Rumors of Apple's second-generation iPad expected to weaken tablet sales
With Apple's second-generation iPad expected to debut in the first quarter of 2011, many consumers are expected to hold off on purchasing any competing touchscreen tablets.
Sources from overseas suppliers indicated to DigiTimes that they expect the launch of Apple's next iPad to "seriously weaken" tablet offerings from other PC vendors. Some believe that tablet sales projections for 2011 have been overly optimistic, and may disappoint.
"Since consumer demand for tablet PCs is still limited, while most upstream and downstream players are over-optimistic about the market, tablet PCs may see a sharp drop in demand as soon as the third quarter of 2011, after a big battle in the second," the report said.
That "big battle" in the second quarter of 2011 is expected to be led by Apple's second-generation iPad. In addition, Google is expected to have a tablet-specific version of its Android mobile operating system ready, while Intel will launch its Oak Trail platform.
While the report notes that total tablet sales in 2011 are currently expected by some to reach between 45 million and 55 million sales, some have expectations that high for Apple's iPad alone. For example, analyst Brian Blair of Wedge Partners sees Apple selling 48 million iPads in 2011.
However, after some on Wall Street were disappointed by Apple's sales of 4.19 million iPads last quarter, some analysts lowered their forecasts. Yair Reiner with Oppenheimer has predicted Apple will sell 23 million iPads next year, while Charlie Wolf of Needham & Company expects the company to ship 18 million iPads in 2011.
Last week, one report alleged that Apple currently plans to build about 40 million iPads in calendar year 2011. The company has also allegedly increased its build orders for the end of 2010, in anticipation of strong holiday sales.
Sources from overseas suppliers indicated to DigiTimes that they expect the launch of Apple's next iPad to "seriously weaken" tablet offerings from other PC vendors. Some believe that tablet sales projections for 2011 have been overly optimistic, and may disappoint.
"Since consumer demand for tablet PCs is still limited, while most upstream and downstream players are over-optimistic about the market, tablet PCs may see a sharp drop in demand as soon as the third quarter of 2011, after a big battle in the second," the report said.
That "big battle" in the second quarter of 2011 is expected to be led by Apple's second-generation iPad. In addition, Google is expected to have a tablet-specific version of its Android mobile operating system ready, while Intel will launch its Oak Trail platform.
While the report notes that total tablet sales in 2011 are currently expected by some to reach between 45 million and 55 million sales, some have expectations that high for Apple's iPad alone. For example, analyst Brian Blair of Wedge Partners sees Apple selling 48 million iPads in 2011.
However, after some on Wall Street were disappointed by Apple's sales of 4.19 million iPads last quarter, some analysts lowered their forecasts. Yair Reiner with Oppenheimer has predicted Apple will sell 23 million iPads next year, while Charlie Wolf of Needham & Company expects the company to ship 18 million iPads in 2011.
Last week, one report alleged that Apple currently plans to build about 40 million iPads in calendar year 2011. The company has also allegedly increased its build orders for the end of 2010, in anticipation of strong holiday sales.
Comments
This isn't surprising at all, but could have been mitigated somewhat had Apple made iPad 1 a far higher speced system. The low res screen, lack of cameras, limited RAM, and poor connectivity (not even a single USB port? Come on Apple) make this very, very much a 1.0 product. Maybe not even 1.0.
I would like to see you do better for the price (or any company for that matter).
USB/Camera/RAM were omitted/limited for valid reasons.
"low res screen" I would hardly call the screen on the ipad low res.
This isn't surprising at all, but could have been mitigated somewhat had Apple made iPad 1 a far higher speced system. The low res screen, lack of cameras, limited RAM, and poor connectivity (not even a single USB port? Come on Apple) make this very, very much a 1.0 product. Maybe not even 1.0.
They have that machine. It's called a MacBook Air. Why is it so difficult for people to understand what the iPad *is*, and what it *isn't*.
I would like to see you do better for the price (or any company for that matter).
USB/Camera/RAM were omitted/limited for valid reasons.
"low res screen" I would hardly call the screen on the ipad low res.
Netbooks offer far more for less money.
As for the screen, it's one of the lowest DPIs on any Apple product, and is so low as to render small text very ugly. (try going to The Guardian and don't pinch to zoom) It's rather telling that the iPhone 4, with it's microscopic screen, almost matches the resolution of the iPad.
They have that machine. It's called a MacBook Air. Why is it so difficult for people to understand what the iPad *is*, and what it *isn't*.
No, the iPad is a tablet, the Macbook is a laptop. It's really very simple. If I want a tablet, why would I buy a Macbook?
I fail to see why Apple couldn't have included a USB port (for example) on the iPad. Which part of being able to plug a digital camera directly into an iPad to view photos is bad thing?
No, the iPad is a tablet, the Macbook is a laptop. It's really very simple. If I want a tablet, why would I buy a Macbook?
I fail to see why Apple couldn't have included a USB port (for example) on the iPad. Which part of being able to plug a digital camera directly into an iPad to view photos is bad thing?
Plug your camera into your computer, then sync the photos to the iPad. That's why you have a computer, remember? Wait a second - hold the phone! You CAN plug your camera directly into the iPad via the connector adapter for the tiny percentage of people who give a crap about that.
This isn't surprising at all, but could have been mitigated somewhat had Apple made iPad 1 a far higher speced system. The low res screen, lack of cameras, limited RAM, and poor connectivity (not even a single USB port? Come on Apple) make this very, very much a 1.0 product. Maybe not even 1.0.
This is why Apple doesn't really advertise RAM, etc. Who cares how much RAM it has? It runs everything fast as hell as it is.
No, the iPad is a tablet, the Macbook is a laptop. It's really very simple. If I want a tablet, why would I buy a Macbook?
I fail to see why Apple couldn't have included a USB port (for example) on the iPad. Which part of being able to plug a digital camera directly into an iPad to view photos is bad thing?
In the not so distant future, I'm sure Steve Jobs envisions a completely sealed Rolex iPad. Wireless syncing and blue tooth (or something else) headphones. Special glass that spreads the sound from the speakers. You know we're headed for less holes, not more.
As far as getting a netbook for less... I've seen these plastic, flimsy, unappealing netbooks at Costco and they are so slow and unimpressive that it's hard to believe anyone buys them over an iPad.
I'm not getting the value equation of your post.
iPad v2, with the camera and facetime alone, is going to be a must-have upgrade. It was smart. They knew they'd hook the early adapters with v1 and add enough compelling features in v2 to nearly guarantee an upgrade from the EAs as well as those who sit on the fence, waiting for the bugs to be worked out. It's genius.
That said, I get by with the 30 pin adapter for my DAC's and amps - it works just fine, but USB would be great. Still, USB does not mean (as you may notice with netbooks) actual USB capability. There are few if no laptops that can supply a full 5V of electricity from USB. I've several audio DAC's that need that much and not a single laptop can power them. The iPad, coincidentally is one of them.
However, other than design work, the iPad is my go-to work tool ahead of my macbook pro and ahead of the windows laptop I use at one of my jobs. RAM and USB port (not real USB - no need to drain the battery) are issues. The screen isn't. That screen may not be perfect for pixel peeping, but it has the best viewing angle in the industry (among peers), very good colour response, and overall, a high resolution for its size.
You can only complain about its resolution if you compare it to the iPhone. In its class of device, it is very high up there.
I love it and I'll love the 3rd or 4th gen that I pick up in a couple of years from now to replace this. I can't imagine using a camera with it; then again, back in 2007, I couldn't imagine using one with an iPod touch and now I use it all the time.
No, the iPad is a tablet, the Macbook is a laptop. It's really very simple. If I want a tablet, why would I buy a Macbook?
I fail to see why Apple couldn't have included a USB port (for example) on the iPad. Which part of being able to plug a digital camera directly into an iPad to view photos is bad thing?
