If you worked in an organization where you hand to manage hundreds of desktop Macs it would dawn on you. I know places like that are not exactly everywhere, but they do exist...I know because I work at one. After our current Xserves reach the end of their useful life, there will be absolutely no enterprise class hardware that can be used for management and deployment of desktops. I'm sorry, but we will not be putting Minis on rack shelves for services (Open Directory, for example) that need to be available 24x7. The lack of redundant power supplies, lights out management and hot swappable drives is just not acceptable in an enterprise datacenter. I also cannot give up 6u per Mac Pro just to get the same 8-core speed that is currently available in a 1u box while I'm giving up those availability features. It's just not going to happen.

We're already pondering what life is going to be like with Windows-only desktops. It's possible Apple is going to pull off some announcement about OSX server availability on VMWare/HyperV or something (which would be acceptable for larger environments I guess) but I can't plan ahead for what they *might* announce. Frankly, it doesn't give me confidence in the future of OSX server in general. Without large deployments, people won't be needing things like Open Directory, so that could easily be dropped at some point, for example.

They are effectively removing themselves from consideration in large environments. Just a week or two ago, there were rumors they were going to make a bigger play in the enterprise space and I was anxious to see what they had in the pipeline. Now, suddenly we're looking at abandoning OSX as a platform almost completely at hundreds of desktops. We were about to put in an order for 50+ iMacs for the second or third time this year alone, but now those plans are on hold until we can get a new long term plan together. As a result, it is definitely going to be a factor in future iPad/iPhone deployment (which has been pretty positive thus far).

I never doubted Apple was evil, I didn't know they were dumb too.

You hit the nail on the head, and I'm not even sure you noticed. That's the philosophical difference between the iphone and Android phones. One is much more open, with all the good and bad that comes with it...you can really get at the insides and bend it to your will, and write any sort of app you want, for better or worse. The price you pay for openness like that is the potential for huge instability, but the rating system will hopefully help with that over time. For some technically oriented people and some others, this trade is very worthwhile. The openness is worth those possible inconveniences, and we understand and accept it. I mean, it's not like the user experience is BAD or anything, it's just sometimes things don't work as perfectly as you'd like.

Meanwhile, you have the opposite approach, which is very much the Apple way of doing things. Very closed, very restricted from a developer's standpoint. The benefit of this approach is that the user experience is very controlled and streamlined. Not that they never experience crashes, but generally speaking, the overall experience is a lot more sanitized, clean, and consistent. Few crashes, familiar overall look and feel. It's "the Apple Way" or the highway, but you can see they try to make "the Apple Way" pretty darn nice, if not open.

When people ask me if they should get an iphone or something else, I tell them for most people, your 2 best bets are an Android phone and an iphone. The way they should decide is by thinking about what they expect out of their cell phone. If they only want a few apps they saw on TV and don't want to fuck with it too much and just want a really nice capable phone, then iphone. If they want to do all sorts of additional interesting things, they should definitely get an Android, but recognize that with those abilities comes complexity, and be sure you want a device like your cell phone to *be* that complex.

It all depends on what you want out of a phone, and it's different for everybody. I don't really get why people get so angry about it.

Oh come on, you edit your pictures while you're still on holiday? Really? You must be fun to travel with.

Clearly, you are not the target market. It's OK, don't be mad over it, just don't get one. My wife (for example), IS the target market. She edits photos when she gets home on a home computer. She likes having a useful browser laying on the coffee table without hauling a laptop around the house. She enjoys reading interactive books with the kids. She likes it PRECISELY because it is NOT a computer. Companies have been making tablets like you claim to want for 15+ years now. I had one in 1989 that was a 386sx and ran "Windows 3.1 for Pen" (no joke). Instead of complaining that Apple isn't filling the niche you want, why don't you support a company that IS and buy one of their devices already?

Really, people, if you don't want one, don't get one, that's cool. What is not cool is assuming everybody that buys one is a drooling idiot and only bought it because it's stylish. Some people would like to do a few basic computing tasks sometimes WITHOUT using a real computer.

