Well, you have a point about the Android devices. There were 500M mid sep, and 300M mid Feb. Extrapolating linearly (too conservative, obviously), there are around 600M today. As for "WE ALREADY KNOW": you already know the answer to the wrong question. The question is, who will win? Apple was on the verge of going out of business in the mid-nineties, after being on top of the world in the late eighties. It was taken over by NeXT, which looked like a failed startup for a LONG time (remember "OpenStep"?) As for malware, blah, blah, you can't compare linux with windows -- it is much more robust, though obviously people are very ingenious. The question you are answering is: "What do I (Tallest Skil) prefer to use?" With all due respect, there is only one person who cares about the answer to that question.
That's not the reason that the non-cellular models lack GPS though. Tower-assisted positioning helps to speed up the position lock from cold, but is not required. It appears to be more due to the fact that almost all the mapping software downloads map data on the fly via cellular (unless you have mobile wifi of some kind or you had cached the relevant map data in advance), and so most of the time you would get position data but no map on which to display it.
That's not the reason that the non-cellular models lack GPS though. Tower-assisted positioning helps to speed up the position lock from cold, but is not required. It appears to be more due to the fact that almost all the mapping software downloads map data on the fly via cellular (unless you have mobile wifi of some kind or you had cached the relevant map data in advance), and so most of the time you would get position data but no map on which to display it.
But all iPads (WiFi or cellular) support geotagging! That sounds like a good reason to have GPS?!
I agree that it would be nice. Two factors to consider though:
1. The level of complaints about mapping if the devices had GPS but could not display maps without wifi or preloaded data;
2. The GPS receivers reside on the radio chips, so the wifi-only devices would need separate GPS chips, adding to the cost.
Don't pretend you can change the definition of "win", either.
Apple has the use share. Apple has the money. Apple has the mindshare. Apple has the customer satisfaction. Apple has the ecosystem. Apple has the developers. Apple has the secure platform. Apple has the UX.
Android has the units… "shipped". We even have to put shipped in quotes now. They've already been caught lying about sales, but shipments are even questionable anymore.
Don't pretend you can change the definition of "win", either.
Apple has the use share. Apple has the money. Apple has the mindshare. Apple has the customer satisfaction. Apple has the ecosystem. Apple has the developers. Apple has the secure platform. Apple has the UX.
Android has the units… "shipped". We even have to put shipped in quotes now. They've already been caught lying about sales, but shipments are even questionable anymore.
I agree with both items, and 2. is why I had initially said that Apple compromised by not giving the WiFi iPad minis (and, as it turns out, any other WiFi iPads) GPS capability. Of course, a competing argument is that presumably WiFi only devices are only used around the house where you can't acquire a signal anyway. I don't tend to agree with this, since people use WiFi devices in cafes and such a lot.
I agree that it would be nice. Two factors to consider though:
1. The level of complaints about mapping if the devices had GPS but could not display maps without wifi or preloaded data;
2. The GPS receivers reside on the radio chips, so the wifi-only devices would need separate GPS chips, adding to the cost.
I agree with both items, and 2. is why I had initially said that Apple compromised by not giving the WiFi iPad minis (and, as it turns out, any other WiFi iPads) GPS capability. Of course, a competing argument is that presumably WiFi only devices are only used around the house where you can't acquire a signal anyway. I don't tend to agree with this, since people use WiFi devices in cafes and such a lot.
A least there is the option of an external Bluetooth GPS module.
Of course, a competing argument is that presumably WiFi only devices are only used around the house where you can't acquire a signal anyway. I don't tend to agree with this, since people use WiFi devices in cafes and such a lot.
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
People make a conscious decision to buy an iPad with cellular or with WiFi only. Hopefully they are making an informed decision and understand that there is no GPS in the WiFi only model.
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
The cellular data helps a lot. It's a fast side channel for certain information where you'd otherwise need about five minutes to establish a location, where data coming through cellular can help you get you a fix in 15-30 seconds. Cellular also offers triangulation features to go with the data. Apple also triangulates based on WiFi signals too, I don't know if that's happening for you.
People make a conscious decision to buy an iPad with cellular or with WiFi only. Hopefully they are making an informed decision and understand that there is no GPS in the WiFi only model.
Agreed. GPS in a digital device without cellular data generally doesn't make a lot of sense. The people with the one exception I'm aware of probably don't mind much about paying the extra anyway.
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
People make a conscious decision to buy an iPad with cellular or with WiFi only. Hopefully they are making an informed decision and understand that there is no GPS in the WiFi only model.
1. My statement about cafes is supposed to mean: people use them in cafes, therefore you TRAVEL with the device, which means you COULD use GPS if it were available.
2. The conscious decision is (I am guessing) based on the much lower price of the WiFi only version. All my iPads are cellular enabled, but it would not have occurred to me that the WiFi iPads are different in any way other than not having cellular data.
I am sorry to say that you are somewhat delusional. It IS true (in my experience) that MOST people who can afford apple devices buy them, but most does not mean all. Some devices (Samsung Notes of various flavors) offer features (decently integrated stylus input) Apple does not offer, and some people obviously want.
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
The cellular data helps a lot. It's a fast side channel for certain information where you'd otherwise need about five minutes to establish a location, where data coming through cellular can help you get you a fix in 15-30 seconds. Cellular also offers triangulation features to go with the data. Apple also triangulates based on WiFi signals too, I don't know if that's happening for you.
Modern GPS chips will lock much faster than 5 minutes. I use my iPad GPS as well as standalone GPS units regularly in areas with no cellular coverage. Acquisition times are broadly similar, and nearly always less than 60 seconds. Sensitivity is also much better than it used to be, and most modern units will acquire inside non-metallic structures with no problem.
It is interesting that with Androids being about 50% greater in users, that their online shopping presence is @ 60 % of iPhone usage. Could be demographics or user interface, since over half of Android devices are on an OS that is older than 1-2 years. The fact that there is such a difference in usage is not insignificant
Cheers !
You know what would be an interesting statistic for me? What is the ratio of iOS vs. Android use of wifi especially while shopping online? That would perhaps shed some light on the Android demographics as I suspect a huge block of Android users both in the states and abroad are people without computers and therefore no wifi at home. This single metric could explain the usage disparity.
It raises the question if WiFi in conjunction with an iPad is a contributing factor to Apple's blowout lead in online purchasing!
I know in our household, we stayed away from the stores on Thu-Sun, and did our shopping on "impulse" using iPads -- while sitting around enjoying the holiday. We could browse, compare, discuss and purchase with the greatest ease and convenience -- using iPads over WiFi.
For example my daughter wanted a new over-the-range microwave. We were able to comparison-shop, read the user & installation manuals and schedule store pickup.
It just wouldn't have happened using a smaller iPhone display or cellular data network.
1. My statement about cafes is supposed to mean: people use them in cafes, therefore you TRAVEL with the device, which means you COULD use GPS if it were available.
Do you seriously think anyone believes that? Why did you even mention cafes? People travel everywhere they go. Why does their destination matter? If you meant TRAVEL then the rest of your argument is baseless because unless they have constant wifi while they TRAVEL the maps program is useless.
1. My statement about cafes is supposed to mean: people use them in cafes, therefore you TRAVEL with the device, which means you COULD use GPS if it were available.
Do you seriously think anyone believes that? Why did you even mention cafes? People travel everywhere they go. Why does their destination matter? If you meant TRAVEL then the rest of your argument is baseless because unless they have constant wifi while they TRAVEL the maps program is useless.
I think that all he was trying to say was that since one does see them in cafes etc., it shows that they are not always left at home. Maps apparently works fine without cellular if you cache the route in advance.
Do you seriously think anyone believes that? Why did you even mention cafes? People travel everywhere they go. Why does their destination matter? If you meant TRAVEL then the rest of your argument is baseless because unless they have constant wifi while they TRAVEL the maps program is useless.
Yes, I do believe that. What does maps have to do with WiFi? A Garmin has no WiFi, and operates perfectly well, so if mapping software requires constant connectivity, it is badly designed.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What other posts, where, who's lying about that? There are more than a billion Android devices? I seriously doubt that.
Once again: WE ALREADY KNOW.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Well, you have a point about the Android devices. There were 500M mid sep, and 300M mid Feb. Extrapolating linearly (too conservative, obviously), there are around 600M today. As for "WE ALREADY KNOW": you already know the answer to the wrong question. The question is, who will win? Apple was on the verge of going out of business in the mid-nineties, after being on top of the world in the late eighties. It was taken over by NeXT, which looked like a failed startup for a LONG time (remember "OpenStep"?) As for malware, blah, blah, you can't compare linux with windows -- it is much more robust, though obviously people are very ingenious. The question you are answering is: "What do I (Tallest Skil) prefer to use?" With all due respect, there is only one person who cares about the answer to that question.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
GLONASS has full global coverage, just like GPS.
