Pondering the iPad Panel

[Jer Warren]

I'm curious what the plan is for next month's iPad panel. Who is on the panel, what makes them experts, etc?

I'm really interested in the iPad, which, as someone who is not at all the typical Apple customer, surprises even me. I don't want one, but I really think it's going to be at least as big a deal -- if not bigger -- than the usual suspects are praising it to be.

I think it's going to appeal very much to most of the people who already "get" the iPhone, but, like we saw with the iPhone, as "normal" people start seeing the cool stuff their nerd friends are doing, they're going to want one too. I think that it has the potential to be even bigger than iPhone (so to speak) due to the lack of commitment to an expensive wireless plan. That no-contract plan is going to be huge, I bet.

I'm curious to hear what people who are really on-board have to say, but I'm even more curious about people like me who really ought not be on board -- but actually are.

I'm also curious to take a look at what the perceived upsides and downsides are from people in different parts of the wireless spectrum, and see if some of those downsides (and upsides) could be flipped by looking at them in different ways. Can some of the negatives from the "haters" be flipped by the pro-iPad folk, and can some of the "haters" burst some of the magical-happy-land feelings of the lovers? There are always going to be upsides and downsides, but what's interesting to me are discussions that take both he up and down into account.

I think the big question here for me is: what impact will iPad-specific apps have on the about-to-blow-up-any-minute array of polished webapps that Google's ChromeOS is promising to foster. If people opt to get an iPad that already has some nice native apps, will there be any incentive for developers to create the kinds of apps ChromeOS is hoping to push into existence. Has Apple's closed-garden already killed ChromeOS before most people have even had a chance to play with it? Is the success of the iPad going to foster mobile development or squash it?

[Jeff Brandt]

It is a cool device but their are so many others on the way not sure of the traction.  Tablets and slates in the Medical field have been a bust to data.  It will depend on the software if this product will succeed.

  My thoughts is that it is more or less a big iPod touch.  Most of my issues and complaints have come from customers with these devices.  Has anyone else experience this?

If customer really bit on the iPad then I think we will see the iTable next year.

Jeff 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-portland?hl=en.

--
Jeffrey L. Brandt
Communication Software, Inc.
www.comsi.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffreyleebrandt
http://twitter.com/jeffbrandt
503.664.0274
www.motionPHR.com

[Gene Ehrbar]

I see a few key elements here that I think will play into the success of the iPad:

Developer base

Competing tablet devices will have the same uphill battle that Android and Palm touch-based phones have had -- lack of a devoted legion of developers and critical mass of apps available through a relatively frictionless market.  (Android, while promising, hasn't had nearly the consumer-focused platform cohesion that iPhone has; Palm has been downright developer-antagonistic). 

In this regard, I think it's really interesting, and great, that the SDK is out a full two months before the device.  Granted, it's bound to change prior to launch, but the message is clear -- developers, start your engines.  We need you to make this thing work.  (Raven, I saw your bit in the NYT expressing surprise that they only are giving devs 60 days -- I think it's actually quite generous, considering that the first iPhone SDK didn't even come out until 8 months after the first iPhones shipped).

User base

Jobs was right -- everyone who's used an iPhone or iPod touch is already a "trained" iPad user.  The entry point is low enough that a whole lot of folks will take a shot at this, given the slim likelihood of it being only early-adopter-friendly.  It's aimed squarely at the masses, and upper-middle-class stay-at-home moms are going to buy this thing in droves.  Also, remember -- hardware prices only go down.  So, $499 to start is a great sign of things to come.

Proprietary multi-touch

Paired with the above, this is the real killer.  If you haven't been fantasizing since Wednesday (or even before) about what you could do with Apple's multitouch on a scaled-up iPhone interface, you should probably hand in your ADC membership.  Board games, in-your-face POV gaming, musical instruments that haven't even been conceived of yet -- the possibilities are just now becoming clear.

So, put me squarely in the on-board category (duh), but oddly -- more from a developer's standpoint than a user's.  I'm excited to get my hands on one, but I'm more excited to put cool new software in the hands of consumers.  This goes right along with the perfectly reasonable complaints we've been hearing from open source advocates and professional creatives -- this is a closed platform aimed at consumers.  The idea that anything without a terminal could be a primary computing device for any of _us_ is kind of silly.  But this isn't the end of the open computer -- it's hopefully just a really good example of a closed device.  There's a difference, and it's an important one.

The bottom line for me: new interaction models are fun.  There are interesting times ahead.

cheers,

gene

[marleneZ]

Jer, you pose some very interesting questions. I am an iPhone
developer so I've drunk the Koolaid as far as buying and developing
for the iPad. I think of the iPad as eventually the de facto media/
information device and perhaps the concept of the device itself the
future of computing. Desktops are certainly going to disappear though
they will still be used for their massive computing power similar to
mainframes in use today. I think eventually the iPad and its ilk will
replace laptops. There is no doubt that the iPad will kill the Kindle
and other ebook readers as the price is right and the iPad does so
much more and in color.

