Just went back and read the headline of this article. The fact is that the iPad does have a hardware keyboard, but it's optional. With its little Bluetooth keyboard buddy along, it IS a 'netbook if you want it to be. Just more flexible: take the keyboard when you need it, leave it home when you don't. Beating it up because it isn't hinged seems really silly.
IMHO with the iPad, Apple is doing the wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say-no-more to content providers. Apple is effectively telling them all: "You've been knocking yourselves out trying to provide the best, free content over the Internet, because no one wants to pay for it. None of you has a viable business model for continuing this. But with the iPad, its proven e-store environment, its locked-down OS and hardware, and unique user experience, you've finally got an excuse to charge for all that great content."
Look to the purchase price of the iPad to be just the beginning of the total cost of ownership. If the iPad platform is a huge success, Apple's revenue from subscription services etc. might even reduce the iPad purchase price below the cost of manufacturing.
I completely agree. Here's hoping.
And for those that complain about $1 for an hours tv entertainment (same as those who complain about 79p for a single in the UK) - seriously, let the moths out of your wallet- it's less than half the price of a beer, and lasts a lot longer...
1) I don't understand this "it's just a big iPod Touch" meme. Watch the demo -- every application was significantly re-designed using an assortment of new multi-touch UI widgets. Most third party iPad applications are going to get the same treatment. They're two totally different environments at the application level. When you're dealing with a touchscreen interface there's not going to be a lot of variation in the hardware. It's just a touchscreen with a case around it. All the important differences are in software.
2) Just because the iPad exists doesn't mean you can't buy a net book if that's what you prefer. People seem to be very confused about this point. I personally prefer full sized laptops. I don't go around telling net book owners their net books are soooo crippled compared to my MacBook. It's their money -- they can buy whatever fits their needs.
3) Technology is reaching a much larger market these days than ever before. Geeks need to start accepting that not every single product is going to be designed for their specific extremist geek needs. That's just how it goes.
Eminently reasonable observations. Obviously they have no place in this discussion.
The problem is not one of hardware, it's one of content. I genuinely don't see how anything has changed in content licensing/broadcasting since the introduction of the apple tv.
As long as content providers lock down content and don't allow ripping of DVDs, the apple TV can't perform the one function that would make it great. No change in design or software can overcome that. What we all want is to be able to legally stream content from our computers to the apple tv in any format, free of copy restriction that gets in the way and requires third party hacking software, or hacking the apple tv itself. Let's have an optical drive that enables you to insert your blu-ray or DVD and automatically have all the content and menus copied to a massive harddrive, and put all our physical media away in the loft with our CD collections.
The content producers simply aren't ready to let this happen, and Apple can't overcome that - neither can anybody else. It may be 'old tech', but there's no point trying to move to the next stage without the content to support it.
You blame the content providers way too much and not Apple enough. There is absolutely NO reason why Apple couldn't put Safari on the ATV like the iPod touch has even. Apple is hellbent on you watching or listening to content through its iTunes store only.
Just went back and read the headline of this article. The fact is that the iPad does have a hardware keyboard, but it's optional. With its little Bluetooth keyboard buddy along, it IS a 'netbook if you want it to be. Just more flexible: take the keyboard when you need it, leave it home when you don't. Beating it up because it isn't hinged seems really silly.
Even more than that, it will work with your existing bluetooth keyboard, so there's little reason to buy this accessory, unless you want the device held vertical while you're typing.
It doesn't really compete with anything Microsoft sells now, and if it gets more people interested in tablet computing in general, that's a win for him.
You blame the content providers way too much and not Apple enough. There is absolutely NO reason why Apple couldn't put Safari on the ATV like the iPod touch has even. Apple is hellbent on you watching or listening to content through its iTunes store only.
That is simply not true. Apple is "hellbent" on nothing, it's revenue from iTunes relative to hardware and software sales is zilch - which is stated financial fact. They are providing a simple, legal channel for distribution and although it is profit making for them, it's not the core of their business model or income stream. No mac restricts your source of media channel. (Blu-ray excepted).
Apple tv is not designed to provide web browsing, or applications or anything other than its sole, simply stated purpose for being. It exists to "wirelessly stream the media content from your computer (mac or windows) to your high definition television". That you can't legally rip DVDs and television content to a DRM free, accepted standard format and stream to the device is entirely at the feet of the content providers. Apple don't make tv programmes and films, they've made a device to stream entertainment media from your computer to your HD tv, and it does this well.
