Goldacre's book is a great read-All the Bi-polar folks I know that I can still stand, self-medicate. They get harder to stand the more they ascribe or succumb to the ramblings of their not-so-affected piers-friends and family usually.
Enochs' on to something, Know Thyself.

right on IATB.
i think maybe we are talking about two seperate,yet similar,issues.
i am addressing the willy nilly diagnosis of the majority of people who have been diagnosed and then subjected to mind altering chemicals which have been proven to not be very effective.
how can you speak to someone for an hour and decide they are bi-polar and then put them on an anti-psychotic?
thats crazy.
it seems you are addressing the very REAL and tragic mental disorders in which medication may be a persons only real hope for a somewhat normal existence.
and in that regard i totally agree with you.
now you may disregard alternative methods in treating someone diagnosed with bi-polar and that is ok and your right but i feel it is not something to be dismissed so lightly.
please understand i am not dismissing the science,that would be foolish of me.i am not a luddite.i just feel treatment and healing will not come solely from chemicals.
i have anecdotal evidence but thats not exactly proof of anything except for my own experience.

in my opinion other avenues should always be pursued before we zombify people.there is a growing amount of data concerning the healing power of affection and love concerning us humans which is not surprising to me.
so while this man has taken a spiritual lilt to his approach,i would just call it being human.

this is a societal issue.on how our culture has become so materialistic as to strip us of our humanity.a constant barrage of "you are not good enough,smart enough,sexy enough but you WILL be if you buy this or that useless piece of crap".
mass marketers=satans little helpers.
is it any wonder that our society is lonely,depressed,anxiety ridden?
it really should not come as too much of a shock to those paying attention and is an entirely different conversation.

thanks for the recommendation on the books!
very awesome of you to offer to pay for them as well! appreciated but no need.the bad science one does look interesting and i will check it out (no chemistry in there right? cuz i suuuuck at chemistry).

p.s:dont feel bad trashing this dudes videos.berticus has to hold his down from exploding when i post one of this guys vids.

if you already discount the spirit as being non-existent and have never experienced the mental health system then this video will really not hold anything of interest for you.

i find this young mans approach to dealing with mental illness a very humanistic one and while you may feel the numbers may be fudged to make his point...big deal.are you denying the RAMPANT diagnosis in the industrialized world concerning bi-polar?panic-anxiety? this list is becoming LEGION..everyone seems to be all fucked sideways mentally.
and the answer to all this mental health calamity is?........
medicate baby!!
create a society of utter zombies.

and who doesn't take favorable numbers or statistics to make their argument?
or base a philosophy partially on the words and teachings of another?
ken wilbur practically stole from teilhard de chardin and so what of it...not a big deal.

bi-polar is just failed indoctrination manifesting itself as a polarized polemic of what we have been taught how we are SUPPOSED to be and NOT who we actually are.
there are many ways to deal with this.
some self-medicate,others are medicated and then there are those that choose the path this man chose.

i do not agree with everything this young man put forth but i do agree with the humanistic approach:
know what you want.
to do that you have to know who you are and to do THAT you have to have the courage to look at yourself clearly,openly and honestly (much harder than it sounds).
this is when you realize that maybe...just maybe..you were living your life not according to what YOU wanted but rather what OTHERS wanted for you (mom,dad,grandma,girlfriend..you get the idea).
does this solve everything?
of course not but it is a good place to start and notice not one mention of spirit nor any new age jargon.

now self-medication and prescribed medication to me are just band aids without addressing the real problem and BOTH have long lasting side effects that are not of the positive kind.
i dont need to list those do i?

see what im saying here?
i see you tearing apart somebody elses work but did not see you post any solutions.
i mean look at this one line in your post:
"At the beginning, he posses the question, why can't mainstream psychology and psychiatry heal bi-polar disorder. The answer is because we don't understand exactly what it is, just that it tends to happen."
you wrote that and it didnt give you pause for a second?
they over-diagnose something that they dont know what it really is.
how the fuck can you ever be expected to heal something you dont really know anything about but the REAL question is:why the fuck are you even diagnosing people with something you dont really know anything about?

am i the only one seeing insanity all over that?
thats just fucking crazy.

