I am surprised that many of the comments so far are the equivalent of "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
I'm excited at the very distinct deviation this is taking from the keyboard/mouse/monitor paradigm in something other than a strictly portable device. I think the OS looks pretty damn good and I can't wait to try using one myself.
I'm mainly surprised at how quick people are to post their opinion on a device they've only seen demoed on a stage.
It seems like you'd have to try to read some things on it, type, and surf the web before you could have an informed opinion about how useful/useless it is. I'm looking forward to reviews by people who have had a chance to spend a few days with one of these things.
Absolutely. I haven't even seen a list of specs yet.
Wait and see, that's the only sensible thing at this point in time, and try one as soon as you can get your grubby hands on it to see what it really feels like and works like.
Then we get some real information. All this hype goes nowhere, not for making decisions anyway.
...and as someone who uses an iPhone/13" laptop to get stuff done on my commute, this seems like a very nice middle ground (also seems like it would be good for using casually at home too - I rarely use my laptop at a desk now unless I'm getting work done).
I agree. I can't complain about the iPad until after its been released, I've gone into an Apple store, picked it up with my own hands and tried it out.
Judging it for good or bad via pictures isn't particularly sensible.
It worked fine, but it wasn't especially cheap and it only worked with a relatively late model Mac. And in 2001, this meant something like 95% of computer owners wouldn't be able to put any music on it.
True, but I can still fit most of my music on a single original iPod, carry it around in my pocket, and use the cool wheely interface to navigate through it, which is loads more convenient than what everyone else did in 2001 (either listen to one CD all day, or carry around a binder filled with CD's on a long road trip, or carry the equivalent of one or two CD's around on a Rio).
Clearly there is a long history of people complaining without knowing what they are complaining about. As someone else put it the iPad is already so hyped up that no matter what Apple has put into it people will still complain.
I bought an acer netbook that came with an SIM slot that I didn't even know about until after unpacking the thing. (check behind the battery if you have one, maybe you got lucky :) )
Worked like a dream too using ubuntu NBR and a 3G capable sim card.
Currently it is on loan to the father of a buddy of mine that is stuck in a hospital on 'extended stay'. Surf the net and stay in touch with the family.
Until I've had a chance to try one out for a while without commitment I'll stick to the little form factor PC, especially because I'm not locked in to some 'phone os'.
But I don't think it will take very long before someone gets ssh running on this device.
Ugh. Very lame on his part. His company doesn't magically hold exclusive rights to a bookshelf with books on it. Thankfully he realized that iBooks and Delicious Library are completely different products.
Well, I think there is doing something, and then doing something very well. Delicious Library did the bookshelf thing very well, and the iBooks thing seems to do it very well in a similar way.
I'm not saying he has a legal bone to pick or anything, just that he is allowed a tweet or two to hrmph about it.
Yeah, I also though about that although I'm not sure using a wooden shelf is that revolutionary / unique. But then again, stranger things have been patented and trademarked so perhaps the Delicious Library guys might have a case.
It's DOA as far as I'm concerned. The companies that were supposed to launch it are stuck in infighting mode and meanwhile the iPad is here and defines the market.
They could have had a good run of it if they managed to steal apples' thunder by launching 6 months early.
Have apple make the hype and run off with the customers, that would have been a classic coup. As it is they might as well pull the plug.
Reading this now makes me think this might be a set up by apple.... yeaaah, maybe they just incited those guys over at Fusion Garage to screw the project.
Well, If I were an OEM making a tablet, I would be very happy about today's announcement. The only thing surprising about it was the total lack of surprises. Everyone's been expecting basically a large iPod touch with books in its app store. That's exactly what they got, and it doesn't even have that many books either, with only a few publishers signed up.
So if I were making a tablet, the iPad we saw today would be what I'd consider best case scenario. Do you think the cell phone OEMs felt that way when they saw the first iPhone? My guess is their reaction was quite the opposite. Guys at RIM and Motorola were probably like "holy shit, I didn't know a phone could be this good at web surfing." They still weren't going to shut the company down and give the money back to investors due to pricing and single carrier, I'm sure, but they undoubtedly weren't happy because what they saw was probably a lot better (or at least different) than they expected.
So the point is, the iPad is what they've been planning around since the rumors started picking up steam forever ago. I think if the JooJoo or any other pad doesn't make it to market, it won't be because of what you saw today.
