I don't know about that. Apple is one company. In 2011 to 2012 they will face an onslaught of low-to-zero margin poor-quality products thrown into the market. Apple will have to cede marketshare. People will always buy cheap crap, and Apple doesn't do that, so... I see Apple ceding 50% of the tablet market by end of 2011 to other manufacturers. But just like iPhone, iPad will be a significant product still. Not like the Mac, which is not as significant in terms of market share and volume of PCs sold.
What Apple has learnt is that it can still be significant by innovation, volume of products and appropriate pricing. Mac is "niche" for many reasons, but iPhone/iOS and iPad would hold at least a third of their respective markets in 2011, at very rough estimates (I know this sounds vague). Bottom line, iPhone, iOS, iPad is a significant, major player in 2011 and 2012, but may not be dominant.
I'm not going to try to guess any outcomes, if only because the market categories themselves are so much in flux. Breaking this rule right away, one outcome I will guess without too much fear of being wrong is that it won't play out like the PC market. It won't be arbitrarily reduced to one highly dominant player and few opportunities left over for anyone else. This market, however it ends up being defined, will be more diverse and hence more healthy than the PC market has been. This is another reason why I think the analogy made in the article is inaccurate.
I have little doubt that Apple will be a major player, not just in market share, but in defining what the market looks like. They can't entirely prevent the market from being flooded with cheap imitations, but Apple can use their influence on what people expect and their marketing power to make them look like cheap imitations. Not that some still won't choose them, but I think the serious players who'd like to be in for the long haul (HP and RIM at this point) will have to pay very close attention to Apple's product and at least come close in functionality and price, or come out on the short end.
I don't know about that. Apple is one company. In 2011 to 2012 they will face an onslaught of low-to-zero margin poor-quality products thrown into the market. Apple will have to cede marketshare. People will always buy cheap crap, and Apple doesn't do that, so... I see Apple ceding 50% of the tablet market by end of 2011 to other manufacturers. But just like iPhone, iPad will be a significant product still. Not like the Mac, which is not as significant in terms of market share and volume of PCs sold.
True. That market exists. And the Mac has never sold as well as it sells today. Apple struggled from the very first year the Mac 128K was released. The Lisa did even worse, costing over three times as much.
I didn't see anything in the article to suggest that margins on the iPad are thin, only that Apple can use economies of scale to be as aggressive on price as they need to be.
Apple has said stated many times to investors (Wall Street() that the iPad has (priced aggressively) lower margins.
Frankly I think apple will be forced to offer a sub seven inch iPad/iPod to remain competitive.
Anybody that wants to argue the point should pick up a kindle and experience the device a bit. Put iOS on a similarly sized device and watch students and others adopt the machine in a mad rush.
I have the new kindle and I agree the screen size is perfect for what it does but it ain't no iPad. I'd argue, no I'll stick my neck out, and say Apple won't release a 7 inch iPad.
Besides there is a thought in the industry that Apple screwed up in two respects. One is the issue of aspect ratio and the other is that iPad is to damn big.
Is "thought in the industry" just wizardspeak for "I want a smaller iPad?
How anyone who professes to be a stockholder can express even mild disappointment in the strategy of Steve Jobs absolutely blows me away. Apple has a very focused strategy that is proving itself to be the envy of all of its competitors...
Oh crap! I pissed off The Defenders of Jobs--now I'm in for it!!
1) I didn't get in early enough (despite all my talk 10 years ago) nor did I buy enough to owe Jobs my allegiance for my retirement fund. I do thank him from the bottom of my heart for my emergency house fund...
2) Believe it or not, I'm not actually criticizing Jobs here. Sure, I'm pulling against his stated plans, but he has publicly misled his competitors (and supporters) many times before. Who is to say he isn't doing it now?
3) What fun would it be if we felt we couldn't think for ourselves just a little? Besides, its like talking about the weather--I might complain about aspects, but in the end, I will enjoy what comes and be happy
I was at The Source today to have a look at the Galaxy Tab. The first thing out of the salesperson's mouth, "Unlike the iPad, the Galaxy Tab displays flash.". I told her that is a non-issue with me. Her answer, "Well, yes, it would be a non-issue for someone who is stuck on the iPad and won't look at anything else.". At which point I told her that she was correct... I didn't want to look at anything else... and then I promptly left the store.
[on edit - full disclosure... I own an iPad.]
That was a very good story. I grow tired of all the iPad detractors ALWAYS coming back to Flash. I have ran into maybe ONE scenario, among hundreds, in which I would have needed Flash. It's a non-issue. Apple haters always hold on to one thing. I still go to blogs in which they talk about duct tape for the iPhone 4 because the have NOTHING ELSE on it. They are NOT very creative! :-)
That was a very good story. I grow tired of all the iPad detractors ALWAYS coming back to Flash. I have ran into maybe ONE scenario, among hundreds, in which I would have needed Flash. It's a non-issue. Apple haters always hold on to one thing. I still go to blogs in which they talk about duct tape for the iPhone 4 because the have NOTHING ELSE on it. They are NOT very creative! :-)
I recently switched my Mac?s Safari browser User Agent to represent the iPad by default. I did this so sites would pull HTML5 video instead of Flash.
While this was the case as more sites than most realize will avoid Flash if using a non-desktop OS browser, there was an issue that was also telling about the future of web browsers, albeit one that forced me to eventually return to my original User Agent with an Extension that called HTML5 video over Flash for many sites.
This issue, is that many sites have an iPad app in the App Store. Unfortunately most, if not all, had the splash appear each time you reloaded the page which in itself was a deal breaker, but it?s interesting that not only is Flash non-issue for modern websites but that many also have added iOS specific apps as well.
I recently switched my Mac?s Safari browser User Agent to represent the iPad by default. I did this so sites would pull HTML5 video instead of Flash.
While this was the case as more sites than most realize will avoid Flash if using a non-desktop OS browser, there was an issue that was also telling about the future of web browsers, albeit one that forced me to eventually return to my original User Agent with an Extension that called HTML5 video over Flash for many sites.
This issue, is that many sites have an iPad app in the App Store. Unfortunately most, if not all, had the splash appear each time you reloaded the page which in itself was a deal breaker, but it?s interesting that not only is Flash non-issue for modern websites but that many also have added iOS specific apps as well.
Great idea. I am tired of being force-fed "required" plug-ins, just because those sites are too lazy to use web standards.
Great idea. I am tired of being force-fed "required" plug-ins, just because those sites are too lazy to use web standards.
This Extension works for the majority of video you?ll likely come across. Of course, the ClickToFlash plug-in or extension are independisble for reducing resource usage and saving your battery.
It has some interesting insights about the 7" form factor, in general -- for example:
Interesting take on both devices, and as I've said many times... my iPad is fine for around the house or when sitting stationary for a period of time, but my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad (swiping with two thumbs is masterfully efficient - IMO).
If there's one thing that frustrates me about some of these reviews, it's that those writing them often fail to learn much about the devices before labeling something as a deficiency.
Example: "After googling for some answers it became clear that you needed a third party app to take a screenshot."
NOT TRUE: Screen capture is an integral part of the device's OS, requiring only the simultaneous holding of the [POWER] and [BACK] buttons for 2 seconds to accomplish.
Personally, I find this kind of ignorance regarding a device being reviewed both disheartening and annoying.
Great idea. I am tired of being force-fed "required" plug-ins, just because those sites are too lazy to use web standards.
Solip was referring to sites that have gone to the effort of providing HTML5 video. It is just the mechanism for delivery that is conditional based on devices known to need the alternate content. Since the Flash based video can offer enhancements that HTML cannot (yet), such as integrated advertising, the programmers look for the plug-in and if it is there, they send Flash. If the user agent is an iDevice they know that there is no support for Flash. In order to completely sniff out the platform and browser instalation it takes a lot of coding so most of the time they keep it simple. One thing I find curious is that more developers don't test for Flash blockers and deliver alternate advertising.