Why are people so angry that Apple doesn't make what they want? Why are the same people who DIDN'T buy the tablet of their dreams 5 years ago when HP was making them, now ANGRY that Apple is making money on a similar but different product?

I'd argue they are NOT wholly unhealthy for society. They are a necessary evil. While you or I may not approve of the way they do business, the computing landscape would not be the same without them. Enjoy using a truly powerful AND easy to use smartphone? Thank Apple. Like buying music online? Thank Apple. Over the next couple years, you'll probably find a good use for a tablet style computing device, and you can thank Apple for that too. Of course others did all these things first, but Apple made them mainstream and kick-started each of these industries, including all the good competing products and services.

If you don't like what Apple does, don't buy their stuff, that's cool, but remember that when you grab your Android phone and use it to buy an mp3 from Amazon, and next year listen to that mp3 on your Android (or WebOS, eh HP?) tablet, remember that Apple were the first ones to make those things viable business models in the mainstream, and the devices you're using may very well not be possible without them.

Wow. That was the most gentile Godwin-ing of a discussion I've ever seen. :)

First, you're a jerk for that unnecessary insult. Some people like the benefits of using the computer without much liking the computer itself. Second, the iPad isn't a computer, so you can relax. That's the point here, now his wife can do certain tasks that *used to* require a computer, which is good. Jerk.

It's not a tax on the inept, it's a product and service to fill a perceived gap in the marketplace. The entire economy is built on people paying money for goods and services that they themselves can't or won't provide for themselves. This is no different...it's paying Apple for making it very simple and convenient to handle a few specific tasks that have traditionally been done on more complex devices. No more, no less. If enough people see value in that, the product will succeed, if not, then it won't, it's just that simple.

Well, a lot of people in the so-called "geek community" sure to seem angry that the iPad even exists. As if they're indignant that Apple didn't use their personal dream spec-sheet when designing a mass-market computing appliance. To drag out an old analogy, I am a car guy, and I appreciate hearing the engine roar, and I like shifting my own gears, changing my own oil, etc. and mostly I like old sports cars, but I don't get enraged that the Ford Taurus exists. I don't call Ford fools and idiots, and anybody who would possibly want one must be a brainwashed asshole who is sucking Alan Mulally's cock. Yet there seems to be a lot of this sort of thing happening around the web in the last day or so. It's the much-maligned Apple fanboyism just in the opposite direction.

Not to accuse you personally Arthur, of course, I'm just thinking that a lot of the people who supposedly "get the point" sure do seem keen to ruin it for the people who DID find the iPad a compelling device, and I just don't get that.

Anyhow, a bit on-topic, an Android tablet would be nice if it could get near the 10-hour battery life Apple claims....that would be sweeeeet.

Sounds like what you really wanted was an ASUS touchscreen netbook, which you got, so that's nice. I think a lot of tech enthusiasts and geeks expected this to be a general purpose computing device, combined with some sort of Apple Magic to alleviate the conundrum caused by needing to perform sophisticated tasks with no simple way of giving sophisticated input (ie keyboard/mouse). For the last 10 years, Microsoft has repeatedly shown that a full desktop OS without a keyboard and mouse is a letdown. The approach that Apple took was to strip the machine down to the very basic tasks that average consumers (not geeks) most often use their computer for, and optimized the whole device for *just those tasks*. The end result is very far from the functionality of a full blown computer, but in return you get a very good and simple experience (save Flash support, grrr) as long as you are only doing the things it was designed to do, which again covers most average consumers, most of their time. Geeks decry it's lack of abilities, but the general public will love it because it makes some very common tasks as simple as possible.

I probably would not buy one just for myself, but my wife will LOVE having one of these in the house. I like tinkering with computers and making them do interesting things...they are their own reward to a certain extent and I like understanding how they work and bending them to my will. My wife (like most regular consumers) *tolerates* computers because they can help her accomplish something. That's why the tragically named iPad will be popular despite the outcry of geeks everywhere.