iPad usefulness?
in [UK Mac]
|
From: David Kennedy on 31 Mar 2010 11:28 Jochem Huhmann wrote: > usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk (Woody) writes: > >> Ben Shimmin<bas(a)llamaselector.com> wrote: >> >>> Woody<usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk>: >> >>>> If my mum didn't already have the iMac I would be considering pushing >>>> her that way, but she loves printing things, and there is an unknown >>>> about the printing. Presumably with a wireless printer it is possible, >>>> but its unknown at the moment. >>> >>> That's an interesting point. You'd think it'd be possible, but it >>> doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet. >> >> Well, there are some printing apps on the iPhone, but I would think >> printing is much more of an issue when you have something like an iPad, >> especially as you can get iWork for it. > > Printing is clearly a requirement here (and surely not rocket science). > But I fear as with the iPhone getting copy&paste only later this will > take a while. Maybe even iSteve can learn from his mistakes? -- David Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com
From: Woody on 31 Mar 2010 11:28 Graeme <Graeme(a)greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In message <1jg86xr.mghcpc24zxm2N%usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> > usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk (Woody) wrote: > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > > > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So maybe I'm missing something, or Apple really have screwed up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So people said when the iPod was introduced, > > > > > > > > > > > > It took a while for the iPod to catch on, and it rapidly > > > > > > developed into something useful. But the iPad is definitely a > > > > > > big step up from the iPod, and too expensive to be a vanity > > > > > > purchase. It needs to be at least *basically* capable. > > > > > > > > > > Complete nonsense. > > > > > The first iPod could do next to nothing > > > > > (except play mp3) and it sold at 399 $, > > > > > which is more than today's devalued 499 $, > > > > > > > > I bought the second iPod (after slagging off the first!) after using it. > > > > Yes, all it did was play mp3s, it was fantastic. > > > > > > Right. So the iPad, which does much more > > > and is cheaper too (in real terms) > > > will be fantastic too. > > > > Probably not cheaper by the time they add the non-US tax, but it will be > > fantastic > > > > > > Are there any gotchas to buying one in the States? I'm off to Colorado in a > couple of months, could be a good opportunity to acquire one. None immediately obvious. Colorados sales tax is quite low too, which is good, except that some cities have their own tax too, so check what town you are in! I did consider getting one from the many ebay adverts, but I would get it for my company so it would probably work out more expensive that way. However, if I was in the states this weekend I would have one! -- Woody
From: James Jolley on 31 Mar 2010 11:34 On 2010-03-31 08:56:25 +0100, peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) said: > My sister in law (in Geneva) is talking of buying an iPad. She's never > owned a computer before, except for an old terminally slow PC laptop > that had belonged to her son in law, which I set up for her to work on > dialup; it worked, after a manner of speaking, but was dreadful and she > never used it. > > She's not interested in computers at all, just wants to have email and > be able to shop and buy railway and airline tickets on line. > > I was thinking that she should have a basic ADSL or cable connection, > with a Wifi router. Presumably she won't need a real computer as well, > like for intance people who have AGAs but also need a real cooker to do > anything useful. > > However, thanks to Steve, the iPad is crippled by not being able to run > Flash. In spite of this, is she going to be able to do her shopping etc > when using it? > > Reading Bella's experiences with Safari on the iPhone, it makes for > slightly gloomy reading. > > This is for Quite Soon Now, not in some misty future when everybody has > converted their sites to HTML 5. Should I be advising her to forget it > for a few years? Part of me would love to say yes forget it because of the featureset. Honestly though, flash content isn't accessible with VoiceOver and this hasn't really bothered me all that much. I shop on the main sites alright, so it's really a question of is it worth the cost compared to the 13 Inches macbook pro. Best -James-
From: Peter Ceresole on 31 Mar 2010 12:02 Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > > I have to say that the iTouch is so extremely limited that I hardly ever > > use it. I admit that it was a 'gadget' impulse purchase, and a mistake. > > It's basically like a piece of jewellery. It's sweet, but unnecessary. > > And I find the interface irritating. If I needed to do anything much, > > I'd carry a laptop. > > Really? I do recall you gushing when you'd just got it. Yup. It is lovely. But as time passed, *for me* I found it wasn't much use. > The Touch would be OK for a primary machine for people like my > wife/children if it was bigger. Damn, I've just talked myself into an > iPad :-) Well yes, which is why I think it would be a good primary machine for my sister in law. *If* it actually does useful things, and doesn't need a full-on computer to manage it. -- Peter
From: Nancy on 31 Mar 2010 12:16
On 3/31/2010 11:02 AM, Peter Ceresole wrote: > Sak Wathanasin<sw(a)network-analysis.ltd.uk> wrote: > >> I think the iPad is intended to be 'tethered" to an iTunes-capable system >> ala the iPhone. > > I do hope not, otherwise it'll be too limited for my sister in law, and > I'll have to advise her to get a MacBook or a Netbook. It seems to me that the iPad is too limited a device in it's initial incarnation. It has less functionality than an iPhone and a larger screen (at least the iPhone has a camera and phone capability, and all current iPhones have 3g). |