Comments on: What’s Your Take On The Ipad? [POLL]

By: SamK

SamK — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:57:10 +0000

This thing is MOST DEFINITELY NOT a netbook. It is a device designed to place entertainment in a full frontal way. No multitasking means no twitter stream blaring at you while you watch a movie and a better focus on the entertainment you are watching. The device will end up being entertainment oriented along with e-books and web surfing. The device’s hardware will almost immediately fall away from your attention. What will make people want to but the ipad is the software. All those fun, productive interesting, and transfixing interactions are based upon software. This product will pick up just like the iphone did and a niche will be made.

By: William

William — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 23:05:26 +0000

Apple is a company for people that want a device that is simple and is virtually problem free. They put high-end componets in so there are no problems. The iPad might not be locked to the App store in the future. I am a big fan of Apple’s device architecture and software. It you don’t like it, go with M$ Windows or Linux. Get an older tablet, put linux on it and make it look like Mac OSX. Theres alot of software and devices compatible with Linux too!

By: Sawyer

Sawyer — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 19:04:57 +0000

+1 John. I agree 100%

By: John in CO

John in CO — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 01:26:05 +0000

I can’t believe so many people are judging what they haven’t touched or seen. Do I like the iPad?? Hell, I don’t know…how could I possibly know if I can’t touch one and try it out?? Give it a break, folks!! Judge it AFTER it comes out — not before.

By: David M

David M — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:16:33 +0000

What if it only took pictures? How tragic would that be?

By: David M

David M — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:14:40 +0000

When does the iCamera come out that’s also a cellphone, a computer and plays music? Will people be upset if it does not run on OSX or does not allow you to surf the internet?

By: David Kennedy

David Kennedy — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 23:34:59 +0000

Come now. Maybe they didn’t intend it to do everything (as evidenced by no camera), but it’s quite obvious they intended it to do more than just reading.

By: David M

David M — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:12:13 +0000

I am considering getting one if I can get magazines, including pictures in color, that are less expensive than the subscription rates. The same pretty much applies to books. There must be a huge variety of books available at a price which is less than paper books from Amazon.

As with most new Apple product releases, I will wait for the second or third version. People still need time to voice their opinions and complaints and for Apple to consider making changes to the product.

That’s the downside to making a product in secrecy, the public never get to voice their opinion therefore the first version is usually not nearly as good as the second or third version.

I really don’t care which OS it runs. So long as I can use it for what it was intended for….reading. And you know what?..it seems to do that quite well.

If anyone wants the iPad to be a phone or a computer or for it to play music…then go buy a Macintosh, an iPhone or an iPod.

Its not intended to be everything to everybody. Sometimes is makes no sense to try to Swiss army knife all products.

By: Doctor Gonzo

Doctor Gonzo — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:45:17 +0000

I agree 100%. If it was running a version of Mac OS and had all the capabilities therein, it would be a huge deal. I think they are making a mistake by limiting it to the iPhone OS and the app store.

I don’t think the average iPhone/Touch buyer cares about being locked into the app store. Somebody looking for a tablet computer does, though.

I can only guess that they want to lock users into the app store to monopolize that revenue stream.

By: Scot Herrick

Scot Herrick — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:09:26 +0000

Well, a computer isn’t exactly something that does something original either, tablet or not.

While I don’t know if I will buy an iPad or not, I have seen some uses for it.

1. having the iPhone app compatibility means I can continue to use my productivity tools (e.g., calendar, Things, social media, movie schedules, etc.) and synch them with the Mac. ON A MUCH BIGGER SCREEN. Much easier to read and work with.

2. I do tons of casual surfing. It is not uncommon to have an unknown answer to a question (what else has Julia Roberts been in?) and have that answered by whipping out an iPhone and having to deal with the small real estate to find out.

3. The Kindle App on the iPhone is great, but very small reading area. The iPad changes that to a real page format. And, no, I won’t get the Apple book stuff; Amazon has worked well for me.

4. I went “up north” last weekend and was mostly off the grid. E-mail, check the news, etc. Lugged a notebook with me. The iPad would have fit that role perfectly. Bigger keyboard than an iPhone, easier to navigate, etc. It would have worked, at a much less lugging ratio, then the notebook.

Now, a camera would be nice (upload that pic to Facebook) and a USB port would be good (allows powering other devices), no doubt. Multi-tasking would be good; I don’t remember if it has copy and paste — it better.

But there are uses. Most of them, as with the iPhone and all the hoopla about how limited it was when it was released, are as yet unknown. Utility has a way of finding its way given a tool and a platform.

We shall see.