Tablets investigate

Poll: Will Android eclipse iPad the same way it did to iPhone?

The Samsung Galaxy Tab is the first of many high-profile Android tablets. Are they destined to overtake Apple iPad in market share the same way Android smartphones overtook iPhone?

The Samsung Galaxy Tab -- the first mass market Android tablet -- has landed on shore but it is only the beginning of a tidal wave of Android tablets that are going to come to market in 2011. Will these tablets overwhelm the Apple iPad, which currently has over 90% market share in the tablet market, simply because of their sheer numbers?

With multiple manufacturers and wireless carriers dedicated to the Android platform in the smartphone market, Android has quickly zoomed past Apple's iPhone in market share of that segment of the technology sector. As a result, many are expecting and assuming the same phenomenon to happen with tablets.

However, there are those who will argue that while the OS for these tablets has been adapted from smartphones using Apple iOS and Google Android, the market segment itself is much different than smartphones.

For one, the smartphone market was already growing rapidly and had several major players when Apple arrived with the iPhone in 2007 and changed the rules. The tablet market, on the other hand, had almost completely dried up before Apple gave people a new reason to buy tablets in early 2010. Now, the company has sold over seven million of them in six months and created a wave of demand for buyers who want to use the iPad either in place of or as a compliment to other computing devices.

Which argument do you agree with? Answer the poll and then jump into the discussion to explain why.

Take the poll

About

Jason Hiner is the Global Editor in Chief of TechRepublic and Global Long Form Editor of ZDNet. He is an award-winning journalist who writes about the people, products, and ideas that are revolutionizing the ways we live and work in the 21st century.

72 comments
mcquade181
mcquade181

Android is still very immature and bug ridden. Google themselves only recommend v2.2 on tablets. Current android deficiencies:- 1. Very buggy. Version 2.2 is a bit better, but v2.1 is betaware ? earlier versions are almost unusable. 2. Most of the android phones are very mechanically fragile, particularly HTC?s (and don?t get me started how fragile the iPhone is) 3. No MS Outlook synchronisation capability ? even bought add-on software is crap (This is the killer for me) 4. Google calendar sync is very erratic, even worse than the rest of the Google sync package. 5. You can only sync with the Google cloud or Exchange. 6. No built-in note pad. 7. No built-in audio recorder. 8. Camera functionality/application is crap. 9. VERY sub par contact list capabilities. (This one hurts as well because I use contact lists a lot). 10. Serious constraints on application storage space. Can?t install to SD card. Graham.

Hazydave
Hazydave

Android is the most likely long-term winner for tablets, assumibg tablets themselves are a permanent new category, and not just some odd computing niche. The reason is simple and independent of the players -- no proprietary platform has ever kept its dominance in a mature mass market product slot. Apple was one leader in the 8-bit world, they were the first consumer GUI system, the first real consumer smartphone, and they have not held any of these leads. The iPad will be no different. Unless, of course, tablets turn out to be just a fad. There are plenty of small and proprietary solutions once you look at limited niche markets. Apple has the first successful mass market tablet, but they already have issues. People will want to use these increasingly as PC replacements, not PC satellites. You still need to thether your iPad, Apple will need to make the device completely stand-alone, like all Android devices today. With one model per year, and Jobs complete rejection of smaller sizes, Android devices will aattract more users over time, not holding to Apple's no ports, one size fits all model. Android isn't there yet, either. Google needs to allow Android Marketplace on wifi-only devices, and they need to make it clear they won't throw Android tablet support under the bus to somehow make the world safe for ChromeOS... let each live oor die by its own merits. Android could benefit from some large-screen UI tweaks. Not as bad as iOS was, most apps today handle multiple resolutions. But there's no optimization for tablets from Google, leaving providers to go their own way. That doesn't break the API, but it does add confusion.

todd.beaubien
todd.beaubien

A different, but I think also very important, question would be: Will Android tablet makers' profit margins be eclipsed by iPad profit margins the same way they have been by iPhone profit margins? While a large number of units of Android OS devices have been shipped, it remains to be seen if it will actually bring a huge benefit to the companies selling those devices.

andyzgram
andyzgram

Android is going to be the next home phone on a tablet with gtalk

Digicruiser
Digicruiser

I've just seen here in Aussie a 7" Android Tablet with a camera and a myriad of connections for $188 Aussie. One Telco here is also selling one with full features for a fraction over $200, Ye the IPad has a 10 inch screen but if one can buy one for this price even though it's a smaller screen, guess where the money is going to go?!? It is Android manufacturer's intentions to beat them on price and flood the market with cheap devices. Shortcomings? Maybe but the EEPC made a killing all over the world even though they were meant for third world schools. Because they were so cheap, there are tonnes around - then people woke up to start buying slightly bigger ones with more acceptable keyboards etc. I think the Androids will be a running river over IPad. IPad is one brand, there will be more on display and those more will likely to be all be Android! These competitors are out to get iPad as well just like Android phones running past iPhone - they deliberately go more steps further in ability and all I hear at one of my Electronics stores in Aussie, is that they get continual complaints about the limitations with their iPhone, one recent story is that one got so fed up with it, one just tossed the new iPhone against a wall - then went to Android - go figure!

josephfennellster
josephfennellster

In almost every sector but the desktop the community of Openness has proven an effective method. At present if you want to use an iOS device, you're options are limited. With Android devices you have multiple carriers and manufacturers. In addition to that on most Android devices you're not locked into applications approved by the company that released the operating software. As our world becomes more mobile, consumers are looking to control those devices in the same manner in which they expect of their personal computer to which Apple refuses to allow.

aharper
aharper

Android will end up with more Open Source developers than Apple will have people who buy in to IOS. End result is a plethora of apps, good, bad, and ugly, which will help Android Tablets gain a reputation for versatility. Apple will have to move on the the next sector and make that sexy, selling to their consumer base and early adopters before an open source version sacks the quarterback again.

