Read more.Quote:
Is it just me?
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Is it just me?
You aren't alone, I think queuing for items like that is bonkers.
I have an Nintendo DSi XL... and I don't plan on getting a 3DS at all. I find it ridiculous to think people will be wasting perfectly good DSi's when getting a 3DS and more so when Nintendo hasn't bothered giving it any thought at all. Such a waste of resources.
As for the iPad, I know better than to get myself locked into anything Apple. I literally can't afford to use their closed system.
http://tenerife-training.net/Tenerif...conception.jpg
I mean there was only one person there in any of those videos who had a genuine revenue producing reason (at least he leads us to believe so) to queue early.
I'd wait in a queue like that if there was several hundred quid in it for me, not for me to fork out at least 400 quid for a massively inferior computation device with a £100 3G tax. Not on your life.
Maybe some of the people will sell their iPad on for uber profits??Quote:
Originally Posted by aidanjt
don't worry, if you cant be bothered to wait in like you can just buy your place in the queue later on
want to make a bit of quick money? well you can just get there really early and sell your place in the queue later on
madness, from all parties.
So there's on guy who *needs* it for his job and one guy who must have it because he owns every other prouct...
I'm sick of this world.
I REALLY can't understand wanting a piece of tech (or anything else... Next sale anyone?) so bad that you go camp outside the shop.
Mind you, I'd much rather buy online and wait a few days than go to an actual shop, especially if that shop meant going into the city.
(We did cave and go to a real shop, in the city, to buy a replacement kettle when ours stopped working, but a kettle is exceptional, coffee made in the microwave just didn't taste the same. :) )
http://cdn0.knowyourmeme.com/i/2270/...prised-guy.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by pipTheGeek
The only way this makes sense to me is by rewinding that to a school kid mentality: not sure if it's the same with others here, but in my school, one of many ways to be"cool" is to have the latest "whatever" (toys, CDs, branded shoes etc.). Or if the very first buyers get something "limited", unavailable for those who get it later.
That logic is badly flawed, and I hope I don't need to explain why.Quote:
But you have to assume that these people haven't queued for so long for anything else in the past year, so in a way that makes buying one of these gadgets the biggest thing that's happened to them in that time. Really?
Some people do not value their time or have common sense to begin with. Every idiot who queued for gadgets like these are blithering idiots.
Maybe we should all queue outside Scan's Head office during NVIDIA and ATI gfx launch days! :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipTheGeek
Or you could buy online and get it a day early, like many people who ordered a 3DS from Tesco. :D
i dont get the obsession with the ipad its an overpriced toy... why would you want one over a laptop...
What kind of job requires you to have in your possession an iPad2? Where an iPad won't suffice, you have to have the iPad 2.
A job developing apps for the ipad2 ? ;) - a bit of a stretch though.Quote:
Originally Posted by duc
I'm still impressed with apple's marketing that they have managed to create a situation where people queue to get their products. Limiting supplies to 5 per store helps too.
I suppose it helps that they do both hardware & software - so their keynotes can advertise the whole product.
Microsoft and Google rely on Dell , HP, Sony et al to actually sell their stuff, so you don't really see as high profile product demos.
I so agree with the basic premise - it's not penicillin. It will keep.
I am interested in the 3D-without-glasses trick, mind. But why be first? Let someone else find out if they have to take it back for a refund.
There's no way I'd queue to buy a bit of tech. I'd just order it online and wait for it to be delivered.
That is just shocking...selling your spot? and that queue! i mean really?
But the iPad 2 is (a) toilet.
It really rubs me the wrong way when people imposes their values over others. "If you buy an Apple product, you are a sheep". "If you don't have an Apple product, you are uncool". "If you queue to buy a gadget, you don't value your time (well, same argument can be made for time spent in forums)". "If you believe in a religion, you are an idiot". "If you don't believe in a religion, you are corrupt and deserve an eternity in hell fire" etc. etc. etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by OilSheikh
Can't people accept that with over 6 billions people living in this world, we are going to have different values. And so long as their values aren't harmful to the people around them, what's the big deal? Where does this need of labelling people come from?
I was going to give this article the benefit of doubt, but looking at the chosen image, the title, and the way it is written, the "But look, whatever floats your boat man" line is added to cover yourself. You (the author) don't really mean it, do you?
