I think that a 12 inch screen would be better. As of now, I'm staring at a 15 inch 1080p screen.
What is ridiculous about having full HD in a tablet?
Okay but now we are talking about building another product... and not the iPad. The iPad is a 10" screen with a 'reasonable' processor. Reasonable enough to decode a 1080p movie file? I'd certainly have my doubts.
Building a new product... SURE 12" 1080p and YES 16:9 would be okay, a nice fast CPU and GPU powerful enough to burn thu even the most intensive 1080p encoded file SURE. However those features come at a price both monetary AND power. You aren't going to see a device as thin as the iPad with the features I just suggested and still have an uptime of anywhere NEAR close to 10 hours. Even 5 might be pushing it... heck it might even crap out in the middle of playing The Godfather (~3 Hr) okay it might last that long but you aren't gonna get to see the dvd extras without recharging it.
I see your problem with the iPad is and thats that the iPad it wasn't designed to be a hand held super thin HD movie player. But to be fair I don't think Apple ever even considered it could or should be. Yes they show the iPad playing movies but Sony shows the PSP showing movies too and it doesn't do 1080p HD either.
Edit:
Tho I do see your frustration with the iPad... When a product comes SO CLOSE to what you've been envisioning (at first glance and clearly only on the surface) and yet it has the components that don't follow thru I can certainly see the extreme anger over it. But it's not Apples fault... they never intended on building your dream media player when they specd out the iPad.
For what I want, and have wanted for years, the 'Pad is fatally deficient. I've wanted a tablet for surfing the 'web and consuming content primarily.
And for these two primary functions, the 'Pad is fatally deficient. Had I wanted an eBook reader, it might fit the bill.
But for 'web and video, it is unacceptable to me. Thus, I am extremely disappointed and will continue to wait until somebody does it right. I'm watching Dell, Archos and others to see what they come up with. And from what I have seen. many new companies will introduce tablets soon, with a variety of capabilities and deficiencies.
I am optimistic that within 12 months, there will be a tablet computer that makes the 'Pad look like a toy.
I guess you will have to wait many more years or you can start your own company and make the whatever you want to whatever specifications you wish and market it. FOR NOW---IF YOU DON'T LKE IT. DON'T BUY IT AND DON'T MAKE COMPLAINTS THAT OTHERS FAIL TO SEE IN YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
To be clear, the article doesn?t require an interpretation that Apple has changed strategy, notwithstanding the statement ?If true, it would be a significant change for Apple?.
Revenue and earnings are very different animals. Revenue is how much money one sold one?s products for. Earnings is the difference between revenue and how much it cost to create/acquire the products being sold. Thus, large revenues do not necessarily translate into large earnings. For Apple, because there is only a small difference between the acquisition/distribution costs of iTunes content and the price it is sold (?a bit over break even?), even though there are very significant revenues (10 billion songs sold), the earnings aren?t as significant.
Which is a long way of saying you can sell a lot of stuff but that doesn?t mean you are making any money.
A final clarification. In the first line, it says ?the sale of applications ... for the iPad is predicted to equal nearly 30 percent of the revenue Apple will EARN [emphasis added] from selling the hardware...? This really means ?app sale revenue will be nearly 30 percent of hardware revenue? ? it doesn?t mean that app earnings will be 30% of hardware earnings. It could be, but the analyst report doesn?t say that.
My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.
tks for clarifying...i was also struck by the article's failure to distinguish btwn rev & profit...and the corresponding conclusion (that AAPL was changing strategies) was an erroneous one as a result.
Apple uses very much the opposite of a razor and blades strategy. They charge a lot for the razor and sell the blades at cost to encourage the sales of more razors. Actually, they charge a lot for the razor and even more for its accessories.
Yes. That has been their traditional strategy. AI thinks that they have a new strategy, and when they emphasized (and keep emphasizing) the price of the 'Pad, it made me tend to agree that the strategy may be changing.
I was also impressed that in order to explain the lack of a camera in the iTouch, iSteve said that they were engineering it to meet a price point. This was the first time I've heard Apple say anything like that. Steve's statements, put together, are evidence that maybe a new strategy is in the offing.
ummm...not sure about this...you'd have to be taking steve at his word abt the decision to not include a camera in an ipod touch. while it's not likely a camera-enabled ipod touch would cannibalize iphone sales...you could easily see the ipad as the "big brother" to an ipod touch.
if you've thought (and i'd argue that AAPL probably did) ipad sales could more easily be influenced by a lower-cost, yet still feature-rich ipod touch, then it would make some sense to decide NOT to include cameras in ipod touches.
no matter that the decision was made a year before the ipad hit the streets...it just made it easier to deal with the eventual ipad launch without the overt need to de-feature a product you'd been selling for a couple of years.
You've posted the same anti-iPad nonsense numerous times now. I doubt that you are incapable of reading or comprehending the many many responses that have talked about the logic for 4:3 aspect ratio (Hint: Portrait mode).
I haven't seen anything that could be called logic with respect to the aspect ratio discussion. The lack of a HD ratio is a very valid concern and does rule out the unit for use as a video player. That is OK for Apple if they aren't going after that market but sucks if one of the features you are looking for is great video playback.
Quote:
Therefore, one has to conclude that your obtuseness on this is 100% trolling. You are frankly adding nothing to the discussion -- please stop.
