Looks like every week we get at least one iPad killer. They have a wide moats to cross:
1. They lack value added chain - No secure content source of Apps or other content.
2. No integration with other devices like an iPhone, iPod, etc. The Android OS is fragmented.
3. The Android OS is fragmented, with different versions for each device. Not sure if upgrades will come on time.
Apple kink in the armor is their supply chain and carriers. Apple can not manufacture enough devices fast enough to maintain a dominant share. Their distribution is limited with the iPhone to UMTS/3G in their quest to optimize profits... they become number one in tech for a good reason.
Google is not dumb either. They took a page from Microsoft and copied Apple with a free OS. They gave it away and created a huge global value chain to sell their ads. DOS/Windows was not as good as the MacOS, but it still crushed Apple. It remains to be seen how this contest plays out in the market place. Anyway, from the investor point of view, Apple made it to the top already.
I think you miss the point. I can see a salesmen remotely logging in to place orders or check inventory from the ipad. Inventory control, order picking, etc can be done from an ipad as well. Home inspectors, contractors, landscapers can find these very useful on the job site as well.
Just because the ipad is not used for content creation does not mean it has no place for work.
Tablets, and hand held computers have been used in this method for well over a decade, so it shouldn't a hard concept for people to grasp.
Korean conglomerates like Samsung and LG that dabble in everything from semiconductors and rice cookers to selling insurance and ship construction have come a long way. I should know: I was born in Korea and have observed their growth and transformation into global companies with much interest. That being said, their weakness has always been the lack of creativity and innovation in their products. Do they have any sort of software products that they've developed to speak of? Of course, they're essentially hardware companies but having been OEM suppliers (and still are to a large degree with chips and flat panel displays), it's still all about volume manufacturing with them.
I was reading a recent annual report by Samsung Electronics after they did $119 billion in sales in '09. Now that's only the Samsung conglomerate's Electronics division. I suspect they'd be well over $200 billion if you factor in all these other unrelated businesses they operate. Anyway, the report also stated their goals to achieve by 2020: $400 billion in annual sales, one of the world's top 5 brands (I think Fortune listed them around 95 or something like that recently), and one of the top 5 most admired companies, etc. LG, obviously, would have similar goals. LG Electronics is in the $70 billion range.
In many areas, Samsung and LG are collectively beating the hell out of Japanese electronics giants like Sony, Panasonic (formerly Matsushita) and Toshiba. They've lifted themselves nicely out of the bargain basement realm and have become respected global consumer electronics companies while growing their revenues to gargantuan levels. Samsung will soon be much larger than HP in terms of revenues. Sony and Panasonic have stagnated at around $80 billion for years and will soon be overtaken by LG. But can they take it to the next step in this brave new world of convergence between high-tech and consumer electronics?
Now we have the likes of US high-tech companies like Apple, Microsoft, HP, Dell, etc. competing against consumer electronics titans likes of Sony, Samsung, LG, Toshiba, etc. and this brawl will make what we've witnessed in the tech industry over the past 20 years seem tame in comparison. You throw in the major telecom players and content providers around the world and this battlefield is one amazingly complex soup of alliances, double-crosses and intense cutthroat wars. This sure beats following MLB and NFL!
I just don't think the strategies of these do-it-all companies like Sony, Samsung and LG will work in this new battlefield as they take on Apple and other US high-tech companies. You can bet that HP is going to go all-out to fight in this space as well. And I don't expect Dell to be a slouch with the resources they have. Overall, the companies that create and control the software and the platforms will be the ones at the leading edge and this is not something the Asian manufacturers have. That's why all the focus is on Apple vs. Google (with Microsoft joining the fight soon).
Still, the next 10 years will be very interesting. A lot of companies that seemed dominant (or at least in a very strong market position) only several years ago may not be around by 2020. Samsung and LG are going to be serious players for sure (with the help of Google), but I believe Apple and HP will carve out their own turf and be able to defend it as this new market evolves. It's really difficult to say what will happen with Nokia and RIM. And we have no idea if Microsoft will become a player with their mobile software strategy. There's never been a business war like this one that's only getting started now. It's only like the second inning or midway through the first quarter. I don't believe it'll be a blowout like what Microsoft did during the PC era. I believe this will go down to the wire and stay that way for a long, long time to come. For us consumers, I think that'll be the best outcome.
If history is any guide, the companies with proprietary standards will take the bulk of the profits. In the PC wars it was Microsoft and Intel... the real gorillas. I think that HP and Dell are just box makers with limited proprietary technology. Their services business is a low margin. Their success depends on execution... that is what Mark V. Hurd was good at doing, and Michael Dell in his heyday. That is why HP bought Palm, but I think they will be a niche player since they do not have a value chain like iTunes, App store, etc.
Right now it is a fight between Apple with it relatively closed proprietary architecture versus Google with open proprietary architecture. Microsoft is yesterday's tech like the IBM mainframe... ditto for Nokia and RIMM... they are not going to go away, but unlikely to dominate.
When will people get it. Tablets aren't designed for productivity. They are designed for leisurely use. Anybody who is serious about getting work done will pick up a laptop. Not a netbook, or a smartphone, or a tablet--a full featured and powerful laptop.
If history is any guide, the companies with proprietary standards will take the bulk of the profits. In the PC wars it was Microsoft and Intel... the real gorillas. I think that HP and Dell are just box makers with limited proprietary technology. Their services business is a low margin. Their success depends on execution... that is what Mark V. Hurd was good at doing, and Michael Dell in his heyday. That is why HP bought Palm, but I think they will be a niche player since they do not have a value chain like iTunes, App store, etc.
Right now it is a fight between Apple with it relatively closed proprietary architecture versus Google with open proprietary architecture. Microsoft is yesterday's tech like the IBM mainframe... ditto for Nokia and RIMM... they are not going to go away, but unlikely to dominate.
I agree. I think it's interesting that Apple's resurgence was due to leveraging their unique closed and vertically integrated proprietary system and adapting it to the wide-open Internet standards (and, to a lesser degree, adopting PC hardware standards like USB, Intel, etc.). Apple's vertical integration still is and will remain Apple's differentiator. Motorola? Samsung? LG? They've become the new HP, Dell and Acer.
There is indeed a striking similarity between the PC wars (Intel/Microsoft vs. Apple/PowerPC) and the current mobile platform war but it's also quite different, which is what I find interesting. Now you've got traditional tech companies duking it out with new rivals from the consumer electronics industry who are becoming more technologically savvy. Still, as I pointed out in my earlier post, none of these hardware makers have any control over the software and, hence, the platform.
While the comparison between Apple vs. Microsoft during the PC era and Apple vs. Google in this mobile Internet era is valid, the dynamics of the competitive landscape are very different when we consider all the different players involved. Essentially, it is much more complex as we have to factor in not only the major players in the aforementioned traditional high-tech companies and humungous consumer electronics firms, but also the telecom giants and content providers (mainly the huge media companies) who are all looking to get a piece of the action.
No one in any of these industries wants another Microsoft. If it seems either Apple or Google is getting too powerful, all these other players will align themselves in a way to counter that growing dominance. Apple and Google have no choice but to pursue dominance just to counter each other and to remain relevant, but it will come down to what types of alliances each company musters up that will give them the edge.
Also, I wouldn't totally dismiss Microsoft just yet. They have a history of coming back and banging their heads against the wall until they get things right. They're still extremely profitable and it's not like the desktops of the enterprise are going to disappear. People still have to sit down and work - even at home. The backend players like IBM, HP, Oracle, SAP, Cisco, EMC, etc. will also want in on all of this new action and will continue to exert their influence to make sure they profit in this new converging market.
I have to say, though, that Apple seems best positioned and best equipped to compete against all of these behemoths - mainly because they have both the software platform/ecosystem and the hardware that people want to be able to look at and touch and feel with their flesh. And Apple understands this very well. For Apple, it'll be about maintaining a balance between attaining the critical mass to sustain their iOS ecosystem while being able to charge a premium for their unique differentiating factor of software/hardware integration.
When will people get it. Tablets aren't designed for productivity. They are designed for leisurely use. Anybody who is serious about getting work done will pick up a laptop. Not a netbook, or a smartphone, or a tablet--a full featured and powerful laptop.
Totally agree with you. Sure a tablet can do some productive tasks but seriously out of the people that have argued against this how many of you really think you could use a tablet for 8 hours a day instead of a computer.
Even if they had the exact same software your going to get health issues from your seating position.
Yeah, there will be tablets 'soon' but until then, I wish they'd all shut up and get back to work on delivering something that isn't a freaky bad clone of the iPad.
Totally agree with you. Sure a tablet can do some productive tasks but seriously out of the people that have argued against this how many of you really think you could use a tablet for 8 hours a day instead of a computer.
Even if they had the exact same software your going to get health issues from your seating position.
Tim, stop and think about this - the inherent flexibility of the iPad/tablet design means you potentially can do more in more places than with a laptop or desktop, you are less constrained by the limitations of having to have a keyboard and pointing device and a surface on which to use them. My wife uses hers more than 8 hours a day for tasks ranging from the traditional "productivity" to the more leisurely reading, games, web browsing, video watching and listening to music and podcasts. She is at here desktop machine less and less as time goes on and apps are developed that answer specific needs she has. Not everything is perfect, but it is a damn sight better than it has been with the traditional computer, and development is open-ended. For those odd moments when she wants to use a full keyboard, she has a stand at her desk in the office that she puts the iPad into and it links to her computer's bluetooth keyboard. The computer slumbers int he background while she types away on the iPad.
Let's also not forget that due to the myopic nature of PC hardware and Windows OS development the "tablet PC" market was languishing in a small niche dedicated to some medical practices or hospitals, inventory companies and a smattering of manufacturing use. Apple reset the benchmark and now everyone else is trying to match or beat it. LG may well produce a more feature-laden device, with more ports of various kinds and a cool design - because LG has a knack for doing that occasionally, but as has been noted previously, they will have to create whole-cloth an ecosystem like Apple's to compete on the same playing field.
It won't be with any current version of Windows and we are still waiting to see if Google's honeymoon with Android was serious or if Chrome will be the tablet solution of choice. Ultimately this is going to be a fun ride as all of this shakes out. Let's remember too that Apple has never played, in spite of the success of the iPod, to dominate the market, only it's most profitable segments. The focus is not on being the majority of the market, just the most profitable - which gives Apple the wherewithal to keep advancing the technology targets and gives their competition fits trying to hit a moving target. Jobs told us when the iPhone was introduced that they were only going after 1% of the cellphone market - that goal has been surpassed already, and they are still growing the iPhone owner population world-wide.
A lot of people call the iPad a giant iPod touch because it looks the exact same, just larger. It uses the same OS and even has a little switch on the side. However, that is a gross oversimplification.
The iPad has shortcomings. For example, there isn't a camera on it. However, the bigger screen in itself is a game-changer. To understand why the iPad is more than just a giant iPod touch, let's go back to history of tablets. Tablets haven't been successful, simple as that. Before the iPad, most tablets followed a typical model. They would have Windows and looked like an ordinary laptop. However, the screen could swivel around fold the unit over the keyboard with the screen facing outwards, converting the device into a tablet. However, tablets of this design haven't been very successful. The reason is that most people are used to using Windows with a mouse and a keyboard.
The iPad is quite different. Yes, the OS and user interface are almost identical. However, that OS is a proven success with touchscreen-only interaction. Anyone who has used an iPhone can use an iPad without learning much. People are familiar with the OS and feel very comfortable using it without a keyboard.
A big criticism of the iPad is that it is an entertainment device without any real productivity value. However, there are certain limitations without a keyboard. People aren't going to be typing out 100 page reports with an iPad or any touchscreen tablet for that matter. That's why LG can trashtalk all they want about their tablet. However, how good a tablet device functions a content creation tool depends on software. With a good camera, people can make videos. That's probably going to be on the next iPad. However, if the LG tablet is a touchscreen, it's not going to be easy for people to type out large reports. While not perfect, there is a capability for creating and editing documents on the iPad using Pages. It needs improvement but that will have to happen at its own pace. But still, there's only so much typing you can do with a touchscreen keyboard.
I believe that all this discussion of tablets and laptops and computers and content creation versus productivity is muddying the waters.
An iPad is a computer, unless of course your only acceptable definition of a (home/office/portable) computer means a mouse based operating system with an external keyboard running a multi-windowed OS. I owned the original Macintosh in 1984 and the follow up Mac Plus. Remember that the DTP revolution was created on a computer with a 9" B&W screen (slightly smaller), 1MB RAM (err, less) and a Motorola 68000 processor (less advanced) running at 8MHz(err, much slower). How does that compare to the potential of an iPad? Remember too that MS Word, Excel and Powerpoint, Aldus Pagemaker and Quark Express originally all debuted on this computer.
Apple have clearly shown with the iWork suite that productive apps are entirely possible on the iPad's hardware, though admittedly those apps do not have the depth and coverage of their Mac counterparts, but that's a matter of degree and perhaps intent. There are already plenty of apps for managing and reading documents, editing photos, sound editing and mixing apps and GTD apps to help you be productive when using all the others. And of course there are plenty more apps being released every day.
Several of the problems surrounding content creation are more about connectivity, integration with other apps, sharing data between apps and such. These are factors that can be addressed via iOS and hardware changes, should Apple believe that it's something they think will benefit the iPad and all that goes with it.
Also, as someone else mentioned earlier, I have my iPad almost everywhere I go - it just slips in that slim pocket in the rear of my backpack. I didn't do that with my iBook which means that I now have a full sized powerful device on which to do a number of tasks that I didn't have before simply because I rarely had my iBook with me.
If people see the iPad simply as an email and video viewer then it is. If people see it as a productivity tool and develop for that, then that's it. Of course it can be either, both and much more.
It is a computer underneath. And it's about the software.
how is ti news that a CxO thinks his companys product is better than the competition? it would be news if the LG ceo came out and said "we suck buy apple" that aint ever gonna happen
So unless LG has the media ecosystem along with the fit and finish of Apple's offerings LG can kiss my........................
You nailed it right there my friend.
And without that ecosystem I would have probably got bored with my iPad by now regardless of how good it is.
You can also include the iPod Touch in there as well, not the iPhone though because I need to make calls with that. It's only a matter of time before iPad gets more productive.
I think you miss the point. I can see a salesmen remotely logging in to place orders or check inventory from the ipad. Inventory control, order picking, etc can be done from an ipad as well. Home inspectors, contractors, landscapers can find these very useful on the job site as well.
Just because the ipad is not used for content creation does not mean it has no place for work.
That last line says it all.
I look at it this way iPad is less than optimal for the creation of certain types of content. On the other hand it is a new approach to working with content for many. It is mistake to frame every problem in terms of old computer technology, iPad is about thinking fresh.
At least not with what I'm seeing in the Adroid world right now. LG would have to fork it and then find a creative soul with a vision to manage the port. Easier said than done.
Honestly, things will have to change in the Android world for it to see any long term success. However Android isn't the only alternative, there are enough Linux based ideas out there that something different could easily end up on the tablet.
In any event who really cares if any COMING device blows iPad away? Lets face it iPad is very much a rev one device in Apples finest tradition and will likely have been on the market for a year before serious competition arrives. By that time Apple will have blown away iPad themselves. By that I mean a SMP based Cortex A9 based machine with lots of RAM. That processor will likely be a SoC highly optimized for use in tablets not cell phones. So yeah the can blow away the current iPad, but so will Apple. There is more to the game than that.
When will people get it. Tablets aren't designed for productivity. They are designed for leisurely use. Anybody who is serious about getting work done will pick up a laptop. Not a netbook, or a smartphone, or a tablet--a full featured and powerful laptop.
so, what you're saying is, an ipad is a toy?
Wrong. I bet the ipad gets used in productivity in a serious way. And I'm sure the other companies sees this, so it's only a matter of time before the other manufacturers get their crap together too. Companies like LG, HP etc, aren't going anywhere either.
And without that ecosystem I would have probably got bored with my iPad by now regardless of how good it is.
You can also include the iPod Touch in there as well, not the iPhone though because I need to make calls with that. It's only a matter of time before iPad gets more productive.
I don't think LG is building theOS, or the eco system. They're using someone else's, android I suppose.
There is all these manufacturers, used to using microsoft as their OS for so many years, and now, they're flapping in the breeze. It seems M$ has been pretty quiet on things for some time now. That's why Android is doing so well. I suspect, that not only does M$ was to kill android as much as apple does, but they're gearing up to simply copy apple head to toe, and we'll see all the manufacturers flock to M$.
A famous man once said "Hell, I'm not looking to take over Coka Cola" I'll be happy with 1% of their market share.
Many other companies must look at Apples products the same way. the trouble is 1% doesn't feed their share holders or need for killer apps.
A better mouse trap is always right around the corner, the trouble is, the mouse is always 2 corners ahead of the better mouse trap.
The good news is, all of these companies will bring something to the table, and if that something makes Apple jump 2 steps ahead of them, then it's a Win-Win for us Apple folks.
And hey, if in fact they or anyone else tops Apple, then we'll buy that product, and if only for 30 days or so, company (X) will be the leader, and hey, shouldn't everyone have their 15 minutes of fame.
