pinkmonkey
2.4 hour party person
If it ran illustrator, they'd have been in with a chance, with me. It's a shiny toy really isn't it?if you can't run illustrator on something, what's the point?
Apple iPad and related items
- Thread starter paolo
- Start date
- Status
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
The link implies otherwise...
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
No; the "iBooks" thing appears to be just for ones purchased via Apple but there are a million and one ebook-reading apps already.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
I have one (stanza) on my iPhone, therefore it will work on the iPad. Just no iBooks (yet), hey ho.
I see the iPad as being a slow burner, the iPad won't make the big splash that the Iphone made but in a couple of years it will make sense. I won't be buying one yet, same as I didn't buy the first iPhone. but I won't be writing it off.
Also as a fairly casual user, lack of Flash has not been a massive problem for me on the iPhone. can't say I'm that bothered.
I see the iPad as being a slow burner, the iPad won't make the big splash that the Iphone made but in a couple of years it will make sense. I won't be buying one yet, same as I didn't buy the first iPhone. but I won't be writing it off.
Also as a fairly casual user, lack of Flash has not been a massive problem for me on the iPhone. can't say I'm that bothered.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Been reading the discussion about designers preferring macs a few pages back... One of the reasons for this that wasn't mentioned, was that mac products are generally very well designed from a visual point of view.
If what you do is some kind of visual design/'creative' work, you value things looking good. If you didn't... you'd be kind of hypocritical. So, you don't really want your studio full of ugly Dell PCs. Apple products on the whole are very, very well designed from a visual point of view. The same extends to the interface. The Apple OS interface simply looks better than windows and is more cleanly designed.
I can understand why geek types might have a hard time getting their head around this, because functionality is what they are mainly interested in. They will scoff at the notion of paying extra for something that looks better rather than works better. But that's just a reflection of their different priorities and sensitivities.
If what you do is some kind of visual design/'creative' work, you value things looking good. If you didn't... you'd be kind of hypocritical. So, you don't really want your studio full of ugly Dell PCs. Apple products on the whole are very, very well designed from a visual point of view. The same extends to the interface. The Apple OS interface simply looks better than windows and is more cleanly designed.
I can understand why geek types might have a hard time getting their head around this, because functionality is what they are mainly interested in. They will scoff at the notion of paying extra for something that looks better rather than works better. But that's just a reflection of their different priorities and sensitivities.
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
has the 'hitler ipad' youtube been posted yet? here it is anyway
Shippou-Sensei
4:1:2.5
let us pray apple don't fix it so they don't run on the ipad
that's being a little bit of a worry wart though
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apple iPad is announced
I'm going to kill the person that made that Downful film.
bouncer_the_dog said:
I'm going to kill the person that made that Downful film.
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
not sure that is why they were traditionally used, maybe now, some of them were ugly back in the day!
when i used to do a bit of design in the late 90's Macs were just what was used and they could handle the bigger progs and files better. and what printers init bruv.
was it not that macs processed bigger files better and had more RAM then or something to do with the graphics cards?
of course pc's caught up and other posters have covered that better than i can.
editor
hiraethified
That's a really, really stupid argument. Following your daft logic, design companies would only employ good looking people for fear of having an 'ugly' view in their offices.
Back on topic, Adobe are still showing just how unchuffed they are:
Kanda
Diving wanker
This isn't THAT unusual ^^ ....
sunnysidedown
caput mortuum
I'm looking forward to this, for the first time in my Apple purchasing history (nearly 20 years) I'll be picking up a rev 1 device.
Must say there is a lot of crap being posted on this thread, and apparently by tech savvy individuals...
Couple of things for me:
No Flash - thank christ, the sooner there is a move to the HTML5 standard the better (Youtube and now Vimeo supporting h264), if Apple can help eliminate Flash from the web all the better.
No camera - This is a Rev 1 device, people need to look at previous rev 1 devices by Apple and see how limited they were on release to what they became a few revisions later - with that in mind I think this device gives a huge amount on it's first release. - and no camera isn't a huge issue for me at the moment.
No Multi-task - no doubt a software update will address this, Apple doesn't want sluggish performance on it's new device on launch - again, not a huge issue for me as I know it won't be forever.