This isn't surprising at all, but could have been mitigated somewhat had Apple made iPad 1 a far higher speced system. The low res screen, lack of cameras, limited RAM, and poor connectivity (not even a single USB port? Come on Apple) make this very, very much a 1.0 product. Maybe not even 1.0.
True, but that would have reduced the battery life, increase the price and most importantly significantly delayed the release.
Apple are shipping something like 10 million a quarter and there is more than $200 profit to be had in each iPad.
Do the sums, then think about trying to convince Jobs in a round table discussion about the release date...
"Option 1. We release now, make billions of dollars, redefine what a tablet device is and ensure invaluable free press for years to come as every single tablet that is released after the iPad will be compared to the iPad. The problem is that some guys on the Internet won't be happy.
Which brings us to option 2. We wait for 12 months until we can increase the specs, Google gets the jump on us and we don't make all of those billions. The positive side is that we'll keep those guys on the Internet happy..."
No, the iPad is a tablet, the Macbook is a laptop. It's really very simple. If I want a tablet, why would I buy a Macbook?
I fail to see why Apple couldn't have included a USB port (for example) on the iPad. Which part of being able to plug a digital camera directly into an iPad to view photos is bad thing?
because if apple had designers like you, our apple products would be hideous
lap warmer, I agree fully with the USB. And considering the iPad, a very large iPod touch/iPhone came with half the memory of the iPhone 4, it sucks.
That said, I get by with the 30 pin adapter for my DAC's and amps - it works just fine, but USB would be great. Still, USB does not mean (as you may notice with netbooks) actual USB capability. There are few if no laptops that can supply a full 5V of electricity from USB. I've several audio DAC's that need that much and not a single laptop can power them. The iPad, coincidentally is one of them.
However, other than design work, the iPad is my go-to work tool ahead of my macbook pro and ahead of the windows laptop I use at one of my jobs. RAM and USB port (not real USB - no need to drain the battery) are issues. The screen isn't. That screen may not be perfect for pixel peeping, but it has the best viewing angle in the industry (among peers), very good colour response, and overall, a high resolution for its size.
You can only complain about its resolution if you compare it to the iPhone. In its class of device, it is very high up there.
I love it and I'll love the 3rd or 4th gen that I pick up in a couple of years from now to replace this. I can't imagine using a camera with it; then again, back in 2007, I couldn't imagine using one with an iPod touch and now I use it all the time.
Just curious as to what kind of work or apps you use on the IPAD. I just got the 16G model and I am exploring it.
Rob
Boggling.
That is the problem. Analyst making these wild a** claims and when sh** doesn't pan out they bit** out the industry for not doing more to make it happen. Blah.
Netbooks offer far more for less money.
No, the iPad is a tablet, the Macbook is a laptop. It's really very simple. If I want a tablet, why would I buy a Macbook?
You do realize you are talking in circles, right? You criticize the iPad for not having features commonly found in small form laptops and then complain when someone suggests that what you want is a small form laptop.
I agree with you, the iPad doesn't quite seem all there to me--I don't have $500 for another toy as cool as it may be. I ended up buying a MacBook when it was clear to me that an iPad would be insufficient for my needs. But I don't complain about the iPad because, clearly, Apple found something that people DO want at a price that both makes them plenty and still sells plenty. It's not like they cancelled all laptops and are forcing people to lake due with underspeced iPads...
Sometimes we forget that part of Jobs' genius is knowing what to cut out...
This isn't surprising at all, but could have been mitigated somewhat had Apple made iPad 1 a far higher speced system. The low res screen, lack of cameras, limited RAM, and poor connectivity (not even a single USB port? Come on Apple) make this very, very much a 1.0 product. Maybe not even 1.0.
This is pretty close to one of the stupidest comments ever posted on AI, and there have been plenty of stupid comments. This is pretty much equivalent to saying that if they had released the MacBook Air in 1984, they could have taken over the personal computer market.