on Android. Apple's offensive deployment of software patents (a concept which I oppose to begin with) against Linux makes me very, very unhappy. Before Apple's patent lawsuit, I was happy to let Apple compete in the marketplace on technical merit, but now that Apple has (apparently) decided to resort to legal attacks based on abuse of our broken patent system, it follows that Apple needs to be stopped, by any means necessary.
  Incidentally, even before Apple filed their lawsuit, it was obvious to Linux supporters like myself that Apple would stop at nothing to deprive users of the option of running Linux. The lawsuit should make it amply clear even to Apple supporters like yourself that Apple is no better than Microsoft when it comes to tolerating the existence of competition, or allowing their competitors to compete fairly in the marketplace.
153. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-01 02:36 · Score: 0
  
  Hackers can already open them up. Jailbreaking is breaking in without destroying the OS. So just breaking in, stealing data, wreaking havoc on the userbase is far easier.
  Black hat folk will always target the software-hardware with the biggest userbase, and if you're locked out, you can't defend yourself even if you would have the knowledge for it.
154. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-01 03:48 · Score: 0
  
  I disagree. To jailbreak you must have physical access to the device. It's already been shown that jailbreaking weakens the security on the device either through leaving the default ssh password unchanged or by stripping the signing requirements for apps.
  Now put the ability to install remote software on the phone that any Joe User can install and imagine what happens. It would be a Windows Virus Sponge all over again. The closed system protects regular users from themselves.
155. Re:Tablets are dead by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-01 14:31 · Score: 0
  
  Then again, Macs are not that horribly more expensive than a PC with the same-ish hardware specs (but less bundled software) despite what old myths and Microzombies claim.
  You're kidding, right? The cheapest Mac in notebook form factor (MacBook) is $1000. You can buy two Windows based laptops for $1000 with the same CPU, RAM, HDD, integrated webcam, slot-loading DVD burner (plus other perks like an SD slot, standard VGA out, HDMI out and a larger display).
156. Re:Tablets are dead by toriver · 2010-05-01 22:34 · Score: 1
  
  In addition to not providing a link to such a device (the $500 or less laptop to match a MacBook), I noticed you did not list "battery life", a very significant factor for laptops. "Standard VGA" is a dying standard, DisplayPort can be converted to such things if necessary. And I guess it ships with Intel integrated grapics instead of the nVidia card in the Mac?
  But feel free to link to such a machine. I could only find second-hand laptops at that spec and price point when I searched.
157. Re:Tablets are dead by chaboud · 2010-05-02 13:15 · Score: 1
  
  Not state, come up with, astute reader.
  Sheesh.
  Let's spell this out, as the obviousness of available techniques has clearly eluded you:
  - Hold finger on corner edge (or other hot point that is most commonly out of the active area) and use other, second press, to hover.
  - Don't like the dead-space created by that? Letter-boxing could work, but, given the available interfaces, try swiping one finger from the edge onto an active overlay area and using another to hover.
  - Long-press.
  - Multi-touch (since flash is one-touchy), like two fingers to get a pointer in the average of the two points is available.
  I mean, it's just not that hard. I've been labeled a troll in my previous post by Apple-lovin' blinder-monkeys, but, seriously, hover is not even close to a show-stopper with flash on a touch platform. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over its absence, but a bit of intellectual honesty would be appreciated.
  Just say "we don't like it." There's no need for fake reasons.
158. Re:Tablets are dead by Smurf · 2010-05-04 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  Newsflash: Apple iPad Reaches ‘1 Million Sold’ Twice as Fast as iPhone.
It's a shame ... by jhhl · 2010-04-29 11:54 · Score: 1

It was an intriguing design - trying to solve the problem of more information in a small, foldable space. Maybe someone will pick this concept up, patents willing. Then again, there's the roll-out computer design.

--
-- Real Stupidity is the Artificial Intelligence of the 21st century
Where Is sopssa? Where is He? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 11:54 · Score: 4, Funny

Where's sopssa when you need him!? I hope that Courier touting MIcrosoft shill is reading this. He's going to need more than a hug after this news.

Hold on, I think I hear someone backpedaling.
It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by 3seas · 2010-04-29 11:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

.....products it then never produces... its all part of market testing.
1. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by x1n933k · 2010-04-29 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure this was never announced anyway. Ballmer even denied the video when he was interviewed on the Engadget show a few months back.
2. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by sammyF70 · 2010-04-29 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  considering how excited people seemed to be about the concept, I'd say it wasn't as much market testing as just too ambitious to be realized.Too bad really, it sounded like a concept which might have made tablets actually useful for everyday use.
  
  --
  "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
3. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by ClosedSource · 2010-04-29 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  even if the Courier isn't an example.
4. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by Darkness404 · 2010-04-29 12:07 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Plus, the time wasn't right. The entire Microsoft line of failed products happened not always because Microsoft's version was worse, but because it came across as Microsoft copying the industry leader. Lets see here:
  
  The Zune looked like a copy of the iPod. The Zune HD looked like a copy of the iPod Touch. Bing/Live Search all seemed to be copies of Google. Etc.
  
  Microsoft's products that have been successful have been those ahead of their competitors. Look at the 360 which got a few months head start on Nintendo/Sony and has been very successful (of course a lot of this could be due to the lack of decent games for the Wii and the astronomical price of PS3 hardware for the longest time...).
  
  Releasing Courier would seem like a copy of the iPad, something that Microsoft can't pump money into because it will be dead on release.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
5. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by Angst+Badger · 2010-04-29 12:39 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Possibly. It's also possible that MS is privy to more accurate sales figures (and profit margins) from the iPad than the rest of us, and they decided it wasn't worth their time. And that could be because hardware margins are razor thin and the potential profit was not worth the investment, or it could be because they figured that everyone who wanted an iPad-like device would already have an iPad by the time MS could actually ship product. There's also opportunity cost to consider: MS may have been confident of producing a successful product, but decided that the same time and money spent elsewhere would generate greater returns. And finally, given the Crunchpad debacle, it may just be that they had a working design, but realized they couldn't source the parts cheaply enough for it to be competitive -- the iPad is expensive enough with its single screen, so it's likely that a dual-screen tablet would have been even more pricey.
  Also worth considering is that Apple and Microsoft have very different business models. Where its "lifestyle" devices are concerned, Apple has an extensive infrastructure for providing add-on services and products -- iTunes and the App Store -- that Microsoft doesn't have. What could be a successful product for Apple might be a loser for Microsoft even if it was just as good and sold as well.
  
