iPad Without Pixel Qi, the Apple iPad fails

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Flash is generally a really big security headache though, which is probably why Apple doesn't want to support it.

No, again it's that it would cut into their app business as many of their games, apps etc. are free on the web in flash applications.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

Same here. I can't remember the last time I read outdoors.

But I just hate being outdoors very often period. Almost always too hot or too cold. Sunburn easily. Hate getting sweaty. I'm a magnet for biting insects.

I grew up in a rural state, am an Eagle Scout etc. Got my fill of the outdoors growing up and have been a pure city slicker from college on!

It be some crazy Apple fever going around...everyone's boarded up all their Windows.

I try to read in shaded sunlight whenever possible, whether it's on the bus/train, next to a window, under a gazebo on a nearby mountain, wherever. Despite getting bloody muggy/hot here during the summer, I still much prefer natural ambient light.

You'd think all the people reading E-Ink under fluorescent lighting would be complaining of eye strain, and switching to LED-backlit LCDs. I don't find the lighting to be problematic, but I like sunlight as much as I like fresh clean air. At least I can find sunlight in Taipei.

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Flash is generally a really big security headache though, which is probably why Apple doesn't want to support it.

Perhaps, but still a mighty big chunk of the internet missing. Luckily people can use converters and run video files and such, otherwise they'd need to rely on animated GIF porn.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

You'd think all the people reading E-Ink under fluorescent lighting would be complaining of eye strain, and switching to LED-backlit LCDs. I don't find the lighting to be problematic, but I like sunlight as much as I like fresh clean air. At least I can find sunlight in Taipei.

E-ink under fluorescent lighting (which is my main use, as I have a CFL bulb in all my lamps at home) is still better for reading novels for an hour plus than a back lit screen IMO.

But a backlit screen is ok as well for me personally, and has advantages in poor lighting conditions. And is worth the trade off for me in terms of large screen tablet as I'd end up using the internet, video, games and other stuff more than I'd be reading PDFs and academic books on it anyway.

But yeah, it's not an Apple fever for me--I've never owned one of their products. I'm just not big in the outdoors. Most of my time is spent in my office, or in my condo--with seldom even the blinds open (no privacy since all my windows face other units windows).

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by Charbax

What was the point of Apple waiting so long to release their tablet if it wasn't even to include the e-ink-killer Pixel Qi 3Qi screen?

Pixel Qi 3Qi has been confirmed to be in production now, so that should mean several competitors will be implementing it in cheaper Netbook/Tablet convertibles and the Apple iPad will look quite weak in comparison.

Not only in terms of readability, sunlight readability, also in terms of battery life, an ARM Powered product like the iPad could most surely achieve upwards 50 hours battery life with the Pixel Qi 3Qi screen in reflective mode since the LCD backlight is surely the single most power consuming component of the whole iPad.

Your opinion.

I've yet to actually be able to hold a PQi device in my hand. I *HAVE* held iPhones and iPod Touches and I *HAVE* been able to see LED and AMOLED screens in action. Same with e-ink. They are out there. And come March we should be able to buy and use the iPad.

That is not to say that the PQi tech won't be better, just that I'm not really ready to commit to a 'product' which can't state it *is* available or will be available within the next two months.

Derek

[tomsem]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

No, again it's that it would cut into their app business as many of their games, apps etc. are free on the web in flash applications.

I think that's mostly it, but Apple has expressed concern about performance impact on browsing. Adobe hasn't exactly disagreed with this. But I think if Apple really wanted Flash on these devices they would be more cooperative in helping Adobe achieve an acceptable level of performance with Flash. iPad has quite a bit more CPU than iPhone so these challenges should be easier to overcome.

Meanwhile, Flash for Android is in beta, and Windows 7 tablets have a flash that works, though there probably needs to be some multitouch support at some point.

[JoeD]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Your opinion.

I've yet to actually be able to hold a PQi device in my hand. I *HAVE* held iPhones and iPod Touches and I *HAVE* been able to see LED and AMOLED screens in action. Same with e-ink. They are out there. And come March we should be able to buy and use the iPad.

That is not to say that the PQi tech won't be better, just that I'm not really ready to commit to a 'product' which can't state it *is* available or will be available within the next two months.

Derek

It sounds like the displays are not far from been available in products, from what was said in the video I'd expect we'll see products shipping this year that use it. The quality (as everyone here already knows) of reflective displays for reading comfortably combined with the ability to have colour and video makes this tech really interesting imo, to the point where I would put off an iPad purchase to see what products ship this year using it.

Sure you can put off purchases forever waiting for the "next big thing", but if products will be on the shelves by Q3-Q4 of this year, that's not much time to wait for what may be a real change in display tech.

That said, I wouldn't buy an iPad anyway, I don't like the way Apple lock down their products. So the extra wait isn't really a wait for me I've got my Hanlin, but if someone releases a touchscreen tablet using the new display tech and the price isn't outragous, I'll be upgrading

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by JoeD

It sounds like the displays are not far from been available in products, from what was said in the video I'd expect we'll see products shipping this year that use it. The quality (as everyone here already knows) of reflective displays for reading comfortably combined with the ability to have colour and video makes this tech really interesting imo, to the point where I would put off an iPad purchase to see what products ship this year using it.

