This reminds me of why I spurned a baseball career to become an artist.

“Why?” he asks. “Because it’s got a ‘3’ after its name, not a ‘2,’ which means it’s newer - and that also means I don’t have it. So, I’m going to have to get it.”

The new model is simply called iPad-- it does not have a 3 after its name.

“Why?” he asks. “Because it’s got a ‘3’ after its name

Actually, Dallas, like "the new Kindle", it's simply "the new iPad", sans numbering.

EDIT: Damn! Beaten to the punch.

The new model is simply called iPad-- it does not have a 3 after its name.

Everyone is going to call it the iPad 3, so get used to it.

The new model is simply called iPad-- it does not have a 3 after its name.

Everyone is going to call it the iPad 3, so get used to it.

I don't know what version number my Macbook Air is. Why should I keep track of the iPad's?

Why should I keep track of the iPad's?

Because they're keeping track of you.

Because they're keeping track of you.

Well, sure. But Apple has the staff for that sort of thing. I'm an independent over here; I can't be taking on random accounting tasks like remembering what version number my car is. Or my shoes. Who cares how many times Vans made shoes before they got to the kind I bought?

People are supposed to buy laptops or shoes or cars when they need them. You're supposed to buy an iPad whenever a new one comes out. I think that's the difference.

I just saw a talk the other day about how David Fincher uses a small fleet of synced iPads to drastically simplify the production process across multiple people in multiple places at multiple times. Say what you want about David Fincher, but for a product that I thought was pointless upon release, it sure keeps going.

I think I might get one.

Because they're keeping track of you.

Well, sure. But Apple has the staff for that sort of thing.

I was referring to this.

I don't know what version number my Macbook Air is. Why should I keep track of the iPad's?

Nobody said you should. But with over 50 million iPads sold, lots of folks will want to differentiate.

Noted intellectual Rob Dibble had a sound bite that XM would play as part of their promotional filler: "So an iPad is like an iPhone but it's too big to put in my pocket? Why would I want that?"

"So an iPad is like an iPhone but it's too big to put in my pocket? Why would I want that?"

As dumb as this sounds now, the internet was full of people saying this right up to the day Steve Jobs announced the iPad. Jobs was definitely right that people often don't know what they want until someone shows it to them (and that someone was very often Jobs).

People were saying that long after Jobs unveiled it. Much of the tech media even were predicting the iPad to be a big flop because it was just a big iPhone/iPod Touch. Only after the first few months of sales figures did this crowd get silenced.

Jobs was definitely right that people often don't know what they want until someone shows it to them (and that someone was very often Jobs).

Although sometimes that didn't work out so well, as the major e-book publishers and Apple are likely to find out from the DOJ and EU :P


JOBS: You know what you guys should do? I can't really figure out why you haven't done this - you should all band together, set your own ebook prices instead of the retailer, and force everyone to sell at the same price! I'll be the first to sign up with this iPad thing I'm going to sell! Screw Amazon!

PUBLISHERS: Hey, why didn't we think of that! Higher prices for everyone! Whooo!


Two years later, Apple's an afterthought in the e-book market (Amazon and B&N have about 90% of the market between them - go figure, if everyone's the same price, people buy from booksellers and not Apple), and now Apple and the publishers have multiple governments ready to tear into them.

As dumb as this sounds now, the internet was full of people saying this right up to the day Steve Jobs announced the iPad. Jobs was definitely right that people often don't know what they want until someone shows it to them (and that someone was very often Jobs).

What is somewhat disappointing is that Bill Gates has been saying for over a decade now that tablet pc is the future of computing, but he just never grasped the concept that people would be willing to pay more for a tablet computer that features a slower machine with fewer features and options provided it looked pretty. About the only thing he got right was the subscription fee aspect of it.

I thought iPads (and tablets in general) were pointless, long after they came out. After traveling 30 hours each way carrying my laptop, I no longer think so.

As dumb as this sounds now, the internet was full of people saying this right up to the day Steve Jobs announced the iPad. Jobs was definitely right that people often don't know what they want until someone shows it to them (and that someone was very often Jobs).

I still think it's true.

But that's why I'm not in the business of inventing iPads, I guess.

What is somewhat disappointing is that Bill Gates has been saying for over a decade now that tablet pc is the future of computing, but he just never grasped the concept that people would be willing to pay more for a tablet computer that features a slower machine with fewer features and options provided it looked pretty.

This is incredibly reductive. For the things people want to do on tablets, an iPad is much faster than a computer, let alone one of those early-aughts XP tablets. It starts instantly, the battery life is great so you don't have to orient yourself around a plug, the apps are all built around tablet interaction and around the tablet's strengths and weaknesses. What Bill Gates didn't realize was that people didn't want to buy a tablet so that they could click on the start menu with their fingernail and open Excel.

I got how people imagined Apple to be a triumph of marketing and prettiness over function back circa the iMac G3, or the iPod, but at this point it takes willful ignorance not to see the real usability innovations and benefits Apple has brought to the smartphone and the tablet spaces.

Oh yay, an apple/pc flamewar.

You're right, I've forgotten what this site is truly about. I'll Google News "Rick Santorum" "iPad" "baseball" and pass the first result along to Repoz.

I thought iPads (and tablets in general) were pointless, long after they came out. After traveling 30 hours each way carrying my laptop, I no longer think so.

I never thought iPads were pointless, but I still think they are relatively pointless for me. If you have a reasonably light laptop and a smart phone, the iPad is sort of redundant.

They are cool, snd one day that might in itself be enough of a reason for me to purchase one.

I got how people imagined Apple to be a triumph of marketing and prettiness over function back circa the iMac G3, or the iPod, but at this point it takes willful ignorance not to see the real usability innovations and benefits Apple has brought to the smartphone and the tablet spaces.

Apple is great at a certain type of usability, which is worth mention but I think a bit overstated: Apple creates an interface that is very good "out of the box" for everyone, which is different from the best possible interface for individuals.

Why is a triumph of marketing and prettiness not, in itself, a very great achievement? I'm not an Apple person but I'm very glad they exist because they made "cool tech" a lot more mainstream; that pushed the other vendors to innovate as well. Smartphones existed before the iPhone but they were clunky and expensive. That is, to me, the most impressive (and useful, at least to me) thing about Apple. I think we still get there without Apple's vision, but not nearly as quickly.

What is somewhat disappointing is that Bill Gates has been saying for over a decade now that tablet pc is the future of computing, but he just never grasped the concept that people would be willing to pay more for a tablet computer that features a slower machine with fewer features and options provided it looked pretty.

I know you're being snarky, but that is exactly what some people want. Why does my wife need a computer that is ultra-fast with all sorts of bells and whistles when all she wants to do with check her email, Facebook, recipes, do crosswords and have lots of games for the kids? All without the hassle of dealing with the programs and updates she has no idea about on a PC.

I hate Apple, and have never bought the products save for an ipod, but when we received an Ipad as a gift from my Apple-crazy dad, we found we use it a lot more than we ever thought we would.

I got how people imagined Apple to be a triumph of marketing and prettiness over function back circa the iMac G3, or the iPod, but at this point it takes willful ignorance not to see the real usability innovations and benefits Apple has brought to the smartphone and the tablet spaces.

Heck even I want an Ipad, but as the 4th computer, and I'm still not a fan of subscribing to a service to get any real benefit out of the product. Bill Gates took a lot of flak for trying to create a subscriber based business model, but as the gaming world has shown, that is ultimately the profit model to go for. He took a lot of flak for saying ten years from now tablet pc is going to be common(he was optimistic in how quickly things would get to the public, as that was written in 1999--his company never really tried to design an operating system built from the ground up for tablets, which probably delayed development)

I hate Apple, and have never bought the products save for an ipod, but when we received an Ipad as a gift from my Apple-crazy dad, we found we use it a lot more than we ever thought we would.

I hate the cult of Apple, I hate the silly myth that they are easier to use--having to teach people how to use computers and finding out that their grandkids bought them an Apple because it's easier(yet not even the grandkids had an apple) has led to way to many grandparents going out and spending their own money on a real computer and having an expensive paperweight. (I will never get over the stupidity of an operating system which had you put something in a trash can to eject, or being a decade behind the world with a two button mouse) I think the Ipod success would have made PT Barnum proud.

Why does my wife need a computer that is ultra-fast with all sorts of bells and whistles when all she wants to do with check her email, Facebook, recipes, do crosswords and have lots of games for the kids?

