or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › RIM PlayBook only garnering half the prelaunch interest of iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RIM PlayBook only garnering half the prelaunch interest of iPad

post #1 of 55
Thread Starter 
An analyst's survey of 1,100 consumers found just 6 percent reporting they are "likely" to buy RIM's new playbook, less than half the number who said the same of Apple's iPad last February.

The survey, performed by Royal Bank of Canada Capital Markets analyst Mike Abramsky earlier this month after the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, indicates that buyers aren't simply attracted to tablet hardware specifications alone.

RIM's strongest card with its new PlayBook is the promise to deliver dual core CPU performance via its newly acquired QNX real time operating system. However, a major factor of the iPad's success wasn't hardware features but rather its familiarity with iPhone and iPod touch users and the third party developers building apps for it.

Developer interest in mobile platforms

Abramsky noted that "developer interest in PlayBook nearly doubled to 28% in January from 16% in September," citing figures compiled by Appcelerator and IDC of 2,235 mobile developers.

However, RIM's 28 percent interest figure is well behind the 74 percent who reported interest in coding for Android tablets and the 87 percent who said they were very interested in iPad.

Developer interest in iPad is equal to Android smartphones, with only the larger iPhone market reflecting greater interest among developers. Interest in the PlayBook came in below even the 38 percent who said they were very interested in the existing (and incompatible) BlackBerry OS and the 36 percent who expressed interest in Windows Phone 7.

Of all of the features that developers reported as being critical success factors for new Android tablets, 57 percent noted price of the hardware. However, RIM will be debuting its 7 inch PlayBook for the same price as Apple's full sized iPad, offering no advantage in that regard.



RBC's enthusiastic outlook for RIM

Abramsky noted that Appcelerator's developers were more likely consumer-oriented, saying, "we believe BlackBerry's popularity among enterprise developers is significantly higher." The firm expects RIM to sell 6 million PlayBooks in its first full year on the market and 4 million through the end of 2011; that's well ahead of the street consensus of 2-3 million sold in 2011.

RBC is a major investor in RIM, and the two partnered in 2008 with other Canadian investors to set up the BlackBerry Partners Fund to help foster the development new mobile applications. RBC's chief operating officer Barbaras Stymiest also sits on the RIM board of directors. The investment bank's analyst has historically taken an exuberant outlook on RIM's future prospects.
post #2 of 55
The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
  • Runs Flash
  • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!
  • Flash
  • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)
  • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have
  • See bullets above
post #3 of 55
I think the consumer interest in the Playbook will be even lower when people realize that you have to use a Blackberry to make it useful. Even Blackberry owners aren't going to want to be locked in to RIM's double-play.
post #4 of 55
DOA, in the words of Mr. Jobs... Too little way too late.
post #5 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

An analyst's survey of 1,100 consumers found just 6 percent reporting they are "likely" to buy RIM's new playbook, less than half the number who said the same of Apple's iPad last February. ...

I've seen this same data trotted out around the web this morning on several sites, but it's complete nonsense if you think clearly about it. The survey purports to gauge "developer interest," with the subtext being that we can tell which platforms the developers think are better or worse or indeed likely to "take off" by examining the data. In fact however, "developer interest" in platforms/devices that aren't even on the market yet, or are so nascent that consumers haven't even had a chance to use them, really tells us nothing at all.

"Developer interest" is indeed a good gauge of what platforms are more likely to succeed, but only after they've been around and fighting it out for a while. The absolutely huge developer interest in Honeycomb tablets for instance reflects nothing more than the hopes of the developers and can't really be used in any analytical way to say anything at all.

Most of this data is essentially meaningless. It's a survey of opinion, and that opinion is just based on all the same advertising we've all seen ourselves. There's nothing to really inform it at this stage.
post #6 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
  • Runs Flash
  • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!
  • Flash
  • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)
  • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have
  • See bullets above

Please explain what part of Apple's no-flash strategy leads anyone to believe that consumers give a crap? Is it the endless developer support for Apple's platform? Or the 160Million Flash-less iOS devices sold? Or the product launches featuring people wrapped around the block, eager to get their hands on the newest device that doesn't run flash?

Nerds and apple-haters care about flash. Consumers do not.
post #7 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
  • Runs Flash
  • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!
  • Flash
  • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)
  • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have
  • See bullets above

there is more to life than FLASH... if you're basing your decision on flash alone, then you're going to miss out on the many other advantages to iOS.

your loss...

besides... why would you want to watch a 1080p movie while playing chess on the same display???? personally... not what I would do...
post #8 of 55
Quote:
RBC is a major investor in RIM, and the two partnered in 2008 with other Canadian investors to set up the BlackBerry Partners Fund to help foster the development new mobile applications. RBC's chief operating officer Barbaras Stymiest also sits on the RIM board of directors. The investment bank's analyst has historically taken an exuberant outlook on RIM's future prospects.

This should have been placed at the beginning of the article. Could have saved me, and others, valuable time
post #9 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
  • Runs Flash
  • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!
  • Flash
  • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)
  • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have
  • See bullets above

Guys I think it is called Sarcasm, I know it hard to believe that someone who lives in Calif understands sarcasm,
post #10 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
  • Runs Flash
  • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!
  • Flash
  • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)
  • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have
  • See bullets above



You forgot "Comparable battery life".. Compared to what?! Who care!
post #11 of 55
QNX is not a "feel good" Operating System like iOS that is for sure.

iOS is extremely easy for developers while QNX not so much.

I fully expect the iPad 2 to kick the PlayBook to the curb where it rightly belongs in the RIM scrapheap.

Steve was absolutely correct that RIM poses no threat whatsoever and should be totally ignored since Apple blew passed it last year in sales and they have no chance of ever getting close again.

Apple be wise to focus on Android as the primary threat and since all the Honeycomb Tablets initially will be the ten-inch variety Apple should launch a flank attack with a 7" iPad to blow the Gingerbread slates totally out of the water.

Crackberry users should avoid this tablet like the plague since it is so heavily teathered to the handheld blueberry devices and offers no premium over the might iPad.

Consider yourselves schooled people. The call me the BUS DRIVER because I take everyone to school. You can thank me later. Also, absolutely no charge for this lesson as I consider it a public service.
post #12 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Guys I think it is called Sarcasm, I know it hard to believe that someone who lives in Calif understands sarcasm,

I read it as sarcasm.

The first thing the salesperson said to me when I was looking at the Samsung Galaxy Tab... "it runs flash!".
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #13 of 55
Those stats look pretty good to me. Of course, it's the user experience of the entire device that will make or break it. Didn't the iPad interest drop after the announcement because of what it didn't have?

An article yesterday — that I hope AI picks up — has RiM making some pretty bold and definiate claims about the battery. I think this is a very important aspect to customer satisfaction of a tablet so I hope they aren't jut blowing smoke.


edit: Pipped by Maestro64.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #14 of 55
These numbers get revised downwards twice:

The first time will be when the Playbook actually gets released, and people actually get to use the device for real, and find out the 4000 apps RIM says will be able when it ships are just web pages that display better on the iPad.

The second time will be when the iPad 2 is announced.
post #15 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post


Nerds and apple-haters care about flash. Consumers do not.



Excuse Me ! I am a nerd and I dislike Flash........
post #16 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post

Excuse Me ! I am a nerd and I dislike Flash........

I think by 'care' he meant "are not ambivalent toward".
post #17 of 55
I'm shocked it's even getting half the interest. I figured it would be a lot less than that.
post #18 of 55
It's all a Public Relations show. RIM has made over 20 announcements about its Playbook and it is not even out for sale yet. On the other hand, Apple made only 1 announcement and item was available on that same day for developers to play with.

Well, it shows that RIM is scared and is just trying to make noise for noise sake. Just like before Blackberry Storm came out, there were many smoke from RIM but Storm never ignited any fire.

Playbook is DOA. I will not take it for free.
post #19 of 55
If vendors are trying to woo potential customers on hardware specs alone, they refuse to acknowledge the reality of what's going on in modern computing.

I think we are approaching (if not passed) the days where folks don't care what's under the hood anymore. Speed is always welcomed but folks care of the entire experience.

Give the user a great, smooth, well-thought-out GUI, couple by fast hardware and you have a winner. I think it's the simplicity of it is what makes it so difficult for RIM.

If it works great with a single-core CPU, folks won't care. They'll complain if that fancy dual-core CPU sucks the battery twice as fast.

I would expect RIM to have the advantage over the Android folks since (like Apple) they control both the OS and hardware.

However, until they actually product a tangible product that people can actually touch and see, then they are simply blowing smoke with vaporware.

I mean honestly, how can one even decide to get RIM's offerings without even seeing the darn thing?

In the end, they'll probably end up creating an iPad app to hook into their system.
post #20 of 55
First of all, we have to distinguish between what a company "expects" to sell, and what actually happens. All companies make forecasts about the prospect of a new device or product line. Many don't reveal those numbers. With the onslaught of iPads and shortly, Android tablets, I imagine they felt they needed to say something positive. If they don't expect to sell a decent number, then it wouldn't pay to spend the money on it.

We can be sure that MS felt it would sell more Plays-for-Sure licenses than it did. Same for their Zune line, the Kin's, and, so far at least WP7 licenses. But they didn't give out estimates, because they weren't that sure. Good thing too. If RIM doesn't meet those sales numbers it will look worse than it would have had they not announced them at all.

As far as battery life goes, they've stated that 8 hours is their goal. Have they reached that yet? Who knows? Even so, it's still 20% short of the twice as large iPad. If they state that battery life is "up to" 8 hours, that means it's really 7 under most uses.

As far as businesses wanting this, I don't think the interest is really there in a big way. But we also have to understand that interest is not desire, nor is it a commitment.

I believe this article shows some of the problems with RIM's approach to their tablet. It's three pages:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/21767...html?tk=hp_new
post #21 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I think by 'care' he meant "are not ambivalent toward".

Hah, indeed I did. Thanks for the clarification!
post #22 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

I'm shocked it's even getting half the interest. I figured it would be a lot less than that.

Yeah, I was going to say that -half- of iPad's interest nearly a year after people have seen and now been desensitized to tablets is pretty damn impressive...

I'd like to disclaim that I know absolutely nothing about this device, so it could be made of Kraft Singles for all I know...

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #23 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

... I believe this article shows some of the problems with RIM's approach to their tablet. It's three pages:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/21767...html?tk=hp_new

Sounds much worse than I had even imagined, but I loved this bit:

Quote:
RIM also argues that users always have their BlackBerrys with them, so PlayBook users won't need to worry about getting BES connectivity. Ironically, the RIM exec who told me this had left his BlackBerry at home that day, so he couldn't actually use his PlayBook prototype to connect to BES and show me how it worked.
post #24 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

I'm shocked it's even getting half the interest. I figured it would be a lot less than that.

That was my reaction, too. If it's really going to be half as popular as the iPad that's actually quite an accomplishment. But... 1,100 "consumers" is an awfully small sample size. It's really easy to accidentally stumble across pockets of folks that would skew the results significantly, and the timing (*RIGHT* after CES) probably skewed results far away from what they'll be in a few weeks. Without reading about the questioning process, sample selection, or other methodology it's really hard to make a judgement about whether this is just noise or not. My guess? Noise.
post #25 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

First of all, we have to distinguish between what a company "expects" to sell, and what actually happens.

[]

I believe this article shows some of the problems with RIM's approach to their tablet. It's three pages:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/21767...html?tk=hp_new

There is a lot of truth there, but I also cant help but think about the Samsung Galaxy Tab running the smartphone version of Android, with no 3rd-party apps for tablets and a poor battery life still selling over 1M units in what I think is a very short time for what I think is a poorly conceived product. RiM seems to be in a better position than the Galaxy Tab so I think several million is very possible for the first version.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #26 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

There is a lot of truth there, but I also cant help but think about the Samsung Galaxy Tab running the smartphone version of Android, with no 3rd-party apps for tablets and a poor battery life still selling over 1M units in what I think is a very short time for what I think is a poorly conceived product. RiM seems to be in a better position than the Galaxy Tab so I think several million is very possible for the first version.

Well, that 1M units of the Galaxy Tab represents the number of hardcore Android geeks that "had to have one". How many hardcore RIM geeks (not typical users) are there?
post #27 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

These numbers get revised downwards twice:

The first time will be when the Playbook actually gets released, and people actually get to use the device for real, and find out the 4000 apps RIM says will be able when it ships are just web pages that display better on the iPad.

The second time will be when the iPad 2 is announced.

*Assuming the PlayBook even ships first, which is far from a given.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #28 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

*Assuming the PlayBook ships [before iPad 2], which is far from a given.

I'd say it almost certainly won't.
post #29 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Well, that 1M units of the Galaxy Tab represents the number of hardcore Android geeks that "had to have one". How many hardcore RIM geeks (not typical users) are there?

There aren't any hardcore android geeks anymore --- ever since their "open source" bubble got busted by the so-called efuse tivo-ized with Microsoft Bing search on top. Android is THE tool by the carriers like Verizon to lock down stuff their own way.
post #30 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

There aren't any hardcore android geeks anymore --- ever since their "open source" bubble got busted by the so-called efuse tivo-ized with Microsoft Bing search on top. Android is THE tool by the carriers like Verizon to lock down stuff their own way.

I agree with your second sentence, but they are all still living in denial.
post #31 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

RBC interest.... This should have been placed at the beginning of the article. Could have saved me, and others, valuable time

RBC was also a Nortel supporter. That didn't turn out so well either.
post #32 of 55
Playbook eh? I wonder if it's a 3-4 or 4-3 based one?
post #33 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Guys I think it is called Sarcasm, I know it hard to believe that someone who lives in Calif understands sarcasm,

Finally, a genius!
post #34 of 55
I'm interested in the Playbook and I plan to give it a serious look.
post #35 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

Hah, indeed I did. Thanks for the clarification!

Campestral greetings from London suburbs!
post #36 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by SailorPaul View Post

RBC was also a Nortel supporter. That didn't turn out so well either.

Canadian banks also didn't require bailouts from the Feds.
post #37 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

It's all a Public Relations show. RIM has made over 20 announcements about its Playbook and it is not even out for sale yet. On the other hand, Apple made only 1 announcement and item was available on that same day for developers to play with.

Well, it shows that RIM is scared and is just trying to make noise for noise sake. Just like before Blackberry Storm came out, there were many smoke from RIM but Storm never ignited any fire.

Playbook is DOA. I will not take it for free.

I agree 100 Percent. It's called FUD and they stole it from the Microsoft playbook !

[PUN INTENDED]
post #38 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

Please explain what part of Apple's no-flash strategy leads anyone to believe that consumers give a crap? Is it the endless developer support for Apple's platform? Or the 160Million Flash-less iOS devices sold? Or the product launches featuring people wrapped around the block, eager to get their hands on the newest device that doesn't run flash?

Nerds and apple-haters care about flash. Consumers do not.


I read the post with the mention of "Flash" on every other bullet point as SARCASM!

In that to differentiate itself, RIM will tout Flash capability and therefore a superior product because consumers will have access to the "whole internet", however, it has been proven without a doubt that a device like the Flash-less iPad can be wildly successful even without such a bullet point.

In fact, if it weren't for the Playbook having Flash, there probably would be only half of the half showing prelaunch interest which for RIM would not be good.

But that is how I interpreted the post, but the only way to find out which interpretation is correct is to ask the poster.
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #39 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
  • Runs Flash
  • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!
  • Flash
  • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)
  • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have
  • See bullets above

LOLz!!!!

You forgot:
  • Will fit in a large coat pocket--take that, iPad!!!
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #40 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

There is a lot of truth there, but I also cant help but think about the Samsung Galaxy Tab running the smartphone version of Android, with no 3rd-party apps for tablets and a poor battery life still selling over 1M units in what I think is a very short time for what I think is a poorly conceived product. RiM seems to be in a better position than the Galaxy Tab so I think several million is very possible for the first version.

To a large extent, Android buyers are either anti-Apple buyers, or can't get an iPad for some reason. I don't see the Playbook as appealing to that crowd as much.

In addition, Samsung has you thinking, in its Ads, that there ARE a lot of apps available. I don't see how RIM could pull that off as well. And Samsung doesn't talk about battery life. Most consumers aren't sophisticated enough to do any useful research, and will buy just on the Ad. I know Ill get some flack for saying this, but Apple gets a lot of sales that way too. The difference is that Apple's products usually deliver what the Ads say.

How will the Tabs buyers react when they find out that it can't be upgraded to Honeycomb? Assuming what we're hearing about the required specs for it are true.

As for the Playbook, who will be interested? A recent survey of CIO's showed that 78% of those who were going to implement tablets for their firms were going to buy iPads, and that 9% were going for Playbooks. Right now, Android is pretty much out of the picture for corporate use, and MS was about 5%.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › RIM PlayBook only garnering half the prelaunch interest of iPad