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 433130
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

What they have not created is the new, revolutionary device that people seem to think they have done..which is my point.


iPad is to tablets what Asus EEE PC was to netbooks. It's not a technical revolution, but it does revolutionize the market and creates a new consumer need.

Regardless of all the negative aspects, I'm glad iPad got released. It took Apple to release a tablet anyway, regardless of all the naysayers everywhere (incl. osnews) chanting "we don't need tablets".

Reply Parent Score: 2