That's not the reason that the non-cellular models lack GPS though. Tower-assisted positioning helps to speed up the position lock from cold, but is not required. It appears to be more due to the fact that almost all the mapping software downloads map data on the fly via cellular (unless you have mobile wifi of some kind or you had cached the relevant map data in advance), and so most of the time you would get position data but no map on which to display it.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
But all iPads (WiFi or cellular) support geotagging! That sounds like a good reason to have GPS?!
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
I agree that it would be nice. Two factors to consider though:
1. The level of complaints about mapping if the devices had GPS but could not display maps without wifi or preloaded data;
2. The GPS receivers reside on the radio chips, so the wifi-only devices would need separate GPS chips, adding to the cost.
Originally Posted by igriv
The question is, who will win?
Apple. Hence me saying, "We already know".
Don't pretend you can change the definition of "win", either.
Apple has the use share. Apple has the money. Apple has the mindshare. Apple has the customer satisfaction. Apple has the ecosystem. Apple has the developers. Apple has the secure platform. Apple has the UX.
Android has the units… "shipped". We even have to put shipped in quotes now. They've already been caught lying about sales, but shipments are even questionable anymore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Apple. Hence me saying, "We already know".
Don't pretend you can change the definition of "win", either.
Apple has the use share. Apple has the money. Apple has the mindshare. Apple has the customer satisfaction. Apple has the ecosystem. Apple has the developers. Apple has the secure platform. Apple has the UX.
Android has the units… "shipped". We even have to put shipped in quotes now. They've already been caught lying about sales, but shipments are even questionable anymore.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Just so we don't change the definition later: what IS your definition of win?
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
I agree that it would be nice. Two factors to consider though:
1. The level of complaints about mapping if the devices had GPS but could not display maps without wifi or preloaded data;
2. The GPS receivers reside on the radio chips, so the wifi-only devices would need separate GPS chips, adding to the cost.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
I agree with both items, and 2. is why I had initially said that Apple compromised by not giving the WiFi iPad minis (and, as it turns out, any other WiFi iPads) GPS capability. Of course, a competing argument is that presumably WiFi only devices are only used around the house where you can't acquire a signal anyway. I don't tend to agree with this, since people use WiFi devices in cafes and such a lot.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
A least there is the option of an external Bluetooth GPS module.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
Of course, a competing argument is that presumably WiFi only devices are only used around the house where you can't acquire a signal anyway. I don't tend to agree with this, since people use WiFi devices in cafes and such a lot.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
People make a conscious decision to buy an iPad with cellular or with WiFi only. Hopefully they are making an informed decision and understand that there is no GPS in the WiFi only model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
A least there is the option of an external Bluetooth GPS module.
I have a Sierra Wireless cellular hot spot that has GPS built in but I have not tried it to see how it sends the data to the device.
The cellular data helps a lot. It's a fast side channel for certain information where you'd otherwise need about five minutes to establish a location, where data coming through cellular can help you get you a fix in 15-30 seconds. Cellular also offers triangulation features to go with the data. Apple also triangulates based on WiFi signals too, I don't know if that's happening for you.
Agreed. GPS in a digital device without cellular data generally doesn't make a lot of sense. The people with the one exception I'm aware of probably don't mind much about paying the extra anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
People make a conscious decision to buy an iPad with cellular or with WiFi only. Hopefully they are making an informed decision and understand that there is no GPS in the WiFi only model.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }1. My statement about cafes is supposed to mean: people use them in cafes, therefore you TRAVEL with the device, which means you COULD use GPS if it were available.
2. The conscious decision is (I am guessing) based on the much lower price of the WiFi only version. All my iPads are cellular enabled, but it would not have occurred to me that the WiFi iPads are different in any way other than not having cellular data.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
I am sorry to say that you are somewhat delusional. It IS true (in my experience) that MOST people who can afford apple devices buy them, but most does not mean all. Some devices (Samsung Notes of various flavors) offer features (decently integrated stylus input) Apple does not offer, and some people obviously want.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
What percentage of touted Android activations are Galaxy Notes?
Too bad these figures aren't released, I'll go out on a limb and say it would be a small fraction of one percent.
The disingenuousness of the "Android is winning" argument, use examples of high end devices when real world figures indicate this is not the case.
One only has to look at Android OS versions to see how little marketshare these flagship devices with ICS or later are taking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
This is just silly. People use laptops in cafes too yet most laptops I have seen do not have GPS. Of course you are talking about outdoor cafes decreasing the market further because you are assuming that a GPS signal cannot be acquired indoors.
For some reason I have no problem acquiring a GPS signal in my building which has a lot of glass and wood frame construction. I'm not sure if the new GPS chips are just more sensitive or whether the cell signal assist is helping but I can watch the blue dot move around inside the building footprint as I walk around.
The cellular data helps a lot. It's a fast side channel for certain information where you'd otherwise need about five minutes to establish a location, where data coming through cellular can help you get you a fix in 15-30 seconds. Cellular also offers triangulation features to go with the data. Apple also triangulates based on WiFi signals too, I don't know if that's happening for you.
Modern GPS chips will lock much faster than 5 minutes. I use my iPad GPS as well as standalone GPS units regularly in areas with no cellular coverage. Acquisition times are broadly similar, and nearly always less than 60 seconds. Sensitivity is also much better than it used to be, and most modern units will acquire inside non-metallic structures with no problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
What percentage of touted Android activations are Galaxy Notes?
Too bad these figures aren't released, I'll go out on a limb and say it would be a small fraction of one percent.
The disingenuousness of the "Android is winning" argument, use examples of high end devices when real world figures indicate this is not the case.
One only has to look at Android OS versions to see how little marketshare these flagship devices with ICS or later are taking.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }How is what you say relevant to my post?
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Here ya' go...
http://www.statista.com/topics/847/apple/chart/735/apple-s-astonishing-profit-in-context/
I guess you could say that iPads are used for consumption... Conspicuous Consumption!
When you use an iPad to buy a "productivity" device... how is that use classified?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandman619
It is interesting that with Androids being about 50% greater in users, that their online shopping presence is @ 60 % of iPhone usage. Could be demographics or user interface, since over half of Android devices are on an OS that is older than 1-2 years. The fact that there is such a difference in usage is not insignificant
Cheers !
You know what would be an interesting statistic for me? What is the ratio of iOS vs. Android use of wifi especially while shopping online? That would perhaps shed some light on the Android demographics as I suspect a huge block of Android users both in the states and abroad are people without computers and therefore no wifi at home. This single metric could explain the usage disparity.
@mstone Yours is an interesting comment!
It raises the question if WiFi in conjunction with an iPad is a contributing factor to Apple's blowout lead in online purchasing!
I know in our household, we stayed away from the stores on Thu-Sun, and did our shopping on "impulse" using iPads -- while sitting around enjoying the holiday. We could browse, compare, discuss and purchase with the greatest ease and convenience -- using iPads over WiFi.
For example my daughter wanted a new over-the-range microwave. We were able to comparison-shop, read the user & installation manuals and schedule store pickup.
It just wouldn't have happened using a smaller iPhone display or cellular data network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
1. My statement about cafes is supposed to mean: people use them in cafes, therefore you TRAVEL with the device, which means you COULD use GPS if it were available.
Do you seriously think anyone believes that? Why did you even mention cafes? People travel everywhere they go. Why does their destination matter? If you meant TRAVEL then the rest of your argument is baseless because unless they have constant wifi while they TRAVEL the maps program is useless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
1. My statement about cafes is supposed to mean: people use them in cafes, therefore you TRAVEL with the device, which means you COULD use GPS if it were available.
Do you seriously think anyone believes that? Why did you even mention cafes? People travel everywhere they go. Why does their destination matter? If you meant TRAVEL then the rest of your argument is baseless because unless they have constant wifi while they TRAVEL the maps program is useless.
I think that all he was trying to say was that since one does see them in cafes etc., it shows that they are not always left at home. Maps apparently works fine without cellular if you cache the route in advance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Do you seriously think anyone believes that? Why did you even mention cafes? People travel everywhere they go. Why does their destination matter? If you meant TRAVEL then the rest of your argument is baseless because unless they have constant wifi while they TRAVEL the maps program is useless.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Yes, I do believe that. What does maps have to do with WiFi? A Garmin has no WiFi, and operates perfectly well, so if mapping software requires constant connectivity, it is badly designed.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }