I have this creepy feeling that this post is part of an attempt to attack the iPad trademark (trademarks can't be enforced if they come to refer to a type of product rather than a specific product produced by the trademark holder).
Of course, I have no evidence to support this theory, and I furthermore don't particularly care about the rights of IP holders. It just struck me as implausible that someone could really believe that "ipad" is a generic term for a tablet, and I wouldn't put it past corporate PR departments to engage in this sort of shenanigan.
I know of literally thousands of specific apes (and have it on good authority that the actual number reaches into the billions) who have built vocabularies reaching the tens of thousands without the use of advanced technological aids.
In what way are you contributing to the dialogue here? This is an incredibly interesting topic and you do a disservice by not adding anything worthwhile.
