If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
The Maxi-Pad.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
Rich wrote:
The Maxi-Pad. It wasn't that funny a few days ago. Sheesh. -- lsmft |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:16:57 -0600, Rich wrote:
The Maxi-Pad. Funny thing is that Mad TV, a comedy sketch show, beat Apple to the name in 2005 with this sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L68aKVAzwQ4 How could Apple choose this name? Besides, the device is crippled. No camera, no phone, no Java, no Flash. Who is this for? Is it just a glorified reader? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
"Bowser" wrote in message ... On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:16:57 -0600, Rich wrote: The Maxi-Pad. Funny thing is that Mad TV, a comedy sketch show, beat Apple to the name in 2005 with this sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L68aKVAzwQ4 How could Apple choose this name? Besides, the device is crippled. No camera, no phone, no Java, no Flash. Who is this for? Is it just a glorified reader? If the iPad is just a glorified reader what is a Kindle ? It might seem crippled but so was the iPhone before people started writing apps. Might not be handy for everyone but some of us that repair computers and all sorts of these can download PDFs movies photos on take aparts even camera manuals, can you do that on a kindle, I don't know. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
On 2010-01-31 23:27:38 -0800, John McWilliams said:
Rich wrote: The Maxi-Pad. It wasn't that funny a few days ago. Sheesh. It isn't that original. IBM had the ThinkPad. There have been all kinds of Pads both before and since. Apple wanted people to think of the iPod -- which, of course, can be lampooned by its detractors as creating pod people. It is okay, all you Apple haters. One day you will be one of us. Resistance is futile. -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
nospam wrote:
In article , Atheist Chaplain wrote: PDF's most definitely but then the Kindle isn't marketed as a net book like the iPad is, the ipad is not marketed as a netbook And it's not a phone and it's not a music player and it's not a this and it's not a that, so what exactly IS it? and to be honest what's it going to be like at surfing the web with no java of flash support when 99% of the web is flash and/or java ?? even adobe doesn't say it's that high. what kinds of sites do you need flash for? video? the ipad will play h.264 streams, which youtube (and others) support. if you hit a page with a youtube link, you get the h.264 stream automatically. games? flash games are designed for keyboard/mouse and that is not going to work so well on an ipad and a lot of those games have native versions anyway which is even better (no need to download it each time, for one). ads? that's a reason *not* to have flash. entire website interfaces? can you say bandwidth hog? The whole Web is a bandwidth hog by some standards. That argument just doesn't fly. the lack of flash hasn't hurt iphone sales all that much The iphone is a PHONE. Until recently phones didn't even have displays. and it's fairly low on the list of complaints (at&t is tops). with roughly 100 million iphone/ipod touches out there, companies will be creating mobile friendly sites, without flash. Or not, as the case may be. How many people really spend much time surfing the Web on iphones and ipods? a $500 eeePC can do everything the iPad can and then so much more. it can do some things the ipad can't and the ipad can do some things the eee can't. different devices for a different tasks. What can the ipad do that the eeePC can't? your not handcuffed to the apple app store, your not stuck using the crippled version of Safari mobile safari is not crippled. it's exactly the same as the desktop version, but with a touch interface. and the Kindle and other e-ink readers are so much better for actual reading than even the most crisp backlit LCD/LED screen. Been there, tried that ! so you were at the apple event and used an ipad to know how good or bad its screen is? Apple hasn't announced any magic new screen technology. If they had something new there I'm sure they would have said so. That being the case, their screen is going to have the same disadvantages for reading text as any other backlit LCD. So, tell us, in 20 words or less, what is an ipad? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
In article , J. Clarke
wrote: How many people really spend much time surfing the Web on iphones and ipods? quite a bit. over 50% of mobile traffic is from iphones/ipod touch (from last march): http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...s-continue-to- dominate-mobile-traffic.ars a $500 eeePC can do everything the iPad can and then so much more. it can do some things the ipad can't and the ipad can do some things the eee can't. different devices for a different tasks. What can the ipad do that the eeePC can't? here's a few: play music for 140 hours, non-stop. much better multimedia device, including built in music/video store much better ebook reader, including built in bookstore create a slide show with a single tap use its gps and/or compass to geolocate it will be a *very* nice navigational tool when the various gps apps are updated (probably before it ships). Apple hasn't announced any magic new screen technology. If they had something new there I'm sure they would have said so. they said it's an ips screen. those are quite good. That being the case, their screen is going to have the same disadvantages for reading text as any other backlit LCD. it will be significantly better for photos and video. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
whisky-dave wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:16:57 -0600, Rich wrote: The Maxi-Pad. Funny thing is that Mad TV, a comedy sketch show, beat Apple to the name in 2005 with this sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L68aKVAzwQ4 How could Apple choose this name? Besides, the device is crippled. No camera, no phone, no Java, no Flash. Who is this for? Is it just a glorified reader? If the iPad is just a glorified reader what is a Kindle ? Kindle is designed for reading text. The iPad isn't. -- Ray Fischer |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
"nospam" wrote in message
