A decade from now iPads will be everywhere and will totally reshape personal computing.
It's going to be a lot quicker than that. Two to three years, tops. Esp. if Apple keeps the current model and drops the price $100 - that will put a 16GB WiFi at $400...
Umm..no. Maybe for the car radio, GPS and HVAC system, but not an interface for the driving itself. When you have a bug on a computer, you reboot. When you have a bug in a car, you can be seriously injured. It's very dangerous to change the UI of a car. Everyone has to be able to walk into any car and drive it safely. That's why Consumer Reports (not that I like them) has always been opposed to new models which change the position of shifters, wipers, etc. Do you want Steve telling you that you have to "drive it like this"?
But I will admit that the electronics industry does need serious help. Just look at the user guide to any A/V Receiver. And then look at postings boards where even the nerds and techies can't figure out what's going on. The other problem is that the electronics industry is putting redundant functionality in Blu-ray players, A/V receivers and in the TVs themselves. So there's Ethernet and/or WiFi access in all three. So either you can access NetFlix in all three places or one service only links to one and another service only links to another. (And AppleTV links to none). And unlike Apple, the industry pretty much refuses to give up legacy inputs/outputs so every receiver still has multiple composite, S-video, component and HDMI video inputs because they're too afraid to get rid of any inputs.
This makes no sense. But an Apple approach would simplify the whole thing and make it easier to use, but would probably reduce audio/video quality and flexibility in the name of simplicity.
With all due respect, your view is very limited to the "new adopter" thought. Especially on your view of A/V Receivers. Over the X-mas holidays I had to tell one person that they needed to either upgrade their TV, get a switcher, or get a receiver. When asked what the best 'bang for their buck' would be I said get a receiver. There are people out there who are JUST buying a PSP3 and have an old TV. I also had to tell someone (else) to get a receiver because their TV wouldn't support an ATV2. Everyone thinks people buy the newest thing out, but they don't. A/V suppliers cater to the least common denominator... across the board. All of these different mfgs are trying to appeal to the masses by giving them the most connectivity for their dollar.
You are so right! I am always amazed that car radios are so pathetic. The whole car "entertainment system" is lame in most cars. Even luxury cars have clumsy GUIs.
My parents have a 2010 Lexus and I must say, the navigation system in it - while the look of the software is very plain, it does have a very good controller. It's kind of a mouse/joystick, but the most interesting thing is it's servo controlled - when you get near an on screen button or control, the controller "clicks" into place (to be clear, the click is physical - the controller provides force feedback - it's not an audio or visual effect). It's very intuitive and helps dramatically in selecting things on screen. It's easily the easiest of the car based systems I have used to control - very fluid and quick with the selection of things on screen.
Of course, Toyota in their infinite wisdom doesn't let you do anything with the nav system while the car is in motion - even if you have a passenger, so the damn thing is impossible to update while you are on the move - but the controller is pretty cool even if the rest of the system is pretty lame and almost useless for most tasks you would want from a GPS while driving around.
One thing about the new Playbook....RIM may think they have a nice product to compete with Apple. The problem I see happening is them competing with last year's iPad. RIM is pining its hopes on the new dual-core ARM technology, which frankly everybody is going to be doing in 2011. What nobody knows right now is what Apple's technology buys in the chipmaking development space is going to do for the next generation A4. Oh sure we expect multi-cores, but what else can Apple do that will be exclusive to them? Time will tell.
Bingo. People seem to forget that with things like the A4 and Apple's battery designs, other companies simply can't go pull the same parts off the shelf and at least release something that physically looks like Apple's products (witness the redirection trying to tell us that "no, no - you really wan't a 7" tablet after all!")
With each generation, Apple should be able to widen the gap as they roll their previous experience into their new custom designs. Combine that with the obvious extraordinary vision they displayed with the first iPhone and if anything I'd say Job's was being modest in his assertion Apple is five years ahead of everyone else.
