Wow, it never occurred to you that people who stand in long lines to buy the iPad might actually WANT an iPad?
It's pretty obvious that people who go to a store to buy a specific product are there to buy that product, and that they feel strongly about their decision.
Those people are not there with a wishy-washy idea that they are going to go home with some product from a category - they are there to buy a specific product.
Sometimes I type this stuff and then just delete it before I post it. Usually I do that, in fact. Often responding to this type of thing is just TOO boring.
We are laughing now but I feel that this will be a repeat of the smartphone market. Apple's share will drop but it will retain the 15-20% that everyone wants. The most profitable slice of the market.
That is very likely. There's nothing magical about these products.
That's silly. The TouchPad is a very useful tablet and does a lot of things. The only major limitation is lack of apps - so why would you cripple it further by hacking it to run an OS where you can't even be sure if ANY of the apps will work?
Let's put it this way: if I would have been thinking about getting an Android tablet at the time of the TouchPad fire sale, I would have jumped on one immediately. The TouchPad hardware is much better than any of the sub-iPad-price Android tablets, and it was almost guaranteed someone would make a fully functional custom Android ROM for it, seeing that HP was dropping support for WebOS.
I'm not saying WebOS is inferior to Android, just that at $99, the TouchPad was a perfect device for anyone into Android hacking. I imagine lots of units ended up running custom Android ROMs.
I don't think so. I think it's moving steady toward repeating the iPod dominance, only much faster. If they do get Retina Display (265ppi) for the iPad in early 2012 then I'd say it's definitely a done deal for the foreseeable tech future.
I would bet on that...
Likely a faster, more core, CPU/GPU combo; bigger SSD; More RAM
Also ThunderBolt (if only through an adapter to the existing connector).
And an update to iOS that allows you to AirPlay Mirror everything.
There is a companion update necessary -- an Updated AppleTV that is robust enough to handle the new iPad...
Below are some interesting devices -- basically, an inexpensive ARM computer on a stick.
It would be interesting if Apple could build an inexpensive ATV this size -- that could get power from the TV (or Display) through the cable that attaches it to the HDTV.
The ATV would not require a separate power supply or power cable -- just the cable (or port) to plug into the HDTV.
Then, the ATV could WiFi receive content from one or more iDevices and display it on the HDTV.
Staying off topic, re Netflix Streaming ... I'm working through every Star Treck ever made, in chronological order. So Voyager is first. Got to love T'Pol
The Fourth angel said to me « umrk, if you want to know what the future will be, just watch the 726 Episodes of the 30 Seasons of Star Trek?s five Series since the beginning (Star Trek, Star Trek Next Generation, Star Trek : Voyager, Star Trek : Enterprise, Deep Space Nine). If you are attentive enough, you will know what all future Apple products will be (Combadge, iPad, holosuite, etc ?). Things will happen exactly as described. However, do not try to match countries on the Earth with Star Trek?s characters (People from the Federation, Romulians, Cardassians, Bajorans, Ferengis, Vulcans, Klingons, etc ?) : all assumptions you may make will prove to be false !
Be also informed that we added Rule N°286 to the Ferengis « Rules of acquisition ». This new rule states ?if you want to make money, just buy Apple Shares?. Be nevertheless aware that this rule applies to Ferengis only. If you are not sure to be one, do whatever you please, it?s your money after all !?
He also said « be careful with the guy who « conducts his business with a pointed stick » (as Frank Zappa describes him), I think you know who I am talking about?
I don't think so. I think it's moving steady toward repeating the iPod dominance, only much faster. If they do get Retina Display (265ppi) for the iPad in early 2012 then I'd say it's definitely a done deal for the foreseeable tech future.
If you honestly believe that, you're ability to see into the future must be quite limited. The iPod was introduced as a dedicated device in an era who's concept of "syncing" was limited to contacts and notes in a PDA. The iPad isn't a dedicated device, nor are any of those other tablets. The iPad is a computer, one that's touched based, easy to use, and has an almost-limitless feature set with 3rd party apps.
But much like a computer, it can't be best for everyone. Some need lower-cost devices to deploy on a budget. Some need custom hardware, functionality or applications that are impossible with the iPad. Some just prefer different form factors and screen sizes. There will always be opportunity in this market if a product comes along that's a compelling alternative. Very few devices on the market today qualify for that title, but once the magic formula has been figured out, more and more will.
The iPad will most likely be the default choice for the next few years, but even a major hardware refresh next year won't stop the inevitable. The iPad won't be on top forever, and that's a good thing. Competition yields innovation and better products.
If you honestly believe that, you're ability to see into the future must be quite limited. <...>
But much like a computer, it can't be best for everyone. Some need lower-cost devices to deploy on a budget. Some need custom hardware, functionality or applications that are impossible with the iPad. Some just prefer different form factors and screen sizes. There will always be opportunity in this market if a product comes along that's a compelling alternative. Very few devices on the market today qualify for that title, but once the magic formula has been figured out, more and more will.
<...>
You do realize that there were several companies that tried in vain to find the "magic" formula to knock the iPod from top spot, right?
What makes you feel that someone will eventually find that "magic" formula for a tablet?
I know, I know... it'll just happen because it's magic...
If you honestly believe that, you're ability to see into the future must be quite limited. The iPod was introduced as a dedicated device in an era who's concept of "syncing" was limited to contacts and notes in a PDA. The iPad isn't a dedicated device, nor are any of those other tablets. The iPad is a computer, one that's touched based, easy to use, and has an almost-limitless feature set with 3rd party apps.
But much like a computer, it can't be best for everyone. Some need lower-cost devices to deploy on a budget. Some need custom hardware, functionality or applications that are impossible with the iPad. Some just prefer different form factors and screen sizes. There will always be opportunity in this market if a product comes along that's a compelling alternative. Very few devices on the market today qualify for that title, but once the magic formula has been figured out, more and more will.
The iPad will most likely be the default choice for the next few years, but even a major hardware refresh next year won't stop the inevitable. The iPad won't be on top forever, and that's a good thing. Competition yields innovation and better products.
I disagree...
Figuring out the recipe (the magic formula) doesn't mean you can afford all the ingredients, bake the cake that is desirable enough to sell at a profit.
Everybody has good ideas -- Apple implements them in a marketable appealing way.
I do agree that the iPad won't be on top forever... I'd give it 5-10 years (starting in 2010)!
But, if I were to bet on who will come up with something that unseats the iPad... it would be Apple!
Competition yields innovation and better products.
Oh, does it really?
So far there is the iPad, which reigns supreme and there have been countless other tablets, which are all pieces of crap and nobody is interested in buying them, because they're inferior and cheap knockoffs. Not a whole lot of innovation taking place.
So far there is the iPad, which reigns supreme and there have been countless other tablets, which are all pieces of crap and nobody is interested in buying them, because they're inferior and cheap knockoffs. Not a whole lot of innovation taking place.
By that logic, OSX isn't innovative because they don't sell as well as Windows?
It's pretty obvious that people who go to a store to buy a specific product are there to buy that product, and that they feel strongly about their decision.
Those people are not there with a wishy-washy idea that they are going to go home with some product from a category - they are there to buy a specific product.
Sometimes I type this stuff and then just delete it before I post it. Usually I do that, in fact. Often responding to this type of thing is just TOO boring.
Ferget it.
I didn't quite understand what you meant by "default tablet choice," since most people I know are not asking themselves, "which tablet?" but "should I get an iPad or a new laptop?" Although lately, the Kindle Fire has people I know asking "Kindle or iPad?"
"Default" makes it sound like no thought was put into it, but any product that costs at least $499 requires some thought commitment--whether they stand in line or not--it's not a what the hell impulse buy.
I've always maintained that a tablet market exists, and it has going back to the days of Windows for Pen Computing and the Apple Newton. But Apple managed to create an all but separate market for iPads through sheer demand. Given that tablets have been around for 20 years in one form or another, did Apple's success in 2010 prove there was demand for tablets, or just iPads?
By that logic, OSX isn't innovative because they don't sell as well as Windows?
No, it's not just about the sales numbers. WIndows ripped off OS X. Windows will always have a greater market share than OS X, but OS X is doing quite fine. Apple is not going to be blowing anything out the door in any fire sales anytime soon.
And the non-iPad tablets are not pieces of crap simply because of the sales numbers. They're pieces of crap because they actually are pieces of crap.
