iPad

[ghost]

I'm sure, likewise, that you won't be able to stream music with Pandora or some other third party service while you run other apps, just like the iPhone.  I assume Apple's answer to this is not "enable background apps" but instead "provide a proprietary streaming music solution endorsed by Apple" (see purchase of LaLa).

Maybe that is what the guy  was referencing at the store.  To be honest, I get so fucking frustrated any time I have to go to the Mac store for anything that I usually just tune those idiots out. 

I'll probably get one of these when they come out.  I got the wife a Nook for Christmas and its a buggy piece of shit so far.  Maybe the iPad will be better.

[Surlyboi]

Gah.

[naum]

HTML5 will be spiffy as its support becomes more universal, but right now the projected date of full adoption of the standard is 2022.   

I'm sure that the real day to day Internet will have adopted a 'good enough' HTML5 that plays nice on all the major browsers in the next year or two, and I'm looking forward to it.  I hate plugins and format wars.

This adoption shit takes time, too much time. As an example, the sites I work for still have between 10 and 15% IE6 users. Firefox is like 20%. Anyone saying IE6 is "dead" is sorely mistaking themselves, it just looks that way to us as powerusers. We even have a small percentage (like 2-3) that still uses goddamn IE 5. I don't see how though, because the sites don't support IE5 one iota but I guess if they've endured this long, they'll keep enduring. You can't tell that many people to "get an upgrade", you're not the first and it just won't happen. They'll just not use your site instead. I think the big job there is to get rid of all the Windows 95/98/Me/2K users that can't update their IE past version 6. Once a user has XP, it's atleast possible to get them to update IE, if not get them a proper browser.

But atleast we can thank God for modern JavaScript libraries that take 95% of the development pains out.

Most online services have already dropped IE6 support. Google makes it official on March 1, when they drop support for IE6 users using google docs. Other services like Tumblr throw up a huge error box to IE6 users and instruct them to download a more modern browser — giving them links to Firefox, IE8, Safari…

[Tarami]

Most? Specify. I have a very, very hard time thinking many sites can defend blacklisting 10-15% of their users, given they have the average share of IE6 users. The exact percentage of course depends on location and field. I can imagine Google Apps has a very small share of IE6 users, since it's pretty much a power user web application. In addition, prompting users to upgrade is a very different thing from dropping support.

In a year or two the number of IE6 users might be small enough (like a few percent) to be ignorable, but right now it's certainly expected that a site works in IE6, even if in dimished capacity. Blackballing your users isn't exactly a great idea. It's no coincidence that companies that have their products working on as many machines as possible often are the most successful.

Then we have IE7 to get rid of!

[AutomaticZen]

Most? Specify. I have a very, very hard time thinking many sites can defend blacklisting 10-15% of their users, given they have the average share of IE6 users. The exact percentage of course depends on location and field. I can imagine Google Apps has a very small share of IE6 users, since it's pretty much a power user web application. In addition, prompting users to upgrade is a very different thing from dropping support.

In a year or two the number of IE6 users might be small enough (like a few percent) to be ignorable, but right now it's certainly expected that a site works in IE6, even if in dimished capacity. Blackballing your users isn't exactly a great idea. It's no coincidence that companies that have their products working on as many machines as possible often are the most successful.

Then we have IE7 to get rid of!

Naum's only slightly ahead of himself, but Google just (as in the 29th) announced they're dropping IE6 support on Docs.  But as you said, this still leaves IE7.

