# apple mac



## tom-coupe (Jan 17, 2009)

been a few threads recently about apple macs i love the products and am a massive fan off there inotive ways had macs for the last 10 years or so. my current mac of 4 years is so slow now and kind of maxed out. and looking batterd. anyone had any experience of there finance i see atm its 0% for 10 months but i can not decide to go for this option or not. and weather to go for a macbook or an top spec i pad? what does anyone think? 


tom


----------



## david g (Dec 14, 2005)

Stay away from the IPAD ,i returned mine to Apple as on this forum it wasnt loading all the pictures ,turns out on safari can only load so much information on the ipad 
I would suggest booking an appointment at your local Apple store and seek advice as to what product meets your needs 

Hope that helps


----------



## tom-coupe (Jan 17, 2009)

cheers david i think ill stick with the mac book or top spec mac mini.


----------



## david g (Dec 14, 2005)

Macbook Pro is fantastic :thumb:


----------



## cdti_sri (Jul 17, 2006)

hold off buying a macbook just yet they are due to be updated in the next month or two according to the rumors.


----------



## Spuj (Apr 19, 2010)

david g said:


> Stay away from the IPAD ,i returned mine to Apple as on this forum it wasnt loading all the pictures ,turns out on safari can only load so much information on the ipad
> I would suggest booking an appointment at your local Apple store and seek advice as to what product meets your needs
> 
> Hope that helps


I wouldn't say to stay away from the Ipad soley for this reason.

If you are going to be browsing forums like this all the time with picture heavy posts then I will admit it does get frustrating when halfway through it closes safari because of the amount of pictures.

However apart from this I have had no other problems! (Apart from the thing with flash but that is well known.)

The fact that I am online as soon as I walk in the flat, not having to wait for a boot up process from a laptop is great. I can look at what I want and be doing something else in the time it can take to turn a laptop on. Plus the fact that the battery life is incredible and if you own an Iphone then you know all the other benefits, it is a fantastic piece of kit.

At the end of the day it depends what you will use it for. If you want mass storage for video and music while browsing forums/websites containing loads of photos/masses of info then I would go for a mac book (as said the rumor is new update soon), If you want something that is fantastic for on the move use and is a fantastic bit of kit to have for most online browsing then Ipad is definately a good choice.


----------



## adamck (Dec 2, 2010)

I have the MacBook Pro (core i7) with 15" screen.
Its very good  the battery life is also good and its so much quieter than my Acer.
I'd say go for a Macbook Pro on finance before they change it to a silly finance interest rate!


----------



## Jace (Oct 26, 2005)

Dixons web site has the 13" pro for £960


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

from what i have read about the ipad (i dont own one myself) i cant see how the ipad is really even a choice.no flash,No Multitasking (has that been sorted yet ?),no hdmi out is a bit of a shocker to be honest,No Cameras,the screen isnt wide screen and last but not least if you give it any web page with a high picture content then it cant handle it :doublesho how has that device even sold :lol: oh thats right,advertising and legions of drones 

maybe instead of the old days when you would have to put up a "56k" warning on pic heavy posts we could now put this :lol:


----------



## Spuj (Apr 19, 2010)

silverback said:


> from what i have read about the ipad (i dont won one myself) i cant see how the ipad is really even a choice.no flash,No Multitasking,No Cameras and last but not least if you give it any web page with a high picture content then it cant handle it :doublesho how has that device even sold :lol: oh thats right,advertising and legions of drones


Possibly an unfair statement if you haven't owned one. The Flash thing isn't just limited to the pad, the 3g and 4 phones are the same also and it wouldn't be a hard problem to fix if some sort of agreement was made.

If you mean multitasking like the phones, then they do have that with the latest software update (IOS4.2). No camera isn't really an issue to me personally although I imagine for others it would have been a nice feature, and I think the next gen Ipad will have one (not sure though). The main problem with it is the picture content problem.

