Ten New Details on the Apple Tablet | iLounge Backstage


Ten New Details on the Apple Tablet

Want to know some more about Apple’s upcoming tablet device? You’re in luck. We’ve received the scoop from our reliable source—who correctly called the iPod nano 5G, iPhone 3GS and Chinese iPhone 3G months ago.

  1. Apple has created at least three separate prototypes of its tablet computer. Let’s call it “iPad.”
  2. Version 1 was designed with a 7” screen, which was judged to be too small. The latest version has a 10.7” screen.
  3. image
  4. It runs iPhone OS.
  5. There have been reports that it looks like an iPhone. They’re sort of true. It looks like an iPhone 3G, complete with a curved back.
  6. It will come in two different variations: one with 3G networking capabilities, and one without 3G networking capabilities. Think of the 3G version as a bigscreen iPhone 3GS, and the non-3G version as a bigscreen iPod touch.
  7. Screen resolutions will obviously jump considerably from the iPhone and iPod touch 480x320-pixel displays, enabling easy reading of full-sized book and magazine pages, plus cropped newspaper pages. Expect something like 5-6 times the resolution of an iPod touch or iPhone screen (720p or thereabouts) and 7 times the touchable surface area.
  8. It is designed to expand the iPhone and iPod touch media concept to its next potential level: as a slate-like replacement for books and magazines, plus all of the media, gaming, app, and web functionality of the iPhone and iPod touch.
  9. It is not meant to compete with netbooks. It’s an iPhone OS media player and light communication device.
  10. Apple is currently planning to announce it on or before January 19, 2010, and to use an iPhone-like hype buildup period to start selling it in May or June.
  11. It is apparently awaiting a final green light from Steve Jobs; chances of it appearing in the market are believed to be 80% at this point.

Feel free to discuss it all below. Just don’t make the mistake that some of these people made back in May (“what’s the point of putting a camera on the Nano?”). Keep an open mind.

« Great News: The FTC Finally Requires Payment-For-Review Disclosures

The Growing iPod + iPhone Family, in Pictures (2009) »

Related Stories



re: your last comment.  I remember hearing an econ professor (mike munger on econtalk) once make a comment something like this:

“the average person (and, thereby, common sense) is right almost all the time.  it correctly predicts that most new products will be failures, because most new products ARE failures.  What it can never predict, in fact is 100% wrong about every time, is a GOOD new idea.  It will always miss those.”

I always dug that.

Posted by shawn on September 28, 2009 at 11:58 PM (CDT)


If true, this sounds like an utterly worthless product to me.

Why do I want to carry around a BIG iPhone with me when I already carry around a regular one? If it won’t be as capable as my laptop—i.e. more than one app at a time, full office apps, Flash—then the usefulness of such a product is extremely limited.

As to this new device being used as an eReader: The Kindle 2 is about as big and as heavy as is comfortable for most people to hold for long reading sessions. This device (as rumored) would appear to be much larger and heavier, and would be tiring to hold for extended reading periods.

If an iPhone costs $599 without subsidy - what’s a 10” iPhone cost without subsidy? Answer: Well more than it’s worth.

Posted by Russell Boyer on September 29, 2009 at 12:08 AM (CDT)


That’s pretty slick. A few questions:

-Will it be able to make/receive phone calls via Bluetooth? Will it be able to use Skype?

-Hardware-wise, will it have a camera? Microphone? Accelerometers? Light sensors?

-Will it have the same battery problems as an iPhone? If the battery lasts as long as a Macbook, it seems like it might not have much value.

-Will iLounge cover this product? I know you guys have, to a small extent, blurred the line between iPods and full Mac computers with a few of the articles, will this further dilute things?

-Will the 3G version be sold on subsidy from AT&T (who I assume will be the carrier for it)?

I’m intrigued by this, but I’d be most curious about the price. I can’t imagine Apple putting the price too close to a Macbook, but then again, they priced the iPhone ridiculously high at first.

Posted by Dave on September 29, 2009 at 12:14 AM (CDT)


Will it display apps in full screen or at the iPhone resolution?

Posted by J on September 29, 2009 at 12:29 AM (CDT)


I heard some talk of redeignating the more expensive touch as the low end tablet and include a camera.

Posted by Ashley on September 29, 2009 at 3:24 AM (CDT)


It sounds good if all existing Apps work on the larger platform…
I do hope there is also a line of MacBooks in 13 and 15 inch form factors…

Posted by Rob on September 29, 2009 at 3:46 AM (CDT)


aahh i just want this thing, and if it will cost $999 or less i am going to buy it. hopefully there will be some slimmed down software available for basic graphic input. battery is definitely an issue, and also the ruggedness of the surface and body- can´t be as slick and slippery as the iphone..

Posted by renata in germany on September 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM (CDT)


I’m looking for a smaller touch based version of my Macbook, not a bigger version of my iPhone.  I’ll pass on this if it is nothing more than a bigger iPhone / iPod touch.  But I do know people who would be interested in this. 

This is starting to sound like Apple is looking to get into the digital book market, and this is the product that’s going to put them into it.  I can see the iTunes Store having a book / periodical section, along with Book category on the iPod APP for the iPhone & iPod touch.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 9:20 AM (CDT)


iPhone OS = FAIL.  I’m looking for a next computer, and I definitely want it in a handheld form factor, but I also want it to be *an actual computer*, not a larger-sized iPod touch.  Guess I’ll be staying on the Windows side of things.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 9:22 AM (CDT)


If it is just a supersized iPhone, the product has no real appeal besides it will cannibalize the iPod touch sales.

What I’d love to see is something that will make my life easier and at the same time easy to use:
put the OS where it belongs: in the background.
Put in front what I look for: while travelling: keeping track of all the information around me (email, news. etc) while being able to read a book as well as listen to music or watch a movie.
Ideally, it has some business value as well: I can scribble my notes during meetings, can present using a external device, etc.

Posted by Norbert on September 29, 2009 at 9:51 AM (CDT)


This is a little idea that I’ve got from a long time about the next device so called “iPad”: is there a chance that this device will use the Remote Acces to control your Mac staying away from your desk sitting in your sofa?!?

