Just ordered the EXOPC Slate

[harryE123]

Originally Posted by volwrath

Flash is not atrocious. It works great on my Android phone. You are just quoting Jobs, but you are offbase. Frankly I think Apple will have Flash again very soon, and Jobs will come out and proclaim that adobe fixed flash to apple standards and its the consumers that win, and you can thank me, steve jobs. And millions of apple fans will proclaim this as truth.

The #1 top grossing apps in app store is Angry Birds. It comes in with a hefty $0.99 price. 10 out of 12 of those apps are less than $5.00. People want to VNC from ipad because they are remote, not because people dont want to use their computer.




Hah you cut the middleman known as google, yet added the middleman known as apple. iAds is much more of a ripoff than traditional google ads

No I am not quoting Jobs and you are misinformed to such an extent that what you are saying becomes even more ludicrous by the fact that you are saying it with such conviction. Apple had approached adobe for flash but adobe wouldn't provide a workable non battery draining flash for ios, and NEITHER for any other device up until now. So that comment that apple didn't have flash is garbage because no one did. And now that they do it's still laggy, buggy, doesn't interface well with flash and is no where near imitating desktop flash use. Read any review, these are the facts. Now if your android phone runs flash great it's probably from another coding planet. Good luck to your battery life with all the flash content draining it. I use click to flash with safari to disable flash across all webpages on my desktop btw, and I don't miss it one bit.

I don't think there's an argument on your second point, if there is one remind me.

Apple is not a middleman here, it's an enabler of a superior ad platform that is unobtrusive, it runs within apps, it respects privacy unlike google (aka they won't sent your location data to advertisers so they can track your EVERY waking hour - and they explicitly inform you IF and WHEN you would like to provide location data), and offers some very very creative stuff for advertisers whilst also enabling developers to make a living.

They are not the de facto ad pig of the web hogging any and everyone who would like to advertise on the web. This big brotherish and preposterous, and you have been hoodwinked into believing you are getting a free os whilst your privacy is violated and tons of scam ads make tons of easy $$$ for goolgle. and the evil totalitarian data empire that is google (under ship's clothes) grows and grows. Good, wise choice. Have you ever wondered all those scam ads around the world, who actually pushes them, it's google. Do they exercise any quality control on these like apple? No. Because that's the ONLY route by which they make their money.

[weateallthepies]

Originally Posted by harryE123

No I am not quoting Jobs and you are misinformed to such an extent that what you are saying becomes even more ludicrous by the fact that you are saying it with such conviction. Apple had approached adobe for flash but adobe wouldn't provide a workable non battery draining flash for ios, and NEITHER for any other device up until now. So that comment that apple didn't have flash is garbage because no one did. And now that they do it's still laggy, buggy, doesn't interface well with flash and is no where near imitating desktop flash use. Read any review, these are the facts. Now if your android phone runs flash great it's probably from another coding planet. Good luck to your battery life with all the flash content draining it. I use click to flash with safari to disable flash across all webpages on my desktop btw, and I don't miss it one bit.

That's not really true. My three year old Nokia tablet has flash and has done since it was released, it has a pretty good battery life too. Will run for 5 or 6 hours in use and all week on stand by. It's a little old now and only running Flash 9 but it'll still run a lot of content out there. Flash for linux has been around for quite a while now and give the unix roots of iOS I don't imagine it would be hard to get a version of flash working just as well.

[vaughnmr]

This is starting to be very entertaining. Obvious signs of koolaide overdose.

[harryE123]

Originally Posted by weateallthepies

That's not really true. My three year old Nokia tablet has flash and has done since it was released, it has a pretty good battery life too. Will run for 5 or 6 hours in use and all week on stand by. It's a little old now and only running Flash 9 but it'll still run a lot of content out there. Flash for linux has been around for quite a while now and give the unix roots of iOS I don't imagine it would be hard to get a version of flash working just as well.

What nokia are you referring to when you say tablet? And when you say a lot of content what exactly do you mean, a lot of content can't be run on current android devices with the latest flash, let alone nokia ones from three years ago. Also bear in mind the screen size, and the constant use of browsing would indeed drain battery (let's not forget in terms of actual browsing time by the users iphone by far dwarfs any other "smart" phone on the market) with flash. Do you get 5-6 hours browsing the web on the nokia? No way. And how large is the device?

