

What the iPad 3 really needs: fewer stupid articles about the iPad 3 - huskyr
http://reverttosaved.com/2012/03/06/what-the-ipad-3-really-needs-fewer-stupid-articles-about-the-ipad-3/

======
Wickk
I really agreed with a lot of this article (but not all) but really couldn't
get past the juvenile way in which it was written the entire time I was
reading.

I dont't personally understand everyone's need for a stylus. I hear this
complaint from time to time, and with how intuitive apple's keyboard is on the
iPhone/iPad ( really its the only one I can remotely stand. And yes it's far
from perfect) I just don't see much of a need. If I was taking handwritten
notes in class id be carrying around a notebook.

~~~
huggyface
_I don't personally understand everyone's need for a stylus._

I don't understand why it needs to be _everyone_. How about some people want a
stylus, some people don't? (Which is why, for instance, Samsung has a tablet
with a stylus, and a tablet without. They have a smartphone with a stylus, and
a smartphone without. They didn't go all in on the stylus).

I can certainly see value for me, especially if it's pressure sensitive.
Outside of obvious painting and drawing apps, even for something where you
need to interact with small objects on the screen, using a big finger,
obscuring the entire area you're trying to interact with with a meat sausage
is suboptimal. Substituting a little appendage can be very useful.

But it isn't for everyone. Which is why I don't get the utter fearsome
defensiveness about the stylus that many in the Apple camp seem to resort to
(e.g. Gruber): It isn't for them, and that's great, but trying to mock others
who might want it? That's just weird.

~~~
mmahemoff
Yeah I can see the value for niche uses/users, but the manufacturers are
getting a bit too optimistic when they present it as a must-have killer
feature.

Like the Note's Superbowl ad, where really the only noticeable difference
(from a mainstream consumer's perspective) is the stylus.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V40oo4kkzHg>

~~~
huggyface
_Like the Note's Superbowl ad, where really the only noticeable difference
(from a mainstream consumer's perspective) is the stylus._

It was a pitch for a specific product and thus highlighted the attributes of
that product. If Samsung is presenting it as a must-have killer feature, why
do so many of their products actually lack a stylus?

I also don't care if a vehicle can parallel park itself, yet if a manufacturer
makes a model with that feature they're naturally going to highlight it.

~~~
mmahemoff
It just seems too niche for a Superbowl ad and the whole presentation of the
ad makes it apparent the manufacturers believe they've revolutionised the
tablet space with, behold...the stylus. Setting themselves up for
disappointment.

~~~
huggyface
They've sold 2 million of them, and all reports are that they've seen great
sales: I doubt they're disappointed. And while it is indeed a niche, but a
very lucrative one. Further Samsung had no other new releases around the time
of the Superbowl -- had the GS III been ready, I have no doubt they would have
led with that.

It's a feature of a product. A feature that appeals to some, turns off others.
That's how the whole choice thing works.

------
VonLipwig
I completely agree with the article though I think it misses what the iPad 3
is. I think most tech commenators miss the point.

Apple isn't a traditional tech company. The majority of Apples 'new products'
aren't new at all. They are just a new iteration of an existing product.

Many tech commentators look at the iPad 3 and see it as make or break. They
want reason's why you would toss aside your iPad 2 and buy an iPad 3. The fact
is though, if you don't want to piss away your money you will not get an iPad
3 if you own an iPad 2.

Its like like if you own a 2010 iMac you didn't buy a 2011 iMac (I assume
there was a 2010/11 iMac). While the latest model is superior, quicker, has
better gizmo's etc. The one you have is just fine.

The iPad 3 will be the continued evolution of the iPad product, just as the
iPad 2 was. This isn't a new product, Apple is just continuing to keep its
product up to date.

~~~
derefr
> The iPad 3 will be the continued evolution of the iPad product, just as the
> iPad 2 was. This isn't a new product, Apple is just continuing to keep its
> product up to date.

The branding seems to contradict that idea. If it's just an update, then why
not just keep calling it "the iPad", without appending a Big Shiny Version
Digit? You know, like they do with all of their other desktop and notebook
products?

~~~
allwein
> If it's just an update, then why not just keep calling it "the iPad",
> without appending a Big Shiny Version Digit?

Because eventually there's going to be an iOS version or an application that
only runs well on version X of the iPad. It's a lot easier for a user to
understand "Only works on iPad 2 or better" then to understand "Only works on
iPads manufactured on or after March xth 2012".

