So how many failed iDevice killers is this now? What are IDC’s projections? Haha
This announcement is just about Google hardware. Not OEMs.
Rick Osterloh (@rosterloh)
6/20/19, 2:33 PM
Hey, it's true...Google's HARDWARE team will be solely focused on building laptops moving forward, but make no mistake, Android & Chrome OS teams are 100% committed for the long-run on working with our partners on tablets for all segments of the market (consumer, enterprise, edu).
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
Apple has competition - they’re known as Windows 2-in-1’s, Windows laptops and to some extent those useless Chromebooks. Apple keeps improving the iPad (and now iPadOS) not because they’re threatened by Android tablets (which have been terrible for years now), but because they want to move into these markets.
Apple mostly competes with itself. They wanted to add extra value to the iPad, to take advantage of its larger screen.
This headline is ridiculous. As if Google tablets were ever competition for iPad. Maybe AI could gloat if Microsoft canceled Surface products. But not now.
Nope, it’s still true, even if it bugs the “concerned” crowd.
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
Me, actually. I’m also someone who said Microsoft would hit $1T market cap before Google ever did and I was right about that. Btw, Microsoft’s market cap is currently just over $1T. Apple’s is $917B.
Yup. Microsoft isn’t affected by the Trump tariffs, because almost all Microsoft products there are illegal copies, whereas Apple sells tens of billions there, now in jeopardy because of the buffoon in the White House.
Zero reason to try and compete with the iPad. Concentrate on the Pixel line including the excellent Pixel Book, speakers and Nest gear, areas they are seeing some success in. Don't try to be all things to everyone, it doesn't work and only serves to dilute resources as well as invite comparisons that reflect badly on the rest of Google hardware.
They will not improve on the iPad experience nor even the Surface line for that matter and to their credit they're recognizing that, but if one of the OEM's thinks they can pull it off then have at it. Google has other projects with much better potential futures that deserve attention.
Next up: Either give a lot more resources to improving smartwatches, work on much better hardware integration and unique features for a Google-branded one, or stop hardware development in that area too. That's another area failing. Either commit 100% or give it up IMHO. This half-hearted stuff is a silly waste of engineering and manufacturing.
This is what the Google’s of the world don’t seem to grok. It’s not about giving a lot more resources or unique features or committing 100%.
It’s about having a vision and saying no to those projects and products that don’t, or won’t, meet that vision, before they are dumped on consumers with overpromising marketing pitches.
Only by going deep and really taking the time to create a vision of the future will you be able to create truly enduring products like iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Mac, etc. Google is a well-funded tinkerer. Nothing wrong with that, but they simply won’t get the results a business run the way Apple is run will achieve. They will always be second-rate in any area where the two businesses attack the same problem or market.
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
People, this is what happens when you get your MBA at Apollo ^^^
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
Think about what you just said. If “the secret to great products is great competition” then shouldn’t Google and every other competitor to Apple have been able to build great and enduring products? After all, they all have Apple as their competition.
Your supposition makes no sense.
The secret to great products is vision, innovation and execution. None of these has as its prerequisite great competition. Look at the iPod as an example. It was born into a field of lousy products. Apple raised the bar significantly. Where was the “great competition” that created that vision, that innovation, that execution?
The iPhone is the same story. During its invention and development there was only a field of wonky, difficult to use keypad phones and the blackberry, a phone that defined anachronism with its hardware keyboard, an innovation at the time but not at all enduring as a design. Imagine if we’d stuck with hardware keyboards; you need a different one in Japan, in China, in the Middle East... it’s not an enduring design or practical, and it consumes physical space that’s at a premium in the phone form factor. Did RIMM have in their roadmap an evolution away from that idea? If they did, they were far too late in its execution. Apple, facing a field of competitors who were not innovating, brought us the form factor everyone subsequently copied. No “great competition” was required for that. Vision.
Same with iPad. The tablets put out by Microsoft were wonky and loaded with buttons and superfluous ports. Apple didn’t need “great competition” to re-envision the tablet form factor.
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
There are still plenty of crummy cheap Android tablet manufacturers.
From day one Apple has been a hardware manufacturer first and supported that hardware with software. Both Google and Microsoft were founded as software developers and are trying to get into hardware manufacturing. They are finding out just how difficult it is to produce a physical product and to acquire the skills required to do it. Supply chains, factories, packaging, distribution, support, parts, warranties, repair and exchange, all things Apple is supremely skilled at and has been doing for forty years makes a big difference.
