My thread is obviously poorly named, since everyone seems to be caught up on iPad sales figures, when my real point was to discuss whom they can and can't sell it to and why. I guess people would rather discuss the definition of "selling like hotcakes", of which I have no interest.
My thread is obviously poorly named, since everyone seems to be caught up on iPad sales figures, when my real point was to discuss whom they can and can't sell it to and why. I guess people would rather discuss the definition of "selling like hotcakes", of which I have no interest.
I don't think anyone has missed the point except you. Hotcakes aside, your thread was just another treatise on why the iPad would not sell successfully. Regardless of what you name the thread, you were very, very wrong. There is no reason why the iPad will not sell as it is selling as fast as they can be produced. That means all of your well considered reasons were just plain wrong. Trying to pretend that you meant something else at this point is just plain silly.
I don't think anyone has missed the point except you. Hotcakes aside, your thread was just another treatise on why the iPad would not sell successfully. Regardless of what you name the thread, you were very, very wrong. There is no reason why the iPad will not sell as it is selling as fast as they can be produced. That means all of your well considered reasons were just plain wrong. Trying to pretend that you meant something else at this point is just plain silly.
Thank you for telling me what the point of my own thread was; what would I do without you
It would have been pointless to create a thread predicting the iPad to be unsuccessful, as its success is measured only by how many units Apple had hoped to sell, which is not a number they shared with us. What I was discussing was who the iPad is limited to, and what software limitations are currently in place that prevent the iPad from selling outside that market. Please, explain to me how I was wrong about that?
There is nothing wrong with those who buy the iPad if wish.
The latest iPad sales of two million sounds impressive, but there are 1.8 BILLION Internet users worldwide, so that leaves 1.6 BILLION that are not buying so far.
Of course Apple isn't looking to sell 1.6 billion, likely happy to sell several million to the rich tech types and make decent profits. Nothing wrong with that.
Apple is also happy with their niche single digit or sometimes double digit market share of computers too.
The iPad being chained to a computer is designed to prevent it from running off as it's own platform obviously and to get people to buy a Mac as their next computer.
So if you have cheap Windows PC and buy a $500 iPad, Apple is hoping you will like it so much as to buy a $1000+ Mac next time around.
It's not like Apple will allow OS X on PC's so they got to have some way for people to get use to the way Apple does things.
Imagine a person considering a luxury car and renting different ones to see which one works well for them. That's what the iPad is, a way to get a Apple at a low price point, but with enough limitations to get your to upgrade to a full Mac later.
It's no wonder well seasoned computer users detest the iPad, they see no purpose for it. But Apple does, it's just another "halo" effect product like the iPhone and iPod are.
While the idea behind this thread has some merit I don't really see the problem. The iPad has just come out and it's selling like mad. The current feature set satisfies the desires of enough people to sell every one Apple makes. When demand begins to slacken, Apple can announce an update which implements new features to help boost demand. There is little to prevent apple from implementing most of this at some point in the future anyhow. As many have mentioned, there are some good apps to cover most of the points. This situation will only improve as apps evolve and more developers join in.
As for Flash, the sooner it dies, the better. In my experience, it diminishes the web experience far more than it enhances it. Additionally, the performance of Flash on OS X does nothing to assure me that a mobile version would be a positive experience.
All things considered, it's probably better to focus on what the iPad *can* do rather than what it can't.
The iPad is selling very well (hotter than hotcakes), likely beyond even Apple's dreams. Why? Because it is awesome. Yeah, I have had one for six days and can honestly say it is awesome.
Is it perfect? No. Is anything?
In Jobs' interview the other day, he mentioned a transition. Apple is fully aware of where tech is going in the next several years and are also fully aware of what they can do well right now. They made a great device now, one that will be updated over the years to eventually (IMO) be a complete stand-alone device, no PC required.
Had a thought last night that the Apple TV could eventually be the support device for the iPad. As it connects to a TV and thus has a monitor, and connects to the internet, it is the perfect compliment device to the iPad. All it needs it the software tweaks that would allow it to back up the iPad, restore the factory settings, etc. Of course, it would need the ability to back up to a hard drive, too. All for under 300 bucks. So, you could use your iPad without a more expensive computer.
The iPad is a terribly limited product for most geeks like me, but for millions of casual users, it is the BEST at what it does, so that, along with ridiculous fanfare, are why it has been the biggest launch in recent gadget history.
I still doubt that Apple will sell 8 million this year, but somewhere in the 6-7 million range is very possible.
