Once the average Android device has a monitor output, they'll really be post-PC. And the big question is will the iOS devices have monitor outs?
Most of the Android device manufacturers don't have a horse in the laptop/desktop race - Samsung, HTC, Motorola all only stand to gain by replacing traditional desktop OSs. Apple probably still wants to sell you a MacBook. That's why I think Android will beat Apple to the true post-PC era.
Android phones will have monitor outs, though, not just the tablets. How about the iPhone or iPod Touch? They could fit an Apple monitor connector in the side of an iPhone, but I think it will be a long time before we see that.
"Watch slideshows and movies on the big screen by connecting your iPad, iPhone 4, or iPod touch (4th generation) to a TV, monitor, projector, or LCD display that uses a VGA connector."
I haven't really looked into it much, so I don't know if apps are limited to mirroring content, or if they can display another screen worth of UI/etc through the cable.
They can't mirror automatically - it always appears to the app as a second window.
There are games (e.g. The incident) that use this to let you play on a TV, and things like Keynote can display the presentation on the output and presenter notes on the device itself.
I sure wish Post-PC devices can be used to copy over content, be updated etc. without taking the trouble to physically take them to stores, especially in this day of the Internet and the cloud.
Can you imagine if Windows PCs needed to be taken to the Microsoft Store for Windows Update? Patch Tuesday would need to be made a national holiday and just imagine the queues, rush, the traffic and the parking.
Yes, ideally they will stand on their own two legs. However, as with most things there is an imperfect transition. Hopefully, great Android tablets will soon arrive and we'll be off to the races.
I want a tablet that I can slide next to a keyboard, mouse and monitor and that becomes my desktop, as needed.
No, in that case we have it, it just doesn't have wide adoption. All of the trappings of the typical office of 1995, (Ethernet LANS, WYSIWYG word processing, windowed OS) we had back in the 1970's at Xerox PARC.
>This is true, but I think a "post-pc" device should be able to stand on it's own two leg
The 'Post-PC' statement is just posturing and hype to be lapped up by the media, the general public and Apple friendly bloggers like Gruber. Not meant to be subject to interpretation by real geeks/hackers.
How many people totally have just a tablet and no other 'PC' at home? Maybe a few grandmas but that's it. Have iPad owners sold off their PCs? Is that even desirable? Tablets are just another segment of computers that cover use cases like browsing on the bed, couch, plane seat, car seat, using touch apps, for kids etc.
They're bad for other use cases that need screen estate, heavy typing, serious spreadsheet work, coding etc. etc.
joke:
Maybe it was just an attempt to use the RDF influence to counteract the furor over the 30% forced cut of revenue for online services. I wish Post-PC devices wouldn't come with a 30% consumption tax ;)
I think a "post-pc" device should be able to stand on it's own two legs.
Why?
I ask seriously. Your interpretation of the phrase post-PC as "you don't need to see a PC ever again" is just one interpretation, and perhaps not the one that Steve Jobs meant. [1] It's a deliberately ambiguous term, like most statements about trends and fashion.
He's talking about the PC era. Just because an era ends doesn't mean that all its legacy goes away. Indeed, it can mean quite the opposite. The mainframe era is over, and yet there may be more mainframes in existence now than ever. The era of recorded music sales is, arguably, in decline, yet that doesn't mean that we don't have recorded music anymore. In that particular case, it means that recorded music has become so cheap and ubiquitous that it's like air, so it's devalued and its profit margins have dwindled. Kind of like PCs.
I've always felt that the iOS ecosystem was post-PC not because it is trying to replace the PC, but because its design is predicated on the assumption that everyone who actually wants a PC has one by now. So of course iOS doesn't have to support, say, emacs: If you want to run emacs you do so on your PC. If by some miracle you want a PC but don't have one already, there's probably a disused one sitting at a nearby garage sale marked "$25" that would do in a pinch. And, more controversially, of course iOS has a closed and curated ecosystem: If you want an open ecosystem, pick up a PC for a few bucks. They're all over the place. I had to throw away two of them last year.
---
[1] I mean, not this year. Apple still makes PCs. Surely they won't declare the PC dead until they stop making them.
Curious, does the iPad packaging or advertising point this out? If the iPad is supposed to be a post-PC device designed for mom, pa, grandpa and geek alike, then it, IMO, shouldn't need to be connected to a computer for any reason. The fact that it can is surely a plus. I personally have no issue, but to herald it as past current PC devices is slightly disingenuous if I have to connect it to a supposed relic.
Because syncing a 32gb personal collection of music, movies and photos wirelessly takes too long?
Funny I think it's only people without any iTunes purchase complaining about this. The ones enjoying the media capabilities of the iPad, capabilities completely missing from Android, have no complains.
The initial sync didn't seem to take that long on a 802.11n connection using DoubleTwist/AirSync. (around 20G music/videos).
But that's besides the point - the neat thing about wireless sync is that you don't have to wait with the device physically tied up to your PC. In my case I was using it while the sync happened in the background. More over with wireless sync - I buy my MP3s at Amazon on my laptop and they automatically go out to my Android devices without needing any special action on my part.
You can get at least 32GB on most of the phones (plus internal storage ranging from 512MB to 4GB). Some of them may support SDXC, meaning you can go beyond 32GB (I know there are 64GB cards for purchase, probably larger ones for insane prices).
Thanks, I just ordered one. I have a G2 now, but I've had everything from the G1 to the CLIQ to the MyTouch Slide and it's been really confusing figuring out what microSD will work and what won't.
I don't know what the technical issues are, but I can't wait until you can match the storage of an iPod. I love doubleTwist, and if I could have it just sync everything automatically it would be so ideal, but my collection is way too big, but it fits on the biggest iPod so I end up still carrying both.
Yeah, my mistake, I just saw the similar description and figured it was the same model. The Amazon link is the one I ordered. Good looking out though, thanks.
No sweat, you're in the clear. On another topic, are you aware of a good leading indicator for storage increases? I can't believe that I am at the stage where 32GB doesn't seem like that much, but here I am.
Unfortunately, since your phone has an SDHC slot, you're going to be limited to the 32GB card. Hopefully phones will begin supporting the SDXC standard, which goes to 2TB cards, but the largest I've seen so far have been 128GB and they're unbelievably expensive. I suspect that those prices will drop soon, but I have no insight as to what indicates price drops for them and such.
What about my Grandma? I wanted to give her an iPad, but the only computer she has is the one she shares with her entire nursing home, and there isn't an Apple store within a thirty minute drive of her house. I get that syncing is faster when connected, but that shouldn't be a requirement for use. Why can't I just turn it on, sign in and be done with it?
That's completly besides the point. Also why the hell are you claiming Android have no media capabilities, I don't think you know what you are talking about.
If you're looking for someone, I have iTunes purchases, and I'm not happy about it.
1) What are these magical capabilities you're talking about that are so egregiously missing from Android? At least with my Droid, I can download software to let me sync wirelessly.
2) When I get new music, why do I have to a) go through the steps of adding it to iTunes b) connect my iPad to sync c) connect my iPod touch to sync d) connect my iPod nano to sync? When Apple's pushing us to buy all these devices, it would definitely be convenient to have it sync wirelessly (or even just sync the stupid folder in iTunes). I don't care if it takes long if I never have to invest any of my time to do it.
3) I don't see how iTunes purchases changes any of this?
But what if you don't want to sync all of that? The article made it clear that the problem is that you need to connect to iTunes just to turn the iPad on the first time.
Interesting -- that's an improvement from iPad v1 -- my wife bought one of those and was annoyed that she had to plug it in to her Mac and sync it to make it work. (And she's the Apple fangrrrl in the household.)
So just because it happens to be convenient for you, you want everyone to be forced into that mode?
Sure wire synching with a computer should be possible for people that have huge music collections and are too eager to let their ipad sit on their desk one night to synch everything. But why is it required?
Realistically, people will continue to own multiple computers. Computers have become very cheap, households can usually afford more than one.
For tablets to be successful “post-PC devices” it’s not necessary that people stop buying and using PCs.
Still, it should be possible to get by without a cable. I don’t want to transfer my 40GB media collection wirelessly just yet but the iPad is useful without my media (and can wirelessly sync contacts, calendars, notes, e-mails), there is no reason why I should be forced to connect to iTunes.
If my memory is not failing me completely I would say that lower middle class to maybe even down to slightly above the poverty level could afford some computer ten years ago. A majority could buy a computer.
