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 → iPad
12345678
iPad
2010-04-08, 2:32 PM #201
Wow, this is just pathetic.

http://gizmodo.com/5512847/apple-takes-developers-hostage-in-war-on-adobe

Apple's effectively trying to ban apps created using tools like MonoTouch or the Flash compiler in CS5.
2010-04-08, 2:49 PM #202
I work with a lot speed school students, their *****ing just kind of gets pounded into my brain.
2010-04-08, 3:11 PM #203
Originally posted by Darth:
Wow, this is just pathetic.

http://gizmodo.com/5512847/apple-takes-developers-hostage-in-war-on-adobe

Apple's effectively trying to ban apps created using tools like MonoTouch or the Flash compiler in CS5.


Fail
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2010-04-08, 4:40 PM #204
I have to give U of L credit for keeping the Pink Floyd Laser Light Show going at the planetarium. :)
? :)
2010-04-08, 5:10 PM #205
I have to give U of L credit for providing me with plenty of dumb room mates and sexy hot *****es in booty shorts to gawk at on the way to school every day.
2010-04-08, 5:20 PM #206
Originally posted by Darth:
Apple's effectively trying to ban apps created using tools like MonoTouch or the Flash compiler in CS5.
Of course. They have a very similar strategy for their computers: in OSX 10.5 they deprecated the Carbon C++ interfaces. They still exist (iTunes and Quicktime are written in C++) but Apple won't give out the libraries.

Apple's entire strategy is to create an insular platform that's as far removed from the competition as possible. They have their own UI conventions, their own development environment, their own framework and their own programming language. It's very difficult to create a cross-platform application that targets OSX without rewriting huge parts of it.
2010-04-08, 5:26 PM #207
I'm loving some of the ridiculous arguments people come up with to support this move. My favorite has to be the fact that some people say it's a move to only allow high quality apps that perform well on the iPhone... Yeah, cause obviously it's impossible to write a ****ty app in Objective-C...
2010-04-08, 5:47 PM #208
The way they're going now, it will be impossible to write a crappy app... or any apps.
2010-04-08, 5:48 PM #209
Yes, perform well. That's exactly what I think of when I compare Objective-C to other languages.
2010-04-08, 5:50 PM #210
Oh, Objective-C may be a nightmarish abomination but it's perfectly possible to write an application in it. It's really just a question of whether it's worth the time to learn it.

(It's not. It's a slower, less feature-rich, more bug prone version of C++)
2010-04-08, 5:54 PM #211
But it's more logical! Or whatever the bull**** excuse Apple came up with for taking C++ and giving ass-backwards syntax was.
2010-04-08, 6:04 PM #212
Technically Objective-C was invented at around the same time. It's similar enough, except it uses a hash table lookup for dispatch instead of vfts. What's a little constant time performance cost, right?

The strangest part is Objective-C 2.0. Apple, for no good reason at all, wouldn't backport the garbage collector to Tiger or earlier versions of OSX. Apps that relied on the garbage collector would just leak memory on older computers.
Not that it matters, because it's just reference counting so any cyclic structure will end up leaking anyway. I guess that's what you deserve when you hire "artists" instead of "engineers" and "scientists."
2010-04-08, 6:08 PM #213
I'm glad I never invested any money in MonoTouch, since apparently it will be pretty worthless now.
2010-04-08, 8:51 PM #214
Originally posted by Rob:
I work with a lot speed school students, their *****ing just kind of gets pounded into my brain.


Tablet?

INITIATE RAGE MACHINE!!!

...Oh well.
Attachment: 23752/1234931504682.jpg (60,125 bytes)
2010-04-08, 8:51 PM #215
These are some of the things I would like to see for a tablet to be an attractive product.

-Wacom digitizer
-IPS or OLED screen
-Capacitive multitouch
-Very high pixel density (Say, 1680x1050 on a 12" tablet)
-Hinges that don't suck
-Software that isn't a closed environment, but has active support for tablet specific apps. Windows 7 would be good if it had a robust sweet of tablet apps and a development community there to take advantage of the platform.
-Low power dedicated video card.

Apple got the screen down pretty well minus the digitizer. Companies really should use IPS screens more often; they make such a huge difference.
2010-04-08, 9:04 PM #216
sweet of tablet apps
"Honey, you got real ugly."
2010-04-09, 3:49 AM #217
other companies are gonna now worth their ass off to get on par with the iPad
last i saw nearly 600,00 were sold, thats incredable
Bingo at bubbabingo.com
2010-04-09, 6:30 AM #218
Originally posted by Revan:
other companies are gonna now worth their ass off to get on par with the iPad
last i saw nearly 600,00 were sold, thats incredable


450,000 as of yesterday. Not that incredible.
2010-04-09, 6:39 AM #219
I think he was confusing the number of iPads sold w/ the number of iBooks sold (per the Apple keynote).
? :)
2010-04-09, 7:30 AM #220
Bets on the JooJoo or HP Slate getting those sorts of sales in a year, let alone a day?

*shrug*
2010-04-09, 7:38 AM #221
The JooJoo? That was a serious contender? I thought everyone knew that was a miserable failure just from the drama.
2010-04-09, 7:39 AM #222
Originally posted by Cool Matty:
The JooJoo? That was a serious contender? I thought everyone knew that was a miserable failure just from the drama.


It's a giant touchscreen with a web browser. It really doesn't do any more than that.

