Apple announces 128GB iPad

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by K. Molen

How does that work? Can any iPad app access the files stored on there, or do you have to store only certain kinds of data? For example, could I store Wired magazine that I have in Newstand on the cloud drive instead of on the iPad itself, and then access each issue the same way I do now?

Or is this strictly to store movies and photos and those kinds of things that aren't app specific?

I suspect it's the latter, because I've been poking around in Newstand and the Settings, and I can't find anywhere where I'd be able to tell the iPad to look elsewhere for the magazines.

Natively it prefers some data types but it works fine for any app with FileBrowser (really expensive at £2.99)... when you transfer a file, it gives you the option to "Open in..." which gives a list of Apps that can deal with the file so PDF will show Adobe Reader and any other Apps that can access PDF, CBR will give a list of any Apps you have for comics etc...

[K. Molen]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Natively it prefers some data types but it works fine for any app with FileBrowser (really expensive at £2.99)... when you transfer a file, it gives you the option to "Open in..." which gives a list of Apps that can deal with the file so PDF will show Adobe Reader and any other Apps that can access PDF, CBR will give a list of any Apps you have for comics etc...

Huh... okay, so just to make sure I understand you correctly...

I would buy the magazine using Newsstand, and have it download onto my iPad using Newsstand. Then I'd use FileBrowser to transfer the magazine off of the iPad onto the personal cloud. And then just do "Open in..." whenever I want to revisit a magazine I have stored in the cloud.

Correct?

Oh, and thanks.

[shanghaichica]

The price is pretty reasonable for the wifi version. Yea you could get a laptop but the iPad does have some advantages such as being more reasonable.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by K. Molen

Huh... okay, so just to make sure I understand you correctly...

I would buy the magazine using Newsstand, and have it download onto my iPad using Newsstand. Then I'd use FileBrowser to transfer the magazine off of the iPad onto the personal cloud. And then just do "Open in..." whenever I want to revisit a magazine I have stored in the cloud.

Correct?

Oh, and thanks.

I don't know as I haven't tried that - I use it for epubs, PDFs, video, audio, images, artwork etc for iPad, Nexus, phone and computers... could ask on some of the Forums related to iPad stuff... for Apps that let you directly access IPad filesystems and don't need jailbreaking etc...

[VaultBoy]

Originally Posted by shanghaichica

The price is pretty reasonable for the wifi version. Yea you could get a laptop but the iPad does have some advantages such as being more reasonable.

The price is indeed reasonable. I expected it to be more.

[Jyster]

When I bought my ipad 3, i also purchased a .5TB seagate hard drive for less than $200 dollars. I put movies, comics, audio books etc on it.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by shanghaichica

The price is pretty reasonable for the wifi version. Yea you could get a laptop but the iPad does have some advantages such as being more reasonable.

How so? I was just leering at a ThinkPad with touch screen at Staples and the entire package -- with a much faster processor than the iPad and of course running a full-blown OS -- went for exactly the same price as the 128GB iPad.

The main arguments for the iPad seem to be the form factor, the number of available professional apps, and its usefulness to people involved in specific disciplines within the arts. Anyone can enjoy using an iPad (or not), of course. But if you're talking about which thing is most cost-effective, I'd have to choose PC laptops over iPad iterations.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

How so? I was just leering at a ThinkPad with touch screen at Staples and the entire package -- with a much faster processor than the iPad and of course running a full-blown OS -- went for exactly the same price as the 128GB iPad.

The main arguments for the iPad seem to be the form factor, the number of available professional apps, and its usefulness to people involved in specific disciplines within the arts. Anyone can enjoy using an iPad (or not), of course. But if you're talking about which thing is most cost-effective, I'd have to choose PC laptops over iPad iterations.

You also have to balance your idea of cost-effectiveness against usefulness in the real world... and not just for iPads... I use a tablet in lots of ways and locations that I wouldn't use a laptop (and recently got rid of a laptop because I was rarely using it)... I can use a tablet for work and relaxation anywhere (in the house or elsewhere) with no problem but using a laptop requires a more structured usage - a support/tray to stop it overheating and/or overheating my legs, a specific seating position to allow for the weight and form factor etc. Allowing for how something's used is also a critical part of cost effectiveness, not just the processor and OS...

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by elcreative

You also have to balance your idea of cost-effectiveness against usefulness in the real world... and not just for iPads... I use a tablet in lots of ways and locations that I wouldn't use a laptop (and recently got rid of a laptop because I was rarely using it)... I can use a tablet for work and relaxation anywhere (in the house or elsewhere) with no problem but using a laptop requires a more structured usage - a support/tray to stop it overheating and/or overheating my legs, a specific seating position to allow for the weight and form factor etc. Allowing for how something's used is also a critical part of cost effectiveness, not just the processor and OS...

You make good points for either a machine used mainly for consuming or for laying about.

I have had a 7" tablet for some time and am trying out a smaller mini-tab (an old Droid I) and except for navigation and looking at maps, terrain, etc., or checking emails, I much prefer a note/chrome/net/mini/laptop even when traveling.

The 7" on WiFi makes a nice larger GPS/map type device, and the Droid I (on wifi) is useful for reading email in restaurants.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

You make good points for either a machine used mainly for consuming or for laying about.

I have had a 7" tablet for some time and am trying out a smaller mini-tab (an old Droid I) and except for navigation and looking at maps, terrain, etc., or checking emails, I much prefer a note/chrome/net/mini/laptop even when traveling.

The 7" on WiFi makes a nice larger GPS/map type device, and the Droid I (on wifi) is useful for reading email in restaurants.

