The iPad will rock

Lots of fun watching Apple bring down the Internet. So many sites that tried to LiveBlog the event just went down hard. Engadget and Gizmodo held up the best.

And it is always fun reading the geeks/pundits. They got the iPod wrong. They got the iPhone wrong. And I think they are getting the iPad wrong. It is not going to replace what someone already has. It will fill into the cracks that they did not even know existed.

The iPad is for those times when you need a reasonable amount of computing power but simply do not want the weight or space that even a netbook takes up. I think that will turn out to be quite a lot of time.

The big deal about the iPad is how high powered it will be for almost anything, including business work, for something that weighs as little as it does. My Powerbook weighs 6 pounds. The iPad weighs 1.5. When I travel, do I need a fully loaded, multitasking, behemoth to lug through airports?

Would a 1.5 pound wonder that could carry all my needed documents on the trip, allow me to work on them, and present them to others be great? Would I give up some power to gain ease of use and light weight? I know I would.

The only competitors of the iPad, netbooks, are really just slimmed down laptops. They still weigh a ton compared to the iPad, some coming in at almost 3 pounds. Same with some of the proposed tablets. Sony has a very lightweight netbook, the VAIO W series, which weighs more than the iPad. The cheapest model is $450. And it still weighs over 2 pounds. And to make it useable for a business man, lots of extra money since it is only installed with the Starter edition of Windows 7. And the battery lasts about 3 hours. A longer battery, up to 8 hours, costs $130 more and adds more weight. And no 3G.

You can find VAIO models (the P series) which weigh about the same as the iPad and have 3G. They come with a smaller screen than the iPad but it has higher resolution. However you still get only 3.5 hours of battery life unless you want to add a heavier battery. It costs about $1000 for one of these with 64 GB of memory. The comparable iPad is $829.

And, of course, you have to use the attached keyboard or a mouse to manipulate data. No touchscreen. No way to rotate the screen to get a better viewing angle.

It seems to me that when weight is included, the iPad is very comparable in price and specs to PC netbooks that are out there. But all of those netbooks use space and weight to house a keyboard, while the iPad only has a keyboard when you need it.

I think the iPad is going to be used by a lot of people who do not want to have to lug around even a netbook for what they need to do, want extended battery life without adding more weight and want to interact with their data and apps without needing to type.

A personal example – when my son is home, the three of us will be sitting around watching TV. And all three of us will have our Apple laptops nearby. Whether it is to check.write email during commercial breaks, check up on some fact from Jeopardy or simply skim the Web, we use those laptops all the time.

We could accomplish all of that on an iPad, would not have to worry about tripping over plugs, and not have to worry about burning our laps. All for the cost of just ONE Macbook!

I see this really making desktop models of computers, evan Apples, almost unnecessary for all but the most computationally heavy tasks. Laptops today provide the necessary requirements for almost everyone. And when they have to leave the computer, they can take along an iPad for lighter tasks, without having to lug around a heavy laptop.

So, desktop for those who pursue computer intensive tasks. Laptop for those who just need to get work done. iPad for those times you need to get work done while away from your laptop where weight is critical. iPhone for all the other times when you just need a quick connection to work or the web.

I think they will sell millions.

[Listening to: Matchbox from the album "Past Masters, Vol. 1 [2009 Stereo Remaster]” by The Beatles]

Evolution: The Curious Case of Dogs

Evolution: The Curious Case of Dogs

[Via Observations of a Nerd]

Man’s best friend is much more than a household companion – for about two centuries, artificial selection in dogs has made them prime examples of the possibilities of evolution. While humans have been breeding dogs for over ten thousand years, it was until recently that strict breeds and the emphasis on “purebreds” has led to over 400 different breeds that are some of the best examples of the power of selection. Those that doubt that small variations in traits can lead to large levels of diversity clearly hasn’t compared a Pug to a Great Dane – I mean, just look at them compared to their ancestor:

