• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

iPad Reactions

Policenaut said:
Phones, pmps, and netbooks can already do that. What gap does this iPad fill exactly? The iPad is an option if you need to access email and the internet but just one in a sea of electronic devices. If you already own a device that can get on the web (which most people have at least one) what are the chances that you also "need" an iPad for that purpose?
Click to expand...

Remember Web TV? This looks almost like Web TV in your hands...
 
quadraginta said:
But it's the same as what we're used to. Only less.
Click to expand...

Then it's not the same, is it?

Everyday, all over the world, people are very productive using nothing more than what capabilities the iPad has. If you do not feel you can be productive under those circumstances, then this is simply not the product for you.
 
Last edited:
daSkeptic said:
Then it's not the same, is it?

Everyday, all over the world, people are very productive using nothing more than what capabilities the iPad has. If you do not feel you can be productive under those circumstances, then this is simply not the product for you.
Click to expand...


I don't think that has anything to do with the point. The point is that there is nothing particularly new or revolutionary about it.

It isn't about whether or not it's productive enough for me. It's about whether or not it's even as productive as offerings that have been around for quite a while.

The point is that it isn't "a new way of doing things". It's not even an improvement on an old way of doing things. At least not from what I've read about it so far. That seems to include the general consensus in this thread.

I think it will find a niche and sell enough to justify Apple's investment. In fact I fervently hope it does. I think that the main effect of that will be for people to start looking differently at this "new way of doing things" which has been hidden in plain sight all around them for over half a decade, and make it a "way" which enough people acknowledge as mainstream for the good implementations to become price competitive with laptops.

To be honest, I had anticipated that happening earlier, but I'll be content with it happening at all.
 
It will be a good device for the coffee table in the lounge room once the price drops in a couple of years.
 
quadraginta said:
It isn't about whether or not it's productive enough for me. It's about whether or not it's even as productive as offerings that have been around for quite a while.
Click to expand...

Why does it need to be? What's wrong with it being a lesser device?

The point is that it isn't "a new way of doing things".
Click to expand...

Really? There are other devices out there designed for people that A) don't need the functionality of nor wish to deal with the complexity of a computer, and B) find a phone to be too small? I have not encountered such a thing, but that doesn't mean it isn't out there. Please, provide a link. I'm curious.
 
Jobs on Adobe and Google. From his "townhall" meeting with employees after the iPad launch.


On Google: We did not enter the search business, Jobs said. They entered the phone business. Make no mistake they want to kill the iPhone. We won’t let them, he says. Someone else asks something on a different topic, but there’s no getting Jobs off this rant. I want to go back to that other question first and say one more thing, he says. This don’t be evil mantra: “It’s ********.” Audience roars.


About Adobe: They are lazy, Jobs says. They have all this potential to do interesting things but they just refuse to do it. They don’t do anything with the approaches that Apple is taking, like Carbon. Apple does not support Flash because it is so buggy, he says. Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it’s because of Flash. No one will be using Flash, he says. The world is moving to HTML5.


The world, of course, includes Google, which last week in a somewhat more modest development bypassed Apple’s iPhone app blockade by unveiling an html5 version of Google Voice, which takes full advantage of mobile Safari on the iPhone. Wired.com found it to be an impressive variation of the app Apple has neither approved nor officially rejected.


​
 
erlando said:
Oh yes, the Archos 9. With excellent in-built 3G capability... (/sarcasm)
Click to expand...

Well the iPad doesn't have built in 3G unless you spend an extra $130. I'm sure the next iteration of the archos 9 will have 3G for you sticklers. All their larger pmps and tablets have wifi just like the basic iPad. Like I said before the archos 9 is missing some key features but it sure as hell has more features I care about that the iPad doesn't have. I wouldn't buy either right now but I can see myself buying an improved archos 9 whereas I don't see an iPad ever offering the options and flexibility archos or any other company now in the process of creating tablets is willing to provide.
 
Policenaut said:
Yes the Archos 5/5g/7/9.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archos_Internet_Media_Tablets
Click to expand...

Interesting. The 5 and 7 are definitely along the lines of the iPad, the 9 not so much. Judging from the website, however, I think they're targeting a different market than Apple. There's also the question of visibility. If the target audience isn't generally aware of these devices, then to them the iPad is something new. It's only natural for a manufacturer to make use of that in their marketing.
 
ponderingturtle said:
So you don't care about functionality vs price when you buy things? Sales people must love you.
Click to expand...

