Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 12 Feb 2010.
I wouldn't have it down as a "proper" computer. Just a ponced up phone.
Im sure intel with there billions really dont care, this wont hit them at all
Everything you said may be true, except for the fact that it is an over-sized phone.
I agree completely tbh - the boys over at Intel will be pretty worried by this.
The Atom has never really produced a totally friendly device. The Linux-equipped ones are very unfamiliar to your casual pc user, the ones with Windows are a bit slow.
Even though I wouldn't call it a "proper" computer it's still a big leap forward in this sense, and hopefully we'll see something a bit more Atom-friendly soon.
Does anyone know what OS MS are supposed to be using for the Courier?
The iPad promises a 'third way' between smartphone and laptop. It is filling a gap in the market that simply doesn't exist - from what I've read, it offers essentially nothing that can't be achieved (albeit with a smaller screen) on an iPhone, but lacks the crucial elements of portability and convergence (no phone or camera functionality). You can't use it for proper document work; you can't access the filesystem directly; and 'multitasking' is fudged in the same way it is on the iPhone - i.e. you can listen to music while browsing the web, but that's about it.
My conclusion - the iPad isn't going to be a runaway success and Intel aren't going to be running scared. Much like a Liberal Democrat manifesto, the iPad offers a couple of interesting ideas that competitors will no doubt pinch, but is otherwise a non-event.
That having been said, given Apple's track record, I may be being stupid and missing something, and will be eating my words in twelve months when the iPad has sold 100m units. Maybe.
The iPad will sell like hot cakes. Understand that the iPad is not for the power user - it is for the other 90% of the population. I'm talking about the users that couldn't care less about multitasking, office suites with features that are never used, or how this tablet-thing works under the hood. I think that Chrome OS is losing against it's sibling rival: Android. Expect Android to appear on tablets. Yes please think of the iPad and all tablets to follow as nothing more than blown up smartphones (after a fashion). They'll be just as easy to use, they'll be running a diverse set of operating systems, and they'll be syncing and interacting with the cloud.
This is the thing. The iPad is not really competing with anything major. It's just like a bigger and more powerful iphone - with the same limitations of the iphone.
The iPhone currently competes with Windows Mobile. In my opinion, Windows Mobile provides me with so much more usefulness and greater freedom than the iphone environment.
And then there's Android netbooks and tablets running on Snapdragons and Tegras just round the corner.
the problem with x86 is that it's too big and clumsy. it will never be as power efficient as an ARM or similar RISC instruction set.
Intel knows this and even though they really want a slice of the mobile computing cake, their best effort is the Atom that used to power slow netbooks.
i think the only way for Intel to dominate and establish itself in mobile computing, is to port Moblin OS (a fantastic Linux distro by Intel) into RISC. take a new approach by creating a RISC chip, with x86 decoder that is turned off and only power up when needed. x86 performance may be slower, but it will be competitive with ARM on the power domain while having backwards compatibility.
x86 architechture must be coming up for 20 years old now. Surely its time for change and innovation soon?
Should be looking forward at 128 bit new cpu's?
It's running Unix...
User interface =/= Operating system.
Operating systems are like icebergs, the UI is just the tip of the iceberg, you can't see most of it, but the UI is a miniscule part. MacOSX is proof that 'nix isn't complicated, the crappy environments developed by volunteers for free are what suck.
A proper computer?
Cool, so I can get one and encode some video while surfing the net and listening to music?
This maybe the "start" of a new arcitecture, and nothing lasts forever, but I bet we don't see a revolution in the next 5 years, and during that time intel will be able to come up with something that will keep them in the marketplace.
Yeh, I would be very hesitant to call a "upsized" iPhone" a "proper" computer.
all the reasons i bought a netbook are all the same reasons i will not be buying an iPad.
Can i stream video from my media server and watch them in bed?
Can i multitask and surf the net while doing other things?
Can install anything i want on it?
Can i play flash games and videos?
Can i do proper work on it if i need to? (ie on the train)
It is basically a big iPod, and i didnt get one of those either. Far too limited in what it can do (especially for the crowd that frequent these forums anyway).
With a Netbook?
I would say:
Low resolution maybe
At a snails pace...just
anything? I wouldn't want photoshop on it. Or Crysis.
Again, as long as you don't mind it at a snails pace.
Yes! (Providing you have small fingers)
Having said that, if I had to choose I would go for a netbook every time!
At least it "can" do them, albeit not very well. The ipad won't even try.
First: The last line of your post is not true — I have used MacOS X on a 1,6 Ghz single core Intel Atom (a friend asked me to build him an OS X powered nettop) and it runs very well (no, it doesn't run Crysis, lol), and i have two more Hackintosh's to compare (core i7-920 and pentium dual core). Mac OS X is just more efficient than Windows (all of them )
Second: Using an x86 cpu wouldn't make Apple use a standard desktop OS because iPhone OS does run on x86 quiet nicely (it runs in a iphone simulator app from the iphone sdk), as OS X is easily portable to any cpu architecture (it's predecessor NeXTStep/OpenStep worked on four architectures without any problems), but that would require iphone developers to recompile their apps for the iPad's new cpu (it's would be easy, but what's the point of doing it when you can use a cpu with the same ARM architecture as in the iPhone?).
dont see the atraction of the Ipad I'm afraid - but then it isnt for people like me - I'm sure they look much sexier
And yes, you can play music while surfing the web on an iPad. You can on an iPhone. You cannot encode video on top of that (possibly, although it is already making a mean photoshopping tool), because it was not meant for power-applications like that. Personally, I have a desktop rig with a 30" TFT for heavy crunching. I use my Tablet PC for light browsing and basic Office suite tasks.
Windows Mobile, meanwhile, is a joke. It totally fails at being geared to small mobile applications.
Sorry, but the iPad is the beginning of the future. It may not be as fully-featured as people want, but it is the shape of things to come. Y'all just still stuck in the old stand-alone laptop paradigm.
low resolution yes, but then again thats the screen a netbook has. it would be pointless to lug around a big monitor then whine about how the netbook cant play 1080p.
a netbook can browse the web while playing music, and have my mail app in the background - its all about choosing which programs to use (ie go for the lightweight option everytime).
why would i need photoshop or crysis when i can install Paint.net and GTA: vice city?
Flash doesnt run half badly on the netbook - better than on the mac i use at work anyway (piece of crap struggles playing normal res flash video).
You get used to the keyboard. unless you have sausage fingers.
Perhaps im just not getting this, but what is the iPad for? People keep saying its the next big thing but why? I dont want to stare at a bright screen for hours reading a book. I dont want to have to pay Apple to watch/listen to media. I can see all those early-adopters be dead pleased with their new iPads, but not having a clue what to do with it. They will force themselves to use it to get their moneys worth.
Separate names with a comma.