I think it's exciting to see a company with an excellent vision and a focus on the end user experience (not just slaving to endless feature lists) executing so well - I do believe the iPad and future iOS devices are finally realizing the "Computers for the rest of us" that was the motto for Apple for so long.
Well, its not like their claiming that it does all that much to begin with.
Definitely nothing ground breaking.
It "could" be a very valuable product for RIM. Currently it appears to be the only viable contender to iPad. Unless the android people can clean up their mess I don't ever see Android being viable competion. Likewise with MS.
RIMs biggest problem is getting a native SDK out the door ASAP. They could become Apples Bigest competition.
I remember laughing my ass off every time I saw one the iPhone commercials back in 07. Not because it was a bad product ( I'm still using my first gen iPhone ), but because Jobs had finally proved what most all of us die hard Mac freaks had known for so long, that Apple was one of the few true innovators out there and a good decade ahead of the pack. I knew RIM and MS had to be shitting their pants back then.... and probably even now since they only understand how to copy technology... not create it. I got my first iPad as a Christmas gift..... and holy crap.... no ad can do it justice. This thing is amazing..... Unlike with the iPhone which I immediately recognized as so far beyond what was already in the marketplace.... I saw potential with the iPad... but didn't quite get it until a couple days ago. LOL... Now I can't image life without this amazing dude.
Cudos to Jobs and Apple.... they are so far beyond MS, RIM and Motorola that it amazes the hell out of me at times.
Of course RIM will be saying their PlayBook will be better than the iPad. They're in denial, but the truth is it's gonna be another HP Slate 500 - sell a few to businesses, not customers, they need to aim at customers, that's how Apple did it.
I'm a tablet person, I know a lot on it. The Apple iPad is REVOLUTIONARY, it changed the entire market, if RIM thinks they could throw some stamps on their device they are sadly mistaken, they are gonna try to follow the iPad but sadly fail. The Samsung Galaxy Tab probably will have 10x the number of sales! RIM doesn't have a prayer.
Their best bet is to announce their device is vaporware and drop out. They can't compete, I know the PlayBook would have horrid battery life, it will be buggy, and not provide a nice interface like the iPad. These people say apps are a fad, are they stupid?
RIM is probably gonna be bought out by Apple in 2 years to use as a testing place.
No... not by Apple but by Microsoft. Surprised no one has posted that yet. RIM wont survive the next 2 years.(Period)
You are so right! I am always amazed that car radios are so pathetic. The whole car "entertainment system" is lame in most cars. Even luxury cars have clumsy GUIs.
Apple could make a huge improvements the whole car experience. Imagine an Apple interface in your car. You know it would be so simple to use and yet do all the things you want (well, after drawn out updates dripped to you). But you know it would be great.
Apple is working on this.
In car entertainment will use a 7" screen.
Apple wants to be in your pocket, in your living room and in your car.
It would be quite something if they revealed iPad 2.0 with 2048*1536 resolution, but it seems a bit premature . Now that would be awesome. Perhaps around 2013...
Had I lots of free time and a decent soldering iron, I'd make sure the next generation of cars had options for a snap-in space that could accommodate an iPad or iPhone where most cars have that big screen that can't ever do anything different than what it was born doing.
Apple wants to be in your pocket, in your living room and in your car.
The last time I looked, a built-in in-car entertainment system cost $1,000-$2,000.
For that same price (or less) you can get several iPads (front and back passengers).
The iPads are more flexible, easier to use -- with the added advantage that when you get to your destination(s), you can take your iPads with you: motel room. game, hiking, office, beach, etc.
I don't know why the 7" screen would be an advantage unless dashboard space is the major consideration.
I remember well my reactions both to seeing the BlackBerry in 2004, and the iPhone in 2007...
BlackBerry: It looks like a cell phone that does email
iPhone: It looks like a touchscreen computer that's a cell phone
The idea of a cell phone that does email didn't really appeal to me because I really hated cell phones. The comment I had about cell phones at the time was: "you get charged for something every time you press a damn button on them".
