You answered your own question... they've failed in the Windows world. Now we'll see if they succeed when done right (and with taste.)
the WIndows tablets had a lot of good reviews because you could flip the screen and write on the LCD with your hand. Reason they failed was price. When the average laptop cost $1500 no one wanted to pay $3000 for a tablet laptop.
in the days of a nice laptop being under $1000 how many people are going to pay $1000 for a limited product?
Just for interests sake, at 16:10 a 9.6 inch diagonal screen works out to 5.10 x 8.17 making the device roughly 5.5 x 8.5 (or maybe 6 x 9), so pretty much "steno pad" type of size.
While that size is good for a lot of things, I'm hoping this means it's a document centric kind of device with writing and drawing capabilities at least instead of just a big video pad.
Agreed, and the the tablet may not just have one 'Killer App' but have a 'Killer App' for each of a wide variety of industries, think medicine, education.
after the iphone 3G Exchange file encryption bug medical providers will test these first. anything medical has to pass HIPAA and has to be tested and/or certified
I still can't see why this device needs to exist. Is it just to browse the web from my sofa? If so, the price is hilarious. If it's a portable media player then it's far too bulky. Then what? A computer with no buttons? Count me out.
Tablets have failed in the Windows world for many, many years now. Personally I believe that's simply due to the entire tablet concept being pointless.
Do you live in your sofa?
You are being too blind. It is not going to be "just a giant media player".
Tablets have failed in the Windows world just as WinMo smartphones also failed. Then Apple came. Look at the difference.
I am hoping it includes a tablet/mobile version of iWork, which I think could be killer. But the point I am making is that too much excitement and debate is being created by the price rumors, which have been generated by a source that could not know Apple's retail price. Everybody who thinks that Apple tells their part suppliers what the retail price of the final product is going to be, please raise your hands.
Do you believe this will fail because 1) MS has never figured out how to do it right, and 2) you can't see the market?
Just so we can come back in a year an BBQ up some crow for you.
I see a market for this high end device and this it will do very well- it should appeal very well to upper income types. I have been wanting this for quite a while even before it was mentioned onhere. It seemed like a totally natrual progression after the Touch.
But what Apple has failed to see is the need to enter the economical netbook market (yes and it's educational) which has been in existence for 3 or more years now.
And I'm so sick of hearing how Apple doesn't do low end, especially after they've gone directly after the lowest end video market- the Flip. Someone's kids must have driven SJ and gang nuts with a Flip- why else would they enter this crap market?
the WIndows tablets had a lot of good reviews because you could flip the screen and write on the LCD with your hand. Reason they failed was price. When the average laptop cost $1500 no one wanted to pay $3000 for a tablet laptop. ...
I don't think this is true.
If you have to "flip the screen" then you're not talking about a tablet, you're talking about a convertible laptop which is at best a tiny sub-category of an already tiny category of devices. Also, while a lot of tablets were expensive failures, I don't think cost is the only reason they failed. A great deal of the ones I've seen were just poorly designed. Most were both bulky and heavy making them hard to hold or use.
All of them except perhaps the Newton, used standard desktop OS's which is a gigantic mistake right there.
At the end of the day if the tablet from Apple is useful, it will sell even if it costs as much as a laptop. If they can keep it in the low-end of the laptop market (the high end of the netbook market) it should do well as long as it's a useful working device.
It's all speculation though, we will really never know until we actually see one in use.
Do you believe this will fail because 1) MS has never figured out how to do it right, and 2) you can't see the market?
Just so we can come back in a year an BBQ up some crow for you.
For the record- my post was in response to his Zune trashing which by the way (not to defend it) has been in exitence for over 3 years now and not showing any signs of dying especially with today's release of the ZuneHD.
The big question now is operating system - will it run an expanded version of the iPhone OS or something closer to 10.6? If it's a slimmed-down 10.6 then that means many standard desktop apps might run on the thing (Office, iLife, Firefox, etc.) But if it's iPhone OS based, then it'll only run apps from the apps store. So, will it be like a really big iPod Touch or a shrunken down MacBook Air? Hmmm...