I'm not sure about it killing Google Chrome, it might just compliment
it simply by the Chrome browser being on the iPad...

Just a few thoughts.

Marlene

[HiQuLABS]

iPad is an appliance and it is designed to consume the content. Where

as netbooks, laptops and desktops can be used to create contents so

iPad will never replace those categories. 

However, it may ding netbooks sales a bit because lot of people do

buy netbooks as their 3rd or 4th device to play media. For them, I think iPad

is a perfect device. 

ChromeOS is an OS for netbooks and completely cloud based. Most 

likely it is not multitouch enabled. That may change because Google

 and other copycats must be scratching their heads and thinking about next step.

iPad will not kill kindle for it is for book lovers. For people who

read for several hours continuously, iPad wont be a comfortable

device. It may kill Kindle DX if KDX stays at the same price point. 

[Preston Crawford]

I wish I had something to add, but as an aspiring mobile developer I
just wanted to say that this conversation is both interesting and
inspiring.

For those of us who have suffered with RSI the thought of this +
further improvements in voice control opens the promise that I'll
still be computing comfortably later in life.

Preston

Sent from my iPhone

[Jer Warren]

[Jer Warren]

gosh dangit. Having multiple google accounts is such a pain in the arse. I keep getting bounced replies because I sent from the wrong one, and then forgetting to paste in the unsent message when I DO get a reply to work. Arg.

unsent reply follows:

Yeah, I'm glad someone else said it: Kindle won't be replaced by iPad. If anything, iPad is going to spur ebook sales, and once people find that they like reading when they don't have to worry about keeping track of pages and carrying around books, they're going to find that the (exaggerated) 10 hours of iPad life doesn't stack up to 10+ DAYS of Kindle life, and the eyestrain caused by looking at a bright OLED screen is significantly alleviated by an ePaper display.

As for multitouch, the issue isn't about copycats. The only reason we don't see more multitouch now is because Apple was granted a bogus patent for the multitouch gestures like pinch zoom, and most of the people with a real stake in it (i.e. Google) are playing ignorant on account of the "treble damages" caluse of patent law. If Google even talks about how Apple has a patent (bogus or no) on multitouch, and then include any such functionality, Apple could take action and Google would be penalized by 3 times the amount of any damages rewarded. As multitouch has been around significantly longer than Apple has been using it, I have no doubt that the patent will eventually be struck down -- but it won't be at the hands of anyone who is currently using it on account of the slim change that they lose.

It's pretty frustrating, actually. I don't think ANYONE thinks it's right for Apple to have won that patent, but everyone is afraid to do what needs doing in order to rectify the situation.

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 1:23 PM, HiQuLABS <hiqu...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Scott Hooper]

Hello,

I'm not an Apple developer, nor an Apple fan, though I did years of OS 6.x and 7.x development w-a-y back then :-)  Today, I'm an Android developer.

Personally, I believe in converged devices. I think today's phones are getting close, but aren't big enough. Netbooks don't have the features we need, and they're just a little cumbersome.

But, for the iPad to really fill the niche, I think it must be able to use that 3G radio for phone calls. I personally almost never hold my phone to my head, and would be just fine using a "speaker phone" feature, and bluetooth in my car.

Studies have shown that you cannot both type-on and look-at the same surface at the same time (whether it's horizontal or vertical) for long without strain, so pads as serious computing platforms are out of the question today, but killer voice recognition could mitigate that problem.

I'm unsure of how to see the iPad against eReaders; on the one hand, it would be nice to not need a reading lamp while in bed, but on the other hand there's been much talk about LCD eye-strain, particularly in darker environs.

At any rate, it's an exciting development. While I don't see the iPad breaking any new ground, Apple always sets the bar in form-factor and quality, and now the rest of the world will seek to overtake them.

It's a great time to be an electronics consumer :-)

Scott

Scott

[Jer Warren]

So how would you feel with the exact same form-factor, but running Android 2.1? Keyboard with very similar usability, except that voice input works everywhere the keyboard does. No restrictions on apps, including VOIP apps that work right now, enabling one to make and receive Google Voice calls over the 3G connection?

It seems to me that that solves all of your complaints with the iPad. And there are several coming soon...

[Scott Hooper]

That would be great!

Unfortunately, although I recall rumors here and there, I've been a bit busy to watch what's coming. I'm aware of several 5" devices, and the Entourage eDGe (eInk, LCD combo), the latter of which will not ship with 3G.

I suppose I should be more abreast of the news, as I'll likely hunt down each device when it releases, to test our software on.

