6 ms·

A quote from the article (quoting someone else): > "there's not much a PC can do that you can't do on an iPad." iPad can't run user programs! (without permiss

by cryptoz 16y ago

A quote from the article (quoting someone else): > "there's not much a PC can do that you can't do on an iPad." iPad can't run user programs! (without permission from Apple, anyway). What a load of bollocks...wow.

tvon 16y ago
Apparently user programs aren't that important.
lotusleaf1987 16y ago
I think the author means: browsing internet, email, watching movies (Netflix/Hulu/YouTube), playing video-games, listening to music, editing photos, word-processing/spreadsheets/presentations via Keynote (as an alternative to PowerPoint), printing to a printer, etc. I would say that is 90% of what most end-users require of their PCs anyways. Most people buying laptops/desktops don't even use them to their potential. Edit: Hulu requires Hulu Premium, which is in Beta currently. Thanks for the correction Larsberg, I should have been more clear.
- larsberg 16y ago
  Small correction -- no Hulu unless you were invited to the beta and are paying $10/month.
anwill 16y ago
I know it's not quite the same, but with a developer account ($99) you can run your own programs on your iPhone.
- fierarul 16y ago
  That's $99/year and Apple really doesn't see this as a way to install programs that aren't on AppStore. It's really just meant to compile locally, deploy locally to your devices or submit to AppStore. Even the number of devices you can support per year in your profiles is limited to 100, probably because they don't want you to use it as a distribution mechanism, just a temporary testing mechanism. 100 devices per year is actually rather limited if you do custom work and each client comes with his own list of 5-20 devices they want to test onto.
  - masklinn 16y ago
    > Even the number of devices you can support per year in your profiles is limited to 100, probably because they don't want you to use it as a distribution mechanism Really? Even though they call it a distribution mechanism themselves[0]? Interesting. > 100 devices per year is actually rather limited if you do custom work and each client comes with his own list of 5-20 devices they want to test onto. If you do custom work for clients, then clients are supposed to get their in-house license for distribution. Either a company developer program, or an Enterprise program[1] which exists very specifically for company in-house deployments. Using your personal developer key for client-site deployment is not a good idea and makes low to no sense. Are you really suggesting that you should manage and deploy your client's device park forever? [0] http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/distribute.html http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/distribute.html [1] http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/ http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/
    - fierarul 16y ago
      >Really? Even though they call it a distribution mechanism themselves[0]? Interesting. It's not a mass distribution mechanism where, for example, you could just add the UDIDs of all your users. Of course it's a distribution mechanism, but it's just meant for testing, not a competition to AppStore. That's what I was talking about. >If you do custom work for clients, then clients are supposed to get their in-house license for distribution. Really? And what do you do when the customer wants you to start work NOW and they'll apply to Apple in the mean-time for their own keys ? Do you just tell them you can't email them a simple prototype because, well, you're too lazy to add some device IDs to your own list ? Anyhow, your reply seems to be quite orthogonal to what I meant and those links and your tone are mildly insulting. My point was that the developer account isn't really designed as a way to install your own apps for the masses (hence my examples).
      - masklinn 16y ago
        > It's not a mass distribution mechanism where, for example, you could just add the UDIDs of all your users. not it's not a mass distribution mechanism. But it's still a distribution mechanism, and one that is supported. > but it's just meant for testing That's woefully incorrect. It can be used for testing, but it definitely isn't just meant for that. > Really? And what do you do when the customer wants you to start work NOW and they'll apply to Apple in the mean-time for their own keys ? Do you just tell them you can't email them a simple prototype because, well, you're too lazy to add some device IDs to your own list ? No but that's a very different issue. You don't need to enable 5000 devices to test the application, and you will reclaim those spots later on. > those links and your tone are mildly insulting. Feel free to blame yourself. > My point was that the developer account isn't really designed as a way to install your own apps for the masses. Then you might have wanted to write that. And you'd have gotten a "No, really?" instead. > (hence my examples) You only gave one example and it had no relation to mass-distribution. Quite the opposite, in fact.
glhaynes 16y ago
Maybe it'd be better phrased as "there's not much that most PC users actually do with their PC that they couldn't do with an iPad".
- kenjackson 16y ago
  Things like run Flash, play WoW, or swap between a handful of tabs (including streaming Pandora) and few running apps (like Word, Excel, and IM client) are all pretty common things for most users I know. These aren't the geeks, but just people who actually use their computers.
  - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
    You can download iWork: Pages for Word, Numbers for Excel, Keynote for PowerPoint. It does the exact same stuff, easier, and for far cheaper ($30 vs $150 or more). I'll give you WoW and Flash but I don't think "most" people play WoW or even care about Flash. There are plenty of IM clients.
    - derefr 16y ago
      Plus, if we were living in a world where "most people" did play WoW, Blizzard would be ignoring a market opportunity not to make an iPad client.
      - kenjackson 16y ago
        "Most people" in the world isn't the right metric. Most people in the world probably don't use the web once a week. The real question is what is the market opportunity. After the Sims, WoW is the best selling PC game of all time. It's pretty popular.
        masklinn 16y ago
        > After the Sims, WoW is the best selling PC game of all time. It's pretty popular. Not by a long shot. WoW sold 12 million copies. Myst sold 14. Starcraft sold 17 millions if you combine SC1 and SC2 sales (SC1 sold 11 million). And The Sims sold about 30 millions, excluding expansions (16 millions for The Sims, 13 for The Sims 2 and 4.6 millions for The Sims 3). At best WoW ranks fourth, whether by franchises (Sims, StarCraft, Myst) or by individual game (Sims 1, Myst, Sims 2)
danilocampos 16y ago
The difference between us and real, honest to god users is that they don't really care. They care about benefits and outcomes. As long as they can do the bulk of what they care about (communication, content, entertainment), they're happy because overall the iPad is very convenient, never nags you about software updates, and generally stays the hell out of your way. There's nothing scary about using an iPad. It does what you tell it, doesn't try to bully you, and uses an interaction paradigm that anyone can instantly grasp. Users will happily trade a straightforward, non-intimidating experience for a little power or flexibility.
ugh 16y ago
Can we not make this about the iPad? There will be a plethora of similar devices out soon with all the features you can imagine (maybe not all in one package). Apple created a new successful category. That’s what’s important. It covers most if not all common use cases (Installing user programs is not a common use case. At all.) and seems to have just the right form factor, battery life and UI.
- wonderzombie 16y ago
  I understand the sentiment. I really do. But the reality is that nobody else has even showed up. It's about the iPad because it's the only product out there. It's all the more shocking when you go back and read a lot of the analysis back in January. It was like the iPod announcement all over again. Don't get me wrong. I'd love for somebody to out-Apple Apple. I just don't see it happening anytime soon. The only thing that looks comparable to me is the tablet from Samsung. What makes me nervous is that I haven't heard definitive word on the price. Rumor has it that it'll be 600 pounds in the UK. That's, um, spendy. Also, the "all the features you can imagine" part makes me wonder. What was that HN article earlier this week? Users don't pay for attributes, they pay for results? I'm not convinced that packing in more features for their own sake translates to a more compelling experience.
  - ugh 16y ago
    I’m very tired of the stupid ideological fights. All that has really been discussed to death on HN. We witness the emergence of a new category and all we can talk about are stupid rules from Apple? Also, if the tech industry can’t manage to produce a decent iPad competitor soon it probably doesn’t deserve any better.

by cryptoz 16y ago

tvon 16y ago

Apparently user programs aren't that important.

lotusleaf1987 16y ago

I think the author means: browsing internet, email, watching movies (Netflix/Hulu/YouTube), playing video-games, listening to music, editing photos, word-processing/spreadsheets/presentations via Keynote (as an alternative to PowerPoint), printing to a printer, etc. I would say that is 90% of what most end-users require of their PCs anyways. Most people buying laptops/desktops don't even use them to their potential. Edit: Hulu requires Hulu Premium, which is in Beta currently. Thanks for the correction Larsberg, I should have been more clear.

larsberg 16y ago
Small correction -- no Hulu unless you were invited to the beta and are paying $10/month.

anwill 16y ago

I know it's not quite the same, but with a developer account ($99) you can run your own programs on your iPhone.

fierarul 16y ago
That's $99/year and Apple really doesn't see this as a way to install programs that aren't on AppStore. It's really just meant to compile locally, deploy locally to your devices or submit to AppStore. Even the number of devices you can support per year in your profiles is limited to 100, probably because they don't want you to use it as a distribution mechanism, just a temporary testing mechanism. 100 devices per year is actually rather limited if you do custom work and each client comes with his own list of 5-20 devices they want to test onto.
- masklinn 16y ago
  > Even the number of devices you can support per year in your profiles is limited to 100, probably because they don't want you to use it as a distribution mechanism Really? Even though they call it a distribution mechanism themselves[0]? Interesting. > 100 devices per year is actually rather limited if you do custom work and each client comes with his own list of 5-20 devices they want to test onto. If you do custom work for clients, then clients are supposed to get their in-house license for distribution. Either a company developer program, or an Enterprise program[1] which exists very specifically for company in-house deployments. Using your personal developer key for client-site deployment is not a good idea and makes low to no sense. Are you really suggesting that you should manage and deploy your client's device park forever? [0] http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/distribute.html http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/distribute.html [1] http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/ http://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/enterprise/
  - fierarul 16y ago
    >Really? Even though they call it a distribution mechanism themselves[0]? Interesting. It's not a mass distribution mechanism where, for example, you could just add the UDIDs of all your users. Of course it's a distribution mechanism, but it's just meant for testing, not a competition to AppStore. That's what I was talking about. >If you do custom work for clients, then clients are supposed to get their in-house license for distribution. Really? And what do you do when the customer wants you to start work NOW and they'll apply to Apple in the mean-time for their own keys ? Do you just tell them you can't email them a simple prototype because, well, you're too lazy to add some device IDs to your own list ? Anyhow, your reply seems to be quite orthogonal to what I meant and those links and your tone are mildly insulting. My point was that the developer account isn't really designed as a way to install your own apps for the masses (hence my examples).
    - masklinn 16y ago
      > It's not a mass distribution mechanism where, for example, you could just add the UDIDs of all your users. not it's not a mass distribution mechanism. But it's still a distribution mechanism, and one that is supported. > but it's just meant for testing That's woefully incorrect. It can be used for testing, but it definitely isn't just meant for that. > Really? And what do you do when the customer wants you to start work NOW and they'll apply to Apple in the mean-time for their own keys ? Do you just tell them you can't email them a simple prototype because, well, you're too lazy to add some device IDs to your own list ? No but that's a very different issue. You don't need to enable 5000 devices to test the application, and you will reclaim those spots later on. > those links and your tone are mildly insulting. Feel free to blame yourself. > My point was that the developer account isn't really designed as a way to install your own apps for the masses. Then you might have wanted to write that. And you'd have gotten a "No, really?" instead. > (hence my examples) You only gave one example and it had no relation to mass-distribution. Quite the opposite, in fact.

