
Why I don't care very much about tablets anymore - zdw
http://arstechnica.com/staff/carthage/2011/02/why-i-dont-care-very-much-about-tablets.ars
======
cletus
> Don't get me wrong: I'll always have a tablet in my life...

And how is this not a game changer? Would the author have said the before the
iPad?

The iPad has replaced a laptop or desktop for all casual browsing (I typed
this comment on mine) and a lot of media consumption. It's great for technical
books. And I play games on it.

It is _easily_ the most cost effective tech purchase I have _ever_ made in
terms of how much I use it. Buying the new version--pretty much _whatever_ it
is--is almost a no-brainer.

Apple has sold 16M since launch with 40M+ expected this year. For a new
product segment.

Sounds like a game changer to me.

What I am over is all the hype over Android tablets. Basically I'll believe it
when I see it.

~~~
EnderMB
> The iPad has replaced a laptop or desktop for all casual browsing (I typed
> this comment on mine) and a lot of media consumption. It's great for
> technical books. And I play games on it.

I live in a large city in the UK, and throughout the past year I've only seen
two iPad's. I wouldn't even remotely say that the iPad has "replaced the
laptop" in any way, shape or form. When the iPhone was released it was near
impossible to not see it outside, whereas the average iPad user will keep
theirs at home.

Even if the figures are good I really cannot see the casual user deciding to
ditch their laptop for the iPad, and I'd go as far as to say that the iPad has
been a huge disappointment.

~~~
ladon86
Which city? I've seen a whole bunch of people in London standing on street
corners using their iPads.

Granted they do look pretty silly...

But I would certainly not say that the iPad has been a 'huge disappointment';
not for Apple, and not for the consumer. Or did you mean for you personally?

~~~
EnderMB
Bristol, although I do travel to Birmingham and Manchester quite a bit. I've
not seen a single iPad in any of those places (except at the Apple Stores).

I think the iPad was always going to struggle because when compared to the
iPhone it is less likely for someone to be seen using a tablet than a mobile
phone.

As I said, the figures may be impressive, but I'd lump this in with Apple TV
as being a good idea that will struggle to find a long-term market outside of
the typical Apple users.

------
Kylekramer
I got to agree. I got caught up in the tablet fever like everyone last year,
but in practice all the complaints that people had with the iPad release
panned out. Tablets across the board are jacks of few trades, master of none.
Terrible input, only so-so for web browsing/reading, and basically on par with
a laptop for video and portability.

To quote a very smart man in 2003 [1], tablets are still only good for "a
bunch of rich guys who want a third computer" (edit: relevant tablet talk is
around 8:00-10:00). I have hope things will be better 3-5 years from now.

1: [http://video.allthingsd.com/video/steve-jobs-onstage-
at-d1/1...](http://video.allthingsd.com/video/steve-jobs-onstage-
at-d1/162F122B-2500-4BF8-8240-C8D1A603A816/)

~~~
joe_the_user
In my unscientific survey, netbook usage far outstrips tablet usage in cafes.
Moreover, the people who bring tablets don't seem to really _use_ them, they
just glance at them occasionally.

An iPad just seems like a very expensive Kindle.

If Tablet prices get down to say, $50, they'd be great to hang in the kitchen
and get weather and recipes from!

~~~
Zev
In my unscientific survey, MacBook Pro's outrank iPads, which outrank generic
Windows laptops in cafe's.

Moreover, in a further unscientific survey, paperback books outrank hardcover
books, who's usage surpasses the Kindle and Nook, combined.

And I live in San Francisco. Moreover, the people who bring any of these items
don't seem to drink their coffee! _feigned shock_

~~~
cletus
I won't disagree with your observations. I will however point out one thing:
the sampling is skewed because you only really see what people are doing in
public.

I would guess that the majority of iPad usage is in the home and, to a lesser
extent, in the office, so much so that I probably won't even buy the 3G
version of the iPad 2 (I have the 64GB 3G iPad). Plus now I live in New York
(rather than Australia, when I bought mine) and wifi is much more readily
available here (Starbuck's for one) if I feel inclined to take it with me and
need the internet.

