FYI, you are allowed to compare your product with competitors (at least here in the UK you are), but what is a no-no is negative marketing.
I think we have to look no further than USA politcal TV ads to see that negative advertising is depressing and unnecessary in the extreme - though we do see some of that here now as well.
David
Well, yes I should have been more explicit about that. You aren't allowed to put your competitor in a negative light, which would be the sole point of mentioning them after all. What Apple did wouldn't be allowed in an ad.
No. Cornflakes are not competitors, are they? Other companies products are competitors when their products are named. And Cheerios is a product, not a company.
Both product names are registered to their respective companies.
Corn Flakes a product owned and marketed by Kellogs
Cheerios a product owned and marketed by General Mills
The problem with that concept is: for obvious reasons, Apple would only do it if it could expand the Mac platform's market share. Could a convertible? Or a tablet PC? And if they could, why wouldn't Apple produce them themselves? Since Apple doesn't produce them, they probably believe that the needn't R&D wouldn't be justifiable based on projected sales, and that wouldn't be different for a third party either. (Even if you were to take a third party that already has experience with Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, that's still a different story than using Mac OS X as a tablet computer.)
This is very flawed logic in one sense. Just because it doesn't make sense for apple to produce a tablet does not mean it doesn't make sense for a third party. Example, it probably doesn't make sense for Apple to produce a TV tuner (or else they would have right?) but someone has done so for the mac, haven't they?. Probably doesn't make sense for apple to produce printers for the mac (or else they would still be producing printers for mac right?) but someone else has done so for the mac right?. I agree with you in one respect though. I don't think apple will ever (by that, i mean in my lifespan.. i am sure things change.. example, jobs could get old and die and a new CEO have a different philosphy) license their OS (which they would have to do to allow others to produce a tablet PC). That is the crux of the problem, not that it wouldn't make economic sense for a third party. It very well might.
This is very flawed logic in one sense. Just because it doesn't make sense for apple to produce a tablet does not mean it doesn't make sense for a third party. Example, it probably doesn't make sense for Apple to produce a TV tuner (or else they would have right?) but someone has done so for the mac, haven't they?. Probably doesn't make sense for apple to produce printers for the mac (or else they would still be producing printers for mac right?) but someone else has done so for the mac right?. I agree with you in one respect though. I don't think apple will ever (by that, i mean in my lifespan.. i am sure things change.. example, jobs could get old and die and a new CEO have a different philosphy) license their OS (which they would have to do to allow others to produce a tablet PC). That is the crux of the problem, not that it wouldn't make economic sense for a third party. It very well might.
a tablet doesn't make sense to me either. I keep pointing to the market numbers, which show a big .5% marketshare for tablets.
If Apple, or some third party made a Mac tablet, there is no reason to believe that Apple (or that third party) would do much better than that. That is to say, .5% of their own sales.
If Apple sells 6 million machines next year, that would be 30 thousand machines a year! Apple discontinued the Cube, and it was selling 30 thousand a quarter.
Even if they could manage to do four times better than the current marketshare, that would still be only 2% of 6 million machine, 120 thousand. That would be optimistic.
a tablet doesn't make sense to me either. I keep pointing to the market numbers, which show a big .5% marketshare for tablets.
If Apple, or some third party made a Mac tablet, there is no reason to believe that Apple (or that third party) would do much better than that. That is to say, .5% of their own sales.
If Apple sells 6 million machines next year, that would be 30 thousand machines a year! Apple discontinued the Cube, and it was selling 30 thousand a quarter.
Even if they could manage to do four times better than the current marketshare, that would still be only 2% of 6 million machine, 120 thousand. That would be optimistic.
Your analysis probably makes sense.. but not lets fool ourselves here. The reason there is no tablet is because apple will not license their OS!!.. Do you think apple is presumptous to predict a third party sales and profit?.. So maybe tablets are not successfull now, that doesn't mean it can't be. Even if a third party would fail, what business is that of apple?. So what if they want to fail?. I think the profitability of any third party is not apple concern right now. Apple main concern is that they will not, under current polycies, license their OS so the profitability (or lack thereof) of a product is a moot point.
