[QUOTE]"While its competitors shave down storage capacity to reach impressive entry level prices, Apple appears focused on delivering value-oriented products that are profitable. "[/QUOTE]
Yet, you will then post that Apple needs to release a cheaper iPhone.
[QUOTE]Apple fails to follow the herd
Apple's new 128-gigabyte fat iPad bucks the trend toward cheaper, less powerful tablet and netbooks, the kind of lower end devices that many observers had predicted to rapidly win tablet market share away from Apple's iPad line.[/QUOTE]
Again, which is it. Apple sells value-oriented profitable products, or they have to compete with lower end products for the masses?
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
I think this is one of the best articles I have read in a while. Finally, someone writes about Apple that actually gets what Apple is about. Great work!!
... iOS still lacks a user accessible file system, so as to easily acess all of those 'CAD files' etc. one might load on all that new space.
Although I agree accessing files can be improved on iOS -- I wish individual files were a part of the Search feature -- iOS hardly lacks an accessible file system. It's just presented differently than the old-fashioned file system metaphor. And that presentation is obviously very desirable to the vast majority of mobile device users (iOS and Android). The old-fashioned file system metaphor presents a user with files before a specific application must be opened to work on that file. iOS simply prioritizes the application, bringing the user into an application first before presenting a view of associated files. That prioritization doesn't diminish the need for storage space. If anything I could argue many ways it brings efficiency to storage for less-savvy users.
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
You are so right¡ I can't believe Apple had a 2 hours presentation yesterday to show how they doubled the NAND in the iPad (4)¡
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
Nice phone. Competition is always great. I can see the screen sharing being a very useful feature. Is there already an app for that for the iPhone?
What is yet understood my many, is that Apple has the ecosystem that really drives the products. I'm sure the Blackberry 10 will sell well, and I hope it does, but it does not have the family of features and apps like iOS devices do.
And with iOS, you buy once and use on all your devices.
But none of the competitors will try to sell a 128GB tablet at the same price! Ok except the always clueless MSFT, but still...
In the end, GOOG or AMAZ can easily sell a 128GB version of their tablets, e.g. NEXUS 10 with 128GB for $599, or Kindle Fire 8.9HD with 128GB for $499, which can easily undercut the iPad.
No, they can't. They can produce one. They can market one. But it's very clear at this point that they won't actually be able to sell one.
All the bashing of the article is unfair, because the premise is very true. Apple has (as Tim Cook said last year) started to show a willingness not to leave a price umbrella over the low end. The introduction of the iPad mini showed that they aren't going to go to the same price point as competitors, but instead adopt a strategy of being "close enough" that consumers are willing to pay the slight premium to have an iPad and be in the iOS ecosystem. The introduction of another high end version of the iPad is a good strategic move because it gives Apple more margin at the high end, where no one else can compete, and gives coverage to the lower margin device. This puts even more pressure on the low cost competitors to be even lower cost. Apple is pursuing the same strategy on tablets that it has done on laptops. Suck all the profit out of the segment and then keep putting downward pressure on competitors. On the Windows side, MS is desperate to get out of this downward spiral, but it's doubtful the Surface Pro is going to enable it. On the Android side, there's currently not even an attempt.
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
Even if one were to accept your premise, consumers won't care. Just ask Microsoft. The only viable competitor is the one that is given away for free to handset makers.
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
With the timescale contraction the analogy requires, Apple's development model closely follows nature's evolutionary pathway to self-consciousness.
Quantum leaps interspersed with consolidation phases.
Had it progressed under some Samsung/Google/Microsoft/Etc evolutionary dynamics, ...some sort of commoditization of the underlying development process, we would probably be listening to the moaning and groaning of tribal Australopithecus instead of reading through a subtle analysis by a thoughtful, X generational mindset.
Dilger's perspective on Apple gets its source-code from evolution. Some commenters on this site simply relive through and through some alternate evolutionary model whereby, eons gone-by on the European continent, Neanderthals preempted Homo Sapiens and slung History to a dead-end.
Apple is no creationist economic agent. It micro-manages evolution's long arch of History and makes it blend locally with an already time-tested curvature. It drives grounded hope, just as nature, left to its own volition, coalesced towards a life-emerging-sustaining point of optimal equilibrium.
I commend Dilger for steadfastly reminding the readers of this Blog that we've developed into Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Apple emerged as a corollary to this 'life-blooming' denouement; and there lies the comprehensive foundation of his argumentation. That is however way out of bound for either a Neanderthal or an Australopithecus mindset.
