iPad Without Pixel Qi, the Apple iPad fails

[garygibsonsf]

One thing that's worth mentioning about Flash is that it's problematic in other ways. It tends to be wildly overused at times, for instance, and can be a real memory hog. In a way, I wonder if it's an opportunity for some flash developers to actually generate cash from their sites by rebuilding them as Ipad apps they might otherwise never have seen. One admittedly rather whimsical site I came across that's quite entertaining but possibly even quite useful on either an Iphone or Ipad - should the designers decide to port it over - might be something like www.eggtimers.com. Yes, it's daft, but I have an egg every morning.

I've designed web pages in both HTML and Flash, and although I appreciate Flash's potential wow-factor, I can also tell you for a fact it gets tired very quickly, and assuming web designers have the sense to program in static image replacements for the flash files, you very likely won't miss it. If I fear for anyone, it's the people who build those side-ads with moving video you see everywhere (I'm assuming they're built in Flash).

For a low-down on some other serious problems with Flash, take a look at these links:

http://www.mardiros.net/flash-technology.html

and

http://www.jhuskisson.com/articles/2...ased-site-suck

May I just add that although I was initially a bit disappointed by the Ipad, I was a bit more upbeat on it after watching the whole of the Apple presentation on streaming video. With a non-reflective, non-OLED screen or similar, it's definitely not designed primarily as an ebook reader. That's just trying to steal Amazon's thunder - a useful extra aimed at people whom I suspect haven't seen e-ink. If I got one, it would be more for other stuff than reading books.

On the other hand, it would make an INCREDIBLE reader for comics.

[mores]

The misuse of a technology is no reason to prohipit its use alltogether.

flash sucks in OsX, and seeing the "broken plugin" icon on my iPhone sucks too.
I rarely browse full sites when on the iPhone, I try to stick to sites that offer mobile versions, like mobileread does.
I can't say I miss flash terribly on the iPhone. I would, though, miss it on the iPad. There is no excuse for boycotting Adobe in this way. The CEOs might have their own little feud going, but why take it out on the backs of their users?

[HarryT]

I don't care about Flash games and so on; just want to be able to watch video on the BBC News site.

[LDBoblo]

In my Firefox browser, I have the "Flashblock" plugin, which shows me a little transparent frame with the Flash icon, that I can opt to play or remove, or simply ignore. I use it at work too, where the somewhat deprecated hardware might not handle flash-intensive pages with lots of advertisements well.

I agree that Flash is sometimes abused in websites and has lots of problems. However, even though my browser blocks flash by default, it allows me to play what I choose (videos, in particular).

[scottjl]

the iPad isn't going to get flash. so get over arguing about it, it isn't going to make it magically appear no matter how much people whine for it. Apple clearly has the ability to put Flash on the iPhone/Touch/iPad if they wanted to. regardless of how many sites use it, how much adobe cries foul or how many users say they won't buy one because of the lack of flash. beating. dead. horse.

[Sonist]

Regardless of what a few here and there think, Flash is one of the most widely adopted internet technologies, with practically 100% install rate. It supports H.264, the new version supports hardware acceleration, and it does a few things better than still-work-in-progress HTML 5.

The iPad sounds like a well-thought out device, and it's very tempting. But the one reason I would not buy the iPad, would be if it doesn't support Flash.

I don't do extensive browsing on my iPhone, so the lack of Flash is not a deal-breaker. But the iPad is a different device, and the lack of Flash would be unacceptable, to me (and I suppose, many others).

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by stustaff

I might mount the iPad in my bathroom

Dude-- when people called the iPad sexy, that is not what they meant!

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Sonist

The iPad sounds like a well-thought out device, and it's very tempting. But the one reason I would not buy the iPad, would be if it doesn't support Flash.

It's 3rd on my list of reasons why I'm not buying.

1. Not designed around stylus handwriting. Doubt a capacitive touch screen stylus and hand writing apps would give me the precision in writing and flexibility of what documents/programs I can mark stuff up in.

2. No multitasking. Would want to have the web browser up to look up stuff when reading research articles, music playing while reading etc.

3. Flash. Would want to use it for hulu etc. I put that last as they could probably put out a Hulu app like they have a Youtube app etc. to get around it well enough for me.

[LDBoblo]

But back on Pixel Qi's relationship...

I think Apple got a lot right, and the screen is probably fine enough. I do think though, that it would be a better document-viewing device than almost anything else if they used Pixel Qi, as it is supposedly capable of ~200ppi in reflective mode, as well as having noticeably superior battery life, in a pretty good form factor.

Rather than hoping that Apple adopts Pixel Qi though (which is very unlikely), I'd rather hope that some competitor that acknowledges and takes cues from what Apple got right steps up and uses something like a Tegra 2 and Pixel Qi combo. Notion Ink's got a prototype going, but I'm not 100% convinced, especially on the software end.

The competitors might not go that route either though if the iBook side of Apple isn't played up a bit.

[nikkie]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

It's 3rd on my list of reasons why I'm not buying.
2. No multitasking. Would want to have the web browser up to look up stuff when reading research articles, music playing while reading etc.

On this one, I don't find it an issue for most things on my iPhone. By the way, you *can* have music in the background of any app. Looking up stuff in stanza or many other apps requires you to highlight a bit of a text. Then you can choose what you want to do with that text (define it, share with facebook, annotate, look up in google, wikipedia, etc). It brings up those interfaces in a new panel, then when you're done it takes you back to the text. I'm sure with a bigger screen the new apps will streamline that even more to allow you to read wikipedia/google side by side with your text.

[nikkie]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Regardless of what a few here and there think, Flash is one of the most widely adopted internet technologies, with practically 100% install rate. It supports H.264, the new version supports hardware acceleration, and it does a few things better than still-work-in-progress HTML 5.

The iPad sounds like a well-thought out device, and it's very tempting. But the one reason I would not buy the iPad, would be if it doesn't support Flash.

I don't do extensive browsing on my iPhone, so the lack of Flash is not a deal-breaker. But the iPad is a different device, and the lack of Flash would be unacceptable, to me (and I suppose, many others).

It doesn't support flash. Some people thought it might because the screens of NYT showed flash video, but it turns out those were modified. The new screens shows the "no plugin" element where videos should be on NYT pages.

[nikkie]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

But back on Pixel Qi's relationship...

I think Apple got a lot right, and the screen is probably fine enough. I do think though, that it would be a better document-viewing device than almost anything else if they used Pixel Qi, as it is supposedly capable of ~200ppi in reflective mode, as well as having noticeably superior battery life, in a pretty good form factor.

Rather than hoping that Apple adopts Pixel Qi though (which is very unlikely), I'd rather hope that some competitor that acknowledges and takes cues from what Apple got right steps up and uses something like a Tegra 2 and Pixel Qi combo. Notion Ink's got a prototype going, but I'm not 100% convinced, especially on the software end.

The competitors might not go that route either though if the iBook side of Apple isn't played up a bit.

This makes me wonder if there will soon be hackintablets...I can definitely see buying a tablet with a multitouch PixelQi screen and wanting the iPad OS and programs on it. For a while there will be a dearth of quality multi-touch productivity applications for non-Apple devices. It's not like Microsoft spent the last three years re-engineering World and Excel to work with a touch-only interface.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by nikkie

This makes me wonder if there will soon be hackintablets...I can definitely see buying a tablet with a multitouch PixelQi screen and wanting the iPad OS and programs on it. For a while there will be a dearth of quality multi-touch productivity applications for non-Apple devices. It's not like Microsoft spent the last three years re-engineering World and Excel to work with a touch-only interface.

"Productivity" on a touch-only device is still quite a bit of a contradiction, especially when the OS doesn't support actual multitasking.

However, it would be nice to have a more touch-oriented UI for a tablet, and unfortunately there aren't many great options. WinMo7 is still a relative unknown, and I'm not a huge fan of Android or iPhone or earlier WinMo.

Perhaps even more unfortunately, a lot of developers are under this assumption that the entire computing paradigm must be radically altered, so they'll never actually get anything done.

[zacheryjensen]

Originally Posted by kjk

I think its an aesthetic decision. Steve Jobs would rather have a gorgeous full color, responsive display with limited battery life and wide functionality, than a merely decent color display with incredible battery life and optimized for reading. Just my guess.

I think the PixelQ tech is amazing, and hope Jepsen puts it on a bunch of devices. I'm just not sure Apple is the right fit for that kind of tech. My bet is AMOLED is Apple's next screen tech.

You are the closest without going over!

Seriously though, anyone who has followed Jobs career will know that he would never make such a large compromise as that which is made by the Pixel Qi screens. There are other upcoming screen techs that are much, much better anyway, with no compromises to color depth. Just look back at CES coverage for examples.

The fact that the non-backlight-mode of Pixel Qi isn't even color is the biggest problem, I would guess, in getting Jobs to be interested. Another problem is that Pixel Qi has only demonstrated screens that are as thick as the whole iPad itself. Perhaps it's simply too space consuming to be an option for Apple-esque design.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't care about Flash games and so on; just want to be able to watch video on the BBC News site.

I thought the BBC iPlayer used .h264 just for the iPhone?