Fanboi's lament - falling out of love with the iPad
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: Linksys 54G wireless Problem
Next: Newsgroups demise
From: Jeff Liebermann on 31 May 2010 00:54 On Sun, 30 May 2010 21:16:40 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >In article ><your.name-3105101615510001(a)203-109-170-215.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, Your >Name <your.name(a)isp.com> wrote: > >> Personally I prefer the Newton's size - true it was too big to fit in a >> pocket, but the Palm was too small to be useful (and had a hopeles OS and >> second-rate "handwriting" recognition that was nothing of the kind). > >the newton fit in a jacket pocket just fine, something the ipad cannot >do. Well, there are suits that will fit an iPad: <http://gizmodo.com/5549151/suits-with-custom-ipad-pockets-for-the-fanboy-on-the-go> Stephen Colbert probably wore one of these suits at the Grammy's: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqp8_m5It5s> If all else fails: <http://www.ohnodoom.com/ibap/> -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
From: Larry on 31 May 2010 01:02 nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in news:300520102114494649% nospam(a)nospam.invalid: > changing pages on an ipad is just a tap or swipe. no need to fuss with > buttons or controls or bluetooth mice. > > That is true, too, on my Samsung NC-10 but I didn't mention it because the touchscreen was my addition, not standard configuration. With the touchscreen added, Acrobat or Adobe Reader or Microsoft's own reader work exactly as you'd expect from the touchscreen....swipe or click to change pages forward or back. The touchscreen's multitouch is also effective. But, netbooks don't have touchscreens so it's not fair to compare to mine. -- Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics. Larry
From: nospam on 31 May 2010 01:03 In article <jhb60618si8psis3eg6doa60rbs4i5cniu(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > >2. I personally need a decent keyboard for email, documents, > >presentations, annotations, etc. The iPad "keyboard" just doesn't cut > >it. > > My friend has no plans to use her iPad for document preparation most people don't create, they consume and that's what the ipad is optimized for. that's why a handful of authors sell millions of books. > (formerly called desktop publishing), Power Point, annotation(?), and > assorted productivity applications. She might view documents that > others have emailed to her, but she has no intention of replacing her > desktop machines primary function with the iPad. More crudely, the > iPad is best used in conjunction with a desktop (running iTunes). it doesn't need a desktop computer, other than to initially set it up and to do firmware upgrades, however, syncing with a desktop is helpful. > Others have mentioned that the iPad is not really intended to be used > as a general purpose computah. I'm undecided on this and want to > actually try doing some productivity work on the iPad first. I don't > expect to run Photoshop, Final Cut, or some monster database manager, > but perhaps the lesser applications might actually be useful. there are some very slick apps already, and more will be coming. it's a brand new product. how much windows software was there 2 months after windows came out? > >3. I find a netbook (like this Acer Aspire One) works great in bed (and > >other odd places), probably because I don't like lying on my tummy, > >preferring to sit up with a machine on my lap, typing on a real > >keyboard. > > I don't. The display makes it top heavy where it tends to topple. I > find myself constantly adjusting the position of the display so that I > can see it. When I do that, the keyboard to display angle changes, so > I have to also play with the hinge. The original 2200ma-hr battery > lasted about 2 hours when new and about an hour after about 6 months > of use. I now have a bulging 4400ma-hr battery which started at about > 3.5 hrs, and is now down to perhaps 3 hrs. Acer claims that the > 2200ma-hr battery will last 3 hours, but I've never seen it. three hours? hah. and that's with an extended battery? more bulk and weight. > The iPad data sheet claims 10 hrs of battery life. We haven't tested > that yet, but so far, my friend has been able to go for about 3 days > of moderate use without a charge. people have been reporting 11+ hours watching video, i.e., heavy use and not trying to conserve power. open it up, it's two giant batteries and a tiny circuit board. :) > >>In my never humble opinion, the best thing about the iPad is the > >>absolutely gorgeous 1024x768 LCD display. I did a side by side > >>comparison with my assortment of PDA's, netbooks, laptops, and DVD > >>players. The iPad display looks the best playing a movie in bed. > > > >4. I took this Acer Aspire One across the street to the Apple store, put > >it side by side with an iPad, and the screen compares pretty well, > >especially given the huge price difference. > > I beg to differ. Try playing a movie or video. yep, that's where the ipad display shines, literally. > >5. I much prefer Windows, because Windows runs the software I need, > >including Flash, multitasking, etc. > > I prefer Unix/Linux because it's easy to do the things I get paid to > do, but that's another discussion. Again, I'm not really sure that > the iPad is usable as a productivity tool. In my never humble > opinion, it's more an entertainment device or oversized PDA and not a > general purpose desktop or laptop replacement. there's a huge market for entertainment devices. > Yeah, not having Flash is a mistake. no it isn't. flash on android turns an otherwise fast browser into a very slow browser. also, the frame rate is sometimes very choppy and it kills battery life too. <http://blogs.forbes.com/velocity/2010/05/24/flash-for-smartphones-is-fi nally-here-and-it-is-terrible/> The Nexus One outperformed the other phones by a comfortable margin -- but only when Flash was disabled. With Flash enabled, the Nexus One was the slowest of the three phones. Speed isn't the only problem with Flash in Android.