Re: [backstage] iPad

[Dave Crossland]

2010/1/28 Tom Morris :
>
> A quote from Apple COO Tim Cook: "We believe that we need to own and
> control the primary technologies behind the products we make"
>
> Err, no thanks.
>
> No more Macs. I'm done feeding this beast - for the same reason I was
> done feeding the Microsoft beast a few years ago.

Awesome!

Thanks for posting this, reminds me of
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/06/02/when-the-bough-breaks :-)
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Dave Crossland]

2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts :
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:49, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>> 2010/1/28 Daniel Morris :
>>>
>>> > Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
>>> > runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)
>>
>> Apple actively oppose you installing whatever you want to, and running
>> applications in the background, on the iPhone and now on the iPad.
>>
>> These are features of any respectable operating system since the 70s.
>
> No, these are features of any operating system designed for use by
> computer users.

iPad is a computer, owners of iPads are computer users, but Apple
blocks access to those features. So, from the user's perspective,
those features do not exist, and so, it is not a respectable operating
system.

I find it very similar to the way that governments, in serving
corporate interests, attempt to deny people are citizens with rights
and refer to them as much as possible as consumers.

>> If you own your computer, it ought to be under your control. Apple
>> computers are not. The ultimate answer is 100% free software.
>
> The same applies to your car, central heating system, ADSL router,
> Freeview box, TV and most mobile phones...

There is an crucial social question raised by the difference between a
microprocessor in a car, CHS, router, STB, TV or mobile phone that no
one can update the software on, and one which the manufacturer can
update but not the user.

You can't even choose NOT to take Apple's updates, for example when
they disable a feature that you enjoy using. There are countless
examples of computers with 'tivoisation' that have done this.

> Point of note, though, it's a "computer" in the technical sense, in
> the same way that all mobile phones are "computers". Really, though,
> it's [consumer electronics].

That the iPad or any other ebook reader is "not a computer" is a
dangerous lie. Almost all mobile phones sold today are proper
computers and the iPad certainly is.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Tom Morris]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 22:37, Mo McRoberts  wrote:
> So, what does everyone think?
>

I quoted it earlier on my blog - Alex Payne (@al3x) states succintly
what the problem is with closed platforms like the iPad:

"The thing that bothers me most about the iPad is this: if I had an
iPad rather than a real computer as a kid, I’d never be a programmer
today. I’d never have had the ability to run whatever stupid,
potentially harmful, hugely educational programs I could download or
write."

- 

I'm preaching to the choir here - the first computers I used were both
open and booted straight to a BASIC prompt (BBC B booted straight to
BBC BASIC, and the Amstrad CPC 6128 booted to AMSBASIC). Back then,
games and accessories were pretty expensive - £25-£30 (£30 in 1990
money is £45 in 2009 money, remember), and no Internet, meant the only
thing to do was to play around and write code.

Now, to programme on my Mac, I have to install a special developer kit
from the DVD. On Windows, you can hack, but it's not at all clear how
to unless you really rummage around a bit.

Okay, so Apple have made a closed platform. Big deal.

What concerns me more about the iPad and the rise of proprietary App
Stores (there are people saying that there ought to be app stores for
Windows and Mac OS X!) is the reaction of the geeks is "don't worry,
web apps will save us". I've seen so many people say this - Joe
Hewitt, Chris Messina and many others.

Except web apps won't save us. Web apps will always be a second class
citizen. How about any software that requires a bit of oomph? I bring
up three examples always: Final Cut Pro, Eclipse, Crysis. Last time I
checked, browsers weren't much good at chucking polygons around
compared to the cheap and widespread graphics cards in everybody's
computers (don't let the length of the spec fool you: HTML5 does not
contain OpenGL hidden inside!). And they will never have full platform
access. On the iPhone, how do you get access to the Notifications API
from a web app? (Best I can think of is e-mail or Twitter.) And what
if there's data that's supposed to be a little bit more private? And,
it doesn't solve Alex Payne's issue: it basically splits the world
into two - the haves and the have-nots. The haves live in a world of
computers, compilers and servers. The have-nots, even if they have
great ideas, don't get to play in that world. They don't even get to
play at the shallow end and build webpages or write JavaScript hacks
(sorry, no Firebug for you, no text editor, no filesystem even!).

-- 
Tom Morris


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Tim Dobson]

Tim Dobson wrote:
It seems such a step backwards that the first device which will make a 
real impact on the tablet form factor is going to stifle developers open 
innovation and prevent consumers from getting the most out of their device.


Ahaha

This is probably the funniest thing I've seen so far this year: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQnT0zp8Ya4

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 17:43, Brian Butterworth  wrote:

> Apologies for inflammatory language, I found out this morning someone has
> stolen by external terrabyte drive.  Lost a decade of TV recordings...

Oh cripes, my condolences :(

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Brian Butterworth]

Ian,

I don't know where you host cubicgaren.com (at home, perhaps) but it's very
often down, as it is now...

