Well said. The tablet talk reminds me of the run-up to the iPhone. Apple bashers were pretty sure that there was nothing that Apple could bring to the table, because RIM and WinMo and Nokia already had that covered with their super awesome powerful devices.
Even after the release of Apple's handset, they didn't get it. They compared spec lists and laughed. They talked about the phones that they had had for years that "could do all that, and more." We all remember, right? "Oh look, a phone with a browser, welcome to 2001."
And then of course as every other manufacturer started to shift their smart phone design towards Apple's template, the same people promptly forgot all that and started acting as if such design was simply right and normal and had been going on for ages, and Apple was being eclipsed because of screen resolution or processor speed or, well, back to spec whoring.
I don't know if Apple's take on the tablet will be hugely successful, but I can confidently predict that if it is, its UI and hardware conventions will be promptly adopted by the rest of the industry, at which point Apple bashers will once again forget that they ever championed the prior generation of Windows based failures, and become extremely preoccupied with specs. Apple's contributions to the state of the art will be dismissed as "marketing", with whatever new stuff that becomes industry standard held to be "obvious."
Maybe we should have a contest: what "obvious" things will Apple do with their tablet to make it more useful that what Ballmer just showed from HP? Since whatever they do will clearly be simply repackaging stuff for the sheeple, it should be pretty easy to predict. Any one?
Has anyone seen MS's in car offerings? Do they have any UI innovations?
MS may not be innovating in the same space as Apple. But they are innovating. Their innovations just get overwhelmed by the mundane stuff they're doing and some prominent screw ups (Vista).
- Jasen.
There is a difference between "innovating" and "coming up with new products." I teach leadership for change classes and I will use this video in class to discuss the difference between a visionary and an MBA.
Business people, like Wall Street traders, tend to see what they want to see and what they expect to see ... commodities. They could be building and selling parsnips, pliers or ICBM's and the same mental and creative process would happen, because the same business model is burned into their brains. It is unsurprising because it has been a business model that has been effective in the past, but it only works in the fat middle of the economy, not on the cutting edges.
This keynote has so much to it:
1. The obsequious intro by the guy who basically did an MS advert before Ballmer even got on stage.
2. Ballmer's focus on developers rather than customers.
3. MS's need to constantly have its logo and "Start" button EVERYWHERE, like FOX News having to constantly call itself "fair and balanced" just to make it true through repetition.
4. Ballmer's carnival show antics with repetitive words, like "developers, developer, developers, etc." and "Bing, Bing, Bing..." This is marketings version of Tourette's.
5. The fact that even Seth had to talk about technology for several minutes without discussing anything that Apple innovated - mouse, windows ui, ipod, iphone, etc., and thus having to joke about it as if satire could cover the gaping hole in the universe that is MS innovation.
6. Tons of supposed "innovation" but everything is shown, described and thus designed in very shallow ways that require bright blue colors and Apple inspired black backgrounds to obscure that shallowness.
7. Balmer's need to remind the audience that regardless of whether MS is really innovative or even good for the consumer electronics industry - it is part of the back bone of the e-economy and he made sure everyone knew how many jobs depend upon MS. Kinda like GM in the 1970's.
This is the problem with corporate business and marketing. I don't fault MS for what it does. I fault the media for making most of its money hyping what it does. This happens with Apple too, but Apple transcends it enough to actually inspire wonder, not inspire a temporary amygdala reaction. We just need a consuming public that is far more smart, sophisticated and dare I say wise to at least cut through the crap and hype and fake corporate heroism, and at least be honest when they buy a Windows pc at WalMart, that they are buying a relatively cheap product with no life affirming qualities at all, but they can't afford a MacBook Air.
I just want honesty in the market place and you won't find it at any trade fair.
MS will keep going and keep Zune alive and the XBox marketplace and buy whomever it needs to get back into phones until its OS can be good enough in everything to please most people most of the time. That is its true MO and it will keep working for 2 more decades. By then Apple will be at 17% of the pc market and still healthily ahead in music and video and tablet content - and some new tech that we can't imagine will come out of a US/India/German company that will push things too far for even MS to pretend to lead anymore.
Hopefully CES 2026 will not feel the need to have anyone from MS do a keynote and maybe we can get back to the heady days of the 1980's when there were thousands of innovators and not just thousands of MS "developers."
Microsoft?s Ballmer claims there isn?t a sizeable market for tablets
"As the world knows, everyone is anticipating a tablet computer from Apple later this winter. Based on the veracity of past rumors about Apple, I believe this to be true," Sydell reports. "I asked Ballmer, 'Why would Apple spend so much money and time on a tablet if there wasn't a big market?' He deftly deflected my question saying, 'You'd have to ask Apple.'"[/I]
[/B]
That should be the new answer that Microsoft gives to any question about future tech ...
which has nothing to do with what was being discussed
Of course it does. What's being tossed around is the idea that Apple couldn't innovate by releasing a tablet, or that a tablet has little chance of success, because Windows based tablets have been around for a while and they haven't been big sellers.
My point is that Apple could very well to to "tablets" what they did to smart phones-- basically reinvent the category.
Talking about whatever tablets have been around till now is exactly like talking about smart phones prior to the iPhone-- that is, what has been done to date tells us pretty much nothing about what Apple might do or how it would be received in the market place.
