An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Page 2 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 >
Topic Options
#8038 - 01/29/10 04:59 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

So...how do geeks feel about 70% of all web video content and 90% of all web games requiring a proprietary plug-in?

I'm puzzled that you can view the potential erosion of the Flash monopoly at the hands of HTML 5/CSS/JavaScript as a bad thing while simultaneously embracing open standards over proprietary formats elsewhere.
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#8039 - 01/29/10 05:44 PM Re: iPad [Re: dkmarsh]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Uhhh ...

Where, exactly, did I say the potential erosion of Flash's necessity by HTML5 was a bad thing? I think you're misinterpreting, "Releasing a device for the web without Flash makes no sense," as, "Flash is a great platform."

Do I like Flash? No. Is it a necessary component in today's web experience? Sadly, yes.

And CSS and Javascript cannot replace Flash. The bit of HTML5 that will do so is the <video> tag. And the way that will happen is still very much up for debate. Apple and others are pushing for h264. Firefox and Free software folks would prefer something released under Free licenses (like OGV).

Top
#8040 - 01/29/10 06:37 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

Quote:
Do I like Flash? No. Is it a necessary component in today's web experience? Sadly, yes.

Gee, I dunno. I use ClicktoFlash in Safari and the built-in Flash blocker in Camino. Yes, I sometimes do invoke Flash content when I can't get information I want in some other fashion, but I'd no more call it "a necessary component in today's web experience" than I'd call corn-fattened beef a necessary component in today's gastronomic experience. Ubiquity != necessity.

Quote:
And CSS and Javascript cannot replace Flash. The bit of HTML5 that will do so is the <video> tag.

Well, I was thinking also of sites whose navigation is Flash-based; CSS and JavaScript do, in fact, offer alternative means to a similar end there.
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#8041 - 01/29/10 06:41 PM Re: iPad [Re: dkmarsh]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Quote:
I use ClicktoFlash in Safari and the built-in Flash blocker in Camino. ... Ubiquity != necessity.


And "Works For Me" != "Will Work For Everyone In The iPad's Target Demographic."

Top
#8043 - 01/29/10 08:56 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Originally Posted By: mneptok
And "Works For Me" != "Will Work For Everyone In The iPad's Target Demographic."

But this phenomena is not new. My 2008 iPod touch (and the other 4 billion* iPod/iPhones sold so far) doesn't have Flash either. I can surf to the places i *care* about, while sitting in the dentist's office. Can i get all the bells and whistles from every single web page in the world? No... but who cares? Apparently not me or the other 4 billion iPod/iPhone users either.

* not sure of the exact number, but it's HUGE. [edit: maybe 1/4 billion is more accurate.]


Originally Posted By: mneptok
Seeing that the first accessory Apple lists for the iPad is a full-sized external keyboard dock, this is less an argument than it is an apologist's rationalization. wink

Did you watch the event? Apple is the largest supplier of *mobile* devices in the world. Bigger than Sony, Nokia, Palm, etc. Docking the iPad up to a keyboard will be a minor part of its practical usage. Its main objective is to be mobile.


Edited by Hal Itosis (01/29/10 09:09 PM)

Top
#8045 - 01/29/10 10:06 PM Re: iPad [Re: Hal Itosis]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Quote:
Apparently not me or the other 4 billion iPod/iPhone users either.


Yes, but the iPad is not a mobile phone nor a music player. Take a look at the survey Ars Technica is running today. The current breakdown:

I'm interested in the iPad and I do not want Flash support 20% (3,326 votes)
I'm interested in the iPad and I do want Flash support 30% (5,194 votes)
I'm interested in the iPad and I don't care either way 12% (1,963 votes)
I'm not interested in the iPad but I would if it had Flash 20% (3,393 votes)
I'm not interested in the iPad and I still wouldn't be, even if it had Flash 13% (2,283 votes)
I am not interested in the iPad and I don't care either way 5% (888 votes)

So, currently 32% of people are interested in the iPad, and either don't want or don't care about Flash support.

50% of respondents are interested in the iPad and want Flash support, or would be interested if the iPad supported Flash.

