It's amazing how many of my friends dismisses the retina display, saying either it's not important or it's just a marketing hype. I guess it's really hard to put into words how good those displays are, it's really something they'd have to see.
It's pretty genius of Apple to dominate the most tangible spec: the display. And not just dominate it, but by all accounts, practically own the world-wide inventory. All of the other devices which continue to try [and fail] to out-RAM/CPU/GPU/battery the iPad just don't get it.
When you are holding the device and just looking at it, maybe trying a few apps - whether at the store, or trying out your friends - the display is the only constant that'll matter and it's the only thing that you can definitively and objectively compare.
Apple's choice of the display is a good/bad situation. They are getting some positive press around their so called "retina display" - but I suspect that Apple will have supply shortages that will negatively impact them for a significant portion of the quarter. The 2048x1536 display is a fairly new component, the yields are probably suboptimal, and the manufacturing lines are probably not up to speed. Don't be too surprise if you are unable to purchase the "new iPad" for several months while Apple (and it's component vendors) try and crank out enough supply for the foxconn factories.
And yes - I do agree with you - Apple and their bundles of cash have likely hamstrung world-wide inventories of this display for a minimum of 60, if not 90 days. No other electronics vendor will be shipping the 2048x1536 form factor in large volumes until June/July at the very earliest.
Doesn't Apple have a history of successfully using/inventing new components? The unibody aluminium, the original retina display, glass trackpads..even the "hidden" LED on Macbooks. The only major supply failure that I'm aware of is the white iPhone.
Also, Apple says they'll have enough screen for 12-15 million devices this quarter, and claim there's no supply issue at all. [1]
That aside, shortage isn't bad for in-demand items. It just causes more hype. A year after the Wii shortage, they were still one of the hotest electronic devices you could get your hands on.
I think that this is an area where Apple's retail presence is a big strength for them. The benefits of the new display are hard to get across in marketing, especially to consumers who are not tech-savvy and don't understand how a higher resolution display would improve the iPad. Apple Stores let people experience the product firsthand, and I expect a lot of these people will be very impressed after they see the screen with their own eyes.
Damnit, I accidentally downvoted you. Your old links just got some extra love to make up for it.
Anyways, I was attempting to upvote your comment because I've noticed the same. I'm sure it will change once they see the display in person, and then see an iPad 1 or 2 again. I stare at pixels all day and it was an incredible upgrade to go from a standard Dell to a MBP with a high res display a few years back. Looking forward to this next step as well.
My big question is: Is 2K by 1K5 actually an improvement over the best of the competition (1920x1200)? Obviously 1024x768 is way too low. Bumping to exactly 4 times the number of pixels made the transition seamless, but is there a significant visual difference between the 3 megapixel screen of the new iPad versus the 2 megapixel screen of the ASUS Transformer Infinity? At some point you are going to hit the limit of what the human eye can distinguish. Perhaps a different way of phrasing the question is: at what distance do you have to hold the tablet from your eyes to notice a significant difference?
One difference is that the ASUS tablet isn't out yet. And, as far as I know (which, admittedly, isn't much), it doesn't even have a release date. Once it is out, it should be definitely comparable, but this tablet is out now. Which is pretty impressive.
Around the office, when discussing the new iPad, many people have said "but it's just a higher resolution display," to which I replay "exactly, and it's a darn fine $500 display."
I'm in the market for a tablet right now and I wanted to choose the new iPad for its superior resolution, high quality app store and great pedigree.
But I can't. When I put aside any internal biases I realize that I want a tablet whose memory I can expand with SD cards. I want one that I can throw ripped movies onto without jailbreaking or going through time-consuming video conversions. I want one that lets me use it as a simple removable drive, free of the Apple ecosystem and its bloated iTunes client.
The iPad would be a great device for someone like my mom, but I can tell I'd forever regret its limitations and barriers.
I think you are imagining features you'll never need in practice, and passing on a great tablet with amazing software, in favor of something you'll find far less satisfying than your laptop, and probably never use.
That's my hunch as well. Of course, there are certainly situations in which those extra features might be necessary, but they are in .01% of the case situations that the average iPad user is going to need it for.