Posted by Joe on September 29, 2009 at 10:08 AM (CDT)


Yeah, I want it, too.  I’m looking for a big iPod Touch I can read from and stream to and possibly play games on.  I’m fairly certain that schools can use a product like this.  I can’t make any firm predictions about success or failure since the product hasn’t been shown yet.  I don’t mind paying $800 to $900 for it as long as Apple stock goes up accordingly and then basically Apple will be paying for it.

The iPod was supposed to fail and so was the iPhone, but they didn’t, so trying to predict the future is a waste of time.  Many people thought the Earth was flat and the sun revolved around the Earth and they were also wrong.  Only time will tell.  I just know I’d like to have this tablet because it uses iPhone/Touch apps and there are some educational language apps I’d use on it.

Posted by iphonerulez on September 29, 2009 at 10:27 AM (CDT)


I would use this product, PROVIDED that it can be used as a secondary, touch-screen monitor to my MacBook or iMac. That alone would be worth 6 hundo to me with the portable e-reader being a bonus

Posted by eric on September 29, 2009 at 10:59 AM (CDT)


“iPhone OS = FAIL.  I’m looking for a next computer, Guess I’ll be staying on the Windows side of things.”

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 6:22 AM (PDT)

Apple’s take on Scott and the like is Scott = FAIL. The UBIQUITOUS computing devices that CONSUMERS will be using from this point forward will be small OS, dare I say Palm-like (as in the old Palm OS 2-5) where the app experience dominates over the OS. CONTENT PRODUCERS will continue to need a real computer but both desktops and laptops will be a shrinking category as computing power is commodified and woven into the fabric of everything most people do. Face it, the golden and silver ages of computing are now over and you’ll just have to live with it. Nice that there may be a non-3G device like the Touch but I don’t see this as a trend for xenophobes. Mobile connectivity is what makes these lower consumer devices thrive and wireless companies are in the driver seat in helping to effect the change.

Posted by Yacko on September 29, 2009 at 11:02 AM (CDT)


@Russel Boyer,

  It’s kind of ridiculous for you to comment on a product you essentially know nothing about.  Wouldn’t it be best to see what the product can and cannot do before commenting?  As for running multiple apps, that’s an artificial limitation Apple has imposed on the iPhone due to resources (memory, etc.) in order to keep a reasonable user experience in terms of performance, etc.  It is not a limitation of the OS itself.  This device is more likely to have more resources (faster processor(s), more memory, etc.) as it is not restricted by size.

Speaking of size, are you aware of the upgraded Kindle size?  This will actually be smaller and get this… have a color screen.  It will likely make a much better reader.


  Your comment is silly.  You want a handheld device that is an actual computer.  You’re not going to do better than the iPhone in that arena.  Windows mobile tries to do this but fails miserably.  You need a different interface for a handheld device.  Microsoft does finally understand this and maybe by WinMo 7 we’ll actually see something competitive from them.

In the end, what do people do with netbooks?  Not much.  A little web surfing, e-mail, etc.  You’re not going to do any real content creation like video editing, or anything Adobe related.  A device like this would be an excellent media player while providing a superior web experience.  No, it won’t replace your “real” computer, but then, neither will a Netbook.

Posted by Steve on September 29, 2009 at 11:03 AM (CDT)


Will it be compatible with the internet? I.E., will it be Flash compatible and stream audio and video without the need for apps?  I’ll be buying no more new internet devices unless they can at least access and play the same sites my nearly six-year old XP desktop can…

Posted by John on September 29, 2009 at 11:08 AM (CDT)


The 3G version of the iPad will probably be launching on Verizon’s data network.
There are lots of iPhone users out there who love using their iPhone apps but hate how it eats up the battery life of their phone.  Once I get an iPad I can use my iPhone apps for hours without using my phone’s battery.
My investment in iphone apps will also pay off in having a ton of great software I can use right away with the iPad.

To those saying that this device will be a failure because the iPhone OS can’t multitask…The iPad isn’t an iPhone.  It will most likely have a faster processor, more RAM and better graphics chips.  It will also be running a different version of the iPhone OS that will most certainly support multitasking.

These are some of the things that millions of iPhone users have been wanting and Apple is going to offer it to them…just not on the iPhone.

Posted by SubGenius on September 29, 2009 at 11:23 AM (CDT)


@Steve: How is this a silly comment?  There are a number of emerging devices in the handheld/tablet format that run a full version of Windows, and which work with Bluetooth keyboards/mice for prolonged text entry.  The iPhone doesn’t even recognize Bluetooth keyboards, so I don’t understand how you think I couldn’t “do better than the iPhone” in this regard.  And why wouldn’t I do content creation with a handheld computer?  I’m a guitarist, and I’d love to, for example, be able to record multitrack demos on the go.  Can’t do that with the iPhone, but I could with (as an example) the Viliv X70.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM (CDT)


The iPhone breaks like no other mobile. The large glass screen is very sensitive. Now imagine where this will place a 11 inch glass slate. It would need protection just like a laptop the minute you move it off your table. Who don’t people see how unreasonable this rumored giant is?

If I cannot put it in my my pocket I will not buy it, period.

Posted by Bertil Holmberg on September 29, 2009 at 11:33 AM (CDT)


I would love to have a large-screen mobile Internet device that supported magazine & newspaper subscriptions.  If it could also be used an an iTunes/Apple TV controller, or secondary display, and supported Bluetooth keyboards, it should be a big seller.

Posted by Galley in Greenville, SC on September 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM (CDT)



You are correct that the big marketplace for computers in the future is consumers, not techies like those who visit these lists. 

The consumer doesn’t know he needs (and certainly doesn’t want) an OS. 

What’s an OS?  Oh, an OS is that thing that you use to turn off the flashing date on a VCR… never could figure that out, either.

The point is, give me an appliance that I can adapt to my will, and that will provide me with the content I want…  An OS would only get in the way…  Besides, there’s an app for that!

Posted by Dick Applebaum on September 29, 2009 at 11:45 AM (CDT)


The real challenge Apple will face is how to balance iPhone/iPod/Apple TV media features/functionality at a netbook/notebook price point. If it does too little and is priced $800+, who would buy it? How would it fare compared to a Windows 7 touchscreen netbook at a similar price point?

I know you can’t argue against an Apple product idea on the merits of price (people still bought $500 iPhones back in the day.) What I am saying—wouldn’t it make *more* sense to launch a new MacBook with touchscreen, iPhone OS “instant-on” secondary boot option, and a display that rotates and closes against the keyboard like a typical tablet PC?

