Doubtful. But also mostly irrelevant. There's no way even 10% of Android users have an emulator installed (emulators are allowed in the App Store, btw), and out of all reasonably potential customers, the 99% number is quite reasonable.
Anyway, even if it's 90%, the point is still valid.
Liberty? Apple isn't a government. You don't sign away any rights to them. Things like iPhones and iPads let you do *more* with them than you could do without them. How does liberty come into play at all?
Right, because iPod dock connectors are so rare...
Apple will address this (if they have to) with a dock connector to mini/micro (whichever one the regulation mandates) USB adapter. It's possible, but I don't think very likely, that they'll actually add another dedicated port.
As any iOS user can attest to, Flash is all but dead except for (and in this order):
Video
Ads
Games
For the first one, H.264 streaming works way better, people actively dislike the second one, and while Flash games can be fun, it's definitely not a deal breaker for most people.
I've gone with the "don't install Flash, just use Chrome when you do need it" method, and I've discovered that I rarely need it.
Flash is already dead. Sure, it'll be around for a few more years at least, and I imagine Flash games will be around for a long time as well (although a more proper game plug in could reasonably supplant it), but as a "must-have, default plug in", Flash is on its way out.
How is that worthy of class action? It wasn't any sort of bait-and-switch, and isn't a secret. In fact, Apple highly touts this as a reason for people to choose iOS devices.
But when almost nobody demands non-locked-down computers, non-locked-down computers might be cost-prohibitive to acquire for those that do demand them. Compare the price of video game consoles vs. PCs in the 1990s, for example. Besides, Richard Stallman back in 1997 imagined one scenario where only "officially licensed and bonded programmers" are eligible for non-locked-down computers. This has already come to pass.
This has not come to pass. Anyone anywhere can buy a PC and run Linux today. And I don't see how it will be possible, except via legislation (which would be insane, even by legislative standards), to prevent some entrepreneur from going to Taiwan and buying up some chips and boards and selling those for the vast array of tinkerers. I don't see how it's even possible to imagine that chips and boards that only cost $50 today will somehow become so difficult to make that they will be hundreds of dollars tomorrow.
In the future, technology becomes cheaper, not more expensive. In ten years, your high-end, noisy, power-hungry i7 desktop becomes outclassed by a $200 battery powered iPod. Even if 99% of computers become iPads, you'll still have people who want a non-locked device. In 30 years, when iPads become $10, you might have to spend $50 for the parts to assemble your own Linux PC.
Already, almost everything has a chip in it. Someone has to program them. In order to program them, in order to design them, in order to emulate them, there will have to be unlocked computers. Governments, NASA scientists, programmers, Boeing designers, hardware makers, FSF members, etc., etc., these people will all require unlocked computers. And some of those people are involved in actually making computers, so they'll be able to make the thing they want. There is no way whatsoever that general purpose computers will ever go away. Even worldwide dictatorship legislation can't ultimately do it.
I just hope in the name of the redeemer that you're right about this and that we're not about to fall into a world like that of "The Right to Read" by Richard Stallman.
The only way that will become completely true is via legislation. Even if most consumer products go locked-down, there will always be nerds who want to tinker, and there will be computers for them. And even on locked-down devices, you'll be able to run Linux in emulation. This is even possible on iOS, although not currently reasonable. You can write a VM in javascript, and although it would be too slow today, just let Moore's Law do its thing.
But you can even write a proper VM. You can pay $99/year, become friends with someone who has, or jailbreak. Even though the last option is unsanctioned, the first two are 100% legitimate and fully approved by Apple.
You are having a difficult time realizing your claim that the tablet market will dry up is you applying your own point of view to everyone else. The thing that should clue you in that you are woefully wrong here is the phenomenal success of the iPad. You seem to think people are just being suckered in by the hype and will end up agreeing with your nerd sensibilities, leaving the market to wither.
This completely ignores reality. Reality is people are buying iPads at an increasing rate. Reality is people are highly satisfied with their iPads. Reality is they enjoy playing games on them. Reality is most people aren't nerds, and it's almost solely nerds who seem to think iPads are no good.
The most amusing part is how confused the nerds are that the normal people don't share their opinions.
Who's asking you to ditch your PC, PS3, Xbox 360, PSP or DSi? No one here is even asking you to get an iPad. But even if they were, it would just be an additional device to play games on. You didn't get rid of any of the other devices each time you bought a different one.
That's because each new device is great for playing games (with a great game library). The iPad sucks for playing games. I am a gamer. I know. I don't even like using stylus on Nintendo DSi. Just think how much I would "enjoy" using my smudgy greasy fingers on a screen, blocking the view of the game while controlling it? No thanks.
