This should be clever, but it really only reinforces my statement that so many people are mad that this screwdriver isn’t a hammer.
I think the problem isn’t so much that we are given a screwdriver when we want a hammer, but that we could get the screwdriver, hammer, and a butt load of other tools for the exact same price, in some cases far less. It’s a cool tool, I’d love to have one, but I might as well get something that does that and more, even if it weighs 5 pounds.
I think it’s more like ‘bemused that this expensive, feature-lacking, yet stylish and brand-driven tablet PC isn’t up to par with modern expectations of a tablet PC in its price range.’
Wait; we were supposed to be using clever and biting analogies that illustrate our brand preference, weren’t we?
Like apples and oranges? Because it’s Apple, and Apple is different than anything else?
Am I off the mark here?
It’s not being marketed as a tablet PC 
“It’s not a tablet, it’s an extension of the iPod touch. It has some new kinks, but generally speaking it’s using the iPhone OS. It’s more like a smartphone than a personal compute. It’s a media pad, a media consumption device. It’s not a tablet, it’s not a media creation device.”
As I’ve said before, it’s not meant to compete with netbooks. It’s a futuristic gadget that will replace your books, magazines, and newspapers. You leave it on your kitchen table and when you get up for your morning coffee, you check it your stock info and watch BBC news videos on it.
Correct. It’s marketed as a “Here fanboys, we’ll toss you something, you figure out how to make it useful” product.
I realize that Apple don’t market their products as what they are. iMacs “don’t” compete with PCs, Macbooks “don’t” compete with notebooks, and iPods “don’t” compete with anybody. They’ve done a good job of convincing people that stamping an Apple logo on a piece of technology causes it to transcend the mortal plane and stand above all other comparable technology as though it were a god. Don’t get me wrong; Apple make quality products with a great user experience, and it’s a clever marketing strategy, one that Apple are smart to stick to.
However, as Douglas Adams (who, ironically enough, owned the first Macintosh in the UK) said, “if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.”
It has a CPU, memory, storage, Internet connectivity, and provides information and entertainment. It’s too large to be a pocket PC or a PDA (not that anyone still makes those anymore); it doesn’t make calls like a smartphone; it’s not a notebook or a desktop. It’s a PC. It’s the same size and shape as a tablet, and fulfills most of the same functions. It’s a tablet PC. I’d also accept “giant iPod.”
A giant iPod is not “magical and revolutionary.” It’s old tech in a new package with a larger screen and it lacks a lot of functionality seen in similar products. It’s a cool gadget for sure, but it’s hardly anything innovative.
I’d say it’s closer to the family of Kindles and Nooks than tablets.
Those Canadians had had this for years, eh?
Eh, I dont have an opinion either way I don’t need one, but if you dig it that’s your choice.
That being said, here’s Pee Wee Herman’s opinion.
And remember…Tampa?..that’s over heeere.
Exactly and put this with a huge price tag; it is simply a rip off.
There are some good Macintosh products out there (though basic functions usually seem to be missing but thats a different conversation) and there are good quality parts in some of the machines. But the iTampon is silly and just lacking for the price tag and what would make it worth while to carry around.
Actually - it can. And yes… it’s basically a giant iPhone too.
So you’re telling me that managing to get an iPad to make a call and walking around with a giant plank stuck to the side of your head is the same experience as making a call with a smartphone?
<3 Austin
Haha those were some of my fav skits from Trigger Happy TV
A very well-positioned review from Scott Kurtz.
No. Just countering your incorrect statement of;
When, in fact, it does make calls like a smartphone.
“like a smartphone” can be interpreted to mean as in the same form and fashion as a smartphone. It appears you missed the context of his statement. An iPad can never make calls like a smartphone due to the size. The iPad can make calls similar to a smartphone, but until the iPad micro comes out the size rules out any claim that the iPad makes calls “like” a smartphone.
I took it as a similie. With an iPad you can dial a telephone number, you speak, they hear. You can also surf the web and blah, blah [marketing jargon here]. With a smartphone you can dial a number, you speak, they hear. They both seem alike to me… unless a clarification of ‘you cannot operate the iPad like a smartphone whilst making calls’ is needed 
That was a good review I agreed and disagreed
The main thing that I liked “When it is 200 bucks cheaper everyone will have one”
At that point I think if you want one and will use it that is not a bad option. But in my opinion 500 dollars + is way too much for what the iPad actually does.