iPad will not fail


Recommended Posts

And honestly, I don't think that Apple really would care with the billions they have in the bank if they tossed out a few million on a product that wasn't incredibly successful if it helped them test key technology for future products like iPhones and iPods which are incredibly successful. As I said, if they threw their own processor in an iPhone, which sells over a million on it's first day, and it has issues, that's a LOT of people to deal with. If they have issues in the iPad, which might sell that many total in it's entire lifetime, that's a lot fewer people to deal with while fixing the issues.

Maybe the higher-ups at Apple wouldn't care, but the shareholders absolutely would, and if Apple decides to just waste money on projects they know won't be very successful, you can bet the shareholders would be removing some of the executives that manage the corporation. Including the CEO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you say this knowing the device lacks Flash and having not even used it yet?

Flash is dying fast, with HTML5 coming people will slowly stop using flash and the web will be a better place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flash is dying fast, with HTML5 coming people will slowly stop using flash and the web will be a better place

Unfortunately, HTML5 will be little more than a buzzword until it's fully supported in IE, the dominat browser for the Web.

And please provides sources and statistics showing that Flash is "dying."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the higher-ups at Apple wouldn't care, but the shareholders absolutely would, and if Apple decides to just waste money on projects they know won't be very successful, you can bet the shareholders would be removing some of the executives that manage the corporation. Including the CEO.

I don't think you understand how many products work in big companies like that. Look at video games for an example. The Playstation 3, still to this day, loses money. The reason this is ok is because so much money is made back in other aspects such as accessories, game publishing, etc, etc. The same concept applies here. Apple stands to save a LOT of money with custom silicon. Plus, like with the video game industry, there's the money they'll make off app/music/ebook/accessory sales as well, be it a lot or a little. Real shareholders, and I'm not talking about Bob down the street that owns 100 shares of Apple, understand that products are created for a reason. I can't find the exact numbers, but Apple has billions in the bank, and no debt. Obviously they know what they are doing when they release products.

The thing that will matter a lot more will be to see how much Apple is putting into these devices vs what they are selling them for. If they are selling them for a loss, then it's hurts them more. If they sell them at a profit, then they are making money selling a test bed for new technology, and how can you complain about that? R&D money spent on this product is very much applicable to iPhones and iPods as well, so I think in this case you can almost ignore a lot of that and just look at manufacturing costs. Overall, I can assure you, this is a good move for Apple. While the product may not sell millions and millions, it's very relevant to the interests of Apple in the future of all iPhone/iPod/iPad devices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flash is dying fast, with HTML5 coming people will slowly stop using flash and the web will be a better place

LOL I keep hearing this and it's absolute nonsense. First of all, HTML5 cannot do all the things Flash can do. So fails there.

The video codec for HTML5 video is still not established and it's nowhere close to being established because everyone wants their codec to be universal so they can make money.

Live Video Streaming is a pipe dream for HTML5 as well. Flash HD with multiple bitrate switching depending on connections on fly is something you can only dream with HTML5 video. Etc etc..

Not all browsers fully support HTML5 and it's very unlikely they will all run it the same way as we've seen with HTML4. This means that you'll have to code your ass off and debug to make sure it works on all browsers well. Flash simply doesn't have that problem.

HTML5 is a pipe dream and even though it will inherit HTML4 it will still not do all the things Flash can. It's just the way it is.

I've heard coders and developers trying to convince me how you can do anything Flash does with CSS/HTML etc.. which is really a delusion because you can't do 3D, you can't do highly creative and interactive experiences, you can't communicate with video and make interactive videos etc etc. None of that will be available in HTML5.

Not to mention with Open Screen Project Flash will be on virtually EVERY single device with over 50 manufacturers supporting it and with Flash 10.1 that has GPU acceleration and hardware h.264 decoding, terrific development tools, Flash is certainly not going to die.

There's a reason why Google uses Flash when they can't do things in their HTML5 or JQuery or whatever....

HTML5 is years and years away from getting widespread and even then, it will still have to support Flash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny how only hardcore Apple fans think that Flash needs to die. Talk about influence.

Fail.

I don't own a single Apple product. My phone is HTC, my PC is custom built desktop computer (not a laptop), and I'm transitioning from Windows XP to Windows 7 as we speak. I don't have an MP3/media player. Spotify all the way for my music needs on my PC.

:rolleyes:

The internet is ridiculous these days.

There's nothing ridiculous about that statement. Flash is on 90-95% of the world's computers. That means that a single security hole covers just about all computers online. That's insanely dangerous. A single point of failure for the entire web!

And I haven't even gotten into how it's inaccessible (try using a screen reader with Flash), slow, has an insecure architecture, is closed and proprietary, etc. The entire web depends on one single vendor to deliver Flash. That's just insantiy. The web is supposed to be open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, HTML5 will be little more than a buzzword until it's fully supported in IE, the dominat browser for the Web.

HTML5 will be supported by all other browsers, and they are quickly stealing market share from IE.

And please provides sources and statistics showing that Flash is "dying."

