Yeah most portable device makers are always upgrading the hardware speed, but apple seems to be trying to do the opposite, the average atom CPU is 1.6ghz but apple’s own is only 1ghz and not even x86 compatible.
Your post sucks, he made a valid point…a troll post claiming an other is a troll is just a dumb post.
It’s only a troll post if you’re looking for one.
No.
What does x86 compatibility have anything to to with the ipad?
Also, lern2 megahertz myth
Granted that frequency is being passed over by architecture efficiency for importance, but when you start getting down to 1GHz frequencies, it doesn’t matter how efficient the chip design is, it’s not very damned powerful.
Also, what x86 has to do with it is that it is a lame ass limitation…though an expected one.
it’s only a limitation if you write code… the majority of iPad consumers would not know what x86 silicon infers, so it’s a moot point.
So, you purposefully hobble the device?
No, it’s a HARDWARE limitation, and it’s got nothing to do with the silicon. The fact that it’s not able to handle the x86 instruction set leaves it very crippled in terms of expanding beyond it’s current use.
Which is what, to read ebooks, watch video, go on the WWW?
Since when did x86 become a requirement for this?
Also,
:hmph:
Either you didn’t read my post, or you didn’t understand what I said.
Whichever it is, think before you hit the post button. Okay?
It already is capable of the three things you mentioned. How would those tasks be BEYOND it’s current use?
Who said anything about needing the device to go “beyond it’s current use”?
You have to remeber this is the first iteration of the device. Later refreshes should give it more expandability (although it is apple… don’t getyour hopes up).
So you think that a device based on a new hardware design, that is limited in it’s ability to move forward is a point not worth mentioning?
Also, the ability of a chip to function compatibly with the x86 instruction set isn’t a problem of the silicon used, it’s a limitation of the design of the chip. The chip does not, and will not ever have this ability.
I’m probably going to get an infraction for this, but you are such a fucking idiot you are too dumb to REALIZE what you are saying is dumb.
I did not say this.
By silicon, I was infering it was the design of the chip… I don’t know wtf you were thinking I was talking about.
no u
Max, I don’t know why you bother…
Anyway obviously if the iPad was x86 capable it would be able to run mac’s own OSX and all the apple fanboys would have been happy, but instead it runs a hires version of the iPod touch firmware.
I don’t know why it would be so hard to understand unless you’re a troll, in which case, job well done I guess.
Oh hai guiz! wuts happenin in hear?
On topic
ipad eh? hm. Could be kewl. Must wait and see.
The Archos and HP tablets look pretty cool. Higher specs, they’re running windows 7, cheaper, built in wifi/bluetooth. All in all, better deal. Set that up with a local network share at your home and you could have something similar to what they did with the computers in avatar. Not as fast, but it’d still be kind of cool to take a document/video from your desktop, and then carry it in your hand to your friend in the next room.
I don’t get why they didn’t just make a tablet laptop for their Mac line of products. That baffles me. I mean Macs are all about graphic designers, so why not give them one of the most obvious products that graphic designers use?
Although to be fair, I’m a graphic designer and I’ve never used a touchscreen tablet :retard:
ED explained it best
only it cant make calls. No doubt mac fans are going to be creaming their pants over it though.