And if nokia flash enabled smart phones are so good how come they have just sacked the head of their smart phones dept. and they are doing colossally bad in smart phones, lower than anyone's negative expectations? And bear in mind that I do like nokia phones (before the iphone I refused to own anything but nokia phones), and I think they are probably the best phone maker on the planet, especially when it comes to voice quality they are surely the best. But lately boy have some of their smart phones been huge disappointments despite of the great core of symbian os they run. Some of them in terms of interface have been abysmal train wrecks.

Flash for linux is a desktop non arm flash variant. Unix roots don't really mean much when the code is for a different platform, different cpu and when adobe didn't bother optimizing it with hardware acceleration for that platform. That unix flash (which also runs on os x) is equally bad too since adobe don't leverage other layers of technology to optimize it there as they do in windows. Everyone on os x knows how bad flash is, why do you think click to flash is one of the most used add ons to safari?

Trust me if apple did have a good enough plug in from adobe they wouldn't have any problem including it, why would they? But adobe didn't provide a good enough plug in because they weren't expecting apple to deliver such a big blow with the iphone to threaten them, they thought they'd take their sweet time and blackmail them ultimately to include it by force of market and demand. They were wrong and apple is now spearheading their decline. But they woke up and started crying and whining to late about it. But of course they found very sympathetic ears and mouths to every dime a dozen pundit on the pc side of the fence who with extreme anger have seen time after time the public disregarding their moronic commentary on apple and apple becoming larger in capitalization than ms...

Apple are not supposed to write flash code for adobe just so adobe can sit on their butts and milk a cash cow that wasn't supposed to be there to begin with, they are as they should be) supporting open standards for the web that have better code, that are faster, more flexible and above all open to all, as the web should. Apple's very own open source webkit which spun off from the kde browser is powering almost ALL mobile browsers including google's browser and most browsers on nokia's phones (and palm's webos was based on webkit) because more often than not apple do practice what they preach. Funnily enough some part of the user interface of Adobe's very own CS5 use webkit for rendering.

Originally Posted by vaughnmr

This is starting to be very entertaining. Obvious signs of koolaide overdose.

This is the typical garbage comment when the flash adoring pc camp runs out of any arguments whatsoever. It's hard to see apple trampling upon so many misguided fallacies of the pc world type rags and all their pundits and going from strength to strength, with the ipad not only dwarfing netbooks but notebooks too by recent surveys.

[Graham]

My understanding was that Apple wanted Adobe to use the Quicktime calls for video rather than open up the API at a lower level. This is why Flash runs so poorly on Apple systems when compared to the performance on Windows or Linux systems, where, despite what you're saying Harry, it really works very well.

Adobe have said publicly that they want to work with Apple to improve the flash performance on Apple devices, but Apple have refused.

Graham

[weateallthepies]

Originally Posted by harryE123

What nokia are you referring to when you say tablet? And when you say a lot of content what exactly do you mean, a lot of content can't be run on current android devices with the latest flash, let alone nokia ones from three years ago. Also bear in mind the screen size, and the constant use of browsing would indeed drain battery (let's not forget in terms of actual browsing time by the users iphone by far dwarfs any other "smart" phone on the market) with flash. Do you get 5-6 hours browsing the web on the nokia? No way. And how large is the device?

It's a Nokia N800 Internet Tablet, one of the line of internet tablets they have produced for some years. I can't really give an accurate answer as to how much flash it will run, it runs the things I use it for.

A big reason some flash sites don't work well on mobile devices is that the sites have not been optimised for mobile devices. Again this is not a great criticism of the flash platform, it's like complaining your mobile won't run desktop applications. I could run firefox on the N800 if I wanted too but it ran like a pig because it wasn't designed for a tiny screen and low power cpu.

Never done an accurate battery test, it lasts 5 or 6 hours without charge for my general use, I'd have to do more accurate tests to find out how long it would last whilst constantly browsing. It's a 4.1" screen I think.

