RIM PlayBook only garnering half the prelaunch interest of iPad

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 54
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Takeo View Post


    I'm shocked it's even getting half the interest. I figured it would be a lot less than that.



    Yeah, I was going to say that -half- of iPad's interest nearly a year after people have seen and now been desensitized to tablets is pretty damn impressive...



    I'd like to disclaim that I know absolutely nothing about this device, so it could be made of Kraft Singles for all I know...



    -Clive
  • Reply 22 of 54
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,948member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    ... I believe this article shows some of the problems with RIM's approach to their tablet. It's three pages:



    http://www.pcworld.com/article/21767...html?tk=hp_new



    Sounds much worse than I had even imagined, but I loved this bit:



    Quote:

    RIM also argues that users always have their BlackBerrys with them, so PlayBook users won't need to worry about getting BES connectivity. Ironically, the RIM exec who told me this had left his BlackBerry at home that day, so he couldn't actually use his PlayBook prototype to connect to BES and show me how it worked.



  • Reply 23 of 54
    boogabooga Posts: 1,082member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Takeo View Post


    I'm shocked it's even getting half the interest. I figured it would be a lot less than that.



    That was my reaction, too. If it's really going to be half as popular as the iPad that's actually quite an accomplishment. But... 1,100 "consumers" is an awfully small sample size. It's really easy to accidentally stumble across pockets of folks that would skew the results significantly, and the timing (*RIGHT* after CES) probably skewed results far away from what they'll be in a few weeks. Without reading about the questioning process, sample selection, or other methodology it's really hard to make a judgement about whether this is just noise or not. My guess? Noise.
  • Reply 24 of 54
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    First of all, we have to distinguish between what a company "expects" to sell, and what actually happens.



    [?]



    I believe this article shows some of the problems with RIM's approach to their tablet. It's three pages:



    http://www.pcworld.com/article/21767...html?tk=hp_new



    There is a lot of truth there, but I also can?t help but think about the Samsung Galaxy Tab running the smartphone version of Android, with no 3rd-party apps for tablets and a poor battery life still selling over 1M units in what I think is a very short time for what I think is a poorly conceived product. RiM seems to be in a better position than the Galaxy Tab so I think several million is very possible for the first version.
  • Reply 25 of 54
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,948member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    There is a lot of truth there, but I also can?t help but think about the Samsung Galaxy Tab running the smartphone version of Android, with no 3rd-party apps for tablets and a poor battery life still selling over 1M units in what I think is a very short time for what I think is a poorly conceived product. RiM seems to be in a better position than the Galaxy Tab so I think several million is very possible for the first version.



    Well, that 1M units of the Galaxy Tab represents the number of hardcore Android geeks that "had to have one". How many hardcore RIM geeks (not typical users) are there?
  • Reply 26 of 54
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post


    These numbers get revised downwards twice:



    The first time will be when the Playbook actually gets released, and people actually get to use the device for real, and find out the 4000 apps RIM says will be able when it ships are just web pages that display better on the iPad.



    The second time will be when the iPad 2 is announced.



    *Assuming the PlayBook even ships first, which is far from a given.
  • Reply 27 of 54
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,948member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post


    *Assuming the PlayBook ships [before iPad 2], which is far from a given.



    I'd say it almost certainly won't.
  • Reply 28 of 54
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Well, that 1M units of the Galaxy Tab represents the number of hardcore Android geeks that "had to have one". How many hardcore RIM geeks (not typical users) are there?



    There aren't any hardcore android geeks anymore --- ever since their "open source" bubble got busted by the so-called efuse tivo-ized with Microsoft Bing search on top. Android is THE tool by the carriers like Verizon to lock down stuff their own way.
  • Reply 29 of 54
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,948member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    There aren't any hardcore android geeks anymore --- ever since their "open source" bubble got busted by the so-called efuse tivo-ized with Microsoft Bing search on top. Android is THE tool by the carriers like Verizon to lock down stuff their own way.



