_V2.jpg)
Five iPad “controversies” that turned out to be irrelevant
May 31, 2010 by Bill Palmer
With the iPad reaching the two million units sold milestone today in fifty-nine days on the market, sales of the tablet have surpassed the expectations of everyone involved, likely including even that of Apple itself. So with the iPad now an inarguable early success, here are five issues that were supposed to have been controversial about the iPad which turned out to be non-issues or at least haven’t negatively impacted sales in a noticeable manner:
Lack of Flash: The theory that the griping about the lack of Flash on the iPad was merely coming from a small number of very loud people appears to have been validated by the iPad’s success.
Second generation syndrome: By now everyone paying attention knows that the second generation of a new Apple product comes with a better feature set and often a better price tag. While some may indeed be waiting for iPad G2 to arrive, it doesn’t appear to be the default behavior of the general public.
Multitasking: Like with Flash, the “public outcry” over the lack of third party multitasking on the iPad appears to have actually been just a handful of folks screaming at the top of their lungs in an attempt to appear more numerous than they actually are. As it turns out, the mainstream users buying the iPad don’t even know what the word “multitasking” means, much less care.
iPad 3G surcharge: Not only does the iPad 3G cost $15 to $30 a month for use of AT&T’s 3G network, users have to pay a $130 surcharge right out of the gate just to get the 3G enabled iPad model. While the 3G iPad pricing scheme feels like a racket, it hasn’t prevented iPad users from seeking out the 3G model – so much so that it’s been more difficult to find at retail than the non-3G model since it launched.
The name “iPad”: Remember how the iPad was going to be scoffed at and flop because its name contained the word “pad”? The early jokes have died down, sales are through the roof, and the joke appears to have been on those who honestly thought that the name “iPad” would somehow harm sales.
Comments
your a bunch a geeks..go play outside and stop wasting away in your pods
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeLet's be a little more candid about those who were screaming about the lack of Flash on the iPad. It was (and still is) the cross-platform developers who don't want to relearn their trade to build better applications and feel some sort of entitlement to "write once, run anywhere." You can still feel their hatred in the comment sections of certain anti-Mac sites. The most recent hate posts follow the "DOJ is going to sue Apple to force Flash on the iPad and iPhone" BS article on DailyTech.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeIf Steve Jobs hates cross-platform apps so much, I wonder how he feels about Bonjour, QuickTime, MobileMe, iTunes, Webkit, and Safari? Surely they must have special features that take advantage of the unique features that are only available to Windoze native and Mac native apps, respectively, right?Shouldn't the Mac versions all be 64-bit, Cocoa native apps (just like Photoshop) and all of Apple's Pro apps (like Final Cut Pro)? Oh, that's right...
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeThere have been plenty of complaints on the Windows side about slow-running and crash-prone iTunes, Safari, and QuickTime, which are the most directly analogous in terms of ordinary operations to Flash. Problems with the other applications you mention are not noticeable because the functions are different.The question, which you would acknowledge if you had any interest other than hyperbole, is not whether all Mac applications should be Cocoa but rather whether the cross-platform work should be done within or outside a sandboxed browser
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeNo, my point is: If "going native" is an absolute imperative that everyone MUST follow in order work on Apple's systems, why doesn't this same rule apply to Apple itself when it writes apps for other OSes?As for all cross-platform work should be done in a browser? Well, if all you do is type text for a living or some basic accounting work, knock yourself out! (No, I mean it, that isn't sarcasm. Consider yourself lucky, you can work anywhere, on any device, using any OS!) If, however, your work on computers requires a bit more effort than that (professional photography, design, page layout, CAD/CAM, etc.), you'll find the concept of "do it in a browser" laughable.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeYou would be raising legitimate concerns if Apple were trying to prevent cross-platform applications from being installed on laptop or desktop computers. But we are talking about mobile phones and tablets, which have power and processing limitations and are unlikely to replace more powerful computers for professional photography, design, page layout, CAD/CAM etc.My point that Apple's cross-platform software has shortcomings is a recognition both by Apple and its competitors that cross-platform software is acceptable on hardware that can handle the processing and power demands. Adobe has yet to show in non-beta software that Flash on cellphones will not seriously limit battery life and stability.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeYour taking his use of the phrase "cross-platform" in reference to mobile touchscreen apps, and mis-applying it to traditional computer apps. Different ballgame. Different argument.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likeyup, the bs is looking pretty silly. would only note the multitasking coming with 4.0 will be more convenient in fact, but it was always clear it was coming. so that was just petty. and the $15 per month 3G is actually a really good deal. no contract. you only need it when you're out of wifi range. but then it's great.but the boo birds are still crying. did you know that life without Flash is empty and meaningless?
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeYou forgot the fact that it is simply a well-accepted fact that tablet computers have been tried before and always have been a miserable failure. Anyone who thinks Apple can change this must believe that the sun will shine green on Sundays.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeYou're saying two million in sales in two months is a miserable failure? What color is the sun on your planet?
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeI think he was point out one of the myths/complaints about tablets that Apple has just shattered with those sales figures
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeWell, two million in two months is hardly a failure! It's the eco-system of the App Store, iTunes, and everything they represent that enables the device itself to launch like a friggin' rocket. iPad isn't about a device, but a lifestyle. It's 200,000 blades on a Swiss Army knife. It's ten hours a day of fooling around, reading, watching, looking, playing, working, and whatever.It's amazing to watch Microslopties when they finally give up in frustration and get a Mac. About 8 or 9 out of ten never want to go back to Windows. It's even more amazing to put an iPad in the hands of an octogenarian and watch what happens. They GET it. Finally, computing is about the user.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like