I'm actually a little shocked that anyone is still unclear on this point.
Of course it does. What's being tossed around is the idea that Apple couldn't innovate by releasing a tablet, or that a tablet has little chance of success, because Windows based tablets have been around for a while and they haven't been big sellers.
My point is that Apple could very well to to "tablets" what they did to smart phones-- basically reinvent the category.
Talking about whatever tablets have been around till now is exactly like talking about smart phones prior to the iPhone-- that is, what has been done to date tells us pretty much nothing about what Apple might do or how it would be received in the market place.
I'm actually a little shocked that anyone is still unclear on this point.
No. Your missing the point. Apple didn't magically cause smartphones to exist, They were already there and established. They jumped into the game and brought features no one had, changed the game. Consumers bought smartphones PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
MP3. Already established and then Apple then came in and changed the industry. Consumers bought MP3 players PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
Tablets. Not established. No manufacturer (even Microsoft or Android or Maemo) has made any headway whatsoever. There is no reason whatsoever to own one. They are a useless middle technology between a smartphone and computer where it excells at neither. Your being blind to the fact that's Apple it must be great, when the odds are stacked against it to simply be another nice product that only Apple zealots will buy it similar to the Apple TV
No. Your missing the point. Apple didn't magically cause smartphones to exist, They were already there and established. They jumped into the game and brought features no one had, changed the game. Consumers bought smartphones PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
MP3. Already established and then Apple then came in and changed the industry. Consumers bought MP3 players PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
Tablets. Not established. No manufacturer (even Microsoft or Android or Maemo) has made any headway whatsoever. There is no reason whatsoever to own one. They are a useless middle technology between a smartphone and computer where it excells at neither. Your being blind to the fact that's Apple it must be great, when the odds are stacked against it to simply be another nice product that only Apple zealots will buy it similar to the Apple TV
MP3 players were a niche product before the iPod. While smart phones had a market, it was very limited compared to what's happened post iPhone-- pretty much the provenance of geeks and certain business users. Certainly the idea of a mass market, general purpose pocketable computer didn't exist.
It's not like no tablets have sold, they have their fans, and for certain industries they have a role to play. It's just that no one has figured out how to make them appealing-- just like no one had figured out how to make MP3 players appealing, outside of a few enthusiasts.
And it's impossible to underestimate the roll of the iTunes and App Stores play in making a device like this popular. None of the tablets and slates that have come before had anything like this kind of near frictionless access to content and applications.
You might also consider the fact that prior to the iPod Touch there wasn't really any market for that kind of handheld computer- probably less penetration than tablets have had. Yet the Touch is a huge hit, although you could have argued that such a device would have no success, since people either would want a something more powerful, a smart phone, or something simpler and cheaper.
It's what happens when you have ZERO control over the message. That's right MS, you have to *control* things - what goes in, what comes out. Take a page from Apple. Like what you usually try to do.
I believe they want to say Apple is in the palm of their hands....Actually it would be good subliminals for a Palm Pre ad.
I believe we are going to see a lot of similar looking devices soon. I mean how much different could the iSlate look than that?
I'm perfectly calm. Unlike many here I don't have an emotional reaction to inanimate objects. I use the tool that gets the job done. I don't see the need to bash Google or Microsoft. We already know Ballmer is not fit to run Microsoft. Thats not really news. In fact one of the Top 10 prediction for 2010 is that he would be removed.
I have said it a million times here, competition breeds innovation. The Nexus One will push Apple to build a better iPhone. The end user (that would be us) is the only one that suffers when there is a lack of competition. Some just don't understand that very simple fact.
I'm all for competition. I guess at 31+ I'm getting old because I too just need something that gets things done and doesn't waste my patience, which is rather limited.
I guess many of us here are just sick of seeing all these other companies just falling over themselves delivering more useless gadgetry, despite enormous staff, budgets, resources, connections, supply chains, etc.
The iPhone is the best PDA, phone and music player I have ever used. Nothing comes close, for me and many others. Nexus One, good on it, it'll keep Apple on their toes... a little. I think there are still a few issues with HTC and Android, which I won't go into in this post.
This HP tablet thing is just so obviously a lame duck, and clearly Steve Ballmer had even less of a marketing impact than usual. Like seriously, WHAT IS UP WITH THE RED SWEATER. What is wrong with this guy? Where the hell are his PR/ advertising/ marketing/branding gurus?
And all this netbooks and little tablet eReaders and what not. It's just getting old.
I speak for some of us, I'm sure, when we say, for f**ks sake CES and you companies out there, give Apple a bloody run for its money. Please.
I want 6GB RAM affordable and with 4GB modules more commonly in use. I want a decent 256GB SSD for $300. I want a PC case that doesn't look like ass. I want a Macbook/Pro with ATI 40nm decent 5-series graphics + Arrandale. I want netbooks that don't look like ass. I want a Xbox360 that's half the size and half as hot with twice the visuals that connects to an affordable LED-backlit 46". I don't want to be dancing around in front of it like a douche in this Project Natal or whatever.
Maybe I'm just not in the target market. But being a college-educated male between 18-35 with a general interest in technology, if not someone like me, WhoTF?
BTW do these GLOBAL companies realise in many reasonably large economies around the world, people are reading less and less? I don't want Twilight on an eBook, sure, that's great for whoever, but maybe some comics, Economist, Macworld, PC Gamer at reasonable prices, alongside some sort of adaptable web page viewing of blogs, newsfeeds, forums and so on.
Don't get me wrong. 2000-2010 was a great year for tech in many ways. It just seems at this start of this decade post-recession most are floundering trying to figure out "what" the consumer really wants. It's like Hollywood. They've reached some sort of stagnation point.
Maybe all this brains, talent and money should go towards better clean, renewable energy, and advances in medical knowledge and affordability.
I believe we are going to see a lot of similar looking devices soon. I mean how much different could the iSlate look than that?
That's the thing. IT IS NOT ABOUT WHAT THE ISLATE LOOKS LIKE. It's what it does, how it connects to your digital ecosystem, and so on.
I'm just so sick of gadgets for gadgets' sake. Thank goodness I got wise to this, it sure as heck is helping me save my income at this stage.
All this orgy of technology gimmickery like a magician's trade fair... Where's the beef? In fact, I would ask, Where's the Tofu? Sustainability much, CES?
Neither of those? Did you see how many Tablets are reviewed? You know whats so funny about this forum, if Apple announced their Tablet first everyone would have said they stole the thunder for CES. Looks like thats what CES did today to Apple.
There is no way the Apple Tablet can live up to the hype. There simply isn't a need for a Tablet. The void simply isn't large enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
I already posted that the current Tablet market is between 2-4%. Do you consider that sizeable?
Nvidia's just gone batshit crazy with all this Tablet and Tegra stuff. I guess they just don't make chipsets and new-generation, low power GPUs anymore. All this herd mentality sickens me. Sickens.
MP3 players were a niche product before the iPod. While smart phones had a market, it was very limited compared to what's happened post iPhone-- pretty much the provenance of geeks and certain business users. Certainly the idea of a mass market, general purpose pocketable computer didn't exist.
It's not like no tablets have sold, they have their fans, and for certain industries they have a role to play. It's just that no one has figured out how to make them appealing-- just like no one had figured out how to make MP3 players appealing, outside of a few enthusiasts.
And it's impossible to underestimate the roll of the iTunes and App Stores play in making a device like this popular. None of the tablets and slates that have come before had anything like this kind of near frictionless access to content and applications.
You might also consider the fact that prior to the iPod Touch there wasn't really any market for that kind of handheld computer- probably less penetration than tablets have had. Yet the Touch is a huge hit, although you could have argued that such a device would have no success, since people either would want a something more powerful, a smart phone, or something simpler and cheaper.
MP3 players weren't niche, they were just extremely high priced but were the next logic step for music consumption and if you think otherwise then you'd still be lugging a case of CDs around.
Smartphones had consumer features on them but they weren't the main selling point. Still smartphones were gaining consumer traction before the iphone released, as the BB was becoming a popular and iconic device. I remember drooling over the Nokia N9X series smartphones before i got my first Curve. Smartphones had apps and web browsers on them before the iPhone came, none of them were as pretty or as fast as the iPhone i will say. Still smartphones were on their way to becoming even more a "pocket pc" and then the iPhone lit a fire under everyones ass to get better software AND hardware out.
Anyways, tablets are for very specific uses, i dont know any fans of tablets on any OS platform. I have only seen tablet PCs at the Honda and GM dealership, and thats from 04 with my Prelude and when i took my girls Cobalt in for service in 07. Dont these tablets run Windows? If so then they should run iTunes and other PC software as well to a degree.
No one can find a way for a tablet in our lives, hell even if the Courier was revealed if i couldnt replace my hackintosh with it...wtf is the point? Would i pay more for a tablet? Sure but for a higher price point i expect it to not choke and die and have as much functionality as a PC but with some obvious exceptions (games for one).
Everything a tablet can do is capable by another device, either bigger or smaller and for cheaper. Consumers as a whole have shown zero interest in them period. Apple fans are excited because its their first jump into this sector and are ignoring right now they are jumping into a DEAD industry where as they have jumped into industries that were established and changed the game (that was only 2 though...and Apple has had their share of failures, like the Newton, Cube, and AppleTV). Apple is not only taking on itself against the iPhone but the Kindle AND entire netbook industry, in one device. While the Kindle isnt a serious threat to sales, the iPhone/smartphones and netbooks are.
Also how could the touch not have been a hit? A portable device with a bigger screen for playback, mobile safari, email capabilities. Also its funny that last part, because people did want more than just an iPod touch, they bought an iPhone which leads the touch by a whopping 13 million sold.
HUH? Apple aside, can you explain why everyone and his dog at CES has gotten TABLET FEVER? Apple aside, and whether these companies are going to sell tons of tablets, WHY are these companies all ga ga over tablets?
I'm not arguing with you, what's presented are clearly LAME solutions so far by these companies at CES.
It's like a zombie infection in Vegas. Except replace virus with Tablets.
They piped something into the convention center air ducts, I think.
I think Apple will watch everyone flounder for another year with all kinds of tablets and then only bring one in during 2011.
Then it will be a classic case of reinventing an industry.
I think looking at what's happening at CES Apple is going to laugh and wait another year before releasing any Tablet idea.
The best ideas are sometimes the ones you don't share with the world, if the time is not right.
