Slashdot Mirror
Why the Tablet Market is Really the iPad Market
Hugh Pickens writes writes "James Kendrick writes that after Apple introduced the iPad, companies shifted gears to go after this undiscovered new tablet market but in spite of the number of players in tablets, no company has discovered the magic bullet to knock the iPad off the top of the tablet heap. 'What's happening to the 7-inch tablet market is what happened to the PC market several times. Big name desktop PC OEMs, realizing that consumers didn't care about megahertz and megabytes — yes, that long ago — turned to a price war in order to keep sales buoyant,' writes Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. 'Price becomes the differentiating factor, and this in turns competition into a race to the bottom.' Historically, when a race to the bottom is dictated by the market, it's more a sign of a lack of a market in general. If enough buyers aren't willing to pay enough for a product to make producers a profit, the market is just not sufficient. Price is a metric that most people know and understand because it's nowhere as ethereal or complicated as CPU power or screen resolution. Given a $199 tablet next to another for $299, the $100 difference in the price tag will catch the eye before anything else. But if price is such an important metric, why is the iPad — with its premium price tag — so popular? Simple, it was the first tablet to go mass market, and cumulative sales of around 85 million gives the iPad credibility in the eye on potential buyers. 'So the problem with the Kindle Fire — and the Nexus 7 — is the same problem that's plagued the PC industry. Deep and extreme price cuts give the makers no wriggle room to innovate,' writes Kingsley-Hughes. 'By driving prices down to this level so rapidly, both Amazon and Google have irrevocably harmed the tablet market by creating unrealistic price expectations.'"
The Nexus 7 is certainly not a "race to the bottom". It has an excellent spec, including a better CPU than the iPad and similar graphics capability. Okay, it doesn't have everything that the iPad has, but it costs a fraction as much and for most people does the same thing (display web pages, email, Facebook, photos etc).
As for innovation Android itself is innovative, and even on very low end tablets all the features work. Much of the software that makes tablets useful doesn't even run on the tablet anyway, it runs on a server somewhere over the net.
The tablet market is about to explode with the Nexus 7 and Surface. These are devices that people want - cheap but powerful devices for some casual web browsing, ebook reading and Angry Birds. Apple fanbois are getting nervous.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Will be Apple. When they finally make that fatal misstep, which wrankles users no end .. it is actually possible they have already done this, but things take time to work through the market.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
It's actually GOOD. Before the iPad was announced, people were speculating that it would cost $1000, and they thought that was a great price. But then it was introduced at $500. For $500, you get a device you saw on Star Trek 20 years ago... and it is a joy to use.
Could it also be that people compare a $399 tablet, and everything it does not have with that of a $329 PC and everything it does have, capability wise?
When you cant win, ad hominem.
This free market thing is hurting the businesses and destroying jobs. If only we had a monopoly, so that companies could make bigger profits so that we could profit all from them.
The iPad is really the wrong size its too large to be portable, my Nexus goes with me everywhere [My fathers ageing Archos the same for him], At home I am still waiting for a device big enough to fill in for the couch device. The iPad is simply too small. Hopefully the rumored 12" Samsung will be a reality.
It's popular because the software, both from Apple and third parties, is better. No other reason. Apparently, the authors of this article are the same kind of idiots that think it's the shape, color, and icon matrix that make an iPhone an iPhone.
Witness this article, referenced elsewhere in /. earlier today:
http://www.businessinsider.com/if-the-iphone-5-really-looks-like-this-apple-may-be-screwed-2012-7
which states:
"Now that most phones do the same things and work pretty much the same way, the most obvious (and, arguably, important) difference between them is the screen."
This is hogwash. No tablet comes close to the experience of the iPad; no phone comes close to the effectiveness of the iPhone line. No question-- I'm no fanboy, I think Steve Jobs was a jerk, but Apple simply has done things better.
Driving down prices is very good. The market becomes flooded with cheap devices. Then a point will be reached where innovation spurs and the cycle starts again. After all (or is it afterall?), isn't Apple and the others spurring innovation every so many months or years?
Eventually things become cheap and everyone can afford it. Then, or during that time, new things come out which are a bit higher tech. I don't know if this article is true. I have no sources, myself, to cite in order to support my argument. Anyone, please correct me!
Hmm. “50% of people with a tablet have an iPad. That doesn't sound so bad until you consider that previously that number had been more like 72%. The slack was taken up by Amazon's Kindle Fire, which has jumped from zero to a 22% share of the market since it launced in fall 2011 . . . "We expect to see the iPad as the leader, but with the Surface, Kindle Fire, and Nexus as three solid competitors with significant market share..."” iPad losing tablet market share (July 31, 2012).
geek. lawyer.
go look at meritline.com, dealextreme.com, and chinavasion.com: search for 'android' without specifying tablet
Look at how many devices you get, in how many different formfactors, with how many different featuresets.
They have GPS tablets now for under 100 bucks, some even have 3d acceleration.
They have PSP style game consoles 75-150 bucks.
They have tablets with and without hdmi-out, with and without capacitive touch, with and without bluetooth 55-300+ dollars.
Point? There's plenty of innovation going on in the tablet market, it's not stopped by price, and if you look at the specs in some of the 'cheap' devices, you'll see that you're getting performance comparable to the last generation 'high end' devices with perhaps lower build quality, screen size, or accessories, but some people are willing to trade that in order to be able to play the latest wiz-bang game on it.
The tablet market is just getting started and anybody who thinks otherwise likely also thinks America is the only country that can innovate.
'By driving prices down to this level so rapidly, both Amazon and Google have irrevocably harmed the tablet market by creating unrealistic price expectations.'"
Uh no. By driving prices down to this level so rapidly, both Amazon and Google have irrevocably harmed Apple's ability to dominate the tablet market by creating realistic price expectations. It's only getting cheaper to make tablets. There's literally dozens of different tablet designs available in this price range, see DealExtreme for numerous examples including all the way up to IPS and A10 for $207 or so.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm tired of the "innovation" motto. Very little innovation is needed, and whatever is actually need barely qualifies as innovation: better screens and batteries, standard ports.. and, mainly, developpers, developpers, developpers.
Non-iPad tablets are failing because they are priced at the premium level of the iPad but are not really premium, at least not in customers' perception. As in any segment, competitors need to differentiate. Price is one criteria, as are openness, interoperability, features, quality, performance, brand..
Plus I'm not sure non-iPads are failing. Not all of them. They're not the free money some OEMs fantasized about, but I'm sure they're making some money for a few select ones.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
The tablet market is still young, and no one knows for sure yet what customers want. Assuming that the market is totally driven by stats (Mhz, resolution, price, etc) is extremely short-sighted.
The key difference between tablet's development and PC's is form factor. Once PC cases/towers became large enough to hold anything people wanted (mid 90's), the winners were those that offered the most customization, and that brought around widely accepted standards (ATX, PCI, USB, etc.). Eventually consumers were able to pick and choose all the components separately, and entire markets started up around each type of component (ie. nVidia does not compete against Broadcom, etc.)
The tablet market will never get to that point, because form factor is so important, and there is no way, yet, to tear away the app store and OS choice from the hardware. With iOS, every part of the purchase is tied to Apple. The company that chooses which hardware devices are used is the same company that builds the app store, and that provides updates to your OS, and you have no choices to change OS. Android is gives a little more for customization options, but you still are buying into one complete system or another when you make your initial hardware purchase.
Things will change dramatically. Apple is the best company for doing all in one products, but as the market matures, the piecewise model (whatever that will be) will come close to catching the all-in-one model. Until it matures, it's silly to try to compare the products to each other by simply looking it prices and specs.
Free unix account: freeshell.org
No tablet comes close to the experience of the iPad; no phone comes close to the effectiveness of the iPhone line. No question-- I'm no fanboy
The former statement appears to contradict the latter. I'm sorry you think your shiny iThing is the be all and end all, but the reality is that Android phones come out of the box with a different (see that word? you may want to learn that word if you want to get rid of your fanboy label) feature set than Apple's offerings. Some of us *gasp* actually weighed up the feature set of both platforms not ever having owned a smartphone and have chosen willingly to go with Android.
It's only taken the iPhone 2 years to catch up partially with the features which sold me on the far better Android platform (yes I'm am now an Android fanboy) with things like a useful notification bar, multitasking, or home screen widgets, and even now what I don't miss is paying 99c for every bloody app no matter how basic.
You are a fanboy. The same as this person is clearly nucking futs: http://www.allbids.com.au/Buy/?T=Apple-iPad-2-3G-Tablet&ID=514722
Who else but Apple fans pay 90% of retail for year old kit?
And the iPhone is adequate as a "device" and horrible as a phone. There are plenty of similarly expensive Android phones that are every bit as good a device and far better as phones. If you take this article's thesis as gospel and buy a bottom of the line touch screen phone then yeah, you get what you pay for.
