“Disappointing” iPad 3 speculation
marco.org
marco.org
They don't care that Apple and third parties ship software that utilizes both cores (iMovie, GarageBand) and that hardly anyone ships Android software that utilizes more than one core, much less all four. They don't care that Apple may have tweaked last year's dual-core chip to get better performance and better battery life. According to them, since 2=2 and 2 < 4, the iPad 2 is a lackluster upgrade and is empirically worse than an Android tablet.
Meanwhile, 50 million people could care less what's inside an iPad. All that matters is that the hardware and software work well enough for what they want to do.
I wish I still had the link, but I remember a review for a Dell laptop that was a poor cut-and-paste job of the HP they reviewed a week before. They missed some pastes.
I assume you mean 'couldn't care less'. [1]
The iPad is not the transformational device so many Apple enthusiasts were hoping for. It won’t turn all the content industries upside down, it won’t be your primary computing device, and it’s not even a bigger, better iPhone. (http://mashable.com/2010/01/27/apple-ipad-downsides/)
Still seems true to me today.
"Still seems true to me today."
Seems true? Is it true, or is it not true? The claims levied in that review are as follows:
1) The iPad is not a transformative device
2) It won't turn all the content industries upside down
3) It won't be your primary computer
4) It's not even a bigger, better iPhone
I'm not sure how anyone could claim that the iPad is not a transformative device with a straight face. Name a single tablet I can think of sold even one quarter the number of devices. Plenty of similar devices came before the iPad, but none of them were the iPad, and none of them were accepted by consumers. That's transformative.
The upheaval in item 2 was already well under way when the iPad showed up, so I imagine this is somewhat provable. The iPad hasn't turned "all content industries" (a high bar, btw) up-end. However, we're not long in to the race at this point. Plenty of media companies are producing content for the iPad, and Apple is continuing to collect their vig, which many said would not stand the test of time.
Item 3 isn't true for the majority, but Apple never intended the iPad to be your primary computer. The graphic they used at the original iPad presentation showed the iPad right between an iPhone and a MacBook; not displacing them. This is like saying, "The Mini Cooper won't haul a palette of sod." Well no kidding?
Item 4 is similar nonsense. The iPad isn't a phone. It's not intended to fit in your pocket. It has its own set of applications. It's not a bigger, better iPhone. It was never meant to be.
The popularity of a device cannot be a good indication of how disruptive/transformative it really is. To be able to judge that, you need to see trends over a much longer period of time. Let's see if tablets are still around and as popular as they are now in about 10 years. Then we can reflect whether they really achieved a transformation or not. For now the only thing that we know for sure has brought computers to a mass number of people, more than the iPad, is the PC. And you can count it in billions of devices sold over the years, not just a dozen of millions. It was transformative because it enabled a number of people to access internet from home and do a number of stuff for a relatively low price and great compatibility across models.
The iPad has no legacy yet. Let's be a little patient before jumping on conclusions on whether it will be important/transformative in computing or not. It might just be a bubble market for all you know.
Since nobody sold even 1/10 that much in that market segment (tablets) before.
Also since 1 in N households in the US (where N < 10) now owns one.
Also since it become a multi-billion dollar industry, in a couple of years, out of nothing.
Also since most major print news/magazine outlets hailed the device as their potential savior, and jumped in offering content for it, with even the big mogul, Murdoch, creating a special publication for it.
Also since the educational book marked was just turned upside down, with publishing houses and schools jumping into iBooks distribution.
Also since iPad/iPhone pretty much owns mobile web usage in volume, with Android devices a distant second.
Also since for many professional industries, an iPad is getting indispensable, with extremely large numbers among doctors, lawyers and financials goes, to low end like warehouses tracking things, POS systems, etc. Actually, "small business iPad use quadrupled to 34% in 2011".
Also since the enterprise jumped in and started using iPads and iOS in-house apps. "a survey of 1,200 IT professionals conducted by mobility management solutions vendor BoxTone indicates that iPad adoption is on the rise. Read on to find out why iPad is becoming an enterprise favorite." (and this article is from 2010).
Also since "touch" entered the UX/UI vocabulary for good after iOS.
I agree you can say "transformative" for smartphones, because they did change the market and there is no way it's coming back. As for tablets, the fact that only the iPad is a tablet market (and nothing else in tablet form is successful) tells me we should be careful about calling this a revolution, and wait to see how things will turn in a few years, after the 5th-7th iteration of the same concept.
When you don't say anything, chastising others for not saying anything is pretty hypocritical, don't you think?
It's a device, that is fun, and has its value. It's a successful product, no question about that.