2010/1/28 Ian Forrester 

>  I tried calling him but he wouldn't take my call. Something about a blog
> entry I wrote about the ipad?
>
> :)
>
>
> http://cubicgarden.com/wordpress/2010/01/27/the-apple-ipad-underwelming-but-not-a-bad-price/
>
> Secret[] Private[x] Public[]
>
> Ian Forrester
> Senior Backstage Producer
>
> BBC R&D North Lab,
> 1st Floor Office, OB Base,
> New Broadcasting House, Oxford Road,
> Manchester, M60 1SJ
>
>
>  --
> *From:* owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:
> owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] *On Behalf Of *Brendan Quinn
> *Sent:* 28 January 2010 16:15
>
> *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> *Subject:* RE: [backstage] iPad
>
>  heh, we have a "virtual steadicam" system in R&D that could address this
> problem (the motion sickness thing)...
>
> has anyone got Steve Jobs' phone number?
>
>  --
> *From:* owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:
> owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] *On Behalf Of *Michael Kraskin
> *Sent:* 28 January 2010 13:49
> *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [backstage] iPad
>
>  I'd agree to a gentleman's wager that the second generation will have a
> front facing camera and a native application just for this purpose.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> Sent: Thu Jan 28 08:37:23 2010
> Subject: RE: [backstage] iPad
>
> I can see why they didn’t put a camera on it.
>
>
>
> Who’s going to be bother holding the thing still enough to enable decent
> chat?
>
>
>
> It would be a nightmare to try and hold it out in front of your face and
> even worse for the person getting motion sickness on the other end.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [
> mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk ]
> On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
> Sent: 28 January 2010 13:28
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad
>
>
>
> Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple laptop
> has one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat.
>
> And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps then
> it will make sense to buy one.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
> Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin 
> wrote:
> > I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.
> Hardly
> > the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> > disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers
> as
> > well.
>
> As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
> ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
> appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
> Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
> grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
> the App Store they'd like instead).
>
> As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
> influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
> changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
> relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
> present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
> share customer demographics.
>
> > The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before
> you
> > buy one"
>
> Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
> utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
> phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
> wrong, just that I can't fathom it.
>
> M.
>
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
> Unofficial list archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal
> views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you
> have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use,
> copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and
> notify the sender immediately.
>
>
>
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
> communication will signify your consent to this
>
>
>
>


-- 

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
advice, since 2002

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Brian Butterworth]

2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 

> It's a piece of consumer electronics. A very powerful piece of
> consumer electronics, but a piece of consumer electronics nonetheless.
>

I think that's what I was getting at.

Before "home computers" came along the things consumers bought were called
"calculators".

There's something a bit old-school about me, if I can't pick it up and start
programming it, then it a "thing" not a computer.  And a "thing" with DRM
seems such a broken "thing" then that's my problem.  "Operating System"
isn't what I meant.

Apologies for inflammatory language, I found out this morning someone has
stolen by external terrabyte drive.  Lost a decade of TV recordings...


>
> M.
>
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>  Unofficial list archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>



-- 

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
advice, since 2002

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Tim Dobson]

Mo McRoberts wrote:

So, what does everyone think?



Hm...

I'm a bit concerned that they've taken what is basically general purpose 
computer and said "you can only do what we allow you to do".


If this was a Mac Tablet, I'm not sure I'd have an issue.

On your Mac you can run pretty much anything you want on it; if you 
build a neat program that lets you do something Apple hadn't intended it 
be used for, then you are free to do so.


It seems such a step backwards that the first device which will make a 
real impact on the tablet form factor is going to stifle developers open 
innovation and prevent consumers from getting the most out of their device.


This article has a fairly balanced perspective on the issues apple has 
created:

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2010/01/27/how-a-great-product-can-be-bad-news-apple-ipad-and-the-closed-mac/


(and how much effect will it have on the  situation over the
next 18 months or so, do we reckon?)


Now *that* is an interesting question.

Probably very little - it's just a continuation of the iphone situation 
- limited Browser string.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Ian Forrester]

No more Macs. I'm done feeding this beast - for the same reason I was done 
feeding the Microsoft beast a few years ago.

I'm not sure what I do now. I'll continue using the Mac I have until it needs 
replacing. Then whatever I get won't be a Mac. If Linux still doesn't quite 
fit, I'll hack together a Hackintosh. I'm hoping that in the next year or two, 
I can finally move over to the open source Promised Land. ;)

See 
http://tommorris.org/wiki/Things_preventing_me_from_moving_to_Linux_full_time

-
Found just the thing for you Tom - http://www.haiku-os.org/

Its BeOS but Open source, the alpha is actually quite good

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Ian Forrester]

I tried calling him but he wouldn't take my call. Something about a blog entry 
I wrote about the ipad?
 
:)
 
http://cubicgarden.com/wordpress/2010/01/27/the-apple-ipad-underwelming-but-not-a-bad-price/

Secret[] Private[x] Public[]

Ian Forrester
Senior Backstage Producer

BBC R&D North Lab,
1st Floor Office, OB Base,
New Broadcasting House, Oxford Road,
Manchester, M60 1SJ 

 




From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brendan Quinn
Sent: 28 January 2010 16:15
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPad


heh, we have a "virtual steadicam" system in R&D that could address 
this problem (the motion sickness thing)...
 
has anyone got Steve Jobs' phone number?



From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:49
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad



I'd agree to a gentleman's wager that the second generation will have a 
front facing camera and a native application just for this purpose.


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 08:37:23 2010
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPad

I can see why they didn't put a camera on it.



Who's going to be bother holding the thing still enough to enable 
decent chat?



It would be a nightmare to try and hold it out in front of your face 
and even worse for the person getting motion sickness on the other end.





From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:28
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad



Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple 
laptop has one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat.

And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps 
then it will make sense to buy one.


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin 
 wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  
Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet 
surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation 
before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, 
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain 
personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. 
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not 
use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and 
notify the sender immediately.



Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further 
communication will signify your consent to 

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Brendan Quinn]

heh, we have a "virtual steadicam" system in R&D that could address this
problem (the motion sickness thing)...
 
has anyone got Steve Jobs' phone number?



From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:49
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad



I'd agree to a gentleman's wager that the second generation will have a
front facing camera and a native application just for this purpose.


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 08:37:23 2010
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPad

I can see why they didn't put a camera on it.



Who's going to be bother holding the thing still enough to enable decent
chat?



It would be a nightmare to try and hold it out in front of your face and
even worse for the person getting motion sickness on the other end.





From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:28
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad



Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple laptop
has one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat.

And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps
then it will make sense to buy one.


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin 
wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.
Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet
surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation
before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your
system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act
in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.



Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
communication will signify your consent to this

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Tom Morris]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 22:37, Mo McRoberts  wrote:
> So, what does everyone think?
>

It's very pretty, but I think it represents one of the more
significant moments in Apple's transition from computer company to
rich-media toy company. Which is great and all, but for the things I
do, I use computers, not rich media toys.

A quote from Apple COO Tim Cook: "We believe that we need to own and
control the primary technologies behind the products we make"

Err, no thanks.

No more Macs. I'm done feeding this beast - for the same reason I was
done feeding the Microsoft beast a few years ago.

I'm not sure what I do now. I'll continue using the Mac I have until
it needs replacing. Then whatever I get won't be a Mac. If Linux still
doesn't quite fit, I'll hack together a Hackintosh. I'm hoping that in
the next year or two, I can finally move over to the open source
Promised Land. ;)

See 
http://tommorris.org/wiki/Things_preventing_me_from_moving_to_Linux_full_time

-- 
Tom Morris

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Robin Doran]

The lack of a camera (or two, 1 forward and 1 backward facing) is a shame for 
augmented reality apps as well chat,  it would have been good to see  what 
people could have done here, especially as we’ve already seen good stuff using 
GPS and Q-codes on the iphone.

 

 

 

From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] 
On Behalf Of Andrew Macinnes
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:37
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPad

 

I can see why they didn’t put a camera on it.

 

Who’s going to be bother holding the thing still enough to enable decent chat? 

 

It would be a nightmare to try and hold it out in front of your face and even 
worse for the person getting motion sickness on the other end.

 

 

From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] 
On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:28
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

 

Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple laptop has 
one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat. 

And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps then it 
will make sense to buy one. 


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin  wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal 
views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you 
have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy 
or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the 
sender immediately. 

 

Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further 
communication will signify your consent to this

 

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Michael Kraskin]

I'd agree to a gentleman's wager that the second generation will have a front 
facing camera and a native application just for this purpose.


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 08:37:23 2010
Subject: RE: [backstage] iPad

I can see why they didn’t put a camera on it.

 

Who’s going to be bother holding the thing still enough to enable decent chat? 

 

It would be a nightmare to try and hold it out in front of your face and even 
worse for the person getting motion sickness on the other end.

 

 

From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] 
On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:28
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

 

Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple laptop has 
one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat. 

And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps then it 
will make sense to buy one. 


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin  wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal 
views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you 
have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy 
or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the 
sender immediately. 

 

Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further 
communication will signify your consent to this

 

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Andrew Macinnes]

I can see why they didn’t put a camera on it.

 

Who’s going to be bother holding the thing still enough to enable decent chat? 

 

It would be a nightmare to try and hold it out in front of your face and even 
worse for the person getting motion sickness on the other end.

 

 

From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] 
On Behalf Of Michael Kraskin
Sent: 28 January 2010 13:28
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

 

Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple laptop has 
one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat. 

And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps then it 
will make sense to buy one. 


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin  wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal 
views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you 
have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy 
or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the 
sender immediately. 

 

Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further 
communication will signify your consent to this

 

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Michael Kraskin]

Re camera, I want it for the exact same reason every single apple laptop has 
one.  Not point and shoot, but video chat.  

And if developers do change because of this, that's great, and perhaps then it 
will make sense to buy one.  


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:56:06 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin  wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal 
views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you 
have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy 
or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the 
sender immediately.
 
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further 
communication will signify your consent to this

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Rupert Watson]

Put Jellycar and Doodlejump on it and you will never see it again...