If they can price it right (and don't lock it down), I think it'd be interesting as a low-priced/more-open alternative to iPad.
In effect, JooJoo could run the iPad success in sense it doesn't have to explain what it does - "it's like iPad, just <whatever>".
If iPad gets traction, I'm sure it'll provide an incentive for other companies to follow. JooJoo is perfectly positioned there because they (supposedly?) already have a working device.
That's a disappointingly low pixel density compared to the iPhone, Droid, Nexus One, etc. Really wish we would see more high resolution devices because they're much easier on my eyes.
Personally I think good font rendering solves that problem. It goes back to the pricing issue though. They obviously wanted to deliver this for <$500 and that's difficult to do using an extremely high screen.
+more accurate colors and no color shift with the viewing angle change. Pretty much the best type of LCD. Usually you find IPS in the best monitors, and I am not aware of any notebook with IPS screen.
The TN panels they're being compared against there are terrible, though. My Eee (which is otherwise fairly similar: a 10" display at 1024x600) looks fine at those angles.
I have seen laptops with displays that are that bad, but it's not the norm, but it doesn't make sense to use them as the basis for IPS-TN comparisons.
While I will never buy a screen that isn't IPS for my computer, I question the necessity of it in this device. IPS makes a great marketing point and will make it look really shiny during demos, but I think it is the wrong tech for this device for day to day use. If I had to choose between colour accuracy and battery life, I'd much rather have the battery life. It's not like I'm going to be editing photos for print on the iPad.
My guess is that the viewing angle was a deciding factor there. While on notebook you can adjust the screen so it is at useable angle this is not an option for a tablet with no support. IPS matrix gets rid of that problem.
I'm sure color accuracy and marketing have very little to do with it. If they could have gone with the cheaper LCD they would have, but it would have meant limited viewing angle, which would not have been acceptable.
The newest iMacs use the e-IPS style of IPS panels, which according to Wikipedia have a lower power consuption than previous generations of IPS, presumably are much cheaper to manufacture than the other types (or they wouldn't be in a $499 tablet), and still keep the other advantages of IPS vs TN (color accuracy and wide viewing angle).
Them being in the tablet gives hope that these IPS panels will eventually end up in the Macbook, MBAir, and MBPro.
The pro is that you can view it from just about any angle and it still looks great. Check out some of the images on the Apple website in the iPad gallery and you will see that even from an angle there is no color distortion as there is with most LCD screens.
I'm going to hold off my criticism until I spend more than 20-30 minutes with it and see how well it fits my ideas of what a device like this should be. Knowing Apple, their product design and eye for aesthetics, I wouldn't jump to conclusions based on specs and photos of it.
I am underwhelmed. I think they might have missed the mark on this product or there are a lot of things they didn't discuss in their presentation today!
Yes: don't until you're asked. iPod demos and tech specs pages on Apple's website don't advertise what formats it doesn't play. An iPhone demo wouldn't show dropped calls, at least not if it were easily preventable.
I think the question was asked by quite a few people.
> iPod demos and tech specs pages on Apple's website don't advertise what formats it doesn't play.
Usually a format list is complete, if a format is not there, you know it is not supported. But I do not think that it makes sense for the iPad to list all web technologies, as in, it supports html, css, xhtml, txt, javascript, flash, ... . Flash is not just a format.
> An iPhone demo wouldn't show dropped calls, at least not if it were easily preventable.
Now this is a tough point. Of course they would not show a misfeauture in the demo. Perhaps they were making a point that missing Flash is not a misfeature after all, and that web pages should be written without a Flash dependency.
But in the end, I might be completely wrong and it might have been a slip up after all, I wouldn't know.
If you want to see the parts of the iPad that Apple cares about watch the video: http://www.apple.com/ipad/ipad-video/ It goes over all the bits they think are really cool.
I really hate to ask this - but is there a way to watch that on linux? I have mplayer, but I can't find the embed link in the source to save the raw .mov file.
This link is a perfect example of the problem I have with Apple. Why do I have to have Quick Time to watch the video? Just give it to me and let me worry about which media player I want to use.
I sold my macbook; gave away my ipod; and I'm never going back.
I think the point is that the consumers Apple targets would value 10 hours battery life over multitasking. Engineering is all about trade offs, and if Apple were to deliver everything the geeks wanted (OSX, Flash, multitasking), then Apple would end up with an overpriced, slow, thick, hot, sluggish, power thirsty tablet that would only appeal to computer nerds.
