It’s bigger and costs $450 more. The HP is a general purpose computer, the iPad isn’t. The iPad runs a tightly controlled OS where you won’t be fiddling with a control panel or worrying about viruses (hopefully!) The App Store and iTunes make it easy to add apps, music, videos, etc. And a lot is free, much more than I expected.
Didn’t you just answer your own question? It costs twice as much, it weighs 3 times as much, it’s a regular computer so it has a boot-up time, etc. You won’t be casually pulling this out to make a note on, and then putting it away. You won’t be using it for five minutes while waiting for a bus. You won’t set it down beside you at the breakfast table to read the morning paper.
It’s all about the details. You guys are looking at the broad strokes, but these devices are all about the details.
Mind you, the HP does look like a really nice device. It’s just not really a competitor for the iPad.
OK, so an iPad is a souped up eReader that plays video that is price closer to a netbook. But tell me, how long until something like the HP device comes out only it is lighter and cheaper?
HP already is getting ready to announce their slate, it will be ingeresting to see how it compares.
Now you are talking. I expect a rush of tablets to the market. At least one has to be decent. The problems is, most of the will be PCs. This means they will either be expensive or underpowered. And they will be either running some old or crippled version of Windows (kaboom) or something else and then you don’t have any software on the scale of the App Store.
IF they are not PCs but some flavor of mobile OS, then you have a dearth of software.
A lot of people rant about the App Store but it is a huge library of all kinds of software optimized for a lean OS. You could just as easily program the whole bunch in Java or Flash, but nobody has. It is the App Store (reviled as it is) that propelled the iPhone and the iPod Touch to the top. It might have enough momentum to propel the iPad too. And that’s before you include new software made with the iPad in mind.
Maybe Google will launch a decent Android tablet. Or a Chrome tablet. Other than that, though, I am not holding my breath for something to come out this year to really upset the iPad et al.
I don’t see too many people lugging this thing around and a little pouch for all the friggin dongles associated with it. If I am taking something that big and fragile?? (bigass unprotected screen) I might as well take a netbook or my laptop, at least I could do other stuff also. This seems geared for in home usage, living room , kitchen, crapper. Nobody is going to be pulling out one these to watch a movie or read in a line without looking like douche/idiot.
Every chance I get, if I am waiting in a line, I pull out a book, magazine or newspaper to read. I have a european carry-all with me almost all the time (no it’s not a man-purse! :mad: ) I had no idea that I looked like a douche all those years. And yet I will carry on happily looking like a douche if other people want to stand in line quietly judging me. Perhaps I can bring a little joy to their lives by giving them the opportunity to feel superior to someone and point and laugh at me. 
You mean like this?
10", widescreen aspect ratio, runs Android. And it won’t be alone in the marketplace, I’m sure.
And this is why it’ll sell like hotcakes…and have an LCARS background the second after the first geek gets one.
Yes, it is.
Or any of these:
The iPad is not a competitor to a notebook computer. It just isn’t. I carry a notebook computer around to run Photoshop, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, InDesign, HTML editors, FTP clients, email clients, web browsers, and so on. I would use an iPad to read books, listen to music, and watch videos, with a little Web surfing thrown in. They’re very different things.
Question: I’ve heard it said quite a few times here that the iPad can’t multitask. Does that mean I couldn’t read a book on it while listening to music?
I keep hoping that Flash will go away. I’d be shocked if 25% of the Web used Flash, but I’ll bet half of the troublesome sites that don’t work properly do.
First of all, you can use an iPad without having to run Windows. Then add all the reasons everyone else stated (price, etc.) and the one I opened my post with. They’re just different things.
No, it doesn’t mean that, like the iPod touch you can play music while doing other things. It does mean (from my understanding - it hasn’t been seen “in the wild” yet) that presumably you wouldn’t be able to have your browser application open at the same time as your mail application, or to take another example, if you buy apple’s “office suite”, then you wouldn’t be able to have the word processing program (Pages) open at the same time as the spreadsheet program (Numbers) or the presentation program (Keynote).
I cut out a piece of cardboard in the dimensions of the iPad. I’d hardly call it “lugging” a 1.5 lb 7.5"x9.5" item. And it doesn’t fold out into double the space just so you can use it. It comes packaged (I believe) in a (faux) leather carrying pad.
It’s just about the exact size of an opened up moleskine planner.
They positioned the iPad as a competitor to netbooks in the launch. If the presentation had been ‘This is unlike anything else out there’ then I could see the point of saying don’t compare them, but at the risk of sounding juvenile, they started it.
That depends. If it’s the same as the Touch, which is what my assumption is, then you could listen to music in your local library, but you wouldn’t be able to stream in another application.
I keep hoping to win the lottery. In the meantime I have to deal with the reality that I need to keep my day job. Wishing for one thing doesn’t mean you get to ignore the current reality.
Flash is a big part of the internet and any browsing experience that purposely excludes it results in a less full experience. I may applaud Apple for (potentially) helping hasten the demise of Flash and for saying they’d rather offer a less full, but more stable, experience. But that doesn’t change the fact that lack of Flash support can be seen as a legitimate issue to a large number of people.
It’s OK for a consumer to hope that Flash goes away. It’s not OK for a company that makes a media-consumption device like the iPad to just sit and hope that Flash goes away. A company has to make products for today’s reality, not for some future utopia when only good technologies are around.
This is not rocket science: I buy an iPad. I sit on the couch to surf. I go to hulu.com to catch an episode of my favorite show. **Bzzzt! NO! **You can’t do that, because hulu uses Flash. There are myriads of high-traffic media-rich sites that use Flash. You can’t visit any of them with a device that doesn’t support Flash.
It’s just plain stupid to not include Flash in a device like the iPad. It’s just plain stupid to defend the lack of Flash in the iPad simply because Flash is a bad technology.
I do hope that for those of us on a budget there will be a cardboard iPad made available, similar to the carboard iPhone (.pdf file)
My feelings on the product have evened a bit since my initial disappointment. Partially because I was penalizing Apple for not delivering the product I was expecting and thought I wanted. I was especially taken aback by claims of “magical” and “revolutionary” when it can be successfully argued that they just essentially made an existing product bigger.
I suspect that lots of the omissions people are griping about are calculated omissions that affect battery life, system security and snappiness. Not to mention a reason to release iPad 2.0. It reminds me of Apple’s early refusal of 3G capability because it sucked battery life. While that’s true, it was only after it was 3G-enabled that I actually bought an iPhone.
Possibly, but there was a lot of negativity about the previous products, which bounced back very well. Wall Street is always eager to trounce Apple stock for very little reason. It’s a shame, as it’s a very profitable company.