glhaynes 16y ago

Maybe it'd be better phrased as "there's not much that most PC users actually do with their PC that they couldn't do with an iPad".

kenjackson 16y ago
Things like run Flash, play WoW, or swap between a handful of tabs (including streaming Pandora) and few running apps (like Word, Excel, and IM client) are all pretty common things for most users I know. These aren't the geeks, but just people who actually use their computers.
- lotusleaf1987 16y ago
  You can download iWork: Pages for Word, Numbers for Excel, Keynote for PowerPoint. It does the exact same stuff, easier, and for far cheaper ($30 vs $150 or more). I'll give you WoW and Flash but I don't think "most" people play WoW or even care about Flash. There are plenty of IM clients.
  - derefr 16y ago
    Plus, if we were living in a world where "most people" did play WoW, Blizzard would be ignoring a market opportunity not to make an iPad client.
    - kenjackson 16y ago
      "Most people" in the world isn't the right metric. Most people in the world probably don't use the web once a week. The real question is what is the market opportunity. After the Sims, WoW is the best selling PC game of all time. It's pretty popular.
      - masklinn 16y ago
        > After the Sims, WoW is the best selling PC game of all time. It's pretty popular. Not by a long shot. WoW sold 12 million copies. Myst sold 14. Starcraft sold 17 millions if you combine SC1 and SC2 sales (SC1 sold 11 million). And The Sims sold about 30 millions, excluding expansions (16 millions for The Sims, 13 for The Sims 2 and 4.6 millions for The Sims 3). At best WoW ranks fourth, whether by franchises (Sims, StarCraft, Myst) or by individual game (Sims 1, Myst, Sims 2)

danilocampos 16y ago

The difference between us and real, honest to god users is that they don't really care. They care about benefits and outcomes. As long as they can do the bulk of what they care about (communication, content, entertainment), they're happy because overall the iPad is very convenient, never nags you about software updates, and generally stays the hell out of your way. There's nothing scary about using an iPad. It does what you tell it, doesn't try to bully you, and uses an interaction paradigm that anyone can instantly grasp. Users will happily trade a straightforward, non-intimidating experience for a little power or flexibility.

ugh 16y ago

Can we not make this about the iPad? There will be a plethora of similar devices out soon with all the features you can imagine (maybe not all in one package). Apple created a new successful category. That’s what’s important. It covers most if not all common use cases (Installing user programs is not a common use case. At all.) and seems to have just the right form factor, battery life and UI.

wonderzombie 16y ago
I understand the sentiment. I really do. But the reality is that nobody else has even showed up. It's about the iPad because it's the only product out there. It's all the more shocking when you go back and read a lot of the analysis back in January. It was like the iPod announcement all over again. Don't get me wrong. I'd love for somebody to out-Apple Apple. I just don't see it happening anytime soon. The only thing that looks comparable to me is the tablet from Samsung. What makes me nervous is that I haven't heard definitive word on the price. Rumor has it that it'll be 600 pounds in the UK. That's, um, spendy. Also, the "all the features you can imagine" part makes me wonder. What was that HN article earlier this week? Users don't pay for attributes, they pay for results? I'm not convinced that packing in more features for their own sake translates to a more compelling experience.
- ugh 16y ago
  I’m very tired of the stupid ideological fights. All that has really been discussed to death on HN. We witness the emergence of a new category and all we can talk about are stupid rules from Apple? Also, if the tech industry can’t manage to produce a decent iPad competitor soon it probably doesn’t deserve any better.