Exactly. Mine is pretty much a lurking BBTF machine. My mom uses hers for Facebook and games. For watching TV and surfing, the ipad is great. I never would have spent $600 for it, though.

If I want to buy something online, write an email, or basically anything other than read, I fire up my laptop. That's where having an SSD and Windows 8 comes in handy. I go from hibernate to running in like 10 seconds.

led to way to many grandparents going out and spending their own money on a real computer and having an expensive paperweight

Figures, please.

"So an iPad is like an iPhone but it's too big to put in my pocket? Why would I want that?"

I still think that, sort of. I mean, I have noticed that every single iPad owner I have spoken to loves their iPad, so I'm aware that there's probably something I'm missing, but I don't really know what it is. As soon as I have $500 lying around, I suppose I'll go ahead and find out. In the meantime, I'll be getting by with my phone and laptop.

I have a tablet, but I can only use it for things like reading or watching movies. Stuff where I don't have to do anything. If I even want to write a post here, a laptop is much more useful.

Received an iPad as a retirement gift at the end of the year and now use it for 75% of my computing. Very handy for web surfing while watching TV. Virtual keyboard is slower than the real thing, but I don't write that much and seldom need to print anything. Took it on an anniversary/retirement trip to Hawaii and was able to post to BBTF from the beach via the hotel WiFi. Pretty cool to someone who remembers carbon paper from the start of my career.

"So an iPad is like an iPhone but it's too big to put in my pocket? Why would I want that?"

For me, the answer is "Because a bigger screen is better for reading books and certain sorts of games." It's also easier to write on. The iPhone, while neat, is just too small for some putposes.

For me, the answer is "Because a bigger screen is better for reading books and certain sorts of games." It's also easier to write on. The iPhone, while neat, is just too small for some putposes.

Yeah. If I'm traveling for work and want to review a document or presentation, the iPhone screen is sometimes good enough, but it has its limits. (The Blackberry is just useless for these purposes, by the way. The iPhone has made me much more productive outside of the office, and I imagine the iPad would take that a step further.)

I hate the cult of Apple, I hate the silly myth that they are easier to use

The cult and the hate of Apple makes it really hard to discuss their products rationally. They're okay, some products better than others. The IPad is overpriced I think, but it is useful for some people.

Given their last few years, I think Apple outpaced "cult" awhile ago.

I got how people imagined Apple to be a triumph of marketing and prettiness over function back circa the iMac G3, or the iPod, but at this point it takes willful ignorance not to see the real usability innovations and benefits Apple has brought to the smartphone and the tablet spaces.

I will say the iPhone is an overrated piece of technology. I have found it to be a very well manufactured piece of metal, plastic and glass. In the past 12 months, I've had a Droid X, Palm Pre and iPhone and the iPhone was last in terms of advanced technology and usability. It's nice, but hardly breaking the sound barrier in tech.

The worst thing about the iPhone is its joke of a navigation system. You also need to tap a few extra times to make a phone call vs the Palm. The browser on the Palm dominated the other two. The iPhone does have a better phone than the other two.

The video camera and still camera was best on the Droid X.

In short, Apple is a better stock than cell phone or computer maker in my book. A+ stock, probably still, and merely a B+ tech innovator. I do want to see them solve TV. Frankly, I just want someone to get rid of the absolutely absurdly cumbersome remote controls with 65 buttons everyone still has. ZERO remote innovation in +10 years. DirectTV, as recently as last year, still forced you to push the button each time you wanted to increase or decrease the volume each level. You could not simply hold the button down. I believe they finally changed this a few months back. Amazing.

Not one TV remote/TV box allows you to search for programming by merely typing in words as if it was a google search. I still have to search by type..... what a joke. If there were still 25 channels that would be a non problem....we have nearly 1,000 now!

Apple does have good stuff, but it is overrated from BOTH a pure advanced tech and usability point of view. It is still a great marketing machine, with brilliant operations on the cost of goods side.

I will say the iPhone is an overrated piece of technology.

Other companies might have caught up somewhat, but the original iPhone was the biggest leap forward in cell phones in at least a decade (and maybe longer).

Other companies might have caught up, but the original iPhone was the biggest leap forward in cell phones in at least a decade and maybe longer.

My free, FREE, verizon phone in 2006 had a much better navigator than the iPhone did and still does. It aint that special. There were phones like the iphone immediately on the market, designed concurrently.