Thanks Spock :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by TooNice
I think it was all meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek mate. And the topic is queuing...Quote:
Originally Posted by TooNice
I have the same opinion of people who queue, sometimes for hours, to get into a smelly club full of pretentious people (usually after having to pay a fair enough of money just for that privilege), who then proceed to pay insane amounts of money just to poison themselves and risk their life.
It's no different than that, just a lot safer and healthier :D
Essentially we're all different people with different values - I think that TooNice hits it perfectly. For me, I queued for an iPhone 4 for 2 hours..and hell I enjoyed it. I got some time off work, spent the morning chatting with some friendly like minded people in the queue, got free coffee and doughnuts and the thrill factor of getting my nice new gadget on launch day. I personally wouldn't queue for an iPad (much less an iPad2) but then tablets don't really interest me that much.
Each to their own really. I would have queued for a 3Ds but Tesco were kind enough to deliver it to me on thursday, so there was no need :D
I was once in a queue and it was rubbish!
*prods fire* maybe iP(x) buyers queue for things because they don't actually know technology has given them an easier way?
is that... is that irony?
http://linkoroo.com/images/content/i...-522-large.jpg
Runs away quickly!! :D
The ladies typically have longer queues than the gents, does that taking a leak is a "bigger event" for the ladies than the gents? If you had to queue 20 minutes to use the bathroom on Monday because the venue is packed, and no time at all for your best friend's small private wedding the following day (or even the same day), does that make, again, the former a "bigger event" than the later"? What queueing mainly shows is the (short term) demand vs service capacity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B
At best, it could be the highlights of their day for those people. You might be able to get away saying that, given that it's time that could be used things that day. Yet I doubt that the average person's life is so fulfilling that no time is spent in ways that can be subjectively viewed as wasteful. If the excitement they get from getting a new toy exceeds their usual hobby, so what? If a person gave up an invitation to a friend's wedding for that, I'd consider their priorities messed up, but if it's time that would've otherwise been spent posting in a forum? I'd definitely say to each their own.
Perhaps no one on Hexus has ever queued for a new toy. But I know many pre-orders games even before reviews are out. It's good seeing studios getting support, yet it's not strictly that rational. We can also see people getting excited about new games as release date nears. So I can see how people can get (irrationally) excited from waiting for something new. Maybe not to the extent that they may not be willing to queue (then again, I wonder if no one in Hexus have queued for SC2), but enough to pre-order.
Personally, I don't get excited enough to queue up or pre-order for something I could get sooner or later after the reviews are out. But I genuinely see nothing to it. I certainly see no need to question why given that it's harmless to me.
Because it isn't an alternative to a laptop. You probably wouldn't write a 25,000 word dissertation on an ipad, but if you want to have a quick look at Hexus while you are sitting in front of the TV, is it easier to pick up an Ipad, or sit balancing a clamshell laptop on your lap? Probably easier to use the ipad.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcmiller
Apple sell a tightly integrated product, hardware and software are very tightly integrated and controlled. The user experience across the Apple range is consistent. And the products work, out of the box, and they work well. And if that integration and control comes at a price premium, then there are lots of people prepared to pat that because they have had enough of BSOD in the past, driver problems etc - even if MS have come to grips with quality control (as far as they can with third party developers).
I have some friends with smartphones. One is a Samsung Galaxy with Android - its a good phone, but she can't wait to get rid of it and get an iphone like her husband. Why? because there is noticeable lag when operating any of the touch screen controls, the iphone just feels more responsive.
I don't own any Apple kit apart from a very old ipod (2nd generation) but when I look to replace my 'phone I will certainly be looking at an iphone - simply because I know what I'll be getting - and that is why Apple products sell well.
Android will have a much bigger impact worldwide as it has a much bigger potential market. It has meant that the smartphone has become accessable to more people worldwide and it will do the same for tablet PCs too.
Not really - symbian and RIM have really done much more for the smartphone market than android, and the poor quality of the vast majority of current gen Android tablets does nothing for its reputation. Its popular in the enthusiast market due to the ease of hacking, and vast customisation..but in the home and business markets, it's just not what people want. Apple have played their part - the have the Tablet market sewn up at the moment, and have really helped in getting more people into smartphones..again the sales alone show this.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
We can argue which is better until the end of time and never agree, but that doesn't matter. They both (all) sell and have their own markets, positives and negatives, it's up to each of us to decide which we prefer. Personally I am firmly in the Apple camp for my phone, and tablets are still too expensive to appeal to me, especially when my mac air can do everything a tablet can do and much more, whilst being lighter and more powerful. Oh and I can balance it on my lap without having to hold it..so much easier than a tablet!
