Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Apple tablet launch thread
1234567
Apple tablet launch thread
2010-01-30, 3:02 PM #201
Originally posted by Anakin-Paul:
Very cool, no flash boohoo HTML5 will take over

Yeah, not before the iPad is obsolete. HTML5 is an option on YouTube for select browsers, I assume including Safari for the iPhone, but what about a ton of other video sites out there? Do you think the average user, upon receiving a link to Vimeo from a friend will think, "oh, silly Flash, I'll just wait for HTML5 to watch this video!"

Why do Apple fans keep making retarded excuses for when Apple does something dumb? Some of my friends call me a Microsoft fanboy but I'm usually the first to point out something stupid they do.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2010-01-30, 3:10 PM #202
Actually Vimeo and YouTube are the only two video sites that support HTML5.

It's still a retarded pipe dream though!

Apple fans make excuses because owning and using Apple products make them 'different' in an extraordinarily 'same-y' way. A Mac and a Thinkpad will both let you work on your manuscript, but a Mac will make other people know you're working on it too. :smug:
2010-01-30, 3:25 PM #203
I agree Emon flash is still a big thing and it is going to be a complete pain until something is sorted out, but even BBC, who are the biggest fans of microsoft and its tech are moving away from flash and moving to html5 for iPlayer, which currently is there largest content viewed via them, ok maybe im just looking this from a UK market, but most of the video content from the major TV channels are all doing this or going to be doing it.

Jon - Im not going to say that buy Mac because I work for them to people just because I use them day in day out, some people just are Windows people, each to their, my dad for example will be a Windows user always because thats they way he is and he likes doing under bonnet stuff, playing his games etc, my mum, loves her mac and doesnt need the hassle. We even tell customers that some times a PC is just what you need and a Mac really isnt what you are after, it happens. At the end of the day, people to just buy Apple stuff because its made by Apple, but also there are people who just want to do it because they are fed up with windows, people have a choice, and I let them make it not the other way around.
Flying over there some were...
2010-01-30, 3:27 PM #204
Originally posted by Cool Matty:
Just go with someone like Sprint which has much cheaper plans. Seriously, AT&T is the most expensive phone carrier in the US right now, followed by Verizon.


When I was using a Palm and a Blackberry on Verizon, I was paying about $60 / month for data + minimum voice + minimum text (250 for $5, I think?), and that was after a corporate discount. Sprint was similarly priced, and both would charge me more for corporate access (Verizon was $15 more, I didn't price Sprint, but I imagine it's similar). AT&T is costing me about $70 a month with corporate access and rollover minutes.

AT&T > Verizon >= Sprint

Sprint may have cheap voice-only or limited-data plans, but they're competitive at best with other companies when it comes to unlimited data. The only people I know who have actually good-priced plans either know someone who works for Sprint or worked for Sprint (before laying them off 8 months into their orientation training rotation as part of Sprint's fire-and-hire policy).
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2010-01-30, 3:57 PM #205
Originally posted by Wolfy:
Sprint may have cheap voice-only or limited-data plans, but they're competitive at best with other companies when it comes to unlimited data.

I think your head is a little too close to your ***.

The only data plans Sprint has are unlimited:

450 minutes, unlimited text and data for 70/mo,
900 minutes, unlimited text and data for 90/mo,
unlimited everything for 100/mo.

The killer part is that text is always unlimited. AT&T and Verizon charge extra ($20 for AT&T!) for unlimited text, which given the amount of money and bandwidth it costs the network to send a 160 byte message, is outright criminal.

I just priced a Blackberry on Sprint, it comes to 450 minutes and unlimited text and data for 70. On AT&T, that would cost 90 because of the extra 20 for unlimited text. Granted, AT&T has Rollover minutes, so if you do nothing but talk it might be worth it. Sprint does have unlimited night and weekends starting at 7 PM, however. To get unlimited everything, it costs $100 with Sprint and $120 with AT&T.

Though Blackberries and iPhones are tricky because they have bull**** charges on top of regular plans.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2010-01-30, 9:50 PM #206
Originally posted by Emon:
I think your head is a little too close to your ***.