Plus, with all of the custom-designed hardware and every generation of cell phone having a totally different hardware and software interface -- yuck! Talk about disposable technology at it's poorly-designed worst... just throw together whatever's the cheapest 3rd party hardware and software at the time and call it the latest and greatest phone.
However, the idea of having a computer in your pocket excited me because the possibilities are endless with a computer (assuming it's designed in such a way that it's extensible -- which the iPhone was for the most part). Plus you don't get charged per button press at a computer.
That's the point that RIM has always missing -- the fact that you need to design something beyond the feature checklist comparison table. I honestly don't think that RIM has the expertise capable of creating technology that will live beyond the 2 - 3 year lifespan that cell phones tend to have. At least, I haven't seen anything from them yet that would indicate differently...
Apple already had decades of experience with that in the PC world, so it makes sense that they'd carry it into the cell phone world (especially now that cell phones are more like PCs).
The original iPhone was announced Jan 9, 2007 -- it included live demos, specs pricing and availability announcement,
The original iPhone was released, on schedule, Jun 29, 2007.
In the keynote, Steve said that Apple had been working on it for 2 1/2 years -- that means that work goes back to at least Jul 2004.
Recently, Steve said the original concept was for a Tablet -- but they decided, at some point, to do the iPhone first.
So, RIM has been unable to successfully copy the iPhone after 4 years of seeing a live demo -- unless they release something before Jan 9, 2011.
RIM acquired QNX in Apr 9, 2010 -- so we can assume that they recognized a need (for a smartphone OS) and began to look for a solution, say, Jul 2008.
The iPad was announced Jan 27, 2010 and began shipping Apr 3, 2010.
Since the iPad was a revolutionary form factor for a Tablet -- it is reasonable to assume that RIM, and others, could not have begun aan iPad knock-off design before Jan 27, 2010 or Apr 3, 2010.
We can assume, that RIM immediately repurposed their QNX purchase to work on the PlayBook (instead of a replacement for BlackBerry OS). But, because of a lack of apps, RIM chose to use AIR (Flash) and overpowered hardware to compensate for the RAM/Performance issues of Flash.
The PlayBook was announced on Sep 27, 2010 (but not shown) with partial specs and abstract videos (No Price, No Release Date, No Battery Specs, No Infrastructure).
The PlayBook was first demo'd on Oct 25, 2010 (No Price, No Release Date, No Battery Specs, No Infrastructure).
As of today, the PlayBook specs include: (No Price, No Release Date, No Battery Specs, No Infrastructure).
I believe that the earliest the PlayBook can be released in any reasonable quantity and stage of completion is Jul 2011 -- with minimal apps and infrastructure (hmm.. I almost typed "infostructure" -- I kinda' like it!).
By that time we should expect that the iPad 2 will be released. I expect Feb 2011 Announce/Release for the iPad 2.
By mid 2011, there should be a plethora of knock-off "also-rans" running Android, Windows 7, WebOS, WP7 to compete with the PlayBook for the scheissegeist of the tablet marketplace.
.
RIM had spent billions of $$$ on data centers to host their backend servers that blackberries require. anytime the BIS servers go down blackberries become paperweights.
the iphone doesn't need anything except push notifications. you can't build all these data centers and then tell the board of directors that it was all a waste of money
The new Research In Motion (RIMM) PlayBook tablet, which will launch sometime early next year, suffers from surprisingly low battery life, Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu asserts in a research note this morning.
Wu reports that the device has a battery life of just ?a few hours,? compared to 6 hours for the Samsung Galaxy Tab and 10 hours for the Apple (AAPL) iPad.
Does the term "co-CEO" piss anyone else off when they hear it?
Oh yes, like someone with multiple personality disorder, this company has to have two talking heads that don't really know what's happening in the real world. They need to hire a third "co-CEO" to complete the trio of monkeys (I hear|see|speak no evil) or to have one of them act as a tie-breaker when there's a heated disagreement. I nominate Meg Whitman for the third of this dysfunctional group (grope?).