Not really as you fail to see the much bigger picture in the long term and the fact that sales of Android phones have increased over 800% in the last year. This is despite it being later to the market than all of the other smartphone OSes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud1
http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/09/gar...rcent-in-2010/
It will be the most ubiquitous smartphone OS and will dominate the market in the next 10 years as it has opened up smartphone availability to the lower end of the market which means most of the worlds population.
Nokia had a chance to capatalise on the success of Symbian but have screwed it up.
BTW, Windows was dismissed at the time as being no real competition to the dominant Mac OS. However it could run on multiple hardware configurations and was cheaper.
Funny,how it is still the most ubiquitous OS on home computers.
totally agree. pointless queing for an item IMO. never done it before. never will.Quote:
Originally Posted by ExHail
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
well said. RIM and symbian has been around for donkey years so of course its currenly more accessible then android but people need to look at the bigger picture and realize the rate android is increasing.
diddnt nokia and MS combine? i wonder why
:offtopic:Funny how you can't buy a non-mac PC without itQuote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
Actually you can, but that's not the point here :) Yes windows dominates, and yes its similar to android in many levels (it's open nature, the easy of hacking, the insecurity etc) - but the reason for Windows dominance was completely different. Windows was released into such a young market, personal computing was not mainstream in the slightest and it was the first affordable(in relative terms, it was still very expensive!), usable OS to make it into the mainstream market. The smartphone market is totally different and much more mature.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobharvey
Anyway I don't want to get embroiled in yet another "Android Vs <other_smartphone_os>" debate here, done that enough times. I think that it won't dominate, at least until the usability issues are solved (Google bundling HTC Sense as standard would solve that immediately!) it won't become the most popular smartphone OS, long term. There is a current boost in sales due to clever mobile phone salesmen (caused 100% by the higher commission paid on these handsets at the moment), but this won't last. Too many non techie users have problems using these handsets (especially the really low end ones like the ZTE Racer).
Plus, to get back on topic, i've never seen a queue to buy an Android device..that total lack of excitement is telling.
It's only Apple fags who get excited though.
Really? i would have though balancing a laptop would be easier as you can make the screen face in the correct angle meaning the process can be completely free of using your hands except to type in the location and scroll. The place i saw tables was in places where you dont really have the space for a laptop to be out like the tube or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by peterb
This is kind of true but the tight integration is completely internal to the device and in the modern home of multiple smart electronic devices people are starting to understand the advantages of getting them all to communicate with each other, it only really works at a consumer level if you go for a full Mac environment. If you can afford to have an iphone, macbook/imacs, apple tv etc etc then yeah everything is great but not everyone can. In my experience, trying to integrate a mac in a mixed OS environment isn't particularly easy and the reality of it is that most homes will be mixed OS, its rare that people will be able to afford all mac, more probable that at least one of the house members will have a work laptop that will be windows based.Quote:
Apple sell a tightly integrated product, hardware and software are very tightly integrated and controlled. The user experience across the Apple range is consistent. And the products work, out of the box, and they work well. And if that integration and control comes at a price premium, then there are lots of people prepared to pat that because they have had enough of BSOD in the past, driver problems etc - even if MS have come to grips with quality control (as far as they can with third party developers).
I personally struggle to believe anyone who says they buys them for practicality anyway, most people buy them because they are cool and everyone else has one. The responsiveness of the iphone vs other phones is almost valid, but to me with my desire the difference is so unbelievably tiny the point seems very facile when you consider how dreadful the iphones performance is as an actual mobile phone.
As for queuing up for specific electronic device releases, no i don't really get it. I don't get queing up to be the first of anything, in fact i think its totally dumb BUT the way i do things (wait for the numpties to buy into the marketing and rush out to be the first to deal with all the flaws before i buy into the revised and polished product) wouldn't work if it wasn't for those brainless goombas so i hope they keep at it!
Yes it will dominate since you again fail to see the much bigger picture. A near 900% increase in Android phones and moving from 5th place to 2nd place in the market in only on year itself indicates this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud1
Firstly smartphones have traditionally been targeted as more expensive devices. Blackberries are targeted at the business market,Windows Mobile is again is a higher end device and Symbian smartphones again until recently are higher devices. Most Symbian phones are not smartphones.
Is iOS going to be found on £20 to £40 devices?? How many of the other OS are going to be found on lower end devices apart from maybe Symbian which is now dead?
Is iOS going to be found on a £50 to £100 tablet?
I am talking about unsubsidised retail prices .
What you fail to realise again is that Android will help bring smartphone and tablet technology to many poorer people in the world unlike any of the other OS. Where this is a phone today it will be replaced by a low end smartphone.
It has the advantage of being free and has the backing of Google and many hardware companies too.
This is why I made the following statement:
"Android will have a much bigger impact worldwide as it has a much bigger potential market. It has meant that the smartphone has become accessable to more people worldwide and it will do the same for tablet PCs too."
Android like Windows is not tied to one companies hardware,ie,not an Apple made computer or an IBM made computer for example and this is one of the reasons Windows did well.
It meant there was much more competition among hardware manufacturers which lead to reductions in hardware price and Apple took advantage of this moving to PC hardware when the G5 stalled.
I'd actually argue that Nokia have already brought smartphones to poorer people. I don't know where you get this idea that only some Symbian phones are smartphones; each and every one of them is a smartphone. However, now that Symbian has dropped out of fashion, Android is beginning to pick up where Symbian left off.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
Android will do well, but it'll be plagued by the same sort of issues that Windows has in the PC market.
You may be right, but I don't think the majority of 'phone users think about the operating system when they buy it. They want the functionality of the device regardless of how it is obtained, or what drives it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
Maybe - depends on the size of the laptop (and the heat it generates if it 8is balancing on your knee) and personal preference, but passing someone a tablet to show them (say) a photo) is (IMO) than passing an open clamshell laptop. And I was sceptical too, until I used an Ipad, which put it onto my 'like to have but not essential' list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
If they achieve a similar level of growth in 2011-2012 i'll be impressed, and will eat my hat. Doing that in their first real year in the general market is OK, but nothing more. It's not some amazing "zomg android will take over the world" type of number - apple had similar if not better growth in their first real year also. You have to look at the bigger picture for those numbers to mean anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
mrochester is correct - ALL symbian phones can be considered smartphones, so we don't really need to debate that :) Also remember that in the USA and much of europe, RIM devices dominate the consumer marketplace as well as business - BB Messenger saw to that.
I don't really take your point about low end smartphones either - no you won't get iOS in a £40 device, and I really really wouldn't want it! It would perform really badly, just like the cheap Android phones, the cheap symbian phones, the cheap BlackBerry phones..all of them are terrible and whilst they are technically smartphones, they function so poorly in that role that you can barely call them that. If you don't believe me go and try a ZTE Racer - thats an android 2.1 device that you can get for £60 on PAYG. Sure it runs Android so in theory it can do everything that a high end one can do..but really it can't.
We won't see good, usable low end smartphones for a long time, and when we do they will be cut down versions of the higher end ones, running who knows what. It will effectively be a different OS anyway..for the moment and the near future we're not going to beat the Series 40/60 nokias, or the Samsungs of this world for low end phones. There is of course a big debate about what makes a smatphone "smart" - since even series 40 phones can have pop/imap email access and basic web browsing capability.
The cheapest usable Android "smartphone" that I have heard about is the ZTE Blade (san francisco), and that barely copes imo.
We obviously won't ever agree, but I just don't think that Android will have that big of an impact over the next few years, at least not in its present form. Whether or not a cut down version will ever appear that is suitable for cheaper phones - who knows (That will depend a lot on touch screen prices I presume), but at least for the near future..It will remain a major player, but it won't take the top spot.
Indeed, Android consumers are rational.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud1
It really depends what you mean by low end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud1
Snapdragon is now so cheap they can turn out fully fledged phones based on it for $200. I bought an AMOLED qualcomm device for £320 including contract of £20 a month for a year, no cash backs, no silly farting about, unlimited data and enough calls. I mean that is considerably cheaper than the iPhone than the desire HD.
I don't think people actually need much more processing power in phones, dual core... really?! I want more battery life and lower cost, more money for apps on it etc. But this is off topic.
Telling about what thou?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud1
If you look at the market share side of things, one would conclude that symbian is the best mobile OS by a wide margin? If you look at the number of emails sent etc, we all know it would be BB that would win.