Rupert Watson
+44 7787 554 801
www.root6.com


-Original Message-
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] 
On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts
Sent: 28 January 2010 12:56
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin  wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__

ROOT 6 LIMITED
Registered in the UK at
4 WARDOUR MEWS, LONDON
W1F 8AJ
Company No. 03433253


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20, Michael Kraskin  wrote:
> I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly
> the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.

As a user, the lack of Flash won't affect me much, if at all. fewer
ads, and that's about it. The kids won't get near it, as CBeebies
appears to be built almost entirely in Flash (much the same with Club
Penguin), but I can't say I'd consider them not wanting to get their
grubby fingers on it a bad thing (though there are plenty of games in
the App Store they'd like instead).

As a web developer, I can't remember the last time web developers
influenced browsers and not the other way around. Can't see that one
changing any time soon: if the iPad is successful, websites will stop
relying on Flash being ubiquitous (either degrading where Flash isn't
present, or doing something else entirely), assuming they and the iPad
share customer demographics.

> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"

Why on earth would you want a camera on a device whose form factor is
utterly opposed to the hold-up-point-and-shoot facilities in mobile
phones which made digital photography mainstream? Not saying you're
wrong, just that I can't fathom it.

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[David Greaves]

Dan Brickley wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Mo McRoberts  wrote:
>> So, what does everyone think?
> 
> Would make a very luxurious smart and expensive remote control, or if
> you stuck legs on it, a very very small multi-touch table.

Apparently that's not all it does:
  http://rah.posterous.com/apple-ipad-commercial-1

-- 
"Don't worry, you'll be fine; I saw it work in a cartoon once..."
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Phil Whitehouse]

Some useful context on the Apple / Flash debate:

daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash

Phil

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Michael Kraskin
wrote:

>  I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.
> Hardly the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious
> disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as
> well.
>
> The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you
> buy one"
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:03:32 2010
> Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:49, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> > 2010/1/28 Daniel Morris :
> >>
> >> > Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software
> that
> >> > runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
> >>
> >> Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)
> >
> > Apple actively oppose you installing whatever you want to, and running
> > applications in the background, on the iPhone and now on the iPad.
> >
> > These are features of any respectable operating system since the 70s.
>
> No, these are features of any operating system designed for use by
> computer users.
>
> > If you own your computer, it ought to be under your control. Apple
> > computers are not. The ultimate answer is 100% free software.
>
> The same applies to your car, central heating system, ADSL router,
> Freeview box, TV and most mobile phones...
>
> and while a laudable goal, the people who won't buy one of those
> things for this reason is in the minority, principally because a) you
> need to find someone to actually make the thing and sell it at a
> reasonable price, and b) the alternatives often aren't that good (in
> other words, the freedom is a great big trade-off).
>
> Point of note, though, it's a "computer" in the technical sense, in
> the same way that all mobile phones are "computers". Really, though,
> it's CE. Adjust expectations accordingly. What it isn't, and
> specifically isn't claimed to be (though lots of people would
> certainly like one) is a tablet-form-factor Mac.
>
> M.
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
> Unofficial list archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>
>  This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
> personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
> stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
> on it and notify the sender immediately.
>
>  Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further
> communication will signify your consent to this
>
>


-- 
http://philwhitehouse.blogspot.com

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Michael Kraskin]

I think the no-Flash means that it a seriously crippled web browser.  Hardly 
the "best way to browse the internet," and thus will be a serious 
disappointment, not only to power users, but to casual internet surfers as well.

The no-camera thing just screams "wait for the second generation before you buy 
one"


- Original Message -
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Sent: Thu Jan 28 07:03:32 2010
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:49, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> 2010/1/28 Daniel Morris :
>>
>> > Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
>> > runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>>
>> Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)
>
> Apple actively oppose you installing whatever you want to, and running
> applications in the background, on the iPhone and now on the iPad.
>
> These are features of any respectable operating system since the 70s.

No, these are features of any operating system designed for use by
computer users.

> If you own your computer, it ought to be under your control. Apple
> computers are not. The ultimate answer is 100% free software.

The same applies to your car, central heating system, ADSL router,
Freeview box, TV and most mobile phones...

and while a laudable goal, the people who won't buy one of those
things for this reason is in the minority, principally because a) you
need to find someone to actually make the thing and sell it at a
reasonable price, and b) the alternatives often aren't that good (in
other words, the freedom is a great big trade-off).

Point of note, though, it's a "computer" in the technical sense, in
the same way that all mobile phones are "computers". Really, though,
it's CE. Adjust expectations accordingly. What it isn't, and
specifically isn't claimed to be (though lots of people would
certainly like one) is a tablet-form-factor Mac.

M.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal 
views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you 
have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy 
or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the 
sender immediately.
 
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further 
communication will signify your consent to this

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Darren Stephens]

All good points.

I'm sitting here inside a university thinking that this is a potentially
really useful device. There was nothing hugely unexpected, though I'm a
touch disappointed at the lack of a camera or SD card slot.  The lack of
Flash so far is also still an issue, but may not be forever - I think it's
only a matter of time before the pressure to introduce it becomes too great
to resist. I think Apple's key problem is security (see OS X 10.6.1)

However, the software side is more interesting. And the fact that the book
formats make it much easier for us to publish materials to this format.

