HP's competition for the iPad!

[Robert Maxwell]

Microsoft's attempts at vendor lock-in are pretty piss-poor, in my opinion. Windows Activation aside--because it is so easily bypassed--Microsoft doesn't control what software can and can't run on Windows. They don't require you to purchase a license from them to develop Windows software, and so forth.

Any Linux or BSD flavor would, of course, be preferable for commodity PC hardware if you really want to avoid even the appearance of vendor lock-in.

I haven't used Windows for years, but from what I've read about how Microsoft treats users and developers on Windows, I'm surprised (shocked) that you would use such a platform.

Eh, I have to use it for work, plus I play a lot of games, so Windows is about all there is for that. WINE just doesn't cut it. I use Linux a lot, too, but Windows would be hard to abandon completely--not so much for anything the OS offers but rather the software that's tied to it. I feel no urge to upgrade past XP, though.

To my knowledge, Apple (nor any other computer/software company) can hold a candle to the things that Microsoft has both attempted and/or accomplished. And I've personally seen Microsoft bare down on people for software piracy who weren't even using Microsoft products.

I'm not claiming Microsoft isn't sleazy as hell--they are. They're just supremely incompetent when it comes to locking people in, too. I have not had any experiences with being accused of pirating MS products, though, so I can't speak to that.

But I'm curious... you seem to be holding Apple's standards for iPhone/iPad development up against Windows rather than something like the Xbox. I don't know about Windows, but I can write software for a Mac without paying a single cent. On the other hand, I don't see the Xbox as an open (license free) system for development.

You brought up MS, and I was just responding to that. However, you're right--it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. I would compare the iPhone to the other smartphone platforms out there:

1. Blackberry -- I've never had one, but what little I've seen tells me there's a lot of vendor lock-in there, not least because you're forced to use RIM's network.
2. Windows Mobile -- Easily the crappiest smartphone OS I've ever had the displeasure to use. The less said about it, the better.
3. Palm -- I have a Palm Centro right now. There are tons of hacks and free programs out there for it. I love that 10+ years' worth of software still works on it. I have not used the new webOS, since I don't have a pre.
4. Android -- I've played with this a little bit and I find it very promising, and Google doesn't seem to be keen on locking it down--rather, they want its openness to help it thrive. My next phone may well be an Android-based unit.

As far as I know, it is only Apple that has created a system whereby only "approved" applications may be distributed to smartphones. I don't have a problem with that in and of itself, but they also make it the only source for iPhone apps, unless you want to jailbreak your phone which can cause all sorts of other problems.

Heck, I could actually start development of Mac software on a Linux or BSD system using GNUstep as a foundation as GNUstep was originally based on the OpenStep Specifications, which in turn are what Cocoa APIs (used in both Mac and iPhone environments) are based on.

But you cannot develop iPhone/iPad software on anything but a bona fide Intel Mac.

So are you holding Apple to a higher standard than Microsoft? I mean shouldn't there be just one standard for everything?

You can write Windows software on any other OS, too, though God only knows why someone would want to.

It is funny... Apple is just some company, and really doesn't have the ability to effect anyone's lives if those people don't want it to. Microsoft has it's hands in nearly every aspect of our world (and by world, I mean most countries). Microsoft is much like the banks that were too big to fail... no matter what, the world couldn't survive if Microsoft disappeared at this point.

I don't care what Apple does with their computers, really. I care more about what they do in the mobile/handheld market, because I actually buy such devices, and I don't like Apple's tendency to lock things down. Apple is a trendsetter in this area, too, and I don't want to see others following their lead.

Literally, Apple doesn't know anything about vender lock-in compared to Microsoft, and Microsoft has been willing at times to pay multi-million dollar fines daily to protect that lock-in. I've seen Apple do some bad things... but they are still amateurs at lock-in.

I think we are concerned about different kinds of lock-in, and that's where we're diverging. Microsoft does not control what apps wind up on Windows--or their smartphones, for that matter. Apple provides a single source for iPhone/iPad apps, and only Apple-approved software may be distributed.

Imagine if you bought a computer with Windows on it--you've already paid for the license--and then, you want to develop an application. Now, imagine Microsoft gets to tell you whether or not you're allowed to develop and distribute said app! That would piss me off. This is what Apple does with the iPhone.

