iPad is supercool
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: Doc O'Leary on 9 Feb 2010 12:50 In article <michelle-871271.15415308022010(a)nothing.attdns.com>, Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote: > It may be that O'Leary is right, and you will need a computer; we don't > know yet. Finally. Was that so hard? That's exactly what I said countless posts ago. There is no direct statement to support either camp. Indirect evidence, by any reasonable measure, more strongly supports Apple's intent for an iPad owner to be a computer owner. I will be absolutely shocked if Apple pushes the iPad as the only product you need to buy from them. -- My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, ono.com, and probably your server, too.
From: Doc O'Leary on 9 Feb 2010 13:07 In article <michelle-7BDABD.12210608022010(a)nothing.attdns.com>, Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote: > In article <droleary.usenet-DC4CDA.12562608022010(a)news.twtelecom.net>, > Doc O'Leary <droleary.usenet(a)1q2010.subsume.com> wrote: > > > > Apple would rather sell you a $500 computer or iPad than not sell you > > > anything at all because you can't afford anything more expensive. > > > > That is simply not true. Apple one of the few computer companies that > > doesn't rush to meet the needs the the lowest common denominator. They > > *don't* shovel out $500 systems like the Dells of the world do. > > True, but they do have the Mac Mini (which, admittedly is $600, but they > used to have a $500 model) and the iPad (which is $500). The iPad is not shipping and so we cannot say if it actually *will* function as a standalone computer for that $500. A Mac mini still needs a monitor and keyboard/mouse to be usable, so you need to tack on another $200+. In general, Apple has been about value and not the absolute lowest cost. They fill the lower price points with different products, like iPods, rather that more shoddy computer systems. The iPad is the latest entry that targets the midpoint. > > > There is plenty of room to speculate on what that all means, but there > > is no indication whatsoever from Apple that it means you won't need a > > computer to use an iPad. You might *like* for that to be the case, even > > *I* find the prospect interesting, but nothing really points to it. Why > > is it so hard to admit that? > > YOU STILL HAVE NOT SHOWN US A SINGLE USE OF THE iPad THAT WOULD REQUIRE A > COMPUTER!!!! No need to scream. It's not about how you want to use it, it's about following the evidence that Apple provides at this point. If you want to make the case that no computer is necessary, you still need to support your position with some evidence and not mere conjecture. -- My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, ono.com, and probably your server, too.
From: Doc O'Leary on 9 Feb 2010 13:26 In article <michelle-442158.12310708022010(a)nothing.attdns.com>, Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote: > In article <droleary.usenet-3FBBEB.12480908022010(a)news.twtelecom.net>, > Doc O'Leary <droleary.usenet(a)1q2010.subsume.com> wrote: > > > Like many here, you don't seem to be able to reason properly. The > > burden of proof remains on *you* to provide evidence to support your > > statement. I'm am simply taking the opposing position *because* you're > > failing to do that, and I have already listed evidence that points more > > towards a computer being necessary to properly use an iPad. > > The only "evidence" you have listed is that a computer is necessary for the > iPods and iPhones; in other words, "That's the way it's been done before." And? Fossil records are valuable; history meaningfully informs the present. Evidence is evidence, even if it is not definitive. Like I said, Apple has made no direct statement either way. All we have to go off of is what little they *have* said, so I'll thank you to start citing what evidence supports your point. > YOU keep saying that a computer is necessary, and then challenge us to > prove you wrong. You have not presented a case to show why a computer will > be necessary. Because that is not my claim. I continue to maintain that all signs point to a computer being necessary. You don't seem to be able to dispute them, and you don't seem to offer anything pointing to a computer *not* being necessary, other than your finger-crossed hopes and dreams. > > I have provided them, yet you conveniently choose not to quote them. Go > > back and respond to all my "because" points and we can go on from there. > > Look, I'll even make it easy for you to track them down: > > > > <droleary.usenet-19F7E4.12395801022010(a)news.twtelecom.net> > > <droleary.usenet-B047A0.12092201022010(a)news.twtelecom.net> > > Wow, they provide a cable. That's it? If that's all you saw, you need to read one more time. Please reply to the posts directly and address what is actually said if dispute the lines of evidence. > > Again, all you need to do to prove me wrong is show *one* bit of > > evidence from Apple indicating that no computer is necessary for normal > > iPad ownership. > > There is no need to prove you wrong because you have done nothing to prove > you right. There is no "right" to be had here. Nothing will be "right" until Apple either makes a statement or ships a product. All we can do as *reasonable* people is show why we think what we think. I have shown what evidence leads me to think a computer will be necessary. You have not shown any evidence to support your thinking that a computer will not be necessary. Look, I'll even help you out because I'm such a standup guy: On the iPad spec page Apple list the 10W USB Power Adapter as included. The smaller touch devices only included a dock connector, so clearly Apple envisions some significantly more detached usage for the iPad. *That* is how you use evidence to support your point. If you actually were being reasonable about following the evidence, *you* would have pointed that out long ago. Since I did instead, it's my point; you still have yet to provide *one* shred of evidence to support your point. Can you do that? If not, why do you persist in championing a stance you cannot support rationally? -- My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, ono.com, and probably your server, too.
From: Larry Gusaas on 9 Feb 2010 13:27 On 2010/02/09 12:07 PM Doc O'Leary wrote: > If you want > to make the case that no computer is necessary, you still need to > support your position with some evidence and not mere conjecture. > And you have provided no evidence that a computer is necessary, only your unsupported conjectures. -- Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com "An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese
From: nospam on 9 Feb 2010 13:54
In article <droleary.usenet-EC5CBF.12261709022010(a)news.twtelecom.net>, Doc O'Leary <droleary.usenet(a)1q2010.subsume.com> wrote: > There is no "right" to be had here. Nothing will be "right" until Apple > either makes a statement or ships a product. All we can do as > *reasonable* people is show why we think what we think. I have shown > what evidence leads me to think a computer will be necessary. You have > not shown any evidence to support your thinking that a computer will not > be necessary. since a computer is not necessary for any shipping ipod, iphone or ipod touch, other than a one time setup, it's reasonable to conclude that the ipad will be the same. furthermore, the iphone is normally activated in a store and content can be added over the air, completely eliminating any need for a computer. > Look, I'll even help you out because I'm such a standup guy: On the > iPad spec page Apple list the 10W USB Power Adapter as included. The > smaller touch devices only included a dock connector, so clearly Apple > envisions some significantly more detached usage for the iPad. or that the battery is bigger and 2.5 watts from a usb port is insufficient. |