MK-2 said “To a doctor, it’s groundbreaking....if you think the ipad is groundbreaking, step away from the scalpel and practice a bit more on Operation”
But it is grounding breaking for many more reasons then I am about to right about here. It both created a market in the 10’s of millions of units now apprrocheing 100million and from a technology point of view it’s amazingly powerful for such a small device. No other notebook or tablet has come close to the raw power found in an Ipad 2.
Technology wise it has groundbreaking chips with the GPU power of an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 in a tablet. What’s even more impressive if the next generation of chips. The Ipad 2 was just a refresh; the Ipad3 is using a true new generation and will be massively more powerful.
Love them or hate them, they are a ground-breaking device in many fields. Especially in medicine. Having instant mobile access to up to date records, results etc... from a handy sized device, including x-rays, mri scans, and all sorts of other things is nothing short of amazing for a doctor.
but that aside, i was on about the specific line that a doctor finds it groundbreaking, not that the device itself isn't (which i see localzuk has addressed)
my other point you have hit exactly on, the ipad2 was just a refresh. an apple insider has even said it was nothing more than a rehash of ipad1 and ipad3 will be the big boy. well if thats the case, why not hang fire on selling a unit that adds barely anything new, concentrate on the new ipad and make that groundbreaking. obviously sales figures mean more than customer loyalty and satisfaction (and this goes for many companies not just apple)
Last edited by MK-2; 20th June 2011 at 03:50 PM.
pr1vate_piles (21st June 2011)
A laptop requires a doctor to sit down and find somewhere to use the laptop. It doesn't allow them to stand next to the patient, in their ward bed, with the stuff in their hands, and then allow them to examine the person there and then with the image next to them on the bed.
The form factor is important here. Not just that it is a computer.
For most people (in this forum) they are a device manufactured and sold by a company they don't like ... so it gets slated.
At the moment they are the best device in their bracket. Excluding the flash-based stuff on the web they have a pretty good range of tools to be used, and it is nice to have something challenging the naff flash stuff which is out there, which so many people have slated in the past. In a number of schools it is not just engaging the children, but it is making staff think very differently about how they do things with technology, from blogging to the use of images, from IWBs to the use of personal devices.
If schools are any good (and if we are too) then we can learn a heck of a lot of lessons from this stage so that when other devices are of the same standard then we should be able to use them in similar ways.
Of course there will be downsides to them (implementation / storage / etc) but I would rather improvise and adapt than just slag them off for no reason other than the excuse of "They are more expensive than I like so they are bad" or "They are advertised and marketed very well by a company with a track history of pushy marketing" or "I don't trust them because they are not as open as they claim to be".
I agree with pretty much everything the ad says ... but also appreciate that it has a healthy dose of marketing spin, the same way that I understand that Lynx is not the answer to getting all sad, lonely nerds laid!
The iPad is good at certain tasks but be clear they were not the first or the most advanced, they just made mass market appear/ease of use which does deserve credit but no where near as much as some would credit apple for, and yeh the advert is not one I particularly like. Considering most hospitals had issues getting all things digital for the last few years the previous devices didnt have much of a chance of making an impact without the infrastructure and iPads cant be sterilised.
Thinking about it now, I can see the Sun headline "iPad's gave me iX disease" as its hard enough to get docs visiting wards to wash there hands between patiences let alone wash there ipad between people
Last edited by ZeroHour; 20th June 2011 at 05:02 PM.
One example is Apple’s oldest core product: Mac OS X. It took four difficult years from Apple’s acquisition of NeXT in 1997 until Mac OS X 10.0 was released in March 2001. Needless to say, those four years were… well, let’s just say it was a difficult birth. But from that point forward, Mac OS X’s major releases have appeared regularly (especially by the standards of major commercial PC operating systems), each better than the previous version, but none spectacularly so. Snow Leopard is vastly superior to 10.0 in every conceivable way. It’s faster, better-designed, does more, and looks better. (And it runs exclusively on an entirely different CPU architecture than did 10.0.) But at no point between the two was there a release that was markedly superior to the one that preceded it.
