[quote name='Nytegard' timestamp='1299166585' post='4781418']
People already have Wacom though for Drawing Tablets. And as nice as the iPad2 is, there's no way it could compete with the Cintiq.

Wacom sucks. The world would benefit from Apple giving Wacom a wake up call like they did the phone industry.
[/quote]


I don't know, but I think patent hoarding might limit this. Can't remember where I read this, but it seems that due to certain patent, only Wacom can release the best tablet there is. Unless other companies can find other way to do things better.

It's like suddenly one day mp3 patent holder would one day say "only us can develop mp3 player" which automatically put 90% mp3 player maker out of business, unless they went ogg or wma. I could be wrong here, but AFAIK there was a conversation regarding this, and the patent issue was raised.

Even Genius pen requries battery (Wacom pen does not).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wacom

Quote "[font=sans-serif][size=2]Wacom tablets use a patented electromagnetic resonance technology.[sup][12][/sup] Since the tablet provides power to the pen through resonant coupling, no battery or cord is required for the pointing device. As a result, there are no batteries inside the pen (or the accompanying puck), which makes them slimmer and essentially maintenance-free. However, the battery-less technology makes the tablet bigger and heavier than other technologies, and the short life of the pen makes the lack of maintenance a moot point."[/font]

I don't know, but I think patent hoarding might limit this. Can't remember where I read this, but it seems that due to certain patent, only Wacom can release the best tablet there is. Unless other companies can find other way to do things better.

I think their firmware is better too; that our their tech is just all around better. Either way, they outperform Ntrig noticeably. If someone came up with a better way to do it than wacom then by all means they should do so. As of right now, they are still the best. I do think they suck for not making their tech more available in tablets (not sure if its a price or quantity issue).

http://www.netbooknews.com/18642/n-trig-duosense-on-the-hp-slate-500-vs-wacom-comparison/

This article makes it seem like it's a driver issue, which is good for nTrig because it means they just have to keep developing their drivers and their tech should catch up.

I also thought it was a patent thing, but it seems the patents have expired. And I think it would be 100% fair to say Wacom is the Nokia of the tablet world, waiting to be caught by surprise and to become irrelevant. I own an intuos4 and the simple things like nib life and surface life are an absolute joke that should not occur in any product produced by a market leader.

Apple has announced the release of a new ipad, it features a dual-core processor, new slim design, two cameras and a funky magnetic screen protector.

Now! to me that doesn't make me want to rush out and buy it feels more like ipad 1.5 rather than ipad 2 you would think with apples large share of the tablet market its worth them making bigger improvements to the ipad it seems like apple are happy to make any old rubbish and expect people to buy it.

I think the new a5 processor with 9x faster graphics will not benefit consumers or developers at all, no developer is going to make specific ipad 2 apps.

I think everyone should stick to the original ipad until apple make a significant release.

what do you guys think?

What exactly do you expect them to deliver? The iPhone 4 is not a revolution compared to the 3GS and I can't think of any product which revolutionises each new version. This replaces the iPad1 for new customers and keeps the iPad2 on the leading edge against their competitors. People can sell their old version and upgrade if they want or keep the iPad1.

Your right the ipad is a useless tool its got nothing you cant find on the iphone.

I do love it when people make such idiotic remarks. Millions of people purchasing iPads (and other tablets) don't think they're useless, so by definition they clearly are not. It's like saying a Ferrari is useless.
Not to mention a more analytical comparison... you can't watch a movie or read a book on a tiny phone properly, you can on a 9-10" screen.

I don't particularly think tablets are useful to me, but saying they are fundamentally useless just because you don't find it meets your need is either stupid or very arrogant.

Not to mention a more analytical comparison... you can't watch a movie or read a book on a tiny phone properly, you can on a 9-10" screen.

You can't read a book or a newspaper properly on an LCD screen either, especially not in any environment where you might encounter sunlight, and I don't think anyone would prefer to watch a movie on a 10" tablet over watching it on a TV set or a computer monitor.

Of course there are things you can do with an iPad; it doesn't really seem to have any killer feature however. The main use case, just like with your Ferrarri example, seems to be "it's shiny and I want to show off that I have the money to spend on items with no particular use" - it's an accessory, not a tool.

...a huge market that's already pretty much loyal to apple to begin with.

That's exactly why. There's no need to sink money into R&D to attract buyers if those buyers are already zealously loyal. There's currently no danger in "creative" types being lured away from Apple, so Apple has no incentive to develop something new.

[quote name='d000hg' timestamp='1299328215' post='4782042']
Not to mention a more analytical comparison... you can't watch a movie or read a book on a tiny phone properly, you can on a 9-10" screen.

You can't read a book or a newspaper properly on an LCD screen either,[/quote]So? It's still light-years better on a 10" screen than a 3" screen. Kindle sales on iPad have been quite high so people are clearly willing to use it for this purpose. Personally I have a Kindle but I know I'd rather use an iPad than try and read, or web-browse, or anything on my phone.

I don't think anyone would prefer to watch a movie on a 10" tablet over watching it on a TV set or a computer monitor.[/quote]Really? On the bus or an airplane I don't really want to carry a TV. 10" as a personal screen is quite big enough - think about screens you get in your airplane seat or in the headrests of cars.

Of course there are things you can do with an iPad; it doesn't really seem to have any killer feature however. The main use case, just like with your Ferrarri example, seems to be "it's shiny and I want to show off that I have the money to spend on items with no particular use" - it's an accessory, not a tool.
[/quote]But suggesting that makes it useless is silly. Most of the people who like to act all superior about not wanting to show off an iPad would love a Ferrari.

[quote name='valderman' timestamp='1299335404' post='4782058']
[quote name='d000hg' timestamp='1299328215' post='4782042']
Not to mention a more analytical comparison... you can't watch a movie or read a book on a tiny phone properly, you can on a 9-10" screen.

You can't read a book or a newspaper properly on an LCD screen either,[/quote]So? It's still light-years better on a 10" screen than a 3" screen. Kindle sales on iPad have been quite high so people are clearly willing to use it for this purpose. Personally I have a Kindle but I know I'd rather use an iPad than try and read, or web-browse, or anything on my phone.[/quote]It's a pretty expensive way to read books though.

I don't think anyone would prefer to watch a movie on a 10" tablet over watching it on a TV set or a computer monitor.[/quote]Really? On the bus or an airplane I don't really want to carry a TV. 10" as a personal screen is quite big enough - think about screens you get in your airplane seat or in the headrests of cars.[/quote]Obviously. I'd say that the difference between a decent phone and an iPad in this scenario is pretty small, and that a laptop does it better.

Of course there are things you can do with an iPad; it doesn't really seem to have any killer feature however. The main use case, just like with your Ferrarri example, seems to be "it's shiny and I want to show off that I have the money to spend on items with no particular use" - it's an accessory, not a tool.
[/quote]But suggesting that makes it useless is silly. Most of the people who like to act all superior about not wanting to show off an iPad would love a Ferrari.
[/quote]I wouldn't mind getting either for free; people who do like the things pay a premium for them. Of course an iPad isn't useless per se, I just think it's an extremely overhyped, though neat, solution to a problem that doesn't exist. It would have been interesting to know how well it would have done if it had been sold on its own merits rather than having "it's an Apple product" as its main selling point.

I think iPad (1 or 2) is going to be obsolete sooner than the iPhone or iTouch. The tablets that are coming out now are more powerful, feature-ready, and flexible than the iPad2. And the iPad as a book-reader is outrageously expensive.

Now if I can find some iPad1s for about $100-150. I'd definitely snapped that up.