Report: The iPad won’t go mass market anytime soon
eu.techcrunch.com
eu.techcrunch.com
What was striking to me was that I saw no fewer than three people pop open their iPads and work for a few hours. And I'm not in the Valley.
To add to this, on my last business flight last week, I noticed two middle-aged businesspeople with their iPads in their laps while I walked down the aisle.
I don't know what definition of "mass market" the researchers are using, but when you see multiple people casually use the same device in a random coffee shop, and random businesspeople on a flight popping open the same device, it's tough to argue it's not getting widespread adoption.
The market may have proven this report wrong before the proverbial ink was dry.
My own experience in a suburban area of Southern California is that I have yet to see someone using an iPad. That doesn't mean it's a failure anymore than seeing it in a cafe mean it's a success, of course.
I think more time has to pass, and more data needs to be collected, before anyone can declare the iPad a true success or failure with the mass market.
The mass market are people like my family and friends who don't know what it does but know they have to have one. I don't need one and I plan on getting one. Just waiting for v2, Apple has a history of v1 bugs I'd rather avoid.
If anything, Apple has already established the long tail. They've got apps and add-ons. It's hard to find an alarm clock without an iPod dock these days. j/k
Right. But when your PC gets a virus/hardware-failure or your phone keypad is too small to type up a paper, what would you buy? Maybe not this current version of iPad but eventually the only computer my parents will use/buy will be an iPad or a very similar device. It will be something that works like iPad Wifi (3G not required), will connect to cameras, printers, and have live video chat features.
If it runs Farmville, it addresses every single use-case for my parents. And since it will be easy enough to move around the house, they will love it. I bought them an iPad Wifi for now but hopefully will get them the iPad + USB + Camera device sometime in the near future.
Were your parents planning to buy an iPad anyway, or did you buy it for them because you believed they wouldn't figure out that they wanted it?
I explained to him that for the first time in the history of computers, there is now a low-priced portable computer that he doesn't need me to fix or setup. It won't get viruses, it is easy enough that my grandma can use it, and it just works like the iTouch that he is so familiar with. Suddenly it clicked in his head. He asked "So this will let me go to Gmail, Facebook, all the news sites?" I said yes. "And this will have games that your mom can play all day? And it will let us read your blog and see your photos? All of it wirelessly?" I said yes.
He said "Ok. Get two then." I said it doesn't have webcam yet so I'll give you one now and next year or so when it gets a webcam, I'll buy two. You'll get one and I'll keep one and we can video-chat from our sofas across the world (I'm in Florida). He was happy with that.
I think the real problem is that even though most tech-journalists aren't programmers or engineers, they still align their interests with the techies and try to think like Slashdotters: "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." Good journalists see through the different layers and can more realistically describe a technology for what it's worth. Yes, it sucks that the iPad needs a regular computer before it can even be turned on and it sucks that the iPad doesn't have a webcam. But think about it. Dynabook is finally here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook and it has a LOT more software applications available than you could imagine. My dad doesn't care about USB or even true multitasking. He just wants to go to a website, listen to music, and play a game or two. iPad is a true consumer electronic product. A laptop is not.
Maybe I'm being crotchety here, I can see that possibility. Maybe this coffee buzz and this morning's urge to hold on to some piece of naïve idealism is leading me astray, but there was something deeper in the ideal of the Dynabook. Something noble and in line with the best of humanity in the intention to free every individual to use the computer as an expansion of themselves. Not just the narrower vision of the next step in couch-potato consumption along controlled and approved channels. Do the journalists' eyes not see the difference? Can't you?
I went out and picked up an iPad, and I'm glad I did. People are wrong when they say "it doesn't do anything my PC won't do right now." Your PC doesn't fit in your hand. I owned a netbook for a short time as well. It's light, it's small, and in a lot of ways it's similar to the iPad, but it still follows the laptop format. By consequence, it's most comfortable on your lap. When I hold my iPad I hold it at right at my sternum; just like you would a book. When I used a netbook I'd try resting in the same location, but netbooks get pretty warm, and it quickly becomes uncomfortable. The laptop form factor just isn't built for casual consumption. They're built for a desk.
I agree with the assessment that the iPad won't go "mass market" any time soon, but Apple has a long history of not caring about "mainstream". They only care about making a good margin on a reasonable number of units. Mission accomplished.
I'm hoping that more companies will roll out touch-based devices in a tablet form factor. All Apple-fanboy-ism aside, I think the form-factor is incredible exciting for personal computing. I'm finally untethered from my desk, and most importantly, REALLY comfortable when using a computer in my comfy chair. Unlike Apple, I'm not principally opposed to Flash. I'm principally opposed to sacrificing good battery life, heat, and performance to Flash, but I think the recent spat with Apple has lit a fire under Adobe. I won't hesitate to jump ship when a better touch-tablet comes along.
For me, the question isn't whether it covers territory already covered by existing electronic devices like netbooks or what have you, but whether it covers a significant amount of the territory covered by _paper_. Can it substitute my A4 notebook, or my diary, that's what I want to know. It won't be the same, but will it be as good or better, all told?
As a substitute for a PC, netbook or smartphone, it's compromised in important, possibly fundamental ways. I don't know if it is similarly compromised as a paper substitute. If not, mass market acceptance awaits.
For HNers purposes, quantitative research might be more significant. Me, for example. I don't care whether an iPad has no place in my work/personal life.
I do care whether enough (quantitatively) people are purchasing/using iPads to influence my business decisions about how I target my app development work. (I know, I'm a mercenary SOB, right?)
I have several hundred gb of media on AFP and cifs shares, and I hate that I have to drag out the lappy to move them around, or even view them. On the upside, lacking cell juice makes cracking the iPad much more attractive than the iPhone.
If Apple can continue to get these things into the hands of ordinary people (and from reports about how many people are playing with them at their retail stores, they're accomplishing that), they'll continue to sell amazingly well. I've never seen a product sell itself as easily as iPad does, including the original iPod and iPhone.
//my Dad bought 1 for himself. It is the first "computer" my Mom has used (MLB app)
So far it's working really, really well. The question is just whether they can keep it up -- if the use cases continue to be interesting and compelling to, say, 10% of the population rather than just 1% of it.
Still too early to tell.