The BS on this site is amazing at times. This statement....
"Ballmer later expressed concern about the volume of iPads Apple had sold, while indicating that Microsoft wanted to do to tablets what it did to netbooks: push sales back into the Windows fold. Microsoft hasn't been able to garner much interest in its existing Windows-based tablet products however. "
is so funny. Ok so there has been an Apple tablet for sale for 5 months? Microsoft ignored the netbook market for over a year and then got all over it and won it back.
I am not saying they will do the same with tablets, because I dont think they could. The netbook was/is just a smaller computer and Windows owns the computer market.
However lets look at things a year or two from now when Apple has some competitors and not 5 months after it defines a market and no one else is currently playing in that market.
The backstory is that Microsoft has been trying to figure out tablet computing for some time now. Remember the Origami project a few years back? Only a few OEMs even attempted to build to that form factor, and they were all flops. So the difference isn't that Apple has been in this market for only five months (less actually, more like four), but that their entry into the market was an immediate success. People actually want the product. The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft.
Maybe in a few years we'll see a very competitive market for tablet computers -- which would be a nice turn of events considering the number of years the PC market was suffocated by Microsoft. But I would not hold my breath waiting for Microsoft to make a big splash in this market. Left to their own devices, Microsoft has shown an inability to accomplish much of anything original, so it seems they are put in the uncomfortable position of having to chase Apple, once again. Twenty years ago, that was easy -- they could use their huge market leverage to beat almost any comer. It's far from clear that they have anything like that much leverage now, at least not in this market. They have already tried that approach and come up empty.
The backstory is that Microsoft has been trying to figure out tablet computing for some time now. Remember the Origami project a few years back? Only a few OEMs even attempted to build to that form factor, and they were all flops. So the difference isn't that Apple has been in this market for only five months (less actually, more like four), but that their entry into the market was an immediate success. People actually want the product. The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft.
Maybe in a few years we'll see a very competitive market for tablet computers -- which would be a nice turn of events considering the number of years the PC market was suffocated by Microsoft. But I would not hold my breath waiting for Microsoft to make a big splash in this market. Left to their own devices, Microsoft has shown an inability to accomplish much of anything original, so it seems they are put in the uncomfortable position of having to chase Apple, once again. Twenty years ago, that was easy -- they could use their huge market leverage to beat almost any comer. It's far from clear that they have anything like that much leverage now, at least not in this market. They have already tried that approach and come up empty.
"The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft."
Actually the difference, or the main difference is technology is finally good enough for a iPad device. Remember the Newton? Huge hit?
Origami was too soon. The devices were expensive and under powered because the tech was not there yet.
Microsoft's other tablet offerings were never targeted at consumers. There were for vertical markets, like hospitals, warehouses etc. Even then the technology was not there. The devices were bulky and expensive.
Apple has good timing plus great marketing. The big iTouch is a hit with out a doubt.
"The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft."
Actually the difference, or the main difference is technology is finally good enough for a iPad device. Remember the Newton? Huge hit?
Origami was too soon. The devices were expensive and under powered because the tech was not there yet.
Microsoft's other tablet offerings were never targeted at consumers. There were for vertical markets, like hospitals, warehouses etc. Even then the technology was not there. The devices were bulky and expensive.
Apple has good timing plus great marketing. The big iTouch is a hit with out a doubt.
It doesn't matter how Microsoft targeted Origami. They failed to hit even a relatively easy target. Microsoft tried shoehorning Windows into this form factor, and not surprisingly, it did not work. Origami was a weak approach because it followed the only game plan Microsoft understands, leveraging Windows. (It used to have an internal name "Windows Everywhere" but I wonder if that mantra lives on.) Apple went in the other direction, and succeeded, not so much because the tech is so much better today, but because Apple understood the limitations of the tech and designed accordingly.
We all heard the howls of protest when it was revealed that the iPad was not going to run "real" OSX. A lot of people swore that they'd never buy one if it didn't have the same feature set as a laptop, including every connecter they could want. Turns out this isn't the right way to design the product. Little doubt, Microsoft will have another swing at their "it slices! it dices!" approach. Good luck to them. They'll have as good a chance at succeeding as Apple in this market if they grow a clue.
I think in 2011 with even more iPads sold it will be considered in the same statistical class as netbooks, ie, iPad is a PC, albeit a highly mobile one.
Just one or two revisions of hardware and software, and by the end of 2011 iPad will be a significant platform that in 2011 should, besides many other things, outsell all Macs [if it hasn't already done that in 2010 since launch].
Hi I am Thomas Ponting i have lost my IPOD nano now i want to buy a new ipod but i am lill confused about. tell which is good according to you for me? pls help me out....
Comments
"Ballmer later expressed concern about the volume of iPads Apple had sold, while indicating that Microsoft wanted to do to tablets what it did to netbooks: push sales back into the Windows fold. Microsoft hasn't been able to garner much interest in its existing Windows-based tablet products however. "
is so funny. Ok so there has been an Apple tablet for sale for 5 months? Microsoft ignored the netbook market for over a year and then got all over it and won it back.
I am not saying they will do the same with tablets, because I dont think they could. The netbook was/is just a smaller computer and Windows owns the computer market.
However lets look at things a year or two from now when Apple has some competitors and not 5 months after it defines a market and no one else is currently playing in that market.
Maybe in a few years we'll see a very competitive market for tablet computers -- which would be a nice turn of events considering the number of years the PC market was suffocated by Microsoft. But I would not hold my breath waiting for Microsoft to make a big splash in this market. Left to their own devices, Microsoft has shown an inability to accomplish much of anything original, so it seems they are put in the uncomfortable position of having to chase Apple, once again. Twenty years ago, that was easy -- they could use their huge market leverage to beat almost any comer. It's far from clear that they have anything like that much leverage now, at least not in this market. They have already tried that approach and come up empty.
The backstory is that Microsoft has been trying to figure out tablet computing for some time now. Remember the Origami project a few years back? Only a few OEMs even attempted to build to that form factor, and they were all flops. So the difference isn't that Apple has been in this market for only five months (less actually, more like four), but that their entry into the market was an immediate success. People actually want the product. The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft.
Maybe in a few years we'll see a very competitive market for tablet computers -- which would be a nice turn of events considering the number of years the PC market was suffocated by Microsoft. But I would not hold my breath waiting for Microsoft to make a big splash in this market. Left to their own devices, Microsoft has shown an inability to accomplish much of anything original, so it seems they are put in the uncomfortable position of having to chase Apple, once again. Twenty years ago, that was easy -- they could use their huge market leverage to beat almost any comer. It's far from clear that they have anything like that much leverage now, at least not in this market. They have already tried that approach and come up empty.
"The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft."
Actually the difference, or the main difference is technology is finally good enough for a iPad device. Remember the Newton? Huge hit?
Origami was too soon. The devices were expensive and under powered because the tech was not there yet.
Microsoft's other tablet offerings were never targeted at consumers. There were for vertical markets, like hospitals, warehouses etc. Even then the technology was not there. The devices were bulky and expensive.
Apple has good timing plus great marketing. The big iTouch is a hit with out a doubt.
"The difference is that Apple figured out something that has so far eluded Microsoft."
Actually the difference, or the main difference is technology is finally good enough for a iPad device. Remember the Newton? Huge hit?
Origami was too soon. The devices were expensive and under powered because the tech was not there yet.
Microsoft's other tablet offerings were never targeted at consumers. There were for vertical markets, like hospitals, warehouses etc. Even then the technology was not there. The devices were bulky and expensive.
Apple has good timing plus great marketing. The big iTouch is a hit with out a doubt.
It doesn't matter how Microsoft targeted Origami. They failed to hit even a relatively easy target. Microsoft tried shoehorning Windows into this form factor, and not surprisingly, it did not work. Origami was a weak approach because it followed the only game plan Microsoft understands, leveraging Windows. (It used to have an internal name "Windows Everywhere" but I wonder if that mantra lives on.) Apple went in the other direction, and succeeded, not so much because the tech is so much better today, but because Apple understood the limitations of the tech and designed accordingly.
We all heard the howls of protest when it was revealed that the iPad was not going to run "real" OSX. A lot of people swore that they'd never buy one if it didn't have the same feature set as a laptop, including every connecter they could want. Turns out this isn't the right way to design the product. Little doubt, Microsoft will have another swing at their "it slices! it dices!" approach. Good luck to them. They'll have as good a chance at succeeding as Apple in this market if they grow a clue.
Apple continues to lead the way, while others copy.
Yeah, they did such a great job inventing the GUI.
Oh, wait....
I mean they did a great job inventing portable music players.
Oh, wait...
I mean, they did a great job inventing multi-touch!
Oh, wait....
I mean they did a great job inventing Unix!
Just one or two revisions of hardware and software, and by the end of 2011 iPad will be a significant platform that in 2011 should, besides many other things, outsell all Macs [if it hasn't already done that in 2010 since launch].