A few points to address:

1. The iPad does need some improvements (as does the iPhone).
Wireless sync is one, the list can go on.  If Apple does not address
these issues, others will (through add-on hardware, I imagine).

2. I join with the growing chorus (and have long believed) that there
needs to be a computer for consumers and casual users.  The iPad is a
good step in that direction.  That is also to say, this is not a
computer for engineers or tech geeks.  One might opine that the sorry
state of computers (hardware, operating systems, applications) is due
to the fact that computers are designed for engineers, and everyone
else just has to pick up enough technical expertise to use them.  This
was a hot topic decades ago, and it should be still.  The old adage
goes, "put someone who has never used a computer in front of your
hardware/software and see how far they get without any assistance".
The iPad goes pretty far towards getting past the initial hurdles in
this test.  Not all the way, but far more so than anything that has
been available commercially.  So get over it, "computers" that are
useless to engineers are (hopefully) going to take over.

3. Lastly, allow me to address the initial comment.  If all anyone
owned was an iPad, then yes, Apple *could* control our minds.  The
reality is that a few media conglomerates (not Apple) decidedly *do*
control what we see and hear.  If not for the Internet and some
independent media creators (in film, radio, and TV), we would be
approaching a "1984" existence ruled by corporations, not
governments.  Just like throwing people in jail is not the solution to
poverty, 'breaking' Apple's grip on the iPad/iPhone is not the answer
to freedom of speech.  Apple is interested in making money, and Steve
Jobs is interested in -changing-, not controlling, minds.  If there
were true competition among publishing houses and media outlets, Apple
would be happy to push it all through the iTunes store (and it would
be available through 3rd party apps).  If anyone on this list is truly
interested in solving these issues, write/call your elected officials
(and the EU, etc.) to improve competition in the media world.  Apple
can't solve this problem (alone), but you can help.


> On 26 March 2010 16:29, OldFatGit <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "If Apple’s iPad has the effect on our print reading matter in the way
> > iTunes did on our music consumption, Apple could wind up the dominant
> > channel by which we get published “print” information.
>
> > That’s why the issue of Apple picking and choosing what we can and
> > can’t read is so disturbing. If they’re forcing magazines to edit
> > their contents in order to get distribution, then whatever Apple’s
> > then-current (and thus far completely arbitrary) rules would determine
> > what you get to read.
>
> > It might even determine the political, religious, or ideological slant
> > of what you’re permitted to read."
>
> > read on here:http://government.zdnet.com/?p=8356&tag=wrapper;col1
>
> > --

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to