All I can say is what the Sprint salesman told me. :/
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2010-01-30, 10:12 PM #207
Why would a Sprint salesmen know anything about Sprint's phone plans?
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2010-01-30, 10:55 PM #208
Dunno, but I have said $70/m plan, and nothing else comes close except for T-Mobile, which, of course, doesn't have 3G anywhere that matters.

Also, rollover minutes are irrelevant when Sprint just gives you unlimited minutes to /any/ cell phone now. I seriously would have to try to use my 450 minutes now.
2010-01-30, 11:01 PM #209
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Actually Vimeo and YouTube are the only two video sites that support HTML5.

It's still a retarded pipe dream though!


* and Dailymotion, who apparently started it all.

Of course, who gives a crap when Firefox doesn't even work with it due to HTML5 <video> being a non-standard at the moment. W3C pretty much gave up on it IMO, by refusing to stick to a codec and letting browsers make it up as they go along. I'm sure IE9 will support WMV, and Opera will support DIVX, giving us the quadfecta of codecs to make it pointless.

:suicide:
2010-01-30, 11:31 PM #210
Google acquired On2 not long ago, who have a crapton of video IP (including the basis of Theora, Flash's and Real's video). Google could release their VP8 codec as completely free. It solves the problem by being free, unlike H264, and not sucking, like Theora.

For low bitrate (web) videos, On2 claimed as much as 50% reduction in size compared to H264.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2010-01-31, 3:34 AM #211
I'm not bothered about flash predominantly because I rarely go to websites that use it, and more often than not when I do it's something annoying rather than useful.

Shame that machinarium probably won't be made to work for it though :-(
2010-01-31, 5:06 AM #212
To get this thread back on track: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1928558
Sorry for the lousy German
2010-01-31, 5:32 AM #213
To get it relevant to me again <.<

This was in the forums at ars technica; it describes almost perfectly what I would use the iPad for.

Quote:
Originally posted by mbmcavoy:
I think the vast majority of the detractors simply don't get what the iPad is for. And that's fine - they don't have to buy one.

Yes, the iPad is a "mobile device", but not in the sense of a take-it-every-where-you-go smartphone. I see it more as an around-the house, or in-the-backpack device.

At home, our MacBook spends the majority of the time in the living room, where it is used casually email, Facebook, Twitter, web browsing, email, and looking at pictures. Occasionally it makes its way into other rooms for similar uses (recipes in the kitchen) It gets passed between my wife and I regularly. For the most part, it works great.

But, it's not perfect. The battery life isn't so great that it's usually plugged in, meaning we need to worry about the cord (thank goodness for the magsafe connector!). It's hard to use one-handed, as when we are also holding our infant son. Sometimes it gets uncomfortably hot. It can be a bit awkward to hand back and forth, especially when it's open. It's not usable laying in bed at all.

My wife has her iPhone and I have an iPod Touch, which sometimes get used the same way. Fine when actually out and about, but pretty cramped for at-home use.

Also, I would like to spend more time doing long projects on it, plugged in to a desktop monitor and keyboard. But then my wife can't use it. I've been wanting to get a second MacBook so we don't have to share, but can't justify the expense.

The iPad does everything we would need for the casual use, and I think the form factor is better suited to how we would use it. A $500 iPad would be easier to justify than a $1000 MacBook as well.

If we were to only use it at home, we don't need the 3G. This could still be a handy feature - temporarily activate it when traveling, but don't maintain the data plan at home!
2010-01-31, 6:54 AM #214
Originally posted by Martyn:
To get it relevant to me again <.<

This was in the forums at ars technica; it describes almost perfectly what I would use the iPad for.


I don't think anyone knows what the iPad is for. Let me dissect what is wrong with that post:

Quote:
Originally posted by mbmcavoy:
I think the vast majority of the detractors simply don't get what the iPad is for. And that's fine - they don't have to buy one.

Yes, the iPad is a "mobile device", but not in the sense of a take-it-every-where-you-go smartphone. I see it more as an around-the house, or in-the-backpack device.


I don't see the point if it's not on your person all the time. If you're going to leave it in a room, might as well set up a permanent machine in that room. Otherwise, you're hauling it around a lot, and that's no different than a laptop.

Quote:
At home, our MacBook spends the majority of the time in the living room, where it is used casually email, Facebook, Twitter, web browsing, email, and looking at pictures. Occasionally it makes its way into other rooms for similar uses (recipes in the kitchen) It gets passed between my wife and I regularly. For the most part, it works great.

