From: Pd on
Sak Wathanasin <sw(a)network-analysis.ltd.uk> wrote:

> There's no need for conspiracy theories: it all boils down to what can be
> delivered in the time available for price. If you try to shoehorn everything
> in, you end up with an undeliverable mess.

Or in the case of Longhorn / Vista, even after removing everything of
value, you still end up with an undeliverable mess but I guess it was
all they had so deliver it they must.

--
Pd
From: R on
Sak Wathanasin <sw(a)network-analysis.ltd.uk> wrote:

> I think we're all pretty much in violent agreement that the iPad as it
> stands isn't capable of being a standalone system. The question that we're
> arguing over is whether Apple was right to go for the "iPhone plus" market
> instaed of the "never had a computer before" market. I think they are:
> firstly, they can build on their existing user base

Which they could do if it was a standalone device. There's no reason
why a standalone device couldn't also work with a Mac. It's not either
or.

> and secondly, it allows
> them to test out ideas and get feedback on a standalone device.

It's easier to get feedback on a standalone device if you have actually
made one :)
From: David Kennedy on
Pd wrote:
> Sak Wathanasin<sw(a)network-analysis.ltd.uk> wrote:
>
>> There's no need for conspiracy theories: it all boils down to what can be
>> delivered in the time available for price. If you try to shoehorn everything
>> in, you end up with an undeliverable mess.
>
> Or in the case of Longhorn / Vista, even after removing everything of
> value, you still end up with an undeliverable mess but I guess it was
> all they had so deliver it they must.
>

Now then! Conor [the Barbarian?] will be along to jump all over you if
you keep this up.

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com
From: D.M. Procida on
Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote:

> > There's no need for conspiracy theories: it all boils down to what can be
> > delivered in the time available for price. If you try to shoehorn everything
> > in, you end up with an undeliverable mess.
>
> Or in the case of Longhorn / Vista, even after removing everything of
> value, you still end up with an undeliverable mess but I guess it was
> all they had so deliver it they must.

They should have called it Shoehorn.

Daniele
From: Flavio Matani on
Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote:

> 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.

Same here, I know a few people in that category. But I also know not
being able to print would be seen as a serious drawback.


--
flavio matani
guitar tuition
http://www.flaviomatani.co.uk
http://fflavio.com