There really is no tablet market, and the figures in this thread proves it. The other companies should just pack it in, and call it a day. They're wasting their time and money.
Snip... Competition yields innovation and better products.
When someone says that competion is good, you know the competition is bad. If the best thing you can say about the competition is that the fundamental forces of the market are still in play, that's pretty damning. Although I appreciate the hope it expresses.
No, it's not just about the sales numbers. WIndows ripped off OS X. Windows will always have a greater market share than OS X, but OS X is doing quite fine. Apple is not going to be blowing anything out the door in any fire sales anytime soon.
And the non-iPad tablets are not pieces of crap simply because of the sales numbers. They're pieces of crap because they actually are pieces of crap.
There really is no tablet market, and the figures in this thread proves it. The other companies should just pack it in, and call it a day. They're wasting their time and money.
It's the price. I mean, the Samsung Galaxy Tab is great but why would I get that when I can get teh more established iPad?
The reason why people got the HP touchpad is because of VALUE. It suddenly became a great product overnight because of the price. The problem with many tablets is fragmentation. I know I can get 2+ years out of an iPad. Can't say that about 'droid tabletos. Anyone remeber the orignal Samsung Galaxy Tab a year ago? Now look, it's so outdated it's ridiculous.
$199 is good for non apple. They need to apply the same logic from Android phones to Android tablets.
They are wasting their time because they are playing catch up and want easy money. Microsoft can be a real contender because, oh, it actually runs an OS and interacts with other wordly Microsoft products. If they make a Windows 8 tablet where you can your Xbox games a la On Live...we have a winner.
$199 is good for non apple. They need to apply the same logic from Android phones to Android tablets.
A good tablet costs more than $200 to make and they're not subsidized like the phones are, so yeah, I can see why they're running into problems.
And people aren't just buying a tablet solely based on what hardware the tablet provides. They're buying into a whole eco-system, and Apple has that covered pretty well.
A good tablet costs more than $200 to make and they're not subsidized like the phones are, so yeah, I can see why they're running into problems.
And people aren't just buying a tablet solely based on what hardware the tablet provides. They're buying into a whole eco-system, and Apple has that covered pretty well.
Eco system does play a factor, but I think (despite what the industry was saying at the time) the fact that you can have all of yoru apps on your iPad meant you don't have to worry about transitioning.
Also, I HATE the Android tablets as they are much too limiting. You have that dang task bar everywhere and it's not like theres a home button.
When you look at it though, it was the apps that made iPad. Intially peple didn't see the difference between that and the iPhone, but it has expanded so much. Android....not so much.
So far there is the iPad, which reigns supreme and there have been countless other tablets, which are all pieces of crap and nobody is interested in buying them, because they're inferior and cheap knockoffs. Not a whole lot of innovation taking place.
It took a couple years for competitors to catch up with the iPhone in terms of design, features and abilities, and in some ways, have surpassed the iPhone. Windows Phone is a completely new OS that's different not for the sake of being different, but because it actually does present a nicer experience in many instances, like the People hub, which integrates the activity of your friends across many different services into one simple UI. Android has created an explosion of hardware across different carriers and price points worldwide, each with their own pros and cons. They have also made possible the use of new generation networks like WiMax and LTE, which currently only have Android handsets running on them. At well over 500,000 activations per day, *someone* is buying these things, and not because they're "cheap knockoffs."
Competitors are still figuring out the tablet market. As usual, Apple has gained a major head start with a groundbreaking product, but they never stay that way forever, nor do they need to in order to be successful. Competition from the Kindle Fire won't be enough to impact iPad sales, but it does create an opportunity for people who would like to get started in the second digital revolution without investing too much up-front. If enough devices and manufacturers manage to drive consumer demand up and prices down, Apple will need to adjust their pricing accordingly. Everyone wins, especially Apple users.
So yes, competition is *always* good. It doesn't mean it's always successful, but you don't want a single company dominating any market for too long. I can promise you that Apple wouldn't have worked so hard and invested so much into iCloud and iOS if they didn't feel the heat from Android and other competitors to stay ahead of the pact.
Comments
It looks to me like you didn't read the article carefully.
Guilty as charged.
Wow, it never occurred to you that people who stand in long lines to buy the iPad might actually WANT an iPad?
It's pretty obvious that people who go to a store to buy a specific product are there to buy that product, and that they feel strongly about their decision.
Those people are not there with a wishy-washy idea that they are going to go home with some product from a category - they are there to buy a specific product.
Sometimes I type this stuff and then just delete it before I post it. Usually I do that, in fact. Often responding to this type of thing is just TOO boring.
Ferget it.
We are laughing now but I feel that this will be a repeat of the smartphone market. Apple's share will drop but it will retain the 15-20% that everyone wants. The most profitable slice of the market.
That is very likely. There's nothing magical about these products.
That's silly. The TouchPad is a very useful tablet and does a lot of things. The only major limitation is lack of apps - so why would you cripple it further by hacking it to run an OS where you can't even be sure if ANY of the apps will work?
Let's put it this way: if I would have been thinking about getting an Android tablet at the time of the TouchPad fire sale, I would have jumped on one immediately. The TouchPad hardware is much better than any of the sub-iPad-price Android tablets, and it was almost guaranteed someone would make a fully functional custom Android ROM for it, seeing that HP was dropping support for WebOS.
I'm not saying WebOS is inferior to Android, just that at $99, the TouchPad was a perfect device for anyone into Android hacking. I imagine lots of units ended up running custom Android ROMs.
I don't think so. I think it's moving steady toward repeating the iPod dominance, only much faster. If they do get Retina Display (265ppi) for the iPad in early 2012 then I'd say it's definitely a done deal for the foreseeable tech future.
I would bet on that...
Likely a faster, more core, CPU/GPU combo; bigger SSD; More RAM
Also ThunderBolt (if only through an adapter to the existing connector).
And an update to iOS that allows you to AirPlay Mirror everything.
There is a companion update necessary -- an Updated AppleTV that is robust enough to handle the new iPad...
Below are some interesting devices -- basically, an inexpensive ARM computer on a stick.
It would be interesting if Apple could build an inexpensive ATV this size -- that could get power from the TV (or Display) through the cable that attaches it to the HDTV.
The ATV would not require a separate power supply or power cable -- just the cable (or port) to plug into the HDTV.
Then, the ATV could WiFi receive content from one or more iDevices and display it on the HDTV.
Tiny Android "Cotton Candy" USB Stick Will be Priced at Under $200
Raspberry PI USB Computer, Designed For Schools, Costs £15 (video)
I love NPR and PBS, how do you get the latter via ATV? I'd like the BEEB too. Of course I can use iPad and mirroring ... DUH!
Airplay mirroring via your iPad?
Staying off topic, re Netflix Streaming ... I'm working through every Star Treck ever made, in chronological order. So Voyager is first. Got to love T'Pol
The Fourth angel said to me « umrk, if you want to know what the future will be, just watch the 726 Episodes of the 30 Seasons of Star Trek?s five Series since the beginning (Star Trek, Star Trek Next Generation, Star Trek : Voyager, Star Trek : Enterprise, Deep Space Nine). If you are attentive enough, you will know what all future Apple products will be (Combadge, iPad, holosuite, etc ?). Things will happen exactly as described. However, do not try to match countries on the Earth with Star Trek?s characters (People from the Federation, Romulians, Cardassians, Bajorans, Ferengis, Vulcans, Klingons, etc ?) : all assumptions you may make will prove to be false !
Be also informed that we added Rule N°286 to the Ferengis « Rules of acquisition ». This new rule states ?if you want to make money, just buy Apple Shares?. Be nevertheless aware that this rule applies to Ferengis only. If you are not sure to be one, do whatever you please, it?s your money after all !?
He also said « be careful with the guy who « conducts his business with a pointed stick » (as Frank Zappa describes him), I think you know who I am talking about?
I don't think so. I think it's moving steady toward repeating the iPod dominance, only much faster. If they do get Retina Display (265ppi) for the iPad in early 2012 then I'd say it's definitely a done deal for the foreseeable tech future.
If you honestly believe that, you're ability to see into the future must be quite limited. The iPod was introduced as a dedicated device in an era who's concept of "syncing" was limited to contacts and notes in a PDA. The iPad isn't a dedicated device, nor are any of those other tablets. The iPad is a computer, one that's touched based, easy to use, and has an almost-limitless feature set with 3rd party apps.
