"buy tablets much cheaper than the iPad, with stronger specs in some aspects (SD flash, cameras, ports, bluetooth stack...)"
Name one.
"buy phones much cheaper than the iPhone with a bigger screen, more battery AND exchangeable batteries, more CPU/GPU performance indeed, more ports (HDMI..), better cameras, a keyboard, a more solid build..."
Name one.
" there are MP3 players with better functionnality (iTunes-less upload, removable flash, actual buttons that you can feel and click...) and better sound quality that are much cheaper"
Really? I can buy an MP3 player with 32GB of storage, 960x480 display, Wireless-N. equivalent graphic performance, quality 3rd party apps for less than the iPod Touch?
On another note, they would need to get some deal with apple to let them side load the playbook though since I'd imagine not many teams would want to submit their playbook for approval to the app store.
Companies can get an enterprise license that allows them to distriibute app internally.
Well, maybe the several music stores that were cheaper on a per-song basis than the iTunes store, at the time of the iTunes store? Granted most of them were subscription-based, but come on. iTunes pricing isn't actually revolutionary - if you look at it by album, it's pretty well matched up with previous offerings, and if you look at it by song, it's matched up with other e-Stores. This isn't to say that the iTunes store itself isn't revolutionary, just that price isn't their Sunday punch.
There were no other music stores besides subscription music stores selling music from the big four, they all used some sort of proprietary DRM that Apple would have had to license, and they all failed or were failing before iTunes was introduced
Albums on iTunes back then usually were $9,99 -- cheaper than CD's sold in the store But the "revolution" is that you didn't have to buy the whole album -- just the songs you wanted.
Also, iTunes opened as a pure DRM shop - and yes, it was largely due to vendor concerns. They ALSO refused to license their DRM scheme across platforms, using their dominant position in the e-music market to sell iPod hardware.
This was originally posted on Apple's front page. There was a lot of publicity about it back in the day.
1. The music industry wanted Apple to license their DRM, 2. He gave the music industry two alternatives to make music interoperable -- either a) Apple could license their DRM or b) the music industry could allow Apple and anyone else to sell DRM free music. He said if the music industry would allow it, Apple would be more than willing to sell DRM free music. 3. "Slashdot Wisdom" was that Apple knew that the music industry would never allow anyone to sell DRM free music and that it was a bluff, 4. The music industry wanted variable price music and at first they wanted an upfront payment for the privilege. Apple refused both. 5. EMI allowed DRM free music and Apple started selling "iTunes Plus". 6. The music industry tried and failed to force Apple's hand by allowing everyone else to sell DRM free music. 7. Apple had to allow variable pricing because they wanted to be able to sell music over the cell network for the iPhone..
Hell, that's largely why they settled on AAC in the first place - and why they spent so long fighting community efforts to build AAC transcoders, before their change of heart.
Apple had nothing to do with the development or licensing of AAC. Apple isn't even part of the patent pool for AAC. It is a licensable format that was introduced 4 years before the iPod was ever introduced.
Apple chose AAC because it was a better format.
Webscriptions.net. Hell, anywhere that sells non-DRM eBooks and handles mobi format, which is basically everywhere that handles non-DRM e-Books. My example even has functionality to use the Kindle's push functionality, to send the book directly to your Kindle.
Just like anyone could always sell DRM free music and video that worked on the iPod, anyone can sell DRM free books that work on the iPad.
Now, riddle me this - once Apple demands that every book on the iPad/iPhone come through their store, where else will I be able to buy books for my iPhone?
Apple is demanding no such thing. Apple is demanding that if you allow outside purchases of content, you also must allow in-app purchases. They are not forbidding outside purchases.
Why do you imagine this? Apple is (in)famous for using its ownership of hardware to shut out competitors; for example, any number of music stores with more content back in the early iTunes days.
What stores allowed you to buy singles at 99c before iTunes? Besides, Apple never stopped any store from selling non-DRM'd music in either MP3 or AAC format that worked fine on the iPod.
In fact, when the industry tried to pressure Apple into licensing it's DRM, Steve Jobs in his famous "Thoughts on Music" posting gave the industry the alternative of allowing everyone to sell non-DRM encumbered music that would work across players.
