Really? Which would you have an easier time doing:
A: Remove all your personal data from your Mac/iPhone, move it to a Linux/Android system and tell Apple to take a hike or;
B: Find an alternative to all the Google services you use.

I could do A this evening and, after spending a few bucks on software for the new platform (which you need to do ANY time you switch platforms, walled software garden or not). I couldn't do B without a whole lot of hardship. The alternatives to Google search, maps, reader, mail, etc are just not in the same league. People who think Google is some fuzzy wuvvy wittle bunny wabbit are delusional. Apple makes money by keeping you happy and coming back for more. Google makes money by selling you to others. Not saying Google is evil, just that the core business model involves some semi-hidden transactions.

This might be working towards a lockdown from a developer's perspective, but the consumer retains the ability to leave at any time. DRM'd music/video notwithstanding (which is why you're nuts for buying that in the first place).

To me, it's not what they sell now, but what they might be willing to sell in the future. This data persists a long time.

You can already buy consumer data analytics systems with fancy GIS based interfaces that allow you to click on an individual house and pull up hundreds of records. What type of movies they watch, how old they are, what prescription drugs they do (or might) take, who employs them, what types of purchase they make, psychographic profiles, etc. They pull from hundreds of public and private data sources, then consolidate and geocode *everything*. Bob Jones likes to buy hydroponics supplies and glass pipes, laxatives and My Little Ponies. Sally Fields apparently collects Chia Pets. I suppose it's fine when just advertisers and marketers are using this stuff, but it gets real creepy when it moves beyond that.

I'm fine with customized ads from Google, but I want it de-identified and siloed as much as possible and not linked across services. Not being a lawyer, I dunno how privacy policies and EULAs translate in this circumstance, but it's easy for me to imagine a hypothetical bankruptcy fire sale of Google assets in which their data was made available to these consumer data warehouses.

The applications for this stuff are in their infancy, but it's very easy to imagine a scary future. Do I really want my state child protective services cross referencing households with children with households of, I dunno, atheists? Or the DEA looking up all the aforementioned buyers of grow lights? Or my city cross referencing the purchases of plumbing supplies with people who pulled permits to try to find building code violators? Or some loony group like Westboro Baptist Church publishing some kind of index of the best people to target for harassment or worse? Or employers building enormous psychological profiles of all their employees to try to weed out the subversive types?

Design, defined as the part of something we see/touch/interact with, is everything. Technologies without design are useless. For whatever reason (maybe because they don't understand humans) nerds seem to forget this. His genius went way beyond making stuff look pretty. He took the equivalent of a rock (great tech for hitting stuff!) and turned it into the equivalent of a ergonomic claw hammer. That's design.

As for closed-ness, you can make an argument that OS X/Darwin itself brought a bit of openness to the PC platform at a time when windows was, at best, highly restrictive. Steve is/was pragmatic about products and didn't give a damn one way or another, but where open genuinely works better than closed, I think they chose it. Apple has done an amazing job of picking technologies that help it reach its goal of making money for shareholders.

With the iPhone/iOS they nailed it. Apple understands just how stupid consumers are, has done an incredible job of simplifying things for them. The fact of the matter is that iOS works so well for most people because it's frustratingly closed off to those of us who would implement a bunch of half-assed hack-y apps/mods to it.

Jobs, as the leader of Apple, was absolutely brilliant. Just stop for a moment and think what the technology landscape would look like if he'd never made his comeback, let alone if he'd never started Apple. Computers before the Mac? Laptops before the iBook/Powerbook? The truly terrible MP3 players before the iPod? 'Smart' phones before the iPhone? All the miserable tablets before the iPad? Even if you hate those specific products, you have to admit that the products Apple's competitors put out as a response have absolutely improved our lives as consumers. I think his company changed the world for the better, regardless of what you think of his philosophies or personality or methods or even the specific products he brought to market.

iOS doesn't have any less functionality than any other operating system. Security *is* functionality. A single managed source for new applications *is* functionality. It's functionality that, like all functionality, comes with huge tradeoffs.

I easily spend as much time using my iPad for work as I do consuming media on it. It's not necessarily good for the sort of work we do on traditional desktops, but it's definitely become the tool I grab 95% of the time I walk out the door.

For my work it's like a very, very sophisticated clipboard or pad of paper. Drawing, note taking, marking up technical drawings during review sessions, etc. I take it with me in situations where I wouldn't dream of taking a laptop. You can't beat the battery life, unobtrusive weight/form factor, small personal space impact (laptops sitting on conference tables can be a little alienating...it's like throwing up a wall), time it takes to go from briefcase to usable, etc. Plus, it's very social in that you can pass it from person to person very easily which is maybe its killer ability in a corporate environment.

The more I see and use tablets in the wild, the more I wonder if maybe laptops are the niche product. My laptop rarely gets used as a portable machine, and when I do it's usually to do stuff that the iPad excels at (web browsing, presenting materials, taking notes) rather than working with more hardcore tools like AutoCAD/ArcGIS/Photoshop/Excel. Those heavier pieces of software that work great on a 27" LCD all feel cramped and miserable on a laptop screen. I usually put off working with them on a laptop until it's plugged back into a monitor. A laptop never really feels right being used like a desktop, but a tablet feels great because it's not trying to be something it isn't. Sadly for Apple, I doubt I'll ever buy a $2000 MacBook Pro again when a desktop/ipad combo seems to be so much more flexible for my needs.

Not being a doctor, researcher or expert in EMF fields, I gotta ask: is there a plausible explanation for why this would be? It seems to me that there are a lot of researchers out there fishing for weird correlations with cell phone use, and if you look for statistical fish long enough you're going to find something that isn't really there. Without a plausible mechanism for messing with bone density, I'd be tempted to write this one off entirely until someone else confirms it. Especially since it's the first study of its type and is a relatively small group of subjects (n=24).

Recipe for science fail: conduct 30 studies looking for some type of harm done by a random controversial bogey man. Don't publish the 29 that fail to reject the null hypothesis. Publish the one that does.

I've never heard anyone say laptops are dead, although I think *I* may not need one any longer. I'm not an Apple fanboy, but it's safe to say I'm a serious convert to the iPad.

Author misses the point or deliberately ignored it. The iPad is defined entirely by its physical simplicity. Why would I want a slot for disks when anything I want to watch or listen to can be streamed from my PC at home or from the cloud? Why would I need a terabyte of storage when I have a fast network connection back to my stockpile of data at all times? Why in the hell would I want to watch video while typing (though YES you can listen to music or internet radio while you do other things)? Why do I want to carry around 5+ lbs of machine that does everything a little bit worse than my desktop when I can carry a 1.3lb featherweight that focuses on doing what it does better than anything else while still letting you do a bit of standard computer work on the go?

If I need more battery life I'll get an external battery pack. If I need to connect a camera I'll get a $30 dongle or two. If I need output to a monitor I'll buy that dongle, too. But most people don't need any of those things. Sure it doesn't have a real keyboard, but I can still type at about 75% keyboard speed. Certainly well enough to take the notes I'll need to do my real work when I'm back in front of a desktop.

It is what it is. Whether you like the iPad or want to hold off for a decent Android tablet, the tech gods should bless Apple for what they've done. It's not a laptop, doesn't need to be and doesn't want to be. Comparing it to a laptop is missing the point BIG TIME, but that's what I'd expect from an author who doesn't own one! Laptops always have and always will feel like cramped desktops. Mine is connected to a 27" LCD 95% of the time because a 13" or 15" screen is just too damn small for the multi-windowed interface. The iPad gets around that by doing away with the desktop OS and input devices. It's tactile, paper-like experience that doesn't try to emulate a "real" computer. It can be whipped out and used while you're walking, held over your head while you're in bed, put between you and a coworker on a table to share documents or put on a table in a restaurant and used as a checker board with your kids. When you're using it for what it does well, the experience is entirely transparent and the device disappears.

Finally, hell yeah it's expensive. The thing is a little over a pound, goes 10 hours on a charge and benchmarks almost as fast as a G5 processor from a few years back. It's beautifully designed in a way few other consumer products are. It has a fancy capacitive multutouch IPS display you can see from any angle rather than a turd TN monitor. The funny thing about the iPad compared to other Apple products is that it's a steal. No one who buys an iPad 2 is going to get it home, use it for a week, and thing that they got anything other than an absolutely amazing value for their money.

For what it's worth, I can type on the iPad almost as fast as on my desktop. I have to look at the keyboard a bit while I do it, but I can take notes faster on the ipad than on paper, and I've only had it a week. After some time setting it up so I can access all my documents and media from the tablet, I haven't felt the need to use my laptop since buying it. Obviously it's not a full blown desktop, but it's incredible if you think of it as simply a window to content. It's definitely going to replace the gigantic reams of paper I used to carry around to meetings, replace all my paper auto repair manuals and be the end of hauling a laptop around as a multimedia device. Like the iPhone (and later Android/WebOS stuff), it's a device that truly opens up a lot of possibilities that weren't there before and developers are only getting started with it. It's just going to take a while for people to figure out exactly what its strengths and weaknesses are.