Next from the fanbrigade is usually, "OMG, fragmentation!"
Yeah, there's some of that. I can only run Flash on some android devices versus Apple's none. I can only run some versions of Android on my phone where as iOS6 can go all the way back to the iPhone 3G (find the differentiation here).
I would still suggest the iPhone to people I've always suggested buy Apples; 12 O'Clock flashers.
Apple have done all the innovating for us. Glass screen, rounded corners. What else do you want?
The OS will continue to experience major innovations regardless of what the hardware is done and this is driven by Google anyway so they can't have "hurt" the market in that sense. But what is left to innovate on the hardware side? The form factor has largely been set. That only leaves a question of feature set and how many buttons the thing has.
About the biggest innovation in the last few iTab lineups has been the protective cover. Everything else has been incremental hardware advances.
You can't turn on regular TV nowadays without seeing a commercial for an iPad. When was the last time you saw a commercial for the Amazon Fire, Nexus 7, or other tablet manufacturer. And yes, the Amazon Fire does have commercials, but the number of ads are slim.
Couple that with the displays you see at retail locations. I believe the iPad is sold in Target, Best Buy, Wal*Mart, Staples, AT&T, Verizon, etc, and tons of other places. How many of these have equal representations for the other tablets? And I don't just mean having them in stock -- I'm talking shelf space, dedicated end caps, gorgeous marketing graphics, direct mail promotions, etc.
Then let's talk about how the employees of these stores will direct you to an iPad no matter what you ask for. It's the device they were trained on, the one they know the most about, and maybe even the one they make the most commission (I have no idea about that, just speculation). Any other tablet device is just "one for geeks" and they'll steer you away from it.
And finally, while the iPad was basically the first to market (in a reborn sort of way), let's not also forget the giant base of loyal iPhone and iPod customers that it immediately enjoyed.
But, just as iOS is losing market share in the mobile phone market, the iPad is and will continue to lose market share in the tablet market. Unless Apple contnues to pour money into marketing, this market will even out.
Most people I know agree that Android devices are far more usable. Even just the 'back' button makes them far more usable. The fact that you can put widgets on your screens to present information to you in a way that *you* want adds to it. Those I know appreciate that 'integration' with services such as FaceBook or Twitter doesn't need to be built into the OS specifically. They *all* work well. The iPhone has done a few things in a simpler, more limited way, all the while adding proprietary connectors and formats. The iPhone is far from a clear winner in usability or functionality.
Meh. I've had many a tablet device since my trusty Newton, and currently have both iDevices and Android & etc. I don't think my shiny iThiny is the be all end all; but it's certainly pretty good.
Since my iDevices are jailbroken, I'm not seeing much in feature differences. What I do see, is usability. Android is a pain. Android is not universal across devices; some things work, some don't. It's a repeat of MS/PC/Windows anarchy.
The point here: Apple made tablet devices work for the masses. All the rest seem to be posers.
I'm jailbroken (if you can't ssh in... hell, I don't buy a tree that doesn't allow ssh in). Flash works fine-- pretty much.
Next!
This is hogwash. No tablet comes close to the experience of the iPad; no phone comes close to the effectiveness of the iPhone line. No question-- I'm no fanboy, I think Steve Jobs was a jerk, but Apple simply has done things better.
You are definitely a fanboy. I prefer the Nexus to the iPad...but then I prefer Android, and I really like having lots more money in my pocket; Since the HTX One X and Galaxy III generation of phones, the iPhone 4S is looking last generation literally [giggle], and so is the Xpedia Play Phone in my pocket, in fact frighteningly, looking at some cheap android phones like the Huawei Ascend G300 costing a sixth of the price of an iPhone have similar functionality to both.
Personally I thought shameless Apple fanboys talked about android being better value [race to bottom], choice [fragmentaion], and open platform [piracy], now its just marketing terms like effectiveness and efficiency!? you have all just go lazy!
/me exits xdisplay and looks at widgets on his iDevices' screens.
I think I'm missing something here.
Kendrick is just wrong.
* There is a HUGE market for people that are not willing to pay $400 to $500 for a tablet.
* Android now has more apps in Google Play than Apple's marketplace (granted, not as many tablet optimized ones).
* Android now has a MUCH larger market penetration than iPhones.
* Android has some HUGE players behind it now.
* What held Android tablets back was the lack of OS tweaks for tablet functionality. FIXED. And quality tablet models. FIXED. And low enough priced alternatives to the iPad. FIXED.
People can continue to pretend that Apple will remain in control of the tablet market for many years to come, but those are likely the same people that thought Android could not bump Apple into a distance second place in the smart phone market.
Apple is not going to be able to dismiss Android anymore, regardless of how much they sue everyone. Lower priced Android tablets are going to create a whole new market and Apple is going to have a very hard time competing in that world.
As an owner of both an iPad and a Nexus 7, I'd say they fill somewhat different niches. There is no question that 7" is a better form factor for reading -- which is why we see Kindles only at that form factor. 10" is better for watching video, and some games. I also own a Macbook Air, and increasingly I find I'd rather take that with me than an iPad -- it isn't much larger and can do a lot more.
The software differences are really pretty modest. Apple does some things better (discoverability of the UI, development tools), Google does some things better (integration with web services, speech recognition, home screen customizability). Both the iPad and N7 are great products, bottom line. That's a good thing.
It's not that simple at all. PCs, regardless of the manufacturer, all ran the same software. What you saw onscreen (besides maybe an OEM desktop picture) was EXACTLY the same. Only the hardware was different, and that was usually just a matter of case style. iPad has massive, thriving, 3rd party development going on, and it is directly coupled to the iPhone ecosystem. The two reinforce each other in a major way. So comparing the battle between PC OEMs to tablet manufacturers against iPad is not a valid comparison.
The real question the article should be asking is "could the iPad be the success it is today without the iPhone having existed first?" Instead they ask "But if price is such an important metric, why is the iPad — with its premium price tag — so popular?" and then answer it dead wrong "Simple, it was the first tablet to go mass market, and cumulative sales of around 85 million gives the iPad credibility in the eye on potential buyers."
WHY did it go "mass market"? THAT is the real question. What they discuss is like asking "Why does the iPad have so many sales?" and then answering "because Apple sells a lot of them".
Better known as 318230.
Everyone talks about "killer apps", but one of the reasons for the iPad's adoption by businesses is Filemaker Go. Powerful, user-friendly relational database software that an average business can get up and running for a fraction of the cost of the big boys? No Android/Windows mobile app comes close. It's not all about playing games.
*stretches*
*yawns*
Geekboys like you might put up with Android's engineer-inspired interface. People who actually need something usable, well, need something that usability testing has gone into.
It's successful because people believe it's "safe computing". The whole "Apple isn't subjected to viruses" idea and "It just works" have really done their brainwashing jobs well.
"why is the iPad — with its premium price tag — so popular? Simple," It's not because "it was the first tablet to go mass market, and cumulative sales of around 85 million gives the iPad credibility in the eye on potential buyers" as the author states. There were tablets on the mass market long before the iPad showed up. It's because the iPad is a Veblen good. Peoples' preference for it increases as its price goes up because the higher price confers a greater status on having it.
From TFA:
why is the iPad so popular? Simple, it was the first tablet to go mass market
This is nonsense. I have used both iPads and Androids, and the iPad is far easier to learn and use. Apple did many, many things right. And they were NOT first to market a tablet. Many, many people tried to make a successful tablet before the iPad. I have a drawer full of their failures.
Oh, and before anyone calls me an Apple fanboi, let me assure you that while I have respect for their products, I hate Apple as a company. But I am forced to use their products because I am married to an Apple fangoil.
No tablet comes close to the experience of the iPad; no phone comes close to the effectiveness of the iPhone line. No question-- I'm no fanboy
It's only taken the iPhone 2 years to catch up partially with the features which sold me on the far better Android platform (yes I'm am now an Android fanboy) with things like a useful notification bar, multitasking, or home screen widgets, and even now what I don't miss is paying 99c for every bloody app no matter how basic.
There's a difference between features and experiences. Users care more about the overall experience a lot more than a set of features. They are even willing to go without features if they like the experience.
My company home page
With 85 million sold and the droidfanbois still yappin'
To put it in the words of Sandor Clegane:
fuck the android, fuck google, fuck samsung and fuck the king. I want no water, gimme an iPad.
... and do you still have a warranty?
Apple shills put down all the products that Apple cannot compete with...until- surprise- Apple releases small screen tablet of their own.
There was a great dilbert comic on this not long ago http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2012-06-26/?CmtOrder=Rating&CmtDir=DESC. Me, I'm so sick of apple AND android fanboy new items. The ipad is nice to use... until you actually want to use it like a computer, most people don't and that makes me sad.
I am not just going to agree with the popular view. In other words I have bad Karma.
The only thing I want is for Android to not lag. That is all.