Microsoft is sleazy as all hell, but they don't act as gatekeepers deciding who can and can't develop Windows software. Apple doesn't do this on the Mac either, so why they insist on doing it for the iPhone and iPad is beyond me. I can understand the ease-of-use argument, but then why forbid all other routes of deployment outside the App Store?

 

[mswood]

While Apple has denied programs on a few occasions for fear of competition, the largest factor has been from fear of lawsuits.

That to me is actually the bigger issue of purchasing all apps from apple.

 

[mswood]

So, some of the specs and price for this new HP is leaking out:

1.6GHz Atom processor
32GB of storage on board storage
8.9-inch, 1024x600 screen
5 hours of battery life

.

The only real negative that I see here is the battery life.

One of the things that truly has surprised me about the ipad is its battery life. I assume when they said 10 hours battery life that would be for things like music or reading. But I've managed more then ten hours playing video off the same charge, that amazed me. And I was reading a review site of music of being over 30 plus hours with 70% charge still left.

The storage size on both device doesn't really bother me, as no single unit is ever (at least not any time soon) going to come close to 4 TB I currently have backup. But unless your personal needs are heavy on apps (mine aren't but everyone's different) I would think in most cases (and certainly with the battery life shown above) that unless you were playing a ripped bluray media 32 should be fine.

 

[Data Holmes]

It's like an iPad... that you can plug a thumb drive in to... Awesome!

And do multiple things with at once, and probably even actualy change the batteries on when they die for good (rather than backing up personal files and shipping your device away and being without it for a several weeks while your multi-hundred dollar battery change takes place.)

Well, for one, there is no battery replacement. If the battery is going, apple replaces the entire ipad. Takes about a week, you mail it to them, they mail a new one back to you.

As for the multiple things at once, all things point to multitasking being in the new iphone os 4.x which is being announced Thursday, with roll out some time late june or early july.

This HP device looks a little more like it in this market for portable computers.

Indeed.

DH's comparisson of this device and what maks a "true" device of this nature with the metric of TNG's PADD is... silly. And, IIRC, even PADDs had removable storage in the form of the Isolinear Chips.

it wasn't really an easily removable item on trek's padd, and we have nothing comparable with the concept of isolinear chips at this point either. The only thing in the works that I know of at this time is Phase-change Memory, which uses a form of glass as the memory but we are still a ways of from it being a practical flash replacement. But it does show promise.

But even of they didn't they had the advantage of being "networked" with the Enterprise computer so anywhere on the ship, and presumably anywhere in the Federation, a person with a PADD could accsess their personal files. With the iPad, saving an internet file-storage service there's no way to get a personal file from your PC to the iPad (that I am aware of.)

There are already apps out there that let you access your home computer remotly over the internet from both your iPhone and iPad. This one http://www.iteleportmobile.com/ seems to be the most popular from what I can tell. Works with both mac and windows computers.

So if the HP "PADD" can have a flash-drive connected to it that gives it a huge advantage over the iPad, a person can move his files from the computer to the "PADD" without having to go through the extra step of putting the file onto a web service and then download it with the iPad.

You can direct transfer files to and from the iPad via wifi or bluetooth from any wifi or bluetooth equipped device... No real extra steps there. And with remote access apps there is no need to transfer any files to the device to access them to begin with.

And, where is it said that devices like these can't have USB ports, headphone jacks or things of that nature?

the iPad has a headphone jack. I never said they couldn't have USB, just that for what these new devices seem to be targeted at doing, usb ports are an "extra" above and beyond it's core design intention. A want, not a need. And I have no problem with a wants being accessories sold separately, which I can buy to add an added feature to my devices. You don't always need "everything and the kitchen sink" built in to a device.

Um, define a true "PADD"?

I don't think the comparison should be to a fictional Star Trek PADD, I think the comparison should be the to the iPad, which is its clear competition.

IF the specs you posted are correct, then it seems like it will compete very well with the iPad. Certainly it has the capability to have more features than the first gen iPad.

I'm not comparing it to the trek device, I just think that the trek nomenclature is correct for this new field of device. It is a Personal Access Display/Device. Not a true computer, like netbooks, tablet pc's, UMPC's ect. It is simply an electronic device which primary function is to allow access to media and content, with limited on board storage primarily for native applications and short term storage of media content for off network access, from a central "library" computer, media server, or the internet.

Why would I want a device like that when I could have one that does the same thing but is also built well for storage and has flash drive capacity? What's the point of matching a device to something that you think could be cool when you can make it do even more?

First off, no one is telling you you should want such a device. My questions are as follows, Why would you need such a device to be built for such high storage when it doesn't need it thanks to remote access? Is flash drive capacity necessary for a library computer access device? Why do you need a device to do more than it's designed to do, I mean is your car amphibious? Does your microwave make and dispense ice as well? Will your refrigerator heat your dinner?

The iPad really is a remote access device, not a storage device, not a "mini computer", not a laptop replacement.

 

[FrankR]

About a year ago I finally put two and two together regarding why Apple does things like leaving out the USB port, or SD drive slot.

Apple is a _hardware_ company. If they leave out things like Multi-Tasking, a USB port, SD slot, or a front facing camera, they can then wait a year then launch a "revolutionary Multi-tasking iPad" or the iPad-SD, or "game changing iPad video conferencing app; only for the iPad-video". And sell new SKU's of the iPad with the hardware to support these features.

 

[RoJoHen]

Well, price, for one. More capability can push up the pricetag.

But Apple also likes to push new approaches. They were the first to eliminate the floppy drive, now they're eliminating the USB port on the tablet....maybe that backfires, maybe it pushes things in a new direction again. Time will tell.

With the iPad, saving an internet file-storage service there's no way to get a personal file from your PC to the iPad (that I am aware of.)

I'm not terribly familiar with the specs of these things, but couldn't you just remotely log into your computer over a wireless LAN and copy whatever that way?

Yeah, I suppose you could. Still seems to me that a USB port would be useful in some situations where maybe a LAN wouldn't be feasable.

I agree. I'm sure the day will come when the entire world will be wireless, but we're not there yet. I have a feeling a lot of iPad users are going to end up complaining about the lack of USB.

 

[TheGodBen]

I haven't used Windows for years, but from what I've read about how Microsoft treats users and developers on Windows, I'm surprised (shocked) that you would use such a platform.

I don't know where you've been for the last few years, but every few months I've been reading stories about devs who claim they have been treated shoddily by Apple, especially when it comes to the App Store. There's frequent stories about apps being pulled from the store with no reason, or an app being denied from being put on the store with only a vague description of what's wrong with it. Some of those stories are just the developer whining, such as the recent one by a dev who increased the charge on his crap game from $4 to $400 as an experiment to see who would buy it, Apple was right to pull that app. But others have legitimate concerns.

As for users, as far as I'm concerned tying the iPhone to a single carrier was a big middle finger to users from the start, as is the vendor lock-in when it comes to the apps which you're allowed to install. Would I have downloaded any of the tranche of moderately erotic apps they pulled little over a month ago, supposedly because of complaints? No, but it scares me that they did.

The truth is that both Apple and Microsoft are giant, soulless corporations that want money and control in equal measure, and you can throw Google into that group too. I don't trust or support any of them. I use Windows and an Xbox not because I'm an MS fan, but because I like video games and those are the best options for video gamers. It doesn't bother me if people use Macs or iPhones, so long as I can keep using my PC and Nokia phone it doesn't affect me one iota.

I'm not going to buy either, but if I had to choose between the HP Slate or an iPad then I'd choose the Slate. It would probably be slower and buggier and it doesn't look as nice, but it seems like it's more suited to what I'd want to be able to do with such a device. It's as simple as that.

 

[Shaw]

Eh, I have to use it for work, plus I play a lot of games, so Windows is about all there is for that.

Enough said.

By the same standards, I've been working in the Mac community since the 1990s, so that is how I make a living. So I can understand your stance on Microsoft as a platform you use. But I still don't see why you hold Apple to a different standard. I hold both Apple and Microsoft to the same standards.

Granted, I don't read Windows threads, but I'm going to guess that you don't attack Microsoft in these threads the way you've gone after Apple in Apple related threads.

You've proven to me that you can be very fair and reasonable... I'd ask that you think about extending that fairness to Apple as well.

I don't know where you've been for the last few years, but every few months I've been reading stories about devs who claim they have been treated shoddily by Apple, especially when it comes to the App Store.

Poor argumentative tactic... but we'll work with it.