One can only hope...

LOL I keep hearing this and it's absolute nonsense. First of all, HTML5 cannot do all the things Flash can do. So fails there.

It can do video, which is probably the most important for now. Better yet, browsers will have hardware acceleration and stuff like Canvas, 3D support, etc.

HTML5 is a pipe dream and even though it will inherit HTML4 it will still not do all the things Flash can. It's just the way it is.

HTML5 is more than just a Flash replacement, though.

I've heard coders and developers trying to convince me how you can do anything Flash does with CSS/HTML etc.. which is really a delusion because you can't do 3D, you can't do highly creative and interactive experiences, you can't communicate with video and make interactive videos etc etc. None of that will be available in HTML5.

3D is coming. You can indeed do highly creative and interactive experiences with open web standards, and more and more of it is becoming possible all the time.

There's a reason why Google uses Flash when they can't do things in their HTML5 or JQuery or whatever....

They are using Flash because YouTube was using Flash when they bought it. Now they want to move to HTML5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are using Flash because YouTube was using Flash when they bought it. Now they want to move to HTML5.

Yes..I'm sure they are using Flash on StreetView and other things like their apps because of YouTube.. LOL

HTML5 is a pipe dream. It will take years and years and years to get all of the stuff to work together (considering all relevant companies agree on setting aside their personal interests) and even then it will not be as simple as Flash. Do you even have an understanding on how and what level of proficiency you need to have to code 3d stuff in Canvas? And Canvas is 2D not 3D. Flash CS5 which I have right now, has insanely improved Physics engine, 3D support, multi-touch, iPhone publishing, GPU acceleration, hardware h.264 decoding and so many other things that's puts it even further away from HTML5's capabilities.

This thing is nowhere close to really even giving similar experiences that Flash can provide not to mention in authoring. I don't want to build sites that all look alike because they are up to some standard. I want to build revolutionary interfaces and create immersive experiences users can interact with. HTML5 will even most likely use 6 system fonts like we have now.

For plain videos HTML5 might work for a lot of sites, but without any interactivity, no live streaming or it's going to be a lot of hassle etc etc..

HTML5 will not kill Flash and Flash will not replace HTML5 because that's how it is and how it was imagined. You will still be able to use Flash with HTML5 and Flash will offer things that can't be done with HTML5. Simple as that.

So if you want to make simple websites without a lot of hassle HTML5 will help as it simplifies the process when compared to HTML4 but that's about it.

This is HTML5 website using canvas for background (http://www.madcapstudios.com/). With all the interactivity you will see glitters, flying mouse cursors and similar all over the place again. Just as it is with Flash. It's always a nature of the beast. When you make tools available to everyone and it's accepted there are those who are less creative then others. That doesn't mean that you can't make miracles and fantastic things with it, it just means that there's a lot of non-creative people out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is HTML5 website using canvas for background (http://www.madcapstudios.com/). With all the interactivity you will see glitters, flying mouse cursors and similar all over the place again. Just as it is with Flash. It's always a nature of the beast. When you make tools available to everyone and it's accepted there are those who are less creative then others. That doesn't mean that you can't make miracles and fantastic things with it, it just means that there's a lot of non-creative people out there.

+1

Flash is an interactivity platform. It allows for interactivity. It can be used or abused, but its use on the internet has no bearing on the actual platform.

The fact that the web is just heading towards what Flash has been doing for years is an indication that Adobe had the right idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the iPad is the OS. I think they went with iPhone OS over OS X because the processor is ARM based not x86. They really should have went with an x86, even if it would have decreased battery life, it would have made the iPad far more versatile. Right now it's nothing but a bulky iPod Touch.

Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NciO7AEqKYE

http://www.funnyordie.co.uk/videos/d2b714361c/hello

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until they can get universal agreement on the video codec to be used, HTML5 is going nowhere fast. Even when it does appear, it won't kill flash.

Flash may kill flash if they don't manage to patch up all the bugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The iPad is a major disappointment because it lacks many important features:

* No Desktop OS

* No real File System support

* No printing support

* No Multitasking

* It doesn't offer any real computing

* It doesn't have a real market and tries to create a new one. The problem is that I cannot imagine many usage scenarios for it. You cannot really use it as a phone, so the phone goes always with you. Now, many people have also a netbook or laptop with them, but they wouldn't carry a third device with them. They would look for a better alternative to their netbook/laptop. Where does the iPad fit with its many limitations?

* No MS Office support. You have to be kidding us Apple...

* No VGA Output to connect to a beamer or external monitors...

* No Camera for Video Chatting

* No real Internet

* Supports only H.264 videos, just like the iPhone...

At its current state I can only see the following target groups for the iPad:

* Rich people who don't have anything better to do. I would suggest they donate this money to Haiti...

* I can imagine seeing iPads in movies doing things that are of course not possible, just because it looks cool.

* Idiots who are caught in the Apple lies

* People that never used a computer before and think that this is a "computer"

* Idiots..Did I mention it?

