[Eug]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Every Real Estate agent in the world is going to have an iPad.

Not really. If they didn't bother with laptops until now, they probably won't bother with an iPad either. The real tool of the real estate agent is a Blackberry, or possibly an iPhone.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Eug 

It seems AAPL isn't quite holding up to the hype. It was $215 last week, but now down to $207.

Still, given the iPad's lacklustre introduction, it's holding up better than I expected. I wouldn't have been surprised if a drop below $200 occurred if the iPad didn't blow us away. That it's holding over $205 suggests AAPL investors are a little unsure at this point, hopeful, but not confident.

Spoke too soon. Today AAPL dropped 4% to $199 and change.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

Apple hired a bunch of developers from DL. Calling it stealing is a bit harsh. It's a bookshelf, that's all.

Apple hired two devs away from Delicious Monster. To my knowledge, neither of them was involved in this project at all. Not sure how that makes makes a difference.

At any rate, the Delicious Monster guy wasn't really mad about this. He was just joking around on Twitter.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

In your OPINION, right?

No, it's a fact.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

For me I can pretty much sum it up by saying that I find the iPod innovative but not imaginative.

Still gonna get one though and hope the 4.0 gives us a more thought out UI with multitasking. I'm still blown away that if I am chatting on skype doing anything else will end the call.

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No, it's a fact.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Not really. If they didn't bother with laptops until now, they probably won't bother with an iPad either. The real tool of the real estate agent is a Blackberry, or possibly an iPhone.

Laptops are as well. I have a good friend who is a realtor who is attached to her MBA and Cinema display.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No, it's a fact.

Right. Apple's putting together a device that people can't read. Got it.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by starman 

Right. Apple's putting together a device that people can't read. Got it.

It's a FACT that Shaddim's too old.

iPad Braille to the rescue

-t

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

Right. Apple's putting together a device that people can't read. Got it.

Can they read on it? Yes. Is it as good as Epaper for reading? No.

That simple enough for you, or do you have a little more hyperbole for the rest of the class?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Has anyone heard anything about RAM? Why is there no information anywhere about how much RAM it has?

[slugslugslug]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Has anyone heard anything about RAM? Why is there no information anywhere about how much RAM it has?

Same reason there's no info about how much RAM the iPod touch and iPhone have. Apple doesn't want you worrying your pretty little head about it. Kinda makes sense. You'll never be able to upgrade the RAM in one; and you'll never see software descriptions listing minimum RAM requirements. When there are enough revisions that some models are more powerful than the original, the developers will specify a minimum OS or specific model name. But Apple doesn't want people to think of these as having a whole potential range of specs.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Then why do we know how fast the processor is?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Then why do we know how fast the processor is?

Because it's Apple's way of announcing that they're really in the processor game now.

[MacinTommy]

Latest top ten list of missing features

[starman]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Can they read on it? Yes. Is it as good as Epaper for reading? No.

That simple enough for you, or do you have a little more hyperbole for the rest of the class?

I'm just wondering why you're shoving your PERSONAL, ANECDOTAL experiences as FACT for the rest of us.

[starman]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

It's a FACT that Shaddim's too old.

iPad Braille to the rescue

-t

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by starman 

I'm just wondering why you're shoving your PERSONAL, ANECDOTAL experiences as FACT for the rest of us.

Why are you?

Shaddim prefers e-ink to backlit LCD for reading. He prefers a portable e-book reader to physical books.

You don't.

Both are opinions. Nobody except you is trying to insist otherwise.

[slugslugslug]

^Except that you have it backwards. Shaddim did actually say his contention was a “fact”. Not that I know why I’m getting into this pissing contest…

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

At any rate, the Delicious Monster guy wasn't really mad about this. He was just joking around on Twitter.

The point, though, is that is just as guilty of being "inspired" by other people's ideas as another major OS producer is.

[ort888]

Have you guys spent much time reading opinions elsewhere? Looking at the Digg comment section you would think that Apple just released a $5,000 Tamagochi that sprays a cancer causing poison into the faces of schoolchildren and that anyone who buys a single Apple product is a mentally challenged hipster who couldn't even string together a few words to form a sentence.

[Wiskedjak]

The reality is that, like most things, e-ink and LCD each have their own advantages and disadvantages for reading.

e-ink consumes less power, doesn't have a refresh rate and has higher DPIs than LCDs resulting in less eye strain. But, e-ink is mono-chrome, isn't back lit, can't be used in low light and offers a level of interactivity only marginally higher than a book.

LCDs make a much richer experience possible, can be used in pitch-black and are sexier. But, their back light and refresh rates can result in eye strain, they can't be used very well in bright ambient light and they consume power at a much higher rate.