We’ve turned a fine-tuned hunting animal, the wolf, into a wide variety of creatures, from the wolf-looking shepherds to the bizarre toy breeds. Before domestication, dog’s life was tough, but when people pulled specific wolves out of their packs and began breeding them, we changed everything. There were some traits that made this easy – the social structure of wolves, for example, made them predisposed to belonging to a community. But we opened up a number of genetic traits and allowed them to express variety that would have been fatal in the wild. We not only allowed these traits to persist, we encouraged them. We picked dogs that were less aggressive or looked unique. And in doing so, we spurred on rapid diversification and evolution in an unbelievable way.
[More]

I’m a sucker for dog evolution stories. There is just so much to discuss. I had heard most that was discussed in this blog entry until the end. The feral dogs of Moscow was something i had not heard about and found fascinating. What happens to domesticated dogs when they spend decades without direct human influence on breeding:

When you take away the selective breeding done by humans, a number of these unique traits disappear. But feral dogs don’t just become wolves again – their behaviors and even looks depend greatly on the ecological pressures that surround them. Our centuries of selective breeding have opened a wide variety of traits, both physical and behavioral, that may help a stray dog survive and breed.

A good example of what happens to dogs when people are taken out of the picture lies in Russia’s capital city. Feral dogs have been running around Moscow for at least 150 years. These aren’t just lost pets that band together – these dogs been on their own for awhile, and indeed, any poor, abandoned domesticated canine will meet an unfortunate fate at the hands of these territorial streetwalkers. Moscow’s dogs have lost traits like spotted coloration, wagging tails and friendliness that distinguish domesticated dogs from wolves – but they haven’t become them. The struggle to survive is tough for a stray, and only an estimated 3% ever breed. This strong selective pressure has led them to evolve into four distinct behavioral types, according to biologist Andrei Poyarkov who has studied the dogs for the past 30 years. There are guard dogs, who follow around security personnel, treating them as the alpha leaders of their packs. Others, called scavengers, have evolved completely different behaviors, preferring to roam the city for garbage instead of interacting with people. The most wolf-like dogs are referred to as wild dogs, and they hunt whatever they can find including cats and mice.

But the last group of Moscow’s dogs is by far the most amazing. They are the beggars, for obvious reasons. In these packs, the alpha isn’t the best hunter or strongest, it’s the smartest. The most impressive beggars, however, get their own title: ‘metro dogs’. They rely on scraps of food from the daily commuters who travel the public transportation system. To do so, the dogs have learned to navigate the subway. They know stops by name, and integrate a number of specific stations into their territories.

This dramatic shift from the survival of the fittest to the survival of the smartest has changed how Moscow’s dogs interact with humans and with each other. Beggars are rarely hit by cars, as they have learned to cross the streets when people do. They’ve even been seen waiting for a green light even when no pedestrians are crossing, suggesting that they have actually learned to recognize the green walking man image of the crosswalk signal. Also, there are fewer “pack wars” that once were commonplace between Moscow’s stray canines, some of which used to last for months. However, they remain vigilant against the wild dogs and wolves that live on the outskirts of the city – rarely, if ever, are they permitted into Moscow. When politicians thought to remove the dogs, their use as a buffer against these animals was cited as a strong reason not to disturb them.

Moscow’s exemplary dogs show how different traits help dogs adapt to different ecological niches – whether it be brute strength for hunting in the truly feral wild dogs or intelligence in the almost-domesticated beggars. Some wonder if the strong selection for intellect will make Moscow’s metro dogs into another species all together, if left to their own devices.

These feral dogs breakout into 4 different groups based on personality traits. It would be really interesting to see if these groups interbreed much and where the gene flow goes. I really like the last group, one that has learned to live with man but not as a domesticated animal. These four groups, all finding different niches to fill in the human landscape.
I would bet that it would not take too long to begin domesticating these dogs again. I mean to take some about of their metrodog environment and begin some breeding trials. Probably much easier than domesticating wild wolves.

[Listening to: Know You've Got to Run from the album "Just Roll Tape" by Stephen Stills]