From: David Kennedy on
Howard wrote:
> David Kennedy<davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Howard wrote:
>>>
>>> What is a hard copy print useful for ?
>>>
>>
>> Filing, giving to someone else, reference, etc.
>>
>> There are many reasons for printing and even though you may not wish to
>> print everything the ability to do so is an important one.
>
> While useful ... like MANY different and varied wishlist functions --- I
> don't see the big issue. We can send it to someone by email. We can

Not everyone wants to receive email as there main choice of
communication, there are many instances where I am still having to fax
things to various companies.

> store it for filing electronically. We are after all moving to the
> electronic world and using paper needlessly needs to be reconsidered by
> all of us as using up a valuable resource.
>
> Howard

Whilst true it is far from the final word as there is still a need for
paper filing for many reasons - the main one being for those who don't
have everything [or in some cases anything] on computer.


--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com
From: David Kennedy on
Howard wrote:
> David Kennedy<davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Howard wrote:
>>> D.M. Procida<real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Consumer-facing sites that rely on Flash are going to be changed so fast
>>>> it will take your breath away.
>>>
>>> 100% agree.
>>>
>>> Howard
>>
>> In many cases the main reason for using flash is to prove to the client
>> how clever the web designer was.
>
> Ah yes... I was involved in web design a few years ago and this is SO
> true !
>
> What will happen with MANY providers of web sites is that they won;t
> drop flash as such but will reset thir web sites to offer a non-flash
> version to requests from iPhone and iPads as they arrive.
> HTML5 is coming and this will be another step in the decoupling of
> flash.
>
> Howard

Thank God.

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com
From: Woody on
Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Howard <Howard.not(a)home.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > But they will also have a desktop device. This iPad device format is not
> > intended and I believe will not really be used as a sole computer device
> > in the vast majority of homes.
>
> I suspect you may be wrong.
>
> The only person I know personally (sister in law) who actually wants to
> buy one would have it as her sole machine; she's attracted to it because
> it's smaller and neater than a laptop or desktop, and because it looks
> elegant. She doesn't need to be able to do much beyond email, online
> shopping, iChatting, text processing- and printing. There are a lot of
> people who think this way.

There are several people I could think of that would love that sort of
operation, the iPad doing all they need.

--
Woody
From: Peter Ceresole on
Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:

> No need for an intermediate paper and postage step. Or a paper and
> file step.

No; a lot of people simply need to write to their local authority or to
lawyers- or to their bank. Email is still not the same thing- certainly
not yet, and not for the people I know. For them, being able to produce
a neatly printed letter is a major enabling step. I think that here,
it's full of geeks who just don't realise how enabling it is.
--
Peter
From: David Kennedy on
Howard wrote:
> David Kennedy<davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Then I have clearly failed and my prediction that people will use it as
>> such is clearly wrong. Clearly it won't sell, iSteve has misunderstood
>> his market and will die...
>
> Well David... at least you have a sense of humour if nothing else ;)
> Just kidding !!!
>
>>
>> There is little need for you to bang on Howard. People WILL want to use
>> it as a stand alone device - surely even YOU can see that - they did
>> with the iPhone let alone this. And, what's wrong with that. If I'm not
>> a computer user at present then the iPad could tempt me. But, if I then
>> have to buy another one to use it with there is no chance.
>
> It all comes back to your not grasping that this is not a computer.
>

Not at all. I know that and you know that.

> It is not designed as a compluter. It is something completely new and
> trying to assess it through the preconceived filters of assessing a
> computer is leading you to confusion.
>
> Howard

Not at all. But, as the first it will need to be backward compatible -
something Micro$oft fail to grasp on many occasions - with previous
methods of doing things. This could be the first step on the computing
ladder for many people who have, until now, avoided them. But, it will
need to be flexible and offer familiar facilities as well as being stand
alone. If not, well, it won't die but it won't do as well as it could.

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com