No, it wouldn't. You don't wanna design apps with flash.

But by using flash you wouldn't have to go threw the Apple approval process.

Also if the Iphone/pad had flash why would you pay for a game when you could just go to a site like miniclip.com

Acctually, the apps on iPad are costing a lot more than normal apps that are on iphone

pretend scrabble is like 4.99 on iphone its 9.99 on iPad

you forgot the most important battery life

Top 5 paid apps for the Ipad

1. Pages (Apple)
2. GoodReader for iPad (Good iWare Ltd.)
3. Numbers (Apple)
4. Keynote (Apple)
5. Real Racing HD (Firemint)

1,3, and 4 are free with open office.
4 seems like a PDF reader and you could probably find something similar for free.
5 is a racing game and again you could find something similar for free.

A tablet running a real OS is the way to go.

iphone OS supports PDF natively, so I don't see the point of buying some PDF reader LOL

Ipad does not.

Approval process is only a problem if you write porn or if your name is Google Voice. On the flip side, users can go to one place to find apps. Just like you go to Safeway to buy dinner instead of going to the butcher, the farm, and then to the orchard. Everything in one place - for most developers, it's a good tradeoff.

Assuming miniclip is compatible with Flash Lite (cuz almost all mobile devices don't run the full Flash that's on your PC), iPhone SDK does a lot that any Flash through a browser can't.

Native apps on the iPhone are faster, waste less memory; UI controls, transitions, multitouch, gestures are already pre-programmed; access to accelerometer, gps, BT, network, etc.. are built-in to the various APIs.

Flash web games would find their place, but they don't come close to replacing native apps (ie killing the app store) at all.

If you actually look at the App Store you'll find most apps are still $4.99 and under. There are apps in the $7.99 to $14.99 range, but these are not the norm.

And there are examples of very good apps for cheap, like Autodesks Sketchbook Pro fro $7.99.

No it's not. A real OS requires way more power to run which means the tablet will be larger, heavier, more expensive and have a shorter battery life.

I just tried upgrading a friend's laptop to Windows 7 this weekend. It's an AMD bargain laptop that has 1GB of RAM and a processor about 70% faster than a 1.6GHz Atom (what the HP Slate uses). I put in a 64GB SSD I had lying around (a second generation Idyllinx based drive, not some cheap no-name) just to try out.

Even so, this machine sucks ass to use. It's slow, slow, slow. So we upgraded the RAM to 2GB and now it's not bad. But the Slate only comes with 1GB RAM and it's not upgradeable. Plus it has the slower Atom processor.

Running a desktop OS on a barebones tablet is going to fail. Massively.

I'm running Windows 7 on a 6 year old Pentium M 1.6ghz laptop with 512mb ram at 1920x1200 and it's totally fine. It'll fall flat on it's face if I try running something like Photoshop but for doing the things the iPad is supposed to do, it's as fast or faster. The Atom will do just fine, many carputer guys run Win7 on it plus a cpu heavy front end with a gig of ram and they're happy with it.

I think there's a multitasking app for iPhone- so who knows, it might work on iPad too?

How do you know it's faster? Have you played with an iPad side-by-side to compare speeds?

People who find the performance of Win 7 on an Atom to be acceptable have some pretty low standards, IMO.

All the people here complaining about the iPad

1. Are complaining that it can't do things it really isn't meant to do...

2. have never held one, let alone used one.

I've never understood the complaint about multitasking.

On my home rig I'll often have numerous programs open when doing work. Multiple tabs in IE, Firefox connected to the federal government database, Word and Excel documents and Photoshop to edit and adjust pics prior to publishing.

Yet none of this requires multitasking. None of these programs are doing anything when my focus is away and on another task.

The only time my machine does any real multitasking is when I'm encoding video or ripping Blu-Rays in the background.


Now I'd love for someone to explain a valid reason I want multitasking on my iPhone. And be specific - I want an example of something useful my iPhone can be doing in the background that's going to make my life far more productive. Cuz honestly, I can't come up with a single app that I'd want to be working in the background.

I found that it's not Apple and it's products that I hate- It's mostly the ignorant overzealous fanboys who preach that Apple is god- Case and point: that douchebag in my economics class who thinks Apple is the be-all end-all company and that no one can ever beat Apple- forever.

It's fine to like a product and all, but just don't be too over cocky coming into the classroom swinging your iPad left and right for all the class to see.

"iPhone 3G has no competitor- the closest thing to a competitor that it has is the iPhone."

Honestly, get your head out of your ass.

With that said, the trolls aren't any better- I don't get why you guys spend so much time and effort shit talking Apple. Do you guys have nothing better to do?

It's not a need- It's a nice feature to have. It's like how phones vibrate, you don't need it- it's a nice feature to have.

You don't think it's annoying that whenever your in an app and someone texts you and you press reply you automatically close the app your in and lose any progress you had if you were playing a game or something? It's just easier to be able to text someone and then go right back to what you were doing beforehand.

Posted via RS Mobile

For the most part, you're right. But ver 4.0 multitasking will fix:

1. Streaming music
2. Skype (receiving calls)

There might have been another one worth mentioning, but I don't remember.

Multitasking would make a world of difference. When a phone call comes in, or if i want to reply to a text, I have to quit whatever app I'm using. Sucks that I can't stream music and text at same time. Same with YouTube. Cant listen to a music vid while doing something else.
Posted via RS Mobile

Multitasking is really useful. Even my cheap Sony Ericsson phone has it and I found it invaluable.

^ I said be specific, not replying with something like "multitasking is really useful".

Version 4.0 adds multitasking, but it's still not real multitasking. It "fixes" a lot of the exact things people are complaining about, but the Apple haters still bitch about it not being "true" multitasking.

Apple could put true multitasking in the iPhone 4, add a pair of cameras, allow third party developers to write for it without needing to go through the App Store, and sell it for $99 and people will still find faults with it.

I don't own an iPhone but when I borrowed my sibling's to use eBuddy, I found it annoying that I would have to close ebuddy to do anything else.

You don't need to be specific- Just the fact that you have to trade off of having to turn something off to do something else. If you have a hard time seeing the benefits of multitask, something's wrong with you =/

And plus, there will always be people who complain. If you're happy with the product, then that's good. I don't see why you have the need to convince everyone else that the product is awesome.

kind of off topic..anyone knows where i can get some ipad case in vancouver??..doesn't need to be apple. Thanks guys

You are multitasking when you have more than one program open.

No you're not, because if the programs are waiting for input (Word, Excel as an example) then they are doing virtually nothing (look at Task Manager in Windows and see the % of usage a program like Word has when the window doesn't have focus).

You have the ability to multitask and have several programs doing work at the same time, but for many users they never really multitask in the true sense of the word - they task switch. Most likely the only multitasking they've done is have files downloading while continuing to browse the web.