The other thing is that much of the OS underpinnings have not really been
talked about, so how iPhoneOS 4 and the next iteration of the iPad software
will change things is anyone's guess. I'm also agnostic about the keyboard.
The keyboard on my iPod Touch is better than I expected but two-handed
typing is not going to be all that easy. It seems that more handwriting and
finger based stuff will be possible. The Brushes demo was interesting for
this reason. 

I am a power user and, though I'm not a rabid Apple fanboy, I really can see
myself using one of these things. I really think there will be a market
there, but it will take a little time to grow. And, let's be honest, Apple
are not struggling financially, so they can (like with Apple TV), afford to
sit on it and wait to see what develops


Å 28/01/2010 10:29, "Mo McRoberts"  a écrit:

> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:56, Brian Butterworth 
> wrote:
>> Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
>> runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>> And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.
> 
> Not just an operating system, but a very close relative of a
> commercial UNIX. From what I can tell, iPhone OS isn't far off
> POSIX-compliant at all (mostly because a lot of userspace utilities
> are absent).
> 
> It doesn't have a keyboard built-in, but you can get the keyboard
> dock, or use a Bluetooth keyboard.
> 
> 
> There are a lot of people who the iPad won't be right for, and
> shouldn't buy it -- because if they do, they'll spend all their time
> bitching and moaning about what it can't do. Lots of people seem to
> conflate "it doesn't do the things I want" with "it's rubbish" (and
> the same happened with the iPhone, and the same happens with other
> classes of products), when really that's a huge fallacy; you don't see
> people complaining that the Nintendo DS doesn't run background
> applications, or that you can't open a command prompt on the Wii,
> because they'd probably be laughed at. But, this is the danger in
> breaking new ground; not necessarily in terms of ideas, but definitely
> in terms of execution.
> 
> It's a piece of consumer electronics. A very powerful piece of
> consumer electronics, but a piece of consumer electronics nonetheless.
> There's a bloody good reason that Apple scaled up iPhone OS instead of
> scaling down Mac OS X [again]: the latter is a pain in the backside to
> turn into something usable by many people.
> 
> The big target market for the iPad are the people who have never
> bothered buying a computer (or did, but it's now about eight years old
> and virus-infested), and actually don't really want one because it's a
> lot of hassle; the people who type URLs into Google; the people who
> just want to listen to some music and watch videos, look up web sites,
> get some e-mail and play some games. Maybe write a letter or two.
> There isn't a device on the market today which is appropriate for this
> group of people (despite many attempts over the years), yet it's a
> pretty huge market.
> 
> Many "power users" won't like it, because they think a tablet should
> be a slimmed-down laptop and be capable (from a UI perspective) of
> everything a laptop can do: except that in doing that, you kill off
> any chance of it being appropriate for aforementioned novice market.
> 
> Apple has pretty successfully demonstrated that iPhone OS is usable by
> all and sundry, but will have got some pushback that the form factor
> of the iPhone and iPod touch isn't ideal for some kinds of pretty
> common and ordinary activities. While it's useful to be able to read
> your e-mail on a device the size of the iPhone, composing a long
> e-mail is a pain (hardware keyboard or not). The same applies to lots
> of other things. This is where the iPad fits in.
> 
> There are changes afoot in the OS - baby steps, but 3.2's just a point
> release, and in that context there's a lot to be positive about.
> Developers are going to have a field day with it, and there's a decent
> chance that the iPad will kill off a lot of the more frivolous App
> Store apps.
> 
> Personally, and this seems to be a view shared by lots of people
> (though I wouldn't claim it to be the majority), there are plenty of
> occasions where I don't need the grunt of a laptop, and it's actually
> not all that convenient to open it up to do stuff, but a
> sma

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:49, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> 2010/1/28 Daniel Morris :
>>
>> > Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
>> > runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>>
>> Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)
>
> Apple actively oppose you installing whatever you want to, and running
> applications in the background, on the iPhone and now on the iPad.
>
> These are features of any respectable operating system since the 70s.

No, these are features of any operating system designed for use by
computer users.

> If you own your computer, it ought to be under your control. Apple
> computers are not. The ultimate answer is 100% free software.

The same applies to your car, central heating system, ADSL router,
Freeview box, TV and most mobile phones...

and while a laudable goal, the people who won't buy one of those
things for this reason is in the minority, principally because a) you
need to find someone to actually make the thing and sell it at a
reasonable price, and b) the alternatives often aren't that good (in
other words, the freedom is a great big trade-off).

Point of note, though, it's a "computer" in the technical sense, in
the same way that all mobile phones are "computers". Really, though,
it's CE. Adjust expectations accordingly. What it isn't, and
specifically isn't claimed to be (though lots of people would
certainly like one) is a tablet-form-factor Mac.

M.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Dave Crossland]

2010/1/28 Daniel Morris :
>
> > Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
> > runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>
> Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)

Apple actively oppose you installing whatever you want to, and running
applications in the background, on the iPhone and now on the iPad.

These are features of any respectable operating system since the 70s.

If you own your computer, it ought to be under your control. Apple
computers are not. The ultimate answer is 100% free software.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Andrew Macinnes]

It doesn't look like anything new to me.  Mind you, it's certainly not designed 
for me, or anyone else who wants to work on their computer.

I've been trialling a tablet PC for the last few months.  It looks nice, you 
can write on the screen, the handwriting recognition is amazing, it has Vista 
and a proper keyboard.  You can swivel the screen and use it as a normal laptop.

However, I find for 99% of purposes I use it as a laptop.  I did take notes a 
few times with it, but I preferred pen and paper.

The ergonomics are terrible.  The way you either have to crouch over a tablet 
on a table, balance it on your legs or hold it up to use make it pretty 
terrible for movies.  This is probably even worse if you have to hold and type.

I guess they'll be a good aftermarket for stands, keyboards etc.


Cheers,

Andy


> -Original Message-
> From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-
> backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts
> Sent: 27 January 2010 22:38
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: [backstage] iPad
> 
> So, what does everyone think?
> 
> (and how much effect will it have on the  situation over the
> next 18 months or so, do we reckon?)
> 
> M.
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
> please visit
> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
> Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
> archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Lee Stone]

I'm interested to see if the keyboard on the iPad will actually be worse
than the one on the iPhone - something I won't really know till I get a
chance to hold one.

At least with the iPhone, I can easily hold it in one hand, whilst still
being able to type using my thumb in that hand. To hold the iPad
comfortably, am I going to have to lose the use of one hand which I could
otherwise be typing with?
At least they have that keyboard dock - though I wonder what the cost of
that will be.

Lee




On 28 January 2010 10:28, Alex Mace  wrote:

> It is an OS. It just doesn't allow you to do all the stuff that us power
> users (and I would suggest membership of this list marks someone out as
> such) want to do. The closed app ecosystem is similarly only really an issue
> for us. I suspect a bigger issue for your normal user will be the lack of
> Flash on it.
>
> They keyboard thing is a red herring. It doesn't have a physical keyboard -
> that hasn't been a problem on the iPhone for me and hasn't been a problem
> for anyone I know who actually has actually used the iPhone keyboard. Some
> people just have hangups about it.
>
> I agree with what others have said - the biggest problem I can see is that
> lack of a front facing camera. Using it for video chatting would have been
> awesome and made it pretty much perfect for grandparents.
>
> Alex
>
> On 28 Jan 2010, at 10:17, Daniel Morris wrote:
>
>  Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)
>
>  --
> *From:* owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:
> owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] *On Behalf Of *Brian Butterworth
> *Sent:* 28 January 2010 09:56
> *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [backstage] iPad
>
> Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
> runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>
> And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.
>
> 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth 
>> wrote:
>> > It does, both, what?
>>
>> it runs an operating system.
>>
>> it has a keyboard.
>>
>> >
>> > 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth <
>> briant...@freeview.tv>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek
>> PADD.
>> >> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
>> >>
>> >> It does, both.
>> >>
>> >> -
>> >> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
>> please
>> >> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>> >>  Unofficial list archive:
>> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Brian Butterworth
>> >
>> > follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
>> > web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and
>> switchover
>> > advice, since 2002
>> >
>>
>> -
>> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
>> please visit
>> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>>  Unofficial list archive:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Brian Butterworth
>
> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
> advice, since 2002
>
>
>

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Dan Brickley]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Mo McRoberts  wrote:
> So, what does everyone think?
>
> (and how much effect will it have on the  situation over the
> next 18 months or so, do we reckon?)

Would make a very luxurious smart and expensive remote control, or if
you stuck legs on it, a very very small multi-touch table.
I can imagine flipping thru an EPG / video catalogue on it quite
happily, maybe skipping through videos to find the right part before a
'send to the big screen' action...

Dan
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:56, Brian Butterworth  wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
> runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
> And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.

Not just an operating system, but a very close relative of a
commercial UNIX. From what I can tell, iPhone OS isn't far off
POSIX-compliant at all (mostly because a lot of userspace utilities
are absent).

It doesn't have a keyboard built-in, but you can get the keyboard
dock, or use a Bluetooth keyboard.


There are a lot of people who the iPad won't be right for, and
shouldn't buy it -- because if they do, they'll spend all their time
bitching and moaning about what it can't do. Lots of people seem to
conflate "it doesn't do the things I want" with "it's rubbish" (and
the same happened with the iPhone, and the same happens with other
classes of products), when really that's a huge fallacy; you don't see
people complaining that the Nintendo DS doesn't run background
applications, or that you can't open a command prompt on the Wii,
because they'd probably be laughed at. But, this is the danger in
breaking new ground; not necessarily in terms of ideas, but definitely
in terms of execution.

It's a piece of consumer electronics. A very powerful piece of
consumer electronics, but a piece of consumer electronics nonetheless.
There's a bloody good reason that Apple scaled up iPhone OS instead of
scaling down Mac OS X [again]: the latter is a pain in the backside to
turn into something usable by many people.