But hey, at least it has Flash.
2010-04-09, 7:46 AM #223
I know what it is. I'm saying, as I said before, that I'm surprised someone took it as a serious contender. :P
2010-04-09, 7:49 AM #224
I'm sure you know what it is, but I bet a lot of people don't, which is why I elaborated on what (little) it does.
2010-04-09, 8:00 AM #225
Fair enough, the point still stands for the HP Slate (and the rumoured Courier) though.

I saw these comments on Ars today - I'll paraphrase:

One guy: "Name one thing the iPhone can do that the Nexus 1 can't"
Other guy "Sell by the millions."
First guy ":gbk:"

Probably a fair point when levelled at the iPad too.
2010-04-09, 8:11 AM #226
Not yet it isn't. There was always a strong prediction that it'd sell well its first week, and then once all the fanboys and tech enthusiasts got one, it'd die off. That is, no typical user penetration.

See also: Apple TV
2010-04-09, 8:17 AM #227
Quote:
Within the first week of presales in January 2007, Apple TV was the top selling item at the Apple Store.[129] Orders exceeded 100,000 units by the end of January and Apple began ramping-up to sell over a million units before the 2007 holiday season.

Quote from wikipedia

They've exceeded that by a factor of more than 4 in the first few days. You're right of course, it may just end up a "hobby" product, but I really, really doubt it.

It may not be your cup of tea, but the likelihood is it's going to be very popular.
2010-04-09, 8:19 AM #228
I know only one person who has actually bought (or expressed interest in buying) one. He's also a flaming Apple fanboy.
2010-04-09, 8:29 AM #229
Quote:
450,000 as of yesterday. Not that incredible.

What would you consider to be "incredible"? iPhone sales? Chitika estimates 600,000 in 6 days. It would be unreasonable to expect the type of sales that the iPhone achieved & I don't think that anyone really expected that. I agree that the sales may not fall under the strict definition of the word "incredible" but that's a lot of ****ing units (the first line of Asus EEE PCs only sold 700,000 in an entire month).
? :)
2010-04-09, 8:32 AM #230
Also, bear in mind that's US only. There'll be a big spike when they land in Europe.

(obviously not as big as the US though)
2010-04-09, 8:35 AM #231
It's still an expensive device. Starting price is $500, for functionality similar to the iPhone. That's a hard sell for a lot of people, even if they do want one.
2010-04-09, 8:36 AM #232
Totally agree. I want one, ordinarily I could afford one, but now Izzy's at home and not at work and there's a new mouth to feed ;)

I'm saving my pennies for the new iPhone. That's a cost that will be (a) subsidised and (b) more affordable.

If my new job gives me a huuuge bump in my take home salary (it should be more than modest, but we've got to save) I might be able to save up for one within a few months.
2010-04-09, 8:38 AM #233
I'm fairly certain that I'm going to buy an iPad (3G) but I won't be getting it until the chaos ends (assuming it does anytime soon). I definitely want to find out a little more about the wifi issues first since that's primarily what I'll be using. I think I'm going to start off w/ the cheaper data plan also. My wife has expressed interest in getting the new iPhone so we may end up getting one of those as well.
? :)
2010-04-09, 8:59 AM #234
I haven't experienced any of the wifi issues. But then again I've always been a very lucky early adopter.
twitter | flickr | last.fm | facebook |
2010-04-09, 11:18 AM #235
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/04/iphone-os-destroys-windows-phone-7-without-even-shipping.ars

Quote:
It looks at this stage like the system still won't be a good match for every task; IRC, for example, needs long-lasting network connections but not much else, and this isn't one of the supported background scenarios (well, technically, the support for running VoIP applications in the background looks like it would work pretty well for backgrounding IRC or instant messaging, say, but whether such uses would get through the App Store gatekeepers is another matter entirely).


It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
? :)
2010-04-09, 8:11 PM #236
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars

Quote:
Apple's current—and in our opinion, objectionable—position is now close to the complete opposite of its initial stance. From promoting openness and standards, the company is now pushing for an ever more locked-down and restricted platform. It's bad for competition, it's bad for developers, and it's bad for consumers. I hope that there will be enough of a backlash that the company is forced to reconsider, but with the draw of all those millions of iPhone (and now, iPad) customers, I fear that Apple's developers will, perhaps with some reluctance, just accept the restriction and do whatever Cupertino demands.
? :)
2010-04-09, 8:20 PM #237
Quote:
-Wacom digitizer
-IPS or OLED screen
-Capacitive multitouch
-Very high pixel density (Say, 1680x1050 on a 12" tablet)
-Hinges that don't suck
-Software that isn't a closed environment, but has active support for tablet specific apps. Windows 7 would be good if it had a robust sweet of tablet apps and a development community there to take advantage of the platform.
-Low power dedicated video card.


HP switched back to a wacom digitizer for the new line of TouchSmarts. Though for everything else on the list; wait five years.
2010-04-09, 9:39 PM #238
Originally posted by JM:
HP switched back to a wacom digitizer for the new line of TouchSmarts. Though for everything else on the list; wait five years.


Yeah, I have a TM2. The Wacom digitizer is awesome. I wish the panel was better, as the viewing angle is pretty bad. That's really my only major complaint with it.
2010-04-09, 10:35 PM #239
My Thinkpad X61t has a Wacom digitizer and an IPS Flexview screen and it is :awesome:

I think the current X201t models also have an IPS screen
一个大西瓜
2010-04-10, 6:57 AM #240
They probably do, but they also cost A LOT more.
12345678

↑ Up to the top!