oh course they see it that way, so did IBM when the PC come onto the stage, they though the PC would be an extension to the Mainframe and they would never disappeared, I know many of you have no clue what a Mainframe is, and you kids in 20 years will no idea what a PC is either.
I still work with customers how have Mainframe computers running mission critical applications. True some of them are running Linux for zOS but still, for some customers every time they look at removing the mainframe from their environment they end up buying a new one instead.
...or used the Internet. The campaign never ran in India, but I saw quite a few of them online when visiting various sites. I never found them irritating as I normally find online ads.
the best thing about this debate is that the answer will be decided in the marektplace over the next year. and we'll actually see who was right/wrong.
If you take that as a reasonable metric, then Apple is wrong about OSX. OSX machines never really became popular, and are dwarfed by sales of Windows machines,
Same with Android phones vs. iOS phones.
Do you really want to rely on market share as a basis for any opinion that yo prefer Apple's products? What is with the right/wrong dichotomy?
It is perfectly OK for you to enjoy your Apple products, despite the fact that OSX computers and iOS phones are not as popular as Windows computers and Android phones.
There are lots of reasons why Apple products sell only to a minority of buyers. But I'm not sure that right/wrong has much to do with it.
Oh and here's another Lenovo lt that the Apple haters swear up and down looks nothing like a Mac.
Why is it so hard for people to admit that a lot of PC laptops/Ultrabooks take their design cues from the MacBook Pro/Air these days? It's so obvious. And has nothing to do with whether Apple invented something or not (i.e. wedge shape, chicklit keyboard), it's about the finished product, all th design components put together.A
As someone who has used a Lenovo for 4 years now and has followed their product design, there are two parts of lenovo.
1. the idea___ part, which is just like every cheapass windows manufacturer. Their products are trash
2. the think___ part of Lenovo, which makes high quality and unique machines.
So you are right, part of lenovo is doing what every other PC manufacturer is doing.... however the part of Lenovo that people who buy from Apple should actually look at for other companies innovating has been doing just fine.
as a note, i find it funny that Thinkpad's are generally the highest quality computer's after Apple's, and they have the opposite design ideals (in a way) you have jet black blocky against white/aluminum and smooth .
I always imagined that thinkpad's are basically what would happen in Apple started building computers with windows only... high quality high price.
also another really random note i with i could get a T530 with all the battery options maxed.... ~20 (13 dvd/28 idle/5 hours max load) hours wifi surfing.... followed by a whole ~7 hours to recharge to max.....
The idea behind the name "personal computer" might have been to denote that one person sat at it, at a desk, to operate it, if not to own it. But they haven't really reached penetration levels of one per person; they are usually shared, such as between members of a household. PostPC devices will however easily reach penetration of one per person for much of the world, if not more than one per person (I have both an iPod touch and an iPad, while I share my Mac with my family). They are more personal because of the way you create, publish, carry and share your own data where ever you go, repurposing it in ever more unique ways.
No, the PC is not going away; but I would contend that, actually, PostPC devices will be supplemented by PCs. A subtle difference, but a difference nevertheless, and one that symbolizes the "PostPC" era. For many young people, this is already a reality. This is the difference that is lost on MS. It thinks it can automatically catch up and recapture this divide just by slapping the word "Windows" on everything; thereby denying there is any such notion as "PostPC", or negating it if it catches hold.
EXACTLY!!!! ONCE traditional PC's supplement tablets we will be in a post(stereotypical)-PC world!!!
guess what, we are not even starting to enter one!!! TABLETS CURRENTLY SUPPLEMENT traditional PC's!!!
get back to me in 5-10 years and you may be right.
the Post (stereotypical) PC will come eventually, but right now i believe a PC+ world is more true.
my "definitions/understanding of what words mean":
Post (traditional) PC: tablets/smartphones are completely supplemented by traditional PC's.
(traditional) PC+: tablets/smartphones are supplementing traditional PC's.
tell me which one of those is happening right now, than which one will (should) happen in 5-10+ years.
on that note, apparently Amazon has taken multiple MS phone high up people.... lol...
Well.. when your Surface sells 15 million each quarter then you make a claim that your approach the correct one.
And when Macs sell 80 Million in a quarter will you then make a claim that Apple's approach is the correct one? And more importantly, will you claim that until that happens, the Mac approach is the incorrect one?
C'mon. Don't get hoisted by your own petard. Choose a better weapon. Market share is accounted for by many different factors, but "correct" is a dangerous factor to cite. Glass houses and all that.
and we'll actually see who was right/wrong, AGAIN.
Are you saying that Microsoft is "right" and that Google is "right" with Windows and Android, respectively? And that Apple is "wrong" with OSX and iOS for phones, both?
Are you sure that market share and "right" are tightly correlated?
PC stands for "personal computer." Which is kind of a silly name since no one I know has mainframe lurking in their basement. I think PCs should really be called by their form-factors: desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet computer, hand-held computer. "Personal computer" made sense when I was a kid because up until that point, computers were not a personal belonging, they were massive time-shared machines that lived in businesses, labs and universities. The term "personal computer" is now just as dated and in accurate as "micro computer."
Has Ballmer commented on whether a tablet is a PC or not? If not I can see that coming once they sell a few ... that will be the moment Apple can give in and agree ... then post the Apple sales data for 'PCs' (Macs + iPads).
Yes. Almost two years ago, Ballmer proclaimed that tablets are just PCs with a different form factor. And he's been saying the same thing ever since.
Thats not the point.... the point is that the PC is not going away, instead PC's are being supplemented by tablets.
MS is right... its simple, tell me what "PC" stands for.... now tell me what a tablet is... or are tablets not personal?
All you are doing here is arguing semantics. But the divide between Microsoft's and Apple's positions are about much more than semantics. Apple's position is that the operating systems required for the different form factors (of PCs with larger monitors versus handhelds with smaller ones) need to be different in order to optimize the user experience. Microsoft is disagreeing with that and trying to converge the various form factors with one user interface. You can win your semantic argument all day long, but I think Microsoft is wrong on the actual issue at play here.
On a side note, I think that Microsoft is creating a Frankenstein out of two already ugly parts (Windows, and Metro). When I first saw Metro on current Windows Phones, I found it to be classless, ugly, and nonintuitive. But I figured that's just my own personal opinion. Since that time, the consumers have voted with their wallets, and I think the result of the vote is that Metro is unappealing to the masses (your opinion may differ, that's cool). The poor sales of Nokia's Lumia line is not all Nokia's fault. As a general rule, nobody wants Metro. Now Microsoft is integrating that mess into its other products? Mistake.
How do you explain that Macs are outsold by Windows machines at a ratio of about 9:1, if your premise is true?
A big part of the world ends up buying whatever they can afford, and in the 80's and 90's that meant Windows (for most people). Then the war was over... but a sequel is brewing... and many dynamics have changed.
could offices across america the world replace their computer with iPads and get as much done in the same time?
based on everything i have seen and heard the answer in no. The closest device to being able to fill that role however, is the surface.... (the x86-64 version)
As mentioned, Jobs' analogy of cars and trucks makes the most sense.
Traditional PCs = pickups
Tablets/Smartphones = sedans
I suppose laptops, who although predate tablets actually seem like a tweener category between PCs and Tablets, are analogous to crossover vehicles, SUVs, etc.
At one point, everybody used trucks. Now they're mainly used in professional settings or for people who need to haul things around. While not replacing trucks, the center of focus for the average person has shifted to sedans, and their ilk. Why? They accomplish 95% of what the average person needs to do, while having the benefits of a better ride, better fuel economy, etc.
PCs/workstations/etc won't be replaced anytime soon. Professionals still need them, and prosumers may have one at home to do heavy lifting. But the industry's focus is shifting to the tablet, as it accomplishes 95% of what the average user wants to do: browse the web, shop online, bank online, check email, view photos, play games, and stay up to date with family and friends. For the average user, how often do they need the functionality of a PC? A tablet does the majority of what people want, and it presents a more portable form factor, a more enjoyable experience, and better battery life.
For me personally, I use a PC at work. I could never replace the functionality with a tablet; even if the processor was just as fast, the form factor is for portability, not serious work. But when I get home? I don't even have a PC at home. Just an iPad. And an iPhone. I haven't had a need for a PC at home for quite a while.
I imagine we're headed down a path where most people will be in a similar boat: a PC at work, a personal device (tablet, etc) at home. For some people, they might continue to have a PC at home, but it will outnumbered by personal devices; instead of the days when a home had 3-4 PCs at home, there will be perhaps 1 PC and 2-4 personal devices. Just like people may have a pickup truck at home for the occasional chore, but they drive around in a Camry most days.
All you are doing here is arguing semantics. But the divide between Microsoft's and Apple's positions are about much more than semantics. Apple's position is that the operating systems required for the different form factors (of PCs with larger monitors versus handhelds with smaller ones) need to be different in order to optimize the user experience. Microsoft is disagreeing with that and trying to converge the various form factors with one user interface. You can win your semantic argument all day long, but I think Microsoft is wrong on the actual issue at play here.
On a side note, I think that Microsoft is creating a Frankenstein out of two already ugly parts (Windows, and Metro). When I first saw Metro on current Windows Phones, I found it to be classless, ugly, and nonintuitive. But I figured that's just my own personal opinion. Since that time, the consumers have voted with their wallets, and I think the result of the vote is that Metro is unappealing to the masses (your opinion may differ, that's cool). The poor sales of Nokia's Lumia line is not all Nokia's fault. As a general rule, nobody wants Metro. Now Microsoft is integrating that mess into its other products? Mistake.
Thompson
The other issue is that the only goal that I can think of for having a convergent OS from a user's standpoint is the following:
- If I type a Word document on my PC, I want to be able to open it on my tablet, and vice versa
- I want to be able to use software that I'm familiar with
- ???
What other point is there? And as it stands, those two issues can be settled largely with the cloud and a large developer base. For instance, Apple has shown that you can have the SAME software (from a user's standpoint) running on a Mac and an iPad. Take Pages as example: a user can create a document on their iPad and, using iCloud, can open that document on their Mac, and vice versa. Other developers are taking that queue, and iOS 6 will allow more use of iCloud for third party apps.
This means that developers can release companion versions of their desktop apps for the iPad, and have the data shared between both versions. Plus, it allows the companion version to be designed with a touch interface in mind, instead of running an actual desktop app.
Obviously, this is more work on the back end for developers. But do the users care as long as it works? Nope. And with as much weight as Apple carries in the developer industry (which developer wouldn't want to cater to such a large market?), developers will be than eager to take on the extra work.
Thus, there is no need for a user to want or need a convergent OS. I can understand your desire for one if you're a developer, but you gotta go with the flow.
but you, sir, are in a very limited minority. the rest of the world, the vast majority, want "just works" instead.
...there is no inherent conflict between "just works" and "highly capable"
For instance, you think adding an IR port (so the tablet can talk to/at your stereo, tv, etc.) will make the tablet suddenly not "just work"?
You think adding a memory card slot will make it not "just work"?
You think that because a folder can have more than 16 apps in it, it'll stop working? Or that if you can drag one folder into another, you can't drag them back out? Or never drag them in at all?
You're not thinking at all.
However, yes, the competition will be doing all these things and more, and if Apple sticks to this "dumbed down" hardware path, they'll simply fall behind. So I predict that Apple will see the light, and not too long from now, either. And in the meantime, I'll just wait -- because I'm not buying an "upgrade" that isn't an upgrade.
Microsoft has it right: As tablets power up, they're destined to become more powerful, support more interfaces, like IR, radio, USB, optical, memory, etc. They'll move towards PCs. The closer they get, the more they can do, the better I'll like them.
Apple's misguided attempt to "IOS-a-cise" OSX will backfire on them. Guaranteed. It's a bad idea, based on a misperception.
The primary upgrade I need right now in IOS is true nested folders -- instead of this stupid, no-nest, limited count container that LOOKS like a folder... leading to a disorganized, spread-out mess on my tablet surface. Is it here? No, that folder is full. Is it there? No, that folder is full, too. Stupid. Just plain stupid. And wholly unnecessary.