And yet, it’s the OS and the apps (ie software) that marks the greatest differentiation between the Apple versus Google user experience. So...
From day one Apple has been a hardware manufacturer first and supported that hardware with software. Both Google and Microsoft were founded as software developers and are trying to get into hardware manufacturing. They are finding out just how difficult it is to produce a physical product and to acquire the skills required to do it. Supply chains, factories, packaging, distribution, support, parts, warranties, repair and exchange, all things Apple is supremely skilled at and has been doing for forty years makes a big difference.
And yet, it’s the OS and the apps (ie software) that marks the greatest differentiation between the Apple versus Google user experience. So...
It's true; not only does Apple make better hardware that provides the go-to templates for the rest of the industry, it's their software/UX that cements their superiority to the more "engineer-driven" software form the other guys.
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
Don’t feel too disappointed . Crappy Fire Tablets are still around. One of my friends was complaining about his today.
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
Battle what battle? Hands down Apple iPad any model is far superior to any Surface model. Windows is so 20th century.
And the iPad will be even better with iPadOS and. Catalyst apps.
Uhm, this is the opposite of a win! The secret to great products is great competition - losing an adversary doesn't translate into a great win. This is a pity and the battle moves squarely to Microsoft and its Surface line - who would have thought?
What fucking competition have Android tablets EVER provided the iPad? ZERO.
And no, the secret to great products isn't "competition". The secret is a company that actually gives a shit and has a long term vision. Apple, throughout its history, has shown time and time again that it is capable to making incredible products, and improving these products, regardless of competition. This "competition" is merely noise, not something that dictates Apple's product direction.
From day one Apple has been a hardware manufacturer first and supported that hardware with software. Both Google and Microsoft were founded as software developers and are trying to get into hardware manufacturing. They are finding out just how difficult it is to produce a physical product and to acquire the skills required to do it. Supply chains, factories, packaging, distribution, support, parts, warranties, repair and exchange, all things Apple is supremely skilled at and has been doing for forty years makes a big difference.
Funny thing is that being software centric their software still lags behind the one from a certain hardware company.
The tablet market is like the desktop PC market. It will become less important (but it won't disappear). There is a reason that Apple is pimping up the iPad with more laptop like features.
When I bought my iPad in 2014, I had the intention to use frequently in my professional and private life. But that did not happen due to its limitations. The last few years I only use it to occasionally play a game. The moment it dies, I won't replace it
So how many failed iDevice killers is this now? What are IDC’s projections? Haha
This announcement is just about Google hardware. Not OEMs.
Rick Osterloh (@rosterloh)
6/20/19, 2:33 PM
Hey, it's true...Google's HARDWARE team will be solely focused on building laptops moving forward, but make no mistake, Android & Chrome OS teams are 100% committed for the long-run on working with our partners on tablets for all segments of the market (consumer, enterprise, edu).
Can you name anything Google announced recently (perhaps at their last I/O in May) regarding Android on tablets? Perhaps a bunch of new features?
Google doesn’t take tablets seriously, from either the hardware or software side.
When I bought my iPad in 2014, I had the intention to use frequently in my professional and private life. But that did not happen due to its limitations. The last few years I only use it to occasionally play a game. The moment it dies, I won't replace it
I really don't understand this comment, what was the use case for buying one in the 1st place? I've had an iPad since they released and I've never stopped using it, I have zero games on there even now with the latest iPad Pro. I use mine for work/personal life all the time. I develop software on remote machines, use it for work email, it does everything my Mac/windows laptop does bar running virtual machines (I wish). I really don't get why people find using an iPad difficult, its one better computing form factors out there. Grab a keyboard & pen and thing is productivity powerhouse.
My mum has even dumped her home PC because she never uses it as the iPad does everything she needs. Not sure what she would do without one now.
What I’ve seen is that the lack of interest from Android developers to enthusiastically embrace a tablet product has resulted in this sorry mess. But it’s also Google’s fault. Basically, they’ve ignored tablet development....
But few major apps were modified for the tablet form, rather, it’s mostly unknown apps from China, with odd games and beauty photo apps.
so we see that even Samsung has trouble selling tablets, though they do sell some. Mostly though, they’re $100, and even less.... Some make it here.
Agree, with one additional observation: in the U.S., amazon fire tablets are "good enough" for lots of price first consumers.
Sure, but after a surge when they first came out, sales have been disappointing.
