Oh wait, that's what it should have been called. I was wrong with just about every prediction, and that makes me sad; not because I don't like being wrong, but because the new tablet is underwhelming at best. Starting with the keynote itself, I only really enjoyed the part where Jobs tried to squeeze the product between laptops and smart phones. I disagree with him that very many things will be better on the iPad than on a laptop. Reading books is about the only one, along with an incredibly long battery life. And even here, it's not better than the Kindle.
There are so many things that the iPad fails to do, including multi-tasking, readability in sunlight, Adobe Flash on the internet, and.. uh.. oh yeah, video conferencing or taking pictures (there's no effing camera). iPad cannot run any of the iLife apps, like Garage Band, iDVD, etc. The screen doesn't have proximity sensors (like many drawing tablets) nor does it provide non-visual feedback to typing or other touch screen actions. Lastly, the bezel around the screen is huge, making the device very large for the screen size.
There are a couple things that I expect the iPad to change over the next couple of years. Textbooks, especially those with color photos and graphs could be much more legible on the iPad. And over time, the iPad could make updated and interactive textbooks far more powerful than their paper brethren. Print subscriptions also promise to be a great way to get the NYTimes or Sports Illustrated on the go. Gaming will also presumably be good, although a touch-feel screen would make it even better.
I hope that apple will aggressively update and improve the iPad, as they have with their other hardware. I'd like to see that Pixel Qi screen, as well as one with physical touch feedback and proximity sensors. A camera or two would be great, as would touch "buttons" along the bezel or on the case itself.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Predictions for Steve Job's announcements tomorrow.
What follows is complete speculation:
I expect Mac to announce the much rumored "iSlate" tablet tomorrow. It'll have an amazing, battery-saving, color e-paper 10.1 inch Pixel Qi touch screen, and front camera for video conferencing. But the key is how it will fit into the existing Apple portable lineup. The tablet will run a much more windowed version of the iPhone OS, and will have access to some cloud-based iLife apps and of course 3rd party apps through the app store. It'll also be the preferred product for reading books, and handling magazine and news subscriptions, or for video-conferencing or streaming TV and movies over Wi-Fi. The touch screen may not be dynamic (a la the BB Storm) -- that and proximity sensitivity will come in a 2011 update when technology allows. Price-wise, it'll start at over $1,000, but that will come down after the first couple of months (or with a 3G subscription). Also, there is a 7.5-inch version due out this summer. Once the tablet settles in, it's life expectancy will be 2-3 years, slightly more than the iPhone.
However, to create product differentiation (and because of dissatisfaction over Arrandale's graphics integration), they'll also announce the desktop-replacement MacBook Extreme, which would draw from the Quad-Core Mobile Clarksfield Intel i7's. This is a large 18-inch notebook which go's along with new 14- and 16-inch MBPros powered by recently released Arrandale dual core chips. They'll also announce additional sizes of the new LED screens, and add a more powerful processor to the Mac Pro lineup. We may also get a Beatles on iTunes announcement, and cloud-based iLife should come either tomorrow or later this year. I'd suggest that rummored iPhone announcements (including a new OS, a summer hardware update, and expansion of carriers) are scheduled for March or April, soon after my predicted tablet launch date.
I expect Mac to announce the much rumored "iSlate" tablet tomorrow. It'll have an amazing, battery-saving, color e-paper 10.1 inch Pixel Qi touch screen, and front camera for video conferencing. But the key is how it will fit into the existing Apple portable lineup. The tablet will run a much more windowed version of the iPhone OS, and will have access to some cloud-based iLife apps and of course 3rd party apps through the app store. It'll also be the preferred product for reading books, and handling magazine and news subscriptions, or for video-conferencing or streaming TV and movies over Wi-Fi. The touch screen may not be dynamic (a la the BB Storm) -- that and proximity sensitivity will come in a 2011 update when technology allows. Price-wise, it'll start at over $1,000, but that will come down after the first couple of months (or with a 3G subscription). Also, there is a 7.5-inch version due out this summer. Once the tablet settles in, it's life expectancy will be 2-3 years, slightly more than the iPhone.