You know, innovation happens for various reasons.. one method of fostering innovation is to allow the marketplace to bring out multiple products secure in the knowledge that some will inevitably fail. Imagine if apple had taken the stance that Mp3 players sucked, so why create one?.. we would never have the ipod!!!. Tablets may very well one day succeed but it takes multiple companies trying often for one to succeed. I suspect what is really happening (and very smart of apple by the way) is that apple is waiting to see if any company would succeed with tablets and then enter the market. I guess they are tired of being the trailblazer in differemt markets only to have MS swoop in late and steal their thunder.. let MS do all the heavy lifting for once. Apple can afford to sit on the sidelines on this technology. Heck, they may decide that some company comes very close and then they swoop in and become a dominant player.. or like you said, the tablet market might never take of and then apple would have saved themselves a bundle. Either way, would be smart strategy to wait it out.
Your analysis probably makes sense.. but not lets fool ourselves here. The reason there is no tablet is because apple will not license their OS!!.. Do you think apple is presumptous to predict a third party sales and profit?.. So maybe tablets are not successfull now, that doesn't mean it can't be. Even if a third party would fail, what business is that of apple?. So what if they want to fail?. I think the profitability of any third party is not apple concern right now. Apple main concern is that they will not, under current polycies, license their OS so the profitability (or lack thereof) of a product is a moot point.
I only mentioned third parties because that was part of the previous argument. I don't really think that Apple would license to a third party. But drop that, and stick with Apple. The facts of the numbers remain.
Quote:
You know, innovation happens for various reasons.. one method of fostering innovation is to allow the marketplace to bring out multiple products secure in the knowledge that some will inevitably fail. Imagine if apple had taken the stance that Mp3 players sucked, so why create one?.. we would never have the ipod!!!. Tablets may very well one day succeed but it takes multiple companies trying often for one to succeed. I suspect what is really happening (and very smart of apple by the way) is that apple is waiting to see if any company would succeed with tablets and then enter the market. I guess they are tired of being the trailblazer in differemt markets only to have MS swoop in late and steal their thunder.. let MS do all the heavy lifting for once. Apple can afford to sit on the sidelines on this technology. Heck, they may decide that some company comes very close and then they swoop in and become a dominant player.. or like you said, the tablet market might never take of and then apple would have saved themselves a bundle. Either way, would be smart strategy to wait it out.
One day. Well, ok. but I won't look to the argument of "one day". Sometime in the near future is about as much as I can handle.
So far, the tablet has been tried at least three times, from what I remember offhand. The Grid was the biggest splash, but MS helped that to fail. Hardware wasn't up to it either. Now it is. But it isn't gaining any traction. Several manufacturers have abandoned it.
I don't think that Apple wants to enter what seems to be a failing market. They really can't afford to.
The situation with MP3 players was completely different. The players were execrable, but the market was growing. Apple was able to come out with a much better product. But, that was mostly software, an area they excell in, style and egonomics, another one of their usual good areas (I said usual!), and hardware.
I really don't see what Apple could do with a tablet. The same technology is available to everyone.
The Macbook is not a lightweight, other companies have Apple beaten around the block with that, and I feel VERY strongly that weight is one of the biggest issues for tablets. They are ALL too heavy. Gateway has one, a convertible, that weighs 8 pounds!!!
Put that on your forearm and write.
If Apple comes out with a 3 pound, or lighter, notebook, then I might think that they have some idea of what a tablet needs. But, I don't think they are interested in either.
If Apple comes out with a 3 pound, or lighter, notebook, then I might think that they have some idea of what a tablet needs. But, I don't think they are interested in either.
I've got big forearms. Like Popeye.
So far, from what I've seen, the only way that ANYONE is getting near 3 lb is by eliminating the optical drive, using a smaller battery, and ditching the keyboard. Fujitsu Styalistic 5000 series for example. Problem: They ditched the keyboard, use a smaller battery, and eliminated the optical drive.
Wonder how much the LCD weighs...
Anyone remember reading about LEPs? Or that new paper that changes color pixel by pixel like an LCD? Some article was mentioning using it on pill bottles for scrolling lables. No joke.
