To many people, the "fits in your pocket" argument is a detriment. I don't want to read books or watch movies or surf the web on such a tiny screen.
For the types of things I want to do with a mobile computer, size does matter. And I don't want to have to go the route of a netbook or laptop and be forced to deal with a keyboard 100% of the time when I'll use it maybe 1% of the time.
... but if those 30%-40% are all websites I _dont_ read, I don't care. Surfing, without having annoying animated flash advertisements sounds pretty nice to me.
*sigh*. The ipad isn't about technical prowess. Nor is it something to compare against a netbook. The ipad is about the user experience. Period. The #1 goal was probably UI responsiveness. In a manner of speaking, the very embodiment of eye candy. Nobody (*) cares that a netbook has more storage, faster processor, etc. Unless it has the same user experience it's not a competitor, and nothing on the market so far has even close to the same user experience.
* by "nobody" I mean "nobody who is open minded". The anti-ipad non-fanboys care, but not much we can do about that.
It would add cost. Probably suck a little power (it is, after all, more wires and whatnot). And you can only use it in one orientation. And it would be a very awkward size. Not quite full size, but too big to use thumbs.
And it wouldn't fit with Apple's aesthetic.
Not only is it not about the technology, it's only partly about the content. What it's really about is the _experience_, which Apple has come closer to nailing than anyone.
Multitasking is highly overrated on devices like the ipad. Just yesterday my son was saying he downloaded an app that does nothing but close other apps on his droid. *that* is why Apple doesn't want (much) multitasking. It takes away from the user experience if you have to stop now and then and run an app that closes a bunch of other apps that are taking up memory and CPU.
Sure, I want to listen to music and surf like the next guy, but genuine multitasking is not necessary. Maybe I'll change my tune after spending some time with the ipad. Time will tell.
You can't be serious. You can't.
I've used various flavors of unix for roughly three decades, and as much as I love it I just can't agree with that statement. Linux requires tweaking and knowing arcane stuff. I'm sorry, but it simply doesn't "just work".
Ok, granted, you can pop in an ubuntu disk and be up and running lickety split, but "it just works" as a meme means more than it "just works". It means you can go about your task thinking more about your task than about the OS. Linux is simply not there yet.
You are obviously new to the term "usability". It absolutely *does* matter how usable a device is, *especially* if it can't be used for much. If a device only does one thing (or two, or five) it must make doing that one thing as easy and foolproof as possible.
Imagine Joe Sixpack accidentally closing the iPhone-UI, and then being confused? Confusion and complexity are the things Apple wanted to avoid!
Like I said I'm sure Apple can do this an elegant way. Apple is skilled at putting complexity in the hands of Joe Sixpack.
And indeed they have. The called it the iPad.
The thing that Apple realizes that most geeks don't is, you generally improve usability by removing features.
Sure, they could put OSX on a tablet. And they could get decent battery life. And they could add a keyboard. And bootcamp. And an SD card reader. And.... it would cost twice as much and nobody would buy it.
Hard to believe, but Apple's goal was almost certainly not "let's cram as many features as we can into a tablet". It was more along the lines of "Tablets suck. How can we fix that?".
_Did_ they fix it? Only time will tell. I applaud them for trying. All other manufactuers seem to have the "lets add more features" mindset which is generally in opposition to making something useable for the average consumer.
re: "What we are "bent out of shape" over is the fanboy notion that this is going to sweep away real computers."
That's weird. I frequent some of the fanboy sites and I haven't seen hardly anyone who actually thinks that. So many people have the impression that fanboys think this is the second coming of the computer but I've seen no evidence anyone actually thinks that.
For me, the purpose is to have an ebook reader (that I can read in portrait and landscape equally well), media player, web surfer, and presentation maker/presenter all in one lightweight device. I don't own an iphone, laptop or ipod, and I have no desire to carry a netbook where I'm forced to carry around a keyboard I'll use maybe 5% of the time. I want a multitouch device that makes it painless to purchase and use videos, music and books, and one with enough battery life to survive a full working day (mostly, the commute at each end, plus part-time use in the interim).
while that may be true (though I personally think it's hyperbole), so what?