I still don't see what your "enjoyment" has to do with the over 100 million people who game on their iPads and iPhones and iPod touches. If you don't want an iPad (or whatever) no one is telling you to get one, or to like one, or to replace your assortment of consoles with one.
Most people don't have a cornucopia of gaming systems.
That's right. Most people are not game connoisseurs like yours truly.:) So when I talk about gaming, I actually somewhat know what I am talking about. I have years of experience on many devises with many input methods.
And yet you've never played Angry Birds. If you had, you'd realize that not all games need a d-pad, analog joystick, or keyboard and mouse to be fun. It's fine that you don't think you'll enjoy multitouch games. Some people don't like Wii games, or don't like PC games, etc. Big deal. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's not enjoyable for other people, including the well over 100 million iOS users.
Why shouldn't they play games on it if they are having fun?
Gosh... this is idiotic. I am not here to tell others how to live their lives. I am just saying that in my opinion the tablets will generally fail in the market like they did the first time (remember all the tablet hype years ago?). I think the tablets might succeed if they abandon the "walled garden" philosophy and become extensible and configurable general purpose devices, but I don't see that happening yet. In this hypothetical scenario what will carry the tablets is not their form factor (which is OK) or input method (which sucks very badly), but the open nature.
You are applying your own personal views to others. Tablets failed because they were Windows computers with pen-input tacked on. Nobody wants that. The iPad has outsold every other tablet computer ever made combined, and did so in less than one year. People want iPads. They play games on iPads. If iPads "sucked very badly" for games, people wouldn't be playing them.
If you think people don't like them, or that they want "open" devices, you are delusional. If they wanted those things, they wouldn't be buying iPads in ever increasing numbers. Your nerd sensibilities don't apply to the masses. They only apply to you, and those like you. Which is a minority. And you will always be able to buy more open, more complex systems, so don't worry about it.
Are you worried that PCs (or notebooks or whatever) won't be available anymore, or are you worried that you will start being the weird one who still carries around a notebook after everyone else has moved on?
I'm worried that I won't be able to replace the one I have once it wears out.
Then you are insane. You will *always* be able to buy a computer that you can toss Linux on. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS. The only way this will ever change is if technological civilization collapses.
I'm also worried that my skills will become irrelevant if none of my audience has a PC on which to use the PC software that I produce. As I understand it, developing for a video game console, iPad, or handheld device is noticeably more expensive than developing for a PC.
I bet horse buggy makers felt the same way 100 years ago. Automobiles required different skills and were more expensive to build and work on. BFD. Technology moves on. If you want to remain in the horse buggy era, no one will stop you. You can still buy horse buggies today. Just don't expect the rest of us to not buy a car simply because you don't know how to work on them or don't want to pay to use one yourself.
Also, data plans are much less than $60/month.
It must have come down fairly recently, and it's still $50 per month according to Verizon's page. Or did you mean a data plan designed for phones that allows no tethering and is bundled with a $40/mo voice plan that comes with far more minutes than I'll use in the foreseeable future? I pay $5/mo for voice on my current dumbphone.
Yes, I was referring to non-third-world-poverty plans. If you can only afford $5/month, then I see a bright future in WiFi-only devices for you. WiFi works just fine. If you want connectivity on the go, you pay extra. Big deal.
And if you can't afford it, you can always forego the data plan and use wifi.
I could go with a tablet, an external keyboard, and Wi-Fi, but then I wouldn't be able to use remote desktop in order to work around the iPad's inability to run applications that Apple doesn't like.
Nobody's telling you to buy a tablet. But a PC! Buy a Xoom! Buy a Nook and root the motherfucker. I don't care. But quit crying about being left behind. You will never, ever, be unable to buy a Linux-capable (with all the implied freedoms) computer. NEVER.
They don't want FTP, NAS, USB host devices, etc., etc. They just want to turn it on and use it.
But once a tablet is turned on and they are using it, what do people expect to happen once they fill up the internal storage with contacts, e-mails, documents, photos, music, videos, etc.? Or if they lose or break it, how do they expect to get their contacts, e-mails, documents, photos, music, videos, etc. back? Then they'll start to want FTP, NAS, USB host devices, etc., etc. Or what am I still missing?
The cloud. What you're missing is that people don't want the TLA, they want the space. They don't want something they have to manage (NAS), they don't want some kludgey attachment (USB) they don't want something they have to browse like a PC filesystem (FTP). They just want their shit available whenever they want.
Also, storage will outpace most people's needs. Already notebooks come with more space than most people could even imagine filling up. 64GB + cloud will cover 99% of the people out there.