One disappointing thing is that Apple seems to be doing the big CPU/memory
upgrades of the A _n_ platform with the iPhone, not the iPad. This is annoying
for two reasons:

1\. The iPhone 4 came out a mere ~3 months after the iPad. Are you telling me
that this 3 month gap meant the iPad couldn't have 512MB of RAM like the
iPhone 4? Presumably, the iPad 2 and iPhone 5 will be on a similar gap; and

2\. I'm more interested in processing capacity on the iPad than an iPhone.

~~~
gms
Women especially love having the iPad at home.

~~~
rkudeshi
If you're going to generalize like that, it's best to cite some evidence to
back it up.

~~~
gms
It comes from my admittedly small sample size. The women I know (friends,
family) have always ignored tech purchases their significant others brought
into the home.

But not with the iPad; they ended up being very active users. In bed, on the
couch, in the kitchen, etc

------
trustfundbaby
Another savvy computer user goes on the internet and declares that he prefers
laptops to tablets ... shocking.

The ipad, isn't made with people like the author in mind ... they're made for
people who generally find using laptops a PITA (yes ... there are Millions of
people like this).

The other market is for the people who get tired of working on their laptops
from time to time (and thats where the author seems to fit). What you'll find
with this group is people who try to do things with the ipad but realize that
they simply prefer being on laptops (probably a lot of us here on Hacker
News).

And for everyone of those you'll have people like me ... the ipad has filled a
great gap for me, which I'll call leisure computing ... sitting in my bed on
Sunday mornings watching netflix movies, mindlessly browsing facebook and
twitter ... responding to work emails before I hit the sack at night ...
showing presentations, images etc during meetings instead of having to lug
around my laptop.

I thought the ipad would fail spectacularly when it came out, but its success
has made it clear to me that there is a world of computer users out there who
simply do not view computing the way I do, and not only do they want a
simplified computing experience they are willing to pay very good money for a
for it ... we on HN would do well to not lose sight of that.

------
lowglow
I love my iPad. It's taken over as my mobile computing solution in most cases.
I think there are more possibilities left to explore with tablets in general,
and I think exercising more innovation will only lead to greater things in
that arena. I use my tablet for reading, mailing, surfing, and communicating
while not having to be tethered to a terminal. I honestly can ask this
question now after having experienced the joys of this computing platform :
Where has this been my entire life?

~~~
shantanubala
I think the author misses a key point of tablets: they're not for information
production. I can't think of anyone who prefers tablets for writing or coding,
but I do know a bunch of people who like getting stock quotes, reading the
news, using Instapaper, and consuming content. The analogy with the scribe
doesn't really work because the purpose of the tablet is to consume content,
and actual user input is minimal.

~~~
epochwolf
I beg to differ on the production thing. I do some of my fiction writing on my
iPad using a Bluetooth keyboard.

~~~
shantanubala
I guess I overlooked the keyboard addition. But would you say that a laptop
provides a better interface? Or do you like the iPad more than a laptop for
writing? I haven't actually used a keyboard with a tablet, so I don't have any
personal experience with that.

~~~
epochwolf
I find my ipad with a dropbox compatiable editor is sufficient for my writing
needs, but my laptop is certainly more efficient. For anything other then
sustained reading or using a highly specific app my laptop is definitely
faster and easier to use. I just find portability to trump efficiency in a
great may suitations. If am at my desk I want my MacBook Pro with it's vastly
superior sound card and my Grados. Anywhere else, I'll take my iPad and same
earbuds if I don't have any programming to do.

Edit: fixing overly zealous iPad autocorrect

------
burgerbrain
I've long argued that the reason we haven't seen tablets take off in general
is because while nobody really wants to admit it, _nobody_ actually likes
tablets. They just like Apple products.

~~~
aridiculous
This will be either proved or disproved when up to 20 new tablets are released
by July. If you're right, it's gonna be ugly.

~~~
Stormbringer
The Blackberry Playbook has some interesting ideas, like using the touch-
screen real estate outside of the viewing area for 'meta-gestures' (my made up
word sorry, some nitpicker will no doubt jump in and correct me, and then get
10x the karma for it but whatever).

But the overall execution is going to suck really really badly. Also, RIM are
busy peeing in their developers porridge... kinda like Nokia and the QT
debacle.

I think the problem is that Apple has been working on this thing for years and
years and years. Rumours of a tablet have been much exaggerated since before
the iPhone came along.

Now the other guys are scrambling to catch up. And they're finding that in
order to poop something out in six months, you have to cut corners, and if you
cut corners, then quality suffers etc. Not to mention that things move slowly
at most large corporations (Apple included - heck, they might even be _worse_
than all the others, but because they fail in secret everybody thinks they
magically just coughed hard one day and the iPad sprang forth from Steve Job's
brow fully formed)

------
ihodes
The thing is, nothing beats a tablet (well, I use an iPad) for reading.

Instapaper (articles, news), iBooks (pdf, ebooks), Reeder (rss), Safari
(everything else) are all excellent. I can't lay in bed with my laptop or
desktop, nor does reading on my phone cut it. The Kindle is nice, but it's
black and white, and for me the lack of backlight makes it harder to read
(esp. since I'm reading at night, and don't want to have a light on).

Not only is it the best way to read, but it also can handle emails (you get
used to the keyboard quickly, just like people got used to touch-screen phone
keyboards, but I can type at a reasonable speed on the iPad).

And it can play games…and a lot more.

So, I like it. I'll continue to buy tablets.

~~~
jules
How is the ipad on the eyes? My eyes get tired from reading from a laptop
screen at night. Is the ipad better?

~~~
ugh
It obviously is exactly the same because the iPad uses a laptop screen. (It
has a higher quality IPS and not the usual TN panel [1] but I don’t think that
matters a great deal. IPS panels have better color reproduction and better
viewing angles, that’s the only difference to lower quality LCD panels.) The
iPad screen has even a similar number of pixels per inch compared to current
laptops. (A 15" laptop with a resolution of 1680×1050 has, like the iPad,
about 130 ppi.)

As far as readability goes, it’s probably currently the best color video
screen you can get in the market [2], you can probably do better if all you
need is grayscale without video.

[1] You can get laptops with IPS panels but they are pretty exotic and more
expensive.

[2] As in: the best technology for the job (compared to, for example, e-ink),
not the best LCD panel in the market.

~~~
maguay
Another thing that's better about reading on iPad versus a laptop or desktop
LCD screen is that you can hold it almost any angle. To me, that's the best
advantage. I read and write a lot on my iPad, and being able to sit with it at
a more comfortable angle is a huge advantage to me. It definitely feels better
on my eyes after looking at a desktop monitor for hours. That'd be subjective,
though, but my experience is that the iPad feels easier on my eyes.

That said, I'm not sure if it's better on your neck versus a standard laptop
in your lap. My neck hurts if I'm using a netbook on my lap too long, so I'm
always using it at a desk or table. It never feels that bad typing in my lap
on iPad, though.

------
redthrowaway
The points he raises are the reasons I _never_ liked tablets. Sure, I respect
the iPad, and I'd kind of like to have one, but for what? Productivity?
Laptop. Web surfing? Laptop. Movies? Laptop or TV. Games? PS3. It simply isn't
good enough at anything to make me want one. I still respect it, but I've
never been able to get behind the idea of buying one. I've been counselling
people to grab the Air, as it's a fantastic solution for some non-technical
frequent travellers I know, but I've never told anyone to get an iPad. I
simply just don't get the point.

~~~
knieveltech
Probably because there is no point once you peel back the layers of marketing
and breathless fanboyism. I've seen two (2) of these things in the wild since
they came out. I live in one of the top three tech hubs on the east coast and
I've been to countless meetup groups, starbucks, panera and at least one
international developer conference in that time.

Both of the people I saw with ipads where eager to breathlessly tell everyone
around them how their shiny new $500 purchase had changed everything for all
time. In both instances once the sales pitch was done the clunky gadget went
back in the bag it came out of or sat unused on a conference room table.