If people value the freedom of renting any theater rather than being tied to a single home theater, why get so bent out of shape when they exercise their freedom to choose? I'm not saying _you_ are so bent out of shape, but there are droves of people who seem genuinely angry about the iPad. I just don't get it.
... and never underestimate the stupidity of people who think "more features" == "more usable". The ipod and iphone succeeded in large part because they were demonstrably better for what most people wanted/needed, not because there are hordes of stupid Apple fans. If the iPad succeeds it will likely be for the same reason: people will discover they don't need all the features of a netbook and will gladly make the tradeoff for the features they genuinely want in the iPad form factor.
Time will tell.
I think "much differently capable" than "much more capable" is a better description of a netbook versus an iPad. Kinda like saying a pick-up truck is more capable than a Prius. They both share many fundamental qualities, but designed with different purposes in mind.
... and if we've learned anything about a wide open platform like Windows it's that things can quickly get out of hand and very consumer-unfriendly (think viruses and malware and pre-loaded gunk and whatnot). We've yet to find the right balance of openness and consumer-friendliness.
"I'm betting everybody who's reading this who has a job is working longer hours under worsening conditions."
You'd lose the bet. I've had half a dozen jobs over a couple decades or so and never had to work crazy hours for more than a handful of days at a stretch. My benefits today are better than they ever have been. There are many sides to the industry and not all of them are bad.
I guess I'll just take this ferrari right here. It would be silly for me to pay for it because I only want to use one ferrari-specific feature for a short time.
Surely you must have meant to say "... huge step forward for admins".
What many (most?) application developers forget is that applications exist to make end users more productive, not admins, and there are precious few web based apps that are better than their desktop counterparts.
I thought it was an awful idea when I was using a different scripting language. Then I took a gig that's pretty much 100% python. A couple months in and I still have the same opinion -- it's an awful idea.
It's not an issue -- emacs seems to take care of the problem quite nicely thankyouverymuch -- but it's still an awful idea IMO.
Other than that, Python's not too shabby. Not as great a language design as Tcl (why hasn't the world caught up with the ease of deployment Tcl has enjoyed for years?), but it sure has a ton of functionality baked in which is nice.
You are correct and the parent is mistaken. Menus serve a very important function which is to allow the user to easily browse all the available functionality available to them.
Note that menus are generally not the fastest way to perform a function, but as you said, it is the most unambiguous.
Slashdot Mirror
To many people, the "fits in your pocket" argument is a detriment. I don't want to read books or watch movies or surf the web on such a tiny screen. For the types of things I want to do with a mobile computer, size does matter. And I don't want to have to go the route of a netbook or laptop and be forced to deal with a keyboard 100% of the time when I'll use it maybe 1% of the time.
... but if those 30%-40% are all websites I _dont_ read, I don't care. Surfing, without having annoying animated flash advertisements sounds pretty nice to me.
* by "nobody" I mean "nobody who is open minded". The anti-ipad non-fanboys care, but not much we can do about that.
It would add cost. Probably suck a little power (it is, after all, more wires and whatnot). And you can only use it in one orientation. And it would be a very awkward size. Not quite full size, but too big to use thumbs. And it wouldn't fit with Apple's aesthetic.
linux devs innovative? Since when? Most linux apps I use are just copies of established apps. Very, very little innovation from my perspective.
Not only is it not about the technology, it's only partly about the content. What it's really about is the _experience_, which Apple has come closer to nailing than anyone.
Sure, I want to listen to music and surf like the next guy, but genuine multitasking is not necessary. Maybe I'll change my tune after spending some time with the ipad. Time will tell.
You can't be serious. You can't. I've used various flavors of unix for roughly three decades, and as much as I love it I just can't agree with that statement. Linux requires tweaking and knowing arcane stuff. I'm sorry, but it simply doesn't "just work". Ok, granted, you can pop in an ubuntu disk and be up and running lickety split, but "it just works" as a meme means more than it "just works". It means you can go about your task thinking more about your task than about the OS. Linux is simply not there yet.
It's a joke son, it's a joke.
You are obviously new to the term "usability". It absolutely *does* matter how usable a device is, *especially* if it can't be used for much. If a device only does one thing (or two, or five) it must make doing that one thing as easy and foolproof as possible.
Imagine Joe Sixpack accidentally closing the iPhone-UI, and then being confused? Confusion and complexity are the things Apple wanted to avoid!