..
Using current input methods, I really don't see slates ever taking off. typing is way more efficient than scribbling. even on qwerty. When voice recognition has advanced some more, and processors get to the point where they can handle the load from continuously interpreting the signal from a quad microphone array (hmm, think 128 cores could do it? It's the NEW Mac128, k?) A combination of solid handwriting, screen tapping (with fingers) and voice input I think would go well with a slate.
Convertables are just damn handy for note taking though. Can't count the number of times I've needed to enter a formula or sketch a diagram into the computer. Method A: Open TurboCad, spend 3.5 hours trying to figure out how to draw a circle, then give up and fax the picture of a circle instead of email; or B: Draw a circle in your email client, scribble first four letters of a contact's name, hit send. And no, "C: Why the hell are you using TurboCad to draw a circle??!?!" is NOT an option.
It would be really nice to have it as a BTO option. I still wonder what that would involve, beyond a different display assembly, and top chasis (to support a swivel hinge) though.
*edit* Oh, and since I'm up WAY later than I should be and am really tired and a tad bit delusional, let me state, for the record, that there will NEVER be a laptop as sexy as my G3 Wallstreet!
So far, from what I've seen, the only way that ANYONE is getting near 3 lb is by eliminating the optical drive, using a smaller battery, and ditching the keyboard. Fujitsu Styalistic 5000 series for example. Problem: They ditched the keyboard, use a smaller battery, and eliminated the optical drive.
Wonder how much the LCD weighs...
Anyone remember reading about LEPs? Or that new paper that changes color pixel by pixel like an LCD? Some article was mentioning using it on pill bottles for scrolling lables. No joke.
..
Using current input methods, I really don't see slates ever taking off. typing is way more efficient than scribbling. even on qwerty. When voice recognition has advanced some more, and processors get to the point where they can handle the load from continuously interpreting the signal from a quad microphone array (hmm, think 128 cores could do it? It's the NEW Mac128, k?) A combination of solid handwriting, screen tapping (with fingers) and voice input I think would go well with a slate.
Convertables are just damn handy for note taking though. Can't count the number of times I've needed to enter a formula or sketch a diagram into the computer. Method A: Open TurboCad, spend 3.5 hours trying to figure out how to draw a circle, then give up and fax the picture of a circle instead of email; or B: Draw a circle in your email client, scribble first four letters of a contact's name, hit send. And no, "C: Why the hell are you using TurboCad to draw a circle??!?!" is NOT an option.
It would be really nice to have it as a BTO option. I still wonder what that would involve, beyond a different display assembly, and top chasis (to support a swivel hinge) though.
The LCD s reen and electroluminescent backlight weighs little. The case lid weighs about the same.
Note taking at meetings is about the only thing it's really good for. Jerry Pournell extolls the virtues of his tablet, as do a few other writers, but, even he admits it's not for everyone.
The loss of optical, etc. is the point. The paradyne must be changed. When Flash gets better at writes, and gets cheaper, that will help a great deal. But, that's more than the near future I like talking about, other than some Sci Fi speculation.
Note taking at meetings is about the only thing it's really good for.
== 4 years of college, numerous labs, research papers, etc. And I totally agree, trying to actually WRITE something significant on a tablet is masochism. Seriously though, I can't think of a reason that a digitizer shouldn't be offered as a BTO option. It doesn't seem that the engineering requirements would be that great, and it would really enhance one of Apple's most important segments, the educational laptop. BUT, recognizing that it still hasn't happened, that indicates to me that there must be a very good and logically sound reason it's not being offered. So someone PLEASE help me figure out what it is so I can quit thinking this is such a wonderful idea?
<yes, I'm tired. >
*edit* as I tgotally forget about mobile graphics professionals... duh..
Comments
FYI, you are allowed to compare your product with competitors (at least here in the UK you are), but what is a no-no is negative marketing.
I think we have to look no further than USA politcal TV ads to see that negative advertising is depressing and unnecessary in the extreme - though we do see some of that here now as well.
David
Well, yes I should have been more explicit about that. You aren't allowed to put your competitor in a negative light, which would be the sole point of mentioning them after all. What Apple did wouldn't be allowed in an ad.