Posted by UNCjigga on September 29, 2009 at 11:55 AM (CDT)


@Dick: then float a consumer-friendly iPhone OS interface over Snow Leopard and get the best of both worlds.  *That’s* a device that adapts to your will!  Anything else is a waste of potential - potential applications on the user side, and potential opportunities for Apple to bring users over from Windows on the marketing side.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM (CDT)


As brilliant as the iPhone/iPod touch OS is, the “iPad” should have the Mac OS or some flavour of it. It should be a multitasking device with a strong bias toward entertainment and e-book functionality. You should be able to use it where no desk is, e.g. on a sofa, in the bed, you name it. It should be an indoor device sturdy and light enough to be carried around.

Posted by Michael on September 29, 2009 at 12:13 PM (CDT)


The power of this device is not going to come from “what it is like that came before it in the digital technology realm.” Its power is going to flow from what it replaces in the real world.

Apple is building an enormous data center in NC to serve up content for their goodies. So with that sort of investment in the ecosystem, I’d be expecting all sorts of reasons to want an iPad…

It will replace books, magazines, and newspapers. This device will enable you to take a stack of books and magazines and your daily “newspapers” with you where ever you go, and the only limitations to how long you can read will be the battery life or your proximity to an outlet. But it’s not just a reader! It’s a general purpose device with a lot more bang for the buck.

It’s a stretch, but if they bring back handwriting recognition from the Newton days, it will serve as a note pad for class, meetings, grocery lists, and brainstorming.

The screen is big enough, that with WiFi and Hulu or some similar source, it can replace your TV, or at least TiVo, for personal viewing of programs you missed.

Sure, it will also replace your iPod Touch for better movie viewing, and perhaps it will replace your iPhone as well. With a larger virtual keyboard, it will offer even better email and text capabilities. And browsing on a larger screen will be a lot more convenient.

If they put a front-facing video camera on it, it will be a great videophone for iChat AV, Skype, or similar use.

Don’t limit your imagination to the examples of the past… Apple is about new directions, and this product will have to go in one, just as the iPhone took telecommunications in a new direction, and the iPod took music distribution in a new direction.

Think about all the specialty uses, such as serving up medical records, legal documents, sales presentations… all in a lot more elegant package than a netbook or a notebook package.

Posted by Bill Burkholder on September 29, 2009 at 12:26 PM (CDT)


If Apple wants to push the ~$800 price point‚ there’s going to have to be more functionality that just “a big-ass iPod Touch”.  There has to be something about the UI that differentiates it from its Touch brothers. Apple’s ability to marry UI with particular devices has been one of the most important factors in SJ’s success. 

There will either be a serious push towards making this a ubiquitous media device (the culmination of where Back to My Mac‚ Homegroup and iTMS want to be) and/or there will be some Mac-like functionality incorporated into the OS. Apple does not simply just copy functions when applying them to new forms.

Posted by TheMacAdvocate on September 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM (CDT)


@ my post 24: Of course, it can and should have the iPhone OS if it has multitasking built in. It should have the OS with the economies of scale on its side, and that is the iPhone OS, not the Mac OS.

Posted by Michael on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 PM (CDT)


Just put all the power of the Mac Mini in a 10” tablet.
Add-in a web camera to support real-time OCR-PDF page scanning and file creation, and iChat, and make the touch screen easy to use and provide a stylus so it has all the functionality of an iPhone, Touch, and notebook paper tablet!

Easy to use electronic notebook with 8~12 hours of battery life and full 1080p HD video output..

Forget Kindle!  Apple can do so much more…

Posted by Macman on September 29, 2009 at 12:51 PM (CDT)


I was way out front on this one:

Posted by Alan Wilensky on September 29, 2009 at 1:00 PM (CDT)


I think this product would fit into a student’s life perfectly.  I had a laptop in college but it was still a pain sometimes carrying it to class, having room on a desk/table, taking notes on it (being in engineering there are a lot of formulas to write down which is really hard to do quickly).  It would have been awesome to have something the thickness of a novel, size of a text book that I could use a stylus to write notes on, and possibly record the lecture at the same time.  I don’t need a full laptop’s potential to do the things I did while on campus, but then returning home syncing up the days input would be a piece of cake.  I imagine the same would be true now at work with meetings, notes, phone logs, calendars, drawings, etc.  I think it would really open up the Apps out there for stylus/finer detailed inputs.  To be honest, I probably would love to have this as an ebook reader especially if it can do so much more than that.  I’m pumped.

Posted by Tyler on September 29, 2009 at 1:05 PM (CDT)



I’m curious. Why do you think you’d “carry around” this device in the exact same situations as an iPhone? Because it’s running a version of iPhone OS? You decide when it’s appropriate, not the OS.

There are plenty of things you do with your iPhone that could be done much better with a larger iPhone, such as watch movies. For example, while traveling, I’d rather carry a iPad than a portable DVD player, magazines, books, laptop for browsing the web, note / sketch book, etc.  My 17” MacBook Pro is difficult to use on a plane. 

Also, just because the device will be running a version of iPhone OS, doesn’t mean it won’t have significant changes to take advantage of the additional screen real estate, faster CPU, etc. With 3G and a forward facing camera, you might be able to do video conferencing.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 1:12 PM (CDT)



The default behavior for iPhone views is to scale-up to fit available display area, so well written apps should scale up to higher resolutions. Apps that are hard-coded to the iPhone’s display will need to be updated.

@Joe “is there a chance that this device will use the Remote Access to control your Mac staying away from your desk sitting in your sofa?!?”

Given that you can do that now with your iPhone, I’d say the chance is very good. :)

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 1:13 PM (CDT)


I agree with the gentleman who said he was looking for a smaller laptop not a bigger iphone.  I need something to compose text on that’s small small AND do presentations from as well as internet and media.

Why doesn’t Apple know that? I’ve been waiting for this for 15 years. 

Posted by AHoffmann on September 29, 2009 at 1:14 PM (CDT)



The existence of these devices does not guarantee success. For example, we’ve seen tablet-sized devices which ran a version of Windows for years. None of which have actually been remotely successful. Merely bolting on tablet features to an existing OS isn’t sufficient.

