Acer unveils Windows, Android tablets to compete with Apple's iPad

1234568

Comments

  • pmcdpmcd Posts: 377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by crift2012 View Post


    And you think ACER, really, ACER the bargain bin PC maker is even going to even be able to product a quality product worth even a quarter of apple's build? they make plastic boxes. No wonder there is no video of this devices, they are too sad to show live.



    I have an iPad and all kinds of Mac's. I also have an Acer H340 WHS which is great. Very nice little server. As far as a win7 tablet, I would certainly welcome that. The iPad is great but it does not really handle a stylus very well. Mind you, Penultimate is getting there. Windows Journal is a very good, simple tool for writing out mathematics and pdf Annotator is another very useful tablet program. There are pdf annotation apps on the iPad. Some are quite good, but the iPad just can't deal with writing very well. I think many of you don't realize that you can't type certain subjects on the fly and you certainly can't touch your way through them. I guess the issue would be if the Acer's capacitive screen would be up to handling taking notes as well as Wacom active screens. I somehow doubt it. You'd have to have a way to turn off the touch capabilities.



    While the current Tablet PC's have not been a great success they make it possible for many scientific types to write on electronic devices. Windows 7 is excellent for that. I am not talking about recognition software, I have no idea why many of you are opposed to handwriting. Don't they teach that in schools anymore?



    I don't think the iPad need worry that much, but I do hope that stylus based tablets become more popular.



    philip
  • goochergoocher Posts: 92member
    The iPad is dead. Long live the iPad!



    Or maybe it goes more like this: Bold predictions from an also-ran (Acer).
  • quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,546member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    I have no agenda, I just post comments on an Apple tech site every once in a while. You only call me a troll because my opinion stands out here and there, but most of the time don't say anything that goes against the grain around here.



    It's not surprising to read your comment at a site like this, it's expected being that this is a site devoted to Apple, and in turn attracts die hard fans like yourself. It's completely naive, however, and ironic when you tell me I'm clueless.



    Arguing against Apple's current strategy is a pretty dumb thing to do at present. Doing so on an Apple-centric site doesn't make you bold or avant-garde, just colossally ill-informed. It's even worse if you're playing the contrarian just for kicks.
  • dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 11,220member
    .



    OK!



    Good News and Pretty Good news.



    1) Set as Airport Express B/G as a standalone WiFi router -- not connected to Internet



    2) Turned off all routers except AirPort Express above



    3) Set AppleTV to Access Airport Express WiFi network



    4) Set iPad to use Airport Express WiFi network



    5) Ran AirPlay successfully from iPad to AppleTV -- Videos and Photos



    6) Unplugged AppleTV and Airport Express, then replugged



    7) Was able to run AirPlay successfully from iPad to AppleTV -- Videos and Photos





    So, the minimum all-purpose kit is:

    -- AppleTV and Power Cord

    -- HDMI Cable

    -- Airport Express and Power Cord/Power Stub

    -- iPad WiFi



    With this you should be able to go anywhere and Plug, Plug, Plug and Play.





    The Pretty Good:



    9) The AirPort Express never comes ready (Green Light) without an Internet connection -- just flashing yellow light



    9) Sometimes the iPad and AppleTV remember the Airport Express, sometimes not -- and you must spend a couple of minutes setting up



    10) The iPad and the AppleTV may take 30-60 seconds to "see" the AirPort Express -- I think it is just being thourough.



    11) Setting the AppleTV for the Airport Express right after Airport Express Power On can hang the AppleTV -- it resolves after a minute or so



    12) Setting the iPad to recognize the AirPort Express can be a bit fiddly if there are other WiFi networks around.





    But, even with all that, it looks pretty good!



    13) What is needed is something like a "favored" network for both the AppleTV and the iPad (in our case the AirPort Express) -- the devices would try to connect to the "favored" network first.



    14) If anything goes wrong, I suspect youl'd want a laptop handy to re-configure the AipPort Express, if necessary.



    15) Ideally, iOS on the iPad and AppleTV could perform this connection directly between themselves without the AirPort Express middleman.