Given it's similarity to the reading conditions required by books, I wouldn't be surprised if the Kindle is more appealing to those who lament the end of the printed word.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by MacinTommy 

Latest top ten list of missing features

Top ten apologist list.

[starman]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Why are you?

Shaddim prefers e-ink to backlit LCD for reading. He prefers a portable e-book reader to physical books.

You don't.

Both are opinions. Nobody except you is trying to insist otherwise.

Thanks for agreeing with me. That's exactly what I've been saying.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

and, well, yes, it is.

Ever read a book on an epaper display? Because I've tried reading on both and epaper kicks the s**t out of LCD in that respect.

What were you reading on?

I don't think there's a tablet, or a laptop, on the market that uses an IPS display. They're all twisted-nematic.

The difference is the same as with the old 20" alu iMac vs. the 24" version - you could actually read stuff on the 24" iMac due to the *much* higher contrast and viewing angle.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

The Mac community would be singing a different story if it was Microsoft copying the bookshelf idea from Apple. I don't mind people being inspired from other people's ideas. What I don't like is the double standard.

You know, I keep hearing this every time Apple takes up an idea from elsewhere. Slashdot is really big on repeating this, as well.

Frankly, I haven't actually *heard* anybody complain about Windows' copy-catting since about a year after Vista's release. Even the fanbois wouldn't be "singing a different story" these days, really.

Either that, or I'm just getting older and refusing to listen, let alone care.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by slugslugslug 

^Except that you have it backwards. Shaddim did actually say his contention was a “fact”.

um.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by MacinTommy 

You are right about that.. I just watched the keynote and it seems pretty damn cool. I really liked when they demoed the Pages app and moved that giraffe graphic around and the text f"ing automatically wrapped around it!

It's extremely cool that this works with your finger, but Pages has done that since the first version.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

What were you reading on?

I don't think there's a tablet, or a laptop, on the market that uses an IPS display. They're all twisted-nematic.

The difference is the same as with the old 20" alu iMac vs. the 24" version - you could actually read stuff on the 24" iMac due to the *much* higher contrast and viewing angle.

All of my desktop displays are IPS, none are TN. So are MBP 15 and 17" displays.

The display on the MacBook Pro is beautiful and is a significant improvement over what’s used in the base model thanks to Apple's use of an IPS panel instead of a TN panel. The result is much better off-angle viewing. I can't stress enough how big of a difference the display makes with the MacBook Pro and is honestly the main reason I would pick it over the regular MacBook as a work machine.

Yeah, I tried reading, as in serious reading (not just web browsing), on my IPS desktop displays and on my 17" MBP and it isn't nearly as comfortable (on my eyes) as reading on my Kindle. It's kinda the whole reason Amazon went that route to begin with, you know? As I said before, Epaper is far superior to any type of LCD for that kind of thing.

As a general gadget the iPad will be much better, it does a lot more. However, it isn't the ideal ebook reader.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by starman 

I'm just wondering why you're shoving your PERSONAL, ANECDOTAL experiences as FACT for the rest of us.

Because it is a fact. Live with it.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Why are you?

Shaddim prefers e-ink to backlit LCD for reading. He prefers a portable e-book reader to physical books.

You don't.

Both are opinions. Nobody except you is trying to insist otherwise.

Actually, no, I prefer dead tree books. However, it's hard to cary around 1000 of those at one time without a string of pack mules.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

All of my desktop displays are IPS, none are TN. So are MBP 15 and 17" displays.

AFAIK, that information is incorrect.

Rob Galbraith DPI: A look at the evolving laptop display
January 2009
"We know of no IPS screens in current-model laptops, ThinkPads or otherwise"

IPS screens draw a lot more power, and they have terrific viewing angles, both vertically and horizontally.

The viewing angle on all MacBook Pros is a dead give-away: they are NOT IPS panels.

[MacinTommy]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

It's extremely cool that this works with your finger, but Pages has done that since the first version.

I've always had Pages on my Mac(s) but since I'm in school I've always had to use Word because almost all of my professors have on their syllabus "MUST USE MICROSOFT WORD WHEN EMAILING PAPERS/ASSIGNMENTS!".

Heres another Top Ten List From CNET

[Simon]

But you know Pages can export to Word documents, right?

[MacinTommy]

i is dumb. I just realized that.

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Have you guys spent much time reading opinions elsewhere? Looking at the Digg comment section you would think that Apple just released a $5,000 Tamagochi that sprays a cancer causing poison into the faces of schoolchildren and that anyone who buys a single Apple product is a mentally challenged hipster who couldn't even string together a few words to form a sentence.

Ahaha this made me laugh.

Originally Posted by starman 

Thanks for agreeing with me. That's exactly what I've been saying.

