Yes. If you have music on the iPad, then you can listen to it while doing other stuff...just like you can on the iPhone.
Have had no problem with that thus far. While not true multitasking in the technical sense, Pages and Safari pop open right where I left off. The state saving is really good and the re-initialization of the app fast. Feels all the same to me. I've been going back and forth with no problem. Admittedly, the switching isn't as fast as the expose feature in OSX. The reloading of the app speed differs from app to app. I noticed some third part apps don't save state as well and consistently as the Apple ones. Can't comment of PDFs yet.
The iPad isnt meant to do what notebooks or desktops do. I think many of you are missing the point of the iPad.
If you're looking for a gripe: direct printing. Apple has, in part, marketed this thing as a business productivity tool (http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/), but there is no direct printing from the work apps? I've been told of apps that supply that feature, but still... Rumor is that this is part of what Thursday's announcement will address, but we'll see.
It's worth $500 to the person who forks over the $500. It's obvious that it's not worth $500 to you because you're trying to justify the cost by comparing it with peripherals that aren't even the same at all (e.g. netbooks). Yes an Asus netbook is going to allow you to multitask and run Flash but how is its form function the same as an iPad? "Well, there are convertible netbooks that can turn into tablets" True but aren't you still carrying a netbook in hand regardless? Honestly, the iPad isn't worth the money for me right now and, just like pretty much every electronic or gadget I've purchased, I'll wait it out and see if they fix any kinks and lower the price and then purchase one in the future. This is akin to asking why people want to fork over more money for an Audi when a Lexus offers the same ammenities (if not better), better quality and reputation, at a lower price? You state this and yet you don't understand why it's priced at $500? You think it's a well executed machine that "does what it does really well" but yo don't get why it's priced at where it's at? Apple name + Apple reputation + Creative Marketing = demand. I'm also sure you know that demand drives pricing so of course Apple can price it initially where the iPad becomes an exclusive product but will, of course, go down in price for the masses to consume. Again, since you stated in this thread that you're a gadget person, I don't really understand why it's hard for you to comprehend that Apple can and has commanded a premium for it's products. And THIS is why I said it's basic business economics. If you got hundreds of people lined up for a product that's willing to fork over hundreds of dollars without even blinking and thousands more that pre-ordered a product they have NEVER even touched, why wouldn't you price it for a premium in its initial release? If you can get the public to buy into the product at a high price, why would you NOT do it? Of course, once sales slows down, Jobs and Apple have the luxury of knocking off $50 or $100 off the iPad and sales will climb once more. You also forget that netbooks, while great for portability and pretty much a great way to surf the net and email and watch movies, is a saturated market. Count how many different companies have a netbook in their lineup and count how many have a strictly-non-keyboard tablet in their lineup and there's another reason why Apple can command that price. If you build a mousetrap, someone will always come along and build a better one. But if you build something no one has massively produced (along with a reputable brand name on it, of course), you rake in that dough before the competition catch up.
I'm getting them from... youtube? Anyway, I read over all of the comments from the videos, and I'm having trouble finding the bullshat. If he's selling dookie, please tell me what it is, cause I wanna know.
What I don't understand is why so many seem to get an anti-Apple emotion stirred up in this thread. If someone wants to believe in Santa Claus, I wouldn't get emotional about it. Some see a use for it and some don't (with valid reasons). Let those with the extra cash and the desire to own one have their fun. I'm not sure what Steve Jobs ever did to you guys but it's time to let it go.
Busted link. But people hated Apple and Jobs long before that. Not really sure we have any Adobe or Google board members posting here, either.
While it may be indirect, Apple has done a lot of things that are great for its business but harmful to consumers. One example is Amazon's daily deal, where they offer a different cheap music album every day. Apple threatened to target artists who participate out of iTunes, which has killed the program. http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2010...er-of-apples-power-over-the-major-labels.html Apple consistently does things that are anti-competitive and raise the prices for everyone. There are plenty of reasons for non-Apple-users to dislike Apple as a company.
I couldn't agree more. I'm definitely not getting an iPad anytime soon and would love to hear more from people who are actually using them. Instead, we predictably get whiners who don't even have iPads that yammer about Apple, Jobs and people who have bought iPads.