    16) Ideally, you'd have some ultra-simple ad hoc setup on both devices





    Finally, Erica Sadun has a special version of the Air Video App that:

    -- receives plays a streamed video from a Mac

    -- can alternately AirPlay the received stream to an AppleTV





    http://www.tuaw.com/2010/11/24/airpl...ck-demonstrat/











    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    If that's the case then I'll add fixing that to my list of demands above. Apple would be missing a huge opportunity if they only think of Apple TV as being a stay in one place living room device. I mean, you can literally slip the thing into your pocket, it takes up less room than an actual VGA cable.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Wouldn't aTV remember its last settings? I think you'd need to physically take the thing to a different wireless environment, fire it up cold and see what happens.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    I think it would be the same as if it found no wireless. That is the scenario you want to test first then in the presence of a foreign network which you would want it to be able to ignore or join gracefully.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    I just got home and I plan to check it out as well. We know that aTV can run on ethernet so what affect that has on Airplay I'm not sure, but I will report back if I find anything.



    m



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Could not get to work without a wireless connection, mainly because the iPad will not show the Airplay icon without being connected to a wifi network. There is apparently no way without a wifi router. So I guess you need to add that to your kit to be sure. It doesn't have to be connected to the internet though, it just has to be present. You could use a droid hotspot But if the location you are presenting in has a wifi it is trivial to set up on aTV. It finds available networks very easily assuming you have the password.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    I have an AirPort Express! Right now it is configured to join the AirPort Extreme network.



    Later tonight, I'll see if this can be the missing link. If so, thats another $100 to the kit



    http://www.apple.com/airportexpress/specs.html





    Edit: The Express is an older model B/G no N -- so it may not tell us anything.



    .



  • futuristicfuturistic Posts: 599member
    Two thoughts on Acer's offering:



    1) <PERSONAL OPINION> **FU-GLY!!!** </PERSONAL OPINION>



    2) "will have"; "will feature"; "will sport"; "will come with"; ad nauseum...
  • scorpioscorpio Posts: 27member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    Oh please. There's only a little truth in what you say. I know this is an Apple fan site, and your way of thinking gets stretched to say the least, but don't blatantly ignore reality.



    Even if everyone just copies Apple, how does that not constitute competition!?



    Competition is what has spurred Apple's innovation first and foremost. Whether it's from from knock offs, or true competing innovators. No company has ever continued to innovate when their current business model had no competition. That's the beauty of capitalism: There will ALWAYS be competition moving things forward. This is why I hate republicans who hand over power to large corporations, undermining the capitalistic system, and stifling competition and innovation, but I digress...









    No, it ISN'T. Intel for instance is doing great things. You just aren't paying attention.



    Ugh. We were talking about innovation from Apple's competitors. Intel is not a competitor to Apple. And I'm not paying attention???



    Quote:

    And btw "Giving credit to them for Apple's innovation just doesn't make sense." straw man. Clearly I'm giving credit to Apple's competition for Apple's motivation. The credit for their innovation, or any company's innovation for that matter goes to the innovator!



    Yes. But Apple's competition has nothing to do with Apple's innovation. I'll explain. There was no competitor for iPad when Apple CREATED the touchscreen tablet market. There was no competitor to iPhone when Apple CREATED the touchscreen smartphone market. RIM, Microsoft, Acer, Google and all the others should be thanking Apple for innovating and creating these markets so that they could all follow with their own versions. The innovation came without competition. The competition came later.
  • mike_tmike_t Posts: 15member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post


    "hedging its bets in the fight for tablet supremacy"



    What is "supremacy" worth without the margins and profits to go with it? That's what I don't understand about the market share argument. Even Fake Steve Jobs (Dan Lyons) stated the obvious a few months ago. To paraphrase FSJ "In 3 years Android will dominate in market share but we (Apple) will have the better business."



    This is the thing that analysts and pundits always overlook. You can't take sales and market share to the bank. You can only take profits. And as others have pointed out, if you build a GOOD product that is the RIGHT product for your audience, it will sell for far more than expected, generating profits for the creator. This is why Apple succeeds time and time again. And why I am getting a v2 iPad in the spring, and not considering these wannabes. Innovating and creating is so much more interesting than copying.
  • dcolleydcolley Posts: 87member
    Maybe I should buy another PC device to go with all the other garbage PC devices that I was stupid enough to buy in the past.