* Mac Fanboys...

+1. This thing is a total joke of a device in it's current form. I'm baffled by anyone who would buy it. Oh, well. It's their money to waste...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will admit that I don't really understand how the iPod ever took off at such steep prices, but one thing it definitely had going for it is that it streamlined something consumers increasingly wanted to do. People wanted a big music library in their pocket, with easy management and an easy way to get media for it. The iPad, however, does not do what people want (above all because one of the primary things people look for in larger devices is multitasking).

If you look at the iPod, one of the main criticisms (mine included) is that it does not do enough for its price point. If you look at the iPad, the ridicule very rarely revolves around value. Some people do not even mention the price in their complaints. It's all about the device plain not doing what people want.

I am pretty confident that this device will fail. I also think that Apple will blow everybody away with a second-generation iPad that will be everything the original should have been, as opposed to just burying the brand, but that is another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really want to buy one, to use as an ebook/internet browser while chilling on sofa or in bed.

Iphone = screen too small

Netbooks = akward shape/slower

Laptops = Need a desk/floor/pillow thing, or it'll burn your balls.

Desktop = Sitting at a desk, not on a sofa or in bed.

I'll be waiting for the second revision, multi-tasking and for it to be jailbroken. Hopefully we will start seeing more great applications for it, just look at iWorks for starters.

Also the price is too high in my opinion, $400 or ?250 would be about right.

Same here. I'm thinking of buying one to have on the Coffee table...

When I get home from work, can just pick it up, and browse the web or read the news. No need to wait for the computer to start up, and no tiny iPhone screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious how people are defining 'fail' in terms of the iPad.

If it isn't the next iPod Mini - where everyone and their dog owned several - is it automatically a failure?

What if the iPad is only as popular as a Kindle (approximately 1.5 million sold since 2007)?

Without clearly defining what you mean by failure it's almost impossible to be wrong. You can say "This

thing will never take off" and when Apple doesn't ship 15-million units/quarter like iPods do then you can

say "I knew it all along".

For example, If you use the iPod Touch/iPhone as the yard stick for success then the only video game

console that comes close to being successful is the Wii (43 million units in 2.5 years). Xbox360 and

Playstation 3 are failures of monstrous failures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious how people are defining 'fail' in terms of the iPad.

If it isn't the next iPod Mini - where everyone and their dog owned several - is it automatically a failure?

What if the iPad is only as popular as a Kindle (approximately 1.5 million sold since 2007)?

Without clearly defining what you mean by failure it's almost impossible to be wrong. You can say "This

thing will never take off" and when Apple doesn't ship 15-million units/quarter like iPods do then you can

say "I knew it all along".

For example, If you use the iPod Touch/iPhone as the yard stick for success then the only video game

console that comes close to being successful is the Wii (43 million units in 2.5 years). Xbox360 and

Playstation 3 are failures of monstrous failures.

I think it will enjoy the same kind of success as the Air. That is, it won't be popular, and it will be rare to see anyone with one, but it will make Apple enough profit in order for them to keep producing it. Basically, it will fill a niche market and nothing more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until they can get universal agreement on the video codec to be used, HTML5 is going nowhere fast. Even when it does appear, it won't kill flash.

There's more to HTML5 than just video. Video is just a small part of it. Important yes, but by no means the biggest part of HTML5.

Yes..I'm sure they are using Flash on StreetView and other things like their apps because of YouTube.. LOL

What are you trying to say? Google is known to support stuff as long as it's supported in Firefox, leaving IE with old solutions. Now Google have a browser of their own, and will obviously change their services over time to use technologies built into that browser. Why would Google bother to implement all this new stuff without using any of it? Just because something is using Flash today doesn't mean that it will ina few years.

HTML5 is a pipe dream. It will take years and years and years to get all of the stuff to work together

Considering that all the browsers except IE are basically doing HTML5 and IE is coming eventually, HTML5 is definitely picking up steam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will enjoy the same kind of success as the Air. That is, it won't be popular, and it will be rare to see anyone with one, but it will make Apple enough profit in order for them to keep producing it. Basically, it will fill a niche market and nothing more

I see all tablets as a niche, but they might surprise me yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's more to HTML5 than just video. Video is just a small part of it. Important yes, but by no means the biggest part of HTML5.

Video, you mean that thing that's the reason why people are calling HTML5 a flash killer.

When companies start porting Flash sites to HTML 5, they're going to realize one epic truth:

"Hey, why is my CPU usage still spiking?"

Because to animate anything at the smoothness Flash requires, you'll still need a powerful CPU.

There's a place for hardware accelerated Flash in this world still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flash may kill flash if they don't manage to patch up all the bugs.

As long as it is in as wide use as it is at the moment, I can't see it dying, people will put up with the bugs if there isn't a better alternative

There's more to HTML5 than just video. Video is just a small part of it. Important yes, but by no means the biggest part of HTML5.

Yep, but the video element was the one being mentioned here, and unless they get some agreement on the codec, the spec would have to be ratified without the video element.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.