I know your probably only having a laugh, but It does frustrate me when people pick on apple, sometimes just because it is apple. Yes they market their products in such a way but isn't that how it is in all aspects of life?

I'm not saying the Ipad is perfect or the best thing to hit the markets, because it's not, but it truly is a very good piece of kit!


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

The iPad is a limited device not designed with picture heavy forums in mind, but more the reading of online newspapers/books, etc,
Apple don't even market it as a netbook alternative, but having sold as many as they have, they've managed to convince enough people it's an item that they would revel in using.
If that weren't the case, then the plethora of copies from other brands wouldn't exist, and they'd leave Apple to walk that path alone.

Anyway, as pointed out, it's not a device you'd buy to be the single computer in the home, as it needs iTunes at least to put some content on, unless you'd buy all your content from the iStores and subscriptions to the papers now charging for online access.
You don't say what your current Mac is, and if not a laptop, do you need it to be portable, or would an iMac not suffice?


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

i understand where you are coming from,but what gets me is the amount of leeway people will give apple.i wont list again what it cant do but some of that stuff is basics that have been in place via desktops,laptops-netbooks for ages.i know they are trying something knew,but doing something new doesnt mean you can leave out some very basic features that are pretty much standard just because your new device is in a lovely case.

the cameras (i would have liked but understand why its not an issue to some) isnt a massive issue imho,but not having a widescreen is just madness,they are giving you the option on a decent screen to watch films then hit you with no 16.9 compatibility nearly even film being made or has been made in the last 5 years has been wide.

it just seems to be a bit of a none device imho,one of those that you see on a list in a year or two asking which gadget in the last 2 years was completely unnecessary.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

Spuj said:


> If you mean multitasking like the phones, then they do have that with the latest software update (IOS4.2).


i mean like being able to view web pages and play music etc at the same time.


----------



## Spuj (Apr 19, 2010)

silverback said:


> i mean like being able to view web pages and play music etc at the same time.


You can do that then yeh, I listen to music while surfing the net or playing certain games etc.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

Spuj said:


> You can do that then yeh, I listen to music while surfing the net or playing certain games etc.


i read you couldnt view pages, check email and listen to music ??do you think the reason it is a bit limited is because its basically using a phones operating system ?


----------



## Bungleaio (Jul 18, 2010)

The iPad wil also stream from one window in safari e.g. absolute radio and you can surf another.

I admit being able to open multiple image webpages is annoying at times but I can forgive it as it's so good at surfing in general. The battery lasts easily over a week and mine gets used for a couple of hours a day.

Back to the original question, I would get the MBP. This is what I did about 3 years ago and it's still going strong.


----------



## Bungleaio (Jul 18, 2010)

silverback said:


> i read you couldnt view pages, check email and listen to music ??


You can now with the latest 4.2 update, exacly the same as with the iphone.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

Bungleaio said:


> You can now with the latest 4.2 update, exacly the same as with the iphone.


i would imagine thats a pretty bloody good update to have .

yeah,i seem to have taken this off topic now.sorry about that.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

silverback said:


> i understand where you are coming from,but what gets me is the amount of leeway people will give apple.i wont list again what it cant do but some of that stuff is basics that have been in place via desktops,laptops-netbooks for ages.i know they are trying something knew,but doing something new doesnt mean you can leave out some very basic features that are pretty much standard just because your new device is in a lovely case.
> 
> the cameras (i would have liked but understand why its not an issue to some) isnt a massive issue imho,but not having a widescreen is just madness,they are giving you the option on a decent screen to watch films then hit you with no 16.9 compatibility nearly even film being made or has been made in the last 5 years has been wide.


Last part first - movie/TV episode watching is something people can and have done on many a device that's not 16:9 aspect resolution.
You're missing the point - this is a READER predominantly, all else is to merely round it off.

