No, Apple isn't anything like IBM in 1984. The point of the 1984 ad isn't that IBM is popular and has a lot of users. The point is that IBM is a gigantic, stodgy, business-oriented company that's trying to take over the PC market and make our personal lives as dull and regimented as our work lives. Apple is, in fact, the same company it was in 1984. It's still consumer-oriented, it still concentrates on a few products done well, they're still setting the direction of the market, the same guy is calling the shots and they're still releasing revolutionary products like other companies release quarterly reports. There's a reason people are excited about what Apple is doing and there's a reason those same people find it sad when all of this is forgotten in order to make some lame point about how you don't want to be perceived as a follower who purchases products other people are understandably enthusiastic about.
Relax, I get it. My only comparison was that iPad is a no brainer for the common non-tech savvy consumer, just as IBM was a no brainer for the typical non-technical purchasing agent of the 80's.
Apple has the ecosystem, name recognition, popularity etc, JUST LIKE IBM had in the 80's. I could care less about your devotion to Apple, that is not part of my analogy.
Actually the "much less" comment was a mistranslation. Sort of like the "return rate" was just another example of shoddy journalism.
And here's a little hint:
-If samsung sold the tab to Best Buy, or if they sold it to Joe the Plumber they still get paid. This is why the typical arguments of "Motorola's not making anything because Verizon is giving the phones away" and the like are meaningless. That phone that a customer got BoGo? Motorola got full payment for it. This is the reason Apple's profits are so high. They're making insane money from the carrier's because you the consumer don't see the actual cost of the device 9/10
-7 inches is easier to hold/manage than a 10 inch device. 10 is nice for browsing at your hour or at work, but it sucks if you're on the go.
You have apparently never worked in umm well really any industry. The distinction between the types of sales is extremely important for manufacturing forecasting, investors, application developers, retail buyers...
The number of sell-throughs is well under 250k or Samsung would be shouting it from the rooftops.
You'd be surprised by the number of everyday customers (aka, people who don't know that sites like Engadget and BGR exist, much less this one) that are sick and tired of apple. Not for the app store, not for their policies, but because EVERYONE has them, and there are a lot of people with iphones that if you say you don't want one (for whatever reason) you'll never hear the end of it.
What a lot of people on forums tend to forget is that your views are ALWAYS in the minority when it comes to the consumer viewpoint. the fact that you post on a forum on "the internets" proves this.
And remember, Apple ran their "I'm a mac" ads for years, blatently mocking well over 90% of their potential buyers.
I just wonder why you bother posting here. No offense but you are really going on and on here a bit too much. Why not be among friends over at the Xoom web sites and blogs?
Try saying something to the contrary to the Apple party line. You'll get swarmed. The group think and fanaticism has become ridiculous.
But is moto the one to do it? No. Android might have somewhat of a parity when it comes to app and depending but they don't have a decent media store. When it comes to videos like it or not, you're locked into Apple.
I wonder how hardcore porn video got on my iPhone?
Why don't you Bing how to import video into iTunes and sync it.
Clearly, whoever made the ad is not very creative or innovative. I walked away from this with the feeling that something was missing, there had to something more than white capes and earbuds.
The fact that there were a couple of iPad ads floating around that were far more interesting did not help Motorola.
At the end of the day - it was a lame boring poor ad.
Although ... I think it could create a demand for those nice white hooded outfits amongst Apple fans
No, Apple isn't anything like IBM in 1984. The point of the 1984 ad isn't that IBM is popular and has a lot of users. The point is that IBM is a gigantic, stodgy, business-oriented company that's trying to take over the PC market and make our personal lives as dull and regimented as our work lives. Apple is, in fact, the same company it was in 1984. It's still consumer-oriented, it still concentrates on a few products done well, they're still setting the direction of the market, the same guy is calling the shots and they're still releasing revolutionary products like other companies release quarterly reports. There's a reason people are excited about what Apple is doing and there's a reason those same people find it sad when all of this is forgotten in order to make some lame point about how you don't want to be perceived as a follower who purchases products other people are understandably enthusiastic about.
This comment isn't aimed at you poke, rather the discussion about 1984.
This isn't rocket science folks ... The entire point of the 1984 ad was the analogy Apple drew between IBM and their effect on society and the oligarchical, collectivist society in George Orwell's novel.
Personally I'd argue Apple's fan base is far from that. Most Apple users I meet love their Apple products and go willingly .
Of the three features you just listed, my phone has two (Multiple Pages is functionally the same as Tabs, and my boomarks are synced over the air) and iPads also have both those features. So two of the three features you've picked out as differentiating a "full" browser from a "mobile" browser...Are available in a mobile browser.
Other than plugins you can get browsers on the iPad that do everything a "full" browser does. I like perfectbrowser but it doesn't OTA share bookmarks. Or at least I haven't bothered to figure out how to enable it.
There are two primary form factors: one that should fit comfortably in any pocket and another that should be large enough to comfortably read a book, watch a movie, take meeting notes, etc.
The iPhone is a perfect match for the first and the iPad a perfect match for the second.
Those Android phones with big screens are too large to fit in most pockets and uncomfortable to operate with one hand, making them a suboptimal choice for a primary smartphone device.
The 7 inch "tablets" are both too large to fit in a pocket and too small to provide a significant viewing advantage over more pocketable devices. Moreover, the 16:9 aspect ratio is a misguided choice given that movie watching is hardly the primary use of these devices.
Agreed and I was in that other camp prior to the iPad (in preference toward 7"). It fits, maybe, but not comfortably and the trade offs too severe.
In any case, the other thing he got wrong was that iPads do fit in Doctor's pockets. No one else's maybe but lab coats are one of the few professional daily wear items with pockets that can comfortably hold an iPad or 7" tablet.
Relax, I get it. My only comparison was that iPad is a no brainer for the common non-tech savvy consumer, just as IBM was a no brainer for the typical non-technical purchasing agent of the 80's.
Apple has the ecosystem, name recognition, popularity etc, JUST LIKE IBM had in the 80's. I could care less about your devotion to Apple, that is not part of my analogy.
Of course the analogy completely breaks down if you think about it for a second. IBM made the computers the IT guys liked; consumers were obliged to follow suit. "Liking" PCs never entered into the equation.
Apple made the tablet consumers like, full stop. I guess you want to suggest that the reason the iPad is so popular is some kind of group think, but of course consumers are pretty smart, en mass, about voting with their wallets (when given the freedom to choose, outside of corporate dictates). If they buy the iPad in large numbers, it's probably because they like it and they like how it works. If they continue to buy the iPad in large numbers, choosing it over rivals, it's probably because they like it more and think it works better than those rivals. The idea that consumers fear they'll be ridiculed if they start toting around a Xoom and will therefore continue to buy iPads even if they are the inferior choice is stupid beyond saying.
We've managed to get from "Apple's customers are a small cadre of hipsters, posers and the terminally style-consious" to "Apple's customers are a legion of fearful conformists." Somehow "Apple's customers are people who like Apple's products, for entirely logical reasons" never seems to enter into it.
"The 16:9 aspect won't work as well. We can even thank Netflix for shedding light on that: they're finding people are streaming to AppleTV more that iPads. I know I'm stretching here but that could show some indication that these companies are betting on the wrong "
Personally I don't see anything wrong with the 16:9 ratio.
But back to the add, my kids who have trouble focussing on anything beyond a quick sound/video byte thought it was an iPad add. I suspect most teenagers thought the same.
I suppose "white ear buds" is a convenient shorthand for Apple users, but it still seems like a weird choice for the ad. Is there a sizable contingent of iPod haters out there? Is everyone sick to death of having portable music players? Is there an internal logic to suggesting that buying a Motorola tablet liberates you from, um, listening to music? Yeah, I know its some kind of metaphor, but commercials also have to work at a literal level. If being an Appel Drone means "listening to your iPod", Motorola is pretty much merely insulting about 95% of their addressable market.
It's not unlike the WP 7 ads, which seemed to be telling us that we were spending too much time looking at our phones so we needed a phone that needed less looking at. Managing to miss the point, of course, that people spend a lot of time looking at there phones because they want to, not because there's something inherently cumbersome about doing so.
The recent tone of anti-Apple stuff coming from the likes of Google, Adobe, Motorola (and until recently, Verizon) reminds me a bit of certain political parties, which become self involved and drink their own Koolaid to the point that they become increasingly unintelligible to the public at large. The enthusiasm for the message from their ever narrower circle convinces them that "everyone" shares their prejudices. So you get Google et al chanting about "openness" vs. "iron fisted control" as if this were a message that would resonate with the average buyer of consumer goods. Their rhetoric grows increasingly shrill, suggesting that supporting Apple is the equivalent of throwing your lot in with a totalitarian state, and will lead to some kind of nightmare dystopia ruled by a maniacal Steve Jobs. The average consumer sees this stuff and wonders what all the fuss is about. If they form any opinion at all, it's that these companies are a little crazy.
You'll notice that despite what you might think of Apple's users, Apple itself does not bother with this kind of talk. They show their stuff being used with a little upbeat music; they occasionally mention that they think their way is better for the consumer without indulging in a lot of apocalyptic pontificating.
I know some people really, really want it to be true that "everybody is sick of Apple" and that they long for freedom from oppression and "the walled garden" and "being told what to do."
I can pretty much guarantee you that the average iPhone or iPad or iPod Touch user simply uses their device to do what they want, choosing from a vast selection of apps and media, and never, ever brood on how constrained and trapped they feel.
The problem with this ad is that it only appeals to the geeks who read tech sites and love "open" and android that read about what this was supposed to be and would have bought this anyway (or another android tablet)... Vast majority of people watching the Super bowl dont know anything about the 1984 ad and see nothing else to it.
Xoom appeals to the same old crowd and cant compete in the big leagues.
When your entry level starts at $800, that's a problem in itself for Xoom. Some families will buy more than one, and many won't need the additional memory and won't want to pay for it. So they will remain with one product across the board and buy Apple.
Forcing the consumer to purchase one month subscription to activate WiFi is completely retarded. What were they thinking? The $20 is not even the point. The hassle of signing up, paying with my card, and jacking me for 3% more after I just shelled out $800 is unacceptable.
Oh and the ad. I suppose I want to be the only guy with a Xoom, while the rest of the world uses IPads? Yeah, sounds like a winner to me in terms of developer attention.
Of course the analogy completely breaks down if you think about it for a second. IBM made the computers the IT guys liked; consumers were obliged to follow suit. "Liking" PCs never entered into the equation.
Apple made the tablet consumers like, full stop. I guess you want to suggest that the reason the iPad is so popular is some kind of group think, but of course consumers are pretty smart, en mass, about voting with their wallets (when given the freedom to choose, outside of corporate dictates). If they buy the iPad in large numbers, it's probably because they like it and they like how it works. If they continue to buy the iPad in large numbers, choosing it over rivals, it's probably because they like it more and think it works better than those rivals. The idea that consumers fear they'll be ridiculed if they start toting around a Xoom and will therefore continue to buy iPads even if they are the inferior choice is stupid beyond saying.
We've managed to get from "Apple's customers are a small cadre of hipsters, posers and the terminally style-consious" to "Apple's customers are a legion of fearful conformists." Somehow "Apple's customers are people who like Apple's products, for entirely logical reasons" never seems to enter into it.
I wasn't really trying to draw all the possible comparisons into some history is repeating itself symbolism. There is a lot more group think going on with the common consumer than anyone wants to admit about themselves. People hear things from a more informed buyer and they memorize as if it were their own conclusion when actually it isn't based on any logical data whatsoever. For an example, many people when asked, would say that Toyota is one of the highest quality autos when in fact their quality has fallen considerably as their recalls have increased, yet a young college student looking for a car will remember their parent saying you can't go wrong buying a Toyota.
It just so happens that Apple has a really good reputation so there is a general assumption that iPad must be the best. Which it is. But until recently it was also the only tablet available which makes it the most popular. Hard to argue with best and most popular.
This ad is lame, and Xoom will not be a hit. At best it will be a modest success. It offers nothing better, and the price is not attractive. The truly successful Android tabs will be the Chinese cheapos. Yeh they are crap now, but after a year or 2 they will be fast enough to do browsing smoothly, and cost only 200 bucks. The future of Android is in the hands of these cheapo makers, Mot, Samy will soon find out there are no such things called high end Android devices.
Did you even read the AI article? If you did, then you would know that in terms of hardware specs, the Xoom is streets ahead of the iPad. Better screen, MUCH faster GPU/GPU, 4x the RAM, front and rear cameras with 720p video recording... the works.
Blows the iPad away, at least in it's current form. Plus Honeycomb looks amazing, and again, streets ahead of the current OS the iPad runs.
Comments
No, Apple isn't anything like IBM in 1984. The point of the 1984 ad isn't that IBM is popular and has a lot of users. The point is that IBM is a gigantic, stodgy, business-oriented company that's trying to take over the PC market and make our personal lives as dull and regimented as our work lives. Apple is, in fact, the same company it was in 1984. It's still consumer-oriented, it still concentrates on a few products done well, they're still setting the direction of the market, the same guy is calling the shots and they're still releasing revolutionary products like other companies release quarterly reports. There's a reason people are excited about what Apple is doing and there's a reason those same people find it sad when all of this is forgotten in order to make some lame point about how you don't want to be perceived as a follower who purchases products other people are understandably enthusiastic about.
Relax, I get it. My only comparison was that iPad is a no brainer for the common non-tech savvy consumer, just as IBM was a no brainer for the typical non-technical purchasing agent of the 80's.
Apple has the ecosystem, name recognition, popularity etc, JUST LIKE IBM had in the 80's. I could care less about your devotion to Apple, that is not part of my analogy.
Actually the "much less" comment was a mistranslation. Sort of like the "return rate" was just another example of shoddy journalism.
And here's a little hint:
-If samsung sold the tab to Best Buy, or if they sold it to Joe the Plumber they still get paid. This is why the typical arguments of "Motorola's not making anything because Verizon is giving the phones away" and the like are meaningless. That phone that a customer got BoGo? Motorola got full payment for it. This is the reason Apple's profits are so high. They're making insane money from the carrier's because you the consumer don't see the actual cost of the device 9/10
-7 inches is easier to hold/manage than a 10 inch device. 10 is nice for browsing at your hour or at work, but it sucks if you're on the go.
You have apparently never worked in umm well really any industry. The distinction between the types of sales is extremely important for manufacturing forecasting, investors, application developers, retail buyers...
The number of sell-throughs is well under 250k or Samsung would be shouting it from the rooftops.
XooM is MooX!
Urban Dictionary
Moox
when something is so rubbish its beyond words, so you use this one!
It was made up when sum1 said they looked like moose, but another person (called Box) said what the hell is Moox?
"Maths Is SO...Moox"
or
"My Hair is all moox 2day"
.
I thought Apple was making an iPad commercial with a retro feel. Way to sink yourselves Motorola.
I suspect tons of folks assumed it was an iPad 2 ad and were too busy eating, drinking and talking to ever notice it wasn't.
You'd be surprised by the number of everyday customers (aka, people who don't know that sites like Engadget and BGR exist, much less this one) that are sick and tired of apple. Not for the app store, not for their policies, but because EVERYONE has them, and there are a lot of people with iphones that if you say you don't want one (for whatever reason) you'll never hear the end of it.
What a lot of people on forums tend to forget is that your views are ALWAYS in the minority when it comes to the consumer viewpoint. the fact that you post on a forum on "the internets" proves this.
And remember, Apple ran their "I'm a mac" ads for years, blatently mocking well over 90% of their potential buyers.
I just wonder why you bother posting here. No offense but you are really going on and on here a bit too much. Why not be among friends over at the Xoom web sites and blogs?
Try saying something to the contrary to the Apple party line. You'll get swarmed. The group think and fanaticism has become ridiculous.
But is moto the one to do it? No. Android might have somewhat of a parity when it comes to app and depending but they don't have a decent media store. When it comes to videos like it or not, you're locked into Apple.
I wonder how hardcore porn video got on my iPhone?
Why don't you Bing how to import video into iTunes and sync it.
What was that about locked in?
Clearly, whoever made the ad is not very creative or innovative. I walked away from this with the feeling that something was missing, there had to something more than white capes and earbuds.
The fact that there were a couple of iPad ads floating around that were far more interesting did not help Motorola.
At the end of the day - it was a lame boring poor ad.
