On the software side, Samsung doesn't own its own primary mobile platform as Apple does.
In other words, Samsung doesn't control its own destiny in the smart phone space. They're at the mercy of Google. But there's a way out for Samsung. They can take control of their smartphone and tablet future by doing one of two things,
one easy and one hard:
The easy thing: fork Android. Amazon did that to great effect. Samsung could do it too, cut out all that Google spyware and spamware, and replace Google's profit layer with their own. Most importantly, Samsung would have a software platform that they could optimize for their own hardware and modify as they see fit, without depending on Google to add features they want or to fix bugs and performance issues. Then there's the harder thing...
The hard thing: create their own OS. Samsung is already working on their version of Tizen, which promises to be truly open and free of any Google spyware, spamware, and profit layer. That would take quite a while to perfect, but it might be worth it for Samsung. Again because Samsung would no longer be dependent on Google, who obviously have their own agenda independent of Samsung's success.
The "new Apple," Chowdhry notes, "is not about new hardware. it's about software attach rates."
There are plenty of industries for Apple to disrupt that won't require specific Apple hardware. Embedded automotive electronics control (as in Eyes Free, and fully Embedded Siri as shown by Ford at CES.) Home automation, including
environmental / security / entertainment (of which the Apple television may or may not be a component.) And, of course the television industry, which is an entirely different thread of course.
So yes, eventually Apple will need to switch their profit center from their hardware sales to content and services. Hardware costs always come down over time. A 2 GB hard drive cost $1000 20 years ago. Now you can buy 10 TB of disk space for that same $1000. Of course, Apple has already planned for that low-hardware-revenue future. Their content and services infrastructure is already in place. Music? Done. Video? Done. Interactive television? Ready when you are.
But for now, Apple can and will profit from their hardware designs. And, as we all know by now (right folks?) it's the software that sells the hardware. Oh wait. No, Wall Street doesn't quite understand that yet. And no, Samsung doesn't know it yet either. Oops.
"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware."
- Alan Kay, American computer science pioneer
Alan Kay said that 30 years ago. Still true today.
Absolutely¡ They need it to keep their APR and profit margins from falling¡
Perhaps you would like to explain how selling a low end phone will protect their profit margins enough to offset the cannibalization that would likely follow, because I just don't see it that way.
Perhaps you would like to explain how selling a low end phone will protect their profit margins enough to offset the cannibalization that would likely follow, because I just don't see it that way.
Okay, that's three. I'll write up a sticky (that no one will ever read) about the use of "", ¡, and /s to denote sarcasm here.
this is all just to say again that Apple is an "ecosystem company". aka vertically integrated. hardware + software + services + third party stuff.
only other hardware based company that has tried same thing is Sony. and failed. because the don't control their software and instead rely on Android and Windows. sad. Samsung may try next, but same problem.
MS is coming at it from the software + services side, trying to add hardware. but they totally screw it up due to legacy addiction.
Google is coming at it from the web services side, also trying to add hardware now. but they screw it up with monetizing addiction (ads etc.).
Amazon is trying too, and Facebook can't be far behind.
these all add up to a fragmented mish-mash. techies may love that, but consumers will opt for Apple's Just Works consistency.
In other words, Samsung doesn't control its own destiny in the smart phone space. They're at the mercy of Google. But there's a way out for Samsung. They can take control of their smartphone and tablet future by doing one of two things,
one easy and one hard:
The easy thing: fork Android. Amazon did that to great effect. Samsung could do it too, cut out all that Google spyware and spamware, and replace Google's profit layer with their own. Most importantly, Samsung would have a software platform that they could optimize for their own hardware and modify as they see fit, without depending on Google to add features they want or to fix bugs and performance issues. Then there's the harder thing...
The hard thing: create their own OS. Samsung is already working on their version of Tizen, which promises to be truly open and free of any Google spyware, spamware, and profit layer. That would take quite a while to perfect, but it might be worth it for Samsung. Again because Samsung would no longer be dependent on Google, who obviously have their own agenda independent of Samsung's success.
