Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The iPad vs. Microsoft's "Jupiter" Devices

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the that-was-then-this-is-jobs dept.

Microsoft 293

harrymcc writes "A dozen years ago, Microsoft convinced major manufacturers to put Windows CE inside devices that looked like undersized touchscreen personal computers. The platform was code-named 'Jupiter' and shipped as Handheld PC Pro, and it flopped — it turned out that people wanted full-strength notebooks. But in retrospect, it was a clear antecedent of what Apple is doing — much more successfully — with the iPad."

cancel ×

293 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

12 year old product compares to iPad, and courier (5, Interesting)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850372)

It's actually quite funny to see how similar and in some aspects even better it is (and for a product 12 years ago!). Apart from the obvious (larger price and more weight), the older product actually has 12-16 hour life compared to iPad's 8 hour life. There's also dial-up modem (remember how bulky those were?), more apps, syncing software, and multitasking. 640x480 resolution and touch display.

Pretty awesome for a product in the 1998, considering it even beats iPad at some aspects. Oh and Windows CE also let you install any app you wanted (there was a lot of freeware apps too), not just something Apple didn't block from AppStore or where you have to pay for every app you want, no matter how simple task it does. And you also could program your own apps to it.

But what comes to current generation tablets, I'm waiting to see what happens with Courier. The two touch-screen booklike sure is something a tablet should look like [youtube.com] . I mean, you're supposed to hold these with your hands and on top you, while laying on sofa or bed. It's a lot more natural to hold them like a book, either for browsing the internet while having a game or IM window on the other screen or just to read an ebook. The non-book feel of tablets has turn me off. I have a bad feeling they will want to go the Apple route and have only App Store-approved apps like with Windows Mobile 7, but I still hope for the best. The ability to have what applications you want or code your own is a really importantant one.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0, Troll)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850406)

Oh, forgot the link to how Courier looks like [gizmodo.com] .

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850538)

Oh, forgot the link to how Courier looks like [gizmodo.com] .

Once again, that product is the Courier. The Courier. I'm completely impartial but if you want to buy something that's not the iPad (which barely holds up to Microsoft's 1998 model and in someways is less than what MS had in 1998) than that is the Courier. Did I forget the link to the Courier? No, the Courier link is up there. That's the Courier. Let's see, I'm forgetting something, I'm forgetting something. The Courier. That's it.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0, Offtopic)

ChinggisK (1133009) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850606)

What?

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0, Offtopic)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850752)

Mr Plow, that's my name, that name again is Mr Plow!

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850756)

Monorail!

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850438)

Just goes to show how stupid people actually are. Better doesn't always win. Better very often loses to market hype and brand recognition. Slap an Apple logo on any iGadget and people will buy it today even if they hated it 10 years ago.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (3, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850942)

Making it a small fraction of the price in inflation-adjusted dollars might have something to do with it.

Nothing could ever compel me to spend $1000 in in '98 on a touch-screen computer (with a non-touch OS).

But $500 in 2010? Shit, I think I could dig that kind of cash out of my couch cushions.

Serve No wine before it's time (5, Insightful)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851060)

The Toshiba had a 129-MHz Toshiba TMPR3912U CPU which is something like 2 to 3 orders of magnitude slower than the 1Ghz A4. Sure it functioned but would you use it? Value s not just what you pay but what you get.

You could say that in principle one could have made a Victorian mechanical turing machine into an ipad too.

Apple is what is known as an early settler. ("pioneers get the arrows, settlers get the land."). Apple is also an early adopter. (e.g. see Gui, mouse, postscript printing, .... ) Thus they tred right at the line between pioneer and settler.

How do they know when it's time to settle a market? Steve tells them the wine is ready now. Till then they make fun of the pioneers.

Apple and Jobs sometimes jumps the gun too ( see NeXT or Newton or apples game console if you even remember that).

Apple has more success lately, because it avoids the pitfall that most pioneers have in converting to settlers: undercapitalization. Apple has the resources to design things right and to set up ancilliary markets (see itunes) that an undercapitalized firm cannot. So for apple the wine is ready to serve early than the competition.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31851134)

How is it that people conveiniently forget how much more expensive hardware was 10-20 years ago. My PC in the late 80's wouldn't hold a candle to an iPhone in processor, memory, storage anything. I payed nearly 5K for that beast, and it was the best money I ever spent. Hard drives used to cost hundred, if not thousands of sollars, as did memory... Saying the iPad is a 'better value' as compared to a 12 year old device is just moronic.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Insightful)

juancn (596002) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850946)

Just goes to show how stupid people actually are. Better doesn't always win.

You're oversimplifying. "Better" is a relative term, it needs context to be meaningful. Apple does many things right that aren't easy to duplicate and can't be reduced as check-boxes on a feature comparison chart. Using a different context, I could say that iPad is actually "better", just because it sells more units.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Insightful)

fusiongyro (55524) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851156)

I love the slashdot groupthink! It's like it's never occurred to you that market research is something you can do, or that a product with better technology will lose to a competitor that doesn't break Mom's wrists and doesn't require a manual! "Obviously, it must be the cult of Apple!"

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850454)

Tell me, why do you even pretend to be unbiased or slowly reveal that you're a Microsoft shill? Just have out with it in one go. It's fun!

You're that guy in infomercials that sits down in the crowd and says, "Ohhhhh wow, I didn't even realize that but he's right!"

