"For those of us who live outside of Apple's distortion field, we know that 7-inch tablets will actually be a big portion of the market and we know that Adobe Flash support actually matters to customers who want a real web experience,"
We'll see how right he is come 2011. Particularly what happens when the rumors of what ipad 2.0 looks like start up
If by "better" you mean more meaningless long checklists of features, sure.
If by "better" you mean a superior and well integrated user experience, your wrong - other companies fall short. And it's not just me - look at Apple's market cap which is a direct reflection of the agreement with their philosophies.
I submit the reason that people like you are scratching your head is your in the minority, and you are focused on things that matter to a very small minority of people. A minority that is also online and hang out in forums like this and tend to be represented out of proportion with reality since most "normal people" wouldn't be hanging out in forums like this talking about very "inside baseball" subjects like, well, this entire web site's focus.
Long feature lists matter to geeks with yardsticks. For everyone else, how a device works and accomplishes what they want is what matters more. Guess who there are more of - geeks or everyone else?
Actually part for part, Macs are very cost competitive. Most people who have a problem with Apple and price are trying to compare Mac's to cheap PC's with minimal features. Apple doesn't compete in the bargain basement space - there is no reason for them to. Just because they don't offer the equivalent of a $400 netbook doesn't mean the MacBook is overpriced It just means Apple isn't targeting your desires. Oh well - guess you will just have to buy elsewhere...
I bought by my Thinkpad T510 loaded, with discrete NVidia graphics and a 1920x180 95 gamut display for $1200CAD taxes in. Macbook pro cant touch it. There are alot of crappy cheap PC's out there but if your willing to spend a little more you can get some nice hardware.
Quote:
iTunes is very good if you use it like designed - let it manage the files and manage your content via meta data. Most people complaining about iTunes, for whatever reason, want to tend files in folders. Why? This is 2010 - let the computer do mundane file management. If you have relevant information like artist/album/title in folders instead of metadata, there are plenty of utilities out there that will help you correct that and get the information out of the file structure and into the MP3 tags where it belongs.
Once you have the proper meta data, smart folders are very powerful and iTunes works quite well. I have over 40,000 tracks - there is no practical way to manage that manually. iTunes handles it with ease.
Itunes might be great on a Mac but its borderline bloatware on a PC, 200mb download for a media player! How many services need to run in the background Apple!
Quote:
They are masters at "desperately useable" - which is directly reflected in the popularity of their products as well as their market cap.
I dont even want to touch your agrument of Market Capitalization and your elusion of value, Apple skyrockets and all of a sudden everybody works on Wall Street.
Quote:
Ha! The "solution" is to actual create products people want, not just products that have long lists of features. Pretty simple, actually - the problem is you have to be willing to either leave stuff out, or perhaps drop it to increase usability. Hard for most companies to do when there are people like you whining about "desperately average" and other such nonsense. The irony is your complaints are actually perpetuating that which you are complaining about!
"Build products that people want to buy", is a simplistic argument coined, by a consumerism movement in the North America to simply rationalize domestic business failure and wealth transfer. Your better than that, dont be a carrier for someone else's BS.
Success has alot more to it than creating products people want, its also convincing people that they want your product. Which Apple has done very succsessfully, sublimely, while leaving them with the illusion that they are still a consumer who is in control, even though their purchase was irrational.
Microsoft didn't invest in Apple, they settled with them. Gates couldn't have "sat back and watch Apple die in 1997" - far from it since they had $1.2 billion cash on hand.
the article you mentioned very clearly states the $150 million worth in non-voting Apple shares was, in fact, an investment made by Microsoft. also, Apple purchased NeXT because the Copeland project was a bust. Apple lost around $850 million in 1996 and over one (1) billion dollars in 1997 mostly due to the friendly acquisition of NeXT.
so, how did Apple manage to have $1.2 billion in cash after such heavy losses? software sells (despite having around 5% of the home PC market) and Microsoft of course
Cost is a significant driver behind the 7" size adopted by RIM and others. Significant. I can't stress that enough.
Apple is so vertically integrated when it comes to design that they can piece together a device at an extremely competitive cost. Others wouldn't be able to produce a 9.7" tablet and be cost competitive with Apple. Instead, they've chosen to reduce the size of the device so that costs are lower and supplies of the display are more readily available. With a 7" screen RIM and Samsung can compete at a lower price point than Apple is likely willing to do with its 9.7" iPad.
Very true, except that Samsung's 7" tablet will be retailing for $1k.
Your arithmetic and specsmanship don't appeal to average consumers.
and that's the main reason why average consumers buy an iPhone... they don't care about tech specs.. all they care about is the ease of useability of the phone...
Success has alot more to it than creating products people want, its also convincing people that they want your product. Which Apple has done very succsessfully, sublimely, while leaving them with the illusion that they are still a consumer who is in control, even though their purchase was irrational.
Yes, it's all mind-control. And they *keep* making the same irrational purchases for no good reason.
LOL come off it. Apple gear is just plain desirable.
There is currently NOTHING out there in the same league in terms of design and usability. Nothing. Whether we're talking computers or phones or anything else. So save us the dime-store philosophy. The Matrix trilogy ended seven years ago.
Well maybe he is right and maybe he is not, the market will decide once these devices come to the market.
Personally I own an iPhone and an iPad, I don't think I would have bought an iPad if it was 7" as I would not have seen a big enough improvement over my iPhone to justify it.
You obviously don't have my eyesight or my lack of income.
I would love to have an iPad, but because of it's large screen and bezels it will never be a go-everywhere device. I already have internet most places I go and a cell phone for in between so all I need is a 3G enabled information appliance that's small enough to take with me all the time. An iNotePad with a 6" screen would do perfectly.
Apple, however, wouldn't like that. By forcing people to choose portability or usability they've managed to sell you two iDevices. If they also offered a 6" device with many of the UI benefits of the iPad in a truly portable package maybe they'd have only sold you one.
To me the iPad is a living room device and I don't need ultra light weight or long battery life there. My wife and I looked at the iPad for her to use on the couch, but went with a used MacBook instead. It cost less and does far more including playing Flash video from Facebook that iOS devices don't. I personally hate Flash and use blockers on my Mac, but my wife would be mighty upset if she couldn't see the latest video of our kid at daycare.
Didn't think i needed to list them? Anyway, for anyone outside the reality distortion field....
Any SONY MP3 player is far better noise production wise than anything the iPod has ever offered. Heck even the Creative ones are better and the Zune HD is better for noise and picture..
the iPad is a lovely piece of hardware, crippled by useless production software. Browsing the web, watching a movie its Ok but if I want to do something professional, productive and compatible then I pull out a PC laptop which was half the price and will likely last twice the amount of time an Apple laptop will last (in my experience).
OSX is held up as the bastion of OS development..... but Win 7 is clearly better in nearly every way. Heck the new Ubu is better than OSX.
Any phone..as a phone is better than the iPhone, pick any manufacturer you like. iOS UI is so dated and poor now its not funny. Android just wipes the floor with it. You can set Android up so that the number of times you have to press an icon is so small it doesn't matter.
Pressing icon buttons to get to a Wifi network setting is so 2007!!!
lets not forget the TCO of iPhone too, in some places its 3 or 4 times the cost of other 3g phones.
I'm getting the vibe that you don't like Apple. Its pointless arguing about what products are better than others, it's just your opinion. Why not contribute something that adds value to the debate. Or are you trying to fan the Flames?
RIM has always mentioned their future product plans (either hardware or software) months in advance.
RIM got flushed out by the Samsung Galaxy tab release and had to announce its 2011 tablet way early, even for them. they were afraid of getting lost in the Android tablet hype. but now they may find themselves associated with the 7" tablet dud thud instead.
Very true, except that Samsung's 7" tablet will be retailing for $1k.
probably won't cost that much in USA without a contract. we'll see. but you're right, apparently the competition cannot meet the iPad's price for a 10" screen product.
and Jobs did not mention it, but consumers hate these two year contracts, even if the up front payment is much lower. you're trapped, and you wind up paying more in the end. plus they tack on all those chicken-sh*t extra charges. that is another big issue for the coming "avalanche" of tablets, many/most of which will be telco "subsidized" deals. the a la carte AT&T data plan Apple secured for the iPad is one of its strongest competitive advantages.
"Build products that people want to buy", is a simplistic argument coined, by a consumerism movement in the North America to simply rationalize domestic business failure and wealth transfer. Your better than that, dont be a carrier for someone else's BS.