That’s what I’d expect from vendors. Besides Flash, is there really anything else non-iPad tablets can feasibly market to the average user?
I slept on that question and I arrived at the same thing that I said to DaHarder... why would you take two devices (phone plus Galaxy Tab) when you could just take the iPhone and leave the tab at home (the Tab can only be used as a phone if you use Skype). I couldn't see any advantage in also having the Tab with me.
The GT seemed too big (to me) to be any more convenient than the iPad. It won't fit into a pocket easily and might as well be left at home. If it is to be left at home then I would much rather have the screen real estate that my iPad offers.
Other than Flash I didn't see anything that the GT offered over the iPad.
I slept on that question and I arrived at the same thing that I said to DaHarder... why would you take two devices (phone plus Galaxy Tab) when you could just take the iPhone and leave the tab at home (the Tab can only be used as a phone if you use Skype). I couldn't see any advantage in also having the Tab with you.
That’s why I returned my first iPad and why I still don’t have much use for my 2nd iPad (it was a gift). Between my iPhone and 13” MBP my computing window is just too small for the iPad.
Even though I’m using my iPad for some games (which is a new thing for me) and reading eBooks, I’m more than just a casual user so I’d rather have my MBP if I’m sitting. Those 7” tablets with 16:9 ratios look horrendous for reading. Heck, even the Kindle app for the iPad makes it a less than ideal experience compared to iBooks, even though the Kindle Store has a much better selection.
I suppose if you don’t have a smartphone the Galaxy Tab would seem pretty nice, but compared to the iPad it seems woefully limited and overpriced for what you get.
Interesting take on both devices, and as I've said many times... my iPad is fine for around the house or when sitting stationary for a period of time, but my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad (swiping with two thumbs is masterfully efficient - IMO).
In a previous thread you uploaded a picture that you had composed where you claimed the iPad was "boring bland and blah". So now it is fine?
In a previous thread you uploaded a picture that you had composed where you claimed the iPad was "boring bland and blah". So now it is fine?
he thinks that it gives credibility to him as a balanced reviewer so he sets up the iPad as ?fine? and then states the Galaxy Tab is ?far superior [?] in every way?. If it is, then this one tablet should outsell the iPad in a very short time.
he thinks that it gives credibility to him as a balanced reviewer so he sets up the iPad as ?fine? and then states the Galaxy Tab is ?far superior [?] in every way?. If it is, then this one tablet should outsell the iPad in a very short time.
You really need to work on your reading comprehension, or at least stop selcteively ommitting portions of member posts to better fit your (often biased) views.
What I posted was: "my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad"
You really need to work on your reading comprehension, or at least stop selcteively ommitting portions of member posts to better fit your (often biased) views.
What I posted was: "my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad"
I read Solipsism's reply and then your comment about his reply and came to the conclusion that adding 'on the go' from your original post wouldn't have changed his conclusion one iota.
I read Solipsism's reply and then your comment about his reply and came to the conclusion that adding 'on the go' from your original post wouldn't have changed his conclusion one iota.
I omitted “on the go” for that very reason. It’s pointless filler. His implications being that the iPad is only useful as a stationary device is silly. For instance, which has a better battery life for reading, for WiFI, for video? If the iPad beats the Galaxy Tab in any single test his statement is blown to bits because running off the battery is something that I would think would be important for an “on the go” test.
I focused on his aggrandized "far superior […] in every way” comment as I don’t think there is a single thing I own that I could honestly say is "far superior […] in every way” to something else, whether it’s "on the go" or not. For example, I love my iPhone and it’s by far the best choice for my needs, but saying that it’s "far superior […] in every way” as a statement of fact would be asinine, at the very least, regardless of add some silly comment like “on the go.”
Comments
I don't know about that. Apple is one company. In 2011 to 2012 they will face an onslaught of low-to-zero margin poor-quality products thrown into the market. Apple will have to cede marketshare. People will always buy cheap crap, and Apple doesn't do that, so... I see Apple ceding 50% of the tablet market by end of 2011 to other manufacturers. But just like iPhone, iPad will be a significant product still. Not like the Mac, which is not as significant in terms of market share and volume of PCs sold.