But much like a computer, it can't be best for everyone. Some need lower-cost devices to deploy on a budget. Some need custom hardware, functionality or applications that are impossible with the iPad. Some just prefer different form factors and screen sizes. There will always be opportunity in this market if a product comes along that's a compelling alternative. Very few devices on the market today qualify for that title, but once the magic formula has been figured out, more and more will.
The iPad will most likely be the default choice for the next few years, but even a major hardware refresh next year won't stop the inevitable. The iPad won't be on top forever, and that's a good thing. Competition yields innovation and better products.
If you honestly believe that, you're ability to see into the future must be quite limited. <...>
But much like a computer, it can't be best for everyone. Some need lower-cost devices to deploy on a budget. Some need custom hardware, functionality or applications that are impossible with the iPad. Some just prefer different form factors and screen sizes. There will always be opportunity in this market if a product comes along that's a compelling alternative. Very few devices on the market today qualify for that title, but once the magic formula has been figured out, more and more will.
<...>
You do realize that there were several companies that tried in vain to find the "magic" formula to knock the iPod from top spot, right?
What makes you feel that someone will eventually find that "magic" formula for a tablet?
I know, I know... it'll just happen because it's magic...
If you honestly believe that, you're ability to see into the future must be quite limited. The iPod was introduced as a dedicated device in an era who's concept of "syncing" was limited to contacts and notes in a PDA. The iPad isn't a dedicated device, nor are any of those other tablets. The iPad is a computer, one that's touched based, easy to use, and has an almost-limitless feature set with 3rd party apps.
But much like a computer, it can't be best for everyone. Some need lower-cost devices to deploy on a budget. Some need custom hardware, functionality or applications that are impossible with the iPad. Some just prefer different form factors and screen sizes. There will always be opportunity in this market if a product comes along that's a compelling alternative. Very few devices on the market today qualify for that title, but once the magic formula has been figured out, more and more will.
The iPad will most likely be the default choice for the next few years, but even a major hardware refresh next year won't stop the inevitable. The iPad won't be on top forever, and that's a good thing. Competition yields innovation and better products.
I disagree...
Figuring out the recipe (the magic formula) doesn't mean you can afford all the ingredients, bake the cake that is desirable enough to sell at a profit.
Everybody has good ideas -- Apple implements them in a marketable appealing way.
I do agree that the iPad won't be on top forever... I'd give it 5-10 years (starting in 2010)!
But, if I were to bet on who will come up with something that unseats the iPad... it would be Apple!
Who else!
Competition yields innovation and better products.
Oh, does it really?
So far there is the iPad, which reigns supreme and there have been countless other tablets, which are all pieces of crap and nobody is interested in buying them, because they're inferior and cheap knockoffs. Not a whole lot of innovation taking place.
Oh, does it really?
So far there is the iPad, which reigns supreme and there have been countless other tablets, which are all pieces of crap and nobody is interested in buying them, because they're inferior and cheap knockoffs. Not a whole lot of innovation taking place.
By that logic, OSX isn't innovative because they don't sell as well as Windows?
It's pretty obvious that people who go to a store to buy a specific product are there to buy that product, and that they feel strongly about their decision.
Those people are not there with a wishy-washy idea that they are going to go home with some product from a category - they are there to buy a specific product.
Sometimes I type this stuff and then just delete it before I post it. Usually I do that, in fact. Often responding to this type of thing is just TOO boring.
Ferget it.
I didn't quite understand what you meant by "default tablet choice," since most people I know are not asking themselves, "which tablet?" but "should I get an iPad or a new laptop?" Although lately, the Kindle Fire has people I know asking "Kindle or iPad?"
"Default" makes it sound like no thought was put into it, but any product that costs at least $499 requires some thought commitment--whether they stand in line or not--it's not a what the hell impulse buy.
I've always maintained that a tablet market exists, and it has going back to the days of Windows for Pen Computing and the Apple Newton. But Apple managed to create an all but separate market for iPads through sheer demand. Given that tablets have been around for 20 years in one form or another, did Apple's success in 2010 prove there was demand for tablets, or just iPads?
By that logic, OSX isn't innovative because they don't sell as well as Windows?
No, it's not just about the sales numbers. WIndows ripped off OS X. Windows will always have a greater market share than OS X, but OS X is doing quite fine. Apple is not going to be blowing anything out the door in any fire sales anytime soon.