The iPad is a terribly limited product for most geeks like me, but for millions of casual users, it is the BEST at what it does, so that, along with ridiculous fanfare, are why it has been the biggest launch in recent gadget history.
I don't call doctors who use the iPad to assist them during surgery "casual users", nor teachers who use their iPads in class, nor the business guys I saw this morning having a meeting while viewing data on their iPads, nor lots of other people who have bought it.
For many people, yes, it is great. It won't suit everyone's needs; nothing does. Some people need the power and expandability of a MacPro. Others' needs are perfectly covered by even just an iPhone, or perhaps no electronic device at all.
I don't call doctors who use the iPad to assist them during surgery "casual users", nor teachers who use their iPads in class, nor the business guys I saw this morning having a meeting while viewing data on their iPads, nor lots of other people who have bought it.
For many people, yes, it is great. It won't suit everyone's needs; nothing does. Some people need the power and expandability of a MacPro. Others' needs are perfectly covered by even just an iPhone, or perhaps no electronic device at all.
You forgot the columnists who have changed to writing all their articles on the iPad.
Of course, I wonder if the new HP line of printers that prints whatever you email to it was already in the works before they knew about the iPad's innate lack of printing or not. B/c it seems like those printers were custom made for devices like the iPad.
The latest iPad sales of two million sounds impressive, but there are 1.8 BILLION Internet users worldwide, so that leaves 1.6 BILLION that are not buying so far.
My thread is obviously poorly named, since everyone seems to be caught up on iPad sales figures, when my real point was to discuss whom they can and can't sell it to and why. I guess people would rather discuss the definition of "selling like hotcakes", of which I have no interest.
The thing about the internet is that making grand statements is harder to make go away than it was to make it in the first place.
It would have been pointless to create a thread predicting the iPad to be unsuccessful, as its success is measured only by how many units Apple had hoped to sell, which is not a number they shared with us.
Except that you did predict the iPad would be unsuccessful...deliberately. Your post wasn't worded as a discussion but as a series of opinions stated as facts. Writing what you wrote was almost satirical in comparison to posts on why the iPhone or iPod wouldn't sell.
As far as the number Apple hoped to sell, the addition of a second supplier indicates that it's selling more than they thought or they'd have had both suppliers from the get go.
Quote:
What I was discussing was who the iPad is limited to, and what software limitations are currently in place that prevent the iPad from selling outside that market. Please, explain to me how I was wrong about that?
Nice spin. You essentially said that the only folks that would buy this is fanbois.
"expensive luxury accessory"
"But can a poor college kid or grandparent not wanting to spend a grand on a computer opt for a $499 iPad instead?"
"the only potential customers are those who already own a full-fledged [desktop] computer"
"The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets."
The iPad is selling like hotcakes and outside your limits. Your "limits" are either extremely short lived (multitasking, printing, photo manipulation) or deliberate strategic choices by Apple (slave device, flash).
Oops nothing. This thread has nothing to do with sales predictions, but rather who the iPad market is limited to. As I said, it was poorly titled. Even if they sold ten million a month it wouldn't invalidate the actual points I made in my first post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Except that you did predict the iPad would be unsuccessful...deliberately. Your post wasn't worded as a discussion but as a series of opinions stated as facts. Writing what you wrote was almost satirical in comparison to posts on why the iPhone or iPod wouldn't sell.
I did nothing of the sort. The points I made were facts, not opinions. The fact is that the iPad is a slave device. Regarding its success, as I've already stated only Apple can say whether the iPad is or is not a success, because they never shared their expected sales numbers with the public. That said, I'm sure they're happy with the number they're selling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Nice spin. You essentially said that the only folks that would buy this is fanbois.
"expensive luxury accessory"
"But can a poor college kid or grandparent not wanting to spend a grand on a computer opt for a $499 iPad instead?"
"the only potential customers are those who already own a full-fledged [desktop] computer"
"The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets."
The iPad is selling like hotcakes and outside your limits. Your "limits" are either extremely short lived (multitasking, printing, photo manipulation) or deliberate strategic choices by Apple (slave device, flash).
You've nicely outlined here just how well you've misunderstood me. Why do you assume that when outlining the limits of the iPad, that I'm talking about my list of requirements the iPad should meet? Mr. nht, I am the demographic the iPad is currently restricted to: I have a fully-functioning home computer and disposable income. That's why I have an iPad and love it. I'm talking about the big picture here. I'm talking about an iPad for every K-12 student, half of the college students, docked at most office desks, and in the hands of everybody's grandma. I think the features I outlined will one day come to pass (except for Flash), because like Steve Jobs says the personal computer will one day be owned by a few, just as how most people drive cars instead of trucks, while everyone else uses an iPad-like device instead. Not this year, not next year, but one day.
