or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Microsoft, Nokia, Nintendo take shots at Apple's iPad debut
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft, Nokia, Nintendo take shots at Apple's iPad debut - Page 8

post #281 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Serious question. It's the direction Apple are moving in, so it's not impossible to imagine that happening.

No, it's not a serious question - it's a ridiculous question. But it certainly is fun to cast Apple as evil, isn't it!
post #282 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

what gets me is this guy Kotatsu talking about Apple being closed system because it does not support Flash. Do you actually know that Flash and Sliverlight are closed system apps.

Btw talking of big brother do you walk down your high street and not have every camera looking at you in UK, especially London, so please big brother is already looking at you, stop spouting crap paranoid when you already live in one.

Well done for completely missing the point.

An open system allows me to install whatever I like. Sure it's nice if people can pick apart the source, but as a non programmer all I want is the ability to install flash, firefox, photoshop, 3ds max etc etc. That's the key part, I install what I want on my hardware. Simple concept really.

And why on earth did you bring up the UK's network of spy cams? What am I expected to do about them? Seriously, what do you think I should do? Please try to at least be a little rational when arguing.
post #283 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

Read the article. I think Nokia's fairly pointed out why they sell more mobile devices every year. Plus, I'd argue it's a pretty WAG stat to mix phone, music player, and notebook sales in one stat. If you want that kind of cross-platform comparison, shouldn't you compare an operating system family? For example, let's talk all Windows mobile devices from laptops to cellphones.

And if the other poster is going to talk about Nokia's $4 phones being sold in the third world (and that really should be developing world btw), then are iPod nanos really relevant to this stat? At least every one of Nokia's '$4 phones' can access the web. Last I checked, my Shuffle can't do that.

Nokia is right that they sell more mobile devices. But Jobs said nothing about quantity of mobile devices. He said by revenue, Apple is the biggest mobile devices company in the world. And he is right.

Is not an iPod nano a mobile device? Does a mobile device only include cellular devices?

Sure, let's talk all Windows mobile devices. MS gets about $20 per Windows Mobile device and $50-70 per laptop device. Do the math. It's way short.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #284 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Your response is way too rational and reasonable. I'll bet the guy won't respond, or if he does, it'll be some other nonsensical rant.

Yup, kotatsu came back but he's conveniently ignored all my questions from all my posts questioning his. C'est la vie.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #285 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Oh come off it, what a stupid thing to say.

I'd say your original comment was the stupid one (if we are going to start throwing insults around)

Quote:
It is entirely the point to pull Apple up for the closed nature of the iPad.
This is the reality of the iPad for most people. Insulting people does not change that fact.

I'm not surprised Adobe is upset that the iPad still doesn't support flash.

Boo frigging hoo. Flash gained popularity due to limitations in HTML - those limitations are no longer there.

Despite the protesting (I like the metric of the louder the protesting the more successful an Apple product will be - genius!), the iPad will be successful and there will be even more pressure on sites to ditch flash - at least as the only method for navigating them.

I see this as a good thing. I look back at the howls of protest on Apple dropping the floppy and adopting this crazy "USB" technology.

Well, the protesting for the floppy was ridiculous because even back then there weren't many individual files that fit easily on a floppy never mind doing any kind of useful project work off of floppies. People just wanted them because they have always been there.

I'm FINALLY starting to see PC's that are completely legacy free be the norm rather than the exception. USB has been well entrenched for almost 8 years (due to the iMac no less) and ps/2 ports (PS/2!) are still floating around out there. I still run across things that require serial and parallel ports (and new devices - not stuff hanging around for 9 years).

The bottom line, without companies like Apple pushing boundaries and taking chances there would be few others pushing technology forward. Just look at the stagnation in the PC industry - other than faster CPU's, bigger hard drives and more memory you hardly ever see anything radical from the PC manufacturers. If you look at the directions Apple has pushed the industry (and not just in computers, look at the mess of commercial digital music before iTunes) you should be embracing Apple's willingness to try to "move the puck" - even if you don't care about using their products.

There are plenty of other companies doing things the "traditional" way - go use their products. Stop trying to ridicule Apple for doing something different from everyone else. Thank goodness they don't pay attention to people like you and keep on doing their thing.
post #286 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

An open system allows me to install whatever I like. Sure it's nice if people can pick apart the source, but as a non programmer all I want is the ability to install flash, firefox, photoshop, 3ds max etc etc. That's the key part, I install what I want on my hardware. Simple concept really.