I know a few people who have one, though they don't actually see much use. There are a few niches for which it's particularly useful, but they are still niches. Most of the value seems to be novelty value, which will wear off soon enough.
I've seen a few people try to use iPads and other tablets as a regular device. I've seen iPads at conferences; they wind up being a lot more of a pain to type on than a laptop. A coworker tried an Asus Transformer for a while instead of a laptop; he wound up giving up and buying a MacBook Air. Most people I know who have iPads wind up leaving them sitting around the living room, and when guests are over, they might pick it up, poke at it for a bit as a novelty, and then forget about it.
It reminds me a bit of back when Microsoft was pushing its Windows XP tablet software. They had the convertible laptops with the swivel displays, that you could use a stylus on. I knew a few people who really liked those. There were definitely some uses for them; for instance, when taking notes in class, you could use it to draw diagrams. But they never really caught on; they didn't revolutionize the industry. They wound up being a niche product.
Now, almost everyone I know who's into technology has a smartphone. Those really are revolutionary. You have access to the phone network, the internet, GPS, applications, a phone and video camera, media, and so on from wherever you go. The amount that a smartphone allows you to do, that was just science fiction 20 years ago, is staggering.
Tablets, on the other hand, are in an awkward space. They are bulky enough that you have to think about carrying them around, just like a laptop. You can't do much in the way of real work on them. They don't have a keyboard, so they're clumsy for text input. They're good for consuming media, with light touch based interaction, and lightweight games, but they're not really all that compelling for video, for music you want a smaller and more portable form factor, and for text ebook readers have a lot of advantages (I certainly see more ebook readers on the train than I do tablets).
There are certainly people who get plenty of value out of the iPad. It is a successful product, and has really given life to what seemed before to be a pretty much dead category. But as the grandparent said, it's not a "transformational device."
I believe iPad didn't turn a computer user into an iPad user but it turned every non-computer person into an computer person.
It enabled none-tech oriented people to actually enjoy using a computer. I think this is the true revolution of an iPad.
My parents have a PC at home but my mom can't use a PC because she can't read English. My dad can find his way through but he will avoid using PC unless it's absolutely necessary. iPad is the first computer which my parents are able to use. I am finally able to video chat with them. I can easily share my photos with them. I have created a 'family' Apple account which syncs to iCloud and I copy photos on my computer and it automatically shows up on their iPad. My mom may not be able to read English but we could teach her the 'swipe' gesture to unlock the iPad and show her the 'icon' to touch so that she can see my photos. She used the 'flick' gesture to scroll through photos without any instructions from us.
If you discount iPad, you are seriously underestimating the potential of the device for all the non technical people out there. My parents have completely stopped using PC as iPad is capable of sending emails/seeing my photos/video chat.
Settings > General > International > Language.
My mom is comfortable with iPad but with Hindi language, she will really feel confident and won't worry about 'breaking' the computer and would experiment more. Thank you very much.
I have taught her how to copy and paste files from PC to USB drive. She is a teacher, speaks english and is generally adept at other things. But, she just cannot grasp how to navigate file systems, the menus, the basic actions needed to move things around. Needless to say I have to explain them over and over again.
However, when she uses my iphone/ipad she finds is remarkably simple and easy to navigate. The underlying theme is the simplicity through limitation. The less there is to know, the easier it is to deal with. There is clearly a space for tablets for simple minds.
Only programmers can like modes. Normal people die because of modes, two years ago one a computer in Airbus turned off "controlling with software" mode because some speedometer didn't get input, pilots didn't understand the effects of such mode change.
Modes bad. Not always having a clear "go level back" bad. And even if I haven't tested, I'm quite sure that anything non-Apple is even worse. Although I'd like to be proved wrong, it seems that nobody is even able not to just badly copy Apple.
Two weeks later, they bought a second because they couldn't share.
My parents use their iPads as their main internet device. It's what comes with them on trips. It has certainly transformed how they read articles, browse the web, use Facebook, read email, and communicate while traveling.
When I want to write some songs, I go straight to the iPads. The selection of music-making apps, and the ease by which I can install them and use them, simply astounds me. I haven't touched either of my DAW's (I have both Linux and OSX-based DAW's crammed to the gills with software) in months, because frankly - the iPad really nails it.
So, I wouldn't be so sure to say that ..
Also, we're told that Apple are "beyond specs" in marketing, yet I've seen several official Apple banners (online and physical) that lead with devices having X cores and Y megapixels.
Also, the question is do you think this is a marginal improvement and if so what would they have to do to make this more than a marginal improvement?
This stuff was Science-Fiction just 5 years ago. If Apple didn't bring it to use we'd be using desktop GUI computers forever.