Companies are forcing Apple to say innovative. As bad as Microsoft is right now they still own the PC market. Google has now intro the Nexus One which looks to be a great smartphone.
For the exception of the iPod what market share does Apple lead? As good as the iPhone is it still isn't a market share leader overall. Nokia and RIM are still ahead overall. Even LG overall has more market share then Apple.
Everyone keeps talking about Microsoft when its Google thats going to blow by Apple if they don't stay innovative.
Um...the iPhone is the number one selling smartphone in the US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan, and about a dozen other countries where it's sold. In France, where the iPhone went multi carrier this year, it controls 70% of the total smartphone market. However, competition isn't just about market share; it's about mindshare and perception as well. Apple has shown time and time again that it doesn't have to sell boatloads of merchandise to be considered a leader. You don't see the tech press talking about the Google's competition with RIM or Symbian or Windows Mobile, even though all are just as much competitors as Apple is, do you? Why? Because Apple is the perceived leader on the tech front, and that absolutely nothing to do with it's actual market share . If you look at it only in terms of market share (which you are), you might have a point, but you're not, so you don't.
Honestly, though the Nexus One may be a great smart phone for many, it's NOT innovative. It does some things better than the iPhone (multitasking of 3rd party apps, better camera), some things worse (very limited onboard memory for apps, sometimes user unfriendly GUI), but it doesn't do anything really different than the iPhone. In other words, it's not different enough from the iPhone to qualify it as a real innovation.
Also, the Nexus One is up against today's iPhone. It's practically a given that that the next version of the iPhone will be better than the current Nexus One. Who knows how long Apple has been working on the next generation iPhone (other than Apple of course). Google doesn't. Nokia doesn't. Microsoft doesn't. RIM doesn't.
(NOTE: I only use the Nexus One as an example since YOU brought it up.)
Again, just because Google or MS releases a product to "compete" with Apple does not mean in anyway that those products are the motivating factors behind Apple's product decisions.
HUH? Apple aside, can you explain why everyone and his dog at CES has gotten TABLET FEVER? Apple aside, and whether these companies are going to sell tons of tablets, WHY are these companies all ga ga over tablets?
-snip-
The best ideas are sometimes the ones you don't share with the world, if the time is not right.
Isn't it obvious? The industry got caught with their pants down with the iPod and the iPhone, and they think that if they get their products out now (or at least announced) they can avoid being steamrolled by Apple again.
Problem is that their strategy is based on something that they've only heard about.
As a side note: does anyone remember when Apple had really shitty marketing? You can't say that about the Apple of the 21st century; not only are they masters of buzz marketing, they seem to have perfected the Jedi mind trick (exhibit A: Steve Ballmer).
Well, no, Mr. Ballmer is not natural born presenter; he never was. Yet, what I deduce from his presentation with all my love and passion for conspiracy theories is
The industry believes, Apple is rolling out a tablet; this supports our best expectations,
The industry does not know it for sure; they have doubts; and they do know more, than Internet trolls do; the whole tablet hogwash might also have been brewed by MS secret followers,
Saying "whatever content'd be" would be brainless, if you're projecting the serious business; this may actually be just Mr Ballmer, or MS having got used to the crowd follows them with admire and minute readiness to bring all bricks MS needs to achieve their tower. Or are they just careless, being unsure the new market is shaping now?..
No market for tablets, it's a dead industry, no interest in them . . .
Yet the entire industry is waiting on the edge of its seat for Apple's device. Everyone's gone tablet/slate-crazy.
There is a market for everything. You just have to make people want your product. Apple's usually good at that. In fact, Apple's pretty good at redefining entire markets and creating new ones.
It's based on wants just as much as it's based on needs.
No market for tablets, it's a dead industry, no interest in them . . .
Yet the entire industry is waiting on the edge of its seat for Apple's device. Everyone's gone tablet/slate-crazy.
There is a market for everything. You just have to make people want your product. Apple's usually good at that. In fact, Apple's pretty good at redefining entire markets and creating new ones.
It's based on wants just as much as it's based on needs.
Believe it or not it's actually mostly wants. If I need a dentist I will find one on my own. If I see an billboard for a dentist with big boobs I can oogle at while I'm in the chair upside down, I might just visit that dentist once for a lick....I mean kick.
There is no real excitement about the "Slate PC" because it is not much new. Microsoft advertised such "slate form factor" devises since years as Ultra-Mobile PCs (UMPC) ... and they didn't sell well at all.
Part of the reason was that they were expensive and clunky and there was no real use-case known for them. The current fuss about tablets is a big different: They are not that expensive since they have to compete with netbooks and smartphones. They finally have a little better design; in particular they are no longer that thick . And you can finally use them with the finger, no need for a stylus.
What is still missing, is the real use-case and how being a full-fledged Windows 7 PC helps with it. They certainly are appealing as a secondary or ternary computer for surfing the web and E-Book reading - so providing bigger screens for that than smartphones and replacing what netbooks were initially designed for before manufacturers starting installing Windows XP on them and selling them as cheap laptops without optical drives. And it's a step ahead if you have dedicated E-Book software on such a device. But browsing the web with a regular Windows browser using a touch screen with no dedicated touch gestures? Not really. Playing regular Windows games? Mostly not interesting if they didn't adapt the controls to a touch screen - just try to play Minesweeper on a touchscreen and you'll see what I mean .... not even starting about first person shooters or flight simulator or anything fancy.
I think, such a devise really needs careful adjustment and Safari on iPhone and the iTunes App Store with tons of E-Book software and games for touch interfaces is a much better direction than just saying "it runs Windows 7" ... but of course, Apps for Cocoa Touch would still needed to be adapted to bigger screens and so on.
Comments
Well said. The tablet talk reminds me of the run-up to the iPhone. Apple bashers were pretty sure that there was nothing that Apple could bring to the table, because RIM and WinMo and Nokia already had that covered with their super awesome powerful devices.
Even after the release of Apple's handset, they didn't get it. They compared spec lists and laughed. They talked about the phones that they had had for years that "could do all that, and more." We all remember, right? "Oh look, a phone with a browser, welcome to 2001."
And then of course as every other manufacturer started to shift their smart phone design towards Apple's template, the same people promptly forgot all that and started acting as if such design was simply right and normal and had been going on for ages, and Apple was being eclipsed because of screen resolution or processor speed or, well, back to spec whoring.
I don't know if Apple's take on the tablet will be hugely successful, but I can confidently predict that if it is, its UI and hardware conventions will be promptly adopted by the rest of the industry, at which point Apple bashers will once again forget that they ever championed the prior generation of Windows based failures, and become extremely preoccupied with specs. Apple's contributions to the state of the art will be dismissed as "marketing", with whatever new stuff that becomes industry standard held to be "obvious."
Maybe we should have a contest: what "obvious" things will Apple do with their tablet to make it more useful that what Ballmer just showed from HP? Since whatever they do will clearly be simply repackaging stuff for the sheeple, it should be pretty easy to predict. Any one?
Best. Post. Ever.
Has anyone seen MS's in car offerings? Do they have any UI innovations?
MS may not be innovating in the same space as Apple. But they are innovating. Their innovations just get overwhelmed by the mundane stuff they're doing and some prominent screw ups (Vista).
- Jasen.
There is a difference between "innovating" and "coming up with new products." I teach leadership for change classes and I will use this video in class to discuss the difference between a visionary and an MBA.
Business people, like Wall Street traders, tend to see what they want to see and what they expect to see ... commodities. They could be building and selling parsnips, pliers or ICBM's and the same mental and creative process would happen, because the same business model is burned into their brains. It is unsurprising because it has been a business model that has been effective in the past, but it only works in the fat middle of the economy, not on the cutting edges.
This keynote has so much to it:
1. The obsequious intro by the guy who basically did an MS advert before Ballmer even got on stage.
2. Ballmer's focus on developers rather than customers.
3. MS's need to constantly have its logo and "Start" button EVERYWHERE, like FOX News having to constantly call itself "fair and balanced" just to make it true through repetition.
4. Ballmer's carnival show antics with repetitive words, like "developers, developer, developers, etc." and "Bing, Bing, Bing..." This is marketings version of Tourette's.
5. The fact that even Seth had to talk about technology for several minutes without discussing anything that Apple innovated - mouse, windows ui, ipod, iphone, etc., and thus having to joke about it as if satire could cover the gaping hole in the universe that is MS innovation.
6. Tons of supposed "innovation" but everything is shown, described and thus designed in very shallow ways that require bright blue colors and Apple inspired black backgrounds to obscure that shallowness.
7. Balmer's need to remind the audience that regardless of whether MS is really innovative or even good for the consumer electronics industry - it is part of the back bone of the e-economy and he made sure everyone knew how many jobs depend upon MS. Kinda like GM in the 1970's.
This is the problem with corporate business and marketing. I don't fault MS for what it does. I fault the media for making most of its money hyping what it does. This happens with Apple too, but Apple transcends it enough to actually inspire wonder, not inspire a temporary amygdala reaction. We just need a consuming public that is far more smart, sophisticated and dare I say wise to at least cut through the crap and hype and fake corporate heroism, and at least be honest when they buy a Windows pc at WalMart, that they are buying a relatively cheap product with no life affirming qualities at all, but they can't afford a MacBook Air.
I just want honesty in the market place and you won't find it at any trade fair.
MS will keep going and keep Zune alive and the XBox marketplace and buy whomever it needs to get back into phones until its OS can be good enough in everything to please most people most of the time. That is its true MO and it will keep working for 2 more decades. By then Apple will be at 17% of the pc market and still healthily ahead in music and video and tablet content - and some new tech that we can't imagine will come out of a US/India/German company that will push things too far for even MS to pretend to lead anymore.
Hopefully CES 2026 will not feel the need to have anyone from MS do a keynote and maybe we can get back to the heady days of the 1980's when there were thousands of innovators and not just thousands of MS "developers."
cheers
Microsoft?s Ballmer claims there isn?t a sizeable market for tablets
"As the world knows, everyone is anticipating a tablet computer from Apple later this winter. Based on the veracity of past rumors about Apple, I believe this to be true," Sydell reports. "I asked Ballmer, 'Why would Apple spend so much money and time on a tablet if there wasn't a big market?' He deftly deflected my question saying, 'You'd have to ask Apple.'"[/I]
[/B]
That should be the new answer that Microsoft gives to any question about future tech ...
"You'd have to ask Apple."
And virtually no one bought them.
which has nothing to do with what was being discussed
which has nothing to do with what was being discussed
Of course it does. What's being tossed around is the idea that Apple couldn't innovate by releasing a tablet, or that a tablet has little chance of success, because Windows based tablets have been around for a while and they haven't been big sellers.
My point is that Apple could very well to to "tablets" what they did to smart phones-- basically reinvent the category.
Talking about whatever tablets have been around till now is exactly like talking about smart phones prior to the iPhone-- that is, what has been done to date tells us pretty much nothing about what Apple might do or how it would be received in the market place.
I'm actually a little shocked that anyone is still unclear on this point.
Of course it does. What's being tossed around is the idea that Apple couldn't innovate by releasing a tablet, or that a tablet has little chance of success, because Windows based tablets have been around for a while and they haven't been big sellers.
My point is that Apple could very well to to "tablets" what they did to smart phones-- basically reinvent the category.
Talking about whatever tablets have been around till now is exactly like talking about smart phones prior to the iPhone-- that is, what has been done to date tells us pretty much nothing about what Apple might do or how it would be received in the market place.
I'm actually a little shocked that anyone is still unclear on this point.
No. Your missing the point. Apple didn't magically cause smartphones to exist, They were already there and established. They jumped into the game and brought features no one had, changed the game. Consumers bought smartphones PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
MP3. Already established and then Apple then came in and changed the industry. Consumers bought MP3 players PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
Tablets. Not established. No manufacturer (even Microsoft or Android or Maemo) has made any headway whatsoever. There is no reason whatsoever to own one. They are a useless middle technology between a smartphone and computer where it excells at neither. Your being blind to the fact that's Apple it must be great, when the odds are stacked against it to simply be another nice product that only Apple zealots will buy it similar to the Apple TV
No. Your missing the point. Apple didn't magically cause smartphones to exist, They were already there and established. They jumped into the game and brought features no one had, changed the game. Consumers bought smartphones PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
MP3. Already established and then Apple then came in and changed the industry. Consumers bought MP3 players PRIOR to this release, regardless if they sucked or not.
Tablets. Not established. No manufacturer (even Microsoft or Android or Maemo) has made any headway whatsoever. There is no reason whatsoever to own one. They are a useless middle technology between a smartphone and computer where it excells at neither. Your being blind to the fact that's Apple it must be great, when the odds are stacked against it to simply be another nice product that only Apple zealots will buy it similar to the Apple TV
MP3 players were a niche product before the iPod. While smart phones had a market, it was very limited compared to what's happened post iPhone-- pretty much the provenance of geeks and certain business users. Certainly the idea of a mass market, general purpose pocketable computer didn't exist.
It's not like no tablets have sold, they have their fans, and for certain industries they have a role to play. It's just that no one has figured out how to make them appealing-- just like no one had figured out how to make MP3 players appealing, outside of a few enthusiasts.
And it's impossible to underestimate the roll of the iTunes and App Stores play in making a device like this popular. None of the tablets and slates that have come before had anything like this kind of near frictionless access to content and applications.
You might also consider the fact that prior to the iPod Touch there wasn't really any market for that kind of handheld computer- probably less penetration than tablets have had. Yet the Touch is a huge hit, although you could have argued that such a device would have no success, since people either would want a something more powerful, a smart phone, or something simpler and cheaper.
Tablets. Not established.
That's about to change.
This says it all. As in "subliminal."
It's what happens when you have ZERO control over the message. That's right MS, you have to *control* things - what goes in, what comes out. Take a page from Apple. Like what you usually try to do.
I believe they want to say Apple is in the palm of their hands....Actually it would be good subliminals for a Palm Pre ad.
I believe we are going to see a lot of similar looking devices soon. I mean how much different could the iSlate look than that?
I'm perfectly calm. Unlike many here I don't have an emotional reaction to inanimate objects. I use the tool that gets the job done. I don't see the need to bash Google or Microsoft. We already know Ballmer is not fit to run Microsoft. Thats not really news. In fact one of the Top 10 prediction for 2010 is that he would be removed.
I have said it a million times here, competition breeds innovation. The Nexus One will push Apple to build a better iPhone. The end user (that would be us) is the only one that suffers when there is a lack of competition. Some just don't understand that very simple fact.
I'm all for competition. I guess at 31+ I'm getting old because I too just need something that gets things done and doesn't waste my patience, which is rather limited.
I guess many of us here are just sick of seeing all these other companies just falling over themselves delivering more useless gadgetry, despite enormous staff, budgets, resources, connections, supply chains, etc.
The iPhone is the best PDA, phone and music player I have ever used. Nothing comes close, for me and many others. Nexus One, good on it, it'll keep Apple on their toes... a little. I think there are still a few issues with HTC and Android, which I won't go into in this post.
This HP tablet thing is just so obviously a lame duck, and clearly Steve Ballmer had even less of a marketing impact than usual. Like seriously, WHAT IS UP WITH THE RED SWEATER. What is wrong with this guy? Where the hell are his PR/ advertising/ marketing/branding gurus?
And all this netbooks and little tablet eReaders and what not. It's just getting old.
I speak for some of us, I'm sure, when we say, for f**ks sake CES and you companies out there, give Apple a bloody run for its money. Please.
I want 6GB RAM affordable and with 4GB modules more commonly in use. I want a decent 256GB SSD for $300. I want a PC case that doesn't look like ass. I want a Macbook/Pro with ATI 40nm decent 5-series graphics + Arrandale. I want netbooks that don't look like ass. I want a Xbox360 that's half the size and half as hot with twice the visuals that connects to an affordable LED-backlit 46". I don't want to be dancing around in front of it like a douche in this Project Natal or whatever.
Maybe I'm just not in the target market. But being a college-educated male between 18-35 with a general interest in technology, if not someone like me, WhoTF?
BTW do these GLOBAL companies realise in many reasonably large economies around the world, people are reading less and less? I don't want Twilight on an eBook, sure, that's great for whoever, but maybe some comics, Economist, Macworld, PC Gamer at reasonable prices, alongside some sort of adaptable web page viewing of blogs, newsfeeds, forums and so on.
Don't get me wrong. 2000-2010 was a great year for tech in many ways. It just seems at this start of this decade post-recession most are floundering trying to figure out "what" the consumer really wants. It's like Hollywood. They've reached some sort of stagnation point.
Maybe all this brains, talent and money should go towards better clean, renewable energy, and advances in medical knowledge and affordability.
I believe we are going to see a lot of similar looking devices soon. I mean how much different could the iSlate look than that?
That's the thing. IT IS NOT ABOUT WHAT THE ISLATE LOOKS LIKE. It's what it does, how it connects to your digital ecosystem, and so on.
I'm just so sick of gadgets for gadgets' sake. Thank goodness I got wise to this, it sure as heck is helping me save my income at this stage.
All this orgy of technology gimmickery like a magician's trade fair... Where's the beef? In fact, I would ask, Where's the Tofu? Sustainability much, CES?
Neither of those? Did you see how many Tablets are reviewed? You know whats so funny about this forum, if Apple announced their Tablet first everyone would have said they stole the thunder for CES. Looks like thats what CES did today to Apple.
There is no way the Apple Tablet can live up to the hype. There simply isn't a need for a Tablet. The void simply isn't large enough.
I already posted that the current Tablet market is between 2-4%. Do you consider that sizeable?
Nvidia's just gone batshit crazy with all this Tablet and Tegra stuff. I guess they just don't make chipsets and new-generation, low power GPUs anymore.
MP3 players were a niche product before the iPod. While smart phones had a market, it was very limited compared to what's happened post iPhone-- pretty much the provenance of geeks and certain business users. Certainly the idea of a mass market, general purpose pocketable computer didn't exist.
It's not like no tablets have sold, they have their fans, and for certain industries they have a role to play. It's just that no one has figured out how to make them appealing-- just like no one had figured out how to make MP3 players appealing, outside of a few enthusiasts.
And it's impossible to underestimate the roll of the iTunes and App Stores play in making a device like this popular. None of the tablets and slates that have come before had anything like this kind of near frictionless access to content and applications.
You might also consider the fact that prior to the iPod Touch there wasn't really any market for that kind of handheld computer- probably less penetration than tablets have had. Yet the Touch is a huge hit, although you could have argued that such a device would have no success, since people either would want a something more powerful, a smart phone, or something simpler and cheaper.
MP3 players weren't niche, they were just extremely high priced but were the next logic step for music consumption and if you think otherwise then you'd still be lugging a case of CDs around.
Smartphones had consumer features on them but they weren't the main selling point. Still smartphones were gaining consumer traction before the iphone released, as the BB was becoming a popular and iconic device. I remember drooling over the Nokia N9X series smartphones before i got my first Curve. Smartphones had apps and web browsers on them before the iPhone came, none of them were as pretty or as fast as the iPhone i will say. Still smartphones were on their way to becoming even more a "pocket pc" and then the iPhone lit a fire under everyones ass to get better software AND hardware out.
Anyways, tablets are for very specific uses, i dont know any fans of tablets on any OS platform. I have only seen tablet PCs at the Honda and GM dealership, and thats from 04 with my Prelude and when i took my girls Cobalt in for service in 07. Dont these tablets run Windows? If so then they should run iTunes and other PC software as well to a degree.
No one can find a way for a tablet in our lives, hell even if the Courier was revealed if i couldnt replace my hackintosh with it...wtf is the point? Would i pay more for a tablet? Sure but for a higher price point i expect it to not choke and die and have as much functionality as a PC but with some obvious exceptions (games for one).
Everything a tablet can do is capable by another device, either bigger or smaller and for cheaper. Consumers as a whole have shown zero interest in them period. Apple fans are excited because its their first jump into this sector and are ignoring right now they are jumping into a DEAD industry where as they have jumped into industries that were established and changed the game (that was only 2 though...and Apple has had their share of failures, like the Newton, Cube, and AppleTV). Apple is not only taking on itself against the iPhone but the Kindle AND entire netbook industry, in one device. While the Kindle isnt a serious threat to sales, the iPhone/smartphones and netbooks are.
Also how could the touch not have been a hit? A portable device with a bigger screen for playback, mobile safari, email capabilities. Also its funny that last part, because people did want more than just an iPod touch, they bought an iPhone which leads the touch by a whopping 13 million sold.
I'm not arguing with you, what's presented are clearly LAME solutions so far by these companies at CES.
It's like a zombie infection in Vegas. Except replace virus with Tablets.
They piped something into the convention center air ducts, I think.
I think Apple will watch everyone flounder for another year with all kinds of tablets and then only bring one in during 2011.
Then it will be a classic case of reinventing an industry.
I think looking at what's happening at CES Apple is going to laugh and wait another year before releasing any Tablet idea.
The best ideas are sometimes the ones you don't share with the world, if the time is not right.
Companies are forcing Apple to say innovative. As bad as Microsoft is right now they still own the PC market. Google has now intro the Nexus One which looks to be a great smartphone.
For the exception of the iPod what market share does Apple lead? As good as the iPhone is it still isn't a market share leader overall. Nokia and RIM are still ahead overall. Even LG overall has more market share then Apple.
Everyone keeps talking about Microsoft when its Google thats going to blow by Apple if they don't stay innovative.
Um...the iPhone is the number one selling smartphone in the US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan, and about a dozen other countries where it's sold. In France, where the iPhone went multi carrier this year, it controls 70% of the total smartphone market. However, competition isn't just about market share; it's about mindshare and perception as well. Apple has shown time and time again that it doesn't have to sell boatloads of merchandise to be considered a leader. You don't see the tech press talking about the Google's competition with RIM or Symbian or Windows Mobile, even though all are just as much competitors as Apple is, do you? Why? Because Apple is the perceived leader on the tech front, and that absolutely nothing to do with it's actual market share . If you look at it only in terms of market share (which you are), you might have a point, but you're not, so you don't.
Honestly, though the Nexus One may be a great smart phone for many, it's NOT innovative. It does some things better than the iPhone (multitasking of 3rd party apps, better camera), some things worse (very limited onboard memory for apps, sometimes user unfriendly GUI), but it doesn't do anything really different than the iPhone. In other words, it's not different enough from the iPhone to qualify it as a real innovation.
Also, the Nexus One is up against today's iPhone. It's practically a given that that the next version of the iPhone will be better than the current Nexus One. Who knows how long Apple has been working on the next generation iPhone (other than Apple of course). Google doesn't. Nokia doesn't. Microsoft doesn't. RIM doesn't.
(NOTE: I only use the Nexus One as an example since YOU brought it up.)
Again, just because Google or MS releases a product to "compete" with Apple does not mean in anyway that those products are the motivating factors behind Apple's product decisions.
HUH? Apple aside, can you explain why everyone and his dog at CES has gotten TABLET FEVER? Apple aside, and whether these companies are going to sell tons of tablets, WHY are these companies all ga ga over tablets?
-snip-
The best ideas are sometimes the ones you don't share with the world, if the time is not right.
Isn't it obvious? The industry got caught with their pants down with the iPod and the iPhone, and they think that if they get their products out now (or at least announced) they can avoid being steamrolled by Apple again.
Problem is that their strategy is based on something that they've only heard about.
As a side note: does anyone remember when Apple had really shitty marketing? You can't say that about the Apple of the 21st century; not only are they masters of buzz marketing, they seem to have perfected the Jedi mind trick (exhibit A: Steve Ballmer).
Yet the entire industry is waiting on the edge of its seat for Apple's device. Everyone's gone tablet/slate-crazy.
There is a market for everything. You just have to make people want your product. Apple's usually good at that. In fact, Apple's pretty good at redefining entire markets and creating new ones.
It's based on wants just as much as it's based on needs.
No market for tablets, it's a dead industry, no interest in them . . .
Yet the entire industry is waiting on the edge of its seat for Apple's device. Everyone's gone tablet/slate-crazy.
There is a market for everything. You just have to make people want your product. Apple's usually good at that. In fact, Apple's pretty good at redefining entire markets and creating new ones.
It's based on wants just as much as it's based on needs.
Believe it or not it's actually mostly wants. If I need a dentist I will find one on my own. If I see an billboard for a dentist with big boobs I can oogle at while I'm in the chair upside down, I might just visit that dentist once for a lick....I mean kick.
Part of the reason was that they were expensive and clunky and there was no real use-case known for them. The current fuss about tablets is a big different: They are not that expensive since they have to compete with netbooks and smartphones. They finally have a little better design; in particular they are no longer that thick . And you can finally use them with the finger, no need for a stylus.
What is still missing, is the real use-case and how being a full-fledged Windows 7 PC helps with it. They certainly are appealing as a secondary or ternary computer for surfing the web and E-Book reading - so providing bigger screens for that than smartphones and replacing what netbooks were initially designed for before manufacturers starting installing Windows XP on them and selling them as cheap laptops without optical drives. And it's a step ahead if you have dedicated E-Book software on such a device. But browsing the web with a regular Windows browser using a touch screen with no dedicated touch gestures? Not really. Playing regular Windows games? Mostly not interesting if they didn't adapt the controls to a touch screen - just try to play Minesweeper on a touchscreen and you'll see what I mean .... not even starting about first person shooters or flight simulator or anything fancy.
I think, such a devise really needs careful adjustment and Safari on iPhone and the iTunes App Store with tons of E-Book software and games for touch interfaces is a much better direction than just saying "it runs Windows 7" ... but of course, Apps for Cocoa Touch would still needed to be adapted to bigger screens and so on.