

iPad: Nothing Creative - gvb
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2010/01/27/iPad

======
akadien
You can bet that the these reactions of "it doesn't have this or that" have
already been addressed and are sitting in prototypes locked in an interior
room at 1 Infinite Loop. USB and cameras are easy to add. I'm waiting for
handwriting recognition and 3D UI modes. This device will evolve into
something very cool and useful just like the original deck-of-cards iPod
evolved into what we have today.

~~~
gvb
It already has USB and theoretically could use a USB-attached camera. The
problem is, the iPad-to-USB adapter is something more you have to carry in
addition to the svelte iPad and I would worry about inadvertently damaging the
iPad connector on the iPad with the (relatively) big adapter.

Adding a USB-attached camera is even worse: _two_ more things to carry plus a
cord to add leverage for stressing the adapter.

Tethering a peripheral (e.g. camera) via bluetooth or WiFi would get around
the adapter part, but it still is an ugly solution.

I agree with Tim, Apple's target audience isn't me, it isn't him, and it
probably isn't most of the people on HN. It is consumers, not creators.

~~~
akadien
I meant to imply "USB and cameras are easy to integrate into the device."

I'm not sure I'm going to get a first gen iPad either unless I find five
hundred dollars on the ground. But, I see the potential for getting one in the
future. It's perfect, though, for my daughter to use for school work.

------
yungchin
Yeah well, all of us geeks complain about what this thing can't do and doesn't
have. But in the end, Bray comes to the right conclusion: the iPad wasn't
designed for us.

The iPhone and the iPad are just what portable devices look like after
crossing the chasm: no multi-tasking (a massive number of people I know do not
grok multi-tasking), minimally-complicated input devices, and obviously: no
developer tools or software freedom.

Because "being able to run whatever software I choose" is only great when the
user belongs to that n% (where n is small) of people who know what they're
doing. I will be "selling" (as in recommending) these iThings to many friends
and relatives, and at the same time, I don't think I'll ever buy them myself.

------
cubicle67
bitch bitch bitch... ffs people, I thought the whole thing about being
creative were that you were, um, creative.

It's easy: a. don't buy one, or b. if you accidentally do buy one, then think
of something creative to do with it.

It seems there's a large number of people at the moment who can't see them
selves buying one of these (sorry, still can't bring myself to call it an
iPad) for whatever reason, and they're working hard at mentally positioning
those who may buy one as 'stupid', 'couch potatoes', 'dumb', 'fanboys', 'not
creative people', 'want to be cool', 'gullible', 'buying it just because of
the marketing' etc. I'm sure you've read the endless swathe of similar
comments today. Why? Why is is so hard to accept that whilst a product ay not
be for you, it may be just what someone else wants?

[Disclaimer: I'm in the group of those who probably won't buy one. I can't see
a use case for it yet]

------
Tichy
I wouldn't want to be Wacom right now, though. I could imagine the tablet
beats traditional digitizer tablets for graphics design.

~~~
jacquesm
Right... because drawing with your finger on a small screen of a tablet
without a half decent graphic application is going to overnight destroy the
market for high end computers running photoshop, autocad or some other
graphics program hooked up to digitizer tablets with extremely high resolution
and analog sensors in the tip registering the down force to modify effects.

No way these are even remotely in the same space.

~~~
lurch_mojoff
I don't know if the Apple Tablet will impact Wacom's business in any way, but
for what it's worth a picture drawn on an even smaller screen using one of
these "not half decent graphic applications" ended up on the cover of The New
Yorker.

[http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2009/05/jorge-
colo...](http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2009/05/jorge-colombo-
iphone-cover.html)

And simply because Apple don't supply a stylus with the device, doesn't mean
that you can't use one with it.

<http://tenonedesign.com/stylus.php>

~~~
xcombinator
The Wacom tablet computers sells in the thousands, iPad is going to sell in
the millions. There is nothing like a wacom for drawing with hi quality, but
I'm sure Apple realise a "notebook computer" needs a pen and will add it in
the future.

The capacitive stylus has very poor resolution, and is difficult to contrast
with the part of the hand that you use for support on the screen. It would be
simpler to use an optical,sound, radio or inertial add on.

~~~
jacquesm
> iPad is going to sell in the millions

Wow! Your crystal ball must be a lot better than mine. I figure early adopters
several tens of thousands, most of them people that want to be seen with the
latest gadget.

Then they find out that it is cumbersome to have something like this because
it requires a carrier, it does definitely not fit in your pocket, which was
_the_ reason Jobs was railing against netbooks not all that long ago.

And I actually agreed with him, now it seems he disagrees with himself.

The wacom tablet computers sell in the thousands because they are a niche
device, the apple tablet for now is a niche device too, until the opposite has
been proven.

This is _not_ an iphone, and the iphone is not an ipod.

Iphones and Ipods are selling as good as they do because they fit their niche
(pocket devices for entertainment and connectivity) very well, this device is
in a completely different class.