~~~
danssig
Well I use it a ton every single week. I ride the train for about 3 hours per
day (total), with connections. With a laptop the start/suspend cycle made it
just not worth it to use on some of the connections. I can use the iPad any
time I'm still long enough to justify taking it out of the bag. I've recovered
most of my travel time for reading or watching movies now.

------
jerome_bent
I got an iPad in April, at launch, and gave it away at Christmas. I wanted a
tablet to replace two distinct sets of physical objects that haven't yet gone
digital: my moleskine/writing pads and my library of magazines and reference
books. The iPad is useless for scribbling and the reading experience (the
screen, the weight, the UI) is poor. The iPad doesn't autodeliver new content
and I fear Apple has killed the inchoate market for digital newspapers,
magazines and the like with the new heavyhanded rules for digital
subscriptions. The iPad had great promise but it is unfulfilled.

------
zmmmmm
I think it's important to separate the advent of the touch screen interface
from the form factor of a tablet.

I kind of agree that tablets are pretty poor for everything (unlike others I
think tablets & the iPad specifically is a mostly poor device even just for
consumption, mainly because it can't stand up by itself, and it's near useless
outdoors). But I can see that the touch screen interface has revolutionized
interaction with computers, most especially with very young and very old
people. Touch screens are the real revolution that is going on now and while
the form factor is a part of it I think it's secondary.

~~~
Stormbringer
_"I think it's important to separate the advent of the touch screen interface
from the form factor of a tablet."_

I think you're kind of missing the point then. Apple didn't invent touch
screens, touch screens have been around for a loooong time.

You need to borrow an iPad and a 2 year old, and then watch the 2 year old
interact with the iPad. Heck, I've seen 1 year olds playing with them. Now I'm
not suggesting that a 1 year old is doing anything more than going "look at
the pretty stars"†

Now imagine that you're using a touchscreen on your desktop Minority Report
style. It's alright if you pretend to be Tom Cruise, I'll wait. Okay, now hold
your arms out at maximum extension and move them around in little circles for
a while. Now back and forth. Now up and down. Now go back to circles. Have you
done 15 minutes yet? Liar! Do 15 minutes of that. Okay, now that your arms are
on fire with pain, imagine doing that all day long. Yeah. Now you know why
we're not gonna see touch-screens as a practical input method on a desktop for
a while.

Conclusion: don't make the mistake of under-rating the form factor as part of
the experience.

†Free upvote if you get the reference. :D

~~~
zmmmmm
Ironically I have a 3 year old and a 8 month old and also an iPad. It's
exactly from their use of the iPad, my parent's use of the iPad and my own and
my wife's that I make these observations.

Re: form factor - I agree that these things are linked - but I'm saying the
touch screen is the killer innovation. Yes, the form factor allows the touch
screen to be used comfortably, but people don't really care about the form
factor per se. Lack of a keyboard doesn't enable me to flick photos to browse
my photo album, or to pinch to zoom on them, or to draw with my fingers on the
screen - the touch screen does. A device with a slide out keyboard would do
that just as well. It's just that there are significant design challenges in
building such a thing so we haven't seen a convincing version of it yet. But
we might.

------
spanktheuser
I think the author gets tripped up in the classic "all users look like me"
cognitive trap. Just by mentioning OmniFocus, we know he is a power user of
some type. Which means his article probably contains any number of very good
points, but the title should have been "Why power users won't care very much
about tablets soon."

For regular users, the list of use cases the author proposes should also
include: To do all these things, I want to just press a button on my home
screen. Anything else may confuse me.

Over Christmas, I told my 70 year old mother (who has never sent an email,
seen YouTube, or looked up directions on Google Maps) that I had downloaded a
quilting application on my iPad. And left it, powered off, where she could get
to it. I returned 10 minutes later, and she was happily creating a complicated
quilting pattern on the iPad.

