iPad is supercool
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Wes Groleau on 5 Feb 2010 18:48 Tom Stiller wrote: > According to the tech specs on Apple's website, it has an ambient light > sensor. Yes, but it doesn't work very well. I have seen the screen brightness suddenly change noticeably when the clouds caused some imperceptible change in ambient light. And the screen when there is almost no ambient light is too bright. -- Wes Groleau Conservatives are funny … http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1543
From: nospam on 5 Feb 2010 19:41 In article <hkia8f$3dm$3(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > Most cellphones get upgrades via the cell network. some do. > iPhone and iPod can upgrade apps the same way, and > Apple could have had them do O.S. upgrades that way. pushing a 200+ meg firmware update over the air is not exactly efficient or smart.
From: Doc O'Leary on 6 Feb 2010 13:28 In article <hki9qg$3dm$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > Doc O'Leary wrote: > > That makes about as much sense as saying a car doesn't *need* gas > > There's a heck of a difference between saying a car can run without gas > and saying an iPod can run without a desktop computer. > > The first one is false, the second one is true. And yet not. The only truth is that we don't know how functional an iPod/iPad will be for anyone without a computer. The very fact that an iPad looks to be locked down and have limited functionality make it unlikely that it will be a replacement for Macs or PCs. In the same way, a car is not a replacement for a bike, even if you *could* put pedals in one an run it without gas. It's all about fit to purpose, and all sign point as much to an iPad needing a computer as a car needs gas, regardless of how imaginatively we think otherwise. As with Michelle, I'm going to ask you to point to any statement from Apple that indicates otherwise. If you can't, I'm not going to bother to get into it again. -- My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, ono.com, and probably your server, too.
From: Wes Groleau on 7 Feb 2010 01:22 Doc O'Leary wrote: > Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: >> Doc O'Leary wrote: >>> That makes about as much sense as saying a car doesn't *need* gas >> There's a heck of a difference between saying a car can run without gas >> and saying an iPod can run without a desktop computer. >> >> The first one is false, the second one is true. > > And yet not. ... OK, you win. There _are_ electric cars now. > .... The only truth is that we don't know how functional an > iPod/iPad will be for anyone without a computer. The very fact that an What do you mean "we," paleface? I, and any other iPod owner knows how functional it is for someone without a computer. And _you_ are the one claiming we should assume the iPad is similar. > iPad looks to be locked down and have limited functionality make it > unlikely that it will be a replacement for Macs or PCs. In the same Did anyone say it is a replacement? Is "functioning without" the same as "replacing" or are you trying to change the subject? -- Wes Groleau Expert, n.: Someone who comes from out of town and shows slides.
From: Doc O'Leary on 7 Feb 2010 13:27
In article <hklm7n$oc0$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > Doc O'Leary wrote: > > > .... The only truth is that we don't know how functional an > > iPod/iPad will be for anyone without a computer. The very fact that an > > What do you mean "we," paleface? I, and any other iPod owner knows how > functional it is for someone without a computer. And _you_ are the one > claiming we should assume the iPad is similar. See, that's the problem with geeks who don't understand other people. When I say "we", I don't mean *me* and I don't mean *you*. I mean the general population that just uses the technology. So, yes, I absolutely *will* claim that most people find it necessary to sync their iPod, and likely expect to sync their iPad, with a computer. The bigger question is how Apple further designed/intends/markets the use of an iPad. That's a bit up in the air, but there is nothing I've seen that points to them not wanting to keep selling Macs along with iPads. Until you can show one affirmative statement that indicates they want iPads to run completely standalone, I don't see how you can expect your claims to be taken seriously. > > iPad looks to be locked down and have limited functionality make it > > unlikely that it will be a replacement for Macs or PCs. In the same > > Did anyone say it is a replacement? Is "functioning without" the same > as "replacing" or are you trying to change the subject? Yes, it *is* the same for all intents and purposes. If you can do everything you need with a $500 iPad, Apple loses out on selling you a $1000+ Mac. There is also the potential influx of Windows users, which I think will be the significantly larger base of iPad users. While they may *eventually* shift away from needing a computer to use an iPad, I see no indication that it will be introduced without *key* integration for the millions of users who are already using desktop computers for everything they do. I'm still waiting for you to point to *anything* from Apple to support your point. Idle speculation is tiresome. -- My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, ono.com, and probably your server, too. |