Originally Posted by harryE123

And if nokia flash enabled smart phones are so good how come they have just sacked the head of their smart phones dept. and they are doing colossally bad in smart phones, lower than anyone's negative expectations? And bear in mind that I do like nokia phones (before the iphone I refused to own anything but nokia phones), and I think they are probably the best phone maker on the planet, especially when it comes to voice quality they are surely the best. But lately boy have some of their smart phones been huge disappointments despite of the great core of symbian os they run. Some of them in terms of interface have been abysmal train wrecks.

It's not a smart phone, it's an internet tablet. They were before their time and badly marketed, they did become popular with the dev community but never really with the general public. The latest version the N900 is a smartphone but still running the same linux platform Maemo. The dev community have managed to get a near perfect port of Android running on it though. I'm not suggesting Nokia are great, was just pointing out that other mobile devices have been running flash when you stated that none had.

Originally Posted by harryE123

Flash for linux is a desktop non arm flash variant. Unix roots don't really mean much when the code is for a different platform, different cpu and when adobe didn't bother optimizing it with hardware acceleration for that platform. That unix flash (which also runs on os x) is equally bad too since adobe don't leverage other layers of technology to optimize it there as they do in windows. Everyone on os x knows how bad flash is, why do you think click to flash is one of the most used add ons to safari?

The N800 is ARM based, well OMAP2 but that's just ARM glued to something else, someone obviously managed to compile flash for it. No it might not have been CPU optimized but then neither are lots of things you can run on a device, I'm sure Apple don't ban all CPU intensive processes it seems a little strange they would single out one piece of software.

Besides, ARM themselves state that Flash 10 is optimised for Cortex-A devices.

Originally Posted by harryE123

Trust me if apple did have a good enough plug in from adobe they wouldn't have any problem including it, why would they? But adobe didn't provide a good enough plug in because they weren't expecting apple to deliver such a big blow with the iphone to threaten them, they thought they'd take their sweet time and blackmail them ultimately to include it by force of market and demand. They were wrong and apple is now spearheading their decline. But they woke up and started crying and whining to late about it. But of course they found very sympathetic ears and mouths to every dime a dozen pundit on the pc side of the fence who with extreme anger have seen time after time the public disregarding their moronic commentary on apple and apple becoming larger in capitalization than ms...

Apple are not supposed to write flash code for adobe just so adobe can sit on their butts and milk a cash cow that wasn't supposed to be there to begin with, they are as they should be) supporting open standards for the web that have better code, that are faster, more flexible and above all open to all, as the web should. Apple's very own open source webkit which spun off from the kde browser is powering almost ALL mobile browsers including google's browser and most browsers on nokia's phones (and palm's webos was based on webkit) because more often than not apple do practice what they preach. Funnily enough some part of the user interface of Adobe's very own CS5 use webkit for rendering.

Like Quicktime?

Yep webkit is nice. Apple does some great stuff, you seem to react to everything people write as some sort of attack on Apple. I'm just pointing out that flash does and has worked on mobile devices for some time and will continue to do so. It's not atrocious or evil or going to make my device crash every second, it's just another web technology which Apple have chosen not to embrace for seemingly personal reasons which are backed up with a lot of hot air.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by harryE123

It's hard to see apple trampling upon so many misguided fallacies of the pc world type rags and all their pundits and going from strength to strength, with the ipad not only dwarfing netbooks but notebooks too by recent surveys.

The iPad is not 'dwarfing netbook and notebook' sales. Netbook growth in sales has been dropping throughout this year, which may be a result of the iPad release eating into that end of the market, or it may simply be that the netbook market has reached its peak and is now in decline, particularly as the low end of the laptop market has been reaching into the same territory.

Regardless, the global netbook market in 2010 is somewhere upward of 30 million units, and even if the iPad climbed up to those figures over the next year it could not be described as 'dwarfing' that market.

Analysts predict that total tablet sales in 2010, largely the iPad, will be about 7 to 12 million.

They do expect total tablet sales to overtake netbook sales in the US over the next couple of years:

http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/17/for...sell-netbooks/

Graham

[Graham]

By the way, I also think the iPad is a great device, just not for everything. There is a borrowed iPad right next to me at this very moment. I'm reading this forum and typing this from my laptop though, because I find it much easier.

Graham

[harryE123]

Sure it's much easier on a laptop, hence the ipad dock and the convertibles that are coming out soon (i.e. making a laptop form factor of the ipad). But it sure isn't much easier typing on a netbook, so the comparison is unfair, you should be comparing the ipad with a netbook in terms of typing not a laptop, and the ipad as a lot of options for adding a proper keyboard, netbooks don't. Because it's much easier standing the ipad up and typing on an external than doing that on a netbook.

[HamsterRage]

Originally Posted by harryE123

you should be comparing the ipad with a netbook in terms of typing not a laptop, and the ipad as a lot of options for adding a proper keyboard, netbooks don't. Because it's much easier standing the ipad up and typing on an external than doing that on a netbook.

What a crock! Netbooks, unlike iPads, have USB ports, which mean that you can plug in almost any real keyboard on the market. Including wireless keyboards and mice.

Do that with an iPad.

[vaughnmr]

Originally Posted by harryE123

Sure it's much easier on a laptop, hence the ipad dock and the convertibles that are coming out soon (i.e. making a laptop form factor of the ipad). But it sure isn't much easier typing on a netbook, so the comparison is unfair, you should be comparing the ipad with a netbook in terms of typing not a laptop, and the ipad as a lot of options for adding a proper keyboard, netbooks don't. Because it's much easier standing the ipad up and typing on an external than doing that on a netbook.

I'm seriously thinking about selling tickets to this show. If this conversation was shown to the tech crowd, they would go wild...

Here's a comparison with flash and apple's html5:

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/...ng-on-mobiles/

[GreenMonkey]

I had an n800 internet tablet. It was a cool gadget. It did flash fine.

I used my laptop in tablet mode this morning to view and copy/print some .xps files this morning . I'm pretty fond of my win7 convertible. I'm sure I'd enjoy a cheap win7 almost as much.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by harryE123

But it sure isn't much easier typing on a netbook, so the comparison is unfair, you should be comparing the ipad with a netbook in terms of typing not a laptop...

!!!!!!!

Well, my experience may vary from yours, but I have written reams and reams on various netbooks, including my own, in sessions lasting up to four or five hours. I find being able to type with two hands on a responsive keyboard a more pleasant experience than tapping with one hand on a flat glass plate while holding it in the other, or propping the slate up on something to get a reasonable angle for two-handed use, while at the same time cutting down the available screen real estate with an on-screen keyboard.

Originally Posted by harryE123

... the ipad as a lot of options for adding a proper keyboard, netbooks don't. Because it's much easier standing the ipad up and typing on an external than doing that on a netbook.

A friend of mine now travels with a separate Bluetooth keyboard for his iPad and two strange pieces of orange foam which are designed to prop the iPad up at a suitable angle. I can't help thinking his life would be simpler with a good netbook or convertible.

Graham

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by vaughnmr

I'm seriously thinking about selling tickets to this show. If this conversation was shown to the tech crowd, they would go wild...

Here's a comparison with flash and apple's html5:

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/...ng-on-mobiles/

Don't mean anything. Look at flash, work ok with windows, use it on mac, or linux, it get slower.

On that point I second apple, go for the standard ! Not the proprietary crap.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Don't mean anything. Look at flash, work ok with windows, use it on mac, or linux, it get slower.

On that point I second apple, go for the standard ! Not the proprietary crap.

Here's another take on the same story:

http://www.blackcj.com/blog/2010/09/...obile-devices/

What's interesting is that Flash and HTML5 were being compared side by side on the same Android device, so the effects of the implementation on different OSes aren't relevant (although the situation could differ on a different platform, of course).

Let’s not forget to mention that HTML5 consumed TWICE the battery life as Flash for these tests on the Android.

If so, that weakens the argument against Flash as a battery hog.

It would be interesting to see similar tests on other platforms.

Here's a good attempt at a benchmark for both:

http://www.craftymind.com/guimark2/

The main article was comparing with Flash 10.0. The comments below update the figures for the faster Flash 10.1.

Graham