"I say tomatoe, you say tomato. I say potatoe, you say potato. Tomatoe, tomato, potatoe, potato, let’s call the whole thing off!" We all know this song and it’s recently gained a new relevance in view of my long-held intransigence against both the iPod and iPad.
But today I got an email inquiry from cousin Mark asking my opinion about whether to buy the new iPad or get an iMac. I’m not sure why he thinks I, of all people, would have any particular pearls of wisdom to share on this issue. I actually did recommend the new iPad for him as it’s only $500, considerably cheaper than the iMac, and for what he uses a computer for, the iPad will probably suit his purposes just fine. Why spend the extra money for a lot of extra functionality he’ll never use. Not at all surprising, he responded by saying he would very probably buy both. He’s just absolutely in love with the iMac but also thinks the new iPad is just super cool.
I really don’t get the appeal of these iPads myself. They're huge! I mean they're almost as big as laptops. Why not just use your laptop instead? And I really really don't see carrying both an iPad AND a laptop around with you all the time. So if you're only going to carry one and for the money, a laptop certainly has to have a lot more power and functionality than an iPad. So why the iPad? I don't get it. Besides which, I personally like a real keyboard and the iPad only has those "touch" keypads that I don't like at all.
But it’s entirely a matter of personal preference. Mark says he hates laptops, doesn’t care that they’re more powerful, he finds them clumsy and difficult to use. I vastly prefer laptops to the pads and tablets because I do place a big premium on power and functionality, not to mention the aforesaid keyboard. I would never even consider a device that does not have a good keyboard. And I do realize that the iPad is smaller than a laptop, but not much. That's my beef. They are big! You certainly can't carry them in your pocket and isn’t that, after all, the whole point?
There has been journalism lately that pads and tablets are taking over and will be replacing desktops and laptops. I seriously doubt that. They've been singing the death knell of the desktop for twenty years and, guess what, they're still alive and well. Why? Because a desktop will always have more power than a laptop and there are a lot of people who need that extra power. Same is true of the iPad. The laptops will always be more powerful than the pads and tablets. The iPad's real attraction is its convenience and ease of use. And let's face it - the vast majority of people don't use a fraction of the power their computers provide them. If all you're doing is surfing the web, doing email, listening to music and watching videos, an iPad is perfectly adequate and easier to accomplish these tasks. But if you're doing more- and I do a LOT more - then you need more than a pad. No, I don't see the market for laptops and desktops ever going away. I can tell you that I don’t see the iPad ever being able to do everything that I need it to do. I do however see it as a very nice backup device for use when away from the house. I can see getting one someday for that purpose. But a laptop will do the same and, right now, my laptop suits my purposes just fine.
But getting back to the tomatoe vs the tomato, everyone is well aware of my position to never buy an iPod as I am firmly convinced that I would never use it even if I had it. This is nothing against the iPod per se but for the simple reason that I never listen to music except on the car radio and on my computer. (And of course, when I REALLY want a visceral pleasure, I do still slip a CD into the stereo and rev it up!) In my life, I have never listened to music portably and have no desire to. Since the primary purpose of the iPod is to carry music with you, I saw no chance I'd ever use one for the simple reason that I am very much against carrying music around with me. It is simply too distracting. (I tried a Walkman once many years ago, tried it while jogging, used it once, put it away forever.)
So everyone! Are you ready for a shock? Are you ready to brace yourself? I’m actually rethinking the iPod. What I did not realize until just recently, what I had no idea about until just recently, is that you can now use the iPod for a great deal more than just listening to music. But after listening to cousin Mark go on and on about these wonderful pods for so long, I decided a couple weeks ago to at least go to the Apple web site and see if they’re really as bad as I thought they were. And that’s when I discovered the new "iPod touch." In Mark’s email today, he told me that he owns an iPod touch. With that said, I had to write to him about my recent change of heart.
Yes, I have just discovered the iPod touch. Wow!! This is a lot more than just a music player. It's an HD camcorder with an amazing 7 hours of capacity, a hi-res still camera, a web browser, an e-reader, an (omg!) VIDEO TELEPHONE!!, ... and, of course, a music player and game console, neither of which I have any interest in and would never use. But for $500, it would be worth it just have a quality HD camcorder alone! The new iPod touch has a 3.5" diagonal widescreen display, which is like FIVE TIMES bigger than the regular iPod. I mean that's a huge screen for something you can put in your pocket and weighs only a few ounces. For the first time, they have a device with a screen plenty big enough that you can comfortably watch videos and look at web sites, but still plenty small enough to fit in your pocket. And getting it into your pocket is, after all, the whole point isn't it?
What's really great is that the new model has a new function called "Retina Display" which makes it now a snap to read even the tiniest print. Now all of sudden reading pdf files is no problem, something that is next to impossible on the Kindle. And I definitely see an advantage to having a web browser that you can carry in your pocket. But the really really big attraction for me are its two built-in cameras, one being an HD camcorder good for 7 hours of recording. As I said, that alone would be worth it for me. I may not use it for anything else but I would definitely use it for that much and, at $500, that's much cheaper than you can buy a regular HD camcorder at Best Buy.
Unlike the regular iPod, this can be used for a lot more than music and podcasts, neither of which interest me, and finally has a plenty big enough screen for comfort. Unlike the iPad, it's still plenty small enough to fit easily into your pocket. That's what I don't get about the iPad, you're going to have to carry a satchel around with you all the time. I would think that would very quickly become a real drag. What's the appeal in that?
So anyway I thought I would shock the hell out of everyone and tell you something I'm sure you never thought you'd hear -- Mike is actually reconsidering the iPod.
There's just one drawback but it's a really big one. The Internet connection to make all this work will cost about $100/month. That's way beyond my budget. So it's going to be quite some time before I make the leap to the iPod after all. Maybe after I win the lottery.
Addendum:
I’m still loving my new Kindle, use it everyday, love its convenience, love the fact that you can fit a whole library onto it, love the fact that you can download any single issue of most any newspaper and magazine, do so instantly and at a fraction of the cost of buying it on the newsstand. Some of these are radically edited, which I don’t like at all, but most are delivered completely intact. And I love love love! the fact that you can turn most any book into an audio book with the new Kindle. No other e-reader can do this. Now that I’ve had the chance to work with it quite a bit, I find that the text-to-speech function works quite beautifully and I’m enjoying it as much for listening to books as for reading them. And it certainly has a phenomenal battery life. It’s been six weeks now of daily use and I’m still operating from my first charge. Since these batteries usually take 300 charges, this thing should last me the rest of my life.
Having said all that, I will now do an about-face and say that, as much as I love it, now that I’ve had a chance to use it pretty extensively, I will say categorically that it is absolutely no substitute for a real book. There is a visceral pleasure that can only be had handling real paper in a real book and the Kindle can’t even touch this. Plus there are a number of things that can be done very easily with a real book but are a real chore with the Kindle. Example: the other day I just wanted to flip back a few pages to reread the title of the chapter I was on. I do so and put the Kindle away. When I returned to it, I had a devil of a time finding the page I left off on since the Kindle is designed to automatically take you back to the last page you were reading. In this case, it took me back to the first page of the chapter. So the next time I needed to reference something, I needed to bookmark the page I was on before I started flipping back again. In a real book, you could do this in half a second. On the Kindle, there were several steps involved and it probably took me the better part of a minute to bookmark the page, flip back for a few seconds, and then find the page again. Then delete the bookmark since I’d never be using it again. It’s also pretty hard to form an intimate relationship with a great piece of literature, which is to say is pretty hard to make a book your "friend," when it’s really just a bunch of bits and bytes on a flash drive. No, I love it but it’ll never replace a real book.
No comments:
Post a Comment