As for the Viliv X70, the ability to run XP applications does not guarantee said applications will actually run at the speed necessary to record one or more audio tracks without glitches. Or that existing multi track application UIs will be usable on a small touchscreen display.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 1:15 PM (CDT)


Another thumbs down for a tablet running iPhone OS. I don’t need a bigger PDA/Phone. I need a smaller computer. A 10-inch tablet design is a waste with mobile OS. A 10-inch tablet with OS X, now that’s a product worth buying. I don’t need another iphone.

Posted by Tech Scout on September 29, 2009 at 1:18 PM (CDT)


@Scott (and *that’s* not gonna get confusing!):

Agreed re: lack of Win tablet success in the past, but: Windows 7.  Reports indicate that the tablet support features are pretty awesome on devices like the X70.  And ironically, with the success of the iPhone, consumers are now *more* likely to accept touch interfaces - even virtual keyboards - as acceptable for short-to-moderate text input.

As far as performance goes, my six-year-old hardly-top-of-the-line XP desktop can handle tracking a single audio input without glitching.  I have little concern that a smaller form factor current machine could deliver on that front.

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 1:22 PM (CDT)


And an argument that doesn’t depend on what *I* want in a tablet: I work at a major US university, and in my experience students usually carry two devices: a cellphone and a laptop/netbook. If their phone isn’t an iPhone, they *might* also carry an iPod for listening to music. If the rumored Apple tablet doesn’t replace their laptop/netbook, they’re not going to drop $800-1000 on it to get another netbook-sized device that duplicates functionality they already have on their phone. (I’m making the assumption that the student market is a decent proxy for the consumer electronics market in general, which I don’t think is unwarranted.)

Posted by Scott on September 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM (CDT)


not so sure about the networking class yet
but I suppose it will have a 1 gigabyte plus
processor weather quad core

would be fine for my new application dslr remote

Posted by peter harris on September 29, 2009 at 1:28 PM (CDT)


Like every gadget, market acceptance will depend on feature set and pricing. As someone who already has a netbook, I’d prefer something with a somewhat smaller screen. If it had an 8-9 inch screen, it would be about the same size as a Kindle since it wouldn’t need extra space for a physical keyboard. Using the iPhone OS seems okay to me IF it also allows the following: (1) full multitasking with multiple windows open, (2) support for Flash, javascript, etc, so that users can watch video and use Web Apps. And (3) support for full bluetooth and the ability to pair with a keyboard. With the larger form factor, Apple can have a much bigger battery. So, their excuse for not allowing multitasking goes away. Now, that would be something I would consider if priced reasonably ($599 tops unsubsidized). A big problem will be the wireless carriers mobile broadband plans. $60 for 5 GB is just not going to hack it, when an iPhone is $30 for all you can eat. Now, if the unit allowed VOIP, then that’s another thing, but the 5 GB cap would still be an issue.

Posted by catlike on September 29, 2009 at 1:30 PM (CDT)


Just my thoughts: whatever Apple puts on the market, if they fail in actually delivering the product to the market, as they do now with the iPhone GS - launched in summer, still more then 6 (SIX) months waiting time for delivery here in Europe - what’s the point of wanting an Apple iPad? By the time it’s being deliverd, Cupertino will be busy presenting the next version. Apple is seriously shooting itself in the foot here. People are turning away from the iPhone to other phones at the moment because there is simply no way to be able to buy one - because they are just NOT in the stores. If that happens again with the iPad - why bother waiting? Sad, but true.

Posted by Rudy on September 29, 2009 at 1:32 PM (CDT)


A large tablet which can run more than one iPhone app in small windows will be good as I already have app purchased and app are cheaper due to large market. New application specially for this tablet can then arrive with some of the mac functionality through app store.  Regular app might be too heavy for a tablet leading to poor battery life. Because iPhone OS is slimmer and many developer. This will allow faster developement without compatibility layers etc. The sensors will be there as these give a unique functionality compared to netbook and other tablets. Big desktop app can always have a tablet companion with a limited functionality which are optimized for this platform. I think this is a better idea than Netbook which is a miniature laptop running processor heavy desktop software leading to poor performance.

Posted by Nastanir on September 29, 2009 at 1:49 PM (CDT)


A bigger iPhone? Sorry, no, my pocket’s full already.

A better Kindle? Oh, wait…. Hmmm…...........

Posted by jrep on September 29, 2009 at 1:51 PM (CDT)


I´d like the MS Courier format, a mean, 2 screens that can be interactive like courier does (I mean “does” obviously looking at the Gizmodo Videos) but with an Apple Brain.
A tablet can look nice, but, again if this is just a big iphone alike the screen can be severe damaged and scratched on a daily basis.
A 2 screen format like a book can be great to protect the screen if you are just transporting the device and not using it., then if you need anything, just open the device and use it with your fingers like the iphone OS.

Posted by Lardo on September 29, 2009 at 2:08 PM (CDT)


You forget these are prototypes, apple may be righting another OS for the tablets. Apple will not release these running iPhone OS. I predict it will run mac OS X but with an iPhone interface.

Posted by Daniel Reed on September 29, 2009 at 2:12 PM (CDT)


If they are announcing it in january for a release in june it makes a lot of sense from a development perspective because it will give developers a chance to build or port our apps over to the larger interface.  There won’t be much you will miss from a notebook once you have 10,000 or so iphone apps ported over and redesigned.

Tablets have been failures to this point because they are running a desktop OS.  A desktop OS is not what you want despite what you may think now.  The only thing I do hope for is bluetooth support so I can hook up a wireless keyboard for faster text input when at a desk.

Posted by Jeff on September 29, 2009 at 2:18 PM (CDT)


This is disappointing. I was hoping that the iPad would support handwriting recognition and ability to run at least some apps from the Mac platform. Well, hopefully it will.

Posted by Anon on September 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM (CDT)


I’m pretty sure the iPhone OS IS the MAC OS X Kernel. So an iPad running iPhone OS WOULD BE running MAC OS. Just adding somethings back in that were taken out for the slim lined phone OS. That’s the secret power of the iPhone. Most other mobiles run a mobile OS(read small and stunted) the iPhone is running OS X 10.5 (At least) it IS a computer in your hand. Oh and I’m all for the iPad. It indeed has the potential to change the world.

Posted by drew on September 29, 2009 at 2:29 PM (CDT)


“A 2 screen format like a book can be great to protect the screen if you are just transporting the device and not using it., then if you need anything, just open the device and use it with your fingers like the iphone OS.”