I was viewing it from an overly western perspective. Countries like India or China are especially interesting, they might be able to leapfrog certain developments in Europe and North America, i.e. take a different path altogether.
If all you ever do is consume digital media, yes the iPad could replace your PC. But PCs are also widley used to produce content, which is something the iPad can't do at all. Where does Apple think all the stuff they sell on iTunes, the AppStore, iBooks comes from? It's not being made on the iPad, thats for sure.
Potential sure, but the new GarageBand etc. are still just toys, even if Steve claims otherwise. No body is gonna use GarageBand or iMovies to produce something, that gets sold on iTunes.
Who said anything was a replacement for anything? I'm giving examples of content creation on the iPad to someone who said it couldn't do content creation "at all". It doesn't mean everybody should switch to it completely for everything, that's ridiculous.
The author seems to assume that Apple is either unaware of the contradiction or aware of it with no plan to change. In other words, that the management of Apple is either stupid or blind. Recent history does not suggest that either is the case.
It seems more likely to me that Apple is very much aware of the contradiction but has plans to change this, but no intention of telling us about it yet.
Gotta wonder what that huge data centre they are building is for, eh?
I don't make either assumption. I've staked quite a bit of my lively hood on building apps for Apple products. I wouldn't do this if I thought they were stupid or blind. I just don't buy the "Post-PC" device story they are telling with the iPad quite yet.
The author mentions the data center and it's likelihood as a solution. His point was that until that DC comes on line and is used as a solution it's disingenuous to call the iPad a post-pc device because it isn't, it's a peripheral.
If and when they fix that then you can start calling a post-pc device.
Meanwhile an Android pad really is a post-pc device right now no waiting.
Watch 90% of the streaming video out there? Use your choice of fully functional browsers? Download and listen to Amazon MP3 store purchases? Run arbitrary software, even if it's competitive to the platform provider? Mount a usb flash drive?
I'm not sure that was the list that you were looking for, but there it is. How post-PC is it really if every time you have to do something Steve Jobs might not approve of you need to borrow someone's laptop?
The 90% of streaming video claim is utterly false - it's at least 54% and climbing very fast. If we're going to do this, let's at least not just make stuff up.
I'm going to skip most of your comments, because if you're trying to equate "download amazon mp3s" with "run (binary emulated) windows apps (built for a different cpu)" you're clearly just looking to score points for the home team.
But as far as the "at least 54% of streaming video is html5" I had to laugh. Yes, I realize you linked to someone who said it was true so it must be. I take it, though, that you don't actually try to watch web video with nothing but an html5 client - or you'd never have felt comfortable repeating that. Statistics of course can be bent, and I'm sure what they're doing is weighting for volume - and since youtube has 18 zillion videos and supports html5 that's probably at least 40% of their number right there.
However, in the real world...
MeFeedia’s index includes over 33,000 publishers including Hulu, CBS, ABC, YouTube, Vimeo, DailyMotion and others.
Hulu: Hulu requires Flash Player 10.0.32 or higher. Please download and install the latest version of Flash Player before continuing. (Indeed, yes, you can pay $8/mo for a dedicated ipad client)
CBS: Should work on the iPad - sadly, it only gave me: This content requires Adobe Flash Player 9. Please click here to install it.
ABC: This content requires Adobe Flash Player - Ver 10.1. Click here to get the latest version of Flash (iPad? Download an app!)
Youtube: It works!
Vimeo: It works!
Dailymotion: claims html5 support but no video plays (FAQ: Why is the video not playing? You might need to update you browser's Flash plug-in)
So OK, 33% (or maybe even 50%-66%) of their main list supporting html5 is actually pretty good - and it's only 21% below their figure. The only problem? That list is slow pitch softball, every single provider on that list publicly supports iPad content in one way or another.
It almost makes you wonder, who paid for that survey?
Check a few more...
FOX: We're Sorry! You need to update your flash player
NBC: The NBC video experience requires flash
Al Jazeera: We're Sorry! You need to update your flash player
Comedy Central: To view this movie you need the Adobe Flash Player plugin.
Amazon Instant Video: You do not have a supported version of Adobe Flash, a requirement for watching Amazon Instant Video
PBS: To view the full experience of this website, please download and install Adobe Flash Player 9.
Metacafe: Needs flash
IMDB: In order to play this video, you must have Flash 8 or higher installed on your computer
Yahoo Video: Yahoo! Video requires a more recent version of the Adobe Flash Player.
etc etc etc
Obviously, I could list those for pages. I think you get my point.
All tests done with Chrome + VP8 & Opera w/ gstreamer h.264. I couldn't find my iPhone charging cable.
Why isn't weighting for volume appropriate? Sure, fewer than 54% of sites may support HTML5 video. But who cares if those sites aren't where most of the videos are?
You're trying to claim that your handpicked list of sites which deliberately avoids sites that have publicly stated support for the iPad is a better methodology? Who's looking to score one for the home team now?
I'd take this seriously if you found any 3rd party support for your 90% claim.
And yes, I do actually use an iPad for almost all my web video watching. I don't use anything else at home. It works fine for almost all of the video I come across while browsing - in fact it seems more like 80% the other way.
Weighting for volume isn't appropriate because if I started up html5videosofmybackyard.com and placed 5 second clips in 10 bitrates each of the last 3 years of my backyard 24/7 the web wouldn't have magically become 25% less dependent on flash overnight.
I get it though. You really, really like your iPad. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you really, really like your MacBook Pro as well. It's cool, they are both nice gadgets. I am sure Apple appreciates your efforts as far as discounting any criticisms of the platform as invalid.
The lesson here is probably "don't ask questions you don't want the answers to".
Your argument actually shows that weighting by volume is a necessity if you're trying to represent people's experiences - which are driven by the likelihood that each given video they want to watch will play - not by the abstract number of videos in each format.
Some of your criticisms are valid - they're just minor and missing the point.
We're never going to move past the PC if we have to drag along all the legacy. Most of that legacy exists to solve incidental issues and complexity than offering end users with real capabilities. Far from
not being what I wanted to hear, the things you list are all in that category.
You'll always be able to score points by saying 'but my PC does XYZ'. But the world in which we endlesskly drag along everything from the PC-era however crummy or hard to use isn't one I'd want to advocate for however much of an Apple hater I was.
That's the best you can do? How I initially transfer over my big photo/music libraries when I buy a new toy is of vanishingly little significance to me. (BTW, Apple has a few well-known applications for this, like iTunes and iPhoto and Aperture. Perhaps you have heard of them?)
Talk to me about a superior user experience. Talk to me about a superior applications base. Talk to me about a more responsive, reliable device with better battery life. Then I'll be interested.
>The author seems to assume that Apple is either unaware of the contradiction or aware of it with no plan to change. In other words, that the management of Apple is either stupid or blind. Recent history does not suggest that either is the case.
If it had no intention of telling us about it, why call it a Post-PC device?
They wanted to create media hype among the crowd and the media and bloggers. Just like Motorola likes to bill the Xoom as an iPad killer because of the spec difference, Jobs want to posture the iPad as a PC killer because of the high sales. Truth doesn't enter into the conversation in either case and is kind of afterthought to the objectives behind such posturing. Only geeks like us would be arguing over such things.
We talk a lot about "lean startups" here. I think this is an example of Apple being lean and going where the market has taken them. My guess is that, as they were building the iPad, they had a hunch things could go this way (e.g. "post-pc device"), but weren't sure. Rather than spend billions building out an infrastructure on a hunch, they build the device and have followed the market.
The market is saying the iPad is "post-pc", so Apple will (eventually) get there. And we'll likely be charged for the privilege (most likely through MobileMe).
Personally, it is a huge complaint I have. I would love to switch my mother to an iPad, but the requirement to continue having a PC doesn't make things easier.
Do you not do all your coding, photo editing, FPS fragging, word processing, and spreadsheets on an iPad yet? Don't you have one sitting in your basement acting as a home media and web server? I'm not even going to get into how much more upgradable they are than PCs. How could you ever possibly need more than the few hundred megs of ram that an iPad has?
Dell might as well announce liquidation right now.
($75 on craigslist gets you a computer 3x as powerful with 3x as much ram and 10x+ as much disk space as an iPad, which only costs $500)
Well, I am sure someone is composing a message right now about how all those are either possible on the iPad (possible != best job for it) or are used only by geeks/developers who will go the way of the dinosaur(cue analogy of trucks vs. cars).