  --
  Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
6. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by geekoid · 2010-04-29 12:46 · Score: 1
  
  the courier, as shown, was nothing like the iPad. I don't think they could engineer it.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
7. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by The+End+Of+Days · 2010-04-29 12:52 · Score: 1
  
  The Zune looked like a copy of the iPod. The Zune HD looked like a copy of the iPod Touch.
  What, in that both product lines play media? Maybe you just never used any Zune stuff but they don't behave anything like iPods or iPod Touches. Don't get so excited that you do nothing but post factless anti-Microsoft rants into this topic.
  Oh, I'm too late to stop that. Never mind.
8. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by Karlt1 · 2010-04-29 14:05 · Score: 1
  
  It's also possible that MS is privy to more accurate sales figures (and profit margins) from the iPad than the rest of us, and they decided it wasn't worth their time. And that could be because hardware margins are razor thin and the potential profit was not worth the investment,
  You can accuse Apple of a lot of things, but selling products with a "razor thin profit margin" is not one of them.
  You do have to take iSuppli's analysis with a grain of salt, but it's the best we have....
  http://www.isuppli.com/News/Pages/Mid-RangeiPadtoGenerateMaximumProfitsforApple,iSuppliEstimates.aspx
  The 16GB iPad was estimated to cost $229 and sells for $499.
  The 64GB GSM iPad sells for $829 and has an estimated cost of around $350
9. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by russotto · 2010-04-29 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft's products that have been successful have been those ahead of their competitors.
  Microsoft's successful products are mostly follow-the-leader as well. Windows -- following the Mac, of course. Excel, following Lotus 1-2-3 (more or less a descendant of Visicalc). Word, following Wordstar. Exchange, following Netware (I think)
10. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-04-29 18:03 · Score: 1
  
  Thing is, though - Courier didn't look much like iPad. If anything, HP Slate looks most like "MS iPad" these days.
11. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 19:12 · Score: 0
  
  The Zune looked like a copy of the iPod
  Dude, iPods were never released in shit brown...
12. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by MemoryDragon · 2010-04-29 20:07 · Score: 1
  
  Actually no, almost no Microsoft Product was ahead of their competition only the XBOX 360 for one year and that one backfired big time (they released it despite knowing that it was broken, you can read that all up)
  Windows 95 was a blank copy of OSX, Windows 3.1 was way worse than OSX and the UI basically the same code as OSX 1.x had (they had the code rights so they could carry it over)
  Dos was worse than CPM etc...
  The main difference back then was, that they had the press behind themsleves, and most people did not know there were alternatives.
  XBOX 360 well that was pure luck that they could pull another time a stunt of shoving an unfinished product onto the end users without being grilled for it.
13. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by Marcika · 2010-04-29 21:41 · Score: 1
  
  ...And that could be because hardware margins are razor thin and the potential profit was not worth the investment...
  The iPad's manufacturing cost is 52% of the retail price of the cheapest model (there was a Slashdot story about it, even). For the more expensive prestige models the margin gets even bigger. 100%+ margin on the cost of goods sold is by no means "razor-thin", especially if you are MS and already have the software engineers by hand who can write the software...
14. Re:It is not uncommon of MS to announce... by xtracto · 2010-04-29 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  The Zune looked like a copy of the iPod. The Zune HD looked like a copy of the iPod Touch. Bing/Live Search all seemed to be copies of Google. Etc.
  
  Man, with Microsoft you can go *waaaaaaay* back. Say, Windows was a copy of the Apple OS, (Lisa??) or Excel which was a copy of Lotus, or powerpoint which was a copy of harvard graphics etc, etc etc....
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Touted? by Kenja · 2010-04-29 12:02 · Score: 2, Funny

Never heard of the thing before now, and why would MS need an 'iPad killer'? They've had tablet support since Windows 3.11.

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
1. Re:Touted? by Amarantine · 2010-04-29 12:08 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They've had tablet support since Windows 3.11.
  Yeah, and look how many Windows tablets you've seen in the wild since then.
  I have only seen one with my own eyes. In use by a Microsoft partner account manager, so it kinda figures.
2. Re:Touted? by Kenja · 2010-04-29 12:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yup, the market figured out that tablets are kinda dumb for most uses a long time ago. I still use one for network testing and such, but anything that requires actual data input still wants a keyboard with actual tactile feedback.
  
  --
  
  "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
3. Re:Touted? by Low+Ranked+Craig · 2010-04-29 12:55 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft has yet to figure out that putting a desktop OS on a touchscreen device without fundamentally changing the way the OS works leads to a bad and muddled experience.
  
  --
  I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
4. Re:Touted? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-04-29 12:58 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  The problem for Microsoft and tablet support is that, while in strict engineering terms, tablet support is "something you add"(ie. wacom drivers, handwriting/ink support, some touch gestures, a demo app or two), in terms of design, UI, and pleasantness of user experience, tablet support is all about what you remove. It's like the old notion of "burning the boats" to inspire your army.
  
  As long as MS approaches tablet support as just a few optional features, that can be added as a superset of their primary OS, they may well be technically competent(I've heard that their handwriting recognition is actually pretty good, for instance); but they will, outside of tech-demo-ware and highly specific custom applications, never escape the massive gravitational pull of the gigantic install base of the touchless OS. At worst, their superset offering will be completely ignored. At best, it will find a few niches, and a reasonably broad adoption in the form of "pen=mouse" ports of existing applications. Since these applications won't be all that comfortable, manufacturers will back off from bold all-tablet designs, and just start churning out "convertibles", which are just laptops with a wobbly single hinge and a screen that looks like crap because of the digitizer layer.
  
  This is one of MS's major strength/weakness combinations. They have the resources(and some genuinely good people) to relentlessly add interlocking feature-set after interlocking feature-set to their products. However, because of their enterprise orientation, they are not good at the exotic, or the starkly cut down. Any innovation has to be capable of being tacked on to the gigantic interlocking feature mass. Any cut-down subset has to alienate as few 3rd parties and legacy customers as possible, and integrate with the feature mass as much as possible. On the plus side, this means that their stuff makes it relatively easy(if not wise) to build a towering enterprise stack, and then have it supported for years and years. On the minus side, it pretty much stomps on innovation, even where technologically possible.
5. Re:Touted? by swb · 2010-04-29 14:01 · Score: 1
  
  The related problem they have is that the desktop OS group and the Office group have such status that any computing product must include them in some way; MS will always be burdened by the "need" to genuflect to Windows & Office in everything they do. It's hard not to see it as good business (ie, moneymaking) strategy but eventually it strangles your ability to innovate because you can't escape the desktop paradigm.
  Whoever takes over after Ballmer should take a couple of billion out of the bank and setup an autonomous division in Minneapolis or someplace similar, far from Redmond. Kind of like Xerox's PARC.
  Let this group develop something and make it mandatory back at the home office for marketing/Windows/Office to support it and provide technical compatibility.
6. Re:Touted? by Buelldozer · 2010-04-29 15:48 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen lots of tablets with MS operating systems on them. They're very popular in _medical_ settings.
  You've only seen one, I've seen hundreds.
  I'm still not saying that they're popular but they're obviously used more often then you're aware of.
7. Re:Touted? by linj · 2010-04-29 17:47 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe one in ten notebooks on campus are tablets. I've got one; great being able to search through your notes instantaneously while taking a midterm or final. OneNote 2010 introduces math input, LaTeX style--typing any math is almost always faster than writing it, so nowadays I only "need" the tablet functionality for diagram-heavy classes (circuits class or devices class, stuff like that).
  
  I haven't seen or touched an iPad yet (I've seen perhaps 50 Windows tablets, mostly IBM/Lenovos), but it wouldn't fill this same niche, at least not without stylus / pressure sensitivity.
8. Re:Touted? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 17:56 · Score: 0
  
  -1 Whooosh.
9. Re:Touted? by gtall · 2010-04-29 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  MS already has such a group; MS Research. They've bought the souls of computer scientists around the globe, I imagine their output does go into MS products. We don't see their output because most research is small research. Consumer paradigms don't really come from computer scientists; it's not in their DNA because they are in the trenches doing the grunt work necessary for advances. Consumer paradigms come from more arts and humanities driven people. The obvious reason can be seen in the responses by the /bots above claiming the ipad doesn't give them multiple Os. It isn't what THEY would design. What THEY would design comes out as something like Linux. Wonderful OS, and completely useless for Ma and Pa Kettle. They want an iPad they can program, does wi-fi, phone, TV, refrigeration, heats water, runs on solar cells, urinates on and refreshes their rose bushes. And you know what, it would put Rube Goldberg to shame.
10. Re:Touted? by xtracto · 2010-04-29 23:26 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft does not do hardware, they do software. The time when they have done hardware (except for the Xbox) they have been completely unsuccessful.
  It is up for Asus, HP, Lenovo, Palm, Motorola and friends to develop the new hardware.
  The bad news for Microsoft? More and more companies are using free software as backend OS for their hardware.
  
