I have a kindle DX and before the iPad came out I *loved* it. The display is *amazing* and is extremely easy to read.

The problem is that in addition to reading books I read *alot* of pdf scientific papers. the Kindle (neither the small one nor the DX) is just plain old not suited to this task. The rendering is *very* slow. The display has the resolution but I find that the iPad's display can render the text so much cleaner and readable. I ended up turning the kindle sideways and reading that way but that's a sub-optimal way to read multi-column text (especially when coupled with the slow rendering). Add to that instant zooming and full color images and in the arena of reading not just books but also pdfs the iPad (and any other tablet for that matter) wins hands down.

If e-ink tech can get rendering and refresh rates similar to an LCD then I would return to that market because the screen really is incredible. But until then I can't justify a single purpose device that doesn't fill the actual purpose (for me).

You guys are adorable. I say I'm replacing my laptop with an iPad and you say "yeah .. But you can't do all the stuff you can do on a desktop". No kidding! I have a desktop. I use it when the task requires. I can't use it on the plane though. I can't use it while sitting on a curb while waiting for the crew to move on to the nextt shot while we're on location. Can you?

I say I want a boat and people like you keep telling me I should buy a car. Goodness.

This is such a short sighted way of looking at things. I do *alot* of work on my iPad. Real money making stuff. What you (and all the rest who dismiss tablets) is that there's no such thing as a "real interface". What I need is the *right* interface. And more than 9 times out of 10 a laptop is just plain old the wrong interface, the wrong layout and the wrong form factor. Pity away.. I'll be over here being productive and making money.

I guess there's not much point to replying to an AC.. but I would *love* to know how it is that you are certain I do all of the things that I do *less* well on the iPad. In fact the work tasks I use my iPad for I do *more* well and more productively than I ever could with a laptop. But hey.. you keep on thinking that you've got it all figured out. I'll be over here making money.

And as to your last suggestion. Yeah.. I *definitely* want to carry around *two* devices neither of which does what I want.

Try reading dense scientific PDFs on a Kindle. It's a nightmare. It's slow and low resolution and generally not up to the task. You know how I know that? Because I *have* one. A Kindle DX. It's currently gathering dust next to my laptop.

Always the same ridiculous assertions from people who don't understand how useful tablets are and can be. The idea that there's no reason to buy a tablet except because I want to be trendy is just absurd. I've completely replaced my laptop for all mobile computing with an iPad. I write emails, read books, do work, make money, travel and consume entertainment on it. My laptop has left my desk maybe twice in the last year and a bit (since the iPad 1 was released). There's no Apple fever. There's a desire to get away from devices that aren't suited to the task at hand (which the laptop is for most of my mobile computing needs). If I want or need a keyboard I can keep a bluetooth keyboard around or get an eePad Transformer which is a rather nice device because it's the best of both worlds (though I still find Android to be a very confusing and clunky OS). For 9%% of my mobile computing needs I don't need an attached keyboard. In fact a keyboard is an active hindrance. Have you ever tried to read something in portrait mode on a laptop? Have you ever tried to scrub through a quicktime movie while holding a laptop with one hand on a busy film set? Yeah. No thanks. I'll take the tablet.

Nobody's been able to compete with Apple in this domain yet (though I'm certain in a few years they will manage it) so they're crying sour grapes and declaring the market dead. Uh huh. Riiiight.

Yes.

The "blanket claim" to which I was referring was CmdrTaco's in his summary.

300 was an exciting but pointless movie. I enjoyed the experience of watching it in the theatre and then promptly forgot everything about it when I got home.

Watchmen was boring and pointless.. I wanted to leave the theatre while watching it.

I wasn't responding to anyone who said "for my part". That came *after* what I posted.

From CmdrTaco's original summary:

"The most frustrating part of this is that Watchmen was actually *good*"

how is that any different from what I said?

I agree with this completely. Scott Pilgrim had the advantage, for me, of being *fun* and silly and just plain easy to watch. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience of watching it.. as opposed to Watchmen in which I was shifting in my seat and looking at my watch.

Scott Pilgrim -- good
Watchemen -- not good

In my opinion.

So why is the blanket claim that a movie is *good* not a troll? Why does it not go both ways?

Is it really necessary to preface *everything* one writes with "In my opinion"?

No.. I've liked some adaptations: V for Vendetta, Scott Pilgrim among the best of them and 300 for the sheer ridiculous spectacle. I don't consider the material low brow in the least. I just thought it was a boring, pointless movie. Too many flashbacks showing what could have been manage much more simply and artfully. The problem I have with Watchmen is the same problem I had with Sin City -- the adaptation was *too* faithful. I felt like the filmmakers were just reading the books to me... I wasn't engaged at all. Not nearly the same was I was engaged when I read the actual books -- both of which I found thought provoking and exciting to read.

They missed an opportunity to *adapt* the material for the screen. Instead they *recited it* on screen.

Watchmen was an overlong, overwrought, overly wordy, over hyped, over produced mess.

It was not, by any stretch of the imagination, good.

Scratch that part about the headers and side bars. When the window is narrow they scroll away as they should (IMHO). When the window is wide they stay put (which I don't like).

I'm using Mac OS 10.6.5 with Safari 5.0.3 and I don't see any of the high CPU usage on idle reading. Nor do I see any headers or sidebars that stay attached to the page. Window resizes are very laggy, though. The font in the comments is easy to read and has good contrast. I would like the article text to use the same color (I agree it's too pale currently).

Also a nice bonus to the update: on the previous version the "Many More" button at the bottom of the main page would disappear in my iOS-based browser (Atomic)... making it rather hard to click. Now it stays where it's supposed to be.

All in all a good update. Keep it up. Very nice.