But, it's not perfect. The battery life isn't so great that it's usually plugged in, meaning we need to worry about the cord (thank goodness for the magsafe connector!). It's hard to use one-handed, as when we are also holding our infant son. Sometimes it gets uncomfortably hot. It can be a bit awkward to hand back and forth, especially when it's open. It's not usable laying in bed at all.


My Macbook gets up to 6 hours if I stick to the apps mentioned. The newer integrated battery macbooks will last even longer. The iPad only gets 10 hours as Apple advertises it. My Macbook can sit idly in suspend mode for days, so that's no big deal either. I think there are netbooks that will do even better.

As for one handed, uhm, the iPad is essentially impossible to use with one hand. You need one to hold it, and the other to touch with.

Yes, the Macbook can get hot, but only when you're doing something that's complicated enough to get it hot. So of course the iPad won't get hot, because it's completely incapable of running any applications that would hit the iPad that hard. If you restrict yourself to those apps on the mac you'll get the same results.

Quote:
My wife has her iPhone and I have an iPod Touch, which sometimes get used the same way. Fine when actually out and about, but pretty cramped for at-home use.

Also, I would like to spend more time doing long projects on it, plugged in to a desktop monitor and keyboard. But then my wife can't use it. I've been wanting to get a second MacBook so we don't have to share, but can't justify the expense.


So get a netbook. Less price, same battery life, capable of more.

Quote:
The iPad does everything we would need for the casual use, and I think the form factor is better suited to how we would use it. A $500 iPad would be easier to justify than a $1000 MacBook as well.

If we were to only use it at home, we don't need the 3G. This could still be a handy feature - temporarily activate it when traveling, but don't maintain the data plan at home!


All in all this post seems to completely forget what netbooks are, restricting itself to only what Macbooks are capable of. Steve Jobs would love it if everyone pretended netbooks were terrible and had no place, but unfortunately for him, that's not true. In fact, it's the other way around, netbooks give the iPad no reason to exist.
2010-01-31, 7:20 AM #215
You call it "wrong" all you like: in my opinion, in my life, that's how it would fit in. Having a permanent machine in my living room isn't what I want, nor do I want a netbook which is another laptop with all the grief that comes with it.
2010-01-31, 7:38 AM #216
Originally posted by Martyn:
You call it "wrong" all you like: in my opinion, in my life, that's how it would fit in. Having a permanent machine in my living room isn't what I want, nor do I want a netbook which is another laptop with all the grief that comes with it.


That second half is what I'm having trouble processing. What kind of crazy ridiculous grief is a netbook giving you that the iPad isn't?
2010-01-31, 8:01 AM #217
Assuming a netbook rather than another macbook --> things like defragging hard drives, generally setting it up, removing pre-installed bloatware, installing anti-spyware, doing all the windows crap I left behind. If it had a flavour of linux there's learning how to drive it, but with a presumed payoff of less housekeeping.

(admission: if it ran win7 I admit there may be fewer things to do for housekeeping, but there's a learning curve because the last windows OS I've used is XP)

If it were a macbook - repairing disk permissions, checking startup volumes, making sure there's an easy way for me tell mine from Izzy's at a glance, plus the fact that a new mac would be more expensive than an ipad.