  --
  Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
11. Re:Touted? by indiechild · 2010-04-30 00:55 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft is way too large for their own group. They have heaps of smart engineers and developers but the bureaucracy ensures that most of their innovation goes to waste. Microsoft executives would do well to read "ReWork" by 37signals.
Announce? by linumax · 2010-04-29 12:05 · Score: 4, Informative

AFAIK, Microsoft never really announced anything. They even went as far as calling it a rumor and at best some "sources" called it an incubation project.

Announced product examples are Windows Phone 7 and Natal.
1. Re:Announce? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 13:25 · Score: 0
  
  They never announced it, but they sure did market and hype it. The concept videos (which were never fully stated as concept/rendered only) came out every time an interesting product was debuted. They coincided the last video with the announcement of the iPad.
  
  Sure, you can say they never announced it, but they portrayed it as a competitor to actual products.
What the iPad should've been? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2010-04-29 12:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

Hinge(Which can break) + Stylus(Which can go lost and is a lousy input device) = Fail in the long haul.
Of course, I also believe that the iPad's losing out by not having an *optional* stylus tool for drawing, but that's just me.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
1. Re:What the iPad should've been? by sammyF70 · 2010-04-29 12:16 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I agree on the hinge, but a stylus is actually a very good input device for drawings and writing (as in script, not as in typing), actually it's probably the best one for those two activities.(Multi-)Touch, on the other hand, is very limited in terms of use in anything creative.
  
  --
  "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
2. Re:What the iPad should've been? by Kantara · 2010-04-29 12:27 · Score: 1
  
  While Apple doesn't provide an option, I do want to point out that there is an 'optional' stylus via http://tenonedesign.com/sketch.php called Pogo Sketch. They also sell an app for drawing. While not the same app there is an article quote that is interesting about drawing vs wacom here http://mobile.venturebeat.com/2010/04/05/jim-lee-ipad/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Venturebeat+(VentureBeat)
  
  “fun and frustrating at the same time cuz half the time yer going this would be so easy to do by hand or wacom [a pen tablet device],
3. Re:What the iPad should've been? by dakameleon · 2010-04-29 12:50 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  (Multi-)Touch, on the other hand, is very limited in terms of use in anything creative.
  Buh? Heard of Brushes? Used for, y'know, a New Yorker cover or two?
  
  --
  Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
4. Re:What the iPad should've been? by Low+Ranked+Craig · 2010-04-29 13:01 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  You can use a stylus with them - Apple uses the Pogo Sketch stylus in the Apple Stores... http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/11/03/exclusive_look_at_apples_new_ipod_touch_based_easypay_checkout.html http://tenonedesign.com/sketch.php
  
  --
  I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
5. Re:What the iPad should've been? by sammyF70 · 2010-04-29 13:38 · Score: 1
  
  ever heard of the word "limited"? I never said it's completely useless. Obviously you can fingerpaint, and yes, I'm aware of brush and the New Yorker covers. I'm also aware thanks to Kantara (246758) of that story and the sentence "While Lee complained that it was “fun and frustrating at the same time cuz half the time yer going this would be so easy to do by hand or wacom [a pen tablet device],” he also said he “was digging the primitive feeling of using yer hands.”. Hint : a Wacom tablet's main control is a stylus (although they tend to support touch *too*)
  
  --
  "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
6. Re:What the iPad should've been? by grouchomarxist · 2010-04-29 16:31 · Score: 1
  
  There are a handful of third-party companies that make a stylus for iPhone and iPad. Is that what you want? Or do you want an official iPad stylus from Apple?
7. Re:What the iPad should've been? by gyrogeerloose · 2010-04-29 17:04 · Score: 1
  
  I agree on the hinge, but a stylus is actually a very good input device for drawings and writing
  
  You're right, but they do have drawbacks as well. I used to have a Palm PDA that I liked a lot. I also used to have to carry around a pack of extra styluses (styli?) in my briefcase because I was always losing the damned things. So far, my fingers have always been there for me when I'm using my iPhone.
  Not that fingers as input devices don't introduce their own set of problems. For instance, never try to use an iPhone while eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwich...
  
  --
  This ain't rocket surgery.
8. Re:What the iPad should've been? by sammyF70 · 2010-04-29 18:13 · Score: 1
  
  slightly off topic, but : I must confess, I'm more used to graphic tablets, and I kept losing the stylus's all the time too. The last tablet I bought privately (a "Bamboo Pen") though has something I first put mentally in the "WTF-Gimmick-branding" category : it has a tube of red cloth on one side with a big white WACOM printed on it.
  At first I seriously thought it was just a branding measure, but it is actually the most ingenious part of the tablet. It's a pen holder that isn't in the way while working and at the same time a very convenient place to put the stylus when you don't need it anymore, and taking it out again comes completely naturally (no "clipping" or anything. It just glides in and out) I don't think I misplaced the stylus once since I got that one.
  really a cheap "trick", but it makes a big difference. Of course, with PDAs and Tablet computers, it might break the shiny glossy metally design of the device.
  (even more OT : I think whoever thought of the name "Bamboo" for a graphic tablet had a very twisted mind. A friend who was thinking of getting one lately asked me per email "how is your bamboo? Is it smooth? how does it feel? How big is it?", which without context, might be a bit confusing;)
  
  --
  "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
9. Re:What the iPad should've been? by tehcyder · 2010-04-29 23:47 · Score: 1
  
  (Multi-)Touch, on the other hand, is very limited in terms of use in anything creative
  
  Multi-touch is designed for consuming, not producing, simple as that.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
How freaking annoying by jbeach · 2010-04-29 12:09 · Score: 1

I was really, seriously looking forward to that device. It was everything I wanted that iPad was not. Even having two screens. It would have actually made me use Windows 7 voluntarily. Smooth move, M$.

--
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
Re:Where Is sopssa? Where is He? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:10 · Score: 1, Funny

I think he's in a corner somewhere crying.
Crazy conspiracy theory by walterbyrd · 2010-04-29 12:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

Msft got HP to buy Palm so that HTC, or Google, could not buy Palm. Now, to repay HP for buying Palm, msft drops msft's own "iPad killer" thus eliminating a huge competitor for HP.
Msft and Apple, hate and fear Android - they want to patent troll Android out of existance. HP has no special love for Android, because Android would not differentiate HP enough from the other Android tablet, or phone, sellers.
HP is a very close partner with msft, with both PCs and phones. If either HTC, or google, bought Palm, they would be able to use Palm's arsenal of patents to counter-sue msft and/or apple.
Pure speculation on my part, but it is quite a coincidence that the following all happened at the same time:
Apple sues HTC
Msft and HTC form a special patent deal
HP buys Palm
Msft discontinues Courier
1. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by tomhuxley · 2010-04-29 12:26 · Score: 1
  
  Pure speculation on my part, but it is quite a coincidence that the following all happened at the same time ...
  You forgot to include the volcano ash cloud ...
2. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:30 · Score: 0
  
  Look you retard, smart phones are a brave new world where you can differentiate based on OS. But if you're using windows mobile (or whatever the fuck they call it these days) or android, you're in the commodity business, dependent on someone else (less so with android but still), and profits will soon be minimal. But if you own the OS (ie, Apple, Palm, Nokia) and it doesn't suck (ie, Apple), you're printing money almost as fast as ben berbanke and turbo tax timmy.
3. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by node+3 · 2010-04-29 12:39 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The awesome thing about how Slashdot moderation works is your insane theory should make it to +5 in no time.
  Excuse me while I grab some popcorn, this is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
4. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by jjohnson · 2010-04-29 14:45 · Score: 1
  
  A slow motion train wreck of clowns.
  