Likely the single biggest obstacle for to having such a large amount of storage on an iPad is that iOS still lacks a user accessible file system, so as to easily acess all of those 'CAD files' etc. one might load on all that new space.
having a visible and accessible file system is not the point of the iPad.
Oh, "all those 'CAD files'" get stored in Autodesk's "cloud" as part of the App. So no need for extra storage there.
I still think traditional paper prints are better for the job site as they are bigger and easier to read instead of panning and zooming on an iPad. Plus the prints make it easier for discussing with coworkers instead of being huddled around a 10" screen.
Having the files in the cloud is convenient if you have broadband access but in the field you are likely to be using cellular data which can be troublesome for large files. The other thing about sharing files with sub contractors is it gets tedious setting up security accounts on your cloud. It is much simpler if just your reproduction house has a share account in your cloud and they print out the blueprints in mass for distribution to the contractors. Most subs only need specific layers anyway so giving them the entire file is a waste of time.
This is just speculation on my part. I have dealt with building plans a few times but I would be interested to hear how professionals use AutoCAD on iPad.
What does Dilger mean by "fat" iPad?
Is the "fat" referring to the bump in storage or the physical size of the device?
So far, nothing on the Apple Store website showing it as an option.
Maybe he means "phat".
A reference to the 512KB "Fat Mac". Because 512KB was phat, for its day.
That's an awful lot to read into a fairly standard storage bump...
It's understanding the implications of what often on the surface appear to be small, inconsequential things that usually gives more than superficial insight. Yes, anyone can see, especially after the fact, that an iPad mini will change the game in many ways, but that's fairly obvious, and you're already behind the game. You have to look deeper and consider whether things that at first glance seem trivial have greater importance if you want to understand what may, or is likely to, happen.
After all, until you focus on it, everything seems like noise.
Thanks, DED, for the analysis. Good as ever. I don't need 128 GBs, but from my experiences with iPads and iPods, there oughta be a law against selling 16 GB devices. Or 32 GB devices like the Surface that use half of it for the OS. Talk about immediate dissatisfaction. More like yowls.
the most interesting info in the article is the profit margin chart, which documents that Apple's recent very high margins were likely a one time bump due to special circumstances. but also that its current margins are still above its long term average - and very high for any comparable company.
(not that this matters to "the market" of course. Apple stock is up 7% today YOY, while extremely low margin "nonprofit" Amazon is up 38%. for "the market," hype = value.)
everyone knows that Apple overcharges buyers for expanded storage models, and that this contributes to its high margins. but for most consumers iCloud and all the streaming web media options reduce the capacity they need a lot, so storage is not a big deal anymore like the old days. only hobbyists and techies ever fill up their storage nowadays (and post 99% of all website comments too i bet)(i'm a hobbyist).
as Apple clearly outlined in its press release for the 128G iPad, which DED didn't mention, it is aiming it at the enterprise market, which he did discuss at length. so in this case, the conventional wisdom that Apple timed this product announcement to undercut MS' new Surface Pro tablet is very likely correct. MS is hyping the Pro as the tablet for "real work" at a price few consumers would pay but businesses don't mind. and MS is undeniably an enterprise market heavyweight.
so we have now a head to head competition between the 128G iPad and the Surface Pro for the business tablet market, which DED did not get into much (yet).
the iPad has two big advantages out of the box: much longer battery life and much more available net storage after deducting the operating system usage from the total specced. and most important i think, that there is already a wide range of specialized business apps available for the iPad, plus a large software developer community that can produce customized focused-purpose "light" apps for any particular client relatively easily and economically. whereas all the specialized third party Windows business applications - a huge inventory far far beyond MS Office - are large scale application suites designed for Windows 7 and have not been formatted at all for a touch UI, let alone a tablet. they will not work well on a tablet, if at all, until they are. the big question then is how will the established Windows software industry respond to Windows 8? full software suite redesign for the touch Metro UI isn't quick, easy, or cheap. but until they are, few business can even use the Surface Pro, and its sales will be anemic after the initial group of early adopter MS fans buy theirs.
and those Windows business applications take a lot of storage space too, btw. because the current era of big cheap storage drives on PC's have made the issue of application size unimportant - until now. which takes us back to original problem. if the 128G Surface Pro only has a net of 83G available for actual use as reported, that is a real problem for many businesses unless there are new "light" versions of their specialized software available too, like the iPad apps.