I don't understand where you think Apple has taken a wrong turn - they're selling these without any problem, and their "competitors" have all jumped on the same bandwagon.
You could argue Apple simply expanded and used their industrial design and cachet appeal to flesh out the Amazon Kindle and Sony's e-reader, but you're still thinking in the same vein as a typical PC user looking at a netbook.
The iPad was not designed to be one - Steve Jobs scoffed at them, as they were all flimsily build and neither one thing nor another.
Trying to straddle a divide, excelling in neither.

Moreover the iOS is not designed to act like a computer OS - in the same way Symbian doesn't try to act like Linux on a PC!
So if you get your head around to understanding the iPad is a consumption device designed to sell Apps, subscriptions to online news/media, etc, then you've finally caught up with the rest of us who figured this out at the very outset.

If it lacks things you must have to enjoy using it, then the answer is quite simply don't look at it as something you'd like to buy, if only it had what you think's missing - I'm sure Samsung/ASUS/the rest, will provide you with their version on the theme soon enough.


----------



## beginner101 (Jan 19, 2010)

the truth


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

PJS said:


> Last part first - movie/TV episode watching is something people can and have done on many a device that's not 16:9 aspect resolution.
> You're missing the point - this is a READER predominantly, all else is to merely round it off.
> 
> I don't understand where you think Apple has taken a wrong turn - they're selling these without any problem, and their "competitors" have all jumped on the same bandwagon.
> ...


you do have some valid points,but imho if its a "reader" why does it try to do other things yet only does them half heartedly ? like you said,steve jobs was scoffing at something not being one thing or another,he has created almost the same device :lol: its trying to be a jack of some trades and a master at hardly any.the price tag is massive for what it is capable of imho.like i said,no flash,no card reader,no usb,no hdmi,cant handle picture heavy websites,no cameras and then your told your expecting "too much" lol.

a card reader would have been brilliant,slot your card in and show off the family pics and video etc,lovely touch.no usb ? is just madness,its a bloody standard feature on almost any device now adays.

i have heard the argument that usb isnt really needed as things can be done via wi-fi,fair point,but you try transfering 2gb plus of pics and videos and see if you prefer usb lol.

i wouldnt say i was an apple "Hater" the next mp3 player i need will be an ipod for sure.the ipad looks lovely (bezel is quite big though) but it does look lovely,but for me there are just to many missing basics for a device in this price point.im sure its a brilliant reader,just not so good on film or internet.pretty big lapses wouldnt you say ? but to listen to some people they will just wax lyrical about it and not listen to the flipside of the coin.if it was just some mad ramblings of a brand hater then fair enough,but i am not just saying "its ****" with no back up or reason.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Flash is a non-issue to most people, and there's always Skyfire if you jailbreak the device.
If Adobe ever bother their backside to code Flash for Mac OS X properly, I think Steve will wet himself.
By the time they make an efficient version for iOS, I fear he'll be long gone and buried.
That's the reason Flash doesn't exist on iOS in native form - Skyfire translates it, but has to download the whole file first before it plays it.
Flash is a crass piece of software designed for an era long since passed, and with smarter web design, is used by novice designers to fool the client they're getting something whizz bang wonderful.
Its use as a video playback medium is dire at best, and due to the monopoly Adobe has, Apple and others are keen to see the much less process intensive HTML5 provide the video standard.
You Tube are already encoding their videos to this format, and it is this that permits YT being used/included in the iOS.

As for everything else you raise - you're still thinking the wrong way!
I repeat, it is a READER device, with the ability to play games, watch TV/movies, listen to music, edit video using iMovie, and an SD card reader adapter to download photos/video from your camera.

iTunes, like with the iPhone and iPod is central to the iPad's syncing of files to/from the computer.
It is not a standalone computer in an of itself - it is a peripheral device!

Once you grasp that concept, you will understand the iPad for what it is, and what it was designed with in mind.
Apple created a new market with it, one that other companies are jumping on with their versions, but in only a very short space of time, Amazon's Kindle was reduced to nothing more than a toy as people flocked to buy the iPad instead.
Corporate businesses have integrated the iPad into their various departments, and we all seen Jake (Humphries?) standing with one at an F1 race not long after they officially released in the UK/Europe.
So rather than fighting against what it isn't, learn to accept and appreciate what it is.