... In article , Atheist Chaplain wrote: PDF's most definitely but then the Kindle isn't marketed as a net book like the iPad is, the ipad is not marketed as a netbook Direct quote from the Apple site "The best way to expeerience the web, email, photos, and video. Hands down." if its not marketed as direct competition for net books then I don't know what is. and to be honest what's it going to be like at surfing the web with no java of flash support when 99% of the web is flash and/or java ?? even adobe doesn't say it's that high. WTF do Adobe know about Java. what kinds of sites do you need flash for? video? the ipad will play h.264 streams, which youtube (and others) support. if you hit a page with a youtube link, you get the h.264 stream automatically. games? flash games are designed for keyboard/mouse and that is not going to work so well on an ipad and a lot of those games have native versions anyway which is even better (no need to download it each time, for one). ads? that's a reason *not* to have flash. entire website interfaces? can you say bandwidth hog? Its obvious that you have swallowed the coolaid but have you noticed that many sites do in fact use flash, many also use java and many many use both. the lack of flash hasn't hurt iphone sales all that much and it's fairly low on the list of complaints (at&t is tops). with roughly 100 million iphone/ipod touches out there, companies will be creating mobile friendly sites, without flash. instead web developers have to code sites for mobile devices, is that where all the ipad traffic will have to be sent as well ?? because that would pretty much confirm that it is then nothing more than an over sized iPod touch. a $500 eeePC can do everything the iPad can and then so much more. it can do some things the ipad can't and the ipad can do some things the eee can't. different devices for a different tasks. your not handcuffed to the apple app store, your not stuck using the crippled version of Safari mobile safari is not crippled. it's exactly the same as the desktop version, but with a touch interface. and no flash and no java, do try and keep up. and the Kindle and other e-ink readers are so much better for actual reading than even the most crisp backlit LCD/LED screen. Been there, tried that ! so you were at the apple event and used an ipad to know how good or bad its screen is? didn't think so. and you were ?? Did you know that the screen shots of the NY Times flashed up on the screen during the presentation, complete with in tact flash content in fact was supplied to Apple by the NY Times as a high res screen shot. can you say deceptive ?? As a matter of fact that same screen shot is on the Apple iPad page. What I want to know is how that page would load at all on an iPad when the NY Times front page has over 30 separate Java scripts running in it! -- [This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of Scientology International] "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." Gandhi |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Apple announces iPad with larger screen
In article , Atheist Chaplain
wrote: PDF's most definitely but then the Kindle isn't marketed as a net book like the iPad is, the ipad is not marketed as a netbook Direct quote from the Apple site "The best way to expeerience the web, email, photos, and video. Hands down." if its not marketed as direct competition for net books then I don't know what is. do you see the word netbook in there? the ipad is an alternative to a netbook. a lot of people buy a netbook for an easy to carry way to check mail and surf. the ipad will work well for that. others buy a netbook for having a laptop with them, but smaller. the ipad won't work so well for that. it's a different product. choice is good. and to be honest what's it going to be like at surfing the web with no java of flash support when 99% of the web is flash and/or java ?? even adobe doesn't say it's that high. WTF do Adobe know about Java. duno but they do know a lot about flash. i think their estimates are around 70-75%. i'm not sure how they measured it though. Its obvious that you have swallowed the coolaid but have you noticed that many sites do in fact use flash, many also use java and many many use both. and many sites have mobile friendly versions (not just for the iphone). seriously, ask people who actually use the iphone how much they miss flash. some will, but overall, it's not that high on the list. then ask them about at&t, and stand back. the lack of flash hasn't hurt iphone sales all that much and it's fairly low on the list of complaints (at&t is tops). with roughly 100 million iphone/ipod touches out there, companies will be creating mobile friendly sites, without flash. instead web developers have to code sites for mobile devices, is that where all the ipad traffic will have to be sent as well ?? they have to code for internet explorer and other browsers with their idiosyncrasies. mobile friendly web pages are a very good idea. the cellular network is relatively slow and some people have bandwidth caps per month. the less data the better. mobile sites also load faster and are easier to use on a mobile device too (no tiny buttons to hit with fat fingers). heck, i even visit the mobile version of some sites on my desktop computer because it's often much faster than a bloated flash/java laden site. mobile users want info and they don't want to wait. the pretty eye candy is a waste of time and bandwidth and probably doesn't look that good on a tiny screen anyway. because that would pretty much confirm that it is then nothing more than an over sized iPod touch. in a lot of ways, it is. so what? the ipod touch is a very successful product. the ipad only improves upon it (other than being easily put into a pocket). mobile safari is not crippled. it's exactly the same as the desktop version, but with a touch interface. and no flash and no java, do try and keep up. neither of those are part of safari, desktop or mobile. and the Kindle and other e-ink readers are so much better for actual reading than even the most crisp backlit LCD/LED screen. Been there, tried that ! so you were at the apple event and used an ipad to know how good or bad its screen is? didn't think so. and you were ?? i'm not the one who is saying the screen sucks, without ever having seen it. Did you know that the screen shots of the NY Times flashed up on the screen during the presentation, complete with in tact flash content in fact was supplied to Apple by the NY Times as a high res screen shot. can you say deceptive ?? As a matter of fact that same screen shot is on the Apple iPad page. What I want to know is how that page would load at all on an iPad when the NY Times front page has over 30 separate Java scripts running in it! they fixed that. i don't know what the hell they were thinking. anyway, there's a new york times native app that is far, far better than trying to deal with the web site, mobile or otherwise. same for cnn. *that* is a major benefit. it even won an award last year for best news app. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
iPad: Apple could sell camel dung to their fans | Ray Fischer | Digital SLR Cameras | 14 | February 4th 10 02:35 AM |
iPad: Apple could sell camel dung to their fans | John McWilliams | Digital Photography | 0 | January 29th 10 04:55 PM |