iPad Is That In-Between Device

Now that the new Apple iPad has been fielded tested for a couple of months now, we're starting to hear stories about it beyond "look how cool this new thing is." We're hearing real-world applications of the device, and talk of future applications of such a device are starting to emerge.

It seems that Apple's vision for the iPad -- neither a tablet nor an iPhone -- is coming true. I see that people are starting to accept the iPad for what it is ... well, an iPad. It's truly a new type of device. That presents some pros (new market, new applications) and cons (may canibalize sales of MacBooks, fierce competition to come), but so far, I'm liking what I'm seeing.

The potential future applications for such a device are truly endless: sales force, doctors, hospitals, assembly line, presentations, etc. While I'm still holding out for the eventual next-gen iPad, I am impressed with this first version. What do you think?

Apple vs. Adobe, Round 3

Remember when Apple and Adobe played nice while thousands of scruffy graphic designers happily used Photoshop to retouch images on their Macs ... and all was right with the world? Well, it all seemed to go downhill over the Great Flash War of 2010.

I saw inklings of trouble when Adobe continued to not fully optimize their CS suite of applications for Mac's Cocoa OS framework throughout most of this past decade. And when the iPhone was released without Flash support, you felt there was trouble brewing. But now, it's getting ugly.

Apple and Adobe have gone tit for tat on the subject. The latest have involved Steve Jobs's open letter regarding Flash, and now Adobe has published founders' Chuck Geschke and John Warnock's open letter in response.

My take ... Is Apple right for not allowing Flash to run on their devices? Yes, it's their device, and Flash is a resource (battery) hog. Is Apple right for restricting creation of iPad and iPhone apps to Apple development platforms? No, that's just plain selfish; Apple's not the only one who knows how to make apps. Is Adobe right for whining about others trashing Flash (which they didn't even make, by the way)? No, Flash is showing its age in an era where computing is becoming more and more portable, where the need for battery life exceeds the need to play Farmville.

And Adobe's argument that Apple should support Flash because it has a 99% install base holds no merit. I'm sure the manufacturers of asbestos had a 99% install base at one point. That didn't make it a good thing. (Okay, that example was harsh, but you get my point.)

Verizon iPhone Won't Be the Savior

So if you're like me and have an iPhone and live in either the New York or San Francisco metro areas, then you probably hate AT&T. In fact, if I have one more call dropped for no good reason, they're going to have to invent a new word for "hate." Perhaps "hateT&T"?

All of this bile is the undercurrent of life as an iPhone user in the U.S. Like an old sports injury, you just sorta learn to live with it. The ostensible light at the end of the tunnel for iPhone/AT&T users is the prospect of a Verizon iPhone. As customers who have used both services know, Verizon at least lets you talk on your phone ... with someone else ... for the duration of a conversation ... even in a train tunnel.

However, what everyone seems to be missing here is the capacity issue. In short, what hampered the iPhone experience was, well, the iPhone. They were victims of their own success. While Apple didn't quite sell the expected 10 million iPhones in year one, they have sold at least (estimated) 45,000,000 of them to date. With a good percentage of those being in the U.S., that results in a mobile carrier that is quickly and consistently overburdened.

AT&T just simply can't handle it, and it only seems to be getting worse, as new iPhone users continue to outpace AT&T's capacity. Five bars mean nothing when there are 5,000 people all trying to connect to one node. But I've heard that Verizon wouldn't have been able to handle the onslaught of new users either, if they had been given the iPhone. And if millions of dissatisfied iPhone users all make the switch when a Verizon iPhone is released, they'll face the same situation.

I'm inclined to stay with AT&T on that day, when their capacity skyrockets from a mass exodus of customers. Am I defending AT&T? Certainly not. Even after the onslaught of FAIL messages months ago, they have yet to make discernible improvements in their service. But I think we're kidding ourselves if we think Verizon will ride in on their white horse and save the day.

iCade

Since its announcement I knew that I wasn't going to buy the first iteration of the Apple iPad. As I noted, it was still lacking too many features for my liking. That all may change after seeing the iCade.

The iCade is an "arcade cabinet" for the iPad, which makes the whole thing look like a classic arcade machine. This is one of those add-on products that's nearly as ingenious as the original product (remember the Palm Pilot keyboard?). The iCade comes with the big joystick and two red buttons that graced just about every arcade game from the late 80's. Included are hundreds of classic arcade games like Donkey Kong, Dig Dug, and Q*bert. At $149.99, it's a bit pricey, but for a hardware/software combo, you can't complain too much.

I wonder if it comes pre-stained with a cigarette burn.

Update on Friday, April 2, 2010 at 10:59AM by Matthew Snodgrass

Shame on me for falling for this April Fool's joke, but PLEASE MAKE THIS ANYWAY!

Apple and Flash

There's been a lot of talk as of late about the battle heating up between Apple and Adobe. In particular, Apple's decision not to support Adobe's Flash plug-in on some of its best-selling devices like the iPhone, the iPod Touch, and the upcoming iPad.

At a meeting with Wall Street Journal executives, Apple CEO Steve Jobs called Flash a "CPU hog" (it is) and didn't build the iPad to support it. Adobe retaliated on its blog, pointing out how the iPad isn't really a good way to experience the Internet if so much of the Web uses Flash (it does).

Frankly, I think this less about Apple's quibble with Adobe and more about their storied tradition of abandoning technologies that, frankly, were on their way out. Apple just sees these demises sooner than most and usually gets pilloried for their efforts. Let's take a look:

• Floppy drive: In 1998 Apple officially dumped the diskette with the introduction of the iMac. Thank you!
• SCSI: The only thing more confusing than configuring SCSI devices was ... okay, there was nothing more confusing than configuring SCSI devices. I'm serious.
• Serial port: Hey, the printer's not printing. Can I unplug the serial port and plug it back in? No, that's worse than crossing the streams.
• ADB port: Okay, the Apple Desktop Bus was their fault in the first place. No harm, no foul.
• Modem: Anyone who remembers what "baud" is, has no love loss for modems ... or this sound.
• Firewire400: It was getting slow, and if you accidentally plugged it in backwards, you could fry your device.
• PCMCIA: This laptop cardbus was about as fast as physically shoveling the data onto your computer. Apple did the right thing by dropping it for Express34 and then the wrong thing by dropping that for SD.

Perhaps Flash is just another in a long line of soon-to-be-aging technologies in which Apple is first to recognize their inevitable obsolescence. If you've ever checked your task manager (Windows) or activity monitor (Mac) while running a Web page with Flash, you've seen how much of a resource hog it can be.