Would you buy a iPad over a Netbook/Laptop? - Page 3

***Chris H.*** · 01-29-2010, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by okstateguy987

Tablets WILL eventually replace 100% of computing needs. Saying they won't is like saying the car would have never replaced owning a horse.

Sorry, that's just wrong. Peripheral input will always be required in some use cases...how do you suppose engineers are going to write the code necessary to run the software on those devices? Might things change for a large percentage of consumers, sure. But an absolute statement such as yours is nothing but absolutely false. Just like your horse/car analogy, in some use cases horses are still used for certain tasks or even entertainment. Horses are by no means 100% unnecessary.

Poke4Christ · 01-29-2010, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Chris H.

But it's not entering the netbook market, that's my point, it's a whole new market....it's something completely different than a netbook.

If that's the case then it will definitly fail. People aren't going to buy another device and this is to big to be carried around with it's limited functionality I truly believe that I'm speaking for the majority here and not just myself. I'm critical of the iPhone, but I've never doubted that it would be successful. I've always said it's great for the average joe. I'm not saying that about this.

Poke4Christ · 01-29-2010, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Chris H.

I'm not trying to sell you an iPad. I'm not trying to sell myself an iPad. You're not in the market for a netbook. Nor am I in the market for an iPad. That's my point. You wouldn't buy a netbook nor an iPad, so the question being asked in the poll is worthless. It simply depends on the use case. Both are fun gadgets with very, very specific real world use cases...that's about it.

You're trying to argue that it is a new market segment. That's your argument for this poll being worthless. I don't acknowledge that. I think it's wrong and few will buy this as a separate device. In a more advanced state it will sell, but people will never buy this in addition to a phone and laptop except for specific circumstances. THAT is why the poll is valid. Because the only way this thing is going to be a huge hit is if it can get people to want to mobile computing that can't be done on a phone's small screen. When you're looking at that, most people will still choose a netbook or laptop. THAT is what this poll proves and THAT is why it is valid. Take it to the bank, quote me, do whatever you want.

***Chris H.*** · 01-29-2010, 11:09 AM

It's not a netbook. Period. End of story. Different markets. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.

People don't buy a netbook in addition to a phone and laptop except for specific circumstances. Those specific circumstances do not necessarily overlap the specific circumstances for a tablet (in some cases yes, but not in all). THAT is why this poll is not valid. You're taking a very myopic view which is just wrong, I'm sorry. Tablets are not netbooks and vice versa.

Does the device leave much to be desired? Yes. I've never said otherwise. It may not sell (I still think it will) because of THAT reason, not because people are choosing a netbook over it.

OSUCherokee · 01-29-2010, 11:25 AM

I agree, it's not a netbook. It's much less functional than a netbook.

I shall call it, an iNetReaderPodTabletPad

***Chris H.*** · 01-29-2010, 11:29 AM

It just boils down to use case. Both in the "is it a nebook?" conversation, and the need for a keyboard discussion. You guys are trying to apply blanket statements in a situation (form factor) where users have varying requirements which run the gamut. There's people that don't have need for either, there's people that will need one or the other form factor, and there's some that want both just because they are complete gadget geeks. It just frankly depends on what your requirements are, what you want, and your amount of disposable income (because neither device is anywhere close to be a necessity).

***Chris H.*** · 01-29-2010, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by OSUCherokee

I agree, it's not a netbook. It's much less functional than a netbook.

Yea it is. Unless you're a glob trotter going on a 10 hour flight and want to watch your own movies on a 9.7" screen...

Or are a physician needing access to patient charts and place orders.

Or are a home inspector who needs to check boxes and write brief notes as you go around the home.

ScooberJake · 01-29-2010, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by OSUCherokee

So, if I already have an iPhone and a laptop, How would you sell me on an iPad? I already have an iPhone to check email/facebook/etc... I get on my laptop when I need to do everything else. Why would I need something in between? The market is so niche. There's no place for it.

Winner winner. Chicken. Dinner.

ScooberJake · 01-29-2010, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Chris H.

Or are a physician needing access to patient charts and place orders.

Or are a home inspector who needs to check boxes and write brief notes as you go around the home.

