As you've no doubt heard by now, Apple launched a new mobile computing device and it's within a product category that is all-new territory for the traditionally tight-lipped company. It's a bit of an odd choice for a company that revels in innovation, and after today's announcement, we're left with more questions than answers on whether or not it can truly deliver in the way that Apple CEO, Steve Jobs thinks it can. The iPad simply isn't as revolutionary as the iPhone and iPod, and that alone is at least initially limiting the general perception of the product. For better or worse, Apple has worked itself into a corner where people simply expect each and every new product release to change that product category for the better. To revolutionize things in a way that no other company has done so far.
On almost every front, the iPad doesn't do that. Read on, there's more. Lots more...
This was actually one of the brightest things for me in the intro. I was expecting it to be running snapdragon, Tegra2, atom pinetrail, or even a VIA SOC. When he said it was on an Apple A4 chip I was intrigued. This as pointed out in this article could be substantial for the company. Where with the iPad in general I was disappointed after inspection.
Yea, the iPad is rather underwhelming. That new chip sounds impressive tho!
Core i7 920|EVGA X58|GTX 660 TI & 460se for PHYSX|2x30GB Vertex RAID0|5x1.5TB RAID5
-- Certifications --
CompTIA A+; CompTIA Network+ ; CompTIA Security+; Microsoft Certified Professional(MCP); Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator(MCSA); Microsoft Certified Sysems Engineer(MCSE); Certified Wireless Network Administrator (CWNA); Certified Wireless Security Professional (CWSP); Aruba Certified Mobility Associate (ACMA);
@rapid The A4 chip definitely looks to be one of the bright spots of this device. I would love to see some performance benchmarks on it, and matched up against some of the other chips you mentioned. As it is now, I'm very impressed with how energy efficient it is, without sacrificing performance. Looks like a possibility for the 4th generation iPhone.
Yea gibbersome that's what I was getting to. For it to be that low energy, but still fluid in seen operation while transmitting to a large screen as well.
Yea gibbersome that's what I was getting to. For it to be that low energy, but still fluid in seen operation while transmitting to a large screen as well.
I've also been thinking about what Apple decided to sacrifice for the battery life. And I think I understand why Apple decided to not support Flash, a known CPU-hogger. Multi-tasking was also perhaps excluded with the battery efficiency in mind. What Apple has done is create a very minimalist user interface. For those looking for a netbook replacement, they will be disappointed. It is (as many have stated) a giant Ipod Touch.
There's a total problem with what you're saying, and its a shame you
can't see it. When the iPod and iPhone came out, they were
"underwhelming" too. People immediately claimed that Apple has screwed
up, and that other products were better, faster, cooler. Whether it
was an HTC product or the LG Prada or the Helio Ocean, people thought
the iPhone was overhyped and lackluster. Same with the iPod if you
remember that far back. Here with the iPad, its a bit worse, because
without looking closely, most uninformed observers want to point out
that its an oversized iPod. The truth however, is that the product was
delayed specifically because of all the changes that were being mad to
the underlying OS. Moreover, updates to the iPhone were delayed do to
cross-over with the code from this project that they did not want to
leak. Now, all can be revealed, and Apple can retain its development
lead on all its competitors. Don't listen to Steve Jobs comments on
netbooks or the Kindle. If you notice, he specifically said that
netbooks FAIL at what they're trying to do (most people think of them
as mini laptops). Also, Jobs noted long ago that he thought the
eReader class wasn't mainstream enough, because "People don't read
books anymore". His view was that it had to do MORE than an eReader...
and yet retain the same simplicity.
pay MORE for a Kindle that did more (yet had a lower battery life)?
Good question. That's the gamble. That's why this is DIFFERENT, and
that's why its either a complete failure, or the start of a
revolution. According to Steve Ballmer at CES this year, this year is
the start of an emerging category... the Slate PC. He described it
exactly in the terms Jobs used. He showed unannounced, unspeced models
coming "soon" by HP, Pegatron, and Archos... in precisely the same form
factor as Apple... but the problem is, these were NOT "revolutionary".
They were simply netbooks with touchscreens and no keyboards running
Windows 7. None of them were architected for touchscreen other than to
be capable of doing it. There were no "splitscreen" or "pop-over"
systems, they did not have a library of touchscreen ONLY apps like the
iPhone does. They were netbooks without keyboards. --And therein lies
a tragic problem that even outstrips questions about battery life,
cost, and other issues.
As Jobs said, and most people that used
it, and appreciated what they were seeing have said... we (the rest of
us) probably won't "get it" until we're holding one in our hands.
Until we truly feel how fast it is, and really see how it can affect
our lives. Like the iPhone, people will keep saying they want
multitasking (and Jobs will translate that as "they want to do X task
while doing Y task", without opening the entire device up), they'll say
they want a camera (which may easily happen), and they'll say they
thought it would run full MacOS software... at which point, it will be
clear they don't get it. The ModBook has been with us for a while.
Not many people want it... even for cheap. People want a new consumer
level appliance that's no where NEAR as complicated as a desktop OS.
is what Apple has delivered, and yes... people like yourself will go on
missing the point, while people like myself, John Gruber, Stephen Fry,
and Michael Pusateri will insist that we're looking at an amazing 3rd
repeat of history in terms of tech buzz. When the revolutionary comes
along, there is the urge not to notice it... even if people announce it
boldly, and insist that you will soon understand what they already
know. That's just the nature of things. Rarely do you get the perfect
storm of a NEW product that changes everything... but came out of no
where... and no one else is even in the same class. Apple is now set
to have done this many, many times (not without its G4 cubes, Newtons,
and iPod HiFis though). No one is perfect, but they really outdid themselves here.
Time will tell.
"Time Will Tell"
Yes, it will, but with everyone else getting ready to announce their iteration of the Tablet, I for one will not bite the Apple in such a rush. The fact that it's a "minimalist" device could work either way for them and other manufacturers may produce a Tablet that is more fully featured and still has battery life that is acceptable.
Apple's allure is dependent on their support structure and development of 'Apps' for their devices. They give 'good commercial' too. They filled a marketing void when it was needed and were targeted towards younger people who were just coming into their financial well being.
The devices are only just so,so.
Oh,...and Yeah,....I just Don't 'Get It' either because I'm not clever.
Don't part with your illusions. When they are gone you may still exist, but you have ceased to live.
"Getting it" doesn't have to sound like a slight. I personally
think this is a tricky issue. Maybe I'm the one not "getting" it.
I mentioned with the other form factor entrants coming in, "time will
tell"... but that's most relevant, because NO ONE else has released
specs or even a time to ship yet... so, they're hypothetical ideas
right now that we "think" sound right. So, everytime I hear someone
say, "well, I'll just get one of these others" it seems odd to me. More
like it should be a "boy, I wish someone would..." than anything else.
It's not clear to me how "natural" Windows 7 would seem in an
all-touch environment. Look at the spreadsheet demo Apple gave.
Imagine doing that with Excel on Windows today. No dice. iPad is coming
into the market in a class by itself chiefly because of the work on the
OS (and how it handles touch). Recently ASUS/Taiwanese manufacterer
was reported as "scrambling" because of Apple's super-low entry point
($499). They were thinking Apple would come in at $999, and had
planned to undercut Apple by 20%-30%. Now, there's no margin for that
tactic. Apple has aimed themselves at a different type of computing
experience... not simply a repackaging of a desktop OS. The question is... will it catch on, considering Apple has been "training" its customer base for this next step.
You said: "Getting it" doesn't have to sound like a slight".
But you made it sound like one with comments such as: "its a shame you can't see it" and "people like yourself will go on missing the point."
We're mostly saying that we'll wait to see what DOES come from other sources BEFORE we spend our money and that's just reality biting allot of people in the wallet considering the state of the economy and how it's affecting too many of us. Is it OK if we take a little time to choose?
Your: "Apple's super-low entry point ($499)" speaks volumes all by itself.
No clever I actually agree with much that you say. One thing I don't think you see is the delay thing had nothing to do with anything except the A4 chip that this item runs on. Other than that it is an adaptation of the current platform in a larger and more inclusive model. Yes it is a over sized iPhone however there is absolutely nothing wrong with that from both a marketing view or stand point and a business one. So it basically rides that popularity adds to it and helps it grow even more.
One of my issues between the Steve Jobs Bill gates thing is the business model is very different on one point. Steve Jobs is very involved in the hardware end of everything for Apple. He is also a VERY smart man. Bill Gates on the other hand is an idea man on the software side of things as well as marketing and aim for a product he is a genius. The problem for Microsoft here is there Genius retired and is a philanthropist where Steve Jobs came back and is active rather than a commentator.
As for this device and many of your arguments I understand them directly. As I said well before this item was ever seen even if I don't want one, mainly because I am a hardware nut is because I also cannot manipulate or suit this device directly to all my needs. However; as I stated this device is a very good thing, and I believe a market changer in a large way.
Much like the original iPhone the next version will have considerably expanded functionality. The big thing about this from a business stand point is the Apple app market that already exists. No one else has this or even anywhere close to it. This market also in many ways is open source at the bottom. You grab the Dk develop your app throw it to Apple they approve it or not. But the start point is open source basically. Much like Firefox you have thousand working and developing apps and plug ins for you for nothing. They only get something if the app is useful and in many ways just like Linux this changes the market I think in a very good way.
As I mentioned before I said well before this was introduced it is a market changer. Yes this type of device has been in and out of the market for years. However; I believe it was never take seriously or developed cohesively as a singular device type and market. The netbook gets party of it the UL notebooks do to with added functionality, the apple device in the end combines all available. It is a netbook, and er-eader, a UL notebook a cell phone or direct communications device and in a slate package which I thinks is considerably more useful.
This I think is done right because a slate device with totally new inclusiveness such as this has to be released. That is so we see how the market responds and what the market wants added to it. R&D in any case takes an aim even if it's imaginary. The other thing I think this will do is fastly gain a device type following which will extend cohesively across the market. I remember a year and a half b4 the iPhone existed I told a co-worker that b4 very long we would have a PC the size of you Cell phone. Then 1.5 to two tears after that first the i-phone and then the netbook hit the market. I have also said and even tried to patent an all inclusive device that incorporated and e-reader a cell phone with 3 or 4g connectivity and a netbook/UL in one package. However I was 1 month and 2 weeks late on it, and 3 patents were in b4 mine.
I basically dropped it there because I saw no point the parties that had it were I believe though do not know directly were Apple, MSI, and IBM/Lenovo and maybe Asus to. These companies have way more resources than I could ever hope to have so it is pointless for me. I also think Nokia is developing something along these lines in a smaller package.
In the end this builds on the iPhone market which for a single specialized device is huge and insurmountable in my eyes. I actually question whether Apple rather than M$ will be in the same place in a few years because of there adoption of this expanded mobile market segment. I think in many ways they will be even because in the end for the general consumer there devices may be somewhat less all functional like the PC, but they are easier to use completely mobile, and stable. plus Apple is now developing both the hardware and software sides of there market as well which in a business sense gives them far more control.
Of course this is all basically a debate anyway we will see where it all goes!
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
lol that was great 3vi1
Dang that's vicious 3vi1 I love it getting ripped by college students classic and ripped hard.
Well, there's two types of "getting it". There's
the "I'm smarter than you" type and the "I have a totally different
perspective" type. It's like someone saying, "I don't get why you
collect cans... you only get a small amount of money from the recycling
center." To which the person returns, "Well, every little bit helps. I
use it for pocket change." The first person can shrug his shoulders
and say "Ok. But, I'd never do that. Doesn't make sense to me."
doesn't mean one person is smarter... it just means they may have a
different set of needs than the guy who doesn't find VALUE in what he's
That brings us to the tablet. I'm SUPER clear that while
you scoff at any notion that Apple's is a "super-low" entry point, I
have the numbers on my side. You can't show me anything else that does
what the iPad's OS does with a capacitive multitouch screen UI...