Did I make it sound like I supported Apple? I thought I was pretty specific that I don't trust any corporations (including Apple).

-following your lead-

I don't know where you've been for the last 15-20 years, but I've known (personally) tons of developers and watched their interactions with Apple (and have my own personal experiences working directly with Apple). Lets talk about these as a broad range (rather than focusing just on the worst).

One friend of mine wrote an application back in 2001 for Mac OS X that was truly revolutionary. I wasn't happy with the foundational changes made to Mac OS X over the course of the developer preview releases, and had stuck with the Rhapsody based OS instead (to learn about Rhapsody, please feel free to browse my web site). But when I saw this app, I started using Mac OS X even though I wasn't happy with Mac OS X's short comings.

Now one could get the impression that my feelings for this app had something to do with being friends with this developer, but I hadn't known him before I found the app. And one might also think that my rosy impression was strictly my personal view, but it went on to win a number of design awards, including Most Innovative at the Apple Design Awards. So I wasn't the only one who thought this was great. And it wasn't just great for the original developer, because it was a platform for other developers to write to as well.

So, what happen to this incredible app? This app that seemed to have so much potential.

Apple then stoled all his ideas and implemented them into the next version of Mac OS X (only much worse and in a way that made it less attractive for other developers). This effectively crushed this app out of existence.

It almost came back as a non-Mac application when Sun Microsystems bought the whole thing, but it died in development hell.

That friend is still making software for Macs.

Another friend had put together a very powerful image editing application for NEXTSTEP, and had done pretty well there as Adobe had abandon that market before a port of Photoshop had been made (NEXTSTEP, which made extensive use of Postscript, did get a version of Illustrator). When Apple acquired NeXT, most NeXT developers saw this as an opportunity to finally sell to a larger market. And Apple gave out rosy projections of how soon a new OS was going to be released... all of which hurt the NeXT market (Apple continued to sell NeXT products for another three years) and subsequently NeXT developers. These developers, who live by their applications being sold to the public, were stuck waiting for Apple to finally release an environment to the public that their apps could be sold to. As it turned out, they had to wait for almost 5 years.

But my friend held on while other developers slowly dropped off over that period. And his applications (along with some applications by another friend of mine) were among the first third party apps to be up and running on Mac OS X. Unfortunately Mac OS X wasn't really ready for the public (mainly because Apple had gone down the path of a dual application environment to support companies like Microsoft and Adobe). And being first on Mac OS X wasn't enough to take on Photoshop.

My friend's company quietly closed it's doors one day a couple years later.

As it turns out, it wasn't because he had gone out of business... it was because all of his IP had been bought by a much larger company.

A short time later Mac OS X included a new set of application frameworks for image manipulation called Core Image which included a lot of my friend's work. And then even more parts showed up in a Apple application called Aperture.

That is not a unique case, I can point to features within Mac OS X that were at one time third party apps by friends who ended up working at Apple.

I have yet another friend (I have a lot of friends in the Apple development community... if you guys haven't guest already) who has been developing with NeXT since the beginning. His was the first third party application for NEXTSTEP, the first to take advantage of OPENSTEP, the first third party application for Rhapsody, the first third party application for Mac OS X, one of the first universal third party developers, and had the first third party application to make use of the Core Image frameworks.

How could one developer (a very small developer) do this? The only way is to know what Apple is working on before anyone else outside of Apple... which is exactly how he does it. Apple (and NeXT before them) has given him remarkable access to their technology for more than 22 years.

So the point is... I've seen Apple do everything, and every type of thing, up close and personal (rather than having to wait for it to show up in the news... which most of this stuff doesn't). I could write pages and pages on what I've seen Apple do over the years. I've seen the full stories behind the partial stories which have shown up in the press (sometimes Apple is fairly vilified, sometimes Apple has gotten a raw deal), so I don't need to read about Apple to have a much better idea about them than the average person.

Hopefully that helps fill in where I've been in the last few years. This is how I make a living after all.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Shaw, my beef with Apple at this point is limited pretty much to their lockdown of the App Store and how that development ecosystem works. Other smartphone platforms are far more open, so it's mind-boggling to me that Apple locks theirs down the way they do.

If Apple made a game console and locked it down, I wouldn't really care, since all current consoles are locked up like that.

