I love Apple products but Steve Jobs is full of shit.
Nokia is (by far) the largest mobile company in the world.
Mobile products do not include laptops, they are single handheld devices
Today Apple includes laptops. By next year at this time, they'll be the biggest mobile revenue company without including laptops but including iPads.
But let's back up for a second. Why did Apple say that during the keynote? Isn't it kinda extraneous? Was it just to tweak Nokia? Well, yes it was!!!
Seriously though, here's my take: It was for financial analysts and developers. To analysts, Apple is saying you should start valuing us in comparison with mobile device companies, not personal computer companies. Because PCs are a slowing market, while mobile devices is a booming market. To developers, Apple is saying, mobile devices is Apple's future, so have confidence we're in it for the long haul and develop for the iPad and iPhone/iPod touch.
It will likely be able to read books from other stores, though the iBooks Store is in a preferred position.
Can we put this to bed? Apple chose an open format for the basis of their books. It may be wrapped in DRM for books you buy from their bookstore, but the bookstore will no more be closed than iTunes was as it supported MP3 and non-DRM AAC from day one. AAC was not an Apple format either, yet that didn't stop people from jumping up and down about "Apple proprietary" and "walled garden" nonsense either. It would be completely daft for Apple to not allow books from outside.
So can we be consistent and try to stop the fuss about the upcoming book store? I'm sure there will be plenty of people who, like with iTunes, try to paint Apple as the debil, but let's not let leave them any more ambiguity to blow out of proportion than we have to
Can we put this to bed? Apple chose an open format for the basis of their books. It may be wrapped in DRM for books you buy from their bookstore, but the bookstore will no more be closed than iTunes was as it supported MP3 and non-DRM AAC from day one. AAC was not an Apple format either, yet that didn't stop people from jumping up and down about "Apple proprietary" and "walled garden" nonsense either. It would be completely daft for Apple to not allow books from outside.
So can we be consistent and try to stop the fuss about the upcoming book store? I'm sure there will be plenty of people who, like with iTunes, try to paint Apple as the debil, but let's not let leave them any more ambiguity to blow out of proportion than we have to
Fully understood and that's what I think Apple will do. That said, I wouldn't put it past Apple to make a bonehead move, so until I see the Kindle and other ebook readers available for the iPad...
Fact - Flash is everywhere on the web. iPad does not support flash, therefore Job's claim of the iPad beind a great way to browse the web is simply untrue.
Fact - spurned by just the iPhone major sites like YouTube have been actively moving away from flash. Fact - as more larger sites do and pave the way, flash will become less and less relevant.
Fact - as the iMac drove USB adoption, even though it had been a standard, developed by Intel (!!) and on the market for a couple of years yet universally panned by the PC vendors, so will be the same for HTML5 vs. Flash. Much like Nokia is watching it's self be marginalized and forced into the low-margin market segments, Adobe Flash is undergoing the same transition.
Quote:
Fact - Multi-tasking has been standard in computers since the late 1980s. For a new computer not to have it, is an incredible omission.
The iPhone, Ipod Touch and iPad are not "computers" in the traditional sense.
And multi-tasking is a software update away. The iPhone 3Gs can support it, and it's pretty obvious the iPad can too - much like cut/copy/paste if your hanging a major competitive talking point on the lack of multitasking, you might want to have some other objections in reserve.
Quote:
Fact - USB is an interface common to virtually all computing devices. The iPad does not have a USB port.
Fact - Apple demoed it with a USB adapter for the dock connector - for the minority that will want one, it's there!
Quote:
Fact - You evidently have no argument, just cheap insults. Good night!
After reading an unGodly amount of vitriol these last two days, here and elsewhere, posted by a multitude of trolls, astroturfists, windoze apologists, and flashtards, I have concluded that Apple truly has a major hit on their hands.
Flashtards!
I vote winner for best post of the thread and word for the week (not just the day!)
Flash is not the end all, be all. Sites are already rapidly moving away from it
Show me some site and statistics on this one PLEASE cause im calling you full of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
Sigh. Yes, Apple is so scared about competition in the content space their devices only support proprietary Apple formats. iTunes is so closed it's data base is encrypted.
Except neither of the above is true. Apple doesn't need "lock in" because people use their products because they want to.
Really, because it wasnt until recently i think that Apple made it so your music can be DRM free and not tethered to only iTunes. But good way to throw something in there i wasnt really talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
And I think Apple may just be considering that streaming thing. I vaguely remember reading about new data centers, aquisitions of companies that specialize in streaming... heck, being a large shareholder in this obscure company called Akami and releasing things like the quicktime streaming server. But your right, Apple is totally clueless about streaming
I wonder if it will be for free, because i sure as hell doubt Apple's will be. Streaming/buying paid content from a provider and being able to get the SAME CONTENT FOR FREE from some website online is what can hurt Apple (Apple has the most to lose unlike Palm/RIM/Android with no established media stores). Remember Flash goes beyond just music and videos but also into apps and games...and that conveniently steps right on Apples toes yet again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
HTML5 is a HUGE threat to Flash. It renders it moot. Before the iPhone and now iPad, HTML5 wouldn't have been a threat to flash - it has too much momentum to be supplanted by HTML5 on it's own. Just as the iMac drove adoption of USB, the iPhone and iPad will drive adoption of HTML5. Once the tide starts to turn in earnest (look at the vimeo link provided earlier in this thread if you still think that's a pipe dream) the game is up. Adobe knows it. This is the zero hour. I wouldn't count on Apple blinking...
Yeah, it renders it moot...in 10 years. How about we get a standard out that consumers can AND DO use today and implement for tomorrow at the same time? That to me seems like a common sense standpoint no? You're also assuming that Flash/Silverlight will literally be standing still for the next 10 years, neither of us know so dont even dare try to act like you do.
Show me some site and statistics on this one PLEASE cause im calling you full of it.
Well, YouTube, vimeo, and BBC have launched or will soon launch an H.264 alternative from Flash. And MS is using Silverlight instead of Flash whenever it can (not that it's any better).
Plus, many websites have created iPhone apps that display video without using the Flash that they used on their website.
That may not have been a big deal on an iPhone. But on a mobile computing platform, that's a handicap for sure.
Yup, you get 10 billion downloads from by having a severe handicap
When we come back to this thread in a year, what's going to be your explanation? Why does the size of the iPad negate the iPhone/AppStore model? Just because it's larger? I wasn't aware that simply changing the size of a device also affected the model under which a device operates to such a radical degree.
Changing the size my challenge your perception about how such a device should work, but I assure you the iPad isn't targeted at you or your perceptions. It's something different, something new. It's targeted at non-technical users (or technical users like me who, at the end of the day, just want something that will work when we need it) and that's a much larger market than the market currently being served by "traditional computing".
I can see the iPad replacing my fathers iBook, and him being instantly more productive with it. It's a far more fluid and intuitive experience than a full-blown computer. He doesn't need a full blown computer, nor does he really want a full blown computer. He want's access to information (the web) and to communicate with his friends (email). The iPad will do that in spades, and it will do that far more reliably than even an Mac OSX laptop will - never mind a PC. Reliability, ease of use, meeting his needs - those are things he cares about - not endless checklists of often contradictory features. eBooks are a double bonus that he will enjoy. He would never buy a Kindle or read an electronic book on a notebook, but it's almost second nature on an iPad due to it's form factor.
That's the potential here, and one that I think will be easily realized going forward. To call it a prediction is almost criminal...
Oh yeah, there are more of him than there are of you
Balmer also laughed at the iphone the moment it came out claiming it was such an expensive phone...a joke... Yet here is is today negotiating to have Bing installed on it.. Where does Win mobile or the zune stack up today..
Nokia is a dead dinosaur and they know it
Nintendo should be worried, their advantage has always been the lower price vs quality. enter the iphone OS devices that do more and are 2x better than what they have, plus the software is cheaper and in vastly greater quantity. Their days are numbered also, only so long they can keep going with this streak until they are passed.. im surprised they have lasted this long honestly..
Nokia is right that they sell more mobile devices. But Jobs said nothing about quantity of mobile devices. He said by revenue, Apple is the biggest mobile devices company in the world. And he is right.
Is not an iPod nano a mobile device? Does a mobile device only include cellular devices?
Sure, let's talk all Windows mobile devices. MS gets about $20 per Windows Mobile device and $50-70 per laptop device. Do the math. It's way short.
That's a rather useless comparison. Apple is getting the profits of both the hardware and software from a sale. MS only gets the software profits. If you want to add up both the hardware and software profits from all Windows laptops, that'd be a much fairer comparison. And then I think the numbers would show a fairly different picture.
There's no doubt Apple is a huge player in mobile devices. I am not disputing that. I don't take issue with cherry-picking stats to suit their marketing. How convenient for Jobs to compare all mobile devices that Apple sells to a company that pretty much sells only mobile phones or one that sells only gaming devices. If Nokia started selling music players and laptops, it'd be a fair revenue comparison.
Yup, you get 10 billion downloads from by having a severe handicap
Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference). Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped? It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more? And I am not arguing for the usual control Apple places on its platforms. I own an iMac, so obviously I am not that concerned about some control by Apple.
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before. Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac? On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network. On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone. On the iPad that's quite a stretch.
Though, I will agree that if people see it as a media consumption device, more in line with a portable DVD player or a Kindle, that Apple's control over the device is not really that much of a concern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
When we come back to this thread in a year, what's going to be your explanation? Why does the size of the iPad negate the iPhone/AppStore model? Just because it's larger? I wasn't aware that simply changing the size of a device also affected the model under which a device operates to such a radical degree.
It's not the size. It's the function of the device. If all that's going to be allowed are apps that are allowed on the iPhone or productivity suites that are on par with iPhone tools, then the iPad will be less of a computer and more of an oversized iPod Touch. I have no problem with that. But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
Changing the size my challenge your perception about how such a device should work, but I assure you the iPad isn't targeted at you or your perceptions. It's something different, something new. It's targeted at non-technical users (or technical users like me who, at the end of the day, just want something that will work when we need it) and that's a much larger market than the market currently being served by "traditional computing".
I might actually agree with you here. I might get Gen 2 to replace my old Windows laptop. I am concerned though that people seem to be thinking that this more a netbook replacement than a giant portable DVD player/net browser/e-reader all in one. Some of the comments here certainly seemed to paint some picture of a mobile computing revolution before the launch. It's nothing of the sort. Apple just made a significantly improved mobile internet device (MID).
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
I can see the iPad replacing my fathers iBook, and him being instantly more productive with it. It's a far more fluid and intuitive experience than a full-blown computer. He doesn't need a full blown computer, nor does he really want a full blown computer. He want's access to information (the web) and to communicate with his friends (email). The iPad will do that in spades, and it will do that far more reliably than even an Mac OSX laptop will - never mind a PC. Reliability, ease of use, meeting his needs - those are things he cares about - not endless checklists of often contradictory features. eBooks are a double bonus that he will enjoy. He would never buy a Kindle or read an electronic book on a notebook, but it's almost second nature on an iPad due to it's form factor.
I agree with you. And that's why I might get one to replace an old laptop as well. But let's not pretend it's going to be able to do all that my old laptop did. This is no productivity machine. Even the iWorks Touch package is just a sop to sell the "productivity" aspect. Is anybody really going to write papers or edit spreadsheets or make whole presentations on here? In a pinch, maybe. But most will do it on a real computer and use this thing for last minute changes or to display their work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
That's the potential here, and one that I think will be easily realized going forward. To call it a prediction is almost criminal...
Agreed. And smart move by Apple. If they added anymore functionality they would have cannibalized their macbook sales. Amazing. The company that wanted to give you one device in your pocket (instead of an iPod and a phone) now wants you to have two in your briefcase (iPad and Macbook).
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
Oh yeah, there are more of him than there are of you
Is the attitude really necessary? Keep your fanboy in your pants.
That's a rather useless comparison. Apple is getting the profits of both the hardware and software from a sale. MS only gets the software profits. If you want to add up both the hardware and software profits from all Windows laptops, that'd be a much fairer comparison. And then I think the numbers would show a fairly different picture.
There's no doubt Apple is a huge player in mobile devices. I am not disputing that. I don't take issue with cherry-picking stats to suit their marketing. How convenient for Jobs to compare all mobile devices that Apple sells to a company that pretty much sells only mobile phones or one that sells only gaming devices. If Nokia started selling music players and laptops, it'd be a fair revenue comparison.
Jobs referred to a company, not a platform which makes it irrelevant what the laptop makers make when we're talking about mobile devices and MS, since MS is not selling the hardware. Remember Ballmer said he liked his position, selling WM to many rather than selling a single hardware model. Jobs is pointing out that Ballmer is out to lunch on WM (though not for Windows).
Nokia has tried to get into laptops. And I believe Nokia was the first to include music players into cell phones (good for them as that's the long term solution); but it was their choice not to sell separate players, which will still have a niche market.
So counting revenues resulting from cellphone sales, Nokia is the largest cellular device company. Counting revenues resulting from computer (hardware or software) sales, MS is the largest computer company. Counting revenues resulting from sales of mobile devices, which are devices that can be easily carried and used from place to place, Apple is the largest mobile device company (and that's not even counting a portion of the iTunes Store sales).
I seriously don't know why you even care to raise an issue. As I wrote earlier, Jobs statement was for financial analysts and developers. Who else gives a crap? Excluding Nokia, that is.
Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference). Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped? It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more? And I am not arguing for the usual control Apple places on its platforms. I own an iMac, so obviously I am not that concerned about some control by Apple.
The control is what allows Apple to maintain a standard for user experience. So, Apple cannot allow itself to lose control of its platform. Bad stuff happens, people lose confidence in the platform's user experience, and it's downhill from there. (See MS Windows.) Now, since the App Store vetting was new for Apple, they've arguably made mistakes. Most were quickly corrected, and in the last 2 months, excepting Google Voice and Adobe Flash, the furor has all but died down. (Given that GV can now be accessed thru Safari, it's less of a big deal.) So yes, Apple could've done better, but they've shown the ability to learn so people have moved on.
Quote:
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before. Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac? On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network. On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone. On the iPad that's quite a stretch.
Though, I will agree that if people see it as a media consumption device, more in line with a portable DVD player or a Kindle, that Apple's control over the device is not really that much of a concern.
I agree that there is a concern. Although it's like an appliance, it will be taking a spot that used to be occupied partially by many things including a computer, so those expectations might linger. But once again, it turns on how Apple handles the App Store. So rather than get all worked up now, I'm willing to wait and see how that goes. If Apple gets too restrictive, and users become unhappy, I would predict that sales would start to slow, and Apple would be wise enough to plot a new course.
Nokia could only make non-smartphones and that business alone would make them more profits on phones than Apple. Hardly a dead dinosaur. And outside of the US and Canada, Nokia is far more competitive than you'd think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by daratbastid
Nintendo should be worried, their advantage has always been the lower price vs quality. enter the iphone OS devices that do more and are 2x better than what they have, plus the software is cheaper and in vastly greater quantity. Their days are numbered also, only so long they can keep going with this streak until they are passed.. im surprised they have lasted this long honestly..
They'll always have their market. Nobody is going to give an iPod Touch or an iPhone to an 8 or even a 10 year old. And that network gaming feature on an Nintendo DS is a big draw for kids. Ultimately though, with kids it's what other kids have that determines the popularity of a device. I have yet to see a group of grade schoolers huddle together with their iPod Touches. If I was 10 today, I'd want a DS over an iTouch. Teenagers? Different story altogether.
Simple. Apple wants you to pay for something that is free.
Ridiculous. The revenue Apple gets from their hardware sales far outpaces what they get from content. Apple provides content through iTunes for the convenience of their users.
A company that made money from content - Amazon - just reversed the split in revenue in favor of content producers.
One week before the launch of the iPad
Apple blocks flash because it's an unwieldily resource hog that affects performance and battery life in a negative way. That in turn impacts.... the user experience!
To quote a certain movie "Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!"
The real answers are there for those that seek them - although conspiracy theories are certainly more fun!
I seriously don't know why you even care to raise an issue. As I wrote earlier, Jobs statement was for financial analysts and developers. Who else gives a crap? Excluding Nokia, that is.
Meh. Unfortunately, statements like that tend to drive the fanboyism to rabid levels. I just get annoyed with misleading statements.
I love my Mac. But increasingly, I am disappointed that my fellow Mac fans seem to give Apple and Steve a pass when they say or do something less than par. You know if Gates or Ballmer had made a statement like that, people on here would have been all over it, about how it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Why can't Jobs be held to the same standard?
Comments
I love Apple products but Steve Jobs is full of shit.
Nokia is (by far) the largest mobile company in the world.
Mobile products do not include laptops, they are single handheld devices
Today Apple includes laptops. By next year at this time, they'll be the biggest mobile revenue company without including laptops but including iPads.
But let's back up for a second. Why did Apple say that during the keynote? Isn't it kinda extraneous? Was it just to tweak Nokia? Well, yes it was!!!
Seriously though, here's my take: It was for financial analysts and developers. To analysts, Apple is saying you should start valuing us in comparison with mobile device companies, not personal computer companies. Because PCs are a slowing market, while mobile devices is a booming market. To developers, Apple is saying, mobile devices is Apple's future, so have confidence we're in it for the long haul and develop for the iPad and iPhone/iPod touch.
It will likely be able to read books from other stores, though the iBooks Store is in a preferred position.
Can we put this to bed? Apple chose an open format for the basis of their books. It may be wrapped in DRM for books you buy from their bookstore, but the bookstore will no more be closed than iTunes was as it supported MP3 and non-DRM AAC from day one. AAC was not an Apple format either, yet that didn't stop people from jumping up and down about "Apple proprietary" and "walled garden" nonsense either. It would be completely daft for Apple to not allow books from outside.
So can we be consistent and try to stop the fuss about the upcoming book store? I'm sure there will be plenty of people who, like with iTunes, try to paint Apple as the debil, but let's not let leave them any more ambiguity to blow out of proportion than we have to
Can we put this to bed? Apple chose an open format for the basis of their books. It may be wrapped in DRM for books you buy from their bookstore, but the bookstore will no more be closed than iTunes was as it supported MP3 and non-DRM AAC from day one. AAC was not an Apple format either, yet that didn't stop people from jumping up and down about "Apple proprietary" and "walled garden" nonsense either. It would be completely daft for Apple to not allow books from outside.
So can we be consistent and try to stop the fuss about the upcoming book store? I'm sure there will be plenty of people who, like with iTunes, try to paint Apple as the debil, but let's not let leave them any more ambiguity to blow out of proportion than we have to
Fully understood and that's what I think Apple will do. That said, I wouldn't put it past Apple to make a bonehead move, so until I see the Kindle and other ebook readers available for the iPad...
You see, kotatsu, I'm not just an Apple fanboy.
Would you prefer I add it to my signature then?
No, I just wish people would stop quoting you - or at the least your entire posts. Time to add the "new" you to my ignore list too...
Fact - Flash is everywhere on the web. iPad does not support flash, therefore Job's claim of the iPad beind a great way to browse the web is simply untrue.
Fact - spurned by just the iPhone major sites like YouTube have been actively moving away from flash. Fact - as more larger sites do and pave the way, flash will become less and less relevant.
Fact - as the iMac drove USB adoption, even though it had been a standard, developed by Intel (!!) and on the market for a couple of years yet universally panned by the PC vendors, so will be the same for HTML5 vs. Flash. Much like Nokia is watching it's self be marginalized and forced into the low-margin market segments, Adobe Flash is undergoing the same transition.
Fact - Multi-tasking has been standard in computers since the late 1980s. For a new computer not to have it, is an incredible omission.
The iPhone, Ipod Touch and iPad are not "computers" in the traditional sense.
And multi-tasking is a software update away. The iPhone 3Gs can support it, and it's pretty obvious the iPad can too - much like cut/copy/paste if your hanging a major competitive talking point on the lack of multitasking, you might want to have some other objections in reserve.
Fact - USB is an interface common to virtually all computing devices. The iPad does not have a USB port.
Fact - Apple demoed it with a USB adapter for the dock connector - for the minority that will want one, it's there!
Fact - You evidently have no argument, just cheap insults. Good night!
sigh - nevermind....
+1
After reading an unGodly amount of vitriol these last two days, here and elsewhere, posted by a multitude of trolls, astroturfists, windoze apologists, and flashtards, I have concluded that Apple truly has a major hit on their hands.
Flashtards!
I vote winner for best post of the thread and word for the week (not just the day!)
Flash is not the end all, be all. Sites are already rapidly moving away from it
Show me some site and statistics on this one PLEASE cause im calling you full of it.
Sigh. Yes, Apple is so scared about competition in the content space their devices only support proprietary Apple formats. iTunes is so closed it's data base is encrypted.
Except neither of the above is true. Apple doesn't need "lock in" because people use their products because they want to.
Really, because it wasnt until recently i think that Apple made it so your music can be DRM free and not tethered to only iTunes. But good way to throw something in there i wasnt really talking about.
And I think Apple may just be considering that streaming thing. I vaguely remember reading about new data centers, aquisitions of companies that specialize in streaming... heck, being a large shareholder in this obscure company called Akami and releasing things like the quicktime streaming server. But your right, Apple is totally clueless about streaming
I wonder if it will be for free, because i sure as hell doubt Apple's will be. Streaming/buying paid content from a provider and being able to get the SAME CONTENT FOR FREE from some website online is what can hurt Apple (Apple has the most to lose unlike Palm/RIM/Android with no established media stores). Remember Flash goes beyond just music and videos but also into apps and games...and that conveniently steps right on Apples toes yet again.
HTML5 is a HUGE threat to Flash. It renders it moot. Before the iPhone and now iPad, HTML5 wouldn't have been a threat to flash - it has too much momentum to be supplanted by HTML5 on it's own. Just as the iMac drove adoption of USB, the iPhone and iPad will drive adoption of HTML5. Once the tide starts to turn in earnest (look at the vimeo link provided earlier in this thread if you still think that's a pipe dream) the game is up. Adobe knows it. This is the zero hour. I wouldn't count on Apple blinking...
Yeah, it renders it moot...in 10 years. How about we get a standard out that consumers can AND DO use today and implement for tomorrow at the same time? That to me seems like a common sense standpoint no? You're also assuming that Flash/Silverlight will literally be standing still for the next 10 years, neither of us know so dont even dare try to act like you do.
Says the company that controls the Windows Mobile Marketplace.
Or the company that shafted their Plays4Sure "partners" to create the Zune in a last-ditch attempt to match Apple.
I wonder how open those "partners" think Microsoft is
Show me some site and statistics on this one PLEASE cause im calling you full of it.
Well, YouTube, vimeo, and BBC have launched or will soon launch an H.264 alternative from Flash. And MS is using Silverlight instead of Flash whenever it can (not that it's any better).
Plus, many websites have created iPhone apps that display video without using the Flash that they used on their website.
That may not have been a big deal on an iPhone. But on a mobile computing platform, that's a handicap for sure.
Yup, you get 10 billion downloads from by having a severe handicap
When we come back to this thread in a year, what's going to be your explanation? Why does the size of the iPad negate the iPhone/AppStore model? Just because it's larger? I wasn't aware that simply changing the size of a device also affected the model under which a device operates to such a radical degree.
Changing the size my challenge your perception about how such a device should work, but I assure you the iPad isn't targeted at you or your perceptions. It's something different, something new. It's targeted at non-technical users (or technical users like me who, at the end of the day, just want something that will work when we need it) and that's a much larger market than the market currently being served by "traditional computing".
I can see the iPad replacing my fathers iBook, and him being instantly more productive with it. It's a far more fluid and intuitive experience than a full-blown computer. He doesn't need a full blown computer, nor does he really want a full blown computer. He want's access to information (the web) and to communicate with his friends (email). The iPad will do that in spades, and it will do that far more reliably than even an Mac OSX laptop will - never mind a PC. Reliability, ease of use, meeting his needs - those are things he cares about - not endless checklists of often contradictory features. eBooks are a double bonus that he will enjoy. He would never buy a Kindle or read an electronic book on a notebook, but it's almost second nature on an iPad due to it's form factor.
That's the potential here, and one that I think will be easily realized going forward. To call it a prediction is almost criminal...
Oh yeah, there are more of him than there are of you
Nokia is a dead dinosaur and they know it
Nintendo should be worried, their advantage has always been the lower price vs quality. enter the iphone OS devices that do more and are 2x better than what they have, plus the software is cheaper and in vastly greater quantity. Their days are numbered also, only so long they can keep going with this streak until they are passed.. im surprised they have lasted this long honestly..
Nokia is right that they sell more mobile devices. But Jobs said nothing about quantity of mobile devices. He said by revenue, Apple is the biggest mobile devices company in the world. And he is right.
Is not an iPod nano a mobile device? Does a mobile device only include cellular devices?
Sure, let's talk all Windows mobile devices. MS gets about $20 per Windows Mobile device and $50-70 per laptop device. Do the math. It's way short.
That's a rather useless comparison. Apple is getting the profits of both the hardware and software from a sale. MS only gets the software profits. If you want to add up both the hardware and software profits from all Windows laptops, that'd be a much fairer comparison. And then I think the numbers would show a fairly different picture.
There's no doubt Apple is a huge player in mobile devices. I am not disputing that. I don't take issue with cherry-picking stats to suit their marketing. How convenient for Jobs to compare all mobile devices that Apple sells to a company that pretty much sells only mobile phones or one that sells only gaming devices. If Nokia started selling music players and laptops, it'd be a fair revenue comparison.
I'm going to wait until the 2nd or 3rd Gen. Just like I did for the iPod and iTouch.
Why wait? Buy the $499 version, enjoy it for a year/18 months, sell it for $300, then buy the 3G version.
Flashtards!
I vote winner for best post of the thread and word for the week (not just the day!)
Thanks! I have to give FakeSteve credit for the 'tards" moniker (I think he invented it), but it works so well in this case.
Yup, you get 10 billion downloads from by having a severe handicap
Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference). Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped? It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more? And I am not arguing for the usual control Apple places on its platforms. I own an iMac, so obviously I am not that concerned about some control by Apple.
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before. Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac? On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network. On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone. On the iPad that's quite a stretch.
Though, I will agree that if people see it as a media consumption device, more in line with a portable DVD player or a Kindle, that Apple's control over the device is not really that much of a concern.
When we come back to this thread in a year, what's going to be your explanation? Why does the size of the iPad negate the iPhone/AppStore model? Just because it's larger? I wasn't aware that simply changing the size of a device also affected the model under which a device operates to such a radical degree.
It's not the size. It's the function of the device. If all that's going to be allowed are apps that are allowed on the iPhone or productivity suites that are on par with iPhone tools, then the iPad will be less of a computer and more of an oversized iPod Touch. I have no problem with that. But let's not pretend this is an amazing platform if that's all that's coming to market.
Changing the size my challenge your perception about how such a device should work, but I assure you the iPad isn't targeted at you or your perceptions. It's something different, something new. It's targeted at non-technical users (or technical users like me who, at the end of the day, just want something that will work when we need it) and that's a much larger market than the market currently being served by "traditional computing".
I might actually agree with you here. I might get Gen 2 to replace my old Windows laptop. I am concerned though that people seem to be thinking that this more a netbook replacement than a giant portable DVD player/net browser/e-reader all in one. Some of the comments here certainly seemed to paint some picture of a mobile computing revolution before the launch. It's nothing of the sort. Apple just made a significantly improved mobile internet device (MID).
I can see the iPad replacing my fathers iBook, and him being instantly more productive with it. It's a far more fluid and intuitive experience than a full-blown computer. He doesn't need a full blown computer, nor does he really want a full blown computer. He want's access to information (the web) and to communicate with his friends (email). The iPad will do that in spades, and it will do that far more reliably than even an Mac OSX laptop will - never mind a PC. Reliability, ease of use, meeting his needs - those are things he cares about - not endless checklists of often contradictory features. eBooks are a double bonus that he will enjoy. He would never buy a Kindle or read an electronic book on a notebook, but it's almost second nature on an iPad due to it's form factor.
I agree with you. And that's why I might get one to replace an old laptop as well. But let's not pretend it's going to be able to do all that my old laptop did. This is no productivity machine. Even the iWorks Touch package is just a sop to sell the "productivity" aspect. Is anybody really going to write papers or edit spreadsheets or make whole presentations on here? In a pinch, maybe. But most will do it on a real computer and use this thing for last minute changes or to display their work.
That's the potential here, and one that I think will be easily realized going forward. To call it a prediction is almost criminal...
Agreed. And smart move by Apple. If they added anymore functionality they would have cannibalized their macbook sales. Amazing. The company that wanted to give you one device in your pocket (instead of an iPod and a phone) now wants you to have two in your briefcase (iPad and Macbook).
Oh yeah, there are more of him than there are of you
Is the attitude really necessary? Keep your fanboy in your pants.
That's a rather useless comparison. Apple is getting the profits of both the hardware and software from a sale. MS only gets the software profits. If you want to add up both the hardware and software profits from all Windows laptops, that'd be a much fairer comparison. And then I think the numbers would show a fairly different picture.
There's no doubt Apple is a huge player in mobile devices. I am not disputing that. I don't take issue with cherry-picking stats to suit their marketing. How convenient for Jobs to compare all mobile devices that Apple sells to a company that pretty much sells only mobile phones or one that sells only gaming devices. If Nokia started selling music players and laptops, it'd be a fair revenue comparison.
Jobs referred to a company, not a platform which makes it irrelevant what the laptop makers make when we're talking about mobile devices and MS, since MS is not selling the hardware. Remember Ballmer said he liked his position, selling WM to many rather than selling a single hardware model. Jobs is pointing out that Ballmer is out to lunch on WM (though not for Windows).
Nokia has tried to get into laptops. And I believe Nokia was the first to include music players into cell phones (good for them as that's the long term solution); but it was their choice not to sell separate players, which will still have a niche market.
So counting revenues resulting from cellphone sales, Nokia is the largest cellular device company. Counting revenues resulting from computer (hardware or software) sales, MS is the largest computer company. Counting revenues resulting from sales of mobile devices, which are devices that can be easily carried and used from place to place, Apple is the largest mobile device company (and that's not even counting a portion of the iTunes Store sales).
I seriously don't know why you even care to raise an issue. As I wrote earlier, Jobs statement was for financial analysts and developers. Who else gives a crap? Excluding Nokia, that is.
Yep, and I am sure every one of those apps is truly useful and entertaining (obligatory fart app reference). Aside from that, what does the number of app downloads have to do with my argument that a closed platform is handicapped? It's difficult to argue a negative. How much would downloads have been if Apple had opened up the platform more? And I am not arguing for the usual control Apple places on its platforms. I own an iMac, so obviously I am not that concerned about some control by Apple.
The control is what allows Apple to maintain a standard for user experience. So, Apple cannot allow itself to lose control of its platform. Bad stuff happens, people lose confidence in the platform's user experience, and it's downhill from there. (See MS Windows.) Now, since the App Store vetting was new for Apple, they've arguably made mistakes. Most were quickly corrected, and in the last 2 months, excepting Google Voice and Adobe Flash, the furor has all but died down. (Given that GV can now be accessed thru Safari, it's less of a big deal.) So yes, Apple could've done better, but they've shown the ability to learn so people have moved on.
What I am concerned about in this case, is that Apple is selling a computer with restrictions we have not really seen before. Can you imagine for example, Apple approving what software you can install on your mac? On the iPhone it might have been excusable because of issues and concerns about the impact on the cellular network. On the iPod Touch it might have been tolerable because they wanted to avoid duplication and keep one app store for the the ITouch and the iPhone. On the iPad that's quite a stretch.
Though, I will agree that if people see it as a media consumption device, more in line with a portable DVD player or a Kindle, that Apple's control over the device is not really that much of a concern.
I agree that there is a concern. Although it's like an appliance, it will be taking a spot that used to be occupied partially by many things including a computer, so those expectations might linger. But once again, it turns on how Apple handles the App Store. So rather than get all worked up now, I'm willing to wait and see how that goes. If Apple gets too restrictive, and users become unhappy, I would predict that sales would start to slow, and Apple would be wise enough to plot a new course.
Nokia is a dead dinosaur and they know it
Nokia could only make non-smartphones and that business alone would make them more profits on phones than Apple. Hardly a dead dinosaur. And outside of the US and Canada, Nokia is far more competitive than you'd think.
Nintendo should be worried, their advantage has always been the lower price vs quality. enter the iphone OS devices that do more and are 2x better than what they have, plus the software is cheaper and in vastly greater quantity. Their days are numbered also, only so long they can keep going with this streak until they are passed.. im surprised they have lasted this long honestly..
They'll always have their market. Nobody is going to give an iPod Touch or an iPhone to an 8 or even a 10 year old. And that network gaming feature on an Nintendo DS is a big draw for kids. Ultimately though, with kids it's what other kids have that determines the popularity of a device. I have yet to see a group of grade schoolers huddle together with their iPod Touches. If I was 10 today, I'd want a DS over an iTouch. Teenagers? Different story altogether.
Simple. Apple wants you to pay for something that is free.
Ridiculous. The revenue Apple gets from their hardware sales far outpaces what they get from content. Apple provides content through iTunes for the convenience of their users.
A company that made money from content - Amazon - just reversed the split in revenue in favor of content producers.
One week before the launch of the iPad
Apple blocks flash because it's an unwieldily resource hog that affects performance and battery life in a negative way. That in turn impacts.... the user experience!
To quote a certain movie "Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!"
The real answers are there for those that seek them - although conspiracy theories are certainly more fun!
I seriously don't know why you even care to raise an issue. As I wrote earlier, Jobs statement was for financial analysts and developers. Who else gives a crap? Excluding Nokia, that is.
Meh. Unfortunately, statements like that tend to drive the fanboyism to rabid levels. I just get annoyed with misleading statements.
I love my Mac. But increasingly, I am disappointed that my fellow Mac fans seem to give Apple and Steve a pass when they say or do something less than par. You know if Gates or Ballmer had made a statement like that, people on here would have been all over it, about how it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Why can't Jobs be held to the same standard?