Maybe revision 1 isn't for you, and it won't be until revision 2 or 3 comes along, that you get some extra functionality that justifies its purchase then - that's okay, but please stop harping on that it doesn't have features the majority of users don't need.
HDMI is on the Apple TV - so buy one of those if you need to watch TV/movies in 16:9.
The iPad's design is one of convenience, not absolute - and sitting on an aeroplane watching a movie/TV show is hardly conducive to the cinematic experience the 16:9 is designed to replicate, which even then it fails as a lot of movies are wider than 16:9, and many US HD shows are 1440x1080, meaning 4:3 aspect!


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

I agree with Silverback. I also totally disagree that it is mainly aimed at being a reading device - have you not even seen the TV Advert... 

I personally think Apple products are a lot of flash and often very little go. Which in fact are not limited by design as such, at least not so far as the technical asipirations of the average Apple fan are concerned.


----------



## beginner101 (Jan 19, 2010)

if i ever build a website i would use silverlight, flash, java...all the formats apple devices dont support


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

the kindle has sold millions hasnt it ?? i find it hard to believe people who had the kindle in mind would nearly triple there budget to buy the pad.


----------



## PugIain (Jun 28, 2006)

What I cant work out is why Apple Macs are so expensive.
Id like one but no way would I pay lots of money on one to match the performance of my current windows based desktop.


----------



## Lloyd71 (Aug 21, 2008)

I used the Samsung Galaxy Tab the other day. Now _that_ is how you make a tablet. It's got everything the iPad should have had and can handle Flash too. Oh, and it's got a lot more connectivity.


----------



## John757 (Jun 11, 2009)

Lloyd71 said:


> I used the Samsung Galaxy Tab the other day. Now _that_ is how you make a tablet. It's got everything the iPad should have had and can handle Flash too. Oh, and it's got a lot more connectivity.


Agreed, yet you still see the iSheep jumping on to the Apple bandwagon. You can even point out the major downfalls and advise of a better device, yet they still go for Apple? I think people follow the brand name tbh, which is fair play to Apple and their advertising.


----------



## Bungleaio (Jul 18, 2010)

Apple seems to be like tattoo's, those that have them don't care if other people have them or not, those that don't seem to go on constantly about how bad they are and try and put people off getting them as much as they can.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

RoverIain said:


> What I cant work out is why Apple Macs are so expensive.
> Id like one but no way would I pay lots of money on one to match the performance of my current windows based desktop.


 :wall:  :wall:  :wall:

Dear God Alingmighty!
I really wanted a TVR Sagaris, but all I could afford was a Honda Accord.
I can't work out why they were so much more expensive - how dare they! How *very* dare they!

Please for the love of God and all that is sacred, nobody, and I mean NOBODY start a bloody thread about Breitling or Omega watches, or we'll have the stupid nonsense about why they are no better than a Citizen or Sekonda!


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Lloyd71 said:


> I used the Samsung Galaxy Tab the other day. Now _that_ is how you make a tablet. It's got everything the iPad should have had and can handle Flash too. Oh, and it's got a lot more connectivity.





John757 said:


> Agreed, yet you still see the iSheep jumping on to the Apple bandwagon. You can even point out the major downfalls and advise of a better device, yet they still go for Apple? I think people follow the brand name tbh, which is fair play to Apple and their advertising.


If Apple really got it wrong, they wouldn't have been backlogged with orders, and even allowing for that being "managed", they'd have been inundated with returns that they couldn't give away in the refurb section.
The iPad is not for everyone - some will try/have tried to mould themselves to it, and decided it's not for them. Others will find the lack of "features" everyone likes to point out as the complete non-issue it is.
Apple designed it, Apple created the new market sector, you decide if you fit it or not - a very simple concept to grasp that beggars belief why we have so many ostriches as members, all with their heads firmly wedged up their bums!