His posts do leave a lot to be desired but you have done nothing here to combat his valid points. Most likely that is because there is no rational arguement for argueing against HD ratios if your opponent is interested in video. If some one says that they are interested in a device to play back video then there is no way to sell a 4:3 device to them.
Now that does not deny that a 4:3 ratio might be more useful for certain uses on the iPad. Long term though I think Apple will have to deliver another device optimized for wide screen usage. The thing here is people are looking for hardware like iPad to consume video content with. Thus the rational approach is to go with optimized hardware. That is not iPad.
As to the vocal complaints well yeah speak up because Apple needs to hear about our desires. The iPad simply isn't suitable if you are interested in HD video. By the way that doesn't make the iPad worthless in general, rather it highlights markets for multiple devices.
I don't feel any Tablet made by anyone is going to do well but that is based on history of other Tablet sales and just simply my opinion. To me the iPad really doesn't offer much of anything.
Only you know what would be best (most appealing) to you so I'm certainly not going to argue with that! I do think the iPad will have wide ranging market segments.
- K-12 School Kids (provided all/most school books can be obtained in ebook format) will possible have the iPad replace the 'a laptop for every student' programs found across the US.
- College (same deal - same requirement) the first thing you learn in college is the TRUE meaning of 'school books' makes the little pile of books needed at 12th grade all but a fond memory.
- 20ish-30ish unmarried ESPECIALLY will in my estimation be the hard sell. These people are way too active, bars, dance clubs, team recreation, working out, clubs, leagues, etc yea these are the iPhone people the iPad would do nothing for them but be a pain to carry.
- 30-somthings (married ones especially) clubs are no longer the place to be, sure you still go out on occasion but not nearly as much as you did when you were single/dating. Many have purchased a comfortable home and enjoy spending time at home... Having weekend cookout and maybe a weeknight power game. This group is another big potential market for iPad customers. People who are at home more often. These people would love to NOT be forced into funneling their guests to the computer room just to show off vacation photos, movies of the kids etc. An iPad in the living room and/or kitchen will be fairly common especially if the app developer pull thru with innovative apps and the newspaper and magazine publishers come up with a compelling product.
- 40s, 50s,60s same as above and possibly more so since any children are growing older and jobs are generally paying better then they were when they were in their 30s and time spent at home expands.
- Retired also a possibly big market... I've been finding older people seem to take to new technology VERY quickly... My 85yo father in-law is video skyping to as many people as he can find and if people he knows don't have skype he sends out emails with the links to install it.. He'd be all over the iPad and since he suffers from macular degeneration IF an iPad came out with a CAMERA I'd get him one in a heart beat. The ability to take a photo of something and then ZOOM IN to make the text bigger (so he can read it) would be invaluable. (yes hand held magnifiers exist but they all suffer to some degree or another and if you look at the prices of existing 'digital magnifiers' its sinful $600, $700, $800 and even more are quite common.
So the iPad market is kinda all over the place... and clearly certain segments of the population are a much better fit then others. But the same was true for the iPhone. While I do own one the screen is just to damn small for my (time ravaged) eyes.
...all this discussion of the iPad (and iPhone) display and what is the proper aspect ration for displaying content.
Consider these points:
1) Steve Jobs is an uber-perfectionist
2) Apple likely experimented with many different display sizes for these devices
3) They could have made any display size choice(s) they wanted
4) Of all the options available to them, they chose what they did, for the iPad (and iPhone)
Why?
I have my own needs and preferences, but I suspect that: SJ, Ives, and Apple, et al have a much better understanding of the market and the device(s) than I will ever hope to have.
Any anti or pro iPad predictions at this point are simply that and in most cases are all nonsense on both sides of the fence. There is no way at this point anyone can know how well the iPad is going to do because it hasn't even been released.
Well that is highly debatable. I've seen enough interest in the thing that I can say it will do well. It will not do well for people looking for a video machine. On the otherhand it has enough features that I could see people buying it for a primary machine. Especially if ones interests are E-Mail and the web.
Quote:
Hell pre-orders haven't even started yet.
Preorders and the first three months indicate nothing. Generally those are early adopter sales and do not indicate a long term consummer demand.
Quote:
Any intelligent method and all comments anti or pro have no factual data to back them up because right now there isn't any data.
This I have to disagree with totally, we have enough info to rule out iPad for certain uses. However Apple has done us a disservice by keeping important details to themselves. One issue being the supplied RAM. There has been much noise raised about iWork for example teat we have no idea how large of a document the programs can actually handle.
So it is a mixed bag right now. That however doesn't mean aything because the data is there to judge the system in certain realms of usage.
Quote:
Also what you deem logical or what appears to fit your needs may not work for someone else.
Exactly so why is everybody here defending 4:3 when it clearly is not suitable for some usages? Heck I would have settled for 720P HD. Dismissing rational desires is not taking into account what works for somebody else. It is better to simply say this is not the Video iPod.
Exactly so why is everybody here defending 4:3 when it clearly is not suitable for some usages?
Because no one aspect ratio is suitable for all usages? because for a 10" display it's the best option?
I'm glad Apple did the smart thing over the "in" thing. One of the biggest faults with netbooks is the use of 16:9 aspect ratio on a 10" display. Subsequently, I've hoped that the 4:3 ratio would reemerge since 6:9 simply doesn't work. The 13" MacBook has a shorter display height than the 12" PowerBook because of the different ratio choice. You go to 10" and you get a 4.9" . It's horrible.