You can't take a product's value by the 'buzz'. Look at twitter for instance, fix gear bicycle owners, they are absolutely retarded. But they rant a lot about how great it is, because that is part of their enjoyment of it.
There is as mentioned also the physcology of it, being first is important to some people, heck I've taunted a college of mine about him not having a 3DS because his wife wouldn't let him by one, that was just this morning. But then again I'm a next tuesday and I know it. However i'm not enough of one to queue for it.
But some sheeple do behave that way, they see more people queueing up and they automatically think it means it must be good. We've probably evolved this trait for good reason too, as a simple heard communication technique but, it doesn't for second make it 'the best' or 'better'.
As are the overwhelming majority of Apple's customer. Those that queue on launch are a very tiny but vocal minority.Quote:
Originally Posted by aidanjt
Perhaps, perhaps not.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester
Sure, although their vocalisation is amplified by the RDF.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester
And while I'm certain there are a significant number of iPhone users who make use of the phone to good, and even profitable effect, the vast majority of iPhone totting and worshipping muppets I've observed merely use it to send and recieve calls and texts, play a handful of tracks over and over, and maybe goof around with crappy freebe games to alleviate boredom as an alternative to masturbation due to lack of flash.
I think it's fairly safe to say that the few thousands that queue at launch are vastly outnumbered by the many millions who end up buying the product.Quote:
Perhaps, perhaps not.
That probably sums up the vast majority of smartphone users. As a user of public transport pretty much every day of the week, I see a lot of smartphones in my travels, and most people are just dicking about with them. They could probably easily get by with a feature phone, but then it'd probably be a whole lot less fun.Quote:
And while I'm certain there are a significant number of iPhone users who make use of the phone to good, and even profitable effect, the vast majority of iPhone totting and worshipping muppets I've observed merely use it to send and recieve calls and texts, play a handful of tracks over and over, and maybe goof around with crappy freebe games to alleviate boredom as an alternative to masturbation due to lack of flash.
Wow, using a 'phone to make phone calls and send texts - what small minded irtrational people they must be. And playing games - well, what utter time wasters, and clearly anyone who plays a game on their phone or (shock horror - listening to music) must be an iphone user. Users of other brands of smartphones are so much more rational and sensible than to use them for anything like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by aidanjt
There was no need to queue, every phone operator had iPads in stock, Three having the best deal out there.
10 minutes walk from Covent Garden [500+ people in queue] local Currys had sh!t lots of stock, every model with 10 people at the very best in the queue.
I went to Covent Garden and at 5:30PM [they started selling at 5] 16GB flavours of both 3G and Wi-Fi were gone. Crazy.
Quick wonder down the road discovered more stock ;)
There was soo much hype in the air its unreal, people running like mad asking about iPads :rockon:
That's an interesting point: you wander around, decide it's time to eat, and see two restaurant. One is queued all the way outside, and the other barely has three customers inside. You have no mean to look up the restaurants. The menu and pricing are similar. Do you:Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAnimus
1. Join the queue on the basis that the restaurant with the queue must be really good and / or the empty one really bad.
2. Walk into the near empty restaurant because the queue is just some kind of coincidence / an elaborate set up / everyone else queueing have a different taste.
3. Flip a coin, because you think that 1 and 2 are equally likely.
Let's assume that you are hungry, not starving, there is nothing else around and you aren't rushed for time.
i would use my smartphone and look up reviews ont he internet :D
So damn true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
But when abroad what do you do?
Do you trust the concierge's advice? Do you try and ask one or two questions to make sure its truely better and serves the kinda thing your after whilst subtly telling him you'll be pissed off if its bad and just for a back hander.
I know I have gone to a place just because it had a lot of 'local looking' types in it.
in Munich there was also an incredibly long queue! you can watch it on youtube if you want, search for ipad 2 launch in munich
This whole queuing thing is great sales and marketing tactic. Lots of companies do it now. Not just for products, but movies, end of year sales, etc etc...
Like you I can't see the point of queueing up ... unless you're a total fanboy of whatever it is (iWhatever, CallOfDuty, etc). On the other hand I will leap to the defence of the pre-order. Mainly because:Quote:
Originally Posted by TooNice
1. If you pre-order you can end up getting said product before the pavement sitters - as someone on this thread has said about a 3DS order from Tesco. To me this is hilarious, not only do you get it before them outside, but also save some much-needed sleep!