I just can't wait to see the thread on how Ferrari are missing a trick by not having a diesel engine model in their line-up.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

PJS said:


> :wall:  :wall:  :wall:
> 
> Dear God Alingmighty!
> I really wanted a TVR Sagaris, but all I could afford was a Honda Accord.
> ...


lol.in the posters defence he was simply saying that he wasnt sure why apple computers are higher priced for the same (roughly) perfomance as pc`s.

TVRS are crap any way mate.stick with the honda 

apology to the OP btw,i think it may have been my post that kicked off all the ipad chat.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

PJS said:


> a very simple concept to grasp that beggars belief why we have so many ostriches as members, all with their heads firmly wedged up their bums!


 how dare people have a difference of opinion or care to air there view points on a public forum eh.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

PJS said:


> If Apple really got it wrong, they wouldn't have been backlogged with orders,


just because the cheeky girls got to number one doesnt make them a great musical experience  but in all seriousness,you have a point,if it was such a dog it wouldnt be selling.but on the flip side of the coin people are stupid and buy what they are told.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

There's a difference of opinion, and then there's downright stupidity.
I've tried my utmost to make it abundantly clear that Apple were not interested in doing tablet PCs as they don't see their merit (slightly covered that angle with the original MacBook Air and its revised model), and with wanting to make more use of the iStores, using iOS as per the iPhone/iPad, they decided to create a new market sector with a reader device that also has the other functions I've already covered.

That certain members are complaining it doesn't have a whole host of additional capabilities is beyond my comprehension, and akin to complaining the gear-change on a particular car is too slow (if an auto) or too long a throw (if a manual).
It's a pointless and futile exercise since the manufacturer of said car has decided that's the way their car is going to be - like it lump it!
It's that simple with the iPad too - but obviously as they continue to harp on about it, the iPad must've struck a chord with them as being desirable, if only it had....

The funny thing is, if I see something that doesn't suit my criteria, or I can't see me fitting into its way of working, then I forget about it - no matter how much I like the look of it or whatever.

So you'll never see me in a Saab thread gurning about the ignition key's in the wrong place - that's how Saab designed it, it doesn't work for me, so I'm not interested in a Saab until I can accept that "design flaw".


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

silverback said:


> just because the cheeky girls got to number one doesnt make them a great musical experience  but in all seriousness,you have a point,if it was such a dog it wouldnt be selling.but on the flip side of the coin people are stupid and buy what they are told.


No, that's the biggest mistake non-Apple users imagine goes on - Apple buyers are not stupid.
Sure there are some fanbois - Windows has them too - but as I pointed out, if the product was not suitable, the buyer has 14 days to return for a refund.
I believe that applies as much to the iPad as it does a typical Mac computer.
So the fact they're not sitting on a mountain of returns to sell off at discount on the refurb section suggests the majority of buyers are more than happy with their purchase.
In that respect, Apple have got it spot on.


----------



## james_death (Aug 9, 2010)

If you want portability and be able to do some serious work on it the macbook pro is fantastic.
get in a store and try one out you can even return it if its not exactly for you.
The 13 inch seams bigger in use than you think.
The ipad is a cracking piece of kit for casual browsing but when it comes to magazines and books its simply fantastic.
If you dont realy need the portabilty but want to be able to do everything appart from play cutting edge games, thats what consoles are for then the imac will see you right can be all you need for decades dependent on what exactly you want from it.

I have ipad 32gig wifi. If i ever want to use wifi totally out and about i would buy a portable hotspot unit thingama jig. Very technical i know.

I have a 13 inch macbook pro, from dixons at £100 less than apple got at snow leopard launch time. Apple will price match if there is a store nearby that has it instock.

I also have an imac 21 inch.
Love them all but my all time fave is my ipod touch second gen 32gig my wife got for me at its launch that was my best present ever love listening to podcasts on that.