Basically, IT support would be at an absolute minimum, we both know how to drive the iPad's OS, and it'd look nicer on the bookshelf than an EeePC. And yes, that last point is important to a wife whose nesting instinct has well and truly kicked in.
2010-01-31, 8:47 AM #218
I think that some of you are overlooking the possibility of something being useful to some people even if it's not useful to you. I like PCs & I like Macs. I have a desktop PC that runs Ubuntu, I have a laptop that runs Windows XP & I have an iMac that runs OSX & soon it's going to have a Windows 7 partition via Boot Camp. I couldn't be accused of being a fanboy by anyone that stepped in to my office for more than 5 seconds. I find the concept of the iPad to be incredible useful. I don't want a smart phone (not even an iPhone) because the screen is too small for my purposes & I would rarely use the phone (when people call me, 99% of the time I let it go straight to voicemail & it's a rare occasion that I call anyone myself). I could go with a net-book but it's not going to have OSX (or even a mobile variation), which I prefer, it's not going to have a touch screen which I think is incredibly useful when it comes to reading eBooks & browsing the web & even though it's small, it still has a hardware keyboard that prevents it from being handled the way that an iPad could be handled (I can rotate the screen to fit my needs without using hot-keys, it's ideal for reading eBooks (minus eInk which doesn't really bother me as much as it does some people because I've been reading books on my desktop for years), viewing maps, playing games & watching movies (other than the lack of flash support that could be resolved in the future if it affected sales). I used to repair net-books (mostly Asus) & while I understand that they're useful for some people, I've never personally found them useful for my purposes. I think that it's easy for people to overlook the possibility that there could be a lot of people out there that don't care about the things that make you like a smart phone or net-book so much.
? :)
2010-01-31, 8:47 AM #219
Originally posted by Martyn:
Assuming a netbook rather than another macbook --> things like defragging hard drives, generally setting it up, removing pre-installed bloatware, installing anti-spyware, doing all the windows crap I left behind. If it had a flavour of linux there's learning how to drive it, but with a presumed payoff of less housekeeping.


Defragging is a thing of the past, really. Hell, even in XP it was a one-a-year deal. And if you get one with an SSD, it's completely irrelevant.

Pre-installed bloatware is a manufacturer-specific stupidity, not a problem with all netbooks :P

Installing anti-spyware, maybe, if you think you actually need it. MSE stupidly fast and easy, no maintenance whatsoever (runs in the background, doesn't prompt for anything unless there's a serious issue, very good protection).

Most Linux distros on netbooks are built for usability now, although I'd rather pick Win7.

Quote:
(admission: if it ran win7 I admit there may be fewer things to do for housekeeping, but there's a learning curve because the last windows OS I've used is XP)


Incredibly true, Windows 7 has really snuck up close to OS X in most every way. There's no learning curve, either. It's not such a vast departure from other Windows that you won't know how to turn it off or anything. It's more... OS X like.

Quote:
If it were a macbook - repairing disk permissions, checking startup volumes, making sure there's an easy way for me tell mine from Izzy's at a glance, plus the fact that a new mac would be more expensive than an ipad.

Basically, IT support would be at an absolute minimum, we both know how to drive the iPad's OS, and it'd look nicer on the bookshelf than an EeePC. And yes, that last point is important to a wife whose nesting instinct has well and truly kicked in.


There's actually a bunch of netbooks that look very sleek, IMO better than the iPad :P
2010-01-31, 9:49 AM #220
Originally posted by Cool Matty:
Dunno, but I have said $70/m plan, and nothing else comes close except for T-Mobile, which, of course, doesn't have 3G anywhere that matters.

Also, rollover minutes are irrelevant when Sprint just gives you unlimited minutes to /any/ cell phone now. I seriously would have to try to use my 450 minutes now.


I pay $75/month for AT&T (450 minutes, unlimited data, and something like 200 text messages that I never come close to using). Then I get a discount which actually brings it down below $70, so yeah, I'm fine with AT&T's pricing. ;)
2010-01-31, 10:16 AM #221
Matty: totally take your points, but for Iz and I an iPad seems to tick more boxes than a netbook. As well as what I mentioned above, don't forget I'm in the market for an e-reader ;)
2010-01-31, 10:39 AM #222
iPad's a terrible e-reader :/
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2010-01-31, 11:12 AM #223
If it turns out to be I won't buy one. Bear in mind 95% of all the reading I do is indoors, I won't be shedding a tear if it doesn't work so well in the famous British sunshine... <.<

If it's straight $ to £ conversion I won't either.
2010-01-31, 11:16 AM #224
Yeah, I've heard nothing but horror stories from those who've tried to sit down for 4 hours with an iPad and enjoy a good book.
Detty. Professional Expert.
Flickr Twitter
2010-01-31, 11:46 AM #225
I heard it burns babies' eyes when they use it.
2010-01-31, 11:55 AM #226
You know, no matter how I play with it in my head, I can't imagine anybody actually finding the iPad useful for anything.

If it's anything like the iPhone, reading a book on the iPad means you'd be frozen into a single spine-mangling pose because any attempt at lounging will cause your book to be rotated away from you. The screen is reflective enough that you wouldn't be able to put it on a table and read anything if you had lights on. Not to mention that there's a 50-50 chance that it'll randomly rotate your book as soon as you set it down.

