What do you think of Apple's new iPad?

[pianowizard]

You can read all about it on this page.

It's basically a magnified version of the iPhone. The screen is nice: 9.7" LED-backlit IPS with 1024x768 pixels. Apple is calling it "The best way to experience the web, email, photos, and video. Hands down." But it doesn't have a physical keyboard, which for many people (namely, touch typists) is the fastest way to enter information, so for me the best way to experience the web and email is still a conventional computer. But for those who can't touch type, the virtual keyboard would probably work just as well as an actual keyboard, I guess.

One thing I'm wondering about is how durable this thing is. Judging from the way it's supposed to be held, people are going to be dropping this thing quite often. I hope they are purchasing accidental warranties!

What do you think of this new gadget?

[paul*robertson]

How is it meant to be used. Sat at a desk, stood up, sat on the sofa. Ergonomically you cant beat a laptop. Flat keyboard, tilted screen.

[yak]

Nice looking but nothing for me. Like you said, it's a magnified iPhone, or rather iPod Touch because it won't have calling capability and no SMS. With its closed environment and no multitasking, it's just a toy. I'm grown up so it has no value for me .

But it will sell, that's a fact.

[A31]

But it will sell, that's a fact.

...Sadly, as it's the most pointless thing ever.

How is it meant to be used

I think it is supposed to be used "on the go". I'd rather have an iPhone than iPad though, plainly becuase iPhone is actually a phone and has lots of features in on, however, the reason why I say this iPad is "pointless" is becuase it cannot be a phone, and it's bigger than an iPod Touch and does nearly all the same things so why wouldn;t you just buy an iPod Touch? BUT, I've experienced a HTC Touch HD and I think that the Touch HD is better than iPhone, so I'd rather have the iPhone than the iPad but I've rather have the Touch HD than the iPhone...

[craigmontHunter]

I am very tired of apple

Both my brothers have Ipods, I use a sansa fuze. Mine has better battery life, expandable memory, and IMHO, a better user interface than the nano.

I have trouble with the Ipod touch, since I have big hands (I have had random people - driving examiner - say things like "Holy ****, you have big hands). i touch type, and it seems counterintutive to have to look on the screen to enter information. Same for Cell phones - I hit 4 or 5 buttons when I am trying to type on one .

Jack

[A31]

I am very tired of apple

I am too! It seems every week these guys will invent some pointless gadget and then sell it off for ridiculous prices.
Traditionally, I've always been rubbish with touchscreens, but the Touch HD's touchscreen is amazing, and yes, if you have big hands, then using the screen without a stylus can be tricky, but even if you've got reliatively small hands, like me, using the touchscreen can be a pain!

[Tasurinchi]

Let me dream a bit... Being the iPad a "tablet" I hope that it will make prices of used X4/X6 tablets machines drop...

... end of the dream...

Don't be so tough on Apple. I consider the touchscreen interface to be a good thing and ergonomics-wise way ahead of its competitors. I have myself and iPhone and I could start using it from the first second without reading any manual. Ok, I'm a geeky guy and I'm used to handle things like that, but I have also see several "dummy" users which could get around quite quickly with it.

Now I have more trouble finding things in my wife's Sony Ericsson's cell phone than in my iPhone.

I was somehow impressed by the price. The iPad seems to be a keyboard-less notebook, so for being an Apple product I think $699 (64GB with WLAN) is not a horrendous price.

I hit 4 or 5 buttons when I am trying to type on one

You should then try one of these

[pianowizard]

Don't be so tough on Apple. I consider the touchscreen interface to be a good thing and ergonomics-wise way ahead of its competitors.

The iPhone was NOT the first smartphone with a touchscreen! A Google search revealed that the Ericsson R380, released in 2000, was the first touchscreen smartphone. Palm also had a few touchscreen smartphone before the iPhone came out.

[qviri]

New Apple product announced, has screen, button.

[rkawakami]

So far as I can see, the iPad is just an iPod Touch that's been blown up 6X. It'll be great for people with bad eyes and/or fat fingers . Yes it might have a few more apps (book reader, iWork suite) than the Touch I got last month but I really don't see myself going out and spending $500 on a 16GB MP3 player/photo viewer/movie player. I already have those things in any one of my TPs. Okay, maybe it's not meant to be a replacement for an iPhone or Touch. After all, Mr. Jobs and company would like for you to buy one of each of the products they sell.

The form factor is not really suitable for causal portability. Do this: take a piece of letter sized paper (or A4 for the rest of the world). Fold it into a 9.6" x 7.5" rectangle. There, that's the size of the iPad. Now, put it in your pocket and go out for a walk. The footprint is about 75% the size of the T23 that I'm typing on and about 90% the size of my X60. Too big for pockets and probably most purses; too small for most laptop bags. It would be great for leaving it on the living room table and looking up imdb.com for movie/TV trivia at a moments notice. Or maybe someone will write some games which uses the accelerometer that's in the system (ala Tux Racer). About the only thing that I can say about the iPad being better than a regular laptop is that it's lighter and will last longer on a single battery charge.

[A31]

I have trouble with the Ipod touch, since I have big hands (I have had random people - driving examiner - say things like "Holy ****, you have big hands). i touch type, and it seems counterintutive to have to look on the screen to enter information. Same for Cell phones - I hit 4 or 5 buttons when I am trying to type on one .

This is why the Thinkpad tablets are better, becuase one minute they can be laptops with keyboards and the next minute they can be a tablet PC with a touchscreen still running the full OS. So doesn't this make the iPad a bit beaten really?

About the only thing that I can say about the iPad being better than a regular laptop is that it's lighter and will last longer on a single battery charge.

I agree with you - otherwise a laptop is better in every way.

[Tasurinchi]

The iPhone was NOT the first smartphone with a touchscreen!

I know that. I mean "ahead of its competitors" in terms of ergonomics and ease of use. Now almost any company has models with touchscreens and nobody has succeeded beating the iPhone (yet).

Now, put it in your pocket and go out for a walk

I don't think that's the purpose of the iPad, me thinks it's targeting more towards tablets and netbooks.

[mgo]

You can read all about it on this page.


What do you think of this new gadget?

iPad? ...

iYawn ...

[moronoxyd]

Disclaimer: I am not an Apple fanboi. I don't own any Apple products, I don't plan to buy any in the foreseeable future.


I think some of you have a misconception about what Apple wants you to do with the iPad.
It is not a Laptop replacement. It is not a smartphone replacement.
It's meant to fill the gap: ebook reader, casual browsing of the net, watching pictures.

It's not meant for "real work", it's not really meant to be used on the go.

And for that purpose, a tablet is often better suited than a laptop.
Have you ever tried reading ebooks or PDF files on a laptop? It works, but after some time the keyboard comes in the way and it's hard to find a really comfortable position.


And while I personally have been thinking about buying a tablet for exactly that purpose (couch surfing), I would never spent 500 bucks on such a device.

[pianowizard]

People were discussing the iPad on Facebook and my cousin's friend brought up some good points:

"for new college students to carry less books it is awesome. For healthcare workers it is awesome also because you take your tablet full of info use the wifi access in the hospital to get which ever patient's medical records...there are scores of ways of using this tablet, it's lighter and better than a net book."

So, if your goal is to use this device to replace papers, books and clipboards, this is a neat device. But if you want to replace laptops and tablets, you will be disappointed. I think Apple made a huge mistake when calling the iPad "the best way to surf the web and access your email...", which really are done much better on a laptop.

That said, I actually don't want to see kids carrying just the iPad to school, because there would be even more obese kids! Lugging heavy books around is good exercise.

[beGi]

"for new college students to carry less books it is awesome. For healthcare workers it is awesome also because you take your tablet full of info use the wifi access in the hospital to get which ever patient's medical records...

Good point, but such device can be far more basic for that purpose (black/white display, more rugged) and well under 500$ (250$ max) ...

[craigmontHunter]

The issue is that if you can't move it, you are supposed to leave it on your coffee table to search for random things online, but you can't really take it anywhere, That is what I have the dell in my sig for - it runs constantly, and if I want to google something, I type it in. The diffrence is that the dell can also be used as a backup system in two ways, a system to back all my stuff onto, and a system to have as a backup.

I will take my laptop - most T series have the 9-cell batteries, and the ultrabay battery. All you loose is the drive, but the Ipad does not even have one of those.

I would take any laptop over an Ipad.