I just don't understand this dichotomy between battery life and multitasking. It would be perfectly reasonable to offer a choice, wouldn't it? Apple could say: if you want the full 10 hours of battery life, don't multitask. Otherwise, accept the battery life tradeoff and multitask to your heart's content. I can then choose to use the device however I want to. Isn't this how battery life estimates with laptops work?
Why does Apple assume their users are idiots that can't be trusted to make an informed choice?
Apple's strategy is to not burden their users with the mental load of having to make that tradeoff. Can you imagine trying to use this device for a whole workday and having to worry about whether you quit that last app so that the battery will last until your shift's up?
For casual multi-tasking, the speed of the flash memory means that well-written apps should be able to save and restore their state pretty quickly even if the operating system does quit the app when the user switches to a new one. More serious multi-tasking (where you would want side-by-side windows and other major UI changes) would definitely reduce battery life and make things much more complex.
They most certainly could be related. If you had a few background apps doing something, such as playing music while browsing the web, that would take more clock cycles. Even something like a native twitter app running in the background could be pinging twitter several times a minute, obviously requiring power to do so.
Every iPhone and iPod Touch ever released has had background apps running at all times to provide services like e-mail. How do you think the iPod mode on an iPhone works? It plays music while you're browsing in Safari by leaving an app running in the background. Email notifications? App running in the background.
I would rather have be usable for 4 hours than limited for 10. If you can run iPhone apps not in full screen, why can't I run a few side by side. I don't want unlimited multitasking, but a few at a time would be nice.
That is exactly what I thought. I would have loved to see iphone apps running like widgets. Keep them the same size, but give me three or four running at the same time!
No integrated notes/sketches/diagrams? An odd oversight for a form-factor so perfectly suited to it.
No mention of free-form annotation of documents/images? Another weird omission for a device seemingly built to free people from the limitations of traditional mobile interaction.
An iWork suite and kickstand/keyboard peripheral? That's positively Microsft-ian.
A tri-fold leather folio kickstand? Alright, now we've steered directly into Sharper Image territory.
I like it...but it's a USB client rather than a host. That's a hard pill for me to swallow. I suspect I'll be getting a competitor's model with somewhat inferior aesthetics and for maybe $100 less. I admire the product (and especially their pricing, which was a surprise) but it doesn't arouse real gear envy for me.
TBH I was hoping for haptic feedback and a webcam, or host connections that would allow it to work as a generic console for other devices - which would have driven the entry price to $800 or more, but felt really revolutionary. Apple will do well out of this, but the competition is coming up a lot closer than with the iPhone, where it was unarguably the best of its kind for a long time.
I saw that it has bluetooth, but I haven't seen anything about it supporting the Bluetooth keyboard... source? (Or does the bluetooth keyboard work with the iphone now?)
Maybe, but not necessarily. Each new type of communication device threatens old revenue streams of Telcos. Broadband/skype threatens long distance, 3g threatens voice minute/SMS, but...
Overall, I think the total amount we spend on communication is going up like mad. 10 years ago a sophisticated 5 person household had a landline phone, a mobile phone and a dial up account or maybe a DSL. Today they have the phone, 5 mobiles(some of them expensive ones including lots of 3g acess), a home broadband connection (network) and now they're looking at adding some other device/plan package (Tablet, netbook, etc.).
As a rule, they don't really care that much about providing cheap additional services. They care about cannibalising other stuff. This isn't likely to replace anything. Apple is a good partner for avoiding skype-over-3G, tethering or some other antisocial behaviour.
Yeah, ATT is already overloaded. Offering unlimited access so cheaply will bog it down even more. I hope AT&T will be beefing up their network over the next few months.
I agree, but it really is unfortunate that AT&T can't get with it, because unlimited wireless access for $30 a month isn't a bad deal at all, unless of course, it is really slow and unreliable.
Call me naive but I think my productivity problem can be solved now. I'm thinking to get an iPad just for the email, HN and notes. That is, not check email on my work computer but rather go to iPad whenever feeling the itch to check email/HN and etc. Not sure, but excited to try that idea ;)
If that's really your desire, you could have gotten a cheaper netbook a long time ago. On the other hand, if you happened to buy an iPad and wonder what to do with it, then your idea might come in handy.
The main point for me is how Apple did come up with a such low resolution (1024x768@132ppi) for a screen that you hold so close to your eyes?