While a macbook air would let some types of users create quilting patterns
more efficiently, OSX is just too complicated for my mom and many others like
her.

~~~
macrumor
_I think the author gets tripped up in the classic "all users look like me"
cognitive trap._

Um, no he doesn't. Did you miss the title?: "Why _I_ don't care very much
about tablets anymore". This "all users look like me cognitive trap" line of
yours is bullshit. The guy was only talking about _himself_ , his own uses.

Also, I'm tired of seeing people like you say, "the title should've been
this"... "the title should've been that". This title was fine and more than
appropriate. Besides that, he can give his article whatever title he damn well
pleases.

------
grishick
I like the point about hands being in the way. That was the first thing that
turned me away from iPad when I tried typing an email. I still think tablets
are best for information consumption such as browsing internet and simple
tasks such as making an order at a restaurant. The best uses of an iPad I've
seen are mounted in the dashboard of a car, back of the car seat, table in a
restaurant, and magazine basket.

~~~
bheckel
Agree. Hands-in-the-way bothers me on phones as well. Plus keyboard device
users don't have to worry about the fingerprint-smear effect.

------
veidr
My iPad has been in my bathroom for all of 2011 so far. Like this piece's
author, I don't find the iPad to be a very useful device, because it really
isn't better than a computer at very many things (and does not fit in your
pocket, unlike its far more useful siblings).

But, for dukey-time reading, I must say that it markedly outperforms my
previous system (which consisted mainly of musty back issues of the
Economist).

------
Bossman
I think people are making too big of a deal out of all these tablets coming
out. Android 3.0 looks like a great OS and I'd love to have a device that runs
it, but I don't think they're as useful as people believe them to be.

The main reason they're becoming so widespread is because carriers are
offering them with 3G data plans. People use them for tethering, etc. I have
an iPad that I hardly use. The thing is useful sometimes, but it's just so
rare that I actually take it out to use it when I have my netbook, desktop,
and an Android phone that's more powerful...

~~~
dwc
Tablets are not for us, but they are for someone. I bought my wife an iPad and
she _loves_ it, not for the gee-whiz factor but because it's well suited to
how she use a computer at home.

~~~
Bossman
I like my iPad a lot, too. And I have a feeling I'd use a Xoom more than my
iPad. But it's more a novelty thing. You can't be extremely productive on it
like you can on a cheap netbook. I'm not saying they don't have a market, but
it looks like an artifcially created market.

I think tablets will be immensely more useful in a few years when you can do a
hell of a lot more on them.

------
jordanb
I got in a lot of fights with Apple fans over this last year. :) My point is
that tablets have _never ever_ taken off---even though various companies have
been trying for _decades_.

Of course the argument that the iPad is different from every other device in
history due to ubiquitous internet access and multi-touch. And I admit that I
couldn't even convince myself entirely that those weren't game changers, but a
year later it seems that the verdict is in: they're not.

PS: One of my Apple friends just bought a Macbook Air and was trying to sell
his iPad to me last week. :)

~~~
Groxx
> _a year later it seems that the verdict is in: they're not._

Not entirely sure what world it is you live in... how has touchable computing
not been a game-changer? Just look at all the iDevice apps out there, and how
frequently and powerfully the UI decisions there have changed desktop
applications.

~~~
jordanb
My argument isn't that touch devices haven't taken off, nor do I argue that
ubiquitous internet isn't a huge deal for the pocket computing market. I love
my new Nexus S for those reasons, and I'm sure if Palm had had those features
ten years ago, we'd be in a different place today.

My argument is that---regardless of those features' importance for pocket
computing---they haven't changed the game for tablet devices. Tablet devices
remain wedged in that space where they're too big for the pocket and too small
for the lap or desk. If you're going out, take your phone; if you're staying
in, you might as well use your laptop and get some work done.

~~~
trustfundbaby
15 Million Ipads sold in one year would seem to handily contradict whatever
argument you're trying to make. People love tablet pcs, because they simplify
computing for them ... a lot of people on hacker news don't get that, because
using computers (in all their delicious complexity) is generally second nature
for us.

~~~
blocke
$15 million impresses you?

