NEWS: Microsoft's dual-screenbooklet shows 'face' on web € The Register
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Microsoft's dual-screenbooklet shows 'face' on web � The Register
Next: NEWS: Microsoft's dual-screenbooklet shows 'face' on web• The Register
From: SMS on 6 Mar 2010 22:32 Steve Fenwick wrote: > In article <4b930a4b$0$1632$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, > SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: > >> John Slade wrote: >> >>> I don't see the iPad being big in the "kids' market" because of >>> it's price and capabilities. More popular games are on cheaper devices >>> more suited to gaming. I can see the iPad being more successful in the >>> e-book reader market if the price comes down. >> I'm sure you're going to be proven wrong. Parents spend $1000-1500 on >> DVD systems for their kids to watch movies in the car. $500 to keep the >> kids busy in the car, and then having the iPad to use at the destination >> via WiFi (instead of carrying a laptop) is going to make it the >> must-have kid's toy of 2010. >> >>> It comes with a USB port via the adapter that comes with it. >> No it doesn't. It's not a USB host port. You can't plug in various >> peripherals that the vertical market needs, like bar code scanners, >> cameras, blood glucose meters, scales, blood-pressure cuffs, etc.. Apple >> is not interested in those vertical markets because they don't involve >> selling apps, music, videos, and books to the buyers. > > It is more likely USB OTG than USB device, as it supports the external > keyboard (<http://www.apple.com/ipad/specs/>, near the bottom), and the > iPad Camera Connection Kit, which allows a camera to be connected to the > iPad through USB. But it's not a general purpose USB port, the OS only supports stuff like the camera kit and keyboard. You can't plug in stuff like external disk drives, optical drives etc. Perhaps someone will figure out how to do this.
From: John Slade on 8 Mar 2010 17:47 Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 07:59:27 -0800, AES <siegman(a)stanford.edu> wrote: > >> In article <4b930a4b$0$1632$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, >> SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >> >>> Apple >>> is not interested in those vertical markets because they don't involve >>> selling apps, music, videos, and books to the buyers. >> Truer (and sadder) words were never posted. > > Apple lost their way. > > Once upon a time they were streets ahead of the PC world, and for a > while they held a niche where better graphics were required. Also the > Motorola based architecture didn't have the limitations that the > earlier Intel based architecture did. Remember the days of 640K max > memory and the third party software to make the most of it? It was > also more intuitive than Windows. I remember those days but I didn't have a Apple with a Motorola CPU, I had an Amiga and the Amiga was leaps ahead of PCs then. We didn't have the limitations that PCs did with the memory and we had better graphics. Then Commodore sat on it's lead in technology and the PC passed them by very quickly. So Commodore and the Amiga became history. I saw that same thing happening to Apple but Apple had the good sense to switch and start making PCs rather than compete with them. Now it seems Apple's OS X is becoming stagnant and Microsoft is far ahead with Windows 7. John
From: SMS on 8 Mar 2010 19:22 John Slade wrote: > Now it seems > Apple's OS X is becoming stagnant and Microsoft is far ahead with > Windows 7. Well Microsoft has at least leveled the playing field in most respects, and passed OS-X in others. Now the reason to buy a Mac is that you like the design of the hardware or you need to run one of the applications that isn't available for the PC. I.e., I know my nephew sticks with the Mac because he does a lot of freelance non-linear editing work with FinalCut Pro, which isn't available for Windows. He also uses Avid, but FinalCut is faster if the projects aren't too complex. The extra cost of the hardware is lost in the noise if he can complete projects a bit faster. Of course some of his colleagues run OS-X on high-end non-Apple machines, but it really isn't worth the hassle of doing this because there's always something that doesn't work quite right, and the monetary savings are small. Apple's approach of diversifying out of just selling Intel based hardware into more profitable areas where their strength in ergonomics and human factors helps them dominate is very smart indeed.
From: John Slade on 9 Mar 2010 00:21 SMS wrote: > John Slade wrote: >> Now it seems Apple's OS X is becoming stagnant and Microsoft is far >> ahead with Windows 7. > > Well Microsoft has at least leveled the playing field in most respects, > and passed OS-X in others. Now the reason to buy a Mac is that you like > the design of the hardware or you need to run one of the applications > that isn't available for the PC. I.e., I know my nephew sticks with the > Mac because he does a lot of freelance non-linear editing work with > FinalCut Pro, which isn't available for Windows. He also uses Avid, but > FinalCut is faster if the projects aren't too complex. The extra cost of > the hardware is lost in the noise if he can complete projects a bit > faster. Of course some of his colleagues run OS-X on high-end non-Apple > machines, but it really isn't worth the hassle of doing this because > there's always something that doesn't work quite right, and the monetary > savings are small. The high-end workstation market is the only computer market that Apple truly competes in. > > Apple's approach of diversifying out of just selling Intel based > hardware into more profitable areas where their strength in ergonomics > and human factors helps them dominate is very smart indeed. Actually I think Apple's portable devices and music sales are overshadowing their computers. They needed to go to Intel architecture to keep their computers from becoming obsolete. John
From: SMS on 9 Mar 2010 18:28
John Slade wrote: > Actually I think Apple's portable devices and music sales are > overshadowing their computers. It's the sale that keeps on selling. > They needed to go to Intel architecture > to keep their computers from becoming obsolete. The big problem with their old architecture was that they could no longer compete in the laptop market with the PowerPC because Intel was so far ahead in terms of low power consumption notebook processors. It was affecting battery life, thermals, and performance. They also got tired of paying a premium price for every peripheral chip they used in their machines. The switch to x86 was one of the smartest moves they made in the history of the company. Only Jobs could have pulled that off without destroying the loyalty of the fanbois. |