Linked by David Adams on Wed 7th Jul 2010 19:09 UTC
Apple A Forbes article notices that while the iPad's reception from the public and the mainstream press has been overwhelmingly positive, the prevailing sentiment among some alpha geeks has been negative to the extreme. The conclusion, of course, is that these people aren't reacting to what the iPad is, but rather what it represents: a violation of the ethos of the personal computer. The author of the Forbes article concludes that much of the anti-iPad vitriol is hyperbole, and doesn't help advance the cause. It's a thought-provoking question.
Thread beginning with comment 433120
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ssa2204
Member since:
2006-04-22

Apple released a pedestrian device. It was up to Apple to do their magic and give me a tablet that raised the bar for all other tablet devices and do things we hadn't thought of yet. They did this with iPod. They did it with iPhone. We expect that of iPad.


I have to ask though, what did the iPod actually do that was simply so new and revolutionary? I ask because so many seem to think, and talk, as if the portable digital music player was somehow invented by Apple. Funny, because I seemed to remember owning Mp3 players years before the iPod came out. The funny thing is that I have seen some argue that it was the Apple software that was what revolutionized the iPod. To which I reply...really? Are you serious? Consider that statistically speaking you will have more people running iPod software on Windows, this is a bad argument to make. Also, I seem to have thought over 10+ years ago the software that was used with my Rio to be more functional that the Apple iTunes. So what do we have left but the iTune store, which really is not all that revolutionary.


The old saying still holds true, Apple doesn't make computers for people who know anything about computers. That's not always a good thing. It's all flash, no substance, and goes back to the joke from two decades ago... First week you own a Mac you'll be amazed by what it can do, the rest of your life you'll be amazed by what it can't.


Agreed. So agreed. I resist the urge every time the name Apple comes up, but sometimes it just gets too damn much and I can not control myself. This statement above pretty much is 100% my sentiments exactly.

Reply Parent Score: 2

mlankton Member since:
2009-06-11

2001. From what slim options existed for linux and the BSDs at the time, (which I'm pretty sure was limited to one KDE and one Gnome app, neither of which was worth a damn, and command line options) and the sad state of Windows solutions (I'm thinking whatever Roxio made for Win32 might have been your best bet back then) iTunes was a revolution. 2001. Don't think so? Been using various BSDs, linux, Digital Unix, Windows and Solaris, not to mention OPENSTEP throughout the 90s. If you want to tell me some Rio software back then was better at importing, cataloging, burning and exporting than iTunes I may be interested in what you've been smoking.

It's a moot point: we're talking iPad, and there is simply nothing compelling about it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

2001. From what slim options existed for linux and the BSDs at the time, (which I'm pretty sure was limited to one KDE and one Gnome app, neither of which was worth a damn, and command line options) and the sad state of Windows solutions (I'm thinking whatever Roxio made for Win32 might have been your best bet back then) iTunes was a revolution. 2001. Don't think so? Been using various BSDs, linux, Digital Unix, Windows and Solaris, not to mention OPENSTEP throughout the 90s. If you want to tell me some Rio software back then was better at importing, cataloging, burning and exporting than iTunes I may be interested in what you've been smoking.

It's a moot point: we're talking iPad, and there is simply nothing compelling about it.


I seem to remember the Real Jukebox 2.0 was a pretty nice program that did import, catalog, and burn. Point here is that the iPod itself was simply NOT a "revolutionary" device. Apple simply can not claim that title when existing products existed years before. Did the iPod come with some extra or different features? Sure, but that changes absolutely nothing as a few minor features does not equate again to "revolutionary" status. My whole point here is that Apple gets these labels that are based purely on good PR, but not so much on actual delivery of new and innovative technology. Whether it be smartphones (iPhone), music players (iPod), and the tablet (iPad) Apple has simply created a consumer fetish product, nothing more. What they have not created is the new, revolutionary device that people seem to think they have done..which is my point.

Reply Parent Score: 2

mlankton Member since:
2009-06-11

"
The old saying still holds true, Apple doesn't make computers for people who know anything about computers. That's not always a good thing. It's all flash, no substance, and goes back to the joke from two decades ago... First week you own a Mac you'll be amazed by what it can do, the rest of your life you'll be amazed by what it can't.


Agreed. So agreed. I resist the urge every time the name Apple comes up, but sometimes it just gets too damn much and I can not control myself. This statement above pretty much is 100% my sentiments exactly.
"

Alright if you are going to reply to my comment, identify what you put in block quotes. I will respond to the above nonsense, but first tell me where it comes from. It wasn't me, which is implied since you are responding to my post.

Reply Parent Score: 1