Yes but none of that is new functionality. My wife has a 3 year old HP touchscreen laptop that can already do all that. 12" screen, so basically the same size. Plus it has a dual-core processor, 320GB HD, 4G ram, Win 7, etc. etc. etc. And it cost $700 three years ago!

ScooberJake · 01-29-2010, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by Chris H.

Sorry, that's just wrong. Peripheral input will always be required in some use cases...how do you suppose engineers are going to write the code necessary to run the software on those devices? Might things change for a large percentage of consumers, sure. But an absolute statement such as yours is nothing but absolutely false. Just like your horse/car analogy, in some use cases horses are still used for certain tasks or even entertainment. Horses are by no means 100% unnecessary.

Definitely agree with this. iPad is for consuming content. But that content must still be created.

Besides, people forget how much of our nations collective computing power is not intended for accessing facebook or creating a photo gallery, but for business applications. So so so many businesses still use Win2000, or even Unix. Heck, my company's main products still run on FORTRAN77! Companies like Sun, Cisco, and HP are going strong. An iPad does not bring 0.1% of the functionality that those systems provide, and similar devices never will. It would go completely against the whole concept of a tablet.

***Chris H.*** · 01-29-2010, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by ScooberJake

Yes but none of that is new functionality. My wife has a 3 year old HP touchscreen laptop that can already do all that. 12" screen, so basically the same size. Plus it has a dual-core processor, 320GB HD, 4G ram, Win 7, etc. etc. etc. And it cost $700 three years ago!

I don't think I've ever argued it's new functionality, it's just better but leaves much to be desired. Currently touchscreen laptops (hybrid models) have the swivel top, and having been exposed to several including having to use one for 2, the hardware leaves a lot to be desired (not specs, but construction). Especially if I was going to use it as a true tablet form, I probably would have thrown it against the wall... There's no swivel, it's thin, it's sleak, it's sexy, and has a 10 hour battery. It's designed to be a tablet vs. laptops that have tablet components bolted on. Compared to the laptop/tablet hybrids of today, the iPad blows it away IF you're really looking for a true tablet. And some people are, but a lot of people with the hybrids rarely use the tablet functionality becuase they really don't need it...

okstateguy987 · 01-29-2010, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by Chris H.

Sorry, that's just wrong. Peripheral input will always be required in some use cases...how do you suppose engineers are going to write the code necessary to run the software on those devices? Might things change for a large percentage of consumers, sure. But an absolute statement such as yours is nothing but absolutely false. Just like your horse/car analogy, in some use cases horses are still used for certain tasks or even entertainment. Horses are by no means 100% unnecessary.

I'm sorry, that's just wrong. Peripheral input exists because it's the only means we currently have to communicate our commands to a computer. Eventually, the computer will be able to recognize our commands without peripheral devices. You're thinking in short term situations, and that is the problem with most people in the technology industry who have no vision. Recognizing the logarithmic pace at which technology develops is key to creating new ideas and new products.

And my horse/car analogy fits perfectly. Horses, like you said, are by no means 100% unnecessary, but they are also not necessary in any particular situation. Vehicles exist now that render the horse obsolete in almost all cases. Same thing with technology. Vinyl records are obsolete in almost all cases, but some people still use them for entertainment.

Code is not going to be entered with word commands forever. I predict word commands will fall out of use in only a matter of decades. Future computers will receive commands much the same way we command a horse, with subtle movements, gestures, and words.

***Chris H.*** · 01-29-2010, 01:06 PM

I'm done. You can't even stay on your own point...

Originally Posted by okstateguy987

And my horse/car analogy fits perfectly. Horses, like you said, are by no means 100% unnecessary, but they are also not necessary in any particular situation. Vehicles exist now that render the horse obsolete in almost all cases. Same thing with technology. Vinyl records are obsolete in almost all cases, but some people still use them for entertainment.

So not in any situation, or almost all?? It's almost all, and it's the almost that renders your argument worthless. There's still use cases for horses, and there will still be use cases for keyboards.

ScooberJake · 01-29-2010, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by okstateguy987

Code is not going to be entered with word commands forever. I predict word commands will fall out of use in only a matter of decades. Future computers will receive commands much the same way we command a horse, with subtle movements, gestures, and words.