Scott

[Jer Warren]

I've not seen any tablets shipping with 3G, but I have seen a handful of different sizes of Android tablets, all of which have WiFi. This one is the most promising right now:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/msi-shows-off-10-inch-android-tablet-running-new-tegra-chipset/

That one is almost tit-for-tat the same feature-wise as the iPad, but at a movie-friendly 16:9 aspect ratio instead of the wacky 4:3 that iPad is using to sort of preserve iPhone app compatibility. I'm really surprised they didn't just do like Android and make the individual widgets in an app move around proportionally on the screen so as to avoid that particular restriction. I guess, though, Android planned to support any resolution from the start, whereas Apple didn't really seem to plan ahead at all.

No 3G wouldn't be a problem for me, as I just use my Android phone's 3G connection as a wifi access point whenever there's no wifi around. Why pay for more 3G when I'm already paying for some, right?

[Jer Warren]

(ARG! I have GOT to get this multiple-accounts thing sorted)

Unsent reply follows:

Oh, I forgot: I've been following the Entourage eDGe for some time now, and am quite fond of it. I wanted to include a link so others could see it.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/10/dual-screen-entourage-edge-ebook-reader-gets-a-little-hands-on-t/

It's a really nice happy medium between the Kindle and the iPad and is pretty much what I'm looking for.

The other thing I forgot is that the MSI tablet I linked in my last message also solves most -- if not all -- the common complaints people have about iPad. Camera? Check. Multitasking? Check. Flash? Sort of. There are several Android devices that ship with Flash (one of which I've even gotten to play a YouTube video embedded in the browser, even!) with various levels of functionality, but Adobe is promising an official Flash 10 Any Time Now. That said, I still don't think Flash on a device like this is really ever going to be usable, but I'll be happy to eat those words if and when I'm proven wrong.

Granted, Android doesn't have the big publisher names backing them at the moment, and not even a Kindle app (yet), so as far as buying eBooks, that's not going to be in the same ballpark as the iPad anytime soon. But both Barnes & Noble and Borders have Android-powered eInk devices, so it's reasonable to expect that it'd be a cinch for them to release an app that'll run on vanilla Android.

[Scott Hooper]

Wow, very nice.

I'm dieing to get my hands on a large-display android device to run our software on!

Not intending to hijack this thread.

Scott

[Jeff Brandt]

Marlene,   I also develop for iPhone but I try not to get to hung up on manufactures of hardware.  Thing change to fast. Unisys, DEC, IBM, Apollo...  I try to recommend to my customers what they need based on their needs which are also changeable at high speed.

It will be the killer app that determines if the iPad becomes a leader in the tablet world.  I do think it will be quite a long time until virtual keyboards replace physical keyboards.   Have you ever tried you use a tablet?  I have and own one, most to date suck.  I will be interesting and hopefully one of use will come up with that killer app. 

  But I want one, or at the least one of the 10-20 that are coming out this year.

Jeff

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 11:38 AM, marleneZ <marl...@mac.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-portland?hl=en.

--

[Gene Ehrbar]

On Jan 30, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Jeff Brandt wrote:

> Marlene, I also develop for iPhone but I try not to get to hung up on manufactures of hardware. Thing change to fast. Unisys, DEC, IBM, Apollo... I try to recommend to my customers what they need based on their needs which are also changeable at high speed.
>
> It will be the killer app that determines if the iPad becomes a leader in the tablet world.

Ping pong. With bluetooth paddles. :-)

[Jer Warren]

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Gene Ehrbar <genee...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ping pong.  With bluetooth paddles.  :-)

I think you're on to something. But 'paddles' ? That's like a baby's toy. Imagine setting your iPad on its case/stand and looking at your side of a ping pong table, ball comes at you, you swipe the screen to hit it and put spin on it. Then the person in Omaha you're playing against sees it coming at THEIR screen, and volleys it back.

I think you're onto something.

jer

[marleneZ]

Just for the record, Jer, iPad is not OLED just LED - OLED is way too
expensive especially at the size of the iPad's screen.

I think that this is just the beginning and that the iPad will set the
tone for what tablets should be. I am not committed to Apple devices,
but they do set a high standard to beat. As a user and developer I
welcome competition to Apple as that is what gets us better features
on each iteration of each new or existing device.

I'm sure that the iPad will get a camera and phone capabilities, I
think Apple is trying to keep costs down and very much wanted to
introduce the iPad at a lower price than expected.

marlene

[Jeff Brandt]

I am very disappointed that the iPod and iPad do not have camera,  It is pretty much a show stopper for many medical application.  can't read bar codes or picture of patients...

Jeff

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-portland?hl=en.

[Jer]

I can't even imagine the horror of relying on data for medical examination on a device that relies on iTunes not fscking things up. I had many problems with iPhone suddenly deciding it needed to sync with iTunes before it would do anything. That was irritating at home, but when you're only halfway through your day and it happens it's downright infuriating.