Sure you can put off purchases forever waiting for the "next big thing", but if products will be on the shelves by Q3-Q4 of this year, that's not much time to wait for what may be a real change in display tech.

That said, I wouldn't buy an iPad anyway, I don't like the way Apple lock down their products. So the extra wait isn't really a wait for me I've got my Hanlin, but if someone releases a touchscreen tablet using the new display tech and the price isn't outragous, I'll be upgrading

A pixel QI screen looks great for my uses but as you point out maybe waiting till Q4 and then depending on prices I may have to wait till a 2nd gen QI product say Q2 2011, Ill get an iPad now(March) have it for 12 months then see hwat is out their thats better. The only reason I am going to buy an iPad is that there is NO other choice at the moment for MY needs and I dont want to wait.

[JoeD]

Originally Posted by stustaff

A pixel QI screen looks great for my uses but as you point out maybe waiting till Q4 and then depending on prices I may have to wait till a 2nd gen QI product say Q2 2011, Ill get an iPad now(March) have it for 12 months then see hwat is out their thats better. The only reason I am going to buy an iPad is that there is NO other choice at the moment for MY needs and I dont want to wait.

plus you can always sell the iPad should you decide to move onto something with a QI screen when they finally become available. At least hardware can still be sold, unlike the trend for books/games and most other things running on it :P

[BWhite]

Originally Posted by dwanthny

Your comment is quite funny since this post was aimed at folks reading Mobileread. I venture to guess that at least 60% of us here at this site have heard of this technology.

So what you are saying is the iPad will be a "fail" if a poll is taken in six months of MobileRead members and will "win" for the people who purchase it?

Okay, I can buy into that logic. I just want to be a member of the "winners" category and it looks like I have a high probability of achieving that in sixty days; by my own List of Requirements, not according to another member's Requirements.

Northern Florida here, we might read out on a covered porch but reading for hours in sunlight - no.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by stustaff

A pixel QI screen looks great for my uses but as you point out maybe waiting till Q4 and then depending on prices I may have to wait till a 2nd gen QI product say Q2 2011, Ill get an iPad now(March) have it for 12 months then see hwat is out their thats better. The only reason I am going to buy an iPad is that there is NO other choice at the moment for MY needs and I dont want to wait.

Originally Posted by JoeD

plus you can always sell the iPad should you decide to move onto something with a QI screen when they finally become available. At least hardware can still be sold, unlike the trend for books/games and most other things running on it :P

No need to shout QI. It's Qi, a monosyllable word (pronounced chee), not an acronym.

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

No need to shout QI. It's Qi, a monosyllable word (pronounced chee), not an acronym.

OH YES SORRY

[kjk]

Originally Posted by JoeD

plus you can always sell the iPad should you decide to move onto something with a QI screen when they finally become available. At least hardware can still be sold, unlike the trend for books/games and most other things running on it :P

Or keep both! Never can have too many eReader devices scattered around the house, office, and car!

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by kjk

Or keep both! Never can have too many eReader devices scattered around the house, office, and car!

I might mount the iPad in my bathroom

[charleski]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

That's because free flash games, programs etc. on the web would render a lot of stuff in their App store useless. And thus they wouldn't get their cut from selling an App of a game that you can play in Flash on the web for free etc.

The issue of Flash on the iPhone OS is a lot more complex and political and is ultimately founded in the fact that Apple and Adobe are prime competitors for content creation apps and content delivery structures. (In fact John Gruber has pointed out that the animosity between Apple and Adobe may reach back to the days of Display Postscript on the Next.)

Flash on OSX is well known to cause a lot of crashes, though this may simply reflect the extent to which it's used. Adobe says they want to fix that, but need greater access to core, undocumented parts of the OS. Apple doesn't want to give them that access. Photoshop used to be the Mac's 'killer app', yet for the past few years it has run better on the PC (PS's code is such a spaghetti that just porting it to Cocoa was a major task, leading to a long delay for an intel-native version and the continued lack of 64bit functionality on OSX).

The lack of Flash is just one result of a long and complex history in which both parties have some blame. Apple's response has been to construct a new paradigm based on HTML5 and h.264, and it's largely worked for the iPhone with its small-screen experience. The fact remains, though, that without Flash you're not getting the whole web, and that may become more evident for those who use the iPad for general browsing.

[MikeRo]

In hindsight, I was not surprised that Apple went with an LCD screen instead of new, untried technology. They learned a big lesson with the less-than-stellar acceptance of the Apple Newton: Don't be on the bleeding edge.

The iPod was not the first MP3 player. Apple released a player that was not a big improvement over others on the market but they then came out with one thing the others did not have: iTunes. This gave you a seamless process of buying music and getting it onto your player. That was the big improvement.

They repeated that with the iPhone and the App Store - again other already existing smartphones had everything the iPhone had (or close enough) but again it was the seamless integration with the App Store that was the winner.

I think the iPod is the MP3 player sales leader (don't know for sure, haven't seen sales figures) but Nokia is still way out in front of Apple in smartphone sales although Apple has closed the gap somewhat. What does this mean for the iPad? No idea.