What Apple has learnt is that it can still be significant by innovation, volume of products and appropriate pricing. Mac is "niche" for many reasons, but iPhone/iOS and iPad would hold at least a third of their respective markets in 2011, at very rough estimates (I know this sounds vague). Bottom line, iPhone, iOS, iPad is a significant, major player in 2011 and 2012, but may not be dominant.
I'm not going to try to guess any outcomes, if only because the market categories themselves are so much in flux. Breaking this rule right away, one outcome I will guess without too much fear of being wrong is that it won't play out like the PC market. It won't be arbitrarily reduced to one highly dominant player and few opportunities left over for anyone else. This market, however it ends up being defined, will be more diverse and hence more healthy than the PC market has been. This is another reason why I think the analogy made in the article is inaccurate.
I have little doubt that Apple will be a major player, not just in market share, but in defining what the market looks like. They can't entirely prevent the market from being flooded with cheap imitations, but Apple can use their influence on what people expect and their marketing power to make them look like cheap imitations. Not that some still won't choose them, but I think the serious players who'd like to be in for the long haul (HP and RIM at this point) will have to pay very close attention to Apple's product and at least come close in functionality and price, or come out on the short end.
I don't know about that. Apple is one company. In 2011 to 2012 they will face an onslaught of low-to-zero margin poor-quality products thrown into the market. Apple will have to cede marketshare. People will always buy cheap crap, and Apple doesn't do that, so... I see Apple ceding 50% of the tablet market by end of 2011 to other manufacturers. But just like iPhone, iPad will be a significant product still. Not like the Mac, which is not as significant in terms of market share and volume of PCs sold.
True. That market exists. And the Mac has never sold as well as it sells today. Apple struggled from the very first year the Mac 128K was released. The Lisa did even worse, costing over three times as much.
I didn't see anything in the article to suggest that margins on the iPad are thin, only that Apple can use economies of scale to be as aggressive on price as they need to be.
Apple has said stated many times to investors (Wall Street() that the iPad has (priced aggressively) lower margins.
Frankly I think apple will be forced to offer a sub seven inch iPad/iPod to remain competitive.
Anybody that wants to argue the point should pick up a kindle and experience the device a bit. Put iOS on a similarly sized device and watch students and others adopt the machine in a mad rush.
I have the new kindle and I agree the screen size is perfect for what it does but it ain't no iPad. I'd argue, no I'll stick my neck out, and say Apple won't release a 7 inch iPad.
Besides there is a thought in the industry that Apple screwed up in two respects. One is the issue of aspect ratio and the other is that iPad is to damn big.
Is "thought in the industry" just wizardspeak for "I want a smaller iPad?
From the standpoint of a user, the lack of suppport for wide aspect ratios and a smaller screen leaves me frustrated.
Ah, thought so!
How anyone who professes to be a stockholder can express even mild disappointment in the strategy of Steve Jobs absolutely blows me away. Apple has a very focused strategy that is proving itself to be the envy of all of its competitors...
Oh crap! I pissed off The Defenders of Jobs--now I'm in for it!!
1) I didn't get in early enough (despite all my talk 10 years ago) nor did I buy enough to owe Jobs my allegiance for my retirement fund. I do thank him from the bottom of my heart for my emergency house fund...
2) Believe it or not, I'm not actually criticizing Jobs here. Sure, I'm pulling against his stated plans, but he has publicly misled his competitors (and supporters) many times before. Who is to say he isn't doing it now?
3) What fun would it be if we felt we couldn't think for ourselves just a little? Besides, its like talking about the weather--I might complain about aspects, but in the end, I will enjoy what comes and be happy
I was at The Source today to have a look at the Galaxy Tab. The first thing out of the salesperson's mouth, "Unlike the iPad, the Galaxy Tab displays flash.". I told her that is a non-issue with me. Her answer, "Well, yes, it would be a non-issue for someone who is stuck on the iPad and won't look at anything else.". At which point I told her that she was correct... I didn't want to look at anything else... and then I promptly left the store.
[on edit - full disclosure... I own an iPad.]
That was a very good story. I grow tired of all the iPad detractors ALWAYS coming back to Flash. I have ran into maybe ONE scenario, among hundreds, in which I would have needed Flash. It's a non-issue. Apple haters always hold on to one thing. I still go to blogs in which they talk about duct tape for the iPhone 4 because the have NOTHING ELSE on it. They are NOT very creative! :-)
That was a very good story. I grow tired of all the iPad detractors ALWAYS coming back to Flash. I have ran into maybe ONE scenario, among hundreds, in which I would have needed Flash. It's a non-issue. Apple haters always hold on to one thing. I still go to blogs in which they talk about duct tape for the iPhone 4 because the have NOTHING ELSE on it. They are NOT very creative! :-)
I recently switched my Mac?s Safari browser User Agent to represent the iPad by default. I did this so sites would pull HTML5 video instead of Flash.
While this was the case as more sites than most realize will avoid Flash if using a non-desktop OS browser, there was an issue that was also telling about the future of web browsers, albeit one that forced me to eventually return to my original User Agent with an Extension that called HTML5 video over Flash for many sites.
This issue, is that many sites have an iPad app in the App Store. Unfortunately most, if not all, had the splash appear each time you reloaded the page which in itself was a deal breaker, but it?s interesting that not only is Flash non-issue for modern websites but that many also have added iOS specific apps as well.
I recently switched my Mac?s Safari browser User Agent to represent the iPad by default. I did this so sites would pull HTML5 video instead of Flash.
While this was the case as more sites than most realize will avoid Flash if using a non-desktop OS browser, there was an issue that was also telling about the future of web browsers, albeit one that forced me to eventually return to my original User Agent with an Extension that called HTML5 video over Flash for many sites.
This issue, is that many sites have an iPad app in the App Store. Unfortunately most, if not all, had the splash appear each time you reloaded the page which in itself was a deal breaker, but it?s interesting that not only is Flash non-issue for modern websites but that many also have added iOS specific apps as well.
Great idea. I am tired of being force-fed "required" plug-ins, just because those sites are too lazy to use web standards.
Great idea. I am tired of being force-fed "required" plug-ins, just because those sites are too lazy to use web standards.
This Extension works for the majority of video you?ll likely come across. Of course, the ClickToFlash plug-in or extension are independisble for reducing resource usage and saving your battery.Here is Gruber?s take on removing Flash completely from Mac OS X.
There is an interesting review of the Galaxy Tab at:
http://brooksreview.net/2010/11/tab-review/
It has some interesting insights about the 7" form factor, in general -- for example:
Interesting take on both devices, and as I've said many times... my iPad is fine for around the house or when sitting stationary for a period of time, but my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad (swiping with two thumbs is masterfully efficient - IMO).
If there's one thing that frustrates me about some of these reviews, it's that those writing them often fail to learn much about the devices before labeling something as a deficiency.
Example: "After googling for some answers it became clear that you needed a third party app to take a screenshot."
NOT TRUE: Screen capture is an integral part of the device's OS, requiring only the simultaneous holding of the [POWER] and [BACK] buttons for 2 seconds to accomplish.
Personally, I find this kind of ignorance regarding a device being reviewed both disheartening and annoying.
Oh Well...
Great idea. I am tired of being force-fed "required" plug-ins, just because those sites are too lazy to use web standards.
Solip was referring to sites that have gone to the effort of providing HTML5 video. It is just the mechanism for delivery that is conditional based on devices known to need the alternate content. Since the Flash based video can offer enhancements that HTML cannot (yet), such as integrated advertising, the programmers look for the plug-in and if it is there, they send Flash. If the user agent is an iDevice they know that there is no support for Flash. In order to completely sniff out the platform and browser instalation it takes a lot of coding so most of the time they keep it simple. One thing I find curious is that more developers don't test for Flash blockers and deliver alternate advertising.
That’s what I’d expect from vendors. Besides Flash, is there really anything else non-iPad tablets can feasibly market to the average user?
I slept on that question and I arrived at the same thing that I said to DaHarder... why would you take two devices (phone plus Galaxy Tab) when you could just take the iPhone and leave the tab at home (the Tab can only be used as a phone if you use Skype). I couldn't see any advantage in also having the Tab with me.
The GT seemed too big (to me) to be any more convenient than the iPad. It won't fit into a pocket easily and might as well be left at home. If it is to be left at home then I would much rather have the screen real estate that my iPad offers.
Other than Flash I didn't see anything that the GT offered over the iPad.
Just my observations.
I slept on that question and I arrived at the same thing that I said to DaHarder... why would you take two devices (phone plus Galaxy Tab) when you could just take the iPhone and leave the tab at home (the Tab can only be used as a phone if you use Skype). I couldn't see any advantage in also having the Tab with you.
That’s why I returned my first iPad and why I still don’t have much use for my 2nd iPad (it was a gift). Between my iPhone and 13” MBP my computing window is just too small for the iPad.
Even though I’m using my iPad for some games (which is a new thing for me) and reading eBooks, I’m more than just a casual user so I’d rather have my MBP if I’m sitting. Those 7” tablets with 16:9 ratios look horrendous for reading. Heck, even the Kindle app for the iPad makes it a less than ideal experience compared to iBooks, even though the Kindle Store has a much better selection.
I suppose if you don’t have a smartphone the Galaxy Tab would seem pretty nice, but compared to the iPad it seems woefully limited and overpriced for what you get.
Interesting take on both devices, and as I've said many times... my iPad is fine for around the house or when sitting stationary for a period of time, but my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad (swiping with two thumbs is masterfully efficient - IMO).
In a previous thread you uploaded a picture that you had composed where you claimed the iPad was "boring bland and blah". So now it is fine?
In a previous thread you uploaded a picture that you had composed where you claimed the iPad was "boring bland and blah". So now it is fine?
he thinks that it gives credibility to him as a balanced reviewer so he sets up the iPad as ?fine? and then states the Galaxy Tab is ?far superior [?] in every way?. If it is, then this one tablet should outsell the iPad in a very short time.
he thinks that it gives credibility to him as a balanced reviewer so he sets up the iPad as ?fine? and then states the Galaxy Tab is ?far superior [?] in every way?. If it is, then this one tablet should outsell the iPad in a very short time.
You really need to work on your reading comprehension, or at least stop selcteively ommitting portions of member posts to better fit your (often biased) views.
What I posted was: "my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad"
You really need to work on your reading comprehension, or at least stop selcteively ommitting portions of member posts to better fit your (often biased) views.
What I posted was: "my Galaxy Tab is a far superior 'on the go' device in every way as its form-factor and overall ergonomics are superior to my larger/heavier iPad"
I read Solipsism's reply and then your comment about his reply and came to the conclusion that adding 'on the go' from your original post wouldn't have changed his conclusion one iota.
I think you're just looking for a fight.
I read Solipsism's reply and then your comment about his reply and came to the conclusion that adding 'on the go' from your original post wouldn't have changed his conclusion one iota.
I omitted “on the go” for that very reason. It’s pointless filler. His implications being that the iPad is only useful as a stationary device is silly. For instance, which has a better battery life for reading, for WiFI, for video? If the iPad beats the Galaxy Tab in any single test his statement is blown to bits because running off the battery is something that I would think would be important for an “on the go” test.
I focused on his aggrandized "far superior […] in every way” comment as I don’t think there is a single thing I own that I could honestly say is "far superior […] in every way” to something else, whether it’s "on the go" or not. For example, I love my iPhone and it’s by far the best choice for my needs, but saying that it’s "far superior […] in every way” as a statement of fact would be asinine, at the very least, regardless of add some silly comment like “on the go.”