    Maybe I will buy a Ken or an ugly Zune or maybe I will build a cheap PC and reinstall WIN95, WIN98, WINMe, WINxp, or Vista. Maybe I will load them up with twenty different virus and spam protectors.



    Then I could pull out all those sorry thousands of software titles rotting in my closet.



    I don't think so.
  • dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    .



    OK!



    Good News and Pretty Good news.



    ...



    This is news we can use. Thanks for being a good sport!
  • lkrupplkrupp Posts: 3,824member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    So let me get this straight: AI posts an article on the success of the Galaxy Tab in order to troll Apple fans into coming in for a massive circle jerk, a GT owner proclaims how much he likes his instead of joining in with the Apple fanboy's illogical bashing of the device, now you create an alt to mock the guy...



    Actually, I'm honestly not surprised I'm seeing this from someone on these forums.



    When it comes to Android, you fanboys call people morons for buying any device that runs an OS not designed for morons...



    The really funny thing about this thread is that Kasper Jade is ROFLHAO as the click count soars. He probably already has the reports printed out and ready to show his advertisers when he ups the ad rates on them.
  • mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    .





    12) Setting the iPad to recognize the AirPort Express can be a bit fiddly if there are other WiFi networks around.





    But, even with all that, it looks pretty good!



    13) What is needed is something like a "favored" network for both the AppleTV and the iPad (in our case the AirPort Express) -- the devices would try to connect to the "favored" network first.



    14) If anything goes wrong, I suspect youl'd want a laptop handy to re-configure the AipPort Express, if necessary.



    15) Ideally, iOS on the iPad and AppleTV could perform this connection directly between themselves without the AirPort Express middleman.



    16) Ideally, you'd have some ultra-simple ad hoc setup on both devices






    Hey Dick, thanks for your research. Your results exactly match mine.



    One thing I did discover which somewhat relates to addabox remarks is that if you decide to dedicate the items in the kit you can get a permeant setup by switching to static ip on the router and the aTV. Just hard code a non routable ip and make your own intranet. Since it is so easy to set the iPad to not join other networks the flaky behavior of other wifi can be completely eliminated.



    I still think a mifi of some other mobile hotspot is a better solution since you would also have the Internet available. All of this discussion is based on the assumption that Apple will expand airplay to be a universal screen sharing feature because right now it is limited to movies and music.



    My personal preference is to have complete self contained presentation system and not have to ask anyone for a password to join their wifi network.
  • mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    It sure looks like we're SOL on that front, for now. Seems someone e-mailed His Steveness about that very issue, and got back one of those cryptic replies suggesting that it was a "coming soon" feature.



    One thing about a theoretical keynote presentation over airplay is that the nature of airplay in general is that it transfers the play to the tv and takes it away from the iPad.



    This prevents you from controlling the presentation. You could view it as slideshow but not advance or rewind without taking it off the big screen to adjust the position.





    If any mods would like to split these airplay posts to another thread it may make sense.
  • dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 11,220member
    .



    After playing around a bit, the iPad or iPhone Airplay to AppleTV is quite compelling -- with a few tweaks it could be the killer app for iDevices.



    1) modify Photos app to allow videos to be AirPlayed (or allow Videos app access to Photos videos).



    2) allow iPads (iPhones, iPod Touches) and AppleTV to see each other without setup (or existence of WiFi network) -- ad hoc recognition of each other



    3) maybe an AppleTV main menu category for AirPlay devices (and their content) -- Pull from AppleTV as well as Push from iPad (iPhone, iPod Touch)



    4) eventual extension of AirPlay to other iDevice apps like Safari, Keynote, etc. to AirPlay to AppleTV.



    5) eventual extension so that iDevices can AirPlay stream among themselves, e.g. iPhone to iPad.



    6) eventual stream and forward to AIrPlay

    -- my home movies are on my Mac at home

    -- 3G stream them to my iPad

    -- the iPad AirPlays the stream to the ad hoc AppleTV where I currently am





    For, say, the next 6 months, Apple has an advantage that no competitor can touch:

    -- the hardware at both ends (Tablet, Phone, AppleTV)

    -- the streaming software at both ends

    -- apps to exploit the AirPlay

    -- one stop shopping and support





    Ideally, you could take your iPad into any place that has a HDTV and Airplay (or stream and forward) your content!.