Right now as far as "shutting out competitors", there is a Rhapsody client available for iOS that competes directly with iTunes for music Hulu and Netflix both compete with iTunes for movies and TV shows. Netflix is even available for the AppleTV.
But on the other hand, where else can I buy e-books that work on the Kindle?
all that and you ignored the basic premise that adding 13 to 100 doesn't double your total?
I didn't comment on the basic premise -- I commented on the fact that everything that was said in the original post was demonstrably shown as incorrect.
It doesn't matter how many Android users there are to third party developers, but how many are actually willing to buy stuff. As much as Slashdotter's hate to believe that Android's "fragmentation" is not a problem and makes it a less attractive platform. The truth is different.
Again take Angry Birds -- the best selling mobile app in the world. It is compatible with every iOS device that has ever existed. On the other hand.....
There are at least 18 different phones that are not supported by Rovio, including some that were still selling.
"Of those polled who are currently Verizon subscribers, 19% said they were "very likely" to buy an iPhone if it became available to the carrier, with another 34% answering that they were "somewhat likely" to buy. Both numbers were higher than those for either Sprint or T-Mobile subscribers."
Apple moved 10 million phones in Q4 2010 alone.
Calendar 4th quarter numbers haven't been announced. They sold 14 million during their fiscal 4th quarter (ending in September).
guess we are also supposed to forget about the even larger number of Android devices out there, and the even larger number of new Android devices being sold each quarter when we think about the mobile gaming market.. but still how exactly does 13 million new users double anything?
Study after study shows that Android users buy a lot fewer apps than iOS users. For example, from Rovio -- the maker of the most popular mobile game last year -- Angry Birds.
As for 'modern', well, as of CES last week, the iPhone 4 is certainly not top-shelf, what with a single core, 3G connectivity (not even HSPA+, right?), no storage expansion slot, etc. The screen is still the highest resolution one out there, but it's so _small_, it's not for me. Some people don't mind small screens, though. *shrug* It's pretty funny - iPhone owners keep looking longingly at my EVO. "Is that new?" "No, it's over 6 months old. Old technology.":)
Monopolies are bad. Period. Pay the creators through a levy, or tax, or give them a portion of ad revenue, or something. But don't give them absolute control, and then expect them to use that control solely for making a living. Asking for permission or charging to copy sheet music is like having to get permission to pee, or charging for toilets.
Why would I as an author, musician, etc. invest the time in something without getting paid? You want the government to decide how much a creative work is worth, collect taxes, and apportion it out?
So if you believe in freedom of copying, does that mean I should be able to take GPL source code, make changes, compile it, distribute it and do with it as I wish? What if I then make the modified GPL based software only work with my proprietary hardware (i.e. "Tivoization")?
Traditionally educational purposes have always been exempt or less restricted than personal and commercial enterprises when it comes to copyright. The reason is that educating children is more important than the petty profit of today. Education isn't a competing business interest, it's a complementary service which supports and enhances all other aspects of life and business.
Should teachers then be allowed to copy textbooks? educational DVD's? Commercial software?
The main reason why it takes so long for a lot of those phones to get the latest release, is that the carrier feels the need to include a custom interface.
So the carrier feels the need to install the Sense UI on HTC phones, MotoBlur on Motorola phones and TouchWiz on Samsung phones?
You missed the biggest reason, to run the latest OS version. Hardware vendors and carriers make updates slow and infrequent. On top of this they will stop updating a phone soon after release to ensure you upgrade to a newer model and get another contract.
Original iPhone -- released in June 2007 and was capable of running the latest OS until Jun 2010 iPhone 3G -- released in June 2008, still capable of running the latest OS (with limitations) iPhone 3GS -- released in June 2009, capable of running the latest OS.
No waiting on the carrier to decide when you can upgrade. Apple released the OS and everyone worldwide could upgrade the same day.
If it's an iPhone, you may not want to replace it every year or two, but you can damn well bet on the fact that Apple will be doing everything in it's power to push you into doing so regardless. Apple didn't become the Saint of Obsolescence by playing fair with its products.
Right, because it is Apple that has a history of not providing OS updates for the iPhone for at least two years and not Android manufacturers......
