The new iPad Pro has been released, so of course it’s time for everyone to discuss how it can’t be used as a work device.
In my opinion a big part of the arguments stem from the idea of it being a laptop replacement. And this leads to a lot of comparisons of apps, and tasks that people do on their Mac, and how they’d accomplish it on an iPad. Some of the time, you find some really good discussions on where a Mac or iPad would be better suited, or things that could be improved. But most of the time I don’t find the comparisons to be very helpful at all, and the rhetoric of not doing work on an iPad, is for some reason, still a thing.
There’s quite a lot of things that I think cause this type of reaction, and hopefully I’ll manage to explain all of them, in this rant-style piece.
First of all, the reviews are not always being done by people who use the device full-time, or do a substantial about of tasks on it. I wouldn’t be able to review a windows laptop very well, simply because I don’t use one, or even know anything about them anymore. Therefore my opinion would be completely worthless, and would only provide inaccurate information to the debate.
Also, I think the comparisons between the devices are being done are mostly too high-level. The problem is being abstracted away so much, that what’s left is checking if a Mac app is available on iOS, or if a workflow can be done in the exact same way. They’re not trying to solve an actual issue, or ask themselves what else can this device do that I couldn’t do before.
This shouldn’t need to be pointed out, but macOS and iOS are different operating systems. And the way to do something is not always going to be the same. Maybe the question you have to ask yourself when trying to see if the iPad could work for you, is “How can I reproduce my expected result using the iPad?”. Instead of trying to replicate the exact process. It’s a nice thing to have if everything works the same, but it doesn’t devalue the iPad as a platform, just because the way it does things is different.
Another thing I see, and I think it’s becoming noticed by more people, is that reviewers tend to project their own situation a bit too much. For example if the reviewer couldn’t use an iPad full-time, or if a specific group of tech people can’t either, then it must mean the device is the problem, and that no-one can use it for work. A lot of professionals exist outside the tech community, and a lot of them happily use the iPad for their work. But a lot of reviewers tend to ignore these people. Not every person is in the tech community.
It leads to another misconception, that if you can’t do your work on an iOS, then the iOS platform is somehow behind. Sure, there are loads of places where iOS can be improved. One of my biggest wishes is some way to develop apps for iOS, on iOS itself, that would be a huge chunk of users that could then do work on the iPad. But it doesn’t necessarily automatically apply to all work. For example, does a farmer moan about his tractor because he can’t do his taxes on it? No. It’s just one of the many tools they use to do their work. And the iPad is just another tool that people can use.
My last complaint is what I regularly see on Twitter, and that’s when people want proof about how people use their iPad, and they want the people that do happily use them for work, to explain how other people can as well. I don’t like this. They tend to put blame on happy iPad users, why they can’t become one themselves. Maybe this stems from jealousy, but it’s annoying to see.
I’ll end on what my current situation is: I like to work on my iPad, and I’d like to work even more on it, but that doesn’t mean the iPad is necessarily bad.
If anyone wants to know about why they can’t work on an iPad, my answer is: “I like to work on my iPad, and I can do a great deal on it. If you can’t, then oh well.”
It’s not unusual for celebrities paid to promote Android brands to be caught using an iPhone. In many cases, they have been caught out on Twitter – like Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot.
But Samsung appears to take the matter more seriously than most: they are suing their own Russian brand ambassador for using an iPhone X for a massive $1.6M …
Reality TV show host and politician Ksenia Sobchak is the face of Samsung in Russia, and is required by contract to use a Samsung smartphone. But the Mirror reports that she was seen on a television interview using an iPhone X.
I don’t blame them. Who would, given the option, use a Samsung phone 😜.
However, you’d probably either make a better effort to hide it, or just not become a Brand Ambassador.
I visited the British Museum about 10 days ago, and my iPhone XS was super fresh in my hands, so I decided to take a bit more effort into the photos I took while I was there.
Well, after looking back at them, the three photos that I like the best have nothing to do with what the museum actually holds inside. But instead, people, and the inner architecture of the museum.
Also, you’ll noticed that all of them are black and white. I nearly always shoot in black and white, and if not I’ll usually apply the Noir filter afterwards. I just find everything looks a bit better without the distraction of colour.
Essentially, Smart HDR was choosing the wrong base frame for HDR processing when you took a selfie. Instead of choosing a frame with a short shutter speed to freeze motion and preserve detail, it would sometimes choose a frame with longer shutter speed. The front camera also does not have optical image stabilization, so it takes blurrier shots at the same shutter speed as the rear, stabilized camera. The result is a loss of detail that looks like smoothing on the front camera.
I knew it was something to do with Smart HDR, but it’s interesting to know the exact detail of why it was happening.
Maybe one of the main benefits of computational photography, is that it can be continuously improved, and sent out in regular software updates. It’s intriguing to think what the difference in the camera will be in a years time, compared to how good it is now, even with no hardware change.
Eurogamer recently had an interview with two people from Game Freak, the main developers of Pokémon games. Junichi Masuda (executive director and head of game development) and Kensaku Nabana (designer). It’s a really interesting read, especially with all the changes they had to make when adapting the game to a different style of playing.
Two decades on from Pokémon Red and Blue’s arrival here in the west, we’re going back to Kanto once again.
Pokémon Let’s Go have made big changes – some proving more popular than others in the lead up to its release – but there’s still a lingering sense that, with just the first generation of Pokémon available, in the first region, we’ve seen it all before.
A couple of weeks ago, alongside an extended hands-on preview of Let’s Go Pikachu and Eevee, we talked to Junichi Masuda, executive director and head of game development at Pokémon’s main studio Game Freak, as well as fellow designer Kensaku Nabana, about some of the nitty gritty details fans are always after, including how that whole Meltan reveal came about, HMs, and those perpetual questions of difficulty, open worlds, and the series’ future.
It ends with a answer from Junichi Masuda, which is quite reassuring about their idea of how the main series of Pokémon games will be played:
I know that a lot of people and fans have spent a lot of time hatching eggs, they’ve hatched… a lot of eggs, but we want them to kind of discover new ways to enjoy Pokémon games, you know I’d be really sad to think that for them, Pokémon is hatching eggs, so with this one we’re trying to show them a different side of the game.
Pokémon GO is super popular, and I still play it quite a lot, but I wouldn’t want the main games to be simplified to match. So this is good news!