I have seen other screwy resolutions before. Nonsquare pixels are not new. Arent most 19" screens 5:4 when looking at pixels but 4:3 in dimensions?
Some of us do rip our dvds and like to preserve the multiple audio tracks, so we use .mkv. Why can't Apple support play back of this container? It's open source so it won't cost them anything.
What's with the resolution too. Are they using rectangular pixels? Or is it not really widescreen as in 16:9 or 16:10 but "widescreen" (4:3) simply cause one dimension is longer than the other?
Some of us do rip our dvds and like to preserve the multiple audio tracks, so we use .mkv. Why can't Apple support play back of this container? It's open source so it won't cost them anything.
What's with the resolution too. Are they using rectangular pixels? Or is it not really widescreen as in 16:9 or 16:10 but "widescreen" (4:3) simply cause one dimension is longer than the other?
I don't see how this product fits into a person's life or anywhere really. It's too big for a pocket, so to carry it around it would need to go into a case/backpack. Fine, but since I need to carry it around in a case now, why wouldn't I just bring my ultraportable laptop or tablet PC? How does it offer a better internet experience than a netbook when it doesn't support flash?
Apple keeps bringing up the educational values of this, am I expected to be finger painting for taking notes? Yes I know you can buy capacitive pens, but if Apple was serious about it's educational values they'd include one. Since it can't multi task I couldn't possibly have say an e-textbook open and a note taking program. I'd only be able to maybe take my notes in the e-textbook, not separate.
I'd sure love reading e-books on this thing too. Eye-strain much? What about reading outside? LCDs are pretty crappy outdoors.
What exactly does this thing do better than an Iphone that justifies it's extra bulk? I sure can't think of anything really.
A device like this needs to displace a laptop, not coexist with it. People are only going to carry two things, a phone and a 2nd device (laptop). Since this has no benefits over a laptop why would they carry this? It's too expensive for just dicking around, it needs to have productivity value.
What the hell is the point in this thing?!
I do hope that this influences other manufactures to make tablet PCs in this form-factor though. I would love to have a fully functioning PC that was that size (and that price).
^ current tablets are full computers, when this is a beefed up iphone.
besides, the whole tablet laptop idea never got that big really.
No. They are physically 5:4.I have seen other screwy resolutions before. Nonsquare pixels are not new. Arent most 19" screens 5:4 when looking at pixels but 4:3 in dimensions?
Mainly because of price. Tablets came out with prices in the $2000+ range (and they're still pricey). There's not a very big market for devices that are that expensive. Especially in the computer world where things get replaced in a couple of years.
I guarantee tablets will make a comeback. This iPad may even help encourage that proper comeback.
When they claim 720p, isn't that 1280x720 res? But the display can't really do that. It's limited to 1024x768.
720P is badly named; it's both a horizontal and a vertical resolution, specifically 1280x720. This device can decode 720P but it can't display 720P, it's not wide enough.Funny. All these people are claiming it can't do 720p must be smoking something. 720p states the vertical line count ONLY. It exceeds that, so scaling will be used for 720p to scale it UP to 768 lines.
My Panasonic PX70 Plasma TV is a 720p panel, with a resolution of 1024x768 AND it is a 16:9 ratio. How do they do it, must be magic...
I still think the Tablet that Microsoft is coming out with will be great, And it will be running W7 and you will actually be able to write on it, Unlike this ipad which your cant even write on wtf call it a pad for.
I agree about the multitasking and imagine that it is coming.
I see this as being great for trips, sitting on the couch, and in bed. Im always on my iphone even when I am at home but something larger would be nice. Using a laptop is just annoying.
I also see uses for this for photographers. Ever see the iphone app that lets you control your dslr? After you take the photo you can review it on the screen. I can only imagine using an ipad like that.
I can find many uses in my daily life and for the price I do not see anything even close.
720P is badly named; it's both a horizontal and a vertical resolution, specifically 1280x720. This device can decode 720P but it can't display 720P, it's not wide enough.
The only thing in HD that this device can show natively would be something encoded at a 4:3 resolution, such as 960x720 (which would be very, very rare). Widescreen material on the other hand always has a fixed width of 1280, with the height varying depending on the aspect ratio.
