Posted on 08/23/2010 10:02:07 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
Yes, the iPad operates like an iPod. Once loaded with content from a laptop, you can just use the iPad without ever going back to another computer for syncing. New content can be downloaded directly to the iPad. However, you lose the security of having a backup for your content. The syncing automatically backs all the content from your iPad to another computer.
Regards your second question, I have an iPod and iPad syncd to the same iTunes. Content differs between the two devices, my iPod only handles music, photos, and text. My iPad handles it all, including video, books and apps. The apps are what makes the device sparkle. I imagine many of these apps will become available for the Android tablets.
That's an ignorant statement! Seeing how they're always several years ahead of Microsoft, with Microsoft copying what Apple has had out for years. Right from the beginning, Apple has innovated. The Apple II had a switching power supply designed by Wozniak, which everyone then copied. The Apple II had a multiple-slot interface card setup with open architecture, which IBM then copied (and just about everyone else). Without the Apple II, there would not be the PC that everyone says almost killed Apple. Back in the late 1970s I watched demos of mice-driven gaming graphics on the Apple II, long before Apple applied the technology to their Macintosh computers - and well before any other company was doing it. A guy I knew back then was the co-inventer of the Mac, Andy Hertzfeld, and he did indeed innovate many of the features on the Mac.
Apple's Newton touch-screen tablet was years ahead of everyone else, back in the early 1990s. I was on a development team putting it to new uses for police departments as a portable ticket-writer for motorcycle cops. The Newton was selected because there was nothing else.
Talk about an ignorant statement yourself...
The Apple II had a switching power supply designed by Wozniak, which everyone then copied.
Which itself copied the idea from the IBM 510, which existed 3 years prior to the Apple ][.
The Apple II had a multiple-slot interface card setup with open architecture, which IBM then copied (and just about everyone else).
If you ignore that little thing called the "S-100" bus that had been around since 1974...
Without the Apple II, there would not be the PC that everyone says almost killed Apple.
How many Apple ][ computers were sold, relative to Commodore machines? Or even the IBM 5100 or 5110?
And you do realize that the best selling computer of ALL time wore the Commodore badge, don't you? The C64 sold 30+ million copies, about 5 TIMES as many as all Apple ][ variants ever built.
Apple's Newton touch-screen tablet was years ahead of everyone else, back in the early 1990s
I'll give you that. Of course, it came about when John Scully was running the company, and Steve Jobs was gone...
So I'll amend my statement. Apple rarely innovates when Steve Jobs heads the company...;)
As I remember, it was VisiCalc, the first ‘killer app’ that made the Apple II a hit - and made personal computing for businesses a viable market. That was a huge event in PC history.
Yep, VisiCalc was foundational! I think Bricklin released it for the Commodore PET, C64, Atari, and IBM PC all within about 2 years. Porting an application to 4 completely different platforms in just 24 months is astounding!
Took micros from hobby to business.
Then came Lotus 1-2-3, the best of the bunch, until they got greedy and MS knocked them out with Excel, an inferior product.
There’s still room, after all these years, for a better mousetrap spreadsheet program. I miss the early days of the frontier and wild west competition.
First off, Wozniak did invent the switching power supply in the Apple II, and copied it from no one else. The things he did were brilliant and breaking new ground. The S-100 bus was not the same as the Apple bus system, totally different. I was an avid micro-computer enthusiast in the mid-70s. 8080s, Altairs, S-100s were all the rage at the time and quite popular. Geeks enjoyed flipping toggle switches to input hex commands to program them. They were great machines for hobbyists. The Apple bus system had a main motherboard with fully published schematics, printouts of the rom code, breadboard areas for experimenting, and an easy-to-use interface card system. I know, because I worked on them and modified my own systems. These were not only great for hobbyists, but also easy for the masses to use right out of the box.
The first IBM PCs did indeed borrow heavily from the Apple design, and that is very well known. Yourstatement about the number of machines being sold as nothing relevant to the discussion. Apples vs oranges. John Scully nearly destroyed the company. Steve Jobs brought his NEXT operating system with him upon his return to Apple, which became the basis for OSX. I've seen my stock holdings go from single digit prices to hundreds, with splits along the way, and that has made me very appreciative of Jobs efforts and his innovations. I'm wealthy. How are you doing?
Apparently you cannot refute my claims, other than to rant on about how wonderful Apple is, and how they were the font of all good things. And then you end it all with a “my wallet’s fatter than yours”. What is this, 4th grade?
Sorry, sir, bring some facts to a discussion (like the first modern use of a PC bus, the S-100 bus), not your ego, or what you use to compensate for your shortcomings below your navel...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.