Wait, "solid Flash support"? From all I have read, it is anything but solid. "Spotty, buggy, resource-hog" seems to be what is being said, even by people that aren't fans of Apple.

Wait, wait wait... there was a time when you *really* needed flash? As in, oh my god, I need flash right now or I might die or at least have some kind of fit? What the hell did you do a months ago before flash was released?

As a source of irony, Flash just crashed on my browser as I was writing this.

So I hope all of these manufacturers do the right thing and recall their phones. If it possible to do something to a phone to get it drop in signal, then the only right answer is a recall. Originally I thought that the only right answer was a free case for everyone that bought them, but then Apple gave out free cases and I had to revise my opinion. I haven't yet figured out how to make the signal drops on phones from other manufacturers somehow Apple's fault, but if I can, then I will again revise my opinion to demand that Apple recalls the phones on behalf os the other manufacturers as well. There has to be a class action lawsuit somewhere here that I can peg on Apple...

You have a point. Mom and pop shops like Google hardly ever advertise because they are just too small and don't have the money. Plus, on any ads that are about Google phones, they never make any bold claims at all. In fact, they are kind of down on themselves. I'm always writing them, saying "cheer up, ol' Goog, things ain't so bad!", but they never listen because they are just that modest. Not like those Apple jerks, always walking around all proud, puffing out their chests, spending money on advertising that says good things about their products. Where do they get off saying nice things about the stuff they are trying to sell? Apple should be happy that /. gives them that free press, because lord knows that Apple *never* gets free press.

On a more serious side, I don't own an iPhone either, and I agree that phones need pop-up antennas, but it is my understanding that the whole problem on all phones stems from FCC rules and the evil radiowaves being too close to your head. Given the choice, I am sure that pretty much all manufacturers would not put their antennas under a skin-bag of water.

It's a good thing that no one here on /. ever posted in the last few weeks demanding that apple give out free cases, otherwise they'd have admit that apple met their demands and then shut the hell up.

God bless selective memory.

Yeah, and another thing... Google has never apologized for the Nexus One having the exact same problem as the iPhone! What is it with these smart phone companies thinking they can screw up and never apologize!

Oh crap, I forgot, we only focus on Apple problems here. Other smart phones with the same problems don't count, especially Google.

Oh, yes, I imagine goodwill will get them far here on /. Before you pretend like there is anything that they can do to appease the "gotcha" masses, a lot of people here need to take a deep breath and consider their own goodwill. If they do the right thing (I'm not even sure what that could be at this point), will you admit it, or will you gloat, or will you just find something else to complain about?

that commented on /. about how Apple was making false claims about the incorrect signal bars? Surely if the responders on Friday had the balls to stand on a pedestal and make grand claims based on no evidence, they can have the balls to come back and admit they were wrong.

The story pulls a clever choice of data -- "the majority aren't happy with Apple's App Store approval process", when in reality the vast majority (85%ish) of people answered with the two answers that are the most positive towards the app store (Not a problem at all and minor problem). The fact is that the possible answers that they could give were skewed towards the negative:

Not a problem at all
Minor problem
Major problem
Unacceptable

So, your summary basically says that "of the four possible answers, the majority of people picked from three of them", which is not all that impressive of a feat. Suppose the possible answers were instead:

I prefer to have apps reviewed before purchasing or downloading them
I'm neutral on the app store
Minor problem
Major problem
Unacceptable

By adding a positive answer, rather than a slightly above neutral answer, you change the skew of the response. By have a great majority of negative answers, someone who has not completely formed their opinion will be more likely to say, "huh, I had never thought of it before, but since there are so many negative possible answers, there must be a problem."

Why isn't this article linked to the source AP story instead of a lol-atarian blog? I wonder if the owner of the blog submitted this story hoping to jack up his page rank.

I woke up this morning to urgent "my site is down" calls from clients on one of my old servers. It turns out that ClamAV was trying to update itself. It would download the update, fail to update, then download again and again until it filled up the hard drive. We don't even do email on this particular server, so it must have gotten turned on months/years ago and then never noticed. We've disabled it, but it was kind of an annoying way to be woken up.

The mid-hundreds is too expensive, it needs to be $100-200?

and the cries of...

The pad/tablet market is not viable and this will die...

Oh wait, those cries are saved for Apple products. Linux products of the same type and the same general price are brilliant!

I completely agree that his opinion of how Slashdot looks on an iPad would be relevant to *a* review, but that part of the review should be called "Slashdot Review", not "iPad Review".

As for the headers that the iPad sends, here they are:

Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.21.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7B334b Safari/531.21.10

as documented on Apple's developer website. So maybe that part of the review could be pulled out into a post titled "Lazy Web Developers Review" or "Challenges in Web Design for Multiple Platforms Review" or "Documented Things Web Developers Should Pay Attention To Review".

So wait, your review of the iPad was almost entirely how stuff other people have made shows up in it... isn't that kind of like basing a review of Firefox on how a "Made for IE 5.5" website displays in it?

News Flash: Apple doesn't have control of the HTML on Slashdot, therefore that information doesn't belong in an iPad "review". When a web designer has put special code to make a website display differently in an iPhone, and the website mistakes the iPad for an iPhone, that is on the web designer's shoulders... not Apple's. If Slashdot can say that they are sticking directly to W3C standards always, then you have something to base your criticism on... but my guess is, that like every web developer out there, they have done little work arounds here and there to make sure the site looks good to a wide audience. Once you do that for even one browser, then I say that you have made your own bed, so stop whining.

And as a web designer and as a Mac user that has Flash eat up my CPU constantly and crash at least twice a day, I say good riddance to Flash. Quick show of hands for all those that whine about no Flash on the iPad: How many of you run the plug-in for Firefox that prevents Flash from showing until you click on it? How many of you actually looked at the Flash ad in the upper right corner of the screen?

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms for the iPad, why waste a review trying to paint it with illegitimate ones?