I'm open for suggestions as I would like to get the new iPad. The things holding me back are: the inability to expand the memory, the challenge of playing common video formats like AVI or WMV and being pushed into the iTunes ecosystem (I use an Android phone so theoretically I'll be repurchasing apps, movies, music, etc)
If you mean memory as in storage, there are several ways around that for certain classes of data (mostly photos) through the camera connection kit. (I have a HDD photo tank that includes firmware capable of mounting a folder as if it were a camera card, fooling the iPad into mounting data from a hard drive.) On the other hand, with my 32GB iPad (2010), I don't think that I've hit a limit that I care about. (I don't typically care about movies on the iPad, and HandBrake works beautifully to convert DVDs for play on the iPad when I do care.)
For format issues, both AirVideo (http://www.inmethod.com/air-video/index.html) and ZumoCast (http://www.zumocast.com/) provide ways to stream data from your primary computer with 'live' transcoding of the data into formats that iOS devices can play without any additional codecs.
My suggestion is buy the new iPad. Play with it. You'll either realize that your concerns don't exist once you have the device, or they matter more than anything else. If the latter, wipe it and sell it. You'll get great resale value for it, even a year later. If the new iPad is as hard to get as the iPad 2 was when it first came out, you might even manage to break even.
You can use your music if it's in MP3 or AAC (which are pretty much the standard these days), you can play AVI and WMV. You will always have to repurchase your apps no matter which platform you jump to.
It sounds like such an old wife tale that people kept saying they can't play video formats. There are a number of ways of doing this. I have numerous friends who thinks this is the case, but it really is just a myth. There are even so many apps that pretends to be like a USB drive.
If you're curious though here's how I deal with your limitations & barriers. Not sure if it will work for you or not or if you want to change the way you do things.
I want one that I can throw ripped movies onto
Rip to H264. Even the piracy groups have switched to it. If you encode your ripped movies to H264 they will play on almost any device. Xbox, Playstation, Android, iOS, Windows Phone, etc. Even OS/2 Warp has support via VLC. (though good luck getting OS/2 installed on a machine with the guts to play H264 video) With all my files in H264 I don't have to worry about this at all.
I want a tablet whose memory I can expand with SD cards.
With cloud storage/services I feel like my iPad has unlimited storage. The one area I think this is an issue is transferring photos or videos from another camera into the iPad which is what the Camera Connection Kit handles for now. I suspect in the near future it will all be handled wirelessly. Looking back into history as soon as the local area network appeared people didn't really bother walking floppy disks around anymore. The same is going to happen with SD cards. I haven't owned an SD card in probably 6 or 7 years. I'm not really sure what I would do with one at this point.
I want one that lets me use it as a simple removable drive
There are a number of applications that just create a writable network share on the iPad. Seems easier to me than finding a cable and plugging it in. This also goes back to cloud storage/services that just sync the data for you automatically. I rarely find that I actually need to use these apps. I just put the file onto Dropbox and let it sync. Done.
bloated iTunes client.
I don't sync my iPhone or iPad to a computer anymore. Works fine without it.
This wont change your mind, but there are a few apps that you can throw any format video at. The downside is that you're limited to the internal storage and you have to manage it through iTunes (however, there is one that I have that will allow you to wirelessly manage your files).
I saw some of those and, while they would help, it's still a bitter pill to swallow.
I really just wish there was a tablet with the app quality and build quality of Apple devices but the openness and options of Android devices. Currently I'm forced to either work around Apple's simplicity/limitations or Android's mediocrity/obsolescence.
Sorry, I didnt have the ipad in front of me when I wrote the first post. The workhorse is AVPlayerHD, it can play just about anything we throw at it. I dont even bother with conversions. For car rides I just load up a bunch of movies that my son would watch and we're set. I only have the 16gb ipad 1, but opted for the 32 "the new ipad" for this reason alone.