That it's not great is ONLY an issue of DRM limitations on optical drive media and the multitude of restricted legal digital formats floating around the web.
Apple know it's a matter of time, they're building a healthy foundation of users in advance of the change which will inevitably come. Jobs isn't an idiot, his 'hobby' (6.5 million users and counting) will be making a lot of money soon enough.
I will agree without a doubt the terms Fanboy and Troll are thrown around too much on this forum. Myself being guilty of both at some point. I think many of us including myself can do a little better job at common respect in regards to other members.
at last we agree on something. I believe when those words are used, the person has ran out of points to support their discussions and just resort to cheap shots.
I think how successful the iPad will be will depend a lot in what kind of applications developers dream up. Personally, I think it's on the big side and wish it were a little smaller. But if Apple came out with a version of Aperture for the iPad that let me load my photos in the field, review/edit/arrange them on the iPad, and then sync the whole project back to my desktop, then I'd say with a high degree of certainty that I'd get one.
Short of that I'd probably just stick with an iPod touch because it's more portable (while wishing it was a little bigger... got that Apple, I'd like something between the touch and the iPad )
That would be cool, but I fear iPad hardware is nowhere powerful enough to process huge images - especially RAW images - in any really useful manner. That just by judging how fast (slow?) is processing of Nikon 6MP NEF images on quad core with 8GB of RAM.
For that reason mostly I still carry laptop with me while travelling, but even with fully functional dual core laptop I usually do most basic things - backup images to the laptop, sort them to subfolders, eventually delete really bad ones. All the other adjustments will wait for quad core and big screen... \
This is true though I think the two worlds are getting closer. There is a geek element to OSX now that you have Terminal and Unix foundations. With W7 it is clear that MS has realized the importance of simplicity. I have never tried a W7 machine but it is simpler, is it not? In the war between the two OS's theres always been the Apple argument that our GUI is more intuitive. I do believe that to be true but I also know that the most intuitive GUI is the one you are used to (having seen switchers struggle). Which proves that no GUI is very intuitive at all and which brings us nicely to the iPhone OS and the iPad. I am sure this is the way forward as the first truly intuitive GUI ever.
Perhaps they are getting closer, but only because Microsoft has been chasing Apple for the last 20 years, with only limited success. The big hidden in plain sight selling point of Windows 95 was that it was almost as good as a Mac. Technically it was a mess, the UI was nothing more than a bastardized version of the Mac, but they weren't speaking to advancing the tech any, but instead to mollifying a huge installed base of PC users. Good enough was good enough back then. Maybe that's not such a workable proposition anymore. It would be nice to think so.
Intuitive is word that gets thrown around a lot without being very well defined. I think your observation that intuitive is what you are used to, is quite fair. The implication is, that in order for people find a reason to change requires an approach which is far superior to the one they are currently used to. The iPhone succeeded because the UI experience with feature phones was so bad, it was relatively easy for Apple to show how it could be made substantially better. Whether Apple can duplicate this feat with the iPad remains to be seen.
Are you claiming that 90% or so of desktop/laptop users are geeks?
Or would you allow that many more types of folks, other than geeks, also are comfortable with the MS "approach"?
You have to remember that most of those 90% of users didn't choose their platform. It was either chosen for them directly -- by their employer's IT department -- or indirectly -- by a recommendation from a geek whose opinion they trust -- or really indirectly -- because there are still enough "Macs are too expensive" / "Macs don't run any good software" myths going around that some people don't think there's an alternative.
I just talked to my accountant yesterday and she had a new Droid. She was totally befuddled by it. She couldn't figure out how to turn the ringer off, so she put it in a drawer during our meeting! But she bought it because her son told her it was the best phone out there. I'm sure she'd be more happy with an iPhone.
So, no, 90% of desktop/laptop users aren't geeks, but geeks do have an influence over how average people perceive new technology. The Mac platform actually benefited from this when OS X was released. Since it was built on top of a respected Unix platform, that's the first time I stopped getting pushback from my clients' IT departments when I brought Macs around.
While that may be true for you, the AVERAGE person will totally love it and want it in a heartbeat.
Uh, I don't think average person cares much about technology at all.
Here in NZ, average person cares only about having fridge of full beer, good barbie in the backyard and huge TV for that Sunday footie game. Average person might have some crappy desktop or cheapest possible laptop to check on his TradeMe auctions, but that is pretty much as far as average person will go regarding IT
You are really stretching with this quote. Clearly norway is the hotbed when it comes to predicting how a product is going to do on the market...
By they way that wasn't even close to the main point of my post.
Actually, I disagree with you, and agree with the person who posted this article. Your quote said there was no real world interest. I know of companies in the US, New Zealand and the UK in a similar situation who are quietly worried that Apple won't be able to produce enough of these things quickly enough to meet demand (I don't currently do business in any other country). No doubt the doubters will turn their doubt to attack on Apple for "not anticipating sales figures accurately".
Apple wouldn't have produced this unless their market researched showed a healthy market place in which to sell it. Apple do seem to have a penchant for giving people what they want - even if the people don't know they want it yet.
Sure, us tech geeks aren't that excited about it (actually I am, as it fits into my photographic workflow a dream and means my photographers in the field no longer need laptops to take images from their DSLRS and send them back to the office. This saves me a fortune.
In the real world, my parents, both in their sixties have finally expressed an interest in owning a piece of technology. my mum because she loves reading, and loves the fact she'll be able to enlarge the type-size to read, while listening to some music in the background, which she can change without having to go over to the 'hi-fi' as she still calls it. She doesn't seem too bothered about flash ("what's that") or multi-tasking ("only women can do that, not men").
An affluent, untapped, demographic with disposable income.
Uh, I don't think average person cares much about technology at all.
Here in NZ, average person cares only about having fridge of full beer, good barbie in the backyard and huge TV for that Sunday footie game. Average person might have some crappy desktop or cheapest possible laptop to check on his TradeMe auctions, but that is pretty much as far as average person will go regarding IT
Does that same average person read books, email, have an iPod touch and browse the web? No, no interest at all.
I find it hypocritical that a marketing guy that never really invented anything except DOS says "no biggie" to something he doesn't really know anything about.
Bill Gates knows innovation like Donald Trump knows how to mop his floor.
Bill Gates did not invent DOS. He sold rights to it to IBM and then went across town to Seattle Micro and bought it (what he had been pitching to IBM). Of course it was subsequently developed into a more capable product over the years by a team led by Paul Allen.
So DOS was not a product created internally by Microsoft and iTunes was not a product created internally by Apple. For that matter OS X was not created internally at Apple. It was created at another company started by Steve Jobs while he was exiled from Apple. That was NeXT. Standard operating procedure is for bigger companies to watch for innovation from smaller companies and then buy it. It seems like they need a discriminating eye more than a spark of inspiration.
IMHO with the iPad, Apple is doing the wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say-no-more to content providers. Apple is effectively telling them all: "You've been knocking yourselves out trying to provide the best, free content over the Internet, because no one wants to pay for it. None of you has a viable business model for continuing this. But with the iPad, its proven e-store environment, its locked-down OS and hardware, and unique user experience, you've finally got an excuse to charge for all that great content."
Look to the purchase price of the iPad to be just the beginning of the total cost of ownership. If the iPad platform is a huge success, Apple's revenue from subscription services etc. might even reduce the iPad purchase price below the cost of manufacturing.
That's probably the best thing I've read about the iPad. And probably true too. A device like this is just screaming for all the multi-media it can handle and the way the iTunes model works I can see providers lining up to monetize on it. I'm not sure about Apple being subsidized enough to pass it on to consumers though.
Norwegian resellers forced to halt Apple iPad pre-orders due to "crazy interest"
Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - 04:53 PM EST
Apple is facing the rare incident of an advance sellout this week as a number of Norwegian resellers have had to stop their pre-order programs for the iPad. Eplehuset (Apple House) has told its customers that "crazy interest" has led it to stop sales in advance. Fellow Apple reseller Humac has also quietly pulled the iPad, as it still has a category but no longer has active product pages.
It's believed that the sites took thousands of advance orders for the touchscreen device and that, unusually, the largest portion of orders skew heavily towards the more expensive 64GB iPad with 3G. Norwegian prices are also expected to be disproportionately high as a 16GB, Wi-Fi only iPad may cost 3790 Krone, or about $636.
Most retailers elsewhere in the world haven't taken pre-orders, making it difficult to gauge how reflective Norway's surprise may be of actual overall demand. However, the smaller population compared to some of Apple's larger markets suggests that unofficial pre-orders should be larger where they exist in the US.
A strong build-up isn't uncharacteristic for e-reader devices, as Barnes & Noble had to delay retail Nook sales for months. Such delays have usually been attributed to low production rather than sheer demand, however, and have rarely been given concrete numbers to gauge actual interest.
Also, such demand isn't known to have been seen before for tablet computers, which usually ship in lower numbers as a whole and are noticeably less common in Europe or the Americas than in southeast Asian countries like Korea. [via iPod1]"
Cool. Now, can we see actual numbers? After all, Norway has a bit bellow 5 million people all together - one mid-sized US city?
BEAUTIFUL idea! Shooting with your DSLR tethered to an iPad would be an asset that would be invaluable and make a wonderful professional reason to buy one!
Alas though.... Unless they made the iPad so that I can tether it to my iPhone and I don't need to pay for any extra data package I most likely will not be in the market for one. I have my iPhone and I have my MacBook Pro. Do I really need or want a 9.7" iPod Touch that cannot embrace the real internet?
Jailbreak your iPhone and use MyWi to create a wireless network for the iPad to use.
I see huge potential for the iPad, but not out of the starting blocks. When post-1.0 versions offer USB input, play Flash, and run multiple apps concurrently, it'll be a winner.
The iPad could serve at least three roles very effectively at home:
1) Convenient on-the-couch e-reading, web surfing, emailing, and social networking.
2) Superior touch-interface universal IP-remote-control for home entertainment (needs app).
3) Laptop replacement -- with the clever stand and keyboard/mouse plug-in option you could do real work on the iPad. Data storage isn't a problem if you locate files you're not currently working with on a home server or cloud.
I just got a Verizon Palm Pre (couldn't wait any longer for a Verizon iPhone) and I love having several apps open at once and the convenient ease of checking/culling email in my hand instead of on my lap. I'm new to the touch interface, but I'm really liking it. I would find the touch keyboard great for couch computing. To justify an iPad, it needs to replace my laptop; so it needs to have USB input, play Flash, and run multiple apps concurrently.
Comments
IMHO with the iPad, Apple is doing the wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say-no-more to content providers. Apple is effectively telling them all: "You've been knocking yourselves out trying to provide the best, free content over the Internet, because no one wants to pay for it. None of you has a viable business model for continuing this. But with the iPad, its proven e-store environment, its locked-down OS and hardware, and unique user experience, you've finally got an excuse to charge for all that great content."
Look to the purchase price of the iPad to be just the beginning of the total cost of ownership. If the iPad platform is a huge success, Apple's revenue from subscription services etc. might even reduce the iPad purchase price below the cost of manufacturing.
I completely agree. Here's hoping.
And for those that complain about $1 for an hours tv entertainment (same as those who complain about 79p for a single in the UK) - seriously, let the moths out of your wallet- it's less than half the price of a beer, and lasts a lot longer...
A few points:
1) I don't understand this "it's just a big iPod Touch" meme. Watch the demo -- every application was significantly re-designed using an assortment of new multi-touch UI widgets. Most third party iPad applications are going to get the same treatment. They're two totally different environments at the application level. When you're dealing with a touchscreen interface there's not going to be a lot of variation in the hardware. It's just a touchscreen with a case around it. All the important differences are in software.
2) Just because the iPad exists doesn't mean you can't buy a net book if that's what you prefer. People seem to be very confused about this point. I personally prefer full sized laptops. I don't go around telling net book owners their net books are soooo crippled compared to my MacBook. It's their money -- they can buy whatever fits their needs.
3) Technology is reaching a much larger market these days than ever before. Geeks need to start accepting that not every single product is going to be designed for their specific extremist geek needs. That's just how it goes.
Eminently reasonable observations. Obviously they have no place in this discussion.
The problem is not one of hardware, it's one of content. I genuinely don't see how anything has changed in content licensing/broadcasting since the introduction of the apple tv.
As long as content providers lock down content and don't allow ripping of DVDs, the apple TV can't perform the one function that would make it great. No change in design or software can overcome that. What we all want is to be able to legally stream content from our computers to the apple tv in any format, free of copy restriction that gets in the way and requires third party hacking software, or hacking the apple tv itself. Let's have an optical drive that enables you to insert your blu-ray or DVD and automatically have all the content and menus copied to a massive harddrive, and put all our physical media away in the loft with our CD collections.
The content producers simply aren't ready to let this happen, and Apple can't overcome that - neither can anybody else. It may be 'old tech', but there's no point trying to move to the next stage without the content to support it.
You blame the content providers way too much and not Apple enough. There is absolutely NO reason why Apple couldn't put Safari on the ATV like the iPod touch has even. Apple is hellbent on you watching or listening to content through its iTunes store only.
Just went back and read the headline of this article. The fact is that the iPad does have a hardware keyboard, but it's optional. With its little Bluetooth keyboard buddy along, it IS a 'netbook if you want it to be. Just more flexible: take the keyboard when you need it, leave it home when you don't. Beating it up because it isn't hinged seems really silly.
Even more than that, it will work with your existing bluetooth keyboard, so there's little reason to buy this accessory, unless you want the device held vertical while you're typing.
You blame the content providers way too much and not Apple enough. There is absolutely NO reason why Apple couldn't put Safari on the ATV like the iPod touch has even. Apple is hellbent on you watching or listening to content through its iTunes store only.
That is simply not true. Apple is "hellbent" on nothing, it's revenue from iTunes relative to hardware and software sales is zilch - which is stated financial fact. They are providing a simple, legal channel for distribution and although it is profit making for them, it's not the core of their business model or income stream. No mac restricts your source of media channel. (Blu-ray excepted).
Apple tv is not designed to provide web browsing, or applications or anything other than its sole, simply stated purpose for being. It exists to "wirelessly stream the media content from your computer (mac or windows) to your high definition television". That you can't legally rip DVDs and television content to a DRM free, accepted standard format and stream to the device is entirely at the feet of the content providers. Apple don't make tv programmes and films, they've made a device to stream entertainment media from your computer to your HD tv, and it does this well.
That it's not great is ONLY an issue of DRM limitations on optical drive media and the multitude of restricted legal digital formats floating around the web.
Apple know it's a matter of time, they're building a healthy foundation of users in advance of the change which will inevitably come. Jobs isn't an idiot, his 'hobby' (6.5 million users and counting) will be making a lot of money soon enough.
I will agree without a doubt the terms Fanboy and Troll are thrown around too much on this forum. Myself being guilty of both at some point. I think many of us including myself can do a little better job at common respect in regards to other members.
at last we agree on something. I believe when those words are used, the person has ran out of points to support their discussions and just resort to cheap shots.
I think how successful the iPad will be will depend a lot in what kind of applications developers dream up. Personally, I think it's on the big side and wish it were a little smaller. But if Apple came out with a version of Aperture for the iPad that let me load my photos in the field, review/edit/arrange them on the iPad, and then sync the whole project back to my desktop, then I'd say with a high degree of certainty that I'd get one.
Short of that I'd probably just stick with an iPod touch because it's more portable (while wishing it was a little bigger... got that Apple, I'd like something between the touch and the iPad
That would be cool, but I fear iPad hardware is nowhere powerful enough to process huge images - especially RAW images - in any really useful manner. That just by judging how fast (slow?) is processing of Nikon 6MP NEF images on quad core with 8GB of RAM.
For that reason mostly I still carry laptop with me while travelling, but even with fully functional dual core laptop I usually do most basic things - backup images to the laptop, sort them to subfolders, eventually delete really bad ones. All the other adjustments will wait for quad core and big screen...
This is true though I think the two worlds are getting closer. There is a geek element to OSX now that you have Terminal and Unix foundations. With W7 it is clear that MS has realized the importance of simplicity. I have never tried a W7 machine but it is simpler, is it not? In the war between the two OS's theres always been the Apple argument that our GUI is more intuitive. I do believe that to be true but I also know that the most intuitive GUI is the one you are used to (having seen switchers struggle). Which proves that no GUI is very intuitive at all and which brings us nicely to the iPhone OS and the iPad. I am sure this is the way forward as the first truly intuitive GUI ever.
Perhaps they are getting closer, but only because Microsoft has been chasing Apple for the last 20 years, with only limited success. The big hidden in plain sight selling point of Windows 95 was that it was almost as good as a Mac. Technically it was a mess, the UI was nothing more than a bastardized version of the Mac, but they weren't speaking to advancing the tech any, but instead to mollifying a huge installed base of PC users. Good enough was good enough back then. Maybe that's not such a workable proposition anymore. It would be nice to think so.
Intuitive is word that gets thrown around a lot without being very well defined. I think your observation that intuitive is what you are used to, is quite fair. The implication is, that in order for people find a reason to change requires an approach which is far superior to the one they are currently used to. The iPhone succeeded because the UI experience with feature phones was so bad, it was relatively easy for Apple to show how it could be made substantially better. Whether Apple can duplicate this feat with the iPad remains to be seen.
Are you claiming that 90% or so of desktop/laptop users are geeks?
Or would you allow that many more types of folks, other than geeks, also are comfortable with the MS "approach"?
You have to remember that most of those 90% of users didn't choose their platform. It was either chosen for them directly -- by their employer's IT department -- or indirectly -- by a recommendation from a geek whose opinion they trust -- or really indirectly -- because there are still enough "Macs are too expensive" / "Macs don't run any good software" myths going around that some people don't think there's an alternative.
I just talked to my accountant yesterday and she had a new Droid. She was totally befuddled by it. She couldn't figure out how to turn the ringer off, so she put it in a drawer during our meeting! But she bought it because her son told her it was the best phone out there. I'm sure she'd be more happy with an iPhone.
So, no, 90% of desktop/laptop users aren't geeks, but geeks do have an influence over how average people perceive new technology. The Mac platform actually benefited from this when OS X was released. Since it was built on top of a respected Unix platform, that's the first time I stopped getting pushback from my clients' IT departments when I brought Macs around.
While that may be true for you, the AVERAGE person will totally love it and want it in a heartbeat.
Uh, I don't think average person cares much about technology at all.
Here in NZ, average person cares only about having fridge of full beer, good barbie in the backyard and huge TV for that Sunday footie game. Average person might have some crappy desktop or cheapest possible laptop to check on his TradeMe auctions, but that is pretty much as far as average person will go regarding IT
You are really stretching with this quote. Clearly norway is the hotbed when it comes to predicting how a product is going to do on the market...
By they way that wasn't even close to the main point of my post.
Actually, I disagree with you, and agree with the person who posted this article. Your quote said there was no real world interest. I know of companies in the US, New Zealand and the UK in a similar situation who are quietly worried that Apple won't be able to produce enough of these things quickly enough to meet demand (I don't currently do business in any other country). No doubt the doubters will turn their doubt to attack on Apple for "not anticipating sales figures accurately".
Apple wouldn't have produced this unless their market researched showed a healthy market place in which to sell it. Apple do seem to have a penchant for giving people what they want - even if the people don't know they want it yet.
Sure, us tech geeks aren't that excited about it (actually I am, as it fits into my photographic workflow a dream and means my photographers in the field no longer need laptops to take images from their DSLRS and send them back to the office. This saves me a fortune.
In the real world, my parents, both in their sixties have finally expressed an interest in owning a piece of technology. my mum because she loves reading, and loves the fact she'll be able to enlarge the type-size to read, while listening to some music in the background, which she can change without having to go over to the 'hi-fi' as she still calls it. She doesn't seem too bothered about flash ("what's that") or multi-tasking ("only women can do that, not men").
An affluent, untapped, demographic with disposable income.
Perfect.
Uh, I don't think average person cares much about technology at all.
Here in NZ, average person cares only about having fridge of full beer, good barbie in the backyard and huge TV for that Sunday footie game. Average person might have some crappy desktop or cheapest possible laptop to check on his TradeMe auctions, but that is pretty much as far as average person will go regarding IT
Does that same average person read books, email, have an iPod touch and browse the web? No, no interest at all.
you're very wrong, in what you're saying with that picture, but the 2010 image made me laugh
apple's idea of evolution isn't oversizing their products
no duh. it's just funny because that's what people keep saying this thing is
I find it hypocritical that a marketing guy that never really invented anything except DOS says "no biggie" to something he doesn't really know anything about.
Bill Gates knows innovation like Donald Trump knows how to mop his floor.
Bill Gates did not invent DOS. He sold rights to it to IBM and then went across town to Seattle Micro and bought it (what he had been pitching to IBM). Of course it was subsequently developed into a more capable product over the years by a team led by Paul Allen.
So DOS was not a product created internally by Microsoft and iTunes was not a product created internally by Apple. For that matter OS X was not created internally at Apple. It was created at another company started by Steve Jobs while he was exiled from Apple. That was NeXT. Standard operating procedure is for bigger companies to watch for innovation from smaller companies and then buy it. It seems like they need a discriminating eye more than a spark of inspiration.
IMHO with the iPad, Apple is doing the wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say-no-more to content providers. Apple is effectively telling them all: "You've been knocking yourselves out trying to provide the best, free content over the Internet, because no one wants to pay for it. None of you has a viable business model for continuing this. But with the iPad, its proven e-store environment, its locked-down OS and hardware, and unique user experience, you've finally got an excuse to charge for all that great content."
Look to the purchase price of the iPad to be just the beginning of the total cost of ownership. If the iPad platform is a huge success, Apple's revenue from subscription services etc. might even reduce the iPad purchase price below the cost of manufacturing.
That's probably the best thing I've read about the iPad. And probably true too. A device like this is just screaming for all the multi-media it can handle and the way the iTunes model works I can see providers lining up to monetize on it. I'm not sure about Apple being subsidized enough to pass it on to consumers though.
http://www.electronista.com/articles...ipad.requests/
Norwegian resellers forced to halt Apple iPad pre-orders due to "crazy interest"
Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - 04:53 PM EST
Apple is facing the rare incident of an advance sellout this week as a number of Norwegian resellers have had to stop their pre-order programs for the iPad. Eplehuset (Apple House) has told its customers that "crazy interest" has led it to stop sales in advance. Fellow Apple reseller Humac has also quietly pulled the iPad, as it still has a category but no longer has active product pages.
It's believed that the sites took thousands of advance orders for the touchscreen device and that, unusually, the largest portion of orders skew heavily towards the more expensive 64GB iPad with 3G. Norwegian prices are also expected to be disproportionately high as a 16GB, Wi-Fi only iPad may cost 3790 Krone, or about $636.
Most retailers elsewhere in the world haven't taken pre-orders, making it difficult to gauge how reflective Norway's surprise may be of actual overall demand. However, the smaller population compared to some of Apple's larger markets suggests that unofficial pre-orders should be larger where they exist in the US.
A strong build-up isn't uncharacteristic for e-reader devices, as Barnes & Noble had to delay retail Nook sales for months. Such delays have usually been attributed to low production rather than sheer demand, however, and have rarely been given concrete numbers to gauge actual interest.
Also, such demand isn't known to have been seen before for tablet computers, which usually ship in lower numbers as a whole and are noticeably less common in Europe or the Americas than in southeast Asian countries like Korea. [via iPod1]"
Cool. Now, can we see actual numbers? After all, Norway has a bit bellow 5 million people all together - one mid-sized US city?
BEAUTIFUL idea! Shooting with your DSLR tethered to an iPad would be an asset that would be invaluable and make a wonderful professional reason to buy one!
Alas though.... Unless they made the iPad so that I can tether it to my iPhone and I don't need to pay for any extra data package I most likely will not be in the market for one. I have my iPhone and I have my MacBook Pro. Do I really need or want a 9.7" iPod Touch that cannot embrace the real internet?
Jailbreak your iPhone and use MyWi to create a wireless network for the iPad to use.
The iPad could serve at least three roles very effectively at home:
1) Convenient on-the-couch e-reading, web surfing, emailing, and social networking.
2) Superior touch-interface universal IP-remote-control for home entertainment (needs app).
3) Laptop replacement -- with the clever stand and keyboard/mouse plug-in option you could do real work on the iPad. Data storage isn't a problem if you locate files you're not currently working with on a home server or cloud.
I just got a Verizon Palm Pre (couldn't wait any longer for a Verizon iPhone) and I love having several apps open at once and the convenient ease of checking/culling email in my hand instead of on my lap. I'm new to the touch interface, but I'm really liking it. I would find the touch keyboard great for couch computing. To justify an iPad, it needs to replace my laptop; so it needs to have USB input, play Flash, and run multiple apps concurrently.