"Wait, don't administer that! It says here she's allergic to... oh great. 'Please connect to iTunes.'"

To be fair, maybe that doesn't happen anymore. However, I always see at least one person bitching on Twitter about hosed data/contacts at firmware update time.

Am I imagining this problem to be a bigger deal than it is?

On Jan 30, 2010 3:04 PM, "Jeff Brandt" <jlb...@gmail.com> wrote:

I am very disappointed that the iPod and iPad do not have camera,  It is pretty much a show stopper for many medical application.  can't read bar codes or picture of patients...

Jeff

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 2:51 PM, marleneZ <marl...@mac.com> wrote:
>

> Just for the record, Jer, ...

--
Jeffrey L. Brandt
Communication Software, Inc.
www.comsi.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffreyl...

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.

T...

[Jeff Brandt]

FYI,  I backup our app encrypted data to Google Docs.  For medical Android is a bit easier to work with.  Hopefully Apple will take care of some of these issues that we have, it would make my life easier.  O how I wish I could write games.

Jeff

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.

To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-portland?hl=en.

--
Jeffrey L. Brandt
Communication Software, Inc.
www.comsi.com

[Scott Hooper]

Why _can't_ you write games?

Scott

[Jeff Brandt]

I have never been a gamer.  I just don't get it.   You have to do things that you enjoy. Life is to short.
Jeff

[HiQuLABS]

I wouldn't say Apple got bogus patents. Then one could argue that all software

patents are bogus. They were the 1st one who made a consumer device

with multitouch capability and in the process they patented some nice

gestures. Where was Google before that? 

[Jer]

I think it COULD be argued that all software patents are bogus, but I won't do that today. The patent isn't for a device, it's for interacting with software by using multitouch gestures, which is something that predates iPhone by many years.

Just because you're the first person to incorporate existing tech into a specific device doesn't mean you get to prevent everyone else from doing so.

Realworld example: if xerox could have patented putting buttons on the outside of a copy machine, literally none of the devices in your household could be made or sold. That's obviously BS, but it's the same issue as Apple's multitouch patent. It's not an algorithm for detecting multiple point input, and it's not even for detecting vcertain gestures -- it's for the very concept of interacting with a device via certain means.

I wonder if anyone has patented the button...

On Jan 30, 2010 5:27 PM, "HiQuLABS" <hiqu...@gmail.com> wrote:

I wouldn't say Apple got bogus patents. Then one could argue that all software

patents are bogus. They were the 1st one who made a consumer device

with multitouch capability and in the process they patented some nice

gestures. Where was Google before that? 

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Jer Warren <jerw...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> gosh dangit. Having multiple google accounts is such a pain in the arse. I keep getting bounced ...

--

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group....

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" grou...

[HiQuLABS]

Well, nobody thought of those gestures before. So, it is called innovation. And,

innovation can be patentend. How would your otherwise protect what you

created? I don't think it would be fair if copycats clone Apple's creation and

offer it for $100 cheaper. 

[Jer]

Again, it's not the gestures that are patented. That'd be a different argument entirely. (One I'd still disagree with, though.)

They've patented the very idea of using more than one finger on a touch surface, which is something people have been doing elsewhere for ages. I had a G3 powerbook in 2001 that someone had created a linux touchpad driver for to do different things when you had more than one finger on it. That's at least 4 years prior to iPhone's inception.

If you do even a little searching, you can find a number of different technologies using multiple touch points for maniplating software, almost all of which use pinch-style gestures dating to well before iPhone. I compiled a list a few years ago before I learned that nobody is willing to contest it. I wish I still had it.

In any case, is it innovation to use technology that already exists? I'm going to innovate this new technique of sending an email by way of a specialized 'send' button now. By the way, you owe me royalties for having clicked that button ;)

On Jan 30, 2010 5:39 PM, "HiQuLABS" <hiqu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, nobody thought of those gestures before. So, it is called innovation. And,

innovation can be patentend. How would your otherwise protect what you

created? I don't think it would be fair if copycats clone Apple's creation and

offer it for $100 cheaper. 

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Jer <j...@nyquil.org> wrote:

>
> I think it COULD be argued that all software patents are bogus, but I won't do that today. The p...

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group....

> To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this ...

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.

To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this grou...

[Jason Grigsby]

On Jan 30, 2010, at 11:14 AM, Jer Warren wrote:

> I'm curious what the plan is for next month's iPad panel. Who is on the panel, what makes them experts, etc?

The panel hasn't been determined yet. It just made sense that the topic of the hour for next month was going to be whatever product Apple was about to announce.