  --
  Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
5. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by walterbyrd · 2010-04-29 15:28 · Score: 1
  
  Look you retard, smart phones are a brave new world where you can differentiate based on OS
  Yeah, and in the world of smart phone OSes, I think Palm comes in solidly in fifth place. Sure, that's worth $1.2 billion.
  Besides, I mentioned that HP has no great love of android for just that reason.
6. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-04-29 18:05 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  The awesome thing about how Slashdot moderation works is your insane theory should make it to +5 in no time.
  That's nothing, you should see how quickly any conspiracy theory involving U.S. government (any past or present) gets upmodded around here...
7. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by Mindcontrolled · 2010-04-29 21:52 · Score: 1
  
  You mean a slow motion train wreck involving a train with a wild assortment of psychos off their medication dressed up as clowns, with the occasional oddball costumed as imperial trooper or wookie? Hey, that's why I come back to this site...
  
  --
  Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
8. Re:Crazy conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 03:50 · Score: 0
  
  If you must use stock symbols to refer to companies, at least be consistent. Your first sentence should have read:
  
  MSFT got HPQ to buy PALM so that TPE:2498, or GOOG, could not buy PALM.
  There, that's much more readable.
Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:11 · Score: 3, Insightful

The idea seemed at first glance to be interesting, and was full of a lot of new concepts for how to use a tablet.
But I didn't see a lot of really practical ideas in there, starting with the dual folding screens. The thoughts of glass on glass, with slight torque in everyday carrying and average amounts of dust and grit...
Some of the other things in the videos seemed cool, but in everyday use again I just thought some of the actions would grow to be annoying. The central dragging area was kind of interesting...
Someone could easily carry on the concept with a special case that held two iPads, and some software to have them act in tandem over Bluetooth.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by rolfwind · 2010-04-29 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  You ever hold an iPad? They're heavy as bricks. Strapping two together would be good excercise but not enjoyable.
2. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 13:19 · Score: 0
  
  gameboy DS?
3. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by Your.Master · 2010-04-29 13:25 · Score: 1
  
  The central dragging area seems to have been used in the Kin phones.
4. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by jamie(really) · 2010-04-29 13:45 · Score: 1
  
  Very small bricks, one assumes. Or perhaps you should work out more. Oh, wait, where am I? Sorry!
5. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 15:22 · Score: 1
  
  You ever hold an iPad? They're heavy as bricks.
  Yes, I have one - I agree two would be very heavy (which should make you think very hard about how much a real courier would weigh what with needing two screens and almost double the battery to power them).
  However, I was more interested in the idea of doing that in order to explore the concepts in the video more, and see what ideas really had merit.
  
  --
  "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
6. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by voidptr · 2010-04-29 15:34 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Most of the weight in an iPad is the massive batteries to power the larger screen and the glass plate over the screen, which is thicker than an iPhone since it has a larger span. The whole thing weighs a pound and a half, and that's after leaving off all the I/O ports and subsequent case thickness everyone on here wants from a "real tablet" competitor like 3 USB ports, HDMI out, a removable battery, and a floppy drive.
  The JooJoo doesn't get anywhere near the same battery life, and it weighs 60% more at two and a half pounds.
  What makes you think MS or anyone else could actually ship a dual screen Courier that wouldn't end up weighing somewhere near three pounds by the time it made it out of manufacturing anyway.
  
  --
  This .sig for unofficial government use only. Official use subject to $500 fine.
7. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by DuranDuran · 2010-04-29 15:47 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  > Dual folding screens were always a non-starter
  Yeah, Nintendo found that out the hard way with all the millions of Game and Watches they sold.
  
  --
  "You can justify anything by putting it in quotes, adding a famous name and making it a sig" - Albert Einstein
8. Re:Dual folding screens were always a non-starter by macserv · 2010-04-29 18:58 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, the iPad is surprisingly light, given that it's made out of aluminum and glass. I don't know how anyone could hold one and think it was heavy. Half of the body is actually completely empty (contributing to the decent bass levels in the audio it can produce with its built-in speaker).
On the other hand by treeves · 2010-04-29 12:14 · Score: 3, Funny

It was planned to only allow installation of one font, a certain typewriter font, to make it run faster and create a consistent branding.
This did not do well in focus groups, who showed a preference for being able to use Comic Sans and other fonts.

--
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
1. Re:On the other hand by StuartHankins · 2010-04-29 13:56 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  For all that is holy, I wish people would drop Comic Sans. It's like everyone got the same idea at once -- ten years ago -- and it's Groundhog Day every time I see it. It's overused and was one of the first things I changed when I jailbroke my Touch. People using Brush Script, using Cooper Black for body text, or Copperplate for anything other than titling should probably be shot.
  
  Oh, while you're at it, make sure you get those using Latin Wide and Marker Felt for any purpose -- because there's just no excuse. They might reproduce.
2. Re:On the other hand by gyrogeerloose · 2010-04-29 17:15 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  People using Brush Script, using Cooper Black for body text, or Copperplate for anything other than titling should probably be shot.
  I agree and am willing to join your endeavor. I have guns.
  
  --
  This ain't rocket surgery.
"testing"? Is that what they are calling it now? by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

its all part of market testing.
And if the "testing" happens to kill a competitors product launch while people wait for the Microsoft product, well that was just an accident!
Happily there are very few product announcements from Microsoft people are willing to wait for these days it was apparent to pretty much anyone Courier wasn't going anywhere at slow pace of even delivering concept videos...

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
All we've ever seen were renders by melted · 2010-04-29 12:19 · Score: 0

All we've ever seen were renders. It never WAS real. Show me a single video of it in real life actually running some kind of software (beta or not).
I remember the Longhorn mockup videos, where it demonstrated seamless interop between apps, WinFS, new UI. All of that was shown in about 2003, and it all looked awesome. Like the fucking FUTURE. Yet in the end we got Vista.
Huh?!? by Locke2005 · 2010-04-29 12:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

So, first time in years that Microsoft's concept of "innovation", which is really "just copy whatever Google or Apple or Sony do", actually WASN'T a stupid idea... and they kill the project? You've got to admit, this was much better conceived than the Zune!

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
1. Re:Huh?!? by macserv · 2010-04-29 19:00 · Score: 1
  
  Gotta give it to them... they actually DID innovate this time. Or at least, we thought they had.
2. Re:Huh?!? by indiechild · 2010-04-30 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  With the Courier, they innovated on paper only. It's the end product that matters. That means solving a lot of engineering and industrial design challenges along the way. Talk is cheap. Delivering is what counts. I was looking forward to seeing how they would do it.
what did Microsoft actually do? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

You have exactly one VP saying that the product was real, but was shitcanned. Besides that, there's some leaked computer generated videos and pictures of an alleged product.
You're mourning the fact that a puff of vapor got carried off by the breeze. That's not awesome, that's standard operating procedure for Redmond; unless by awesome you mean "marketing bullshit that never has to withstand real world use and criticism," in which case, spot on.
You can buy a stylus for the iPad/iPhone today by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:22 · Score: 1

There are already a number of makers of stylus for the iPhone, that work on the iPad.
They are somewhat wider than what you would traditionally call a stylus, but still allow for a more narrow contact. After all, children can use the devices just fine so that sets a lower bound on size...

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:You can buy a stylus for the iPad/iPhone today by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2010-04-29 12:28 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Yeah, Pogo Stylus. Just wish Apple would've thought about it before a 3rd Party did. Still don't have an iPad yet, but once I get one, I'm getting me a pogo.
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Alternate theory by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

How about, HP was the only hardware maker willing to build Courier, but Microsoft's schedule was slipping and slipping so HP in disgust decided to buy Palm to use WebOS for the tablets it has lined up instead?
Thus without a hardware backer, Microsoft had to close Courier for good.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Alternate theory by walterbyrd · 2010-04-29 15:23 · Score: 1
  
  Problem with that theory is that HP could have used Android for free, and saved themselves $1.2B.
2. Re:Alternate theory by MemoryDragon · 2010-04-29 20:12 · Score: 1
  
  I assume so, since there was nothing more to be seen of courier than a few concept animations (people always fall into the trap to think there is a product if they see pictures or animations), I assume the entire team has been moved over to WinMobile 7 where Microsoft currently has really pressure to deliver or otherwise being dead in a market they once dominated to some degree.
When Beta lost to VHS was similar by WillAffleckUW · 2010-04-29 12:25 · Score: 1

When the Beta versus VHS wars were going strong - I had one of the few VHS RCA VCRs on my block. (really long block actually, about half a mile long)
Technically, the Beta VCRs were better, but it's really a market choice, and this is similar.
As we can see from the fall version of the iPad, some of the features in the Courier are in that version, or analogs thereof, such as a video camera (in the fall iPad it's a forward facing optional unit, as you can tell by the iPhone that got jacked and the design of the internal iPad h/w). Others aren't at this time.
Over time, expect the useful and marketable features of the Courier to be added, but for now, if you've got a Beta, it's time to realize switching time is here.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
1. Re:When Beta lost to VHS was similar by toriver · 2010-04-30 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  I thought it was generally agreed upon that VHS won because of three factors: Porn, more liberal licensing to manufacturers and that the tapes were actually long enough to record a full movie, despite Jack Valetti's gnashing teeth and portents of doom.
  Beta lived on happily in the professional market.
2. Re:When Beta lost to VHS was similar by WillAffleckUW · 2010-04-30 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  No, it was shift workers like me, wanting to record an entire shift worth of TV, so that we could watch it later.
  We were the ones that could afford to buy time-shifting recording devices and had a need to do so, to try to maintain a normal life.
  You need to think of who actually had the disposable income and the need for the devices back then. The other three things just accelerated our initial choice.
  Back then I was a steelworker, working 4x4 shifts (2 12 hour days, 2 12 hour nights, 3.5 days off) - all of us had money, but we wanted to be able to come home and be with our families, and watch Roots or MacMillan and Wife.
  
  --
  -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Cool! by Gerald · 2010-04-29 12:26 · Score: 3, Insightful

Can they kill Comic Sans too?
1. Re:Cool! by StuartHankins · 2010-04-29 13:57 · Score: 1
  
  Amen brother! I didn't see your post when I replied in another thread.
that crisis was over quick by fred+fleenblat · 2010-04-29 12:30 · Score: 1

is anyone else disturbed that slashdot is linking to gizmodo stories again?
okay, i guess it's just me, sorry.
1. Re:that crisis was over quick by geekoid · 2010-04-29 12:47 · Score: 1
  
  Why would we be disturbed?
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
2. Re:that crisis was over quick by Low+Ranked+Craig · 2010-04-29 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  Yep, it's just you.
  
  --
  I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
3. Re:that crisis was over quick by Bing+Tsher+E · 2010-04-29 13:05 · Score: 1
  
  This is not on the apple.slashdot.org domain. It's okay here.
4. Re:that crisis was over quick by david_thornley · 2010-04-30 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  May as well do it while we can. I'm expecting an industrial espionage suit that will leave Gizmodo a smoking, salted hole in the ground.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
If they cared about copying why WIndows 7 Mobile? by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

Releasing Courier would seem like a copy of the iPad, something that Microsoft can't pump money into because it will be dead on release.
But they can't afford not to try.
As with WIndows Mobile 7, which comes off copying lots of iPhone things - all touch screen, lots of animation, locked down app store, etc. So if Microsoft really cared about only delivering products that were firsts, why are they even doing Windows Mobile 7?
I think Courier was killed because it was really only ever a last-ditch attempt to slow down Apple and the iPad (Microsoft had to know a tablet was coming along at some point). Otherwise why even publicize the very scant details they had a year ago? If they killed it just now, why did they bother releasing a new concept video with the expense that entailed, just ahead of the iPad announcement?

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
ov Vaporware by v1 · 2010-04-29 12:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

Vaporware is the ultimate refining of the process of "Overpromise, Underdeliver".
In other words, when you promise everything, and deliver nothing.
Though the basic premise of overpromise/underdeliver has always a basic theme in I.T in general. You're making promises you know you can't deliver, to an audience that is in no position of expertise to question what you say, and in their dependent state, has to believe you, and has no choice but to accept whatever you happen to actually deliver. (a process also known more commonly as "I.T. Consultant")

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
1. Re:ov Vaporware by Idbar · 2010-04-30 01:28 · Score: 1
  
  Wow! I realized you just defined politics!
2. Re:ov Vaporware by Belial6 · 2010-04-30 04:40 · Score: 1
  
  That problem is definitely not restricted to I.T. It is pretty much standard operating procedure for any industry where the customer is at the mercy of the supplier, and many industries where they are not.
Amazing really by Ilgaz · 2010-04-29 12:41 · Score: 1

I know that I showed its demo to 4 die hard, fanatic iPhone _and_ Apple users and they were really impressed with it.
I don't think they will produce/demo anything that will impress those 4 guys in coming years. I can bet some people at Apple Inc. must be happy that concept was canceled.
1. Re:Amazing really by gyrogeerloose · 2010-04-29 17:09 · Score: 1
  
  I know that I showed its demo to 4 die hard, fanatic iPhone _and_ Apple users and they were really impressed with it.
  To be fair, though, it's pretty easy to create an impressive demo of a product that doesn't actually exist.
  
  --
  This ain't rocket surgery.
Go away and let us innovate! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:45 · Score: 0

Oh yea. It's sooo easy to tell Apple what their product should have been; especially when you don't have to sell a product yourself. Hard to make a mistake then.
All the anti-Apple fanbois should register their complaint by buying a new copy of Office. Oh wait, you steal that, don't you. Clowns.
(I don't even like Apple, but you Apple bashers and Microsoft apologists are just too pathetic to tolerate in silence.)
Explanations by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:45 · Score: 4, Insightful