Like I said I'm sure Apple can do this an elegant way. Apple is skilled at putting complexity in the hands of Joe Sixpack.
And indeed they have. The called it the iPad. The thing that Apple realizes that most geeks don't is, you generally improve usability by removing features. Sure, they could put OSX on a tablet. And they could get decent battery life. And they could add a keyboard. And bootcamp. And an SD card reader. And .... it would cost twice as much and nobody would buy it.
Hard to believe, but Apple's goal was almost certainly not "let's cram as many features as we can into a tablet". It was more along the lines of "Tablets suck. How can we fix that?".
_Did_ they fix it? Only time will tell. I applaud them for trying. All other manufactuers seem to have the "lets add more features" mindset which is generally in opposition to making something useable for the average consumer.
re: "What we are "bent out of shape" over is the fanboy notion that this is going to sweep away real computers." That's weird. I frequent some of the fanboy sites and I haven't seen hardly anyone who actually thinks that. So many people have the impression that fanboys think this is the second coming of the computer but I've seen no evidence anyone actually thinks that.
*cough* heavy, *cough* not user-friendly in portrait mode, *cough* lame OS (for the intended purpose).
For me, the purpose is to have an ebook reader (that I can read in portrait and landscape equally well), media player, web surfer, and presentation maker/presenter all in one lightweight device. I don't own an iphone, laptop or ipod, and I have no desire to carry a netbook where I'm forced to carry around a keyboard I'll use maybe 5% of the time. I want a multitouch device that makes it painless to purchase and use videos, music and books, and one with enough battery life to survive a full working day (mostly, the commute at each end, plus part-time use in the interim).
while that may be true (though I personally think it's hyperbole), so what? If people value the freedom of renting any theater rather than being tied to a single home theater, why get so bent out of shape when they exercise their freedom to choose? I'm not saying _you_ are so bent out of shape, but there are droves of people who seem genuinely angry about the iPad. I just don't get it.
... and never underestimate the stupidity of people who think "more features" == "more usable". The ipod and iphone succeeded in large part because they were demonstrably better for what most people wanted/needed, not because there are hordes of stupid Apple fans. If the iPad succeeds it will likely be for the same reason: people will discover they don't need all the features of a netbook and will gladly make the tradeoff for the features they genuinely want in the iPad form factor. Time will tell.
I think "much differently capable" than "much more capable" is a better description of a netbook versus an iPad. Kinda like saying a pick-up truck is more capable than a Prius. They both share many fundamental qualities, but designed with different purposes in mind.
... and if we've learned anything about a wide open platform like Windows it's that things can quickly get out of hand and very consumer-unfriendly (think viruses and malware and pre-loaded gunk and whatnot). We've yet to find the right balance of openness and consumer-friendliness.
"I'm betting everybody who's reading this who has a job is working longer hours under worsening conditions." You'd lose the bet. I've had half a dozen jobs over a couple decades or so and never had to work crazy hours for more than a handful of days at a stretch. My benefits today are better than they ever have been. There are many sides to the industry and not all of them are bad.
We *think* we know that life arose.... There, I fixed that for you.
I guess I'll just take this ferrari right here. It would be silly for me to pay for it because I only want to use one ferrari-specific feature for a short time.
since its inception, for private companies that create devices used for interstate and international communication?
Surely you must have meant to say "... huge step forward for admins".
What many (most?) application developers forget is that applications exist to make end users more productive, not admins, and there are precious few web based apps that are better than their desktop counterparts.
I thought it was an awful idea when I was using a different scripting language. Then I took a gig that's pretty much 100% python. A couple months in and I still have the same opinion -- it's an awful idea.
It's not an issue -- emacs seems to take care of the problem quite nicely thankyouverymuch -- but it's still an awful idea IMO.
Other than that, Python's not too shabby. Not as great a language design as Tcl (why hasn't the world caught up with the ease of deployment Tcl has enjoyed for years?), but it sure has a ton of functionality baked in which is nice.
You are correct and the parent is mistaken. Menus serve a very important function which is to allow the user to easily browse all the available functionality available to them. Note that menus are generally not the fastest way to perform a function, but as you said, it is the most unambiguous.