I see that you failed to notice the word "work" in my comment and that you make no allowance for those whose physical status make things a lot less painful when not required to sit in conventional working positions all the time i.e. laying about which is also a straight comment on physical positioning rather than just a remark implying laziness...

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by elcreative

I see that you failed to notice the word "work" in my comment and that you make no allowance for those whose physical status make things a lot less painful when not required to sit in conventional working positions all the time i.e. laying about which is also a straight comment on physical positioning rather than just a remark implying laziness...

Sorry if I seemed offensive.
I didn't mean to imply laziness when I said laying about. Just relaxation.

Myself, I don't even have a recliner. Don't like them. Don't lay on sofas unless to sleep. I like to sit upright if I am sitting, and when I go to bed, do it completely. I think that is because while in the military sometimes I had to sleep in all sorts of awkward positions even standing while leaning against something.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

Sorry if I seemed offensive.
I didn't mean to imply laziness when I said laying about. Just relaxation.

Myself, I don't even have a recliner. Don't like them. Don't lay on sofas unless to sleep. I like to sit upright if I am sitting, and when I go to bed, do it completely. I think that is because while in the military sometimes I had to sleep in all sorts of awkward positions even standing while leaning against something.

No problem... it's just that tablets can make life a lot easier for some people as well as being entirely productive tools...

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by elcreative

You also have to balance your idea of cost-effectiveness against usefulness in the real world... and not just for iPads... I use a tablet in lots of ways and locations that I wouldn't use a laptop. . . .

elcreative: This first bit isn't about you.

Lately, I've been dismayed by MR members who seem to have just looked up rhetorical fallacy on Wikipedia and now accuse everyone reflexively of using various kinds of fallacies -- all without understanding the specific cases in which terms like straw man argument and ad hominem actually apply.

In the most ridiculous instance I've seen on an MR thread, a member accused someone else falsely of ad hominem -- and then made ad hominem assertions about his opponent's use of ad hominem!

What's next -- shaving one's head in the process of condemning others for indulging in spurious baldness?

If I were playing that annoying game with you, I would accuse you of making a "straw man argument," but this is not a case of that. You're not knowingly attributing to me an argument I never made about a point I never raised, only to argue against it and attribute flaws in the argument to my reasoning. My insisting on that would itself be an attribution of false motives and assertions to you.

All you've done is respond in a friendly way to what I seem to you to be saying, and that is how people's opinions should be understood in a casual public discussion -- at face value.

The point of knowing about rhetorical fallacies is to avoid targeting opponents unfairly, not to imply, by way of unfair accusations, that one is more reasonable by comparison.

§*§*§*§*§

ShanghaiChica was talking about something far more specific than cost-effectiveness to each user. She was saying that the iPad 128GB was more "reasonable" than a laptop. In English usage, reasonable in the financial sense means less expensive.

Hence my mention of the advantages of a tablet as opposed to its price, and the careful distinction I made regarding this.

It's possible that SC is comparing the cost of the iPad 128GB to that of Apple laptops, in which case her statement would be absolutely correct. It's also possible she's using reasonable in a more idiosyncratic way than it would seem.

But because I am not privy to her inner thoughts and motives, and can only reply to what she has said outright, I have no choice but to conclude she is comparing the price of an iPad to that of a comparable laptop.

Hence my original differentiation between value and cost.

Obviously, the iPad 128GB is the better value for a person who does storage-intensive work on a tablet using software which is specific to iOS. Obviously, that isn't the only scenario in which value conditions cost-effectiveness.

But a device which is of value is not necessarily reasonable in price -- especially when it is being compared to another device (in this case, a laptop) on the basis of its price alone.

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

It's possible that SC is comparing the cost of the iPad 128GB to that of Apple laptops, in which case her statement would be absolutely correct. It's also possible she's using reasonable in a more idiosyncratic way than it would seem.

The case for the reasonableness of Apple anything has always been based on comparison to what the comparer considers worthy competition.

So, the iPad is reasonably priced when compared to the Surface Pro and it doesn't matter that the iPad cannot run Office or other productivity tools, BUT the Fire is not a fair comparison because the iPad has hundreds of thousands of apps more than the Fire.

The beauty is that my wife can read books, watch movies, manage her healthcare, and play games on her Fire while I craft a Microsoft Access Database Application on a Surface Pro and iGuy autotunes the latest low brow television interview on his iPad. And that we all feel good about our choice of productivity tool.

Things only get contentious when iGuy or I try to tell my wife why her Fire makes her inadequate. Fortunately, my wife is not a poster on or reader of MR and is totally oblivious to her place in the eCaste system.

iGuy and I each are too self centered to care what the other misguided soul (who will undoubtedly be a data entry clerk in the next life) thinks.

So, in the end, BLISS.

[Prestidigitweeze]

It looks as though we're using the word reasonable in two different ways, both of which can apply to monetary value. As Merriam-Webster specifies (and I've only included the bit which pertains to us):

rea·son·able
adjective \ˈrēz-nə-bəl, ˈrē-zən-ə-bəl\
Definition of REASONABLE. . . .

c : moderate, fair <a reasonable chance> <a reasonable price>
d : inexpensive

According to d., my prosaic interpretation of reasonable is correct (i.e., literally less expensive).

But according to c., the more general sense of pricing -- moderate, fair -- is also correct.

What I like about d. is that it isn't open to interpretation: A thing is either more expensive than another or it isn't.

But when it comes to pricing vs. value, the word reasonable itself turns out to be open to reasonable interpretation.