About the healthcare - most of them have tablets already, I have heard that they are almost a requirement for med school. Otherwise, there are cheap consumer type convertible systems, that can also be used to type up forms and stuff. Or they just get the U1.

[qviri]

> "for new college students to carry less books it is awesome.
> For healthcare workers it is awesome also because you take your tablet
> full of info use the wifi access in the hospital to get which ever patient's
> medical records...

Good point, but such device can be far more basic for that purpose (black/white display, more rugged) and well under 500$ (250$ max) ...

With an e-ink screen better suited for reading, and a longer battery life... Wait a second, this is beginning to sound like another product I know of.

All there is to Apple's credit is that they might be able to establish a nice content base, but unless they've got a lot of textbooks cheaper than the printed versions, this argument isn't going to go far. McGraw-Hill wasn't on the slide in the presentation, we know why, but they're a huge education publisher -- is the content going to be there in the end?

As an aside, PC tablets have long been used in medical settings -- and you don't need Apple's approval to put custom software on them, either.

[sparta.rising]

The lack of flash completely kills the casual browsing experience. I've talked to a lot of casual technology users and they are super excited about the iPad, but I think when they get on it and can't access their favorite site that has integral flash elements they will be [censored]. Of all the complaints I've heard, I think this and no multitasking are the only ones that will have a large consumer effect. Multitasking will likely only frustrate people, and they'll learn to live with it. But its pretty silly, even my cheapo SE W760i has multitasking.

Personally I love the idea of casual browsing on a slate, but having done so with a Motion Computing M1300, reality doesnt live up to the ideal. There is just a lot more typing and reading in our web experience than I think people realize.

[ThinkRob]

It's overpriced, can't multitask, and is technically inferior to most of its competitors. It will also sell incredibly well thanks to a combination of user ignorance and fantastic marketing.

The lack of Flash is a *good* thing in my book. The sooner that insecure, unstable, inefficient hunk of junk dies, the better.

[Tasurinchi]

It's overpriced, can't multitask, and is technically inferior to most of its competitors.

That's true. But having a product in which every component is state of the art does not necessary result in a overall good product.

I have an iPhone. And every time I talk with a friend/collegue/co-worker/whomever about cell phones, a comparison with other models is inevitable. Almost every time my counterpart will have a phone with either a faster processor, or more RAM, or an additional card slot, or a better battery, or a larger display, you name it... But in those phones is not allways that easy to surf the web, listen to music, check your emails or choose between huge amounts of applications like my (or any) iPhone will do.

I won't ignore the fact that the marketing department at Apple is doing one of the best jobs out there, but you also have to admit that they do very good products just using "normal" or let's say "average" components inside. From an ergonomics point of view, Apple is doing a great job as well... Even without multitasking or flash support, the iPhone's OSX version is very stable and extremely intuitive.

Just my 0,02 cents...

[killer]

What do I think of the iPad? A good question.

We all knew it was on the cards. As Pink Floyd sang in 'Time' on 'Dark Side of the Moon', "Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way," so our anticpation was greater than reality.

When the product was revealed I laughed at it. It gave me a fit of the giggles as it appears to be the 1980s mobile phone relaunched in a slightly different shape ... but, ergonomically, equally, or more, impractical.

First reaction: laughter
Second reaction: amazement
Third reaction: I would look a right idiot walking round with that.
Fourth reaction: They will probably sell in their millions as all the geeks in the world will want to look a complete numpty by claiming that they are 'up to the minute'.

In summary: If you fork out hundreds of £s, $s, Euros, CHFs or whatever for that pile of sh!te then best of luck to you matey. I'll carry on using my T43.

Anyway, on a serious note, let's test the reasons to buy:

Security: Better than MS but worse than Linux
Performance: Limited
Appearance: "I have the latest" or "I look a complete prat lugging this around"
Convenience: Hmm ... a Blackberry does all that, doesn't it?, and a lot more convenient
Economy: I doubt it
Durabilty: I doubt it

It hasn't passed many of the tests of being marketable. Dear Mr Jobs, you might have made a mistake with this.

We'll see.

[ThinkRob]

I have an iPhone. And every time I talk with a friend/collegue/co-worker/whomever about cell phones, a comparison with other models is inevitable. Almost every time my counterpart will have a phone with either a faster processor, or more RAM, or an additional card slot, or a better battery, or a larger display, you name it... But in those phones is not allways that easy to surf the web, listen to music, check your emails or choose between huge amounts of applications like my (or any) iPhone will do.