    Less Ideal -- you would need to bring an AppleTV and HDMI Cable to connect to the HDTV.



    .
  • dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 11,220member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Hey Dick, thanks for your research. Your results exactly match mine.



    One thing I did discover which somewhat relates to addabox remarks is that if you decide to dedicate the items in the kit you can get a permeant setup by switching to static ip on the router and the aTV. Just hard code a non routable ip and make your own intranet. Since it is so easy to set the iPad to not join other networks the flaky behavior of other wifi can be completely eliminated.



    Fantastic!



    After I finished resetting everything to "normal", I played around a little with static ip on the iPad. It was late, and cold -- so I went to bed instead!.



    I'll try that tonight!.



    This just keeps getting better and better...



    .
  • addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,667member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    One thing about a theoretical keynote presentation over airplay is that the nature of airplay in general is that it transfers the play to the tv and takes it away from the iPad.



    This prevents you from controlling the presentation. You could view it as slideshow but not advance or rewind without taking it off the big screen to adjust the position.





    If any mods would like to split these airplay posts to another thread it may make sense.



    OTOH the iPad will allow you to continue to do other things while streaming to an aTV, so it doesn't seem like it would take much for Apple (or third party devs, if given the APIs) to implement this.



    There are so many bits of business that seem to obvious yet can't be done yet; I have to assume Apple is rolling out stuff as quickly as they can. Of course, Apple's priorities may be different than mine, so they might not get to everything on my list as quickly as I would like...
  • dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 11,220member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    One thing about a theoretical keynote presentation over airplay is that the nature of airplay in general is that it transfers the play to the tv and takes it away from the iPad.



    This prevents you from controlling the presentation. You could view it as slideshow but not advance or rewind without taking it off the big screen to adjust the position.



    I've Thought about that, a little.



    It may be a hardware limitation on the iPad (CPU, GPU, RAM) -- especially showing audio and video in both places.



    It may just be a latency problem.



    It may be just a software implementation issue. (I can't do it right now (watching football), but if you AirPlay from Photos on the iPad, you get the picture on both the iPad and HDTV. You can swipe and change slides, with minimal latency.)





    Photo slide shows and KeyNote Presenter mode presos are different -- the content does not need to be streamed continuously.



    Rather:

    -- display the content on the iPad

    -- stream (background) the selected slide (and transition) to the AppleTV where it is displayed and cached.

    -- change the slide or annotate/on the iPad

    -- repeat



    Alternately, the entire preso could be streamed to the AppleTV before beginning the display



    I haven't thought through how to handle videos in Keynote presos, but I think the above would satisfy most needs.





    Quote:

    If any mods would like to split these airplay posts to another thread it may make sense.



    Yes! I agree! It would nice to be able to fork a thread when there seems to be a common interest!



    There are some subjects like this that I could follow for days & (would even click some ad banners to help pay for it)



    ... kind of an open tech discussion thread on a topic.



    .
  • chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Arguing against Apple's current strategy is a pretty dumb thing to do at present. Doing so on an Apple-centric site doesn't make you bold or avant-garde, just colossally ill-informed. It's even worse if you're playing the contrarian just for kicks.



    Apple DOES pay attention to the competition, and it keeps them motivated to be the innovators everyone praises them for.



    We're talking about the same company who scorned people for wanting multitasking. Who convinced everyone multitasking is the killer of any mobile device. That it is a performance killing battery hogging feature that only idiots would want. Then Microsoft shows how to implement it on a mobile device with limited resources, and months later Apple has multitasking and they did it better than anyone else.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scorpio View Post


    Ugh. We were talking about innovation from Apple's competitors. Intel is not a competitor to Apple. And I'm not paying attention???



    They're competitors in different ways, but partners in other ways. For instance Intel created WiDi to run on PC laptops, and Apple's response was Airplay.



    nVidia is similar. They partner with apple to specially design video cards for Macs, and they are also currently working on mobile GPU's. I remember last year or maybe even the year before that, AI was posting news that Apple was hiring people in this field, and the discussions spoke of what sort of great graphics processing future iphones would have (and how great Apple was for this move lol.)







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scorpio View Post


    Yes. But Apple's competition has nothing to do with Apple's innovation. I'll explain. There was no competitor for iPad when Apple CREATED the touchscreen tablet market. There was no competitor to iPhone when Apple CREATED the touchscreen smartphone market. RIM, Microsoft, Acer, Google and all the others should be thanking Apple for innovating and creating these markets so that they could all follow with their own versions. The innovation came without competition. The competition came later.



    The fact is there are clear examples where competition has motivated Apple's innovation, which was my point. You're talking about wins for Apple, which is great, but even the iPad for example can be shown to be better as a result of what Apple saw competitors doing. Their decision to go with a mobile OS instead of OSX is what was innovative.



    I know you're convinced of the opposite being true, but I'm convinced competition to Apple is what keeps them great, and that may be why you think I'm such a troll for showing opinions about what their competitors are doing that go against the popular point of view around here.
  • addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,667member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    Apple DOES pay attention to the competition, and it keeps them motivated to be the innovators everyone praises them for.



    We're talking about the same company who scorned people for wanting multitasking. Who convinced everyone multitasking is the killer of any mobile device. That it is a performance killing battery hogging feature that only idiots would want. Then Microsoft shows how to implement it on a mobile device with limited resources, and months later Apple has multitasking and they did it better than anyone else.



    Can you perhaps link to something that suggests that Apple "scorned" anyone for wanting multitasking? That only idiots would want it? My memory is that Apple was cautious about multitasking because of battery life concerns, nothing more. When they figured out how to do it without undue battery drain, they did it.



    How on earth did MS show anyone how its done?





    Quote:

    They're competitors in different ways, but partners in other ways. For instance Intel created WiDi to run on PC laptops, and Apple's response was Airplay.



    nVidia is similar. They partner with apple to specially design video cards for Macs, and they are also currently working on mobile GPU's. I remember last year or maybe even the year before that, AI was posting news that Apple was hiring people in this field, and the discussions spoke of what sort of great graphics processing future iphones would have (and how great Apple was for this move lol.)



    I think you're confusing pretty obvious areas of development with responding to competition. Just like multitasking, wireless connectivity is an area of functionality that any CE company worth their salt is going to be sinking resources into. Apple doesn't "need" someone else to implement some version of this to know that their customers want it. In fact, Apple has been pretty explicit in its desire to drive wireless connectivity via its iTunes hub model for quite a while now.





    Quote:

    The fact is there are clear examples where competition has motivated Apple's innovation, which was my point.



    I don't think you've given any compelling examples. It's a variant on the old "Apple doesn't really innovate" canard. There's not a single area of possible technological innovation that you couldn't point to some sort of prior art and claim that Apple was just refining other's work.



    Correlation does not imply causation.



    Quote:

    You're talking about wins for Apple, which is great, but even the iPad for example can be shown to be better as a result of what Apple saw competitors doing. Their decision to go with a mobile OS instead of OSX is what was innovative.



    Case in point. The iPad is demonstrably a different category of device from the Windows based, stylus driven devices that preceded it. You can always enlarge your categories until you have one big enough to include anything that Apple might do-- if the next iPhone can read your mind we could just say that it's a "better phone" with a clever input idea. At some point you have to make relevant distinctions, and the iPad, with its full on touch UI, tightly integrated hardware, iTunes ecosystem and App Store is a fundamentally different experience from what came before.



    Quote:

    I know you're convinced of the opposite being true, but I'm convinced competition to Apple is what keeps them great, and that may be why you think I'm such a troll for showing opinions about what their competitors are doing that go against the popular point of view around here.



    Arguing against "the popular point of view around here" is pretty much a straw man. We attract such a sizable stable of for real, flat-out trolls that it's not even clear that the majority of posts are particularly charitable towards Apple.



    At any rate, I don't think it's reasonable to claim that Apple looked around at the tablet market, say, and that spurred them to "compete" by improving on what they saw.



    It's more accurate to say that they look for areas where there basically isn't any competition-- either because whatever incumbent technology is there is so wretched that is scarcely counts, or because there's an area of unmet need that they feel they can bring some functionality.