but who is going to invest in all this software development for a new product with very uncertain prospects? and assuming that MS (bribes) subsidizes the major software companies to do it - i'm sure they will put $hundreds of millions into this - it's going to take the rest of the year. talk about a slow start ...
and that all begs the ultimate question: will many enterprises ever adopt Windows 8 at all? which is a different topic, but i think i know the answer - which is No, they are sticking with W7. and that makes the Surface Pro a one-off orphan product without much of a market no matter what.
so to wrap up, the 128G iPad is the Surface Pro Killer.
ps: just like it is now undeniable that the iPad Mini is the Surface RT Killer.
I find it humorous when people cite tech sites to support some claim that Apple (insert product name) isn't (insert techy aspect) enough and will therefore fail. Do you not understand Apple's play book?
$300 extra for 112GB seems at least a little more reasonable than $100 for 16GB additional. This has to be a temporary measure and surely they will ditch the 16GB model and move the 32GB to the base model with the next iPad.
I read the article but I am not convinced that a compelling case was made that a 128GB iPad achieves that goal. In fact many of the advantages the author makes about the iPad over Android tablets apples to the entire line and not this new one.
128GB Class 10 SD cards are around the corner and 64GB ones are here already for $50. A decent Android tablet with 32GB or 64GB internal supplemented with a 64GB SD card for around $300 less than this "fat" iPad seems to suggest they do have a path to follow.
Personally I am far more loyal to iOS on my iPad than on I am on my iPhone. I like the experience and the far greater native iPad apps than what is available for Android. I would be far quicker to switch to an Android phone later this year if I don't like what Apple releases as opposed to switching to an Android tablet. That is because I am more or less satisfied with my iPad experience and see no real advantage to switching to an Android and plenty of disadvantages. With a phone my main consideration when I upgrade is display size. If Apple makes a larger display I will buy another iPhone and if not I will probably get the Galaxy S4 or similar.
Comments
Don't be homophobic you racist¡
Yet, you will then post that Apple needs to release a cheaper iPhone.
[QUOTE]Apple fails to follow the herd
Apple's new 128-gigabyte fat iPad bucks the trend toward cheaper, less powerful tablet and netbooks, the kind of lower end devices that many observers had predicted to rapidly win tablet market share away from Apple's iPad line.[/QUOTE]
Again, which is it. Apple sells value-oriented profitable products, or they have to compete with lower end products for the masses?
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
I think this is one of the best articles I have read in a while. Finally, someone writes about Apple that actually gets what Apple is about. Great work!!
Quote:
DaHarder
... iOS still lacks a user accessible file system, so as to easily acess all of those 'CAD files' etc. one might load on all that new space.
Although I agree accessing files can be improved on iOS -- I wish individual files were a part of the Search feature -- iOS hardly lacks an accessible file system. It's just presented differently than the old-fashioned file system metaphor. And that presentation is obviously very desirable to the vast majority of mobile device users (iOS and Android). The old-fashioned file system metaphor presents a user with files before a specific application must be opened to work on that file. iOS simply prioritizes the application, bringing the user into an application first before presenting a view of associated files. That prioritization doesn't diminish the need for storage space. If anything I could argue many ways it brings efficiency to storage for less-savvy users.
You are so right¡ I can't believe Apple had a 2 hours presentation yesterday to show how they doubled the NAND in the iPad (4)¡
Quote:
Originally Posted by NelsonX
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
Nice phone. Competition is always great. I can see the screen sharing being a very useful feature. Is there already an app for that for the iPhone?
What is yet understood my many, is that Apple has the ecosystem that really drives the products. I'm sure the Blackberry 10 will sell well, and I hope it does, but it does not have the family of features and apps like iOS devices do.
And with iOS, you buy once and use on all your devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever
But none of the competitors will try to sell a 128GB tablet at the same price! Ok except the always clueless MSFT, but still...
In the end, GOOG or AMAZ can easily sell a 128GB version of their tablets, e.g. NEXUS 10 with 128GB for $599, or Kindle Fire 8.9HD with 128GB for $499, which can easily undercut the iPad.
No, they can't. They can produce one. They can market one. But it's very clear at this point that they won't actually be able to sell one.