At the moment. But will Apple really be able to carry the momentum once people start realizing theres nothing really -great- about the iPad?
They would not be selling hugely if there were not things people found great about them NOW. Marketing can only get you so far, and marketing only helps Apple much because people have grown to trust Apple more than other companies.
But signs point to iPad sales climbing. They just got a big boost from Oprah (formerly champion of the Kindle), they also have had to move back international release dates. And at this point, people thinking about buying one can try them out in Apple Stores and figure out if they are great or not.
With the iPad, what benefit are you getting for the cost?
An excellent screen (which really matters if you care about eye strain) over any normal screen for a device in that price range.
Tens of thousands and soon hundreds of thousands of applications dedicated to operation by touch, and used in that form factor. Yes you can buy a netbook but few applications work well in the screen sizes most netbooks support. This is such a massive benefit I can't believe it is constantly overlooked.
Compact size for the battery life - sure some netbooks also have good battery life, but they are a lot larger.
A world of peripherals that all work via the dock connector.
A fantastic data plan ($15/250MB/month or $30/month unlimited, no contract).
And let me repeat the thing about many, many developers working hard to write software that works really, really well on the device vs. running software that was built for a desktop and "works OK" on a netbook.
On a side note, you and so many other people are so mistaken about the iPad being only for consumption, or even consumption focused... That is not the end game.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Explanations by binary+paladin · 2010-04-29 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  What I have found is that, for the most part, geeks don't get the iPad at all. Geeks are too spec oriented and use their computers in a completely different manner than non-technical types. I was really wowed by the iPad when I played with it the other day. The book reader, in particular, was damn neat.
  I have some feeling the computer could probably replace my mom's Mac Mini for what she uses a computer for.
  I'm gonna wait one generation and I might get one as a travel machine depending on the state of the apps available for it.
  (Also, I'm one of those people who view the lack of Flash as a feature.)
2. Re:Explanations by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 15:37 · Score: 1
  
  It's pretty clear that you think in an adjective, adjective way about things. Are you sure you're not in marketing?
  Not at all, I am a developer through and through.
  But what I have done, is spent a lifetime also trying to understand business and marketing angles to things all around us - many times trying to understand the motivation for seemingly stupid commands from on high at large companies, or to judge if a company I am working for is really doing intelligent things.
  Your counter-arguments with these people as to design decisions in ANY software hold quite a lot more weight if you can combine your technical and marketing knowledge into what amount to really powerful points that few can refute, because so few people can span that bridge.
  I wouldn't go so far as to minor in business in college mind you, I think a degree more focused on math and theory and engineering and skill is useful than what they teach in business school... you can pick up a ton of street knowledge through self-study, and that's enough.
  
  --
  "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
3. Re:Explanations by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2010-04-29 16:35 · Score: 1
  
  On a side note, you and so many other people are so mistaken about the iPad being only for consumption, or even consumption focused... That is not the end game.
  WebMD displays a lot of articles, not just the one about Tuberculosis, and very well on the iPad.
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
4. Re:Explanations by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 18:32 · Score: 0
  
  What I have found is that, for the most part, geeks don't get the iPad at all.
  What I have found is that binary paladins overgeneralise all the time and especially in the wrong places. I have many geek friends who are thinking of getting one. On the other hand, I've heard none of my less geeky friends even mention the ipad...
5. Re:Explanations by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 21:28 · Score: 0
  
  An excellent screen? By what standard? You've got to be fucking kidding me. It has a ridiculously low resolution (1024x768) an aspect ratio that almost NO video uses any more (4:3) and isn't all that large or otherwise impressive. I keep hearing people gush about the screen (with some news outlets gushing about how awesome HD video is on it, despite the fact that it can't even display HD video) even though the screen is lackluster at best and pathetic at worst.
6. Re:Explanations by delinear · 2010-04-30 00:58 · Score: 1
  
  (Also, I'm one of those people who view the lack of Flash as a feature.)
  On the desktop, I've started to use a plugin that blocks flash. This means that, for the most part, it doesn't spoil my experience of the web but when I do occasionally come across a site where I have to use it for whatever reason (I actually had to use it a couple of weeks ago because the site was serving a CAPTCHA with it) I'm not left without options. You might say, if enough people stopped using Flash the sites that relied on it would have to change, and that's a great goal for the future, but it won't help me if I need to use it today. To me, the plugin is a feature, if I couldn't access Flash at all, that would be a disadvantage, as much as I dislike Flash.
7. Re:Explanations by SuperKendall · 2010-04-30 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  Well honestly I would have modded you funny, but I guess the Slashdot moderators were just dense that day. I appreciate the effort though.
  
  --
  "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Pogo sylus pretty good by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 12:51 · Score: 4, Informative

Yeah, Pogo Stylus
I ordered several different styluses to test them all out, and the Pogo was much nicer than the others - a few others have rubbery tips that have too much resistance moving across the screen to move easily. The Pogo has a kind of sponge-like material that coasts across a screen much more easily.
I wanted to confirm that was a good choice.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is a huge advance for Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 12:52 · Score: 0

I'm amazing and think this represents a major step forward for Microsoft product development. Maybe they have learned something from the Zune, but it looks like they now know when something sucks! Pretty soon they'll learn how to figure out if something is good and then they'll be off to the races. Apple better watch out five years from now.
The thing with the "dumbed down OS" by rolfwind · 2010-04-29 12:58 · Score: 3, Insightful

is that companies always thought they were for things like Child's First Computer type of toy. Little did we understand that children come along with computers just fine, it was the adults that needed the hand-holding.
As iPad's sales are still going strong, many people still won't get it. They're usually the ones that understand how to get the computer to do almost anything.
1. Re:The thing with the "dumbed down OS" by cgenman · 2010-04-29 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  The other thing with "dumbed down OS" is that they have actually been re-examined and re-written. Windows is still hampered by concepts it introduced in 95 (No sane OS would ever have a registry in Window's current form). Linux is still a naked server OS at heart with all of it's fidgety bits dangling out. Even OSX is starting to get crufty around the edges.
  But millions of dollars and a complete revision of what it means to compute are going into these "dumbed down" operating systems. Sure, there is no file system. But you also never misplace a file, and your desktop isn't cluttered with downloaded junk. You can't multitask. But you don't have a half-dozen apps all bouncing up at you for your attention. They don't have the tools to kill individual processes. But they reboot in about 20 seconds.
  I'm still not sold on the iPad. But anything that gets rid of this awful user interface design that we've been hampered with for years is good in my book.
  
  --
  The ______ Agenda
It was only a fancy wish. by itomato · 2010-04-29 13:00 · Score: 1

They need someone like Jeff Han to develop the prototype first. Necessity is still the mother of invention, not the other way round.
1. Re:It was only a fancy wish. by Plunky · 2010-04-29 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  They need someone like Jeff Han to develop the prototype first. Necessity is still the mother of invention, not the other way round.
  So.. are you suggesting that Han should do it first?
  I mean, not sure thats going to fly.. but hey, give it your best shot!
Still a better named product by wrencherd · 2010-04-29 13:01 · Score: 1

The worst part is that they had so much of a better name than "i-"whatever.
1. Re:Still a better named product by StuartHankins · 2010-04-29 13:58 · Score: 1
  
  I don't care what the name is so long as it works for me.
Piss. by itomato · 2010-04-29 13:04 · Score: 1

Thr products try to sidle up and say, 'I'm not only that which I imitate, I'm better.. Pay no attention..' while being so poorly implemented, they fail to be a decent product in their own right.
If they could have put a click wheel on it, they would have. Fucking everybody would have.
got to love the fud by SmallFurryCreature · 2010-04-29 13:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

First it is "the iPad won't sell".
Then when it is selling, the claim is "it ain't running out" when figures show Apple just ordered more then at previous introductions.
then when it sells half a million, it won't last...
Oh and lack of flash will kill it despite more and more sites ditching it.
Face it, Jobs has done it again. Move on and start predicting his fall for the next gadget.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
1. Re:got to love the fud by MichaelSmith · 2010-04-29 13:35 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  The real question is whether the iPad will sell beyond the rush of early adopters. In a year we will probably know the answer to that question.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
2. Re:got to love the fud by sincewhen · 2010-04-29 14:51 · Score: 1
  
  You left out "Only idiots would buy an iPad because it's a dumbed-down computer"
  
  --
  -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
3. Re:got to love the fud by binary+paladin · 2010-04-29 14:52 · Score: 1
  
  It will.
  In fact, as people find convenient uses for it and more and more apps appear it's going to get more popular, not less. (And Apple will certainly add in a few glaring omissions in the next revision.)
I can't say I'm surprised. by Timex · 2010-04-29 13:39 · Score: 1

Whenever Microsoft comes up with something snazzy, something that would dominate the market, they kill the project.
Whenever the competition comes up with something truly productive, Microsoft promises something better, then doesn't follow through.
Mark my words: Microsoft will eventually come out with a product to compete with the iPad, but it will not be anywhere as useful, and Microsoft will push it as "innovative".