Or it could open like a netbook and you “type” on one screen and use the other for visuals. Or like a Nintendo DS for games either with two screens side-by-side or one on top the other. Lot of possibilities. I’m disappointed Apple is not pursuing the folding tablet, two screen format. The future could bring folding screens where there is screen real estate over the hinge and the whole thing unfolds to be one large tablet in addition to two screen use.

Posted by Yacko on September 29, 2009 at 2:32 PM (CDT)


“I was hoping that the iPad would support handwriting recognition”

Unlikely on a touchscreen. The “failed” Windows tablets are based on Wacom art tablets and pressure sensitivity. Touch screens are capacitance so a touch is either on/off. The continuous motion of handwriting is more difficult to convey.

Posted by Yacko on September 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM (CDT)


Sheesh, you guys started flaming Scotty just because he said he’s a Windows user, even though he was TELLING YOU THE FREAKING TRUTH!

A Tablet with iPhone OS would be a worthless, expensive product with an OS that would waste the hardware!

“I’m pretty sure the iPhone OS IS the MAC OS X Kernel. So an iPad running iPhone OS WOULD BE running MAC OS.”

Fine, it will run the basic base of OS X… so what? Without the things that differ Mac OS from iPhone OS, it continues to be a WASTE OF HARDWARE.

MARK MY WORDS: This baby either is going to have Snow Leopard with Cocoa Touch or FAIL.

Posted by lukeskymac on September 29, 2009 at 2:43 PM (CDT)


The only interest i have is to see how Apple will market this against the Courier, and i have to say so far just being a glorified iphone with ebook capabilities doesnt impress me. Id rather hear its running off a different variant of Mac OSX than just a glorfied version of the iphone OS since i know the MS Courier is running off Windows 7

Posted by Nick on September 29, 2009 at 2:43 PM (CDT)


As others have pointed out, lack of Flash is a real problem.

Love it or hate it (and I mostly hate it), it is essential to the web experience for many. (Streaming MLB games is one example for me.)

iPhone OS, of course, makes sense from Apple’s perspective. A tightly controlled product environment that feeds the App Store, iTunes Store, and a phone company. More ways to keep making money after the sale.

As a user, it’s step in the wrong direction for me.

Posted by gjs on September 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM (CDT)


@Daniel Read

Then it will still be a waste of hardware. C’mon people, it is just a matter of slightly zooming in buttons so you can touch them comfortably… Like Universal Access, but not THAT big.

Posted by lukeskymac on September 29, 2009 at 2:51 PM (CDT)


@“A bigger iPhone? Sorry, no, my pocket’s full already.”
What do you do? Walk around with a huge getto blaster on you shoulder?

The interface being like an iPhone is the point.  Not using it as an iPhone.

That’s all.

Posted by Robert on September 29, 2009 at 2:55 PM (CDT)


“The 3G version of the iPad will probably be launching on Verizon’s data network.”

Probably not 3G. The June delivery date smacks of LTE which will have its first roll out by then. Verizon and AT&T will have networks that are compatible and those two companies are in a tooth and nail struggle to differentiate from the other by having the faster and more reliable LTE than the other. You could talk about 3G AT&T Vs Verizon and neither cares now. The current feelings consumers have about service reliability don’t matter, LTE restarts the race. You just can’t see the technical forced march going on behind the scene as one company tries to best the other.

Posted by Yacko on September 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM (CDT)


“lack of Flash is a real problem”

No it is not. There are now non proprietary ways to accomplish the same thing. Flash is no longer that essential to the web experience.

And it is becoming less and less every day.

How about that Light Peak?

Posted by Robert on September 29, 2009 at 3:03 PM (CDT)


Joe (comment 11) of course it will. The Touch lets my VNC into my Desktop Macs with no issue. Great use case.

Posted by JoeTaxpayer on September 29, 2009 at 3:22 PM (CDT)


I’d buy one for $900, just to stick it onto the wall and control my home automation (control my stereo, shades, light, HVAC, etc) and check the web-cam who’s outside my apartment.

Posted by Tim13 on September 29, 2009 at 4:03 PM (CDT)


If it only runs iPhone OS it will be a flop. I predict it will have iPhone operability being a touch screen device, but will run OSX.  This sets the stage for the next generation of laptops. The delays we’ve seen may be caused by Apple working on the software side of it, as much as the hardware. A big iPhone is not going to make it because people are looking for a full fledged, lightweight computer that will run current applications, such as photoshop for traveling photographers, etc.

Posted by Marshall on September 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM (CDT)


was really hoping for the 7 inch

just want my iphone screen to be bigger!

Posted by Ric on September 29, 2009 at 4:16 PM (CDT)


Thx for the reply; at this point using an iPad like an iPhone but only with a bigger screen is just a suicide because you’re gonna to overlap the featurs of one device to the other, bringing to cannibalization of the market! There will be some particular featurs that will be only for that device like a redesigned OsX a real battery and like I’ve said the choice to use in Remote Desktop with your computer o with your Mac!

Posted by Joe on September 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM (CDT)


I really want an OSX tablet with great batter life and decent performance for under $1,000. As I’ve followed the iPad rumors I’ve been forced the realization that the technology doesn’t exist for that yet.

I love my iPhone but just scaling it won’t do it for me, but I asked myself why? It’s not because I dream of composing legal pleadings on the couch or annotating westlaw searches at the park. I just need a mobile data center that connects to things. As has been said: an appliance. My iPhone only syncs notes! For anything else I have to sync each application with its desktop counterpart over wifi. So I realized that I would go for the iPad IF I could pass my content to applications in way that wasn’t locked down to the sync. I need a file system and concurrent applications. I need a seemless-MobileMe-like link from my applications to my iPad.

Forget the media player. I’ll take a tablet with iPhone OS with great batter life, decent performance AND seemless syncing.

Posted by quandmeme on September 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM (CDT)


I’m a mac user - have been for years.  I have always wanted a tablet from apple similar to Axiotrons modbook.  I don’t need another larger iphone.  I don’t want to read books on it, I want to draw on it - multitouch with a stylus input as well!  I want computing power with touch input.  I have to say for the first time in my life, If MS releases the Courier anywhere close to what’s shown on the video’s online - I’m in.  That product is exactly what I am hoping apple will release.