Ugh, he doesn't understand evolution at all... He keeps saying things like "During a certain part of evolution...", it's pathetic how newage-y non-sense likes to attach scientific sounding terms in attempt to legitimize their ideas.

At the beginning, he posses the question, why can't mainstream psychology and psychiatry heal bi-polar disorder. The answer is because we don't understand exactly what it is, just that it tends to happen.

Plus, I can almost guarantee that the 'statistic' that bi-polar disorder had gone up 4000% percent in 10 years two decades ago is a exercise in both failing to correct for clustering and misrepresenting the data. Read one book on how statistics can be easily manipulated to support your bias and a number like 4000% immediately becomes highly suspect thus making the assumption behind his belief also suspect.

Spiral dynamics is little more than a rehashed "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs" which has been found to be useless as a way of measuring people.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video is Bi-polar really a spiritual awakening?. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

--> @kceaton1
--> @peggedbea

The only reason I upvote these is that I think it's good for discourse. It's more useful for the lurkers on this site than really the involved members. I knew I would be bringing up a very neutral standpoint as I am on the fence; especially, recently as more biological evidence has direct implications on who you may be later in life. That is VERY important to remember for everyone reading. You have to remember that your brain collects and stores information and then processes it through "filters" before it is distilled into what you would say. Biologically you may be far more likely to be an atheist than a believer (the study makes no distinction religion wise; so they are talking about Islam, Christianity, Norse, Greek, Roman, Buddhist, Hinduism, etc...).

We need a table that we can (we, as in, the religious versus non-theist) talk at. More importantly logical minds and compassion MUST prevail for society to remain intact. If Richard Dawkins (maybe I'm thinking of Hitchens) really can't talk with creationists then he is as much a problem as the creationists themselves (of course one of these parties ARE correct, but the lack of civility is extremely annoying--from both sides).

If you want others to learn sometimes you need to act just like Mormon, Catholic, Evangelical, missionaries. You must expect the vitriol and swearing that usually comes out as highly defensive "maneuvering" or hate; the same that the missionaries get day in and day out. Sorry, "my brethren", but answering the door to purposefully create an unnecessary rude or hateful situation comes off as hate/bigotry speech or dismissive attitudes which is just as bad. This is morally corrupt behavior in my eyes. I suggest answering the door and being able to identify to them issues you have strongly opposed views of and why compared to what they do and about what they say. You have to hope, in this day of the Internet, that people will take ONE aspect of what you said and learn more about it.

I had Mormon seminary teachers that taught creationism, but creationism is extremely limited in acceptance within the Mormon church. For crying out loud BYU (Mormon based university for those that don't know; just south of Salt Lake City) accepts evolution WITHOUT ANY hesitation. They are very active in the sciences as well which is why they do believe; furthermore they are huge researchers when it comes to genealogy which eventually loops into evolution. In many situations the Bible is a work of allegory and followers that take it literal are the uneducated Mormons; even unto their own religion.

So when I have these seminary teachers it truly makes me wonder how they got to their position as they seem to follow their own set of tenets which ends up creating Mormons like Glenn Beck who literally don't stand for church beliefs as I knew them (and again why hasn't he been excommunicated--this actually bothers me a lot as he only hurts the churches standing; which is poor to begin with and is nothing like the Mormons I know). Science was always taught to be incredibly important; if not the most important as it was a way to "uncover even more of Gods truths"; plus it is the applicable "science". That is that it gives us our modern day of living and quality of life (like airplanes, microwaves, TV, energy, etc...). I may not believe in any religion now. But, I appreciate that sentiment; as I think it's a very healthy objectivity to have if in a religion: adaptability.