It might still be worth a try. Specs and capabilities are easy to judge something by when you're looking to buy it (since they're all that you can really see without owning the device), but they sometimes matter less than the holistic experience once you actually own it. Basically: optimise for the common case. If 90% of the time you'll want to use your tablet as a tablet, not an SD card reader or portable drive, then it makes sense to pay more attention to the tablet experience than whether it can function as an SD reader or drive.
I'd recommend seeing if you can check out an iPad and whatever alternative you're looking into at a local store, and spend some time using them how you anticipate you would on a day to day basis.
While I hear there are some good android tablets, some are laggy (Kindle Fire, I'm looking at you), which gets incredibly frustrating over time. There are also other potential limitations, such as the app store (not to say Android isn't doing well there, but a lot of mobile apps still seem to start with iOS first, although this could change).
Disclaimer: I own an iPad, and I like it. I also have friends with both Android tablets and iPads who love their choice. If you feel that the features lacked by the iPad are important, then go for it and get something else. Good luck in your search!
(Side note: I totally agree about iTunes, especially on Windows.)
To use SD cards, use Camera Connection kit. To play common video formats, use apps, such as AVPlayerHD. To use your iPad as a removable drive, use iExplorer (no jailbreaking required). If you don't want to use iTunes, you can completely avoid using it as well. The only thing that requires iTunes is to put your music on it. iTunes can be optional if you don't need to do this.
Regarding repurchasing apps, it may be a good thing. There are plenty of good iPad apps, which fully take advantage of the tablet form factor. Although I have not used many Android tablet apps to prove it, Tim Cook should have good reasons to criticize about tablet apps on Android.
Out of curiosity- is this wanting due to your need for expandable space, for example, or your desire to tinker with the device?
The iPad certainly isn't for everyone, just like most consumer technology products are for certain types of people. But I think Apple's hit the sweet spot where for 99% of their customers, 16, 32, or 64GB of space is plenty and customization isn't really needed.
Well, the SD card simply isn't going to happen on any Apple iOS device, but what are your objections to jailbreaking? It's easy and addresses all of your software concerns. Yes of course it would be great not to have to do it at all, but how is it different than the rooting process you have to go through with most Android devices?
As per footnote #2, the text on the Kindle application is not rendered by iOS and, as a result, the text is not rendered at a retina resolution for free.
damn I was actually thinking about how awesome the Kindle app would look on PDFs, do you know if Adobe Reader or any other PDF reader will use the new retina resolution right off the bat?
I think the key thing to take away from this post is how many lightyears ahead the third generation iPad is from its competitors, or current consumer technology in general.
> Going back to the iPad 2 after reading for a few hours on the iPad 3 is jarring.
> ...most graphics and images on the web are behind the curve, as of today
> The iPad display is so good that it shows, like no device before it, just how crummy most images on the web are.
It's like using a product from the future. Except Apple has engineered it now, and everyone can have one for a (relatively) decent price: $500. The new iPad is the poster child of everything that Apple does really well, and why it has been so successful over the past couple of years.
My biggest problem with the iPad has always been the 4:3 ratio when it comes to watching widescreen movies. It seems a waste to watch a movie on the ipad when most of your screen is black bars (and the zoom to fill is just a slap in the face because it cuts off a lot of video).
This is annoying, but I think using a 16:9 or 16:10 device as a tablet would make it so you could only comfortably use it one way. Not good news if all you do is watch video on it though.
It is a waste, but why are you watching movies on an iPad? That's what a tv is for.
When you're surfing the Internet, a vertical 4:3 screen is awesome. The reason I sold my android tablet and bought an iPad was because the 16:9 screen sucked for anything other than movies.
I'm really annoyed with ad hominems like "Anyone who thinks Apple only makes high-priced products has completely lost sense of reality." Statements like this basically amount to "everybody who disagrees with me is an idiot" and add nothing. All they do is annoy the reader.
I really wish people would avoid them both in blog posts and comments. I've been seeing some here on HN as well and really wish they would go away.
It's not an ad hominem, it's a statement of fact. Apple has a reputation for producing expensive products which are distinguished mostly by industrial design and software rather than specs. It remains absolutely true of their peripherals and accessories, and true, though to a lesser extent, of their computers; however, in smartphones and tablets, Apple is the company that releases best-of-class hardware year after year at retail prices that their competitors have a hard time matching, let alone beating.
