Overall I'm fairly impressed by Apple's announcement today, although I do have a few issues with the device (neither of which will prevent me from purchasing it).

1. The Bezel - Although this matches my desktop cinema displays as well as my laptop; it doesn't seem as portable with the bezel. I have a feeling this will go the same way the ugly iMac 'gap' went.
2. Touchscreen keyboard - I was really hoping that Apple would pull a rabbit out of their hat on this one; and perhaps they did and we haven't realized it yet (the screen might be big enough to facilitate an on screen keyboard). But fundamentally they didn't do anything really impressive with the way you input text. This is probably an example of the Mac heads expecting Apple to perform miracles; and I fell for it.

Now there are some things I really like about it:

1. No multi-tasking - Not only is it a nightmare as a developer; but even as a user. I do not want GTA: Chinatown Wars to hiccup when my Mail app decides to check for new mail. It's bad enough I get text messages while running from the cops. I'm sure Apple will introduce this feature when the hardware exceeds the need of any one software app.
2. No camera - I've got too many devices with cameras on them already; I don't need one on my book-replacement.
3. Video Out - Now I won't need to lug my laptop in to give lectures.
4. Backwards Compatibility - Good news; all those fart and gun apps already work on the iPad.

Also, I anticipate we will see some iPhoneOS 4.0 features at WWDC. These new features (perhaps multi-tasking) would obviously become available for the iPad as well.

I haven't read up on all the features yet, but so far I'm disappointed -- it's just an oversize iPod Touch, not anything revolutionary like I'd hoped. Maybe I'll feel a little better after I learn more.

I ditto mossy. While the iPad is kinda cool... I guess... what I'd been hoping for by way of a Mac tablet was less a giant iPod clone and more of a lightweight stylus-driven art-Mac that could be used for drawing, as well as lightweight computing with whatever traditional Mac files/apps I chose to install. If I want a glorified doc reader, I'd be more likely to go with an iRex product, and if I want networking and apps on a portable, the iPhone looks just fine.

I do, however, approve of unlocking the thing out of the gate. AT&T horror stories have been the biggest stumbling block to my actually getting an iPhone so far...

seanstar wrote:

My feelings exactly. If Jobs says that they wanted to bridge the gap between laptops and iTouch/iPhones then it could have done a lot more in my opinion. However this doesn't mean I don't like it, I'm just not sold instantly.

Give it one or two refreshes in coming years, it'll probably (nay definitely) have better specs and perhaps gain a few improved features which will swing me round to buying - I'd definitely need a lower price for the higher capacity models.

PS
Any more apps like these on that bigger screen and I'll be probably be more keen.

EDIT: Also, I'm still not seeing this on Apple's UK site so I'd have a wait on my hands anyway!

As an embedded programmer my main interest is this new A4 controller they are using, although I highly suspect that it has an ARM Cortex-A9 core.

I somewhat doubt that the device might be worth it for me, but who knows?
At least the price is much lower than most people thought it would be.

Personally I'd rather they bridge the gap between the iMac and Mac Pro instead of the iPhone and MacBook. I can think of a few good uses for the iPad that would make it better than an iPhone or MacBook, but not many.

I could read the New York Times on paper on the toilet, then I could read it on my iPhone, now thanks to this new "innovation" I can read it on a larger screen. To me this isn't that big of a deal I feel almost cheated by the hype and the end product.

1. I hope it has a speaker, just like a touch.
2. I want to see if I can just install Leopard on it (buying the one with the biggest memory, of course) and use it as a touch screen laptop.

Forget it. Leopard runs on PowerPC or x86.
As I wrote, the A4 controller in the iPad most likely has an ARM core. Especially since it can run iPhone Apps, which definitely is powered by an ARM.

The UK site now boasts the 'unbelievable price' of the iPad but just below states 'UK pricing to be announced'. I'd guess about £300 for the Wi-Fi 16GB.

I'm buying one... probably the 64GB 3G model. I'll convert all my iPhone games to run natively on the iPad's bigger screen, and their sales should cover the cost of the iPad pretty quickly. (I'm averaging around $600 a week on iPhone game sales.)

I like the no-contract 3G internet. If I go on a trip somewhere, I can pay for a month of internet. The rest of the time, I can just use it at home on Wi-Fi without a monthly fee.

www.business-strategy-innovation.com/201...tive-innovation.html

This actually makes a very good point. True, the iPad as hardware is about as innovative as sliced toast, but as the flagship product to start getting carriers to give unlocked devices first-class status, it could be quite the vaulting pole. Because for those who do buy it, you can bet it's going to be sucking more data bandwidth than smartphone-class devices, meaning AT&T is really going to need to shape up, or else buckle completely when Verizon and T-Mobile jump on board.
And if that means future iPhones start being available unsubsidized and untethered, I'd call that a win.

I think people here are really missing the point on the iPad. Windows, Linux, and even Mac OS X are too difficult to use for many people. I've had to explain time after time how to do basic stuff on computers to otherwise intelligent people. I will use an example: installing a program on Mac OS X. Most programs come on DMGs which mount on the desktop. The concept of a disk image is difficult for people to grasp, and I've gone onto my parent's Mac mini several times and seen applications in the dock that are actually stored on the disk image. Someone didn't realize that you're supposed to move the application from the disk image to the Applications folder. It's not intuitive.

The iPad is simpler. Download the program from the App Store and click on the icon. That's it. On the iPad, you don't have to mess with system files or permissions or all the other technical aspects of Mac OS X/Windows/Linux. Those aspects exist with the iPad, but they're hidden from the user.

Say what you want about missing features. It does everything most people want (by which I mean, web browsing). People are going to see this and be amazed at how easy it is to use. It's going to be an amazing success, and I'm convinced computers of the future will be more like the iPad than traditional PCs.

Yep, as disappointed as I am that it's not what I wanted, I have to agree about the iPad's significance in bringing computing to the masses. There's a good write-up here about why the iPad will be a huge hit with the baby boomers.

I'm absolutely in favour of making computers more user-friendly, but it would be nice to see some more features for prospective power users.

M.I.K.e wrote:


Right. I hope it comes with something more powerful though. It would be sweet to do Leopard on it. Maybe there could be an emulation app to make it kind of like a computer...

Many similar tricks have been played with jailbroken iPhones, attempting to achieve the same functionality as OS X. I'm sure a lot of that will be coming to the iPad as well.

I also think it's interesting that we saw iPhone OS 3.2 and not iPhone OS 4.0. I believe the message Apple is sending is that the iPad is simply a larger and faster iPod Touch / iPhone for now. People will buy it as such, and when Apple needs to boost sales, we will see an iPhone OS 4.0 with enhancements which bring it closer to OS X (just as we've seen on previous iPhone OS integer upgrades).