Great! There is hardware out there that lets you do that - go buy it!

Why does Apple have to be just like everyone else to be successful?

Your argument is specious, irrational and pointless. If those things are important to you, the iPhone/iPad is not for you. Pretty simple concept, really.

Next!
post #287 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post

To some extent, I think we all need to be careful about judging the iPad or any new product merely because it is not what we expect it to be. As people with experience with computers and technology, we can be blinded by own own preconceived notions of how things should be.

Exactly. The vast majority of criticism of the iPad is filtered through the critic's narrow vision of what "success" should be. And most of those visions are pretty myopic. Just like with the iPod and iPhone, most of them will more than likely be totally off the mark

I can see all kinds of opportunities for the iPad where the iPod Touch/iPhone aren't appropriate, and where a traditional notebook computer aren't appropriate. Coupled with an open SDK for a wildly successful app store and the incentives for developers to play and try radically new concepts is huge. I started to imagine how the Apple remote app could be enhanced to take advantage of the extra screen space and got positively giddy - they sky's the limit
post #288 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajneuman View Post

"Wait they did not have any real smart phones when the iphone came out." Umm... the N95 was out long before the iPhone and to this day, still competes based on spec

Specs in and of themselves aren't useful. A fast CPU isn't going to do anything for me if the software I wan't isn't available to run on it. Sofware in and of itself isn't interesting if I can't get to it easily, or if it isn't useable on the device I have it loaded on. There are plenty of devices that blow the iPhone away in individual areas. None compete as equally in all areas as the iPhone does.

Your focused on specs, Apple is focused on experience.

Guess who's kicking who's butt in the smartphone space?
post #289 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Ballmer rudely denounced the iPhone in Jan 2007 and has now made himself look like an ass because of it. The guy is so deluded that he compared the Motorola Q as being a great alternative to the iPhone.

Did he? All I saw in that interview was him listing some legitimate concerns about it such as it being $500, which ya he did kind of smirk but was that really rude? In the end of the video he actually said, paraphrasing here, you never know it could do really well, and if I'm not mistaken he also complimented them on their iTunes store. So at least give him credit for complimenting them.
post #290 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

pmz makes a great point about Flash that also works for the multitasking debate. 75 million users currently don't have either and seem pretty satisfied.

Some people, however, want to tell those 75 million that they are completely wrong.

Well... I'm one of those 75 mils and gess what - I'm not that happy with missing flash. So is my wife - can't play Facebook games on her iPhone. A colleague of mine would like flash as well, got very excited with perspective (probably false) that iPhone OS4 will support flash.

I could continue about most of the people I know having iPhone, but you should have got my point so far. 75 million users doesn't by default mean 75 million fully satisfied users. There is always space for improvement, and there is always danger competition will improve faster.

So why did I got iPhone at all? Well, when I was looking for new phone (September 2009) my estimate was that iPhone was the best overall device for me. Lack of Flash was minus, but Stanza, decent email client, well executed chat and address book sold it to me. At the end, screen size limitation is making iPhone browsing matter of necessity, not first choice. When I browse on iPhone, it is usually quick search for some text information, be it Wiki or any other source. If I want to browse for "experience" (look for house to buy or rent, check review of new car...) I'll use computer as, even without Flash on web pages, iPhone screen is too small for real web experience.

Thus lack of Flash is minus, but considering way I browse on iPhone, it is not that big.

But... iPad screen is big enough for full experience browsing. Big enough to show most web pages without resizing, zooming in an out... so I can see myself doing most of my browsing on device like iPad. Since I would browse on iPad not only for information, but also for experience, I feel that lack of Flash would be much more noticeable - and much more annoying, for me.
post #291 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

iTunes is too much of a cash cow so apple is building a walled garden like it did in the 1980's.

Wow, a walled garden that includes a browser that supports open standards.

No wonder Apple sucks so bad - they can't even do a good job building a walled garden!
post #292 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Y.M.S.BUSHAN View Post

Who on earth would dream in 70's that any new computer company would start with a fruits name "Apple" for a personal computer. We got used to it and would have also gotten used to it even if they had called it" Mango" computer or "pomagranate" computer or whatever when the functionality is the best.

The banana jr is still my favorite computer named after a fruit.



Although Apple doesn't do a bad job
post #293 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Great! There is hardware out there that lets you do that - go buy it!