The technology is there for much higher density screens.
I was expecting Apple to lead the way.
There is nothing that machine do better than any laptop out there (notebook, laptops, etc.)
And it’s the keypoint of the Steve keynote.
It’s a luxury machine designed to spend (and possibly waste) time and money by being entertained and by buying more, more and more instant gratification items without having a direct control of your expenses.
Kudos to Apple to be the best player in this category but it’s not a tool for people creating stuff.
I have to wonder if it is perhaps due to the resolution of the iPhone. As I understand it, most iPhone apps are hardcoded to the iPhone screen size, so if Apple wanted to reuse iPhone apps on the iPad, it would either need to use an itty-bitty screen or resize the display.
1024x768 is the smallest standard 4:3 resolution to fit a doubled iPhone screen, which is 320x480, doubled to 640x960. Hardware support for pixel doubling could be faster and use less power than scaling a textured 3D quad. But regardless of how the scaling is performed, an integer multiple will probably look better than scaling to an arbitrary size.
One undesirable artifact of doubling the iPhone screen on a 1024x768 screen is that it would have borders all around the edges. And this is precisely what we see on their demo page. http://www.apple.com/ipad/app-store/
I'm surprised at the lackluster 3G options. If I can't tether my iphone to this - and the existence of a 3g model, combined with notable omission of any talk of tethering certainly points to a resounding no - why would I have an iphone rather than a rooted nexus one or Pre, which I could tether via wifi?
If I were Google/Palm, I'd work hard to get official, viable 3G->WiFi AP tethering working by the time the iPad ships. Then advertise it far and wide.
I understand Apple/AT&T want the revenue from an additional data subscription, but the option of saving $130 up front + $30/mo. is a pretty strong case against going all Apple, at least for me.
I find it really strange that they advertise 720p playback, but they didn't give it a 720p screen. I would expect the device to have a 1280x720 resolution display (like some netbooks) instead of a 1024x768. I'm not sure what their target user is, but I guess one who watches HD video isn't it. Still, it does look interesting.
My feeling is that it is fairly non-essential. But the same holds for the iPod, and they sold loads of them. So it seems possible they might find buyers for the iPad, too. The price is OK.
I guess the real need it is filling will be "I really want to buy something right now, but I already own everything I need".
There is a large market for business-oriented netbooks -- managers, salespeople and executives who are largely using it for access to Outlook, simple document viewing, and other business-oriented apps.
I have a difficult time seeing the iPad fulfilling those needs -- Apple Mail is a far cry from full-fledged Outlook.
Am I the only one who was expecting a killer feature that they don't seem to have? The calendar looks like it'd work well, and iBook would be decent at the right price, but much of the rest is basically "like a big iPhone."
I was expecting them to dominate the textbook market with live-updates to etextbooks at an affordable price, annotations, social annotations, digital bookmarks, etc. If tertiary students are having to spring $100ish/book and buying x books/year, then blowing $500 on something to cart around campus might be an easier decision.
No real play at sketching or note taking either? Might not be as easy as it should be (always gave up on handwriting recognition with an old Dell handheld) but they could've included it I'm sure.
And after seeing a proof of concept of a multimedia version of Sports Illustrated, I was positive that Apple would take a crack at magazines and newspapers with an app-type store that handled subscriptions, editions, upgrades, premium/sealed sections, easy sales and links direct from magazines, etc.
The price is good and I actually could make use of this (replacing my iPhone for basically browsing the net at home on the couch or in bed, playing Freecell, etc) but I am very surprised that there's not more to it.
I think a front facing camera was probably just too awkward to use. If you're sitting with your legs crossed resting the tablet on your knee a front facing camera isn't going to be showing your face. People will get a good look at your shirt though. If you have it laying down at a usable angle on a desk (say 30 degrees inclined) you're going to get a shot of the celling. I imagine this is something you'd see in the form of a third party accessory with a movable camera.
Bluetooth doesn't have the bandwidth, and while Apple has a program for approving attached accessories, only a handful have made it to the public: Apple strangled a lot of products in their cribs.
Yup, the device is designed to have "no particular orientation", so the dock connector can be on top. I wouldn't be surprised to see a dock-connector iSight at some point.
Was disappointed by lack of multitasking. Already ditched my iPhone for Android, and the difference is huge.
Is this going to be another thing with Apple like the single mouse button? Seems like they are really trying to stick to their guns. I mean, why would anyone want to use more than one app at a time right?
