Originally Posted by 0yvind
Yes, the tablet category existed long befor the iPad. Apple got there quite early with a PAD in 1993 (the Newton Message Pad). Does anybody know of any "pads" before that?
Here is my Newton 2000 from 1997, sitting beside my iPad 1.
Originally Posted by cgc0202
Bill Gates showed a tablet with stylus ca 2005? and believed it was to become the future of personal computing. But Bill Gates dreams did not resonate with the consumers, primarily because he was thinking of it mainly as a computer (for techies); computers that many average consumers are afraid to use-- because they do not want to feel stupid with such a foreign machine, the computer.
Remember what Gates said, after he saw the iPad? "It does not even have a stylus.
" The implied but unsaid was that to Bill Gates, the iPad would fail.
Many consumers use their computer in a much simpler way than what techies used their computers. They do like their computers to help them do stuff that matter to them -- connecting with family and relatives, creating and sharing memories photoalbums (that is what made Kodak and all camera makers), except now it is digital. And perhaps do some creative stuff also.
Apple/Steve Jobs understood the needs of the consumers, but did even more... Maybe you may want to "use the iPad also for this. or that"... He integrated music to make the iPad even more integral to their lives. And more:
"...there's an App for that.... Only at Apple!
All those years, it took a Steve Jobs to remember what matters to consumers. Now everyone is scrambling to follow his lead, even better him, if they can.
The Newton was a personal digital assistant. Thus, although it had some roles similar to the tablets of the mid 2000s, the Newton was never considered a portable computer in the same vein as the iPad.
Originally Posted by Mac.World
While there were tablets prior to the iPad, it was Apple that made the tablets popular, thus "creating" a viable category. Before Apple, only a few thousand tablets had been sold and therefore not a category.
Originally Posted by Mister Snitch
Well, let's be clear then. Yes, tablets absolutely existed before the iPad. But I am talking about dominating a 'product category' - not creating a wholly 'new' product, per se.
Before the iPod, MP3 players absolutely existed. But they were a tiny niche, at best, compared to other music-playing devices. Since the iPod, the MP3 player is probably the sales leader of all products in the music-playing device category.
You can make a similar comparison re the 'smartphone' niche in relation to the overall cell phone product category prior to the iPhone.
And you can also make a similar comparison to the 'tablet' niche in relation to the overall 'personal computer' category prior to the iPad.
Smartphones, MP3 players, and tablets barely existed as niches within larger product categories before Apple created products in those areas. After they did so, however, those niches grew quickly to dominate their respective categories. (This has, of course, not yet happened with the iPad and the 'personal computer' product category - but we can all see which way the wind is now blowing.)
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I've used Windows-based tablets going back before 2000 (yes, they existed), and the technology was available back then just couldn't cut it: battery, screen, processor speed, pen input. For years, Microsoft saw tablets as an "extension" of their desktop OS, with a pen replacing the mouse, and on-screen keyboard that you would have to peck at with the pen. Those Windows tablets were heavy--like holding a 15" MacBook Pro in one hand. And chunkier than a modern MBP.
It shows that it's hard for companies that think in one direction to think in a completely opposite direction. That's the one thing Apple did right with the Newton... they were not thinking about replacing a mouse with a pen with a desktop OS, but creating an entirely new type of device, using the paradigm of a "digital notepad". It cost less than a PC, lighter than any Windows tablet, and the UI didn't suffer from being adapted from a desktop OS (no tablet should ever force users to have to "right click" with a pen, talk about getting it wrong).
Wow, I've never really pay attention to Apple's Newton size until now. It's so obviously big when put side by side to the iPad, thanks for the picture 0yvind
But what surprises me more is that you still own that "historical" device from Steve Job-less Apple era, are you a collector or something like that?
Now let's talk about those many posts about tablet while we're at it..
What was the first tablet device, and who was the first invented it or the moniker, those are questions to debate among tech historian experts (along with trolls LOL) in another thread or forum.
Even though Apple did deserve a credit for breaking the most commonly known ways to interact with computer at that time (in 1993) with Newton, the company itself has described it as a MessagePad
not a tablet, and widely accepted by consumers as PDA not a tablet.
Not to add more arguments on why was it not called a tablet, IMO the most obvious is because people at that time weren't familiar with what a tablet is, even PDA was still a new thing back then. And like cgc0202, Mac.World, Mister Snitch, and Suddenly Newton
have said up there; the tablet moniker along with the device itself have evolve, but slowly.
Fast forward to present, 2011, where iPad 2 was launched and people are (still) lining up to grab one. With the introduction of iPad, Steve Jobs and Apple, have radically change the way we look at a tablet. All thanks to the revolutionary iOS.
But even now Apple is not calling its famous iPad as a tablet, there is no mention of such moniker in the iPad website. Looks like Steve Jobs doesn't want the iPad to be connected to the PC era, where tablet is known to come with a stylus. He even goes as far as calling iPad as a "magical device". Apple just want its iPad to be known as: an iPad.
So what is a tablet anyway? Trying to describe it, we can't help but to include most of the iPad's features such as all-touchscreen display, apps, app store, mobile web browser, fluid UI, etc. And I even haven't talk about its hardware.. Nowadays, if someone tries to call a device as a tablet without those features, mockery will be in order next. And iPad has always become the main reference, iPad is right now the leader of the pack. But who knows 2-3 years from now? Heck, the iPad is only less than a year old, and yet it has set such standard for a niche category that 'barely' alive before it.
And that bring us to here, where mockery continues to be given at those who claim to have made a better device better than Apple's iPad, in this case is Samsung. <to be continued below...>
Originally Posted by zoetmb
In the U.S., such ads (where there is an implication that the ad contains actual consumers) must say "actor portrayal" or something of the sort. It might be in tiny type and flash by faster than mere mortals can see it, but it has to be there. You see this in pharmaceutical advertising all the time. It also has to state if the claims are typical, which is why there's a disclaimer in virtually all weight loss advertising, even that which does contain actual consumers, that their weight loss claims are not typical. I used to produce web sites for an infomercial company, so I'm familiar with all the legal disclaimer stuff.
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
You're missing the point entirely.
It's not a matter of using actors for ads it's a matter of using actors but telling us they are not actors. Almost all advertisements use actors, but it is technically illegal
(in most western countries anyway), to lie
in advertising or to directly mislead consumers about your product
. They didn't even bother to use that old dodge of putting microscopic writing on the bottom of the screen that lets you know the situation is simulated.
The laws against this sort of deception have never been taken off the books and those of us old enough to remember when the government and the truth in advertising agencies actually took people who made ads like this to court, and eventually to jail are a bit upset that nowadays this is just par for the course. In fact it's underhanded, immoral and still (technically) illegal
Advertising is quite literally an art that is based on deception
. The whole idea is to fool people into using your product by presenting it in the best possibly light and to cover up your products flaws through creative wordplay and imagery. Out and out lying is still not allowed though, and in an industry that's "right on the edge" as it were between misdirection and outright lies, it's arguably even more
important to notice when an advertiser crosses that line.
If these laws aren't upheld then there is nothing to stop anyone from saying anything they want about any product. That's the whole point.
Here Samsung is announcing a product that doesn't even exist
. They are presenting "real people" who aren't actually real
, who are then telling long detailed lies
about using the non-existent product. They are also directly, themselves, and completely outside of the issue of the commercials, lying
about the features the product has.
Advertising is of course a shady business, but almost no company is willing to go this far
even in today's market. Samsung has crossed a huge line here and should really be taken to task over it.
This is literally no different than a car commercial that lies about the MPG the car gets, or how safe it is in an accident. If you can produce outright lies about your product and get away with it, the whole system will fall apart.
<..continued from above> The Korean-based electronic giant's 'Galaxy Tab Interview Project' was described as "true life stories", but it was then revealed that the users interviewed in it are actors and an actress, not the real people who had the so claimed stories.
It doesn't matter if the stories are real and being told by actors or actresses, but not to use the real people after claiming it as "true life stories" got to make you wonder the authenticity of those stories at all. Plus there's legal stuff that 'zoetmb'
has said up there, that's spot on the money.
And Prof. Peabody'
s also said it right, the 'Galaxy Tab Interview Project' presentation is misleading the consumers. Remember when Apple's iPhone 3G tv ad was banned
for misleading consumers over the internet capabilities of the smartphone?
Samsung might be able to get away from legal lawsuit by saying they need people with photogenic face to represent their device on camera, along with other BS the company's lawyers can think of, but they ought to be spanked for having the audacity to made that kind of presentation. And that's what we're here for, this is why we are so passionate to mock Samsung right now.. (the cue goes to those who still wonder why this particular thread is so long)
But cheer up Samsung, maybe we'll root for you someday when you finally done it right, maybe..