For those in the minority, like you, there will always be options with more flexible capabilities.
Affordable for individuals, or cost prohibitive?
Not my problem. But computers are going to be disposable soon. A computer will cost a nickel. Maybe an unlocked one will cost a dime, who cares? Digital greeting cards have more power than a million dollar computer from the sixties, and you throw it away when you're done.
Those that do need to can buy a car with manual transmission.
Until a stick becomes far more expensive than an automatic.
you will still be able to fire up a VM in your contact lens computer and run Linux until your eyes dry up if you want.
Not if the manufacturer of contact lens computers bans such a VM and enforces this ban with verification of digital signatures. It'd be like when Apple pulled a Commodore 64 game from the App Store solely because the emulator it ran in allowed the user to reset into BASIC (see previous Slashdot article).
Then just buy your contact lenses from a manufacturer that lets you. Why is this so difficult to comprehend? Non-locked down computers will be available forever.
I do a lot of programming on the bus commute. Tablets are explicitly not designed for programming. Therefore, I carry a 10" laptop because I'm a 2%er. Trouble is, 2%ers do not a market make.
Why not? 2% is well over 100 million people worldwide, and over 6 million in the US alone. That's a very viable market size. Gaming mice, Wacom tablets, Photoshop, Linux, Visual Studio, Ham radio, DSLR cameras, hot air balloons, horses, manual transmission cars, ball peen hammers, paint brushes, trombones, Boxee Boxes, Sega Saturn emulators... There are tons of viable and profitable markets that are much smaller than 2%. There will always be people who want or need PCs, so they will always be made.
Are you worried that PCs (or notebooks or whatever) won't be available anymore, or are you worried that you will start being the weird one who still carries around a notebook after everyone else has moved on? Newsflash, you already are the weird one. The only difference is that, today, everyone else has to buy the computer that is ideal for you, but not for them, because they don't have a choice that's well suited for them. The iPad is beginning to change that.
The industry already makes computers that are good for you, why begrudge it when the market begins to serve everyone else too?
and for the other 2%, they RDC back to their office computer.
That would cost me an extra $720 per year for a mobile data plan. Companies can afford it; students and hobbyists often cannot.
Of course they can. I see hobbyists and students with iPhones all over the place. Also, data plans are much less than $60/month.
And if you can't afford it, you can always forego the data plan and use wifi. That won't help you on the bus, but you can do other things. That's what the rest of us do when we can't afford something, we make do with what we have.
Already, even iDevices are far more capable than Apple allows them to be.
Actually, iOS devices are far more capable now than they would be if they were more "open" or more PC-like in terms of things like root access and open filesystems and all the other things geeks bitch about. That's why they are so popular, and Android devices have failed miserably outside of the artificially affected handset market.
Additional capabilities only help if the user can make use of them. Geeks can make use of these things, but most other people either cannot, or simply don't care enough to expend the effort. People want, just like your sig says, for it to just "go". They don't want to get mired down in unnecessary options, or have to deal with additional complexity.
If you want root, if you want full control, if you want to be able to customize every little detail, you will always be able to buy a PC and run Linux. This will never change. Even when Moore's Law makes the idea of a dedicated computing unit quaint, you will still be able to fire up a VM in your contact lens computer and run Linux until your eyes dry up if you want.
Just please quit making the mistake that that's what everyone else wants, or that most people are even well served by such a system.
Not exactly. The owner of a PC has root. The owner of an iPad does not, even if the iPad can store documents on FTP, NAS, or USB mass storage.
The thing you and jed and the rest don't understand is people don't want root. They don't want FTP, NAS, USB host devices, etc., etc. They just want to turn it on and use it.
For those in the minority, like you, there will always be options with more flexible capabilities. You're witnessing the advent of the automatic transmission, and freaking out that people won't be in full control over what gear they are in. Most don't need to, and simply don't care. Those that do need to can buy a car with manual transmission. What's the big deal? Why oppose something that works better for others?
The tablet is for people that don't actually want a PC
So once the market shifts such that the "people that don't actually want a PC" so greatly outnumber the people that do want a PC, and the economies of scale of making PCs have dried up, what should people that do want a PC do?
The same thing people who want a record player do today. They buy a record player.
Games are everywhere. What would be significantly more troubling for iPads would be if people *weren't* playing games on them.
I'm a huge gamer. Now tell me why I should play on an iPad. What will make me ditch my PC, PS3, xbox360, PSP and Nintendo DSi, and pick up iPad when I want to play some games?
Who's asking you to ditch your PC, PS3, Xbox 360, PSP or DSi? No one here is even asking you to get an iPad. But even if they were, it would just be an additional device to play games on. You didn't get rid of any of the other devices each time you bought a different one.