Nested, scrolling folders have been OS basics since the early 1980's. Apple screwed the pooch there, too.
It'll be fun to see Android and Windows ignore the artificial limits Apple imposes. Nothing like seeing the mighty brought down for entertainment value.
The reasons you defend MSs decisions are based on the same fallacies MS is making and has always made. You cling to the past. Case in point, you want USB, IR, and optical media on a tablet.
Optical media is dead - that's a fact. No one is working on a successor to BlueRay and anything that tries to would fail. Burning disks or buying movies on disk is outdated and obsolete. Have you seen sales figures for optical media? It is quickly on its way out and I for one and many others don't lament it's death. Any view other than that is likely short-sighted.
IR is outdated. It's hardly used. Even my ceiling fan uses RF for its remote. IR is only good for remote controls and with the ubiquity of BlueTooth and WiFi there is no need for IR. one would surely never choose IR over BT or, especially, WiFi for data transmission. There is no point to IR for either a remote (must be line of site) or data transfer (can you say painfully slow?).
USB is not necessary for a tablet. One doesn't do anything with USB that they can't do over WiFi or BT. File transfer with a thumb drive? Why? You've already got your portable device in the tablet. Carrying around a thumb drive or hard drive in addition to that is assanine. USB mic? You have a dual purpose audio port that works with several third party headsets. Backup Drive? You have the cloud and backup to PC (which should have its own dedicated backup drive hense a double backup solution - triple if you count the cloud).
In reference to your file system argument, well, I'd like greater capacity per folder as well but it hasn't been a huge issue for the majority of users. Additionally the dismissal of the traditional folder system is welcome. Most users can't figure out where their résumé is saved to on their C drive to save their lives. It's pathetic, but true. Most users think their document is stored IN WORD. Not as an independent file. I know all this from my experience working with the public. So Apple's in app documents simply builds on the consumers expectations. The fact that the docs are stored on the cloud as well as locally as independent files is transparent so the user always knows where to go for their data. To the app that created it.
The iPad (and iPhone and iPod Touch, and Android devices for that matter) are disruptors. They are not continuations of the same OLD tired and dying technology that a minority of users are unwilling to give up or are blinded to the demise of their ubiquity. The iOS devices are a new breed ushering in an erra where we are liberated from dragging around a half dozen peripherals to support our bloated PCs (I use the term PC to describe both PCs and Macs in this context). The rest of the world is moving on and you're welcome to join the ride or stay behind. If you need IR, USB, and optical drives for the majority of what you do with a tablet then by all means stick with your legacy technology. No one is asking you to abandon it. Just don't expect the rest of us who have moved on to continue to cater to your needs because we will not. Like religion, political party, or favorite ice cream flavor the choice is yours. Just don't impose it on me.
On that note, how's your standard definition CRT TV, VCR, carburated engine, 3.5" floppy disk drive, and wood burning kettle stove working out for you?
What you fail to consider is how easy Apple made it for software developers to write software for the iPad and iPhone. That has resulted in a drastic reduction in cost in software for the iPad and iPhone. Apps cost $1-$5 instead of $50-$300 like OS-X and Windows apps. Apple is succeeding in training a whole generation of new programmers. And, the limitations of iOS are diminishing every year. With Apple's upgrade cycle, there is no reason why Apple can't keep its developers and customers happy. (or at least most of them). In the meantime, Apple's devices will continue to be the fastest and lightest produvts with the best batter life (which is what matters to the largest number of people). And they will have plenty of software to choose from.
Good grief. I am an Apple developer, and more than that, I've been developing software since the 1970's. It's no easier (or more difficult) to develop IOS apps than it is OSX, WIndows or Linux, for that matter. It's just (slightly) different. The cost of IOS apps is just a marketing strategy. And there are some that are quite expensive, too. As well to note that there are many inexpensive or free OSX, WIndows and LInux apps.
I really don't know where you people get these crazy ideas.
Fastest? No. There are faster computers out there than Apple makes; there are certainly some faster tablets, too. Lightest, yes, perhaps. And that's a big selling point, I agree. But it's not enough to keep them in front. The question every consumer ultimately asks is "what can this device do for me" and when APple comes up wanting in a comparison, that'll be the beginning of the market force that makes them adjust their strategy.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
oh course they see it that way, so did IBM when the PC come onto the stage, they though the PC would be an extension to the Mainframe and they would never disappeared, I know many of you have no clue what a Mainframe is, and you kids in 20 years will no idea what a PC is either.
I still work with customers how have Mainframe computers running mission critical applications. True some of them are running Linux for zOS but still, for some customers every time they look at removing the mainframe from their environment they end up buying a new one instead.
You can see all of them here:
http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/apples-get-mac-complete-campaign-130552?page=1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
the best thing about this debate is that the answer will be decided in the marektplace over the next year. and we'll actually see who was right/wrong.
If you take that as a reasonable metric, then Apple is wrong about OSX. OSX machines never really became popular, and are dwarfed by sales of Windows machines,
Same with Android phones vs. iOS phones.
Do you really want to rely on market share as a basis for any opinion that yo prefer Apple's products? What is with the right/wrong dichotomy?
It is perfectly OK for you to enjoy your Apple products, despite the fact that OSX computers and iOS phones are not as popular as Windows computers and Android phones.
There are lots of reasons why Apple products sell only to a minority of buyers. But I'm not sure that right/wrong has much to do with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Oh and here's another Lenovo lt that the Apple haters swear up and down looks nothing like a Mac.
Why is it so hard for people to admit that a lot of PC laptops/Ultrabooks take their design cues from the MacBook Pro/Air these days? It's so obvious. And has nothing to do with whether Apple invented something or not (i.e. wedge shape, chicklit keyboard), it's about the finished product, all th design components put together.A
As someone who has used a Lenovo for 4 years now and has followed their product design, there are two parts of lenovo.
1. the idea___ part, which is just like every cheapass windows manufacturer. Their products are trash
2. the think___ part of Lenovo, which makes high quality and unique machines.
So you are right, part of lenovo is doing what every other PC manufacturer is doing.... however the part of Lenovo that people who buy from Apple should actually look at for other companies innovating has been doing just fine.
as a note, i find it funny that Thinkpad's are generally the highest quality computer's after Apple's, and they have the opposite design ideals (in a way) you have jet black blocky against white/aluminum and smooth
I always imagined that thinkpad's are basically what would happen in Apple started building computers with windows only... high quality high price.
also another really random note i with i could get a T530 with all the battery options maxed.... ~20 (13 dvd/28 idle/5 hours max load) hours wifi surfing.... followed by a whole ~7 hours to recharge to max.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
But the market will be the final arbiter of who is "wrong,"
Do you really believe that? Was Apple wrong about the Mac? Is apple wrong about iOS phones?
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen
The idea behind the name "personal computer" might have been to denote that one person sat at it, at a desk, to operate it, if not to own it. But they haven't really reached penetration levels of one per person; they are usually shared, such as between members of a household. PostPC devices will however easily reach penetration of one per person for much of the world, if not more than one per person (I have both an iPod touch and an iPad, while I share my Mac with my family). They are more personal because of the way you create, publish, carry and share your own data where ever you go, repurposing it in ever more unique ways.
No, the PC is not going away; but I would contend that, actually, PostPC devices will be supplemented by PCs. A subtle difference, but a difference nevertheless, and one that symbolizes the "PostPC" era. For many young people, this is already a reality. This is the difference that is lost on MS. It thinks it can automatically catch up and recapture this divide just by slapping the word "Windows" on everything; thereby denying there is any such notion as "PostPC", or negating it if it catches hold.
EXACTLY!!!! ONCE traditional PC's supplement tablets we will be in a post(stereotypical)-PC world!!!
guess what, we are not even starting to enter one!!! TABLETS CURRENTLY SUPPLEMENT traditional PC's!!!
get back to me in 5-10 years and you may be right.
the Post (stereotypical) PC will come eventually, but right now i believe a PC+ world is more true.
my "definitions/understanding of what words mean":
Post (traditional) PC: tablets/smartphones are completely supplemented by traditional PC's.
(traditional) PC+: tablets/smartphones are supplementing traditional PC's.
tell me which one of those is happening right now, than which one will (should) happen in 5-10+ years.
on that note, apparently Amazon has taken multiple MS phone high up people.... lol...
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
Well.. when your Surface sells 15 million each quarter then you make a claim that your approach the correct one.
And when Macs sell 80 Million in a quarter will you then make a claim that Apple's approach is the correct one? And more importantly, will you claim that until that happens, the Mac approach is the incorrect one?
C'mon. Don't get hoisted by your own petard. Choose a better weapon. Market share is accounted for by many different factors, but "correct" is a dangerous factor to cite. Glass houses and all that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx
and we'll actually see who was right/wrong, AGAIN.
Are you saying that Microsoft is "right" and that Google is "right" with Windows and Android, respectively? And that Apple is "wrong" with OSX and iOS for phones, both?
Are you sure that market share and "right" are tightly correlated?
PC stands for "personal computer." Which is kind of a silly name since no one I know has mainframe lurking in their basement. I think PCs should really be called by their form-factors: desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet computer, hand-held computer. "Personal computer" made sense when I was a kid because up until that point, computers were not a personal belonging, they were massive time-shared machines that lived in businesses, labs and universities. The term "personal computer" is now just as dated and in accurate as "micro computer."
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Has Ballmer commented on whether a tablet is a PC or not? If not I can see that coming once they sell a few ... that will be the moment Apple can give in and agree ... then post the Apple sales data for 'PCs' (Macs + iPads).
Yes. Almost two years ago, Ballmer proclaimed that tablets are just PCs with a different form factor. And he's been saying the same thing ever since.
Thompson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
the rest of the world, the vast majority, want "just works" instead.
How do you explain that Macs are outsold by Windows machines at a ratio of about 9:1, if your premise is true?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471
BTW, isn't the Big Bang Theory the funniest TV show ever produced?
That depends on its market share.
/s
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolbolas
Thats not the point.... the point is that the PC is not going away, instead PC's are being supplemented by tablets.
MS is right... its simple, tell me what "PC" stands for.... now tell me what a tablet is... or are tablets not personal?
All you are doing here is arguing semantics. But the divide between Microsoft's and Apple's positions are about much more than semantics. Apple's position is that the operating systems required for the different form factors (of PCs with larger monitors versus handhelds with smaller ones) need to be different in order to optimize the user experience. Microsoft is disagreeing with that and trying to converge the various form factors with one user interface. You can win your semantic argument all day long, but I think Microsoft is wrong on the actual issue at play here.
On a side note, I think that Microsoft is creating a Frankenstein out of two already ugly parts (Windows, and Metro). When I first saw Metro on current Windows Phones, I found it to be classless, ugly, and nonintuitive. But I figured that's just my own personal opinion. Since that time, the consumers have voted with their wallets, and I think the result of the vote is that Metro is unappealing to the masses (your opinion may differ, that's cool). The poor sales of Nokia's Lumia line is not all Nokia's fault. As a general rule, nobody wants Metro. Now Microsoft is integrating that mess into its other products? Mistake.
Thompson
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
How do you explain that Macs are outsold by Windows machines at a ratio of about 9:1, if your premise is true?
A big part of the world ends up buying whatever they can afford, and in the 80's and 90's that meant Windows (for most people). Then the war was over... but a sequel is brewing... and many dynamics have changed.
Thompson
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolbolas
could offices across america the world replace their computer with iPads and get as much done in the same time?
based on everything i have seen and heard the answer in no. The closest device to being able to fill that role however, is the surface.... (the x86-64 version)
As mentioned, Jobs' analogy of cars and trucks makes the most sense.
Traditional PCs = pickups
Tablets/Smartphones = sedans
I suppose laptops, who although predate tablets actually seem like a tweener category between PCs and Tablets, are analogous to crossover vehicles, SUVs, etc.
At one point, everybody used trucks. Now they're mainly used in professional settings or for people who need to haul things around. While not replacing trucks, the center of focus for the average person has shifted to sedans, and their ilk. Why? They accomplish 95% of what the average person needs to do, while having the benefits of a better ride, better fuel economy, etc.
PCs/workstations/etc won't be replaced anytime soon. Professionals still need them, and prosumers may have one at home to do heavy lifting. But the industry's focus is shifting to the tablet, as it accomplishes 95% of what the average user wants to do: browse the web, shop online, bank online, check email, view photos, play games, and stay up to date with family and friends. For the average user, how often do they need the functionality of a PC? A tablet does the majority of what people want, and it presents a more portable form factor, a more enjoyable experience, and better battery life.
For me personally, I use a PC at work. I could never replace the functionality with a tablet; even if the processor was just as fast, the form factor is for portability, not serious work. But when I get home? I don't even have a PC at home. Just an iPad. And an iPhone. I haven't had a need for a PC at home for quite a while.
I imagine we're headed down a path where most people will be in a similar boat: a PC at work, a personal device (tablet, etc) at home. For some people, they might continue to have a PC at home, but it will outnumbered by personal devices; instead of the days when a home had 3-4 PCs at home, there will be perhaps 1 PC and 2-4 personal devices. Just like people may have a pickup truck at home for the occasional chore, but they drive around in a Camry most days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr
All you are doing here is arguing semantics. But the divide between Microsoft's and Apple's positions are about much more than semantics. Apple's position is that the operating systems required for the different form factors (of PCs with larger monitors versus handhelds with smaller ones) need to be different in order to optimize the user experience. Microsoft is disagreeing with that and trying to converge the various form factors with one user interface. You can win your semantic argument all day long, but I think Microsoft is wrong on the actual issue at play here.
On a side note, I think that Microsoft is creating a Frankenstein out of two already ugly parts (Windows, and Metro). When I first saw Metro on current Windows Phones, I found it to be classless, ugly, and nonintuitive. But I figured that's just my own personal opinion. Since that time, the consumers have voted with their wallets, and I think the result of the vote is that Metro is unappealing to the masses (your opinion may differ, that's cool). The poor sales of Nokia's Lumia line is not all Nokia's fault. As a general rule, nobody wants Metro. Now Microsoft is integrating that mess into its other products? Mistake.
Thompson
The other issue is that the only goal that I can think of for having a convergent OS from a user's standpoint is the following:
- If I type a Word document on my PC, I want to be able to open it on my tablet, and vice versa
- I want to be able to use software that I'm familiar with
- ???
What other point is there? And as it stands, those two issues can be settled largely with the cloud and a large developer base. For instance, Apple has shown that you can have the SAME software (from a user's standpoint) running on a Mac and an iPad. Take Pages as example: a user can create a document on their iPad and, using iCloud, can open that document on their Mac, and vice versa. Other developers are taking that queue, and iOS 6 will allow more use of iCloud for third party apps.
This means that developers can release companion versions of their desktop apps for the iPad, and have the data shared between both versions. Plus, it allows the companion version to be designed with a touch interface in mind, instead of running an actual desktop app.
Obviously, this is more work on the back end for developers. But do the users care as long as it works? Nope. And with as much weight as Apple carries in the developer industry (which developer wouldn't want to cater to such a large market?), developers will be than eager to take on the extra work.
Thus, there is no need for a user to want or need a convergent OS. I can understand your desire for one if you're a developer, but you gotta go with the flow.
Quote:
but you, sir, are in a very limited minority. the rest of the world, the vast majority, want "just works" instead.
...there is no inherent conflict between "just works" and "highly capable"
For instance, you think adding an IR port (so the tablet can talk to/at your stereo, tv, etc.) will make the tablet suddenly not "just work"?
You think adding a memory card slot will make it not "just work"?
You think that because a folder can have more than 16 apps in it, it'll stop working? Or that if you can drag one folder into another, you can't drag them back out? Or never drag them in at all?
You're not thinking at all.
However, yes, the competition will be doing all these things and more, and if Apple sticks to this "dumbed down" hardware path, they'll simply fall behind. So I predict that Apple will see the light, and not too long from now, either. And in the meantime, I'll just wait -- because I'm not buying an "upgrade" that isn't an upgrade.
The reasons you defend MSs decisions are based on the same fallacies MS is making and has always made. You cling to the past. Case in point, you want USB, IR, and optical media on a tablet.
Optical media is dead - that's a fact. No one is working on a successor to BlueRay and anything that tries to would fail. Burning disks or buying movies on disk is outdated and obsolete. Have you seen sales figures for optical media? It is quickly on its way out and I for one and many others don't lament it's death. Any view other than that is likely short-sighted.
IR is outdated. It's hardly used. Even my ceiling fan uses RF for its remote. IR is only good for remote controls and with the ubiquity of BlueTooth and WiFi there is no need for IR. one would surely never choose IR over BT or, especially, WiFi for data transmission. There is no point to IR for either a remote (must be line of site) or data transfer (can you say painfully slow?).
USB is not necessary for a tablet. One doesn't do anything with USB that they can't do over WiFi or BT. File transfer with a thumb drive? Why? You've already got your portable device in the tablet. Carrying around a thumb drive or hard drive in addition to that is assanine. USB mic? You have a dual purpose audio port that works with several third party headsets. Backup Drive? You have the cloud and backup to PC (which should have its own dedicated backup drive hense a double backup solution - triple if you count the cloud).
In reference to your file system argument, well, I'd like greater capacity per folder as well but it hasn't been a huge issue for the majority of users. Additionally the dismissal of the traditional folder system is welcome. Most users can't figure out where their résumé is saved to on their C drive to save their lives. It's pathetic, but true. Most users think their document is stored IN WORD. Not as an independent file. I know all this from my experience working with the public. So Apple's in app documents simply builds on the consumers expectations. The fact that the docs are stored on the cloud as well as locally as independent files is transparent so the user always knows where to go for their data. To the app that created it.
The iPad (and iPhone and iPod Touch, and Android devices for that matter) are disruptors. They are not continuations of the same OLD tired and dying technology that a minority of users are unwilling to give up or are blinded to the demise of their ubiquity. The iOS devices are a new breed ushering in an erra where we are liberated from dragging around a half dozen peripherals to support our bloated PCs (I use the term PC to describe both PCs and Macs in this context). The rest of the world is moving on and you're welcome to join the ride or stay behind. If you need IR, USB, and optical drives for the majority of what you do with a tablet then by all means stick with your legacy technology. No one is asking you to abandon it. Just don't expect the rest of us who have moved on to continue to cater to your needs because we will not. Like religion, political party, or favorite ice cream flavor the choice is yours. Just don't impose it on me.
On that note, how's your standard definition CRT TV, VCR, carburated engine, 3.5" floppy disk drive, and wood burning kettle stove working out for you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471
What you fail to consider is how easy Apple made it for software developers to write software for the iPad and iPhone. That has resulted in a drastic reduction in cost in software for the iPad and iPhone. Apps cost $1-$5 instead of $50-$300 like OS-X and Windows apps. Apple is succeeding in training a whole generation of new programmers. And, the limitations of iOS are diminishing every year. With Apple's upgrade cycle, there is no reason why Apple can't keep its developers and customers happy. (or at least most of them). In the meantime, Apple's devices will continue to be the fastest and lightest produvts with the best batter life (which is what matters to the largest number of people). And they will have plenty of software to choose from.
Good grief. I am an Apple developer, and more than that, I've been developing software since the 1970's. It's no easier (or more difficult) to develop IOS apps than it is OSX, WIndows or Linux, for that matter. It's just (slightly) different. The cost of IOS apps is just a marketing strategy. And there are some that are quite expensive, too. As well to note that there are many inexpensive or free OSX, WIndows and LInux apps.
I really don't know where you people get these crazy ideas.
Fastest? No. There are faster computers out there than Apple makes; there are certainly some faster tablets, too. Lightest, yes, perhaps. And that's a big selling point, I agree. But it's not enough to keep them in front. The question every consumer ultimately asks is "what can this device do for me" and when APple comes up wanting in a comparison, that'll be the beginning of the market force that makes them adjust their strategy.