Features - QOTW: Will you be buying the new iPad?

[aidanjt]

Fantastic explanation? It is 90% an ideological argument, rather than one related to the merits and demerits of the actual product.

It might convince the open-source ideologues who are happy to tolerate palpably inferior products in order to avoid having to fill the coffers of the evil Apple, but 99% of the population just doesn't care.

Yeah, 99% of the population just want working apps which don't keep crashing all the time. Wait, that's Android. So much for 'open-source ideologues being happy to tolerate palpably inferior products'.

[Mattus]

Yeah, 99% of the population just want working apps which don't keep crashing all the time. Wait, that's Android.

I invite you to consider the relative popularity of the iPad and the various Android tablets before making pronouncements on what 99% of the population wants. Android tablets have various plus points, but mass appeal is an argument you're just not going to win.

[aidanjt]

I invite you to consider the relative popularity of the iPad and the various Android tablets before making pronouncements on what 99% of the population wants. Android tablets have various plus points, but mass appeal is an argument you're just not going to win.

Popularity is no more an indicator of suitability than it is an indicator of scientific accuracy.

[3dcandy]

I'm sure I read that Apple products crash a lot more often than Android, but because of the silent crashing in iOS compared to Androids very noticeable warning people don't realise....shall try and dig it out, I thinkl you'll be surprised!

[3dcandy]

http://www.tuaw.com/2012/02/05/study...droid-apps-do/

[Gordy]

I'm sure I read that Apple products crash a lot more often than Android, but because of the silent crashing in iOS compared to Androids very noticeable warning people don't realise....shall try and dig it out, I thinkl you'll be surprised!

Intriguing. I wonder if that is caused by there being more apps and and apps being used more frequently?

Yeah, 99% of the population just want working apps which don't keep crashing all the time. Wait, that's Android. So much for 'open-source ideologues being happy to tolerate palpably inferior products'.

The iPad is not just apps, as HP, Samsung etc have found to their cost. It's about a whole ecosystem, built around a great product. Amazon are the first to realise this and do something about it. You have to believe that they had the fire in mind when they started their app store for android. They have by far and wide the best ebook store and more than good enough music store. The fact they are using a different model to apple helps too with the cost price of the fire.

Copying apple's products has been attempted by many companies in the past few years and that has failed totally. They need to try to do something unique. A me too product is doomed to fail.

You could argue for all android's success it has been a failure. It's cost Google far more than they've generated in advertising income. I suspect they did it so that they wouldn't beholden to apple or blackberry or microsoft in the mobile sphere. I that way it has definitely been a success. How much longer the board can justify investing billions into it without seeing decent revenue in return is going to be interesting.

[crossy]

Fantastic explanation? It is 90% an ideological argument, rather than one related to the merits and demerits of the actual product. It might convince the open-source ideologues who are happy to tolerate palpably inferior products in order to avoid having to fill the coffers of the evil Apple, but 99% of the population just doesn't care.

Erm, I think you're doing "saltyzip" a disservice there - I count 15 bullet points he's listed, of which 9 are "opinion", so in actuality 66% idealogical argument. But that being the case, is it any different to that trotted out by Gordy - I'd say not. (but then again, I'm biased)

I shake my head when I see people refusing to buy Apple products, because very few have a good reason. If you think google or motorola or samsung or htc are angels compared to Apple, well you are living on cloud cuckoo.

Here's one person who won't buy an Apple product - but that's because either they're too inflexible/expensive (Mac), flawed - either in design or function (iPhone4/4S), a poor fit for needs (iPad), or poor value for money for me (iPods - apart from the Classic). Do I think other companies are angels? No, certainly not. But I will argue to my last breath that - at the moment at least - Apple are a heck of a lot more "evil" than all others (except Oracle).

Fair enough there are lot of people that a tablet is not for them, it's just most of them see to spend a lot of time arguing on forums why tablets and the iPad specifically are diabolical products.

True - to an extent - there's a lot of folks, heck even on this thread, arguing that tablets are a dead end. Maybe they're right, maybe not - I'm not a "futurologist" so I'm not going to say one way or t'other. iPad is singled out purely because of Apple's PR that it's a "magical device" (barf) that'll change the way you live your life ... no it won't it's just a gadget, (like any other tablet).

I would bet my life on the fact the night of the latest iPad announcement there were some terrified excutives at Dell/HP/Intel etc who didn't get a drop of sleep.

I'll take that bet ... because you're so out of touch that it's funny. Intel, for one, are getting into the tablet market, so a "mis-step" like iPad3 gets great PR for tablets, without actually generating a lot of defections to Apple. The "mis-step" monica comes from others - like I've said before - although it's a boring rehash of the iPad2, it's actually seems to be an okay device afaik.

If the iPad follows the iPod path in terms of adoption as opposed to the iPhone one there are going to be some massive changes in the landscape of computing for the masses. And in their bottom lines as a result. At present there is no one outside Amazon and Barnes and Noble who is doing anything of note in the tablet market. I cannot see how anyone else with their present methods can change that.

Again, not convinced, look at the responses here and you'll see some folks saying that they'd prefer the smaller form factors (i.e. the ones that Apple don't do at the moment), others are saying that they can't see the point of a tablet when a normal large screen smartphone (e.g. HTC One X is 4.7"!) will do all they want.
As to the "no-one else doing anything of note in the tablet market" comment - you must be speaking only of sales, in which case perhaps Samsung are a distant fourth. However, on a different view - namely from the technical point of view - others are doing a lot more than Apple, B&N or Amazon - all three guilty of turning out "just good enough" devices rather than something special. Look at what Samsung (Galaxy Note), Asus (Transformer and padFone) or Sony (P series) are doing from the technical aspect.
iPod was special because it allowed easy, pocketable access to entire music libraries. iPod Touch was special because it allowed smartphone-like app delivery while still being a music and video consumption device. (Personally though I would have preferred a little less focus on the apps side of the Touch and more on the music playing - I still maintain that the sound quality on a 1st or 2nd Gen iPod Touch is noticeably worse than an old 5th Gen iPod. Tablets are different to iPods - solely because they're just as difficult to carry as an ultrabook or similar ultra-light netbook/laptop - although I'll grant they have the "instant on" appeal of iPods too if you insist.

[watercooled]

Here's one person who won't buy an Apple product - but that's because either they're too inflexible/expensive (Mac), flawed - either in design or function (iPhone4/4S), a poor fit for needs (iPad), or poor value for money for me (iPods - apart from the Classic). Do I think other companies are angels? No, certainly not. But I will argue to my last breath that - at the moment at least - Apple are a heck of a lot more "evil" than all others (except Oracle).

Very much my opinion.

Again, not convinced, look at the responses here and you'll see some folks saying that they'd prefer the smaller form factors (i.e. the ones that Apple don't do at the moment), others are saying that they can't see the point of a tablet when a normal large screen smartphone (e.g. HTC One X is 4.7"!) will do all they want.
As to the "no-one else doing anything of note in the tablet market" comment - you must be speaking only of sales, in which case perhaps Samsung are a distant fourth. However, on a different view - namely from the technical point of view - others are doing a lot more than Apple, B&N or Amazon - all three guilty of turning out "just good enough" devices rather than something special. Look at what Samsung (Galaxy Note), Asus (Transformer and padFone) or Sony (P series) are doing from the technical aspect.
iPod was special because it allowed easy, pocketable access to entire music libraries. iPod Touch was special because it allowed smartphone-like app delivery while still being a music and video consumption device. (Personally though I would have preferred a little less focus on the apps side of the Touch and more on the music playing - I still maintain that the sound quality on a 1st or 2nd Gen iPod Touch is noticeably worse than an old 5th Gen iPod. Tablets are different to iPods - solely because they're just as difficult to carry as an ultrabook or similar ultra-light netbook/laptop - although I'll grant they have the "instant on" appeal of iPods too if you insist.

As I was saying earlier, something like the Transformer is what I'd buy over the plain tablets, touch keyboards are and always will be crap until someone comes up with a way of making the screen turn into a normal keyboard or something. And just the form factor in general of tablets is very poor IMO, you're either hunching over a table its sitting on or holding the equivalent of a heavy book in your hands for some time, neither of which is comfortable beyond checking your emails. And the portability is just a pile of ... they're no easier to carry than a laptop but you have the added concern of a fragile, exposed glass screen. So the iPad as a product is near the bottom of my tablet list, regardless of the Apple badge, which just nails the coffin shut. And TBH it's the same for all Apple products, I'm yet to see one I consider being anywhere near worth the money, and I've unfortunately used many over the years, before anyone gives the default 'try one' line.

About ~90% of people not caring about Apple being an awful example of a company, I'd say that 90% just don't know. There's a difference...

[Gordy]

I'll take that bet ... because you're so out of touch that it's funny. Intel, for one, are getting into the tablet market, so a "mis-step" like iPad3 gets great PR for tablets, without actually generating a lot of defections to Apple. The "mis-step" monica comes from others - like I've said before - although it's a boring rehash of the iPad2, it's actually seems to be an okay device afaik.

Out of touch? Apple selling my iPads than anyone else sold computers? How many intel chips are in those iPads? or any tablet? It's all ARM chips. Even Microsoft are now supporting ARM. Getting into tablets doesn't equal sales or traction. You only have to look at microsofts attempts at tablets for evidence of that.

Here's an interesting read on the same kind of point
http://www.slate.com/articles/techno..._success_.html

As for the new iPad being a boring rehash of the iPad 2... Seriously, what does it need to have to not be a boring rehash? A nuclear power pack attached?

How did discounting the iPhone as a fad go for RIM and Microsoft?

[Barakka]

Do I think other companies are angels? No, certainly not. But I will argue to my last breath that - at the moment at least - Apple are a heck of a lot more "evil" than all others (except Oracle).

At the moment, in technology, yes, but Apple are just using whatever means they have at their disposal to try and dominate the market by eliminating competition, it's what they all did, and what they'll all continue to do, at the moment it patents.

In the early 90's there was a running joke in IT that all you needed to do to earn your 1st million in IT was start a company and announce that you were developing a product to compete with MS Office and you would get bought out by MS within a few weeks and shut down a week later. MS were ruthless in gaining domination of the Office PC environment, destroying companies left right and centre, forcing their own products onto PCs and then using lawyers so expensive that any attempt to stop them through legal channels would literally take years, even if the opposition was a continent. Intel spent the 90's and early 00's actually bribing the global distributors to delay the launch of AMD products on a global scale to allow Intel to get the upper hand, and only stocking products with Intel chips. The 70's/80's were a nightmare for Reverse Engineering to just copy products like engines before it was made illegal. A classic was the one about a company in the 70's that developed a rubber compound that could be used to make tyres that would last 10 years, apparently Firestone bought the company out and physically destroyed all the research, everything. Supermarkets have used underhand "loss-leading" strategies to destroy UK high street shopping and forced masses of UK farmers out of business due to their market domination.

Apple are no worse than anyone who's gone before them, it's just most of them did it at a time when the internet was the University network I used to access by dialing into JANET on my 14.4k modem.

[Gordy]

Again, not convinced, look at the responses here and you'll see some folks saying that they'd prefer the smaller form factors (i.e. the ones that Apple don't do at the moment), others are saying that they can't see the point of a tablet when a normal large screen smartphone (e.g. HTC One X is 4.7"!) will do all they want.
As to the "no-one else doing anything of note in the tablet market" comment - you must be speaking only of sales, in which case perhaps Samsung are a distant fourth. However, on a different view - namely from the technical point of view - others are doing a lot more than Apple, B&N or Amazon - all three guilty of turning out "just good enough" devices rather than something special. Look at what Samsung (Galaxy Note), Asus (Transformer and padFone) or Sony (P series) are doing from the technical aspect.

The only measure of success of a product is sales or profitability. What is the point of a great product that is sold to two people and is cancelled shortly after?

I agree that there is a nice hole in the market that others should be exploiting. That of the 7in tablet. Personally I don't have a need for something between the 10in and 4in side of the phone/ipad, but I know others do want something in that area.

I think the ASUS transformer is a great little product too, again they aren't just copying the iPad, but trying to improve on the idea. It's not for me, but I respect what they are doing with it. Looking at their financials I'm not sure how they can do the other things that are required to take on the iPad fully.

Amazon have really got the idea and realised to compete and not create another Dell Streak they have to lower the price to a lot lower than apple's and bring in the ecosystem around the product. They are a brand that people trust and are aware of. Having your customers already have an account to use to buy items on your device is very important. Amazon have that, Apple have that, most others like Microsoft/Dell/Samsung don't. That all said, Amazon are competing with Apple and the iPad, by not competing directly. I don't see them trying to take Apple on at their own game anytime soon. They would have to make huge investments in R&D etc. By outsourcing most of the hardware design/build they avoid that issue.

[watercooled]

Intel spent the 90's and early 00's actually bribing the global distributors to delay the launch of AMD products on a global scale to allow Intel to get the upper hand, and only stocking products with Intel chips.

I remember, and was disgusted with them at the time, the same as many companies. But ATM it seems Apple unapologetically does stuff of a similar scale on an almost daily basis. Intel also (rightly) lost a lot of money over that, albeit probably nowhere near the amount they cost AMD, but Apple are just juggernauting through smaller/independent companies with judges pathetically favouring them most of the time.

The only measure of success of a product is sales or profitability. What is the point of a great product that is sold to two people and is cancelled shortly after?

Marketing plays a massive part and Apple could rebadge an almost identical product and sell it to their fanboys for a higher price (oh what's that? they already do?), Apple ruthlessly market their products, handing them out to TV stations etc.

[TooNice]

There are too many things I'd "like" (as opposed to "need") to have to consider buying a tablet at the moment (DSLR camera is at the top of the list, and I have even held back on that).