Most people don't have a cornucopia of gaming systems. Who are you to tell them the iPad sucks for playing games? For a lot of people, their iPhone or iPad is the best gaming device they have. Why shouldn't they play games on it if they are having fun? Because some nerd on the Internet told them so?
If gaming is their primary use, then tablet is doomed because the general purpose computers, game consoles and portable game consoles are all much, much better for playing games.
Your logic is, something is doomed if people are using it a lot?
Games are everywhere. What would be significantly more troubling for iPads would be if people *weren't* playing games on them.
It's not a good sign if the device's primary use involves a function it sucks at.
Says who? The millions of people spending many millions of hours playing games on them?
The tablets failed to take off in the past and I think they'll fail again. They just don't fill a credible niche. They're largely useless.
The iPad had, in less than one year, completely outsold all other tablets ever put on the market. That's not just a "credible niche", that's mainstream. The iPad is the most successful consumer electronics device ever. The market has spoken, and it wants iPads.
Maybe doctors and nurses will use them in hospitals to keep the patient notes, or maybe tablets can fill some other super-specialized industrial niche like that.
Maybe they will, but I don't understand why you keep trying to find some niche for a wildly successful product. It's like wondering if maybe TV will someday find a niche.
But tablets suck as general purpose devices, and they suck as gaming devices as well.
Yeah, keep repeating that and maybe it will somehow reverse reality and become true.
-cut- Senes' three step plan to completely destroy the tablet market -cut-
Boom, tablets are the new PCs. Not a replacement, simply an evolution out of the old form. Until all this happens they'll still just be a gimmicky toy that some people happen to spend a lot of time on. Make these things happen and you'll see business tablets as well.
That's the exact opposite of what people want. It makes no sense to turn the tablet into a PC. We already have something like that... the PC. For people that want that, they can buy a... PC!
The tablet is for people that don't actually want a PC, and for those that do want a PC (and there will be plenty of such people, especially amongst the slashdot crowd), the tablet is for them too, for those times when they don't want to use a PC.
For those for whom the PC is ingrained into their very being, tablets will remain a "gimmicky toy that some [other] people happen to spend a lot of time on".
Will this give us the 'one language to rule them all' that Java failed to bring, or will the bad blood between the F/OSS groups and Microsoft make this a dead end?
Neither. It will be exactly what it already is today, just one of many programming languages.
You cannot truly use an iPad for production, i.e writing, video editing, programming, etc.
Oh, really? Writing, like with Pages, the bundles Notes app, or any of the multitude of writing apps? Video editing, like with the built-in bare bones editor, or the full featured consumer editing iMovie app, which is a port of the desktop version?
You're (mostly) correct about programming, though. But that's an artificial (and ultimately misguided, IMO) security decision. There's nothing inherent to the iPad itself that precludes using it for programming. In fact, it's more powerful than developer machines from less than ten years ago. I don't recall people complaining that computers of the day could not be used for programming (or writing or video editing, etc.).
You're not going to generally use an iPad for high end professional work (although they have already found their way as an integral tool in professional feature film creation), that doesn't mean they "cannot truly [be used] for production".
It would be a mistake however to assume that iPad's are for purely passive media consumption, ala video, books, and music. Instead, iPads allow for interactive media consumption, ala games.
It's just as much a mistake to assume the iPad can't be used for open-ended content creation, and instead just limited to, at most, guided interaction, like with games.
I was actually considering getting a Xoom for video editing. I can imagine a touch interface working really nicely for that. I know I'd much rather have 1GB of RAM than 512MB in that scenario.
Why, exactly? Even assuming all other things remaining equal (and things definitely aren't equal), there's no reason to assume 1GB of RAM is going to be appreciably better than 512MB of RAM. Once you have sufficient memory (and 512MB is more than enough for HD video editing), the software differences become ultimately important.
What good is 2x the RAM if you're using it to run inferior software?
About not releasing before it's ready: They are doing closed development.
We're not talking about a closed development process, but a closed distribution process.
That's actually the mode the FSF has traditionally worked in (note that this was one of the reasons for the egcs fork of gcc), therefore it quite obviously doesn't make the code less open source (or even less free software), although it makes for a less open development model.
No, that's exactly what it makes it. The FSF does not distribute closed source software. Android 3.0 is closed source.
However the restrictions to approved modifications might indeed make the code less open source, however it depends on how they are doing it.
No, the fact that you can't get the source makes it less open source.
Slashdot Mirror
Doubtful. But also mostly irrelevant. There's no way even 10% of Android users have an emulator installed (emulators are allowed in the App Store, btw), and out of all reasonably potential customers, the 99% number is quite reasonable.