Comments
1. They lack value added chain - No secure content source of Apps or other content.
2. No integration with other devices like an iPhone, iPod, etc. The Android OS is fragmented.
3. The Android OS is fragmented, with different versions for each device. Not sure if upgrades will come on time.
Apple kink in the armor is their supply chain and carriers. Apple can not manufacture enough devices fast enough to maintain a dominant share. Their distribution is limited with the iPhone to UMTS/3G in their quest to optimize profits... they become number one in tech for a good reason.
Google is not dumb either. They took a page from Microsoft and copied Apple with a free OS. They gave it away and created a huge global value chain to sell their ads. DOS/Windows was not as good as the MacOS, but it still crushed Apple. It remains to be seen how this contest plays out in the market place. Anyway, from the investor point of view, Apple made it to the top already.
Remember when Lucky Goldstar made cheap microwaves and third-rate tape recorders? Aw, now look at Goldstar! They think they're Apple! How cute!
I think you miss the point. I can see a salesmen remotely logging in to place orders or check inventory from the ipad. Inventory control, order picking, etc can be done from an ipad as well. Home inspectors, contractors, landscapers can find these very useful on the job site as well.
Just because the ipad is not used for content creation does not mean it has no place for work.
Tablets, and hand held computers have been used in this method for well over a decade, so it shouldn't a hard concept for people to grasp.
LG also announced plans to launch 10 more smartphones by the end of the year in addition to the Android-based tablet dev
Because we don't have any single device that is good enough, we have to make a whole bunch of different models so we can sell any significant numbers.
Just like fishing with dynamite.
Ma, who says he doesn't do much work on the iPad,
Even if he did do much work on it, do you think he would admit to it when discussing a new competing product?
Korean conglomerates like Samsung and LG that dabble in everything from semiconductors and rice cookers to selling insurance and ship construction have come a long way. I should know: I was born in Korea and have observed their growth and transformation into global companies with much interest. That being said, their weakness has always been the lack of creativity and innovation in their products. Do they have any sort of software products that they've developed to speak of? Of course, they're essentially hardware companies but having been OEM suppliers (and still are to a large degree with chips and flat panel displays), it's still all about volume manufacturing with them.
I was reading a recent annual report by Samsung Electronics after they did $119 billion in sales in '09. Now that's only the Samsung conglomerate's Electronics division. I suspect they'd be well over $200 billion if you factor in all these other unrelated businesses they operate. Anyway, the report also stated their goals to achieve by 2020: $400 billion in annual sales, one of the world's top 5 brands (I think Fortune listed them around 95 or something like that recently), and one of the top 5 most admired companies, etc. LG, obviously, would have similar goals. LG Electronics is in the $70 billion range.
In many areas, Samsung and LG are collectively beating the hell out of Japanese electronics giants like Sony, Panasonic (formerly Matsushita) and Toshiba. They've lifted themselves nicely out of the bargain basement realm and have become respected global consumer electronics companies while growing their revenues to gargantuan levels. Samsung will soon be much larger than HP in terms of revenues. Sony and Panasonic have stagnated at around $80 billion for years and will soon be overtaken by LG. But can they take it to the next step in this brave new world of convergence between high-tech and consumer electronics?
Now we have the likes of US high-tech companies like Apple, Microsoft, HP, Dell, etc. competing against consumer electronics titans likes of Sony, Samsung, LG, Toshiba, etc. and this brawl will make what we've witnessed in the tech industry over the past 20 years seem tame in comparison. You throw in the major telecom players and content providers around the world and this battlefield is one amazingly complex soup of alliances, double-crosses and intense cutthroat wars. This sure beats following MLB and NFL!
I just don't think the strategies of these do-it-all companies like Sony, Samsung and LG will work in this new battlefield as they take on Apple and other US high-tech companies. You can bet that HP is going to go all-out to fight in this space as well. And I don't expect Dell to be a slouch with the resources they have. Overall, the companies that create and control the software and the platforms will be the ones at the leading edge and this is not something the Asian manufacturers have. That's why all the focus is on Apple vs. Google (with Microsoft joining the fight soon).
Still, the next 10 years will be very interesting. A lot of companies that seemed dominant (or at least in a very strong market position) only several years ago may not be around by 2020. Samsung and LG are going to be serious players for sure (with the help of Google), but I believe Apple and HP will carve out their own turf and be able to defend it as this new market evolves. It's really difficult to say what will happen with Nokia and RIM. And we have no idea if Microsoft will become a player with their mobile software strategy. There's never been a business war like this one that's only getting started now. It's only like the second inning or midway through the first quarter. I don't believe it'll be a blowout like what Microsoft did during the PC era. I believe this will go down to the wire and stay that way for a long, long time to come. For us consumers, I think that'll be the best outcome.
If history is any guide, the companies with proprietary standards will take the bulk of the profits. In the PC wars it was Microsoft and Intel... the real gorillas. I think that HP and Dell are just box makers with limited proprietary technology. Their services business is a low margin. Their success depends on execution... that is what Mark V. Hurd was good at doing, and Michael Dell in his heyday. That is why HP bought Palm, but I think they will be a niche player since they do not have a value chain like iTunes, App store, etc.
Right now it is a fight between Apple with it relatively closed proprietary architecture versus Google with open proprietary architecture. Microsoft is yesterday's tech like the IBM mainframe... ditto for Nokia and RIMM... they are not going to go away, but unlikely to dominate.
*sigh*
When will people get it. Tablets aren't designed for productivity. They are designed for leisurely use. Anybody who is serious about getting work done will pick up a laptop. Not a netbook, or a smartphone, or a tablet--a full featured and powerful laptop.
Fascinating... You're as wrong as the LG exec is.
If history is any guide, the companies with proprietary standards will take the bulk of the profits. In the PC wars it was Microsoft and Intel... the real gorillas. I think that HP and Dell are just box makers with limited proprietary technology. Their services business is a low margin. Their success depends on execution... that is what Mark V. Hurd was good at doing, and Michael Dell in his heyday. That is why HP bought Palm, but I think they will be a niche player since they do not have a value chain like iTunes, App store, etc.
Right now it is a fight between Apple with it relatively closed proprietary architecture versus Google with open proprietary architecture. Microsoft is yesterday's tech like the IBM mainframe... ditto for Nokia and RIMM... they are not going to go away, but unlikely to dominate.
I agree. I think it's interesting that Apple's resurgence was due to leveraging their unique closed and vertically integrated proprietary system and adapting it to the wide-open Internet standards (and, to a lesser degree, adopting PC hardware standards like USB, Intel, etc.). Apple's vertical integration still is and will remain Apple's differentiator. Motorola? Samsung? LG? They've become the new HP, Dell and Acer.
There is indeed a striking similarity between the PC wars (Intel/Microsoft vs. Apple/PowerPC) and the current mobile platform war but it's also quite different, which is what I find interesting. Now you've got traditional tech companies duking it out with new rivals from the consumer electronics industry who are becoming more technologically savvy. Still, as I pointed out in my earlier post, none of these hardware makers have any control over the software and, hence, the platform.
While the comparison between Apple vs. Microsoft during the PC era and Apple vs. Google in this mobile Internet era is valid, the dynamics of the competitive landscape are very different when we consider all the different players involved. Essentially, it is much more complex as we have to factor in not only the major players in the aforementioned traditional high-tech companies and humungous consumer electronics firms, but also the telecom giants and content providers (mainly the huge media companies) who are all looking to get a piece of the action.
No one in any of these industries wants another Microsoft. If it seems either Apple or Google is getting too powerful, all these other players will align themselves in a way to counter that growing dominance. Apple and Google have no choice but to pursue dominance just to counter each other and to remain relevant, but it will come down to what types of alliances each company musters up that will give them the edge.
Also, I wouldn't totally dismiss Microsoft just yet. They have a history of coming back and banging their heads against the wall until they get things right. They're still extremely profitable and it's not like the desktops of the enterprise are going to disappear. People still have to sit down and work - even at home. The backend players like IBM, HP, Oracle, SAP, Cisco, EMC, etc. will also want in on all of this new action and will continue to exert their influence to make sure they profit in this new converging market.
I have to say, though, that Apple seems best positioned and best equipped to compete against all of these behemoths - mainly because they have both the software platform/ecosystem and the hardware that people want to be able to look at and touch and feel with their flesh. And Apple understands this very well. For Apple, it'll be about maintaining a balance between attaining the critical mass to sustain their iOS ecosystem while being able to charge a premium for their unique differentiating factor of software/hardware integration.
*sigh*
When will people get it. Tablets aren't designed for productivity. They are designed for leisurely use. Anybody who is serious about getting work done will pick up a laptop. Not a netbook, or a smartphone, or a tablet--a full featured and powerful laptop.
Totally agree with you. Sure a tablet can do some productive tasks but seriously out of the people that have argued against this how many of you really think you could use a tablet for 8 hours a day instead of a computer.
Even if they had the exact same software your going to get health issues from your seating position.
What is there to compete with the iPad? joojoo?
Yeah, there will be tablets 'soon' but until then, I wish they'd all shut up and get back to work on delivering something that isn't a freaky bad clone of the iPad.
Totally agree with you. Sure a tablet can do some productive tasks but seriously out of the people that have argued against this how many of you really think you could use a tablet for 8 hours a day instead of a computer.
Even if they had the exact same software your going to get health issues from your seating position.
Tim, stop and think about this - the inherent flexibility of the iPad/tablet design means you potentially can do more in more places than with a laptop or desktop, you are less constrained by the limitations of having to have a keyboard and pointing device and a surface on which to use them. My wife uses hers more than 8 hours a day for tasks ranging from the traditional "productivity" to the more leisurely reading, games, web browsing, video watching and listening to music and podcasts. She is at here desktop machine less and less as time goes on and apps are developed that answer specific needs she has. Not everything is perfect, but it is a damn sight better than it has been with the traditional computer, and development is open-ended. For those odd moments when she wants to use a full keyboard, she has a stand at her desk in the office that she puts the iPad into and it links to her computer's bluetooth keyboard. The computer slumbers int he background while she types away on the iPad.
Let's also not forget that due to the myopic nature of PC hardware and Windows OS development the "tablet PC" market was languishing in a small niche dedicated to some medical practices or hospitals, inventory companies and a smattering of manufacturing use. Apple reset the benchmark and now everyone else is trying to match or beat it. LG may well produce a more feature-laden device, with more ports of various kinds and a cool design - because LG has a knack for doing that occasionally, but as has been noted previously, they will have to create whole-cloth an ecosystem like Apple's to compete on the same playing field.
It won't be with any current version of Windows and we are still waiting to see if Google's honeymoon with Android was serious or if Chrome will be the tablet solution of choice. Ultimately this is going to be a fun ride as all of this shakes out. Let's remember too that Apple has never played, in spite of the success of the iPod, to dominate the market, only it's most profitable segments. The focus is not on being the majority of the market, just the most profitable - which gives Apple the wherewithal to keep advancing the technology targets and gives their competition fits trying to hit a moving target. Jobs told us when the iPhone was introduced that they were only going after 1% of the cellphone market - that goal has been surpassed already, and they are still growing the iPhone owner population world-wide.
The iPad has shortcomings. For example, there isn't a camera on it. However, the bigger screen in itself is a game-changer. To understand why the iPad is more than just a giant iPod touch, let's go back to history of tablets. Tablets haven't been successful, simple as that. Before the iPad, most tablets followed a typical model. They would have Windows and looked like an ordinary laptop. However, the screen could swivel around fold the unit over the keyboard with the screen facing outwards, converting the device into a tablet. However, tablets of this design haven't been very successful. The reason is that most people are used to using Windows with a mouse and a keyboard.
The iPad is quite different. Yes, the OS and user interface are almost identical. However, that OS is a proven success with touchscreen-only interaction. Anyone who has used an iPhone can use an iPad without learning much. People are familiar with the OS and feel very comfortable using it without a keyboard.
A big criticism of the iPad is that it is an entertainment device without any real productivity value. However, there are certain limitations without a keyboard. People aren't going to be typing out 100 page reports with an iPad or any touchscreen tablet for that matter. That's why LG can trashtalk all they want about their tablet. However, how good a tablet device functions a content creation tool depends on software. With a good camera, people can make videos. That's probably going to be on the next iPad. However, if the LG tablet is a touchscreen, it's not going to be easy for people to type out large reports. While not perfect, there is a capability for creating and editing documents on the iPad using Pages. It needs improvement but that will have to happen at its own pace. But still, there's only so much typing you can do with a touchscreen keyboard.
An iPad is a computer, unless of course your only acceptable definition of a (home/office/portable) computer means a mouse based operating system with an external keyboard running a multi-windowed OS. I owned the original Macintosh in 1984 and the follow up Mac Plus. Remember that the DTP revolution was created on a computer with a 9" B&W screen (slightly smaller), 1MB RAM (err, less) and a Motorola 68000 processor (less advanced) running at 8MHz(err, much slower). How does that compare to the potential of an iPad? Remember too that MS Word, Excel and Powerpoint, Aldus Pagemaker and Quark Express originally all debuted on this computer.
Apple have clearly shown with the iWork suite that productive apps are entirely possible on the iPad's hardware, though admittedly those apps do not have the depth and coverage of their Mac counterparts, but that's a matter of degree and perhaps intent. There are already plenty of apps for managing and reading documents, editing photos, sound editing and mixing apps and GTD apps to help you be productive when using all the others. And of course there are plenty more apps being released every day.
Several of the problems surrounding content creation are more about connectivity, integration with other apps, sharing data between apps and such. These are factors that can be addressed via iOS and hardware changes, should Apple believe that it's something they think will benefit the iPad and all that goes with it.
Also, as someone else mentioned earlier, I have my iPad almost everywhere I go - it just slips in that slim pocket in the rear of my backpack. I didn't do that with my iBook which means that I now have a full sized powerful device on which to do a number of tasks that I didn't have before simply because I rarely had my iBook with me.
If people see the iPad simply as an email and video viewer then it is. If people see it as a productivity tool and develop for that, then that's it. Of course it can be either, both and much more.
It is a computer underneath. And it's about the software.
So unless LG has the media ecosystem along with the fit and finish of Apple's offerings LG can kiss my........................
You nailed it right there my friend.
And without that ecosystem I would have probably got bored with my iPad by now regardless of how good it is.
You can also include the iPod Touch in there as well, not the iPhone though because I need to make calls with that. It's only a matter of time before iPad gets more productive.
I think you miss the point. I can see a salesmen remotely logging in to place orders or check inventory from the ipad. Inventory control, order picking, etc can be done from an ipad as well. Home inspectors, contractors, landscapers can find these very useful on the job site as well.
Just because the ipad is not used for content creation does not mean it has no place for work.
That last line says it all.
I look at it this way iPad is less than optimal for the creation of certain types of content. On the other hand it is a new approach to working with content for many. It is mistake to frame every problem in terms of old computer technology, iPad is about thinking fresh.
Dave
Honestly, things will have to change in the Android world for it to see any long term success. However Android isn't the only alternative, there are enough Linux based ideas out there that something different could easily end up on the tablet.
In any event who really cares if any COMING device blows iPad away? Lets face it iPad is very much a rev one device in Apples finest tradition and will likely have been on the market for a year before serious competition arrives. By that time Apple will have blown away iPad themselves. By that I mean a SMP based Cortex A9 based machine with lots of RAM. That processor will likely be a SoC highly optimized for use in tablets not cell phones. So yeah the can blow away the current iPad, but so will Apple. There is more to the game than that.
Dave
*sigh*
When will people get it. Tablets aren't designed for productivity. They are designed for leisurely use. Anybody who is serious about getting work done will pick up a laptop. Not a netbook, or a smartphone, or a tablet--a full featured and powerful laptop.
so, what you're saying is, an ipad is a toy?
Wrong. I bet the ipad gets used in productivity in a serious way. And I'm sure the other companies sees this, so it's only a matter of time before the other manufacturers get their crap together too. Companies like LG, HP etc, aren't going anywhere either.
You nailed it right there my friend.
And without that ecosystem I would have probably got bored with my iPad by now regardless of how good it is.
You can also include the iPod Touch in there as well, not the iPhone though because I need to make calls with that. It's only a matter of time before iPad gets more productive.
I don't think LG is building theOS, or the eco system. They're using someone else's, android I suppose.
There is all these manufacturers, used to using microsoft as their OS for so many years, and now, they're flapping in the breeze. It seems M$ has been pretty quiet on things for some time now. That's why Android is doing so well. I suspect, that not only does M$ was to kill android as much as apple does, but they're gearing up to simply copy apple head to toe, and we'll see all the manufacturers flock to M$.
Many other companies must look at Apples products the same way. the trouble is 1% doesn't feed their share holders or need for killer apps.
A better mouse trap is always right around the corner, the trouble is, the mouse is always 2 corners ahead of the better mouse trap.
The good news is, all of these companies will bring something to the table, and if that something makes Apple jump 2 steps ahead of them, then it's a Win-Win for us Apple folks.
And hey, if in fact they or anyone else tops Apple, then we'll buy that product, and if only for 30 days or so, company (X) will be the leader, and hey, shouldn't everyone have their 15 minutes of fame.
Skip