2. Loyalty points - both HMV and GAME offer more "loyalty points" for pre-orders than day1+ orders. So if you were going to buy the damned thing anyway, then you'll get a small(?) benefit for not hanging around. In addition, if I'd bought an iPad2 then I would have done it through the Apple (online) Store via the Nectar.com portal. That way not only do I get it with the minimum of hassle, but also with £500 worth of Nectar points that the rabble on the street are missing out on.
3. Delivery. Let me see, on one hand I've got to schlepp into town, find somewhere to park, etc. And on the other hand I get to sit in the chair and just wait for the postman/courier to come to me. Hmm, not much of a decision there then! ;)
Or use a fast-booting netbook - then you could write that 25k word dissertation. And a large screen (4") mobile is just as "instant-on" as the iPad. Like others on this thread, I just fail to see why any £400+ tablet isn't just a piece of digital bling, rather than something with genuine capability.Quote:
Originally Posted by peterb
... most of the time. There fixed that for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by peterb
Sounds like an OS update is needed on the Galaxy - although Samsung do seem to have a few quality control issues with their software. Oh, and my old X10 phone is just as responsive as the iPhone4 (I'll grant that the 3GS might be a bit quicker for some stuff), but without the clock and signal issues. (sorry that's a bit off topic)Quote:
Originally Posted by peterb
Shame that their customer service is below par and, according to the trends on the Apple support site, getting worse. Granted the main problems seems to be the (ironically named) "Genius Bar". Strangely enough I'll be avoiding Apple's telephony* products because I know what I'll getting if I went with one - frustration being prime. (* If they do new version of the iPod Classic with decent DSP's then I'll be interested - before someone accuses me of too much Apple bashing).Quote:
Originally Posted by peterb
But, ymmv of course... :D
It comes from the environment we have created for ourselves where money is more important than anything else. Money itself is a label we assign value to, so it's hard for people to have so many things labelled and not create labels for that which isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by TooNice
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I find the arguing over different operating systems and different approaches to devices as mute. It's all subjective and depends entirely on the environment the person in question is in and the information they have been exposed to. I like the fact that we have so many options for smartphones, and I also like to leave it at that. What I need can be very different from what someone else does and thus phones I find pointless exist to serve those needs. If a phone I dislike serves you well, good. Don't expect me to like it though.
I guess it's all about people fulfilling their wants, and in this case, they 'want' to be one of the first to own one. Personally, I regard it as kind-of daft to queue like that, and I'm struggling to think of anything I want bad enough to queue like like for the privilege of paying premium prices for it. I'd much rather wait a few weeks/months, and see if the price drops, which it usually does. Then again, it'd have to drop a LOT from what Apple charge to get me to part with money for one, because I don't think they're worth anything like the price.
But that opinion on value for money is why, or at least part of why you wouldn't find me queueing. But .... if it is worth it to someone else to be among the first, then it's worth it to them. Who am I to criticise, just because it isn't worth it to me?
Criticise? Perhaps not. Ridicule, on the other hand, fair game! ;)
It is an interesting point thou, what is value for money. The more I study economics (just as a hobby, not sure I'd like to do a MSc just yet) the more you learn that its very hard to define a non-local unit of measurement. I wouldn't pay £1.10 for a bottle of water right now. Yet ask me in the middle of no were, in a heatwave and I'd gladly pay it. The value of anything often depends on who has it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saracen
I remember someone telling me that the Audi TT was one of the most highly sold on credit cars at the time (as a ratio of sales) and it sort of fits the stereotype! Clearly these people felt it was worth getting into a lot of debt (almost certainly negatively eq) for.
I would love to know, honestly, the average % that these people are spending on their iPads as a ratio of 'disposable income', ie net - (housing cost + utilities).
Because I think it would be interesting, from looking at some of those who were queuing in London they don't strike you as the kind of people who have oodles of spare cash, some couldn't even afford a hair cut :P
The other, which would be curious is what they actually use them for. I know one person who is still using their iPad on a regular basis (about 4 hours a week), and been a geek, I know quite a few people who bought em.
I guess a large part of value for money is subjective as it comes own to what your need is, and what "utility" you'll get from your purchase. And "utility" is a very and subjective wide term. The value of a bottle of water if you're in a desert and dying of thirst is an extreme, but apt, example.
But it's not just about "need" but "want". I bought a BMW M3, and paid cash (well, cheque, actually). I wouldn't have bought it if I'd had to use credit to do it. But I wouldn't buy an iPad at anything like the current price. Partly, that's because I think they're over-priced for what they are, and partly because I neither want nor need one, certainly not at that price.
But I didn't need the M3 either. Any number of other (and cheaper, to buy and run) cars would have provided adequate transport. I just wanted the M3. One of my friends said he'd never buy a car like that new, as I did. He'd buy one a few years old and save a lot of money. I bought one new because I wanted it spec'd how I wanted it, and because (along with a few other reasons) because I wanted to avoid the hassle of worrying about how it'd been used (or abused) if I bought it a few years old. And I was prepared to pay for the privilege.
The "utility" in the M3 was that it was what I wanted, I could afford it and it was worth the money to me.
That's why I'd neither criticise nor ridicule someone for buying an Ipad if it's what they want. It's about what it's worth to them, and the fact that it's not worth anything like that much to me speaks to my values and wants as much as, or more than, it does theirs.
That's also why you'll rarely (if ever) find me criticising Apple's pricing policy. I suspect their pricing policy, as with iPhone, iPod, etc, isn't aimed at mass-market, sell-the-max-quantity. It's aimed a notch or two above that, at those that want and will pay for not just the hardware but the image, too.
And it's a policy that's stood all sorts of companies in good stead. Why pay Rayban prices for sunglasses? Why pay Rolls Royce prices for a car? Why pay Rolex prices for a watch? Why pay <insert name of choice> prices for designer clothes?
Personally, I would, and sometimes do, pay a reasonable price for good quality clothes, but that's for comfort and durability. I would not pay, picking a name out of thin air, Levi prices for jeans. So, currently, I'm wearing a pair of £3 Asda jeans, and a shirt from a Jermyn Street tailor that was a LOT more than £3. Nobody other than me is likely to have a clue what the shirt cost, so it certainly isn't about 'image'. I just like the feel of the cut and the quality (and longevity) of the material. But with the jeans, as far as I'm concerned, George or Levi, the result is the same. But that's me. If someone else wants Levi (or whatever) jeans because of the name, it's their call, and their money.
Well said. I have a few friends who can't seem to understand "because I wanted it" as justification for spending what they consider silly money. Most often commented on is my 50mb broadband, or my contract smartphone. I don't download vast amounts from torrents or p2p and a few months ago I had used less then 20 seconds of my 600 minutes talk time.
Even so, if you want (or need?) an iPad then order it online, I still can't see how you could want something so badly that you are prepared to go camp outside the shop.
I've used that "excuse" myself - but there's the question of scale. At a time when the current group-of-idiots-in-charge seem determined to make everything more expensive, the amount of "disposable" income is a lot less.Quote:
Originally Posted by pipTheGeek
For myself I'm finding it really tricky - upgrading my broadband (to Virgin's 30Mb service) was easy to "justify", after all I work from home so it's really a business decision. ;)
But the fancy smartphone was less easy to work in - 2 year contract at £30/month. I still kind of managed it. But a one-off payment of the kind of money that they're wanting for an iPad2, especially when I've got a pretty usable phone and netbook? Not a chance! I'm not really singling out the iPad1/2 - my question is just as valid for Motorola Xoom/Samsung Galaxy Tab/HP Touchpad/etc.
Getting back to the article, after thinking about it, I think the only reason I'd queue in the cold/rain/late for some gizmo/game would be for the sense of "community" - certainly not for some nebulous "I was amongst the first" justification.
I won't queue for anything new to be the first one to get it any more. Why? Early adopters face problems in most cases. Take the iPad 2. Screen bleed issues. OK so the majority of screens have it anyway, but not as bad as I have seen it on the iPad 2. Its awful. I'd rather let the issues come out first, then wait till they are sorted then maybe get one. So if you queued for ages waiting for your new toy and it has a problem, you are probably going to have to wait longer just to get it resolved.
I did queue up for the iPhone 4 when Covent Garden Apple store opened. Never again, I'll stick to a preorder (although for Apple, I don't think they will now, they didn't allow preorders for iPad 2) and wait if I really want something. As said earlier it works for games pretty well.
Credit where credit is due Apple do know how to sort out and hype up a launch of a product.