10 ways the Apple iPad changes the game

15. apple fans= *****, im sorry ok but its a big ipod, thats it who really cares about colour ebooks, i got colour books on my self right now, its **** no1 will copy this if they do they wont make no money.

14. @ kasino72.

"7. Everybody's going to copy it"

They're not really going to copy it, are they? We've already seen prototypes from other companies before the slate was announced, did apple copy them? No they didn't, because everybody's got a work in progress, all the time. Its like saying everyone was going to stick with the typewriter until the first PC was released, and then they copied it. Its the same with mobiles. Who's copying who?

"9. It's really cheap - and could get cheaper still"

No it wont. Apple will do the same with this as they have with the iphone. Trickle feed tech to it every six months or so to keep prices the same or higher and fleece the fanboys.

13. @ kasino72

Thank you for the boring quote, from a, you guessed it,fanboy. I do actually get it. My gripe at chdot is the fact that he thinks every school kid has an ipod touch and a stay at home parent.(unless he's talking about private schools and not the real world).

As for you. It doesn't matter what anybody on this post says in the negative about the ipad, your going to just sit at you keyboard, and rather smugly, tell us "your all wrong, and this is why...." It doesn't matter what we say or think, your going to contradict EVERYTHING. If this thing does fail (it probably wont), six months down the line you will probably be writing in your blog, rather patronizingly, that it is the fault of "non-techie punters" who didn't "get the point".

"Don't be ridiculous. Decent newspapers are about analysis and insight. Magazines too."

I really hope your not a sun reader.

12. Ah, Windymiller. Did you hear that rushing noise? That's the point, whooshing right past you. CHdot's point is a good one. The iPhone OS is a superb OS for educational use, if the apps are there - and I suspect they will be.

Fraser Spiers nailed it:

"The Real Work is teaching the child, healing the patient, selling the house, logging the road defects, fixing the car at the roadside, capturing the table's order, designing the house and organising the party.

Think of the millions of hours of human effort spent on preventing and recovering from the problems caused by completely open computer systems. Think of the lengths that people have gone to in order to acquire skills that are orthogonal to their core interests and their job, just so they can get their job done."

(full link: http://speirs.org/blog/2010/1/29/future-shock.html)

> If your spending that much money on one day old news, your a fool.

Don't be ridiculous. Decent newspapers are about analysis and insight. Magazines too.

11. @ kasino72

"I also have a £702/year newspaper habit. Imagine if I could come downstairs in the morning, grab the iPad, and use it as a newspaper"

A journo with a blog, a laptop, PC, or both in his home, and "Doesn't" know how to use the internet?. Give me a break. If your spending that much money on one day old news, your a fool.

@ chdot

"Parents will use iPad while kids are at school"

The very small minority of parents who aren't at work you mean. Another fool.

"So if children see them at school, will they be happy with an iPod Touch at home?"

What do you think the ratio of kids in a typical class is, that have an ipod touch? foolish, foolish, foolish.

10. Most 'Apple fans' seem to be ignoring the education market.

“UPDATE 29.1.10

At least one Edinburgh primary school is hoping to buy a “class set of iPads”. Previously it had been seriously looking at iPod Touches, but the launch of the iPad has changed the plan…”

(That’s about 30 iPads in one school….)

http://applebicycle.info/tablet

So if children see them at school, will they be happy with an iPod Touch at home? (Parents will use iPad while kids are at school....)

This comment sent from my iPhone - of course.

9. > However, I don't agree with you on most of it.

Damn. *shouts* Release the bats!

> Just because users don't care about Apple wanting to vet everything they install on their machines it doesn't mean they shouldn't care, and as a tech journalist you certainly should!

I think there's a trade-off in most things, so for example I worry about the way Google stores data and seems to want to own the world, but I still use Google. Similarly I think Apple wants not just to sell iPads, but to be the middleman for all the world's music, movies and books. And yet I want an iPad. The problem for me is that the iPad appears to be everything I personally want in a second computer, so I'm willing to forgive the control freakery and the continued use of Marker Felt in the Notes application.

I'm arguing about this on my own blog too, where I wrote this:

"I also have a £702/year newspaper habit. Imagine if I could come downstairs in the morning, grab the iPad, and use it as a newspaper. It’s big enough so there’s still the serendipity of seeing articles you might otherwise miss, and it’s digital enough that I can get my news for free (or nearly free, depending on what the Guardian, Sunday Times etc do about online content). When I’m done it becomes a photo frame until Mrs Bigmouth fancies a bit of Facebooking, emailing or newspaper reading.

So: it replaces the laptop, it saves me money. It’s an easy sell. It doesn’t have e-ink, but I wouldn’t be using it long enough for that to be an issue."

I absolutely, 100% understand that for everyone like me who's going "wow, that's the perfect device" there are others thinking "Wow, what a missed opportunity".

> The rest of your points basically seem to amount to "Yes that is a negative but it's no big deal".

I think all hardware and software involves compromise. I reviewed the first-gen iPod and didn't rate the sound quality (creative's kit was better, Sony had superior sound), but the packaging and control system made up for it. I ignored loads of things about the iPhone v1 - terrible camera, no copy & paste, no multitasking, no 3G - because the UI was amazing. I think the iPad's like that too. There are loads of things that could be changed, but for many people - me included - the package is compelling enough to overlook them.

For my particular house, the benefits of the iPad massively outweigh all the negatives. It'll save me £300 in year one and £700 in year two, it'll be a rather nifty photo frame, 802.11n is ace compared to the 802.11b on the laptop I'm currently using, etc etc etc. That said, if you want to do work - of any kind, so for example if you want to write a novel in your spare time - then the iPad would be a mistake IMO. Much better off with a netbook.

In my very specific circumstances, though, it works. A photo frame that becomes a newspaper, does the odd email and Twitter, can handle facebook and online banking, something I can use to watch video on a plane where I can't open a normal laptop (easyjet and laptops don't go together), for less than four hundred quid? I'd be using it at home so the lack of a widescreen display for video doesn't matter. On the rare occasions I'm travelling, it's good enough for watching a movie.

> how can apple justify charging more for the iPad when it has less?

I do think in Apple terms it's cheap - it's set to be cheaper than a pay as you go iPhone 3GS - and if you look at the high end of the market, where things like the Nokia Booklet and wee Sony Vaio live, then it's a bargain. That said, it's only a bargain if you want one :)

Back to my blog:

"It’s entirely possible that Apple’s got it wrong, that the iPad won’t sell. But if that happens, it won’t be because it doesn’t multitask, or because it doesn’t have an SD card slot, or because it has the wrong kind of SIM, or because it doesn’t do Flash. It’ll be because Apple can’t convince punters – non-techie punters – that they need it."

8. Hi Gary,

Thanks for taking the time to reply, it's not often an author would bother to do that.

However, I don't agree with you on most of it.

Just because users don't care about Apple wanting to vet everything they install on their machines it doesn't mean they shouldn't care, and as a tech journalist you certainly should!

The rest of your points basically seem to amount to "Yes that is a negative but it's no big deal".

So, even if these things aren't a big deal to you, you have to admit that all of these things ARE available on most netbooks, so how can apple justify charging more for the iPad when it has less?

It just doesn't make sense.

7. Hi Bombfrog, it's Gary here.

"I'm getting a little annoyed with TechRadar's swooning over the iPad. They seem totally out of touch with popular opinion on the net, which is that it's a big disappointment."

My job isn't to reflect popular opinion: it's to write *my* opinion. Which this is :)

"1) No Multitasking. Essentially there isn't a proper operating system. It's just a big iPhone."

I don't see that as a negative. Seriously. If you want a tablet to work, then sure, it's a problem. If you want to relax - to read a book, say, or to muck around with your pics - the lack of interruption is a plus. I've never found a print magazine lacking because it doesn't tweet, bong and generally get in my face when I'm trying to read something.

"Apple censorship."

I honestly don't think most people care. And inevitably, it'll be jailbroken for those who do.

"3) 4:3 resolution."

Widescreen's rubbish for reading. I think this has been designed with ebooks/mags as one of its main priorities - and that suits me. If I want to watch TV I've got an enormous Sony Bravia for that :) Same with the camera. Who wants to take low-res pics with something the size of a big paperback? We carry cameraphones for quick and dirty pics, SLRs for proper photography.

I don't see Micro SIM as a problem either. If there's money to be made from providing Micro SIMs, the networks will provide them.

I'm not a huge fan of iTunes software but I don't particularly hate it either, but I'm not missing Flash - on my mac it's rather keen on crashing Safari, and more often than not it's only there to bug me with ads anyway. That's purely personal preference, of course, but I don't miss it. iPlayer works just fine with H.264.

Expensive? Assuming we don't get stuffed with exchange rates, you're looking at around £380 for the basic one. That's not hugely more expensive than a good network, and it's cheaper than some of the better-made ones such as HPs'. If you want WXGA *and* higher capacity batteries you tend to be at the higher end of the price range rather than the lower.

"No standard ports."

Again, that's a problem if you want to use it as a work machine. Completely agree. Once again, though, in a home usage scenario it doesn't really matter.

"Everyone else will do it better, cheaper and more flexible, within the year. Give it six months and we'll be seeing lovely tablet PCs from the likes of Samsung, HTC, Asus etc which don't have most of these limitations or problems, and they'll be cheaper."

And that's brilliant. If they can get the OS right, I'll be singing the praises of the rivals too.

6. Pucbaldwin - I agree, but my newspapers alone cost £702/year. iPad + decent RSS reader would save me £300. If you see it as a laptop rival, it simply doesn't measure up. If you see it as a rival to other things, newspapers in my case, things get interesting :)

5. nope, sorry, this iPad's not revolutionary at all. It tries to do many things, none too well at all. I'd rather get a netbook than this. I'll pass on this one.

4. I'm getting a little annoyed with TechRadar's swooning over the iPad. They seem totally out of touch with popular opinion on the net, which is that it's a big disappointment.

Here's my list of 10 reasons why I won't be buying one...

1) No Multitasking. Essentially there isn't a proper operating system. It's just a big iPhone.

2) Apple censorship. If Microsoft suddenly told everyone that any piece of software they wanted to run would have to be pre-approved and that they could disable any piece of software that they didn't like, or competed with their own revenue streams then the world would be up in arms. How come people don't realise Apple is doing this, or don't care?

3) 4:3 resolution. Really? We have to have black bars at the top and bottom of any wide-screen video. In this day and age?

4) No Camera - not even a 1.3MP webcam, which is pretty standard on most netbooks.

5) Micro Sim card. No using your pre-existing SIM card. It's their data plan or nothing.

6) It'll be tied to iTunes. Just like the iPhone and if you don't connect it to iTunes when it wants to do an update it'll just stop working.

7) No flash. Which means 90% of online videos are out. Unbelievable.

8) It's expensive. That's right, it costs more than most netbooks, even though it's basically a crippled netbook.

9) No standard ports. No USB, no HDMI, no VGA, no SD Card, nothing. You'll have to buy an Apple adapter to use any 3rd party accessories. To me this one is pretty horrifying.

10) Everyone else will do it better, cheaper and more flexible, within the year. Give it six months and we'll be seeing lovely tablet PCs from the likes of Samsung, HTC, Asus etc which don't have most of these limitations or problems, and they'll be cheaper.

Think about it, you could get a netbook for half the price, which has a proper operating system on board, allows you to run any software you want, uses standard ports for all your peripherals, has a webcam, allows any 3G dongle to be used on any price plan, runs any browser (with flash) and has a 16:9 screen. What's more you could go out and buy it right now from PC World!

3. The articles says it's cheap, and perhaps it is for the technology you're getting. But nothing's cheap if you don't need it. This is a great toy, but given you also need a phone and a laptop, and it's likely to cost at least £450 (plus accessories), then the market will be restricted. Also, expect to see Android tablets before you can say "OEM Taiwanese Manufacturer"...

2. I agree with you on Microsoft to a point: what's interesting here is the software, I reckon. I like the idea of a tablet PC but it's really Pointy Windows :) It's a bit like Windows Mobile smartphones pre-iphone: they work fine, but the whole ethos is very much "let's put Windows on a phone" rather than "what would be really cool on a phone?" Do you know what I mean?

I'd *love* a Courier.

1. There's actually only one thing the iPad might do well and that's popularise the tablet market. I feel Microsoft's pain here they've been pushing tablets for years and 5 year old models seem to be far more powerful and versatile than the iPad. I was hoping for something equivalent to Microsoft's Courier project but it's nothing but a giant iPod with 3G connectivity. Even as just an ereader it pretty much fails by using an LCD screen. Where's the clever use of E-ink?