~~~
sjmulder
It’s a slightly different situation but that’s essentially what they are doing
with Macs, saying this-and-that is compatible with the MacBook Pro (early
2009) and such.

~~~
lloeki
It is also common to refer to the Macs with their iteration+variant number,
e.g mine is a MacBook Pro 5,5

System Information was actually the easiest way to get such a specifier before
Lion, which now shows the "MacBook Pro 13-inch, Mid-2009" in the brand new
"More Info..." of "About This Mac".

------
saturdaysaint
Sort of obvious. This hype cycle is so predictable that even the parodies are
getting tired - the perpetual stream of half-baked critiques of Apple is just
part of it. CNET's been pretty shameless about presenting some kind of
Android/iOS horserace. I don't think any Apple product has escaped these kinds
of dismissive critiques - the original iPhone was derisively compared to the
Nokia N95 from the get go, the original iPad got an incredibly underwhelmed
response, the iPhone 4's perceived faults overshadowed any of its
breakthroughs, etc.

But this is one of the most profitable/important products by one of the most
profitable and interesting companies in the world, so what do you expect?

~~~
funkah
To the dismay of folks like myself, the half-baked critiques you describe are
unchanged from the days when Apple was still smaller than their peers. Think
of Slashdot's infamous iPod review, for example. The tech press just seems to
lose its mind when it comes to Apple and their products. Anyone who gets it
right is a "fanboy" member of the "Mac cult", and all that nonsense.

~~~
icebraining
_Think of Slashdot's infamous iPod review, for example_

You mean the _"no wireless, less space than a Nomad. lame"_? I think that was
more CmdrTaco's personal opinion than a review for the general public, like
these pundits are supposedly doing. He probably has very different priorities
when choosing gadgets when compared to the average person; I know I do.

------
mmahemoff
"Apple could lose $9 billion in one day if aliens descended from the skies to
steal it". Relevant parody on TNW.

[http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/03/06/apple-could-
lose-9-bi...](http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/03/06/apple-could-
lose-9-billion-in-one-day-if-aliens-descended-from-the-skies-to-steal-it/)

I was thinking of making an iPad headline generator, which looks something
like <N random characters>iPad<N random characters>

------
aufreak3
To add to this, much of what was said about the ipad 1 when it launched was
along the lines of "but this is just a large sized ipod touch!". Tech
"analysis" quality seems to have taken a dive. Thank goodness sites like
anandtech exist.

Personally, I'd drool if I see an ipad announced with a stylus - not just the
blunt kind that you can get today, but a true Wacom calibre stylus complete
with tilt sensor, pressure sensor, side buttons and "flip to erase". That'll
be my _dream_ educational computing device!

~~~
aufreak3
... And to top it, i really hope they put the front facing camera somewhere in
the middle of the display -- a patent they've held for a while without being
used in a product. That'll change all the awkwardness with video conferencing
on the device where it is incredibly hard to make eye contact with the one
you're talking to.

------
icebraining
Pundits will pundit, it's what they do, and Apple is a prime target nowadays.
Not sure what's with all the fury.

I do wonder if the Fire will be a bigger success, especially worldwide. It's
not a direct iPad competitor - it's not a product for the same market segment
- but I can see it selling well in lower income places. An iPad will never be
a huge success here in Portugal, for example (and in my opinion, of course).

------
chucknelson
This seems eerily like a Macalope article.

------
billpatrianakos
Article gets it all right but in the end it misses a larger point: these
pundits, writers, and bloggers have motivations behind these ridiculous claims
they make. Those motivations are personal preference, ignorance, desire for
clicks, and... wait for it... some are paid shills in one way or another. I'd
venture to guess that a lot of the unrealistic things being written about the
iPad are born from those motivations. For big tech sites I'd say the paid
shills reside there. For bloggers with big audiences I'd say paid shill-ism
and personal bias play into that. And for nobodies I'd say ignorance and
personal bias are their motivations.

When it comes to reviews its good to follow the money. It'll lead to why a
review recommends one thing over another. That then trickles down to smaller
sites. The little guys echo what the big guys say and hope they can ride some
coat tails and get some Adsense revenue. Just take a look at any tech scandal
like the Path address book fiasco. As soon as it became a big story everyone
wanted in on the action and most everyone just echoed the popular opinion.

------
hahla
/end rant