Recipes? You'd get grease and dough all over it just picking it up.
Watching movies in bed? You'd have to hold it over your head the whole time, or curl up into some ridiculous pose.
Typing anything? If anybody in this world has practice typing on an iPad, it's Steve Jobs - and he could barely hold on to the thing. Plus you'd have to use Google Docs or something.
Music maybe? But then it's just a giant, unportable iPod with a shorter battery life.

Bleh.
2010-01-31, 2:58 PM #227
If it was some fancy screen that was like the Gameboy Advance SP, where it could be backlit or eink-style front-lit, it might be much better for book reading.

But as it stands, the number one reason ereaders have been so successful thus far is not the battery life or the book stores, it's been the screens. You feel like you're actually reading a book, not a screen.
2010-01-31, 3:01 PM #228
What about using it as a projectile?

I can imagine using it as a nice doorstop in the lobby of a Ritz-Carlton hotel.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2010-01-31, 3:10 PM #229
Originally posted by ECHOMAN:
What about using it as a projectile?
Too wide, probably not well-balanced. No way to get a really good grip on it.

Quote:
I can imagine using it as a nice doorstop in the lobby of a Ritz-Carlton hotel.
It's made of lightweight futuristic polished aluminum and polished glass.

Too light, too thin.
2010-01-31, 3:13 PM #230
I think Pee-Wee had the best idea when he used it as a drink tray.
2010-01-31, 3:16 PM #231
Originally posted by Martyn:
If it turns out to be I won't buy one. Bear in mind 95% of all the reading I do is indoors, I won't be shedding a tear if it doesn't work so well in the famous British sunshine... <.<

If it's straight $ to £ conversion I won't either.


I have heard £380 ish :)
Flying over there some were...
2010-01-31, 3:17 PM #232
Originally posted by Detty:
Yeah, I've heard nothing but horror stories from those who've tried to sit down for 4 hours with an iPad and enjoy a good book.


Who what and were?
Flying over there some were...
2010-01-31, 3:27 PM #233
Originally posted by Anakin-Paul:
Who what and were?


I think that was his point, that no one's used it for 4 hours straight yet. Not that that matters at all, since it's not rocket science to see how it'll be even without holding it.
2010-01-31, 3:58 PM #234
I heard the ipad causes kidney stones.
COUCHMAN IS BACK BABY
2010-01-31, 4:08 PM #235
According to Wired (via Engadget):

Jobs had a handful of choice words for Adobe, calling the company "lazy" and claiming that "Apple does not support Flash because it is so buggy. Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it's because of Flash. No one will be using Flash. The world is moving to HTML5."

Uhm, yeah.
2010-01-31, 11:23 PM #236
What is far closer to the truth is that:

Whenever a Mac crashes, the usual culprit is Safari
Whenever Safari crashes, the usual culprit is a plugin
Whenever Steve Jobs chooses to talk about crashing plugins, he always says it's Flash.

Don't have a clue as to the real numbers, but I bet that's not too far from the truth.
2010-01-31, 11:37 PM #237
Haha, just read Charlie Brooker's article on the iPad. Great stuff.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/01/ipad-therefore-iwant-why-idunno

"I hope buying an iPad doesn't turn me into an iPrick"

:D
2010-02-01, 1:04 AM #238
Originally posted by Martyn:
Whenever a Mac crashes, the usual culprit is Safari

If Safari is actually bringing down the whole OS, then Apple are the lazy ones for writing a **** operating system.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2010-02-01, 2:33 AM #239
Flash is an easy thing to hate. I don't think I've ever had a (non-IE) browser crash that didn't at least appear to be caused by it.
Why do the heathens rage behind the firehouse?
2010-02-01, 2:42 AM #240
Originally posted by Emon:
If Safari is actually bringing down the whole OS, then Apple are the lazy ones for writing a **** operating system.


What Martyn meant, was that the majority of crashes on a mac are caused by Flash. He didn't mean that Flash was bring down the whole OS. For me this is certainly true, Flash causes so much instability.
Detty. Professional Expert.
Flickr Twitter
1234567

↑ Up to the top!