You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Computer Tech, Gaming & ElectronicsTHIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE! Silicon Valley.
Tips & tricks, tech support, home theatre, online gaming, reviews, latest news...
There is no iPad 3. Why would Apple make one? The iPad 2 is good enough to dominate for another year and relegate Xoom, Playbook, TouchPad and all the others to distant wannabees in sales.
I think the iPad 3 rumor is a cheap shot by the competitors intended to make people wait so they can get their tablets to market, instead of people jumping on board and buying an iPad 2 right now.
Minor upgrades? LOL at all the comments saying the iPad 2 is a minor upgrade from the original. It's really funny going over to the Android forums and seeing everyone say that the Playbook, Xoom and TouchPad are way better then the iPad simply because they are dual core. Then Apple adds dual core to the iPad 2 and suddenly it's a "minor upgrade". They all say that graphics on Android tablets are way better than the iPad, and Apple ups their graphics performance and again it's a "minor upgrade".
^
App store + iOS4 + Safari are the biggest reasons why people inseminate their pants when using apple products. I'm on the android bandwagon now but even so I miss the app store and safari. A lot of people forget that user experience >>>> specs. Sure, most of us here are very tech savvy. But to a majority of the people the market caters to...not so much.
Anyhow I'm looking forward to playing around with the ipad 2 and the galaxy tab 10.1
Yeah there is no comparison for app support it's not about being fanboy. Android isn't bad for apps but for ones that are optimized for a tablet apple still leads the way
I am willing to bet good money that the iOs still runs smoother than the playbook
there is so much more that you can't see just by looking at on paper specs
I recently bought an iMac. Now that iPad prices dropped I'll be getting one and also an iPad 2 when it cones out. If there's an iPad 3 I'll get that too. Does that make me a fanboy? Hardly. I'm starting to develop apps for iOS, and the SDK only runs on Mac. So I had to buy one. To test my apps I need the iPads to ensure they work properly.
One thing for sure: I won't be wasting my time developing apps for Android. I have no desire to develop for 10 different tablets each with slightly different configurations. Nor do I want to invest in buying that many tablets just to ensure my apps work on all of them.
But the main reason I won't develop for Android is I'm not about to gamble on an unproven market. There are too many tablets coming out. They can't all be successful. Maybe they'll all get a small piece of the market or maybe a couple will do really well while the others disappear. Regardless, I'm not getting in the middle of that mess. It's even worse with the TouchPad or PlayBook which run their own OS. I think they will do well on the business/enterprise market (especially the PlayBook because of QNX).
With the iPad I already have 15 million potential customers with easily another 15 million this year. Why would anyone want to develop for Android tablets, I don't know. Posted via RS Mobile
I recently bought an iMac. Now that iPad prices dropped I'll be getting one and also an iPad 2 when it cones out. If there's an iPad 3 I'll get that too. Does that make me a fanboy? Hardly. I'm starting to develop apps for iOS, and the SDK only runs on Mac. So I had to buy one. To test my apps I need the iPads to ensure they work properly.
One thing for sure: I won't be wasting my time developing apps for Android. I have no desire to develop for 10 different tablets each with slightly different configurations. Nor do I want to invest in buying that many tablets just to ensure my apps work on all of them.
But the main reason I won't develop for Android is I'm not about to gamble on an unproven market. There are too many tablets coming out. They can't all be successful. Maybe they'll all get a small piece of the market or maybe a couple will do really well while the others disappear. Regardless, I'm not getting in the middle of that mess. It's even worse with the TouchPad or PlayBook which run their own OS. I think they will do well on the business/enterprise market (especially the PlayBook because of QNX).
With the iPad I already have 15 million potential customers with easily another 15 million this year. Why would anyone want to develop for Android tablets, I don't know. Posted via RS Mobile
You think you will bw able to sell enough apps to turn a profit?
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
^ It's a little more complicated than that as my "product" is hardware and the iPad is mearly the interface to program it. But yes, I expect to turn a profit or I wouldnt have invested in an iMac/iPads.
Besides, the money I invested in developing the hardware makes the price of an iMac/iPad seem like pocket change.
