e-Books have already started coming to Mac's with Amazon's Kindle for the Mac software. CourseSmart has textbooks, lets one read less than 20% to judge and get a refund if they don't like it.
Mac availability of Kindle is irrelevant - almost no-one will e-read on a mac. CourseSmart is a small niche player that could be swallowed whole if iBooks gets the right content with the right deals. We'll see - it certainly won't be any form of real reason not to have an iPad
Quote:
Really don't need another device for that, unless you have children.
The whole duplication thing is a red herring. The nature of modern computing is total duplication, main computer, handheld device, cloud etc. duping on the iPad is a requirement since its usage occasion is different to most other devices (or a superior experience to the smaller device. I for one will be replacing the use of my iPhone at the couch with an iPad for the superior experience and I want most of the same core data (contacts, email, faves etc.) on it as on my iPhone or Mac.
Quote:
Newspapers perhaps, but I doubt magazines would work well on a iPad, as a lot of magazine content is duplicated on the net an not subject to advertiser influence like it is on a magazine. (only exception would be Consumer Reports)
Magazine demos have been far more interesting than newspapers. If publishers combine compelling content (which they should have already) with more innovative and fresh methods of display, value added content etc. magazines could be a real winner.
Quote:
Duplicate computer or smaller device functionality
See above - duplication of content or function is a requirement if it performs better in specific use cases/occasions
Quote:
Need large storage, 64GB isn't enough for music and everything else for a lot of folks.
The opposite is true, 64GB is way more than the general user needs given that they will sync, charge in fairly regular intervals, like everyone does who adds more music to their iPod. Most people's music libraries cannot even remotely fill an iPod nano anyway (1000-2000 songs)
Quote:
dupe functionality
See above
Quote:
Need large storage and constant syncing with main computer, a chore. People will opt for a large non-reflective screen for watching movies first, the iPad second for long stays away from their TV.
Physical sync is hardly a chore... it is a step more than wireless sync but hardly a big deal since the iPod has neatly trained hundreds of millions of people to do it. Most people are not voracious with their movie watching and don't have time to watch 10 movies stacked on any device. The iPad will not be better than a TV for movies but will be better than laptops, desktops, iPhones for many use cases (on couch, in bed, in hotel, on airplane, in kitchen etc.)
Quote:
OUCH! Just a bigger iPod Touch, talk about cannibalism.
I will be replacing the USE of my iPhone with the ipad but not getting rid of the iPhone. The iTouch will still have its uses (games, portable music etc.) and will no doubt be handed down to one of the kids, parents etc. There will be some cannibalization for sure butI suspect that every displaced iTouch will create one more user who will later want an iPad
Quote:
Netbooks - blah blah, yawn yawn, tired logic...
The iPad provides no essential use for the general computing public like the iPod did. It will sell as well as a iPod Touch does and for gaming purposes chiefly is my guess. It all could change if Apple solves a new market need.
Your opinion of what the general computing public wants is hardly scientific. If it sells as well as the Touch, that will mean 30 mill in a couple of years which will be stellar, but it will be the apps (most of which have not been conceived of yet) that will determine the value of the iPad to the market. Media consumption is just a simple jumping off point because everyone does it... the rest is to be written. Notice the new iPhone ads - all pimping the 3rd party app-based functionality while (An)droid is still talking about basic OS features...
In terms of cannibalism, 37 percent of respondents said they are most likely to have the iPad replace an iPod touch. But only 22 percent of consumers said they would use an iPad in place of a netbook.
Ouch. 37% will drop the iPod to transition to the iPad, though kind of expected since the two are so similar.
The most striking is that only 22% would replace their netbook with it. Does this mean that there are going to be Netbook and iPad owners. That is a bit of overkill. If it means that out of people who would otherwise buy a netbook 22% would now buy an iPad, the numbers are amazing.
The iPad provides no essential use for the general computing public like the iPod did. It will sell as well as a iPod Touch does and for gaming purposes chiefly is my guess. It all could change if Apple solves a new market need.
You have your point of view. I don't think it needs to solve a new market need. But let's consider some others:
Neil Young, CEO and cofounder, ngmoco: "Forget the netbook. It’s a slow, clunky piece of junk. Do I want to look like the guy who couldn’t afford a real computer or the guy who went to the future and brought back a device that’s as cool as I imagine I am?"
(Yeah, he's got self-interest since he's writing apps for the iPad. But it's also his investment and company on the line.)
Gina Bianchini, CEO, Ning: "A smartphone is mobile, but it isn’t fun to browse on. On a laptop, the technology is built in, but few want to carry around a 6-pound computer for the privilege of using a browser. The tablet bridges this gap."
Chris Anderson, Editor in chief, Wired: "Bigger than a phone, funner than a laptop, more cuddly than a Kindle. I think they’re going to sell like hotcakes."
Steven Johnson, Science writer: "With the arrival of the tablet, we have crossed a critical threshold: Where text is concerned, we effectively have infinite computational resources, connectivity, and portability."
The idea that Apple didn't realise the female sanitary wear allusion with the name is pretty silly, you can be sure they think these things through very carefully. iPod - iPad - they were never going to give that advantage away. They have achieved the Holy Grail of consumer devices - where a product name becomes the generic name, which has even given its name to a new sub-form of media. People download podcasts to listen on their Zune (not many people admittedly, but you get the point). A passing wave of post-adolescent sniggering in US High Schools doesn't really figure in the big picture here.
You have your point of view. I don't think it needs to solve a new market need. But let's consider some others:
Neil Young, CEO and cofounder, ngmoco: "Forget the netbook. It?s a slow, clunky piece of junk. Do I want to look like the guy who couldn?t afford a real computer or the guy who went to the future and brought back a device that?s as cool as I imagine I am?"
(Yeah, he's got self-interest since he's writing apps for the iPad. But it's also his investment and company on the line.)
Gina Bianchini, CEO, Ning: "A smartphone is mobile, but it isn?t fun to browse on. On a laptop, the technology is built in, but few want to carry around a 6-pound computer for the privilege of using a browser. The tablet bridges this gap."
Chris Anderson, Editor in chief, Wired: "Bigger than a phone, funner than a laptop, more cuddly than a Kindle. I think they?re going to sell like hotcakes."
Steven Johnson, Science writer: "With the arrival of the tablet, we have crossed a critical threshold: Where text is concerned, we effectively have infinite computational resources, connectivity, and portability."
HTML5. It's the future, and developers and content providers would be wise to get comfortable with it NOW, because if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong. It's a whole new ballgame in 2010 and beyond.
HTML5. It's the future, and developers and content providers would be wise to get comfortable with it NOW, because if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong. It's a whole new ballgame in 2010 and beyond.
Scratch my head?
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing. In fact I picked up the Toy Story Blu today- it looks amazing and saw the Steve Jobs producer credit. Great pics of Steve from back in 1994-95 on its special features as well. Ironic that it won't play on any Apple device nor can I connect my Blu-ray to the HD iMac monitor. Blu-ray is hardly doing anything wrong .
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing. In fact I picked up the Toy Story Blu today- it looks amazing and saw the Steve Jobs producer credit. Great pics of Steve from back in 1994-95 on its special features as well. Ironic that it won't play on any Apple device nor can I connect my Blu-ray to the HD iMac monitor. Blu-ray is hardly doing anything wrong .
Who the hell said anything about Blu Ray? You mentioned some nonsense about the iPad's internet abilities as they are related to Flash. OBVIOUSLY this means intenet content.
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing. In fact I picked up the Toy Story Blu today- it looks amazing and saw the Steve Jobs producer credit. Great pics of Steve from back in 1994-95 on its special features as well. Ironic that it won't play on any Apple device nor can I connect my Blu-ray to the HD iMac monitor. Blu-ray is hardly doing anything wrong .
Yours and Woohoo's posts continue to border on surreal.
What is it with you guys?
Your post has nothing to do with the article - and an old English teacher of mine would describe them as 'ex nihilo' - 'out of nothing, comes nothing'
OTH Woohoo posts are virtually a tortuous version of yours.
I've read hundreds of replys to both of you this year and many people have no idea what you guys are here for?
Any chance of an explanation from either of you, please?
Who the hell said anything about Blu Ray? You mentioned some nonsense about the iPad's internet abilities as they are related to Flash. OBVIOUSLY this means intenet content.
Didn't you say "if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong."
I simply responded accordingly. Now it sounds like you didn't mean what you said. Maybe you shouldn't make such generic statements??
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing.
What evidence do you have that Blu-ray is "doing amazing"? Other than anecdotal. A link?
Despite a large increase in the number of Blu-ray discs sold, it hasn't been able to replace the number of non-Blu-ray discs not being sold. Thus, pricing of Blu-ray discs have dropped a lot faster than expected. The DVD market, including Blu-ray, in both units and revenue, is still shrinking.
Didn't you say "if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong."
I simply responded accordingly. Now it sounds like you didn't mean what you said. Maybe you shouldn't make such generic statements??
Notice that only YOU seem to be confused. Mostly because owing to your trolling (a distraction even to you) you aren't able to follow the conversation.
What evidence do you have that Blu-ray is "doing amazing"? Other than anecdotal. A link?
Despite a large increase in the number of Blu-ray discs sold, it hasn't been able to replace the number of non-Blu-ray discs not being sold. Thus, pricing of Blu-ray discs have dropped a lot faster than expected. The DVD market, including Blu-ray, in both units and revenue, is still shrinking.
He's constantly ignoring the evidence that Blu-ray is a very small fraction of optical media spending with most people still content to use DVD despite Blu-ray "doing amazing".
He's also ignoring the fact that digital streaming still beings in more revenue than Blu-ray ever has while claiming how unused the medium is. And that's for paid services, ignoring the free video sites that are widely popular, illegal downloads and likely Netflix streaming.
Blu-ray is an "amazing" experience for the right content and right home theater setup, but he fails to see how that instantly means it's the "best" for every consumer for every situation and fails to understand that convenience and "good enough" usually wins out in the end, which is why DVD is still on top.
HTML5. It's the future, and developers and content providers would be wise to get comfortable with it NOW, because if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong. It's a whole new ballgame in 2010 and beyond.
Developers and programmers put their resources based on market share. As long as Windows owns the market which they do and Windows systems and browsers can run flash just fine it simply means Flash is going to be around for a while. Apple doesn't have the power to kill Flash because their desktop and notebook market share is so small.
Developers could care less how much money Apple has in the bank they care about selling their product to the biggest market share because thats how they make money.
To fool yourself into believing Apple runs the market simply isn't true.
In three decades the iPod is the only product where Apple has owned the market.
Maybe next time Apple puts 1 billion into building a chip they should think about making it powerful enough to run all content. What a novel idea, hardware that is powerful.
Seriously, only 50% plan to browse the web? I think the survey is flawed. Surely over 90% of iPad owners will use the device's web browser.
I agree, I doubt there are many people who won't use the web on the iPad. Other than the apps, the internet is the biggest factor in my decision to buy one. Or maybe that's just me.
Comments
The new higher costs is obviously a issue.
e-Books have already started coming to Mac's with Amazon's Kindle for the Mac software. CourseSmart has textbooks, lets one read less than 20% to judge and get a refund if they don't like it.
Mac availability of Kindle is irrelevant - almost no-one will e-read on a mac. CourseSmart is a small niche player that could be swallowed whole if iBooks gets the right content with the right deals. We'll see - it certainly won't be any form of real reason not to have an iPad
Really don't need another device for that, unless you have children.
The whole duplication thing is a red herring. The nature of modern computing is total duplication, main computer, handheld device, cloud etc. duping on the iPad is a requirement since its usage occasion is different to most other devices (or a superior experience to the smaller device. I for one will be replacing the use of my iPhone at the couch with an iPad for the superior experience and I want most of the same core data (contacts, email, faves etc.) on it as on my iPhone or Mac.
Newspapers perhaps, but I doubt magazines would work well on a iPad, as a lot of magazine content is duplicated on the net an not subject to advertiser influence like it is on a magazine. (only exception would be Consumer Reports)
Magazine demos have been far more interesting than newspapers. If publishers combine compelling content (which they should have already) with more innovative and fresh methods of display, value added content etc. magazines could be a real winner.
Duplicate computer or smaller device functionality
See above - duplication of content or function is a requirement if it performs better in specific use cases/occasions
Need large storage, 64GB isn't enough for music and everything else for a lot of folks.
The opposite is true, 64GB is way more than the general user needs given that they will sync, charge in fairly regular intervals, like everyone does who adds more music to their iPod. Most people's music libraries cannot even remotely fill an iPod nano anyway (1000-2000 songs)
dupe functionality
See above
Need large storage and constant syncing with main computer, a chore. People will opt for a large non-reflective screen for watching movies first, the iPad second for long stays away from their TV.
Physical sync is hardly a chore... it is a step more than wireless sync but hardly a big deal since the iPod has neatly trained hundreds of millions of people to do it. Most people are not voracious with their movie watching and don't have time to watch 10 movies stacked on any device. The iPad will not be better than a TV for movies but will be better than laptops, desktops, iPhones for many use cases (on couch, in bed, in hotel, on airplane, in kitchen etc.)
OUCH! Just a bigger iPod Touch, talk about cannibalism.
I will be replacing the USE of my iPhone with the ipad but not getting rid of the iPhone. The iTouch will still have its uses (games, portable music etc.) and will no doubt be handed down to one of the kids, parents etc. There will be some cannibalization for sure butI suspect that every displaced iTouch will create one more user who will later want an iPad
Netbooks - blah blah, yawn yawn, tired logic...
The iPad provides no essential use for the general computing public like the iPod did. It will sell as well as a iPod Touch does and for gaming purposes chiefly is my guess. It all could change if Apple solves a new market need.
Your opinion of what the general computing public wants is hardly scientific. If it sells as well as the Touch, that will mean 30 mill in a couple of years which will be stellar, but it will be the apps (most of which have not been conceived of yet) that will determine the value of the iPad to the market. Media consumption is just a simple jumping off point because everyone does it... the rest is to be written. Notice the new iPhone ads - all pimping the 3rd party app-based functionality while (An)droid is still talking about basic OS features...
In terms of cannibalism, 37 percent of respondents said they are most likely to have the iPad replace an iPod touch. But only 22 percent of consumers said they would use an iPad in place of a netbook.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Ouch. 37% will drop the iPod to transition to the iPad, though kind of expected since the two are so similar.
The most striking is that only 22% would replace their netbook with it. Does this mean that there are going to be Netbook and iPad owners. That is a bit of overkill. If it means that out of people who would otherwise buy a netbook 22% would now buy an iPad, the numbers are amazing.
Seriously, only 50% plan to browse the web? I think the survey is flawed. Surely over 90% of iPad owners will use the device's web browser.
...
The iPad provides no essential use for the general computing public like the iPod did. It will sell as well as a iPod Touch does and for gaming purposes chiefly is my guess. It all could change if Apple solves a new market need.
You have your point of view. I don't think it needs to solve a new market need. But let's consider some others:
Neil Young, CEO and cofounder, ngmoco: "Forget the netbook. It’s a slow, clunky piece of junk. Do I want to look like the guy who couldn’t afford a real computer or the guy who went to the future and brought back a device that’s as cool as I imagine I am?"
(Yeah, he's got self-interest since he's writing apps for the iPad. But it's also his investment and company on the line.)
Gina Bianchini, CEO, Ning: "A smartphone is mobile, but it isn’t fun to browse on. On a laptop, the technology is built in, but few want to carry around a 6-pound computer for the privilege of using a browser. The tablet bridges this gap."
Chris Anderson, Editor in chief, Wired: "Bigger than a phone, funner than a laptop, more cuddly than a Kindle. I think they’re going to sell like hotcakes."
Steven Johnson, Science writer: "With the arrival of the tablet, we have crossed a critical threshold: Where text is concerned, we effectively have infinite computational resources, connectivity, and portability."
All quotes from http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/03/ff_tablet_essays/
You have your point of view. I don't think it needs to solve a new market need. But let's consider some others:
Neil Young, CEO and cofounder, ngmoco: "Forget the netbook. It?s a slow, clunky piece of junk. Do I want to look like the guy who couldn?t afford a real computer or the guy who went to the future and brought back a device that?s as cool as I imagine I am?"
(Yeah, he's got self-interest since he's writing apps for the iPad. But it's also his investment and company on the line.)
Gina Bianchini, CEO, Ning: "A smartphone is mobile, but it isn?t fun to browse on. On a laptop, the technology is built in, but few want to carry around a 6-pound computer for the privilege of using a browser. The tablet bridges this gap."
Chris Anderson, Editor in chief, Wired: "Bigger than a phone, funner than a laptop, more cuddly than a Kindle. I think they?re going to sell like hotcakes."
Steven Johnson, Science writer: "With the arrival of the tablet, we have crossed a critical threshold: Where text is concerned, we effectively have infinite computational resources, connectivity, and portability."
All quotes from http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/03/ff_tablet_essays/
Exactly. Neil Young's post is particularly lucid.
.....and view one third of the internet.
HTML5. It's the future, and developers and content providers would be wise to get comfortable with it NOW, because if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong. It's a whole new ballgame in 2010 and beyond.
HTML5. It's the future, and developers and content providers would be wise to get comfortable with it NOW, because if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong. It's a whole new ballgame in 2010 and beyond.
Scratch my head?
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing. In fact I picked up the Toy Story Blu today- it looks amazing and saw the Steve Jobs producer credit. Great pics of Steve from back in 1994-95 on its special features as well. Ironic that it won't play on any Apple device nor can I connect my Blu-ray to the HD iMac monitor. Blu-ray is hardly doing anything wrong .
Scratch my head?
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing. In fact I picked up the Toy Story Blu today- it looks amazing and saw the Steve Jobs producer credit. Great pics of Steve from back in 1994-95 on its special features as well. Ironic that it won't play on any Apple device nor can I connect my Blu-ray to the HD iMac monitor. Blu-ray is hardly doing anything wrong .
Who the hell said anything about Blu Ray? You mentioned some nonsense about the iPad's internet abilities as they are related to Flash. OBVIOUSLY this means intenet content.
Pull your head out, already.
Scratch my head?
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing. In fact I picked up the Toy Story Blu today- it looks amazing and saw the Steve Jobs producer credit. Great pics of Steve from back in 1994-95 on its special features as well. Ironic that it won't play on any Apple device nor can I connect my Blu-ray to the HD iMac monitor. Blu-ray is hardly doing anything wrong .
Yours and Woohoo's posts continue to border on surreal.
What is it with you guys?
Your post has nothing to do with the article - and an old English teacher of mine would describe them as 'ex nihilo' - 'out of nothing, comes nothing'
OTH Woohoo posts are virtually a tortuous version of yours.
I've read hundreds of replys to both of you this year and many people have no idea what you guys are here for?
Any chance of an explanation from either of you, please?
Who the hell said anything about Blu Ray? You mentioned some nonsense about the iPad's internet abilities as they are related to Flash. OBVIOUSLY this means intenet content.
Didn't you say "if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong."
I simply responded accordingly. Now it sounds like you didn't mean what you said. Maybe you shouldn't make such generic statements??
Ouch. 37% will drop the iPod to transition to the iPad, though kind of expected since the two are so similar.
How many companies would kill to have customers transition to one of their products instead of a competitors, as Apple routinely does?
Scratch my head?
Blu-ray doesn't play well with Apple and it's doing amazing.
What evidence do you have that Blu-ray is "doing amazing"? Other than anecdotal. A link?
Despite a large increase in the number of Blu-ray discs sold, it hasn't been able to replace the number of non-Blu-ray discs not being sold. Thus, pricing of Blu-ray discs have dropped a lot faster than expected. The DVD market, including Blu-ray, in both units and revenue, is still shrinking.
How many companies would kill to have customers transition to one of their products instead of a competitors, as Apple routinely does?
... especially to another product that costs two or three times as much.
Didn't you say "if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong."
I simply responded accordingly. Now it sounds like you didn't mean what you said. Maybe you shouldn't make such generic statements??
Notice that only YOU seem to be confused. Mostly because owing to your trolling (a distraction even to you) you aren't able to follow the conversation.
What evidence do you have that Blu-ray is "doing amazing"? Other than anecdotal. A link?
Despite a large increase in the number of Blu-ray discs sold, it hasn't been able to replace the number of non-Blu-ray discs not being sold. Thus, pricing of Blu-ray discs have dropped a lot faster than expected. The DVD market, including Blu-ray, in both units and revenue, is still shrinking.
He's constantly ignoring the evidence that Blu-ray is a very small fraction of optical media spending with most people still content to use DVD despite Blu-ray "doing amazing".
He's also ignoring the fact that digital streaming still beings in more revenue than Blu-ray ever has while claiming how unused the medium is. And that's for paid services, ignoring the free video sites that are widely popular, illegal downloads and likely Netflix streaming.
Blu-ray is an "amazing" experience for the right content and right home theater setup, but he fails to see how that instantly means it's the "best" for every consumer for every situation and fails to understand that convenience and "good enough" usually wins out in the end, which is why DVD is still on top.
HTML5. It's the future, and developers and content providers would be wise to get comfortable with it NOW, because if your content doesn't play well with Apple devices you're doing it wrong. It's a whole new ballgame in 2010 and beyond.
Developers and programmers put their resources based on market share. As long as Windows owns the market which they do and Windows systems and browsers can run flash just fine it simply means Flash is going to be around for a while. Apple doesn't have the power to kill Flash because their desktop and notebook market share is so small.
Developers could care less how much money Apple has in the bank they care about selling their product to the biggest market share because thats how they make money.
To fool yourself into believing Apple runs the market simply isn't true.
In three decades the iPod is the only product where Apple has owned the market.
Maybe next time Apple puts 1 billion into building a chip they should think about making it powerful enough to run all content. What a novel idea, hardware that is powerful.
I will play 'Bloons'
Seriously, only 50% plan to browse the web? I think the survey is flawed. Surely over 90% of iPad owners will use the device's web browser.
I agree, I doubt there are many people who won't use the web on the iPad. Other than the apps, the internet is the biggest factor in my decision to buy one. Or maybe that's just me.