I do think Apple made a deliberate decision to make their google maps and navigation a complete joke. That chews up a ton of data and bandwidth, and ATT has a joke of a network capacity--compared to Verizon.

Apple wanted the browsing and other features to be able to access a less cluttered network.

My free, FREE, verizon phone in 2006 had a much better navigator than the iPhone did and still does. It aint that special.

No sense battling over Apple for the fiftieth time, but tens of millions of people didn't run out and pay $400 to $600 (!!) for an inferior phone in 2007 just because it had an Apple logo on it.

I won't get a tablet until the damn things will allow me to make phone calls, thus negating me needing a new smart phone. There's no reason why to disable cell phone access on tablets since they use the same OS as smartphones do.

The visual of holding an iPad to your face to make a call is hilarious. You would need two hands or a specially designed case. Plus you'd lose half your vision if you were walking and talking, or worse yet driving and talking, so that would be fun. And yes, that would be pretty dumb, but you know people would do that and complain about or blame the iPad for the accident they get into.

I do think Apple made a deliberate decision to make their google maps and navigation a complete joke. That chews up a ton of data and bandwidth, and ATT has a joke of a network capacity--compared to Verizon.

The current maps application does not provide navigation functionality, but it does provide directions. Apple is currently licensing Google Maps and a licensee may not implement turn by turn navigation. Apple will likely switch the map data in iOS 6 to another source (either their own solution or OpenMaps), but until then navigation is only available on iOS vis third party applications.

The visual of holding an iPad to your face to make a call is hilarious. You would need two hands or a specially designed case. Plus you'd lose half your vision if you were walking and talking, or worse yet driving and talking, so that would be fun. And yes, that would be pretty dumb, but you know people would do that and complain about or blame the iPad for the accident they get into.

Just get one of those bluetooth receivers. It still looks ridiculous but its existing technology that people already use.

I'm pretty firmly in the Apple hater camp (everyone is allowed a few character flaws), but I don't find the iPad to be overpriced. It costs pretty much the same as a Galaxy Tab, after all.

I won't get a tablet until the damn things will allow me to make phone calls, thus negating me needing a new smart phone. There's no reason why to disable cell phone access on tablets since they use the same OS as smartphones do.

Couldn't you just get a 4G iPad and use Skype for all your phone calling needs? Or you could just do tablet + dumb phone if you think the tablet would be more useful than a smart phone for uses other than calling. No one says you NEED a smartphone, especially if you're always toting a tablet around with you.

I'm pretty firmly in the Apple hater camp (everyone is allowed a few character flaws), but I don't find the iPad to be overpriced. It costs pretty much the same as a Galaxy Tab, after all.

Yes. Calling the iPad overpriced when competitors were unable to produce competitive products anywhere near its cost for well over a year seems way off the mark. The first Honeycomb Android tablet (the Motorla Xoom) was something like $900 when it launched, compared to $500 for an iPad! The iPad's price massively undercut anything other companies were saying was feasible.

In short, Apple is a better stock than cell phone or computer maker in my book. A+ stock, probably still, and merely a B+ tech innovator. I do want to see them solve TV. Frankly, I just want someone to get rid of the absolutely absurdly cumbersome remote controls with 65 buttons everyone still has. ZERO remote innovation in +10 years. DirectTV, as recently as last year, still forced you to push the button each time you wanted to increase or decrease the volume each level. You could not simply hold the button down. I believe they finally changed this a few months back. Amazing.

Not one TV remote/TV box allows you to search for programming by merely typing in words as if it was a google search. I still have to search by type..... what a joke. If there were still 25 channels that would be a non problem....we have nearly 1,000 now!

This x 1000. Its amazing we still have pretty much the same remote we did when I was a kid, even though we now have hundreds of channels now, video on demand, DVRs, content online, etc. Whoever figures this out and is able to provide an alternative to cable companies is going to make a killing.

Just get one of those bluetooth receivers. It still looks ridiculous but its existing technology that people already use.

Of course. But there would still be dumb people who wouldn't do that.

Couldn't you just get a 4G iPad and use Skype for all your phone calling needs?

Would this yield a useful audio stream? 3G/4G can be ok in terms of bandwidth, but they seem like they have very poor latency. You can only buffer a phone call so much.