At least I don't have to worry about my tablet becoming obsolete or being dis-continued, which is far more important to me than a "spec sheet". Posted via RS Mobile
I recently bought an iMac. Now that iPad prices dropped I'll be getting one and also an iPad 2 when it cones out. If there's an iPad 3 I'll get that too. Does that make me a fanboy? Hardly. I'm starting to develop apps for iOS, and the SDK only runs on Mac. So I had to buy one. To test my apps I need the iPads to ensure they work properly.
One thing for sure: I won't be wasting my time developing apps for Android. I have no desire to develop for 10 different tablets each with slightly different configurations. Nor do I want to invest in buying that many tablets just to ensure my apps work on all of them.
But the main reason I won't develop for Android is I'm not about to gamble on an unproven market. There are too many tablets coming out. They can't all be successful. Maybe they'll all get a small piece of the market or maybe a couple will do really well while the others disappear. Regardless, I'm not getting in the middle of that mess. It's even worse with the TouchPad or PlayBook which run their own OS. I think they will do well on the business/enterprise market (especially the PlayBook because of QNX).
With the iPad I already have 15 million potential customers with easily another 15 million this year. Why would anyone want to develop for Android tablets, I don't know. Posted via RS Mobile
you have to purposely buy an Ipad to test out your own app?? Y didn't you get an iphone?...after all an Ipad is just a blown up version of an Iphone
I find it funny that people always bash Apple. They are the ones that lead the portable music, smart phone and tablet markets. Everyones following, and reacting to what they do.
Without Apple you wouldnt even have alternatives yet alone choices.
Be thankful for Apple. You dont have to buy Apple, but dont bash them for being innovative.
iPad 3 rumours are already starting up...supposed to be out before end of the year lol
I am not sure if you are serious or not. But who cares how much ram it has. If it can run everything smooth and fast. Then it can have 128mb for all I care.
I find it funny that people always bash Apple. They are the ones that lead the portable music, smart phone and tablet markets. Everyones following, and reacting to what they do.
Without Apple you wouldnt even have alternatives yet alone choices.
.
Apple killed the MP3 player market. Before the Ipod there were number of MP3 player makers now it's hard to find an alternative to the crappy Ipod. and yes the Ipod is a crappy MP3 player compared to other MP3 payers.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
Apple killed the MP3 player market. Before the Ipod there were number of MP3 player makers now it's hard to find an alternative to the crappy Ipod. and yes the Ipod is a crappy MP3 player compared to other MP3 payers.
If the iPod is so crappy, then what other MP3 players would you consider superior, and why?
If the iPod is so crappy, then what other MP3 players would you consider superior, and why?
Creative Zen Stone/plus is cheaper than the shuffle, has a screen uses a mini USB cable that is also used with Digital camera's, remotes, portable hard drives, and many other devices and can be bought for a $1.00.
But the biggest thing is it has no software/bloatware and acts like a mass storage device just like a USB thumb drives and external hard drives. I can connect it to any computer and add any files (not just mp3's)to it just buy right clicking it and then going to send to. The sound quality is also better and has a built in mic for recording.
The plus version has a built in speaker.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
The iPod, for all it's great innovation has TERRIBLE sound quality.
I would think that sound quality should be the most important attribute in something that plays music.
Of course most of the general public can't tell the difference between a 96kbps mono MP3 and FLAC, but I can.
No question with the iPod Apple was on top with it's interface, features and "cool" factor however I was willing to trade off those things for better sound quality, since I spend most of my time Listening to my Mp3 player, and not playing with it's features.
I personally think all MP3 players sound like crap. I use my iPod (iPhone 4 actually) at work in a dock for music. Same thing in both of my cars (which have iPad docks and steering wheel controls to operate). I don't really care about which one sounds better since they all sound like shit compared to my home audio system, which is where I listen to music.
As an audiophile (I'm not the kind of audio buff that claims to hear the difference between $500 or $1,000 cables) I really enjoy my music. But only at home as anything else I listen to music on (my dock, my car, my earphones) is just for background. Kinda like listening to the radio. And for that any MP3 player on the market would do. So I'm going to get the one that operates how I like.
And having the ability to store files on my iPod or iPhone is of no use to me whatsoever. I have a USB thumb drive for that, and I keep it on my keychain. Why the hell would I want to carry around a USB cable just so I could attach my MP3 player to a PC to transfer files when I can simply plug in my thumb drive directly?
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