I brought an ipad home from work for 2 weeks. Both my kids (gamer son, daughter) constantly used it the first few days. 2 weeks later I was the only one using it regularly and not for games. My son quickly reverted back to the DS, PSP, XBOX or PS3 to play games. Up until I brought an ipad home my daughter had a fund saving up for one. I think she spent it on clothes since then.. I haven't heard a peep.
The plural (singular?) of anecdote is not data. Luckily, we have data showing iPad use increases over time...
http://gigaom.com/apple/survey-ipad-is-replacing-computers-for-many/ ---- Though the researchers originally thought the iPad might be passed off as a flashy device that held little long-term value, 77.6 percent of the users found their iPad usage went up after their initial "honeymoon" period. So, the iPad probably won't end up in your return pile shortly along with oddly-colored sweaters. -----
The problem with a phone/game platform is that people have to pay a contract which takes it away from a key market: kids. No parent wants to buy their kid a $300 Ubersmartphone, pay a $40 text/call/data plan on it per month AND buy the games.
It sure would be nice if one of the major smart phone manufacturers introduced a device with basically the same hardware as their phone, without the phone hardware and the need for a contract....
Not to mention all the different operating systems that make it impractical to be a real gamer and play all the good games no matter what the platform. It is feasible for someone to own a DS and PSP, it is feasible for someone to own a Wii, PS3 and 360. It however, is impractical for most people to own an Android, Windows Mobile, Symbian, iOS and BlackBerry phone.
Yes, because Android, Windows Mobile 7, Symbian, and BlackBerry phones have so many killer games....
What specific "fleet management components or API's" does Windows Mobile have? I have experience developing with WM ruggedized devices used in fleet management and I can't think of one thing that Windows Mobile gives you specifically geared toward it.
Only dumb people. I think most of us knew that it would fail.
It was pretty much "common Slashdot wisdom" [sic] that "the same thing would happen to the iPod that happened to the Mac." because "open always wins".
Rob Glaser (ceo of Real Networks) said in 2003 that in 5 years the iPod would have around 5% of the market.
This is not Apple vs. Dell, this is Apple vs. All PC Manufacturers. Further, profit is only one part of the equation. As long as Dell makes a profit it can stay in business, and it doesn't matter whether they make more than Apple or not. But again, Dell can go away and it won't help Apple.
Even if you consider Apple versus the rest of the industry. It's still not a pretty picture. The five top PC vendors worldwide are HP, Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, and Acer. Apple's market cap is larger than HP, Dell, and Lenovo combined. Acer and Toshiba aren't traded on the U.S. stock market. Apple's more profitable as of last quarter than HP, Dell, and Lenovo combined. (all numbers from finance.google.com)
As far as Acer, it's the biggest combination of suck in history == Acer + Gateway + Emachines + Packard Bell.
The PC companies have all but given up going after the most profitable part of the consumer PC market and basically let Apple have free reign.
If history repeats itself, and there is no reason to believe that it will not, then iOS will be an also-ran in ten years, and Android will be dominant. Any features in iOS lacking in Android can be added, but the biggest problems with the App Store etc are also its biggest benefits (e.g. walled garden model) and if you remove them then what you have is an Android competitor with no compelling advantages whatsoever and no ability to run Android apps.
Didn't people say the same thing about the iPod versus Plays4Sure almost a decade ago?
Dell with four times the market share of Apple just announced "great" profits of a little bit over $1 billion -- 4x times less than Apple.
And a lot of people have turned $1 into millions of dollars with a lottery ticket, but that doesn't mean people who buy lottery tickets aren't morons.. While there are success stories, the economics for the average developer may not be quite so bright, as this article suggests. It may not be dead on and things have probably changed somewhat with iAds, but it probably isn't a good choice by itself.
I read that blog all the time. But quoting him as evidence of anything is about as bad as quoting Enderle or Paul Thurott (windowsitpro.com). If you want strategy lessons, usualy the best thing to do is just the opposite of what they suggest.
Slashdot Mirror
"buy tablets much cheaper than the iPad, with stronger specs in some aspects (SD flash, cameras, ports, bluetooth stack...)"
Name one.
"buy phones much cheaper than the iPhone with a bigger screen, more battery AND exchangeable batteries, more CPU/GPU performance indeed, more ports (HDMI..), better cameras, a keyboard, a more solid build..."
Name one.