The big target market for the iPad are the people who have never
bothered buying a computer (or did, but it's now about eight years old
and virus-infested), and actually don't really want one because it's a
lot of hassle; the people who type URLs into Google; the people who
just want to listen to some music and watch videos, look up web sites,
get some e-mail and play some games. Maybe write a letter or two.
There isn't a device on the market today which is appropriate for this
group of people (despite many attempts over the years), yet it's a
pretty huge market.

Many "power users" won't like it, because they think a tablet should
be a slimmed-down laptop and be capable (from a UI perspective) of
everything a laptop can do: except that in doing that, you kill off
any chance of it being appropriate for aforementioned novice market.

Apple has pretty successfully demonstrated that iPhone OS is usable by
all and sundry, but will have got some pushback that the form factor
of the iPhone and iPod touch isn't ideal for some kinds of pretty
common and ordinary activities. While it's useful to be able to read
your e-mail on a device the size of the iPhone, composing a long
e-mail is a pain (hardware keyboard or not). The same applies to lots
of other things. This is where the iPad fits in.

There are changes afoot in the OS - baby steps, but 3.2's just a point
release, and in that context there's a lot to be positive about.
Developers are going to have a field day with it, and there's a decent
chance that the iPad will kill off a lot of the more frivolous App
Store apps.

Personally, and this seems to be a view shared by lots of people
(though I wouldn't claim it to be the majority), there are plenty of
occasions where I don't need the grunt of a laptop, and it's actually
not all that convenient to open it up to do stuff, but a
small-form-factor device is a less than ideal. I may be a developer, a
sysadmin and a power users, but I'm often just an ordinary end-user
and want to browse the web or play some games without having to faff
around, and that's with the proviso that I don't have to do much
faffing as it is (it's still more than it should be). It's a device
which can be left on a coffee table and be unobtrusive, until you want
to see the TV schedules for the next seven days. As much as many of us
currently do reach for our laptops or smartphones to do just that,
you'd be hard pressed to argue that a middle-ground between the
convenience of a smartphone (which you can just pick up and put down
when needed) and the useful size of a laptop screen isn't something a
lot of people wouldn't buy into, quite possibly in preference to
either of them.

I expect we'll see plenty of applications appearing as it starts to
sell, too: similar things happened with the iPhone, as developers
started to explore what's possible.

Now, for the (again) "power user" group, there's lots of stuff which
could be transposed onto a different device - there's nothing
particularly "iPad-specific" about having a cool newspaper app with
embedded video, for example, but the competing devices aren't here
yet. I doubt it'll be long before some start to appear, though, with
varying degrees of success  (and there's always Microsoft's second
tablet push, which may or may not be more successful than the first).

M.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.c

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Alex Mace]

It is an OS. It just doesn't allow you to do all the stuff that us power users 
(and I would suggest membership of this list marks someone out as such) want to 
do. The closed app ecosystem is similarly only really an issue for us. I 
suspect a bigger issue for your normal user will be the lack of Flash on it.

They keyboard thing is a red herring. It doesn't have a physical keyboard - 
that hasn't been a problem on the iPhone for me and hasn't been a problem for 
anyone I know who actually has actually used the iPhone keyboard. Some people 
just have hangups about it.

I agree with what others have said - the biggest problem I can see is that lack 
of a front facing camera. Using it for video chatting would have been awesome 
and made it pretty much perfect for grandparents.

Alex

On 28 Jan 2010, at 10:17, Daniel Morris wrote:

> Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)
> 
> From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk 
> [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth
> Sent: 28 January 2010 09:56
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad
> 
> Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that 
> runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
> 
> And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.  
> 
> 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth  
> wrote:
> > It does, both, what?
> 
> it runs an operating system.
> 
> it has a keyboard.
> 
> >
> > 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD.
> >> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
> >>
> >> It does, both.
> >>
> >> -
> >> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> >> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
> >>  Unofficial list archive:
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Brian Butterworth
> >
> > follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
> > web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
> > advice, since 2002
> >
> 
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
> Unofficial list archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Brian Butterworth
> 
> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover 
> advice, since 2002

RE: [backstage] iPad

[Daniel Morris]

Am I missing something - how is it not an OS? :)




From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth
Sent: 28 January 2010 09:56
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad


Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the
software that runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system. 

And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.  


2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 


On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth
 wrote:
> It does, both, what?

it runs an operating system.

it has a keyboard.


>
> 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth

>> wrote:
>> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after
the Star Trek PADD.
>> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had
a keyboard.
>>
>> It does, both.
>>
>> -
>> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.
To unsubscribe, please
>> visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>>  Unofficial list archive:
>>
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>
>
>
> --
>
> Brian Butterworth
>
> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital
television and switchover
> advice, since 2002
>

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To
unsubscribe, please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/





-- 

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and
switchover advice, since 2002

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Rob Myers]

On 28/01/10 09:56, Brian Butterworth wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
> runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
>   
It's a UNIX. It's a UNIX broken to remove your freedom, but it's still a
multi-tasking* memory-protected kernel-based operating system.

> And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.
>   
It's not a piano... ;-)

- Rob.

* - Unless you're an application author or a user. See the "broken" part.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Alun Rowe]

 
What else would you call it?  An operating system it is.  Whether you like
it or not is a different matter.

