Official iPad Discussion Thread

[wyneken]

Originally Posted by cxc273

There are some people who want to see a camera or more memory, but it seems like the question we're all trying to wrap our heads around is, "What are we going to use the iPad for?"

I've got a pretty clear idea of what I want to use this for. As I laid out in another thread, I need a portable device to shlep back and forth to the school where I teach part-time that is capable of word processing, linking to the local network, accessing e-mail and the web, and being used as a teaching tool -- for instance by displaying photos and charts to my students, as well as playing music and videos, all of which I like to use to liven up my English classes. I do not need (or want) another computer.

Right now, I use an iPod touch for some of this stuff, but it doesn't work as a practical word processor (for cranking out class handouts and homework assignments and the like), and the tiny screen limits its usability as a teaching tool.

I think the iPad's greatest strength would be when I travel. I think it's a viable alternative to the Macbook Air.

Yes and yes for me too.

I'd like to have a copy of my full iTunes library along with a few movies but the Air's limited capacity and high price makes that difficult.

I have long passed the point where it's feasible to carry my whole iTunes library around on ANY portable device. My first iPod was a shuffle, so I've always thought of these things as essentially portable playlists.

I'd like to see the iPad platform mature a bit before jumping in, perhaps in a year or two.

Yeah, me too. But then I'd waste two years in which I could be having fun with this beautiful new toy. Life is too short.

[Matt M]

Kornchild provided some VERY useful input, seriously. I agree, why put something in that's crappy? Do something right, or don't do it at all. The iPod nano is a great example, why place the video camera in if it doesn't work? I do like the current iPad and I think it has lots of hidden "power" which many of us haven't noticed yet.

[Germansuplex]

Overall, I'm pleased with the iPad.

The biggest omission to me was a camera, but then I don't go anywhere without my iPhone, so no big deal there.

Many are complaining about the 4:3 aspect ratio and the large bezel. Both of them are ideal to me. 16:9 just isn't a good AR for portrait mode. I guess they could've went with the iPhone's aspect ratio, but I think 4:3 just works better for a larger device.

My biggest gripe is cosmetics... the homescreen looks ridiculous with all that retail space and the tiny icons. I think what would work more better is more buttons on the dock along the bottom, and for them to work like stacks. You can arrange your icons and name your stacks however you like. Then most of the screen could be used for widgets. I think that would look much better. Widgets like stocks, weather, recent photos, and simple news feeds could come stocked with the device, and the app store would offer more.

I LOVE the way the iPod looked on the device. Video too.

iBooks looks great.

I would like to see wireless syncing with this device. The way home sharing, the Apple TV and Apple Remote devices work lead you to believe it would be easy enough to implement. I'm surprised we don't have it already, really.

So yeah, I think the device looks great. There's room for improvement, but I don't think Apple could have released any device or done anything where that statement wouldn't be true to some degree.

[kornchild2002]

Originally Posted by wyneken

Yeah, me too. But then I'd waste two years in which I could be having fun with this beautiful new toy. Life is too short.

That is true. Even as German pointed out, Apple could have never released a tablet that is perfect. It could have achieved 14 hours of real world usage on a single charge, been running Mas OS X Snow Leopard, have 250GB SSD, and been priced at $300. There still would have been people who complained. In my opinion, the iPhone OS has become what Windows 7 Starter is. It gives you the basic functionality without the advanced features.

You can either wait a generation or two before buying an iPad or get one now. However, if you wait until the second generation, what is going to stop you from waiting until the third generation where the iPad will be even better? Well, you have already waited two years, why not wait just another year to see what Apple does? Three years go by so what's another year after that? You can either get a technological device when it is released or spend your entire time waiting for the next big improvement.

[Code Monkey]

Originally Posted by kornchild2002

You can either wait a generation or two before buying an iPad or get one now. However, if you wait until the second generation, what is going to stop you from waiting until the third generation where the iPad will be even better? Well, you have already waited two years, why not wait just another year to see what Apple does? Three years go by so what's another year after that? You can either get a technological device when it is released or spend your entire time waiting for the next big improvement.

And? I'm not sure about everyone else's finances, but a $500 and up item is well outside of my "aw shucks, why the hell not?" price range. It's a purchase price point that means I won't be getting anything with a price measured in the hundreds for a significant length of time. I don't see how the, "yeah, it's not perfect, but it sure is cool!" argument makes any sense whatsoever. Even if I had considerably more money that I do have, I'm still not sure that sort of thinking is anything but questionable bordering on lunacy.

As an example, I'm still waiting on Apple to make a touch I regard as worth the price, and I'm happy to wait. They'll either ship a good enough touch one of these days, or they won't, but I'm not about to financially reward them until they do. People who pay for the toy just to play with it even though it's not what they really want are exactly why Apple gets away with deliberately handicapping devices out of the gate, and I don't want to encourage them any more than they clearly already are. I'm not missing out on anything by waiting, at least anything worth spending money on.

[wyneken]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey

I'm still waiting on Apple to make a touch I regard as worth the price, and I'm happy to wait. They'll either ship a good enough touch one of these days, or they won't, but I'm not about to financially reward them until they do. People who pay for the toy just to play with it even though it's not what they really want are exactly why Apple gets away with deliberately handicapping devices out of the gate, and I don't want to encourage them any more than they clearly already are. I'm not missing out on anything by waiting, at least anything worth spending money on.

These are valid points and very well taken. This is exactly how I felt about the iMac when it was introduced. It was cool and sexy and tempting, but just didn't seem to be a finished product, somehow. (What was the deal with that silly round mouse?) And I definitely didn't get the point about the original iPod. which cost what, $399 or something?

This is a personal call and there is an obvious trade-off involved: Either you jump in now and have the pleasure of owning this exciting (though flawed and limited) 1st-generation gizmo, or you act like a mature adult and wait for the product to evolve to the point where you feel it makes sense. And obviously too there is real money involved.

I speak only for myself when I say that this is not one of those "mature adult" moments in my life.

[oslodude]

Originally Posted by kornchild2002

Well, what is the point of a video chat if you are going to have to turn every light in your house on along with making some makeshift spotlight? I realize we are not talking about professional photo shoots, I am not stupid. It just isn't very convenient to have a camera (such as the 0.3MP one in my netbook or 5MP one in my digital camera) that requires a million different light sources in order for it to produce decent results. Why have a video chat if the person on the other end isn't going to see you?

I have never had a problem with lighting on my MBP, which is only 1.3MP, or for that matter, not even with my 0.3MP Motorola RAZR camera. Neglecting to incorporate a video camera is clearly a strategic play on Apple´s part, so they can release a "New And Improved!" version in a year.

But where on earth is the "New And Improved" ipod Touch/iphone with multitasking, flash and video??? AT&T touts the ability to do multiple things simultaneously on the iphone. Seems like false advertising to me! We have been waiting too long already for this.

Also, does lack of multitasking mean that one would have to quit Mail if opening Preview to view a PDF attachment? How can Apple consider that an acceptable tradeoff???

[kornchild2002]

Originally Posted by OG_Kush

I still can't get over the fact that I can't view my favorite flash based adult websites.

I don't think we need to hear that you want your Flash porn on a portable internet device again. We get it, OK.

Originally Posted by oslodude

I have never had a problem with lighting on my MBP, which is only 1.3MP, or for that matter, not even with my 0.3MP Motorola RAZR camera.

Yeah, OK. You are willing to settle on sub-par image quality. I had a RAZR with a 0.3MP camera and hated the image quality, same thing holds true for the 1.3MP cameras I have used and the 5MP one in my cellphone. I am not expecting professional quality here but it becomes a problem when someone has to turn on three or four lights just to get a decent shot. Sure, it can be done but it isn't practical.

Originally Posted by Code Monkey

And? I'm not sure about everyone else's finances, but a $500 and up item is well outside of my "aw shucks, why the hell not?" price range.

My comment wasn't directed towards them, it was to the people who constantly wait and wait while never buying anything new. You will never, ever, ever find a perfect product even in the $500+ range. There are people who will sit and wait for 6 years before even looking at upgrading their hardware. They will then not find something absolutely perfect and wait another few years. Sure, the iPad is far from perfect but people who want one should get it when the iPad is released. Otherwise they will keep waiting for the perfect iPad that will never come out. That is, if they want an iPad. There are people such as yourself who are perfectly content with what they currently have and don't want or need to upgrade. That is different than someone wanting/needing an iPad (though, do we really NEED anything technological these days aside from a $50 monitor and $199 net-top? no) while always waiting for the next big thing.

[Code Monkey]

Originally Posted by kornchild2002

You will never, ever, ever find a perfect product even in the $500+ range. There are people who will sit and wait for 6 years before even looking at upgrading their hardware. They will then not find something absolutely perfect and wait another few years. Sure, the iPad is far from perfect but people who want one should get it when the iPad is released. Otherwise they will keep waiting for the perfect iPad that will never come out.

You're defining this an illogical either/or. It's not a question of perfect and nothing at all. It's a question of if the product is good enough. The *concept* of the iPad is very appealing: lightweight, vibrant screen, can do most basic computing tasks, decent enough battery life, etc..

The *concept* is fine. The question is does what's there live up to the concept for the price being asked well enough, and that is not something that should be so blithely dismissed. Apple could have delivered a much stronger product for the same or lower cost, and that's my problem with it. It simply doesn't live up to being sufficient for even basic computing needs because of the lack of multi tasking, and it fails utterly at "the best web experience" because of the forced use of Safari and no Flash (and who knows what other plugins) support. For basic computing, it's actually worse than Windows 3.X, and that's been a while.

It's one thing to say, "you'll possibly be waiting forever if you want the perfect device for the perfect price", it's another thing to say, "since there will never be the perfect device at the perfect price, just go for it if you want it." The logic is similar, yes, but the conclusions and their consequences couldn't be any more different.

[marinelayer]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey

It's one thing to say, "you'll possibly be waiting forever if you want the perfect device for the perfect price", it's another thing to say, "since there will never be the perfect device at the perfect price, just go for it if you want it." The logic is similar, yes, but the conclusions and their consequences couldn't be any more different.

Every consumer goes through a cost/benefit analysis of this type, and everyone will have slightly different standards and criteria for pulling the trigger on an X dollar item. The problem is that we won't be able to tell anything trendwise until this thing starts selling.

I held off on the iPhone until it had what I felt was an appropriate feature set. Along came the 3GS and I'm a happy camper, even moreso now that I've JB'ed it. While I was waiting the two years, I got an 1G iPod touch just to get a better feel for the UI. Even though it didn't have Bluetooth, it had nearly all of the utility I could've asked for. Now it's semi-retired for use as a living room gadget and in hindsight, with the subsequent upgrades, was well worth the purchase. My iPhone has already paid for itself in terms of utility, especially a couple of weeks ago when my neighborhood suffered a blackout and I had to use the iPhone as a WiFi router to get some work done. The thing is that I never would've conceived that last scenario while considering the iPhone purchase. Utility doesn't exist only in a vacuum. It can grow based on circumstance.

[Code Monkey]

Originally Posted by marinelayer

Every consumer goes through a cost/benefit analysis of this type, and everyone will have slightly different standards and criteria for pulling the trigger on an X dollar item. The problem is that we won't be able to tell anything trendwise until this thing starts selling..

True, and also largely irrelevant to the 1.0 iPad

For the Macintosh using crowd, its price point does indeed make for a bit of a justified argument as a companion device. When you're talking over two grand just to get a 15" screen laptop in 2010, sure, a $500 device that does most basic computing tasks doesn't seem so extravagant. However, more than 80% of laptop users are not using Macs, and more than 90% of desktop users are not using Macs, that price point does not resemble much in the way of sane costs compared to performance to this majority of your potential consumer base.

For the $830 that the top of the line 3G enabled iPad costs, you can get some really nice Windows based laptops, and some absolutely screaming Windows based desktops. At that point, it more than starts to become a vanity affair to try and justify the value of this new toy.

For some, either because of MUCH better finances than I have or simply niche user demands, the iPad may be a great product, but I doubt many will be able to buy the 1.0 as anything other than a vanity product.

[kornchild2002]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey

At that point, it more than starts to become a vanity affair to try and justify the value of this new toy.

That pretty much sounds like every Apple product I have seen. I am not sure why the iPad would be immune from the Apple syndrome. It doesn't take a Genius (see what I did there?) to point out that the iPad is an expensive Apple product that falls in line with their other releases. We are talking about a company that has a $50 4GB portable player while telling us that we don't need a screen or even controls on the player to use it.

