I can't help wondering if, a few months down the road, having learned what they can from the iPad, that we might see a version that runs OS-X, with more I/O options etc. Nice as the iPad is, I don't see it as a replacement for my MacBook.
At this point, to me, the iPad is a "nice to have", certainly not a "must have".
Cheers,
Simon
Hi Simon
With respect, I think that you are missing the point of the ipad.
Everyone else has been making tablet computers with 'proper' operating systems on for the last 8 years . . . . and nobody has bought them.
The idea is not to have something as a replacement for your MacBook - this is where previous tablets have failed. Anyway, why would Apple want you to replace your expensive macbook with a cheap tablet?
The idea is to have something which is as easy to use as an iphone - which basically means that it isn't a standard computer.
There is an excellent article on Gizmodo:
The Apple Tablet Interface
This was written before the announcement, but it made me understand what they were up to.
Of course, whether you want a device like this depends on you, but they would have been mad to bring out a 'me too' tablet device running OS-X.
I thought the most telling part of the presentation was:
75 million people already know how to use it.
Personally, like Terry, I'll be leaving my ebook reader behind, this will be great for a quiet half hour in the living room or a hotel bar to catch up on email, the net, omni-focus with something which will slip in the back of my small fogg bag (which I always have with me). I can then prop it against the flower vase on the restaurant table and read the latest edition of the Guardian . . . or Middlemarch or whatever. When flying I can watch the movie I'd like to watch on something which doesn't have to open up and sit on the tray. The 17"MBP can stay in the hotel room / office / luggage shelf.
Sure, it won't replace your macbook . . . but did you really think they were going to produce something which would?
all the best