This article is the most stupid thing I read recently. So I am in a worse position because I'm not forced to buy an overpriced tablet? Right.
If I've only got Comcast, DSL, satellite and cellular, the market isn't working because Comcast has a "monopoly", where "monopoly" is Greek for "I don't like that company". Because the market isn't working unless the fiber fairy has given the hobo on the park bench 10 Gbps, and he's regular.
And if there are a dozen manufacturers producing tablets, some of which are premium and some of which are cheap, the market still isn't working because there's a "race to the bottom." God forbid poor people could be allowed to purchase consumer electronics!
You not getting what you want is not a market failure. Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of scarcity?
Just to be sure i understand: "...the PC market (...) turned to a price war in order to keep sales buoyant.Historically, when a race to the bottom is dictated by the market, it's more a sign of a lack of a market in general." So i guess the PC, televisions, cars and cellphones whose prices have become a fraction of what they were at their infancy are all examples of a lack of a market? Weird, i always thought enlarging your pool of customers would point to a growing market. A maturing market if you prefer.
It's called the Apple cycle for a reason....
I'm thinking about taking some spare cash and putting a ridiculous short option on Apple stock for the next 12-18 months. Only part that makes it high risk is the capricious nature of jurists in Apples' many lawsuits and their currently health cash reserves. Might be 24-36 months until we are looking at the desperate Apple of the 90's again, but it will happen.
There is this thing called a fad. It is fashionable to own iPads and iPhones, so people will pay the price.
Will it remain fashionable in a few years? Probably not. Will people continue to buy iPads in a few years? Only if the price justifies it.
Er, why wouldn't I?
Oh, you're one of those-- too meek to walk into an Apple Store and demand service. I didn't think such weakminded individuals bought non-Apple, but hey.
That's not due to 'extreme' price cuts. It's due to all the resources being wasted on patents and copyrights and license enforcement.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
eventually Apple did become less expensive and the specs became more comparable. PC components became fast and reliable enough for use on Apple products, and eventually Intel, in need of a high end market, and Apple in need of a power efficient cheap, created a chip Apple could use.
Until recently much of the selling has continued to be feature bloat often in order to sell a cheaper product. For instance, look at the number of table that come with no memory, but promote the SD card. Sure it is cheap to add an SD card, but what are the speed and security penalties. Look at Amazon FIre that is selling fine without a camera or an SD slot.
The fact is that Apple got it right this time. The machine is not expensive, and the services are there in abundance. Amazon has it right as well. Google sells advertisement, not services, so it is for the new apple, but worse since the hobby toys are not even that business capable. MS who is not end user service oriented, is going to have to create that culture if it does not provide a real way for the third parties to generate expected profit ont he new windows 8.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Two problems I could imagine having with the Courier (if it existed) or similar style tablet...
1) Weight. I have a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and it weighs 565g / 1.25 lb (quite a bit lighter than the iPad) which is weighty enough that it can become a little uncomfortable holding it unsupported in the same position for too long, especially one handed and in landscape orientation. The Courier would have had two screens and to power them, maybe a bigger battery too. I'd guess that thing would be closer to 900g / 2 lb which takes it out of lightweight handheld device territory.
2) Form factor. Arguably what would be it's biggest selling point, but the hinged book form factor would require two hands to hold it properly when unsupported which doesn't allow you to easily use the touch screens, or at least would require some balancing against your forearm whilst clutching it in order to freely use the other hand. Tablets like the iPad and Android are incredibly easy to pickup and pass around freely, rotate between landscape and portrait for different media, etc. The Courier seems more like a desk device to me.
"I'm a fanboy" "You're a fanboy" "Fanboi! Fanboi! teeheehehe"
Reading these terrible posts is causing my testicles to shrink.
What? You're coming through garbled, is there a land line near you? Are you typing this on your iPhone?
As a person who has rolled our 200 tables in their company, saying it is just about price is misleading. Yes, price is a factor. But it's also about being about being able to choose the price you want to pay.
There is no doubt in my mind that if you want a device with iPad's specs, the iPad is the best value for money. I don't know how they have done it, but in a complete turnaround Apple has become the lowest cost manufacturer. Hell, if I try to buy a laptop with the same specs as a MacBook Pro retina from Dell, it literally costs more than twice as much where I live. Unbelievable, given Apple's past reputation for being a premium manufacturer.
The problem is we don't need a tablet with the iPad's specs. We just need a reliable 10" tablet with WiFi. An Android 10" tablet may not be the same value for money as an iPad for what you get, but it is cheaper, substantially cheaper. Pair it with a Android phone and it really becomes lopsided. An iPhone - $700. An Android phone, IP67 rated, $200. And then we can write apps that run on both the phone and the tablet. You can't get a IP67 rated iPhone, let alone one for $200. That brings the price of the total system with the features we want to around 1/3 of Apple can provide.
That IP67 phone sums it up really. It's about choice, the Android ecosystem gives you huge range of choices whereas Apple doesn't. Apple will most likely continue to dominate market where the choose to play. But that is the upper end, and the upper end is always the smallest end. Numerically Android will come to dominate in tablets over time, just as they have in smart phones.
It's just a repeat of what happened in the smartphone market, and, a long time ago, in the PC market.
Apple introduced a new product, captured a gigantic portion of the market they essentially created, then their marketshare slipped in response to competition from others. But despite the marketshare slip, Apple still makes most of the profits.
Microsoft taught everyone to worship marketshare because they used theirs to bully everyone into buying their other products. Apple seems to know that marketshare doesn't matter so long as you're still raking in money. They'd much rather sell half or a quarter of the devices at a nice profit than three quarters of the devices at a loss.
if a device has no features what do you think the experience will be? you act like features and experience are not linked when infact they are.
Tablet hardware is and should be a commodity, there's very little you can change about a rectangle you hold in your hand and touch with your fingers, just more storage and faster chips. The software on the other hand is where massive amounts of innovation could be happening, but aren't, and the reason is obvious: people associate buying a tablet with buying hardware, because it is, but the hardware platforms available today don't offer a choice of operating software, just whatever gunk they threw together to rush to market.
It's quite similar, yet quite different to the early PC space before IBM entered the market, each computer vendor slopped something together, and that was all you got, but most users didn't care, because they were buying the machine, not the software. Then when the IBM PC showed up, and it was clear everyone was buying it, despite MS-DOS being barely more than a loader. Infact I think it helped that MS-DOS was more or less a program loader, as it encouraged many to race to build an OS for the PC, I'm talking things like GEM (which was a port), Netware, Desqview, more I can't remember. They were all losers in the end, but they were able to leverage the open platform that was the PC and MS-DOS, and create systems people wanted to buy.
The trouble with tablets today is they are a package deal, you can go into a store today and say "Hey this Galaxy Tab is real nice, but I want it with WebOS" or "This iPad is great, but I would like it with Android", but you won't get it. In the early PC days, I could go to Computerland, say give me a Compaq 386, that one looks nice, and I want a copy of OS/2 to go with it, or SCO, or Xenix, or PC-DOS, or MS-DOS, and all the others I forgot. If you bought PC-DOS or MS-DOS, then there was a bunch of graphical shells for it, and you could pick. In the end people picked Windows, some say because of forced bundling. People are in large numbers picking Android today, definitely because of forced bundling. It is in manufacturers interests to bundle Android, as it is free or carries very little licensing cost (can someone weigh in on this?), but it hardly encourages innovation.
Now, you might say, oh it wouldn't be possible to separate the hardware from the software, as the hardware only supports one OS. This is so clearly bullshit and backwards reasoning, it only supports one OS because the engineers built it that way. There could be a variety of hardware with software shims that allow standard software to run, as DOS + TSRs allowed for the early PC (today this is obviously not the case on PC, as the architecture has morphed into a more and more closed platform).
Google have used their monopoly to entrench themselves in the smartphone and tablet market, by giving away their OS in exchange for search and web services tie-ins. Most people here are aware when you buy an Android phone, you are also selling yourself to Google Web Services, but most people, in general, think I'm buying a Samsung, I'm buying a Motorola, I'm buying an Acer, they have no idea they are selling themselves.
*stretches*
*yawns*
Geekboys like you might put up with Android's engineer-inspired interface. People who actually need something usable, well, need something that usability testing has gone into.
*scratches balls*
Fanatics like you post Apple propaganda in the hope anyone still believes you. I shocked that you lie that Google do not do usability testing.
Lets compare say using chrome vs safari on their perspective platforms. The most used feature on a smartphone...show me how Safari is better in ANY way. Chrome is incredible on Jelly Bean. Apple have nothing that can compete.
What's a land line?
"Lower priced Android tablets are going to create a whole new market and Apple is going to have a very hard time competing in that world."
Just like they have trouble competing in the smartphone world against lower priced Android phones? You do know Apple makes more money in the smartphone market than everyone else put together, right?