anywhere NEAR $500. The point is, you would like it to be a netbook and
its not. It's also not an ebook reader. It's a different category
that steals a little from both. ebook readers can't run a spreadsheet
program, but they have e-ink... netbooks don't currently offer the
ease-of-use and multitouch UI the iPad offers... but they're
mini-laptops that run desktop software, browsers, and in many cases can
be expanded. If the Amazon Kindle DX (with its accellerometer and
larger 10" screen) is $489, why aren't people complaining that its
ridiculously priced? Because its not. It also has (in my opinion)
horrifying limitations that aren't out-weighed by the addition of
Apple is suggesting that there is a category for
"media readers" that don't end with ebooks. They've put together an
end-to-end solution that is state-of-art and pushes the envelope of GUI
mobile experiences. They are GAMBLING that by doing more than the
Kindle (which requires abandoning e-ink for video-playback support),
that they bring more people to the table. Analysts are saying that
this will work and that Apple will realize 5-10 million iPad sales this
year. --But, they say that most people who want ebook readers will
still get ebook readers. They're saying that Apple will likely eat
away at the netbook market, at people who would probably get a netbook,
but get sold on the iPad's value proposition (targeted uses and
I agree we should WAIT and SEE it (use it for
ourselves) before we decide either way. However, I already have an
iPhone, and I'm surrounded by family that are picking up iPhone's left
and right (and I'm not pushing ANYONE to get it, cause I don't care if
they do or don't). People around me love the UI. They "get it". The
next question is... will they go for an "appliance" product that has
the same UI and begins to help them do more of what they would normally
use a full-computer for. That answer seems obvious to me. If I
carried my Bluetooth Apple keyboard and an iPad, most of my mobile
computing needs are taken care of immediately with software like
"Pages" and "Safari". I have lots of PDF books I've been reading on my
iPhone that are mocking me for a bigger screen, but the same rich
Haha, they must have come across your female hygiene joke!
All apple and no games makes jack a 'clever' boy?
I think the development level and mainly the A4 processor is the only real technological achievement of this item personally.
I also wonder what answer this will bring from Intel. If anyone else (IBM,AMD etc) makes a processor Intel has always answered sooner or later. The later part is also generally not there forte. So I will be interested to see if we will see another UL cpu or atom with enhanced capabilities or speed come out soon. This is also being that the snapdragon NEC Via etc units are also biting at Intel's pocket book on this sector as well. As I said and many of you already know Intel has always been rather aggressive. So I will be interested to see there answer here.
Intel has NO response to Apple's use of their own A4 chip. That's
really the crux of the matter. Apple isn't trying to compete with
Intel, they are simply choosing an approach that (if proven successful)
their own competitors would be hard pressed to duplicate. If Apple's
competitors press Intel for a response, they will have one that is
predictably as good or bad as that competitor's implementation of what
Intel has provided. Apple's only excuse for doing this, is to
differentiate itself in the market with a better, more highly optimized
final product (by allowing the hardware, OS, and software to work in
tight concert). If, like with the PowerPC roadmap, this trajectory is
deeply troubled by advanced developments from Intel, then Apple will
gladly change lanes. These kinds of decisions aren't usually for just
the next product iteration however, they are always part of a larger
roadmap they will have to live with for over a decade out.
"I think the development level and mainly the A4 processor is the only real technological achievement of this item personally." - rapid1
I'm not sure how much of a technical achievement the A4
CPU actually is, given that Apple purchased the company already
creating chips for use by a number of clients. The A4 itself is new,
but observers will be hard pressed to provide useful relative
benchmarks for a chip inside of such a wholly proprietary environment.
One useful metric will be when one compares benchmarking software on
the iPhone 3Gs with the same benchmarking software on iPad and other
devices (3D, rendering, movie playback, etc). However, this fails to
account for realword scenarios and custom optimizations Apple may have
in play. You can have the best chip, but the worst drivers and/or APIs
on a given OS.
iPad can comfortably sit in a class by
itself, because it will be the only truly average consumer ready
multitouch mobile OS on the market (queue youTube videos of babies
using the iPhone). Between now and its launch, HP will be working hard
to replicate the level polish it had for its Touchsmart in a tablet
format that matches the iPad's application and usability set. Apple is
coming at the "solution" for the smartphone/computer tweener from a
completely unchallenged direction that most competitors won't be able
to quantify, never mind compete with.
I don't know the points you make are very valid, but even VIA got an answering chip. I guess though on this one the chip is so specialized that you right. In all reality it deserves no answer. I just think it's interesting Apple actually jumped in the chip business for this, especially on the first run. I think they should have kept developing it and then they may have had a valid answer. This chip although interesting I do no see as that answer.
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2013 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms