Gartner sees Apple's iPad dominating tablet market through 2015 - Page 2

But the issue isn't what you believe. What he was commenting on is the fact that Apple Insider has questions Gartner's predictions (not the numbers as much as methodology and reliability) at least twice. The most recent of which was just TWO days ago:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...nd_a_half.html

If AI doesn't Trust Gartner's research then WHY are they posting this crap as news? The ONLY thing different is that this report shows Apple in first place, which the other's haven't.

In fact, whenever Any analyst puts another OS in the lead, AI calls them out as faulty (if they report them at all) but whenever someone posts numbers with Apple in a positive light, no matter HOW FAULTY the survey, it's suddenly a trusted source (Like that "report" about the lines for Verizon iPhones that only looked at FIVE apple stores and no Verizon locations)

You don't judge if an analyst (or a press release by them) is worth listening to based on if it lines up with your expectations. You judge it on the data.

By posting this article TWO DAYS after they just called the SAME firm out for shoddy predictions, AI's showing that they don't care how accurate the "News" is, as long as it paints Apple in a positive light.

Heck, they didn't even link back to their previous article warning their readers not to accept this report at face value. but you can bet that as SOON as Gartner releases another report that paints another OS in a positive light, AI will be sure to link to:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...7_million.html

That's not "Apple News and Analysis" That's "Apple PR"

Do you also believe that AI should believe and fervently stand behind any and all rumours it posts? I think youre failing to see what this and many other sites are about.

Research firm Gartner sees Apple's iPad controlling the lion's share of the tablet market for the next three years. Or maybe a little bit less. Or perhaps a whole lot more. On second thoughts, only just a little bit more. Or less. Ummm - well, come back and ask us again in 2014. OK?

Can we have our $500,000 now please? Thank you very much. It's a pleasure doing business with you.

No, they don't have to believe them all. But if they post a "rumor" by a company they've publically stated they doubt, it's dishonest not to link back to that doubting post simply because they happen to like the rumor this time.

This site is for "apple news and analysis"

Not: "We post everything Apple, and if it's positive we let it slide, but if it's negative, we go out of our way to try and discredit it"

That's "Apple PR" at best "Apple Fanboyism" at worst.

I don't draw issue with them bringing up this report, since every other tech site will. What I draw issue with is them posting this one like it's from a trustworthy source (no questioning) when they JUST pointed out how inconsistent the firm was two days ago. Again, if this post showed Android (or any other platform) gaining the upper hand by 2015, you KNOW that DED or someone would be here ready to write off the report as useless and not to be listened to.

But because they AGREE with the outcome, they let other's assume it's true.

That is not analysis.

I've never said that Apple does intend to stand still

I'd also disagree with your idea of the average consumer. I don't believe he/she/it has much of an idea how many apps one store or the other has. There's probably many who don't even really understand "apps" to begin with, assuming that the device they buy just magically does all those things they saw in the commercial. And according to some recent surveys there's a significant percentage of smartphone/tablet buyers who buy few if any apps at all. Personally I think the "average" consumer is more concerned with price and presentation. If you've got two good-looking devices on the shelf with the form-factor the buyer is looking for, basically the same hardware and stock functionality, but the "other" is 20% less than Apple's product, "other" is going to get the nod more often than not. Arguing that 80% of the buyers would opt for spending 20% more only because one has the Apple name on it is unlikely. Remember, my "average consumer" isn't well-versed on the technical differences or perceived advantages of Apple's iPad even tho they may have heard of it. Once they're standing in front of the display the Apple advantages may not be so clear to them. That's my opinion anyway.

Gartner has zero credibility in my book. Their poor track record speaks volumes and companies that blindly follow Gartner's recommendations are shortsighted.

+1 If we are going to trash the analysts when they make predictions that go against Apple then we shouldn't be lauding them when they do the opposite.

Oh, he knows exactly what it's about. But, since he's astroturfing for Android, it's convenient for him to ignore inconvenient facts. (Then try to rationalize them away when they're pointed out.)