As I've said elsewhere: Apple's products tend to do very, very well at exposing a certain, limited set of functionality to the user. Provided you're content doing only what Apple supports in the manner that they support, their products really are the best. It's when you want to do something that's not one of their targetted use cases or when you want to do something in a different way than they've deemd "optimal" that the user experience heads downhill, and fast.

Take, for example syncing your iPhone wirelessly with your desktop (something that all Symbian and BlackBerry devices can easily do). It's incredibly easy -- provided you're willing to pay $99/year and use only Apple's apps on your desktop. If you don't use iCal and Mail, or if you don't want to pay a yearly fee, you simply can't do it. It's Apple's way or no way.

Even syncing in general is an example of this: the iPhone is great, unless you want to sync via Bluetooth. You simply cannot do it. Apart from MobileMe, you can only sync via USB and only with iTunes -- and your calendar entries, etc. will only be synced if you use iCal (or Outlook on the PC). That's it. If you happen to be one of the many users who falls outside of those categories, tough. There is no third-party solution, either, since Apple doesn't allow applications that duplicate functionality, nor do they allow homebrow/OSS. You either use Apple's apps, or you don't have desktop/mobile synchronization.

iPod/iTunes integration is another example. It's very, very easy to manage your music the way that Apple has envisioned (i.e. you use iTunes on one computer to manage music on your devices.) If you want to do something different -- let's say you want to copy a song from a device to a friend's computer -- you're out of luck. Or what if you have two laptops and you want to manage the music on your iPhone? The user experience begins to suck, and fast.

Outside of mobile devices, the Apple TV provides an example of the sort of "all or nothing" user experience that I have a problem with. There are a large number of set-top streaming boxes that cost about the same amount as the Apple TV does. Almost all of them support more formats, and support streaming from any old SMB share (aka. Windows file share). This means that no matter what platform you're on you can share media to watch on your TV. Not so with the Apple TV. You can only stream media from your iTunes library, and even then only if it's encoded in one of a very few codecs. The Apple TV is great if you manage all your movies, etc. through iTunes, and it's really nice if you're willing to purchase all your media through the iTunes Store. If you happen to have media encoded in XviD, as many, many people do, you're completely out of luck. Or what about if you don't store your movie collection in your iTunes library (as many people don't, due to drive space issues)? Then your Apple TV is worthless.

I think Apple makes a number of very, very nice products that serve a certain subset of users quite well. Unfortunately, that ease of use for that subset comes at the cost of functionality and efficacy for the rest of us. *That's* my problem with Apple.

[A31]

It's overpriced, can't multitask, and is technically inferior to most of its competitors. It will also sell incredibly well thanks to a combination of user ignorance and fantastic marketing.

The lack of Flash is a *good* thing in my book. The sooner that insecure, unstable, inefficient hunk of junk dies, the better.

I agree with everything you say, you are completely right... people will ONLY buy it becuase it has the Apple logo on it, they won't buy it for any other reason whatsoever. As I said earlier, it is the most pointless gadget ever made and Apple has only made it to get some money and publicity.

[asiafish]

People will buy it because it is cool.

[dr_st]

This to me summarizes what the new product is all about:
http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/201 ... =500&h=500

[killer]

This to me summarizes what the new product is all about:
http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/201 ... =500&h=500

That's really apposite!

[sb102]

After a quick browsing the net for similar pictures that dr_st posted, I've came accross these -
http://www.joemonster.org/art/13297/iPa ... nternauci_ - the website is in Polish language - sorry for that, but the pictures pretty much sum up what do most of people think of the new gadget from Apple - let us hope that Nokia will release it's own, more functional version of the iPad - as shown on the last picture in the article... .

[killer]

@sb102: A brilliant collection, especially the Hitler film. I laughed my socks off looking at that.

How can anyone see it as cool, other than in the real meaning of the word?

[A31]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... users.html
Hmmm - what *is* the iPad?? A whole new tablet or just 4 iPhones stuck together with gaffers tape??
Be sure to watch the 'iPad' (no quite literally!!) video which is embedded into the article, it's so funny but yet so true!!