Apple always said they would not make a tablet but the market had exploded with the netbooks and they said they would not make a net book so decided to sort of make a tablet and hey presto the ipad


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

dont get me wrong, im not saying just apple users are stupid and buy what there told,i was aiming it at the general public (me included) .i have seen the ipad advert and there reading books,surfing the net,viewing photos and watching films.this isnt just being targeted as an expensive kindle imho,and it certainly doesnt say on the adverts that it cant handle intensive web pictures.

but as you pointed out,its selling.


----------



## Spuj (Apr 19, 2010)

It does start to get annoying when you get people calling you sheep etc just because you buy a brand of product.

Ah you own a Samsung TV like loads of other people so you must be a sheep, oh you buy autosmart detailing products, you must be a sheep. Just because I and others decide to buy Apple products doesn't make us sheep or any other insults you care to throw our way. It just means we have recognised that they make some very good products that suit OUR needs.

It may be that there are certain things that the current generation doesn't do, and if that is a deal breaker for you then thats fine, buy something else or wait till they release the next generation which may well cover these original points.

Im sure that some of the people on this thread haven't even used an Ipad for a good amount of time (more than a play in an apple shop now and again) yet they write it off as a piece of crap??

Thank you to Silverback for being polite and putting up a good debate rather than apple suck blah blah!! As you said it isn't being targeted as an expensive kindle, because it does so much more than the Kindle does. Im not saying that the kindle is bad, infact it is fantastic at what it does and if I hadn't bought my Ipad I would have gone for the kindle to read on, however when you look at functionabillity I would say they are 2 different products (If that makes sense).


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

> There's a difference of opinion, and then there's downright stupidity.
> I've tried my utmost to make it abundantly clear that Apple were not interested in doing tablet PCs as they don't see their merit (slightly covered that angle with the original MacBook Air and its revised model), and with wanting to make more use of the iStores, using iOS as per the iPhone/iPad, they decided to create a new market sector with a reader device that also has the other functions I've already covered.
> 
> That certain members are complaining it doesn't have a whole host of additional capabilities is beyond my comprehension, and akin to complaining the gear-change on a particular car is too slow (if an auto) or too long a throw (if a manual).
> ...


Do you have shares in Apple or something? It's clearly marketed as a device that can browse the web, view photos, play games, run apps, watch videos etc.

What Silverback, I and others are saying is that the device is a compromise on one of its primary functions, the Internet. You've already stated that there is a work around for Flash, and work arounds for other things no doubt which ironically reinforces our opinion.

I don't recall ever buying a Breitling (to use your analogy) and having to adjust something to make full use of it's one it's most basic functions.

You've also said that the device is primarily a 'reader'. Do you mean for ebooks? Or magazines? Neither would be particularly enjoyable in my opinion compared to say a Kindle, so if this is the case then why did they not use the same technology? That's a rhetorical question because the answer is the device is a primarily a web enabled tablet, OK it might not be intended as a full blown tablet PC, we can accept that. But, it should (especially given the price) be able to handle the Internet adeptly.

With regards to the sales, again you're right in that it has sold well, perhaps partly on the success of other Apple products, or indeed on it's own merits (of which there are many).

But, in my opinion the average user isn't going to push the device very hard and therefore the limitations we speak of will never be realised. More hardcore users seem prepared to adapt and overcome any limitations. Unfortunately, I cannot stand to make a compromise when it comes to computing, which is why although I like Apple Macs, I would never switch to one. Bootcamp anyone? Another Apple compromise, OK not their fault perhaps, but it shows that the Mac user is prepared to compromise or doesn't have any need to due to their 'lower' expectations/requirements. That's not intended as a derogatory statement, I appreciate a wide base of people use Apple computers but it's undeniable truth.