My intent was to outline the limitations currently in place that would need to be addressed before the iPad can reach new markets. This thread was never supposed to be about how well it would or would not do within the "I already have a computer but can afford to buy a device to use when I can't be bothered to use my computer" demographic.
Oops nothing. This thread has nothing to do with sales predictions, but rather who the iPad market is limited to. As I said, it was poorly titled. Even if they sold ten million a month it wouldn't invalidate the actual points I made in my first post.
"Apple could sell a billion iPads if they had..."
"These are just flat-out lost sales..."
[if they did what I say the] "...number of potential customers is endless"
Please. You're talking sales and potential sales as a function of market.
Quote:
I did nothing of the sort. The points I made were facts, not opinions. The fact is that the iPad is a slave device. Regarding its success, as I've already stated only Apple can say whether the iPad is or is not a success, because they never shared their expected sales numbers with the public. That said, I'm sure they're happy with the number they're selling.
" It has to function solo," "do 100% of what 90% " is opinion.
" It has to be able to print," is opinion.
" It needs basic photo-manipulation capabilities." is opinion.
[it has to have] "Multi-tasking and Flash support." is opinion.
That the iPad currently lacks these features is fact. That these are hard requirements to be successful is not fact but opinion. It is not even a fact that these features are all required to replace the netbook for "90%" of users. The statement that Apple misunderstands the netbook market is certainly opinion and not fact.
Quote:
You've nicely outlined here just how well you've misunderstood me. Why do you assume that when outlining the limits of the iPad, that I'm talking about my list of requirements the iPad should meet?
Yes, these are your requirements. Whom else's would they be?
Quote:
I'm talking about the big picture here. I'm talking about an iPad for every K-12 student, half of the college students, docked at most office desks, and in the hands of everybody's grandma.
In at least 3 of those 4 use cases the need for this to be a master device is debatable given that most homes already have a computer of some kind to act as a master device.
Grandma, maybe not.
Those users also do not all need all of the other requirements although printing is probably one common one...that will be solved.
Quote:
My intent was to outline the limitations currently in place that would need to be addressed before the iPad can reach new markets. This thread was never supposed to be about how well it would or would not do within the "I already have a computer but can afford to buy a device to use when I can't be bothered to use my computer" demographic.
So you're saying that the iPad is not already selling to any new markets for Apple? That the iPad doesn't itself define a new market?
The iPad is selling as fast as Apple can make them, and it's not even launched in many countries. iPad madness will continue, despite the shortcomings which are obviously there.
Comments
My thread is obviously poorly named, since everyone seems to be caught up on iPad sales figures, when my real point was to discuss whom they can and can't sell it to and why. I guess people would rather discuss the definition of "selling like hotcakes", of which I have no interest.
I don't think anyone has missed the point except you. Hotcakes aside, your thread was just another treatise on why the iPad would not sell successfully. Regardless of what you name the thread, you were very, very wrong. There is no reason why the iPad will not sell as it is selling as fast as they can be produced. That means all of your well considered reasons were just plain wrong. Trying to pretend that you meant something else at this point is just plain silly.
I don't think anyone has missed the point except you. Hotcakes aside, your thread was just another treatise on why the iPad would not sell successfully. Regardless of what you name the thread, you were very, very wrong. There is no reason why the iPad will not sell as it is selling as fast as they can be produced. That means all of your well considered reasons were just plain wrong. Trying to pretend that you meant something else at this point is just plain silly.
Thank you for telling me what the point of my own thread was; what would I do without you
It would have been pointless to create a thread predicting the iPad to be unsuccessful, as its success is measured only by how many units Apple had hoped to sell, which is not a number they shared with us. What I was discussing was who the iPad is limited to, and what software limitations are currently in place that prevent the iPad from selling outside that market. Please, explain to me how I was wrong about that?
The latest iPad sales of two million sounds impressive, but there are 1.8 BILLION Internet users worldwide, so that leaves 1.6 BILLION that are not buying so far.
Of course Apple isn't looking to sell 1.6 billion, likely happy to sell several million to the rich tech types and make decent profits. Nothing wrong with that.
Apple is also happy with their niche single digit or sometimes double digit market share of computers too.
