Hopstretch

Greek yoghurt with blueberries mixed in.

No, Dinny. Oh, wait... It's really instructive to see how opinion splits on this thing between the tech pros, who generally don't like it, and the finance pros, who are already counting all the extra money they think Apple is going to make. I guess this is because the former are focusing pretty much solely on the use case -- where Apple has clearly not, as they had hoped, delivered the innovations required to establish tablet devices as fully-fledged, general-purpose computers. The money men, though, are looking at the business case -- and they see an extremely aggressive attempt to create a whole new category of mass-market consumer data device. Instead of taking the usual approach to the technology adoption lifecycle, Apple is trying to "cross the chasm" (between tech-savvy early adopters and the majority of consumers) straight out of the gate, betting that the iPad's price point is more important than its feature list and that the existing installed base of iPhone/Touch OS users (plus the intuitive simplicity of that operating system) will let them bypass the usability issues that are generally the major drag on the diffusion of innovation. So, while the iPad isn't the Jesus tablet the geeks were dreaming of, it's huge for Apple nevertheless. It's their entry in the sub-$500 sort-of-computer race that they'd previously ceded to the netbooks. It's their shot (and a pretty good one) at being the single biggest player in the diffuse media market of the future. It's their testbed for innovations in mobile technology that can be pushed down to the smartphone lineup (the processors) and up to the laptops (gesture UI etc.). It's another potential profit channel for indy developers, allowing them to extend their already huge lead in mobile software. I don't think it was all hype when Jobs said the iPad could be the most significant product he has been involved with at the company. Eh, what do I know? I'll buy one straight away because it suits me. Your mileage will vary.

Loading is adjustable on the Pearl by swapping a socketed resistor. The one I have is set up to be either 100 ohm or 47K right now, but a 1K resistor could be substituted instead.

It won't bug me to pay for added functionality in an iPad app if it really takes advantage of the extra capacities of the device. But Apple's been clear that they're not going to let people charge for straight "ports".

Any apps you have will automatically sync over. You don't pay twice.

Don't think that's going to happen for a while. The iPad aspect ratio is based on 2*iPhone/iTouch screen ratio and needs to be that way so apps can scale up seamlessly by pixel doubling.

dacdacdacadaccadaccadacdac

Thurrott declared the original iPhone a dud, too, and claims Windows Mobile wipes the floor with both Android and iPhone OS. I would say that his evaluations are generally less than unimpeachable!

.

Eurythmics -- We Too Are One

I see Teh Internet has pretty much already decided the iPad sucks, they hate it and Steve Jobs's lawn should be set on fire.

For that, I would jailbreak!

That's nicely put. I think these sort of slates are going to turn out to be ubiquitous in a little while, not as computers per se but as networked content-delivery devices. Apple gets first (serious) mover advantage, plus the ability to lock even more users into the broader iTunes ecosystem. I'm pretty sure Apple's wet dream of the future is a household with an iMac, iPad and a couple of iPhones.

The other thing that seems clear is that Apple is staying with AT&T for the long haul. I imagine the discounted iPad data plans were part of the price of getting an extension on the iPhone exclusive. Apple also must be very sure that AT&T really can get their 3G network up to scratch in the medium term, because if the iPhones were crushing it on their own... And this new processor looks really, really fast. I hope it's going to go into the next iPhone, too!

Dinny, I think they could have built a really cutting-edge device that hardcore geeks would love, but it would have been twice the price or more. And they decided the only way to create this new category was to have it be mass-market right from the start. To do that, it had to be relatively cheap and it had to be relatively simple. Jobs said it right at the end: "With over 75 million iPhones and iPod touches sold, we've got over 75 million people who already know how to use the iPad."

It also looks like you don't get GPS unless you pony for the 3G model. Must be an integrated chip.

Yup. The only visual indicator is the black strip on the back, which isn't there with the wi-fi model.

As far as SD cards go, there is a card reader adaptor for photos and a USB connection for cameras, so we know the device can access external storage through the 30-pin connector. It'll be a question of file system support for other media or external drives, I guess?

Chill. It is widely rumored that multitasking will be added to the iPhone -- and presumably now the iPad too -- in the next major firmware update. Also, I see several things it has that netbooks generally do not -- like a decent display and a processor that isn't hamster-powered.

From Engadget: EDIT: Oops. Late.

Why would you want a camera? All cell phones have cameras and you're going to be buying this as well as a phone.

Yup. The base model is exactly what I wanted. A kick-ass Web tablet + email device + ebook reader. Easy sell at $499. Now, whether people will buy the full-boat models for $830 + whatever the accessory keyboard costs as a full-on laptop replacement, I do not know.

It will. They're going to sell a metric ass-ton of these.

Sweet!

Heh. Apple stock just went nuts.