/ I have to agree somewhat with @gwiz665 as religion (like all things) from an atheists vantage point looks a lot like fear manipulation. I love the Golden Rule as it truly does incorporate perhaps the easiest summary of what it is to be good. But, I know religious people use this to their own ends, including what we see in Libya or on Fox News. To them, people and their beliefs are a joke and they abuse it. It often makes me wonder if these CEOs are truly religious (the ones that say they are) or just using it as a gateway--who knows. Which goes back to my first point. It's entirely possible that we as a species have a tendency to vote "sociopathic" or likewise people into office as they themselves, much like drug seeking personalities (like bi-polar) seek out these positions. The abuse of these positions are partially hard wired into their makeup. All this means is that we must be more diligent. We've come too far as atheists and the religious to let this civilization slip away out of our hands.

//If this is tl;dr, to you, go watch a monkey flinging poop on youtube.

No problem. My Mom is very religious and my Dad has Asperger's so I tend to be a great diplomat. But, these type of scientific insights into psychology are awesome when they come out. Especially, in my case where I can see that it hit's the nail dead on.

I think we underestimate our physical imposed mental limitations too much. Everything we've learned about modern psychology tells us that our psychology is in a "ready" state when we're born; to the extent that you could say one person uses "ATI" to see and the other "Nvidia" if you know what I mean.

In reply to this comment by SDGundamX:
Sweet, thanks for the info.

In reply to this comment by kceaton1:
>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^westy:
I think what this video inadvertantly highlights is that Education is directly tied with atheism the more intellectual/educated sum-one is the harder it is for them to believe in bullshit and the more likely it is they will do things based on facts of reality to improve reality.

You should check out this study, which basically shows that isn't the case. The high proportion of atheist scientists compared to the general population seems to be a function of upbringing (i.e. they were raised in homes that didn't place much importance on religion). The increased education seems to have little effect on those who enter the field with religious convictions. In other words, those raised in non-religious households seem to self-select disproportionately highly into the sciences. The study states that more investigation is required before coming to any conclusions as to why, but they didn't see any indication of people giving up their religious beliefs as they advanced in their education or career.


One interesting aspect coming out in psychological studies versus genetic backgrounds shows one interesting aspect of people that have Asperger's being unable to relate to religion and are constantly looking for a more rational explanation for any event. Likewise, some people may show an inclination to be religious via their genetics.

Most likely this is due to a preference in the way the brain decides to use information. Such as: the right hemisphere versus the left; or even to the extent of specific areas on one side--like math over chemistry.

This is VERY new information. Their was another study out on Friday I believe (look for it at physorg.com) that showed that people that were religious tended to be more healthy both mentally and physically. However, the study (from what I could find) doesn't really say whether they took the disparity of between population numbers into account. Also they never took into account situations like autistic savants, Asperger's, bi-polar, and other conditions that tend to "create" extremely smart people (I'm guessing this might happen as they tend to favor the left hemisphere and also have a very different perspective than a normal healthy average human--giving them "fresh eyes" and a new perception intrinsically), comparatively.

>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^westy:
I think what this video inadvertantly highlights is that Education is directly tied with atheism the more intellectual/educated sum-one is the harder it is for them to believe in bullshit and the more likely it is they will do things based on facts of reality to improve reality.

You should check out this study, which basically shows that isn't the case. The high proportion of atheist scientists compared to the general population seems to be a function of upbringing (i.e. they were raised in homes that didn't place much importance on religion). The increased education seems to have little effect on those who enter the field with religious convictions. In other words, those raised in non-religious households seem to self-select disproportionately highly into the sciences. The study states that more investigation is required before coming to any conclusions as to why, but they didn't see any indication of people giving up their religious beliefs as they advanced in their education or career.


One interesting aspect coming out in psychological studies versus genetic backgrounds shows one interesting aspect of people that have Asperger's being unable to relate to religion and are constantly looking for a more rational explanation for any event. Likewise, some people may show an inclination to be religious via their genetics.

Most likely this is due to a preference in the way the brain decides to use information. Such as: the right hemisphere versus the left; or even to the extent of specific areas on one side--like math over chemistry.

