Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The iPad IS a computer

Sure, but technically, a calculator is a computer too. But when people use the word "computer" in common vernacular it's not the technical, dictionary word they are talking about, but rather the street level meaning.

If the avg. consumer walked into Kinkos and said he'd like to rent a computer and the clerk pointed to a bank if iPads there would be some head scratching going on. So yes, the iPad is a computer, but its not a "computer." Of course I think Apple is set to help redefine the common meaning so in a few years, who knows.
 
In the strictest definition, yes its a computer. In the real world usage, its not.

By using the same logic, a car, tv, even refrigerators are computers because they can perform the same type of operations.

Its a device that is limited in function, and storage and while it can do various tasks that overlap a laptop/desktop. I'm hesitant to call it a computer, just like I'm hesitant to call its little brother the iPod touch a computer (and yes an iPad is just an over-sized ipod touch)
 
Chupa Chupa said:
Sure, but technically, a calculator is a computer too. But when people use the word "computer" in common vernacular it's not the technical, dictionary word they are talking about, but rather the street level meaning.

If the avg. consumer walked into Kinkos and said he'd like to rent a computer and the clerk pointed to a bank if iPads there would be some head scratching going on. So yes, the iPad is a computer, but its not a "computer." Of course I think Apple is set to help redefine the common meaning so in a few years, who knows.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Its this difference between connotation and denotation (look it up) that nitpicks simply don't get.
 
While it is a computer, the specific design choices that make it better for certain tasks make it more of an appliance in my view. It's primary a web browsing, book reading appliance.

Perhaps what we need is a new name for a traditional, open, multi-purpose computer?
 
miniConvert said:
While it is a computer, the specific design choices that make it better for certain tasks make it more of an appliance in my view. It's primary a web browsing, book reading appliance.

Perhaps what we need is a new name for a traditional, open, multi-purpose computer?
Click to expand...

How about "PC"
 
A lot of this discussion is bound to end up anchored in semantics.

The question is, at least in my mind, does the iPad perform a subset of mobile functions and provide the same or better experience due to its form factor then a desktop, laptop, or smartphone do? I don't expect to write a novel on an iPad. But it's not unreasonable to expect to be able to edit documents, view web content, and deliver audio and video on a device like this in a way that is superior to both a laptop and a smartphone.

I think that there are two ways of looking at this kind of device.

First, it's a fact that a large portion of laptop users, both consumers and business users, don't use laptops to the fullest of their ability. The appeal of the platform isn't so much its ability to be a jack of all trades device that is a desktop replacement (although certainly many users do have that need) but rather its mobility. Most users only use laptops at a fraction of their potential and mostly as a media delivery device. Laptops, despite their power, are constrained by a number of problems. Their form factor is unwieldy in many situations, requiring a table or for the user to be seated to type on, they aren't instant on, and they require physical media to install software which isn't always available when users are on the go (unless they carry their install DVD's with them- Unlikely).

And secondly, there are a large number of iPhone and other smartphone users who are, in fact, using their phones as computers. I would redefine the use of these phones as data communicators. People exchange and edit data on the fly on their phone in the way that people once used laptops exclusively to do. The obvious problem with smartphones is their screen size, battery life, and processor power.

Despite this, no one would argue that a smartphone should replace a laptop/desktop. Nor should the argument be made that a tablet should as well.

Tablets are the ideal form factor that properly designed would fit many of these functions. It can't replace a traditional computer in terms of text intensive tasks, but it has numerous advantages, particularly the way Apple has implemented it with the iPhone OS. Specifically, it's instant on, isn't unwieldy, has a GUI that is specifically designed for touch interaction, and has apps that can be installed easily, on the go, and without the need for physical media. And obviously, those who use their smartphones as computers should find a well designed tablet preferable to a laptop, which they may still prefer over a tablet when they're back at their desk.

What many observers erroneously confuse is the ability of a device to perform important functions for its users with the devices data input method. Some users will argue that since the iPad lacks a physical keyboard that it can't be a computer, despite the fact that many of the most common tasks on computers don't require intensive text entry. This is false. It also should serve as something users should be aware- If you need a mobile device for intensive text entry on the go the iPad is not for you. In fact, no tablet is. But that doesn't mean it's any less of a computer.
 
Fact is, nowadays damn near EVERYTHING is a computer. My watch, stove, car, TV, Tivo... all have more computing power than my first "Computer."

But we all know damn well what people mean when they say "Computer." They mean that thing they sit in front of at work with the monitor and keyboard and the usb ports galore.

Everything else is simple nitpicking and smartassery. We all know what people MEAN. Connotation not Denotation.
End of Discussion.
 
It's not a computer. The iPod touch is not a computer, the iPhone is not a computer, the nexus one is not a computer, the zune is not a computer.
 
maflynn said:
In the strictest definition, yes its a computer. In the real world usage, its not.

By using the same logic, a car, tv, even refrigerators are computers because they can perform the same type of operations.

Its a device that is limited in function, and storage and while it can do various tasks that overlap a laptop/desktop. I'm hesitant to call it a computer, just like I'm hesitant to call its little brother the iPod touch a computer (and yes an iPad is just an over-sized ipod touch)
Click to expand...

Very very apt statement.
 
maflynn said:
In the strictest definition, yes its a computer. In the real world usage, its not.

By using the same logic, a car, tv, even refrigerators are computers because they can perform the same type of operations.

Its a device that is limited in function, and storage and while it can do various tasks that overlap a laptop/desktop. I'm hesitant to call it a computer, just like I'm hesitant to call its little brother the iPod touch a computer (and yes an iPad is just an over-sized ipod touch)
Click to expand...

How is an iPad or even iPod Touch anything like the computer in your car, tv, or fridge? The latter are completely closed systems that serve exactly one purpose and have exactly the hardware resources to perform that purpose and nothing more.

The iPod Touch/iPhone and even more so the iPad are general purpose, reprogrammable computers with excess storage and RAM, input devices, networking hardware, etc. Lack of Flash and multitasking does not preclude an otherwise extremely flexible device from being called a computer.

If you want to compare the iPad to some kind of appliance, I think the most appropriate comparison would be to a game console, which are also very much computers.
 
admanimal said:
How is an iPad or even iPod Touch anything like the computer in your car, tv, or fridge? The latter are completely closed systems that serve exactly one purpose and have exactly the hardware resources to perform that purpose and nothing more.

The iPod Touch/iPhone and even more so the iPad are general purpose, reprogrammable computers with excess storage and RAM, input devices, networking hardware, etc. Lack of Flash and multitasking does not preclude an otherwise extremely flexible device from being called a computer.

If you want to compare the iPad to some kind of appliance, I think the most appropriate comparison would be to a game console, which are also very much computers.
Click to expand...

so you go around calling the xbox and Ps3 computers and not video games?
 
Many of you are arguing distinctions that lack differences. The reality is that the definition of 'computer' is best built around what people actually use them for in which case the iPad is most assuredly a computer.

What the iPad currently lacks compared to more traditional 'computers' will shrink over time and ultimately disappear, either by incorporating those features (e.g. multi tasking, productivity applications, and webcams), or by those 'features' evolving out of existence (e.g. cloud storage/syncing/streaming of media replacing the need to sync an iPad with another 'computer').

Like one poster quoted up above - we've just been shown "what's next." Not realizing this reflects a tremendous lack foresight and imagination IMO. The future is coming guys, like it or not.

I'm embracing it - I'll be using my iPad as my primary computer on Day 1, retiring my MBP for good.
 
eplchamps0305 said:
so you go around calling the xbox and Ps3 computers and not video games?
Click to expand...

Why would you think that playing video games by design disqualifies a device from being a computer? That's absurd and myopic, particularly since both the X-Box and the PS3 do much more than run video games. This is especially true of the PS3.

Additionally, many of the devices are way more powerful than the basic definition of what a computer is, which is what many of us are familiar with. A long time ago when I was a kid, computers included mainframes, an abacus, and slide rule. And digital calculators ran around the same price as the iPad is listed at without adjusting for inflation.

Would you consider the original Macintosh 128k a computer? It certainly was and is, despite not being mobile, having less then 1 meg of internal RAM, no hard disk, a monochrome monitor and monoaural sound, and the absence of mutitasking.

Maybe one would argue that the original Mac was state of the art, bleeding edge technology at the time. That would be factually wrong. There were many computers, some with pre-emptive multitasking, mouse driven GUI's, color displays, stereo sound, with more memory and RAM at comparable prices to the original Mac around the same time, such as the Amiga and Atari ST.

It's interesting, but the iPad is way more functional as a computer, with programmable software, then any of those computers.

So yeah, the iPad is a computer. If people use iPhones and smartphones as computers to perform computer related functions then the iPad certainly seems even better designed to be used specifically in this way.
 
admanimal said:
Not in everyday conversation, but if someone asked me if they are a computer I would say of course.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and the ONLY reason this topic even comes up it because of all the people pissed of it didn't meet "their own" expectations. This leads them to try to belittle everyone that wants the iPad and belittle the device all they can to make themselves feel better. It's rather sad really, they come up with some condition that in their mind "it cannot be a computer!!" it doesn't do or have xxxxxx feature!

Reality is like stated here, no one is going to walk around with the iPad and say "Look at my computer, isn't it cool!". In general terms it is a computer just like all those people list from your car to your refrigerator. Simple as that, the topic was "is" or "isn't" the iPad a computer. It clearly is by definition a computer. No agenda's, no opinions, just fact by definition.

"com⋅put⋅er  [kuhm-pyoo-ter] Show IPA
–noun
1. Also called processor. an electronic device designed to accept data, perform prescribed mathematical and logical operations at high speed, and display the results of these operations. Compare analog computer, digital computer.
2. a person who computes; computist."
 
G4R2 said:
Why would you think that playing video games by design disqualifies a device from being a computer? That's absurd and myopic, particularly since both the X-Box and the PS3 do much more than run video games. This is especially true of the PS3.

Additionally, many of the devices are way more powerful than the basic definition of what a computer is, which is what many of us are familiar with. A long time ago when I was a kid, computers included mainframes, an abacus, and slide rule. And digital calculators ran around the same price as the iPad is listed at without adjusting for inflation.

Would you consider the original Macintosh 128k a computer? It certainly was and is, despite not being mobile, having less then 1 meg of internal RAM, no hard disk, a monochrome monitor and monoaural sound, and the absence of mutitasking.

Maybe one would argue that the original Mac was state of the art, bleeding edge technology at the time. That would be factually wrong. There were many computers, some with pre-emptive multitasking, mouse driven GUI's, color displays, stereo sound, with more memory and RAM at comparable prices to the original Mac around the same time, such as the Amiga and Atari ST.

It's interesting, but the iPad is way more functional as a computer, with programmable software, then any of those computers.

So yeah, the iPad is a computer. If people use iPhones and smartphones as computers to perform computer related functions then the iPad certainly seems even better designed to be used specifically in this way.
Click to expand...

Technically it is a computer. Do you go around calling it one? No. When I buy a computer I expect to be able to use it without assistance from another computer.
 
eplchamps0305 said:
Technically it is a computer. Do you go around calling it one? No. When I buy a computer I expect to be able to use it without assistance from another computer.
Click to expand...

So when you use your PC or Mac, for instance, you don't hook up to other computers on the internet? You don't use Apple's computers to download music and videos on to your desktop, laptop, or iPod?

That's basically the state of affairs from the 80's before the state of the art 1200 k baud modems were available and people were using their computers without the assistance of other computers, according to your definition.
 
eplchamps0305 said:
Technically it is a computer. Do you go around calling it one? No. When I buy a computer I expect to be able to use it without assistance from another computer.
Click to expand...

Nearly every computer sold today is "assisted" by other computers. Welcome to the internet. Your computer is also "assisted" by a keyboard and mouse, without them it would be a paper weight, I could argue the iPad is more advanced on the simple fact is has no need for either (keyboard or mouse) to do it's tasks. :rolleyes:
 
bossxii said:
Nearly every computer sold today is "assisted" by other computers. Welcome to the internet. Your computer is also "assisted" by a keyboard and mouse, without them it would be a paper weight, I could argue the iPad is more advanced on the simple fact is has no need for either (keyboard or mouse) to do it's tasks. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Even the iPad is assisted by other computers in that sense (ie the internet), but not every computer needs to be plugged into another computer to synch on a regular basis. It's a fine distinction, but that's what's being debated here.

No need to : rolleyes :
 
bobob said:
Even the iPad is assisted by other computers in that sense (ie the internet), but not every computer needs to be plugged into another computer to synch on a regular basis. It's a fine distinction, but that's what's being debated here.

No need to : rolleyes :
Click to expand...

The iPad needs to "sync" for two reasons. Firmware update, Backup. I also get updated on my iMac from Apple's servers (which are a computer) via the internet to keep my iMac running as I want. The only difference is a cable to the internet vs a usb cable. Again seems silly but this is the basis for everyone saying it's not a computer. So by your definition, my iMac is not a computer because I do in fact sync it with the servers to get updates.

Everything else can be done wirelessly, it's just a matter of how fast you can move files to it.

Movies, Games, Music, ebooks, podcasts all wirelessly.
*unconfirmed yet but in a recent appleinsider article, a source from Apple's business dev side stated wireless printing across iPad apps as well as network file sharing.

I don't see the need to sync on a "regular basis". I see the need to update for firmware if it has something I actually need. Backups are a choice, most of my info is already sync'd with Mobileme anyhow. If I lost an app, I can re-download from the App store for free. If I lost something from iTunes same thing.

On the "syncing" of your computer. I'd also venture to say that a huge percentage of people use hotmail, gmail etc.. for their email clients. They need to sync with those servers or they have no email. Again it's semantics and pointless. Computers sync with others all the time to make them useful.
 
bobob said:
Even the iPad is assisted by other computers in that sense (ie the internet), but not every computer needs to be plugged into another computer to synch on a regular basis. It's a fine distinction, but that's what's being debated here.

No need to : rolleyes :
Click to expand...

Any particular reason why you believe it would be necessary to sync an iPad on a regular basis?

You may need to sync it at least once, but that is true of any new computer. New laptops or desktops aren't magically populated with a users files the first time they're turned on.

If syncing is required for backup purposes, that's a matter of user preference. It's probable that a large number of desktop PC and laptop users don't backup regularly so it's not clear why this would be more important on the iPad.

Backuping music or videos is another matter. Depending on how a user decides to manage their media, it might be argued that it is the desktop or laptop that regularly needs to be plugged into the iPad in order to backup the media files on those computers.

And there's no reason why a user would need a desktop or laptop to download apps, music, or videos. This can be done independently of any desktop or laptop.

Synchronizing devices through a cable isn't a distinguishing feature between computers and non-computers. It's a practice that is predicated by certain software and file usage. On the iPad, just on the iPhone, it isn't entirely necessary, just convenient.

And that is what this discussion is boiling down to, the mere perception and possible misconception by some that the inconvenience of certain specific features may somehow outweigh advantages inherent to the form factor and software.
 
G4R2 said:
And that is what this discussion is boiling down to, the mere perception and possible misconception by some that the inconvenience of certain specific features may somehow outweigh advantages inherent to the form factor and software.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm buying an iPad first day - - that doesn't mean we can't have an enjoyable little discussion of semantics here.
 
To me, the practical definition of a computer implies some notion of general purpose-ness, usually achieved by allowing you to use multiple types of software on it. So IMO, what is technically a computer in your car or TV is not practically one because it only does the one thing that it was made to do. Similarly, if someone made an iPad-like device that ONLY let you check your email and nothing else, I would have a hard time calling that a computer, too.

This is why I would consider a video game console or an iPad a computer, because they can serve different purposes depending on what type of software you use with them.
 
Interesting comments, a lot of people get it (it being the iPad), a lot don't. My purpose for this thread was not in the definition of a computer and getting people to agree that technically the iPad is a computer. It was to prompt people to think outside of the apparent restrictions so many have in the planned use (or capability) of it. A lot of people only think the iPad is a "mediapad."

That's a shame. The iPad is a real computer, and from what I've seen of Apples hopes and plans for it, they expect that iPads will be used as real computers. Some people see major limitations because it does not have all the connectability options of larger computers, but those are only incoveniences. It is still connectible to both the Internet, the "cloud," your laptop and your desktop.

I plan on using my iPad for just about everything I use my bigger "real" computers for: writing/ word processing, database management, note taking, research, photo/image processing, email, note taking, hopefully in the near future: movie editing, etc.

I don't see any reason not to use an iPad for just about everything, and do see some reasons to use it: one being I like the touch screen method of input for a lot of uses.
 
I do agree that it is a computer.....but

I dont agree that it can replace a macbook, imac, windows etc

I could have had it wrong for years, but I was under the impression that the iPod's/iPhone (soon iPad) are an extension to iTunes on your main machine, you sync what you need to use on this device and use it.

your main device has lots of storage, how do you fit lots of hd movies, music etc all onto and iPad.

I class these devices as a smaller computer that works in conjunction with your main machine, not a replacement for them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back