The breakdown is as follows:

Internet Explorer 6   20.07%
Internet Explorer 7   14.58%
Internet Explorer 8   22.31%
Firefox 3              5.29%
Firefox 3.5             17.10%
Google Chrome           3.92%
Other                        16.17%

And by version:
Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0   22.31%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0   20.07%
Firefox 3.5   17.10%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0   14.58%
Firefox 3.0   5.29%
Chrome 3.0   3.92%
Safari 4.0   3.55%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0 - Compatibility Mode   2.79%
Opera 10.x   1.65%
Chrome 4.0   1.16%
Firefox 3.6   1.07% Firefox 2.0   0.79%
Opera 9.x   0.70%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 - Maxthon Edition   0.61%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 - Tencent Traveler Edition   0.42%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 - Maxthon Edition   0.40%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 - TheWorld Edition   0.32%
Netscape 6.0   0.31%
Opera Mini 4.2   0.31%
Safari on Windows 4.0   0.29%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0 - Compatibility Mode - Maxthon Edition   0.21%
Safari 3.1   0.19%
Safari 41   0.18%
Opera Mini 4.1   0.13%
Safari 3.2   0.12%
Mozilla   0.12%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0 - Compatibility Mode - Tencent Traveler Edition   0.10%
Firefox 1.5   0.10%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0 - Compatibility Mode - TheWorld Edition   0.09%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 - Tencent Traveler Edition   0.09%
Safari 3.0   0.08%
Chrome 2.0   0.07%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 - TheWorld Edition   0.06%
Opera Mini 4.0   0.06%
Opera Mini 5.0   0.05%
SeaMonkey   0.03%
PLAYSTATION 3 5.0   0.03%
Firefox 1.0   0.03%
Konqueror 3.5   0.03%
Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0   0.03%

[Viin]

We still support IE6, even though it's 10%-ish of our users. 10% isn't much when you only have 5,000 UVs, but when you have millions .... it's a large chunk.

[Tale]

iPad nano

[schild]

Jokes already a week old :(

[Trippy]

It's not official till the blogosphere says it is.

[NowhereMan]

But is it taking it very seriously yet? I must know!

[Draegan]

Windows 7 on iPad?

[Ingmar]

Hey an application for that thing that actually sounds sort of useful!

[Morat20]

This thing looks like a product searching for a market, rather than filling a necessary niche.

I don't think it's going to have the wide appeal Apple would hope for, although given it's Apple it'll at least get a real shot at acquiring one.

My personal thoughts: It's too bulky for the functionality. It's just a bad trade-off -- you don't get enough "Extras" for the hassle of carrying it around.

Mass appeal wise --- I can sort of see it as a portable media station --- hooked to, say, home wireless and a good, fat pipe and you could have a hand-portable TV, web interface, book reader, whatnot -- allowing you to, say, watch a movie or a TV show without having to leave your chair or stick in a DVD.

The problem with that is I don't think it has the bandwidth in the field to stream it on-demand at any reasonable quality (does it?) or store enough to make it feasible. Around the house where it can leach onto your home network, no big.

If the bloody thing could access my Netflex instant queue, live TV and for gravy, my home DVR or provider's on-demand services and stream it at good quality -- that I'd pay 800 bucks for. I use my laptop enough for watching Netflix or DVD's that trading it for a less bulky interface would be nice and worth quite a bit as a media station, and being able to check email and surf the web would be gravy.

I don't see it killing e-readers, though. Totally different market. People with e-readers don't want a tiny laptop. They want an "anybook" that'll access an entire library, can be read without eyestrain, and weigh no more than a regular book. 

[naum]

What people said about the iPod 9 years ago when it launched…

iPoop… iCry. I was so hoping for something more.

Great just what the world needs, another freaking MP3 player. Go Steve! Where’s the Newton?!

I still can’t believe this! All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about an MP3 player? I want something new! I want them to think differently! Why oh why would they do this?! It’s so wrong! It’s so stupid!

All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve’s mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off.

1. Not revolutionary. Big capacity mp3 players already exist. With Creative Labs’ entrance into the firewire arena, future nomads will have similar specs and better prices.

2. A bad fit. This product is outside Apple’s core competancy - computing devices. When many are calling for a pda, they release an MP3 player.