Chump change.

~~~
trustfundbaby
15 million iPads sold in one year certainly impresses me, that's 5% of the US
population reached ... In one year.

~~~
gergles
The iPad was sold worldwide.

------
cageface
The thing is, most people aren't scribes.

The iPad isn't a good laptop replacement. It's something new. Developers are
still in the early stages of figuring out what this means.

~~~
hammock
Rule #1 of entrepreneurship? Make sure your product solves an existing
problem. If tablets don't do this then they fail.

~~~
sudont
An existing problem is not always codified through speech: rather, we may not
understand the problem because it is such a part of the fabric of our life we
cannot consider the alternative. It’s possible that tablets and their rapidly
evolving OSes have not been around to show us the distinction between digital
data retrieval and desktop computing. This is not the same as a manufactured
problem. Using digital data in the field has always been shitty, but it’s been
up until now that we’ve understood that computers must be in some static form,
not a clipboard. Previous tablets most likely failed through latching an OS
for sitting onto a computer for walking.

The same issue is in art: our modern idols are merely the most recognizable
stop points in a continuous evolution of style and formality. In retrospect,
it’ll be easier to see the distinction between tablet and laptop five years
from now.

See also: the faster horse in your garage or driveway.

------
Legion
Using Wired's awful iPad app and its ludicrous 700MB downloads as an example
of how magazines are bad on tablets is a joke.

Go try the Economist app and then come back and try to make the same argument.
I hardly read my print copies anymore.

~~~
johnrob
One reason content can look good in a tablet is that it's designed with UX in
mind. Print design has always favored maximizing the content per page over
actual usability.

------
enjo
My completely unsolicited experience: I didn't think I really wanted a tablet
until I went out and bought a Nook Color and hacked the thing. Even in it's
really rough state, it's become a constant companion. I really like the
smaller (7" I think) form factor of the device. I tried an iPad and it was
just a bit bigger than I wanted to tote around. A slightly smaller version
fits me just right... with a proper case it's as easy to carry as a book.

I can't wait for honeycomb to hit AOSP, then this $250 device is just a steal.

------
neutronicus
A lof of the author's point hinges on his affection for dead-tree media and
television. If at all possible, I read pdf's on my laptop instead of books,
and I kind of prefer watching TV on my laptop as well.

Of course, I love my laptop and can't see blowing my disposable income (of
which there is not that much), on something which duplicates only the
unproductive functionality of my laptop.

However, as an older and richer man, I could see myself having a desktop and a
tablet instead of a laptop.

------
michaelpinto
I've been following this industry now since the "old days" and the author is
essentially saying that a miniframe will never be quite as good as a
mainframe. Or that a workstation will never be as cool as a miniframe. Or that
a PC will never be as cool as a workstation. Or that a luggable will never be
as good as a PC. It's really about the right tool for the right job. Once
tablets cost $10 each you'll be forgetting that you own a few of them...

------
tomwalsham
Regarding tactile feedback. I recently just re-enabled audio feedback on my
Chumby (resistive screen), and the combination of physical push + audible
'click' is sufficient for most of my need for feedback, and those of my
3-year-old.

I also have the vibrate feedback on my Nexus One, and find that for small
capacitive screens a subtle vibrate executed on the exact click-fire to be
extremely useful.

Neither of these will ever compare to old-school keyboard tactile response -
something that laptop keyboards also fail to equal - but funnily enough I find
the N1 input feedback more satisfying than a MBP keyboard.

We're a long way off programatically raised areas on low-cost touch-input
devices. That said, Apple have a long track record of amazing UX and must be
looking into these options. I suspect the tactile vibrate experience wasn't
too compelling on the scale of the iPad, but it wouldn't surprise me if this
feature appeared (localised in quadrants?) in future iPad versions to afford
better feedback for typing and other operations.

------
dot
Because his hands are in the way? Really?

I guess he doesn't use a touch based phone either..

~~~
jedbrown
You think a phone is a good way to interact with a computer? There is exactly
one reason why I love my phone: it fits in my pocket. When I'm in a location
where a larger device is convenient, rest assured that I am not working on my
phone. Tablets have always seemed silly to me: they don't do anything well and
they don't fit in my pocket.