Posted by Jer on September 29, 2009 at 4:30 PM (CDT)


This sounds great to me if priced reasonably. I wouldn’t be paying $800 for such a device, more like $500-600. It’d be great if it DOESN’T run OS X. I want it to be something completely new based around iPhone OS or a variation.

Posted by iLly on September 29, 2009 at 4:56 PM (CDT)


I can remember the MP3 player launch days (yes, I’m old enough).

“Why would you want a music player with a limited set of digital songs that required *a computer* to change the music? I can just swap a cassette in my walkman in mere seconds - some poor schmuck with a MP3 player needs to boot up their PC and moves files around. FAIL.”

As has been noted many times, ‘Common Sense’ tends to not predict the future, only comment on the past. You can get wealthly by improving existing products (like adding FM radio to a Walkman) but you can get filthy rich if you can define a new need and paradigm (iPod + iTunes).

Odds are the iPad will not be the second coming. But to dismiss it because your current usage model is not iPad friendly is terribly short sighted.

Posted by Sean on September 29, 2009 at 4:58 PM (CDT)


@Tech Scout

“Another thumbs down for a tablet running iPhone OS. I don’t need a bigger PDA/Phone. I need a smaller computer. A 10-inch tablet design is a waste with mobile OS. A 10-inch tablet with OS X, now that’s a product worth buying. I don’t need another iphone.”

While it might be technically possible to put the desktop version OS X on a 10-inch table, it results in a poor end user experience which Apple does not want to invest in. It’s simply not that compelling on a number of levels. 

Instead, Apple is approaching the problem from the opposite direction with the iPhone. As hardware and screen real-estate allow, more functionality will be added. This will result in an OS specifically designed around multi-touch, instead of being bolted-on to a desktop UI. 

And, in the process, Apple will have created practical and compelling products with wide commercial appeal. When you make products that people actually buy in significant numbers, this drives down cost the technology and help fund the development of futures products.

Posted by The other Scott on September 29, 2009 at 5:00 PM (CDT)


Whattttt no iChat or video cam built in?! U couldn’t tell us that?! Dats sum B.S. Plus why would they want to use iPhone ui? What about why snow leopard have a new on screen keyboard?! Not making any sense… This is why I just wait untill apple comes out with it. Then no dissapointments or other surprises…..

Posted by Jbeach on September 29, 2009 at 5:09 PM (CDT)



You say lack of Flash isn’t a problem thanks to non-proprietary alternatives.

It’s simply not true yet. The example I pointed out is Major League Baseball. Their audio and video is only available via Adobe Flash.

That’s a show-stopper for me.

In time, I think open standards will win out. Right now, however a tablet that doesn’t support Flash doesn’t support a fully functioning web experience.

I don’t like it, but that’s the way it is.

Posted by gjs on September 29, 2009 at 5:10 PM (CDT)


Just think about the photoshop possiblilities, and possibly a REAAAL video editer. (with a SD card slot and that sort of stuff)

Im thinking that this thing will pack a fairly powerful proscesor considering its from apple

Posted by bergaminivideos on September 29, 2009 at 5:11 PM (CDT)


The missing link…
So short sighted guys! this is the first model in this new genrere to soon grace apples pages, why do you think Steve J is so committed to getting this right, do you think the iPhone is a failure? I can remember such comments back when that was introduced just a couple of short years ago, but you comment as if your way of life is threatened, this is the beginning of the new personal computer of the future that is destined to replace laptops completely.

Within a couple of equally short years this slate will be as powerful as a laptop with every application you desire built in, voice operated on command it will become your work and play mate of the future rather than lugging about a heavey easily damaged expensive slab of an inconvenient computer, its like the comments when macbook air came out without a dvd drive, don’t you know you hardly use dvds anymore,  they will be superfluous in the near future every possible requirement will be net connected, gaming online! office online! marketing online! studio online! there is even a TV remote app already available, or interactive TV on the tablet, every pro programme has multiuser online realtime editing built in today, Adobe, Office, Logic, FCP, use online servers.

I am a pro photographer & sound engineer and use pro progs, even a macbookpro is too small to edit properly requiring hours of compiling to form a high res finished product using an external HD array, but it will and so will this solid state device in time online, personally I prefer to send the capture to my desktop for that process on the big screen.
I give the whole concept of a tablet a big thumbs up and can’t wait to see it develop, it really is to become the next big step forward in on the go computing putting the power of future laptops in your briefcase and relegating the stopgap inbetweener laptop to the bin of the past, and it won’t take as long as you think. (Moors law.)

So perhaps we should be contemplating more where this technology is going next and what is most desirable in store for the next step and think beyond what we already have. Thanks for reading.

Posted by Allan on September 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM (CDT)


Full OS might not be particularly usable with a touch interface but the pre’s card paradigm might be useful - the screen is not really big enough to confortable run a multi window interface but multitasking with full screen apps and being able to quickly switch between them like you can the pre would be far more appealing in my view.

Posted by Chris on September 29, 2009 at 5:35 PM (CDT)


I’m holding out hope that it’ll feature handwriting recognition…

Posted by Rob O. on September 29, 2009 at 5:46 PM (CDT)


@68 The MLB iPhone app uses HTML 5 goodness to deliver audio and video, so why would we need Flash on the tablet?

Posted by Galley in Greenville, SC on September 29, 2009 at 5:48 PM (CDT)


“@68 The MLB iPhone app uses HTML 5 goodness to deliver audio and video, so why would we need Flash on the tablet?”

Bingo! Apple has held out against Flash and Silverlight. It would be nice to see a more open option end up as the winner.

Posted by Yacko on September 29, 2009 at 6:37 PM (CDT)


“Just think about the photoshop possibilities”

Not gonna happen. Touch screen is not a pressure sensitive tablet.

“and possibly a REAAAL video editer. (with a SD card slot and that sort of stuff)”

Im thinking that this thing will pack a fairly powerful proscesor considering its from apple”

Also not likely. A processor on battery power is by definition, for the next few years, not going to be powerful. Maybe it could handle a 30 second clip you shot and edit and then upload for sharing. It’s much more likely the iPad could serve as an audio and video controller that communicates wirelessly with a computer running Logic or Final Cut.