Anyway, even if it's 90%, the point is still valid.
Liberty? Apple isn't a government. You don't sign away any rights to them. Things like iPhones and iPads let you do *more* with them than you could do without them. How does liberty come into play at all?
Right, because iPod dock connectors are so rare...
Apple will address this (if they have to) with a dock connector to mini/micro (whichever one the regulation mandates) USB adapter. It's possible, but I don't think very likely, that they'll actually add another dedicated port.
As any iOS user can attest to, Flash is all but dead except for (and in this order):
For the first one, H.264 streaming works way better, people actively dislike the second one, and while Flash games can be fun, it's definitely not a deal breaker for most people.
I've gone with the "don't install Flash, just use Chrome when you do need it" method, and I've discovered that I rarely need it.
Flash is already dead. Sure, it'll be around for a few more years at least, and I imagine Flash games will be around for a long time as well (although a more proper game plug in could reasonably supplant it), but as a "must-have, default plug in", Flash is on its way out.
How is that worthy of class action? It wasn't any sort of bait-and-switch, and isn't a secret. In fact, Apple highly touts this as a reason for people to choose iOS devices.
But when almost nobody demands non-locked-down computers, non-locked-down computers might be cost-prohibitive to acquire for those that do demand them. Compare the price of video game consoles vs. PCs in the 1990s, for example. Besides, Richard Stallman back in 1997 imagined one scenario where only "officially licensed and bonded programmers" are eligible for non-locked-down computers. This has already come to pass.
This has not come to pass. Anyone anywhere can buy a PC and run Linux today. And I don't see how it will be possible, except via legislation (which would be insane, even by legislative standards), to prevent some entrepreneur from going to Taiwan and buying up some chips and boards and selling those for the vast array of tinkerers. I don't see how it's even possible to imagine that chips and boards that only cost $50 today will somehow become so difficult to make that they will be hundreds of dollars tomorrow.
In the future, technology becomes cheaper, not more expensive. In ten years, your high-end, noisy, power-hungry i7 desktop becomes outclassed by a $200 battery powered iPod. Even if 99% of computers become iPads, you'll still have people who want a non-locked device. In 30 years, when iPads become $10, you might have to spend $50 for the parts to assemble your own Linux PC.
Already, almost everything has a chip in it. Someone has to program them. In order to program them, in order to design them, in order to emulate them, there will have to be unlocked computers. Governments, NASA scientists, programmers, Boeing designers, hardware makers, FSF members, etc., etc., these people will all require unlocked computers. And some of those people are involved in actually making computers, so they'll be able to make the thing they want. There is no way whatsoever that general purpose computers will ever go away. Even worldwide dictatorship legislation can't ultimately do it.
I just hope in the name of the redeemer that you're right about this and that we're not about to fall into a world like that of "The Right to Read" by Richard Stallman.
The only way that will become completely true is via legislation. Even if most consumer products go locked-down, there will always be nerds who want to tinker, and there will be computers for them. And even on locked-down devices, you'll be able to run Linux in emulation. This is even possible on iOS, although not currently reasonable. You can write a VM in javascript, and although it would be too slow today, just let Moore's Law do its thing.
But you can even write a proper VM. You can pay $99/year, become friends with someone who has, or jailbreak. Even though the last option is unsanctioned, the first two are 100% legitimate and fully approved by Apple.
You are having a difficult time realizing your claim that the tablet market will dry up is you applying your own point of view to everyone else. The thing that should clue you in that you are woefully wrong here is the phenomenal success of the iPad. You seem to think people are just being suckered in by the hype and will end up agreeing with your nerd sensibilities, leaving the market to wither.
This completely ignores reality. Reality is people are buying iPads at an increasing rate. Reality is people are highly satisfied with their iPads. Reality is they enjoy playing games on them. Reality is most people aren't nerds, and it's almost solely nerds who seem to think iPads are no good.
The most amusing part is how confused the nerds are that the normal people don't share their opinions.
Who's asking you to ditch your PC, PS3, Xbox 360, PSP or DSi? No one here is even asking you to get an iPad. But even if they were, it would just be an additional device to play games on. You didn't get rid of any of the other devices each time you bought a different one.
That's because each new device is great for playing games (with a great game library). The iPad sucks for playing games. I am a gamer. I know. I don't even like using stylus on Nintendo DSi. Just think how much I would "enjoy" using my smudgy greasy fingers on a screen, blocking the view of the game while controlling it? No thanks.
I still don't see what your "enjoyment" has to do with the over 100 million people who game on their iPads and iPhones and iPod touches. If you don't want an iPad (or whatever) no one is telling you to get one, or to like one, or to replace your assortment of consoles with one.
Most people don't have a cornucopia of gaming systems.
That's right. Most people are not game connoisseurs like yours truly. :) So when I talk about gaming, I actually somewhat know what I am talking about. I have years of experience on many devises with many input methods.
And yet you've never played Angry Birds. If you had, you'd realize that not all games need a d-pad, analog joystick, or keyboard and mouse to be fun. It's fine that you don't think you'll enjoy multitouch games. Some people don't like Wii games, or don't like PC games, etc. Big deal. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's not enjoyable for other people, including the well over 100 million iOS users.
Why shouldn't they play games on it if they are having fun?
Gosh... this is idiotic. I am not here to tell others how to live their lives. I am just saying that in my opinion the tablets will generally fail in the market like they did the first time (remember all the tablet hype years ago?). I think the tablets might succeed if they abandon the "walled garden" philosophy and become extensible and configurable general purpose devices, but I don't see that happening yet. In this hypothetical scenario what will carry the tablets is not their form factor (which is OK) or input method (which sucks very badly), but the open nature.
You are applying your own personal views to others. Tablets failed because they were Windows computers with pen-input tacked on. Nobody wants that. The iPad has outsold every other tablet computer ever made combined, and did so in less than one year. People want iPads. They play games on iPads. If iPads "sucked very badly" for games, people wouldn't be playing them.
If you think people don't like them, or that they want "open" devices, you are delusional. If they wanted those things, they wouldn't be buying iPads in ever increasing numbers. Your nerd sensibilities don't apply to the masses. They only apply to you, and those like you. Which is a minority. And you will always be able to buy more open, more complex systems, so don't worry about it.
Are you worried that PCs (or notebooks or whatever) won't be available anymore, or are you worried that you will start being the weird one who still carries around a notebook after everyone else has moved on?
I'm worried that I won't be able to replace the one I have once it wears out.
Then you are insane. You will *always* be able to buy a computer that you can toss Linux on. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS. The only way this will ever change is if technological civilization collapses.
I'm also worried that my skills will become irrelevant if none of my audience has a PC on which to use the PC software that I produce. As I understand it, developing for a video game console, iPad, or handheld device is noticeably more expensive than developing for a PC.
I bet horse buggy makers felt the same way 100 years ago. Automobiles required different skills and were more expensive to build and work on. BFD. Technology moves on. If you want to remain in the horse buggy era, no one will stop you. You can still buy horse buggies today. Just don't expect the rest of us to not buy a car simply because you don't know how to work on them or don't want to pay to use one yourself.
Also, data plans are much less than $60/month.
It must have come down fairly recently, and it's still $50 per month according to Verizon's page. Or did you mean a data plan designed for phones that allows no tethering and is bundled with a $40/mo voice plan that comes with far more minutes than I'll use in the foreseeable future? I pay $5/mo for voice on my current dumbphone.
Yes, I was referring to non-third-world-poverty plans. If you can only afford $5/month, then I see a bright future in WiFi-only devices for you. WiFi works just fine. If you want connectivity on the go, you pay extra. Big deal.
And if you can't afford it, you can always forego the data plan and use wifi.
I could go with a tablet, an external keyboard, and Wi-Fi, but then I wouldn't be able to use remote desktop in order to work around the iPad's inability to run applications that Apple doesn't like.
Nobody's telling you to buy a tablet. But a PC! Buy a Xoom! Buy a Nook and root the motherfucker. I don't care. But quit crying about being left behind. You will never, ever, be unable to buy a Linux-capable (with all the implied freedoms) computer. NEVER.
They don't want FTP, NAS, USB host devices, etc., etc. They just want to turn it on and use it.
But once a tablet is turned on and they are using it, what do people expect to happen once they fill up the internal storage with contacts, e-mails, documents, photos, music, videos, etc.? Or if they lose or break it, how do they expect to get their contacts, e-mails, documents, photos, music, videos, etc. back? Then they'll start to want FTP, NAS, USB host devices, etc., etc. Or what am I still missing?
The cloud. What you're missing is that people don't want the TLA, they want the space. They don't want something they have to manage (NAS), they don't want some kludgey attachment (USB) they don't want something they have to browse like a PC filesystem (FTP). They just want their shit available whenever they want.
Also, storage will outpace most people's needs. Already notebooks come with more space than most people could even imagine filling up. 64GB + cloud will cover 99% of the people out there.
For those in the minority, like you, there will always be options with more flexible capabilities.
Affordable for individuals, or cost prohibitive?
