4 ms·

> "I love how you change the argument" I think I've been fairly consistent in defending the core statement. You're the one who appears to be consistently misu

by roc 16y ago

> "I love how you change the argument" I think I've been fairly consistent in defending the core statement. You're the one who appears to be consistently misunderstanding the statements you take issue with. To wit: > "I don't think it can do most of what a PC can do," No one claimed anything remotely close to that. What was said was: of the things that most PC users do, most of it can be done on an iPad. (implicitly: usably well; not in that kinda-sorta-technically way that accompanies talks about windows slates, symbian phones, etc.) How is it that you can recognize no-one expects netbooks to be PC replacements and you can dismiss their limitations due position as secondary devices, but you can't see the same of the iPad? A device that --unlike a netbook-- can't even be used unless you sync it with a primary PC? > "It just seems that many iPad owners contort themselves into pretzels to prove that the iPad is more powerful than any other device at any price point ever conceived." Again: No-one said anything remotely close to that in the article or in this thread.

kenjackson 16y ago
Here's the quote again: "there's not much that most PC users actually do with their PC that they couldn't do with an iPad" I've listed several things. What exactly is "not much" and what are "most PC users", I don't know. I've listed several things that a lot of PC users do. I've given concrete things like Flash (or Silverlight). Not sure if there is JVM for it, but there's certainly no CLR. Of course these get dismissed as not being important. Hardcore gaming. Apparently a niche industry now. It's an industry big enough to help drive PC sales, but apparently a blip for iPads. Side-loading, USB keys, printing -- mere inconveniences, as minor as missing a mute button. Didn't even mention things like watch DVDs or CDs, but that's old technology right? What about BluRay? Streaming over iTunes is the way better solution anyways. Burning CDs/DVDs? Why would you do that when you can just put stuff on DropBox? And then less concrete things like workflow difficulty. Such as the current browser tabs being ridiculously slow, and the fact that one can't have a spreadsheet calculating in the background while reading a report. Because clearly unless you do things the way Apple prescribed, you're doing it wrong. The iPad doesn't fit this quote: "there's not much that most PC users actually do with their PC that they couldn't do with an iPad". A FAR better quote is, "The iPad does somethings your PC does, but some things it doesn't do. OTOH, some experiences are better on the iPad. It's a different kind of device".
- roc 16y ago
  I think both quotes work perfectly well. I'm not reading into the first whatever it is you think the second avoids. "much" I personally quantify on the basis of "things a normal user does at least weekly". If half the things a normal user does weekly can't be reasonably done on the iPad, that's 'much'. If we're down to one or two things, that's not much. "most PC users" I personally define as the people who are primarily concerned with outcomes as opposed to technologies. The kind who don't care whether a device does or doesn't 'do' Flash; they only care when a site they visit doesn't do the things they want it to do. To approximate 'much' and 'most PC users', try this: Suppose you're on vacation for a week. You take the iPad with you to the lounge for happy hour and leave the laptop in the room. (You're on vacation to get away from the corporate concerns that normal users don't have. You're in the lounge to give us a threshold to determine if an outcome is realistically feasible or not.) How many things might you want to do during a week of happy hours, where you'd rather go back to your room to use the laptop, rather than just use the iPad? i.e. If you'd rather go up to use the laptop, then the iPad's capability is moot, because it's too onerous even if it exists. And if the better interface isn't worth the five minute walk, then the iPad 'can' do that task, even if not ideally. Crunching that spreadsheet might be less annoying if you could browse during the process, but if the wait is only a minute or two, you'd probably just grumble about the lack of backgrounding and stay where you were. A more serious spreadsheet might be worth the walk. But how often would those come up? Similarly, you might want some files that are on a USB key. Now, do you just take the key upstairs, or can you get those files with an alternative workflow that is less annoying that going up to the room? (e.g. downloading the files directly to the iPad if they're on a server. Or emailing the person who gave you the key and asking them to email a zip file. or otherwise post them.) If there's a lot of data, or if you keep important stuff on there as a matter of course, then it's probably easier to just run up to the room. But how often are you accessing data that's only on a thumb-drive and inconvenient enough to get another way that you hop on that elevator? etc. The workflow problem is, in my mind, a far more serious problem than a lack of flash or usb mass storage support. It's the unavoidable barrier that prevents the iPad being remotely arguable as suitable as a primary device for any user. Until that's addressed --while still not a toy-- the iPad will forever be a secondary device.
  - 16y ago