You're forgetting the issue of complexity. Functional capability is irrelevant if it cannot be employed. Given two devices that both meet a person's functional needs, the $500 unit they can actually use is a much better deal to them than the $300 unit they can't figure out.
 
daSkeptic said:
You're forgetting the issue of complexity. Functional capability is irrelevant if it cannot be employed. Given two devices that both meet a person's functional needs, the $500 unit they can actually use is a much better deal to them than the $300 unit they can't figure out.
Click to expand...


Most people don't use any of their techie devices to full capability. It would make more sense to talk about having a device with capabilities they don't use than about capabilities they don't need. Any device can be obscurely complicated to a user. That is not a function of its potential, but rather its interface. A device with more capability doesn't have to be more complicated when used for basic tasks, and not all devices that have no capability beyond basics are by definition user friendly.

Viewed from this perspective the dichotomy you present would involve someone buying a $300 unit with capabilities they might come to learn about and take advantage of, or a $500 one that they learn isn't capable of doing what they find out other people can do.

Then the company that soaked 'em for the $500 will cheerfully sell them an "upgrade" or even something "new" and "revolutionary".

I suppose this is one way to build a loyal customer base, but it might be an impediment to overall market share.

Oh. Wait.
 
daSkeptic said:
Interesting. The 5 and 7 are definitely along the lines of the iPad, the 9 not so much. Judging from the website, however, I think they're targeting a different market than Apple. There's also the question of visibility. If the target audience isn't generally aware of these devices, then to them the iPad is something new. It's only natural for a manufacturer to make use of that in their marketing.
Click to expand...

Archos is, of course, a small time company compared to Apple but their products are being sold at Best Buy, Radio Shack and some other B&M stores as well as online so they have the potential to grab new customers clamoring for the iPad or an iPad-like device. Some might like or prefer the smaller screen size, android os, price point, memory expansion, webcam or other features once they see it compared to the iPad. And once the onslaught of other tablets are released by companies like Dell, Asus, MSI etc. I think the general public will see that there is more than one game in town (and the competition can only be good for prices). I personally like Archos as a company but they haven't made a perfect device for me yet (they're close though).
 
The Joojoo looks pretty cool for a simple, practical internet uni-tasker. The price is ungodly high and the company will probably fold in a few months, but the device itself looks promising. It looks like it will actually do its one job quite well, rather than a dozen jobs half-assed.
 
StanUpshaw said:
The Joojoo looks pretty cool for a simple, practical internet uni-tasker. The price is ungodly high and the company will probably fold in a few months, but the device itself looks promising. It looks like it will actually do its one job quite well, rather than a dozen jobs half-assed.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's an interesting piece of tech (but the story behind it is more interesting than the device itself like the article says) but for me it's way too limited and too damn big. It's got 12" screen! I believe the original target price was something ridiculously cheap like $200. For that price it would be a tempting buy even with it's severe limitations.
 
quadraginta said:
Any device can be obscurely complicated to a user. That is not a function of its potential, but rather its interface. A device with more capability doesn't have to be more complicated when used for basic tasks, and not all devices that have no capability beyond basics are by definition user friendly.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely correct. Functionality, price, and complexity can be completely orthogonal. But each person has their own idea of what is the proper balance of these factors. There's no one rule for everybody.

Viewed from this perspective the dichotomy you present would involve someone buying a $300 unit with capabilities they might come to learn about and take advantage of, or a $500 one that they learn isn't capable of doing what they find out other people can do.
Click to expand...

The operative word there is "might." They might find a feature of the more capable unit they wish to use, but then again they might not. You strike me as the type of individual who values having an option whether or not you'll ever exercise it, and that's fine. But not everybody is like that.

I suppose this is one way to build a loyal customer base, but it might be an impediment to overall market share.
Click to expand...

Improving market share is not necessarily the top priority for all businesses. Just as consumers have differing values, so too do companies.
 
Last edited:
StanUpshaw said:
It looks like it will actually do its one job quite well, rather than a dozen jobs half-assed.
Click to expand...

If you require something more than what the iPad does, then go buy something else. Just because you perceive a significant limitation does not mean everyone else does too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom