Will iPad be an end of the Mac's historic role in content creation?

[snouter]

He hasn't noticed it yet, but the closeness of his platform and his own arrogance are already biting Steve in his own butt.

When business gets personal, business gets bad.

Developers make or break a platform. And hell hath no fury like a disgruntled and disappointed software developer.

I agree, this definitely looks like an overreach.

My initial reaction was, whatever, just like the iPhone, which, really wasn't the end of the world.

But, yeah, seeing screen caps of so many mainstream sites failing, wow. The larger screen, just really takes it out of the realm of a typical mobile device.

And this is just the days after the launch reaction, wait until people actually get their hands on it and start complaining about this and that site not working while sipping latte.

 

[MisterMe]

why on earth would they get involved in content consumption only to turn their back on the content creation for the exact same device? thats like nabisco making knives forks and plates and stopping making food

Apple needs the movies music etc that fuel itunes and the public consumption...

I cannot agree more. The announcement of the iPad seems to have dawned a new silly season.

A fully-loaded iPad comes in about $1000 US and this is supposed to replace the MacBook Pro? This despite the fact that it is a much less powerful device that it runs only a handful of the same apps as the MacBook Pro and that these apps are the same in name only?

Where does this "Replacement Theory" come from? Is it really that difficult to grasp the concept that Apple is expanding its product line rather than replacing highly profitable products with less expensive low-margin devices?

Replacing the MacBook/MacBook Pro makes no sense. Over the last decade, Apple has become a runaway success. To continue its success, it must grow. As part of its growth strategy, Apple is expanding its product line.

 

[snouter]

The the original point of this thread makes little sense.

iPad is not running Photoshop anytime soon.

 

[Counterfit]

Steve might have sold millions of expensive designer gadgets, but he does not own the future of the world nor will he be able to keep riding this wave on the long run. The hype around the iToys won't last, and the iPad didn't receive the excited welcome that the iPhone had received.

Exactly, which is why Apple has been selling 50+ million iPods for each of the last three years and Apple is having their best years ever while most other manufacturers, well, aren't.

He hasn't noticed it yet, but the closeness of his platform and his own arrogance are already biting Steve in his own butt.

How long have we been hearing "Apple's gonna die because of their closed platform!!"? It's not new, and it's even less true now than it was 5+ years ago.

Developers make or break a platform. And hell hath no fury like a disgruntled and disappointed software developer.

 

[Robertus]

I think you are wrong on your take on this. Here is my take:

Steve Jobs runs a tight ship. Apple is working with the New York Times to provide content, and he always knew he was going to pull up the NY Times home page, and the missing flash plug-in would be there for a second before moving on. But this was not an accident, it was on purpose.

Apple and Adobe have been in a cold war for a while. Adobe feels that Apple jerked their chain by switching OS strategies during the OS9/Rhapsody/Copland days. Adobe then said, fine, we will wait until you figure out what to do and then get around to re-writing our apps. Apple released shiny new Intel Macs and there were no native Adobe apps. Mac users had to keep their G5 computers, or get an Intel Mac and use Rosetta emulation. Every day for over a year, Apple had to hear about people who were not buying new Intel Macs until Adobe shipped. I was one of those people. I bet the day Adobe released native Intel apps was one of Apple's better sales days ever.

That was then, Flash is now. Adobe had a "lite version" of Flash, but it went nowhere. Developers had no real interest in pushing lite apps out. And Jobs is not the type to offer a lite experience anyhow, so he punted. No flash on the iPhone. Flash is notorious for being a bit of a CPU hog, and that would affect battery life and Apple wanted no part of that.

I always kind of felt bad for Dell. There computers were what they were, but a lot of their rep suffered because people had Dells and were having issues with things like viruses. Well, when people get viruses, they don't call Microsoft and ask them why Windows and IE is one giant security hole. People called Dell and said "my computer is junk!"

Apple did not want that to play out with the iPhone and Flash. For security reasons, for performance reasons and for keeping the spotlight on the app store reasons. Apple would be happy if Flash went away.

Anyhow, Jobs knew that the missing plug-in was going to show up and guess what? We are seeing lots of articles about the demise of Flash. A return to server side and web standard technologies. Javascript has risen from the dead. If there is a missing plug-in icon on the NY Times, it's up to the NY Times to make sure they are developing a web site that just works.

I heard a great phrase the other day, the internet has become the splinternet. It's no longer only desktops and laptops connecting to the web, it's phones and now iPads with who knows what capabilities, it's web services consumed by all sorts of things, etc.

The onus is on the developers to develop for the new splinternet, it's not up to the hardware makers to make sure their devices support Flash if it's not appropriate for their device.

Hell hath no fury like a Steve Jobs scorned.

Anyhow, that's my take, it's my opinion, love it or leave it.

Agreed. I would rather wanted Apple to develop its own alternative version of "Flash" instead of relying on Adobe Flash. And get the ball rolling to kill Flash!

 

[Robertus]

The the original point of this thread makes little sense.

iPad is not running Photoshop anytime soon.

Just wait when the fans of Photoshop Elements pressuring Adobe to create a PSE app for iPad. Tech-savvy, they aren't, but, damn, they wanted PSE on iPad, come hell or high water.

I'm not one of those fans.

 

[leomac08]

no it won't

 

[lucidmedia]

The the original point of this thread makes little sense.

iPad is not running Photoshop anytime soon.

As someone who has worked in the creative industry for quite a while (my first professional mac was a IIfx) I think that the OP is overstating things a bit, but agree that apple is definitely shifting away from its strong support of the creative industry.

As Apple is morphing into a consumer products company, its support of professional solutions and applications has dwindled.

As more and more of Apple's devices become closed systems, the opportunities for content creation become limited to those that apple allows us / gets a cut of. This is, as some folks have rightly pointed out, one of the primary reasons apple does not want Flash running in the iphone / ipad.

The quoted comment above mentioning photoshop is prescient. Apple and Adobe are currently engaged in a battle of wills, and have been for some time. Is it any surprise that the mac software from Adobe is lagging behind PC development? It is a stupid game, and it is the professional users that are losing out.

The iPod does not mark the end of Apple's role in content creation. But if you take a longer view you cannot help but see that Apple has been moving away from our market, and will continue to do so, for quite some time.

 

[MisterMe]

... Apple and Adobe are currently engaged in a battle of wills, and have been for some time. ...

Apple and Adobe have been fighting for at least 20 years. I would certainly agree that it "has been some time."

 

[snouter]

Apple does not support Flash because it is so buggy, he says. Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it’s because of Flash. No one will be using Flash, he says. The world is moving to HTML5.

It's not even a Cold War.

 

[FightTheFuture]

Regardless, I understand why you would think that. I had high hopes for the "iPad", but watching the keynote updates my hopes vanished. I did realize that it was a product for the masses, albeit, the masses with a grip of cash laying around, waiting to be wasted.

I don't quite understand why they would make such an obscure product.
Oh wait, for the money, duh. All this device is is a device to give apple money. You cannot create content worth anything on this device, all kit can do is give money to apple.

tell that to Jorge Colombo and Steve Sprang.

Jobs was pretty clear that this is a device that doesn't replace a notebook or a smartphone. i mean, the iPhone and the MacBook are the real money makers for apple after all. this is apple's answer to both the netbook and the slate PC. they just wanted to take a different approach to the tablet since they were never successful before.

could this be another AppleTV? very likely. but at least apple gave it a shot. they are competing with manufacturers who barely make a profit on netbooks and tablet PCs will wind up being a novelty that noone ever uses (PDAs?). who knows, maybe if the iPad fails, this could all wind up lowering the cost of the MacBook Air.

Developers make or break a platform. And hell hath no fury like a disgruntled and disappointed software developer.

Consumers make or break a platform, and developers follow the money.

The best device for surfing the internet...
http://theflashblog.com/

"You Had a point, but it wasn't as large as you thought"

 

[IgnatiusTheKing]

First of all, the best content creation programs are the same whether you are using the Mac OS or Windows. It behooves designers/artists to know both.

Secondly, Apple has not stopped making extremely high-quality computers for design, video, sound and animation. For what I use it for (Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, HTML, etc.), my i5 iMac is faster than the 2008 Quad Mac Pro I had at my last job.

 

[snouter]

"You Had a point, but it wasn't as large as you thought"

What was wrong with those pictures? Yes, they were on tiny iPhone screens showing mobile versions (aka slim versions) of the real websites.

The 1024x768 screen means I'm going to want the full website experience, not the hacked down featureless mobile version running in a small window.

If iPad was only expected to give me an iPhone experience on a larger screen, well, that's kind of weak to be Jobs' last most important thing of his career.

 

[MisterMe]

What was wrong with those pictures? Yes, they were on tiny iPhone screens showing mobile versions (aka slim versions) of the real websites.

The 1024x768 screen means I'm going to want the full website experience, not the hacked down featureless mobile version running in a small window.

If iPad was only expected to give me an iPhone experience on a larger screen, well, that's kind of weak to be Jobs' last most important thing of his career.

Wow! Talk about missing the point--completely. The websites displayed are not slim versions of real websites. They are real websites. The images show that there are only a tiny few instances where the lack of Flash on the iPhone (and soon, the iPad) hurt the browsing experience.

Now get this: The iPad will place more pixels in the palm of your hand than most users have on their desktops. Stop whining and read. If you can't read, then watch Steve Job's presentation that introduced the iPad. You will clearly see that most of your negative assertions about the iPad are unfounded.

 

[snouter]

The websites displayed are not slim versions of real websites.

mobile.bangbros?

I think that's the mobile version.

I just went to CNN on my phone was kicked to m.cnn.com.

Splinternet.

The iPad has a large enough screen and enough CPU to handle full websites. It acts like a small mobile device though.

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Well I think some people need an iPad for that time of the month...

Really it's a new and not even released product, it looks great, it's functional but how the market as whole accepts the product it still yet to be seen.

Personally I think it will be a killer product and I think people are loosing sight of what it does, the iPad isn't trying to be a better netbook, it's trying to be better than a netbook. It will never be a full function PC/Mac but aim to fill a new niche of mobile+ entertainment, media, web and communication.

Now for the complaints about no Flash, yes it doesn't do Flash but personally it doesn't bother me Flash sites eat battery life and I the way the web is moving is to a more HTML5 based environment. Flash will still have a place but not on mobile devices it's that simple, Apple have taken this line.

I can see professionals using this device, it would be great for a demos, emails and site mock-ups.

As a creative director will I buy? We'll see, until I see it in action it's a little tough to speculate how useful it will be. But like the iPhone I remember plenty of people canning it in the same ways.

 

[snickelfritz]

The iPad is actually good news for RIA developers that will get paid to create decent alternate content for Flash websites, but their clients are not going to be thrilled that their $10,000 Flash website will now require additional, and potentially very expensive, alternate content development in order to be viewable on emerging "mobile" platforms like the iPad.

ie: the iPad is good news for developers that need work; bad news for owners of expensive RIA sites that will not be viewable on that platform.
Cell phones are one thing; a large and beautifully designed multitouch tablet that is likely to sell by the truckload is quite another.

This reminds me a little of the late 90's when Apple computers were perceived as "less compatible" with the mainstream than Windows PC's.
Without Flash and other ubiquitous plugin architectures, this would be a fair assessment of the iPad, regardless of its other virtues.

 

[covisio]

As this question was posed in the Design and Graphics section, I assume the OP really means 'graphic content', and to an extent I think it is true that Apple realised some time ago that they weren't going to be able to stave off the relentless price-led attack from PCs in the professional market.

Businesses are more cost-conscious than ever. The big design and marketing houses are not swimming in money like they were 15 years ago. If they have to replace 20 G5s complete with 20 very expensive CS 'upgrades' or worse still, Quark upgrades, then it's understandable if they look at getting 20 Dells at probably half the cost instead.

Apple aren't going to trim their margins just to maintain market share in this environment. They know where the real money is and they've demonstrated that emphatically.

If Adobe said tomorrow there would be no CS5 for Mac OS, whilst it being extremely unlikely Adobe would piss off a sizable chunk of their user base, I don't think it would hurt Apple's bottom line that much.

I think they will continue to make high spec machines because there's clearly a market for them, but they won't be high spec so they can cope with Adobe apps, they'll just be high spec because that's what people want.

 

[0098386]

I doubt it marks the end of content creation, but if Apple do ditch their pro hardware then I'm out. If the next OSX is as closed as the iPhone OS they keep using I'm also gone.
I doubt this will happen but even so....

 

[iDisk]

Maybe, but who honestly gives a damn?

Steve might have sold millions of expensive designer gadgets, but he does not own the future of the world nor will he be able to keep riding this wave on the long run. The hype around the iToys won't last, and the iPad didn't receive the excited welcome that the iPhone had received.

With so many similar, trivial apps on sale, the gold rush for developers is over and so far the only winner has been Apple because they own the infrastructure. Especially smaller developers are currently waking up and Apple has pissed off so many developers with their arbitrary and unpredictable "approval" process for the AppStore, that they those developers have already begun to abandon the Apple ship.

He hasn't noticed it yet, but the closeness of his platform and his own arrogance are already biting Steve in his own butt.

Developers make or break a platform. And hell hath no fury like a disgruntled and disappointed software developer.

Dude another great post... How long have you been using macs your theory sounds spot on

 

[theshadowleague]

I have slowly lost my FAITH in apple, If you are like me you get MACLIFE
"hard copy" every month.. So for about a little over a year now as I read maclife there is less and less articles about great software development and and advancement on tech and hardware, the entire magazine is about iphone/ipod apps and accessories. When I got my copy of snow leopard my worst fears became true, apple has given in to the pressure of competing instead of making a great cpu and software for artist of all talents.. Snow Leopard was not finished and didn't work out of the box I had to re-install Leopard, sound familiar? yes this is what windows user do, not "mac addicts"
"Ipad" will be another product that will divert your focus and attention from the real problems at apple. Unless there is something more sinister going on, like making the entire world anti-social with portable devices, "macpro" will be my last apple purchase and will run leopard until it meets the same fate as the G 4's, apples focus on innovation is one of self preservation of their product line, and no longer artistic creation from it loyal prosumers. Truly a sad day

 

[Eric5h5]

Now get this: The iPad will place more pixels in the palm of your hand than most users have on their desktops.

The iPad is 1024x768. Most users have desktops with far more pixels than that.

--Eric

 

[MisterMe]

The iPad is 1024x768. Most users have desktops with far more pixels than that.

--Eric

No, they don't. Many recent buyers of computers will have more pixels than this. However, the vast majority of computers in the installed base have been in use for years. The pixel count of a substantial fraction of their monitors don't even approach the pixel count of the iPad.

 

[lucidmedia]

No, they don't. Many recent buyers of computers will have more pixels than this. However, the vast majority of computers in the installed base have been in use for years. The pixel count of a substantial fraction of their monitors don't even approach the pixel count of the iPad.

do you have numbers to support this? This is counter to most of the web analytics that I analyze. The average lifespan of a desktop computer is 3 - 5 years and 1024 x 768 has been a resolution standard for far longer than that.

 

[chrono1081]

That is an awesome idea!
Beats dragging round a portfolio of printed samples that get damaged when people want to "have a closer look" and being able to show booklets and full content.

Is there any app already available that can do that for iPhone/iPod Touch?

I have designer and photographer friends who are DYING to get these for that sole purpose. Its really a great idea.

I wasn't sold on the iPad at first until I saw video of it and heard other people who were not tech-savvy talk about how much they wanted one and the uses they had for it. It got me thinking and I realized that although I probably won't buy one I too had many uses for such a device.

I don't think its going to sell on the scale of iPhones and iPods but for a lot of people this is a device they have been waiting for.