Only you know what would be best (most appealing) to you so I'm certainly not going to argue with that! I do think the iPad will have wide ranging market segments.
- K-12 School Kids (provided all/most school books can be obtained in ebook format) will possible have the iPad replace the 'a laptop for every student' programs found across the US.
- College (same deal - same requirement) the first thing you learn in college is the TRUE meaning of 'school books' makes the little pile of books needed at 12th grade all but a fond memory.
- 20ish-30ish unmarried ESPECIALLY will in my estimation be the hard sell. These people are way too active, bars, dance clubs, team recreation, working out, clubs, leagues, etc yea these are the iPhone people the iPad would do nothing for them but be a pain to carry.
- 30-somthings (married ones especially) clubs are no longer the place to be, sure you still go out on occasion but not nearly as much as you did when you were single/dating. Many have purchased a comfortable home and enjoy spending time at home... Having weekend cookout and maybe a weeknight power game. This group is another big potential market for iPad customers. People who are at home more often. These people would love to NOT be forced into funneling their guests to the computer room just to show off vacation photos, movies of the kids etc. An iPad in the living room and/or kitchen will be fairly common especially if the app developer pull thru with innovative apps and the newspaper and magazine publishers come up with a compelling product.
- 40s, 50s,60s same as above and possibly more so since any children are growing older and jobs are generally paying better then they were when they were in their 30s and time spent at home expands.
- Retired also a possibly big market... I've been finding older people seem to take to new technology VERY quickly... My 85yo father in-law is video skyping to as many people as he can find and if people he knows don't have skype he sends out emails with the links to install it.. He'd be all over the iPad and since he suffers from macular degeneration IF an iPad came out with a CAMERA I'd get him one in a heart beat. The ability to take a photo of something and then ZOOM IN to make the text bigger (so he can read it) would be invaluable. (yes hand held magnifiers exist but they all suffer to some degree or another and if you look at the prices of existing 'digital magnifiers' its sinful $600, $700, $800 and even more are quite common.
So the iPad market is kinda all over the place... and clearly certain segments of the population are a much better fit then others. But the same was true for the iPhone. While I do own one the screen is just to damn small for my (time ravaged) eyes.
One of the issues I will have to get past is the fact the iPad doesn't use a full OS. While for some that isn't an issue at all in fact some see it as a benefit because it suits their needs better.
I have used a Tablet in the past and I am just simply use to having the same functions I have on my primary system. I don't expect those same function on my mobile device but over time I have come to expect them from a Tablet.
Windows based Tablets as Solip would say simply plop Windows on a Tablet. He is correct but over time that is what I have gotten use too and maybe have adapted.
Once I get my hands on an iPad and play around with it a bit I could certainly change my mind about getting a first gen iPad, but its not something I would pre-order without using it first.
One of the things I would be looking forward too is gaming on an iPad compared to an iPod Touch. Multi-touch iWorks is also a very attractive option for me, one of the main reasons I use a MBP is Keynote and Pages.
So time will tell. I expect I will end up with one at some point just not sure if it will be when they are first released.
Well that is highly debatable. I've seen enough interest in the thing that I can say it will do well. It will not do well for people looking for a video machine. On the otherhand it has enough features that I could see people buying it for a primary machine. Especially if ones interests are E-Mail and the web.
Preorders and the first three months indicate nothing. Generally those are early adopter sales and do not indicate a long term consummer demand.
This I have to disagree with totally, we have enough info to rule out iPad for certain uses. However Apple has done us a disservice by keeping important details to themselves. One issue being the supplied RAM. There has been much noise raised about iWork for example teat we have no idea how large of a document the programs can actually handle.
So it is a mixed bag right now. That however doesn't mean aything because the data is there to judge the system in certain realms of usage.
Exactly so why is everybody here defending 4:3 when it clearly is not suitable for some usages? Heck I would have settled for 720P HD. Dismissing rational desires is not taking into account what works for somebody else. It is better to simply say this is not the Video iPod.
Dave
Everything is debatable at this point. Also I have never defended 4:3 because I also believe in some cases its an issue. May not be an issue for some but it is form, as is HD.
...all this discussion of the iPad (and iPhone) display and what is the proper aspect ration for displaying content.
Consider these points:
1) Steve Jobs is an uber-perfectionist
2) Apple likely experimented with many different display sizes for these devices
3) They could have made any display size choice(s) they wanted
4) Of all the options available to them, they chose what they did, for the iPad (and iPhone)
Why?
I have my own needs and preferences, but I suspect that: SJ, Ives, and Apple, et al have a much better understanding of the market and the device(s) than I will ever hope to have.
*
For many decades SJ and Apple couldn't understand the market if smacked them in the face, their stock value and market share clearly reflected that simple fact.
Apple is doing well now but that doesn't mean they get everything perfect and its not clear yet if the iPad will be popular or not. Forums like this just assume its going to be the best thing since sliced bread.
Most other forums not totally Apple devoted raise real issues and in many cases the iPad does not relfect what the consumer whats or needs.
You will always have a better understanding of what you want because you are the end user.
Normally I'd let a thread like this go but reading through this thread I'm pretty much convinced that iGenius is being beat up by a bunch of idiots. His only point is that design decisions by Apple make the iPad unsuitable for his usage or desires. They are completely valid concerns if your intentions are to watch movies on the thing.
Instead we get a bunch of nonsensical responses like suggestions to go find an IPS screen for a HD tablet this size. It should be pretty obvious that Apple is having this screen crafted for their needs as mist of the display manufactures have left the 4:3 world behind. The fact is Apple could have asked for a round display to build iPorthole and the display manufactures would have jumped to make the iPorthole screen. The 4:3 screen on the iPad is a design decision made by Apple and nothing more.
Now the question becomes is that the best choice? Well it certainly isn't if the point of this thread is to be believed. Selling HD content for use on old 4:3 screens is difficult at best. In fact one could say that HD content drove the adoption of HD TVs. So in the context of this thread I don't believe the iPad will be generating that much revenue from conent sales. At least not movies. I do suspect that movies aren't even on Apples radar as far as iPad content goes.
Speaking of which, we had the stupid comment that iPad would drive content back to the 4:3 ratio. Sorry guys but I don't see this happening at all. Would anyone want to watch the next Avatar or Hurt Locker as a 4:3 movie in a theater? There is a reason that the movie industry went to wider and wider formats over the years and the studios ate likely to go back. Even outside of movies content will still be produced for the wider formats with the iPad getting compromised versions. Like it or not the 4:3 ratio is outdated for content containg video or games.
Further the inability for people to listen to what is being said about video on the web is important. It isn't so much an issue of Flash as it is the ability to view videos. It is a fine distinction but one that needs to be clarified. The simple fact is that if Apples devices could play back Flash videos without flash the iPad would be a lot more useful on the web. The reason is pretty simple really, even sites that support iPhone don't have all their videos available in compatible formats. So hopefully this clears up the issue where people don't care about or for flash but are concerned about videos on the web. Click to Flash is a wonderful thing on the Mac as it permits one to stave off flash while still getting the news or whatever.
So all of this together has me wondering just what is generating all these ignorant responses. It would be far better to simply say the iPad is not the video iPod device many of us where looking for. That would avoid all the ignorant attempts to justify a 4:3 device as a video delivery system. It isn't and frankly I don't think that was even Apples intention. Nor do I see the device generating the revenue this thread implies from movies. So it is entirely justified in being frustrated with Apples new iPad if your hopes where for a media consumption device with media being heavily weighted towards movies.
Because no one aspect ratio is suitable for all usages? because for a 10" display it's the best option?
It is a good size for some uses. For movie playback it simply sucks. In any event this highlights the entire problem with this thread. If one is interested in movies on the thing it doesn't matter if 4:3 is good for some things, it is wothless for the desired usage.
The problem here is that many are having problems accepting that a lot of us where really interested in that movie playback aspect of the iPad. Apple moving to 4:3 just makes the thing far less useful.
Quote:
I'm glad Apple did the smart thing over the "in" thing. One of the biggest faults with netbooks is the use of 16:9 aspect ratio on a 10" display.
This is not however a netbook. Even there though I could debate with you the aspect ratio issue.
Quote:
Subsequently, I've hoped that the 4:3 ratio would reemerge since 6:9 simply doesn't work. The 13" MacBook has a shorter display height than the 12" PowerBook because of the different ratio choice.
Yes but how many pixels are being put on the screen? Besides that the wider screen can work out much better for document creation if your software is designed for it. In any event you mis the point with small notebooks, they are all compromizes. The biggest issue with respect to functionality is the keyboard which can't be shrunk in width excessively. They reality is the small laptops aren't even possible without the wider screens.
Quote:
You go to 10" and you get a 4.9" . It's horrible.
It is by no means horrible. However a different device is implied. Also there is nothing to say a HD ratio screen has to have a ten inch diagonal. Considering I was hoping for something in the seven inch range there are a lot of options for Apple.
The point is that the iPad is a disappointment if you are interested in video playback. That is not an insult to the product as I'm sure it is going to do very well indeed. Rather it just misses entirely one market it could have excelled in.
It is sort of like having your kid grow up to be a lawyer when you had your heart set on a doctor in the family.
I guess you will have to wait many more years or you can start your own company and make the whatever you want to whatever specifications you wish and market it. FOR NOW---IF YOU DON'T LKE IT. DON'T BUY IT AND DON'T MAKE COMPLAINTS THAT OTHERS FAIL TO SEE IN YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
I don't think I have ever made complaints that others fail to see my point of view.
Because no one aspect ratio is suitable for all usages? because for a 10" display it's the best option?
I'm glad Apple did the smart thing over the "in" thing. One of the biggest faults with netbooks is the use of 16:9 aspect ratio on a 10" display. Subsequently, I've hoped that the 4:3 ratio would reemerge since 6:9 simply doesn't work. The 13" MacBook has a shorter display height than the 12" PowerBook because of the different ratio choice. You go to 10" and you get a 4.9" . It's horrible.
I think that an 11 or 12 inch screen would have been a better choice.
Comments
I think that a 12 inch screen would be better. As of now, I'm staring at a 15 inch 1080p screen.
What is ridiculous about having full HD in a tablet?
Okay but now we are talking about building another product... and not the iPad. The iPad is a 10" screen with a 'reasonable' processor. Reasonable enough to decode a 1080p movie file? I'd certainly have my doubts.
Building a new product... SURE 12" 1080p and YES 16:9 would be okay, a nice fast CPU and GPU powerful enough to burn thu even the most intensive 1080p encoded file SURE. However those features come at a price both monetary AND power. You aren't going to see a device as thin as the iPad with the features I just suggested and still have an uptime of anywhere NEAR close to 10 hours. Even 5 might be pushing it... heck it might even crap out in the middle of playing The Godfather (~3 Hr) okay it might last that long but you aren't gonna get to see the dvd extras without recharging it.
I see your problem with the iPad is and thats that the iPad it wasn't designed to be a hand held super thin HD movie player. But to be fair I don't think Apple ever even considered it could or should be. Yes they show the iPad playing movies but Sony shows the PSP showing movies too and it doesn't do 1080p HD either.
Edit:
Tho I do see your frustration with the iPad... When a product comes SO CLOSE to what you've been envisioning (at first glance and clearly only on the surface) and yet it has the components that don't follow thru I can certainly see the extreme anger over it. But it's not Apples fault... they never intended on building your dream media player when they specd out the iPad.
For what I want, and have wanted for years, the 'Pad is fatally deficient. I've wanted a tablet for surfing the 'web and consuming content primarily.
And for these two primary functions, the 'Pad is fatally deficient. Had I wanted an eBook reader, it might fit the bill.
But for 'web and video, it is unacceptable to me. Thus, I am extremely disappointed and will continue to wait until somebody does it right. I'm watching Dell, Archos and others to see what they come up with. And from what I have seen. many new companies will introduce tablets soon, with a variety of capabilities and deficiencies.
I am optimistic that within 12 months, there will be a tablet computer that makes the 'Pad look like a toy.
I guess you will have to wait many more years or you can start your own company and make the whatever you want to whatever specifications you wish and market it. FOR NOW---IF YOU DON'T LKE IT. DON'T BUY IT AND DON'T MAKE COMPLAINTS THAT OTHERS FAIL TO SEE IN YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
To be clear, the article doesn?t require an interpretation that Apple has changed strategy, notwithstanding the statement ?If true, it would be a significant change for Apple?.
Revenue and earnings are very different animals. Revenue is how much money one sold one?s products for. Earnings is the difference between revenue and how much it cost to create/acquire the products being sold. Thus, large revenues do not necessarily translate into large earnings. For Apple, because there is only a small difference between the acquisition/distribution costs of iTunes content and the price it is sold (?a bit over break even?), even though there are very significant revenues (10 billion songs sold), the earnings aren?t as significant.
Which is a long way of saying you can sell a lot of stuff but that doesn?t mean you are making any money.
A final clarification. In the first line, it says ?the sale of applications ... for the iPad is predicted to equal nearly 30 percent of the revenue Apple will EARN [emphasis added] from selling the hardware...? This really means ?app sale revenue will be nearly 30 percent of hardware revenue? ? it doesn?t mean that app earnings will be 30% of hardware earnings. It could be, but the analyst report doesn?t say that.
My two cents on aspect ratios: widescreen is becoming more and more standard for video with HD adoption. But, today, there is still a lot of 4:3 content (older TV shows, kids shows, etc.). And, for text, 4:3 is probably a little more user-friendly. As the mix of media shifts and becomes clearer, I don't think it will be very difficult for Apple to change the aspect ratio of the iPad (and, instead of pointing out the horizontal black bars and wasted screen real estate for wide screen content, we'll point out the vertical bars for 4:3 content). In my case, only the kids will be watching video on the iPad so 4:3 is fine.
tks for clarifying...i was also struck by the article's failure to distinguish btwn rev & profit...and the corresponding conclusion (that AAPL was changing strategies) was an erroneous one as a result.
Apple uses very much the opposite of a razor and blades strategy. They charge a lot for the razor and sell the blades at cost to encourage the sales of more razors. Actually, they charge a lot for the razor and even more for its accessories.
great point & 100% spot-on
Hey, relax.... don't go all angina on us... it is just a forum.....
Actually, I was pretty calm when I wrote it.
Yes. That has been their traditional strategy. AI thinks that they have a new strategy, and when they emphasized (and keep emphasizing) the price of the 'Pad, it made me tend to agree that the strategy may be changing.
I was also impressed that in order to explain the lack of a camera in the iTouch, iSteve said that they were engineering it to meet a price point. This was the first time I've heard Apple say anything like that. Steve's statements, put together, are evidence that maybe a new strategy is in the offing.
ummm...not sure about this...you'd have to be taking steve at his word abt the decision to not include a camera in an ipod touch. while it's not likely a camera-enabled ipod touch would cannibalize iphone sales...you could easily see the ipad as the "big brother" to an ipod touch.
if you've thought (and i'd argue that AAPL probably did) ipad sales could more easily be influenced by a lower-cost, yet still feature-rich ipod touch, then it would make some sense to decide NOT to include cameras in ipod touches.
no matter that the decision was made a year before the ipad hit the streets...it just made it easier to deal with the eventual ipad launch without the overt need to de-feature a product you'd been selling for a couple of years.
You've posted the same anti-iPad nonsense numerous times now. I doubt that you are incapable of reading or comprehending the many many responses that have talked about the logic for 4:3 aspect ratio (Hint: Portrait mode).