The other easy thing: Buy RIM to get Blackberry. With Blackberry's strong (albeit declining) presence in the corporate market, it would give Samsung a leg up in that market.
I think this article is well written. Years ago, Microsoft figured out that the money was in software, not hardware. I became a software engineer because you design hardware once. You write software 10 times over, because it always needs updates.
This chart labels each category more explicitly, with results not much different from the other one:
Are other breakdowns more readily available which would show a different mix?
And more relevant here, as I asked above, has Apple made stats available which would show profits from software vs hardware?
I'm not convinced you get it yet. The problem is that only Apple knows its figures. Every other data is either presenting the information Apple has published, or is making guesses as to what Apple's exact product mix is.
So, for example, we know that of iPods, the iPod touch is over half of Apple's iPod sales because the company says that. But we don't know the exact mix of Shuffles, Nanos and Classics because the company doesn't reveal those details for competitive reasons. If you find a breakdown of iPods, it's based on guesses because the real figures are proprietary and secret to Apple.
The figures that keep getting reported in these graphs are the business segments that Apple has reported. What's changing it HOW Apple will break out software in the future. Not how it has broken out some fraction of "software" in the past, a group of shrink wrapped boxes it no longer even sells.
No amount of historical graphs showing Apple's previous performance reports will show you how much software Apple sells, because it never isolated all software together before.
For the same reason, you also can't compare Apple's previous regional data with their new reports on China and Asia/Pacific, because China wasn't broken out on its own before.
Apple is selling not hardware or software but a platform. This is something analysts are ignoring. When you look at things from the perspective of platforms, there are some obvious things to look for:
1. What is and isn't part of a given platform. Analyst bundle different types of Android together. But really there's Google's Android, Amazon's Android, and various Chinese flavours of Android. They need to distinguish between platforms. Analysts have been grossly overestimating the size of Google's platform. They also look at iPhone separately from iPad and pay no attention to the iPod touch, but iOS is the platform, not the iPhone.
2. The health of the platform. App sales, ecosystem, lock-in, network effects, page views, ad revenues, etc. Apple is the clear winner here. Android is such a mess that it's even difficult to figure out what is and isn't part of a given platform. Windows Phone isn't gaining much traction.
3. Installed base in key markets. Emerging markets need to be cultivated, but what's most important is to have the dominant platform in markets where software is made. The US is by far the leading producer of software. Analysts, because they're looking at raw volume of hardware sales, focus too much on trends in global markets. They need to distinguish the importance of different markets. Having the lead in the US is absolutely necessary to winning the mobile platform war. US-based developers will develop first (and often only) for the leading platform in the US, not for the leading platform in China or India.
4. People like to compare Android to Windows and the iPhone to the Mac, but Microsoft's success with Windows was as a platform vendor. It's Apple who is in the Microsoft position in the current market. During the Microsoft era, anyone could have replicated Windows and made a Windows-compatible OS. The only reason we did not see this happen is because Microsoft employed a variety of tactics to thwart anyone who tried. That's the story of Microsoft's success. Apple developed a permanent solution to this problem in the App Store. But, more importantly, Google has no protection from copying whatsoever. Anyone can swap out Google's services and still run Android-compatible software. If everyone had been able to sell their own Windows, Microsoft wouldn't have been successful. Arguably, for this reason, Android isn't really a platform at all.
If you are in the music industry, iOS dominates. NAMM is going on this weekend and every demonstration is basically iOS. Hardware, iPads and iPhones are all over the place. You can turn an iPad into a 6 or 16 channel mixing board that individual musicians or bands can use. They are used in conjunction with keyboards.
Pretty much no one is developing for Android or WIndows tablets/smartphones. It's embarrassing. All of the major application developers are ALL OVER iOS, but NOTHING for Android or Windows devices. Even on the desktop side, there are less Windows apps. Some companies are actually starting to drop Windows support altogether. It's pretty scary for anyone using Windows.