What I'm concerned about is that Apple gets so much attention for the success of the iPhone and now the iPad, and I worry companies that make similar devices are going to go down that path and use the same approach--lock up who can develop apps for their devices, who can sell them, and for how much.

What Apple does with their own products isn't of great concern to me except for how it sets trends in the industry at large. That's why I don't give two shits what Microsoft does with their smartphone OS. It's crap, everybody knows it's crap, and it's never set trends for anything.

 

[Shaw]

What I'm concerned about is that Apple gets so much attention for the success of the iPhone and now the iPad, and I worry companies that make similar devices are going to go down that path and use the same approach--lock up who can develop apps for their devices, who can sell them, and for how much.

That is a valid point... which is why I hope that Android will force Apple to change. When any one company gains too much power in any one market, everyone suffers.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

What I'm concerned about is that Apple gets so much attention for the success of the iPhone and now the iPad, and I worry companies that make similar devices are going to go down that path and use the same approach--lock up who can develop apps for their devices, who can sell them, and for how much.

That is a valid point... which is why I hope that Android will force Apple to change. When any one company gains too much power in any one market, everyone suffers.

Google is definitely the underdog in this fight, but I hope Android proves you can have a community-supported platform without requiring vendor lock-in at the application level.

 

[Data Holmes]

What I'm concerned about is that Apple gets so much attention for the success of the iPhone and now the iPad, and I worry companies that make similar devices are going to go down that path and use the same approach--lock up who can develop apps for their devices, who can sell them, and for how much.

That is a valid point... which is why I hope that Android will force Apple to change. When any one company gains too much power in any one market, everyone suffers.

Google is definitely the underdog in this fight, but I hope Android proves you can have a community-supported platform without requiring vendor lock-in at the application level.

Is there any other smart phone operating system which is anywhere near as open as google's, because outside of a few small linux based smartphones I can't think of any?

I mean, even Windows is going to it's zune os derived windows mobile 7 which is only going to run apps approved by it's new Windows Phone Marketplace.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Palm was (and is) a relatively open platform, I think. I realize nobody cares about them anymore, though.

 

[TheGodBen]

Poor argumentative tactic... but we'll work with it.

Did I make it sound like I supported Apple? I thought I was pretty specific that I don't trust any corporations (including Apple).

Since we're contrasting one another's debating tactics.

The thread was discussing apps and how Apple controls what apps can and cannot be used on the iPhone/iPad/iTouchMyself, but when you joined the conversation you quoted Robert Maxwell, who was discussing this issue, and started talking about software verification on various systems, 2 of your 3 examples being about Microsoft. Software verification is a separate, albeit annoying, issue, and nobody is going to defend Microsoft for Windows Genuine Advantage, especially since it doesn't work. Now, your point was a bit silly, because for Microsoft to disappear overnight it would involve asteroids hitting all their worldwide HQs and server infrastructures, and if that were to happen I think we can all agree that we've got bigger problems than being unable to reinstall an operating system. No, for Microsoft to go bust it would take several months, which is plenty of time for them to release some sort of patch for their various OSs and software packages that require online validation. But that would never be needed because Microsoft is so important that someone would buy the company and keep the validation servers running, and in a worst case scenario the US government would bail out the company because they couldn't afford to let it collapse. And in the worst worst case scenario where Microsoft collapses overnight, all worldwide software companies collapse overnight, the US government collapses, but I somehow still have electricity and the internet and really need to reinstall Windows on my computer... pirates will have the solution.

But apparently this issue is of such pressing concern to you that you decided to attempt to change the course of discussion in this thread to say things like "No Microsoft, no activation, no Windows" and "We're talking about nearly 20+ years before Apple's disappearance would have a direct effect on me".

So let's see, you ignored the subject you quoted, you went off on a tangent, you described an absurd scenario filled with holes to make Microsoft look ill-prepared for the apocalypse and then explained how Apple products are better suited for it. Did you make it seem like you supported Apple? Why yes, yes you did.

And let's not forget that you chastised me for saying that I "read" about several issues devs have been having with Apple after you said this:

I haven't used Windows for years, but from what I've read about how Microsoft treats users and developers on Windows, I'm surprised (shocked) that you would use such a platform.

Poor argumentative tactic... but nah, I'm done.

 

[Awesome Possum]

About a year ago I finally put two and two together regarding why Apple does things like leaving out the USB port, or SD drive slot.