I'm thinking extended iPhone OS (with mobile iLife/iWork, etc.) but who knows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc Ingersol
Because the form factor and ergonomics of a laptop only make sense if you have a desk, the keyboard/mouse UI isn't a good fit for smaller screens and the desktop computing model don't work quite so well when you're actually mobile.They've always been running desktop-designed software (huge negative) on machines that weren't quite fast enough to run most of that software (huge negative) with screens a bit too small for that software (huge negative) with comparatively short battery times (huge negative) and required styluses to effectively navigate and manipulate the UI (huge negative).
But you blame the form-factor? That's weird.
Put as signature (I had to cut some off for it to fit). Those arguments also work for an iPhone OS tablet over a Mac OS X tablet.
Right now that analogy is a bit premature. The ZuneHD ain't looking all that bad. I might get one.
What you might want to consider is that a year from now MSFT might come out with a competing tablet that copies the Apple tablet and tries to overcome any of the Apple product's shortcomings.
That will be an interesting comparison when it finally arrives. And you know MSFT is going to copy it.
Yeah, what are you smoking? Zune ain't looking bad? From the demos, the interface is sloppy and badly designed-typical M$. Have you seen any picture of it at all? The font size is so ridiculous that the last "e" from "marketplace" is always cut in half! If in so simple things M$ has paid no attention at all, I fear how the rest of it works.
Besides, the resolution is absurd considering it has a "oh-so-shiny-and-apple-doesn't-have-one" OLED screen
I see a market for this high end device and this it will do very well- it should appeal very well to upper income types. I have been wanting this for quite a while even before it was mentioned onhere. It seemed like a totally natrual progression after the Touch.
But what Apple has failed to see is the need to enter the economical netbook market (yes and it's educational) which has been in existence for 3 or more years now.
And I'm so sick of hearing how Apple doesn't do low end, especially after they've gone directly after the lowest end video market- the Flip. Someone's kids must have driven SJ and gang nuts with a Flip- why else would they enter this crap market?
I think maybe they aren't really "going after" the Flip market but that it just looks that way.
The way I see it, they are just doing that thing where they "add value" to an existing product each year to make it keep selling even though the product is getting a bit long in the tooth at this point. Looked at that way, the reason they added the camera is just because the kids like video nowadays and the cheap camera parts were available.
Like when calculators first came out and were hundreds of dollars just for a basic adding subtraction functionality, and the same for digital clocks. Then later the parts became so cheap that they were added to everything. Clocks in pens, calculators in toilet roll dispensers etc.
It's more just a cheap way to make the product a bit more attractive this year than a determined attempt to take over Flips market I think.
Yeah, what are you smoking? Zune ain't looking bad? From the demos, the interface is sloppy and badly designed-typical M$. Have you seen any picture of it at all? The font size is so ridiculous that the last "e" from "marketplace" is always cut in half! If in so simple things M$ has paid no attention at all, I fear how the rest of it works.
Besides, the resolution is absurd considering it has a "oh-so-shiny-and-apple-doesn't-have-one" OLED screen
Can you edit video on the new Nano as you can on a Flip? NO.
Can you post to YouTube as easily on a Nano as you can a Filp? NO.
I do believe that multitouch enabled notebooks will be the standard going forward sooner or later.
The touch interface is extremely intuitive and user friendly but it is not nearly as fast to type on as a dedicated keyboard.
On a phone people do minimal typing but on a notebook/netbook the amount is much more.
The lack of a keyboard or lack of standard x86 hardware, software, and OS's is enough to doom this device to niche status only. Moreover, it would add only very marginally to the iPod Touch/iPhone...why pay more...and why carry more?
I think Apple is a smart company and know exactly what they are doing with their products. I doubt this product will ever be brought to market....unless it's as a replacement of the mac book line....
I think Apple is a smart company capable of thinking outside of the box. Your analysis is a very inside the box thing. A gigantic, but otherwise unchanged iPhone would not sell, but that is not what a tablet running iPhone OS on an Arm chip would be. Some of the (artificial) limitations of iPhone OS would be removed, tablet specific apps would be created, and the Arm chip would be more powerful than that in the iPhone. I highly doubt that it would only add a marginal benefit to the iPhone.
Would you pay $2000 for it? Converting the Air to a tablet would increase the cost relative to the Air, and it still wouldn't be that powerful. Offsetting the increased power over an arm chip would be the increased processor demands from snow leopard and the desktop applications. One of the major problems of past tablets was that they were essentially full laptops converted to a tablet, with a cost higher than the laptop. Screen sharing could be greatly improved upon if Apple chooses to make the tablet a true companion device [/I]).
Like I said, a larger Ipod Touch for $1000 that you still need another computer from time to time to sync with. No thanks.
I'd pay $1500 for one fully powered touch computer rather than over $2300 for my Macbook/iMac and the upcoming companion Tablet.
You really think it's going to need to be synced? I agree- that's not good - especially at that price.
If it runs iPhone OS, it will need to be synced. I would almost expect wireless sync though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmm21
Like I said, a larger Ipod Touch for $1000 that you still need another computer from time to time to sync with. No thanks.
I'd pay $1500 for one fully powered touch computer rather than over $2300 for my Macbook/iMac and the upcoming companion Tablet.
You have a computer now right? Wireless sync when the device is at home sitting idle/charging, problem solved? One of the biggest potential markets for a tablet is the education market. One of the biggest markets for the 13" MB/MBP's is also the education market. It doesn't make sense from a business perspective to spend years of development on a product that will simply transfer sales of the MB to the tablet. At under $1000 I strongly believe that it will be a companion device, perhaps a more expensive pro tablet will come out at some point as well, but the device rumored in this article isn't it.
I see a market for this high end device and this it will do very well- it should appeal very well to upper income types. I have been wanting this for quite a while even before it was mentioned onhere. It seemed like a totally natrual progression after the Touch.
But what Apple has failed to see is the need to enter the economical netbook market (yes and it's educational) which has been in existence for 3 or more years now.
And I'm so sick of hearing how Apple doesn't do low end, especially after they've gone directly after the lowest end video market- the Flip. Someone's kids must have driven SJ and gang nuts with a Flip- why else would they enter this crap market?
Essentially agree, except for the meme that Apple can't succeed if it doesn't address the low-end market. The Nano is the entry-level candy. It's really not that complicated... Apple at this time (and for the foreseeable future) can provide a higher quality product by keeping numbers low and margins high. If what you want is cheap, then there are plenty of alternatives. But its the old project triangle... you can have low price, high quality or high performance... pick 2. You can't have all three. Apple has gone with quality and performance. MS has gone with price and ostensibly performance by way of a complicated hardware model. But performance is more than the appeal to solder jockeys and gamers. Performance also means usability, and say what you will, Apple's through the roof customer satisfaction levels show which is real 'performance'.
And when it comes out everyone will say "Apple blew it on the price, it's way too expensive, and only meets a small niche of early adopters," and then it will sell 10 million units in the first two years and redefine the market and people will say, "Oh, we knew apple would do that."
Killer app: total sync with home computer and mobile me every time it's within range of its "home" wifi LAN.
Yeah, but Apple will drop the price two hundred bucks two months after its introduction causing a backlash from those that purchased the higher priced version and Apple will give a one hundred dollar credit to use in the Apple Store. Hey, it could happen...
Comments
You answered your own question... they've failed in the Windows world. Now we'll see if they succeed when done right (and with taste.)
the WIndows tablets had a lot of good reviews because you could flip the screen and write on the LCD with your hand. Reason they failed was price. When the average laptop cost $1500 no one wanted to pay $3000 for a tablet laptop.
in the days of a nice laptop being under $1000 how many people are going to pay $1000 for a limited product?
Question: How would a parts supplier know the retail price of an unreleased Apple product? ...
Exactly!
Same as iPhone... 16:10(.33)
Just for interests sake, at 16:10 a 9.6 inch diagonal screen works out to 5.10 x 8.17 making the device roughly 5.5 x 8.5 (or maybe 6 x 9), so pretty much "steno pad" type of size.
While that size is good for a lot of things, I'm hoping this means it's a document centric kind of device with writing and drawing capabilities at least instead of just a big video pad.
Agreed, and the the tablet may not just have one 'Killer App' but have a 'Killer App' for each of a wide variety of industries, think medicine, education.
after the iphone 3G Exchange file encryption bug medical providers will test these first. anything medical has to pass HIPAA and has to be tested and/or certified
I still can't see why this device needs to exist. Is it just to browse the web from my sofa? If so, the price is hilarious. If it's a portable media player then it's far too bulky. Then what? A computer with no buttons? Count me out.
Tablets have failed in the Windows world for many, many years now. Personally I believe that's simply due to the entire tablet concept being pointless.
Do you live in your sofa?
You are being too blind. It is not going to be "just a giant media player".
Tablets have failed in the Windows world just as WinMo smartphones also failed. Then Apple came. Look at the difference.
So show some balls and go on the record.
Do you believe this will fail because 1) MS has never figured out how to do it right, and 2) you can't see the market?
Just so we can come back in a year an BBQ up some crow for you.
I see a market for this high end device and this it will do very well- it should appeal very well to upper income types. I have been wanting this for quite a while even before it was mentioned onhere. It seemed like a totally natrual progression after the Touch.
But what Apple has failed to see is the need to enter the economical netbook market (yes and it's educational) which has been in existence for 3 or more years now.
And I'm so sick of hearing how Apple doesn't do low end, especially after they've gone directly after the lowest end video market- the Flip. Someone's kids must have driven SJ and gang nuts with a Flip- why else would they enter this crap market?
the WIndows tablets had a lot of good reviews because you could flip the screen and write on the LCD with your hand. Reason they failed was price. When the average laptop cost $1500 no one wanted to pay $3000 for a tablet laptop. ...
I don't think this is true.
If you have to "flip the screen" then you're not talking about a tablet, you're talking about a convertible laptop which is at best a tiny sub-category of an already tiny category of devices. Also, while a lot of tablets were expensive failures, I don't think cost is the only reason they failed. A great deal of the ones I've seen were just poorly designed. Most were both bulky and heavy making them hard to hold or use.
All of them except perhaps the Newton, used standard desktop OS's which is a gigantic mistake right there.
At the end of the day if the tablet from Apple is useful, it will sell even if it costs as much as a laptop. If they can keep it in the low-end of the laptop market (the high end of the netbook market) it should do well as long as it's a useful working device.
It's all speculation though, we will really never know until we actually see one in use.
So show some balls and go on the record.
Do you believe this will fail because 1) MS has never figured out how to do it right, and 2) you can't see the market?
Just so we can come back in a year an BBQ up some crow for you.
For the record- my post was in response to his Zune trashing which by the way (not to defend it) has been in exitence for over 3 years now and not showing any signs of dying especially with today's release of the ZuneHD.
The big question now is operating system - will it run an expanded version of the iPhone OS or something closer to 10.6? If it's a slimmed-down 10.6 then that means many standard desktop apps might run on the thing (Office, iLife, Firefox, etc.) But if it's iPhone OS based, then it'll only run apps from the apps store. So, will it be like a really big iPod Touch or a shrunken down MacBook Air? Hmmm...
I'm thinking extended iPhone OS (with mobile iLife/iWork, etc.) but who knows.
Because the form factor and ergonomics of a laptop only make sense if you have a desk, the keyboard/mouse UI isn't a good fit for smaller screens and the desktop computing model don't work quite so well when you're actually mobile.They've always been running desktop-designed software (huge negative) on machines that weren't quite fast enough to run most of that software (huge negative) with screens a bit too small for that software (huge negative) with comparatively short battery times (huge negative) and required styluses to effectively navigate and manipulate the UI (huge negative).
But you blame the form-factor? That's weird.
Put as signature (I had to cut some off for it to fit). Those arguments also work for an iPhone OS tablet over a Mac OS X tablet.
Right now that analogy is a bit premature. The ZuneHD ain't looking all that bad. I might get one.
What you might want to consider is that a year from now MSFT might come out with a competing tablet that copies the Apple tablet and tries to overcome any of the Apple product's shortcomings.
That will be an interesting comparison when it finally arrives. And you know MSFT is going to copy it.
Yeah, what are you smoking? Zune ain't looking bad? From the demos, the interface is sloppy and badly designed-typical M$. Have you seen any picture of it at all? The font size is so ridiculous that the last "e" from "marketplace" is always cut in half! If in so simple things M$ has paid no attention at all, I fear how the rest of it works.
Besides, the resolution is absurd considering it has a "oh-so-shiny-and-apple-doesn't-have-one" OLED screen
I see a market for this high end device and this it will do very well- it should appeal very well to upper income types. I have been wanting this for quite a while even before it was mentioned onhere. It seemed like a totally natrual progression after the Touch.
But what Apple has failed to see is the need to enter the economical netbook market (yes and it's educational) which has been in existence for 3 or more years now.
And I'm so sick of hearing how Apple doesn't do low end, especially after they've gone directly after the lowest end video market- the Flip. Someone's kids must have driven SJ and gang nuts with a Flip- why else would they enter this crap market?
I think maybe they aren't really "going after" the Flip market but that it just looks that way.
The way I see it, they are just doing that thing where they "add value" to an existing product each year to make it keep selling even though the product is getting a bit long in the tooth at this point. Looked at that way, the reason they added the camera is just because the kids like video nowadays and the cheap camera parts were available.
Like when calculators first came out and were hundreds of dollars just for a basic adding subtraction functionality, and the same for digital clocks. Then later the parts became so cheap that they were added to everything. Clocks in pens, calculators in toilet roll dispensers etc.
It's more just a cheap way to make the product a bit more attractive this year than a determined attempt to take over Flips market I think.
Yeah, what are you smoking? Zune ain't looking bad? From the demos, the interface is sloppy and badly designed-typical M$. Have you seen any picture of it at all? The font size is so ridiculous that the last "e" from "marketplace" is always cut in half! If in so simple things M$ has paid no attention at all, I fear how the rest of it works.
Besides, the resolution is absurd considering it has a "oh-so-shiny-and-apple-doesn't-have-one" OLED screen
Can you edit video on the new Nano as you can on a Flip? NO.
Can you post to YouTube as easily on a Nano as you can a Filp? NO.
Is a Nano HD like a Flip? NO
Apple doesn't always do things right either.
I think maybe they aren't really "going after" the Flip market but that it just looks that way.
My god- how many times did SJ mention Flip? I had never heard of a Flip until last week and for good reason.
I do believe that multitouch enabled notebooks will be the standard going forward sooner or later.
The touch interface is extremely intuitive and user friendly but it is not nearly as fast to type on as a dedicated keyboard.
On a phone people do minimal typing but on a notebook/netbook the amount is much more.
The lack of a keyboard or lack of standard x86 hardware, software, and OS's is enough to doom this device to niche status only. Moreover, it would add only very marginally to the iPod Touch/iPhone...why pay more...and why carry more?
I think Apple is a smart company and know exactly what they are doing with their products. I doubt this product will ever be brought to market....unless it's as a replacement of the mac book line....
I think Apple is a smart company capable of thinking outside of the box. Your analysis is a very inside the box thing. A gigantic, but otherwise unchanged iPhone would not sell, but that is not what a tablet running iPhone OS on an Arm chip would be. Some of the (artificial) limitations of iPhone OS would be removed, tablet specific apps would be created, and the Arm chip would be more powerful than that in the iPhone. I highly doubt that it would only add a marginal benefit to the iPhone.
Would you pay $2000 for it? Converting the Air to a tablet would increase the cost relative to the Air, and it still wouldn't be that powerful. Offsetting the increased power over an arm chip would be the increased processor demands from snow leopard and the desktop applications. One of the major problems of past tablets was that they were essentially full laptops converted to a tablet, with a cost higher than the laptop. Screen sharing could be greatly improved upon if Apple chooses to make the tablet a true companion device [/I]).
Like I said, a larger Ipod Touch for $1000 that you still need another computer from time to time to sync with. No thanks.
I'd pay $1500 for one fully powered touch computer rather than over $2300 for my Macbook/iMac and the upcoming companion Tablet.
Like I said, a larger Ipod Touch for $1000 that you still need another computer from time to time to sync with. No thanks.
I'd pay $1500 for one fully powered touch computer rather than over $2300 for my Macbook/iMac and the upcoming companion Tablet.
You really think it's going to need to be synced? I agree- that's not good - especially at that price.
You really think it's going to need to be synced? I agree- that's not good - especially at that price.
If it runs iPhone OS, it will need to be synced. I would almost expect wireless sync though.
Like I said, a larger Ipod Touch for $1000 that you still need another computer from time to time to sync with. No thanks.
I'd pay $1500 for one fully powered touch computer rather than over $2300 for my Macbook/iMac and the upcoming companion Tablet.
You have a computer now right? Wireless sync when the device is at home sitting idle/charging, problem solved? One of the biggest potential markets for a tablet is the education market. One of the biggest markets for the 13" MB/MBP's is also the education market. It doesn't make sense from a business perspective to spend years of development on a product that will simply transfer sales of the MB to the tablet. At under $1000 I strongly believe that it will be a companion device, perhaps a more expensive pro tablet will come out at some point as well, but the device rumored in this article isn't it.
I see a market for this high end device and this it will do very well- it should appeal very well to upper income types. I have been wanting this for quite a while even before it was mentioned onhere. It seemed like a totally natrual progression after the Touch.
But what Apple has failed to see is the need to enter the economical netbook market (yes and it's educational) which has been in existence for 3 or more years now.
And I'm so sick of hearing how Apple doesn't do low end, especially after they've gone directly after the lowest end video market- the Flip. Someone's kids must have driven SJ and gang nuts with a Flip- why else would they enter this crap market?
Essentially agree, except for the meme that Apple can't succeed if it doesn't address the low-end market. The Nano is the entry-level candy. It's really not that complicated... Apple at this time (and for the foreseeable future) can provide a higher quality product by keeping numbers low and margins high. If what you want is cheap, then there are plenty of alternatives. But its the old project triangle... you can have low price, high quality or high performance... pick 2. You can't have all three. Apple has gone with quality and performance. MS has gone with price and ostensibly performance by way of a complicated hardware model. But performance is more than the appeal to solder jockeys and gamers. Performance also means usability, and say what you will, Apple's through the roof customer satisfaction levels show which is real 'performance'.
And when it comes out everyone will say "Apple blew it on the price, it's way too expensive, and only meets a small niche of early adopters," and then it will sell 10 million units in the first two years and redefine the market and people will say, "Oh, we knew apple would do that."
Killer app: total sync with home computer and mobile me every time it's within range of its "home" wifi LAN.
Yeah, but Apple will drop the price two hundred bucks two months after its introduction causing a backlash from those that purchased the higher priced version and Apple will give a one hundred dollar credit to use in the Apple Store. Hey, it could happen...