3. Without a future. This Christmas you will see mp3 players be commoditized. Meaning that the players from Korea will be way less expensive tha iPod. The real money is in DRM and distribution (ala Real Musicnet). If Apple were smart they would be focusing on high gross revenue from services rather than a playback device.

[fuser]

What people said about the iPod 9 years ago when it launched…
Stuff

Seriously? Did you even read the original source about 4 layers down?

Half of the bad things people said was from one post. If you look at a majority of the comments was bad based upon the $399 release price.

In regards to the pic it took 4 generations of the iPod to get up to steam and an entry level pricing of $299 to make a big splash. So what your pointing out is that in 3 years and a few revisions down the road the iPad will be worth buying?

[AutomaticZen]

What people said about the iPod 9 years ago when it launched…

iPoop… iCry. I was so hoping for something more.

Great just what the world needs, another freaking MP3 player. Go Steve! Where’s the Newton?!

I still can’t believe this! All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about an MP3 player? I want something new! I want them to think differently! Why oh why would they do this?! It’s so wrong! It’s so stupid!

All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve’s mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off.

1. Not revolutionary. Big capacity mp3 players already exist. With Creative Labs’ entrance into the firewire arena, future nomads will have similar specs and better prices.

2. A bad fit. This product is outside Apple’s core competancy - computing devices. When many are calling for a pda, they release an MP3 player.

3. Without a future. This Christmas you will see mp3 players be commoditized. Meaning that the players from Korea will be way less expensive tha iPod. The real money is in DRM and distribution (ala Real Musicnet). If Apple were smart they would be focusing on high gross revenue from services rather than a playback device.

Would you like the same for the Apple TV or Macbook Air?  Not even counting it took awhile to get to that point with the Pod.

[Teleku]

What people said about the iPod 9 years ago:

[insert link to a single thread from 2001 with people jizzing all over it]

Because they do exist and I'm not even going to bother looking.  Seriously, thats the proof it will be ok, one thread on a forum where people bitched?  Anyways, I hate that argument.  "People were wrong about the iPod.  So they MUST be wrong about the iPad!"

Though the fun thing about that chart is that is shows us nobody was buying the fucking things until several upgraded models later, when they integrated all sorts of cool features, AND lowered the price.  Which is what I think (and am actually hoping) happens with the iPad.  What they introduced sucks ass.  I know Apple has the ability to make a great tablet, so I'm hoping in a few more iterations we'll get baby Jesus.  Thats the model they seem to follow with everything lately.  

Or it could just end up being another cube, which I seriously hope not.

edit:  Aaaaand beaten like a Red Headed step child by everybody else.

[pants]

Google sez a iPad?  Great idea, lets have a gPad too!

[ahoythematey]

Goddamn.

Apple chief executive officer Steve Jobs reportedly told staff at a recent "Town Hall" meeting that Google was the one that began competing with Apple by entering the phone industry, labelling the company's "Don't be evil" corporate mantra "a load of crap".

 

[Engels]

Windows 7 on iPad?

Uhm, that's sorta a remote connection to Windows 7 running on another machine. Sure, its a form of cloud computing, but instead of an app its an OS.

what you are seeing above is Windows 7 running on the iPad SDK simulator, thanks to Citrix Receiver and XenDesktop 4—running meaning that it's executed on a server and remotely displayed on the iPad at full resolution.

Not sure why that would be better than plain vanilla remote desktop.

[Trippy]

It's not, other than the fact that Windows Remote Desktop Connection doesn't run on the iPhone OS.

[naum]

Though the fun thing about that chart is that is shows us nobody was buying the fucking things until several upgraded models later, when they integrated all sorts of cool features, AND lowered the price.  Which is what I think (and am actually hoping) happens with the iPad.  What they introduced sucks ass.  I know Apple has the ability to make a great tablet, so I'm hoping in a few more iterations we'll get baby Jesus.  Thats the model they seem to follow with everything lately.  

I always hold off on version 1 Apple products… …wait a few months, or a year, it will be half the price, more features and the early "beta" adopters will hash out all the glitches…

[AutomaticZen]

I always hold off on version 1 Apple products… …wait a few months, or a year, it will be half the price, more features and the early "beta" adopters will hash out all the glitches…

I figure 2 years out and they'll have the version I'm willing to work with.

[Engels]

It's not, other than the fact that Windows Remote Desktop Connection doesn't run on the iPhone OS.

I got it on mine... http://www.jaadurdp.com/

[Trippy]

It's not, other than the fact that Windows Remote Desktop Connection doesn't run on the iPhone OS.

I got it on mine... http://www.jaadurdp.com/

Wow cool thanks.

[Jeff Kelly]

Though the fun thing about that chart is that is shows us nobody was buying the fucking things until several upgraded models later, when they integrated all sorts of cool features, AND lowered the price.

The cool features you're talking about are known as Windows compatibility and USB support. Both introduced with the fourth generation of the original iPod which offered no significant new features the first iPod didn't already have except a bigger hard drive.

[AutomaticZen]

The cool features you're talking about are known as Windows compatibility and USB support. Both introduced with the fourth generation of the original iPod which offered no significant new features the first iPod didn't already have except a bigger hard drive.

If you don't think those are significant, I got nothing.

And to play naum's game, which Apple product are these comments about?

As always with an Ars review of an Apple product the list of Pros matter to consumers, while the list of Cons matter only to geeks.

Too true!

What?! You mean this doesn't play ogg vorbis! I'm not buying it until it does!

One of the best quotes I've ever seen on /. summed this effect up nicely:

"The most vocal group of people demanding a specific product and promising to buy it will usually not actually buy what they say they want. They are just looking to get something they can't have, and when they can have it, they don't want it anymore."

It's not going to flop. It's drop-dead simple and highly focused, it's sleek, it's got a snazzy interface, and it's already selling well on Apple's online store.

No it's not. It is limited, but the limitation makes it a better product for consumers actually. I think the extremely easy to use interface will win a lot of people over.

I think the naysayers expect a bit much

People complained about all of these things when the iPod came out too, remember? And some people won't buy them as a result. But the fact is that the vast majority of people don't seem to care about any of this, as long as it works. And does anyone here think it won't?

Wake the fuck up people. Your mom, your grandma, and your 60-year old boss will never buy an  *competing product*. Never-fucking-ever.

Or this gem:

My whole point is you're not wrong, but the **** doesn't suck. It just works differently.

and the reply:

But thats the thing, it really doesn't. Theres nothing here thats not already on the ****, or even anything thats implemented differently.

Same shit, different day.  Who knows if this will be a success or not.

[Jeff Kelly]

Well Windows compatibility is a significant feature which kind of defeats the point you were trying to make.

The original iPod used an HFS file system, had firewire and the only compatible sync software was availiable for Mac only.

Still there were enough people who wanted one desperately enough to kick start whole businesses. People reverse engineered the sync protocol, a lot of firewire cards for PCs were sold, HFS drivers for Windows were developed and popular music managemet software was adapted to work with an iPod.

iPod sales took of not because it got cheaper (it didn't) or had more features (it hadn't) but because Apple opened the device for Windows users.

If they would have had a Windows compatible iPod on day one you'd see a lot more sales in the first two years. In fact there was such a lot of pent up demand that the Windows version of the 3rd gen iPod was sold out for nearly half a year. (I know because it was the first one I bought). A fact that wan't reflected anywhere in the media at that time.

I checked back to the news item the most popular german IT news service released on the day of the iPod announcement. The forum discussion was a really great flame war but not between Apple fanboys and users who didn't like the iPod but rather between people who would have bought one if it was available for Windows and those who didn't see the point in another mp3-player.

As for the quotes I could just copy and paste the same amount of quotes that state the failure of the iPod but it's just pointless selective quoting. Nobody knows if it will be a success or not that's true

The discussion that follows a new Apple device however is pathological. Some see in it the herald of a new era of computing some don't see the merit because they can get a computer/toaster/foot massager that bakes muffins for half the price, both parties are too myopic too realize that they are the fringe of the discussion because all they do is live in their own internet echo chamber.

Most people don't care for revolutions and they also don't care that you could buy a veritable super computer for less. They want something that "just works" and they actually enjoy using without getting a masters degree in computer engineering.

A fact nobody in the profession seems to get.

[Teleku]

Though the fun thing about that chart is that is shows us nobody was buying the fucking things until several upgraded models later, when they integrated all sorts of cool features, AND lowered the price.

The cool features you're talking about are known as Windows compatibility and USB support. Both introduced with the fourth generation of the original iPod which offered no significant new features the first iPod didn't already have except a bigger hard drive.

Err, the iPod Video?  Came out in 2005, same year that chart suddenly shows a boom in sales of iPods.  Lets you play video and games on it.  Also, incidentally, the first year I got one.  Theres a huge difference between those models and the first models.

[AutomaticZen]

iPod sales took of not because it got cheaper (it didn't) or had more features (it hadn't) but because Apple opened the device for Windows users.

Teleku covered this is his post.

The discussion that follows a new Apple device however is pathological. Some see in it the herald of a new era of computing some don't see the merit because they can get a computer/toaster/foot massager that bakes muffins for half the price, both parties are too myopic too realize that they are the fringe of the discussion because all they do is live in their own internet echo chamber.

The same happens with any tech that hails itself a 'revolution', not just Apple.  When Sony hit the block with their PS3 the first time, the comments were about the same.  So there's no reason to paint Apple as some sort of martyr.

If I say my new product is going to, 'change urban transportation as we know it', and then I give you this:
then sorry, there's probably going to be some disappointment thrown my way.  Not even going into the fact that a regular bike would do the same thing, for cheaper.

Most people don't care for revolutions and they also don't care that you could buy a veritable super computer for less. They want something that "just works" and they actually enjoy using without getting a masters degree in computer engineering.

A fact nobody in the profession seems to get.

Add, 'that serves a need'.  Again, as has been pointed out many many times, you can buy a netbook to do the same things for less.  It's not like Netbooks are in bargain basements only.  Pick any electronics store and there they are.

This may be the one, but not this version.  Maybe gen 2 or 3.  This is a great proof of concept, but it's certainly not the 'best internet device ever'.

Personally, the elegance ends for my mother the instant she needs to type on the virtual keyboard.  For me, it'd need handwriting recognition.

[Morat20]

I'm still at a loss to what need this fills.

What's the end use supposed to do with this thing? How's it supposed to integrate into daily life? Not niche -- mass market.

The iPod was an MP3 player. And later a video player + mp3 player. The market there, the target they were going for, was obvious -- the people who liked listening to music. There were already existing items in the market -- portable radios, walkmen, there were even dedicated mp3 players already.

"Take your entire music collection with you in a pocket-sized device with 10 hours of playtime" is not a hard pitch. It might succeed or fail, but it's really clear what it's for.

What's the iPad for? Who is it being sold to? What uses is it for? What needs is it fufilling? Do those needs represent a large market? Or a growable one? Is the pricepoint acceptable for that?

I can see uses for an iPad sized device, sellable ones, but not the ones the iPad seems to be offering. So what am I missing?

[Prospero]

It's a computer for people who can't handle the complexity of modern computing, which is most folks. It can do basic word processing, web surfing, and email. For a lot of folks that's all they need. It's kinda dumb that it needs a home computer still, but I can see that going away in the future.