Apple is a _hardware_ company. If they leave out things like Multi-Tasking, a USB port, SD slot, or a front facing camera, they can then wait a year then launch a "revolutionary Multi-tasking iPad" or the iPad-SD, or "game changing iPad video conferencing app; only for the iPad-video". And sell new SKU's of the iPad with the hardware to support these features.

Now the Steve Job's killer robots are going to come after you for revealing the terrifying truth. Just remember press the center button on the iKill's chest and it will reboot.

That's why some of us just wait will the Apple products. I'm no fanboy, but I do enjoy my old 5th Gen iPod. Although it is starting to show its age, I'll probably get an iTouch in the near future. But I'll wait to see if the next gen model will have any major improvements.

 

[Shaw]

... but when you joined the conversation you quoted Robert Maxwell, who was discussing this issue, and started talking about software verification on various systems, 2 of your 3 examples being about Microsoft.

Well, lets review for everyone what I quoted...

Robert Maxwell wrote:
Vendor lock-in and control is a big part of why I don't buy Apple products.​

Software verification (software activation) is a form of vendor lock-in and vendor control. I gave examples of egregious practices, but I surely wasn't saying that they were limited to any one company (even the single largest software company in the world for the last few decades).

Another example would be Amazon and it's ability to repossess books after you've bought them on the Kindle. Apparently when you buy books for the kindle, you aren't buying them in the same sense as you buy books at a book store.

My point has been, and always will be, that once purchased a software product (or computer product) should be able to stand on it's own... divorced from the original company.

Apple's computer products (to date) have been on the side of the divide that I can live with. I don't need Apple... period. Everything I own and used need never have another interaction with Apple. And If put in a position where I would need that type of tying to the company, I would abstain from buying such products.

Your straw man tactic aside, I've made very clear my position on this.

Now, your point was a bit silly, because for Microsoft to disappear overnight it would involve asteroids hitting all their worldwide HQs and server infrastructures, and if that were to happen I think we can all agree that we've got bigger problems than being unable to reinstall an operating system.

It was silly for both Microsoft and Apple, but you seem to wish to labor on the Microsoft aspect of my argument, so lets let you continue...

No, for Microsoft to go bust it would take several months, which is plenty of time for them to release some sort of patch for their various OSs and software packages that require online validation. But that would never be needed because Microsoft is so important that someone would buy the company and keep the validation servers running, and in a worst case scenario the US government would bail out the company because they couldn't afford to let it collapse. And in the worst worst case scenario where Microsoft collapses overnight, all worldwide software companies collapse overnight, the US government collapses, but I somehow still have electricity and the internet and really need to reinstall Windows on my computer... pirates will have the solution.

Well, beyond the fact that it seems that pirates have the same types of solutions for the iPhone/iPad (and yet this is still an issue for Apple, but not for Microsoft)... hasn't Microsoft already abandon customers who bought products that required activation? That was one of the examples I gave about the playforsure server being shutdown.

Why no patch to permanently fix the issue for their customers there? Why not keep the servers up forever (or for at least a decade)? It surely can't be a cost issue as they have thrown tons of money at less valuable things (like fines).

But apparently this issue is of such pressing concern to you that you decided to attempt to change the course of discussion in this thread to say things like "No Microsoft, no activation, no Windows" and "We're talking about nearly 20+ years before Apple's disappearance would have a direct effect on me".

Again, from the quote above, we were talking about vendor lock-in and control, and where I, personally, would draw the line in my own purchases (which is where my examples came from, as those were examples that have directly effected me or immediate family members... and why I didn't originally include the Kindle example).

So let's see, you ignored the subject you quoted, you went off on a tangent, you described an absurd scenario filled with holes to make Microsoft look ill-prepared for the apocalypse and then explained how Apple products are better suited for it. Did you make it seem like you supported Apple? Why yes, yes you did.

I didn't ignore the quote (quoted again in this post for all to see), I support that type of stand no matter what the corporation is (and said as much many times), I posed the same scenario for both Microsoft and Apple, and only discussed Apple products I've been willing to buy (which has never been everything they are willing to sell).