Why does Apple have to be just like everyone else to be successful?

Your argument is specious, irrational and pointless. If those things are important to you, the iPhone/iPad is not for you. Pretty simple concept, really.

Next!

You Macheads really are passionate defenders of the faith aren't you? And what on earth are you on about claiming my argument is specious and irrational? Now that's a strange thing to claim. Where is the irrationality in expecting a device which is sold as the best way to browse the web, to actually be able to browse the web in full? It's rather telling that in Apple's own advertising they faked the iPad playing flash content. Buying an iPad is akin to buying a car which can only drive in selected cities, or a TV which doesn't show anything Steve doesn't aprove of. In other words, it's a broken device.

This really is going in circles now. On one side the sensible masses who are, quite rightly pulling up Apple for making such a crippled device, and on the other, the devotees, who will defend Apple to the end no matter what. And I thought fanboys were bad when it came to videogames, but you guys are on an entirely different level.
post #294 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

You Macheads really are passionate defenders of the faith aren't you? And what on earth are you on about claiming my argument is specious and irrational? Now that's a strange thing to claim. Where is the irrationality in expecting a device which is sold as the best way to browse the web, to actually be able to browse the web in full? It's rather telling that in Apple's own advertising they faked the iPad playing flash content. Buying an iPad is akin to buying a car which can only drive in selected cities, or a TV which doesn't show anything Steve doesn't aprove of. In other words, it's a broken device.

This really is going in circles now. On one side the sensible masses who are, quite rightly pulling up Apple for making such a crippled device, and on the other, the devotees, who will defend Apple to the end no matter what. And I thought fanboys were bad when it came to videogames, but you guys are on an entirely different level.

I gave you a rational answer way back when, but you've chosen to ignore it. So this isn't going in circles at all.. You just choose to ignore whatever rational arguments are made because your mind is made up, or it's too narrow to see beyond.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #295 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Did you read this yet? http://joehewitt.com/post/ipad/

Joe Hewitt left working on the Facebook app for iPhone because of Apple's requirement to vet every release of an iPhone app. Well, he sounds like he can't wait to get back, but for the iPad. He gets it.

Thanks for posting that link! His second to the last paragraph nails it. You are correct, he gets "it".
post #296 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Great! There is hardware out there that lets you do that - go buy it!

Why does Apple have to be just like everyone else to be successful?

Your argument is specious, irrational and pointless. If those things are important to you, the iPhone/iPad is not for you. Pretty simple concept, really.

Next!

What is important to him may be easily be just as important to others. You dont sell a product with the tag name "The Best Web Browsing Experience Available" and not be able to support the most basic standards of the web which even a netbook can do. Flash wont stop me from buying one for myself, but i already know what im getting into and your average buyer wont or atleast thats what Melgross has taught me to assume.

We make the sacrifice with our phones (seems like thats only gonna be the iPhone soon...) because they were just phones but with the power and capability many people are looking for these solutions for a more robust mobile web surfing experience. Adobe and many manufacturers have been working to make Flash for smartphones and i'd say by the demos its paying off and well.

The lack of Flash is the way Apple is protecting itself from possibly butchering itself from loss content sales (why buy when you can stream and for free?) HTML 5 is no threat to Flash, and wont be for quite a few years (not even supposed to be done until 2020 iirc), but i doubt Apple will be able to continue to play coy while their competitors will be trumpeting these features when available.
post #297 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

You Macheads really are passionate defenders of the faith aren't you?

You don't sell 10's of millions of devices on faith. You had better be prepared to be frustrated and annoyed for a long time....

Quote:
And what on earth are you on about claiming my argument is specious and irrational?

Do you really want me to answer that? Wait, I don't have to - others have tried in addition to me. If you didn't get "it" from them or my earlier posts, I fail to see how another attempt could be fruitful.

Quote:
Where is the irrationality in expecting a device which is sold as the best way to browse the web, to actually be able to browse the web in full?

Because it's an argument that's becoming fast irrelevant - why do you think Adobe is so concerned?

Quote:
Buying an iPad is akin to buying a car which can only drive in selected cities, or a TV which doesn't show anything Steve doesn't aprove of. In other words, it's a broken device.

Are you sure you aren't being paid by someone to post here?

Quote:
This really is going in circles now.

