The Real Disappointment
sigusr2.net
sigusr2.net
It's not a computer, though; it's a device. Apple doesn't want you to interact with it like a real computer.
It's disappointing but if you wait someone will come out with a computer that size and you'll get all of the interactivity you want from it. Hell, Dell has one in the wings.
Precisely. My point is that I don't want to use it in the way "The Jobs" wants me too. I want to hack it into an input device for my real computer.
Sorry for the confusion.
But when such a device has the potential to take over the market and eliminate other channels of delivery and "ownership", I become very concerned. That's what most concerns me about the iPad; that in a year -- or more likely three -- I'll have to have one in order to access content. And then I'll only have a temporary, non-transferable, revocable-upon-whim license to said content. Bah.
I don't mind paying a reasonable amount. I do mind being locked in to whatever a monopoly dictates, in terms of cost but also in terms of rights. And I mind paying over and over and over for the same thing, as the platform changes.
And when "big media" so controls the content, what's to prevent the effective revision of history? What torture pictures? What treaty details? (What "Catcher In the Rye"?)
I guess some of us will have to resort to taking pictures of our iPads, just to document what was said. Let's just hope we're still able to do that.
(Finally, a personal grudge: I can tolerate advertisements, but ones involving motion and/or sound COMPLETELY distract me. Will the content become unusable for people like me, because the delivery channel forces an overwhelming level of distraction?)
Devices like iPad are exactly what "big media" want, and if we let them it's just what they'll get. Anything inconvenient, be it torture pictures, leaked information or whatever could be erased from millions of devices at the centralized click of a button. Think you own that library of ebooks you paid for? Think again. Want to transfer your content from one locked down device to another? You'll have to pay us first. Think you have any fair use rights whatever? Not on this device, baby.
You can't write an arbitrary code execution environment.
You can't publish someone else's software.
Your software must carry an appropriate age rating.
Hardware devices have to go through the dock connector.
Only one app can run at a time.
You cannot access the data of other applications.
BTW, there are already both traditional VNC clients and multi-touch "mouse" applications for the iPhone.
So long as they can keep such things separate from their walled garden of an App Store, they can maintain the seamless user experience for the end-user consumers.
A virtualized "sandbox" could have a bandwidth-rate cap built into it, so the concern about "protecting the mobile network" could also be satisfied.
This thing, it's an information tool first and foremost. Also, professionals are willing to pay top dollar. Apple already makes lots of unlocked top-dollar hardware aimed at creative professionals.
But the real kicker -- Apple could sell almost the exact same hardware, with a few tweaks. Voila, a new product with even higher margins.
I am thinking of a general answer to posts of this sort: If you don't like it, don't buy it. And further, given the nature of this board, if you see a need (e. g., something people want), build it. Apple has seen a need, and it is building something that people want. You are seeing a need for something else, and it is possible that other people want it too, so why not go build it?
I don't think I ever thought it would be open and hackable, however one can always hope!
In reality though, some piece of me always believed that the iPhone was so locked down for reasons of getting it on cellular networks who seem not be so keen on the idea of letting folks do as they please with their devices. I've heard that in years past, getting a developers kit for something like the motorola RAZR was impossible, though that was word of mouth.
And of course the iPad will have GSM support, so that may still remain true.
> I am thinking of a general answer to posts of this sort: If you don't like it, don't buy it.
I won't.
> And further, given the nature of this board, if you see a need (e. g., something people want), build it. Apple has seen a need, and it is building something that people want. You are seeing a need for something else, and it is possible that other people want it too, so why not go build it?
In this specific case, I don't know if there's a want for it aside from my own. It's my Pony. The biggest reason to not go build it is the threat of patents. But, that aside, I don't have the resources or know-how (easily obtained myself, or by partnering with someone who does of course).
Well, judging by the number of posts expressing disappointment, I see quite a few--I sense there is a need.