That cannot be true, because someone who knows of these things has already pointed out that:
Quote:
... it can't be many of the professionals or content creator types because the iPad just isn't very good at those tasks.
Well they definitely need to step it up on the software side of their business. iOS is looking dated and tired, the same screens everywhere you look. Its time they make a leap in software design and its not just about Siri (which is a leap) or Maps (which is a stumble forward)). It may be better under the hood, as it were, but its not old enough to be considered classic. It is just dated.
Maybe dated to you, but a la 'a computer for the rest of us' ... many people are just getting into the ecosystem. They LIKE the familiarity.
Me, I'd just as soon redesign an interface repeatedly, but I learned firsthand how upsetting that is to most users. One of the first rules of designing interfaces is don't go changing everything around!
this is all just to say again that Apple is an "ecosystem company". aka vertically integrated. hardware + software + services + third party stuff.
only other hardware based company that has tried same thing is Sony. and failed. because the don't control their software and instead rely on Android and Windows. sad. Samsung may try next, but same problem.
MS is coming at it from the software + services side, trying to add hardware. but they totally screw it up due to legacy addiction.
Google is coming at it from the web services side, also trying to add hardware now. but they screw it up with monetizing addiction (ads etc.).
Amazon is trying too, and Facebook can't be far behind.
these all add up to a fragmented mish-mash. techies may love that, but consumers will opt for Apple's Just Works consistency.
One of the first rules of designing interfaces is don't go changing everything around!
If you have to go changing it around, don't do it unless EVERY aspect you change is better for it, or if the total effect becomes worth more than the sum of the changes.
Apple is selling not hardware or software but a platform. This is something analysts are ignoring. When you look at things from the perspective of platforms, there are some obvious things to look for:
1. What is and isn't part of a given platform. Analyst bundle different types of Android together. But really there's Google's Android, Amazon's Android, and various Chinese flavours of Android. They need to distinguish between platforms. Analysts have been grossly overestimating the size of Google's platform. They also look at iPhone separately from iPad and pay no attention to the iPod touch, but iOS is the platform, not the iPhone.
2. The health of the platform. App sales, ecosystem, lock-in, network effects, page views, ad revenues, etc. Apple is the clear winner here. Android is such a mess that it's even difficult to figure out what is and isn't part of a given platform. Windows Phone isn't gaining much traction.
3. Installed base in key markets. Emerging markets need to be cultivated, but what's most important is to have the dominant platform in markets where software is made. The US is by far the leading producer of software. Analysts, because they're looking at raw volume of hardware sales, focus too much on trends in global markets. They need to distinguish the importance of different markets. Having the lead in the US is absolutely necessary to winning the mobile platform war. US-based developers will develop first (and often only) for the leading platform in the US, not for the leading platform in China or India.
4. People like to compare Android to Windows and the iPhone to the Mac, but Microsoft's success with Windows was as a platform vendor. It's Apple who is in the Microsoft position in the current market. During the Microsoft era, anyone could have replicated Windows and made a Windows-compatible OS. The only reason we did not see this happen is because Microsoft employed a variety of tactics to thwart anyone who tried. That's the story of Microsoft's success. Apple developed a permanent solution to this problem in the App Store. But, more importantly, Google has no protection from copying whatsoever. Anyone can swap out Google's services and still run Android-compatible software. If everyone had been able to sell their own Windows, Microsoft wouldn't have been successful. Arguably, for this reason, Android isn't really a platform at all.
Okay, that's three. I'll write up a sticky (that no one will ever read) about the use of "", ¡, and /s to denote sarcasm here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
...
Give it up. No one is going to accept and use your fabricated sarcasm tag. /s is relatively widely known and perfectly acceptable.
TS as moderator intentionally does things as he sees fit, because he can. His sarcasm is often stated without the standard sarcasm notation to stir the pot, so to speak, to get responses pure and simple. You have been on AI long enough to know that you'll never convince TS to use the /s tag on his posts.