The iPad being chained to a computer is designed to prevent it from running off as it's own platform obviously and to get people to buy a Mac as their next computer.
So if you have cheap Windows PC and buy a $500 iPad, Apple is hoping you will like it so much as to buy a $1000+ Mac next time around.
It's not like Apple will allow OS X on PC's so they got to have some way for people to get use to the way Apple does things.
Imagine a person considering a luxury car and renting different ones to see which one works well for them. That's what the iPad is, a way to get a Apple at a low price point, but with enough limitations to get your to upgrade to a full Mac later.
It's no wonder well seasoned computer users detest the iPad, they see no purpose for it. But Apple does, it's just another "halo" effect product like the iPhone and iPod are.
As for Flash, the sooner it dies, the better. In my experience, it diminishes the web experience far more than it enhances it. Additionally, the performance of Flash on OS X does nothing to assure me that a mobile version would be a positive experience.
All things considered, it's probably better to focus on what the iPad *can* do rather than what it can't.
Is it perfect? No. Is anything?
In Jobs' interview the other day, he mentioned a transition. Apple is fully aware of where tech is going in the next several years and are also fully aware of what they can do well right now. They made a great device now, one that will be updated over the years to eventually (IMO) be a complete stand-alone device, no PC required.
Had a thought last night that the Apple TV could eventually be the support device for the iPad. As it connects to a TV and thus has a monitor, and connects to the internet, it is the perfect compliment device to the iPad. All it needs it the software tweaks that would allow it to back up the iPad, restore the factory settings, etc. Of course, it would need the ability to back up to a hard drive, too. All for under 300 bucks. So, you could use your iPad without a more expensive computer.
I still doubt that Apple will sell 8 million this year, but somewhere in the 6-7 million range is very possible.
The iPad is a terribly limited product for most geeks like me, but for millions of casual users, it is the BEST at what it does, so that, along with ridiculous fanfare, are why it has been the biggest launch in recent gadget history.
I don't call doctors who use the iPad to assist them during surgery "casual users", nor teachers who use their iPads in class, nor the business guys I saw this morning having a meeting while viewing data on their iPads, nor lots of other people who have bought it.
For many people, yes, it is great. It won't suit everyone's needs; nothing does. Some people need the power and expandability of a MacPro. Others' needs are perfectly covered by even just an iPhone, or perhaps no electronic device at all.
I don't call doctors who use the iPad to assist them during surgery "casual users", nor teachers who use their iPads in class, nor the business guys I saw this morning having a meeting while viewing data on their iPads, nor lots of other people who have bought it.
For many people, yes, it is great. It won't suit everyone's needs; nothing does. Some people need the power and expandability of a MacPro. Others' needs are perfectly covered by even just an iPhone, or perhaps no electronic device at all.
You forgot the columnists who have changed to writing all their articles on the iPad.
You forgot the columnists who have changed to writing all their articles on the iPad.
And lots of other professionals who are flocking to buy the thing.
The latest iPad sales of two million sounds impressive, but there are 1.8 BILLION Internet users worldwide, so that leaves 1.6 BILLION that are not buying so far.
You're bad at math.
My thread is obviously poorly named, since everyone seems to be caught up on iPad sales figures, when my real point was to discuss whom they can and can't sell it to and why. I guess people would rather discuss the definition of "selling like hotcakes", of which I have no interest.
The thing about the internet is that making grand statements is harder to make go away than it was to make it in the first place.
Apple selling 1.2 million iPads per month, rate could double by holidays
Ooops.
It would have been pointless to create a thread predicting the iPad to be unsuccessful, as its success is measured only by how many units Apple had hoped to sell, which is not a number they shared with us.
Except that you did predict the iPad would be unsuccessful...deliberately. Your post wasn't worded as a discussion but as a series of opinions stated as facts. Writing what you wrote was almost satirical in comparison to posts on why the iPhone or iPod wouldn't sell.
As far as the number Apple hoped to sell, the addition of a second supplier indicates that it's selling more than they thought or they'd have had both suppliers from the get go.
What I was discussing was who the iPad is limited to, and what software limitations are currently in place that prevent the iPad from selling outside that market. Please, explain to me how I was wrong about that?
Nice spin. You essentially said that the only folks that would buy this is fanbois.
"expensive luxury accessory"
"But can a poor college kid or grandparent not wanting to spend a grand on a computer opt for a $499 iPad instead?"
"the only potential customers are those who already own a full-fledged [desktop] computer"
"The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets."