Bezel around device - how the fuck else are you going to hold the damn thing? and not get in way of both the screen and touch sensors?
Oh yeah, everyone was going on about it costing around the $1000 mark - lol
Must say there is a lot of crap being posted on this thread, and apparently by tech savvy individuals...
Couple of things for me:
No Flash - thank christ, the sooner there is a move to the HTML5 standard the better (Youtube and now Vimeo supporting h264), if Apple can help eliminate Flash from the web all the better.
No camera - This is a Rev 1 device, people need to look at previous rev 1 devices by Apple and see how limited they were on release to what they became a few revisions later - with that in mind I think this device gives a huge amount on it's first release. - and no camera isn't a huge issue for me at the moment.
No Multi-task - no doubt a software update will address this, Apple doesn't want sluggish performance on it's new device on launch - again, not a huge issue for me as I know it won't be forever.
Bezel around device - how the fuck else are you going to hold the damn thing? and not get in way of both the screen and touch sensors?
Oh yeah, everyone was going on about it costing around the $1000 mark - lol
That's a really, really stupid argument. Following your daft logic, design companies would only employ good looking people for fear of having an 'ugly' view in their offices.
Back on topic, Adobe are still showing just how unchuffed they are:
it's not really anywhere near the same is it? People involved in product design prefer to choose well designed computers and surround their office with them, as surely as day follows night and well designed studios are created to leave an impression with clients and inspire employees. And whatever you throw at Apple their computers, especially in the last decade, have had a strong and consistent design ethos where form tends to follow function. That's not the same as just picking dolly birds and hunks just to brighten up the office, any office.
Historically Macs had some compelling advantages over pcs when it came to design software and the OS. That's long been eroded, but you can't blame folks in the design industry from taking more than a passing interest and affinity in a brand with an outstanding reputation for product design. There's some ponciness and pickiness for sure, but you can understand that given the field.
mauvais
on reddit or something
There is no HTML 5 video standard. Mozilla want Ogg, the other smaller shares want H.264, and Microsoft haven't bothered at all. Even then all you've covered is dumb video - nothing interactive. There's not really an excuse for omitting Flash from a serious web device.
fen_boy
Exits gracefully.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
That's a really, really stupid argument. Following your daft logic, design companies would only employ good looking people for fear of having an 'ugly' view in their offices.
Well, your appearance will certainly affect your chances of getting a job. At least, what you are wearing and stuff. Yes, this applies to any job but in the visual/design industries it means more than just showing up for the interview in a suit and tie.
Sunray
Its sunny somewhere.
People should not be advocating H264 as a video format like Apple does. Its problem is that there are huge patent issues with regard to H264, technology on the web should be patent free. Note that there is PNG file format. Why? Because of patent issues.
Read Mozilla reason for not using H264 and understand that is a very powerful argument. Unless someone like google buys the patent holders and makes them free for all then its Ogg or perhaps On2 as google just bought them.
Read Mozilla reason for not using H264 and understand that is a very powerful argument. Unless someone like google buys the patent holders and makes them free for all then its Ogg or perhaps On2 as google just bought them.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Except loads of devices already have hardware support for decoding h264. Ogg can't be run on these devices without caning the CPU. I agree that h264 is a box of patent hurt, but realistically, Ogg doesn't stand a chance.
elbows
Well-Known Member
The h.264 patent issues are a shame, and are especially painful for the likes of firefox to try to deal with, but unless the license terms for h.264 become extremely draconian in future then it wont affect many people. It could become a nightmare, or not.
I could not safely bet that ogg theora will catch on before the h.264 patents expire.
html5 and css3 are not miracles, and it will take a while for flash to be displaced, but to assume these alternatives are pointless just because the reality right now is imperfect is a mistake.
Of course its also true that the lack of flash on devices like the iPad is a real issue for real users, one that will diminish with time and will help the standards-based web as time goes on, but these issues certainly have an ugly side.
I could not safely bet that ogg theora will catch on before the h.264 patents expire.
html5 and css3 are not miracles, and it will take a while for flash to be displaced, but to assume these alternatives are pointless just because the reality right now is imperfect is a mistake.