I bought the new iPod Touch and I've been impressed with apps like Djay, Vjay, iMovie and others. I have noticed that iOS has tremendous selection of creative apps for video, pictures, and music that don't exist on Android (I own a Galaxy S2 phone too). It was actually iMovie that drew me to wanting an iMac.
I've been using Sony Vegas pro for years now and while it's powerful and popular, it's not easy to use like iMovie and while it's possible to make transparent lower thirds on Sony Vegas (title bars), it's made far easier on iMovie.
I ordered an iMac (I'm waiting for it) and I already have parallels software to run Win 7 on it so it can be a two-fer. I have been to two weddings where they used Macs for the slideshow software and I am so impressed with the quality. Macs really do have the best software in some cases. For many video enthusiasts Final Cut Pro is the standard and Macs are extremely popular with desktop publishing as well.
If I could pick one or the other, Pages would be my choice as Word has become too complicated and intimidating. Keynote has better built in templates and pictures than Powerpoint so it gets the nod there in my book (I've used Powerpoint for many a school presentation). It's close, but many photo veterans give the nod to Aperture over Lightroom for slightly better layout and algorithms. Obviously Garage Band is the standard for music creation so no competition there.
Funny thing about iPads and even iPhones, many DJ's are using them now. With professional apps like DJay, you really can do all your DJ'ing on your iPad. It certainly cuts down on the equipment they have to shlep around.
I see iPads used in restaurants for point of sale transactions and conventions where they are used to display photo and/or video promotions. Some hospital just ordered a boatload of iPads so doctors could use them. iPads are used in flight school now. Someone came out with a slew of great apps for flying and iPads are now standard in many a class curriculum.
I guess when you create a great beautiful looking product, it inspires people to do things with it. That's one of the negative aspects of Android that brings it down. Their devices are cheap, plasticky things. If you want to use Google Play store to download a metronome, a scientific calculator, a fractal maker, or something to calculate electrical resistance Android's got you covered and then some.
It's with creative apps that Android fails. I have looked at and even downloaded some of their picture editing apps to use with my camera and I don't feel inclined to use any of them. It's very much an eco-system by geeks for geeks. I guess that's what you get when you have a company where engineers run the show as opposed to Apple where designers (like Jony) run the show first and foremost.
If you have to go changing it around, don't do it unless EVERY aspect you change is better for it, or if the total effect becomes worth more than the sum of the changes.
Good. So you're going to drop your silly sarcasm tag since it offers no advantage over the conventional one and the total effect is actually worse (since most people don't recognize it).
If you are in the music industry, iOS dominates. NAMM is going on this weekend and every demonstration is basically iOS. Hardware, iPads and iPhones are all over the place. You can turn an iPad into a 6 or 16 channel mixing board that individual musicians or bands can use. They are used in conjunction with keyboards.
Pretty much no one is developing for Android or WIndows tablets/smartphones. It's embarrassing. All of the major application developers are ALL OVER iOS, but NOTHING for Android or Windows devices. Even on the desktop side, there are less Windows apps. Some companies are actually starting to drop Windows support altogether. It's pretty scary for anyone using Windows.
That cannot be true, because someone who knows of these things has already pointed out that:
Quote:
... it can't be many of the professionals or content creator types because the iPad just isn't very good at those tasks.
Cheers
Have you seen the freaks at NAMM? Not exactly what I would call a cross section of professionals. And, the content they create well...let's just say it is a small niche at best. I seriously doubt Apple would ever align themselves with that sort of subculture as an example of how people use the iPad.
Comments
On the software side, Samsung doesn't own its own primary mobile platform as Apple does.
In other words, Samsung doesn't control its own destiny in the smart phone space. They're at the mercy of Google. But there's a way out for Samsung. They can take control of their smartphone and tablet future by doing one of two things,
one easy and one hard:
The easy thing: fork Android. Amazon did that to great effect. Samsung could do it too, cut out all that Google spyware and spamware, and replace Google's profit layer with their own. Most importantly, Samsung would have a software platform that they could optimize for their own hardware and modify as they see fit, without depending on Google to add features they want or to fix bugs and performance issues. Then there's the harder thing...