Although not scientific, this poll makes it clear that people care about this subject. What they will tolerate on a mobile phone is not necessarily what they will tolerate on a device Apple is marketing as a transformational way of viewing the web.

Quote:
Apple is the largest supplier of *mobile* devices in the world. Bigger than Sony, Nokia, Palm, etc.


Apple is pretty fast and loose with numbers as regards this. They count laptops as "mobile devices" to get those numbers. They also define "largest supplier" by revenue. If you use the traditional, well-accepted definition of "mobile devices," and the more accepted metric of "total number of devices sold,' then Nokia is still in the lead by a large margin. Something Nokia addressed today.

Just 'cause Steve said it doesn't make it so. smile

Top
#8047 - 01/29/10 11:00 PM Re: iPad [Re: Hal Itosis]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Quote:
Did you watch the event?


I can't. It requires proprietary QuickTime codecs, and Apple does not make QuickTime available for Linux users. They also are extremely litigious toward anyone trying to reverse engineer their codecs.

This is why open formats on the web are important. Don't complain about Real or Microsoft's proprietary codecs that don't work on a Mac, because Apple is doing the exact same thing.

Top
#8048 - 01/29/10 11:05 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

Quote:
And "Works For Me" != "Will Work For Everyone In The iPad's Target Demographic."

Quote:
What they will tolerate on a mobile phone is not necessarily what they will tolerate on a device Apple is marketing as a transformational way of viewing the web.

Quote:
I guarantee you, the more Apple gains market share...


Which is the problem, then? That Apple will fail to gain market share by misreading the desires of the market? Or that Apple will continue to gain market share—presumably, by making and selling devices that people want?

Seems to me that if all those unhappy over the iPad's shortcomings exercise their marketplace vote by simply not buying the product, the draconian future you fear will never arrive.
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#8049 - 01/29/10 11:20 PM Re: iPad [Re: dkmarsh]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
The more I gain weight, the less healthy I become.

This does not mean, "I will inevitably gain weight, and I am doing so right now."

Top
#8050 - 01/29/10 11:27 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

YouTube - Apple iPad: Steve Jobs Keynote Jan 27 2010 Part 1 (Parts 2-8 also available).

Perfectly viewable via a proprietary format.
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#8051 - 01/29/10 11:36 PM Re: iPad [Re: dkmarsh]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Quote:
Perfectly viewable via a proprietary format.


A proprietary format with a Free Software implementation that Adobe has not threatened with legal action.

Top
#8053 - 01/29/10 11:56 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
OK, so I watched the first minute of the YouTube keynote.

"These devices are going to have to be far better at certain key tasks. Better than a laptop. Better than a smartphone."

And the first thing Jobs mentions is web browsing.

And it will do this better by not offering Flash? That's the same as an iPhone, which Hal says is OK with everybody. But that's not how Steve pitched it. He said it would be better. That's the whole point. It's better than an iPhone. It's a whole new product category.

And it's clearly not.

Check out this response. That pretty much sums up how a lot of people feel.

Think about this. If a week ago I had told you that Microsoft was introducing a tablet computer that they were saying was a transformational device, even "magical" (Steve's own word), but that the device could not multitask and had no support for Flash content, what would you have said? Never mind how you feel about Windows, what would you have said about these technological limitations?

If you won't say the same thing about Apple, I personally would question your ability to think critically. And many would label you a fanboy. I don't mean to be harsh, but it seems pretty obvious from the reviews, polls, and response that a LOT of people consider this device technolgically handicapped, and not at all the transformational device in a whole new product category that Jobs said it was.

I know a lot of FTM users love Apple. But don't love them blindly. Think different!

Top
#8054 - 01/30/10 07:00 AM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
crarko Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Minnesota USA
So I wonder how long it will take Apple to sell the first million of them? The release weekend or maybe a whole month? wink
_________________________
---

The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth. - Niels Bohr

Top
#8055 - 01/30/10 07:40 AM Re: iPad [Re: crarko]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

Although it's been fun reviewing early iPhone reactions in iPhone Death Watch ("The iPhone’s willful disregard of the global handset market will come back to haunt Apple"), it's also kind of instructive to revisit the initial responses to Apple's New Thing (iPod) ("All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about an MP3 player? I want something new! I want them to think differently!").
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#8063 - 01/30/10 02:23 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Originally Posted By: mneptok
Yes, but the iPad is not a mobile phone nor a music player. Take a look at the survey Ars Technica is running today. The current breakdown:

I'm interested in the iPad and I do not want Flash support 20% (3,326 votes)
I'm interested in the iPad and I do want Flash support 30% (5,194 votes)
I'm interested in the iPad and I don't care either way 12% (1,963 votes)
I'm not interested in the iPad but I would if it had Flash 20% (3,393 votes)
I'm not interested in the iPad and I still wouldn't be, even if it had Flash 13% (2,283 votes)
I am not interested in the iPad and I don't care either way 5% (888 votes)

So, currently 32% of people are interested in the iPad, and either don't want or don't care about Flash support.

50% of respondents are interested in the iPad and want Flash support, or would be interested if the iPad supported Flash.

Although not scientific, this poll makes it clear that people care about this subject. What they will tolerate on a mobile phone is not necessarily what they will tolerate on a device Apple is marketing as a transformational way of viewing the web.

Quote:
Apple is the largest supplier of *mobile* devices in the world. Bigger than Sony, Nokia, Palm, etc.


Apple is pretty fast and loose with numbers as regards this. They count laptops as "mobile devices" to get those numbers. They also define "largest supplier" by revenue. If you use the traditional, well-accepted definition of "mobile devices," and the more accepted metric of "total number of devices sold,' then Nokia is still in the lead by a large margin. Something Nokia addressed today.

Just 'cause Steve said it doesn't make it so. smile

You're right.
The iPad is doomed.
Apple is doomed.
Doomed i say!

So why do you care? grin

[Nokia? Gimme a break. They could fall off the face of the Earth today, it wouldn't matter one whit.]

Top
#8064 - 01/30/10 02:33 PM Re: iPad [Re: dkmarsh]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)


Edited by Hal Itosis (01/30/10 02:50 PM)

Top
#8066 - 01/30/10 05:05 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
I love when people put words in my mouth.

These are my original points:

1). Having no Flash support and no multitasking is a technological limitation, and does not make the iPad a revolutionary, "magical," transformational device that does web surfing better than a smartphone.

2). DRM is bad for users as it limits their choice. The iPad is a DRM vending machine.

This has nothing to do with sales. I never, at any point projected success or failure of this device from a sales perspective. Granted, a non-scientific poll at Ars seems to back up my claim that missing Flash bothers a lot of people. But it's non-scientific, and Ars readers tend to be more inclined to think critically and value their freedoms.

Sure, Apple may sell a million iPads. That has absolutely zero bearing on whether the device is a technological milestone that redefines a product category and offers heretofore unseen features.

Hell, Apple will probably sell at least 100K units to people that have to have the latest and greatest Apple product just because they buy into the "Apple lifestyle" marketing ploys.

"This device has some pretty big limitations, and the DRM involved is pretty abhorrent," does not mean I am saying, "This device will be a commercial failure."

I never said Apple's market share would grow or shrink.

I never said, "Apple does not play any role in the mobile device market." I said that their figures were skewed. Mobile device market analysts are also puzzled by Apple's claims.

I never said, "Flash is a great content delivery platform."

I get it. You like Apple. I didn't expect much different from a forum like this. But has that so clouded your vision that you have to defend everything they do, even if you have to invent arguments from my mouth to do it?

Top
#8069 - 01/30/10 09:05 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Originally Posted By: Jeff Glueck
Many Flash applications use 50 megabytes or more of runtime memory. That’s just too much for handhelds today.

There is only onemobile” device running native Flash in the world: the Nokia N900, a Maemo Linux device which is very close to a full computer with a 1 Ghz CPU, and retails for up to 700 Euros. In practice, even the N900 cannot deliver a useful Flash experience over a 3G connection. When we tried, it could only crawl to 1-2 frames per second with 100% CPU utilization. That’s not a video. It’s a slide show.


See the article for more reasoned thoughts: The Flash is always greener: Why the iPhone won’t have Flash anytime soon

[edit: looks like Flash 10 has a ways to go yet: AnandTech Tests GPU Accelerated Flash 10.1 Prerelease]

So much for "point" #1.


>> DRM is abhorrent.

That's a popular opinion among pirates. I see nothing to argue about (or even discuss). If that's how you feel, fine with me.


Edited by Hal Itosis (01/30/10 09:25 PM)

Top
#8070 - 01/30/10 09:40 PM Re: iPad [Re: Hal Itosis]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Quote:
So much for "point" #1.


Ummm ... hardly. You are basically saying, "The point that you assert that the iPad is technically limited is made moot by the fact that the iPad is technically limited."

If Apple wants to not enable Flash on the iPad, fine. Just don't bill it as a revolutionary, indeed "magical," product that enables a web experience far superior to a smartphone.

Because that's exactly how Jobs described it. And it's simply not true. The reasons that it is not true have no bearing on the lack of veracity.

Quote:
That's a popular opinion among pirates.


So it's fine when Jobs calls for an end to DRM on audio files on the iTunes store, but anyone that then says that the same logic and ethics should be applied to other media is somehow a "pirate?"

I suggest you look at the Defective By Design website. It discusses the problems with DRM, and is most certainly not run by "pirates."

When I earlier complained about the DRM facets of Apple's business and products, your response was, While i agree that 100% of what you said is indeed factual ...

I'm a little confused that you would agree with my principles (although you say most people don't care) but then relegate them to the domain of pirates.

Top
#8075 - 01/30/10 10:48 PM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Originally Posted By: mneptok
Quote:
So much for "point" #1.

Ummm ... hardly. You are basically saying, "The point that you assert that the iPad is technically limited is made moot by the fact that the iPad is technically limited."

If Apple wants to not enable Flash on the iPad, fine. Just don't bill it as a revolutionary, indeed "magical," product that enables a web experience far superior to a smartphone.

Because that's exactly how Jobs described it. And it's simply not true. The reasons that it is not true have no bearing on the lack of veracity.

So -- unless something supports Flash -- it can't be revolutionary? Ha! I view it "differently". The fact that Apple *chose* to ignore the whole Flash paradigm *is* revolutionary, in-and-of itself. smirk

As far as "magical" goes, i'm not here to defend Steve's marketing-speak. But, if this device manages to attract a new type of user (or create a venue toward which current users gravitate), and Apple's stock shoots up as a result... that will be magical enough for me. [cough*dividend*cough]


Originally Posted By: mneptok
Quote:
That's a popular opinion among pirates.

So it's fine when Jobs calls for an end to DRM on audio files on the iTunes store, but anyone that then says that the same logic and ethics should be applied to other media is somehow a "pirate?"

I suggest you look at the Defective By Design website. It discusses the problems with DRM, and is most certainly not run by "pirates."

When I earlier complained about the DRM facets of Apple's business and products, your response was, While i agree that 100% of what you said is indeed factual ...

I'm a little confused that you would agree with my principles (although you say most people don't care) but then relegate them to the domain of pirates.

Technological facts are one thing, and "principles" are another. I really haven't judged anyone's principles... i merely stated another fact. [pirates hate DRM.] Draw whatever conclusion you desire.

--

I'm just trying to *understand* the iPad. If you can help with that endeavor, please do.

[Can we bury the Flash business yet? Given what i've read (and linked to), it makes perfect sense for Apple to ban it from products such as this. Perhaps you should wait a year, see how things go... and then pick up an iPad Pro.]


Edited by Hal Itosis (01/30/10 10:57 PM)

Top
#8076 - 01/30/10 11:37 PM Re: iPad [Re: Hal Itosis]
mneptok Offline


Registered: 08/12/09
Loc: Albuquerque, NM USA
Quote:
So -- unless something supports Flash -- it can't be revolutionary?


That's hardly my point. I would be saying these exact same things if the iPad did not support Javascript, CSS, or other widely-used web technologies.

You cannot claim a product delivers a significantly better browsing experience than does a smartphone when that product fails to implement the same widely-used technologies as does a smartphone.

Jobs said the iPad delivers a significantly better web browsing experience than does the iPhone. It was among the first points he made in the product launch.

Simple question. How? "A bigger screen," ain't gonna deliver on that promise. And that's really the only difference I see. Am I missing something obvious?

Quote:
Technological facts are one thing, and "principles" are another. I really haven't judged anyone's principles... i merely stated another fact. [pirates hate DRM.] Draw whatever conclusion you desire.


It was pretty clear, at least to me, from your tone and context that you are now dismissing arguments against DRM as being a tempest in a teacup, and of concern only to those interested in engaging in intellectual property theft.

Top
#8077 - 01/31/10 12:16 AM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
Hal Itosis Offline


Registered: 09/03/09
Loc: 10.6.8 (build 10K549)
Whatever.

Top
#8078 - 01/31/10 01:54 AM Re: iPad [Re: dkmarsh]
ryck Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Okanagan Valley
Originally Posted By: dkmarsh
....... it's also kind of instructive to revisit the initial responses to Apple's New Thing (iPod) ("All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about an MP3 player? I want something new! I want them to think differently!").


I think that, with the iPod, Apple was marketing. i.e. recognizing and filling a market need as opposed to developing a product and trying to "sell" it.

When the iPod came along music downloading was very popular but it was illegal and it was done on players that were a bit complicated to operate. Apple was smart in concluding: "The market wants to get music from the internet legally and they want to do it simply."

I'm unconvinced that's entirely the case with the iPad, particularly the part about reading books on it. I cannot imagine reading a novel or any other lengthy book on a screen.

However, I can see a person getting their morning paper on an iPad, as they travel to work on a commuter train, because they can link to related news on video et cetera.

ryck


Edited by ryck (01/31/10 01:56 AM)
_________________________
ryck

iMac (Retina 5K, 27", 2017), 3.4 GHz Intel Core i5, 8GB RAM, 2400 MHz DDR4
OS High Sierra 10.13.6
Canon MX710 Printer
Epson Perfection V500 Photo Scanner
Time Machine on 320GB OWC Mercury OTG Pro
Carbon Copy Clone on 500GB OWC Mercury OTG Pro

Top
#8079 - 01/31/10 05:31 AM Re: iPad [Re: ryck]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

But the iTunes [Music] Store—the solution to "The market wants to get music from the internet legally and they want to do it simply"—wasn't launched until a full year and a half after the introduction of the iPod. (Heck, the App Store wasn't launched until a full year after the introduction of the iPhone, yet now is widely held to be the iPhone's raison d'être.) So until the iPad has been upon us for awhile, I do think the current reactions can be seen as analogous to those experienced by the iPod.

As for the reading experience, I think there's a distinction to be made between the iPad and devices such as the Kindle which use e-ink technology. Any "brilliant" display is likely to be hard on the eyes when reading for an extended period of time, but the Kindle and other dedicated e-readers don't employ such displays. Would you disqualify those as well?

Or are you saying the "form factor" of a flat-screen-display housed in a rigid body—however thin and light—doesn't comport with your sense of the novel-reading experience? I'm inclined to agree with you in specific regard to lengthy books.

Interestingly, though, my news and information gathering habits have evolved over the past eight or ten years to the point at which virtually all useful written data is acquired via the internet...and the experience of consuming it on an upright monitor while sitting in a desk chair is barely tolerable at best. A laptop would be somewhat better, but it'd be a lot easier to justify a $500 device I can hold in my hands than a $1000 device not designed for reading postures and needing to be charged every three hours.

And yes, if I were only interested in using an electronic device for reading, and someone's e-reader offered the ability to download newspapers, magazine articles, .pdf instruction manuals, blogs, forums, knowledge-base documents, and email in addition to books...then I'd probably prefer the e-ink solution.

_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#8084 - 01/31/10 08:10 AM Re: iPad [Re: mneptok]
crarko Offline


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Minnesota USA
Originally Posted By: mneptok
I love when people put words in my mouth.

These are my original points:


Actually your original point was to make another in a long string of banal juvenile jokes about the product name.
_________________________
---

The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth. - Niels Bohr

Top
Page 2 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 >

Moderator:  alternaut, cyn