I love my I-pad for taking pictures - so easy to see what I’m doing. However, it is a pain to get the pictures off the I-pad and onto a thumb drive. I’m probably “doing it wrong…” Sigh.
I’ve heard of iPad, mostly here on the SDMB but I don’t (or didn’t) know what it is used for. My sister bought her laptop to use with her real estate data but had some sort of conflict with software; I don’t know details. Anyway, the laptop is now in Texas and the iPad is on order. She has a desktop computer at home that she uses for her real estate business, email, etc. I have a desktop myself and now that I’m retired I don’t need a laptop; the desktop is all I need. I don’t even have a smartphone or a Blackberry----my cell phone is about as basic as it gets. I don’t even wear a wristwatch anymore-----
In which case they could just stick with the original 256mb.
It’s doubtful if any OS manages memory well. I treasure each time an expert claims that ‘unused memory is wasted memory’, as the machine creaks up like running through mud uphill due to unreleased memory… And the experts say this for every OS.
And I don’t do Windows.
Well, I’m glad you at least moved from saying essentially “iPads aren’t suited for ANY production” to “they CAN do some.” While the Bjork album was produced partially, the Gorillaz album was produced almost entirely on the iPad. They produced the album while on tour, in their tour bus and in hotel rooms and with a few hundred dollars worth of apps. No studios (I don’t think, or hardly any anyway). By the time they had returned home, they were practically done. That makes it sound like the iPad is quite well-suited. If the iPad did everything but burn the CDs, would you still be comparing it to an old Dell?
Heaven help me for suggesting Apple’s own PR link, but check out Apple at Work - Success Stories - Retail - Apple . I will understand if you don’t want to be exposed to all the Apple + iPad = Jesus + Moses fluff, but you can parse the text for actual examples of how the iPad goes well beyond being a virtual briefcase. Maybe you and I have different definitions of capability and efficiency.
I’m certainly not trying to make the argument that the iPad can do everything and I’m sure you could indeed find plenty of things it can’t (or shouldn’t) do. For your average person, sure, it’s more about games, web, etc. But pigeon holing the iPad as consumption-only is not reflective of what people and businesses are doing with it. Professional work is already a reality on the iPad.
That is not the Tim Cook quote I am referring to. I am referring to the Q2 2013 earnings call where he said “just to quote you some numbers, iPad is now being used in 95% of the Fortune 500.” He didn’t say “testing” that time like he did the year earlier, but that doesn’t even matter because the point is that many companies are now using iPads in some work/production capacity. And I know deploying them doesn’t mean every single employee is using them- which is why I never claimed anything remotely like that.
I agree with you completely on your original point that an iPad can be valuable in some capacity for generating content, and maybe even the preferred tool for some specific purposes. Your examples were music and artwork. But anything Tim Cook says doesn’t bolster that position, it’s just marketing. By analogy, I know about three people at the Department of Education who use them, but to say that the iPad “is now being used” by a federal agency with a budget of $72 billion would be a bit of marketing hype.
Are the 50,000 iPads being used AIA Insurance just a bit of marketing hype? The 18,000 being used at each SAP AG and the US Air Force? The 12,000 at Cisco? Here is where I got those numbers http://blogs.sap.com/innovation/mobile-applications/top-100-ipad-rollouts-by-enterprises-schools-2012-08-update-016831 . If your only beef is that Tim Cook is cheerleading for his company, then sure, of course he is, but that is because he has data to cheer about. I mean, you don’t think the Department of Education (or any Fortune 500 company moving forward with iPad) is stopping at three, do you? iPads are the new potato chip- you can’t have just one. (Actually, I couldn’t find any iPad numbers at all for the Department of Education, so I’m guessing maybe those three people are rolling BYOD? But I don’t know.)
But the real point that I hope I’m getting across is that calling the iPad a consumption-only device is a worn out canard. To that end, if we’re just quibbling on what is/is not spin and marketspeak, then ok.
My sister and I attended a pool party last evening. One of the ladies in attendance had her iPad with her and she demonstrated the basics of it. She uses hers nearly entirely for pictures and email; my sister now says that is what she intends to do. She and I might go to Texas for Xmas/New Year; if we do, she will have her grandson set the iPad up for her. Now that I have seen one in action, I think I might want one-----I don’t need one but what the hell. The one I saw intrigued me.
Thanks to everyone for your comments, assistance, and general help. It is much appreciated.
What is the problem with this? I use PowerPoint for flyers, posters, and signs. I know how to manipulate text and imported graphics, and PowerPoint has come preinstalled on every work computer I’ve had. It’s not like I’m a professional in graphic arts, advertising, or publishing. If I want to put a poster on an easel for some company event, why would I find and learn some other software package to do the same thing?
If it works for you, no problem at all.
As a professional in publications, graphics, marketing support and even the ad game, I long ago learned to let people waste their own time any way they see fit. When they get tired of wasting a lot of time for lousy results, they come to me and I either do it for them (often at a lower net cost, man-hours considered), set them up and train them with appropriate, efficient tools for the job, or help them hire the right person to take over tasks some secretary or assistant has been doing “left handed” and often badly. They usually save money and time, increase efficiency AND get a positive response from their clients/audience/market.
But it’s a tough sell to new clients, because most people don’t realize what a full-spectrum creative pro does or how they do it, and think fumbling around in MS Office tools is just as good, good enough or saving money. The client I declined wanted me to come in and work alongside (and to the capabilities) of their - no kidding - janitor, machine maintenance guy and poster/flyer/sign maker, using PowerPoint.
There might have been room for further discussion except that (1) it turned out I was supposed to work completely “in trade” when this client didn’t have so much as a chair I wanted to sit in, much less any product or service I could use and (2) their insistence on PP of all things, which I believe is the single most worthless program in wide use, without a single redeeming feature or proper application of any kind.
You asked. 
OK. Let’s set aside Mr. Cook and his comments. As I said, I do agree that it’s closed-minded to say that it’s useless to generate content. However, numbers used and prestige of companies who have adopted it don’t alone tell you how it’s being used, and therefore whether it’s an appropriate tool for any given individual user.
I don’t mean to argue against your point, but I want to offer some analysis on the backup. I looked at the cite, and noted that the top user is using them to document sales transactions for a mobile insurance workforce. OK, that’s production, but it’s content that is transaction-based and driven by a special-purpose application, rather than creating content meant for broad consumption. The Air Force is using them to replace printed flight manuals: consumption. Out of the top 50, 23 were K-12 and higher education, an environment where mobility is the prime motivator, such described by the link cited for University of Western Sydney. Barclay’s decided to buy 8,500 of them for use in branches, which rules out the mobility factor, but that decision appears to be at least in part driven by the decision to use a commercial mortgage software application that is available only for the iPad. Barclay’s a partner in a joint venture that markets the software, so they clearly want to be their own best advertisement.
So I stick to my conclusion, back to responding to the OP, that an iPad is not a suitable replacement for a laptop for many people, but may be perfect for those who mainly consume information, require a high degree of mobility, or use special-purpose apps which are not available on a PC.
To which I’d add the comment that no one is saying it’s impossible to “create” on a iPad, only that it’s a poor tool for the efficient, sustained creation possible with a full console.
(A small handful of tasks suited to touch-slide-pinch-tap aside.)
The iPad is no panacea and I hope that’s not the impression I’ve given. But neither is a “real” computer. There are plenty of examples of businesses facilitating efficient and sustained “real” work with an iPad. So I think you paint with a large brush (one too big even for an iPad) when you indiscriminately write it off as a poor tool compared to a console, your parenthetical notwithstanding.
First, I’m not writing tablets off as anything but being tablets, meaning they have certain strengths and weaknesses. Strength: being able to display any network-accessible resource on earth without the bulk and complexity of even a laptop. Weakness: input, input and input.
List all the content-creative work that can be done efficiently and sustainedly on a tablet and I’ll shut up. I’ll give you number one: freehand art.
For bonus points, list everything that can be done on a tablet that can’t be done on a “real” computer. <fx crickets>
I don’t really want to argue this, but if you’re going to maintain that tablets are even in the same zip code of content-creation ability as a full console, I will.
Photography, for one. I mean the act of taking photographs.
I’m not claiming tablets can equal a “real” computer. But the whole “computers for production/tablets for consumption” idea both underestimates what people do with tablets, and overestimates what they do with computers.
Take the mobile insurance example above - you can write off their ipad production as being limited or minimal. But those same employees would probably be doing just the same kind of minimal production if they were using laptops.
My system probably weighs 200 pounds and takes up most of a large L-desk; I just used it to take a snap of myself doing a fishface. Wanna see it?
I’ve also used both desktops and laptops as the recording and control device for still and video photography; google up tools like OnLocation.
Good point, though: taking a picture with a “real” computer is about as efficient as writing a memo on a tablet.
Really? Tell me about an overestimation of what can be done with a “real” computer.
Taking a few snapshots, filling out a few form fields and being able to look up a ton of reference data does not in any way invalidate any point I’ve made. That’s a case where a tablet can help a person be productive, but that’s not what this discussion is about. (Aside: as a member of the town technology advisory board, I was a part of getting our town building and site inspectors tablets for precisely those reasons. But they still go back to their desktops to write reports and draw blueprints.)
Tell me about sustained capability to create content on a tablet. I’ll wait.
I don’t want to argue anything, I’d like to think we’re having a discussion and would like to keep it that way.
That being said, exactly how many examples of creative work do I have to give to make you shut up? 
But seriously… there is art as you mentioned, the Gorillaz album again, I’ve read stories about professional DJs and professional photographers integrating iPads into their workflows.
As to your bonus question, those crickets you hear must be made of straw because I have never made such a claim. Once again, it has never been my position that the iPad is a magic bullet, it is not the end all be all for everything and everyone. And the same goes for consoles.
its not an overestimation of what computers can do, it’s an overestimation of what people actually do with them. Many people do nothing but consume content and create the occasional Facebook post/email.
I can’t imagine trying to do my job on my iPad, but it’s very good for most everything I would do with a home computer. I could justify replacing my home computer with an iPad.