If this thing can store and play arbitrary video files (to the limit of Quicktime's capabilities) and gets an app for Netflix streaming, I actually think it'll be extremely useful for me in that I can finally separate my entertainment machine from my work machine. It looks like it's only MPEG-4/H.264 friendly, but that may be enough if that becomes the standard. (Letting it somehow play DVD's--even with just a "DVD dock"--would be helpful as well, but I have a laptop fully capable of converting DVD's into H.264 anyhow.)
My suspicion is that next year's iPad will be the one to push the concept over the top for me. Though it's already compelling as an ebook reader and part time laptop replacement, one more iteration will seal the deal.
I can't help but wonder if this thing is related to Amazon's wild success with the Kindle.
Jobs never saw a consumer market he didn't like. Certainly if I was given the option to go with the Kindle or an iPad, my choice would be clear - I want the device with more functionality. The Kindle DX is the same price as the iPad, with a slightly smaller screen.
Kindle killer? Time will tell.
Edit: At the Kindle DX price point the iPad does not provide 3G access though. And that's one of the biggest selling points for Amazon's device.
There are a few major differences, though. The Kindle battery lasts for something like a week of use with the wireless connection ON (Apple claims 10 hrs for iPad). The other big difference is e-ink; the display works well in bright sunlight, and is easier on the eyes than a backlit LCD at night.
The Kindle has proven to be far superior to smartphones and laptops for reading large amounts of text. The iPad will be more versatile, but i'm not sure that's as important, since laptops and iPhones are already pretty versatile.
I'd really like to see limited floating licenses for all the apps I bought on my iPhone, similar to the way DRM from the iTunes store works. You can authorize 1 iPhone and 1 iPad per purchased application. Maybe use Mobile Me to sync settings.
Business users. You should see the number of sales teams and executives who are buying netbooks for simple, lightweight and long-life battery capacity use of mainstream business apps such as Outlook, Office, and custom ERP apps.
They will not buy the iPad except for perhaps personal use at home.
Totally right. Sales aren't the only factor. It can matter for developers targeting users, though again not the only factor.
In particular, as a developer, I'm excited about the opportunity to have solid multitouch on a bigger screen.
The first example that comes to mind is the fact that numerous games and other apps aren't possible on the iPhone/touch because the screen isn't big enough, such as two-player games on the same screen.
Because netbooks are cheaper, have a physical keyboard, and offer much more flexible use cases? Not to mention many, many, many, many more available apps?
Because some of us, actually want a computer with more power than the iPad, or because the App store is a bad idea for end users and developers, or because some of us use netbooks and smaller laptops as our mobile coding machines when this thing doesn't even have a keyboard.
Absolutely right; however, I'm trying to think about a large segment of consumers... I see no justification for buying a PC unless the user is a professional who really is tied to a particular workflow.
1) How easy is the keyboard to use? I imagine most ppl at least occasionally need to do typing. (er, most ppl who can afford a $500 tablet).
2) I don't see many advantages of the tablet. A dead-simple ChromeOS netbook will run faster, do more, and be cheaper.
True - is it possible that they will allow digital cameras etc to be plugged in the way they used to with the iPod USB digital camera link? This was my first thought when they showed the Photos app.
"The Camera Connection Kit gives you two ways to import photos and videos from a digital camera. The Camera Connector lets you import your photos and videos to iPad using the camera’s USB cable. Or you can use the SD Card Reader to import photos and videos directly from the camera’s SD card."
What about support for external DVD players, burners, printers etc... I would be put off if USB connections were limited to importing photos from a camera.
iPad + Bespin. Is anyone else interested in this potentially tasty combo-meal?
The App Store may not allow language interpreters, but as long as Bespin plays well with Safari and JavaScript, Bespin is just another valid webapp. And with a $30 unlimited 3G plan, I can code wherever I want (ok, wherever AT&T lets me). And to be very generous, the lack of multitasking would reduce coding distractions.
Count me in. I can't understand everyone complaining about the lack of open programming/standards/access on the iPad. It appears to be the ultimate html5 client. Adding a Bespin editor would make it a one click cloud coding dream (well, with an external keyboard so we can have a control key...)
I'm excited at the very distinct deviation this is taking from the keyboard/mouse/monitor paradigm in something other than a strictly portable device. I think the OS looks pretty damn good and I can't wait to try using one myself.