--
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
Times sure have changed.. by jcr · 2010-04-29 13:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

I remember when Microsoft was able to kill a platform like Go Penpoint with just a vaporware announcement.
-jcr

--
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
1. Re:Times sure have changed.. by je+ne+sais+quoi · 2010-04-29 14:13 · Score: 1
  
  You know, you make an interesting point. Is this a trend? With Vista, MS had promised the sky and really didn't end up delivering a lot of the features they promised (hello winfs!). That time, my sense is that most tech people had believed them and some people felt betrayed that Vista failed to live up to it's promises. What changed this time that MS didn't even get to the point where they could get a product, any product, out of the door? Are they getting smarter about living up to their promises, or are they becoming impotent, failing to just to innovate but even playing the "me too" game? Or maybe it was just FUD all along and there never was an intent to develop the product. Would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at the MS board meetings for this one...
  
  --
  Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
2. Re:Times sure have changed.. by jcr · 2010-04-29 15:22 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  They certainly lost a lot of their power of intimidation when Longhorn cratered. I'd say the Zune debacle was another big blow, because it showed all the companies that jumped on the "Plays for sure" bandwagon that Microsoft would happily toss them under the bus to take another shot at unseating the iPod. Then you've also got their repeated failures to make a decent mobile OS. Seems to me that if I were in the consumer electronics business, I'd be very wary of anything that Microsoft was asking me to participate in.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Hyperbole can be fun. by Rocketship+Underpant · 2010-04-29 13:57 · Score: 1

A standard American brick is 203 × 102 × 57 mm, or 1,180 cubic cm. Wolfram Alpha tells me that a the density of a standard brick 1.8 g/cm3, so it would weigh about 2.12 kg. An iPad, on the other hand, weights 0.68 kg, which is less than one-third of a brick.

--
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Just killing off a terrible idea... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 14:06 · Score: 0

Move along, nothing to see here.
the technology isn't here for a decent tablet by timmarhy · 2010-04-29 14:32 · Score: 1

let's look at what a tablet SHOULD be. ultra light, ultra thin, enough processing power to play hd movies, multitouch, multi tasking, atleast 10 hours battery life.
currently you can't do all this. i'd say revisit this when oled screens are economical.

--
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
1. Re:the technology isn't here for a decent tablet by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:33 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  you're describing the ipad, retard.
2. Re:the technology isn't here for a decent tablet by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-04-29 18:06 · Score: 1
  
  Ultra-light?
3. Re:the technology isn't here for a decent tablet by jcupitt65 · 2010-04-29 20:41 · Score: 1
  
  It's half the weight of a typical netbook: 600g vs. 1,200g for a Dell mini 10v.
4. Re:the technology isn't here for a decent tablet by shutdown+-p+now · 2010-04-30 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, and practically all reviews I've seen still say that it's tiresome to hold in one hand - and that's the intended primary way of using it, since it's a tablet, and not a laptop.
Netcraft confirms it! by plopez · 2010-04-29 14:37 · Score: 0, Redundant

I couldn't resist posting that. I just couldn't....

--
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Re:Tablets are (not) dead by herojig · 2010-04-29 14:58 · Score: 1

@timholman, I think you raise a unique point not often mentioned. PC mfgs have distributed machines for decades that people can't handle. But it spurred an enti

--
I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
Palm Foleo by osssmkatz · 2010-04-29 15:21 · Score: 1

I actually thought the palm foleo was a great product. It was essentially a larger screen and keyboard for your smartphone. It was a great idea, and they were dumb to throw it away.
--Sam
I agree, but... by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 15:29 · Score: 1

That was a case where Palm listened to common ridicule, and caved in to peer pressure.
I've long thought a PDA with some kind of extended screen would be an interesting idea, and I too thought it was a shame they canceled that. I was ready to buy one when it came out.
But that's the point the poster was making, is that the iPad is more useful than the Courier or the Folio, because it actually exists! It's easy to have amazing ideas, in the case of Palm perhaps even easy to go through design. But there is a lot of merit in getting something to market, especially in the face of seemingly overwhelming ridicule, and being able to see beyond that to how the larger market will react.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Obviously everything by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 15:42 · Score: 1

And what from your list above, may I ask, can not be done on a laptop?
You must not have read his message. Nothing worked well on the netbook, there was always some flaw. While everything he outlined worked to his satisfaction on an iPad.
Just because you have incredibly low standards when it comes to computers working, does not mean everyone can live that way. I used to fix Linux ethernet drivers when they had an issue. Now I can just write software that interests me and not dance for the pleasure of my computer on demand.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Really? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 15:56 · Score: 0

Seriously, I hope you folks who posted that you liked the courier didn't think the thing really existed. It's a nice conceptual idea, but you didn't really think it was real did you?
words for nerds by Skadet · 2010-04-29 16:01 · Score: 1

Slashdot: words for nerds, adjectives that matter =D

--
Sony ha
Different form factor by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 16:05 · Score: 1

gameboy DS?
The smaller form factor means there is no flex, so the screens can be slightly recessed within the plastic housing with no chance of contact.
Now think of two 9" displays, pressed face to face. With just an average amount of pressure, the centers could easily make contact. If you recess the screens too much the device would not look great and it would add to the bulk.
I don't know that the problem is insurmountable, it's just a lot of work for a payoff I'm uncertain of. As others have said, books have the form factor they do because of the requirements of physical assembly. Digital devices only need to be the page you are reading, not the other page too.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Microsofts normal procedure by Hymer · 2010-04-29 16:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

I have stopped to believe in any news from Microsoft until I see the product and even then it usually is only partially what they say it is.
Saved vs. Lost by SuperKendall · 2010-04-29 16:33 · Score: 1

Problem with that theory is that HP could have used Android for free, and saved themselves $1.2B.
Apple could also use Android too. Why don't they?
Because they have a ton more control having power over the whole system, and not having a me-too Android offering (or not ONLY that, since in fact HP is still working on Android tablets to deliver later in the year I think).
But HP would like to have the same control over the whole chain Apple has. If they were really committed to that, they should actually dump Android and really try to make WebOS work... but I doubt they are strong-willed enough to do that, and so will come out with both mediocre Android tablets and mediocre Palm devices.
I'd really like to see a strong Android tablet, right now the most impressive one I've seen is still that transflexive (?) display from India (the one that is kind of a psuedo-eInk display in sunlight). I thought they had a unique enough vision and the passion to make the thing work pretty well.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Saved vs. Lost by walterbyrd · 2010-04-29 23:33 · Score: 1
  
  But WebOS? I think that's the fifth most popular OS for devices. I suppose that will HP to differentiate themselves in the market, but it's hardly a competitive advantage. Maybe WebOS will go the way of VMS.
  In today's hyper-litigious atmosphere, I think the only reason to buy Palm is for the patent
Windows, Windows, Windows! by NicknamesAreStupid · 2010-04-29 16:47 · Score: 1