;) Maybe the message is taking so much time to be written because it's being composed on a iPad(yes I know h/w keyboards can be used).
Yes - I was although I think a mountain bike is a better analogy. But seriously - people can't see the difference between an iPad and a $75 PC off Craigslist? Perhaps a pair of spectacles is in order.
My parents and my mother in law literally don't want to do any of the things you just listed, but all of them have found my iPad useful, could use it immediately, and want one.
That $75 computer on Craigslist simply can't do things in the same way.
It's like comparing a mountain bike with a 15 year old pickup truck. You can spend $1000 on either, and the truck will go further, faster and carrying a greater load. But the mountain bike will go places the truck can't go, and the experience will be totally different.
If all you ever use your PC for is Hulu, then what you need is a TV, and televisions are not "post-PC", they're a different product entirely, nor will they ever replace PCs. :P
Not a straw man, it was an example. I am not trolling. PCs can be used for all manner of things, some things that they are now used for are better suited to other devices. Some things are perfectly suited to PCs and other devices just fail to measure up.
My point is, iPad ownership and PC ownership are not mutually exclusive. Having an iPad does not mean you are done with PCs.
I don't know, to me it seems like a legitimate observation and not trolling. It's not really an anti-ipad argument, but it's just a reminder that the iPad isn't a replacement for everything below a certain threshold.
Looking at Dell's price for the last 10 years (http://yhoo.it/fCdFBo), that doesn't seem to be a great business to be in. The upgrade cycle is slowing, margins are falling and the mainstream consumer just don't care much about the "latest and greatest" any more when it comes to computers.
The reality is that for most users (non-gamers) the power of computers long ago exceeded what they need. Does is really matter if a computer is 3X or 10X faster than you need?
This is a classic market transition where once performance hits some level, other product attributes become important to consumers because they no longer see any material benefit from marginal performance increases.
If you're mostly using your computer to check email and facebook, you don't need a quad core.
(This applies to even fairly tech-heavy folks - I used to replace my desktop like clockwork every two years for almost 15 years, but I'm typing on this on a 4+-year-old MacBook black that's still plenty fast for coding, image processing and web browsing. I expect I'll use it at least another year and I only paid $1500 for it to start with. I'll prob replace it with a 13" MacBook Air, which won't be much of a performance bump - it will be a form factor bump.)
I remember the days when it was all about having the 386/33 or whatever the latest top-of-the-line Mhz was. Now I doubt if you asked most folks, they could even tell you how fast the processor is in their system. It just doesn't matter much any more, same as only car folks really care what BHP their engine delivers these days.
No... if performance is already sufficient for most tablet users (and I'd argue it is - as an iPad owner I have my complaints but "it's too slow" it's really high on the list) then you won't see this happen. It will be some other product feature, like weight, or battery life, or cost, that will be the axis that you see competition focused on.
Marketing folks would love to have consumer focus on a metrics like performance that constantly keeps growing and outdating old products. Other metrics, like price and customer experience, are often just as important to buyers.
To give a parallel example, I don't think most HDTV owners are going to replace their set at this point for higher resolution. If you have 720 you probably don't care all that much about 1080 unless you're an AV geek. So that market is now competing on two other axes: cost (how cheap can you get it for a given size) and they're also pushing 3D.
If you're mostly using your computer to check email and facebook, you don't need a quad core.
I think there's a lot of unfulfilled potential here, and I'm really glad the emerging tablet space is exploring GPS, accelerometers, gyroscopes, pressure sensors, touch sensors, light sensors, Apple is pushing FaceTime, Android and iOS are getting augmented reality apps, etc.
Yes. You install dropbox software on all the computers you want to share the files on and dropbox synchronizes the dropbox folders on all the computers. When you copy a file to the dropbox folder on one computer, dropbox copies the file to the dropbox server (in the background) and then down to all the other computers you installed dropbox on.
Dropbox says they encrypt the files, but they hold the key so the encryption doesn't guarantee privacy. You can encrypt the file before putting it in the dropbox folder which will guarantee privacy (to the extent that your encryption is strong), but you have to decrypt it on the other computers.
Keepass is an example of an encrypted file that should be safe when copied via dropbox.
This really really annoys me about the ipad. Furthermore, for some extra annoyance, Itunes does not run on linux, so I cannot run it. And even after I secured a windows computer to run itunes, I discovered that itunes is a really slow, extremely badly designed, confusing and annoying piece of software. It took me forever to upgrade my ipad to the new os.
Apple's version of iTunes on Windows is so much worse than the Mac version, that I can only assume it is intentional. For example, only one user may run iTunes at one time on a PC while multiple users can run it on a Mac. It also shits all over your registry. As a long time Mac iTunes user, I've been pretty frustrated with the Windows version, which I started using 6 months ago.
The counter point, however, would be my experience with iTunes and the iPad. Before I had a PC I borrowed an iPad which had just been reset. When I hooked it up to my Mac to connect it with iTunes, I discovered that it was incompatible with OS X 10.4. My mind was blown; how could the iPad not work with their computer when I only bought it 4 and a half years ago?! It works with XP!
So I don't know, maybe iTunes sucks everywhere, just in different ways.
I don't mind if iTunes sucks on Windows, because Windows has foobar2000. What really bothers me is that there are no worthwhile alternatives to iTunes for OSX.
iTunes is, perhaps, the least intuitive piece of software I've used in the past decade. I have, on three separate occasions now, deleted my entire music collection on the PC while trying to get music from the machine onto the iPod or iPhone. It's happened once on a Mac and twice on the Windows version of iTunes. I no longer even install iTunes, because I'm afraid of it. (I use an Android phone now, don't have an iPad, and I never liked it for listening to music on the desktop, so I don't need it for anything.)
But, I find a lot of Apple software really hard to use and frustrating, including the OS itself, so I tend to refer to myself as Appletarded. I may be an outlier; just not wired up to understand Apple user interfaces.
You are not alone. I've been using Mac OS X for two years and can't belive why the company that came up with iPad and iPhone still
- have global menus (who really wants that with todays screen resolutions and two monitors?)
- needs the worlds best trackpads because their laptop keyboards have misplaced ctrl and their default keybindings are so inconsistent that users would be lost without a good pointing device.
- forces developers to use the fn key to reach the function keys, but even then, maps some of the F-keys to operating system functions.
- doesn't get multiple desktops? Don't ask me why they ship them, because their window management is so broken that multiple desktops just doesn't work, at least not for me.
This becomes increasingly frustrating as
- none of the other manufacturers "gets" tablets even less ships them,
- none of them was capable of coming up with mag safe,
- Microsoft doesn't have the balls to stop OEMs from crippling a perfectly good enough (for less advanced users at least) operating system
- and Canonical have crippled Gnome to the point where you can't shut down your computer without either using a pointing device or resorting to a shell.
Edit: Forgot iTunes. Try have someone who doesn't know iTunes burn a cd. (Hint: You have to make a playlist out of it, then burn that playlist to a cd.) Also tried to tidy up this rant.
- can only resize a window from one corner, and that corner may be off the screen in certain cases so that you can't move the window to a position where the corner is even visible (this just bit me this week)
- still doesn't understand how to fullscreen programs (windows maximize function is the single best OS function I've seen that allows a user to focus on just ONE thing). I think this is fixed in the upcoming OS X but I don't have it.
- liters the screen, the doc, the global menu with all kinds of state icons to show running programs and background services, but doesn't have a built-in notification system so that the users have to install http://growl.info/
and more and more.
That said, it still manages to be a great OS. It was miles ahead of XP. About par with Vista.
But sadly, it's lagging behind Windows 7. And the new OS X versions just don't make me terribly excited. I'm ready for something new.
- Command-C / Command-V for cut and paste in OS X (if that's what you're looking for)
- TotalFinder is a nice Finder replacement: http://totalfinder.binaryage.com/ - includes tabs and some other nifty features.
Command+x is cut, same as ctrl+x on windows. Might be application specific as I only tried in Chrome and Textedit but I'm fairly certain it is OS wide.
> Command+x is cut, same as ctrl+x on windows. Might be application specific as I only tried in Chrome and Textedit but I'm fairly certain it is OS wide.
I believe the poster meant "Command-X" on a file, not on text. In all other graphical shells, if I wish to move a file from one place to another, I do not have to have two separate windows open. Maybe Apple doesn't view this as a problem, but if you come from an OS that permits it, you miss it under OSX.
It is especially weird given that CMD-c/CMD-v does work in Finder, just not CMD-x. That leads me to believe that it was intentionally omitted for some bizarre reason.
I've been hit by your first point as well (not often, but often enough since I switch between resolutions frequently), and if you press the maximize button it will often (not always though) "raise" the lower portion up above the dock enough so you can resize. Not the most intuitive, but it works. I agree with #2 as well - that's one thing Windows does just right, and I'm glad to see that could be coming in Lion.
> I've been hit by your first point as well (not often, but often enough since I switch between resolutions frequently), and if you press the maximize button it will often (not always though) "raise" the lower portion up above the dock enough so you can resize. Not the most intuitive, but it works.
I'm not arguing with you here, just adding a data point about how unintuitive it is.
I certainly agree that you can do this—but, to my mind, you're then re-sizing the window in its maximised state; and, if you click again to ‘un-maximise’ it, then it'll be right back to the inaccessible position that it had before. I don't know if this is any sort of serious objection, in the sense that it can actually cause trouble, but it nags at my mind when I use it: “You don't really want that window maximised! Go back to its rest state!” I therefore usually wind up with the solution of “Find a big enough monitor and re-size there.”
(By the way, I love Mac OS, but definitely hate this behaviour.)
> still doesn't understand how to fullscreen programs
You're working off of two definitions of maximize though. It's not that OSX "doesn't understand" how to make an app run at fullscreen. It's just a design decision to only maximize to the document's dimensions. I'm not saying that I agree with that decision, but saying that OS X "doesn't understand how to fullscreen programs," is implying that Apple is attempting to make the function work like it does on Windows, but fails at it.
i would prefer to always use Linux, but my company gives all the engineers Macs, so that's what I now use. I miss Linux deeply, but maintaining two dev environments, not to mention context switching wrt key commands, drove me to the brink.
On the positive side, OSX is still unix. MacVim rules. OSX fixes some of the Linux issues that drove me mad (like power mgmt & plugging in an external monitor). And I've gotten around the screen resize issue mentioned here w/ a little 3rd party app called sizeup... Not ideal, but a workable solution that keeps me productive on the platform.
w/ a little 3rd party app called sizeup... Not ideal, but a workable solution that keeps me productive on the platform.
One of the nice things about OS X for sure is that many of the major pain points in the raw OS can be resolved with 3rd party applications. The community, tired of dealing with these minor unaddressed annoyances, has usually resolved most of these issues on their own -- there are 2 or 3 apps of some kind for most of the major OS rough spots.
One of the bad things about OS X for sure is that many of the major pain points in the raw OS have to be resolved with 3rd party applications. The community, tired of dealing with these minor unaddressed annoyances, usually has to resolve most of these issues on their own -- there are 2 or 3 apps of some kind for most of the major OS rough spots.
Out of the box, window management with Mac OS X is a pain in the ass. Once I installed and configured BetterTouchTool, however, most of my complaints went away. Binding keyboard shortcuts and trackpad gestures to window management form a great balance between a floating and tiling window manager. Even if it doesn't solve all of the problems with the operating system, it is a large improvement.
I agree with all your points except the first (I'm especially bitter about Spaces, in fact). But as for that one:
> "have global menus (who really wants that with todays screen resolutions and two monitors?)"
Because there are a lot of operations you can do that are not specific to a particular document/window, or in some cases don't apply to any windows at all. And, even more importantly, sometimes you want to close all the windows for an application without closing the whole application!
I've run into this problem in a variety of applications, including DrRacket and Logisim as well as more widespread ones like Word: I want to go through several documents sequentially. Naturally I want to close one before I open the next, so that I don't have a whole pile of old windows open. But if I close the only open window I quit the whole application, so I have to leave one of the docs open as I sequence through the rest. The behaviour of several "close" operations (e.g. clicking the window's close button) varies according to whether there are other windows (close window) or not (quit app). Some apps get around this by opening a dummy "new document" window if you close the last open window, but that's still a little jarring and counts more as a workaround hack than anything else. I don't have these problems when I'm working on a Mac.
Oh, and I almost forgot: Fitts's Law. The global menu bar is a mile high, and it's way way WAY easier to acquire than a menu bar inside a window.
App controls should live in the dock icon. As Chrome, Word, and most modern Microsoft software has shown us, there's really no need for the standard "File, Edit, etc" menu bar today.
have global menus (who really wants that with todays screen resolutions and two monitors?
I never had a problem with that. With a 13" device it's possible to have 2 to 4 windows open at the same time, since the windows themselves use space efficiently. So at best this argument is subjective to the user.
needs the worlds best trackpads because their laptop keyboards have misplaced ctrl and their default keybindings are so inconsistent that users would be lost without a good pointing device
Not being accustomed to the keyboard layout is rather an excuse than an argument. Also my impression of the key bindings is that they are well done and consistent. Do you have examples to prove your case?
forces developers to use the fn key to reach the function keys, but even then, maps some of the F-keys to operating system functions.
As an developer you should be able to tackle more difficult tasks than finding out that the custom fn keys can be disabled in the system preferences->keyboard pane(if it is important enough for you to write about publicly).
doesn't get multiple desktops? Don't ask me why they ship them, because their window management is so broken that multiple desktops just doesn't work, at least not for me
Window management is a problem for me too. Tools like Shiftit make it easier, but it does't feel like THE solution. I'm curious though if that problem is considered solved on any other platform. The last times I used Windows (XP to 7) it did not do any better.
Try have someone who doesn't know iTunes burn a cd
At some point it was easier to do that(e.g. dedicated button), but given that disc-drives are on the leave in PCs, burning is of less importance to users (at least I can't remember someone burning cd's recently). As one of the most used peaces of software iTunes has a pretty good help documentation, which describes how to burn a cd nicely. The procedure is also quite reasonable, introducing few concepts apart from standard procedures(creating a playlist).
Windows 7 ships with something similar to Shiftit (windows key+arrow keys). Between that and spaces' habit of randomly rearranging my windows on the z-axis I prefer Windows to OSX for window management.
I think the problem is solved, but only for people who don't use OSX or Windows and take a month or two learn how to use a scriptable tiling WM =/
Do iPads actually let you manage your music without using iTunes on a desktop? I know my iPod doesn't. You can add music to it directly by purchasing in the iTunes store, but not delete music. I can't see any clear reason why, but this restriction must do something for Apple.
No - iPad's don't let you manage your music collection.
I assume the no-delete is to reduce the risk of people accidentally deleting things they've just paid for, given that that's the only way to get things on to the device.
You can re-download things you've paid for, can't you? Or hmm.. they limit the times? Given that I have 800 GB of space I have of which 10% is in use, I've never deleted any purchased music, so I don't know from personal experience.
No - you can only redownload apps. This is because of the contracts with the content providers. Apple is apparently trying to renegotiate this at least for music, so that they can put your library in the cloud.
The only devices that have acted as post-PC out of the box have been running webOS. That's not to say they've been a sterling example, but at least they thought that way from the beginning.
We're in a transitional period. The vast majority of people who have iPads do have a PC of some kind also. For now it's the most practical way of doing backups, updates, and syncing large amounts of content. I do think Apple will move in the direction of not requiring a PC for these things but it's non-trival. How do you sync 16-64GB of data over 3G? Do you push 300MB+ updates to someone with a 150MB/month data cap? 2GB? How, and where, do you sync purchased content? How do you backup the device? This is a very important feature iTunes provides that most people won't even notice until they have some need to restore a device.
The newest iOS update has modified the way OS updates work by not erasing/re-syncing the device. I suspect this is one of the first steps towards moving to a more OTA existence for the iPad. They still need to trim down these updates so they're not killing people's caps. Everything on the content side is going to require a lot more work. If you look at Android for example that does just about everything OTA you realize that a) Google doesn't really sell content so they don't care how or if you get anything on your device. Figure it out yourself. b) Android doesn't backup automatically. Some of your data is synced to Google Services but if you flush your Android phone down the toilet by mistake you're going to lose all your application data and content you synced, or created, on the device. Again -- figure it out yourself if you want a good backup c) Google doesn't update all their devices at the same time. There will never be 100 million+ Android devices trying to download android3.0.tar.gz at the same time. It's a bigger challenge for Apple to do OTA updates given their strategy to update all compatible iOS devices at the same time. I'm not trying to bash Google, their system is fine, but people make it sound like this super trivial thing to divorce post-PC devices from the PC. It's not. Google has been able to do this through minimalism. They don't take any responsibility for updates/backups/syncing so it's a bit easier for them to pull this off right now. If you use Google Exchange with an iOS device you get most of the same benefits in-fact.
