iPad - 1 million iPads sold in 28 days!

  • Thread starter Thread starter jedaye
  • 189 comments
  • 15,792 views
Webcam is tough on a tablet that you primarily hold (seasickness).
 
At one stage during the development the iPad may have had a webcam or camera of some sort.

Read the news article here: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/02/apple-ipad-may-ship-with-webcam/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29

I seriously doubt this. In my opinion it's most likely to be a light sensors.

What do you think?

I think it's for a camera.

http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/01/ipad-enclosure-has-empty-space-for-camera/


TB
So is defending an inferior product to the death.

Flash is an inferior product and the sooner this proprietary software is replaced by the web standard html5 the better. Apple is putting pressure on lazy web developers to actually embrace the standards instead of taking the easy route.
 
Last edited:
Flash is an inferior product and the sooner this proprietary software is replaced by the web standard html5 the better. Apple is putting pressure on lazy web developers to actually embrace the standards instead of taking the easy route.

So does this apply to the iPhone as well then... Will it be able to display everything once HTML5 becomes the standard and Flash dies?
 
So does this apply to the iPhone as well then... Will it be able to display everything once HTML5 becomes the standard and Flash dies?

Yes.
 
It is worth noting that specs could, and probably will, change on the iPad. A line at the end of Apple's official video states it's not yet been approved by the FCC.
 
Flash is an inferior product and the sooner this proprietary software is replaced by the web standard html5 the better. Apple is putting pressure on lazy web developers to actually embrace the standards instead of taking the easy route.

Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍
 
Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍

Yes. Good huh! :sly:
 
Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍

Yes. Good huh! :sly:

:lol:

Well that answers my question... Thanks
 
Seriously. The biggest problem with Flash is that it is a buggy powerdrainer. The version Adobe wanted Apple to include in the OS for iPhone allegedly emptied the battery in 30 minutes. Apple said that they did not want to use it in the OS until Adobe could improve it. They never did. If you should blame someone, blame Adobe.
 
Last edited:
This is what Apple do best - they create a device you don't need to buy, and then go about trying to put you off buying it with a huge price tag. And then of course you buy one, followed by another when you inevitably drop it and the screen breaks.
I thought you bought another one when they came out with one small functionality upgrade in a year, you know, like EA Sports games.


And for anyone not understanding the importance of E-Ink, show this vs a Kindle with the same book to people who have severe vision problems and can only read either large print under sunlight equivalent lighting or require some kind of quality e-reader. My 95-year-old grandmother can no longer read most print books, and LCD monitor lighting is just a blurry glare to her, but she can read a Kindle with ease.

In our relative youth E-Ink sounds like a pointless technology, but I have first hand experience with the difference it makes, and I will say that if they want this to compete with Kindle they made a mistake. Add in the 3G comparisons and I have no clue why they think it will compete. My grandmother thinks the Kindle is some kind of weird magic the way she can just request a book and have it show up.


If someone just wants an e-reader, the iPad is likely at the bottom of their list. Even if I needed a device with multiple functionality and just wanted the e-reader for commuting I still wouldn't want this due to its lack of multi-tasking, meaning I can't listen to music at the same time. Heck, even the PSP's digital comic reader can do that much.
 
That's really it?
Did I say it was?

An advertising campaign based on trying to convince people that their system is actually more user friendly and intuitive than what's been the only option for most of the past decade and a half?
Last I checked most of the Get a Mac ads don't really say anything about why Macs are better.

Maybe it's arrogant, but it's certainly not any more arrogant than the way Microsoft has been running its business.
And Microsoft has been raked over the coals for it for over 10 years now.
 
Apple iPad is going on sale April 3. Pre-orders from March 12.

Only the wifi-enabled iPads are going on sale April 3. The other 3G equiped models will go on sale later in April.

It will first be available in USA, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, Switzerland and the UK.
 
Can't wait for people to run out and buy one only to find out the only semi-worthwhile ones don't come out till later in the month.:lol:


I have a gut feeling they will blame Apple for their stupidity.
 
Can't wait for people to run out and buy one only to find out the only semi-worthwhile ones don't come out till later in the month.:lol:
And the worthwhile ones coming out even later. We already know there is camera support in both the body and the SDK, so you can bet safely future models will include at least a camera, and probably some other stuff that's not in there now.

So from a consumers point of view, I'm not interested in this yet; I think it's better to wait until the iPad II comes out. From a developers point of view however, I have a bit more interest; I'm looking forward to writing some apps/games for this device.

But, since I'm still working on my iPhone game project, I'm in no hurry to get one. And the Mrs. will be delivering very soon, so I suspect I will be busy with other things the few coming months anyway. ;)
 
Should have launched it on April fools day.
 
Should have launched it on April fools day.
I'd been seeing jokes about this thing for months now, and I asked my iPhone-loving friends about it a couple weeks ago. They said "It's real." I thought they were joking but it turns out they were right. The iPad is real. I fell to the floor laughing.
 
One week till launch.

I’m going to go out on a very unpopular branch here and say, that having thought about this for quite a while, and from a totally objective non-Apple-fanboy viewpoint, in five years this will probably be seen as the most important user interface development since the original GUI. I’ll even be wreckless enough to say that this will be more important than the iPhone in terms of changing its respective industry.

Why? It’s all about abstraction. Most of us here, especially people in this thread who care about these kinds of things, are tech-savvy. But 99% of people aren’t, and there’s no good reason why they should have to be to benefit from technology. If you truly sit down and think about it from a non-techy point of view, computers nowadays fail at delivering seamless experiences for users. Example: Mac OS X is often lauded for how easy it is to install smaller shareware/freeware programs – usually you open a disk image, drag the application to the Applications folder, then eject the disk image. It may seem dead simple to you and me, but in reality it’s needlessly complex for most people (my mom had to ask me the first time she had to install something using this method). The idea of a disk image is a weird concept, the idea of installing something by copying it is a weird concept, and then ejecting a non-existent disk and having to throw away a .dmg file? I mean seriously, is there anything intuitive about that? I’ve seen people run applications straight from disk images because they didn’t know what to do with them. On the other hand, on an iPad, you click “Install” and then it gets installed. Done.

I mean, really, I think all semi-techies take way too much for granted how familiar we are with computers. Just consider for a second how much the most basic of GUI operations—the file system—scares most people. How many people do you know who pretty much only use the desktop for organizing their files? That’s because it’s a physical, intuitive abstraction that they can latch onto. The rest of the file system is just scary innards to them. It doesn’t matter that we have nice names for these folders like “Documents” or “Movies” – many people are convinced that if they mess with anything outside of the desktop all hell will break lose. I’m not just talking about grandma here, I’m talking about a majority of the computer-using population. Most people don’t need to be exposed to this crap.

So, yes, in a technical sense the iPad is a supersized iPod touch. But in terms of UI design it’s so much more important than that, because it brings the UI developments of the iPhone OS platform (in particular, enormous levels of abstracting away things) to something that is actually usable. For example, I generally prefer browsing the web on my iPhone than at my desktop, because as humans we are hard-wired to enjoy tactical experiences more often than not. However, I browse on my desktop a lot more because the iPhone’s viewport requires a laborious amount of scrolling and panning. I can browse the web comfortably on my phone for minutes at a time; you could probably comfortably browse the web on an iPad for many hours at a time. I can’t imagine trying to make an entire Keynote/Powerpoint presentation from scratch on my phone; I could easily imagine making such a document on an iPad, and if that means I get to deal with an easier-to-use interface than what’s on the desktop, then why not? The screen size is everything. How many of you bitch that Dell sells computer monitors in multiple screen sizes at disparate price points?

Point is, everything that has made the iPhone OS successful needed to be scaled up to major computer use at some point, because it’s too good and too important for mass-computer-consumerism to not to. Current desktop OS’s are like manual transmissions; the iPad is an automatic transmission, which is what the rest of the world wants. So far we’ve only gotten a small taste of it with our cell phones and iPods, but now Apple is bringing it into mainstream computer usage.

I know most of you will disagree with this evaluation. I’ll just say that if five years from now I’m proven wrong, I’ll eat my words and you can mock me all you want. I’m not going to be wrong though. ;)
 
Sage, I agree with you about the interface and all that. The thing is, something like that would be ideal for being on the go. The computer as we know it would be thought of as more of a tool in comparison to this thing.

However, I don't think the price can be justified for what it is. If it was half as expensive, then I think it would be amazing. I think it will need time to develop much like the original iPod. If it's going to change the computer playing field the way the iPod did for portable music, then it's going to happen over a longer period of time.

And I think once we have those huge, fast wifi networks that span over entire cities become more ubiquitous, the iPad format will begin to flourish.
 
One week till launch.

I’m going to go out on a very unpopular branch here and say, that having thought about this for quite a while, and from a totally objective non-Apple-fanboy viewpoint, in five years this will probably be seen as the most important user interface development since the original GUI. I’ll even be wreckless enough to say that this will be more important than the iPhone in terms of changing its respective industry.