The iPad is selling like hotcakes and outside your limits. Your "limits" are either extremely short lived (multitasking, printing, photo manipulation) or deliberate strategic choices by Apple (slave device, flash).
The thing about the internet is that making grand statements is harder to make go away than it was to make it in the first place.
Apple selling 1.2 million iPads per month, rate could double by holidays
Ooops.
Oops nothing. This thread has nothing to do with sales predictions, but rather who the iPad market is limited to. As I said, it was poorly titled. Even if they sold ten million a month it wouldn't invalidate the actual points I made in my first post.
Except that you did predict the iPad would be unsuccessful...deliberately. Your post wasn't worded as a discussion but as a series of opinions stated as facts. Writing what you wrote was almost satirical in comparison to posts on why the iPhone or iPod wouldn't sell.
I did nothing of the sort. The points I made were facts, not opinions. The fact is that the iPad is a slave device. Regarding its success, as I've already stated only Apple can say whether the iPad is or is not a success, because they never shared their expected sales numbers with the public. That said, I'm sure they're happy with the number they're selling.
Nice spin. You essentially said that the only folks that would buy this is fanbois.
"expensive luxury accessory"
"But can a poor college kid or grandparent not wanting to spend a grand on a computer opt for a $499 iPad instead?"
"the only potential customers are those who already own a full-fledged [desktop] computer"
"The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets."
The iPad is selling like hotcakes and outside your limits. Your "limits" are either extremely short lived (multitasking, printing, photo manipulation) or deliberate strategic choices by Apple (slave device, flash).
You've nicely outlined here just how well you've misunderstood me. Why do you assume that when outlining the limits of the iPad, that I'm talking about my list of requirements the iPad should meet? Mr. nht, I am the demographic the iPad is currently restricted to: I have a fully-functioning home computer and disposable income. That's why I have an iPad and love it. I'm talking about the big picture here. I'm talking about an iPad for every K-12 student, half of the college students, docked at most office desks, and in the hands of everybody's grandma. I think the features I outlined will one day come to pass (except for Flash), because like Steve Jobs says the personal computer will one day be owned by a few, just as how most people drive cars instead of trucks, while everyone else uses an iPad-like device instead. Not this year, not next year, but one day.
My intent was to outline the limitations currently in place that would need to be addressed before the iPad can reach new markets. This thread was never supposed to be about how well it would or would not do within the "I already have a computer but can afford to buy a device to use when I can't be bothered to use my computer" demographic.
Oops nothing. This thread has nothing to do with sales predictions, but rather who the iPad market is limited to. As I said, it was poorly titled. Even if they sold ten million a month it wouldn't invalidate the actual points I made in my first post.
"Apple could sell a billion iPads if they had..."
"These are just flat-out lost sales..."
[if they did what I say the] "...number of potential customers is endless"
Please. You're talking sales and potential sales as a function of market.
I did nothing of the sort. The points I made were facts, not opinions. The fact is that the iPad is a slave device. Regarding its success, as I've already stated only Apple can say whether the iPad is or is not a success, because they never shared their expected sales numbers with the public. That said, I'm sure they're happy with the number they're selling.
" It has to function solo," "do 100% of what 90% " is opinion.
" It has to be able to print," is opinion.
" It needs basic photo-manipulation capabilities." is opinion.
[it has to have] "Multi-tasking and Flash support." is opinion.
That the iPad currently lacks these features is fact. That these are hard requirements to be successful is not fact but opinion. It is not even a fact that these features are all required to replace the netbook for "90%" of users. The statement that Apple misunderstands the netbook market is certainly opinion and not fact.
You've nicely outlined here just how well you've misunderstood me. Why do you assume that when outlining the limits of the iPad, that I'm talking about my list of requirements the iPad should meet?
Yes, these are your requirements. Whom else's would they be?
I'm talking about the big picture here. I'm talking about an iPad for every K-12 student, half of the college students, docked at most office desks, and in the hands of everybody's grandma.
In at least 3 of those 4 use cases the need for this to be a master device is debatable given that most homes already have a computer of some kind to act as a master device.
Grandma, maybe not.
Those users also do not all need all of the other requirements although printing is probably one common one...that will be solved.
My intent was to outline the limitations currently in place that would need to be addressed before the iPad can reach new markets. This thread was never supposed to be about how well it would or would not do within the "I already have a computer but can afford to buy a device to use when I can't be bothered to use my computer" demographic.
So you're saying that the iPad is not already selling to any new markets for Apple? That the iPad doesn't itself define a new market?
Mmmkay...bold assertion.