Just as with any other market there will be the high, middle and low ends. Apple has always gone after the high end, usually successfully, and they seem to have mastered capturing enough of it that they make money hand over fist.
Jailbreaking doesn't void the warranty.
The equivalent of what you're saying is, if price is so important, why has this product, which has been on the market and selling for years, still on top of the market when there has been no price competitor with a comparable product on the market yet?
I'll explain. There has been no price competitor with a comparable product on the market yet. The Xoom was too expensive for mainstream. The kindle fire is too weak to take on ipad. The Samsung Tab is too expensive for what it provides.
When you rewrite this article in a year, it won't ask the same question. This is because the market has opened to a whole new demographic: Those who can afford a nexus 7. You wanted a tablet, but couldn't afford an ipad. You can afford a nexus 7.
For what it does, and that's a lot, it's an ipad killer for 90% of the demographic of those who have or want a tablet.
They're using their grammar skills there.
In the PC era, companies made/sold PCs to make profit. In the tablet era, companies make/sell tablets for bugger all profit, to bring those users to their own markets - that is where the real profit is made.
*kicks idiot in balls*
Chrome? You use Chrome?
You're like the cheapskates who bought IBM-MS-DOS instead of a real OS. Sure, it was *cheaper.* Just like you.
P.S. Safari sucks.
the problem is software, plain and simple
apps
it's not "like the PC market" - if anything, it's like the game console market - attract developers to your platform, or watch it die a slow, painful death, made worse by all the price cuts from your desperate attempt to claw back some market share...
death by a thousand cuts
ask Nintendo about it some time
Every time someone comes out with a cool, low-priced tablet (Kindle Fire, Nook Tablet, now Nexus 7) the media trumpets it as "the iPad Killer". But it never is, because those tablets occupy a different niche. There will not be an "iPad killer" tablet until there's one in the iPad's price range that truly is better. The Xoom came close...
"That's either incredibly asinine or the most brilliant troll I've ever read. Not sure which." -Anonymous Coward
That doesn't sound so bad until you consider that previously that number had been more like 72%.
It still doesn't sound bad because the iPads total sales numbers went up. The Kindle Fire and the HP Touchpad showed there's a market for sub-$250 devices that Apple doesn't cater to.
It's hard to use Marketshare as a metric of failure when the said market has grown significantly. What you can draw from it is that Android, in general, has become a more attractive platform.
8 percent of all tablet traffic is on Android. Well. 9 percent that isn't iOS.
Try again. The tablet market is an iPad market.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
I dunno, something I saw in the Matrix. They sounded cool.
When I bought an iPad a couple of summers ago, I found it pretty intuitive from the get-go. There isn't much about the iPad interface that doesn't seem natural. In fact, I miss some of the things (like gestures) when using a workstation.
The iPad is simply the superior product. It just is. By a large and currently unspannable margin.
I want to own a good Android device, I really do, but its just not quite there yet...
Android 2.2/2.3 I just didn't like one bit and felt very sluggish, unpolished and the upgrade path for Android devices being what it is, I'm not willing to drop $600-700 on a phone that won't upgrade to the latest OS in a year. But when Honeycomb was released I decided to purchase a Xoom... Wow, was that the biggest purchasing mistake I've made in a while. It was complete garbage, I couldn't browse the web for more than 15 mins without the browser crashing, especially when visiting Motorola's own support forum. I kept it as long as I could in case an update was released to fix the problem, but that didn't materializes within the return period.
More recently I was going to purchase an Apple TV but instead grabbed a Pivos Xios that runs Ice Cream Sandwich... So far that has turned out to be another major mistake. The UI is garbage for the TV, even with the "sense" remote which acts like a mouse (but only works in a limited number of apps). Apps don't scale to the TV size well at all, the fonts are either too small or too big, icons too small or too big, or there is a ton of wasted space. The device itself is stable, but apps crash all the time, especially Netflix and many other video apps and they are all extremely slow to use, it can take 5-10 seconds to see a response just from clicking on something in Netflix. For a box designed to watch movies this is obviously unacceptable... The only exception so far has been Google Play which seems to work flawlessly (and fast), so the capability is there, just the apps are not up to par. Unfortunately I missed my return window on this device, so its likely going to collect dust after I grab an Apple TV.
The Nexus 7 tablet looks nice and the price is definitely right, so I'm likely going to buy one once the local store has them in stock, but being burned several times already, I'm understandably quite skeptical still... It seems like Google has finally got the OS to a fast/stable point with Jelly Bean, its just a matter for the app developers to catch up.
There is no doubt though, in my opinion the Android app quality has yet to compare to the iOS app quality. Sure there are the odd high-budget apps like Angry Birds or something that is virtually identical on either platform, but the apps I use on a regular basis on my iPhone have no equivalent on Android yet.
You can't fault me for not trying, I own an iPhone and iPad because they just work and they have everything I need, but I hate many of the things Apple does and I would like nothing more than to see them fail, but I'm just not willing to give up my iPhone/iPad until there something at least equal or better.
Open Source Time and Attendance, Job Costing a
But how many people appreciate that the OS doens't need to be built into the hardware specifically.
Not that many.
I think Android is shit. I think iOS is shit. If I had a tablet with nothing but Linux and OpenGL, I could come up with an OS that works much better in a couple of weeks, it wouldn't do what you want it to do, it wouldn't do what my mum wants it to do, but it would do exactly what I want it to do, and be far more useful to ME than anything Crapple or Goggles ships.
The thing is, the hardware exists from multiple vendors, yet I can't find a single vendor that doesn't want to force me to use Goggles' OS (they all even seem to have locked bootloaders).
Background: Not an apple fanboi. Owned no apple products other than a $1500 used Mac Lisa that VPI forced the CS class to buy back in the day because they had a version of Uniplus Sys V for it...
I've owned C64, Amigas, now a bunch of PCs that have various versions of Windows and Linux starting with Windows 3.1 and Linux 1.0 (4 floppies for a distro, I miss that).
I went to the store to look at the Transformer and some other android tablets after checking out a friend's. All the Android tablets were so-so. I'd have to sideload Netflix on most of them. The displays were ok. They had an apple section so I said "what the heck, let me check out this iPad thing".
Looked at an iPad (3rd gen, retina display). Wow. It just worked so well, the display was unbelievable. Everything was super smooth. Reading docs on it was amazing. It made the Android tabs look terrible. There was just no comparison. I went back over to the Android tabs and gave them another shot. There was just no going back anymore.
I bought a 3rd gen iPad, came back for a 2nd for the kids the next day. I tried an iPad 2 for the kids, no good, 1024x768, could not use it after using the retina display (2048x1535), so exchanged that one for a 2nd new 3rd gen iPad. Definitely worth the extra $150.
I keep an eye on the Android tablets, They're starting to come out with 1920x1080 res devices now, still no comparison.
I borrowed a mac mini to try out Xcode (you have to develop iOS aps on a mac). I had tried the android SDK, not too impressed, and the nightmare of managing all the different platforms is no fun (I have to do that at work). I actually liked OS X. Nothing like the crappy OS 9 and prior. A BSD-based desktop OS - imagine that. A Linux-like desktop that is actually good.
I've been eyeing the Macbook Pro w/retina display... 2880x1800 in a 15" package. To run Windows and Linux because I have to.
If I could extricate myself from the Windows / Linux ecosystem that I write software for I would, but I can't, too many PCs, too many ties. I have to write windows and linux software. Windows 8 holds nothing for me, current distros of linux are going in the wrong direction with their insane UIs (activities? really?). But OS X is nice. Too bad the mac desktop/laptop hardware is so expensive and limited, and I can't use a phone w/out a slider keyboard.
But for the tablet experience, I wouldn't trade the retina display iPads for any android tablets. There's just no comparison.
What I figured ;)
"By driving prices down to this level so rapidly, both Amazon and Google have irrevocably harmed the tablet market by creating unrealistic price expectations."
That's like saying apps priced at 99 cents have irrevocably harmed the software and game markets. This isn't true at all. If anything, the trumped up prices reliant solely on artificial scarcity are what have been harming the markets. Where you see huge price gouges, I see them returning to a rational price after a ridiculous period of inflation.
A company may find this harmful if they've been relying on artificial scarcity, overpricing, or market dominance to carry them along. To such companies, I would say: You can't ignore Evolution. If you don't adapt to change then you become extinct.
It's a bit foolish to think the iPads will always retain high sales numbers at such price when cheaper options with better hardware exist. Look at Android vs iOS adoption. There are more Android devices, but iPhone still outsells each individual line... It's not all doom and gloom in the phone market, the tablet market is no different.
There's a difference between features and experiences.
Sure. Features can be objectively defined and compared. "Experience" is utterly subjective. Seriously, what does "overall experience" mean, unless you break it down to the combination of features that you are really describing?
If a user's "experience" is enhanced by a lack of features, it is because their requirements are more narrow, or they are intimidated by options, or both.
NTTAWWT. I have an iPod Touch. I didn't even think I wanted such a device over a netbook, but a friend was upgrading and I ended up with it. I like the "experience". But I can actually tell you why. It has very few features and options, but those that are present are basically what I need for my very limited requirements when using such a device (casual web browsing, alarm clock, shallow gaming).
That is right now. We are talking about over the next year as the Nexus 7 starts to take hold. And sales of the smaller 7 will also start to drive more demand for larger/more expensive Android tablets.
I'm one person who bought a tablet, knowing that it was going to be more expensive than an available iPad at the time. Why? Because I disagree with monopolies. And one reason fw I don't like monopolies, is my belief that competition must always be allowed to exist in some form.
So while I admit that Apple did invent the tablet computer in its present form, I don't think that this makes them the owner of all tablets.
I know that this entire comment is counter to what was originally posted, but that's how I see it, and one trend which I've looked upon with disdain, is how strongly Apple enthusiasts forget this idea, just like Microsoft enthusiasts had often forgotten it. The concept against either monopoly was the same, except that many Apple followers see _themselves_ as The Winners now... (*)
And I'm very satisfied with my Android tablet, without wanting to become another advertisement for one particular brand.
*) It also fits into my greater philosophy, that Capitalist Societies need to be lead and managed, and should not be left to run themselves. And one failure of recent self-proclaimed Capitalists has been, not to engage in enough anti-trust action.
What this tends to do is prove their insincerity, not that they truly believe in Capitalism, as if to say "Too much wanting to make Capitalism work is a bad thing. Watching Capitalism defeat itself is a good thing."
if a device has no features what do you think the experience will be?
Who's talking about devices with no features?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Apple doesn't give a shit about keeping up on features. It will gladly throw away 99 "nice to have" features in order to make sure that 1 "must-have" feature is as good as it can possibly be. You can bet that every single thing that the iPhone has ever been derided for lacking - no 3G, can't copy and paste, no notification system, blah blah - was on a list during development and got crossed out because it wasn't as important at that moment as some other feature.
A market doesn't dictate price. If someone is dictating the price, the market is defeated (price fixing, whether it be by vendors, government or otherwise defeats a free market).
In a free market, the price obtains when suppliers and consumers agree to transactions at some price. One doesn't dictate to the other. Each decides what they will or will not do. There is no independent "market" with a will and ability to dictate to anyone.
If suppliers compete on price and price drops, this does not mean there is no market. There is no market only if there are no transactions. The transaction volumes in PCs and tablets are both very high - ther most certainly is a market, despite (or perhaps because of) price competition.
The only time there is no market is when there are no transactions. If suppliers and consumers don't agree to trade and all trading stops, then there is no market.
Whoever said there is no market when suppliers compete on price is probably a greedy corporate executive who is unhappy because there is competition preventing him from getting a 500+% markup.
* There is a HUGE market for people that are not willing to pay $400 to $500 for a tablet.
Strangely enough, the most valuable publicly-traded company in the world did not get to that position by focusing its business model on poor people.
Look this isn't fair. You are one of the few people who actually own both a selection of Android and iOS devices. Pick on someone with your own level of familiarity with the topic at hand ... will you!
Could it just be that the tablet market, such as it is, is just saturated? I mean I can surf the net on my phone if I need to, but, if I want to really see anything, I use my laptop or desktop.
My karma is bad. Don't get too close!!!
Apple introduced a new product, captured a gigantic portion of the market they essentially created, then their marketshare slipped in response to competition from others. But despite the marketshare slip, Apple still makes most of the profits.
Actually, Apple had lost market share to the point that they were almost no longer a company in the 90's in the PC Market. Then Jobs turned the company. But a case could definitely be made that they were instrumental in creating the consumer PC market.
Smart Phones on the other hand are a different story. Long before the iPhone, or even the iPod touch were even products there was Nokia with Symbian, RIM with Blackberry and Palm with the Treo that were busy creating the Smartphone market. Apple joined the smartphone market at the right time with the right product and took it over without a doubt. But they didn't create it.
You can bet that every single thing that the iPhone has ever been derided for lacking - no 3G, can't copy and paste, no notification system, blah blah - was on a list during development and got crossed out because it wasn't as important at that moment as some other feature.
More like they couldn't yet figure out how to do it well, or cost effectively.
> Apple seems to know that marketshare doesn't matter so long as you're still raking in money
And so long as they get beat back into their historical 10% niche of customers willing to pay a super premium for a brand experience I'll be happy for em.
Because that will mean the other 90% of us can happily ignore their overpriced stuff.
But ya know what? Apple fanbois are about the only fans I know of who make how much money their object of lust is hoovering out of their wallet a selling point when preaching to the heathen. Guys, THAT. DOESN'T. WORK. Just sayin'.
Democrat delenda est
The Samsung Galaxy Tab(II) 10.1 is a contender in terms of price (half), hardware (equal or better) and app-for-app. The think keeping it out of a lot of markets? Apple and its inability to compete in an open marketplace! Why is this wonderful tablet not available in Europe? Apple had to fake lies in a court about its inability to compete and legislate Samsung out of the market. Its trying the same thing in every market. You pose the question (as if you are a marketing shill/droid/bunny for apple), and and try to illicit a response from us like "gosh, Apple", and the only real response you and they deserve is "Fuck!, Apple!"
When the iPad hit the market it was new and faced no competition so a lot of people, mostly iPhone and Apple fans, bought it. Now that Google, RIM, and Microsoft are catching up it remains to be seen what features end users really want in a tablet and how much they are willing to pay for them. Just wait a year to see how all this unfolds.
This has been 2 nearly 3 years after the iPad.
This is literally moving the goal posts.
Try again.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Yea, and a couple years ago the iPhone was around the same share of the smartphone web traffic. It ain't anymore and will never be again. Xmas is coming and millions more people will be buying tablets and Apple might even sell over half of them this time. Next year it would be safe money they sell less than half, as low as a third would be possible. And so on.
Thought experiment, one iPad to share or a couple of Nexus 7s? Yea, when the price gap gets that large it changes the calculus doesn't it.
Democrat delenda est
Apple lost enough market share in the PC world in the 90s to become very unprofitable. I doubt we'll see that with iOS devices, it's a much better run company today.
As an actual software developer with over a decade of actual "work" experience, I can tell you that the best specs in the world don't mean shit if the platform you are running on is not optimized to run on the hardware and if the API for third party developer does not give you access to all of that power.
Optimization is extremely important on mobile platforms where battery life is a limited quantity and the end user expect to run unplugged for an extended period of time.
The reason why iOS on the tablet is so popular is that Apple developed a unique set of controls for the iPad form factor from the first release of the iPad OS and they also provided an easy way to have "universal" apps that target both phones and tablets.
The other major reasons are the power of the API and Apple's promotion of paid apps. At first, Google did not give a rat's arse about whether developers could make money on Android because Google is an advertising company at heart. They view the users as the "product" that they sell to advertisers. They really don't care about you at all unless if they see you start leaving their platform. Privacy is seen as a nuisance at Google which gets in the way of making money for them.
In a nutshell, users of Android devices and developers are seen as a means to an end rather than customers and partners.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
You need a provider, and in many cases this means signing a disadvantageous long-term contract. I'm sorry to have replied in two parts, but at first didn't notice the existence of phones as one of your possible arguments against tablets. Also, it may be difficult to weigh whether a technology is worthwhile, /without/ factoring the cost. I chose paying $500 down, over paying $50 /month, which is $600 /year, *plus* so many down, while in my daily life there's *secure* WiFi everywhere.
As an Apple hater, I can tell you why I eventually bought an iPad.
Since that little toy came out and I've seen its screen quality I've been waiting for Android tablet for a few months, finally when all the big companies announced their so called hd displays I was really disappointed, so eventually I've decided to get an iPad, wait until someone will get some brain and decide to make a tablet with a decent display, when that happens, I'll sell it and get an Android tablet.
So please stop speculating why and how the iPad still rules, in terms of display, its the best in the market, price is a little too high, if you want an iPad killer IMHO, just build a 10 hours battery usage, high resolution, Android tablet with 3.5", HDMI, USB host, SD/miniSD, 4G/Wifi and you got yourself your first customer.
I can see from people around me, those who've seen the new display will think of anything else as flimsy, cheap (and not in a good way) tablet almost anything else they see.
And no, I haven't installed iTunes. I hope to find a way to do everything without it, it was had enough opening an iTunes account without a credit card.
I got a new job recently. My boss gave me a company Iphone so I could keep aware of my email when out of the office and stay on the phone while I talk to vendor tech support without having to worry about discovering I needed to look at a piece of equipment in another office in mid conversation. Now that I have an Iphone, I understand the hype even less than I did before. It's a phone that let's you check your email. The times I have used it to check something on the Internet it has been a waste of time (either the print was too small or I had to keep scrolling). I will admit that it is easier to text on than my personal phone, but since, except for this job, I rarely text (most texts end up taking longer than it would take me to actually talk to the person), that really isn't worth all that much.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Everyone doesn't own one, nor does every body want one. I'm waiting for the second gen of the Google Nexus.
I sometimes wonder if Znet and other editors post contentious, flame-bait nonsense just to make people register with them so they can argue.
I mean, at the end of the day, what is it that pays the bills? Good writing or confirmed email accounts you can sell to god knows who?
Either way, Znet can go to hell.
*bing bing bing bing bing*
People say that you can't get "real work" done on an iPad but I'm an academic and use it as a primary tool for my research and writing. Here's what I use most:
Sente for iPad (academic reference, citation, and PDF database and annotating manager, syncs to the cloud and desktop database)
DevonThink to Go (the anything database, syncs to desktop database)
Textastic (Syntax-aware cloud-capable text editor similar in many ways to SublimeText)
Notability (Notepad/note archiving application)
There are a bunch of other apps that also get put through their paces from time to time—Pages, Numbers, Things, etc.
Thanks to Talkatone, my iPad is also my primary phone and text messenger.
I tried a Samsung Android tablet for a couple of weeks as I was getting ready to upgrade from a 16GB original iPad to a 64GB iPad 2. I hit up my friends and colleagues for input on replacement apps and academic productivity apps in general.
I couldn't get a single one of the apps above satisfactorily replaced in the Android ecosystem. So I returned the Samsung and got the iPad 2. It's not that Android itself sucks (though it is less smooth and polished) but that the apps really suck when it comes to getting real work done.
I routinely put in many-hours-long sessions of real daytime work on the iPad, basically whenever I don't need to do anything with SPSS or large datasets or final write-ups, because the iPad interface is so much more transparent and the iPad is so much more mobile than my laptop. But what I've seen so far doesn't suggest to me that Android could be used for the same serious work in the way that I use the iPad, and it's not about the intrinsic capability of the device (the hardware is nearly as good) but more about the general half-assedness of the Android ecosystem in general.
I want to work on my work, not work on getting my tablet to do what I want.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
The iPad was released three years after the iPhone. Really the tablet market is how the smartphone market was in June 2009. What was it like back then? There really wasn't much competition to the iPhone, but a few contenders emerged. Apple has long past the point of plateauing and has been hemorrhaging market share for some time.
We're bit over a two years from the release of the first iPad. The process of dethroning any prime position Apple manages to briefly take has improved, and it looks like iPad's time is up sooner. There's plenty of viable alternatives to the iPad, and the likes of the Nexus 7/Kindle Fire have pre-empted the forthcoming iPad mini.
Tablets as they are are a limited and gimmicky market with overpriced: remember tablets are mid-low laptop/netbook price range at the momment. Tablets MUST become cheaper, it's an accident of circumstances that they are the price they are.
My 5 year old son can't tell the difference between an iPhone and an Android, other than the apps loaded on them. They are so close to the same that there's no appreciable difference to the casual user.
Learn to love Alaska
The hardware quality is there, but the software hasn't caught up. I've had an Acer Iconia A500 for a while, and it's great for watching videos... because everything else has amazing amounts of lag, and bogs down for a few seconds while loading pretty much every program... including the default Android settings screen. I've heard similar complaints about the Asus EEE Transformer, as well as the Samsung Galaxy Tab. Granted, this is with stock ROMs, but I'd argue that a laggy stock install is worse than a laggy custom ROM.
When I tried out a friend's iPad, everything was as smooth as butter.
Oh this should be fun to watch.
I hate that the back button is not consistent. Depending on what you were last doing, the back button will take you to different places, and if an app is triggered by a different app, you'll end up triggering an app that won't show up in the recent app list.
It's like they made all the functionality, but didn't ever user test it. And when I complain, I get told that's how it's supposed to work, even if it's not consistent or intuitive.
That's the real difference. Apple tells you how you will be doing it, but tries to make that something that the greatest number of people will like. Android gives you more possibilities, and does all of them worse. Hey, you don't like it, do it another way.
Learn to love Alaska
both Amazon and Google have irrevocably harmed the tablet market by creating unrealistic price expectations
Sure, dude... not only that, watch as tablet prices continue to "unrealistically" drop even farther while your "gravely-injured tablet market" continues to evolve and innovate at the same breakneck pace as ever... serious harm, for sure. Decades from now, we'll be pulling our clunky, "green" desktop pc's around behind us (in radio flyer wagons or shopping carts, perhaps) and we'll think back on the "tablet future" that could have been, had not google and amazon fucked it up for the rest of us by "dumping" their cheap devices on a vulnerable market...
You don't start with the assertion that the market is the iPad market, if you expect someone to read and then conclude what you are saying.
"So the problem with the Kindle Fire — and the Nexus 7 — is the same problem that's plagued the PC industry. Deep and extreme price cuts give the makers no wriggle room to innovate"
Yeah, we all know how Apple dominated the PC market because the Windows PC market concentrated on deep and extreme price cuts which gave them no wiggle room to innovate.
Do you think Apple will not release a smaller cheaper tablet shortly? Your point is very valid, but you argue as if Apple will not adapt tactics in any way to the changing market.
If they do, it is only BECAUSE Android tablets exist and a real threat. Thus, everyone wins due to Android tablets- even if you buy an iOS one instead.
I think it is stranger that you think people that are willing to spend $200 on a tablet but not $500 to be "poor".
Nope. It only goes back to the 3GS. iOS5 doesn't work on the 3G either.
My friend say the same thing, and I point them to profits time and time again. iOS makes significantly more profits than all of Android. That means more money for better hardware and to make better software. In the end, companies will not continue to make products that don't make profits, so unless Android turns around the balance sheet, Apple will keep on growing.
People fully expected the ipad to have a $1000 price tag upon its release, and blew away expectations with it's price point. Why is it a premium?
Users care more about the overall experience - might be just US ? In my country iphone around 2% while android is hovering over 40% market share. iphone is termed as pay more get less mobile!
More like they couldn't yet figure out how to do it well, or cost effectively.
I bet you don't even realise you're agreeing with me.
The perception that polymers are somehow inferior dates from the days of polystyrene, which was a very low spec polymer. Now look at advanced racing bicycles, or the control surfaces on F1 cars, or the wings of the Dreamliner. They are made of plastic, rather than aluminum. It certainly isn't to save money. Those carbon fibre/kevlar/polymer resin composites are 100% synthetic plastics.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
"No tablet comes close to the experience of the iPad; no phone comes close to the effectiveness of the iPhone line".
Well, at my house we have 2 iPhones (latest model), a Motorola Droid 3, an original iPad, an iPad2, and a Nook Color. My Droid is viewed as the "coolest" by my wife and daughter, albeit a bit more complicated than their iPhones, but all three would be interchangeable. The iPad2 and the Nook Color get heavy use. The original iPad hasn't been charged up in months because no one has been interested in using it.
My point is that other devices do come very close to the experience of iThings, and some people actually prefer other gadgets to Apple products. You are simply in error to think no one else comes close. I'll grant that the Apple stuff is still generally more polished than the competition, but the wide usability gap has mostly evaporated, and continues to shrink.
I cannot imagine Apple keeping over 50% of the tablet market share for more than another year or two. There will simply be too many Android devices that are nearly as good, and much less expensive. It will be just like what happened with smartphones.
"and this in turns competition into a race to the bottom."
Huh?
Umm, the difference is that your 6month old android can't run the newest operating system, while the 3 yeRs old iPhone cN run the the newest operating system on day one. I'm glad you think there's no differentiator here, because otherwise you'd be pretty pissed thT you have N android.
Don't be a h8r.
why is the iPad so popular? Simple, it was the first tablet to go mass market,
No, you idiot, that is not only not the reason, it's also wrong. There have been many, many attempts at the tablet market before, many of whom were intended and manufactured for the mass market, except that the market left them on the shelves.
The iPad is so popular because it simply works. Your little kid can pick it up and use it. And your grandma. And your uncle John who hasn't seen a computer since he was sent to prison 12 years ago.
Also, it has a cool factor.
It's not the first. It's just the first that actually works. And it still offers more than all the competitors. Not necessarily "more" in the geek categories nobody really cares about (memory, CPU power and other stuff that you can spend an hour explaining to your non-geek friends), but more in the categories that matter to normal people. And that's why they're still being bought as fast as they roll off the production lines.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I had my finger on the button to purchase the 8GB Nexus 7" when I went to double-check the features. Missing external storage (SD/MicroSD)? Damn, so close! I'd pay extra just for that. Other manufacturers make me wary because of all the BS (locked apps, no updates) I've had to put up with and will likely see again.
I for one did not want a i-whatever. Too limited and I really wanted to be able to turn it into a laptop whenever I needed to type a lot.
I waited while the diferent pads came and went, and finally with the Infinity I ran out and got one. The price didn't really bother me but the first few weeks had software bugs I think was hurting it.
Now that most seem to be fixed it is definately the tablet for me, and I suspect a lot of others like me.
In the coming months the new android version will bew released on it too, making it even more attractive.
People will undoubtedly nag about existing apps and such for the iwhatever but that has to do with userbase and time on market. I mean, just because someone has said baaaaah longer than moooh doesn't mean we shouldn't go for the juicy burger. hehe.
I think potentially, the first really serious competitor against the iPad could be devices that run Windows RT. Besides the Microsoft Surface, there may be at least 2-3 other manufacturers selling such tablets by the end of 2012.
People who have played with the "Metro"-like interface of Windows 8 say that's it's actually well-suited for touchscreen operations and once mastered, pretty easy to use. If Microsoft can sell a 32 GB (local storage) Surface for US$500 including the screen cover/keyboard, they could have a winner on their hands.
Well, it's been a year since I bought an iPad, and I certainly hope things have changed since then. But when I was in the shop, thinking of buying an Android tablet, I tried out everything they offered for testing. My "test" was to go online, use Google Scholar to find a scientific paper, download it as a pdf, and browse it for a while. This is what happened:
I'm not an Apple fanboi, and I acknowledge the limitations of iOS, but for my needs the iPad was clearly the best.
... is a retarded Apple fanboy trying to justify his purchase. Of course the iPad is better, but saying Amazon and Google are harming the tablet market because of low prices is about as coherent as saying GNU/Linux being free is killing the PC market. The iPad will thrive alongside cheaper alternatives in an emergent market not driven by price, but by preferences. If I ever bought a tablet, I'd rather buy an Android one because I'm used to them and Apple's economic model annoys me, but I know the iPad's hardware is strictly better... Except this is a tablet. Not a gaming PC. I don't need a high end tablet because all I'll do is read, watch movies play simple games.
Oblivion Awaits
Where does this guy get his "facts?" From 2010? I do see him citing any sources.
Samsung is the only viable competitor to Apple? The Nexus 7 is selling millions, retailers can't keep them on the shelves. What about the Kindle Fire?
The article looks like an industry plant. A unverified puff piece.
Capacative touch was *the* killer feature of the original iPhone. No other legitimately mass-market device of any kind from a major retailer or carrier had it when the iPhone was launched, and the alternatives (resistive touch, button-based navigation, etc.)
Capactivite touch basically makes possible the current generation of mobile devices and the practicability of their basic UI model.
Your dismissal isn't just uninformed but it in fact sounds just plain silly.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Dude, stop replying to all the anti-Apple posts, I want to read comments here, not your replies to everything.
What about the Kindle Fire? The Xoom? The Transformer and the Iconia? The various Samsung Galaxy Tabs?
Same joke, different actors. Seriously.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
A lot of Slashdotters could really stand to read some Human Factors and HCI research before they spout off. Humans are not deterministically programmable. They don't have APIs. They do, othe other hand, have fingers and eyes and cultural assumptions.
Experience is ceretainly not subjective, it is a large area of empirical research and a professional specialization that pays big bucks and it does this for a reason--because good UI/UX design returns big profits because the consumers of any consmer electronics device are (drumroll) people.
See Also: Apple.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Wish I hadn't used my last mod point further up. +1 Insightful.
The iPad is a computing device. It can't be greedy.
A device is greedy if it implements greedy policies of its manufacturer that the user can't turn off without a substantial annual fee.
"and the alternatives (resistive touch, button-based navigation, etc.)"
should read:
"and the alternatives (resistive touch, button-based navigation, etc.) frankly sucked."
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
It is totally absurd to think that the Federation was only allowed to run software on their computers, which had been "approved" by some third party.
You are thinking of the 1960s point of view of the computer market, with IBM saying what software you'll run on your mainframe. By the 1980s and the time of ST:TNG, we had all moved beyond the meager and depressing vision of the iPad. The iPad is what you saw on Star Trek 45 years ago, not 20.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The kindle fire isn't more popular because it's heavy, thick, and gets too hot. I was so excited to get one, only to return it.
The Fire shouldn't have born the name Kindle, because the Kindle is the iPad of e-readers: it does exactly what it was meant to (well), is at the right price point, and it was well thought out.
I wanted to like the Fire, but, honestly, my wife's iPad (2) that I pilfered to test out the Amazon Streaming Video app is the ideal "Kindle Fire DX" . . . no, what we need is a 7" iPad before we get good Android tablets . . . flame away.
There's a difference between features and experiences.
Sure. Features can be objectively defined and compared. "Experience" is utterly subjective.
So what? Who cares if experience is subjective? It doesn't mean it's not real. It is patently obvious that "more" does not always create a better experience; and that conversely, simplicity is something to strive for. A spare writing style; minimalism; a plate of sashimi; a solitary chorister singing; famously, Google's home page; etc etc.
Sufficient for what?
Unrealistic for what?
To sell products? Run a profitable business? Because those are both working very well.
I think you are right that Kendrick got this wrong. I've been surprised by people's willingness to jump on the iPad bandwagon. The tablet computer is an old concept, and doing a respectable job of it has been within our grasp for some time now. In retrospect, I think the fuel behind the iPad's success was a huge pent up frustration with computers that constantly broke and while they had tons of power, couldn't do anything because software was hard to buy, expensive, and the security was so bad that computers rapidly and easily deteriorate into expensive useless crap.
Apple brought the combination of a way to distribute apps cheaply while ensuring quality and safety, and a general purpose easy to use computing device into this pool of pent-up demand and people went wild, despite the fact that when you look at it as just another computer platform, it doesn't compare all that well. The new for factor put it in a class by itself, and without comparisons it was hard to see how overpriced and weak the machines were. I think the i world will always have it's fans, but the newer generation of Android devices will cut it's market share dramatically. I have a Kindle fire, and just got a Nexus 7, and while with the Fire, I could see the appeal of an iPad, but with the Nexus it's gone.
The heavily Objective C based ecosystem of the i world seems like a natural deal-breaker for so many things that I think in the long run, many mobile apps will end up Android-only. The Android platform has figured out how to bridge the gap between programmer friendly java and resource efficiency to deliver the best of both worlds and with that they gain a much larger potential developer base, including many established corporate teams with existing code bases. The big advantage Apple has left is the closed hardware platform that limits the amount of testing and support needed by software vendors and ensures all devices in the ecosystem are high quality. That advantage comes saddled with some pretty heavy baggage that gets heavier as the number of units sold decreases though so as Android cuts into it's market, things start looking a lot worse for the iPad.
set softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4 expandtab nocp worlddomination
Apple's main battle is this: They are a fashion symbol. Yes, Apple absolutely makes solid products (though you can already see some quality being degraded on newer models [Everyone I know with a MBP built in the past 2 years has had serious problems with it.])...but they are a fashion symbol. What happens to fashion? It goes out of style. iOS is currently pretty intuitive, but when you compare it to Windows 8 (oh dear, the loath of Slashdot) or ICS or Jellybean, it's clear that the age of the interface is becoming sort of a problem with innovation surrounding it. iOS has added new features, but nothing feels new, in some cases it just feels plain clumsy and dated. So Apple is now the Windows XP of phone OSes in the sense that it's familiar with no big leaps....but it's also a fashion symbol. To me the results could be catastrophic for Apple if just a -few- individuals migrate to Windows 8 or Android (which is ever improving) because it has a cascading effect that you don't see with PC operating systems. It's fashion, the moment Apple ceases to be "cool" it will hit a big speed bump. With Jobs no longer at the wheel, and us seeing awful ads like the new Mac ads, patent trolling (essentially) from the company. I can already see that tone toward Apple devices has started to turn by regular users, maybe not the journalists that review the products, but a shift is coming. I don't know who will fill the void, but Apple's top-tier standing could fall much much faster than Windows has. You can get almost any app that's at Apple on Android now, and when Windows 8 hits with 4 platform integration...they too will be on equal footing. So why should I stay with Apple? I can get the same stuff elsewhere, I don't have to pay up to get those features anymore...and it's just not -as- cool as it once was. Pop culture can turn quickly.
Is this from the same stupid prick who said keyboards were obsolete?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
None of them are joke (with the Fire being the obvious oddball in the list). I HAVE a Xoom, and it is wonderful. Stable, easy to use, feature packed, great build. I like it a lot. Every one you just named is a "real" Android tablet, shipping with Honeycomb and upgraded to ICS. The Xoom is now even on Jellybean. Sounds like you have not used one before. These are not like the low-end "joke" Android tablets that came before.
