I've had the iPad 2 for several weeks: What it needs...

[MotionMan]

Actually, Apple does have a habit of holding back features just because it can.

Links?

MotionMan

 

[DivideBYZero]

The iPad has native YouTube support, since the YouTube site provides H.264 for iPad users.

I suspect Apple paid YouTube a lot of money for this.

I'm not knocking the iPad, and everyone knows that YouTube works via HTML5, I'm just giving the first examples of Flash uses that came into my head.

 

[Eug]

MotionMan, no links needed. Just a few off the top of my head:

No USB 2, because it wanted to promote Firewire. Macs were Firewire + USB 1.1-only for just about forever.
No third party DVD burner support in iDVD, because it wanted to sell Macs with SuperDrives.
No Firewire port in the first aluminum 13" MacBook.

 

[MotionMan]

MotionMan, no links needed. Just a few off the top of my head:

No USB 2, because it wanted to promote Firewire
No third party DVD burner support in iDVD, because it wanted to sell Macs with SuperDrives.
No Firewire port in the first aluminum 13" MacBook.

What support do you have for your claimed knowledge of all the "because"'s?

MotionMan

 

[Eug]

What support do you have for your claimed knowledge of all the "because"'s?

Why else wouldn't you add USB 2, considering it was already ubiquitous?

As for iDVD, the functionality actually existed for 3rd party DVD burners right in the program. If you added a small software extension, it exposed fully functional 3rd party DVD burning capabilities in the program. That extension wasn't DVD burning code. It just switched on the feature that was already there and which worked perfectly.

Actually, my favourite was Aperture 1 and the iBook. Apple specifically configured the install program not to run on the iBook, requiring a minimum GPU and CPU to function. The iBook's minimum GPU and CPU did not meet the installation programs minimum specs, and hence Aperture would not install. If you hacked the install, it installed fine on the iBook, and ran perfectly (albeit slowly). However, the kicker is that the next version of the iBook met all the minimum requirements, and Aperture installed just fine on it with no hacks whatsoever. So, what did Apple do? They changed Aperture's install requirements at the next point release, specifically just to exclude that new iBook.

Another one is monitor spanning. For the iBook you could only mirror your screen to an external screen. You could not span over both screens. However, if you added a small software hack, screen spanning worked perfectly. Again, this functionality was not added by the hack. All it did was expose this feature that already supported the iBook.

 

[MotionMan]

Why else wouldn't you add USB 2, considering it was already ubiquitous?

So the ONLY POSSIBLE reason was that they wanted to promote Firewire?

As for iDVD, the functionality actually existed for 3rd party DVD burners right in the program. If you added a small software extension, it exposed fully functional 3rd party DVD burning capabilities in the program. That extension wasn't DVD burning code. It just switched on the feature that was already there and which worked perfectly.

So the ONLY POSSIBLE reason was that they wanted to sell Macs with SuperDrives?

Actually, my favourite was Aperture 1 and the iBook. Apple specifically configured the install program not to run on the iBook, requiring a minimum GPU and CPU to function. The iBook's minimum GPU and CPU did not meet the installation programs minimum specs, and hence Aperture would not install. If you hacked the install, it installed fine on the iBook, and ran perfectly (albeit slowly). However, the kicker is that the next version of the iBook met all the minimum requirements, and Aperture installed just fine on it with no hacks whatsoever. So, what did Apple do? They changed Aperture's install requirements at the next point release, specifically just to exclude that new iBook.

Why did Apple do that?

Another one is monitor spanning. For the iBook you could only mirror your screen to an external screen. You could not span over both screens. However, if you added a small software hack, screen spanning worked perfectly. Again, this functionality was not added by the hack. All it did was expose this feature that already supported the iBook.

Why did Apple not allow that?

MotionMan

 

[Eug]

So the ONLY POSSIBLE reason was that they wanted to promote Firewire?

Likely one of the main reasons. Firewire was Apple's baby, and they make royalties off it. Haven't you wondered why even in 2011 the Mac Pro doesn't include external SATA?

So the ONLY POSSIBLE reason was that they wanted to sell Macs with SuperDrives?

Likely one of the main reasons, and it's a damn good reason from Apple's point of view.

Why did Apple do that?

Likely one of the main reasons was to promote PowerBook sales. Aperture had specific requirements. Those requirements excluded all iBooks (even though it ran OK on them). Then Apple later releases a new iBook that's even faster than their older but supported PowerBooks. Apple then rewrites the install problem to NOT exclude those PowerBooks but does exclude the new iBook. Hmmm...