The link works if you change the CF-censored word. As far as the link, I'm sure you can turn up better reasonings on why people should hate Apple and Jobs because a link about him speaking bad about competition doesn't do much. The anti-Apple sentiment that many (not just on this board) has isn't pure hatred IMO. I'm sure they are fine with what Apple and its products has become. The only thing that gets them agitated is that the masses are buying into their products when there are better and cheaper alternatives out there...if people put in the effort to look. Therein lies the problem: you can't expect the masses to put in the effort to look. That's where Jobs and Apple shine: they make a simplistic product that is not only easy to use and understand but is also pretty reliable and is pretty to look at. The thing that takes the anti-Apple people over the edge is the fact that these Apple adopters praise and love their gadgets and are ready to proclaim it the best thing they ever used (which is true for the apple user because they've had a great experience with said product). Of course, an anti-Apple person is going to be pissed off every time they hear this because they're used to overclocking their processors, adding more RAM to their computers, and knows that there are much better video cards out there.
lol. I don't think you're going to convince others any more than they're going to convince you. Rezdawg is the only one who posted something I can understand. You can use this as an ereader. If that's its primary purpose, I would buy it. Outside of that, I put all the pros and cons down next to a netbook and the netbook side won handily. I was against the iPhone initially simply because it was less functional in many ways than cheap phones were at the time. What won me over was that it did something that nothing else could do as well - apps. I'll wait to see what the Slate is like and if Microsoft's Courier, in the form it was hinted, is reality, that thing could possibly blow the doors off of any of these devices.
I think this is false. It is a matter of personal preference, taste, and user-experience for most. Not laziness. Most Apple users I know are fully aware of the technical limitations and price-differential of the products they have vs. the competition, but the premium is worth it to them. I go back to the Wii vs. XBox argument. I'm fully aware that the XBox can dance circles around my Wii, but I like the Wii experience better, and I'd feel the same way even if I had to pay more than an XBox costs to get it. For some reason, some people really resent it when people find value in something that isn't measured in pure technical specifications.
Well I hope you don't think I meant Apple users are stupid or computer-inept. Far from it but Apple do pull in the consumers that just want a computer or laptop that don't need upgrades internally or the myth of having trouble with their OS like they did with Windows (insert your version here).
I can agree with that somewhat. My parents would fall into that category. My aunt and uncle got an iMac and fell in love with it because of how easy it was to use and the service the Apple people gave them in training them how to use it. Now my parents want one because they hear "the damn thing actually works!" Apple's reputation for better user-experience and service is well earned, IMO. Or at least it looks that way according to the market.
Well for the first 2 minutes, he rants about how he defines multi-tasking. Claims people are misinforming others when they say the iPhone doesn't fully multi-task, since it searches for wireless networks and texts in the background. If you use that broad of a term, every phone in existence multi-tasks including the original Palm OS which he later identifies as a single-tasking system. He instead insists people are actually complaining about third-party multiple app concurrency. (I bet if Apple does announce 3rd party multi-tasking on the 8th, Steve Jobs will stick with "3rd party multi-tasking" over whatever he made up.) He then uses the old Palm OS and Windows Mobile as an example of how single-tasking works better than multi-tasking. This is 2010 the processing power of mobile devices has increased. Palm's new OS (WebOS) probably has one of if not the best implementations of multi-tasking. While people complain about the Pre's build quality, WebOS itself and it's multi-tasking card system is nearly universally praised. (It's actually what ProSwitcher for JailBroken iPhones is based on.) Then he goes on to make-up things about security. This one was...wow. He's not even making any sense at this point. Somehow multi-tasking allows for malware to be potentially installed in the background without the users knowledge. He then explains that OSX is exempt from this because of user permissions and how you can easily remove anything compared to Windows. Neither Android, WebOS or any other multi-tasking OS I know of allow for background installations without any user permission. They all also require user permissions before anything is installed. You are not going to have malware installed on you're phone. He continues to make up things by suggesting that Android requires users to constantly manage their tasks through a task manager. That's not true, Android does not even include a task manager by default. Android automatically frees up memory whenever it's needed for new tasks and eliminates tasks that are no longer in use. WebOS with it's card system allows you to easily end tasks by "flicking" them away and you can always spot open apps due to the cards. Also, judging by reviews and my own usage, battery life on multi-tasking OS's is on par with the iPhone. ....all that within the first half of the video. Oh, randomly saying kernel every two sentences does not earn you any credibility. It was just complete BS, man. Ignore him.
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I admit I thought the security thing was a little wonky and mostly just for scare. Hopefully this coming announcement is going to clear up some of the issues people have.