�A snap review from Gizmodo on Thursday pointed out that it's also a huge battery drain, and outside of sites specifically optimized for mobile, isn't yet all that reliable. > Multitasked will allegedly appear on OS 4.0: > <http://www.apple.com/iphone/preview-iphone-os/> iphone os has multitasked since day one, but only with apple's own apps. much of what people want to do in the background was solved with push notifications, but not everything. background apps are now available to third parties in 4.0, nothing alleged about it. > >6. I typically use my Android mobile in the car, with the audio plugged > >into the car stereo aux input, playing Internet Radio or Pandora, with > >Google Maps running at the same time giving me audio turn by turn > >directions while automatically pausing other audio. When a call comes > >in, I can take it by Bluetooth, or by speakerphone, with audio likewise > >automatically paused while the caller comes through the car stereo. And > >it works on the T-Mobile 3G network. Works a treat. iPad would be a > >huge step backwards for me. > > Impressive, but all those are audio based applications. The iPad > could (with multitasking) do all of that but adds the a display > suitable for control and output. All the stuff you describe would > need to be setup in advance on your Android as playing with the > buttons and tiny screen while driving is probably dangerous. With a > screen that's 4 times larger, you can do all the setup and controlling > without risking your life. If I had to make the choice of automotive > entertainment, navigation, and visualization (rear view camera) > device, it would probably be something built into the 2 DIN rail radio > slot. 2nd best would be an iPad. last would be a cell phone. an ipad in a car is going to be really nice. > Incidentally, the iPad seems to have voice control: > <http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/ipad-apps-car/141812-voice-control-ipad.html> as does the iphone 3gs and presumably the next model. > >I think it's actually almost entirely a matter of cachet, like buying > >pricey bottled water (more on that below). > > Well yes. Perception is everything. If the public perceives that the > iPad has more than a utility function, then they will pay the price. the ipad is among the least expensive of tablets. comparing them to netbooks is bogus. of course when android tablets start appearing around the same price (or more), these critics will be saying how amazing it is. i read that the asus eeepad will require a two year cellular contract. hah. yea that's gona be super-cheap. not. > Per a previous discussion, the Apple products (except for the 13" > MacBook) came out fairly close to twice the cost of an equivalent Dell > computah: nope. > <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/Mac-vs-PC.xls> > That's a fairly large premium, but people seem to be more than willing > to pay the price. That could mean that the competition (Windoze and > PC's) are somehow inferior, or that Apple products somehow have some > perceived value (status, style, usability, snob value, bragging > rights, etc). as noted before, it's flawed. > >8. This Acer Aspire One has a built-in multi-format card reader. > >9. This Acer Aspire One has wired Fast Ethernet. > >10. This Acer Aspire One has 160 GB hard drive. > >11. This Acer Aspire One has a faster processor. > >12. This Acer Aspire One has 3 USB ports. > >13. This Acer Aspire One has printing capability. > >14. This Acer Aspire One has a webcam. > >15. This Acer Aspire One has video output. > > Yep. Now how much of the basic function of the iPad is lost by not > having those? If it really were a productivity machine, I see > problems. However, if the applications are limited to entertainment > and personal data (PDA) apps, none of that is really useful. When > coupled with a desktop with iTunes, most of those features can be > remotely accessed via Wi-Fi. It would be nice for us nerds to have > all the technology plus the kitchen sink, but whether it is actually > useful is debatable. it's not targeted at nerds. it's targeted ad normal people who don't care about cpu speed, number of usb ports or the rest. > >16. Gmail on my Android mobile is tightly integrated with everything > >else, better than any other device or email service I know of (including > >Blackberry). iPad (and iPhone) doesn't come close. > > True, but it's coming closer. The new OS 4.0 is suppose to have an > improved email client. As I mentioned, the existing client is > seriously lacking. I'll reserve my opinions on email usability until > after I see the new client. wise move. android/gmail integration is excellent, but that's not surprising. it's when you don't have gmail that android is not so hot. > >As I wrote earlier, why would anyone rationally buy an iPad when (say) > >the Acer Aspire One can be had for only $200 (Newegg Memorial Day sale)? > > See my comments on perception is everything. The usual price is about > $350 for the current model netbooks. Apple is able to sell their > products for twice that. and with far better specs, not to mention that the macbook is not a netbook.
From: Larry on 31 May 2010 01:03 nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in news:300520102114494649% nospam(a)nospam.invalid: > non-ips, so it's not ideal for photos and movies. > Where do you people get these crazy ideas?! The finest high definition TVs don't have a glossy screen! How silly. -- Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics. Larry
From: nospam on 31 May 2010 01:05
In article <Xns9D89AC5A291Fnoonehomecom(a)74.209.131.13>, Larry <noone(a)home.com> wrote: > > non-ips, so it's not ideal for photos and movies. > > Where do you people get these crazy ideas?! The finest high definition TVs > don't have a glossy screen! How silly. what's silly is comparing a 10" tablet with an hdtv that's significantly bigger and more expensive, with a totally different screen technology. |