No it's not. Your welcome to think that it is, though

As I said earlier, let's bookmark this thread and come back in a year. I triple dog dare you
post #298 of 429
I love Apple products but Steve Jobs is full of shit.
Nokia is (by far) the largest mobile company in the world.
Mobile products do not include laptops, they are single handheld devices
post #299 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifail View Post

What is important to him may be easily be just as important to others. You dont sell a product with the tag name "The Best Web Browsing Experience Available" and not be able to support the most basic standards of the web which even a netbook can do.

Flash is not the end all, be all. Sites are already rapidly moving away from it - that will just accelerate with millions of iPads in the marketplace (and at $500, there will be millions).

Quote:
The lack of Flash is the way Apple is protecting itself from possibly butchering itself from loss content sales (why buy when you can stream and for free?)

Sigh. Yes, Apple is so scared about competition in the content space their devices only support proprietary Apple formats. iTunes is so closed it's data base is encrypted.

Except neither of the above is true. Apple doesn't need "lock in" because people use their products because they want to.

I know for some, that's a radical and frightening concept - actually focusing on what normal, average people want instead of slavishly chasing after volumous feature lists... but here we are.

And I think Apple may just be considering that streaming thing. I vaguely remember reading about new data centers, aquisitions of companies that specialize in streaming... heck, being a large shareholder in this obscure company called Akami and releasing things like the quicktime streaming server. But your right, Apple is totally clueless about streaming

Quote:
HTML 5 is no threat to Flash, and wont be for quite a few years (not even supposed to be done until 2020 iirc), but i doubt Apple will be able to continue to play coy while their competitors will be trumpeting these features when available.

HTML5 is a HUGE threat to Flash. It renders it moot. Before the iPhone and now iPad, HTML5 wouldn't have been a threat to flash - it has too much momentum to be supplanted by HTML5 on it's own. Just as the iMac drove adoption of USB, the iPhone and iPad will drive adoption of HTML5. Once the tide starts to turn in earnest (look at the vimeo link provided earlier in this thread if you still think that's a pipe dream) the game is up. Adobe knows it. This is the zero hour. I wouldn't count on Apple blinking...
post #300 of 429
In some ways, Apple is taking a huge risk. In other ways, it's not if we think about it this way.

In 2001, Apple made an iPod, and it had to be used with iTunes, and for games, it had to use the iTunes Store. Not really open (though it could play mp3 so you could get music from other than the iTunes Store), but the masses loved it. Other companies made "open" mp3 players, but the masses only gave all of them just 30% of the market.

In 2007, Apple made an iPhone (and iPod touch), and it had to be used with iTunes, and the App Store. Not really open, but the masses loved it. And developers too to the tune of over 140K apps in 18 months. Other companies made "open" smartphones, but the masses haven't really flocked to them (Windows, Android, etc); neither have developers.

Now, Apple is making an iPad, and it has to be used with iTunes, and the App Store. It will likely be able to read books from other stores, though the iBooks Store is in a preferred position. Other companies made "open" tablets and netbooks; the masses have little interest in tablets, and the netbooks can only be sold at very cheap prices yielding their makers very little profit. Tablets have about 1% share, and netbooks maybe at most 5% share.

See the pattern. Isn't it clear why Apple sees an opportunity? Why they think being "closed" really doesn't make a big difference to users if the App Store has just about every app that a user would expect for a computer with a 1GHz processor (which is a slower speed than most netbooks!)*?

And that this new playground allows all developers to start on an equal footing - no more dominance by MS, especially if they won't write Office for iPad. (Well, almost equal, Apple's iWork will have a bit of an inside track.) Not only is Joe Hewitt excited, but the Omni Group (of OmniGraffle and more) has already said they'll bring all their apps to iPad, and many more are getting ready for what Apple sees as a "gold rush".

*I know GHz is not an apples-to-apples comparison, but most people don't get this.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #301 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by SheldonJohnScott View Post

Mobile products do not include laptops, they are single handheld devices

So says you - my MPB is sitting in my lap right now. If that's not mobile, I don't know what is. Nokia is fast being pushed into the high volume low margin space. In other words, they aren't a leader but a churner of low margin product. It must hurt to be coming to that realization, but it was their position of dominance to loose.
post #302 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by SheldonJohnScott View Post

I love Apple products but Steve Jobs is full of shit.
Nokia is (by far) the largest mobile company in the world.
Mobile products do not include laptops, they are single handheld devices

Today Apple includes laptops. By next year at this time, they'll be the biggest mobile revenue company without including laptops but including iPads.

But let's back up for a second. Why did Apple say that during the keynote? Isn't it kinda extraneous? Was it just to tweak Nokia? Well, yes it was!!!

Seriously though, here's my take: It was for financial analysts and developers. To analysts, Apple is saying you should start valuing us in comparison with mobile device companies, not personal computer companies. Because PCs are a slowing market, while mobile devices is a booming market. To developers, Apple is saying, mobile devices is Apple's future, so have confidence we're in it for the long haul and develop for the iPad and iPhone/iPod touch.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #303 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

It will likely be able to read books from other stores, though the iBooks Store is in a preferred position.

Can we put this to bed? Apple chose an open format for the basis of their books. It may be wrapped in DRM for books you buy from their bookstore, but the bookstore will no more be closed than iTunes was as it supported MP3 and non-DRM AAC from day one. AAC was not an Apple format either, yet that didn't stop people from jumping up and down about "Apple proprietary" and "walled garden" nonsense either. It would be completely daft for Apple to not allow books from outside.

So can we be consistent and try to stop the fuss about the upcoming book store? I'm sure there will be plenty of people who, like with iTunes, try to paint Apple as the debil, but let's not let leave them any more ambiguity to blow out of proportion than we have to
post #304 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Can we put this to bed? Apple chose an open format for the basis of their books. It may be wrapped in DRM for books you buy from their bookstore, but the bookstore will no more be closed than iTunes was as it supported MP3 and non-DRM AAC from day one. AAC was not an Apple format either, yet that didn't stop people from jumping up and down about "Apple proprietary" and "walled garden" nonsense either. It would be completely daft for Apple to not allow books from outside.

So can we be consistent and try to stop the fuss about the upcoming book store? I'm sure there will be plenty of people who, like with iTunes, try to paint Apple as the debil, but let's not let leave them any more ambiguity to blow out of proportion than we have to

Fully understood and that's what I think Apple will do. That said, I wouldn't put it past Apple to make a bonehead move, so until I see the Kindle and other ebook readers available for the iPad...

You see, kotatsu, I'm not just an Apple fanboy.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #305 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

Would you prefer I add it to my signature then?

No, I just wish people would stop quoting you - or at the least your entire posts. Time to add the "new" you to my ignore list too...
post #306 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Fact - Flash is everywhere on the web. iPad does not support flash, therefore Job's claim of the iPad beind a great way to browse the web is simply untrue.

Fact - spurned by just the iPhone major sites like YouTube have been actively moving away from flash. Fact - as more larger sites do and pave the way, flash will become less and less relevant.

Fact - as the iMac drove USB adoption, even though it had been a standard, developed by Intel (!!) and on the market for a couple of years yet universally panned by the PC vendors, so will be the same for HTML5 vs. Flash. Much like Nokia is watching it's self be marginalized and forced into the low-margin market segments, Adobe Flash is undergoing the same transition.

Quote:
Fact - Multi-tasking has been standard in computers since the late 1980s. For a new computer not to have it, is an incredible omission.

The iPhone, Ipod Touch and iPad are not "computers" in the traditional sense.

And multi-tasking is a software update away. The iPhone 3Gs can support it, and it's pretty obvious the iPad can too - much like cut/copy/paste if your hanging a major competitive talking point on the lack of multitasking, you might want to have some other objections in reserve.

Quote:
Fact - USB is an interface common to virtually all computing devices. The iPad does not have a USB port.

Fact - Apple demoed it with a USB adapter for the dock connector - for the minority that will want one, it's there!

Quote:
Fact - You evidently have no argument, just cheap insults. Good night!

sigh - nevermind....
post #307 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

+1

After reading an unGodly amount of vitriol these last two days, here and elsewhere, posted by a multitude of trolls, astroturfists, windoze apologists, and flashtards, I have concluded that Apple truly has a major hit on their hands.

Flashtards!

I vote winner for best post of the thread and word for the week (not just the day!)
post #308 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Flash is not the end all, be all. Sites are already rapidly moving away from it

Show me some site and statistics on this one PLEASE cause im calling you full of it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Sigh. Yes, Apple is so scared about competition in the content space their devices only support proprietary Apple formats. iTunes is so closed it's data base is encrypted.

Except neither of the above is true. Apple doesn't need "lock in" because people use their products because they want to.

Really, because it wasnt until recently i think that Apple made it so your music can be DRM free and not tethered to only iTunes. But good way to throw something in there i wasnt really talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

And I think Apple may just be considering that streaming thing. I vaguely remember reading about new data centers, aquisitions of companies that specialize in streaming... heck, being a large shareholder in this obscure company called Akami and releasing things like the quicktime streaming server. But your right, Apple is totally clueless about streaming

I wonder if it will be for free, because i sure as hell doubt Apple's will be. Streaming/buying paid content from a provider and being able to get the SAME CONTENT FOR FREE from some website online is what can hurt Apple (Apple has the most to lose unlike Palm/RIM/Android with no established media stores). Remember Flash goes beyond just music and videos but also into apps and games...and that conveniently steps right on Apples toes yet again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

HTML5 is a HUGE threat to Flash. It renders it moot. Before the iPhone and now iPad, HTML5 wouldn't have been a threat to flash - it has too much momentum to be supplanted by HTML5 on it's own. Just as the iMac drove adoption of USB, the iPhone and iPad will drive adoption of HTML5. Once the tide starts to turn in earnest (look at the vimeo link provided earlier in this thread if you still think that's a pipe dream) the game is up. Adobe knows it. This is the zero hour. I wouldn't count on Apple blinking...

Yeah, it renders it moot...in 10 years. How about we get a standard out that consumers can AND DO use today and implement for tomorrow at the same time? That to me seems like a common sense standpoint no? You're also assuming that Flash/Silverlight will literally be standing still for the next 10 years, neither of us know so dont even dare try to act like you do.
post #309 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zc456 View Post

Says the company that controls the Windows Mobile Marketplace.

Or the company that shafted their Plays4Sure "partners" to create the Zune in a last-ditch attempt to match Apple.

I wonder how open those "partners" think Microsoft is
post #310 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifail View Post

Show me some site and statistics on this one PLEASE cause im calling you full of it.

Well, YouTube, vimeo, and BBC have launched or will soon launch an H.264 alternative from Flash. And MS is using Silverlight instead of Flash whenever it can (not that it's any better).

Plus, many websites have created iPhone apps that display video without using the Flash that they used on their website.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #311 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

That may not have been a big deal on an iPhone. But on a mobile computing platform, that's a handicap for sure.

Yup, you get 10 billion downloads from by having a severe handicap

When we come back to this thread in a year, what's going to be your explanation? Why does the size of the iPad negate the iPhone/AppStore model? Just because it's larger? I wasn't aware that simply changing the size of a device also affected the model under which a device operates to such a radical degree.

Changing the size my challenge your perception about how such a device should work, but I assure you the iPad isn't targeted at you or your perceptions. It's something different, something new. It's targeted at non-technical users (or technical users like me who, at the end of the day, just want something that will work when we need it) and that's a much larger market than the market currently being served by "traditional computing".

I can see the iPad replacing my fathers iBook, and him being instantly more productive with it. It's a far more fluid and intuitive experience than a full-blown computer. He doesn't need a full blown computer, nor does he really want a full blown computer. He want's access to information (the web) and to communicate with his friends (email). The iPad will do that in spades, and it will do that far more reliably than even an Mac OSX laptop will - never mind a PC. Reliability, ease of use, meeting his needs - those are things he cares about - not endless checklists of often contradictory features. eBooks are a double bonus that he will enjoy. He would never buy a Kindle or read an electronic book on a notebook, but it's almost second nature on an iPad due to it's form factor.

That's the potential here, and one that I think will be easily realized going forward. To call it a prediction is almost criminal...

Oh yeah, there are more of him than there are of you
post #312 of 429
Balmer also laughed at the iphone the moment it came out claiming it was such an expensive phone...a joke... Yet here is is today negotiating to have Bing installed on it.. Where does Win mobile or the zune stack up today..

Nokia is a dead dinosaur and they know it

Nintendo should be worried, their advantage has always been the lower price vs quality. enter the iphone OS devices that do more and are 2x better than what they have, plus the software is cheaper and in vastly greater quantity. Their days are numbered also, only so long they can keep going with this streak until they are passed.. im surprised they have lasted this long honestly..
post #313 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Nokia is right that they sell more mobile devices. But Jobs said nothing about quantity of mobile devices. He said by revenue, Apple is the biggest mobile devices company in the world. And he is right.

Is not an iPod nano a mobile device? Does a mobile device only include cellular devices?

Sure, let's talk all Windows mobile devices. MS gets about $20 per Windows Mobile device and $50-70 per laptop device. Do the math. It's way short.

That's a rather useless comparison. Apple is getting the profits of both the hardware and software from a sale. MS only gets the software profits. If you want to add up both the hardware and software profits from all Windows laptops, that'd be a much fairer comparison. And then I think the numbers would show a fairly different picture.

There's no doubt Apple is a huge player in mobile devices. I am not disputing that. I don't take issue with cherry-picking stats to suit their marketing. How convenient for Jobs to compare all mobile devices that Apple sells to a company that pretty much sells only mobile phones or one that sells only gaming devices. If Nokia started selling music players and laptops, it'd be a fair revenue comparison.
post #314 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by NMMI89 View Post

I'm going to wait until the 2nd or 3rd Gen. Just like I did for the iPod and iTouch.

Why wait? Buy the $499 version, enjoy it for a year/18 months, sell it for $300, then buy the 3G version.
post #315 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Flashtards!

I vote winner for best post of the thread and word for the week (not just the day!)

Thanks! I have to give FakeSteve credit for the 'tards" moniker (I think he invented it), but it works so well in this case.
post #316 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Yup, you get 10 billion downloads from by having a severe handicap

Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference). Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped? It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more? And I am not arguing for the usual control Apple places on its platforms. I own an iMac, so obviously I am not that concerned about some control by Apple.

What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before. Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac? On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network. On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone. On the iPad that's quite a stretch.

Though, I will agree that if people see it as a media consumption device, more in line with a portable DVD player or a Kindle, that Apple's control over the device is not really that much of a concern.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

When we come back to this thread in a year, what's going to be your explanation? Why does the size of the iPad negate the iPhone/AppStore model? Just because it's larger? I wasn't aware that simply changing the size of a device also affected the model under which a device operates to such a radical degree.

It's not the size. It's the function of the device. If all that's going to be allowed are apps that are allowed on the iPhone or productivity suites that are on par with iPhone tools, then the iPad will be less of a computer and more of an oversized iPod Touch. I have no problem with that. But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Changing the size my challenge your perception about how such a device should work, but I assure you the iPad isn't targeted at you or your perceptions. It's something different, something new. It's targeted at non-technical users (or technical users like me who, at the end of the day, just want something that will work when we need it) and that's a much larger market than the market currently being served by "traditional computing".

I might actually agree with you here. I might get Gen 2 to replace my old Windows laptop. I am concerned though that people seem to be thinking that this more a netbook replacement than a giant portable DVD player/net browser/e-reader all in one. Some of the comments here certainly seemed to paint some picture of a mobile computing revolution before the launch. It's nothing of the sort. Apple just made a significantly improved mobile internet device (MID).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I can see the iPad replacing my fathers iBook, and him being instantly more productive with it. It's a far more fluid and intuitive experience than a full-blown computer. He doesn't need a full blown computer, nor does he really want a full blown computer. He want's access to information (the web) and to communicate with his friends (email). The iPad will do that in spades, and it will do that far more reliably than even an Mac OSX laptop will - never mind a PC. Reliability, ease of use, meeting his needs - those are things he cares about - not endless checklists of often contradictory features. eBooks are a double bonus that he will enjoy. He would never buy a Kindle or read an electronic book on a notebook, but it's almost second nature on an iPad due to it's form factor.

I agree with you. And that's why I might get one to replace an old laptop as well. But let's not pretend it's going to be able to do all that my old laptop did. This is no productivity machine. Even the iWorks Touch package is just a sop to sell the "productivity" aspect. Is anybody really going to write papers or edit spreadsheets or make whole presentations on here? In a pinch, maybe. But most will do it on a real computer and use this thing for last minute changes or to display their work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

That's the potential here, and one that I think will be easily realized going forward. To call it a prediction is almost criminal...

Agreed. And smart move by Apple. If they added anymore functionality they would have cannibalized their macbook sales. Amazing. The company that wanted to give you one device in your pocket (instead of an iPod and a phone) now wants you to have two in your briefcase (iPad and Macbook).


Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Oh yeah, there are more of him than there are of you

Is the attitude really necessary? Keep your fanboy in your pants.
post #317 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

That's a rather useless comparison. Apple is getting the profits of both the hardware and software from a sale. MS only gets the software profits. If you want to add up both the hardware and software profits from all Windows laptops, that'd be a much fairer comparison. And then I think the numbers would show a fairly different picture.