Apple could easily divorce the activation-via-PC step but it would set the expectation that you don't need to connect it to a PC ever for normal operation/update/syncing. When they do remove the activation-via-PC step you can be sure everything else won't require a PC connection. It will be all or nothing. That's how Apple tends to operate.
IIRC all the 3.x and 4.x releases until 4.3 have. I'm wondering if maybe that was due to having developer builds installed previously? I assumed it was standard practice but you're making me wonder if I'm wrong about this.
I was updating with dev builds since 3.x without erase/resync. Are you sure that you were updating (Alt + Check for Update), not restoring (Alt + Restore) your iOS device with new firmware?
I'll have to disagree with most of what you say here.
I would attribute Apple's decision not to divorce the iPad from a PC to their desire to assert some presence onto the PC ecosystem. They don't want to be be JUST your tablet OS, they want to be on the desktop, by forcing installation of iTunes onto Windows machines as well.
This way, both products reenforce each other, and they can get increased market share on devices and onto Windows machines (with an activated credit card so you can purchase music directly on the PC).
Apple is ultra-competitive and they do not want to cede any niche of the market that they have managed to gain. Even though the experience of using iTunes, especially on Windows, is horrendous (for all of the reasons already stated in this thread). That's that only logical explanation for maintaining this extra complexity by a company that is otherwise brilliant at simplifying the user experience.
BTW, I do think Google has approached this with a much better vision - treating an Android device as a first-class network citizen. Google does sell content (app market as well as enable 3rd party music stores), most Android apps integrate some form of cloud storage for your data (which don't have to be managed by Google) - if you switch your device, you'll not likely loose anything important to you.
Updates also work very well over the WiFi network - no need to use your low-bandwidth data plan.
Overall, I don't see this as a technical hurdle for Apple - they just have a conflict of interest in locking up users vs. giving them the best user experience.
Interesting point. But WiFi networks are available in coffee shops, etc. And I think the main point of simplification I would be looking for is not that I won't have a computer as well, but I don't want my devices to be dependent on that computer.
Hotels have wifi routers, coffee shops have wifi routers, libraries have wifi routers, airports have wifi routers, conference rooms have wifi routers - even the park area I'm visiting with my kid has open wifi access.
Heck, when I have jailbroken my iPhone with jailbreakme a couple of months ago; I was drinking coffee in a coffee shop that had wifi; and I had no laptop and no wifi router with me ;)
Suggesting that Apple requires iOS to sync with the PC for any reason other than keeping customers locked in iTunes is silly.
"If you don't have a computer, you're unlikely to have a wifi router."
That's a very limited mindset.
In another few years, if there aren't already, there will be households with smartphones, tablets, and broadband + wifi at home but no traditional PCs of any sort. If you refuse to acknowledge such a scenario then you will lose sales for those folks.
hey do not want to cede any niche of the market that they have managed to gain.
Gruber and others have claimed that Apple is unusual in being willing to develop new products at the expense of old products. I think this might be true.
That's that only logical explanation for maintaining this extra complexity by a company that is otherwise brilliant at simplifying the user experience.
In fact, Apple have a track record of poor UX with complex network services. I'll guess that they have always intended for the Ipad to be a stand-alone device, but haven't ironed out the problems with their cloud storage.
I think Google has it figured out with how they do updates for Chrome. On the mobile side they don't have the luxury of everyone running the same software (carrier/manufacturer customizations) like Apple does, which really gums up the works. Apple should be able to significantly improve the update experience.
As far as syncing goes, I think a good first step would be to do it all over WiFi on the local network in the background (TimeMachine style). I have my iPad/iPhone running on the same local wireless network as my laptop all day/night, it's nuts that I have to physically connect the two. The step up from there is to sync to the cloud, but still over WiFi.
Its not trivial to divorce these "post PC" devices, but its just increasingly lame to require it, and several others have overcome the hurdle.
Android has. WebOS has.
I get OTA updates to my WebOS device, and it backs itself up over the air nightly. I just updated to 2.1 and all my apps just magically came back, and it had all my email/im/linkedin/facebook account settings too - I just had to re-enter my passwords to confirm. If Palm/HP can manage it, Apple can.
And the syncing of data over 3G argument is pretty lame. Most people find themselves with wifi at home/work for the large updates.
Having to cable my iOS device to my PC each morning to get my daily podcasts from iTunes is nuts. These are wireless devices, they should wake up, download the content and have it just magically "be there" when I decide to listen to one in the subway the next morning. Having to cable it up, or even open the application to force the sync is crazy.
Just an FYI, there's several apps for IOS that can grab poscasts from the device itself with no need for an iTunes connection. I used Podcaster and it works pretty well.
They're nice and all for not having to use a cable, but neither appear to wake up, see if there is anything new and automatically download it.
This way I wake up in the morning, take the subway to work and my data is already "just there". I dont have to even launch the app before going into the subway (with enough time to sync up).
This is not possible on iOS but a feature I use it daily on webOS.
So not only post-PC, but proactive in keeping my data updated.
You are correct. Sorry I misinterpreted what you meant.
However, I wouldn't be too surprised to see a completely closed Mac/PC ecosystem in the future. Not now, but in the the next 5-10 years. As things move more and more "to the cloud" and the desktop becomes a dumb terminal, the easier it is for Apple to just tell everyone that they must go through the App Store.
Windows, which is by itself in the ~90% range, is not and has never been a closed ecosystem. You can easily install any piece of software you find anywhere. MS is even falling over themselves to give you free developer tools.
Years back, before Vista was released, people were very concerned that MS might move to do in Windows what Apple has done - lock down Windows so that any software requires digital signing to execute.
They did introduce that dialog which warns you when software is not signed, but of course MS didn't take this to the degree that Apple has. While it's a great way to take care of malware, I really don't think Apple's vision of the future is one I want to compute in.
Sorry, I guess it's more specific : when you try to execute an unsigned .exe that needs Admin permission, UAC will tell you "An unidentified program wants to access your computer". If it's signed, it displays the identity of the signer.
I can install on those Windows / Mac machines whatever I want, from whatever source I want; and to build stuff for them I don't have to suffer that $99 registration process and I'm also free to use whatever tools I want, as I don't have Apple's EULA to worry about.
That 90% of the population you're talking about really is using "personal computers". The iPad is just a "rented" piece of hardware, which you can use only in ways that pass Apple's approval. That's pretty far from "personal" to me.
It's not like 30-inch monitors and ergonomic keyboards are going to magically become portable tomorrow. Desktop/laptop computers are sticking around for a while.
Well, I know it's definitely possible to have it be completely independent. Palm did a fantastic job of having the Pre be completely separate. I have never connected it to my computer and everything is done OTA...updates, app downloads, etc. Apple is just dealing with the original way that iOS was developed. It will take a bit for them to swap everything to OTA :(
I've always assumed that Apple required wired sync because otherwise syncing would drain the battery unacceptably. USB syncing doesn't use a radio transmitter, but more importantly, USB supplies some power to offset the drain from sync. When battery life improves I expect this requirement to go away.
this is one area that android as an os is better at. it's ready to go out of the box, syncs data from your google account and upgrades the os over the wire.
Unless your Google account just does not happen to include your 11gig photo library, 10gig music library, etc. Which it likely doesn't.
This is about the fourth post on HN I've seen whining (yes, I think it's whining) about this issue. Apple is going all-cloud soon enough, if the rumors are true. In the meantime, if I'm going to sync 20-25gig of stuff to a new device, I really don't mind plugging it in.
I also don't mind plugging it in occasionally for an OS upgrade. It's just not a big deal, at all. The device is wire-dependent on a daily basis, anyway, folks: it needs a fresh new supply of electrons to keep running. Get over it.
226 comments
[ 5.3 ms ] story [ 316 ms ] thread- Steve
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2292474
Most of the Android device manufacturers don't have a horse in the laptop/desktop race - Samsung, HTC, Motorola all only stand to gain by replacing traditional desktop OSs. Apple probably still wants to sell you a MacBook. That's why I think Android will beat Apple to the true post-PC era.
They've already had 30-pin to VGA output for quite a while now, and now HDMI out with the latest dongle accessory.
"Watch slideshows and movies on the big screen by connecting your iPad, iPhone 4, or iPod touch (4th generation) to a TV, monitor, projector, or LCD display that uses a VGA connector."
I haven't really looked into it much, so I don't know if apps are limited to mirroring content, or if they can display another screen worth of UI/etc through the cable.
There are games (e.g. The incident) that use this to let you play on a TV, and things like Keynote can display the presentation on the output and presenter notes on the device itself.
Can you imagine if Windows PCs needed to be taken to the Microsoft Store for Windows Update? Patch Tuesday would need to be made a national holiday and just imagine the queues, rush, the traffic and the parking.
Thanks for pointing this out, I meant to include it in my article.
I want a tablet that I can slide next to a keyboard, mouse and monitor and that becomes my desktop, as needed.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2000/nov00/11-13...
I guess we don't really have it until it gains wide adoption.
The 'Post-PC' statement is just posturing and hype to be lapped up by the media, the general public and Apple friendly bloggers like Gruber. Not meant to be subject to interpretation by real geeks/hackers.
How many people totally have just a tablet and no other 'PC' at home? Maybe a few grandmas but that's it. Have iPad owners sold off their PCs? Is that even desirable? Tablets are just another segment of computers that cover use cases like browsing on the bed, couch, plane seat, car seat, using touch apps, for kids etc.
They're bad for other use cases that need screen estate, heavy typing, serious spreadsheet work, coding etc. etc.
joke:
Maybe it was just an attempt to use the RDF influence to counteract the furor over the 30% forced cut of revenue for online services. I wish Post-PC devices wouldn't come with a 30% consumption tax ;)
/joke
Why?
I ask seriously. Your interpretation of the phrase post-PC as "you don't need to see a PC ever again" is just one interpretation, and perhaps not the one that Steve Jobs meant. [1] It's a deliberately ambiguous term, like most statements about trends and fashion.
He's talking about the PC era. Just because an era ends doesn't mean that all its legacy goes away. Indeed, it can mean quite the opposite. The mainframe era is over, and yet there may be more mainframes in existence now than ever. The era of recorded music sales is, arguably, in decline, yet that doesn't mean that we don't have recorded music anymore. In that particular case, it means that recorded music has become so cheap and ubiquitous that it's like air, so it's devalued and its profit margins have dwindled. Kind of like PCs.
I've always felt that the iOS ecosystem was post-PC not because it is trying to replace the PC, but because its design is predicated on the assumption that everyone who actually wants a PC has one by now. So of course iOS doesn't have to support, say, emacs: If you want to run emacs you do so on your PC. If by some miracle you want a PC but don't have one already, there's probably a disused one sitting at a nearby garage sale marked "$25" that would do in a pinch. And, more controversially, of course iOS has a closed and curated ecosystem: If you want an open ecosystem, pick up a PC for a few bucks. They're all over the place. I had to throw away two of them last year.
---
[1] I mean, not this year. Apple still makes PCs. Surely they won't declare the PC dead until they stop making them.
(Yes, I know running Ubuntu makes me an outlier, but still.)
Link: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-04/apple-said-to-negot...)
Funny I think it's only people without any iTunes purchase complaining about this. The ones enjoying the media capabilities of the iPad, capabilities completely missing from Android, have no complains.
But that's besides the point - the neat thing about wireless sync is that you don't have to wait with the device physically tied up to your PC. In my case I was using it while the sync happened in the background. More over with wireless sync - I buy my MP3s at Amazon on my laptop and they automatically go out to my Android devices without needing any special action on my part.
Link to 32GB card that will work in just about all Android devices: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820139...
I don't know what the technical issues are, but I can't wait until you can match the storage of an iPod. I love doubleTwist, and if I could have it just sync everything automatically it would be so ideal, but my collection is way too big, but it fits on the biggest iPod so I end up still carrying both.
There are Android devices that go up to 48Gb (16+32) IIRC.
1) What are these magical capabilities you're talking about that are so egregiously missing from Android? At least with my Droid, I can download software to let me sync wirelessly.
2) When I get new music, why do I have to a) go through the steps of adding it to iTunes b) connect my iPad to sync c) connect my iPod touch to sync d) connect my iPod nano to sync? When Apple's pushing us to buy all these devices, it would definitely be convenient to have it sync wirelessly (or even just sync the stupid folder in iTunes). I don't care if it takes long if I never have to invest any of my time to do it.
3) I don't see how iTunes purchases changes any of this?
Sure wire synching with a computer should be possible for people that have huge music collections and are too eager to let their ipad sit on their desk one night to synch everything. But why is it required?
For tablets to be successful “post-PC devices” it’s not necessary that people stop buying and using PCs.
Still, it should be possible to get by without a cable. I don’t want to transfer my 40GB media collection wirelessly just yet but the iPad is useful without my media (and can wirelessly sync contacts, calendars, notes, e-mails), there is no reason why I should be forced to connect to iTunes.
I was viewing it from an overly western perspective. Countries like India or China are especially interesting, they might be able to leapfrog certain developments in Europe and North America, i.e. take a different path altogether.
Should people ditch photoshop now?
Just because there a few examples doesn't make it a suitable tool for most people.
It seems more likely to me that Apple is very much aware of the contradiction but has plans to change this, but no intention of telling us about it yet.
Gotta wonder what that huge data centre they are building is for, eh?
And your problem with this is? Just that they are saying it now? Don't understand the concern, honestly.
If and when they fix that then you can start calling a post-pc device.
Meanwhile an Android pad really is a post-pc device right now no waiting.
I'm not sure that was the list that you were looking for, but there it is. How post-PC is it really if every time you have to do something Steve Jobs might not approve of you need to borrow someone's laptop?
(http://www.loopinsight.com/2010/10/27/54-of-web-video-is-now...)
The closed platform argument is perfectly valid, but has nothing to do with whether we're moving into the world of Post PC devices or not.
It's pretty obvious that we're never going to get away from the PC era if we have to drag along all of the legacy.
Why not list things like "run windows apps" and "run gnome" for good measure?
But as far as the "at least 54% of streaming video is html5" I had to laugh. Yes, I realize you linked to someone who said it was true so it must be. I take it, though, that you don't actually try to watch web video with nothing but an html5 client - or you'd never have felt comfortable repeating that. Statistics of course can be bent, and I'm sure what they're doing is weighting for volume - and since youtube has 18 zillion videos and supports html5 that's probably at least 40% of their number right there.
However, in the real world...
MeFeedia’s index includes over 33,000 publishers including Hulu, CBS, ABC, YouTube, Vimeo, DailyMotion and others.
So OK, 33% (or maybe even 50%-66%) of their main list supporting html5 is actually pretty good - and it's only 21% below their figure. The only problem? That list is slow pitch softball, every single provider on that list publicly supports iPad content in one way or another.It almost makes you wonder, who paid for that survey?
Check a few more...
Obviously, I could list those for pages. I think you get my point.All tests done with Chrome + VP8 & Opera w/ gstreamer h.264. I couldn't find my iPhone charging cable.
You're trying to claim that your handpicked list of sites which deliberately avoids sites that have publicly stated support for the iPad is a better methodology? Who's looking to score one for the home team now?
I'd take this seriously if you found any 3rd party support for your 90% claim.
And yes, I do actually use an iPad for almost all my web video watching. I don't use anything else at home. It works fine for almost all of the video I come across while browsing - in fact it seems more like 80% the other way.
I get it though. You really, really like your iPad. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you really, really like your MacBook Pro as well. It's cool, they are both nice gadgets. I am sure Apple appreciates your efforts as far as discounting any criticisms of the platform as invalid.
The lesson here is probably "don't ask questions you don't want the answers to".
Some of your criticisms are valid - they're just minor and missing the point.
We're never going to move past the PC if we have to drag along all the legacy. Most of that legacy exists to solve incidental issues and complexity than offering end users with real capabilities. Far from not being what I wanted to hear, the things you list are all in that category.
You'll always be able to score points by saying 'but my PC does XYZ'. But the world in which we endlesskly drag along everything from the PC-era however crummy or hard to use isn't one I'd want to advocate for however much of an Apple hater I was.
I'm not sure if that's true on any of those sites, as I'm not American, so haven't visited any apart from Youtube and Vimeo.
That's the best you can do? How I initially transfer over my big photo/music libraries when I buy a new toy is of vanishingly little significance to me. (BTW, Apple has a few well-known applications for this, like iTunes and iPhoto and Aperture. Perhaps you have heard of them?)
Talk to me about a superior user experience. Talk to me about a superior applications base. Talk to me about a more responsive, reliable device with better battery life. Then I'll be interested.
If it had no intention of telling us about it, why call it a Post-PC device?
They wanted to create media hype among the crowd and the media and bloggers. Just like Motorola likes to bill the Xoom as an iPad killer because of the spec difference, Jobs want to posture the iPad as a PC killer because of the high sales. Truth doesn't enter into the conversation in either case and is kind of afterthought to the objectives behind such posturing. Only geeks like us would be arguing over such things.
/joke
The market is saying the iPad is "post-pc", so Apple will (eventually) get there. And we'll likely be charged for the privilege (most likely through MobileMe).
Personally, it is a huge complaint I have. I would love to switch my mother to an iPad, but the requirement to continue having a PC doesn't make things easier.
It is? How?
Dell might as well announce liquidation right now.
($75 on craigslist gets you a computer 3x as powerful with 3x as much ram and 10x+ as much disk space as an iPad, which only costs $500)
;) Maybe the message is taking so much time to be written because it's being composed on a iPad(yes I know h/w keyboards can be used).
That $75 computer on Craigslist simply can't do things in the same way.
It's like comparing a mountain bike with a 15 year old pickup truck. You can spend $1000 on either, and the truck will go further, faster and carrying a greater load. But the mountain bike will go places the truck can't go, and the experience will be totally different.
But I guess I've fallen for a troll.
My point is, iPad ownership and PC ownership are not mutually exclusive. Having an iPad does not mean you are done with PCs.
The reality is that for most users (non-gamers) the power of computers long ago exceeded what they need. Does is really matter if a computer is 3X or 10X faster than you need?
This is a classic market transition where once performance hits some level, other product attributes become important to consumers because they no longer see any material benefit from marginal performance increases.
If you're mostly using your computer to check email and facebook, you don't need a quad core.
(This applies to even fairly tech-heavy folks - I used to replace my desktop like clockwork every two years for almost 15 years, but I'm typing on this on a 4+-year-old MacBook black that's still plenty fast for coding, image processing and web browsing. I expect I'll use it at least another year and I only paid $1500 for it to start with. I'll prob replace it with a 13" MacBook Air, which won't be much of a performance bump - it will be a form factor bump.)
I remember the days when it was all about having the 386/33 or whatever the latest top-of-the-line Mhz was. Now I doubt if you asked most folks, they could even tell you how fast the processor is in their system. It just doesn't matter much any more, same as only car folks really care what BHP their engine delivers these days.
Marketing folks would love to have consumer focus on a metrics like performance that constantly keeps growing and outdating old products. Other metrics, like price and customer experience, are often just as important to buyers.
To give a parallel example, I don't think most HDTV owners are going to replace their set at this point for higher resolution. If you have 720 you probably don't care all that much about 1080 unless you're an AV geek. So that market is now competing on two other axes: cost (how cheap can you get it for a given size) and they're also pushing 3D.
I think there's a lot of unfulfilled potential here, and I'm really glad the emerging tablet space is exploring GPS, accelerometers, gyroscopes, pressure sensors, touch sensors, light sensors, Apple is pushing FaceTime, Android and iOS are getting augmented reality apps, etc.
Dropbox says they encrypt the files, but they hold the key so the encryption doesn't guarantee privacy. You can encrypt the file before putting it in the dropbox folder which will guarantee privacy (to the extent that your encryption is strong), but you have to decrypt it on the other computers.
Keepass is an example of an encrypted file that should be safe when copied via dropbox.
I can copy files off of the ipod via the USB, but not on.
even after I secured a windows computer to run itunes
The counter point, however, would be my experience with iTunes and the iPad. Before I had a PC I borrowed an iPad which had just been reset. When I hooked it up to my Mac to connect it with iTunes, I discovered that it was incompatible with OS X 10.4. My mind was blown; how could the iPad not work with their computer when I only bought it 4 and a half years ago?! It works with XP!
So I don't know, maybe iTunes sucks everywhere, just in different ways.
But, I find a lot of Apple software really hard to use and frustrating, including the OS itself, so I tend to refer to myself as Appletarded. I may be an outlier; just not wired up to understand Apple user interfaces.
- have global menus (who really wants that with todays screen resolutions and two monitors?)
- needs the worlds best trackpads because their laptop keyboards have misplaced ctrl and their default keybindings are so inconsistent that users would be lost without a good pointing device.
- forces developers to use the fn key to reach the function keys, but even then, maps some of the F-keys to operating system functions.
- doesn't get multiple desktops? Don't ask me why they ship them, because their window management is so broken that multiple desktops just doesn't work, at least not for me.
This becomes increasingly frustrating as
- none of the other manufacturers "gets" tablets even less ships them,
- none of them was capable of coming up with mag safe,
- Microsoft doesn't have the balls to stop OEMs from crippling a perfectly good enough (for less advanced users at least) operating system
- and Canonical have crippled Gnome to the point where you can't shut down your computer without either using a pointing device or resorting to a shell.
Edit: Forgot iTunes. Try have someone who doesn't know iTunes burn a cd. (Hint: You have to make a playlist out of it, then burn that playlist to a cd.) Also tried to tidy up this rant.
- can only resize a window from one corner, and that corner may be off the screen in certain cases so that you can't move the window to a position where the corner is even visible (this just bit me this week)
- still doesn't understand how to fullscreen programs (windows maximize function is the single best OS function I've seen that allows a user to focus on just ONE thing). I think this is fixed in the upcoming OS X but I don't have it.
- liters the screen, the doc, the global menu with all kinds of state icons to show running programs and background services, but doesn't have a built-in notification system so that the users have to install http://growl.info/
and more and more.
That said, it still manages to be a great OS. It was miles ahead of XP. About par with Vista.
But sadly, it's lagging behind Windows 7. And the new OS X versions just don't make me terribly excited. I'm ready for something new.
- No cut-paste.
- No tabs in Finder.
- The missing delete key. (Backspace is renamed as delete)
- The not-so-modern Terminal. (hence the wide usage of iTerm)
Hope that helps a bit...
As mdaniel (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2294066) mentions, it bizarrely does not work in one very specific, and presumably intentional, place—the Finder.
It is especially weird given that CMD-c/CMD-v does work in Finder, just not CMD-x. That leads me to believe that it was intentionally omitted for some bizarre reason.
Thank you.
I'm not arguing with you here, just adding a data point about how unintuitive it is.
I certainly agree that you can do this—but, to my mind, you're then re-sizing the window in its maximised state; and, if you click again to ‘un-maximise’ it, then it'll be right back to the inaccessible position that it had before. I don't know if this is any sort of serious objection, in the sense that it can actually cause trouble, but it nags at my mind when I use it: “You don't really want that window maximised! Go back to its rest state!” I therefore usually wind up with the solution of “Find a big enough monitor and re-size there.”
(By the way, I love Mac OS, but definitely hate this behaviour.)
On the positive side, OSX is still unix. MacVim rules. OSX fixes some of the Linux issues that drove me mad (like power mgmt & plugging in an external monitor). And I've gotten around the screen resize issue mentioned here w/ a little 3rd party app called sizeup... Not ideal, but a workable solution that keeps me productive on the platform.
One of the nice things about OS X for sure is that many of the major pain points in the raw OS can be resolved with 3rd party applications. The community, tired of dealing with these minor unaddressed annoyances, has usually resolved most of these issues on their own -- there are 2 or 3 apps of some kind for most of the major OS rough spots.
One of the bad things about OS X for sure is that many of the major pain points in the raw OS have to be resolved with 3rd party applications. The community, tired of dealing with these minor unaddressed annoyances, usually has to resolve most of these issues on their own -- there are 2 or 3 apps of some kind for most of the major OS rough spots.
All of this can be adjusted to your liking in the Keyboard preference pane.
Please prove me wrong.
> "have global menus (who really wants that with todays screen resolutions and two monitors?)"
Because there are a lot of operations you can do that are not specific to a particular document/window, or in some cases don't apply to any windows at all. And, even more importantly, sometimes you want to close all the windows for an application without closing the whole application!
I've run into this problem in a variety of applications, including DrRacket and Logisim as well as more widespread ones like Word: I want to go through several documents sequentially. Naturally I want to close one before I open the next, so that I don't have a whole pile of old windows open. But if I close the only open window I quit the whole application, so I have to leave one of the docs open as I sequence through the rest. The behaviour of several "close" operations (e.g. clicking the window's close button) varies according to whether there are other windows (close window) or not (quit app). Some apps get around this by opening a dummy "new document" window if you close the last open window, but that's still a little jarring and counts more as a workaround hack than anything else. I don't have these problems when I'm working on a Mac.
Oh, and I almost forgot: Fitts's Law. The global menu bar is a mile high, and it's way way WAY easier to acquire than a menu bar inside a window.
I never had a problem with that. With a 13" device it's possible to have 2 to 4 windows open at the same time, since the windows themselves use space efficiently. So at best this argument is subjective to the user.
needs the worlds best trackpads because their laptop keyboards have misplaced ctrl and their default keybindings are so inconsistent that users would be lost without a good pointing device
Not being accustomed to the keyboard layout is rather an excuse than an argument. Also my impression of the key bindings is that they are well done and consistent. Do you have examples to prove your case?
forces developers to use the fn key to reach the function keys, but even then, maps some of the F-keys to operating system functions.
As an developer you should be able to tackle more difficult tasks than finding out that the custom fn keys can be disabled in the system preferences->keyboard pane(if it is important enough for you to write about publicly).
doesn't get multiple desktops? Don't ask me why they ship them, because their window management is so broken that multiple desktops just doesn't work, at least not for me
Window management is a problem for me too. Tools like Shiftit make it easier, but it does't feel like THE solution. I'm curious though if that problem is considered solved on any other platform. The last times I used Windows (XP to 7) it did not do any better.
Try have someone who doesn't know iTunes burn a cd
At some point it was easier to do that(e.g. dedicated button), but given that disc-drives are on the leave in PCs, burning is of less importance to users (at least I can't remember someone burning cd's recently). As one of the most used peaces of software iTunes has a pretty good help documentation, which describes how to burn a cd nicely. The procedure is also quite reasonable, introducing few concepts apart from standard procedures(creating a playlist).
I think the problem is solved, but only for people who don't use OSX or Windows and take a month or two learn how to use a scriptable tiling WM =/
I assume the no-delete is to reduce the risk of people accidentally deleting things they've just paid for, given that that's the only way to get things on to the device.
Interestingly, you can delete videos.
The newest iOS update has modified the way OS updates work by not erasing/re-syncing the device. I suspect this is one of the first steps towards moving to a more OTA existence for the iPad. They still need to trim down these updates so they're not killing people's caps. Everything on the content side is going to require a lot more work. If you look at Android for example that does just about everything OTA you realize that a) Google doesn't really sell content so they don't care how or if you get anything on your device. Figure it out yourself. b) Android doesn't backup automatically. Some of your data is synced to Google Services but if you flush your Android phone down the toilet by mistake you're going to lose all your application data and content you synced, or created, on the device. Again -- figure it out yourself if you want a good backup c) Google doesn't update all their devices at the same time. There will never be 100 million+ Android devices trying to download android3.0.tar.gz at the same time. It's a bigger challenge for Apple to do OTA updates given their strategy to update all compatible iOS devices at the same time. I'm not trying to bash Google, their system is fine, but people make it sound like this super trivial thing to divorce post-PC devices from the PC. It's not. Google has been able to do this through minimalism. They don't take any responsibility for updates/backups/syncing so it's a bit easier for them to pull this off right now. If you use Google Exchange with an iOS device you get most of the same benefits in-fact.
Apple could easily divorce the activation-via-PC step but it would set the expectation that you don't need to connect it to a PC ever for normal operation/update/syncing. When they do remove the activation-via-PC step you can be sure everything else won't require a PC connection. It will be all or nothing. That's how Apple tends to operate.
I would attribute Apple's decision not to divorce the iPad from a PC to their desire to assert some presence onto the PC ecosystem. They don't want to be be JUST your tablet OS, they want to be on the desktop, by forcing installation of iTunes onto Windows machines as well.
This way, both products reenforce each other, and they can get increased market share on devices and onto Windows machines (with an activated credit card so you can purchase music directly on the PC).
Apple is ultra-competitive and they do not want to cede any niche of the market that they have managed to gain. Even though the experience of using iTunes, especially on Windows, is horrendous (for all of the reasons already stated in this thread). That's that only logical explanation for maintaining this extra complexity by a company that is otherwise brilliant at simplifying the user experience.
BTW, I do think Google has approached this with a much better vision - treating an Android device as a first-class network citizen. Google does sell content (app market as well as enable 3rd party music stores), most Android apps integrate some form of cloud storage for your data (which don't have to be managed by Google) - if you switch your device, you'll not likely loose anything important to you.
Updates also work very well over the WiFi network - no need to use your low-bandwidth data plan.
Overall, I don't see this as a technical hurdle for Apple - they just have a conflict of interest in locking up users vs. giving them the best user experience.
If you don't have a computer, you're unlikely to have a wifi router.
Heck, when I have jailbroken my iPhone with jailbreakme a couple of months ago; I was drinking coffee in a coffee shop that had wifi; and I had no laptop and no wifi router with me ;)
Suggesting that Apple requires iOS to sync with the PC for any reason other than keeping customers locked in iTunes is silly.
That's a very limited mindset.
In another few years, if there aren't already, there will be households with smartphones, tablets, and broadband + wifi at home but no traditional PCs of any sort. If you refuse to acknowledge such a scenario then you will lose sales for those folks.
Gruber and others have claimed that Apple is unusual in being willing to develop new products at the expense of old products. I think this might be true.
That's that only logical explanation for maintaining this extra complexity by a company that is otherwise brilliant at simplifying the user experience.
In fact, Apple have a track record of poor UX with complex network services. I'll guess that they have always intended for the Ipad to be a stand-alone device, but haven't ironed out the problems with their cloud storage.
As far as syncing goes, I think a good first step would be to do it all over WiFi on the local network in the background (TimeMachine style). I have my iPad/iPhone running on the same local wireless network as my laptop all day/night, it's nuts that I have to physically connect the two. The step up from there is to sync to the cloud, but still over WiFi.
Android has. WebOS has.
I get OTA updates to my WebOS device, and it backs itself up over the air nightly. I just updated to 2.1 and all my apps just magically came back, and it had all my email/im/linkedin/facebook account settings too - I just had to re-enter my passwords to confirm. If Palm/HP can manage it, Apple can.
And the syncing of data over 3G argument is pretty lame. Most people find themselves with wifi at home/work for the large updates.
Having to cable my iOS device to my PC each morning to get my daily podcasts from iTunes is nuts. These are wireless devices, they should wake up, download the content and have it just magically "be there" when I decide to listen to one in the subway the next morning. Having to cable it up, or even open the application to force the sync is crazy.
This way I wake up in the morning, take the subway to work and my data is already "just there". I dont have to even launch the app before going into the subway (with enough time to sync up).
This is not possible on iOS but a feature I use it daily on webOS.
So not only post-PC, but proactive in keeping my data updated.
However, I wouldn't be too surprised to see a completely closed Mac/PC ecosystem in the future. Not now, but in the the next 5-10 years. As things move more and more "to the cloud" and the desktop becomes a dumb terminal, the easier it is for Apple to just tell everyone that they must go through the App Store.
They did introduce that dialog which warns you when software is not signed, but of course MS didn't take this to the degree that Apple has. While it's a great way to take care of malware, I really don't think Apple's vision of the future is one I want to compute in.
You can set Windows to only allow signed applications to run, too: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd723683(WS.10).a...
That 90% of the population you're talking about really is using "personal computers". The iPad is just a "rented" piece of hardware, which you can use only in ways that pass Apple's approval. That's pretty far from "personal" to me.
It's not like 30-inch monitors and ergonomic keyboards are going to magically become portable tomorrow. Desktop/laptop computers are sticking around for a while.
This is about the fourth post on HN I've seen whining (yes, I think it's whining) about this issue. Apple is going all-cloud soon enough, if the rumors are true. In the meantime, if I'm going to sync 20-25gig of stuff to a new device, I really don't mind plugging it in.
I also don't mind plugging it in occasionally for an OS upgrade. It's just not a big deal, at all. The device is wire-dependent on a daily basis, anyway, folks: it needs a fresh new supply of electrons to keep running. Get over it.