All the bashing of the article is unfair, because the premise is very true. Apple has (as Tim Cook said last year) started to show a willingness not to leave a price umbrella over the low end. The introduction of the iPad mini showed that they aren't going to go to the same price point as competitors, but instead adopt a strategy of being "close enough" that consumers are willing to pay the slight premium to have an iPad and be in the iOS ecosystem. The introduction of another high end version of the iPad is a good strategic move because it gives Apple more margin at the high end, where no one else can compete, and gives coverage to the lower margin device. This puts even more pressure on the low cost competitors to be even lower cost. Apple is pursuing the same strategy on tablets that it has done on laptops. Suck all the profit out of the segment and then keep putting downward pressure on competitors. On the Windows side, MS is desperate to get out of this downward spiral, but it's doubtful the Surface Pro is going to enable it. On the Android side, there's currently not even an attempt.
Yeah, and that's why iPad's market share sucks and that of the others dominates. /s
Quote:
Originally Posted by NelsonX
Wow! Amazing, incredible, wonderful! This is what I call true INNOVATION! A BIGGER HARD DRIVE!!! I'm sure nobody in the world would have expected such an earth-shattering move! Apple is MAGIC once again!
On a different note, I just watched the Blackberry 10 launch. If you want to see true innovation check the Blackberry Hub and real multitasking! Blackberry 10 OS is years more advanced than the primitive iOS.
Even if one were to accept your premise, consumers won't care. Just ask Microsoft. The only viable competitor is the one that is given away for free to handset makers.
With the timescale contraction the analogy requires, Apple's development model closely follows nature's evolutionary pathway to self-consciousness.
Quantum leaps interspersed with consolidation phases.
Had it progressed under some Samsung/Google/Microsoft/Etc evolutionary dynamics, ...some sort of commoditization of the underlying development process, we would probably be listening to the moaning and groaning of tribal Australopithecus instead of reading through a subtle analysis by a thoughtful, X generational mindset.
Dilger's perspective on Apple gets its source-code from evolution. Some commenters on this site simply relive through and through some alternate evolutionary model whereby, eons gone-by on the European continent, Neanderthals preempted Homo Sapiens and slung History to a dead-end.
Apple is no creationist economic agent. It micro-manages evolution's long arch of History and makes it blend locally with an already time-tested curvature. It drives grounded hope, just as nature, left to its own volition, coalesced towards a life-emerging-sustaining point of optimal equilibrium.
I commend Dilger for steadfastly reminding the readers of this Blog that we've developed into Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Apple emerged as a corollary to this 'life-blooming' denouement; and there lies the comprehensive foundation of his argumentation. That is however way out of bound for either a Neanderthal or an Australopithecus mindset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Likely the single biggest obstacle for to having such a large amount of storage on an iPad is that iOS still lacks a user accessible file system, so as to easily acess all of those 'CAD files' etc. one might load on all that new space.
having a visible and accessible file system is not the point of the iPad.
Oh, "all those 'CAD files'" get stored in Autodesk's "cloud" as part of the App. So no need for extra storage there.
I still think traditional paper prints are better for the job site as they are bigger and easier to read instead of panning and zooming on an iPad. Plus the prints make it easier for discussing with coworkers instead of being huddled around a 10" screen.
Having the files in the cloud is convenient if you have broadband access but in the field you are likely to be using cellular data which can be troublesome for large files. The other thing about sharing files with sub contractors is it gets tedious setting up security accounts on your cloud. It is much simpler if just your reproduction house has a share account in your cloud and they print out the blueprints in mass for distribution to the contractors. Most subs only need specific layers anyway so giving them the entire file is a waste of time.
This is just speculation on my part. I have dealt with building plans a few times but I would be interested to hear how professionals use AutoCAD on iPad.
A reference to the 512KB "Fat Mac". Because 512KB was phat, for its day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious
That's an awful lot to read into a fairly standard storage bump...
It's understanding the implications of what often on the surface appear to be small, inconsequential things that usually gives more than superficial insight. Yes, anyone can see, especially after the fact, that an iPad mini will change the game in many ways, but that's fairly obvious, and you're already behind the game. You have to look deeper and consider whether things that at first glance seem trivial have greater importance if you want to understand what may, or is likely to, happen.
After all, until you focus on it, everything seems like noise.
Thanks, DED, for the analysis. Good as ever. I don't need 128 GBs, but from my experiences with iPads and iPods, there oughta be a law against selling 16 GB devices. Or 32 GB devices like the Surface that use half of it for the OS. Talk about immediate dissatisfaction. More like yowls.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgregor
Where is all of this derision for the author coming from? Another great article DED!
