QUOTE(xaw5126 @ Jan 29 2010, 08:12 PM)
@ Only_Human
I don't know how you calculate...
its RM 747 in Singapore ...
@stringfellow
as usual, Apple is showing off that if the iPad SDK is used 100%, then the device becomes more useful.
did you read the 2 posts by John Gruber @ daringfireball.net ? you of all people would get what he's talking about.
I've read his article about simplifying mobile computing. I would agree to a certain extent because on some device that demands this, it is prudent to have it in place. Allowing open environment to such devices will only tax it to such extent that it will render the device useless or erratically unstable. Case in point: shoving Linux into an iPod or jailbreaking the current iPod Touch/iPhone.
On the other end of the spectrum, MacBooks and the likes are relatively open to tinkering and modifications because of the nature of the activities performed on them. They are versatile creatures and to become that, you need the architecture to be open. These devices are also relatively powerful, enough to withstand any serious modifications that may or may not slow it down.
Now, I believe that almost every rabid Apple fanatics waiting for Apple's unicorn, the tablet, wanted it to be powerful enough to operate within the realm of the Macbook, in terms of power and tinkering as well. What did Steve dropped on our laps? A big iPod Touch. You can imagine the utter disappointment.
Again, all this goes back to the point I've iterated before: Apple is stubborn, they do it their way. I had firsthand experience with that the last time I waited for the MBP unibody refresh, expecting BD as CTO. Instead I get a "bag of hurt" from Steve.
Until the development of apps on the iPad improves to the point that Im convinced that they are truly the satisfactory mobile counterpart of their big brothers on the Mac OS X, the iPad will remain, in my opinion, a Frankenstein of an iPod Touch.