Why? It’s all about abstraction. Most of us here, especially people in this thread who care about these kinds of things, are tech-savvy. But 99% of people aren’t, and there’s no good reason why they should have to be to benefit from technology. If you truly sit down and think about it from a non-techy point of view, computers nowadays fail at delivering seamless experiences for users. Example: Mac OS X is often lauded for how easy it is to install smaller shareware/freeware programs – usually you open a disk image, drag the application to the Applications folder, then eject the disk image. It may seem dead simple to you and me, but in reality it’s needlessly complex for most people (my mom had to ask me the first time she had to install something using this method). The idea of a disk image is a weird concept, the idea of installing something by copying it is a weird concept, and then ejecting a non-existent disk and having to throw away a .dmg file? I mean seriously, is there anything intuitive about that? I’ve seen people run applications straight from disk images because they didn’t know what to do with them. On the other hand, on an iPad, you click “Install” and then it gets installed. Done.

I mean, really, I think all semi-techies take way too much for granted how familiar we are with computers. Just consider for a second how much the most basic of GUI operations—the file system—scares most people. How many people do you know who pretty much only use the desktop for organizing their files? That’s because it’s a physical, intuitive abstraction that they can latch onto. The rest of the file system is just scary innards to them. It doesn’t matter that we have nice names for these folders like “Documents” or “Movies” – many people are convinced that if they mess with anything outside of the desktop all hell will break lose. I’m not just talking about grandma here, I’m talking about a majority of the computer-using population. Most people don’t need to be exposed to this crap.

So, yes, in a technical sense the iPad is a supersized iPod touch. But in terms of UI design it’s so much more important than that, because it brings the UI developments of the iPhone OS platform (in particular, enormous levels of abstracting away things) to something that is actually usable. For example, I generally prefer browsing the web on my iPhone than at my desktop, because as humans we are hard-wired to enjoy tactical experiences more often than not. However, I browse on my desktop a lot more because the iPhone’s viewport requires a laborious amount of scrolling and panning. I can browse the web comfortably on my phone for minutes at a time; you could probably comfortably browse the web on an iPad for many hours at a time. I can’t imagine trying to make an entire Keynote/Powerpoint presentation from scratch on my phone; I could easily imagine making such a document on an iPad, and if that means I get to deal with an easier-to-use interface than what’s on the desktop, then why not? The screen size is everything. How many of you bitch that Dell sells computer monitors in multiple screen sizes at disparate price points?

Point is, everything that has made the iPhone OS successful needed to be scaled up to major computer use at some point, because it’s too good and too important for mass-computer-consumerism to not to. Current desktop OS’s are like manual transmissions; the iPad is an automatic transmission, which is what the rest of the world wants. So far we’ve only gotten a small taste of it with our cell phones and iPods, but now Apple is bringing it into mainstream computer usage.

I know most of you will disagree with this evaluation. I’ll just say that if five years from now I’m proven wrong, I’ll eat my words and you can mock me all you want. I’m not going to be wrong though. ;)

I don't disagree with you, actually. Even if I do think it's something I'd never own (simply because it fills a void in my life that really doesn't exist anyway), I do appreciate the boldness of Apple to go ahead and sell this. And I am beginning to appreciate that iPhone OS probably does have some uses beyond the iPhone. If I didn't have to use Photoshop, Flash, Final Cut and the like, I think I could probably live perfectly happily with something iPhone OS based. That is, provided it had a physical keyboard attached.
 
I would buy this instead of the ipad. It's a heck of a lot more portable and for the fact that it can run an entire OS. The battery lasts 6 hours which is very good and it got a bit more power to boot. Not to mention you also got more storage for the price.

I am sorry but I just ain't a believer of the ipad.
 
I would buy this instead of the ipad. It's a heck of a lot more portable and for the fact that it can run an entire OS. The battery lasts 6 hours which is very good and it got a bit more power to boot. Not to mention you also got more storage for the price.

I am sorry but I just ain't a believer of the ipad.

I don't personally think tiny touch-screen devices like that should run a full OS. XP is fine on a 15 or even a 10 inch screen, but it simply wasn't designed to work (or be legible) on one that small. Nor was it designed with touch screens in mind. I don't want to have to use drop-down menus when the screen is the size of my hand; I want a simplified, easy to read and easy to use UI that you can operate one-handed.

I don't think it's the lack of OS X that annoys most people about the iPad, I think it's the fact that it's not a netbook with OS X.
 
I know most of you will disagree with this evaluation.

I'm not. It's what I've been saying all along :)


Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍

Ten years may pass quicker than we both thought.

http://www.brightcove.com/en/video-platform/solutions/html5

New York Times and Time are users of this platform and confirmed launch customers.
 
Last edited:
This issue with this device (and Tablets in general) is that they actually have very few practical applications, ironically outside a specialist role.

Where would you use a 10" Tablet? It's too big to carry around in your pocket. And it's too big to whip out for quick information (like an iPhone). So now you're basically confined to your house or someone you know you will be for an extended period of time.

At your house, are you really going to spend $500+ to view webpages? Especially when a large percentage of users most likely have a MacBook or other laptop, which may only be 3" bigger than an iPad. You also can't browse most web pages on the iPad because it doesn't support Flash.

Can you get Office Suite on an iPad? I don't care what people say, but Microsoft Office is the de facto standard for a lot of work creation, and reviewing, especially in the business and education sectors. iWork may look kinda spiffy, but send your boss a presentation knocked up uncomfortably on your iPad in iWork format and I bet you won't be asked to make a presentation again.

You know how long Tablet PCs have been around? Since around 1985. They have never been successful because they are awkward to use ergonomically and they're hard to input text on. They're used in specific applications such as portable screens for construction sites. Anyone who knows anything about technology knows that tablets generally suck and if this was made by any company other than Apple no one would give a toss.
 
Sage is correct. I already know of a couple of companies that have pre-ordered iPads for their entire executive team.

For myself though, I am curious to see how the Android Tablets stack up once both are actually in the hands of consumers.
 
Ten years may pass quicker than we both thought.

http://www.brightcove.com/en/video-platform/solutions/html5

New York Times and Time are users of this platform and confirmed launch customers.


Mmm, seems I'll have to eat my words a little :p Though I'll be intrigued to see how well HTML5 players work on other mobile devices, say for example the Symbian Nokias that have been floating around for years.

This issue with this device (and Tablets in general) is that they actually have very few practical applications, ironically outside a specialist role.

Where would you use a 10" Tablet? It's too big to carry around in your pocket. And it's too big to whip out for quick information (like an iPhone). So now you're basically confined to your house or someone you know you will be for an extended period of time.

At your house, are you really going to spend $500+ to view webpages? Especially when a large percentage of users most likely have a MacBook or other laptop, which may only be 3" bigger than an iPad. You also can't browse most web pages on the iPad because it doesn't support Flash.

Can you get Office Suite on an iPad? I don't care what people say, but Microsoft Office is the de facto standard for a lot of work creation, and reviewing, especially in the business and education sectors. iWork may look kinda spiffy, but send your boss a presentation knocked up uncomfortably on your iPad in iWork format and I bet you won't be asked to make a presentation again.

You know how long Tablet PCs have been around? Since around 1985. They have never been successful because they are awkward to use ergonomically and they're hard to input text on. They're used in specific applications such as portable screens for construction sites. Anyone who knows anything about technology knows that tablets generally suck and if this was made by any company other than Apple no one would give a toss.

Spot on 👍 And indeed nobody has given a toss until the iPad. Don't think I've ever seen anyone using a tablet. Ever.

FYI, I believe MS have 'expressed interest' in launching Office for iPad. Whether it'll get through to the App store remains to be seen, however... To be honest though, nobody is going to be producing anything serious on it. Quickly going over a presentation perhaps, but writing a report? Eh-no.
 
Some companies develop tech with lots of "stuff" - most of it not working properly but with the promise of it being patched at some time in the future.

The iPad, as well as the iPhone and iPod touch, ship with a focused set of features which all actually do work. Hardware permitting, they'll ship the extra features later with updates when and if they work.

I can see the appeal of a reduced and focused feature set, Apple is still, after all, the company which builds computers "for the rest of us".

To be honest though, nobody is going to be producing anything serious on it. Quickly going over a presentation perhaps, but writing a report? Eh-no.

The other day I was looking for a 3rd party phone contract for an iPhone. I got an offer of 200 MB "flat" for 19,90 €. Because "on such a small device you hardly do a lot anyway." After I showed him YouTube, FStream (web radio) and Safari, the desk clerk went rather silent. ;)

I would have loved the iPad back in the days I had to do a lot of writing in University.

Where would you use a 10" Tablet?

At your house, are you really going to spend $500+ to view webpages?

You also can't browse most web pages on the iPad because it doesn't support Flash.

Can you get Office Suite on an iPad?

You know how long Tablet PCs have been around? Since around 1985. They have never been successful because they are awkward to use ergonomically and they're hard to input text on.

At University and school? May seem a bit posh today, but wait until it's 2020. Also for 85% of my daily work, an iPad would fit my needs perfectly. Hell, even the iPhone works rather well for typing once you got your thumbs up to speed.

Mobile Safari supports almost all websites - if they required flash, it's a video site, isn't it? And why would I want to look at those? ;)

MSOffice will be on the iPad. And MSOffice for Mac is actually quite good and has a long history on the Mac. Rumors say Mrs. Gates loves Apple and that's the reason there's MS Office on that plattform, too.

Tablett-PCs were for the better part too expensive, ugly, heavy and had the wrong OS ;) They were considered Laptops without a keyboard, and that's a stupid idea. A motorbike isn't a car minus two wheels either.
 
Last edited:
.
 
Last edited:
Back