" there are MP3 players with better functionnality (iTunes-less upload, removable flash, actual buttons that you can feel and click...) and better sound quality that are much cheaper"
Really? I can buy an MP3 player with 32GB of storage, 960x480 display, Wireless-N. equivalent graphic performance, quality 3rd party apps for less than the iPod Touch?
Right, because right now:
1. You can buy a tablet much cheaper than the iPad with the same specs.
2. You can buy a phone much cheaper than the iPhone with the same specs (resolution/battery life/graphics performance).
3. And there are dozens of MP3 players with the equivalent hardware of the Touch that are much cheaper.....
Oh wait, nevermind.....
Companies can get an enterprise license that allows them to distriibute app internally.
There were no other music stores besides subscription music stores selling music from the big four, they all used some sort of proprietary DRM that Apple would have had to license, and they all failed or were failing before iTunes was introduced
Albums on iTunes back then usually were $9,99 -- cheaper than CD's sold in the store But the "revolution" is that you didn't have to buy the whole album -- just the songs you wanted.
This was originally posted on Apple's front page. There was a lot of publicity about it back in the day.
http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/12543/
Basically the story is:
1. The music industry wanted Apple to license their DRM,
2. He gave the music industry two alternatives to make music interoperable -- either a) Apple could license their DRM or b) the music industry could allow Apple and anyone else to sell DRM free music. He said if the music industry would allow it, Apple would be more than willing to sell DRM free music.
3. "Slashdot Wisdom" was that Apple knew that the music industry would never allow anyone to sell DRM free music and that it was a bluff,
4. The music industry wanted variable price music and at first they wanted an upfront payment for the privilege. Apple refused both.
5. EMI allowed DRM free music and Apple started selling "iTunes Plus".
6. The music industry tried and failed to force Apple's hand by allowing everyone else to sell DRM free music.
7. Apple had to allow variable pricing because they wanted to be able to sell music over the cell network for the iPhone..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding
Apple had nothing to do with the development or licensing of AAC. Apple isn't even part of the patent pool for AAC. It is a licensable format that was introduced 4 years before the iPod was ever introduced.
Apple chose AAC because it was a better format.
Just like anyone could always sell DRM free music and video that worked on the iPod, anyone can sell DRM free books that work on the iPad.
Apple is demanding no such thing. Apple is demanding that if you allow outside purchases of content, you also must allow in-app purchases. They are not forbidding outside purchases.
What stores allowed you to buy singles at 99c before iTunes? Besides, Apple never stopped any store from selling non-DRM'd music in either MP3 or AAC format that worked fine on the iPod.
In fact, when the industry tried to pressure Apple into licensing it's DRM, Steve Jobs in his famous "Thoughts on Music" posting gave the industry the alternative of allowing everyone to sell non-DRM encumbered music that would work across players.
Right now as far as "shutting out competitors", there is a Rhapsody client available for iOS that competes directly with iTunes for music Hulu and Netflix both compete with iTunes for movies and TV shows. Netflix is even available for the AppleTV.
But on the other hand, where else can I buy e-books that work on the Kindle?
Really?
Oh well, I've got Karma to burn....
"oh.. you're just going on some unrelated rant. ok then."
So exactly which part of your ass did you pull out all of your (mis)information from?
I didn't comment on the basic premise -- I commented on the fact that everything that was said in the original post was demonstrably shown as incorrect.
It doesn't matter how many Android users there are to third party developers, but how many are actually willing to buy stuff. As much as Slashdotter's hate to believe that Android's "fragmentation" is not a problem and makes it a less attractive platform. The truth is different.
Again take Angry Birds -- the best selling mobile app in the world. It is compatible with every iOS device that has ever existed. On the other hand.....
There are at least 18 different phones that are not supported by Rovio, including some that were still selling.
http://www.rovio.com/index.php?mact=Blogs,cntnt01,showentry,0&cntnt01entryid=47&cntnt01returnid=58
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9176349/Verizon_customers_lust_for_iPhone_says_survey
"Of those polled who are currently Verizon subscribers, 19% said they were "very likely" to buy an iPhone if it became available to the carrier, with another 34% answering that they were "somewhat likely" to buy. Both numbers were higher than those for either Sprint or T-Mobile subscribers."
Calendar 4th quarter numbers haven't been announced. They sold 14 million during their fiscal 4th quarter (ending in September).