And the non-iPad tablets are not pieces of crap simply because of the sales numbers. They're pieces of crap because they actually are pieces of crap.
There really is no tablet market, and the figures in this thread proves it. The other companies should just pack it in, and call it a day. They're wasting their time and money.
Snip... Competition yields innovation and better products.
When someone says that competion is good, you know the competition is bad. If the best thing you can say about the competition is that the fundamental forces of the market are still in play, that's pretty damning. Although I appreciate the hope it expresses.
No, it's not just about the sales numbers. WIndows ripped off OS X. Windows will always have a greater market share than OS X, but OS X is doing quite fine. Apple is not going to be blowing anything out the door in any fire sales anytime soon.
And the non-iPad tablets are not pieces of crap simply because of the sales numbers. They're pieces of crap because they actually are pieces of crap.
There really is no tablet market, and the figures in this thread proves it. The other companies should just pack it in, and call it a day. They're wasting their time and money.
It's the price. I mean, the Samsung Galaxy Tab is great but why would I get that when I can get teh more established iPad?
The reason why people got the HP touchpad is because of VALUE. It suddenly became a great product overnight because of the price. The problem with many tablets is fragmentation. I know I can get 2+ years out of an iPad. Can't say that about 'droid tabletos. Anyone remeber the orignal Samsung Galaxy Tab a year ago? Now look, it's so outdated it's ridiculous.
$199 is good for non apple. They need to apply the same logic from Android phones to Android tablets.
They are wasting their time because they are playing catch up and want easy money. Microsoft can be a real contender because, oh, it actually runs an OS and interacts with other wordly Microsoft products. If they make a Windows 8 tablet where you can your Xbox games a la On Live...we have a winner.
$199 is good for non apple. They need to apply the same logic from Android phones to Android tablets.
A good tablet costs more than $200 to make and they're not subsidized like the phones are, so yeah, I can see why they're running into problems.
And people aren't just buying a tablet solely based on what hardware the tablet provides. They're buying into a whole eco-system, and Apple has that covered pretty well.
A good tablet costs more than $200 to make and they're not subsidized like the phones are, so yeah, I can see why they're running into problems.
And people aren't just buying a tablet solely based on what hardware the tablet provides. They're buying into a whole eco-system, and Apple has that covered pretty well.
Eco system does play a factor, but I think (despite what the industry was saying at the time) the fact that you can have all of yoru apps on your iPad meant you don't have to worry about transitioning.
Also, I HATE the Android tablets as they are much too limiting. You have that dang task bar everywhere and it's not like theres a home button.
When you look at it though, it was the apps that made iPad. Intially peple didn't see the difference between that and the iPhone, but it has expanded so much. Android....not so much.
Oh, does it really?
So far there is the iPad, which reigns supreme and there have been countless other tablets, which are all pieces of crap and nobody is interested in buying them, because they're inferior and cheap knockoffs. Not a whole lot of innovation taking place.
It took a couple years for competitors to catch up with the iPhone in terms of design, features and abilities, and in some ways, have surpassed the iPhone. Windows Phone is a completely new OS that's different not for the sake of being different, but because it actually does present a nicer experience in many instances, like the People hub, which integrates the activity of your friends across many different services into one simple UI. Android has created an explosion of hardware across different carriers and price points worldwide, each with their own pros and cons. They have also made possible the use of new generation networks like WiMax and LTE, which currently only have Android handsets running on them. At well over 500,000 activations per day, *someone* is buying these things, and not because they're "cheap knockoffs."
Competitors are still figuring out the tablet market. As usual, Apple has gained a major head start with a groundbreaking product, but they never stay that way forever, nor do they need to in order to be successful. Competition from the Kindle Fire won't be enough to impact iPad sales, but it does create an opportunity for people who would like to get started in the second digital revolution without investing too much up-front. If enough devices and manufacturers manage to drive consumer demand up and prices down, Apple will need to adjust their pricing accordingly. Everyone wins, especially Apple users.
So yes, competition is *always* good. It doesn't mean it's always successful, but you don't want a single company dominating any market for too long. I can promise you that Apple wouldn't have worked so hard and invested so much into iCloud and iOS if they didn't feel the heat from Android and other competitors to stay ahead of the pact.