The hard thing: create their own OS. Samsung is already working on their version of Tizen, which promises to be truly open and free of any Google spyware, spamware, and profit layer. That would take quite a while to perfect, but it might be worth it for Samsung. Again because Samsung would no longer be dependent on Google, who obviously have their own agenda independent of Samsung's success.
The "new Apple," Chowdhry notes, "is not about new hardware. it's about software attach rates."
There are plenty of industries for Apple to disrupt that won't require specific Apple hardware. Embedded automotive electronics control (as in Eyes Free, and fully Embedded Siri as shown by Ford at CES.) Home automation, including
environmental / security / entertainment (of which the Apple television may or may not be a component.) And, of course the television industry, which is an entirely different thread of course.
So yes, eventually Apple will need to switch their profit center from their hardware sales to content and services. Hardware costs always come down over time. A 2 GB hard drive cost $1000 20 years ago. Now you can buy 10 TB of disk space for that same $1000. Of course, Apple has already planned for that low-hardware-revenue future. Their content and services infrastructure is already in place. Music? Done. Video? Done. Interactive television? Ready when you are.
But for now, Apple can and will profit from their hardware designs. And, as we all know by now (right folks?) it's the software that sells the hardware. Oh wait. No, Wall Street doesn't quite understand that yet. And no, Samsung doesn't know it yet either. Oops.
"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware."
- Alan Kay, American computer science pioneer
Alan Kay said that 30 years ago. Still true today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Absolutely¡ They need it to keep their APR and profit margins from falling¡
Perhaps you would like to explain how selling a low end phone will protect their profit margins enough to offset the cannibalization that would likely follow, because I just don't see it that way.
Originally Posted by newbee
Perhaps you would like to explain how selling a low end phone will protect their profit margins enough to offset the cannibalization that would likely follow, because I just don't see it that way.
Okay, that's three. I'll write up a sticky (that no one will ever read) about the use of "", ¡, and /s to denote sarcasm here.
only other hardware based company that has tried same thing is Sony. and failed. because the don't control their software and instead rely on Android and Windows. sad. Samsung may try next, but same problem.
MS is coming at it from the software + services side, trying to add hardware. but they totally screw it up due to legacy addiction.
Google is coming at it from the web services side, also trying to add hardware now. but they screw it up with monetizing addiction (ads etc.).
Amazon is trying too, and Facebook can't be far behind.
these all add up to a fragmented mish-mash. techies may love that, but consumers will opt for Apple's Just Works consistency.
What makes you think AI is a tech site? Seems more like a rumor site driven by advertising and the need to fish for eyeballs.
The other easy thing: Buy RIM to get Blackberry. With Blackberry's strong (albeit declining) presence in the corporate market, it would give Samsung a leg up in that market.
Give it up. No one is going to accept and use your fabricated sarcasm tag. /s is relatively widely known and perfectly acceptable.
I think this article is well written. Years ago, Microsoft figured out that the money was in software, not hardware. I became a software engineer because you design hardware once. You write software 10 times over, because it always needs updates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
This chart labels each category more explicitly, with results not much different from the other one:
Are other breakdowns more readily available which would show a different mix?
And more relevant here, as I asked above, has Apple made stats available which would show profits from software vs hardware?
I'm not convinced you get it yet. The problem is that only Apple knows its figures. Every other data is either presenting the information Apple has published, or is making guesses as to what Apple's exact product mix is.
So, for example, we know that of iPods, the iPod touch is over half of Apple's iPod sales because the company says that. But we don't know the exact mix of Shuffles, Nanos and Classics because the company doesn't reveal those details for competitive reasons. If you find a breakdown of iPods, it's based on guesses because the real figures are proprietary and secret to Apple.