    I agree with your second sentence, but they are all still living in denial.
  • Reply 30 of 54
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post


    RBC interest.... This should have been placed at the beginning of the article. Could have saved me, and others, valuable time



    RBC was also a Nortel supporter. That didn't turn out so well either.
  • Reply 31 of 54
    Playbook eh? I wonder if it's a 3-4 or 4-3 based one?
  • Reply 32 of 54
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    Guys I think it is called Sarcasm, I know it hard to believe that someone who lives in Calif understands sarcasm,



    Finally, a genius!
  • Reply 33 of 54
    dualiedualie Posts: 334member
    I'm interested in the Playbook and I plan to give it a serious look.
  • Reply 34 of 54
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post


    Hah, indeed I did. Thanks for the clarification!



    Campestral greetings from London suburbs!
  • Reply 35 of 54
    dualiedualie Posts: 334member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SailorPaul View Post


    RBC was also a Nortel supporter. That didn't turn out so well either.



    Canadian banks also didn't require bailouts from the Feds.
  • Reply 36 of 54
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post


    It's all a Public Relations show. RIM has made over 20 announcements about its Playbook and it is not even out for sale yet. On the other hand, Apple made only 1 announcement and item was available on that same day for developers to play with.



    Well, it shows that RIM is scared and is just trying to make noise for noise sake. Just like before Blackberry Storm came out, there were many smoke from RIM but Storm never ignited any fire.



    Playbook is DOA. I will not take it for free.



    I agree 100 Percent. It's called FUD and they stole it from the Microsoft playbook !



    [PUN INTENDED]
  • Reply 37 of 54
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post


    Please explain what part of Apple's no-flash strategy leads anyone to believe that consumers give a crap? Is it the endless developer support for Apple's platform? Or the 160Million Flash-less iOS devices sold? Or the product launches featuring people wrapped around the block, eager to get their hands on the newest device that doesn't run flash?



    Nerds and apple-haters care about flash. Consumers do not.





    I read the post with the mention of "Flash" on every other bullet point as SARCASM!



    In that to differentiate itself, RIM will tout Flash capability and therefore a superior product because consumers will have access to the "whole internet", however, it has been proven without a doubt that a device like the Flash-less iPad can be wildly successful even without such a bullet point.



    In fact, if it weren't for the Playbook having Flash, there probably would be only half of the half showing prelaunch interest which for RIM would not be good.



    But that is how I interpreted the post, but the only way to find out which interpretation is correct is to ask the poster.

    /

    /

    /
  • Reply 38 of 54
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post


    The PlayBook will only need a few bullets on the box it will ship in:
    • Runs Flash

    • Can play a 1080p video in the background while you play Checkers in the foreground. Useful!

    • Flash

    • Dual-hexacore modulus RAM with L6 cache and asynchronous step-down transformers (iPad has none of these worthless hardware specs)

    • Plays Adobe Corporation's Flash content using its built-in Flash plug-in, which the iPad doesn't have

    • See bullets above




    LOLz!!!!



    You forgot:
    • Will fit in a large coat pocket--take that, iPad!!!

  • Reply 39 of 54
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,599member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    There is a lot of truth there, but I also can?t help but think about the Samsung Galaxy Tab running the smartphone version of Android, with no 3rd-party apps for tablets and a poor battery life still selling over 1M units in what I think is a very short time for what I think is a poorly conceived product. RiM seems to be in a better position than the Galaxy Tab so I think several million is very possible for the first version.



    To a large extent, Android buyers are either anti-Apple buyers, or can't get an iPad for some reason. I don't see the Playbook as appealing to that crowd as much.



    In addition, Samsung has you thinking, in its Ads, that there ARE a lot of apps available. I don't see how RIM could pull that off as well. And Samsung doesn't talk about battery life. Most consumers aren't sophisticated enough to do any useful research, and will buy just on the Ad. I know Ill get some flack for saying this, but Apple gets a lot of sales that way too. The difference is that Apple's products usually deliver what the Ads say.



    How will the Tabs buyers react when they find out that it can't be upgraded to Honeycomb? Assuming what we're hearing about the required specs for it are true.



    As for the Playbook, who will be interested? A recent survey of CIO's showed that 78% of those who were going to implement tablets for their firms were going to buy iPads, and that 9% were going for Playbooks. Right now, Android is pretty much out of the picture for corporate use, and MS was about 5%.
  • Reply 40 of 54
    jcozjcoz Posts: 251member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post


    LOLz!!!!



    You forgot:
    • Will fit in a large coat pocket--take that, iPad!!!




    Easily the 2nd most important feature....how could he have left that out?
Sign In or Register to comment.