    I wouldn't say Apple never competes-- I'm guessing Android has lit some fires in Cupertino-- but in its broad outlines and strategies I think that Apple clearly has its own agenda, and that agenda is sufficiently different from the rest of the CE industry as to be almost a different business.
  • dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 11,220member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    Apple DOES pay attention to the competition, and it keeps them motivated to be the innovators everyone praises them for.



    We're talking about the same company who scorned people for wanting multitasking. Who convinced everyone multitasking is the killer of any mobile device. That it is a performance killing battery hogging feature that only idiots would want. Then Microsoft shows how to implement it on a mobile device with limited resources, and months later Apple has multitasking and they did it better than anyone else.



    Can you perhaps link to something that suggests that Apple "scorned" anyone for wanting multitasking? That only idiots would want it? My memory is that Apple was cautious about multitasking because of battery life concerns, nothing more. When they figured out how to do it without undue battery drain, they did it.



    How on earth did MS show anyone how its done?





    They're competitors in different ways, but partners in other ways. For instance Intel created WiDi to run on PC laptops, and Apple's response was Airplay.



    nVidia is similar. They partner with apple to specially design video cards for Macs, and they are also currently working on mobile GPU's. I remember last year or maybe even the year before that, AI was posting news that Apple was hiring people in this field, and the discussions spoke of what sort of great graphics processing future iphones would have (and how great Apple was for this move lol.)



    I think you're confusing pretty obvious areas of development with responding to competition. Just like multitasking, wireless connectivity is an area of functionality that any CE company worth their salt is going to be sinking resources into. Apple doesn't "need" someone else to implement some version of this to know that their customers want it. In fact, Apple has been pretty explicit in its desire to drive wireless connectivity via its iTunes hub model for quite a while now.









    I don't think you've given any compelling examples. It's a variant on the old "Apple doesn't really innovate" canard. There's not a single area of possible technological innovation that you couldn't point to some sort of prior art and claim that Apple was just refining other's work.



    Correlation does not imply causation.







    Case in point. The iPad is demonstrably a different category of device from the Windows based, stylus driven devices that preceded it. You can always enlarge your categories until you have one big enough to include anything that Apple might do-- if the next iPhone can read your mind we could just say that it's a "better phone" with a clever input idea. At some point you have to make relevant distinctions, and the iPad, with its full on touch UI, tightly integrated hardware, iTunes ecosystem and App Store is a fundamentally different experience from what came before.







    Arguing against "the popular point of view around here" is pretty much a straw man. We attract such a sizable stable of for real, flat-out trolls that it's not even clear that the majority of posts are particularly charitable towards Apple.



    At any rate, I don't think it's reasonable to claim that Apple looked around at the tablet market, say, and that spurred them to "compete" by improving on what they saw.



    It's more accurate to say that they look for areas where there basically isn't any competition-- either because whatever incumbent technology is there is so wretched that is scarcely counts, or because there's an area of unmet need that they feel they can bring some functionality.



    I wouldn't say Apple never competes-- I'm guessing Android has lit some fires in Cupertino-- but in its broad outlines and strategies I think that Apple clearly has its own agenda, and that agenda is sufficiently different from the rest of the CE industry

    as to be almost a different business.



    I have been observing and dealing with Apple for 32 years -- your analysis is on target.



    Apple takes a proactive approach to product research and design. I think that Steve Jobs' genius is that he sees what he wants, idealistically, and sets out to satisy that desire. Need has little, or nothing, to do with the motivation. Then, Jobs is able to rein in the ideal and deliver the possible -- eliminating all the cruft! Finally, Jobs is the ultimate salesman -- selling what he has in the wagon, but, by inferance, promising a better solution to come.



    We buy Apple products as much for what they are -- as to see what their next product will be!



    Those that don't get that, don't understand Apple... And never will!



    .
  • addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,667member
    When Jobs said "If I ran Apple I'd milk the Mac for all it's worth and get busy on the next great thing"

    those weren't the words of a guy looking at competitors with a mind to make what they're making but somewhat better.



    Jobs and Apple are playing a long game with many parts, but they think in terms of big picture systems and skating to where the puck will be. You can't do that by reacting.
Sign In or Register to comment.