The mantra that made the company now appears to be where much of their development goes -- out the window.
Re:Where Is sopssa? Where is He? by mgblst · 2010-04-29 17:11 · Score: 1

Why are you just picking on sopssa? Microsoft paid 100s of people to go out and say the same sort of thing.
And where is he, laughing all the way to the bank.
Mistaken joke` by SmallFurryCreature · 2010-04-29 18:51 · Score: 3, Funny

You can tell I don't follow MS much because I thought "In a world with walls or fences, who needs windows or gates." was just a clever joke. Turns out that it is paraphrasing an actual MS slogan. "For a world without walls, Windows".
That tells you everything you need to know about Microsoft. They don't even get the concept of basic construction. Either you have no wall and therefor nothing to place the window in, OR you create a big window and it becomes the wall itself. A window cannot exist without a wall.
They drink the koolaid deeply in Redmond.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Apple pricing by FlightlessParrot · 2010-04-29 20:44 · Score: 1

Don't know what it's like in the US, but here in funny little New Zealand iPods are definitely price competitive; in fact, it's hard to find a PMP with a brand-name you've heard of that sells for less than the equivalent Apple product. The iPhone (which is here sold unlocked, without a SIM card, on a straight-out retail basis) is price-competitive with grey market smartphones. Computers, not so much, but yes, Apple can meet the market.
... get a Wepad? by Herve5 · 2010-04-29 20:46 · Score: 1

seems not perfect, but much more open and actually real contrary to what I thought initially...
http://wepad.mobi/en ,
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/26/neofonies-wepad-tablet-shown-to-german-journalists-seems-legit/2#comments ,
http://eu.techcrunch.com/2010/03/29/europes-biggest-publisher-embraces-the-wepad/

--
Herve S.
MS moved the conceptual ball with the Courier by davide+marney · 2010-04-29 22:21 · Score: 1

Say what you will about the business case for the Courier (or lack thereof), you have to admit that the Courier was a genuinely new take on the concept of a hand-held computer without a keyboard.
To me, the biggest conceptual jump was the notion of a hardware-based personal journal. It married the aggregating utility of OneNote with a hardware device in the form-factor of a small paper notebook. The iPad may be for couch-potatoes (er, "media consumers"), but the Courier was for work: remembering things, finding things, sharing things, notating things, etc. These are the basic tasks of brain-storming and collaboration, which constitute 80%+ of what an information worker does all day long.
Apple doesn't really seem to get this notion. They tend to view iPhone/iPad users as only wanting to interact with content created by the experts, rather than using it to author content. (I know that's over-stated, but it feels true even if it isn't strictly true.)

--
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
it's all about the UI by Tom · 2010-04-29 23:03 · Score: 1

product by Microsoft, it had generated a lot of discussion as what the iPad should have been
Mod summary +5 Funny.
You are looking to Microsoft for a "should have been" on a mobile device? Please. A tablet is all about the UI. If the UI sucks, the tablet sucks. You simply have no other access to the device, and input and output are so close together, if Apple can't get it right, nobody can. And Microsoft least of all. When's the last time they had a good interface design idea? Seriously, I mean it.
Windows Mobile is largely a failure because it's clunky. By the time the few people I know who have a Windows Mobile phone have got out their pens and clicked through the menues to start dialing, everyone else - iPhone, Android, regular phone, even Blackberry - has already dialed half the number.
All the /. geeks fall for the feature list, but it isn't about features, it's about useability. Everyone except the 1% tech dudes doesn't care for what they could potentially, theoretically, maybe with some hacking, use a device for. What matters is what the device can actually, easily be used for.
And in that department, it is sometimes better to restrict the functionality and make a limited subset easier to use.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not an iPad owner and likely won't become one, as it is too limited for my taste, too. But I'm pretty sure nobody is going to come out with a better tablet for the next few years.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Re:Who would not buy... by TaoPhoenix · 2010-04-29 23:37 · Score: 1

I chose to be nice enough to reply rather than start a mod-slam on you.
I would seriously not buy an iPad 1.0 with all of its really strange limitations because there might be a better Android pad out in a few months. Fixed that for you. See that German example last month.
"The Phone Is Not The Pad". I accept the locked mentality of the iPhone because lo, I still do regard it as a *phone* that happens to be capable of nifty other stuff. I treat a Pad as a *computer* and once that usage mode switches, I hold my real computers to higher standards where Locked doesn't cut it.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
What the fuck? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-29 23:38 · Score: 0

And if the "testing" happens to kill a competitors product launch while people wait for the Microsoft product, well that was just an accident!
You people are insane. Apple is not a Microsoft competitor in terms of iPad-like devices because Microsoft isn't selling a competing product. Stopping / lowering iPad sales for a few months because people want to wait around for a courier does not help Microsoft in any way shape or form. They don't give a shit if you buy an iPad, because it doesn't affect the sales of any product they do sell. Even if it did, anyone who somehow decided to not buy an iPad because they were holding out for the courier is now aware that the courier was cancelled just in time for the iPad + 3g launch which starts shipping in a week.
The strategy you claim microsoft was employing would only make sense if the courier was, in fact, not vaporware. If they couldn't get the courier released at the same time as an iPad, and the launch couldn't happen before the end of the year (and no later, otherwise the strategy doesn't work again), they would want to keep that market segment from buying iPads, and have them wait for the courier's release. They would do that out of fear that anyone that already has an iPad wouldn't want to also shell out for a courier.
In other words, the fact that it's vaporware proves there's no conspiracy.
And? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 00:06 · Score: 0

Microsoft never promoted. It was R&D. Which, even though you won't admit it, Microsoft is VERY good at. That was the long way around to me saying...

What a great NON-STORY you have here.
so arrogant... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 02:20 · Score: 0

and you don't think that most of those red-ringed owners simply BOUGHT ANOTHER XBOX?
1. Re:so arrogant... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-04-30 14:39 · Score: 0
  
  Oh I know they did. I have a friend whose died a month after the extended warranty and she's saving up for another one. The fact there's a word for the red rings of death on the console is a bit... creepy. (Full disclosure: I've never owned an Xbox. PS2, N64, Gamecube, Wii.)
Further elucidation by SuperKendall · 2010-04-30 03:53 · Score: 1

A mathematician and a physicist agree to a psychological experiment. The mathematician is put in a chair in a large empty room and a beautiful naked woman is placed on a bed at the other end of the room. The psychologist explains, "You are to remain in your chair. Every five minutes, I will move your chair to a position halfway between its current location and the woman on the bed." The mathematician looks at the psychologist in disgust. "What? I'm not going to go through this. You know I'll never reach the bed!" And he gets up and storms out. The psychologist makes a note on his clipboard and ushers the physicist in. He explains the situation, and the physicist's eyes light up and he starts drooling. The psychologist is a bit confused. "Don't you realize that you'll never reach her?" The physicist smiles and replied, "Of course! But I'll get close enough for all practical purposes!"

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
market saturation by svirre · 2010-04-30 06:44 · Score: 1

Maybe both HP and MS marketeers figures the market for tablets is pretty much saturated? Apple will sell boatloads at least right away because of the hype and fanbois, the question for other tablet manufacturers would be if there are actually any more market or if apple will pretty much sell all the tablets that ever will be sold in the foreseeable future in the next 12 months.
The history of tablets do not inspire faith that they will become large sellers, and keep in mind that unlike previous successes of apple the ipad is an additional device that will need to justify it's existence. So can apple prove that the pad can do things that advanced phones or laptops can't? If so they might just have made a new market. If not it is the apple newton all over again.