The figures that keep getting reported in these graphs are the business segments that Apple has reported. What's changing it HOW Apple will break out software in the future. Not how it has broken out some fraction of "software" in the past, a group of shrink wrapped boxes it no longer even sells.
No amount of historical graphs showing Apple's previous performance reports will show you how much software Apple sells, because it never isolated all software together before.
For the same reason, you also can't compare Apple's previous regional data with their new reports on China and Asia/Pacific, because China wasn't broken out on its own before.
Apple is selling not hardware or software but a platform. This is something analysts are ignoring. When you look at things from the perspective of platforms, there are some obvious things to look for:
1. What is and isn't part of a given platform. Analyst bundle different types of Android together. But really there's Google's Android, Amazon's Android, and various Chinese flavours of Android. They need to distinguish between platforms. Analysts have been grossly overestimating the size of Google's platform. They also look at iPhone separately from iPad and pay no attention to the iPod touch, but iOS is the platform, not the iPhone.
2. The health of the platform. App sales, ecosystem, lock-in, network effects, page views, ad revenues, etc. Apple is the clear winner here. Android is such a mess that it's even difficult to figure out what is and isn't part of a given platform. Windows Phone isn't gaining much traction.
3. Installed base in key markets. Emerging markets need to be cultivated, but what's most important is to have the dominant platform in markets where software is made. The US is by far the leading producer of software. Analysts, because they're looking at raw volume of hardware sales, focus too much on trends in global markets. They need to distinguish the importance of different markets. Having the lead in the US is absolutely necessary to winning the mobile platform war. US-based developers will develop first (and often only) for the leading platform in the US, not for the leading platform in China or India.
4. People like to compare Android to Windows and the iPhone to the Mac, but Microsoft's success with Windows was as a platform vendor. It's Apple who is in the Microsoft position in the current market. During the Microsoft era, anyone could have replicated Windows and made a Windows-compatible OS. The only reason we did not see this happen is because Microsoft employed a variety of tactics to thwart anyone who tried. That's the story of Microsoft's success. Apple developed a permanent solution to this problem in the App Store. But, more importantly, Google has no protection from copying whatsoever. Anyone can swap out Google's services and still run Android-compatible software. If everyone had been able to sell their own Windows, Microsoft wouldn't have been successful. Arguably, for this reason, Android isn't really a platform at all.
deleted
Should be 'analysts think Apple should focus . . .'
Originally Posted by jragosta
Give it up. No one is going to accept and use your fabricated sarcasm tag. /s is relatively widely known and perfectly acceptable.
Not my fabrication, not a fabrication, and since /s is also ignored or confused, an actual explanation seems relatively in order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
If you are in the music industry, iOS dominates. NAMM is going on this weekend and every demonstration is basically iOS. Hardware, iPads and iPhones are all over the place. You can turn an iPad into a 6 or 16 channel mixing board that individual musicians or bands can use. They are used in conjunction with keyboards.
Pretty much no one is developing for Android or WIndows tablets/smartphones. It's embarrassing. All of the major application developers are ALL OVER iOS, but NOTHING for Android or Windows devices. Even on the desktop side, there are less Windows apps. Some companies are actually starting to drop Windows support altogether. It's pretty scary for anyone using Windows.
That cannot be true, because someone who knows of these things has already pointed out that:
Quote:
... it can't be many of the professionals or content creator types because the iPad just isn't very good at those tasks.
Cheers
Maybe dated to you, but a la 'a computer for the rest of us' ... many people are just getting into the ecosystem. They LIKE the familiarity.
Me, I'd just as soon redesign an interface repeatedly, but I learned firsthand how upsetting that is to most users. One of the first rules of designing interfaces is don't go changing everything around!
Great post!
Originally Posted by palomine
One of the first rules of designing interfaces is don't go changing everything around!
If you have to go changing it around, don't do it unless EVERY aspect you change is better for it, or if the total effect becomes worth more than the sum of the changes.
Like Classic OS to OS X.
Really interesting viewpoint, thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Okay, that's three. I'll write up a sticky (that no one will ever read) about the use of "", ¡, and /s to denote sarcasm here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
...
Give it up. No one is going to accept and use your fabricated sarcasm tag. /s is relatively widely known and perfectly acceptable.
TS as moderator intentionally does things as he sees fit, because he can. His sarcasm is often stated without the standard sarcasm notation to stir the pot, so to speak, to get responses pure and simple. You have been on AI long enough to know that you'll never convince TS to use the /s tag on his posts.
I bought the new iPod Touch and I've been impressed with apps like Djay, Vjay, iMovie and others. I have noticed that iOS has tremendous selection of creative apps for video, pictures, and music that don't exist on Android (I own a Galaxy S2 phone too). It was actually iMovie that drew me to wanting an iMac.
I've been using Sony Vegas pro for years now and while it's powerful and popular, it's not easy to use like iMovie and while it's possible to make transparent lower thirds on Sony Vegas (title bars), it's made far easier on iMovie.
I ordered an iMac (I'm waiting for it) and I already have parallels software to run Win 7 on it so it can be a two-fer. I have been to two weddings where they used Macs for the slideshow software and I am so impressed with the quality. Macs really do have the best software in some cases. For many video enthusiasts Final Cut Pro is the standard and Macs are extremely popular with desktop publishing as well.
If I could pick one or the other, Pages would be my choice as Word has become too complicated and intimidating. Keynote has better built in templates and pictures than Powerpoint so it gets the nod there in my book (I've used Powerpoint for many a school presentation). It's close, but many photo veterans give the nod to Aperture over Lightroom for slightly better layout and algorithms. Obviously Garage Band is the standard for music creation so no competition there.
Funny thing about iPads and even iPhones, many DJ's are using them now. With professional apps like DJay, you really can do all your DJ'ing on your iPad. It certainly cuts down on the equipment they have to shlep around.
I see iPads used in restaurants for point of sale transactions and conventions where they are used to display photo and/or video promotions. Some hospital just ordered a boatload of iPads so doctors could use them. iPads are used in flight school now. Someone came out with a slew of great apps for flying and iPads are now standard in many a class curriculum.
I guess when you create a great beautiful looking product, it inspires people to do things with it. That's one of the negative aspects of Android that brings it down. Their devices are cheap, plasticky things. If you want to use Google Play store to download a metronome, a scientific calculator, a fractal maker, or something to calculate electrical resistance Android's got you covered and then some.
It's with creative apps that Android fails. I have looked at and even downloaded some of their picture editing apps to use with my camera and I don't feel inclined to use any of them. It's very much an eco-system by geeks for geeks. I guess that's what you get when you have a company where engineers run the show as opposed to Apple where designers (like Jony) run the show first and foremost.
Good. So you're going to drop your silly sarcasm tag since it offers no advantage over the conventional one and the total effect is actually worse (since most people don't recognize it).
Right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by minicapt
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
If you are in the music industry, iOS dominates. NAMM is going on this weekend and every demonstration is basically iOS. Hardware, iPads and iPhones are all over the place. You can turn an iPad into a 6 or 16 channel mixing board that individual musicians or bands can use. They are used in conjunction with keyboards.
Pretty much no one is developing for Android or WIndows tablets/smartphones. It's embarrassing. All of the major application developers are ALL OVER iOS, but NOTHING for Android or Windows devices. Even on the desktop side, there are less Windows apps. Some companies are actually starting to drop Windows support altogether. It's pretty scary for anyone using Windows.
That cannot be true, because someone who knows of these things has already pointed out that:
Quote:
... it can't be many of the professionals or content creator types because the iPad just isn't very good at those tasks.
Cheers
Have you seen the freaks at NAMM? Not exactly what I would call a cross section of professionals. And, the content they create well...let's just say it is a small niche at best. I seriously doubt Apple would ever align themselves with that sort of subculture as an example of how people use the iPad.
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/heardmentality/2013/01/the_people_at_namm_weirder_tha.php