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850520)

Why do you think I absolutely dislike the window mobile 7 move to Apple like App Store and not allowing to run your own or freeware apps? Sometimes people can think on their and not be someones shill and see faults and goods at anyones products.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850900)

How's the ballmer cock these days, sopssa?

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31851012)

You obviously haven't learned the rules of Slashdot:

If you happen to like something from Microsoft, you're a shill,

If you happen to like something from Apple, you are a cool techie.

If you happen to like something closed-source, you're a shill or a fascist.

If you happen to like something closed-source, but from Apple, you are still a cool techie.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851020)

Who says you can't use freeware apps? Why do you go bitching about things you've obviously not even used. You don't have to charge for App Store apps.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (4, Interesting)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851068)

Well, the base charge for developer license and a Macintosh system limits freeware authors. They also need to submit it to Apple, pay their fee and hope it gets approved. If Apple rejects their app they have no way to give it to users. Is that the kind of closed computer systems you want to live with?

m$ slashdvertisers are all online today (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850474)

are you being paid to believe on all that crap?

Re:m$ slashdvertisers are all online today (2, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850832)

As opposed to all the Apple Astroturfers?

And just look how much coverage the Ipad is getting - I made a joke about how we'd have to put up with daily Ipad stories as well as daily Iphone stories, but I take it back: looks like we're now in store for an Ipad and Iphone story each every twelve hours.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Informative)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850512)

the older product actually has 12-16 hour life compared to iPad's 8 hour life

For the record, the iPad has a *minimum* battery life of ~10 hours. So if you play 720p video all day long, your battery is supposed to last about 10 hours, and reviewers have said that it stands up to the claim. Standby time is supposed to be 1 month.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0, Flamebait)

Golias (176380) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851014)

Yeah, how does the battery hold up playing h.264 video on the "Jupiter" pad?

Oh yeah, that's right, it can't do it.

So one of the big selling features of the iPad... can't be done with that gizmo.

Okay, what does WiFi broadband surfing do to battery perfor... Oh.

Fine, how about when you turn on 3G for cell conne... Oh.

So, this is basically like comparing the Sony Walkman to the first iPod... Except that the Sony Walkman was an actual market success that people enjoyed owning.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850548)

It's actually quite funny to see how similar and in some aspects even better it is (and for a product 12 years ago!). Apart from the obvious (larger price and more weight), the older product actually has 12-16 hour life compared to iPad's 8 hour life. There's also dial-up modem (remember how bulky those were?), more apps, syncing software, and multitasking. 640x480 resolution and touch display.

Pretty awesome for a product in the 1998, considering it even beats iPad at some aspects. Oh and Windows CE also let you install any app you wanted (there was a lot of freeware apps too), not just something Apple didn't block from AppStore or where you have to pay for every app you want, no matter how simple task it does. And you also could program your own apps to it.

But what comes to current generation tablets, I'm waiting to see what happens with Courier. The two touch-screen booklike sure is something a tablet should look like [youtube.com] . I mean, you're supposed to hold these with your hands and on top you, while laying on sofa or bed. It's a lot more natural to hold them like a book, either for browsing the internet while having a game or IM window on the other screen or just to read an ebook. The non-book feel of tablets has turn me off. I have a bad feeling they will want to go the Apple route and have only App Store-approved apps like with Windows Mobile 7, but I still hope for the best. The ability to have what applications you want or code your own is a really importantant one.

Microsoft shill. Yawn.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850908)

Apple shill. Yawn.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

idobi (820896) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850554)

I'm pretty sure if Apple doubled the width and weight of the iPad to match, it could get, oh, 20 hours you think?

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

Dthief (1700318) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850952)

Its 12-y/o technology. I dont love microsoft products but the fact that people are hating on a 12-y/o product in comparison to a 1month old one is ridiculous. Computers become obsolete while they are getting shipped, so 12-years is ages in technology. so chillax

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850576)

Form factor means a lot. Especially with mobile data devices. Apple's Newton was a nice device for what it did but it was no Palm Pilot.

Of course, folks who really liked the Newton would complain that the Pilots were no Newton.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Interesting)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850590)

The iPad has a lot of value added because wireless internet is everywhere.

Also the small weight difference counts for a lot.

$499 is still a little more than I want to pay, and I do care (unlike most people) that it is locked down.

But I would happily pay $300 for a similar device that is wireless only, the iPad is a temptation for me.

if it started at $999 no way in hell. Especially if it was attached to 1998's internet, the added value of the iPad is almost entirely that it is now a decade later, and th internet has more value than it did then.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850718)

if it started at $999 no way in hell. Especially if it was attached to 1998's internet

No shit -- too much hairy vagina porn. shaved pussy ftw.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850656)

Every review I read says that iPad meets or exceeds the 10 hour battery claim.

If you cherrypick features, you can make many things look similiar that really aren't. Just look how successful the Windows CE OS is to this day.

If the iPad and the follow-up proved anything, a checklist of features isn't the end-all be-all to devices, just like an accurate map isn't a replacement for being there and experiencing the place.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850704)

Just look how successful the Windows CE OS is to this day.

If you actually look at it and don't just look at the public marketing, I would say it's quite successful. It was used in millions of PDA's, mobile phones (and Windows Mobile is based on it too), embedded systems and most of the ATM's in the world.

Difference is that Apple markets you to believe they're more successful, while almost any other player including MS is more discrete about those and doesn't have major marketing campaigns to get their systems around.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Insightful)

GlassHeart (579618) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850800)

So what? I used to work on a mobile browser that literally sold hundreds of millions of units. The problem is that very very few of those browsers were ever used, so I personally still consider that a failure. Similarly, Windows Mobile in phones did not create an appreciable rise in mobile data usage, while the iPhone did to the point that AT&T's network was strained. That's just marketing? And Microsoft's response to Apple marketing is to start from scratch to build Windows Phone 7?

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0, Troll)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850910)

How many people you think use ATM's around the world a day compared to iPad? Add in the factor that they are commercial products and hence more pricey. Just because it isn't marketed more and you have more fanbois telling everyone how revolutionary, life changing and great it is, doesn't mean theres no significant use of the system.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (4, Insightful)

peragrin (659227) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850896)

Sure WinCE is used in millions of devices but none of them work very well.

Windows CE had ONE major problem it was never designed around a multi touch interface. It was basically a mouse touch which means you "click and drag" with your touch finger. WinCE and the related Applications held promise but failed to deliver a consistent user interface, designed for small screens, allow for mutli point touch and gestures, Oh and Not look like s standard desktop shrunk to a screen that a Command line interface would have a problem with usability on.

I repeat this over and over again a Tablet is not a desktop OS. you can't use a desktop application on a tablet and expect it to work well. You must shift the interface design away from desktop if you want your tablet to succeed. it is why Palm worked so well. it had a new interface. Windows CE, Mobile, all strived to look like windows Desktop and it was skinned horribly to hide that fact.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (5, Interesting)

GlassHeart (579618) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850708)

It's similar in some respects, but not in several that really matter. One, don't take 3G/WiFi for granted, because that feature (obviously nothing unique to iPad) is a game-changer compared to wired networking. Two, 1024x768 is another game-changer, compared to 640x480, as anybody who is old enough to witness that transition should remember. Three, the content that you can consume, starting from music and video to the Internet itself, has also changed dramatically since 1998. Not to mention that the PV-5000 is also more than twice as heavy, twice as thick, and twice (more if you consider inflation) as expensive.

Geeks have a tendency to look at specs and see quantitative differences, but often it is more important to see if the quantitative difference is big enough to become a qualitative difference. For example, a laptop is not just a lighter all-in-one desktop with a battery.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (-1, Redundant)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850944)

Yes, but I was just pointing the lunacy in the whole story. Comparing a just released 2010 product for one in 1998, full 12 years ago? What?

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851136)

i went through most of my college years using a desktop and an HP Jornada 820

http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/abouthp/histnfacts/museum/personalsystems/0038/0038threeqtr.html [hp.com]

Ran win CE and had a PCMCIA slot and i used a Cisco Aironet card with it - in fact still have it on a shelf here.

it had the basic win CE office i could check e-mail it had craptastic version of IE (couldn't do much but i could do some things) it also had word processing and i could load an IRC client on it.

it had a very good 12-14h USABLE battery life so i could take notes all day (saved to the CF slot) and then do my home work on my desktop if i felt like..

i loved it - got into a wreck and the screen got damaged so i hunted down and bought another one - by that time HP had discontinued them. it was a precursor to the Netbook line

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850796)

The old device only had an 8 hour battery life.

The iPad has greater than 9 and much less weight and size.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850810)

add a pound ti the iPAd, and you could double it's battery life.

The iPad is a fine way to read.

I don't own an iPad, and don't see myself every buying one, but I may get one of these:
wepad.mobi/en

For what the main drive for these are(cloud media interfaces), the tables style is the way to go. If you want to replace for Franklin, then the courier is the way to go.

Courier (1, Interesting)

joh (27088) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850964)

If you really try to look at the Courier videos with an analytic eye you can't fail to see that this is just about "how to look good in a video". The user interface looks breathtaking -- because it is. There is no reason nor rhyme to the UI, it's a show of things you'd never discover how to use them on a real device. Every gesture and every touch and everything else does something different on every screen. Everything of this is convenient in the very moment it is done, yes. Because it's just a show-off and made to look this way, not to work in any way.

If there was one thing that teached me that MS is totally without anything real to offer it was this video. It's a concept of an artist, not more. Basically it's an ad for something that doesn't exist and can't exist in this form.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (2, Informative)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850976)

A modem is better than Wifi/3G? THANK GAWD I don't have to use those horrible devices anymore. If someone could just convince everyone to stop printing you'd have killed my pair of most hated devices.

I doubt there are more apps for WinCE than iPhone OS. My experience is WinCE typically doesn't run most Windows apps, or much of anything really. And writing apps for WinCE can be a real pain - at least as bad as developing for iPhone.

Both have syncing but iPhone can sync many files over the air with MobileMe, Air Sharing, etc. Doubt your modem can do that.

Multitasking is really overall a bad idea. Apple has gradually been adding it to iPhone OS in such a way as to keep it from totally screwing the pooch. For a few apps it's really justified but the vast majority it is just waste. Sounds as if Apple is getting it right. I doubt Microsoft did but I don't have any specifics on their implementation other than assuming it's normal WinCE.

640x480 is doable (not bad for back then really) but is certainly not better. Stylus driven is really not the same as a touch display. Even touch is nowhere as good as multitouch. My DS, video camera, still camera, and some older PDAs have stylus or single-touch and they really suck when your used to multitouch. Better than no touch though.

I'm not that impressed with that in 1998. I hand built a handheld computer at about that time that was smaller, had built in camera, mp3, and VoIP, local wireless and cellular wireless, and ran a full Linux OS. And I did that for a few hundred dollars as a stupid hobby project because I was annoyed at how limited my cell phone and PDA were. Again not as pimp as the iPhone but very close in concept. If Microsoft had been on the ball they should have brought us all a real iPhone-ish device a decade sooner.

Have you even used the App Store? It has thousands and thousands of free apps. And you can program your own apps pretty easily (could be a little better but helps protect the market from the spam Android gets).

I don't get book tablets. The reason my laptop isn't as good as a tablet is because it folds in the middle. Why take the worst feature of a laptop and put it into a tablet? If they do that they need to make it so you can use it in slate form when a book isn't a handy format but then they'll have extra bulk and weight for nothing. Doesn't really add up. Maybe make it so two slates can hook together to form a book that works in unison - that might have some uses.

I hope MS does have the sense to go the App Store route. It'll give customers a better experience. Is sure easier than managing a dozen DVDs, going to a dozen websites, and pulling a few things off random Flash drives to get your new computer setup. It would be cool if the App Store would let you save templates of what apps you have installed on different systems and re-install them on new systems all at once. Maybe the new enterprise tools will allow that.

There is certainly still room for improvement in the tablet market. While the iPad is pretty cool and is the closest yet to what I started working on making for myself so many years ago it's still far from perfect. I think eventually we'll see a merge between these lightweight desktops and what we think of desktop operating systems today to get something less restricted but easier and safer to use that will take over both markets (effectively remerging them). I think Chrome OS's idea of apps running in the cloud will get merged in there somewhat too although I tend to think the app will be on the device but heavy processes will run on the cloud when it's available to speed things up.

Still interesting that Microsoft played with the concept back then. To bad they never really took it all the way.

Re:12 year old product compares to iPad, and couri (1)

Xerolooper (1247258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851104)

They are similar in some ways. But form factor and price are what is really important. I would readily pay 300 dollars for a well designed device that would let me surf(wi-fi), watch movies, and read e-books. The touch screen, good battery and flood of apps are all secondary. It was ahead of its time but the 999 price tag is what really made it tank. You will often see this with companies bringing out new tech and saying, "Oh well, no one wanted it." Yeah I guess no one wanted electric cars like they had in the 90's when a decent electric or hybrid would cost you the same as a BMW and probably drive like a Gremlin in need of a tuneup.

For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850378)

At least according to this site [bls.gov] . Now how about some comparisons of the Courier [gizmodo.com] versus the iPad!

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850460)

for comparison, rob malda was a raging homo in 1998 and he's still turd burglar today.

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (2, Insightful)

EdipisReks (770738) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850466)

Now how about some comparisons of the Courier versus the iPad!

i'll believe Courier is anything more than a mockup when i see it in stores.

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (-1, Offtopic)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850552)

Well what it's worth the first tech demos about it were disclosed 4-5 months ago and more details now an month ago. They usually disclose technical things earlier on rather like Apple who goes fully by PR and marketing (and where it makes sense to disclose products and have strict NDA's to keep it secret just prior launch to keep all the fanboys hype it)

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (0, Troll)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850622)

I believe the OP is saying that MS has a history of over-promising and under-delivering. Vista was supposed to have a next generation file system. So was Cairo. Neither of them have such a FS.

Apple on the other hand doesn't release anything until they release it. But Apple has released betas in advance of products like the iPhone 3.2.2 Beta was released in January in anticipation of the iPad launch in April.

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31851064)

Apple on the other hand doesn't release anything until they release it.

Nice tautology there.

I didn't post this comment until I posted it.

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (2, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850962)

I've yet to see an Ipad in stores, personally. Anyhow - there were daily stories about the Ipad months before it was released, and even when it was just rumours (in fact, the first Apple tablet rumour on Slashdot was in 2005). Yet when it's another company, we have to have the product in store, for you to see?

Re:For What It's Worth $999 in 1998 = $1333 Today (1)

ChinggisK (1133009) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850672)

I'm surprised we're not hearing/talking more about the Courier here. So far it looks like it's everything I had been hoping the iPad would be (but unfortunately wasn't).

Apples and Oranges (4, Interesting)

moogied (1175879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850418)

Modern systems like the Ipad(and various replicas using linux & windows) face entirely different issues. Older systems were incapable of most productive features at the time. PC's were used to do "power hungry" things like run excel and word. There was almost no way an older system could run those in anywhere near the same level.
Now even my G1 can read and let me edit spreadsheets. My blackberry as well. Also we live in the age of web 2.0 and cloud computing, most of the crap people do on the internet is pretty processor friendly.

Re:Apples and Oranges (1)

celibate for life (1639541) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850688)

most of the crap people do on the internet is pretty processor friendly.

Except for flash... oh wait, nevermind.

Re:Apples and Oranges (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850748)

Er, the ipad isn't even meant to be used productively. It's a pure consumer's gadget.

Re:Apples and Oranges (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850878)

why did apple waste their time porting iWorks?

Re:Apples and Oranges (5, Interesting)

Golias (176380) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851086)

I don't know, but when I discovered that the iPad can't print, even to a printer plugged right in to their "AirPort" hub, which supports printer sharing, I decided to pass on getting any of the iWork apps.

Fuck including a camera. Lack of printing is my biggest disappointment with the device.

That said, it's fantastic for the tasks I actually bought it for (mostly VNC), so I'm mostly happy with it. I just won't be selling off my laptop unless iPhone OS 4 addresses my few nitpicks like the printing issue.

Apple is Evil (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850422)

Can you believe that Apple is banning frameworks that create ipod compatible software???

Sorry Adobe. Sorry developers. Apple is about control and butsecks.

Steve Jobs and his evil empire Apple may impress the sheeple, but I was born free.

Re:Apple is Evil (-1, Troll)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850486)

Can you believe that Apple is banning frameworks that create ipod compatible software???

Sorry Adobe. Sorry developers. Apple is about control and butsecks.

Steve Jobs and his evil empire Apple may impress the sheeple, but I was born free.

Exactly, I also submitted a story about it [slashdot.org] today.

They ban every other programming language and tool than their own. Before some flash bashing comes in, note that its about Novell and every other cross-compiler too. Apple is the most closed and evil manufacturer there is, beating both MS and Google.

Re:Apple is Evil (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850648)

Exactly, I also submitted a story about it [slashdot.org] today.

They ban every other programming language and tool than their own. Before some flash bashing comes in, note that its about Novell and every other cross-compiler too. Apple is the most closed and evil manufacturer there is, beating both MS and Google.

Unlike Microsoft, neither Google nor Apple are convicted monopolists. Hence they are not as "evil". Try toning down the hyperbole in your posts and constructing a logical argument if you want to be taken seriously.

And stop shilling for Microsoft - the economy isn't that bad - you can get a better job.

Re:Apple is Evil (-1, Flamebait)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850812)

Sure they aren't, but it's not a good route they're taking along with all the lawsuits they're sending out everywhere in the world. Isn't marketing and advertisement something all slashdotters hate? So why are there so many apple fanbois here?

(btw your point would had been good enough without the direct attack too)

Re:Apple is Evil (2, Informative)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850852)

Unlike Microsoft, neither Google nor Apple are convicted monopolists. Hence they are not as "evil".

It just means their behaviour is not illegal. It doesn't tell anything about the morality of their behaviour.

Re:Apple is Evil (1)

mrwolf007 (1116997) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851024)

It just means their behaviour is not illegal. It doesn't tell anything about the morality of their behaviour.

Well, i dont know the judicial system in America, but i would not be surprised if it were illegal there as well under some "anti-competetive behavior" rules.
It would be a pretty clear case in Germany.

Re:Apple is Evil (1, Flamebait)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850838)

Also evil, LG..for not letting em run my own applications on my micorwave.

It's a fucking appliance, get over it.

Re:Apple is Evil (-1, Flamebait)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850990)

You bring this same reason to every iPad story.. Do you understand the difference between a computer and microwave?

And yes, before anyone brings in the "but it's meant for appliance" story, there is no reason why Apple needs to restrict you so much (other than their revenue, mind you).

They have the built-in capability do so, microwaves don't.

Re:Apple is Evil (4, Interesting)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851142)

The argument is that Apple wants control over the user experience. As so many have pointed out the hardware of the iPhone and iPad is hardly revolutionary but the way you interact with these devices is, it is the distinguishing characteristic. So they want native apps developed with the platform in mind, not programmed for common denominator meta-platforms like Flash or Java.

And they certainly don't want to get into the position where they can't change or deprecate APIs because some third party layer would break and a whole host of applications would stop working especially in this stage where they are still working out where they're going with this touch thing. It's been claimed [devwhy.com] (read that article it's quite good) that Apple has been forced to alter their plans for OSX in the past because vendors had them over a barrel :

"This isn’t some perceived risk, I can think of incidents where Apple reverted OS changes, dumped new APIs, or was forced to committing massive engineering resources to something it did not want to do because a Must Not Break app vendor told them to."

Clearly Apple is bitter over some past goings on and is planning some insurance that won't happen again now they're still top dog.

Re:Apple is Evil (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850626)

Apple is about control and butsecks.

Seriously, is that in the corporate charter? Maybe I should give them another look.

Re:Apple is Evil (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850734)

Unfortunately for most, Teh Steve has all the control and delivers all the subtext [boingboing.net] . You are simply the catamite.

Re:Apple is Evil (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850864)

And by born free, you mean hide behind AC, and instinctively do the opposite of what ever is popular.

You are a sheep. You blindly follow the pack of people who have a knee jerk dislike for anything popular.

Let me know when you can judge something on merits, regardless of who makes it.

What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850444)

Minutes since an iPad vs. something story is posted and still no "goodluckwiththat" to dear Microsoft? Get to work!

People used computers differently then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850450)

The way people use computers has changed over the past ten years. Say what you will about "the cloud," people spend more time on the Internet now.

Add to that the Apple magic of hardware-software co-development, widespread wireless access, a decade's worth of mobile chip and battery advancements, and you've got a totally different product.

(For that matter, look at Apple's Newton. Too far ahead of its time.)

windows CE is the best (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850480)

Hi, my name is Juan Saavedra. I do not understand why people follows apple that uses a legacy kernel OS architecture and not a modern Windows Ce one.

Re:windows CE is the best (5, Funny)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850528)

Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. WinCE killed my father. Prepare to die.

Re:windows CE is the best (1)

wsanders (114993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850684)

Your father much have been utterly incompetent. WinCE had a vast cornucopia of at least 5 or 10 apps available for it by the time it EOLed.

Really, the iPad is just a jumbo-sized iPod Touch. Which is just what I wish for when I tire of squinting at my iPod Touch's screen, or viewing videos in super-lo-def.

But I have to admin it's the most fun I've had with any gizmo for $149 (remanufactured.)

Now, even if quadrupling the dimensions 16-tuples the size of the screen, the $500 price tag is still pricey. I'll get one either after Christmas when they will drop the price $100, or when I tire of my family badgering me about not getting them one.

Re:windows CE is the best (1)

zeropointburn (975618) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850736)

on the slim possibility that you are serious, and against my better judgment, here is your answer:

The iPad is an Apple device. Apple makes an operating system that competes with Microsoft Windows. Using your competitor's operating system to run your newest product is not a good idea.
The modern core of Apple OS is openstep-based, and is UNIX/Linux compatible. It is more efficient than Windows. It benefits from the development efforts of the entire open-source community.
Linux and relatives are well-known and respected in the mobile and embedded marketplaces. So is Windows CE, or rather it was (to the extent that Microsoft products ever are respected). The Windows offering is now Windows Mobile for most devices.

It's all a matter of perspective (2, Interesting)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850492)

The reason the iPad is more successful than the Handheld PC Pro is because the iPad looks like a giant iPhone, while the Handheld PC Pro looked like a small laptop.

Bingo (2, Insightful)

Well-Fed Troll (1267230) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850728)

And there you have it folks. You expect a phone. When you see how well it does movies compared to your phone instead of how poorly it does compared to your computer, you're happy.
The interface simplicity also emphasizes this. We associate complicated interfaces with complex, difficult to use machinery. A 747 cockpit has a ridiculous number of switches, gauges & dials, a door just has a knob.

Re:Bingo (2, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851124)

And there you have it folks. You expect a phone. When you see how well it does movies compared to your phone instead of how poorly it does compared to your computer, you're happy.

The interface simplicity also emphasizes this. We associate complicated interfaces with complex, difficult to use machinery. A 747 cockpit has a ridiculous number of switches, gauges & dials, a door just has a knob.

Yeah, but who wants a 747 filling the entry way to the bathroom, when a door does the job so well?

A lot of things about a 747 which make it very valuable, but comparisons of different tools, meant for different jobs, is completely silly.

Re:It's all a matter of perspective (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851032)

Yes, everyone loves brick sized phones - whenever someone calls my slightly not up-to-date phone a "brick", I know it's a compliment. I can't wait to spend all that money to have a giant phone, like I'm back in the '80s. I'd much rather have an oversized phone, than a tiny phone and a powerful but small laptop.

Men are from mars, women are from venus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850494)

Microsoft is Jupiter and Apple is Uranus.

Re:Men are from mars, women are from venus (1)

celibate for life (1639541) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850778)

Some Apple products may rhyme with Uranus.

Expectations (5, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850526)

The iPad has a lot going for it, especially that you can get one for about 1/3 the price of that thing (if you convert the 1998 dollars, see eldavojon's post) and that you have wireless networking (a major plus).

I think a big part of this (and one that Microsoft has run into with their tablet attempts) is that of expectations. If it looks like a PC (because it has a keyboard), and acts like a PC (because the interface looks like Windows 95/98 did), people expect it to operate like a PC. They should be able to install normal software, it should be fast enough to do normal computer things, etc.

Netbooks ran into this too. They were cheap and cute, so people bought them. Then they found out that weren't "real" laptops and had 1 GHz processors, and were never going to edit video or edit 8 MP photos fast. The things looked like normal computers, but cheaper, so why not get it? Then they weren't happy. Now many "netbooks" are full computers that are just tiny. You can buy netbooks that cost $600+ instead of the early $200-$300. They are what people expect out of a laptop, only tiny.

Apple, on the other hand, made a device that is very clearly not a Macintosh. It does look like an iPhone, which is a plus since people see the iPhone as a appliance and not a computer. These two things add up to people seeing the iPad as an appliance and not a computer, which is exactly what Apple intends. It does what it does, and that's what it's supposed to do.

If Apple released the iPad with a fold out keyboard, people would compare it to another netbook or a normal laptop and criticize it for being so inflexible. I was actually very surprised that Apple is even making a keyboard dock, as it makes it look more like a laptop. The flexibility of being able to easily type a document on the road with the dock (or a bluetooth keyboard) must have been enough to overwhelm the worry, and I can see that being the case.

Re:Expectations (5, Interesting)

DdJ (10790) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850744)

I was actually very surprised that Apple is even making a keyboard dock, as it makes it look more like a laptop.

You may have just explained why the keyboard dock forces the iPad into portrait mode instead of landscape, and why the "Pages" word processor only exposes all of its features if you're using it in portrait mode. When the thing is actually attached to its dock, standing there with a screen that's taller than it is wide, and an extreme mismatch between the width of the display and the width of the keyboard, you cannot mistake it for a laptop.

Re:Expectations (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850750)

I wish the iPad came with a foldout replica of Steve Jobs' penis so I could slurp on it every time I use my iPad. Delish.

Re:Expectations (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850892)

People knew what netbooks were, they wanted something light weight and then they bought them in droves. MANUFACTURES bowed to pressure from resellers to make a bigger screen so they would be more expensive and the retailer could make more money.