Not my problem. But computers are going to be disposable soon. A computer will cost a nickel. Maybe an unlocked one will cost a dime, who cares? Digital greeting cards have more power than a million dollar computer from the sixties, and you throw it away when you're done.
Those that do need to can buy a car with manual transmission.
Until a stick becomes far more expensive than an automatic.
Which is never going to happen.
you will still be able to fire up a VM in your contact lens computer and run Linux until your eyes dry up if you want.
Not if the manufacturer of contact lens computers bans such a VM and enforces this ban with verification of digital signatures. It'd be like when Apple pulled a Commodore 64 game from the App Store solely because the emulator it ran in allowed the user to reset into BASIC (see previous Slashdot article).
Then just buy your contact lenses from a manufacturer that lets you. Why is this so difficult to comprehend? Non-locked down computers will be available forever.
I do a lot of programming on the bus commute. Tablets are explicitly not designed for programming. Therefore, I carry a 10" laptop because I'm a 2%er. Trouble is, 2%ers do not a market make.
Why not? 2% is well over 100 million people worldwide, and over 6 million in the US alone. That's a very viable market size. Gaming mice, Wacom tablets, Photoshop, Linux, Visual Studio, Ham radio, DSLR cameras, hot air balloons, horses, manual transmission cars, ball peen hammers, paint brushes, trombones, Boxee Boxes, Sega Saturn emulators... There are tons of viable and profitable markets that are much smaller than 2%. There will always be people who want or need PCs, so they will always be made.
Are you worried that PCs (or notebooks or whatever) won't be available anymore, or are you worried that you will start being the weird one who still carries around a notebook after everyone else has moved on? Newsflash, you already are the weird one. The only difference is that, today, everyone else has to buy the computer that is ideal for you, but not for them, because they don't have a choice that's well suited for them. The iPad is beginning to change that.
The industry already makes computers that are good for you, why begrudge it when the market begins to serve everyone else too?
and for the other 2%, they RDC back to their office computer.
That would cost me an extra $720 per year for a mobile data plan. Companies can afford it; students and hobbyists often cannot.
Of course they can. I see hobbyists and students with iPhones all over the place. Also, data plans are much less than $60/month.
And if you can't afford it, you can always forego the data plan and use wifi. That won't help you on the bus, but you can do other things. That's what the rest of us do when we can't afford something, we make do with what we have.
Already, even iDevices are far more capable than Apple allows them to be.
Actually, iOS devices are far more capable now than they would be if they were more "open" or more PC-like in terms of things like root access and open filesystems and all the other things geeks bitch about. That's why they are so popular, and Android devices have failed miserably outside of the artificially affected handset market.
Additional capabilities only help if the user can make use of them. Geeks can make use of these things, but most other people either cannot, or simply don't care enough to expend the effort. People want, just like your sig says, for it to just "go". They don't want to get mired down in unnecessary options, or have to deal with additional complexity.
If you want root, if you want full control, if you want to be able to customize every little detail, you will always be able to buy a PC and run Linux. This will never change. Even when Moore's Law makes the idea of a dedicated computing unit quaint, you will still be able to fire up a VM in your contact lens computer and run Linux until your eyes dry up if you want.
Just please quit making the mistake that that's what everyone else wants, or that most people are even well served by such a system.
Then the iPad has become a PC.
Not exactly. The owner of a PC has root. The owner of an iPad does not, even if the iPad can store documents on FTP, NAS, or USB mass storage.
The thing you and jed and the rest don't understand is people don't want root. They don't want FTP, NAS, USB host devices, etc., etc. They just want to turn it on and use it.
For those in the minority, like you, there will always be options with more flexible capabilities. You're witnessing the advent of the automatic transmission, and freaking out that people won't be in full control over what gear they are in. Most don't need to, and simply don't care. Those that do need to can buy a car with manual transmission. What's the big deal? Why oppose something that works better for others?
For people that want that, they can buy a... PC!
The tablet is for people that don't actually want a PC
So once the market shifts such that the "people that don't actually want a PC" so greatly outnumber the people that do want a PC, and the economies of scale of making PCs have dried up, what should people that do want a PC do?
The same thing people who want a record player do today. They buy a record player.
Games are everywhere. What would be significantly more troubling for iPads would be if people *weren't* playing games on them.
I'm a huge gamer. Now tell me why I should play on an iPad. What will make me ditch my PC, PS3, xbox360, PSP and Nintendo DSi, and pick up iPad when I want to play some games?
Who's asking you to ditch your PC, PS3, Xbox 360, PSP or DSi? No one here is even asking you to get an iPad. But even if they were, it would just be an additional device to play games on. You didn't get rid of any of the other devices each time you bought a different one.