Study after study shows that Android users buy a lot fewer apps than iOS users. For example, from Rovio -- the maker of the most popular mobile game last year -- Angry Birds.
http://pulse2.com/2010/12/29/rovio-mobile-mighty-eagle-peter-vesterbacka-nobody-has-been-successful-selling-content-on-android/
"Paid content doesn't work on Android".
Big difference -- you can buy an iPhone now.
Why would I as an author, musician, etc. invest the time in something without getting paid? You want the government to decide how much a creative work is worth, collect taxes, and apportion it out?
So if you believe in freedom of copying, does that mean I should be able to take GPL source code, make changes, compile it, distribute it and do with it as I wish? What if I then make the modified GPL based software only work with my proprietary hardware (i.e. "Tivoization")?
Should teachers then be allowed to copy textbooks? educational DVD's? Commercial software?
Yeah because normal consumers are going to troll the Internet,root their phones and install an unofficial OS....
So the carrier feels the need to install the Sense UI on HTC phones, MotoBlur on Motorola phones and TouchWiz on Samsung phones?
Original iPhone -- released in June 2007 and was capable of running the latest OS until Jun 2010
iPhone 3G -- released in June 2008, still capable of running the latest OS (with limitations)
iPhone 3GS -- released in June 2009, capable of running the latest OS.
No waiting on the carrier to decide when you can upgrade. Apple released the OS and everyone worldwide could upgrade the same day.
Right, because it is Apple that has a history of not providing OS updates for the iPhone for at least two years and not Android manufacturers......
You're thinking is very Western centric....
Even in America, more people own cell phones than computers.....
http://www.ere.net/2010/10/21/more-cell-phones-than-computers-means-you-cant-ignore-mobile/
The disparity grows in poorer countries.
Even if you just consider smart phones, as hardware gets cheaper, smart phone will start displacing dump phones on the lowend.
The plural (singular?) of anecdote is not data. Luckily, we have data showing iPad use increases over time...
http://gigaom.com/apple/survey-ipad-is-replacing-computers-for-many/
----
Though the researchers originally thought the iPad might be passed off as a flashy device that held little long-term value, 77.6 percent of the users found their iPad usage went up after their initial "honeymoon" period. So, the iPad probably won't end up in your return pile shortly along with oddly-colored sweaters.
-----
Yes, because Apple has reportedly not approved such a wide variety of games....
On top of that Nintendo and Sony have a wide open platform that anyone can developer for without requiring approval....
It sure would be nice if one of the major smart phone manufacturers introduced a device with basically the same hardware as their phone, without the phone hardware and the need for a contract....
http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/
Yes, because Android, Windows Mobile 7, Symbian, and BlackBerry phones have so many killer games....
Not really. The "alternate browsers" that Apple has allowed are based on WebKit, just like Safari.
Opera Mini is based on Webkit? Really?
What specific "fleet management components or API's" does Windows Mobile have? I have experience developing with WM ruggedized devices used in fleet management and I can't think of one thing that Windows Mobile gives you specifically geared toward it.
It was pretty much "common Slashdot wisdom" [sic] that "the same thing would happen to the iPod that happened to the Mac." because "open always wins".
Rob Glaser (ceo of Real Networks) said in 2003 that in 5 years the iPod would have around 5% of the market.
Even if you consider Apple versus the rest of the industry. It's still not a pretty picture. The five top PC vendors worldwide are HP, Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, and Acer. Apple's market cap is larger than HP, Dell, and Lenovo combined. Acer and Toshiba aren't traded on the U.S. stock market. Apple's more profitable as of last quarter than HP, Dell, and Lenovo combined. (all numbers from finance.google.com)
As far as Acer, it's the biggest combination of suck in history == Acer + Gateway + Emachines + Packard Bell.
The PC companies have all but given up going after the most profitable part of the consumer PC market and basically let Apple have free reign.
Didn't people say the same thing about the iPod versus Plays4Sure almost a decade ago?
Dell with four times the market share of Apple just announced "great" profits of a little bit over $1 billion -- 4x times less than Apple.
I read that blog all the time. But quoting him as evidence of anything is about as bad as quoting Enderle or Paul Thurott (windowsitpro.com). If you want strategy lessons, usualy the best thing to do is just the opposite of what they suggest.