If I was in the market for a tablet, I wouldn't rule out a iPad. For me, most devices come down to the applications. I am sticking to a PC, in part because of better gaming support (and other applications aren't lacking). I am pretty sure that I will swap my 2G iPhone with a second hand 3GS the 3GS will run the applications that I need. And at least one of the application I use routinely hasn't, the last time I checked, an equivalent (complete feature set) on the Android platform. I also note that the applications I use on the iPhone haven't crashed on me, so I must be exceptionally lucky with my selections if they are meant to crash "all the time").

Well, I hope that people making their purchasing decisions on ethical reasons aren't buying any Creative stuff. They pulled on Aureal what Apple just tried to do on Kodak, and got away with it.

[Gordy]

Marketing plays a massive part and Apple could rebadge an almost identical product and sell it to their fanboys for a higher price (oh what's that? they already do?), Apple ruthlessly market their products, handing them out to TV stations etc.

I'm sorry do you live on an alternate planet were Samsung et al don't do marketing and promotion on tv? The difference between them and apple is that quite often apple don't even have to pay or supply the goods.

As for price, that is no longer the case. See Ultrabooks/Tablets or High end smart phones for a ton of evidence...

[watercooled]

I've never seen a Samsung tablet on TV actually...

Oh and a cheaper upgrade option: http://gizmodo.com/5846982/iphone-4s...-only-99-cents

[Roobubba]

Definitely no. I was too late to cast a vote, it seems, though.

Today I have wasted a significant portion of time coming to the conclusion that there's no cheap and easy way to use an existing VGA/USB KVM switch we have in the office for my work Mac Pro and Macbook pro. This is because the apple monitor has a mini displayport connector only (why not more connectors, Apple? My Samsung monitor at home is far superior at a fraction of the cost, and also has vertical adjustment without me having to put textbooks under my monitor!!!!), and there appear to be no simple mini displayport/DVI(or VGA) adapters on the market (again, apple's fault...). So, I would have to buy a mini displayport KVM. Both machines (and the other mac pro I have at the other office) are slow, unstable and intensely irritating to use: for example, I cannot simply get rid of this GODAWFUL mouse acceleration, as I do not have admin rights on the mac pros. At least I can get rid of it on the laptop and will have to wait for the kindly IT support staff to let me sort it out on the big machines.

Added to that, the diabolical airport wifi card in the macbook seems to have a built-in piece of code along the lines of 'if router != apple then (fail at random intervals).'

The mac pros at work (I have 2 offices at different sites) and the macbook pro I have are all quite unstable, I get quite a lot of crashes. They are also very slow in comparison with my similarly-specced machine at home (and the graphics at home are considerably better...), while being approximately 4x the price.

My boss's Mac pro died a horrible death the other week, the graphics card got frazzled somehow. Despite it being all on intel architecture, it appears that apple won't supply graphics cards for macs of this era (only 3 years old...). WTF? It's a PCIE slot! Apparently just plonking in any old PCIE graphics card (which are of course available nice and cheap if you only need 2D and light 3D use as we do) isn't a go-er. How a company can get away with locking down the hardware they support just to make money like that, I do not know. I would probably be looking on ebay to source a suitable graphics card, but it's nothing to do with me.

There is only one thing about any apple hardware/software that I've used which I can say anything positive about: the magsafe power connector is quite nice.

So to me, in the last 4 years I've had using macs at work (and work mac laptop at home occasionally if not using my home-built PC), apple products are poorly designed, overly limiting, unstable, expensive and under-performing.

So no, I won't ever be buying an ipod, an ipad or an iphone. I strongly resent the use of charity and government money having been spent on apple hardware at work (I work in cancer research for a publicly and charity-funded organisation).

Like all consumers, I want a system that works well, is easy to use (but controllable when needed), and is completely fit for purpose. That's why I never, ever, ever recommend Apple to my friends and colleagues.


As for software, I'm not an Android or Microsoft fanboy, but, for me, they have produced systems that work more consistently, faster (and cheaper) than anything from the apple labs. Tied in with the nasty litigation from apple, their poor consumer care (in my personal experience), their pricing, and their unutterably disgusting advertising campaigns, I'm more than a little inclined against them as a company.

It's been said above that 99% of people just don't care. That's a real shame, because if people actually realised that if they shop elsewhere, they can get what they want cheaper, faster, more compatible and cheaper-to-fix (hell, even possible to fix in the case of a £2500 machine where the graphics card dies in 3 years), maybe apple wouldn't be this awful corporate monster they are.

As much as I dislike Microsoft (it might not seem like it, but I do), at least Bill Gates puts a LOT of cash into medical research via the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The only thing I see apple doing is breeding a generation of smug sheeple with more money than sense (by a very large margin).