Although ... I think it could create a demand for those nice white hooded outfits amongst Apple fans
No, Apple isn't anything like IBM in 1984. The point of the 1984 ad isn't that IBM is popular and has a lot of users. The point is that IBM is a gigantic, stodgy, business-oriented company that's trying to take over the PC market and make our personal lives as dull and regimented as our work lives. Apple is, in fact, the same company it was in 1984. It's still consumer-oriented, it still concentrates on a few products done well, they're still setting the direction of the market, the same guy is calling the shots and they're still releasing revolutionary products like other companies release quarterly reports. There's a reason people are excited about what Apple is doing and there's a reason those same people find it sad when all of this is forgotten in order to make some lame point about how you don't want to be perceived as a follower who purchases products other people are understandably enthusiastic about.
This comment isn't aimed at you poke, rather the discussion about 1984.
This isn't rocket science folks ... The entire point of the 1984 ad was the analogy Apple drew between IBM and their effect on society and the oligarchical, collectivist society in George Orwell's novel.
Personally I'd argue Apple's fan base is far from that. Most Apple users I meet love their Apple products and go willingly
Of the three features you just listed, my phone has two (Multiple Pages is functionally the same as Tabs, and my boomarks are synced over the air) and iPads also have both those features. So two of the three features you've picked out as differentiating a "full" browser from a "mobile" browser...Are available in a mobile browser.
Other than plugins you can get browsers on the iPad that do everything a "full" browser does. I like perfectbrowser but it doesn't OTA share bookmarks. Or at least I haven't bothered to figure out how to enable it.
There are two primary form factors: one that should fit comfortably in any pocket and another that should be large enough to comfortably read a book, watch a movie, take meeting notes, etc.
The iPhone is a perfect match for the first and the iPad a perfect match for the second.
Those Android phones with big screens are too large to fit in most pockets and uncomfortable to operate with one hand, making them a suboptimal choice for a primary smartphone device.
The 7 inch "tablets" are both too large to fit in a pocket and too small to provide a significant viewing advantage over more pocketable devices. Moreover, the 16:9 aspect ratio is a misguided choice given that movie watching is hardly the primary use of these devices.
Agreed and I was in that other camp prior to the iPad (in preference toward 7"). It fits, maybe, but not comfortably and the trade offs too severe.
In any case, the other thing he got wrong was that iPads do fit in Doctor's pockets. No one else's maybe but lab coats are one of the few professional daily wear items with pockets that can comfortably hold an iPad or 7" tablet.
Relax, I get it. My only comparison was that iPad is a no brainer for the common non-tech savvy consumer, just as IBM was a no brainer for the typical non-technical purchasing agent of the 80's.
Apple has the ecosystem, name recognition, popularity etc, JUST LIKE IBM had in the 80's. I could care less about your devotion to Apple, that is not part of my analogy.
Of course the analogy completely breaks down if you think about it for a second. IBM made the computers the IT guys liked; consumers were obliged to follow suit. "Liking" PCs never entered into the equation.
Apple made the tablet consumers like, full stop. I guess you want to suggest that the reason the iPad is so popular is some kind of group think, but of course consumers are pretty smart, en mass, about voting with their wallets (when given the freedom to choose, outside of corporate dictates). If they buy the iPad in large numbers, it's probably because they like it and they like how it works. If they continue to buy the iPad in large numbers, choosing it over rivals, it's probably because they like it more and think it works better than those rivals. The idea that consumers fear they'll be ridiculed if they start toting around a Xoom and will therefore continue to buy iPads even if they are the inferior choice is stupid beyond saying.
We've managed to get from "Apple's customers are a small cadre of hipsters, posers and the terminally style-consious" to "Apple's customers are a legion of fearful conformists." Somehow "Apple's customers are people who like Apple's products, for entirely logical reasons" never seems to enter into it.
"The 16:9 aspect won't work as well. We can even thank Netflix for shedding light on that: they're finding people are streaming to AppleTV more that iPads. I know I'm stretching here but that could show some indication that these companies are betting on the wrong "
Personally I don't see anything wrong with the 16:9 ratio.
But back to the add, my kids who have trouble focussing on anything beyond a quick sound/video byte thought it was an iPad add. I suspect most teenagers thought the same.
It's not unlike the WP 7 ads, which seemed to be telling us that we were spending too much time looking at our phones so we needed a phone that needed less looking at. Managing to miss the point, of course, that people spend a lot of time looking at there phones because they want to, not because there's something inherently cumbersome about doing so.
The recent tone of anti-Apple stuff coming from the likes of Google, Adobe, Motorola (and until recently, Verizon) reminds me a bit of certain political parties, which become self involved and drink their own Koolaid to the point that they become increasingly unintelligible to the public at large. The enthusiasm for the message from their ever narrower circle convinces them that "everyone" shares their prejudices. So you get Google et al chanting about "openness" vs. "iron fisted control" as if this were a message that would resonate with the average buyer of consumer goods. Their rhetoric grows increasingly shrill, suggesting that supporting Apple is the equivalent of throwing your lot in with a totalitarian state, and will lead to some kind of nightmare dystopia ruled by a maniacal Steve Jobs. The average consumer sees this stuff and wonders what all the fuss is about. If they form any opinion at all, it's that these companies are a little crazy.
You'll notice that despite what you might think of Apple's users, Apple itself does not bother with this kind of talk. They show their stuff being used with a little upbeat music; they occasionally mention that they think their way is better for the consumer without indulging in a lot of apocalyptic pontificating.
I know some people really, really want it to be true that "everybody is sick of Apple" and that they long for freedom from oppression and "the walled garden" and "being told what to do."
I can pretty much guarantee you that the average iPhone or iPad or iPod Touch user simply uses their device to do what they want, choosing from a vast selection of apps and media, and never, ever brood on how constrained and trapped they feel.
Xoom xoom ... Mazda should be asking for a referral too.
At the risk of being considered a sexist rather than an etymologist -- I wonder about the meaning of the word Ba-Xooms.
Sorry!
Xoom appeals to the same old crowd and cant compete in the big leagues.
Forcing the consumer to purchase one month subscription to activate WiFi is completely retarded. What were they thinking? The $20 is not even the point. The hassle of signing up, paying with my card, and jacking me for 3% more after I just shelled out $800 is unacceptable.
Oh and the ad. I suppose I want to be the only guy with a Xoom, while the rest of the world uses IPads? Yeah, sounds like a winner to me in terms of developer attention.
Of course the analogy completely breaks down if you think about it for a second. IBM made the computers the IT guys liked; consumers were obliged to follow suit. "Liking" PCs never entered into the equation.
Apple made the tablet consumers like, full stop. I guess you want to suggest that the reason the iPad is so popular is some kind of group think, but of course consumers are pretty smart, en mass, about voting with their wallets (when given the freedom to choose, outside of corporate dictates). If they buy the iPad in large numbers, it's probably because they like it and they like how it works. If they continue to buy the iPad in large numbers, choosing it over rivals, it's probably because they like it more and think it works better than those rivals. The idea that consumers fear they'll be ridiculed if they start toting around a Xoom and will therefore continue to buy iPads even if they are the inferior choice is stupid beyond saying.
We've managed to get from "Apple's customers are a small cadre of hipsters, posers and the terminally style-consious" to "Apple's customers are a legion of fearful conformists." Somehow "Apple's customers are people who like Apple's products, for entirely logical reasons" never seems to enter into it.
I wasn't really trying to draw all the possible comparisons into some history is repeating itself symbolism. There is a lot more group think going on with the common consumer than anyone wants to admit about themselves. People hear things from a more informed buyer and they memorize as if it were their own conclusion when actually it isn't based on any logical data whatsoever. For an example, many people when asked, would say that Toyota is one of the highest quality autos when in fact their quality has fallen considerably as their recalls have increased, yet a young college student looking for a car will remember their parent saying you can't go wrong buying a Toyota.
It just so happens that Apple has a really good reputation so there is a general assumption that iPad must be the best. Which it is. But until recently it was also the only tablet available which makes it the most popular. Hard to argue with best and most popular.
This ad is lame, and Xoom will not be a hit. At best it will be a modest success. It offers nothing better, and the price is not attractive. The truly successful Android tabs will be the Chinese cheapos. Yeh they are crap now, but after a year or 2 they will be fast enough to do browsing smoothly, and cost only 200 bucks. The future of Android is in the hands of these cheapo makers, Mot, Samy will soon find out there are no such things called high end Android devices.
Did you even read the AI article? If you did, then you would know that in terms of hardware specs, the Xoom is streets ahead of the iPad. Better screen, MUCH faster GPU/GPU, 4x the RAM, front and rear cameras with 720p video recording... the works.
Blows the iPad away, at least in it's current form. Plus Honeycomb looks amazing, and again, streets ahead of the current OS the iPad runs.