I would lastly like to pick up on the issue of price, yes Apple laptops are very expensive in terms of like for like spec and build quality when compared to other makes of laptop. IMO this is very different to comparing a Honda and a Ferrari, one is a cheap, relatively slow and mass-produced, the other is, well you get the picture. So, to buy Apple means paying a premium to buy into the brand, to be part of it. To me it certainly seems like a brand people aspire to be part of and this isn't a bad thing, but it doesn't mean people should be shot down for questioning price.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

silverback said:


> dont get me wrong, im not saying just apple users are stupid and buy what there told,i was aiming it at the general public (me included) .i have seen the ipad advert and there reading books,surfing the net,viewing photos and watching films.this isnt just being targeted as an expensive kindle imho,and it certainly doesnt say on the adverts that it cant handle intensive web pictures.
> 
> but as you pointed out,its selling.


It's an advert silverback - they've 30 seconds or whatever to draw you in and pique your interest.
In the iPad's case, they haven't the time to explain how many picture-heavy threads you can open, as that's specific to those users who do that sort of thing.
They've simply shown what things you can do with it.

Regarding my stipulation that it was their version of the Kindle - you've taken that too literally.
Think in terms of a car - to most people it's a case of taking them to and from work/kids to and from school, yet we know it also plays music/video if equipped, carries shopping/groceries, and can be taken round a track.
So it doesn't take a genius to understand and appreciate that with the Apps Store and iTunes Store, that the device was going to be one-dimensional.

As I have said before, it's a convenient consumption device with reading being the main focus.
That you can listen to music and watch TV/movies is an additional feature, but not its prime reason for existing - that's already covered very well by both the iPhone and iPod Touch.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

dominic84 said:


> Do you have shares in Apple or something? It's clearly marketed as a device that can browse the web, view photos, play games, run apps, watch videos etc.
> 
> What Silverback, I and others are saying is that the device is a compromise on one of its primary functions, the Internet. You've already stated that there is a work around for Flash, and work arounds for other things no doubt which ironically reinforces our opinion.
> 
> ...


I'll address each of your points as best I can:

1) I don't have shares in Apple - wished I had though, and bought them back when they were at their lowest.

2) That there is a Flash workaround, does not reinforce anything - just merely that someone has written an app which transcodes .flv into .m4v or another video codec the iOS can make use of.
I can tell you now that I know of a number of sites that have dropped their Flash only approach, so they can be accessed by iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch users - that will only increase.
Same for sites doing Flash videos - they have/will offer dual formats, especially if advertisers think they're losing traffic/revenue from iOS users simply closing the window because there's nothing there for them to see.

As a PC user, you can sit on your high horse about Flash all you like, but you do so without understanding that Adobe's coding for iOS wasn't efficient enough for Apple, and even in OS X, their coding is abysmal since they haven't devoted any real time to develop it for the Mac.
The writing has been on the wall a long time, ever since Adobe switched to Windows development for PS and its other software, around the time Apple got raped badly by Motorola and the G4 development pace.
Motorola concentrated their efforts on cellphone chips - more profitable, but at the expense of giving Apple a 200MHz increase almost a year on from the previous top-flight CPU.
If it wasn't for some very nifty Altivec coding to wring the absolute neck out of the likes of PS, more design depts would've transferred to Windows than did.

3) My Breitling/Omega remark was in reference to pricing - after all both tell the time, so why the big cost difference?
Shame you didn't cotton on to that, but thought it was related to the iPad somehow.

4) We're both right - it is an e-reader (the introduction of the iBook Store validated that) and a web-accessing tablet, but lack of Flash aside, it does not fail to access the web. Limited site usability yes, but doesn't render the www as unaccessible or unusable.
The issue there is one for each person to decide if it is an issue or not, not for one group of like-minded people to say it must be able to display Flash sites or else it's a unmitigated disaster.

I don't own one myself, but have done an iPhone for the past 3 years, and the Flash problem is not one that causes me a problem - I have the iMac for that later on if I so choose.
This whole iPad thing has been played out already on Pistonheads, and the end result was two of the most vociferous deniers of the iPad being useless and overpriced, wound up buying themselves one, and loving it - although to save face they caveated "within its limitations".
Bottom line, they ridiculed it from a specs point of view, but once they handled one, and had a bit of a proper play with it, they realised there was more to it than they gave credit for.

5) Sales figures are very healthy for the iPad - convenience, ease of use/familiarity if already an iPhone user (which a lot of corporate business employees are), battery life, design, and a strong brand identity have all done their bit to make sure of that.

6) Bootcamp? In what way is that a compromise?
Apple have recognised many Windows users have moved across to the Mac hardware platform for whatever the reasons, but yet acknowledge that there are possibly instances when certain Windows software would need to be run as it has no Mac equivalent, and may never do.
What intrinsically is wrong with that?
At least Apple recognises Windows existence, and offers a solution for seeing their formatted drives.
You plug a Mac formatted drive into a PC, and you'll not see a thing!
Also, your point falls down further given the fact Microsoft owns Parallels, who prior to takeover were already developing the software to run Windows as a Virtual Machine within OS X. Bootcamp is not a VM solution, but partitions the HDD to allow Windows to be installed, so you have essentially a dual boot computer.
And given that PC users have used Hackintosh to get OS X to run on a generic PC, how can you have a pop at Apple with their Bootcamp solution?

7) Pricing is more than the headline figure you believe it to be - and we've covered this (or rather, I have) in previous threads before.
An Apple computer 3+ years down the line will still have a market value way in excess of the generic PC.
Then there's how do you put a price on not having to use AV/Malware software?
What price do you ascribe to the user interface - OS X vs Windows XP/Vista?
What price do you allow for the Customer Support?
Same for hardware reliability? Both categories Apple have won the computer industry award for the last 6 years running, beating Dell and HP/Compaq into the next places, by 1 pt which is a sizeable margin.
You can talk about certain small brands, but in truth Dell and HP/Compaq are Apple's competitors, and when you do a proper analysis of their prices and compare it to Apple's for as close to same spec as can be achieved, in a number of instances Apple comes out cheaper, plus you have the iLife software included.
And I've not even mentioned the materials used and their associated costs, due to Jonathan Ive's superb industrial designs.

You also make the classic mistake of trying to compare a premium brand like Apple (Mercedes/BMW) to run-of-the-mill brands (Kia/Fiat) which is a pointless exercise.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

beginner101 said:


> if i ever build a website i would use silverlight, flash, java...all the formats apple devices dont support


That's just sad - petty vindictiveness for no GOOD reason. :tumbleweed:


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

silverback said:


> just because the cheeky girls got to number one doesnt make them a great musical experience  but in all seriousness,you have a point,if it was such a dog it wouldnt be selling.but on the flip side of the coin people are stupid and buy what they are told.


What are you talking about? The Cheeky Girls were great! 
Well, Lemsip Optrex thought so.....for a while. :lol:


----------



## beginner101 (Jan 19, 2010)

why is saabs ignition in the wrong place, quote from wikipedia "in an attempt to reduce the very common serious and permanent knee injuries during collisions, caused by the knee impacting the key."


----------



## Miglior (Feb 12, 2006)

I bought an iPad and cant put it down! its f00king brilliant! ive had it since June i think? Its awesome!

Sure it doesnt load 60 photos etc, but as an all round device, its the best gadget ive ever bought, and ive bought many.

Do i can it hasnt got a camera?! NO. how much of a nob would you look holding that up trying to take a photo? Plus, ive got my DSLR for that!


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

beginner101 said:


> why is saabs ignition in the wrong place, quote from wikipedia "in an attempt to reduce the very common serious and permanent knee injuries during collisions, caused by the knee impacting the key."


Because I consider it to be placed in the wrong place - a view shared equally with every other car manufacturer out there!
Still doesn't stop Saab from using the data you've quoted to shore up their defence of choosing to place it where they have.
So who's right? Them or the buyer put off by it's location?

Exactly the same deal with the iPad.


----------



## silverback (Jun 18, 2008)

an ignition in a different location would not faze me one bit from buying a saab :lol:


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

There's more to a Saab that doesn't float my boat, but that's an obvious difference to illustrate my point.


----------

