Opinions - iPad is becoming the generic tablet brand

[HEXUS]

Apple looks set to do an iPod all over again.

Read more.

[Saracen]

It doesn't surprise me that Apple have the lion's share of the survey approval for tablets. After all, they've got a decent head start and a huge marketing budget and pre-existing brand awareness.

But if others get their act in gear, it still remains to be seen if they can dominate as they did with iPods. After all, iPods are more of an impulse purchase, but tablets, given the price and purpose, are a more considered, researched product and I'd expect market take-up to be an order or two slower than MP3 players.

Will the be the Hoover of tablets? Maybe, but I don't think it's by any means clear yet.


PS. I wonder if Hoover faced a small but significant and loud "anything but Hoover" group?

[Scott B]

PS. I wonder if Hoover faced a small but significant and loud "anything but Hoover" group?

I'm sure they did although, as you say, a vacuum cleaner is not as emotive a product as a computing device. Probably more of loathed employer than a new lover.

[aidanjt]

Apple undoubtedly has the market lead. But I haven't observed any half-wits referring to competitor products as an iPad or a pad, so I'm not sure it holds the 'generic tablet brand' title as the iPod had. Although that's just me.

[justdatruth]

Apple seem to have a real core focus on mobile devices, they've got all the app and itunes store to leverage, content which none of their competitors can get close too at this time. The operating system although tied down to a degree does at least offer a consistent experience from device to device.

Android tablets should start eating away at that dominance more aggressively once Google can achieve better standardization of the Android user experience. Everyone else is struggling, Sony, Microsoft and to a lesser degree imo HP might have something to say about it all but they all need to be a bit more creative with their offerings than they have been thus far.

Apple or Google for the win in my opinion

[capt_cornflake]

I'm sure they did although, as you say, a vacuum cleaner is not as emotive a product as a computing device. Probably more of loathed employer than a new lover.

And also you don't need to buy into a whole Hoover ecosystem just to use the thing...

[abaxas]

We are nerds. We understand the options.

Most people are not nerds, so will an item that works. Espeically when their friend, who is also not a nerd, says he/she can use it.

Apple sells more as they have a good product. Andriod sells people who are nerds.

[miniyazz]

But Apple really did invent the tablet

Come on now, that's just not true. They may have invented the modern tablet user experience, but certainly not the tablet, as has already been mentioned several times on these forums

[abaxas]

Come on now, that's just not true. They may have invented the modern tablet user experience, but certainly not the tablet, as has already been mentioned several times on these forums

Maybe we could say 'they invented a tablet that wasn't crap and actually worked'.

Bit like the japanese did with cars in the late 70's 80s

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Maybe we could say 'they invented a tablet that wasn't crap and actually worked'.

Bit like the japanese did with cars in the late 70's 80s

http://www.mercurybrief.com/2010/01/...ets-2001-film/

http://afflictor.com/2011/02/24/alan...ablet-in-1968/

Alan Kay also worked on the Xerox Alto:

http://www.ehow.com/facts_6902047_we...rox-alto_.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Kay

[aidanjt]

Apple sells more as they have a good product. Andriod sells people who are nerds.

That doesn't really hold, either. Total Android sales now dwarf Apple sales in the smartphone market, and Android tablets are only starting to take off now. Being first doesn't automatically equate to being superior (unless we're counting smugness).

[McPhee]

I'm still amazed that the iPad caught the rest of the technology industry off-guard. I mean, there was talk about putting mobile OS's on to tablets way before the launch of the iPad. There was plenty of opportunity for someone to get in there first with a lightweight, touch-optimised OS, yet nobody acted until after Apple had played it's hand. The other big players don't want to admit it, but they were caught sitting on their hands. Google pretend like Honeycomb has been in the works for a long time, but if THAT took them a "long time" then I would frankly be quite embarrassed. It looks more like the product of a year's rushed development than some over-arching strategy to bring Android to all form-factors. Microsoft... well... um... lol? I doubt anyone's surprised to see that they are late to the party. They always seem to be the "lets wait until the party is rolling then turn up with a truck-load of vintage Cristal champagne" type these days. I'm sure Windows 8 will hit the mark, though I'm not sure how relevant it will be by the time it hits in late 2012. RIM I am really disappointed in. The Playbook looked promising when it was revealed, it seems they just made every duff decision they could from there onwards. To me, the only people that seem to have a credible alternative to the iPad right now are HP (when the TouchPad hits in the coming days/weeks). That tablet looks pretty awesome, it's just unfortunately part of a stagnant ecosystem, and possibly the most awesome feature (being able to answer your phone/reply to text messages through the TouchPad) requires ownership of a Pré 3.

I'll say it again, I cannot believe that Apple is going to walk away with the tablet market, a market that emerged to no great surprise after a year to 18-months of increasingly accurate speculation, all because their competitors were resting on their laurels. I am genuinely shocked and amazed that any of them would even consider letting Apple have a head start on them after seeing what happened to the MP3 Player, PMP and mobile phone markets. That we're 16 months after the iPad's launch with only barely credible competitors about has genuinely stunned me.

[Scott B]

Come on now, that's just not true. They may have invented the modern tablet user experience, but certainly not the tablet, as has already been mentioned several times on these forums

Semantics, surely. To all intents and purposes, and certainly for this piece, the modern tablet IS the tablet. Yes, we all know Microsoft was plugging away at it for years but theirs never caught on, Apple's has.

[Rob_B]

I can't say I've ever heard anyone refer to a generic MP3 player as an 'iPod' or tablet as an 'iPad' ...

Of course it's the 'generic' brand though, nothing compares to it just yet, that is changing though but personally I still think Android is miles away, not for functionality but general useability & of course the apps (which IMO are pitiful on Android)

[kingpotnoodle]

I can't say I've ever heard anyone refer to a generic MP3 player as an 'iPod' or tablet as an 'iPad' ...

Of course it's the 'generic' brand though, nothing compares to it just yet, that is changing though but personally I still think Android is miles away, not for functionality but general useability & of course the apps (which IMO are pitiful on Android)

Hoover became the "generic brand" of vacuum cleaner, such that many called them hoovers and I bet many people call it that without realising it's even a brand of vacuum cleaner... now who is thought of as the best brand... I would say Dyson.

Just goes to show, being first, becoming generic is no guarantee of long lasting success... if something better comes along people might still call it an iPad, but they'll have bought a xyzPad.

[peterb]

Maybe we could say 'they invented a tablet that wasn't crap and actually worked'.

Bit like the japanese did with cars in the late 70's 80s

No, but they are the first to exploit it and bring it to the mass market.

They didn't invent the Windows, Icon, Mouse, Pull-down menus paradigm that is now a fewature of all modern GUIs (it was xerox Palo Alto research establishmernt) but they were the first to to the mass market with the Apple Lisa in (IIRC) about 1984.

They didn't invent SCSI, but they were the first to exploit it in a consumer product, and the same is true of USB, firewire and other technologies.

It is true that not all of those caught on, but it partly explains why Apples were so popular with those working with graphics and video production because the high speed interfaces were there at an affordable price.