------
swift
> ... this separation of our productive workspace into display and input
> planes has been with us since the dawn of writing, ... and it means that
> multitouch tablets will continue to be novelty/entertainment items.

> So a new tablet will never be exciting the way that a new, luxury gel ink
> pen will be exciting, or a new leather journal, or ...

This seems inconsistent to me. The way I interact with a leather journal, or a
sketchbook, or a notepad, or any paper that I write or draw upon, is very much
like a tablet: there's only one surface I interact with, not two. The author
seems to enjoy this arrangement, as I do.

The author did specify multitouch, and I agree that multitouch seems better
suited to simpler interactions and media consumption, at least based upon my
experience with it so far. Even taking that into account, though, I think his
diagnosis of the problem is wrong; for me, the problem is not having one
surface instead of two, but the inability to use a precise stylus! An iPad or
iPad-like device which could use a stylus with the accuracy of a Wacom tablet
in addition to supporting multitouch would be a real game changer for me.

Fortunately, I don't expect to wait too long for this; the advantages are too
obvious. When such a device is announced, I feel confident it will be more
exciting than a new luxury gel ink pen, even for Jon Stokes.

~~~
forgottenpaswrd
"Fortunately, I don't expect to wait too long for this; the advantages are too
obvious. When such a device is announced, I feel confident it will be more
exciting than a new luxury gel ink pen, even for Jon Stokes."

There are already tablet prototypes with pen input, it does not have tilt and
rotation like wacom does but normal ink pen have not either. I bet on Apple
being the first to make it mass produced as usual.

------
prknight
Tablets don't excite me either, it makes me appreciate the tactile feel of a
keyboard and the benefits of using a mouse (you can't hover like you can with
a mouse with touch input on an ipad).

I use a hp touchsmart, which is an affordable laptop-tablet hybrid. It's a
fantastic input device due to wacom technology (shame ipad doesn't excel at
pen input), but using the touch screen with my hands is only really convenient
when I'm laying back consuming content leisurely.

------
6ren
Convenience and price is how disruption starts. Why did anyone buy a cell
phone if they had a landline? It was worse in every way, except portability.

~~~
sliverstorm
Yeah, but what one way are tablets better than other things? You get to use
your fingers? I'm still wholly unconvinced that is 'better'.

~~~
rudiger
One way? Simplicity.

My feeling is that the iPad is considered better than laptops and netbooks
because the Big Three operating systems (Windows, Mac, and Linux) are too
complex for the vast majority of users. Of course, a simple OS should be
possible on a non-tablet, non-phone device, but there's just too much baggage
to just start from scratch. The iPhone/iPad had a clean slate.

------
soulclap
I don't own a tablet, saw one in action for the first time a week ago and the
owner and I basically came up with the same reasons why it's rather useless as
the ones mentioned in the article. It's definitely nice to have for reading in
bed or keeping up 'on the road' but overall it seems to be pretty reduced to
'consuming' instead of 'producing'.

One thing I like about tablets is that they made publishers reconsider how
they can bring a better and more rich 'experience' to their readers
(subscribers). But I wonder how long it will take until they notice that they
should rework their web pages as well. I am so tired of (nearly) all web
'articles' ('features') just consisting of a headline and endless blocks of
text, maybe an embedded video and some links, you could do so much more.

~~~
Lost_BiomedE
'you could do so much more'

Could you elaborate on this? It is not immediately obvious to me.

~~~
soulclap
Sure. When you look at a 'proper magazine' there is a lot more work regarding
to the layouts, additional info graphics and such. And I guess the iPad app
versions of current magazines have got all these plus animated graphics,
timelines, better integration of video and all that.

I am not saying a daily news site really needs this but even in articles that
are not time-critical you usually only see large chunks of text or paginated
slideshows. Considering that you can basically do 'everything' on the web, it
would be nice to see sites with a focus on content really take advantage of
this.

I could also imagine today's sites 'borrowing' some stylistic devices from TV
documentaries and the like. Sure, all of this needs some more work. But it
seems to be possible on tablets, so why not on the web? I don't get that.

I hope it's a bit more clear now.

------
Groxx
> _No tactile feedback_

That might be partially solved soonish, actually.
[http://www.hizook.com/blog/2010/08/11/electrotactile-
arrays-...](http://www.hizook.com/blog/2010/08/11/electrotactile-arrays-
texture-and-pressure-feedback-during-robotic-teleoperation)

> _Instead, what all magazine publishers produced (Condé Nast included) was a
> bloated, multitouch-enabled version of the exact same "new media" experience
> that used to ship on a CD-ROM under the name "multimedia."_

Not surprised about this in the least. The vast majority will always do what
never worked previously - we need people to make a few revolutionary
improvements, _then_ we'll see better tablet content across the board.

------
WiseWeasel
Finally, a classic Jon Stokes "get off my lawn" piece. It's been a while.
Maybe the winter weather is getting to him.

Personally, the tablet is the ideal "sitting on the couch browsing the web
during commercials or boring moments" device, for which my iPhone had served
previously. That and maybe a few casual games or acting as a rich remote for
other media center devices. I'd imagine once a front-facing camera is
standard, it'll be a common Skype device as well. I really don't know what Jon
would be contented with given his issues with tablets, other than a brain
implant. As for me, I loves me some tablets, and I've bought my last laptop;
it's all desktops and tablets from here on out.

------
JeffL
I think it's interesting that he mentions that monitor + keyboard is better
than a tablet because it separates out the input from the output areas and the
"hands don't get in the way". But if you take the total surface of the
keyboard plus your desktop monitors, it's way bigger than the area of the
tablet. Make a giant tablet that's 32"x32" or some such, and I think it could
be superior to monitor + keyboard for some things. The tablet lets you mix
what areas are input and what are output for various applications, and that's
way more flexible than being locked into fixed proportions.

~~~
beoba
<https://www.microsoft.com/surface/>

All that's missing is a smug logo, and it'll be a hit!

(also mentioned in the article)

------
codeglomeration
The point seems to be that it doesn't do all the things that the author wants
it to do. And, it doesn't have to.

Anybody who knows what his talking about is not saying that computers are
dead, and that tablets are the way forward. In the same way, nobody is
complaining that smartphones are crap because it's hard to create content on
them.

Obviously the use cases are different.

Now would somebody who mostly consumes content ditch the computer for a
tablet? Possibly. Would somebody who creates content ditch the computer for a
tablet or smartphone? Doubt it.

At the same time, this is not a zero sum game. People can own a computer and
tablet.

~~~
soulclap
The problem is that people who _should_ know what they're talking about have
said things like 'the tablet will eventually replace other computer set-ups' a
lot when tablets first came up. And I don't think it's a problem of 'adapting'
if you claim that this won't happen.

At least I won't believe that until someone beats me in 'Typing Of The Dead',
desktop versus tablet.

------
bradshaw1965
I think the ipad is best of breed for pdf's and comics. Throw in a retina
display or whatever hires equivalent you want to use and it's long form
magazine nirvana. Sure it's a rich geeks toy...but what a toy.

------
fosk
This actually a great idea, a display with a tactile experience. For example
when you touch an icon, that portion of the screen could vibrate for a short
time (let's say 200ms). Or when you're dragging something on the display there
could be a persistent fast vibration (so that in reality is not a vibration
anymore) on that specific area of the screen that makes you "feel" the dragged
item on your finger.

------
charlesju
The killer app for tablets right now is Pulse. It allows you to consumer
information probably 3-5 times as fast as any other medium. They do it by
displaying a lot of information quickly about a lot of articles with a UI that
is unparallel.

Because of Pulse alone, I use my iPad everyday. It's the FASTEST way to read
news.

------
pama
> until someone comes up with a tablet that can do something unique and
> special that nothing else in my life can do better...

I find that drawing and painting on the iPad is better than on any non-tablet
devices.