I don't think my shiny iThiny is the be all end all;
That's exactly *not* what you said in your original post, where you claimed:
No tablet comes close to the experience of the iPad; no phone comes close to the effectiveness of the iPhone line.
Personally, I laugh at my girlfriend when she scrolls through page after page of apps on her iPhone and iPad to find the one she wants, while I have commonly used apps grouped up on two screens for my phone, and stored into the dockbar on my Nexus 7. Everything else is in the application list for the rare times I need them. It's also amusing that she has no widgets and has to actually open apps to see stuff like weather and news.
But sure, my experience isn't as good, because you say so.
but it's certainly pretty good
Yeah, there's nothing wrong with iOS or Apple devices. They're not bad -- in fact, in some ways they're pretty good; possibly even among the best in some cases. The main thing wrong with them are the people who a) think they *are* flawless and b) think nobody else should be able to compete with them, because Apple should own the entire market.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
[Weapons or improvised weapons] implement murderous actions of an assassinatory person.
Not always. In Sony v. Universal, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the concept of a "substantial noninfringing use", which I generalize to a "substantial benign use". The benign use of a knife or a pipe is easy to see. A gun has one as well, seeing as under the U.S. model penal code, hunting and self-defense are not murder. But an iPad has no use other than to run applications approved by Apple and to reject all other applications.
Yes but they failed to capture the market. The iPad still dominates. No one's selling these damned things. They ship, sure, but they're not *selling*. They're not being used in terms of browsing statistics.
Same joke, different actors. Like I said. Don't get me wrong, probably good, maybe even awesome, but no one's buying them.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
It worked great on Tablet PCs because those almost exclusively used resistive touchscreens, sucky for fingers but great with a stylus. For Android, the only device with a digitizer I can think off the bat is Lenovo Thinkpad Tablet.
Until Samsung finally introduced the Galaxy Player, the Archos 43 Internet Tablet was the closest thing Android had to an iPod touch competitor. The Archos 43's resistive touch screen is wonderful with a DS Lite stylus.
The other AC thinks most Android applications don't in fact "automatically adjust their layout depending upon the device". I guess not enough people who develop applications for Android own a 3.0+ tablet on which to test fragment layouts. But I'd like to see evidence either way.
Can you write, compile and execute/interperet code on your iphone/ipad? Can you run a webserver or database on your ipad?
Consider the set of people who want to do either of those. Then consider the set of people who can't SSH to a shell account on a computer whenever they want to do so. For example, these might be people who own an iPad and no laptop and have no mobile broadband subscription. But is that set big enough to make them more than an edge case not worth serving? I for one work around it by carrying a 10" laptop.
Can you use a mouse as a pixel precision pointing/drawing device on your ipad?
iFanboys might claim that one doesn't need to. One can zoom in by spreading with two fingers, draw with a finger, and zoom out by pinching with two fingers.
You can go to Walmart today and pick up a netbook for about $220
They still sell those? I thought Dell and several of the other major laptop OEMs had abandoned the 10" x86 laptop.
Point? There's plenty of innovation going on in the tablet market, it's not stopped by price
But in practice, it is stopped by lack of access to U.S. retail shelves and U.S. promotion channels.
Software development is by no means an edge case not worth serving, it is the core of what makes something a computer. Without it, there are no apps, your precious tablet is just an inanimate slab of plastic and metal.
I'm a fan of Android's model more than Apple's, but allow me to do a bit of devil's advocacy here. There are two tiers: people who make applications and people who only use applications. For $250 extra per year ($100 per year for a certificate and $600 for a Mac mini amortized over four years), anyone can join the higher tier. It's a lot cheaper to become an iOS developer than to become a licensed developer for, say, Wii or PS3. Requiring developers to have skin in the game is thought to improve the user experience by reducing the probability that a particular application is crap from 99% to 90% (numbers extracted from large intestine).
I really dont care if you dismiss the areas where the ipad will always fall behind as unworthy. It just shows your ignorance.
If the majority of buyers in a market have chosen to remain ignorant, it shows that the market values rational ignorance. For example, set-top computing is dominated by dedicated video streaming boxes and game consoles, which are locked down, as opposed to general-purpose computers. This could be seen as ignorance, but it's also a reaction to a severe recession in the North American video game market that occurred in 1983 and 1984 due to a flood of crap on the second-generation consoles. The majority of people don't want to spend time and money researching the quality of every application that they plan to buy; instead, they are willing to give up their money and freedom for the manufacturer to do that for them.
The amount of fanboiism here is staggering.
I thought I'd seen every cart put before every horse, or the cause and effect screwed up as badly as possible, but this is definitely it.
Lets see. Apple makes an expensive tablet, has a complete ecosystem, has a huge installed customer base of macs and ipods and phones tied to the ecosystem with often thousands of dollars worth of purchases in it, the same well heeled mac buyers who willingly pay twice as much for apple goods as comparable products pony up the $600 for an ipad because they can and because they want to show off their cool toy to their friends so as to gain their adoration.
Press sits back and congratulates apple on making the only tablet that anyone wanted. Its still also the only one with an ecosystem and gigantic ready installed base.
The tablet they made is nothing special. There were others before it. There will be others after it. But the success criteria had absolutely nothing whatsoever with the tablet itself. Had Microsoft/google/amazon been successful in creating a usable ecosystem, gathering millions in installed base, feed them phones and pods for years until they were bought in, and then released any sort of reasonable tablet as a follow on, it'd have been an equal success.
However, I see amazon and google getting their hardware out, its decent and its cheap. Their ecosystem isnt quite done, but it won't take long. Microsoft looks like a donkey with a stick and a photo of a carrot with a windows logo on it hanging in front of its face. They'll keep shoving phone features into an OS nobody wants and they and nokia will go down in flames together.
Those other bad tablet makers screwed up our margins on the hardware, so we'll have to make it on software and services like everyone else. Oh boo hoo!
Funny, but when I worked for Intel, it became obvious to me after a bit that AMD's sole function was to make cpu's less profitable. They never made money, and with intels manufacturing capabilities they clearly never could unless intel stepped on its own dick and then kept stepping. The Pentium 4 was a clear step-on-dick, but we recovered from it. AMD seems to be the serial dick stepper now.
So anyhow, my take on the effects of this were that we used to take our time in releasing new hardware, and it was rock solid when we did. We also had a couple of years between major product releases to line up the drivers/bios/support/software/new instruction integration into applications, etc. Now we didn't.
So the world got faster cheaper cpu's released more quickly...but frankly a lot of the software support to really take advantage of that didn't happen or happened a lot later. This was considered by many to be a plus and that competition had been good for the customer. I'm entirely unsure that actually was the case.
So I guess apple will have to dig into the profit chunks they're leaving in other countries to avoid paying US corporate taxes and use some of that money to keep spiffing up itunes while amazon and google polish theirs up and offer a new line of hardware that will be very price and feature competitive with ipads/touches/iphones...
...annoying enough to yank my RSS reader from your drivel. Way to go, /.
Gawker, Politico, and THP is getting cut next. inb4 Stormfront, because you people have been eating paintchips since 1992.
I guess I'll go back to /b/. I won't be informed, but at least I will be entertained without getting pissed off.
You're in a field and on a site with a high asspie factor. Asspies/spergs have trouble dealing with a world that is not codified, objectified, defined, and enumerated. They actually buy into Nigel's method of improving the output of amps.
You are definitely a fanboy. I prefer the Nexus to the iPad...but then I prefer Android, and I really like having lots more money in my pocket; Since the HTX One X and Galaxy III generation of phones, the iPhone 4S is looking last generation literally [giggle],
Wait, I thought it was us fanbois who got all worked up over what looks shiny and flashy and new. Turns out it was you meddling fandroids all along! (And your dog!)
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Next year is the year of Linux on the desktop.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Or it's because the technology is there to make it feasible. There are some opinions and analyses floating about out there comparing a hypothetical 7.85 inch, retina resolution iPad to the 10 inch iPad 1&2 that may be instructive.
Or, hell, fear of Android tablets. What's wrong with a little competition? Despite so many railing against the monoculture that Microsoft was creating in the 90's, plenty of people on this site seem to want/expect the same thing of Android in mobile. Tiny men with tiny thoughts.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
So you paid extra for a phone you then had to invest more time into (read installing jailbreaks and updating jailbreaks).
You are awesome! Wish I could pay twice for features that come for free on other platforms.
Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire are media players — iPods. iPad is a PC for only $200 more. iPad has 600,000 native C/C++ apps, including 200,000 PC apps. iPad runs iMovie and Avid video editors (the 2 leading brands,) and the best presentation client in the world.
So yes, Amazon and Google are failures in the iPod market. And everyone but Apple is a failure in the tablet PC market. iPad competes with Windows only. Nexus 7 is as much a threat to iPad as iPod touch. Yes, you can get a $200 media player if that us what you need. If you need a tablet PC, there is a $399 iPad or an $1100 Windows tablet.