Apple iPad

[Humodour]

Isn't the Macbook Air like $1000 more though?

 

And less portable. Air is bigger, and has a worse form factor for mobility.

[Purkake]

I know, the point was that the Air is exactly the expensive tech toy you'd get to some executive to show off.

 

 

Also College Humor is already parodying the iPad

[Solo]

Another great idea lost to.........??????? What was the question again?

[Purkake]

What?

[Solo]

Exactly.

 

Glad to know that I'm not alone.

 

 

 

Or am I?

[jaguars4ever]

What exactly is the use of this? Isn't it just an iPhone which can't call and which is too big to carry anywhere?

2009

 

 

2010

[Humodour]

Personally I would suggest strongly AGAINST people buying this device from Apple until they show some moves of good faith. A big step in the right direction would be Flash support, instead of trying to lock us into Apple's own proprietary (and not at all widely used) formats, another would be USB ports. Another would be the world-wide industry standard SIM card size, instead of their own proprietary micro-SIM format which doesn't actually take up less space component-wise and uses exactly the same size chip and electrical contacts (this move really makes me want to say "**** you Apple").

 

Everything I have seen about this device says to me "lockdown" and "control". They have zero regard for the consumer.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Krezack

[Purkake]

Personally I would suggest strongly AGAINST people buying this device from Apple until they show some moves of good faith. A big step in the right direction would be Flash support, instead of trying to lock us into Apple's own proprietary (and not at all widely used) formats, another would be USB ports. Another would be the world-wide industry standard SIM card size, instead of their own proprietary micro-SIM format which doesn't actually take up less space component-wise and uses exactly the same size chip and electrical contacts (this move really makes me want to say "**** you Apple").

 

Everything I have seen about this device says to me "lockdown" and "control". They have zero regard for the consumer.

I'm on it

 

Nice to see that you aren't infected with the crazy "HTML 5 will be out salvation" disease spreading among the Apple people after the iPad's announcement. Flash might not be all that great, especially for websites, but there are still a lot of uses for it and just dismissing it is pretty ridiculous.

 

I didn't know Apple had their own SIM cards, that's just like them

Edited February 1, 2010 by Purkake

[Blarghagh]

Flash not that great for websites?

[Purkake]

Have you ever been to a flash website?

 

Try the one for Clash of the Titans for example. It's slow, unresponsive and just nowhere as good as normal websites.

[Krookie]

I don't feel like reading the whole thread, but does this thing have a webcam of any kind? Coupled with Skype or iChat that could be a selling point (video conferencing on the go with this thing would be great)

[Purkake]

No cameras of any kind, apparently to keep the price down.

[Blarghagh]

Have you ever been to a flash website?

 

Try the one for Clash of the Titans for example. It's slow, unresponsive and just nowhere as good as normal websites.

 

I've made a whole lot of flash websites myself, thank you very much.

 

The problem with that website is that they throw large video and image files everywhere and that they just use the thing wrong. The problem is not with flash, it's with idiots making terrible flash-based websites. Most flash websites work great. On the other hand, I can guarantee 90% of the websites featured on sites like The Favorite Website Awards is going to be flash based. Flash is supposed to be used for visually interesting and/or interactive websites, and there's not much else that's better for those kinds of websites than flash.

 

Also, what do you even mean with normal website? A standard website has what? A banner, some text, a few links and pictures? Of course it's going to run better than a website like that with all the video on it. I mean, something like this: http://soytuaire.labuat.com/ may not fit into your view of what a website should be like, but it's still a genius website.

 

EDIT: Apologies for off-topic thread hijacking.

Edited February 1, 2010 by TrueNeutral

[Purkake]

By normal I meant websites using HTML, PHP, Javascript.

 

Flash-based sites are pretty much universally hated among internet-dwellers, especially among the Apple crowd, because Adobe and Apple don't mix too well.

 

Edit: Your "genius" website has some serious cursor lag.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Purkake

[Blarghagh]

Yeah, pears are also universally hated among fruit lovers. You can say just about anything. Doesn't make it true. I'll bet half of the time you hear people complain about flash websites it's from coders, who are far from being a group representing 'internet-dwellers'.

 

EDIT: About your 'only even mentioned because I want to hate it because I'm trying to antagonize the person not agreeing with me' nitpick: The cursor 'lag' in this case is deliberate editing of mouse settings - the visuals would get stretched out and broken if it used computer mouse settings.

Edited February 1, 2010 by TrueNeutral

[Purkake]

That's all well and good, but it makes for a horrible user experience.

 

And seriously, people don't like flash websites. Anyone here want to back me up?

[Blarghagh]

I'm sure we'll all agree that they hate bad flash websites (which there are plenty of, just like there are plenty of bad normal websites). But the problem is that Flash things are really applications rather than websites. You'll find the same problems in any video game or visual application. Because most people who hate flash probably don't even hate flash, they just hate load times. But how else are you going to make something visually heavy like the website I linked? You sure as hell can't code it together in HTML, and what are you gonna do if you need an animation? If there's anything that makes for a terrible user experience it's animated .gifs. Javascript, maybe. If they ever make it anything other than a complete hassle to even get it to work on any computer.

Edited February 1, 2010 by TrueNeutral

[Purkake]

All those are the reasons why I said "flash is not that great for websites", you could change that into "functional websites".

 

I'm sure you could make the awesomest website ever using flash, but the web is about functionality first, aesthetics second, which is why most of the popular websited don't use flash.

[Blarghagh]

If your function is aesthetic or about something aesthetic like a film, or in-browser-games, I'd say they're fine working websites.

 

Honestly, it's kind of like comparing apples and oranges. It's what you do with them that counts. I find that flash websites that are used for the right purpose are great websites. An information website or a fansite or a forum, though, has no business using flash. Doesn't mean that flash is not great for certain types of websites, like you claimed. The real great websites are the ones that manage to combine everything and use whatever is best at what aspect.

[Humodour]

HTML5 will likely be superior to Flash but it's experimental and not the standard. Apple should be suporting Flash concurrently. There's no excuse.

[Purkake]

Yup.

[Walsingham]

Apropos nothing but I was think it would be cool to make mock medieaval scale armour by stitching together loads of brightly coloured sim cards.