Most people don't have a cornucopia of gaming systems. Who are you to tell them the iPad sucks for playing games? For a lot of people, their iPhone or iPad is the best gaming device they have. Why shouldn't they play games on it if they are having fun? Because some nerd on the Internet told them so?
If gaming is their primary use, then tablet is doomed because the general purpose computers, game consoles and portable game consoles are all much, much better for playing games.
Your logic is, something is doomed if people are using it a lot?
Games are everywhere. What would be significantly more troubling for iPads would be if people *weren't* playing games on them.
It's not a good sign if the device's primary use involves a function it sucks at.
Says who? The millions of people spending many millions of hours playing games on them?
The tablets failed to take off in the past and I think they'll fail again. They just don't fill a credible niche. They're largely useless.
The iPad had, in less than one year, completely outsold all other tablets ever put on the market. That's not just a "credible niche", that's mainstream. The iPad is the most successful consumer electronics device ever. The market has spoken, and it wants iPads.
Maybe doctors and nurses will use them in hospitals to keep the patient notes, or maybe tablets can fill some other super-specialized industrial niche like that.
Maybe they will, but I don't understand why you keep trying to find some niche for a wildly successful product. It's like wondering if maybe TV will someday find a niche.
But tablets suck as general purpose devices, and they suck as gaming devices as well.
Yeah, keep repeating that and maybe it will somehow reverse reality and become true.
-cut- Senes' three step plan to completely destroy the tablet market -cut-
Boom, tablets are the new PCs. Not a replacement, simply an evolution out of the old form. Until all this happens they'll still just be a gimmicky toy that some people happen to spend a lot of time on. Make these things happen and you'll see business tablets as well.
That's the exact opposite of what people want. It makes no sense to turn the tablet into a PC. We already have something like that... the PC. For people that want that, they can buy a... PC!
The tablet is for people that don't actually want a PC, and for those that do want a PC (and there will be plenty of such people, especially amongst the slashdot crowd), the tablet is for them too, for those times when they don't want to use a PC.
For those for whom the PC is ingrained into their very being, tablets will remain a "gimmicky toy that some [other] people happen to spend a lot of time on".
Sounds like Canonical has that covered.
That gift must have got lost in the mail...
Will this give us the 'one language to rule them all' that Java failed to bring, or will the bad blood between the F/OSS groups and Microsoft make this a dead end?
Neither. It will be exactly what it already is today, just one of many programming languages.
You cannot truly use an iPad for production, i.e writing, video editing, programming, etc.
Oh, really? Writing, like with Pages, the bundles Notes app, or any of the multitude of writing apps? Video editing, like with the built-in bare bones editor, or the full featured consumer editing iMovie app, which is a port of the desktop version?
You're (mostly) correct about programming, though. But that's an artificial (and ultimately misguided, IMO) security decision. There's nothing inherent to the iPad itself that precludes using it for programming. In fact, it's more powerful than developer machines from less than ten years ago. I don't recall people complaining that computers of the day could not be used for programming (or writing or video editing, etc.).
You're not going to generally use an iPad for high end professional work (although they have already found their way as an integral tool in professional feature film creation), that doesn't mean they "cannot truly [be used] for production".
It would be a mistake however to assume that iPad's are for purely passive media consumption, ala video, books, and music. Instead, iPads allow for interactive media consumption, ala games.
It's just as much a mistake to assume the iPad can't be used for open-ended content creation, and instead just limited to, at most, guided interaction, like with games.
I was actually considering getting a Xoom for video editing. I can imagine a touch interface working really nicely for that. I know I'd much rather have 1GB of RAM than 512MB in that scenario.
Why, exactly? Even assuming all other things remaining equal (and things definitely aren't equal), there's no reason to assume 1GB of RAM is going to be appreciably better than 512MB of RAM. Once you have sufficient memory (and 512MB is more than enough for HD video editing), the software differences become ultimately important.
What good is 2x the RAM if you're using it to run inferior software?
More people run Unix on their desktops than run Linux on their desktops. Mac OS X is Unix.
About not releasing before it's ready: They are doing closed development.
We're not talking about a closed development process, but a closed distribution process.
That's actually the mode the FSF has traditionally worked in (note that this was one of the reasons for the egcs fork of gcc), therefore it quite obviously doesn't make the code less open source (or even less free software), although it makes for a less open development model.
No, that's exactly what it makes it. The FSF does not distribute closed source software. Android 3.0 is closed source.
However the restrictions to approved modifications might indeed make the code less open source, however it depends on how they are doing it.
No, the fact that you can't get the source makes it less open source.