Re:Expectations (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851000)

I agree the Ipad is a consumer appliance - given that, I wonder why there's so much coverage here (if Apple started making an "iFridge", would Slashdot, "News for Nerds", start covering fridges and other kitchen appliances?)

And yes, the Iphone isn't really a general computing device like a smart phone, but a consumer feature phone.

But having said that, I'd like to see evidence that netbooks had this problem with consumers. They've still be more successful than tablets AFAIK. And any power limitations is going to be a short term thing, as computing power advances rapidly. In fact, I've already seen in the shops now "ultra mobile laptops" which are also small like a netbook, but much more powerful (fast CPUs, 3GB RAM etc). They're only slightly more expensive than netbooks (and way cheaper than a Islate or whatever it's called this week, anyway).

Whilst people might have lower expectations of tablets, the problem remains as to what they do expect to use them for - so it's not a computer, but it's also not a phone (calling it a large phone is hardly going to go down well - firstly, people already have a phone; secondly, who wants a brick sized phone? That's the kind of thing that people ridicule, if your phone is only slightly bigger than the latest model). So what is it? This is one of the many problems that tablets have had - they don't really fill a need, and it's especially a problem if they're so expensive. Something with limited use is only going to take off when the price is much cheaper.

"Successfully"? (4, Informative)

bradgoodman (964302) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850568)

I don't know that you can say that Apple is doing it more "Successfully". The Newton sold like hotcakes when it first came out. Just because it got an initial rush of die-hard Apple fans and "early adopters" doesn't mean the product won't go the way of the Newton, too. I thing it's too early to call the iPad any kind of a success, just yet...

Re:"Successfully"? (1)

L3370 (1421413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850694)

AHAHA! Are you comparing the newton to the ipad?
The newton sold 50000 in 1993. Ipad sold over 300,000 ON ITS FIRST WEEKEND.

The ipad IS successful. Period.

Re:"Successfully"? (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850920)

No, he is comparing intial releases to long term success of a product.

and Apple as 10 times more customers, and only sold 6 times more iPads.

"The ipad IS successful. Period."
Wrong. Period.

Lets see where the market is in 6 months, and then at the end of a full fiscal year. Did you ever wonder why Apple releases new products just a couple of months before then end of the fiscal year?

Re:"Successfully"? (1)

L3370 (1421413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31851094)

Newton's initial sales were just as disappointing as its all time sale. Still a bad comparison.

The ipad IS successful. The fact that companies are rushing to make an equivalent already proves this. It also uses the same retail platform as the iphone, which has been around for a few years now and it still hasn't died. Support for the ipad's success is here. Evidence of its success is already here. Name one cell phone, computer, or similar device that sold 300,000 times over on the first day that was considered a failure.

Re:"Successfully"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31851168)

and Apple as 10 times more customers, and only sold 6 times more iPads.

What're you talking about? That is 50k in a year vs 300k in a weekend (and most stores were closed on Sunday).

Re:"Successfully"? (1)

Servaas (1050156) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850982)

Well there you have it folks! This guy says its successful. What was the name of that weird cubed thing they released in early 00's? That flopped as well. Steve kept saying they were going strong and after few months everyone realised it was a bust.

Re:"Successfully"? (2, Informative)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850790)

The Newton flopped.

100,000 the first year.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Q4.06/600D65E6-A31E-45CA-AFC5-42BC253F5337.html [roughlydrafted.com]

While the iPad has at least tripled that

http://www.pcworld.com/article/193781/ipad_sales_estimated_to_top_600000.html [pcworld.com]

I had a couple Newtons, an MP 130 and later a 2000

People are eager to buy anything from Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850640)

Even Jobs' poop.
It's sad how people idolize a company.

Re:People are eager to buy anything from Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850766)

A couple weeks ago, while taking my asian girlfriend shopping at the local mall, I had to take a piss. As I entered the john, Steve Jobs -- the messiah himself -- came out of one of the booths. I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was busy and in any case I was sure the secret service wouldn't even let me shake his hand.

As soon as he left I darted into the booth he'd vacated, hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still warm from his sturdy ass. I found not only the smell but the shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat, stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd -- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as his cock -- or at least as I imagined it!

I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd always been a liberal thinker and had been an Apple user since 1984. Of course I'd had fantasies of meeting him, sucking his cock and balls, not to mention sucking his asshole clean, but I never imagined I would have the chance. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of Steve Jobs, the chosen one.

Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both hands to keep it from breaking. I lifted it to my nose. It smelled like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit without the benefit of a digestive tract?

I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it smelled.

I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big half nigger cock, beating my meat like a madman. I wanted to completely engulf it and bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily, sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My only regret was that Steve Jobs wasn't there to see my loyalty and wash it down with his piss.

I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with the rich bitterness of shit. It's even better than listening to a Jobs press release!

Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished them out, rolled them into my handkerchief, and stashed them in my briefcase. In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole. Not an unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using them but within a week they were all gone. The last one I held in my mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six orgasms in the process.

I often think of Steve Jobs dropping solid gold out of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could, and at least once did, bring to a grateful Apple customer.

Captcha: alters ... eerie

Platform vs Product (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850814)

Microsoft works with OEM partners to create platforms. Apple works by itself (taking from others as much as possible) to create a product.