Next, consider the iPod. It debuted in the fall of 2001 as a Mac-only, FireWire-only $399 digital audio player with a tiny black-and-white display and 5 GB hard disk. The iTunes Store didn’t exist until April 2003. The Windows version of iTunes didn’t appear until October 2003—two years after the iPod debuted! Two years before it truly supported Windows! Think about that. If Apple released an iPod today that sold only as many units as the iPod sold in 2002, that product would be considered an enormous flop.
Today you can get an iPod nano for $179 that’s a fraction of the original iPod’s size and weight, with double the storage, a color display, video playback, and a built-in video camera. Apple took the iPod from there to here one step at a time. Every year Apple has announced updated iPods in the fall, and every year the media has weighed in with a collective yawn.
There’s never been one iteration of the click-wheel iPod platform that has completely blown away the previous one, and even the original model was derided by many critics as unimpressive. The iPod shows, too, how Apple’s iterative development process doesn’t just add, it adapts. Remember those third-generation iPods from 2003, with four separate buttons above the click wheel? Turns out that wasn’t a good idea. They were gone a year later. Remember the iPod Mini? It had no new features, and wasn’t even much cheaper— but it was way smaller.
The iPhone is following the same pattern. In 2007 it debuted with no third-party apps, no 3G networking, and a maximum storage capacity of 8GB. One year later, Apple had doubled storage, added 3G and GPS, and opened the App Store. The year after that, Apple swapped in a faster processor, added a compass and an improved camera, and doubled storage again. The pattern repeats. We may never see an iPhone that utterly blows away the prior year’s, but we’ll soon have one that utterly blows away the original iPhone.
That brings us to the iPad. Initial reaction to it has been polarized, as is so often the case with Apple products. Some say it’s a big iPod touch. Others say it’s the beginning of a revolution in personal computing. As a pundit, I’m supposed to explain how the truth lies somewhere between these two extremes. But I can’t. The iPad really is The Big One: Apple’s reconception of personal computing.
Apple has released many new products over the last decade. Only a handful have been the start of a new platform. The rest were iterations. The designers and engineers at Apple aren’t magicians; they’re artisans. They achieve spectacular results one year at a time. Rather than expanding the scope of a new product, hoping to impress, they pare it back, leaving a solid foundation upon which to build. In 2001, you couldn’t look at Mac OS X or the original iPod and foresee what they’d become in 2010. But you can look at Snow Leopard and the iPod nanos of today and see what they once were. Apple got the fundamentals right. (Source)
I am aware of several haters of MS that struggle to ever want that wares to touch their network but normally they have reasons as well as a dislike for MS, I would never presume they just slate it because its MS, that has little respect for the person or the profession.
Although the problems are minor to your environment it should not be presumed they are not for others, neither should it be presumed people should ignore those points rather then wait a little before changing and seeing the lay of the land as it were. Rushing is NEVER the correct course of action and this device is only a year old...
Also some just say its too limited without elaborating, although its best to give a bit more I would never think its because of apple hating, we are all more professional then that!
BTW all, I love a good *debate* with GD on these things and I like to be the *other side* regardless of all my thoughts/opinions on the subject.
Last edited by ZeroHour; 20th June 2011 at 05:26 PM.
penfold (21st June 2011)
I hate Apple, pure and simple - how could I possibly trust a product by a company that survives and grows by basic level hypnotism and high level bullpoo (Marketing, with extra lies). However I can appreciate the abilities of the product in question and the possibilities tablets have in the workplace.
Is it groundbreaking? In my opinion, no. They're not the first tablets by a long way. They're only "the best" according to some people. I'm not going to make that judgement myself as I've only used one as far as setting up a wireless connection or explaining to someone in the art of "just doing it" why Flash content doesn't work. Tablets are groundbreaking - they have a "long" future in my eyes and we can do well to embrace them. I say "long" because they will of course be usurped by the next thing - perhaps it could just be all in one devices such as more powerful versions of smartphones or something else.
In education their application is going to be very limited by budget. I see absolutely no reason why an iPad would provide a class or teaching staff anything new above existing IT hardware ESPECIALLY when you take money into consideration.
If I was to design or just come up with an idea for an ideal educational package, it would most likely be a properly dockable tablet with full multifunctionality - basically something that would replace a classroom PC fully, cost effectively. Perhaps the dock might not even need to come into it if a decent wireless video standard can be finalised.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)