Double Psst. This isn't europe either.
Wise guy.
Was that supposed to be an incisive observation?
No. Cornflakes are not competitors, are they? Other companies products are competitors when their products are named. And Cheerios is a product, not a company.
Both product names are registered to their respective companies.
Corn Flakes a product owned and marketed by Kellogs
Cheerios a product owned and marketed by General Mills
D
Wise guy.
Hey buddy you better watch it.... I resemble that remark!
D
Both product names are registered to their respective companies.
Corn Flakes a product owned and marketed by Kellogs
Cheerios a product owned and marketed by General Mills
D
Corn flakes, you will find, is used as a generic name as well. It would have to be more specific.
Hey buddy you better watch it.... I resemble that remark!
D
We are all wise, in our own way.
We are all wise, in our own way.
my horse is wiser than your <edit:synonym= "donkey">!
(yes, you can roll your eyes at that.)
The problem with that concept is: for obvious reasons, Apple would only do it if it could expand the Mac platform's market share. Could a convertible? Or a tablet PC? And if they could, why wouldn't Apple produce them themselves? Since Apple doesn't produce them, they probably believe that the needn't R&D wouldn't be justifiable based on projected sales, and that wouldn't be different for a third party either. (Even if you were to take a third party that already has experience with Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, that's still a different story than using Mac OS X as a tablet computer.)
This is very flawed logic in one sense. Just because it doesn't make sense for apple to produce a tablet does not mean it doesn't make sense for a third party. Example, it probably doesn't make sense for Apple to produce a TV tuner (or else they would have right?) but someone has done so for the mac, haven't they?. Probably doesn't make sense for apple to produce printers for the mac (or else they would still be producing printers for mac right?) but someone else has done so for the mac right?. I agree with you in one respect though. I don't think apple will ever (by that, i mean in my lifespan.. i am sure things change.. example, jobs could get old and die and a new CEO have a different philosphy) license their OS (which they would have to do to allow others to produce a tablet PC). That is the crux of the problem, not that it wouldn't make economic sense for a third party. It very well might.
Vista is the new Classic!
This is very flawed logic in one sense. Just because it doesn't make sense for apple to produce a tablet does not mean it doesn't make sense for a third party. Example, it probably doesn't make sense for Apple to produce a TV tuner (or else they would have right?) but someone has done so for the mac, haven't they?. Probably doesn't make sense for apple to produce printers for the mac (or else they would still be producing printers for mac right?) but someone else has done so for the mac right?. I agree with you in one respect though. I don't think apple will ever (by that, i mean in my lifespan.. i am sure things change.. example, jobs could get old and die and a new CEO have a different philosphy) license their OS (which they would have to do to allow others to produce a tablet PC). That is the crux of the problem, not that it wouldn't make economic sense for a third party. It very well might.
a tablet doesn't make sense to me either. I keep pointing to the market numbers, which show a big .5% marketshare for tablets.
If Apple, or some third party made a Mac tablet, there is no reason to believe that Apple (or that third party) would do much better than that. That is to say, .5% of their own sales.
If Apple sells 6 million machines next year, that would be 30 thousand machines a year! Apple discontinued the Cube, and it was selling 30 thousand a quarter.
Even if they could manage to do four times better than the current marketshare, that would still be only 2% of 6 million machine, 120 thousand. That would be optimistic.
a tablet doesn't make sense to me either. I keep pointing to the market numbers, which show a big .5% marketshare for tablets.
If Apple, or some third party made a Mac tablet, there is no reason to believe that Apple (or that third party) would do much better than that. That is to say, .5% of their own sales.
If Apple sells 6 million machines next year, that would be 30 thousand machines a year! Apple discontinued the Cube, and it was selling 30 thousand a quarter.
Even if they could manage to do four times better than the current marketshare, that would still be only 2% of 6 million machine, 120 thousand. That would be optimistic.
Your analysis probably makes sense.. but not lets fool ourselves here. The reason there is no tablet is because apple will not license their OS!!.. Do you think apple is presumptous to predict a third party sales and profit?.. So maybe tablets are not successfull now, that doesn't mean it can't be. Even if a third party would fail, what business is that of apple?. So what if they want to fail?. I think the profitability of any third party is not apple concern right now. Apple main concern is that they will not, under current polycies, license their OS so the profitability (or lack thereof) of a product is a moot point.
You know, innovation happens for various reasons.. one method of fostering innovation is to allow the marketplace to bring out multiple products secure in the knowledge that some will inevitably fail. Imagine if apple had taken the stance that Mp3 players sucked, so why create one?.. we would never have the ipod!!!. Tablets may very well one day succeed but it takes multiple companies trying often for one to succeed. I suspect what is really happening (and very smart of apple by the way) is that apple is waiting to see if any company would succeed with tablets and then enter the market. I guess they are tired of being the trailblazer in differemt markets only to have MS swoop in late and steal their thunder.. let MS do all the heavy lifting for once. Apple can afford to sit on the sidelines on this technology. Heck, they may decide that some company comes very close and then they swoop in and become a dominant player.. or like you said, the tablet market might never take of and then apple would have saved themselves a bundle. Either way, would be smart strategy to wait it out.
Your analysis probably makes sense.. but not lets fool ourselves here. The reason there is no tablet is because apple will not license their OS!!.. Do you think apple is presumptous to predict a third party sales and profit?.. So maybe tablets are not successfull now, that doesn't mean it can't be. Even if a third party would fail, what business is that of apple?. So what if they want to fail?. I think the profitability of any third party is not apple concern right now. Apple main concern is that they will not, under current polycies, license their OS so the profitability (or lack thereof) of a product is a moot point.
I only mentioned third parties because that was part of the previous argument. I don't really think that Apple would license to a third party. But drop that, and stick with Apple. The facts of the numbers remain.
You know, innovation happens for various reasons.. one method of fostering innovation is to allow the marketplace to bring out multiple products secure in the knowledge that some will inevitably fail. Imagine if apple had taken the stance that Mp3 players sucked, so why create one?.. we would never have the ipod!!!. Tablets may very well one day succeed but it takes multiple companies trying often for one to succeed. I suspect what is really happening (and very smart of apple by the way) is that apple is waiting to see if any company would succeed with tablets and then enter the market. I guess they are tired of being the trailblazer in differemt markets only to have MS swoop in late and steal their thunder.. let MS do all the heavy lifting for once. Apple can afford to sit on the sidelines on this technology. Heck, they may decide that some company comes very close and then they swoop in and become a dominant player.. or like you said, the tablet market might never take of and then apple would have saved themselves a bundle. Either way, would be smart strategy to wait it out.
One day. Well, ok. but I won't look to the argument of "one day". Sometime in the near future is about as much as I can handle.
So far, the tablet has been tried at least three times, from what I remember offhand. The Grid was the biggest splash, but MS helped that to fail. Hardware wasn't up to it either. Now it is. But it isn't gaining any traction. Several manufacturers have abandoned it.
I don't think that Apple wants to enter what seems to be a failing market. They really can't afford to.
The situation with MP3 players was completely different. The players were execrable, but the market was growing. Apple was able to come out with a much better product. But, that was mostly software, an area they excell in, style and egonomics, another one of their usual good areas (I said usual!), and hardware.
I really don't see what Apple could do with a tablet. The same technology is available to everyone.
The Macbook is not a lightweight, other companies have Apple beaten around the block with that, and I feel VERY strongly that weight is one of the biggest issues for tablets. They are ALL too heavy. Gateway has one, a convertible, that weighs 8 pounds!!!
Put that on your forearm and write.
If Apple comes out with a 3 pound, or lighter, notebook, then I might think that they have some idea of what a tablet needs. But, I don't think they are interested in either.
Put that on your forearm and write.
If Apple comes out with a 3 pound, or lighter, notebook, then I might think that they have some idea of what a tablet needs. But, I don't think they are interested in either.
I've got big forearms. Like Popeye.