It does have an input device which you would fall into the term defined as
Keyboard IMO.

FWIW I¹m a mac fanboy but the lack of decent interop with other devices,
lack of a camera (which would have meant you could buy one for your
grandparents to use for video calls to the grandchildren) and the closed
nature of the app store submission process means I¹m not even slightly
interested.

Alun


On 28/01/2010 09:56, "Brian Butterworth"  wrote:

> Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that runs
> on the iPhone can be called an operating system.
> 
> And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.
> 
> 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth 
>> wrote:
>>> > It does, both, what?
>> 
>> it runs an operating system.
>> 
>> it has a keyboard.
>> 
>>> >
>>> > 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
 >>
 >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth 
 >> wrote:
> >> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek
> PADD.
> >> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
 >>
 >> It does, both.
 >>
 >> -
 >> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk 
 discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
 >> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
 >>  Unofficial list archive:
 >> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> >
>>> > Brian Butterworth
>>> >
>>> > follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
>>> > web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
>>> > advice, since 2002
>>> >
>> 
>> -
>> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk   discussion
>> group.  To unsubscribe, please visit
>> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  Unofficial
>> list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
> 
> 



Alun Rowe
Pentangle Internet Limited
2 Buttermarket
Thame
Oxfordshire
OX9 3EW
Tel: +44 8700 339905
Fax: +44 8700 339906
Please direct all support requests to mailto:it-supp...@pentangle.co.uk 
Pentangle Internet Limited is a limited company registered in England and 
Wales. Registered number: 3960918. Registered office: 1 Lauras Close, Great 
Staughton, Cambridgeshire PE19 5DP

  
This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of the 
individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that 
is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are 
not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please 
notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your 
computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored.
 
Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as 
information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or 
incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for 
any errors or omissions that are present in this message, or any attachment, 
that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is 
required, please request a hard-copy version. Any views or opinions presented 
are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the 
company.

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Brian Butterworth]

Sorry, I didn't realise we were back in the 1970s where the software that
runs on the iPhone can be called an operating system.

And it clearly doesn't have a keyboard.

2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 

> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth 
> wrote:
> > It does, both, what?
>
> it runs an operating system.
>
> it has a keyboard.
>
> >
> > 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth  >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek
> PADD.
> >> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
> >>
> >> It does, both.
> >>
> >> -
> >> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
> please
> >> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
> >>  Unofficial list archive:
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Brian Butterworth
> >
> > follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
> > web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and
> switchover
> > advice, since 2002
> >
>
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>  Unofficial list archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>



-- 

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
advice, since 2002

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Rupert Watson]

Did he say whether iBooks will run on existing iPhones?

Sent from my dog

On 28 Jan 2010, at 08:53, "Mo McRoberts"  wrote:

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth > wrote:

It does, both, what?


it runs an operating system.

it has a keyboard.



2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 


On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth >

wrote:
Underwhelming. Â It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star  
Trek PADD.

Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.


It does, both.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. Â To unsubscr 
ibe, please

visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
 Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/




--

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and  
switchover

advice, since 2002



-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,  
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html 
.  Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/


__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
__


ROOT 6 LIMITED
Registered in the UK at
4 WARDOUR MEWS, LONDON
W1F 8AJ
Company No. 03433253


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:06, Rupert Watson  wrote:
> Did he say whether iBooks will run on existing iPhones?

Not seen it mentioned.

iBooks is US-only for the moment, though.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Rob Myers]

On 28/01/10 08:03, Brian Butterworth wrote:
> Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD.
> Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
>   
As Mo points out it does. It can run iPhone apps so if it's not running
the iPhone OS it's running another OSX variant. It has an on-screen
keyboard and you can plug in a physical keyboard (they even provide a
dock so you can configure it as a desktop system while doing so).

But it also has DRM...

http://www.defectivebydesign.org/ipad

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/27/defective_by_design/

- Rob.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:32, Brian Butterworth  wrote:
> It does, both, what?

it runs an operating system.

it has a keyboard.

>
> 2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth 
>> wrote:
>> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD.
>> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
>>
>> It does, both.
>>
>> -
>> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
>> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>>  Unofficial list archive:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>
>
>
> --
>
> Brian Butterworth
>
> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
> advice, since 2002
>

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Brian Butterworth]

It does, both, what?

2010/1/28 Mo McRoberts 

> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth 
> wrote:
> > Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD.
> > Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.
>
> It does, both.
>
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>  Unofficial list archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>



-- 

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
advice, since 2002

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Mo McRoberts]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:03, Brian Butterworth  wrote:
> Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD.
> Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.

It does, both.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] iPad

[Brian Butterworth]

Underwhelming.  It's a big iPhone. It's named after the Star Trek PADD.
Might be good it if ran an operating system and had a keyboard.

2010/1/27 Mo McRoberts 

> So, what does everyone think?
>
> (and how much effect will it have on the  situation over the
> next 18 months or so, do we reckon?)
>
> M.
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
> visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>  Unofficial list archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
>



-- 

Brian Butterworth

follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
advice, since 2002