You could try saying it in a slightly less aggressive/angry manner, then.

Perhaps there are studies showing that e-ink is easier on the eyes than backlit LCDs.

Why does it even matter? Nobody's forcing you to buy an eBook reader or an iPad.

[Eug]

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

You could try saying it in a slightly less aggressive/angry manner, then.
Perhaps there are studies showing that e-ink is easier on the eyes than backlit LCDs.
Why does it even matter? Nobody's forcing you to buy an eBook reader or an iPad.

I think what we learned is this:

ALL absolute statements are ALWAYS to be avoided. Including this one.

-t

[Eug]

I think the most interesting part of this particular product release is that Apple surprised us... in that they failed to surprise us. There was no killer app. There was no killer feature. The new iPad is the evolutionary product that we uncreative peons were predicting.

And that's a disappointment.

P.S. AAPL is now down to $195 and change.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I think the most interesting part of this particular product release is that Apple surprised us... in that they failed to surprise us. There was no killer app. There was no killer feature. The new iPad is the evolutionary product that we uncreative peons were predicting.

One can argue that the same was true for the first iPhone and iPod.
Remember how people where quick to point out that none of the technologies used in those were new, and that all of it could be found in other MP3 players and smart phones ?

What people ALWAYS fail to realize is that Apple's products never present something completely new.

But they always improve over existing products, especially in terms of GUI and usability.

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. AAPL is now down to $195 and change.

As it ALWAYS is after a major new announcement.
Nothing different with the iPad as compared to other releases before.

-t

[Simon]

No, that wasn't the point he was making.

On this board several people predicted the iPad would be exactly this. In fact all over the web people predicted it would be exactly this. A big iPod touch with an ebook reader app. OTOH nobody here predicted the iPod or iPhone properly before it came out.

And that makes a lot of sense. For Apple, the iPod and iPhone were revolutionary products. They were rooted in areas of technology where Apple previously hadn't worked. The iPad OTOH is evolutionary. It builds on technology that Apple was already well familiar with. And hence the lack of surprise.

The iPad might turn out to be a success. But surprise it wasn't.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

As it ALWAYS is after a major new announcement.
Nothing different with the iPad as compared to other releases before.

-t

Seems like it's down a bit more than usual though, especially since it was $20 higher a few weeks ago.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

AFAIK, that information is incorrect.

Rob Galbraith DPI: A look at the evolving laptop display
January 2009
"We know of no IPS screens in current-model laptops, ThinkPads or otherwise"

IPS screens draw a lot more power, and they have terrific viewing angles, both vertically and horizontally.

The viewing angle on all MacBook Pros is a dead give-away: they are NOT IPS panels.

I just checked with Anand, to be more precise one of his staff who is a friend of mine, and the MBP does indeed have an IPS panel. I'm not sure where the break could be, or who is at fault here, but the display on my 17" is superb at indirect viewing angles. Personally, I'd trust Anand first, he really is the best at his job.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I think what we learned is this:

ALL absolute statements are ALWAYS to be avoided. Including this one.

-t

I love making absolute statements, especially on an online forum. People get their knickers all in a bunch.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Simon 

And that makes a lot of sense. For Apple, the iPod and iPhone were revolutionary products. They were rooted in areas of technology where Apple previously hadn't worked. The iPad OTOH is evolutionary. It builds on technology that Apple was already well familiar with. And hence the lack of surprise.

> They were rooted in areas of technology where Apple previously hadn't worked.

That doesn't make it revolutionary. Again, the iPod and iPhone were NOT successful just because Apple decided to incorporate hardware technology that was already used by others for MP3 players and smart phones.

Their success was based on very good usability and design features.

According to your definition, of "revolutionary", the iPad would be as well, because Apple had not previously worked on tablets.

-t

[Simon]

Umm, no. For the reasons pointed out above.

[slugslugslug]

Originally Posted by turtle777

That doesn't make it revolutionary. Again, the iPod and iPhone were NOT successful just because Apple decided to incorporate hardware technology that was already used by others for MP3 players and smart phones.

Were there any phones with capacitive multipoint touchscreens before 2007?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by slugslugslug 

Were there any phones with capacitive multipoint touchscreens before 2007?

Good point. I have to agree, this was truly a technological innovation / revolution.

However, before I concede too much ( ), one has to keep in mind that capacitive multipoint touchscreens mean nothing w/o the GUI and usability it gives. In THAT respect, Apple was definitely revolutionary.

BUT (to get back at Simon's point), there are no capacitive multipoint touchscreen tablets on teh market either, so by that definition, the iPad is also revolutionary, and not just evolutionary.

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Umm, no. For the reasons pointed out above.

Huh ? Above ? What are you referring to ?

-t