Posted by Yacko on September 29, 2009 at 6:43 PM (CDT)


Well your right about a may june release. I have got that info from a friend a few weeks back who is working on the tablet as we speak :-)

Posted by Starbuck on September 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM (CDT)



First of all, everyone here - even you - are discussing a non-existent product. To say I shouldn’t be negative because the product doesn’t exist yet is stupid; by that logic, you shouldn’t be positive about this product either. I am - and I believe I said so in my first post - discussing the product “as rumored.”

I didn’t say this “iPad” would be worthless to everyone, merely that I see no potential value for myself in an oversized iPhone OS product. Understand, I want a device that can *replace* my laptop for 60-70% of the tasks I need it for. If this product cannot replace the functionality of my 15” laptop, then I have no interest in carrying around another $600+ device.

“Speaking of size, are you aware of the upgraded Kindle size?  This will actually be smaller and get this… have a color screen.  It will likely make a much better reader.”

Were you trying to compare this “iPad” to a Kindle 2 or a Kindle DX? I’m afraid you are wrong on both counts. The Kindle DX, the larger of the two, has a 9.7 inch screen, a full inch smaller than the size of the rumored iPad. Also, since the Kindle doesn’t require a backlight it is considerably thinner and lighter than a comparably sized iPad would be. Yes it would be color, but the last time I checked the overwhelming majority of books were primarily text, which doesn’t need to be in color anyway.

Posted by Russell on September 29, 2009 at 7:10 PM (CDT)


I don’t care what OS it runs on…I don’t care what it can do…If it says APPLE on it…I’m buyin!!

Posted by Kool Aid is good on September 29, 2009 at 7:21 PM (CDT)


If this ran a cut down version of OSX which would probably need a good processor/memory etc. then that would be great. Half way between ipod/iphone and macbook. But running iphone OS? That will be rather boring, unless of course apps are developed to add all the functionality of, or close to OSX but as a ‘poor mans’ version - even though ironically it will probably cost at least as much as a macbook.

Posted by bob on September 29, 2009 at 7:56 PM (CDT)


It’s also a hover board.

Posted by mike on September 29, 2009 at 8:28 PM (CDT)


@73 & @74

Bingo indeed.

Buy an MLB app for your iPhone. Buy another one for your tablet.

You’ve made my original point. Apple, like any good business, is trying to get you to spend more money with them.

My current MLB web subscription works on my Mac, PC, or any computer I happen to be on. One purchase price.

My larger point is I’d prefer something more akin to a Mac than an iPhone.

Posted by gjs on September 29, 2009 at 9:18 PM (CDT)


I think its ridiculous that it runs on iphone OS. one app at a time concept. Absolute rubbish. Why cant apple allow background processing.
Without a physical keyboard it maybe hard to use this device.

Posted by Sup on September 29, 2009 at 10:02 PM (CDT)


As excited as I am about the new “iPad”, I cannot see it working out as it’s described here. I have an iPod in my pocket. I have a computer I can fold down and put into a case and carry around with me. How will I be able to carry around the iPad? I really don’t think anybody is going to want to carry it around like a book; it will get too many scratches and one bump and you drop it and it’s done.

It’s going to be really interesting to see how Apple advertises this thing as. Too big to carry around like a book and too small and not a powerful enough OS to have it as a main computer? As much as it pains me to say this, I would definitely not buy it.

Posted by Tommy on September 29, 2009 at 10:05 PM (CDT)


This could be big. It could even be the next Apple TV.

Posted by Ryan R on September 29, 2009 at 10:21 PM (CDT)


I would love this thing. I hate lugging my laptop around so usually don’t. Yet my ipod is too small for the writing I like to do on the road. This would fit the bill and seems snazzier than a netbook. I only hope the battery lasts a decent time, if it’s the same as a laptop it wouldn’t be much use.

Posted by rob on September 29, 2009 at 10:27 PM (CDT)


This is large enough to have space for a high-capacity battery, therefore making background apps much more practical than on the iPod touch or iPhone. iPhone OS with backgrounding enabled would be fine for an iPad, and the ability to run existing iThing apps (in windows) is essential.

I very, very much want a large-screen ebook reader, but have avoided the existing ones since they suck with PDF rendering and/or the screens are too slow. iPhone OS works well with PDFs, and LCD displays are of course more than fast enough for ebook reading. So, an iPhone OS-based iPad would make me happy.

Minimum acceptable battey life is 6 hours with the display on, 24 hours with display off (audio-only mode). It should be easy to do at least this well with current technology.

A smart move for Apple would be to convince iPhone carriers to offer a $20/month add-on option for iPhone accounts that would enable WiFi tethering to just an iPad. This would be in addition to offering the choice of an iPad with or without a $40/$60 standalone 3G data plan (same prices as current 250MB/5GB data-only plans from Verizon, for example). It would make vastly more marketing sense to offer just one hardware version (with a built-in 3G transceiver), but provide a subsidy if purchased with a data plan. There could be two tiers for the subsidized device pricing—one for tethering to an existing iPhone account, another (cheaper) for more-expensive standalone data service. This would make an iPad/iPhone combination a viable up-sell from either alone.

Personally, I would pay up to $800 for a non-subsidized, no-contract version of this iPad if it included a built-in GPS receiver, an iSight (or better)-quality camera, forward and rear microphones, and stereo speakers. Landscape-only mode for stereo would be tolerable (so that only two speakers are required), with an automatic downmix to mono in portrait orientation. Always stereo to the headset jack, of course.

The two speakers must face the user, not off to the sides.

The camera would need to be able to face either towards the user or forward, using either two separate cameras or, if it were more cost effective, a single camera on a 180° swivel. Better, a swiveling camera sensor could be completely enclosed within the body for protection, and could be electrically rotated to aim through either of two fixed lenses (one front, one rear). The rear (user)-facing lens would be optimized for portrait closeups, with the front lens designed for general-purpose shots (this is perhaps a patentable idea, but I hereby give it freely to Apple if it gets used in my iPad :-). 2x or better optical zoom on the front lens would be very desirable, but the space required for the rotating sensor might preclude that. I could live with the compromise, though maybe that speaks for having two completely-separate cameras.

Posted by TomB on September 30, 2009 at 12:58 AM (CDT)


this is depressing. i’m switching back to my brick phone…

Posted by whatever on September 30, 2009 at 1:42 AM (CDT)


Any word if it’ll be “pressure sensitive” as the Wacom tablets?