The idea of announcing the topic before the product was actually announced was a bit risky, but that was part of the reason I couldn't resist posting it once we started talking about it. I liked the idea that we were either going to be ahead of the game or I was going to look like a fool! :-)

The idea of having a panel was based on the fact that the rumors seemed to indicate that the new product was going to have multiple facets worth looking at. At the time, the rumors were suggesting new ways of interacting with the display, new publishing models, etc. It would be impossible for one person to cover all those angles, and the meeting would attract a much more diverse crowd if we cover different topics.

So the topics we were talking about were:

* If you currently have an iPhone app, what do you need to consider when making a decision about whether to make an iPad version? [Business/Developer]
* How will the types of applications on the iPad be different than what we've seen on mobile phones? Will pricing change? Is there more or less opportunity for advertising? [Business]
* How does the different form factor change the way applications are designed? [User Interface Design]
* What does the iPad mean for publishers? Books? Magazines? Newspapers? Does this hint at a way out for the problems media has faced over the last few years? [Publishing/Media]
* How do web sites need to change to support the iPad (or do they)? [Web]
* What does the iPad mean for the future of personal computing? [Technology]

The idea was to match each topic area to a panelist. Each panelist would have ten minutes to present. We'd have 4 or 5 panelists. Then we'd have questions and discussion. Total program would be a little longer than a typical meeting. Probably about an hour and half.

Now that the product has been announced, we can start narrowing topics and picking panelists. For example, so far I haven't seen any iPad specific web technology so we can probably get rid of that one.

Part of the reason I liked the panel idea was because I don't think there is a simple way to evaluate the product. Take publishing for example, there's some real promise there (eBooks) and some real shortcomings (price, magazines, newspapers). I'm really interested in finding someone in publishing who will have to evaluate what it means to their business.

I suspect a couple other things will likely be true for this meeting:

1. We will probably have one of the livelier Q&A and post-event discussions ever.
2. We may need a larger space.

So that's the general idea. I reached out to Raven to see if he was available because he would be good fit for either the market questions or the app dev perspective. The other panelist spots are all open so I'd love suggestions on speakers and/or topics.

-Jason

[Scott Kveton]

The iPad is positioned squarely at the Kindle market. Amazon has done
a great job proving out that market but now with a device that has
Apple's "touch" (pun intended) means they can not only dominate but
most likely extend that market. Reasonable estimates put the Kindle at
3 mil devices in 2 years. Apple will easily do that with the iPad
before the end of the year.

Android, iPhone OS, Moblin and others are all developing platforms and
there is a whole host of devices to run these that will do all manner
of things. If you thought the PC market was big, it will be nothing
compared to that of the mobile device market in the next 3 years.

I love open as much as the next person but its not a key
differentiator to me. Apple has been the first company to turn
computing into an actual appliance (complete with a pretty slick
retail experience IMHO). The fact that they manage the whole stack is
their greatest strength and will also be their achilles heel. There
are much bigger forces coming to bear in all of this than just one
company can manage.

Mobile publishers are *scrambling* to get their apps into the pockets
of these smartphone users. We're not talking about building a simple
app. We're talking about making ever-connected rebranding experiences
that finally bring to life the "ubiquitous computing" idea that Bill
Gates was talking about all those years ago. The clock is ticking and
there are massive businesses to be built on this.

As for what the impact the iPad will have on Apple's bottom line or
the industry as a whole? Its impossible to say. However, I absolutely
love this thread from the MacRumors site after the 2001 launch of the
iPod. Anybody else sense any similar comments in there?

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=500

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
> To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.

[Preston Crawford]

That is a great thread. Thanks for that.

I think the criticisms of eyestrain are absolutely valid. As an avid
reader and also a consumer of thick computer books I can't imagine
getting a kindle, much less an iPad.

Back in 2001 I probably felt the same as the people in the thread. My
Samsung flip phone and Diamond Rio worked great. See below now.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 30, 2010, at 7:15 PM, Scott Kveton <scott....@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> port...@googlegroups.com.

[kwe...@gmail.com]

Interesting points. I think you hit on a relevant issue here in that
the iPad will not be for everyone. The device was actually not
designed for the techies like those that are reviewing the product,
but to serve more as a general device to consume media. I personally
don't see a reason for using this device, as it does not have features
I would like, but I already have my MacBook Pro that does, but I can
see my parents and wife being attracted to it and others who are not
"techies" as a simple way to consume media. If I was not in the tech
field and did not have a computer in every room in my house, then I
could see how an iPad could be appealing with its low price point,
ease of use and access to a large amount of content. I see the iPad
fitting into a lot of interesting niche markets particularly in
education and health care, it will be interesting when college
students are able to pirate and share textbooks on the iPad ;-)

It would be nice if developers and deeper access with regards to
software development than the iPhone OS provides. We were hoping it
would run full OS X and would run native applications, but hopefully
at the very least the iPhone SDK will be expanded in 4.0 release to
give developers deeper access to actually extend the functionality of
the device, then I think it can get pretty interesting. Apple does a
pretty good job of listening to their developers and users when they
scream loud enough, so hopefully we will see some interesting things
in the future.

[jonathan karon]

The iPad is getting really close to a traditional "PC" -- email, web,
multimedia, word processing, any custom applications that pass App
Store muster. Many people I've talked to would seriously consider
replacing their desktop or laptop with one. The main complaint they
have is storage as there just isn't enough onboard.

What I think is interesting is that many of those same people have
issues with DRM and were pretty rabidly anti-TPM/Palladium/Trusted
Client when it was news, yet I haven't heard one of these people
mention those issues with the iPad. If it does become a primary
computer for many people, Apple will have succeeded at transforming
the open personal computer into a secure, trusted client -- something
content owners have been trying to do for years.

~jonathan

On Jan 30, 2010, at 11:14 AM, Jer Warren wrote:

> I'm curious what the plan is for next month's iPad panel. Who is on
> the panel, what makes them experts, etc?
>

[Ron Braithwaite]

On Feb 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, jonathan karon wrote:
<snip>

> If it does become a primary computer for many people, Apple will have succeeded at transforming the open personal computer into a secure, trusted client -- something content owners have been trying to do for years.

A really good point, but I've got to point out that - at least for right now - the iPad requires a computer tether for syncing. That certainly isn't a long term necessity (for instance, the sync could be to MobileMe - yet another revenue stream for Apple).

I'm excited about the iPad, just as I am about the iPhone and the iPod Touch. I'm also excited about Android and all the rest, too, which is why I am developing using PhoneGap instead of Objective C or whatever.

The problem with all the alternatives to the Apple mobile devices is that the hardware AND software vendors just don't get it. These are NOT computing devices, they are consumer products and require a front-to-back infrastructure. Which Apple groks and everyone else just pays lip service too (at best). App stores, whoever offers them, have to offer the same level of usability as their devices. When Verizon offers an app store, does ANYBODY think that anyone will be able to find anything in there?

So, I will continue to attempt to make my apps as cross-platform as possible (very interesting problem vis-a-vis the iPhone and the iPad), in hopes that some of the other vendors will hop a ride on the clue train. But I don't anticipate any sort of a significant revenue stream from anything but the App Store for some time in the future.

Peace,
-Ron

--
Ron Braithwaite
Software Engineering, LLC
2946 NE 65th Ave
Portland, OR 97213 USA
+1-503-267-3250
R...@SoftwareEngineeringLLC.com

Mobile Application Development
Apple Certified Technical Coordinator
LPI Certified Linux System Administrator

[Jer]

I've been trying to point out the "you need a PC if you want an iPad" argument since launch, but yesterday somebody proved me wrong. The thing I kept forgetting is that you'll buy the thing at the Apple store. They will plug it into iTunes there in the store to get it off the ground, at which point you can activate 3G right from the tablet w/o a visit to at&t.

Yes, if you have a pre-existing archive of media you want to put on it, you'll need a PC -- but if you do have a vast array of media, you DO have a PC. If you just want to buy from iTunes, you can totally do that sans-pc.

Granted, firmware update time will be problematic, but you could just go let the Geniuses at Apple Store deal w/ that for you.

I've been told that there are many people using iTouches and iPhones with no PC whatsoever, and due to the fact that I used two iPhones without having a Windows or Mac PC for several years, I can believe it.

I don't think it'll be practical, but I think it's totally doable. We all keep thinking from the perspective of PC users. If someone's not a PC user, what content are they going to need to sync over?

On Feb 1, 2010 9:43 AM, "Ron Braithwaite" <r...@braithwaites.net> wrote:

On Feb 1, 2010, at 6:48 AM, jonathan karon wrote:
<snip>

> If it does become a primary computer for many people, Apple will have succeeded at transforming th...

A really good point, but I've got to point out that - at least for right now - the iPad requires a computer tether for syncing. That certainly isn't a long term necessity (for instance, the sync could be to MobileMe - yet another revenue stream for Apple).

I'm excited about the iPad, just as I am about the iPhone and the iPod Touch. I'm also excited about Android and all the rest, too, which is why I am developing using PhoneGap instead of Objective C or whatever.

The problem with all the alternatives to the Apple mobile devices is that the hardware AND software vendors just don't get it. These are NOT computing devices, they are consumer products and require a front-to-back infrastructure. Which Apple groks and everyone else just pays lip service too (at best). App stores, whoever offers them, have to offer the same level of usability as their devices. When Verizon offers an app store, does ANYBODY think that anyone will be able to find anything in there?

So, I will continue to attempt to make my apps as cross-platform as possible (very interesting problem vis-a-vis the iPhone and the iPad), in hopes that some of the other vendors will hop a ride on the clue train. But I don't anticipate any sort of a significant revenue stream from anything but the App Store for some time in the future.

Peace,
-Ron

--
Ron Braithwaite
Software Engineering, LLC
2946 NE 65th Ave
Portland, OR 97213 USA
+1-503-267-3250
R...@SoftwareEngineeringLLC.com

Mobile Application Development
Apple Certified Technical Coordinator
LPI Certified Linux System Administrator

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" gro...

[Jason Grigsby]

Jer: that's a good point. I hadn't thought about people taking their devices into the Genuis Bar for the firmware updates.

That said, it's not terribly convenient. It is one of the reasons why I'm pretty sure there is more coming that they haven't announced.

Solving updates, printing, and some sort of network file sharing are the things that I think take it from being an accessory to a computer in its own right. Apple is rumored to be working on printing and networking. Updates seems like a natural as well.

-Jason

On Feb 1, 2010, at 9:53 AM, Jer wrote:

> I've been trying to point out the "you need a PC if you want an iPad" argument since launch, but yesterday somebody proved me wrong. The thing I kept forgetting is that you'll buy the thing at the Apple store. They will plug it into iTunes there in the store to get it off the ground, at which point you can activate 3G right from the tablet w/o a visit to at&t.
>
> Yes, if you have a pre-existing archive of media you want to put on it, you'll need a PC -- but if you do have a vast array of media, you DO have a PC. If you just want to buy from iTunes, you can totally do that sans-pc.
>
> Granted, firmware update time will be problematic, but you could just go let the Geniuses at Apple Store deal w/ that for you.
>
> I've been told that there are many people using iTouches and iPhones with no PC whatsoever, and due to the fact that I used two iPhones without having a Windows or Mac PC for several years, I can believe it.
>
> I don't think it'll be practical, but I think it's totally doable. We all keep thinking from the perspective of PC users. If someone's not a PC user, what content are they going to need to sync over?

=

[Elia Freedman]

Of course you are assuming that people who use this without a computer care about firmware updates. They won't update, just like they don't for BlackBerry or old Palm devices. People only update if the update is pushed to you. Otherwise the vast majority don't bother (unless they experience a problem that is solved with the update.)

Elia

[Jer]

Excellent point.

You're completely right. I went eons without updating my iPhones (mainly because of jailbreak-related hassles) and _I'm_ used to that sort of thing. Someone who is just using it to read the nyt and fingerpaint is simply not going to be AWARE of updates, let alone bother with them.

Also, I assume wifi-only iPads will have to pay for firmware updates like on iPod touch. No?

On Feb 1, 2010 10:24 AM, "Elia Freedman" <el...@infinitysw.com> wrote:

Of course you are assuming that people who use this without a computer care about firmware updates. They won't update, just like they don't for BlackBerry or old Palm devices. People only update if the update is pushed to you. Otherwise the vast majority don't bother (unless they experience a problem that is solved with the update.)

Elia

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Jason Grigsby <ja...@cloudfour.com> wrote:
>

> Jer: that's a goo...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" grou...

[Elia Freedman]

it is likely that all iPad users will have to pay for major upgrades (although I'd suspect OS4 will be free). The reason it's free on the iPhone is because it is baked into the per monthly subscriber fees.

Elia

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-portland?hl=en.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Elia Freedman
Infinity Softworks
(503) 939-4379
Email: el...@infinitysw.com
Site: www.infinitysw.com
Blog: http://www.eliainsider.com
Twitter: eliajf

[Jer]

The way I look at it: Apple doesn't really benefit from holding functionality back prior to release. I suspect that if the iPad was capable of autonomous functionality, we'd have known about it in Steve's presentation. It'd have been one of the major selling points, wouldn't it?. "It's a device for people who want gadgets but aren't nerds. Grandma doesn't want a PC; iPad is for her."

Almost everyone is bitching that it. Has NOT got PC functionality; they could have totally spun that away as a plus if it were capable of being run that way. Nobody would be bitching because it'd'vd been made perfectly clear that it's not for that.

On Feb 1, 2010 10:00 AM, "Jason Grigsby" <ja...@cloudfour.com> wrote:

Jer: that's a good point. I hadn't thought about people taking their devices into the Genuis Bar for the firmware updates.

That said, it's not terribly convenient. It is one of the reasons why I'm pretty sure there is more coming that they haven't announced.

Solving updates, printing, and some sort of network file sharing are the things that I think take it from being an accessory to a computer in its own right. Apple is rumored to be working on printing and networking. Updates seems like a natural as well.

-Jason

On Feb 1, 2010, at 9:53 AM, Jer wrote:

> I've been trying to point out the "you need a PC if you w...

=

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" g...

[Jason Grigsby]

Actually, I'm assuming that it is Apple's best interest for people to upgrade so they will want to find a way to make it happen.

I don't disagree that if things stay the way they are that a lot of people won't update their devices, but that isn't a good thing for Apple. It diminishes the story of the ease -of-use of the device and leaves a bunch of people exposed for security holes.

Even if a lot of people choose not to update their device, I suspect Apple will make it possible for them to do so without connecting it to a Mac.

-Jason

> --

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
> To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mobile-portland?hl=en.

--

Jason Grigsby
(503) 477-5340 o
(503) 502-7211 m
ja...@cloudfour.com
http://cloudfour.com

[Raven Zachary]

We're up to 40 posts on this thread. While it's a great conversation to have, I think this level of activity on a single discussion topic is a problem for people who subscribe to this list primarily to receive event notices and local Portland mobile news.

Any chance we can table until the event night itself?

[Jeremy Logan]

I'm inclined to agree with Raven on this one. Or maybe move the discussion to Wave (or something similar)?

Jeremy

[Jason Grigsby]

Apple has a history of holding back functionality prior to release. Here's Apple announcing 11 days before the iPhone shipped originally that it would have longer battery life and a glass screen:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/18iphone.html

We also know that they are working on printing and file sharing:

Details found in the 3.2 SDK by jail breakers:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/29/confirmed-iphone-os-3-2-has-support-for-video-calling-file-dow/

Rumors:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/01/29/apple_to_target_ipad_at_business_users_through_new_features_sources.html
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/01/29/apple_reinventing_file_access_wireless_sharing_for_ipad.html
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/27/ipad-sdk-3-2-details-external-display-file-sharing-system-no-multitasking/

I don't know for certain what they will finish for launch of the product, but I suspect more is coming. At minimum, printing seems like a must for iWork.

-Jason

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mobile Portland" group.
> To post to this group, send email to mobile-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mobile-portla...@googlegroups.com.

[Jer]

Isn't there an 'announce' list that's designated exactly for people only interested in announcements?

I've had the same thought re: waiting 'til the event for conversation, but it seems like having questions kicked around before-hand will foster the best questions night-of. We're exploring angles here that could open up more interesting angles.

On Feb 1, 2010 10:42 AM, "Raven Zachary" <ravenz...@gmail.com> wrote:

We're up to 40 posts on this thread. While it's a great conversation to have, I think this level of activity on a single discussion topic is a problem for people who subscribe to this list primarily to receive event notices and local Portland mobile news.

Any chance we can table until the event night itself?

On Feb 1, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Jason Grigsby wrote:

> Actually, I'm assuming that it is Apple's best...

[Jason Grigsby]

FWIW, if you just want announcements about events, there is another mailing list that is announcements only. It is available at the red subscribe button on the right column of http://MobilePortland.com.

If you want announcements plus local Portland mobile news, there isn't a list for that necessarily. This Google Group never had that level of structure to it. It was intended to be an alternative to the announcements-only list where people could have discussions and share information.

That said, this list hasn't had active conversations on it often. So it often acts like announcements plus local Portland mobile news. I can see why the current volume isn't what people have become accustom to.

We've had a couple of active conversations in the past right around big mobile announcements that tend to die off a few days later. I expect the same to happen here.

But I'm open to whatever the group wants this list to be. We could keep the conversation here or spin off a separate list for deeper conversation.

No worries,

-Jason

[Preston Crawford]

I am enjoying the discussion. I thinks it's useful and would hate to
see it moved offline personally.

Preston

Sent from my iPhone

[Jason Grigsby]

I looked at the calendar today and realized that next Monday's meeting was sneaking up on me. I also realized that my note below about the content for the panel and potential panelists hadn't garnered any feedback so I wanted to try again.

I'm looking for recommendations for panelists to talk briefly (10 mins or so) on the following topics:

A. If you currently have an iPhone app, what do you need to consider when making a decision about whether to make an iPad version? [Business/Developer]
B. How will the types of applications on the iPad be different than what we've seen on mobile phones? Will pricing change? Is there more or less opportunity for advertising? [Business]
C. How does the different form factor change the way applications are designed? [User Interface Design]
D. What does the iPad mean for publishers? Books? Magazines? Newspapers? Does this hint at a way out for the problems media has faced over the last few years? [Publishing/Media]
E. How do web sites need to change to support the iPad (or do they)? [Web]
F. What does the iPad mean for the future of personal computing? [Technology]

Those are placeholders. I'm pretty sure Raven, who has confirmed, can speak clearly on A and probably about B. I've reached out to someone on C, but would welcome suggestions.

Any ideas on who might be able to talk about the publishing angle on the iPad (D)?

Is there anything worth talking about from a web perspective (E) or is it just a browser?

Finally, anyone in particular come to mind for (F)?

Thanks for your suggestions.

-Jason

Begin forwarded message:

--