Comments
MBA's love them.
MacBook Airs love BlackBerries?
A decade from now iPads will be everywhere and will totally reshape personal computing.
It's going to be a lot quicker than that. Two to three years, tops. Esp. if Apple keeps the current model and drops the price $100 - that will put a 16GB WiFi at $400...
Umm..no. Maybe for the car radio, GPS and HVAC system, but not an interface for the driving itself. When you have a bug on a computer, you reboot. When you have a bug in a car, you can be seriously injured. It's very dangerous to change the UI of a car. Everyone has to be able to walk into any car and drive it safely. That's why Consumer Reports (not that I like them) has always been opposed to new models which change the position of shifters, wipers, etc. Do you want Steve telling you that you have to "drive it like this"?
But I will admit that the electronics industry does need serious help. Just look at the user guide to any A/V Receiver. And then look at postings boards where even the nerds and techies can't figure out what's going on. The other problem is that the electronics industry is putting redundant functionality in Blu-ray players, A/V receivers and in the TVs themselves. So there's Ethernet and/or WiFi access in all three. So either you can access NetFlix in all three places or one service only links to one and another service only links to another. (And AppleTV links to none). And unlike Apple, the industry pretty much refuses to give up legacy inputs/outputs so every receiver still has multiple composite, S-video, component and HDMI video inputs because they're too afraid to get rid of any inputs.
This makes no sense. But an Apple approach would simplify the whole thing and make it easier to use, but would probably reduce audio/video quality and flexibility in the name of simplicity.
With all due respect, your view is very limited to the "new adopter" thought. Especially on your view of A/V Receivers. Over the X-mas holidays I had to tell one person that they needed to either upgrade their TV, get a switcher, or get a receiver. When asked what the best 'bang for their buck' would be I said get a receiver. There are people out there who are JUST buying a PSP3 and have an old TV. I also had to tell someone (else) to get a receiver because their TV wouldn't support an ATV2. Everyone thinks people buy the newest thing out, but they don't. A/V suppliers cater to the least common denominator... across the board. All of these different mfgs are trying to appeal to the masses by giving them the most connectivity for their dollar.
You are so right! I am always amazed that car radios are so pathetic. The whole car "entertainment system" is lame in most cars. Even luxury cars have clumsy GUIs.
My parents have a 2010 Lexus and I must say, the navigation system in it - while the look of the software is very plain, it does have a very good controller. It's kind of a mouse/joystick, but the most interesting thing is it's servo controlled - when you get near an on screen button or control, the controller "clicks" into place (to be clear, the click is physical - the controller provides force feedback - it's not an audio or visual effect). It's very intuitive and helps dramatically in selecting things on screen. It's easily the easiest of the car based systems I have used to control - very fluid and quick with the selection of things on screen.
Of course, Toyota in their infinite wisdom doesn't let you do anything with the nav system while the car is in motion - even if you have a passenger, so the damn thing is impossible to update while you are on the move - but the controller is pretty cool even if the rest of the system is pretty lame and almost useless for most tasks you would want from a GPS while driving around.
One thing about the new Playbook....RIM may think they have a nice product to compete with Apple. The problem I see happening is them competing with last year's iPad. RIM is pining its hopes on the new dual-core ARM technology, which frankly everybody is going to be doing in 2011. What nobody knows right now is what Apple's technology buys in the chipmaking development space is going to do for the next generation A4. Oh sure we expect multi-cores, but what else can Apple do that will be exclusive to them? Time will tell.
Bingo. People seem to forget that with things like the A4 and Apple's battery designs, other companies simply can't go pull the same parts off the shelf and at least release something that physically looks like Apple's products (witness the redirection trying to tell us that "no, no - you really wan't a 7" tablet after all!")
