Hacker News Reader

Comment by acabal | Hacker News Reader

I think the problem is that people still don't care about or want tablet computers; they care about and want iPads. All the companies jumping on the tablet bandwagon forgot what happened to 95% of the mp3 players that sprang up to compete with the iPod.

View on HN

> people still don't care about or want tablet computers; they care about and want iPads

I've seen this many times when I try to explain to normal people what I do for a living. When I explain we create tablet apps, I get blank stares.

If I say we create iPad apps, they reply "oh I saw the commercial for those".

iPads are mainstream. Tablets in general, not so much.

Couldn't that be a symptom of other tablets not being competitive, rather than the cause?

neuroelectronic 59 minutes ago | link [dead]

yes and no. Going back to the MP3 analogy, their were many MP3 players that were much better deals on paper; a fraction of the cost for more memory. But they didn't have a scroll wheel or iTunes, so consumers found them to be cheap knock-offs.

neuroelectronic: it looks like your posts are auto-dead. Posting as a sibling comment since there's no contact info in your profile.

That's not really a 'problem' though if people understand what they want. What it really means is that HP needs to step up their game on all fronts to make a product and compel people to buy it.

I mean, I tried the TouchPad. It's good in a lot of ways but mediocre in other ways. It's a lot like how the G1 launched. Die-hards bought it, the tech-savvy liked it but weren't 'flocking' to it, and the average consumer just thought of it as another electronic device. HP needs something like a 'Droid' campaign to really spark interest in their products. You have to make it appear cool. Unfortunately, HP has never been able to do that and they're only just learning about the cool-factor with Beats by Dre.

A pretty significant piece of Android/Droid's success that you don't mention is that the Droid launched on the biggest U.S. network essentially without a competitor. If you wanted a phone with a decent browser on Verizon (and Sprint/TMo) in 2009/2010, it was Android or nothing. That's a luxury none of Apple's competitors have now.

There are also people like me -- I switched to Verizon specifically to get the first Droid. (Granted I was on Virgin before...)

>HP needs something like a 'Droid' campaign to really spark interest in their products.

I see a lot of Touchpad, Playbook and Xoom ads on TV. Atleast the Xoom ones seem to be on the level of the Droid ads(it's Motorola again, of course). The ads seem ok and cool but if the current sales figures are something to go by, don't seem to be very effective. As I said in another comment, it's easier to get people to buy a phone when their old ones gets too old or when the contract expires but it's hard to push people to a completely new kind of device where the use case is harder for the average consumer to see.

The Xoom ads I've seen are fairly baffling, full of robots and weird spaceship thingies. In contrast, the iPad ads almost seem like anti-marketing. Look, here's what the product looks like! Look, here's what the apps do! Of course they're actually very cunningly designed (it's difficult to get simple things done that well) but they at least let you visualize what the iPad is and what it's for, which is more than I can say for the Xoom.

The way I see it is that Apple's commercials and most of the Droid commercials were compelling, head-turners. They were much more interesting. Whenever either of those commercials played, I wanted to watch them. I can't say the same thing of the TouchPad, Playbook, or Xoom ads. This quality of marketing were a part of what made the Droid and iProducts so successful.

- The Xoom and Droid commercials are nothing but derivative, dystopian futurist fluff, and the Verizon Android (read: non-Droid) commercials involving their retail outlets are seriously contrived crap speaking to easily-swayed lowest-common denominators in the crowd.

- The Touchpad's commercials are boring and tell me nothing about the device. Like others are saying, they tell me jack crap about the device, and the Russell Brand commercials that actually do? They might not be my tea, but at least they have some personality (comedic value debated). Haven't seen them on TV. Brilliant strategy there, HP!

- Apple's commercials are so well-received that rolling a commercial out based on a feature (see: Facetime) can generate sales because they know just who to market to and, by focusing on one device per form factor, have a history of trusted quality through said long-term focus on each of them. People actually know the models as opposed to the ton of "ManufacturerName Droidbot AspirationalPhraseHere" models being cranked out. They know the history. And, well, Apple's products "Just work" 99% of the time.

Disclosure: I own an Android tablet and an HP Touchpad. Fanboys amuse me.

Yes, the tablet market is very different from phones. Everyone needs a phone and when their contract expires, many of go to the carrier store and get the one they like, which in some cases, is the latest Android phone that people remember seeing in the Droid or Evo commercials on TV.

With tablets, it's very different, many people just don't see the need for one yet. While the iPad is shipping very well, much of that growth would be from iPhone and word-of-mouth publicity. Then there's the whole issue of apps and 3rd party support/corporate support.

While MS dissed tablets [1], with Windows 8 they're coming out with a strategy to make tablets of all flavors with a fresh UI, including x86 ones with backward compatibility. Let whether that can make a dent in the market.

[1] http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/microsoft-exec-questions...

Microsoft dissed tablets because they were not winning at it. Remember they were the first ones to bring tablets to the market. They screwed up on the form factor and the overall experience though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com