Are you saying disappointing compared to the iPad? I was referring only to your last line, that "Samsung has trouble selling tablets..." and "some make it here". Amazon tablet figures -- as far as amazon will say, and as analysis can guide -- have increased slowly but steadily.
What I’ve seen is that the lack of interest from Android developers to enthusiastically embrace a tablet product has resulted in this sorry mess. But it’s also Google’s fault. Basically, they’ve ignored tablet development....
But few major apps were modified for the tablet form, rather, it’s mostly unknown apps from China, with odd games and beauty photo apps.
so we see that even Samsung has trouble selling tablets, though they do sell some. Mostly though, they’re $100, and even less.... Some make it here.
Agree, with one additional observation: in the U.S., amazon fire tablets are "good enough" for lots of price first consumers.
Sure, but after a surge when they first came out, sales have been disappointing.
Are you saying disappointing compared to the iPad? I was referring only to your last line, that "Samsung has trouble selling tablets..." and "some make it here". Amazon tablet figures -- as far as amazon will say, and as analysis can guide -- have increased slowly but steadily.
I forget about those Fire tablets. There's quite a few being used by family members and friends when I think about it. My daughter has two (I guess one to carry with her and one for home), my son-in-law has one, an elderly friend of my wife's has at least three scattered around her home she uses for reading books, my sister uses one for books as well as some game she mentioned and can't recall....
Amazon's tablets have a reason to exist and thus are seeing success. A tablet from Google would be released why? Leave those to OEM's if they've identified a market for them. IMO Google should focus elsewhere. Not ignore it altogether, but don't get involved in developing hardware of their own.
Wow, I didn’t know Google tablet (running ChromeOS & using Intel - they losing their mind?) is this bad. If you, like me, haven’t followed any news of Google tablet, this video will open your eyes https://youtu.be/HOh6d_r63Bw
Comments
Apple mostly competes with itself. They wanted to add extra value to the iPad, to take advantage of its larger screen.
It’s about having a vision and saying no to those projects and products that don’t, or won’t, meet that vision, before they are dumped on consumers with overpromising marketing pitches.
Only by going deep and really taking the time to create a vision of the future will you be able to create truly enduring products like iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Mac, etc. Google is a well-funded tinkerer. Nothing wrong with that, but they simply won’t get the results a business run the way Apple is run will achieve. They will always be second-rate in any area where the two businesses attack the same problem or market.
Think about what you just said. If “the secret to great products is great competition” then shouldn’t Google and every other competitor to Apple have been able to build great and enduring products? After all, they all have Apple as their competition.
Your supposition makes no sense.
The secret to great products is vision, innovation and execution. None of these has as its prerequisite great competition. Look at the iPod as an example. It was born into a field of lousy products. Apple raised the bar significantly. Where was the “great competition” that created that vision, that innovation, that execution?
The iPhone is the same story. During its invention and development there was only a field of wonky, difficult to use keypad phones and the blackberry, a phone that defined anachronism with its hardware keyboard, an innovation at the time but not at all enduring as a design. Imagine if we’d stuck with hardware keyboards; you need a different one in Japan, in China, in the Middle East... it’s not an enduring design or practical, and it consumes physical space that’s at a premium in the phone form factor. Did RIMM have in their roadmap an evolution away from that idea? If they did, they were far too late in its execution. Apple, facing a field of competitors who were not innovating, brought us the form factor everyone subsequently copied. No “great competition” was required for that. Vision.
Same with iPad. The tablets put out by Microsoft were wonky and loaded with buttons and superfluous ports. Apple didn’t need “great competition” to re-envision the tablet form factor.
I could go on.
And yet, it’s the OS and the apps (ie software) that marks the greatest differentiation between the Apple versus Google user experience. So...
And no, the secret to great products isn't "competition". The secret is a company that actually gives a shit and has a long term vision. Apple, throughout its history, has shown time and time again that it is capable to making incredible products, and improving these products, regardless of competition. This "competition" is merely noise, not something that dictates Apple's product direction.
Can you name anything Google announced recently (perhaps at their last I/O in May) regarding Android on tablets? Perhaps a bunch of new features?
Google doesn’t take tablets seriously, from either the hardware or software side.
My mum has even dumped her home PC because she never uses it as the iPad does everything she needs. Not sure what she would do without one now.
Amazon's tablets have a reason to exist and thus are seeing success. A tablet from Google would be released why? Leave those to OEM's if they've identified a market for them. IMO Google should focus elsewhere. Not ignore it altogether, but don't get involved in developing hardware of their own.
https://youtu.be/HOh6d_r63Bw