With each generation, Apple should be able to widen the gap as they roll their previous experience into their new custom designs. Combine that with the obvious extraordinary vision they displayed with the first iPhone and if anything I'd say Job's was being modest in his assertion Apple is five years ahead of everyone else.
I think it's exciting to see a company with an excellent vision and a focus on the end user experience (not just slaving to endless feature lists) executing so well - I do believe the iPad and future iOS devices are finally realizing the "Computers for the rest of us" that was the motto for Apple for so long.
MBA's love them.
The square ones, maybe!
gosh!
Well, its not like their claiming that it does all that much to begin with.
Definitely nothing ground breaking.
It "could" be a very valuable product for RIM. Currently it appears to be the only viable contender to iPad. Unless the android people can clean up their mess I don't ever see Android being viable competion. Likewise with MS.
RIMs biggest problem is getting a native SDK out the door ASAP. They could become Apples Bigest competition.
Cudos to Jobs and Apple.... they are so far beyond MS, RIM and Motorola that it amazes the hell out of me at times.
Of course RIM will be saying their PlayBook will be better than the iPad. They're in denial, but the truth is it's gonna be another HP Slate 500 - sell a few to businesses, not customers, they need to aim at customers, that's how Apple did it.
I'm a tablet person, I know a lot on it. The Apple iPad is REVOLUTIONARY, it changed the entire market, if RIM thinks they could throw some stamps on their device they are sadly mistaken, they are gonna try to follow the iPad but sadly fail. The Samsung Galaxy Tab probably will have 10x the number of sales! RIM doesn't have a prayer.
Their best bet is to announce their device is vaporware and drop out. They can't compete, I know the PlayBook would have horrid battery life, it will be buggy, and not provide a nice interface like the iPad. These people say apps are a fad, are they stupid?
RIM is probably gonna be bought out by Apple in 2 years to use as a testing place.
No... not by Apple but by Microsoft. Surprised no one has posted that yet. RIM wont survive the next 2 years.(Period)
You are so right! I am always amazed that car radios are so pathetic. The whole car "entertainment system" is lame in most cars. Even luxury cars have clumsy GUIs.
Apple could make a huge improvements the whole car experience. Imagine an Apple interface in your car. You know it would be so simple to use and yet do all the things you want (well, after drawn out updates dripped to you). But you know it would be great.
Apple is working on this.
In car entertainment will use a 7" screen.
Apple wants to be in your pocket, in your living room and in your car.
It would be quite something if they revealed iPad 2.0 with 2048*1536 resolution, but it seems a bit premature
Not going to happen. HD is only 1920x1080.
Had I lots of free time and a decent soldering iron, I'd make sure the next generation of cars had options for a snap-in space that could accommodate an iPad or iPhone where most cars have that big screen that can't ever do anything different than what it was born doing.
This iPhone is too small.
This iPad is too big.
This 7" iDevice is just right!
Apple is working on this.
In car entertainment will use a 7" screen.
Apple wants to be in your pocket, in your living room and in your car.
The last time I looked, a built-in in-car entertainment system cost $1,000-$2,000.
For that same price (or less) you can get several iPads (front and back passengers).
The iPads are more flexible, easier to use -- with the added advantage that when you get to your destination(s), you can take your iPads with you: motel room. game, hiking, office, beach, etc.
I don't know why the 7" screen would be an advantage unless dashboard space is the major consideration.
BlackBerry: It looks like a cell phone that does email
iPhone: It looks like a touchscreen computer that's a cell phone
The idea of a cell phone that does email didn't really appeal to me because I really hated cell phones. The comment I had about cell phones at the time was: "you get charged for something every time you press a damn button on them".
Plus, with all of the custom-designed hardware and every generation of cell phone having a totally different hardware and software interface -- yuck! Talk about disposable technology at it's poorly-designed worst... just throw together whatever's the cheapest 3rd party hardware and software at the time and call it the latest and greatest phone.
However, the idea of having a computer in your pocket excited me because the possibilities are endless with a computer (assuming it's designed in such a way that it's extensible -- which the iPhone was for the most part). Plus you don't get charged per button press at a computer.
That's the point that RIM has always missing -- the fact that you need to design something beyond the feature checklist comparison table. I honestly don't think that RIM has the expertise capable of creating technology that will live beyond the 2 - 3 year lifespan that cell phones tend to have. At least, I haven't seen anything from them yet that would indicate differently...
Apple already had decades of experience with that in the PC world, so it makes sense that they'd carry it into the cell phone world (especially now that cell phones are more like PCs).
The original iPhone was announced Jan 9, 2007 -- it included live demos, specs pricing and availability announcement,
The original iPhone was released, on schedule, Jun 29, 2007.
In the keynote, Steve said that Apple had been working on it for 2 1/2 years -- that means that work goes back to at least Jul 2004.
Recently, Steve said the original concept was for a Tablet -- but they decided, at some point, to do the iPhone first.
So, RIM has been unable to successfully copy the iPhone after 4 years of seeing a live demo -- unless they release something before Jan 9, 2011.
RIM acquired QNX in Apr 9, 2010 -- so we can assume that they recognized a need (for a smartphone OS) and began to look for a solution, say, Jul 2008.
The iPad was announced Jan 27, 2010 and began shipping Apr 3, 2010.
Since the iPad was a revolutionary form factor for a Tablet -- it is reasonable to assume that RIM, and others, could not have begun aan iPad knock-off design before Jan 27, 2010 or Apr 3, 2010.
We can assume, that RIM immediately repurposed their QNX purchase to work on the PlayBook (instead of a replacement for BlackBerry OS). But, because of a lack of apps, RIM chose to use AIR (Flash) and overpowered hardware to compensate for the RAM/Performance issues of Flash.
The PlayBook was announced on Sep 27, 2010 (but not shown) with partial specs and abstract videos (No Price, No Release Date, No Battery Specs, No Infrastructure).
The PlayBook was first demo'd on Oct 25, 2010 (No Price, No Release Date, No Battery Specs, No Infrastructure).
As of today, the PlayBook specs include: (No Price, No Release Date, No Battery Specs, No Infrastructure).
I believe that the earliest the PlayBook can be released in any reasonable quantity and stage of completion is Jul 2011 -- with minimal apps and infrastructure (hmm.. I almost typed "infostructure" -- I kinda' like it!).
By that time we should expect that the iPad 2 will be released. I expect Feb 2011 Announce/Release for the iPad 2.
By mid 2011, there should be a plethora of knock-off "also-rans" running Android, Windows 7, WebOS, WP7 to compete with the PlayBook for the scheissegeist of the tablet marketplace.
.
RIM had spent billions of $$$ on data centers to host their backend servers that blackberries require. anytime the BIS servers go down blackberries become paperweights.
the iphone doesn't need anything except push notifications. you can't build all these data centers and then tell the board of directors that it was all a waste of money
The new Research In Motion (RIMM) PlayBook tablet, which will launch sometime early next year, suffers from surprisingly low battery life, Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu asserts in a research note this morning.
Wu reports that the device has a battery life of just ?a few hours,? compared to 6 hours for the Samsung Galaxy Tab and 10 hours for the Apple (AAPL) iPad.
http://blogs.forbes.com/ericsavitz/2...rtner=yahootix
You are 100% right my friend.
Nobody really buys Blackberries anymore. They're usually given one and they're stuck with it.
I hate my BB Torch.
Teens buy them for BBM.
The law of unintended consequences.
Does the term "co-CEO" piss anyone else off when they hear it?
Oh yes, like someone with multiple personality disorder, this company has to have two talking heads that don't really know what's happening in the real world. They need to hire a third "co-CEO" to complete the trio of monkeys (I hear|see|speak no evil) or to have one of them act as a tie-breaker when there's a heated disagreement. I nominate Meg Whitman for the third of this dysfunctional group (grope?).