And anyone who can't admit that is ignoring reality, yeah.
> however, in smartphones and tablets, Apple is the company that releases best-of-class hardware year after year at retail prices that their competitors have a hard time matching, let alone beating.
Half-true. It is true that competitors who build equivalently high-end products as Apple have difficulty competing on price (Apple only sells high-end). But there are Android smart-phones that sell new for $100+ less than even an iPhone 4. (unlocked, non-contract prices!) Equally you can get a kindle fire for $200 less than an iPad 2.
Idiot is your word. Gruber said "lost sense of reality", which is what you would have to do to think that Apple only makes over-priced products. It is objectively not true.
"Idiot" is an ad hominem, but "has no sense of reality" isn't? Ad Hominem is an attack on the person, regardless of which specific attack it is. Being accurate or not has nothing to do with it.
If I say that you're wrong and a jew, I just made an ad hominem attack, regardless if you're actually a jew or not. That's completely uncalled for.
Perhaps "idiot" was too strong a word. But my point is not about severity--it's about personal attacks in general. I did not mean to imply Gruber called anyone an idiot; rather, I was just illustrating how an ad hominem is an ad hominem regardless of accuracy.
>I'm really annoyed with ad hominems like "Anyone who thinks Apple only makes high-priced products has completely lost sense of reality." Statements like this basically amount to "everybody who disagrees with me is an idiot" and add nothing. All they do is annoy the reader
Agreed, and most of the people who say that live in Silicon Valley sipping a $5 latte in a Starbucks with a Macbook in tow.
Whereas, in countries like India, you could be working a great job, have all luxuries, even have a housemaid and the iPhone will easily set you back a months salary. Whereas, in the US, you can buy around 7 unlocked iphones with a month's salary. People's perspective is screwed up when they don't understand why everyone doesn't rush to buy Apple products. How many in the US or Europe would buy the iPhone if it was $5000 ?
I am not implying Apple should lower the prices but I think the people making that claim about them not being high priced products have completely lost their sense of reality.
I really hate the uninformed India/China argument when it comes to exemplifying overpriced Apple products. Turns out, there are a lot of iPhones in New Delhi and Beijing used by a rising middle class...they even pay full unsubsidized high-tax prices for them. FYI, its not $5000, its $820 for a iPhone 4s in Beijing.
Apple is already making a lot of money in China, and I'm sure they will eventually make money in India after they open up a few stores and get people off the gray market (where iPhones are sourced now). I'm dreading when the next iPad comes out in China, there will probably be yellow cow riots again.
>I really hate the uninformed India/China argument when it comes to exemplifying overpriced Apple products
Really?
>FYI, its not $5000, its $820 for a iPhone 4s in Beijing.
I said, IMAGINE if you had pay $5000 for an iPhone in the US or Europe. It is that expensive comparatively to someone in China or India.
I did not say or imply that they aren't making money, I was saying people who say they're overpriced havent "lost all touch with reality" as much the person making such an argument.
The point is that yes, they are overpriced for farmers and migrant workers in these countries, but they are definitely not overpriced for the middle class. The middle class in China is already 200 million people, think a similar number for India. These are huge markets for Apple, and they are doing just fine.
In fact, I think Apple is a bit cheaper in China compared to the luxury alternatives. Apple is very aggressive in China, and their markup is probably just totally due to taxes. This is compared to Samsung or even Lenovo, whose markup is much higher. Apple is actually cheaper than the alternatives, which is why the Chinese are buying their products up.
OTOH, wasn't the iPad 1 the cheapest 10-inch tablet? So either all 10-inch tablets are luxuries or Apple is actually selling bargain-priced hardware compared to the competition.
Whereas, in countries like India, you could be working a great job, have all luxuries, even have a housemaid and the iPhone will easily set you back a months salary. Whereas, in the US, you can buy around 7 unlocked iphones with a month's salary. People's perspective is screwed up when they don't understand why everyone doesn't rush to buy Apple products. How many in the US or Europe would buy the iPhone if it was $5000 ?
He is talking about the US.
If you pick arbitrary countries, even the lowest $200 laptop can be a year's salary.
Why was Gruber's review of the iPad the one chosen by the Hacker News mob? There are lots of other reviews out there, all pretty much as glowingly positive as Gruber's was, but most of them have two significant advantages:
1) some semblance of impartiality
2) the comments will be about the iPad rather than about Gruber
It wouldn't surprise me, but in that case competitors have no one but themselves to blame. They've known a retina iPad was coming since June 2010, so they should have booked capacity then.
Apple's procurement is far beyond "booking capacity". They effectively provide the economy-of-scale for something like an iPad retina display to be economically produced in the first place. No one else has that kind of power.
So you're saying Apple can order millions of retinas from Samsung, but Samsung cannot order millions from themselves? Like I said, if they're not willing to take the financial risk (as HP did with the TouchPad, for example) then they deserve what they get.
It goes something like this--Samsung can't ship enough units by itself to justify setting up production, but Apple can. So Apple preorders an entire production run, and since Apple's already spoken for all the displays they can produce, Samsung doesn't get any.
Samsung could take the risk, but then they'd have an entire production run of Samsung tablets that no one wants to buy and they will have wasted their entire capital investment.
Because that's what happened. They've bought up all the current stock afaik. The other tablet makers will be behind the curve by at least 6 months, maybe a year.
Do you have a point or are you simply taking the obligatory ad-hominem cheap shot at Mr. Gruber? His reviews have, as you might recall, correlated quite well with customer satisfaction ratings and market performance of the products under discussion, and he gives considered reasoning for his viewpoints. If he's wrong about something, let's by all means discuss it.
My beef is not so much with his factual accuracy, as that he buys in hook, line, and sinker with (and actively promotes) Apple's marketing narrative. The things he mentions are those things Apple mentions in their marketing spiel. Hell, he even refers to "retina and non-retina images" on the web, as if the Internet is a mere extension of an Apple product and, like third-party apps, has simply yet to catch up to Apple's vision.
The ad hominems against Gruber (and they are ad hominems) stem from the fact that he shows no ability to think, or write, anything that Apple doesn't deem he should think and write (in regards to Apple). He is, for all intents and purposes, a member of their marketing department, yet he is at least nominally an independent blogger and reviewer.
There's nothing wrong with liking Apple. They make great products. But to so uncritically buy into the hype and narrative, then claim independence of thought and word, rubs many people the wrong way.
> My beef is not so much with his factual accuracy, as that he buys in hook, line, and sinker with (and actively promotes) Apple's marketing narrative.
To the extent that Apple's marketing narrative is factually accurate (which you readily admit), why is accepting it bad?
Our new product, cocaine, is a real life-changer! You'll lose weight, gain confidence, and feel more energetic! Feel awkward at parties, never knowing what to say? Cocaine will have you making deep conversation in no time! We're confident that once you try cocaine, you'll want to do it all the time!
Factual accuracy is not the be-all and end-all of what makes a marketing narrative a good thing on which to base your opinions and what you tell others.
>(which you readily admit)
I did no such thing. I said they make great products.
Gruber likes every Apple product, even the ones that aren't doing well (such as Ping and Safari for Windows), and, moreover, liked every Apple product even when Apple as a whole wasn't doing well. Gruber's opinions of Apple products (always positive) don't correlate particularly well with their products' market performance (usually positive as of late, but varied).
I'm not going to bother digging through his archives to prove this (it wouldn't take much to do, but you're not actually arguing against Gruber as much as your skewed conception of Gruber), but I'm fairly certain that Gruber's reaction to Ping is "confusion" (at best) to "dislike" (at worst), not like.
It's not hard to find cases where Gruber has had a negative reaction to something that Apple has done, or where he's said something negative about an Apple product.
Obviously, Gruber doesn't like every little thing about every Apple product. But I'm pretty sure it's not an exaggeration to say that he likes every Apple product.
You are absolutely right, every time I open the comments thread now, I'm psychologically prepared to read the sarcasm in front of the line. This became HN-standard now. Do people actually feel different and original by doing this?.
Anyway, I wouldn't complain if I didn't like HN, I find great stuff here, but this upvoted sarcasm issue is very predictable.
It's a real shame, but what I think is really lame is they get upvoted so much that the worthwhile, interesting, and constructive comments get relegated to second and third position.
I've taken to deliberately going to the second and third comments in a thread before I decide to continue reading or not. I'd read much less if I didn't.
I think it's probably because he just kept trying so hard. There are other apple blogs, but nobody is quite as fanatical as gruber is. Also, despite the crazy amount of apple stuff he finds to post about, he actually does have a filter for crap - he doesn't bother with most of the more wild rumours or non-news like obscure patents apple filed for 5 years ago.
He's a blatant apple fanboy, but unlike most others he's not a stupid fanboy.
Exactly. If I read a review of an Apple product there, I know I'm going to be reading a positive one, but it's the clear details he goes into, the fact that they're reasonably well-written, and the interesting and relevant observations he makes along the way that I enjoy reading (and that I believe is noticeably lacking in many other sources of writing online, especially relating to technology).
Are you using "fanboy" to mean something other than "a male who is a fan?" Usually, "fanboy" is used pejoratively to refer to someone that claims fandom without thinking critically, or refuses to recognize flaws. On occasion, Gruber has arguably been guilty of that, but this article sounds perfectly fair and reasonable.
The real reason that is there is a fanatical fanbase, especially among sites like HN, who not only make sure his posts get top billing but also flag posts by Windows enthusiasts and insiders like Paul Thurrott are flagged to death, so much so that that http://winsupersite.com is hellbanned from HN.
Haven't notice an actual big Microsoft announcement get far less votes than Gruber's snide and often factually wrong take on it? It's the community of fanboys and worshippers he has created.
It's probably not because this community tends to like one of those bloggers over the other, but rather because this community simply tends to be more interested in Apple products than Microsoft products. Since this site is designed to demonstrate the interests of its users, uninteresting articles will appear to be "blacklisted."
It doesn't just appear to be "blacklisted", it's really blacklisted.
Copy pasting from my own comment from another post in this article since it's relevant here too:
Sure, that might explain why Thurott's articles don't make the front page and Gruber's do, but does it explain why they're completely hellbanned from HN from even appearing on the new page where people can actually see them and vote on it if they find it interesting?
Basically for the same reasons conservatives listen to Rush Limbaugh and liberals read Frank Rich.
There's a place for objective journalism but it's not the only way. What Gruber does is more of a specialized type of journalism. If you've already made up your mind you don't necessarily want to waste time with the other points of view. For example if you really like basketball you would probably prefer to read a blog that focuses on basketball instead of a blog that's comparing basketball to other sports in an objective way. It would really be a waste of your time since you've already decided you like basketball.
When it comes to relatively unimportant things like technology, sports, food, video games, your favorite brand of soda, etc there's a lot less value in objective journalism. I prefer specialized journalism in that context. I'm more interested in the opinions and thoughts of someone who shares my viewpoint because they are more likely to focus on the details that are important to me. We're also likely starting from a common point so not every tiny detail has to be explained verbosely. We all kind of 'get it' so there's no need to rehash it. His comparison of the iPhone 3GS->4 for example is something an Apple user going to understand immediately. He doesn't have to write 300 words describing the contrast using examples of a bunch of products I've never used because he has a reasonable expectation that I probably haven't used them. So why bother?
I don't quite understand why people are so hung up on objective journalism in this context. This isn't reporting on the Watergate scandal or something. It's a consumer product. It's Coke vs. Pepsi. I don't think Gruber needs to aspire to be Edward R. Murrow here. He can proudly write for the home-team if he wants to. Another blog that is anti/pro/objective/etc is only a click away. He certainly doesn't tout himself as being the authoritative beacon of objective journalism.
Consistency and dedication. Then he decided to be a full time blogger and sold weekly sponsorship slots. Selling out and charging enough to make for a very nice salary.
Writing what people want to hear is a business model - half the stuff on HN these days was written for HN. Writing skills and the ability to connect some dots is all you need.
He does original thinking. This includes analysis and synthesis. Additionally, he practices good journalism. He is one of the few people that I read routinely --- I don't read him because he is about Apple, but because of his original thinking. He isn't a fan boy, as many people like to belittle him; he discusses good design, and points out when others practice it, such as the latest Windows mobile (metro? Or something).
That's just one example, his constant hate of and sneering at not just anything Android but anything Google is what is exemplary and shows that he is a fanboy that like to play his fanbase for fun and profit, and his readers just lap it up.
Sure he has disdain for the bad design that is Android, but he objectively has described why that is so over the years. That he dislikes Android, which clearly has a different design approach to Apple and Microsoft, doesn't make him a fan boy of Apple. If he didn't acknowledge the good design coming out of Microsoft these days, then you could argue that he blindly favors Apple. Perhaps you also refer to the drama that has developed from the competition between Google and Apple, and his criticisms of this, and of "don't be evil," etc; design and company culture can't be separated, and so it makes sense for him to approach that topic too. Just consider hiring practices at Google --- do applicants get evaluated for algorithmic abilities alone, or is there something more? Culture is important.
Maybe there is a new word in here someplace - because there is certainly a career to be made out of it, although he could just be the modern Cringly/Dvorak.
FanOpp?
EDIT: I love being downvoted for an honest and direct reply to a question.
Cringely's not a fanboy. He's the quirky camp follower that spins a good yarn. Or a Zelig. Seriously, who does he not know? I love reading his stuff. Crazy ideas. Crazy insights, like that BBC TV connections guy. Always fun.
Early PC Mag, Dvorak had a great column. Geeky insight, pretty good BS detector. Now he's just a crank with a libertarian vibe. Haven't read him in years. I actually met him once, early web days. Great guy. Learned he was a serious amateur civil war historian. Liking Dvorak (the guy) as much as I do, I stuck with him for a long time, hoping he'd get back to having fun. Oh well.
All three are of the same ilk in my book. Having been a very early follower of cringley, and previous married to Dvorak's niece - I do feel I have some context here...
Personally - I find them all to be the same; Opportunistic writers (Yes, they all have skill - I was not disputing this fact) who have found a niche in hte market where they can fill it.
I think ANY successful technology writer must be a fan boi to certain extent -- If all they ever did was shit on everything, then why read them?
I think that fan boi, as a term, is just a modern (hipster, even) way of saying that we have a product evangelist.
I do think that both cringley and dvorak were very much in this role early on - maybe they were much better writers, though, in their prime.
I wouldn't mind that so much but Microsoft/Windows observer (sometimes insider) Paul Thurotts' http://winsupersite.com is hellbanned on HN.
Can't have a Microsoft enthusiast site even be seen or the submitted on the site right? Who knows, it might get some upvotes on the new page and not enough flags from the haters to kill it, it's better to squelch his articles and not take any chances of them hurting the anti-MSFT, pro Apple and Google sentiment on here, right? Bring on the anti-MS articles though, they're surely welcome on the front page.
Thurott is more Microsoft-centric than Gruber, who does write about other things, and generally just not as polished a writer or open to criticizing his “side”. I think you get a certain pass on HN if you write long pieces about typography and other web miscellany, particularly if you're above average as a writer
Sure, that might explain why Thurott's articles don't make the front page and Gruber's do, but does it explain why they're completely hellbanned from HN from even appearing on the new page where people can actually see them and vote on it if they find it interesting?
"The retina display is amazing, everything in the UI feels faster, and the price points remain the same. What’s not to love? It’s that simple."
Sadly, it's not enough for me to switch from the ipad1 to the ipad3. If there was a way to have a reduced prize by trading it with your ipad1, then maybe.. :) Still, I wish there was something more to it..
It turns out that people aren't all te same. I happily upgraded from my iPad 2 solely because of the display. People upgrade their computer monitors all the time, so why shouldn't I upgrade the display on a device I use for at least an hour every day (with some days topping 3 hours)?