I could say the same thing about Microsoft products that I own (operating systems from Windows 2000 Professional and earlier), all of which I can use without having to contact Microsoft. The change came (and I noted it in my post) with the Windows XP release. And I did say the same thing about Sun products, SGI products and NeXT products in addition to Apple products... only in the cases of those other companies, they are already gone.

So I guess you are also arguing that I support those dead companies (and Microsoft of yesteryear) as well?

Word of advice, arguments work best when you work with what someone actually said rather than making up the other person's position from whole cloth (unless you didn't originally have a leg to stand on).

And let's not forget that you chastised me for saying that I "read" about several issues devs have been having with Apple after you said this:

I haven't used Windows for years, but from what I've read about how Microsoft treats users and developers on Windows, I'm surprised (shocked) that you would use such a platform.

I was very specific in my characterization of my Windows experiences in that quote. I said nothing misleading about where I was coming from.

On the other hand, I was responding to your question asking about where I had been for the last few years, in that you seem to think I was giving Apple a free pass. I don't give anyone (or any company) a free pass, and least of all Apple (having seen them in action up close and personal). You seem to have thought that your reading about such things was valuable, I thought that my living of such things is valuable, and now you seem to think that I was chastising you for having the weaker position.



Oh... lets face it, I was.

Poor argumentative tactic...

Depends, it seems to have forced you off into straw man territory for your reply, so I know my tactics have been sound so far. And it seems effective...

but nah, I'm done.

See.


No hard feelings though, if you ever wish to address anything I've actually said, just let me know. The fictional stuff, while amusing, has no place in a serious discussion.

 

[RobertScorpio]

All the better if the iPad is getting some serious competition.

Agreed..Im sitting this out until later this year...Im not getting into another VHS/BETA..HD/BLURAY battle...Im getting to old for this..

Rob

 

[Venardhi]

Or the HP could fall flat on its face, like every single Windows-based tablet before it.

Erm, don't you mean "Every single tablet before last weekend"? It isn't like Apple and half a dozen other companies didn't try this shit before. It just worked a lot better this time due to hundreds of factors that are new/different from a decade ago the last time they all gave it a serious shot, most notably that more people have 'plugged in' and use the internet and computers in their daily lives and the enormous marketing/news blitz that made it a must-have item. The half-breed laptops we've seen in recent years don't really compare.

Personally, neither of these products really appeal to me due to the size. They can't fit in my pocket so they aren't really mobile the way my phone is, and yet they aren't big enough or powerful enough for home computing. I suppose I could get one instead of a laptop but I can't imagine putting it on the table and typing while hunched over it to see what I'm doing and I like buttons anyways so why am I not buying a hybrid? Give me one with a built-in stand and one of those laser-projected keyboards and maybe we'll talk. . . but I still can't imagine carrying it around with me.

I wonder if it would be possible to make one that can dock with a proper laptop base to allow it to make use of more processing power and storage but be able to disconnect at will and transform from display into iPad-like 'snack computer' for simple viewing of media, web browsing, etc.

I think I should probably write that one down actually.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Or the HP could fall flat on its face, like every single Windows-based tablet before it.

Erm, don't you mean "Every single tablet before last weekend"? It isn't like Apple and half a dozen other companies didn't try this shit before. It just worked a lot better this time due to hundreds of factors that are new/different from a decade ago the last time they all gave it a serious shot, most notably that more people have 'plugged in' and use the internet and computers in their daily lives and the enormous marketing/news blitz that made it a must-have item. The half-breed laptops we've seen in recent years don't really compare.

Personally, neither of these products really appeal to me due to the size. They can't fit in my pocket so they aren't really mobile the way my phone is, and yet they aren't big enough or powerful enough for home computing. I suppose I could get one instead of a laptop but I can't imagine putting it on the table and typing while hunched over it to see what I'm doing and I like buttons anyways so why am I not buying a hybrid? Give me one with a built-in stand and one of those laser-projected keyboards and maybe we'll talk. . . but I still can't imagine carrying it around with me.

I wonder if it would be possible to make one that can dock with a proper laptop base to allow it to make use of more processing power and storage but be able to disconnect at will and transform from display into iPad-like 'snack computer' for simple viewing of media, web browsing, etc.

I think I should probably write that one down actually.

where are the ones that can roll up like paper??? THATS what I'm waiting for!!!

Rob

 

[RoJoHen]

I'm waiting for the one that I can project with my mind.