I haven't seen anything that could be called logic with respect to the aspect ratio discussion. The lack of a HD ratio is a very valid concern and does rule out the unit for use as a video player. That is OK for Apple if they aren't going after that market but sucks if one of the features you are looking for is great video playback.
Therefore, one has to conclude that your obtuseness on this is 100% trolling. You are frankly adding nothing to the discussion -- please stop.
His posts do leave a lot to be desired but you have done nothing here to combat his valid points. Most likely that is because there is no rational arguement for argueing against HD ratios if your opponent is interested in video. If some one says that they are interested in a device to play back video then there is no way to sell a 4:3 device to them.
Now that does not deny that a 4:3 ratio might be more useful for certain uses on the iPad. Long term though I think Apple will have to deliver another device optimized for wide screen usage. The thing here is people are looking for hardware like iPad to consume video content with. Thus the rational approach is to go with optimized hardware. That is not iPad.
As to the vocal complaints well yeah speak up because Apple needs to hear about our desires. The iPad simply isn't suitable if you are interested in HD video. By the way that doesn't make the iPad worthless in general, rather it highlights markets for multiple devices.
I don't feel any Tablet made by anyone is going to do well but that is based on history of other Tablet sales and just simply my opinion. To me the iPad really doesn't offer much of anything.
Only you know what would be best (most appealing) to you so I'm certainly not going to argue with that! I do think the iPad will have wide ranging market segments.
- K-12 School Kids (provided all/most school books can be obtained in ebook format) will possible have the iPad replace the 'a laptop for every student' programs found across the US.
- College (same deal - same requirement) the first thing you learn in college is the TRUE meaning of 'school books' makes the little pile of books needed at 12th grade all but a fond memory.
- 20ish-30ish unmarried ESPECIALLY will in my estimation be the hard sell. These people are way too active, bars, dance clubs, team recreation, working out, clubs, leagues, etc yea these are the iPhone people the iPad would do nothing for them but be a pain to carry.
- 30-somthings (married ones especially) clubs are no longer the place to be, sure you still go out on occasion but not nearly as much as you did when you were single/dating. Many have purchased a comfortable home and enjoy spending time at home... Having weekend cookout and maybe a weeknight power game. This group is another big potential market for iPad customers. People who are at home more often. These people would love to NOT be forced into funneling their guests to the computer room just to show off vacation photos, movies of the kids etc. An iPad in the living room and/or kitchen will be fairly common especially if the app developer pull thru with innovative apps and the newspaper and magazine publishers come up with a compelling product.
- 40s, 50s,60s same as above and possibly more so since any children are growing older and jobs are generally paying better then they were when they were in their 30s and time spent at home expands.
- Retired also a possibly big market... I've been finding older people seem to take to new technology VERY quickly... My 85yo father in-law is video skyping to as many people as he can find and if people he knows don't have skype he sends out emails with the links to install it.. He'd be all over the iPad and since he suffers from macular degeneration IF an iPad came out with a CAMERA I'd get him one in a heart beat. The ability to take a photo of something and then ZOOM IN to make the text bigger (so he can read it) would be invaluable. (yes hand held magnifiers exist but they all suffer to some degree or another and if you look at the prices of existing 'digital magnifiers' its sinful $600, $700, $800 and even more are quite common.
So the iPad market is kinda all over the place... and clearly certain segments of the population are a much better fit then others. But the same was true for the iPhone. While I do own one the screen is just to damn small for my (time ravaged) eyes.
Consider these points:
1) Steve Jobs is an uber-perfectionist
2) Apple likely experimented with many different display sizes for these devices
3) They could have made any display size choice(s) they wanted
4) Of all the options available to them, they chose what they did, for the iPad (and iPhone)
Why?
I have my own needs and preferences, but I suspect that: SJ, Ives, and Apple, et al have a much better understanding of the market and the device(s) than I will ever hope to have.
*
Any anti or pro iPad predictions at this point are simply that and in most cases are all nonsense on both sides of the fence. There is no way at this point anyone can know how well the iPad is going to do because it hasn't even been released.
Well that is highly debatable. I've seen enough interest in the thing that I can say it will do well. It will not do well for people looking for a video machine. On the otherhand it has enough features that I could see people buying it for a primary machine. Especially if ones interests are E-Mail and the web.
Hell pre-orders haven't even started yet.
Preorders and the first three months indicate nothing. Generally those are early adopter sales and do not indicate a long term consummer demand.
Any intelligent method and all comments anti or pro have no factual data to back them up because right now there isn't any data.
This I have to disagree with totally, we have enough info to rule out iPad for certain uses. However Apple has done us a disservice by keeping important details to themselves. One issue being the supplied RAM. There has been much noise raised about iWork for example teat we have no idea how large of a document the programs can actually handle.
So it is a mixed bag right now. That however doesn't mean aything because the data is there to judge the system in certain realms of usage.
Also what you deem logical or what appears to fit your needs may not work for someone else.
Exactly so why is everybody here defending 4:3 when it clearly is not suitable for some usages? Heck I would have settled for 720P HD. Dismissing rational desires is not taking into account what works for somebody else. It is better to simply say this is not the Video iPod.
Dave
Exactly so why is everybody here defending 4:3 when it clearly is not suitable for some usages?
Because no one aspect ratio is suitable for all usages? because for a 10" display it's the best option?
I'm glad Apple did the smart thing over the "in" thing. One of the biggest faults with netbooks is the use of 16:9 aspect ratio on a 10" display. Subsequently, I've hoped that the 4:3 ratio would reemerge since 6:9 simply doesn't work. The 13" MacBook has a shorter display height than the 12" PowerBook because of the different ratio choice. You go to 10" and you get a 4.9" . It's horrible.
Only you know what would be best (most appealing) to you so I'm certainly not going to argue with that! I do think the iPad will have wide ranging market segments.
- K-12 School Kids (provided all/most school books can be obtained in ebook format) will possible have the iPad replace the 'a laptop for every student' programs found across the US.
- College (same deal - same requirement) the first thing you learn in college is the TRUE meaning of 'school books' makes the little pile of books needed at 12th grade all but a fond memory.
- 20ish-30ish unmarried ESPECIALLY will in my estimation be the hard sell. These people are way too active, bars, dance clubs, team recreation, working out, clubs, leagues, etc yea these are the iPhone people the iPad would do nothing for them but be a pain to carry.
- 30-somthings (married ones especially) clubs are no longer the place to be, sure you still go out on occasion but not nearly as much as you did when you were single/dating. Many have purchased a comfortable home and enjoy spending time at home... Having weekend cookout and maybe a weeknight power game. This group is another big potential market for iPad customers. People who are at home more often. These people would love to NOT be forced into funneling their guests to the computer room just to show off vacation photos, movies of the kids etc. An iPad in the living room and/or kitchen will be fairly common especially if the app developer pull thru with innovative apps and the newspaper and magazine publishers come up with a compelling product.
- 40s, 50s,60s same as above and possibly more so since any children are growing older and jobs are generally paying better then they were when they were in their 30s and time spent at home expands.
- Retired also a possibly big market... I've been finding older people seem to take to new technology VERY quickly... My 85yo father in-law is video skyping to as many people as he can find and if people he knows don't have skype he sends out emails with the links to install it.. He'd be all over the iPad and since he suffers from macular degeneration IF an iPad came out with a CAMERA I'd get him one in a heart beat. The ability to take a photo of something and then ZOOM IN to make the text bigger (so he can read it) would be invaluable. (yes hand held magnifiers exist but they all suffer to some degree or another and if you look at the prices of existing 'digital magnifiers' its sinful $600, $700, $800 and even more are quite common.
So the iPad market is kinda all over the place... and clearly certain segments of the population are a much better fit then others. But the same was true for the iPhone. While I do own one the screen is just to damn small for my (time ravaged) eyes.
One of the issues I will have to get past is the fact the iPad doesn't use a full OS. While for some that isn't an issue at all in fact some see it as a benefit because it suits their needs better.
I have used a Tablet in the past and I am just simply use to having the same functions I have on my primary system. I don't expect those same function on my mobile device but over time I have come to expect them from a Tablet.
Windows based Tablets as Solip would say simply plop Windows on a Tablet. He is correct but over time that is what I have gotten use too and maybe have adapted.
Once I get my hands on an iPad and play around with it a bit I could certainly change my mind about getting a first gen iPad, but its not something I would pre-order without using it first.
One of the things I would be looking forward too is gaming on an iPad compared to an iPod Touch. Multi-touch iWorks is also a very attractive option for me, one of the main reasons I use a MBP is Keynote and Pages.
So time will tell. I expect I will end up with one at some point just not sure if it will be when they are first released.
Well that is highly debatable. I've seen enough interest in the thing that I can say it will do well. It will not do well for people looking for a video machine. On the otherhand it has enough features that I could see people buying it for a primary machine. Especially if ones interests are E-Mail and the web.
Preorders and the first three months indicate nothing. Generally those are early adopter sales and do not indicate a long term consummer demand.
This I have to disagree with totally, we have enough info to rule out iPad for certain uses. However Apple has done us a disservice by keeping important details to themselves. One issue being the supplied RAM. There has been much noise raised about iWork for example teat we have no idea how large of a document the programs can actually handle.
So it is a mixed bag right now. That however doesn't mean aything because the data is there to judge the system in certain realms of usage.
Exactly so why is everybody here defending 4:3 when it clearly is not suitable for some usages? Heck I would have settled for 720P HD. Dismissing rational desires is not taking into account what works for somebody else. It is better to simply say this is not the Video iPod.
Dave
Everything is debatable at this point. Also I have never defended 4:3 because I also believe in some cases its an issue. May not be an issue for some but it is form, as is HD.
...all this discussion of the iPad (and iPhone) display and what is the proper aspect ration for displaying content.
Consider these points:
1) Steve Jobs is an uber-perfectionist
2) Apple likely experimented with many different display sizes for these devices
3) They could have made any display size choice(s) they wanted
4) Of all the options available to them, they chose what they did, for the iPad (and iPhone)
Why?
I have my own needs and preferences, but I suspect that: SJ, Ives, and Apple, et al have a much better understanding of the market and the device(s) than I will ever hope to have.
*
For many decades SJ and Apple couldn't understand the market if smacked them in the face, their stock value and market share clearly reflected that simple fact.
Apple is doing well now but that doesn't mean they get everything perfect and its not clear yet if the iPad will be popular or not. Forums like this just assume its going to be the best thing since sliced bread.