No, I'm saying for the one or two phone calls month I receive, I'd use the speaker.
I find it shocking that there are that many people who want to talk to you every month .... almost as shocking that you are pissed that Apple is not designing a cell phone that "Fits your demographic". I'm guessing that the first words you learned to say were: "I want it, I want it now".
I'm sorry. I love Apple, but Steve's comments were unnecessary. When you're winning you should remain classy.
So let me get this straight, according to you, by inference, if you're "losing", it's OK to sling barbs and arrows at the 'winner" .... but not the reverse. I'll defer to Yogi Berra on that one .... nice guys finish last.
1. RIM will struggle to create a new software platform.
2. Half the size of an iPad is the wrong size for a tablet.
Balsillie responds by saying.
1. 7" *will* become successful.
2. People want Flash.
Hmm...
Does that strike anyone as odd?
On the second point he does not argue the benefits of the 7" form factor. He just says it "will" become successful, as if some clairvoyant has assured him of this. Okay - let's accept that.
But the first point is completely ignored by the RIM CEO.
RIM has presented a vaporware tablet, showing only renders and non-working mock ups. RIM's recent product usability has been poor. RIM claimed that they can create a breakthrough tablet device with an all-new software platform. Jobs questions their ability to deliver on that.
So does Balsillie defend their efforts?
Nope.
This article on RIM is very good and really worth a read.
"There's tremendous turbulence in the ecosystem, of course, in mobility. And that's sort of an obvious thing, but also there is tremendous architectural contention at play. And I'm going to really frame our mobile architectural distinction. We've taken two fundamentally different approaches in their causalness. It's a causal difference, not just nuance. It's not just a causal direction that I'm going to really articulate here -- and feel free to go as deep as you want -- it's really as fundamental as causalness."
Comments
"For those of us who live outside of Apple's distortion field, we know that 7-inch tablets will actually be a big portion of the market and we know that Adobe Flash support actually matters to customers who want a real web experience,"
We'll see how right he is come 2011. Particularly what happens when the rumors of what ipad 2.0 looks like start up
If by "better" you mean more meaningless long checklists of features, sure.
If by "better" you mean a superior and well integrated user experience, your wrong - other companies fall short. And it's not just me - look at Apple's market cap which is a direct reflection of the agreement with their philosophies.
I submit the reason that people like you are scratching your head is your in the minority, and you are focused on things that matter to a very small minority of people. A minority that is also online and hang out in forums like this and tend to be represented out of proportion with reality since most "normal people" wouldn't be hanging out in forums like this talking about very "inside baseball" subjects like, well, this entire web site's focus.
Long feature lists matter to geeks with yardsticks. For everyone else, how a device works and accomplishes what they want is what matters more. Guess who there are more of - geeks or everyone else?
Actually part for part, Macs are very cost competitive. Most people who have a problem with Apple and price are trying to compare Mac's to cheap PC's with minimal features. Apple doesn't compete in the bargain basement space - there is no reason for them to. Just because they don't offer the equivalent of a $400 netbook doesn't mean the MacBook is overpriced
I bought by my Thinkpad T510 loaded, with discrete NVidia graphics and a 1920x180 95 gamut display for $1200CAD taxes in. Macbook pro cant touch it. There are alot of crappy cheap PC's out there but if your willing to spend a little more you can get some nice hardware.
iTunes is very good if you use it like designed - let it manage the files and manage your content via meta data. Most people complaining about iTunes, for whatever reason, want to tend files in folders. Why? This is 2010 - let the computer do mundane file management. If you have relevant information like artist/album/title in folders instead of metadata, there are plenty of utilities out there that will help you correct that and get the information out of the file structure and into the MP3 tags where it belongs.
Once you have the proper meta data, smart folders are very powerful and iTunes works quite well. I have over 40,000 tracks - there is no practical way to manage that manually. iTunes handles it with ease.
Itunes might be great on a Mac but its borderline bloatware on a PC, 200mb download for a media player! How many services need to run in the background Apple!
They are masters at "desperately useable" - which is directly reflected in the popularity of their products as well as their market cap.
I dont even want to touch your agrument of Market Capitalization and your elusion of value, Apple skyrockets and all of a sudden everybody works on Wall Street.
Ha! The "solution" is to actual create products people want, not just products that have long lists of features. Pretty simple, actually - the problem is you have to be willing to either leave stuff out, or perhaps drop it to increase usability. Hard for most companies to do when there are people like you whining about "desperately average" and other such nonsense. The irony is your complaints are actually perpetuating that which you are complaining about!
"Build products that people want to buy", is a simplistic argument coined, by a consumerism movement in the North America to simply rationalize domestic business failure and wealth transfer. Your better than that, dont be a carrier for someone else's BS.
Success has alot more to it than creating products people want, its also convincing people that they want your product. Which Apple has done very succsessfully, sublimely, while leaving them with the illusion that they are still a consumer who is in control, even though their purchase was irrational.
Microsoft didn't invest in Apple, they settled with them. Gates couldn't have "sat back and watch Apple die in 1997" - far from it since they had $1.2 billion cash on hand.
the article you mentioned very clearly states the $150 million worth in non-voting Apple shares was, in fact, an investment made by Microsoft. also, Apple purchased NeXT because the Copeland project was a bust. Apple lost around $850 million in 1996 and over one (1) billion dollars in 1997 mostly due to the friendly acquisition of NeXT.
so, how did Apple manage to have $1.2 billion in cash after such heavy losses? software sells (despite having around 5% of the home PC market) and Microsoft of course
Cost is a significant driver behind the 7" size adopted by RIM and others. Significant. I can't stress that enough.
Apple is so vertically integrated when it comes to design that they can piece together a device at an extremely competitive cost. Others wouldn't be able to produce a 9.7" tablet and be cost competitive with Apple. Instead, they've chosen to reduce the size of the device so that costs are lower and supplies of the display are more readily available. With a 7" screen RIM and Samsung can compete at a lower price point than Apple is likely willing to do with its 9.7" iPad.
Very true, except that Samsung's 7" tablet will be retailing for $1k.
but it's not too premature to hype it up and refer to it as an actual competitor when it doesn't even exist?
RIM has always mentioned their future product plans (either hardware or software) months in advance.
Your arithmetic and specsmanship don't appeal to average consumers.
and that's the main reason why average consumers buy an iPhone... they don't care about tech specs.. all they care about is the ease of useability of the phone...
Success has alot more to it than creating products people want, its also convincing people that they want your product. Which Apple has done very succsessfully, sublimely, while leaving them with the illusion that they are still a consumer who is in control, even though their purchase was irrational.
Yes, it's all mind-control. And they *keep* making the same irrational purchases for no good reason.
LOL come off it. Apple gear is just plain desirable.
There is currently NOTHING out there in the same league in terms of design and usability. Nothing. Whether we're talking computers or phones or anything else. So save us the dime-store philosophy. The Matrix trilogy ended seven years ago.
Well maybe he is right and maybe he is not, the market will decide once these devices come to the market.
Personally I own an iPhone and an iPad, I don't think I would have bought an iPad if it was 7" as I would not have seen a big enough improvement over my iPhone to justify it.
You obviously don't have my eyesight or my lack of income.
I would love to have an iPad, but because of it's large screen and bezels it will never be a go-everywhere device. I already have internet most places I go and a cell phone for in between so all I need is a 3G enabled information appliance that's small enough to take with me all the time. An iNotePad with a 6" screen would do perfectly.
Apple, however, wouldn't like that. By forcing people to choose portability or usability they've managed to sell you two iDevices. If they also offered a 6" device with many of the UI benefits of the iPad in a truly portable package maybe they'd have only sold you one.
To me the iPad is a living room device and I don't need ultra light weight or long battery life there. My wife and I looked at the iPad for her to use on the couch, but went with a used MacBook instead. It cost less and does far more including playing Flash video from Facebook that iOS devices don't. I personally hate Flash and use blockers on my Mac, but my wife would be mighty upset if she couldn't see the latest video of our kid at daycare.
Didn't think i needed to list them? Anyway, for anyone outside the reality distortion field....
Any SONY MP3 player is far better noise production wise than anything the iPod has ever offered. Heck even the Creative ones are better and the Zune HD is better for noise and picture..
the iPad is a lovely piece of hardware, crippled by useless production software. Browsing the web, watching a movie its Ok but if I want to do something professional, productive and compatible then I pull out a PC laptop which was half the price and will likely last twice the amount of time an Apple laptop will last (in my experience).
OSX is held up as the bastion of OS development..... but Win 7 is clearly better in nearly every way. Heck the new Ubu is better than OSX.
Any phone..as a phone is better than the iPhone, pick any manufacturer you like. iOS UI is so dated and poor now its not funny. Android just wipes the floor with it. You can set Android up so that the number of times you have to press an icon is so small it doesn't matter.
Pressing icon buttons to get to a Wifi network setting is so 2007!!!
lets not forget the TCO of iPhone too, in some places its 3 or 4 times the cost of other 3g phones.
Vertical integration always fails.....always will.
Enjoy the good times, they won't last forever
I'm getting the vibe that you don't like Apple. Its pointless arguing about what products are better than others, it's just your opinion. Why not contribute something that adds value to the debate. Or are you trying to fan the Flames?
There are alot of crappy cheap PC's out there but if your willing to spend a little more you can get some nice hardware.
Yes it's called a Mac.
RIM has always mentioned their future product plans (either hardware or software) months in advance.
RIM got flushed out by the Samsung Galaxy tab release and had to announce its 2011 tablet way early, even for them. they were afraid of getting lost in the Android tablet hype. but now they may find themselves associated with the 7" tablet dud thud instead.
Very true, except that Samsung's 7" tablet will be retailing for $1k.
probably won't cost that much in USA without a contract. we'll see. but you're right, apparently the competition cannot meet the iPad's price for a 10" screen product.
and Jobs did not mention it, but consumers hate these two year contracts, even if the up front payment is much lower. you're trapped, and you wind up paying more in the end. plus they tack on all those chicken-sh*t extra charges. that is another big issue for the coming "avalanche" of tablets, many/most of which will be telco "subsidized" deals. the a la carte AT&T data plan Apple secured for the iPad is one of its strongest competitive advantages.
...
"Build products that people want to buy", is a simplistic argument coined, by a consumerism movement in the North America to simply rationalize domestic business failure and wealth transfer. Your better than that, dont be a carrier for someone else's BS.
...
Right on! - Komrade!
Damn those bourgeois consumers!
Heck the new Ubu is better than OSX.
Joke of the week.
I think you got lost somewhere on the way here:
www.neowin.net
Yes it's called a Mac.
he he
Nice one Mr U
Is that why apple's market share is so low? Why not fix that?
Low? Comparing manufacturers it's pretty high!
No, I'm saying for the one or two phone calls month I receive, I'd use the speaker.
I find it shocking that there are that many people who want to talk to you every month .... almost as shocking that you are pissed that Apple is not designing a cell phone that "Fits your demographic". I'm guessing that the first words you learned to say were: "I want it, I want it now".
I'm sorry. I love Apple, but Steve's comments were unnecessary. When you're winning you should remain classy.
So let me get this straight, according to you, by inference, if you're "losing", it's OK to sling barbs and arrows at the 'winner" .... but not the reverse. I'll defer to Yogi Berra on that one .... nice guys finish last.
Jobs says:
1. RIM will struggle to create a new software platform.
2. Half the size of an iPad is the wrong size for a tablet.
Balsillie responds by saying.
1. 7" *will* become successful.
2. People want Flash.
Hmm...
Does that strike anyone as odd?
On the second point he does not argue the benefits of the 7" form factor. He just says it "will" become successful, as if some clairvoyant has assured him of this. Okay - let's accept that.
But the first point is completely ignored by the RIM CEO.
RIM has presented a vaporware tablet, showing only renders and non-working mock ups. RIM's recent product usability has been poor. RIM claimed that they can create a breakthrough tablet device with an all-new software platform. Jobs questions their ability to deliver on that.
So does Balsillie defend their efforts?
Nope.
This article on RIM is very good and really worth a read.
http://mobileopportunity.blogspot.co...berry-and.html
It includes this awesome quote from Balsillie.
"There's tremendous turbulence in the ecosystem, of course, in mobility. And that's sort of an obvious thing, but also there is tremendous architectural contention at play. And I'm going to really frame our mobile architectural distinction. We've taken two fundamentally different approaches in their causalness. It's a causal difference, not just nuance. It's not just a causal direction that I'm going to really articulate here -- and feel free to go as deep as you want -- it's really as fundamental as causalness."
Hmmm....
C.