[klownaround1111]

Quote

Love my iPad but it cannot be used for business uses. I often work with documents of over 600 pages and need good typing/editing ability. I also regularly need to copy and paste quotes from multiple sources and applications in a word processing document. None of these are at all easy with an iPad. The iPad is nice for regular work tasks as long as it is not resource intensive nor screen limited. Despite Apple's MicroSoft-like insistence on making sure if you use their OS you must comply with their solipsism regarding how we are to "work," I do not expect to make the iPad my main business tool. But I fail to see why I should have to decide. I love my MacBook Air and find that a good middle ground computer for most of my work-related computer. My iPad meets many needs and I have found my wife's iPad Mini a great form factor for many of the lesser tasks!

This will ALL CHANGE AS SOON AS MICRO$LOTH gets off their HIGH HORSE and releases a Mac iPad version of MS OFFICE for iPAD then this will no longer be a valid arguement.. if you get a bluetooth keyboard you can copy and paste easily and load 600 page doucments... I do that NOW!!! you probably need some additional training on how to accomplish these task as they are all available now with the exception of the MICROSOFT HOLD BACK AND HOSTAGE OF THESE APPS!!! they think people will stop using the iPad for the SURFACE PRO jeeezzz

[ted_landau]

Hi!

Thanks for all the comments. More than I ever expected.

I’d like to make a general reply to many of the comments posted here.

As I clearly stated at the start of the article, an iPad is all many people need. It CAN be a Mac replacement for some users. For all of you that said this describes you, I’m fine with that.

On the other hand, some users are content to stay with an iMac (perhaps with an iPhone) and never get an iPad. That’s fine too.

I never meant to state or imply that the iPad NEEDS TO or SHOULD replace Macs. No one is forcing anyone to make such a choice. The iPad stands on its own as an alternative device. As of now, Macs and iPads overlap in function, but do not completely duplicate each other. As such, both can be welcome in the same home. Such is the case for me.

In many homes, the Mac may sit unused much of the time. But it’s still there for when you really need it. Great.

All of that said, not everyone who would like to own both an iPad and a Mac can afford to do so. It’s a luxury that is out of reach for some. They will eventually be forced to make a purchasing choice, deciding which one is the better device to fly solo with. A major point of my article was that, for users like me, choosing to go solo with an iPad is all but impossible now — no matter how much I otherwise like the iPad.

My hope is that this may change someday. It was in this spirit that I detailed what it would take for an iPad to function as my primary/solo computing device.

Similarly, I believe that, over time, Apple’s two product lines will converge. I’m not sure how long this will take, maybe as much as a decade, but I don’t see Apple indefinitely maintaining these two product lines as consumer devices. Assuming this is true, I am confident that the iPad is the primary direction Apple will wind up going. Given this, my article was similarly meant to suggest what iPad limitations I hope Apple will address as it moves in that direction.

[JWiseman]

Hi there! One of the things that seems to get talked all around but sometimes never hit directly on is the simple issue of what the specific stakeholder needs are. I've been involved in systems engineering and requirements management for well over two decades and we continue to come up against a lot of incorrectly assumed design requirements that hide what the real stakeholder needs are.

The fact is that there are many folks with needs for their "desktop" operations and many others with needs for their "mobile" operations. In a given technology, these needs can literally be mutually exclusive. Companies that do not recognize this do so at their own peril.

One example is that a cell phone is by definition a mobile device. If the "mobile phone" function itself is inadequate to the user (e.g., won't sustain calls or takes three hands to hold), it's not gonna make much use to have a bunch of other phone functions on the device, and no one is going to care that it is the smallest and lightest phone on the market.

Another example can be seen in the new iMacs. These are intended to be desktop tools. They are intended to sit on a desktop with all of their facilities easily accessible to the user. It appears that in an effort to make the iMac even smaller, thinner, and lighter (features that are critical to a "mobile" tool but NOT so much to a desktop based tool), they have moved the SD card port from the side to a new position in the rear. The fact that the iMac is 1/2 inch or so thinner is going to mean nothing to the desktop user who is cursing the fact that he now has to pull a large screen iMac out away from the wall and spin it around each and every time he wants to move some photos from his camera. He then as to repeat this operation in order to unplug the device to replace in his camera.

And of course the removal of the optical (i.e., bulk) storage is another step AWAY from what the desktop functions are needed to support (as was mentioned by an earlier posting).

The fact is that the user interface on a mobile device needs to be optimized for how that device is used. Touch screens and minimized button sets achieve this. This is NOT optimal for desktop operations. I have a 30" screen that sits at a full arms length from my face. I have no desire to have to hold my arm up and outstretched to stay in contact with my screen for 8 hours a day!

To try and design a device to do both types of application sets equally well is rarely successful. As long as companies are smart enough to always design to meet the actual needs of the stakeholders in their unique applications, they will be successful. If they can also identify the commonalities of various applications and design them in in a consistent way, they will have substantially more success.

Of course that's just my 2 cents worth :-)

[psichel]

Years after Steve Jobs coined the phrase "Post PC era", people are still debating what this means.

By "Post PC era", I think Apple recognized the focus of innovation, growth, and profits had shifted along with the attention of the masses. Traditional PC software (and hardware) isn't going away, it's just no longer the most dominant thing driving the high tech industry.

Steve Jobs described PCs as trucks compared to the iPad which is more like a car. Most consumers don't need a truck, but that doesn't mean trucks are going away. If you live in the US, almost everything around you was delivered by a truck. Our modern economy is built around moving goods by truck.

To use a simple analogy, virtually all the software for iOS and Android devices was created using PCs (including Macs). The idea that Apple must someday merge their iOS and Mac product lines is like telling Ford Motor Company they'll someday merge their car and truck business because maintaining a separate truck division is too expensive.

For the foreseeable future, this is complete nonsense. The PC and Mac are here to stay.

As for removing the CD/DVD from the latest iMacs, this is simple economics. Apple no longer distributes software on DVD and the rest of the industry is likely to follow. A DVD that holds 6 Gigabytes is tiny compared to 1 TB hard drive or 16 GB flash drive. Apple may be a little ahead of the curve, but the DVD was going the way of dial-up networking. Necessary in a pinch, but no longer mainstream.

Enjoy!