So far, from what I've seen, the only way that ANYONE is getting near 3 lb is by eliminating the optical drive, using a smaller battery, and ditching the keyboard. Fujitsu Styalistic 5000 series for example. Problem: They ditched the keyboard, use a smaller battery, and eliminated the optical drive.
Wonder how much the LCD weighs...
Anyone remember reading about LEPs? Or that new paper that changes color pixel by pixel like an LCD? Some article was mentioning using it on pill bottles for scrolling lables. No joke.
..
Using current input methods, I really don't see slates ever taking off. typing is way more efficient than scribbling. even on qwerty. When voice recognition has advanced some more, and processors get to the point where they can handle the load from continuously interpreting the signal from a quad microphone array (hmm, think 128 cores could do it? It's the NEW Mac128, k?) A combination of solid handwriting, screen tapping (with fingers) and voice input I think would go well with a slate.
Convertables are just damn handy for note taking though. Can't count the number of times I've needed to enter a formula or sketch a diagram into the computer. Method A: Open TurboCad, spend 3.5 hours trying to figure out how to draw a circle, then give up and fax the picture of a circle instead of email; or B: Draw a circle in your email client, scribble first four letters of a contact's name, hit send. And no, "C: Why the hell are you using TurboCad to draw a circle??!?!" is NOT an option.
It would be really nice to have it as a BTO option. I still wonder what that would involve, beyond a different display assembly, and top chasis (to support a swivel hinge) though.
*edit* Oh, and since I'm up WAY later than I should be and am really tired and a tad bit delusional, let me state, for the record, that there will NEVER be a laptop as sexy as my G3 Wallstreet!
I've got big forearms. Like Popeye.
So far, from what I've seen, the only way that ANYONE is getting near 3 lb is by eliminating the optical drive, using a smaller battery, and ditching the keyboard. Fujitsu Styalistic 5000 series for example. Problem: They ditched the keyboard, use a smaller battery, and eliminated the optical drive.
Wonder how much the LCD weighs...
Anyone remember reading about LEPs? Or that new paper that changes color pixel by pixel like an LCD? Some article was mentioning using it on pill bottles for scrolling lables. No joke.
..
Using current input methods, I really don't see slates ever taking off. typing is way more efficient than scribbling. even on qwerty. When voice recognition has advanced some more, and processors get to the point where they can handle the load from continuously interpreting the signal from a quad microphone array (hmm, think 128 cores could do it? It's the NEW Mac128, k?) A combination of solid handwriting, screen tapping (with fingers) and voice input I think would go well with a slate.
Convertables are just damn handy for note taking though. Can't count the number of times I've needed to enter a formula or sketch a diagram into the computer. Method A: Open TurboCad, spend 3.5 hours trying to figure out how to draw a circle, then give up and fax the picture of a circle instead of email; or B: Draw a circle in your email client, scribble first four letters of a contact's name, hit send. And no, "C: Why the hell are you using TurboCad to draw a circle??!?!" is NOT an option.
It would be really nice to have it as a BTO option. I still wonder what that would involve, beyond a different display assembly, and top chasis (to support a swivel hinge) though.
The LCD s reen and electroluminescent backlight weighs little. The case lid weighs about the same.
Note taking at meetings is about the only thing it's really good for. Jerry Pournell extolls the virtues of his tablet, as do a few other writers, but, even he admits it's not for everyone.
The loss of optical, etc. is the point. The paradyne must be changed. When Flash gets better at writes, and gets cheaper, that will help a great deal. But, that's more than the near future I like talking about, other than some Sci Fi speculation.
Note taking at meetings is about the only thing it's really good for.
== 4 years of college, numerous labs, research papers, etc. And I totally agree, trying to actually WRITE something significant on a tablet is masochism. Seriously though, I can't think of a reason that a digitizer shouldn't be offered as a BTO option. It doesn't seem that the engineering requirements would be that great, and it would really enhance one of Apple's most important segments, the educational laptop. BUT, recognizing that it still hasn't happened, that indicates to me that there must be a very good and logically sound reason it's not being offered. So someone PLEASE help me figure out what it is so I can quit thinking this is such a wonderful idea?
<yes, I'm tired.
*edit* as I tgotally forget about mobile graphics professionals... duh..