The iPad's price will likely decrease over time just like the iPhone and iPod touch (ie a 64GB iPod touch is now $399, that was the starting point of a 1G 16GB model oh so long ago) but, for the moment, it falls in line with other Apple products in that Windows tablets not only provide better hardware but also more features.

[Code Monkey]

Originally Posted by kornchild2002

That pretty much sounds like every Apple product I have seen.

For me, and I realize my position is not typical. I am an ex Macintosh user, there is the very key exception of the iPod, which has been the one Apple product to command my enthusiasm and loyalty anywhere in the recent past. I can remember well spending around $3500 on a computer around 1995 that I could have easily gotten the same performance for around $2400 in the Windows world, so I know well the sort of premiums Apple historically dealt in.

I guess, if anything, I've fallen prey to the belief that competing on price, as Apple came to do with the iPod, would have taught them some something. My very first iPod, a 1G mini, compared to the competition was more or less competitive considering size and innovation. This willingness to compete on price/features continued along until the touch/iPhone, which, not coincidentally, is where I stopped buying their products. Yes, Apple products do usually include some sort of premium, but that premium, you must admit, has not been anywhere close to as extravagant as the iPad demands.

[kornchild2002]

Originally Posted by OG_Kush

I would get more use out of a $500 oz of OG Kush, than a stupid iFail.

iFail, that is clever and something that is truly original. I have never heard of that phrase when talking about Apple products before.

Originally Posted by Code Monkey

Yes, Apple products do usually include some sort of premium, but that premium, you must admit, has not been anywhere close to as extravagant as the iPad demands.

True especially when compared to the competition. However, the HP Slate is more of a competition to the iPad than other tablets due to screen sizes and processor limitations. So I guess we will have to see what HP does with the Slate. I am not expecting much though considering the unit's size. However, I feel that the MacBook Pro's carry the same premium considering what you are really getting. Why is Apple still charging over $2000 for a notebook with the Nvidia 9400/9600M? No, that is just wrong especially whenever a gaming notebook (one that could run Crysis now rather smoothly) can be had for $1500.

So I think the iPad is carrying the same premium price as other Apple products. Just when comparing to netbooks, Apple is charging a $200 increase. I don't think it is as bad as what Lenovo is doing with the IdeaPad S12. They are charging $700 for the same thing that HP gives you for $399. Toshiba can give actual true notebook performance in a unit that is the same size as 11.6" netbooks (a dual-core AMD Neo processor, up to 4GB of RAM, 320GB hard drive, and ATI HD3200) all for $499. Sony is also doing the same thing with their craptacular 10" netbook. A decently equipped one will go for $700. Apple isn't the only company charging a premium for their ultra portable device. At least with Apple, there is a distinction between notebook and "netbook" performance. Many companies are trying to blur that line and/or do away with netbooks in general.

I think Apple has shown people that there is definitely a market for these ultra portable type devices. Hopefully it ignites netbook manufacturers to come out with less expensive hardware while offering more features.

[marinelayer]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey

I guess, if anything, I've fallen prey to the belief that competing on price, as Apple came to do with the iPod, would have taught them some something. My very first iPod, a 1G mini, compared to the competition was more or less competitive considering size and innovation. This willingness to compete on price/features continued along until the touch/iPhone, which, not coincidentally, is where I stopped buying their products. Yes, Apple products do usually include some sort of premium, but that premium, you must admit, has not been anywhere close to as extravagant as the iPad demands.

There's nothing wrong with believing that Apple's products don't merit a premium. But you seem to be extraordinarily obsessed with preaching that, which seems odd on a forum that's entirely dedicated to Apple products. To each his own, and if that means being a contrarian so be it.

What you consider "premium" others may consider "value." Is there value in using a computer that's more appliance-like? To my dad, probably yes. To me, definitely yes. To the tinkerer in me, not so much. Fortunately, there will be something to satiate that side of me as well, even within Apple's closed environment.

As to the premium over competing products, how do we quantify it? Is the multitouch interface worth $50 more than a netbook? $100? How much of a penalty is not having flash or multitasking? How about not having to use a RSI-inducing keyboard/trackpad combo? That's worth a lot to me, which is partly why I haven't bought a netbook. When it comes to tablet products, the iPad is priced on par with or below numerous other tablets. Call it premium if you want, you're not painting the whole picture there.