So no, the iPad can't really display HD material.
Edit: And your Panasonic is a lousy TV. It's using non-square pixels, and doing some downscaling before displaying it. The iPad would be doing something similar, except it would be letterboxing the video to maintain the right AR since it uses square pixels.
I dont know of too many regular books that weight less. Would sure like to see that kindle handle web browsing and email. I guess the kindle could do let me edit an document or view photos. Oh wait. No it cant.
Your assertion that the iPad cannot do 720p is incorrect.
And, umm, no the PX70 isn't a lousy TV, it's actually very good. What HiFi rated it 5 stars when tested, but what would they know? Non square pixels they may be, but I guarantee they make no difference to the image, so much so that if I hadn't told you and sat you down in front of it, you would never, ever know. Not only this, but there are in fact very FEW true 720p displays. My bedroom TV is a 26" 720p panel @ 1366x768. By your definition this is also 'lousy' as it is also scaling the image. Big surprise is that for it's size it's actually excellent.
Actually the Kindle does have a browser, and you don't have to pay an extra $130 for the 3G radio, and the service is free.
No, the Kindle can't do everything the iPad does, but it is superior as an e-Reader, and it costs anywhere from 1/2 to 1/3 as much.
It's a really, really bad browser though - it's essentially unusable on anything but Wikipedia. Not to mention you have to wait a long time for the screen to refresh whenever you scroll. The Kindle (I own one) is a great e-book reader due to the e-ink screen, but it's not good for anything else.
I'm looking forward to the MSI Tegra 2 Android tablet they showed off at CES - they say it'll be $500, but no release date yet.
But you agree your bedroom TV has a higher resolution than 720p, so I fail to see your argument.
Windows 7 would suck on a device like this. It's far too power hungry, and really needs a mouse, keyboard and a huge screen.
The winner is going to be google, they are set up for this market - I would even bet that apple rushed the iPad to beat google to market with a similar device.
Think about it google have:
a) the os: google chrome os, or android - something along those lines will be perfect.
b) the back end. These low powered machines need the cloud, for them things like google apps, or google wave, or whatever are perfect. That way the cloud can store your data so you can access it from any machine (not just the google pad) and do the heavy processing work (e.g. converting documents and other files into a more lightweight format).
c) Google also own most of the stuff this thing is going to connect too (youtube, gmail, google search, google maps, etc) so you can bet it will work well with them.
Google also aren't so obsessed with controlling everything so they won't make all the hardware (let whoever wants to do that) or force you to use bits of software you don't want to in quite the same way as apple. The also seem to be able to make lots of money without charging a lot.
They will also get a lot of hardware support from all the netbook makers who want in on the action - people like asus can't get any money from iPad directly so instead will build iPad beating hardware for a fraction of the cost and just need someone like google to provide the software.
No. My argument is that downscaling is bad. If you have to downscale a component of 720P video (be it vertical or horizontal) then it's not an HD display. That's why I'm leery with how Apple is positioning it, since it can't really display HD video even if it can decode it.I don't have an argument, I'm stating that 1024x768 is a valid resolution for displaying 720p. Virge's argument is that scaling is bad, both my TV's scale, the plasma down 256 and the LCD up 86, but the image on my 42" Plasma kicks the snot out of my 26" LCD, dispite the latter having 342 more pixels in the horizontal.
To add clarity, I think the iPad sucks satans cock, but the resolution is more than enough for 720p. I'm the last person on here to go for a ride on the Apple sack.
I don't have an argument, I'm stating that 1024x768 is a valid resolution for displaying 720p. Virge's argument is that scaling is bad, both my TV's scale, the plasma down 256 and the LCD up 86, but the image on my 42" Plasma kicks the snot out of my 26" LCD, dispite the latter having 342 more pixels in the horizontal.
To add clarity, I think the iPad sucks satans cock, but the resolution is more than enough for 720p. I'm the last person on here to go for a ride on the Apple sack.
The iPod was not amazingly successful when it first came out. It was too expensive and had no Windows support. It wasn't till the 2nd gen iPod that it really exploded.
Maybe it'll be the same with this thing, Apple will come out with a new revision or add features to it through updates (hopefully fast, this NEEDS multitasking badly).