by roc 16y ago

kenjackson 16y ago

Here's the quote again: "there's not much that most PC users actually do with their PC that they couldn't do with an iPad" I've listed several things. What exactly is "not much" and what are "most PC users", I don't know. I've listed several things that a lot of PC users do. I've given concrete things like Flash (or Silverlight). Not sure if there is JVM for it, but there's certainly no CLR. Of course these get dismissed as not being important. Hardcore gaming. Apparently a niche industry now. It's an industry big enough to help drive PC sales, but apparently a blip for iPads. Side-loading, USB keys, printing -- mere inconveniences, as minor as missing a mute button. Didn't even mention things like watch DVDs or CDs, but that's old technology right? What about BluRay? Streaming over iTunes is the way better solution anyways. Burning CDs/DVDs? Why would you do that when you can just put stuff on DropBox? And then less concrete things like workflow difficulty. Such as the current browser tabs being ridiculously slow, and the fact that one can't have a spreadsheet calculating in the background while reading a report. Because clearly unless you do things the way Apple prescribed, you're doing it wrong. The iPad doesn't fit this quote: "there's not much that most PC users actually do with their PC that they couldn't do with an iPad". A FAR better quote is, "The iPad does somethings your PC does, but some things it doesn't do. OTOH, some experiences are better on the iPad. It's a different kind of device".

roc 16y ago
I think both quotes work perfectly well. I'm not reading into the first whatever it is you think the second avoids. "much" I personally quantify on the basis of "things a normal user does at least weekly". If half the things a normal user does weekly can't be reasonably done on the iPad, that's 'much'. If we're down to one or two things, that's not much. "most PC users" I personally define as the people who are primarily concerned with outcomes as opposed to technologies. The kind who don't care whether a device does or doesn't 'do' Flash; they only care when a site they visit doesn't do the things they want it to do. To approximate 'much' and 'most PC users', try this: Suppose you're on vacation for a week. You take the iPad with you to the lounge for happy hour and leave the laptop in the room. (You're on vacation to get away from the corporate concerns that normal users don't have. You're in the lounge to give us a threshold to determine if an outcome is realistically feasible or not.) How many things might you want to do during a week of happy hours, where you'd rather go back to your room to use the laptop, rather than just use the iPad? i.e. If you'd rather go up to use the laptop, then the iPad's capability is moot, because it's too onerous even if it exists. And if the better interface isn't worth the five minute walk, then the iPad 'can' do that task, even if not ideally. Crunching that spreadsheet might be less annoying if you could browse during the process, but if the wait is only a minute or two, you'd probably just grumble about the lack of backgrounding and stay where you were. A more serious spreadsheet might be worth the walk. But how often would those come up? Similarly, you might want some files that are on a USB key. Now, do you just take the key upstairs, or can you get those files with an alternative workflow that is less annoying that going up to the room? (e.g. downloading the files directly to the iPad if they're on a server. Or emailing the person who gave you the key and asking them to email a zip file. or otherwise post them.) If there's a lot of data, or if you keep important stuff on there as a matter of course, then it's probably easier to just run up to the room. But how often are you accessing data that's only on a thumb-drive and inconvenient enough to get another way that you hop on that elevator? etc. The workflow problem is, in my mind, a far more serious problem than a lack of flash or usb mass storage support. It's the unavoidable barrier that prevents the iPad being remotely arguable as suitable as a primary device for any user. Until that's addressed --while still not a toy-- the iPad will forever be a secondary device.
- 16y ago