Why did Apple not allow that?

Likely one of the main reasons was to promote PowerBook sales, cuz monitor spanning is some sort of hifalootin professional feature of course.

Honestly, this type of "strategic marketing" from Apple is not a big secret. Don't tell me you've been oblivious to it all these years.

 

[MotionMan]

Likely one of the main reasons. Firewire was Apple's baby, and they make royalties off it. Haven't you wondered why even in 2011 the Mac Pro doesn't include external SATA?


Likely one of the main reasons, and it's a damn good reason from Apple's point of view.


Likely one of the main reasons was to promote PowerBook sales. Aperture had specific requirements. Those requirements excluded all iBooks (even though it ran OK on them). Then Apple later releases a new iBook that's even faster than their older but supported PowerBooks. Apple then rewrites the install problem to NOT exclude those PowerBooks but does exclude the new iBook. Hmmm...


Likely one of the main reasons was to promote PowerBook sales.

Honestly, this type of "strategic marketing" from Apple is not a big secret. Don't tell me you've been oblivious to it all these years.

Actually, Apple does have a habit of holding back features just because it can.

So "just because it can" is not the reason you are now asserting?

MotionMan

 

[Eug]

So "just because it can" is not the reason you are now asserting?

Apple can, and can get away with it, so it does.

Back then they knew they CAN screw over iBook users because they will still make money off PowerBook users.

If they couldn't, they wouldn't have done it.

 

[MotionMan]

Apple can, and can get away with it, so it does.

Back then they knew they CAN screw over iBook users because they will still make money off PowerBook users.

If they couldn't, they wouldn't have done it.

What are you basing this assertion on?

MotionMan

 

[Eug]

What are you basing this assertion on?

My tea leaves obviously.

Seriously though, it's unfortunate I have to spell everything out. Apple's motivation isn't just to make insanely great products. It's also to make insanely great gobs of cash. Thus, product launches and feature sets are to a large extent dictated by the dollar, not just by their engineering capabilities. If you think otherwise, I don't know what to say.

 

[MotionMan]

My tea leaves obviously.

Seriously though, it's unfortunate I have to spell everything out. Apple's motivation isn't just to make insanely great products. It's also to make insanely great gobs of cash. Thus, product launches and feature sets are to a large extent dictated by the dollar, not just by their engineering capabilities. If you think otherwise, I don't know what to say.

I do not think otherwise. I simply want you to provide support for the unqualified assertions you are making regarding Apple's actions and the motivations for their actions.

Common sense agrees with you, but that is not actual support for your position.

If you just want to admit that you have no actual support other than your feelings, tea leaves and horoscopes, that would be fine.

MotionMan

 

[gorcorps]

The iPad2 needs Flash support! I think anyone that likes to play Flash games would agree.
And, NO, Skyfire is not an adequate replacement.

I noticed that Blackberry, Samsung, and Motorola are all hyping up Flash support on their tablets now... the lack of this feature is going to start costing them sales.

No it won't. The people that care about flash wouldn't be considering an idevice at this point anyway, and the people that don't care won't factor that into their decision. At this point Apple sticking with no flash won't hurt them any more than it already has... and I can't say it's hurt them much at all. People that whine about flash would just whine about something else. They don't want an Apple product period and their excuse for why will just change. From what I've seen the people that really want an ipad, but ONLY when it has flash are very rare (non-existent in my mind, but there may be a couple). At this point people either want it or don't.

 

[Ns1]

If you just want to admit that you have no actual support other than your feelings, tea leaves and horoscopes, that would be fine.

in this forum, that IS support.

 

[Oyeve]

Old article about tech Apple killed/abandoned.

http://technologizer.com/2008/10/17...a-brief-history-of-features-apple-has-killed/

 

[Eug]

Anyhoo...

Netflix on the iPad is decent. It's unfortunate that it requires a separate app - as I don't like having a different app for every second website, but at least this app is reasonably done.

I wish it was as seamless with my dual-core Atom ION machine. As soon as I enable HD on that thing it chokes hard, even with Silverlight 5 beta installed. (SL5 is supposed to support DXVA.)

Mind you, on the iPad, they don't give the option of SD vs HD.

 

[Chess]

does anyones best buy have the ipad2 in (64gb wifi only)

 

[Kaido]

Anyhoo...

Netflix on the iPad is decent. It's unfortunate that it requires a separate app - as I don't like having a different app for every second website, but at least this app is reasonably done.

Netflix on my iPad is the only motivation I have to workout. Thank you, Jack Bauer, for helping me through my cardio

 

[ultimatebob]

Links?

MotionMan

I think that it's pretty obvious that they're not offering BluRay drives on any Mac products at this point simply because they want people to be downloading HD movies from iTunes instead. Almost every other hardware manufacturer has had a BluRay option available for over a year now.

 

[ultimatebob]

No it won't. The people that care about flash wouldn't be considering an idevice at this point anyway, and the people that don't care won't factor that into their decision. At this point Apple sticking with no flash won't hurt them any more than it already has... and I can't say it's hurt them much at all. People that whine about flash would just whine about something else. They don't want an Apple product period and their excuse for why will just change. From what I've seen the people that really want an ipad, but ONLY when it has flash are very rare (non-existent in my mind, but there may be a couple). At this point people either want it or don't.

The only problem with your theory is that I already OWN an iPad, and I used to own an iPhone. After upgrading it to a Android phone and finding out how useful it is to have Flash on a mobile device (I use it to play streaming media all the time), I'm going to consider the lack of Flash support a deal breaker on any future Apple purchases.

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

The only problem with your theory is that I already OWN an iPad, and I used to own an iPhone. After upgrading it to a Android phone and finding out how useful it is to have Flash on a mobile device (I use it to play streaming media all the time), I'm going to consider the lack of Flash support a deal breaker on any future Apple purchases.

So you mostly use it for streaming media, why didn't you get skyfire for your iPhone?

 

[Tom]

My tea leaves obviously.

Seriously though, it's unfortunate I have to spell everything out. Apple's motivation isn't just to make insanely great products. It's also to make insanely great gobs of cash. Thus, product launches and feature sets are to a large extent dictated by the dollar, not just by their engineering capabilities. If you think otherwise, I don't know what to say.

There are valid technical and licensing reasons for every issue you've raised. None of them had to occur for the reason you THINK they happened.

On the other hand, MARKETING is a perfectly acceptable business practice. ALL businesses sell products with various levels of features, and release new products with new features. There's nothing different about how Apple does this, they are good at it, and they are good at design and engineering.

There's no point to your assertions except for some reason you have a personal problem with Apple, or you're a communist who thinks capitalism is just bad.

 

[Eug]

There are valid technical and licensing reasons for every issue you've raised. None of them had to occur for the reason you THINK they happened.

On the other hand, MARKETING is a perfectly acceptable business practice. ALL businesses sell products with various levels of features, and release new products with new features. There's nothing different about how Apple does this, they are good at it, and they are good at design and engineering.

There's no point to your assertions except for some reason you have a personal problem with Apple, or you're a communist who thinks capitalism is just bad.

No personal problem with Apple. Check my sig. Used to own their stock too. Sorry if I just call it as I see it and I didn't drink as much of the koolaid as some fanbois have.

 

[MotionMan]

I think that it's pretty obvious that they're not offering BluRay drives on any Mac products at this point simply because they want people to be downloading HD movies from iTunes instead. Almost every other hardware manufacturer has had a BluRay option available for over a year now.

Except that you do not have to get movies from iTunes and play them on your Apple computer. So, perhaps there is some other reason, like battery life or Jobs does not like some aspect of BluRay technology?

In other words, it is not obvious at all.

Without a smoking gun, it is all speculation as to why Apple does anything. We might be able to come up with educated guesses, but, without more, that is all they are, guess.

It annoys me to no end when people make proclamations as to the motivations for any company's actions without having any proof of same.

MotionMan

 

[sportage]

The only thing I dislike on the ipad2 is how they just had to mess up the plug. Now, if you had a ipad1 dock, your new ipad2 won’t fit. Won’t fit unless the dock maker offers a plug adaptor. And the ipad2 is also thinner, so that is an issue.

I find the plug on the ipad2 very weird. On the original ipad, the plug easily snapped into place. This ipad2, it’s like the plug slot is tilted and much harder to snap in. You have to get the angle just right. This makes me feel like the plug will be damaged sooner or later with just normal use.

I don't know why apple had to mess with the plug. Making an un necessary incompatibility between the two ipad versions. Totally unnecessary.