I'm pretty tempted to pick one up for around the house and traveling. I do a lot of web reading on my iPhone, so it seems like a no brainer to pick up something similar with a much larger screen. It also looks much more pleasant than my phone or laptop for watching movies while traveling on planes. Getting my laptop in a comfortable position on those stupid trays is always unpleasant. It'll also be nice for having web based recipes in the kitchen. My laptop has a lot of nooks and crannies crap can get in, but my iPhone has too tiny a screen to be pleasant to use. When they get video chat on it it will damn near perfect. I take my laptop on most trips just to be able to video chat with home.

[Morat20]

It's a computer for people who can't handle the complexity of modern computing, which is most folks. It can do basic word processing, web surfing, and email. For a lot of folks that's all they need. It's kinda dumb that it needs a home computer still, but I can see that going away in the future.

I'm pretty tempted to pick one up for around the house and traveling. I do a lot of web reading on my iPhone, so it seems like a no brainer to pick up something similar with a much larger screen. It also looks much more pleasant than my phone or laptop for watching movies while traveling on planes. Getting my laptop in a comfortable position on those stupid trays is always unpleasant. It'll also be nice for having web based recipes in the kitchen. My laptop has a lot of nooks and crannies crap can get in, but my iPhone has too tiny a screen to be pleasant to use. When they get video chat on it it will damn near perfect. I take my laptop on most trips just to be able to video chat with home.

So basically, it's a simplified tablet with enhanced media -- using a touchscreen interface?

Looking over the price, the memory, and the like it seems it lacks both the storage and the real bandwidth to reliably stream video or store anything more than a very few movies. (Maybe I misread the data storage? 64GB would be bare minimum, and that's at the MUCH higher pricepoint).

Hmm.

I'm getting a camel vibe off this thing. Perhaps it'll surprise me. More likely, successive iterations will fix what seems like poor compromises. I can see the appeal of a hand-held, portable media station -- basically an iTV with enough storage to hold a good number of movies or TV shows, and then tacking on the ability to stream from Netflix or equivilant when you have a WiFi signal to leach off, and web-surfing off the 3G side.

I think it's memory is too small for that, it's battery time is okay but not great (hopefully you can swap them out easily -- you can have 18 to 20 hours between airport waits and flights easily enough). I also see some significant resistance to paying for 3G access again (it's too bloody bulky to be a phone -- hopefully At&T decides a dual iPhone iPad service is a good idea), I think the base (and most affordable) model isn't going to do anything well -- which will probably be the biggest hurdle.

Yeah, definite camel. I can sort of see what they're going for, but they're bound by price and by technology, and the resulting product isn't going to satisfy anyone but the hard-core technies, or the well-off who love their electronic gadgets. It's not even worth getting unless it's the 64GB model with the 3G, and that price point is ludicrous for the functionality.

iPhone worked. iPod worked. iPad? Talk to me in a few iterations. I can see possibilities there -- but not this tech, at this price, with those limitations.

But hey, that's my own personal opinion. It'll sell or not sell, succeed or flop, entirely independent of me.

[AutomaticZen]

... but I can see that going away in the future.

...

When they get **** on it it will damn near perfect.

Excellent proof of concept.  But they're not there yet.  Rev 2 or 3 maybe.

[Morat20]

Excellent proof of concept.  But they're not there yet.  Rev 2 or 3 maybe.

To make it really solid, you'd need say....250GB of memory (enough to hold a decent library of movies and tv-shows). Access to Netflix or an equivilant when in WiFi range. You'd probably need to pump the battery to a minimum of 12 hours, but 10 is acceptable if you can pop in a new one (like a laptop battery). I'd also say alter the dimensions to add standard widescreen support.

And the price point needs to stay below 600 bucks, I'd guess. Without adding much weight. 1 1/2 pounds is a lot -- you'd defintely want a way to prop the bloody thing up, so you didn't have to hold it.

I mean, basically what you want is a TV that works like an iPod. You cart it around, watch TV whenever. I'd honestly say web surfing and email and such would be a low-use functionality. Laptops are ergonomically awkward enough. iPhones get away with it because they are small and light.