

Matt Cutts from Google doesn't want an iPad - keltex
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/mini-review-of-the-ipad/

======
cjoh
I'm not quite sure what this whole openness hate is on the iPad.

Let's say google comes out with the heralded ChromeOS tablet, featuring a
webkit browser that is really fast and can run all kinds of different HTML5
apps. Hooray for Openness!

...but doesn't the iPad have a very fast webkit browser that can run all kinds
of different HTML5 apps too, plus this added feature called the "app store"
that lets you make all kinds of other neat stuff. Isn't:

(web browser + app store) > web browser?

If not, how is it any less open than ChromeOS?

~~~
jsdalton
> If not, how is it any less open than ChromeOS?

You're setting up an artificial comparison with ChromeOS. I think most people
are comparing the iPad to a Mac or PC. There's no question that it's far less
open than either.

~~~
ubernostrum
And yet one can't help feeling there's a double standard here.

When Apple released the original iPhone and told people they couldn't develop
native applications but would get to write web applications for a great
browser engine, there was outrage, and Apple's "culture of control" was
blasted from all sides.

When Google announced Chrome OS and told people they couldn't develop native
applications but would get to write web applications for a great browser,
there was joy, and Google's culture of openness was praised from all sides.

"Nobody expects a Chrome OS device to be a desktop/laptop" doesn't hold up,
since there are going to be Chrome OS devices which have specs at least as
good as and almost certainly better than the iPhone and probably the iPad as
well; why do we rant and rage and demand that _Apple_ devices have to be "real
computers", then, while giving Google the free "oh, it's just a
netbook/tablet/appliance" pass?

~~~
thwarted
Good point. But the difference is that Google releasing a browser based
platform where the only application is the browser forces them to use the same
technology as everyone else to create applications, no one can create native
applications for ChromeOS (or everyone can, since "native" means "web based")
-- this is, in fact, good engineering because it means there are no secret
APIs that give Google's apps an advantage so the Google employees writing apps
are more likely to end up with a good API because they see exactly what non-
google employees have to deal with. In fact, Google gives developers the same
technology they use to develop apps, things like HTML5 and GoogleGears, etc.
In contrast, Apple originally told people they couldn't develop native apps
because _only_ Apple could release native apps.

~~~
ubernostrum
_no one can create native applications for ChromeOS_

So it's deliberately even _more_ crippled than iPhone/iPad ;)

(which is what people would say if Apple released a web-apps-only system,
which is kinda my point)

~~~
thwarted
Is a blender deliberately crippled if it can't microwave food? It helps
Google, I guess, to be a company that releases web-based software, because
then web browsers run their software, even a web browser that they release.
"Our web based OS only runs web based software" is a pretty goofy definition
of "crippled". Would Apple release a web-apps-only system? I doubt it, it
wouldn't provide the level of interactivity and UI/UX that Apple wants to give
their customers, and Apple _wants_ to be both the the provider of the best
experience and apps, and giving that ability to their developers is only
secondary (even the guy who reimplemented coverflow from scratch and didn't
use any secret Apple APIs was denied app inclusion initially).

~~~
ubernostrum
_a pretty goofy definition of "crippled"_

Yes, which is why I wrote it that way. If Apple released a ChromeOS-alike, I
would bet money that the response, from all corners of the tech world, would
be to denounce it as unnecessarily "crippled", invoking theories of Steve
Jobs' pathological need to prevent anyone from ever learning how to write
native applications ever again.

And that response would be about as stupid and misinformed as the attitudes
consistently displayed toward Apple for, e.g., the iPhone/iPad.

~~~
thwarted
Yeah, I got that. I disagree though. If Apple released a ChromeOS-alike and
Apple's provided Apps did not have a advantage, due to direct hardware access
or via secret APIs, because Apple made them, then I don't think we'd see
people crying "crippled". I don't think Apple could keep themselves from
giving themselves and advantage, though, so this ends up just being a academic
discussion. ;)

------
stcredzero
_But the iPad isn’t for me. I want the ability to run arbitrary programs
without paying extra money or getting permission from the computer
manufacturer... I think the world needs more makers, which is why I don’t
intend to buy an iPad. That said, I think the typical consumer will love the
iPad._

There's nothing about the hardware which is anti-maker, other than anything
which specifically supports DRM, which I believe is minimal. It's almost all
in the software.

What if Apple came out with the modern day version of Hypercard running in a
sandbox, with capability-based gating of important facilities like dialing?
HyperCard supported lots of do it yourself tinkering. For those makers who
want to go to the next step, the App Store itself and the SDK are a worthwhile
target.

~~~
diego
It's hard to use the iPad for creation. Since I got mine, all I've done with
it is read, watch videos and a little web surfing. It's just not made for
typing. Sure, you can IM someone or reply to an email, but I couldn't write a
blog entry (or even this comment) with it. You can use a wireless keyboard but
it still doesn't feel right as you have to keep moving your hand to the screen
to click on icons. It doesn't recognize Apple's Magic Mouse.

~~~
endtime
>You can use a wireless keyboard but it still doesn't feel right as you have
to keep moving your hand to the screen to click on icons. It doesn't recognize
Apple's Magic Mouse.

Sounds like you are starting to realize that the iPad is not a laptop...

I don't intend to be facetious. I think a lot of people genuinely think the
iPad will revolutionize computing because it can actually serve as a
replacement for the laptop (which, for many, replaced the desktop). But it's
not a laptop replacement, it's just a big iPod Touch.

~~~
stcredzero
_I think a lot of people genuinely think the iPad will revolutionize computing
because it can actually serve as a replacement for the laptop (which, for
many, replaced the desktop). But it's not a laptop replacement, it's just a
big iPod Touch._

That's funny. I think it will revolutionize computing because it _is_ a big
iPod Touch.

The Touch is too small to be ideal for a lot of tasks. Yet a lot of use is
made of the device's multi-touch interface. With a bigger screen, more mobile
uses will reveal themselves.

------
nickpp
He doesn't want an iPhone either. He's using Nexus One instead. What is he
thinking?! It's almost like he was working for a competing phone/os
manufacturer... oh wait.

~~~
Nwallins
> _He doesn't want an iPhone either. He's using Nexus One instead._

Eh?

> _I played with my wife’s iPhone for just a few minutes before I knew I had
> to have an iPhone._

~~~
nickpp
He switched to a Nexus One recently: <http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/switch-
iphone-to-android/>

------
showkiller
I thought hacking was about taking things that are purposed for one thing and
re-making/re-programming it to do what you want it to do.

If people feel that Apple has created a walled garden they should get one and
show us their vision on how it should operate.

The hardware is second to none, you want a camera put one in it's possible.
Don't like the operating system figure out how to change it.

But don't just sit back and complain, that's easy.

I want one just so I can watch my 4 year old use it. The other she got a hold
of my touch and was tapping away at it, found some app that simulates a brook,
so when you touch it it ripples. So she decides to try and blow on it and see
if it did anything. I thought that was amazing.

For me I will happily play in Apples garden, pay the fees live with the
limitations, because it not only just works it works well.

If something better comes along I will change.

------
djhomeless
I guess I'm kind of in the middle on this one. I love the concept of the ipad,
but hate the closed nature of the platform and am wary of Apple pushing yet
another device that pimps the appstore.

However, I felt the same about the AppleTV and the iphone, but still ended up
buying both once I knew they were hackable.

------
tijs
it's becoming a bit of a recurring theme it seems. not too hard to imagine a
nearby future where consumers carry ipad (-like) devices and makers tote
laptops running, say, ubuntu. it would be like the whole prosumer thing never
happened.

------
ck2
Don't want your iPad? Just do this to it: <http://youtube.com/v/lAl28d6tbko>

Best iPad demo this week!