However, to create product differentiation (and because of dissatisfaction over Arrandale's graphics integration), they'll also announce the desktop-replacement MacBook Extreme, which would draw from the Quad-Core Mobile Clarksfield Intel i7's. This is a large 18-inch notebook which go's along with new 14- and 16-inch MBPros powered by recently released Arrandale dual core chips. They'll also announce additional sizes of the new LED screens, and add a more powerful processor to the Mac Pro lineup. We may also get a Beatles on iTunes announcement, and cloud-based iLife should come either tomorrow or later this year. I'd suggest that rummored iPhone announcements (including a new OS, a summer hardware update, and expansion of carriers) are scheduled for March or April, soon after my predicted tablet launch date.
On Bailouts
I realize I'm like a year and a half late with this, and I think the idea I'm presenting is stolen from someone else -- probably someone who had evidence to back it up -- but I still can't help writing about this.
If the money given to bail out big banks last year, had instead been given to the people who owed the banks money, it would have solved more issues. Whether it's moral or not or whether it might encourage bad economic behavior at a lower level in the future is still up for debate, but there's little doubt in my mind that that money could have been used to both minimize foreclosures (i.e. homelessness), and in turn to keep the big banks chugging along.
One argument could be made that the money was a bargaining chip for bank regulation, but honestly, did the regulation do much? and even if it did, the government has the right to regulate things, that's what we elect them for.
Just think, if we had instead bailed out all the people whose first homes under x feet per person were being foreclosed upon, wouldn't that simply be subsidization of affordable housing, of which there's a chronic shortage in this country anyway? No it wouldn't be fair to those who had worked hard to afford their homes, but neither was bailing out millionaires who pay executives huge sums to make dumb decisions. And I'd suggest that this kind of bailout is less likely to modify future spending behavior than the bank bailout that we did see, based purely on the expectations of rationalism in consumers vs. corporations.
Furthermore, a bailout of many foreclosures might have staved off the economic and real-estate tailspin that the economy is in now. Perhaps it could have cushioned the blow for homeless shelters, tax revenues, those attempting to sell their houses, and other businesses (architecture) that rely on real-estate development, ownership and value maintenance.
If the money given to bail out big banks last year, had instead been given to the people who owed the banks money, it would have solved more issues. Whether it's moral or not or whether it might encourage bad economic behavior at a lower level in the future is still up for debate, but there's little doubt in my mind that that money could have been used to both minimize foreclosures (i.e. homelessness), and in turn to keep the big banks chugging along.
One argument could be made that the money was a bargaining chip for bank regulation, but honestly, did the regulation do much? and even if it did, the government has the right to regulate things, that's what we elect them for.
Just think, if we had instead bailed out all the people whose first homes under x feet per person were being foreclosed upon, wouldn't that simply be subsidization of affordable housing, of which there's a chronic shortage in this country anyway? No it wouldn't be fair to those who had worked hard to afford their homes, but neither was bailing out millionaires who pay executives huge sums to make dumb decisions. And I'd suggest that this kind of bailout is less likely to modify future spending behavior than the bank bailout that we did see, based purely on the expectations of rationalism in consumers vs. corporations.
Furthermore, a bailout of many foreclosures might have staved off the economic and real-estate tailspin that the economy is in now. Perhaps it could have cushioned the blow for homeless shelters, tax revenues, those attempting to sell their houses, and other businesses (architecture) that rely on real-estate development, ownership and value maintenance.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Crazy Costs for America's Cup
Probably don't bother reading this article, but there are two points to take away. First: somehow they've come up with a laser that can measure wind speed and direction 1km away, either along the ground/water or into the air. Second: this is one small purchase that the BMW/Oracle America's cup team made, and it cost them nearly $150k.
the device:
the device:
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)