Most other forums not totally Apple devoted raise real issues and in many cases the iPad does not relfect what the consumer whats or needs.
You will always have a better understanding of what you want because you are the end user.
Instead we get a bunch of nonsensical responses like suggestions to go find an IPS screen for a HD tablet this size. It should be pretty obvious that Apple is having this screen crafted for their needs as mist of the display manufactures have left the 4:3 world behind. The fact is Apple could have asked for a round display to build iPorthole and the display manufactures would have jumped to make the iPorthole screen. The 4:3 screen on the iPad is a design decision made by Apple and nothing more.
Now the question becomes is that the best choice? Well it certainly isn't if the point of this thread is to be believed. Selling HD content for use on old 4:3 screens is difficult at best. In fact one could say that HD content drove the adoption of HD TVs. So in the context of this thread I don't believe the iPad will be generating that much revenue from conent sales. At least not movies. I do suspect that movies aren't even on Apples radar as far as iPad content goes.
Speaking of which, we had the stupid comment that iPad would drive content back to the 4:3 ratio. Sorry guys but I don't see this happening at all. Would anyone want to watch the next Avatar or Hurt Locker as a 4:3 movie in a theater? There is a reason that the movie industry went to wider and wider formats over the years and the studios ate likely to go back. Even outside of movies content will still be produced for the wider formats with the iPad getting compromised versions. Like it or not the 4:3 ratio is outdated for content containg video or games.
Further the inability for people to listen to what is being said about video on the web is important. It isn't so much an issue of Flash as it is the ability to view videos. It is a fine distinction but one that needs to be clarified. The simple fact is that if Apples devices could play back Flash videos without flash the iPad would be a lot more useful on the web. The reason is pretty simple really, even sites that support iPhone don't have all their videos available in compatible formats. So hopefully this clears up the issue where people don't care about or for flash but are concerned about videos on the web. Click to Flash is a wonderful thing on the Mac as it permits one to stave off flash while still getting the news or whatever.
So all of this together has me wondering just what is generating all these ignorant responses. It would be far better to simply say the iPad is not the video iPod device many of us where looking for. That would avoid all the ignorant attempts to justify a 4:3 device as a video delivery system. It isn't and frankly I don't think that was even Apples intention. Nor do I see the device generating the revenue this thread implies from movies. So it is entirely justified in being frustrated with Apples new iPad if your hopes where for a media consumption device with media being heavily weighted towards movies.
Dave
Which must mean the whole world (minus you) thinks it's a great device .... shocking ..... aren't you ever going to get tired of swimming "upstream"?
I find that I often think different.
?
Read it in context and you will get the full meaning. But here's a free clue: one is a means while the other is the end.
Because no one aspect ratio is suitable for all usages? because for a 10" display it's the best option?
It is a good size for some uses. For movie playback it simply sucks. In any event this highlights the entire problem with this thread. If one is interested in movies on the thing it doesn't matter if 4:3 is good for some things, it is wothless for the desired usage.
The problem here is that many are having problems accepting that a lot of us where really interested in that movie playback aspect of the iPad. Apple moving to 4:3 just makes the thing far less useful.
I'm glad Apple did the smart thing over the "in" thing. One of the biggest faults with netbooks is the use of 16:9 aspect ratio on a 10" display.
This is not however a netbook. Even there though I could debate with you the aspect ratio issue.
Subsequently, I've hoped that the 4:3 ratio would reemerge since 6:9 simply doesn't work. The 13" MacBook has a shorter display height than the 12" PowerBook because of the different ratio choice.
Yes but how many pixels are being put on the screen? Besides that the wider screen can work out much better for document creation if your software is designed for it. In any event you mis the point with small notebooks, they are all compromizes. The biggest issue with respect to functionality is the keyboard which can't be shrunk in width excessively. They reality is the small laptops aren't even possible without the wider screens.
You go to 10" and you get a 4.9" . It's horrible.
It is by no means horrible. However a different device is implied. Also there is nothing to say a HD ratio screen has to have a ten inch diagonal. Considering I was hoping for something in the seven inch range there are a lot of options for Apple.
The point is that the iPad is a disappointment if you are interested in video playback. That is not an insult to the product as I'm sure it is going to do very well indeed. Rather it just misses entirely one market it could have excelled in.
It is sort of like having your kid grow up to be a lawyer when you had your heart set on a doctor in the family.
I guess you will have to wait many more years or you can start your own company and make the whatever you want to whatever specifications you wish and market it. FOR NOW---IF YOU DON'T LKE IT. DON'T BUY IT AND DON'T MAKE COMPLAINTS THAT OTHERS FAIL TO SEE IN YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
I don't think I have ever made complaints that others fail to see my point of view.
Because no one aspect ratio is suitable for all usages? because for a 10" display it's the best option?
I'm glad Apple did the smart thing over the "in" thing. One of the biggest faults with netbooks is the use of 16:9 aspect ratio on a 10" display. Subsequently, I've hoped that the 4:3 ratio would reemerge since 6:9 simply doesn't work. The 13" MacBook has a shorter display height than the 12" PowerBook because of the different ratio choice. You go to 10" and you get a 4.9" . It's horrible.
I think that an 11 or 12 inch screen would have been a better choice.