There's no doubt Apple is a huge player in mobile devices. I am not disputing that. I don't take issue with cherry-picking stats to suit their marketing. How convenient for Jobs to compare all mobile devices that Apple sells to a company that pretty much sells only mobile phones or one that sells only gaming devices. If Nokia started selling music players and laptops, it'd be a fair revenue comparison.

Jobs referred to a company, not a platform which makes it irrelevant what the laptop makers make when we're talking about mobile devices and MS, since MS is not selling the hardware. Remember Ballmer said he liked his position, selling WM to many rather than selling a single hardware model. Jobs is pointing out that Ballmer is out to lunch on WM (though not for Windows).

Nokia has tried to get into laptops. And I believe Nokia was the first to include music players into cell phones (good for them as that's the long term solution); but it was their choice not to sell separate players, which will still have a niche market.

So counting revenues resulting from cellphone sales, Nokia is the largest cellular device company. Counting revenues resulting from computer (hardware or software) sales, MS is the largest computer company. Counting revenues resulting from sales of mobile devices, which are devices that can be easily carried and used from place to place, Apple is the largest mobile device company (and that's not even counting a portion of the iTunes Store sales).

I seriously don't know why you even care to raise an issue. As I wrote earlier, Jobs statement was for financial analysts and developers. Who else gives a crap? Excluding Nokia, that is.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #318 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference). Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped? It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more? And I am not arguing for the usual control Apple places on its platforms. I own an iMac, so obviously I am not that concerned about some control by Apple.

The control is what allows Apple to maintain a standard for user experience. So, Apple cannot allow itself to lose control of its platform. Bad stuff happens, people lose confidence in the platform's user experience, and it's downhill from there. (See MS Windows.) Now, since the App Store vetting was new for Apple, they've arguably made mistakes. Most were quickly corrected, and in the last 2 months, excepting Google Voice and Adobe Flash, the furor has all but died down. (Given that GV can now be accessed thru Safari, it's less of a big deal.) So yes, Apple could've done better, but they've shown the ability to learn so people have moved on.

Quote:
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before. Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac? On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network. On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone. On the iPad that's quite a stretch.

Though, I will agree that if people see it as a media consumption device, more in line with a portable DVD player or a Kindle, that Apple's control over the device is not really that much of a concern.

I agree that there is a concern. Although it's like an appliance, it will be taking a spot that used to be occupied partially by many things including a computer, so those expectations might linger. But once again, it turns on how Apple handles the App Store. So rather than get all worked up now, I'm willing to wait and see how that goes. If Apple gets too restrictive, and users become unhappy, I would predict that sales would start to slow, and Apple would be wise enough to plot a new course.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #319 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by daratbastid View Post

Nokia is a dead dinosaur and they know it

Nokia could only make non-smartphones and that business alone would make them more profits on phones than Apple. Hardly a dead dinosaur. And outside of the US and Canada, Nokia is far more competitive than you'd think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by daratbastid View Post

Nintendo should be worried, their advantage has always been the lower price vs quality. enter the iphone OS devices that do more and are 2x better than what they have, plus the software is cheaper and in vastly greater quantity. Their days are numbered also, only so long they can keep going with this streak until they are passed.. im surprised they have lasted this long honestly..

They'll always have their market. Nobody is going to give an iPod Touch or an iPhone to an 8 or even a 10 year old. And that network gaming feature on an Nintendo DS is a big draw for kids. Ultimately though, with kids it's what other kids have that determines the popularity of a device. I have yet to see a group of grade schoolers huddle together with their iPod Touches. If I was 10 today, I'd want a DS over an iTouch. Teenagers? Different story altogether.
post #320 of 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avidfcp View Post

Simple. Apple wants you to pay for something that is free.

Ridiculous. The revenue Apple gets from their hardware sales far outpaces what they get from content. Apple provides content through iTunes for the convenience of their users.

A company that made money from content - Amazon - just reversed the split in revenue in favor of content producers.

One week before the launch of the iPad

Apple blocks flash because it's an unwieldily resource hog that affects performance and battery life in a negative way. That in turn impacts.... the user experience!

To quote a certain movie "Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!"

The real answers are there for those that seek them - although conspiracy theories are certainly more fun!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Microsoft, Nokia, Nintendo take shots at Apple's iPad debut