All that Samsung advertising money buys a lot of bandwidth....
the most interesting info in the article is the profit margin chart, which documents that Apple's recent very high margins were likely a one time bump due to special circumstances. but also that its current margins are still above its long term average - and very high for any comparable company.
(not that this matters to "the market" of course. Apple stock is up 7% today YOY, while extremely low margin "nonprofit" Amazon is up 38%. for "the market," hype = value.)
everyone knows that Apple overcharges buyers for expanded storage models, and that this contributes to its high margins. but for most consumers iCloud and all the streaming web media options reduce the capacity they need a lot, so storage is not a big deal anymore like the old days. only hobbyists and techies ever fill up their storage nowadays (and post 99% of all website comments too i bet)(i'm a hobbyist).
as Apple clearly outlined in its press release for the 128G iPad, which DED didn't mention, it is aiming it at the enterprise market, which he did discuss at length. so in this case, the conventional wisdom that Apple timed this product announcement to undercut MS' new Surface Pro tablet is very likely correct. MS is hyping the Pro as the tablet for "real work" at a price few consumers would pay but businesses don't mind. and MS is undeniably an enterprise market heavyweight.
so we have now a head to head competition between the 128G iPad and the Surface Pro for the business tablet market, which DED did not get into much (yet).
the iPad has two big advantages out of the box: much longer battery life and much more available net storage after deducting the operating system usage from the total specced. and most important i think, that there is already a wide range of specialized business apps available for the iPad, plus a large software developer community that can produce customized focused-purpose "light" apps for any particular client relatively easily and economically. whereas all the specialized third party Windows business applications - a huge inventory far far beyond MS Office - are large scale application suites designed for Windows 7 and have not been formatted at all for a touch UI, let alone a tablet. they will not work well on a tablet, if at all, until they are. the big question then is how will the established Windows software industry respond to Windows 8? full software suite redesign for the touch Metro UI isn't quick, easy, or cheap. but until they are, few business can even use the Surface Pro, and its sales will be anemic after the initial group of early adopter MS fans buy theirs.
and those Windows business applications take a lot of storage space too, btw. because the current era of big cheap storage drives on PC's have made the issue of application size unimportant - until now. which takes us back to original problem. if the 128G Surface Pro only has a net of 83G available for actual use as reported, that is a real problem for many businesses unless there are new "light" versions of their specialized software available too, like the iPad apps.
but who is going to invest in all this software development for a new product with very uncertain prospects? and assuming that MS (bribes) subsidizes the major software companies to do it - i'm sure they will put $hundreds of millions into this - it's going to take the rest of the year. talk about a slow start ...
and that all begs the ultimate question: will many enterprises ever adopt Windows 8 at all? which is a different topic, but i think i know the answer - which is No, they are sticking with W7. and that makes the Surface Pro a one-off orphan product without much of a market no matter what.
so to wrap up, the 128G iPad is the Surface Pro Killer.
ps: just like it is now undeniable that the iPad Mini is the Surface RT Killer.
iPad base model price $499
From 16GB to 32GB = 16GB --> 100$
From 32GB to 64GB = 32GB --> 100$
From 64GB to 128GB = 64GB --> 100$
$300 extra for 112GB seems at least a little more reasonable than $100 for 16GB additional. This has to be a temporary measure and surely they will ditch the 16GB model and move the 32GB to the base model with the next iPad.
I read the article but I am not convinced that a compelling case was made that a 128GB iPad achieves that goal. In fact many of the advantages the author makes about the iPad over Android tablets apples to the entire line and not this new one.
128GB Class 10 SD cards are around the corner and 64GB ones are here already for $50. A decent Android tablet with 32GB or 64GB internal supplemented with a 64GB SD card for around $300 less than this "fat" iPad seems to suggest they do have a path to follow.
Personally I am far more loyal to iOS on my iPad than on I am on my iPhone. I like the experience and the far greater native iPad apps than what is available for Android. I would be far quicker to switch to an Android phone later this year if I don't like what Apple releases as opposed to switching to an Android tablet. That is because I am more or less satisfied with my iPad experience and see no real advantage to switching to an Android and plenty of disadvantages. With a phone my main consideration when I upgrade is display size. If Apple makes a larger display I will buy another iPhone and if not I will probably get the Galaxy S4 or similar.