Of course its also true that the lack of flash on devices like the iPad is a real issue for real users, one that will diminish with time and will help the standards-based web as time goes on, but these issues certainly have an ugly side.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Anyway I have no shame at all in advocating h.264 because:
The quality/filesize ratio is quite good.
Hardware accelerated encoding&decoding can save a lot of energy
I spent years moaning in the bad old days when there were lots of different video formats on the web which made it confusing for many people and h.264 is largely responsible for taking away much of that pain.
Flash played a big part in enabling browser-based video to take off, it did something useful, but I would like to see its domination wane in future. Likewise I would not be sad to see h.264 go, and to advocate alternatives, but only when these alternatives are actually winners when it comes to the main issues of practicality. For that to happen we require far more than some people preaching the benefits of open technology, we need developers to actually harness this to provide great tools & functionality. That hasnt come close to happening with ogg yet, which remains largely trapped in a timewarp no matter how much Mozilla wail about the issue.
The quality/filesize ratio is quite good.
Hardware accelerated encoding&decoding can save a lot of energy
I spent years moaning in the bad old days when there were lots of different video formats on the web which made it confusing for many people and h.264 is largely responsible for taking away much of that pain.
Flash played a big part in enabling browser-based video to take off, it did something useful, but I would like to see its domination wane in future. Likewise I would not be sad to see h.264 go, and to advocate alternatives, but only when these alternatives are actually winners when it comes to the main issues of practicality. For that to happen we require far more than some people preaching the benefits of open technology, we need developers to actually harness this to provide great tools & functionality. That hasnt come close to happening with ogg yet, which remains largely trapped in a timewarp no matter how much Mozilla wail about the issue.
mauvais
on reddit or something
Partly, but it's not going to be enough.
HTML5 isn't Flash, and it isn't Flex or Silverlight or (ha) JavaFX. All of these are very attractive for development, and although all the vendors could have got it all hideously wrong, Apple definitely aren't going to be the nail in anyone's coffin. HTML5 will solve some issues but it won't address just as many, it'll be years before anyone serious takes it seriously, and when they do the rest of the RIA world will have already marched on.
If you want to deploy an app now and be guaranteed it'll work on most of your customers' machines, you damned sure don't consider HTML5. Hell, you can do it in any bonkers proprietary technology you like as long as you can add a plugin for it to IE and a handful of other browsers. But you can't do it in HTML5.
That alone is why web on the iPad is ever so slightly useless without Flash.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
On the design agency front, I've known clients to 'worry' that their creative work wouldn't be 'up to scratch. because they didn't see a bank of Macs when they visited the office...
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Mozilla will end up pushing h264 decoding onto the OS's video system - directshow on windows, quicktime on mac etc. Then it's just up to the OS to support the decoding. Doesn't remove the problem, because linux distros still can't legally include h264 without paying the license (so I suppose Red Hat and the other commercials will manage to)
mauvais
on reddit or something
The other point to consider is why you would cut off your nose to spite your face.
You don't like Flash because what, all the adverts use it? People build stupid Flash heavy sites that are hell to navigate, just because the technology is there? Fine...
...and you think HTML 5 will be different because...?
Flash probably isn't the most efficient video streaming mechanism. It adds a third party component to the browser that makes reliability a much more complex issue. It's a proprietary standard. There are plenty of other failings.
In practice though, these things really don't interfere that heavily with anyone's life. All the things it's hated for are transferable to whatever the next big thing is. On the other hand it runs on something like 95% of computers - remember that the average enterprise is likely still on IE6. It's tried, tested, and atechnical graphic designers can build stuff in it.
You don't like Flash because what, all the adverts use it? People build stupid Flash heavy sites that are hell to navigate, just because the technology is there? Fine...
...and you think HTML 5 will be different because...?
Flash probably isn't the most efficient video streaming mechanism. It adds a third party component to the browser that makes reliability a much more complex issue. It's a proprietary standard. There are plenty of other failings.
In practice though, these things really don't interfere that heavily with anyone's life. All the things it's hated for are transferable to whatever the next big thing is. On the other hand it runs on something like 95% of computers - remember that the average enterprise is likely still on IE6. It's tried, tested, and atechnical graphic designers can build stuff in it.
- Status
Similar threads