This is VERY new information. Their was another study out on Friday I believe (look for it at physorg.com) that showed that people that were religious tended to be more healthy both mentally and physically. However, the study (from what I could find) doesn't really say whether they took the disparity between population numbers into account. Also they never took into account situations like autistic savants, Asperger's, bi-polar, and other conditions that tend to "create" extremely smart people, comparatively(I'm guessing this might happen as they tend to favor the left hemisphere and also have a very different perspectives than your normal healthy average human--giving them "fresh eyes" and a new perception intrinsically).

This video is definitely made to provoke. I don't necessarily like how it does it and I'm atheist. While I disagree with religion in any capacity where it wants to use faith/belief to solve a situation instead of the logical tried and true method, that is where I draw a line in the sand (like Creationism; it's useless to us in every aspect: it explains nothing, is useless in practice, and assumes everything). Religion doesn't necessarily bother me when it's used in a social setting. The only time this isn't true is when it crosses the "religion/state" barrier and rights of others; as is the case for many gay people. I know a lot of religious people that sit on a logical side of the fence and many that sit on the other side and try to (in my estimation) usurp the rights of others for poor reasons and in fact religious ones (state vs. religion again).

Lot's of the religious people (I'm in Utah so I know my situation is semi-unique) I know that refute many logical tenets, like evolution, tend to do so in a way that shows they are INCREDIBLY insecure when it comes to "smarts". I've had some people tell me they belong to MENSA and in the same sentence tell me evolution is fraud and it should be obvious as to why this is true (they usually have no "logical" reason to explain why this is true other than faith; I have yet to hear a good reason...). This may also be an indication that even in religion there is a disparity between other religious people and that it may even be a psychological/physical condition that causes it via genetics.

It would be a new world if you could wager whether someone is religious or not, before they are even born. To me that is a game changer, but to others I know they will not see why that is true.

/edit

As an example Einstein is thought to have had bi-polar along with many other great physicists. Others were autistic or had something like Aspergers.

I think the key is that these individuals are able to look at society or normal rationalizations from a different aspect or with "rose-tinted glasses" and other "colors". It helps to look at a problem from a new perspective. This is also why many people DO use drugs, to force this perceptual change on the brain chemically. It's not an accident that it works in many cases. It's also not an accident that it fails as well.

For every breakthrough there is someone that is lost to their own delusions; forever trapped in a mind that can't understand reality. This is arguably the one thing humans have never gotten right: seeing reality as it is. Or, we refuse to see it, due to our biologically imposed psychology.

This is the most fascinating and the most unique aspect for humanity and humans: we not only can vary GREATLY on how we view reality, but we can describe it to each other with understanding and in great detail.

This is where Psychology as a field must tread lightly. For if we destroy every last shred of what we "think" is an error or a mistake due to our majority imposed societal and cultural norms, we may destroy one of our greatest attributes. Luckily, many have realized that even the most "normal" of us are delusional by default. As this is the only way we have to perceive what we know as reality.

We see reality through a lens and a filter; all of us. That lens can be warped, colored, broken, or very sharp. Likewise, our filter can do what it pleases and give us information with accuracy or lie to us with false or even made up information. It typically follows what evolution has designed for us: to be efficient, to be successful. We are a machine that uses a vast search engine that makes Google look like an elementary addition problem and memory that is amazingly powerful and yet it requires very little room to store it's information; and with both of these, together, our mind creates us. It brings our nodes, memories, and present perception together to give us sentience. We perceive a continuity to this existence that does not exist; yet, it's easy to see why you don't notice this, for what can you notice if you have no memory of it? That is our view, our window--it is a delusional one by definition as it does not SHOW reality, but only approximates it and it can vary greatly.

However, evolution while responsible for what we are, most likely did not have a design in play for true sentience. In that one miscalculation, humanity was born.

That and this is who we are.

Another reason why I think he has schizophrenia rather than bi-polar: he has his kids with the porn stars and him. Even when they party! (Although, I must admit it could be bi-polar as mania can get REALLY bad accompanied by psychotic/hallucinatory type situations and grandeur; and this happened after a binge...)

The porn stars have even said publicly that the children don't belong there. Charlie sounds like he's having some disconnects with reality. Most likely due to drugs (which is why bi-polar is popular, because of it's typical "self-medicating" issues, but this isn't self-medication as that entails that there is a lacking in mood, and Charlie never seems depressed. Plus during the interview he said he was clean for quite sometime; he didn't sound like it.

This all sounds like schizophrenia (if it is bi-polar, I'm guessing it's more drug related than anything else, due to his own words): ranging from psychotic, to normal, to semi-delusional or completely delusional; the drugs would increase the effect and also create more issues if the use is heavy. I personally think he's created this psychotic, semi-delusional state most likely from the "hardcore" drugs (his seven rocks, and self created non-terrestrial based logic). That stuff is like a Vulcan mind meld with a potato if you use it non-stop; it'll force your mind to neurologically connect itself in all sorts of ways it shouldn't. That's assuming there isn't some damage in there (like plaques, causing shifts in personality; that's a determination only the closest to him, or himself, can make).

I like how he sues Warner Brothers for firing him. The other actors on the show should counter-sue him.

Having lived with people who have bi-polar in the past, it's clearly obvious what is going on here. Charlie Sheen is having a full blown manic episode. I am really shocked that no one out there is advising him right on this. Anyone who has seen this before knows what exactly it is. He is living in a world made of delusion and everything he is thinking and saying is related to whatever fantasy world his brain has contrived and stuck him in. This is why he is thinking he is superhuman and beyond everyone else. The world he is seeing and perceiving has very little to do with our reality as we know it. Someone better get him on some meds, because this just keeps getting worse and worse until treated. He is going to crash HARD when he comes down off his high (high as in bi-polar high). When you have this, you go up, into the stratosphere..and what goes up must come down..when he falls back down to Earth it is going to be ugly.

Is he just surrounded by syncophants or what? If he dies from this the people around him will be the ones to blame. Charlie sheen is not with us mentally and needs someone to intervene ASAP.

Charlie, isn't Bi-Polar - But I believe he is Mono-Polar.

I lived with and endured a mono-polar personality in my step-father for 30 years.
The attitudes and words he's using are identical to what I've experienced.

The examples I've experienced with the high-side of a bi-polar or mono-polar personality are that they exhibit a god-like transformation in personality.

Their brain starts firing at such a high rate that they can solve every dilemma man has ever dreamed up. They are smart beyond belief. It's like their brain is running at ten times the speed of a normal brain where no one anywhere could possibly see as clear as they do, no one could possibly be as smart as them and see anything on their level.
The only problem is, when they are firing that fast, they can't stay on one topic for more than a minute before they are off and onto something else. Nothing they solve or think of is clear to anyone else because they cant stop and communicate it properly or even record it. It's just too fast for their brains. Most of the time, they can't even remember what is passing through their head.

In this state, you can't tell them that what is going on here is wrong. My step father had prescriptions for his condition but if he skipped it - and he often did - you couldn't explain to him that the drug was helping him. He'd fire back that the doctors didn't know what they were talking about and that he was just fine. He could go for days or weeks at a time just flying around.

Drugs and alcohol are known triggers - even just a couple beers are enough to set it off - which then leads to an over-indulgence. It wasn't the alcohol that was the problem- though he was clearly drunk at times - it was the condition that blinded him to any sort of reason.

I could go on for ever with stories and descriptions - but from what I've seen, Charlie's condition looks identical with what I've experienced for the last 25-30 years. IDENTICAL! Right down to the speech patterns and arguments. Everything he's been saying, I've already herd so many times, I've lost count.

I hope his family is able to step in and help him onto a program that will lead him toward better mental-health. This is a very hard disease to live with - both for the individuals and the family that needs to interact with them.

Batshiat! There is a reason that word exists.

It sounds to me that he has literally caused a type of psychosis. The drugs have facilitated the change via memory and neuron construction. This doesn't sound like bi-polar (all though it seems like it's cyclical, I think it's the drugs--since he views them as a joke with no negatives), this sounds like a drug induced semi-delusion, schizophrenia, or literally a psychotic break.

This is what happens to you when you take too much--your brain finds a way to sustain itself in every fashion. The drugs were in the way so it cut around the useless area and reconnected. Simple stuff.

It made Charlie believe he's more than mortal, "in touch" with something "else", rampant rambling that's almost incoherent. This is ALL textbook; hell you don't need to be a doctor (one second he asks her if she's a doctor as though that brings qualification; the next he thinks the doctors have got it all wrong; rambling, psychotic...). Charlie needs to take a Human Anatomy 101, Psychology 101, and then either a Psychology +102, Neuroscience 101+, and then a Philosophy 101.

He might find out that his experience is: A-Not unique or special. B-VERY common to people to OD or take heavy doses of psychoactive drugs (or really any neurotransmitter/neurochemical based drug such as Xanax, Phenegran, or the common choice of an Opioid) C-Surprisingly he'll most likely end up like a statistic. Especially, because he thinks he's doing the right thing (psychosis).

I highly doubt Charlie will stop himself, it's up to the people around him that are close enough to affect a change (good luck with that; I know how hard that is to pull off).

Charlie Sheen is only human.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

Not to defend the judge or the "war on drugs" at all but, if the kid killed himself over going to JH, he had bigger issues. It's sad that he didn't get help but that part isn't the fault of the judge.


At some point it isn't, however......over punishing petty crimes even if he didn't take bribes for it is bad. Add in taking money for it, makes it worse. He had incentive to send people who were obviously not meant to be there away for crazy amounts of time given the "crimes" (which are highly debatable and subjective). It's not just the judges responsibility or for that matter a jury's responsibility to send people away for as much time as possible, but also to make sure the person is mentally capable of understanding that they committed a "crime" and that the punishment given them will correct the problem. If you got a guy who has no record, has a trivial offense for a multi-offender..but one that for a first time offender is so minor as to be laughable. The scare of being in front of the judge would often times correct the issue, but if not, they hand out probationary periods and mandatory drug tests to show them how inconvenient their life can become if they keep up with the drug path.

He chose, for money, to skip all other avenues at his disposal on a first time offender with a very very very very very very minor non-violent offense and sentence him with time in juvenile detention. I mean that alone could very well ruin your chances at anything since anyone who knows you spent time in juvenile detention is gonna wonder how fucked up you are...since historically this is a place they put the too young to be tried as adult whack jobs....or the kids who never seem to attempt to turn it around and keep stealing cars or mugging people.

And to think that if he had probated the kid, there would have been a chance to find out the kid had mental issues? Maybe he was bipolar or schizo. Many doctors find that bi-polar sufferers tend to self-medicate via drinking or drugs. The kid wasn't given a chance to be diagnosed, he was stuck straight into the worst possible place someone with a fragile mental state should be stuck...no "alternative" was offered him...it wasn't a choice anyone but the judge could have made. And he made that choice for dollars in his pocket, condemned a kid with a potentially fragile mental state to a living hell for someone that age...who came out broken. Because why bother? He was shown that a judge will not show leniency he will put you away for as long as possible, whether it's the best option or not. I mean seriously, that is a system that promotes you "die by cop" every time you break the law..otherwise you might spend life in prison putting cash in some judges pocket.

It is most definitely the fault of the judge, and it's even more so if the judge didn't have him mentally evaluated or the government didn't try to help the kid out when he got out. That is all on the judge, he exacerbated this kid's problems by an immeasurable amount.

>> ^Yogi:

It's amazing how perceptive, funny, and intelligent Brian Williams can be...and yet still I couldn't watch his program without stabbing forks in my eyes. How can you be this way and not see that your own network...your own show is soo full of shit?


I think he's like this because of the people that surround him; how could you not be. I would also try to make many a joke that they don't understand unless they look up a turn of phrase--on their iPad (a glorified non-cellphone/unless you really need/want to spend that much money on one-"buggy and slow"-device).

Yes, I've used my Dad's. It certainly has some nifty features (which have all been invented or used already), but since it's Apple and it has the name i"x", it must be a game changing, revolutionary, cutting edge, never crashes, solves: world hunger, bi-polar, cancer, Fox News, heralds baby Jesus's return to Earth in North Western Missouri; and it has a shelf/I'm mean battery life of 30.62 days--or so I've heard.

It was semi-slow (that wasn't very surprising); slow in two departments: switching and starting between and new apps or processes. Second, the Wi-Fi connection was flaky (either not downloading or when downloading, even including the occasional burst speeds, it averaged 22 KBps (as I say below it should at least be going 100-200 KBps [this is still incredibly slow], as his connection has a download rate of 1.2-1.5 MBps). I'll play with that a bit more (as I think it may have been the wireless router as he has a 14-Megabit connection).

The games were fun and a few of the apps were great. But, I'd rather have a lightweight fully functional notebook PC with a 16:9 screen, atleast 720p, and a fully customizable network adapter. ...And to be blunt, I'd much rather have Windows 7 or even Vista (fully patched), as both have great functionality and support plus their 64-Bit support is great. Plus I can put in a full Blu-Ray drive that comes with PowerDVD.

Better applications, better games and support. Yes, this is an anti-apple rant as I think all of their once "highly revered" features: functionality, non-crashing, no hacking (hah!), graphical editing applications (which is a "contract" feature), sound editing applications (same as the last), and it's "ease-of-use" (which is now a completely moot point). Apple is still successful, because they find niche products that do well; like the Nintendo DS. The iPod (although the screens break a bit to early, my only complaint) and the iPhone are great products and fill a gap in a niche market. The iPad does the same thing, but from what I've tried it needed another year (plus some spec changes like a 16:9 screen going up to 720p (which is HD not this stupid licensing agreement so they can use the logo on a nice, but NOT HD screen (I think it's XGA or 1024x768), a connection port that could handle a multitude of devices: usb, 1394, ethernet, gamepads, speakers, etc I know it does some of this already, especially in the bluetooth department.

But, I feel that it should have come with the large flash/ssd drive, cell phone features (which they do have, it just costs an arm and a leg), more functionality for the "touch pen" (some mouse-like buttons etc...), FLASH & FULL browser SUPPORT (not having flash, plus other regular features "kills it" in a lot of ways)--Apple has to have their money/way though; I don't think they've got any clue when they shoot themselves in the foot), and a slightly faster (or duo-core) processor to help the experience feel more smooth; they have a: "1GHz Apple A4 custom-designed chip" were as a Intel Atom that has an nVidia extension may have been a better choice (I'm not to sure about battery usage for these guys, but from the devices it was used in it wasn't too bad).

So in the end (damn this was WAY longer than expected) I think they should have refined it for another year. Got some REAL user feedback; give it to people that don't work for the ass-kissing mainstream Apple press-core (yes, I'm talking about the likes of Engadget). Then, actually work on their gripes! People already seem willing to pay an arm and a leg for their stuff, so if the price goes up one-hundred, don't worry all your loyal'ii will still buy it. Anyway...this didn't happen, so I was left feeling underwhelmed by it and would instead by a nice laptop.

BTW, Brian Williams is the shit!

/This post may seem anti=Apple and in a lot of ways it is, but I would like them to make a good tablet (or awesome tablet--if they'd pull their collective heads out of their asses). It seems to me that any company, right now, that takes some time and makes a fast, reliable, easy-to-use, with 720p (and lots of video/codecs support)...will destroy Apple's iPad longterm (right now I just see Android tablets, but the ones I've seen are underwhelming).

//If someone has seen a good tablet coming out that has some of the features that I'm talking about, please throw in a reply.