5 ms·

That the iPad is consistently classified as a media consumption device seems an attempt to trivialize its significance by people who consider themselves power u

That the iPad is consistently classified as a media consumption device seems an attempt to trivialize its significance by people who consider themselves power users. I agree that currently the use cases of most applications fall into this category, that it is expensive and I doubt you will ever do application development on a device of its form factor, but it is clearly not just a media consumption device. A few example applications are the two very nice musical instruments the Korg iElectribe http://www.korg.co.uk/products/software_controllers/iPad_iElectribe/sc_ipad_ielectribe.php http://www.korg.co.uk/products/software_controllers/iPad_iEl..., which sells for $10 while its HW equivqlent is around $450, and the MiniSynth Pro http://www.yonac.com/ http://www.yonac.com/ a fully functional FM synthesizer. Neither of these applications would have been possible prior to the iPad. Others are the drawing applications Brushes http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id363590649?mt=8 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id363590649?mt=8 and SketchBook Pro http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sketchbook-pro/id364253478?mt=8 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sketchbook-pro/id364253478?mt.... I also like the touch and hand drawing interface to OmniGraffle a diagramming application http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/omnigraffle/id363225984?mt=8 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/omnigraffle/id363225984?mt=8. I think the majority of creative or power user applications will be for those with a complex control surface, such as the examples above. The large touch interface of the iPad is much simpler to use than a traditional mouse keyboard. Also when compared to Wacom drawing tablets http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS240&q=wacom+tablet&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=1545184928933896623&ei=o5nES4G3EsL78Aax6bCtDw&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDIQ8wIwBQ#ps-sellers http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ... it is competitive, at the iPad low end the iPad is about $200 more, though not quite as functional, the iPad does not have pressure or stylus tilt sensitivity but it is portable. If you are interested in developing these types of applications you have to have one. If you do not have one you will never see were the deficiencies are or know which problems to solve. The device as only been available for 10 days. I would expect it will take a year or two before the application space has been adequately sampled. Another obvious short coming, or opportunity, is with file synchronization and management. I am currently using dropbox, https://www.dropbox.com/ https://www.dropbox.com/ with ReaddleDocs http://readdle.com/products/readdledocs http://readdle.com/products/readdledocs, which works for reading. If documents are generated on the IPad you have to use iTunes, eMail or an application specific server for document synchronization. Neither of these is adequate. The typing problem you mentioned can be solved by a case that holds it an an angle, such as http://www.goincase.com/products/detail/CL57512 http://www.goincase.com/products/detail/CL57512. The number of viewing and use positions for the device is greater than that for a laptop. Also heavy duty typing can be handled with a bluetooth attached keyboard though for my needs the the onscreen keyboard has been adequate.

crux_ 17y ago
> That the iPad is consistently classified as a media consumption device seems an attempt to trivialize its significance by people who consider themselves power users. Not really. It comes from an idealism that technology (especially the internet) would, speaking broadly, shift our society away from a centralized model where the many are beholden to the few and towards something more distributed and egalitarian. If you cherish that goal, you're fairly likely to see the iPad as a step backwards -- it is not about the size of the step ("significance") but its direction.
- akadien 17y ago
  For me, the iPad does not provide more utility compared to other devices I use to warrant carrying around and maintaining yet another device (Yad? iYad?). If it did or I thought it would, I would keep it. That it makes me physically uncomfortable is another factor. YMMV.
- roc 17y ago
  I'd think if you truly cherish that goal (as I do) you'd have noticed by now that no single device or technology represents a step of any significance in any direction. It wasn't the existence of the internet that changed the creator:consumer ratio for the better. It was the use of the internet as such. And that use exploded thanks to any number of consumption-focused technologies along the way. Consider that even if no-one creates long-form text on an iPad, it's existence as a consumption machine might re-popularize the format and draw more creators to write for digital bookstores, shifting the creator:consumer relationship thanks to the ease of entrance (compared to dead-tree publishing). Or for a more proven example: consider the App Store. Reviled-since-inception by techno-freedom purists, its net effect has been positive for entire classes of software that are as-of-yet implausible via the internet. Though the store serves only these consumption-focused devices, the audience those devices attracted and the comparative low barrier for entry by creators has drawn creators and been a huge step forward. Windows tablets have had more pure potential to push the creator:consumer ratio forward for a decade and they've done essentially nothing. How useful is a world-view in which they're viewed as a step forward and the iPad a step back? All that aside, the core argument is still bogus. The iPad is getting a rap as a media consumption device solely because it's bad at text input without peripherals. Well, guess what? Any form factor is bad at some Arts without peripherals. And peripherals often dictate ergonomics. Keyboard/Mouse PCs suck at digital painting, a/v capture, a/v editing and any number of disciplines without peripherals. We don't pan them for not being a creative panacea out-of-the-box. And we certainly don't begrudge laptops their convenience, even though a digital artist has to lug around a cintiq to do decent work on the road, and is thus limited in use cases.

crux_ 17y ago

> That the iPad is consistently classified as a media consumption device seems an attempt to trivialize its significance by people who consider themselves power users. Not really. It comes from an idealism that technology (especially the internet) would, speaking broadly, shift our society away from a centralized model where the many are beholden to the few and towards something more distributed and egalitarian. If you cherish that goal, you're fairly likely to see the iPad as a step backwards -- it is not about the size of the step ("significance") but its direction.

akadien 17y ago
For me, the iPad does not provide more utility compared to other devices I use to warrant carrying around and maintaining yet another device (Yad? iYad?). If it did or I thought it would, I would keep it. That it makes me physically uncomfortable is another factor. YMMV.
roc 17y ago
I'd think if you truly cherish that goal (as I do) you'd have noticed by now that no single device or technology represents a step of any significance in any direction. It wasn't the existence of the internet that changed the creator:consumer ratio for the better. It was the use of the internet as such. And that use exploded thanks to any number of consumption-focused technologies along the way. Consider that even if no-one creates long-form text on an iPad, it's existence as a consumption machine might re-popularize the format and draw more creators to write for digital bookstores, shifting the creator:consumer relationship thanks to the ease of entrance (compared to dead-tree publishing). Or for a more proven example: consider the App Store. Reviled-since-inception by techno-freedom purists, its net effect has been positive for entire classes of software that are as-of-yet implausible via the internet. Though the store serves only these consumption-focused devices, the audience those devices attracted and the comparative low barrier for entry by creators has drawn creators and been a huge step forward. Windows tablets have had more pure potential to push the creator:consumer ratio forward for a decade and they've done essentially nothing. How useful is a world-view in which they're viewed as a step forward and the iPad a step back? All that aside, the core argument is still bogus. The iPad is getting a rap as a media consumption device solely because it's bad at text input without peripherals. Well, guess what? Any form factor is bad at some Arts without peripherals. And peripherals often dictate ergonomics. Keyboard/Mouse PCs suck at digital painting, a/v capture, a/v editing and any number of disciplines without peripherals. We don't pan them for not being a creative panacea out-of-the-box. And we certainly don't begrudge laptops their convenience, even though a digital artist has to lug around a cintiq to do decent work on the road, and is thus limited in use cases.