Again, what you are saying only makes sense from the consumer's point of view. Sure, we could soon be writing computer code by voice command. In fact, that technology exists today. But all high level languages and applications like this require a low level platform (with low level code, low level electronics, and low level input methods) to build on.

Yes, we could get to a point where devices like the iPad replace all consumer level computing, and where peripherals are not needed. But from the business perspective, and specifically the businesses which build these consumer devices, other hardware/software solutions are necessary.

The horse analogy doesn't fit, because my car doesn't actually run on "horse power". But the iPad does actually run on resistors and capacitors, assembly and machine code.

kaje · 01-29-2010, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by ScooberJake

Yes but none of that is new functionality. My wife has a 3 year old HP touchscreen laptop that can already do all that. 12" screen, so basically the same size. Plus it has a dual-core processor, 320GB HD, 4G ram, Win 7, etc. etc. etc. And it cost $700 three years ago!

Tablets are nothing new but a lot of people are more into the idea of slates (tablets without keyboards). That 3 year old HP touchscreen laptop sounds like a clunky device that I don't want to have to hold in my arms for very long.

There hasn't been a single manufacturer that has developed a tablet PC that wasn't a flop. They haven't become a popular device. Apple is throwing their hat into the ring now and I think they have their form factor nearly perfect (slate apposed to tablet which is bulky). They just need to improve upon the interface so that it can do a bit more than an iPod Touch. Apple probably has it right that for people to jump on the tablet/slate bandwagon, that you need a simplified interface that is created for these types of devices rather than just slapping a desktop OS on one.

I'm not going to try to predict whether the iPad will be a flop or not because Apple has a nice history of coming into a market and taking over in recent years (MP3 players, phones). I just hope that Apple satisfies those of us that really want the iPad by adding the functionality that we'd prefer. And while the iPhone OS is simple to use and perfect for a very small form factor, I think the iPad would do great with a simple interface. I just think that what it has right now is TOO simple for what the screen real estate offers.

okstateguy987 · 01-29-2010, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Chris H.

I'm done. You can't even stay on your own point...

So not in any situation, or almost all?? It's almost all, and it's the almost that renders your argument worthless. There's still use cases for horses, and there will still be use cases for keyboards.

If that's the best you can come up with, then yes, you are done.

Aviation09 · 01-29-2010, 03:10 PM

kaje · 01-29-2010, 03:34 PM

okstateguy987, if you want to use a sci-fi movie to base your argument for the direction computers are going in stating that tablets will replace all computing needs, then you may not want to base that off a movie that you conveniently forget to mention all of the desktop computers used that were far more numerous in the movie than tablets:

And it's pretty ridiculous to state that in the future we'll be controlling computers with our brains and peripherals will no longer be used as a fact. You don't know how precise we can get or how limited we may be in that technology. And lets say in 12590 A.D. when you're controlling your Windows 12K computer with your brain. What are you going to do when the "Neural Scanner Service" crashes or a driver corrupts. Hope you don't plan on it reading your mind on how to fix it...

okstateguy987 · 01-29-2010, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by kaje

okstateguy987, if you want to use a sci-fi movie to base your argument for the direction computers are going in stating that tablets will replace all computing needs, then you may not want to base that off a movie that you conveniently forget to mention all of the desktop computers used that were far more numerous in the movie than tablets:

If you didn't notice, almost all of those computers were simply screens and the only interaction with them was through the screen. That's basically what a tablet is supposed to be.

kaje · 01-29-2010, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by okstateguy987

If you didn't notice, almost all of those computers were simply screens and the only interaction with them was through the screen. That's basically what a tablet is supposed to be.

Touch screen desktop computer does not equal tablet. I don't remember seeing if they were using anything below their screens but how practical do you think they would be if they were using only the screen? What were they doing to input text? Holding their hands out as they type on a virtual keyboard on their screen that is only angled vertically in front of them? I bet that's comfortable... And have you ever sat down and used a desktop touch screen? If not, maybe you should try it for a while without taking breaks with the keyboard and mouse and see how long your arms can stand it before you start worshipping those keyboards and mice you're used to. Just an obvious reason you shouldn't be relying on a sci-fi movie to be making technological arguments.