Okay okay. i'll continue to bite on the pissing contest/ troll thread


GArtner is simply doing what it does well, which is providing very conservative estimates on a market. It is simply covering its bases in a very predictable manner. You folks don't really understand the mind set of how busness is conducted. Yes of course it is making claims that don't make sense to YOU. Thats is fine. Its not about having to prove its findings - its about something else completely

Gartner is selling stability. Companies rely on its estimates to plan their capital and manpower budgets. They make money off this. IF they were to predict the Apple juggernaut and your Fanboy hysteria /takeover the world they would lose credibility and thus lose a lot of customers. You can rant and rave about this and you will, so be it, meanwhile the real world goes on despite you. The market will not let one company dominate. They are simply one force that will bring that consensus about about.

I sadly agree with you, the average consumer has very little clue, what they are buying works for and against them in my book. Apple has great simplistic advertising which works in their favor so do most of the Android commercials. They are selling an image. There will always be folks who want to buy simple , some who want macho and everything in between. most folks buy based on peer pressure and on price. I guess the outcome of this will be fought on the sales floor of few outlets, I don't really understand why Apple puts so few devices in Bestbuy and alike. But one thing I do know as long as the public sees so many Android devices in every phone store/walmart/Rado Shack and alike ournumbering Apple 10 to 1 it doesn't bode well long term does it? Apple will eventually be beaten down by the pure weight and mass of Android. Too bad, that the world will turn once again into a big fragmented, and very insecure race to the bottom Android Universe. Nobody cares really. Its happened with hi-fi, cars and just about every thing sold. I thnk Apple knows this already and is why they don't want the volume market

Gartner are great spreadsheet jockeys, for sure. But the problem with analysts, all of them, is that they really don't know Apple's or Google's or RIM's or HP's real product roadmaps. If they did, they could make more money blackmailing the companies involved than by selling their reports to corporate suckers.

So, since Gartner doesn't know what will really happen 4 years (or 4 days) from now, they extrapolate numbers in a vacuum. Using current data and trends, then running them forward to some arbitrary future date. As in "If things continue exactly as they are right now, this is what will happen in the future."

And that's pretty much the definition of science fiction. The best science fiction makes a comment on current social trends by extrapolating them into a possible future. Maybe Gartner could leave the boring world of tech analysis behind. They could make the leap to Hollywood screenwriting. Big money in that.

You mean like the facts (links) you refuse to provide? or those that Soph refuses to provide? Or the fact that Soph has stated in this article and others that he also things Gartner predictions are trash. So what "facts" are you talking about? Please, where have EITHER of you pointed out facts to contradict what I said here? I would wait, but expecting you to actually respond to a question is about as useful as waiting for a pumpkin to turn into a carriage.

The fact of the matter is is that whenever an analyst predicts Apple on top, this site posts the study as is, but whenever the study states something else, DED or some other writer is quick to point out the fallacies of the study, either in the methodology, or how they interpret it.

So please, tell me what, exactly this site is about. Because I was under the impresstion that it was claiming to be a site for Apple News and commentary on that news, not a Spin zone to preach to the choir, which it's been of late.


When is the last time this site, in it's "analysis," ever said anything contrary to the current company line at apple? or be critical of a move that Apple makes? Surely, you're not going to claim that Apple is perfect, or that a site claiming to offer analysis on Apple only offers things that put the company in a positive light.


And I haven't mentioned android, AT ALL in this topic, and yet I'm somehow "Astroturfing" for them? All I'm saying is what Soph and AI have ALREADY SAID, that Gartner is trash and shouldn't be listened to. So why is AI posting this "story" without linking to the Analysis they've done on the company that released the data?

EDIT: Because you'll use it to nitpick instead of actually answer a question: Yes, I have said the word android, but I haven't said that they're taking over, or that they're better, or anything of the like. I've only mentioned them as an example of a competing platform where AI questioned Garnter's predictions because iOS wasn't in the lead.

First you need to lighten up on the fanboy epithet. It gains you no support for your position except among other astroturfers. AI posted the previous report in the same manner, there is no functional difference here. Except that DED reviewed a previous report to compare their predictive accuracy against what really happened in the predicted timeframe.

No further opinion was offered on their current prediction except to note what it meant in growth terms. No terms of agreement or disagreement were offered either in the smartphone article or this one, you are showing a degree of sensitivity to whether they agree or not which is simply not stated. You can imply all kinds of things but those would be implications which are not defensible. In fact this and subequent posts lead the casual observer to see your arguments as strawman arguments, not based on the articles themselves. I went back and reread the first here:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...nd_a_half.html

to make sure. You are demonstrating a high degree of sensitivity to aligned expectations for these articles, which if parsed from an objective standpoint do not support that assertion. Worse, you seem to conflate subsequent commentary with the article itself.

Read both their titles. One of them tells you that The report is pointless because Gartner can't make up their mind. This is backed up by Analysis. It's CLEAR that they don't take it. They've done similar posts whenever Gartner releases numbers where iOS isn't in the best possible light. And how can you take "Last years predictions not very accurate" as anything other than "Hey, their prediction was wrong"

Or here, where DED made sure to note that Gartner's numbers on Android didn't match other tabulations: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...7_million.html

You're right, when I read an article by DED I have a preconcieved notion about how it will play out. But here's the thing: When DED writes an article about "The competition" you know what type of tone he'll take, and how he'll present the information. He's as predictable as a clock.

This one was posted AS IS, and the wording of the title casts no doubt in the readers mind if they should believe it or not. In fact, words like "Dominating" express quite the opposite (see the article on techcrunch to see how someone can take the SAME information and spin it differently). No, they're not supporting this prediction, but they're certainly not questioning it, or comparing it to other Gartner predictions.

And if "Questioning AI's policies" makes you a fanboy, that's pretty pathetic. Notice I haven't ONCE mentioned a competing platform or how it was going to take over. And I don't expect to gain any "support"

The vast majority of people who read this article don't read the comments. Of those that read the comments, a vast majority don't reply to them. Of those that reply to them they've already made up their minds because if anyone even HINTS at questioning the article or Apple, they're labeled a "Fandroid"

Yes, I use Android. I'm not talking about me. I'm talking about the countless others that posted something and NEVER mentioned another platform, or if they did, it was based SOLEY on personal preference (and they didn't even bash iOS) and yes trolls like Soph and others went out of their way to bash their position (with only opinion of their own) and label them fandroids.

AI: "We paid for a subscription to Gartner's reports and by golly we are going to use it!"

Uh, yeah, the facts we, "refused to provide." WTF are you even gibbering about? And who the hell is Soph?

I think you've just, in the moderately intelligible parts of your post, confirmed what we already knew about you. If only you could just be honest and admit why you're here, then we might respect you, at least.

What Gartner does very well is reinforce the mindsets of clients who really don't have a clue and want some third party to bolster and confirm their unreasoning, uneducated take on the business environment around them. Don't look to consultants selling snake oil to upset clients' apple carts of prejudices. That's not the way to endear themselves to dimwit clients with more loose cash than common sense. It's why Garner so often fails at what it claims to do well - be truly and honestly predictive, letting the chips fall where they may.

There's a resemblance by Gartner and their ilk to Palm Beach "walkers" - young to middle aged "gentlemen" on Florida's Atlantic Coast, who flirt with and squire around wealthy, lonely widows and spinsters. There's no sense of conviction, principles or ethics in play here. It's all about chasing the wafting scent of money.

Your arguments are tiresome and not at all productive. Your demands that AI be critical when you think they should be critical are specious at best and egotistical. You seem to be acutely tuned into the "Apple company line" whatever the heck that is, and accuse AI of blindly supporting that, with no accurately supporting evidence to back it up. And still worse you make utter ridiculous statements like

Unfortunately I feel compelled at this juncture to put you on the ignore list because your arguments fail repeatedly, logically and have no real value for discussion purposes to me.

deleted

The post I quoted on said I was ignoring "inconvenient" facts. So, since I said that AI is a Fan site (not a news Site), where are the facts to counter this? When is the last time AI posted ANYTHING that questioned a move by Apple or suggested how they could improve their current position?

If they were a news site, that would be fine. But the thing is is that they DO provide commentary (see, DED) it just always happens to be in Apple's favor. Then they're not a news site, and they can't be an analysis site, because an analyst NEVER maintains the same POV no matter what. So what are they? I said they're a fan site, being generous. You disagreed, saying I was ignoring facts.

So, where are the facts I'm ignoring mouse?

No, I said if they're going to be critical, be consistent. You either report these "analysts" as the press release shows, or you question their methods. You don't only question their methods when it doesn't suite you.


That's what I'm saying. It's not a question of being critical whenever "I" or anyone else things. It's an either/or thing. They're either critical of Gartner ALL the time, or they just post the news as it comes.

I wasn't aware that it was "Egotistical" or "arrogant" to take a company at their tag line: "Apple news and Analysis" I don't give a rat's ass which path they choose (report all, or analyze all). It's their website. But choosing to only analyze when it placed Apple in a better light IS arrogant.

EDIT: You yourself called out Gartner's track record in a previous post.

I know this is off topic, but this thread is father tiresome anyway...

I had a similar problem with my 3GS last year. Some corrosion on the charging contacts, it seemed. Sync and back up (if you can--email yourself anything important since last update if you can't) and take it to an Apple store. They checked the immersion indicators on mine and swapped it out with a new one in 5 minutes...
The ease of the transaction is one of the reasons I am so happy with my iPhones. When it comes time to get an iPad, it will surely be an iPad...

OK, fine, it's a fan site. I'm a fan, which doesn't mean I don't wish Apple would do some things differently.

I'm really interested in the psychology of this, though. The simplest assumption is that you're a paid Google astroturfer, but if not.... Is somebody from over here going to some Android fansite you hang out at and pissing in your cornflakes? (I'm just assuming that such sites exist, I don't know.) I'm sure they're hotbeds of closely reasoned analysis if they do existsurely nobody would say anything bad about a competitor over there. So seriously, what's your motivation?

But the thing is, AI has NEVER posted any analysis that says apple should do differently. Even as a Fan of iOS, you wish they would improve things. So don't you think it's strange that a site that is the start of so many reposts across Apple-related sites would never mention anything that's even mildly critical of iOS? Even if it leads to a better user experience?

And again, where in this topic have I EVER tried pushing android? No seriously, where have I said it? If I was a fandroid, I'm pretty sure I would take a position pointing out Android's gain (I didn't). I'm saying Gartner is trash, and that AI has said as much, on multiple occasions, and yet they CONTINUE posting the data, only providing commentary if the data isn't in Apple's favor.

I've stated why I'm here before, and since I don't call myself a fandroid, people like you dismiss it. I'm not wasting time writing it up again.

**And for the record, most Android "Fansites" are also rather critical of Android when they need to be, just like most iOS "fansites" aren't afraid to write a post when they think Apple's missing the mark somewhere.

Is the Nook (and Nook Color) really considered an Android tablet? Doesn't it have to be rooted in order to do much more than serve as a book reading device? I have seen some Kindles (also a tablet?) "in the wild" but Nooks I've only seen in B & N and Best Buy stores. Both have probably been sold in quantity but putting them in the same category as the iPad seems an unwarranted stretch.

The Nook just released an SDK for developers to bring their apps to it. It's not an Android tablet in the traditional sense (no Market access) And I don't think it should be tabulated as an "Android Tablet" because of this, but since it technically runs Android, Gartner most likely just threw it in there.

There's a resemblance by Gartner and their ilk to Palm Beach "walkers" - young to middle aged "gentlemen" on Florida's Atlantic Coast, who flirt with and squire around wealthy, lonely widows and spinsters. There's no sense of conviction, principles or ethics in play here. It's all about chasing the wafting scent of money.[/QUOTE]


Now we agree - Capitalism isn't about conviction, ethics or principles simply money, cool of course Apple is above all this (sarcasm)

You're kidding, right? There hasn't been a single thread related to Android or its market share that you haven't immediately hopped onto with the latest Google propaganda, fresh that morning, ignoring anything anybody actually says, and repeating the same talking points over and over and over.... If you're not getting paid, I just can't understand what your motivation is. At least you're considerably more literate than MacRulez or some of the other real trolls.

What fantasy world do you currently live in? Nobody, and I mean nobody has a 20% price advantage on Apple in the iPad market. The only question currently is how hopelessly overpriced "competitive" devices are and how lame the software is. If a customer hates Apple I'm sure he will buy from a competitor just like there was a market for the Zune. How did that turn out for the true disbelievers?

The back and forth would be so much more pleasant if you would respond to what I actually wrote instead of what you either wish or imagined I wrote. I was explaining my idea of a typical consumer. The explanation used an example. Simply because their may not be a device that matches the description yet ( I don't know if there is one or not, or even if there will be), doesn't make the idea behind why the average consumer buys what they do incorrect.

EDIT: Your post did get me looking to see what some of the Android tablets are priced at. Acer's Iconia Tab is set at $450, while ASUS Eee Pad Tranformer will go for $400. Both are comparable both hardware and display-wise with Apple's tablet. Both to be sold by Best Buy (any relationship to Apple's rumored displeasure with BB?) By happenstance the ASUS price is 20% less than Apple's entry-level iPad2.

Gartner seems to have a firm grip of the obvious!

I disagree with you. Your sarcasm is misplaced.

These are sales to the channel not to customers.
For iOS this isn't a problem as we know that each iPad delivered to the channel was sold to a customer.
For the others...

Of course the fact that non-Apple devices were what was in use in office environments is a factor but the biggest reason the early lead was sustained is that price and software availability gave other computer manufacturers a distinct edge over Apple.

Now Apple is making cheaper touchscreen computers and offering a lot more software at great prices. By keeping a closed system, Apple is able to provide an integrated, positive user experience. That the software eco-system is under tight control hardly matters to the end user when there is a convenient, plentiful supply of inexpensive software.

What is rather revealing is that while all of this has clearly demonstrated Apple's ability to learn from the past, the competition, from what I can tell, is not showing the same ability. This may be partially because other manufacturers look back and perceive themselves as having been the victors and hence the tendency to stick with what is perceived to be a winning formula.

Again, I have not ONCE pushed android in this topic.

On the previous post, (also about Gartner) I didn't bring up Android until YOU and other's did. My first post there was much like this one here, I pointed out how AI seems to selectively believe Gartner posts depending on how they position iOS.

-I don't push Google's marketshare and say it will blow iOS out of the water.
-The only time I say Android is superior is how it directly effects how I use it. I know a lot of people who are satisfied with iOS, and that's fine.

In fact, the only time I really post lately is when you or someone like you goes out of their way to spread FUD about Android. Tell me how that makes sense. You're on an apple site, right? You're a fan of apple products because you feel they are superior in both software and hardware, correct? So why feel the urge to go out of your way to bash the competition on this site?

And I don't ignore what people say. In fact, I reply directly to their points (and I even use Links from time to time!) When I ask for the same in turn, I don't get it.

Take your reply here. You ignored everything else from that post, and instead focused on a single quote, which you didn't understand (again, please tell me where I pushed Android on this thread) and called me a fanboy. How is that not ignoring what I say and instead posting the same crap over and over again?

So I assume from what you say here that you also vigilantly patrol the Android fansites (again, assuming they exist) and put them in their place when they unfairly criticize iOS? Hmmm? I think we all know the answer to that. In your mind, no criticism of Android is justified, but any criticism of iOS is.

Just so we're clear, I don't even like iOS. I just like Android even less, because it's an extremely clumsy, tone-deaf copy of iOS. The first Mac I ever really tried was a Centris 610 I got at a garage sale for $10, running System 7.5.?. I couldn't figure out how to get that sucker to do anything. OS X came along, and I sat down and was able to use it like I'd been doing it all my life. IOS is considerably more obtuseit takes a lot of mental effort to try and figure out how something is supposed to work. It's like trying to figure out all those stupid little pictures on my car's dashboard controls. So I'm not a mindless iPhone fanboy by any means. I just want them to keep making better and better iPhones so I can buy them used and use them as superior iPad Touches, living for the day when I can throw my cheap flip phone in the garbage and free myself from cell phones forever.