If the platform launches and sells 1million units, 200k from each of 5 OEMs, then each of those OEMs sees their products as failures. If Apple launches and sells 500k units, then their product is a success (and is also sold at a much higher margin because they aren't one of 5 OEMs fighting for a share of the money on that platform, not to mention the idiot tax).

Apple creates successful products, but the way those products are made possible is the work of OEMs building platforms over a period of decades. Without Microsoft Windows and the PC platform, there's no Nvidia. Without the twenty year old ARM platform, twenty years of SysV/BSD development, and Nvidia, there's no iPad or iPod or iPhone or MacOS X. You can view that as building a market or you can view it as being late to the party, taking cheap parts, putting a cool tax on them, and basically being a parasite on the industry that doesn't really give back.

Blocked by management (1)

Gonoff (88518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850818)

I remember we had a demo of these. They seemed like a possible idea but they were kept out by management who have since wanted laptops in places where they are completely counter productive. I am aware of managers who have never taken their laptops out of their docking stations - using them as expensive and slow desktops. I can think of one who swopped his for his secretary's newly issued desktop PC.

Why were CE tablets blocked? They looked too like laptops but would have been used by the less important? I never did figure it out and have kept cynical thoughts to myself.

We now have various tablets and touch screen devices out there. The problem is that they run full blown Windows, They take too long to start and last no longer than any other laptop-like device. Also, they need a lot more care & management than CE devices might have Pity...

Ah yes, the Apple bashing continues (1)

AresTheImpaler (570208) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850842)

They should have added this pic in the article too:
http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu328/marshall663/iPadvsRock.jpg [photobucket.com]

I wonder if the rock or the Jupiter can do any of these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gew68Qj5kxw [youtube.com]
http://vimeo.com/10630568 [vimeo.com]

I'm not trying to say that other devices couldn't do those things, say an Android based tablet, but that these comparisons are kinda lame and childish. Usually, they are made by those that don't like the iPad. Here's a novel idea: Don't buy one! Or, compare the ipad with Android tablets. Then we can have a good article and hopefully some a good discussion about the topics at hand. If the courier was in production or very close to it, it would be another good item to compare to. Till then, I'm pretty sure apple and some consumers (maybe the apple fanatics) are very happy with the ipad [apple.com] .

More successful than handheld PC, Successful??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850870)

Ok, many things have changed to make the iPad successful (if you can even call it that).
1. Battery Technology has come a long way allowing you do actually do useful work with something small.
2. The iPad has a 1GHz low power processor! If that is not "laptop performance" of at least a couple years ago, I don't know what is?
3. Display technology has improved in leaps and bounds. This also contributes to the low power consumption.
4. Touch Screen technology has come a long way also which improves the user experience. I'm sure even the most expensive displays at the time of the "handheld PC" were not as good.
5. Embedded graphics accelerators...nuff said (not available for Handheld PC)

Also, I don't see businesses picking up iPads in droves to use them for corporate purposes. These are still consumer electronics sales by far. I'd like to see the total sales figures for non-cellphone, PocketPC/Windows Mobile devices which have actually been used corporate purposes. Honestly I think you are comparing apples and oranges (pun intended) using a time machine which just isn't fair. We'll see what the sales numbers are like when the fanboys and early adopters finish buying up the initial run of these devices...

Innovation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31850924)

What's interesting is that when Microsoft is successful and makes money selling a product that resembles something that's been done before, people say they stole the idea. When Apple successfully markets something that's been done before, we have to be grateful that they "finally did it right" and the pioneers were just idiots.

Ipad / WinCE VS Laptops.. all about price (1)

uslurper (459546) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850966)

The price of Windows tablets were really restrictive to early adoption.

People see the tablet PC's as stripped down versions of laptops, so they should be priced accordingly. But instead the manufacturers priced them high to cash in on trendy new tech.

Add to the fact that they were either underpowered or too heavy, and there was no reason to buy them instead of a laptop.

A similar thing happened with the palm sized PC's. The early ones were very expensive. I bought a used Philips Nino and I think the retail on it was $700. Palm was really kicking butt because their units didnt try to do everything and were much cheaper.

But then manufacterers started taking the PIM features and integrating them with phones. Now they could amortize the high cost of powerful units over the term of a service contract. Viola! Everyone has a phone powerful enough to do 90% of their computing.

The question everyone is asking is whether or not Apple can continue the Ipad long enough for wide acceptance of the tablet.

Perhaps if windows tablet pc makers had stuck with the market and modified their products to fit demand, things would be different.

The iPad is not a computer?! (1)

bknack (947759) | more than 4 years ago | (#31850994)

The most essential difference between the iPad and the tablets PCs etc. that have come before is that Jobs and company have realized that the best way to sell the product is to take it out of the "computer" space. That way they don't have to compete with people's preconceived notions of what a computer is and what it should do. This isn't the first time they've done this. Think about it: the iPod wasn't sold as an MP3 player. It was sold as a way to carry all your music with you everywhere you went. Given the press at the time, it almost took an "I grock that" moment to recognize that the iPod was just a gussied up MP3 type player. Consider: the iPad is a "device" not a computer or a tablet. It lets the user download Apps, not run programs or even applications. It lets you consume content, not browse the web or even read. This is all just double speak, but recasting their product this way goes a long way to letting Apple frame the conversation in terms that they control. It also limits comparisons in customers' minds. Cheers, Bruce.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?