Posted by Javier on September 30, 2009 at 2:14 AM (CDT)


Yes… let apple launch a tablet with stock of 10 000 and be short within weeks and have no stock…. I mean if the iphone is in such demand and no stock available what will they do with this tablet????? I have been waiting for two months for an iphone now. I love this product but feeling so despondent about their delivery promises or am i just giving into one of the best marketing schemes out there today.

Posted by Aldo on September 30, 2009 at 2:42 AM (CDT)


I am intrigued by the idea of the Iphone OS being the OS for the Ipad. Where as this would be discouraging for hardcore Mac fans, it may be the best way to get Iphone/non-mac users to adopt the Ipad. It seems to be a high risk challenge for Apple. Go with the full mac os get all hardcore mac users to buy the ipad, and make it to difficult for the average consumer. Go with the iphone os hopefully get nonmac users to adopt the Ipad, maybe make a few hardcore fans upset.

I have had three different tabletpc’s, tc1000, tc1100, toshiba. The slate style it is the best! I loved web surfing on couch, and bed. The machines were never powerful enough to do photoshop. So I look forward to the Ipad and hope the Iphone OS can be improved to fit its larger format. Instant on will be great, and video conferencing.

Posted by Djmindblender on September 30, 2009 at 7:31 AM (CDT)


wont buy if its not running Mac OS, i dont want a larger version of Iphone OS

Posted by andrew on September 30, 2009 at 10:42 AM (CDT)


The only reason I suggested the iPhone OS for the iPad is the ability to take advantage of the existing app store ecosystem. But I suppose that Apple could build an iPhone emulator (sans phone) into the version of OS X that might be used. It could be an extension of the current simulator that could interact with the iPad’s hardware (touchscreen, accelerometers, GPS, camera, microphone, and speakers).

Posted by TomB on September 30, 2009 at 10:43 AM (CDT)


@73: Agreed! It’s time for Flash to be phased out in favor of an open standard like HTML 5. There are far, far too many media formats out there, creating a mess that’s expensive for consumers and benefits only the pushers of the formats. One open, scalable format would be obviously be ideal.

Posted by TomB on September 30, 2009 at 10:55 AM (CDT)


Oh, and a non-proprietary (up yours with the expensive iPhone/iPod video cables, Apple!), dongleless HDMI output for the iPad would be a very nice addition. Slideshows on the big-screen TV and all that.

Posted by TomB on September 30, 2009 at 11:01 AM (CDT)


How will apple market it?

They wont have ads for apps on it because that makes it seem like a big iphone and they wont have ads of it playing gams because thats a rip on the ipod touch, and as for Mac ads there isnt any real competition with Microsoft.

Posted by andrew on September 30, 2009 at 11:13 AM (CDT)


Add support for a USB or Bluetooth keyboard & mouse for desktop use. And an optional folding stand.

Hmm… If it had all the features I’ve mentioned above, I’d pay more than $800.

And to the many, many folks who say something like “Why not just get a MacBook?”, you’re missing the point. A keyboardless tablet is much easier to hold & use in crowded and/or portable situations, or for situations (like ebook reading) where a portrait orientation may be more useful. I might walk the streets with tablet in hand getting information about the sights around me (or, being carbait, reading a book :-), but that would be hopelessly awkward with a laptop and I’ve rarely seen anyone try it.

Posted by TomB on September 30, 2009 at 11:14 AM (CDT)


I have seen the new tablet. In fact, anyone who has gone to an Apple store in the last few months has, too.

Next time you visit a mall-based store, just look at the iPhone/iPod Touch display in the picture window that is showing how the apps work. The size is right and it looks a lot like a tablet device.

Posted by T.Jin on September 30, 2009 at 12:21 PM (CDT)


After reading all the news about this forthcoming Tablet, I couldn’t be more disappointed. As another reader said, I want a smaller, pressure sensitive, touch screen Apple device, not a larger iPod Touch.

The described product, for me, does not fit anywhere. I don’t want an electronic device to replace my books/magazines. I can get news on my iPhone no problem via various websites before print editions are even conceptualized.

A friend of mine recently bought a HP Touchsmart TX2 laptop. I advised him against it but he got it anyway and I must say, I was wrong. It’s a wonderful computer. Whilst using it I couldn’t help but think, “now if Apple would make something like this, it would be a truly perfect computer experience.”

After using the HP, if Apple don’t produce what I’m looking for, I’m jumping ship when it comes to my next purchase. They seem to be more concerned with riding evolving trends than they do making their existing product line better. Hell, if Apple has it’s way, I’ll be using a desktop at home, their ‘tablet’ for controlling it, my iPhone for calls and messages. That, is 1 too many devices. iPhone plus tablet Mac running MAC OS X please. THAT would be a killer lineup that wouldn’t canablize sales of other products.

Posted by Daniel Nicholls on September 30, 2009 at 12:28 PM (CDT)


Good discussion here, but Bill Burkholder (#25) and Allan (#70) nailed it best.

Think of the big picture in computing, what problems it solved yesterday, what problems it solves today, and what problems it has the potential to solve in the near future. Possibilities are endless, but it takes a company like Apple - with a great sense of taste, judgment and strategic thinking - to separate the ordinary from the truly groundbreaking.

I hope the initial iteration of this device will not disappoint, but even if it is not perfect, there is plenty of room to grow.

Posted by Roman on September 30, 2009 at 3:37 PM (CDT)


I am really looking forward to this new device. I’ve put off buying another computer (currently own a five-year-old Mac mini) in anticipation. BUT, I’m hoping it will be more like a touchscreen laptop and not a big version of the iPhone. I don’t need tons of storage because I can use cloud storage, but I’m hoping the processor and RAM will be similar to a laptop. As for the book reader, the iPhone is perfect for that function. I don’t need a bigger device to hold while reading. If it is a big iPhone, I’ll just buy a Macbook Air. I’m quite sure Apple will not disappoint and the tablet will do a lot more than the iPhone, like make me breakfast in the morning. Here’s hoping!

Posted by Posh Penguin on September 30, 2009 at 4:15 PM (CDT)

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods or accessories, or if you sell or market products, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators. Wondering why we're talking about something other than iPods? Check the Archives: Backstage has been here and kicking it since 2004.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
iLounge Weekly

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2019 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy