NEWS: Microsoft's dual-screen booklet shows 'face' on web • The Register
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Microsoft's dual-screen booklet shows 'face' on web ? The Register
Next: Call for papers: CCN-10, USA, July 2010
From: David Kaye on 7 Mar 2010 03:24 SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: > >It doesn't matter how great the hardware is, where are the apps? Uh, the demo seemed to have plenty of apps built in already. Okay, it's not going to give you a snow globe or liar's dice, but what the heck, the Courier Engadget certainly impressed me, and I'm not impressed by very much.
From: David Kaye on 7 Mar 2010 03:27 JC Dill <jcdill.lists(a)gmail.com> wrote: >A photographer friend thinks the iPad will be used as a portable >portfolio display device for photographers. We won't need to make >portfolio books anymore, just load photos into a slideshow application >on the iPad and click play. Who needs an expensive iPad when a cheap picture frame display will accomplish the same thing? Sony's got a nice one with automatic slide show for $100.
From: John Slade on 7 Mar 2010 04:19 SMS wrote: > John Slade wrote: >> JC Dill wrote: >>> John Slade wrote: >>>> The iPad uses watered down everything and I don't know how well it >>>> will do given the netbook market and how the typical netbook is far >>>> more powerful and versatile than the iPad. >>> >>> Not everyone wants (or needs) the most powerful and versatile item. >>> For many people, ease of use is far more important, >> >> I think ease of use means you can go on the Internet and use >> every web site without any problem. As it is, the iPad does not >> support Adobe Flash and a lot of web sites use flash extensively. > > Well maybe Apple is the only company that can make a stand against the > extensive use of Flash. Stand against Flash? Don't make me laugh, oh wait, it's too late for that. Apple is not producing an alternative to Flash. There are alternatives like Silverlight, HTML5 and others. I think the main reason Apple didn't want to implement Flash is the same reason other mobile devices didn't use it. The iPad is not powerful enough to run Flash well. However during the development of the iPad, Adobe has put out a mobile version of Flash that seems to work well for many devices. Why Apple didn't work with Adobe to put it on the iPad is anyone's guess. I guess Job's playing up the shortcomings of Flash prevents him from adopting the mobile version for use on the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch. I don't think Apple is being the lone voice against the overuse of Flash even though it is overused. Maybe if Apple had not allowed Flash to run on OS X, then I might change my mind but that's not the case. John
From: SMS on 7 Mar 2010 12:14 Jeff Liebermann wrote: <snip> > Good idea. Too bad Apple didn't include an SD card slot or USB jack > to install one externally. They do sell a kit with an SD card slot for the iPad. Of course most professional and "prosumer" D-SLRs use Compact Flash, but you can also import via USB directly from the camera. It's not a full USB port that you get, but it's good enough to transfer photos from a camera.
From: JC Dill on 7 Mar 2010 20:29
SMS wrote: > Jeff Liebermann wrote: > > <snip> > >> Good idea. Too bad Apple didn't include an SD card slot or USB jack >> to install one externally. > > They do sell a kit with an SD card slot for the iPad. Of course most > professional and "prosumer" D-SLRs use Compact Flash, but you can also > import via USB directly from the camera. It's not a full USB port that > you get, but it's good enough to transfer photos from a camera. Pro photographers will import processed photos from their computer, not raw photos from a camera. Those that already use Macs will find it easy to use an iPhoto/iTunes transfer/sync type of interface. jc |