Stajilov
Stajilov

People will get sick of iPad's user-friendly interfaces, facilities etc. Android is much more serious somehow... I don' t know why, to be honest. A friend of mine has iPad and Iphone 4, but I don't like them, because they look rather naive, rather straight-forward.... and by the way, iPad and iPhones in general are in fact less than they are considered to be. Also every homeless will soon have iPad/iPhone, so you'd better stick to Android as I did... Feel the new experience with Android! And... Can somebody explain me how Apple got so popular with its iPhones and iPads?

dcolbert
dcolbert

Open models that empower users will always usurp closed models that limit choices. I have an iPad. Unless things change with Apple, I won't when Android tablet models become truly feature competitive.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

I said 'no,' but not because the market is different. What I see is that Android still isn't a tablet OS, has demonstrated by many different reviewers-- not counting the fact that even Google has said Android isn't one. I can't say Google won't adapt it, but they intended for Chrome to be their tablet OS. As such Chome would take that honor, not Android. On another point, the concept of the tablet as a standalone device has been an economic failure by all previous manufacturers, even when you include the PDAs that were so popular for about 5 years. The fact that PDAs died as a computing product merely emphasizes the fact that they needed to supplement the desktop rather than trying to stand alone. I won't deny that I'm not fully satisfied with Apple' current integration methods, but they're better than Andriod's nonexistent integration capabilities. We'll just have to see what the future brings.

jhardy
jhardy

Asking whether Android will "eclipse" the iPad is based upon a faulty premise of the Android OS having more installations than the iPhone hardware. Free, decent software will always have greater initial adoption than a paid-for, single piece of hardware--even if that hardware has a dedicated OS. I am not saying that one is better or predicting whether one will "win" (however you define "win"). I am only saying that Android is the OS for a lot of cheap phones with few features that have sold lots of units.

tony
tony

Only in the fevered imagination of the press, who like a good battle. It will take more than a year, perhaps 2 years, before manufacturers catch up to all the advances made with the iPad and produce comparable products. What we'll see now are a crop of wannabe tablets that won't satisfy with their smaller displays, lower battery lives, and lack of ecosystem advantages.

tiggsy
tiggsy

I use Android. I sync mNote (with Simplenote), Evernote (was a stopgap till I found mNote, really, but good for some stuff), HardCopy (with Instapaper) and dropBox and that's without talking about gmail, twitter, so on, which all sync. I don't use Exchange, and I found google docs less than useful, as it only takes single sheet spreadsheets for a start. Still looking for a good android equivalent to OpenOffice, but it won't be long, i'm sure

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

Just as a clipboard can't replace a typewriter for document creation (no matter what kind) a tablet cannot effectively replace a full PC; however, like that clipboard, it can supplement the PC by giving you a mobil means to mark checklists, track sales calls and other support functions. This is what the iPad does well, though I admit it could do things a little bit better. Android, as yet, doesn't even come close. Why? Because Android can't really do any of the things the iPad does very well. Most of the apps are basic at best and intended to be used the way you suggest--fully independently. There is little to no capability to properly synchronize data or transfer functional information from one device to another. The ability to serve as a satellite device is honestly the iPad's strength, a concept likely to be seen even more as the WP7 devices come more fully into the market. Both Apple and Microsoft recognize the limitations of Android, and are playing to those limitations. If Google doesn't regain control of the platform, then Android will have as many variants as Linux does today--with much the same kind of compatibility issues.

Hazydave
Hazydave

Apple will continue to make huge profits, at least for the forseeable future. Its built-in... they have spent 35 years establishing Apple as a premium brand. They can't maintain that and lower prices. Other companies are matching the iPad price for the most part (and certainly profit margins, particularly Samsung, since they're building on the profits they already make supplying Apple with major components). But if these catch on, they'll hit the same commodity pricing we see on PCs and Netbooks. Apple will not follow, just as today, they can sell much the same PC for 2x-3x the price. This will ensure Apple's loss of market dominance, but also their profit win.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

"...consumers are looking to control those devices in the same manner in which they expect of their personal computer..." Consumers could really care less how they get their apps, as long as they work as advertised and don't cause problems with the device. The more reliable a device is, the more likely they are to stick with the platform they've chosen. In the Windows world, the broad range of hardware manufacturers and their equally broad range of quality of product and support meant that people hopped from one brand to another--placing all the blame on the hardware, which is where the blame belonged for the majority of Windows' problems. That's why Gateway is gone. That is why so many other brands have disappeared or been subsumed into larger brands. Even so, Compaq's reputation is hardly any better than it was before HP's purchase and many others are in the same boat. I already know people and business owners who currently own Android devices and claim that they're reverting to their previous platform or giving Apple a try once their current contract expires. Yes, when price is the issue, a broad selection of vendors is nice--you might find an application on sale at half price from a third party--but when you're talking download markets, you're really not going to see competition for price, but rather competition for titles in the Android app market.

vdesilva
vdesilva

I cannot remember the number of times I have been told that Unix and Open Source will solve the world's problems. Please listen, it is when a manufacturer makes properly integrated, simple to use, reliable and people friendly products that run dust-bins-lids that will make the product successful ...

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

When you consider there are already well over 100 million iOS users, you're claiming that 10% of all computer users in the world will become Android developers. In other words, your so-called Logic is impossible. Android is already running into troubles in both the consumer and enterprise worlds, first with security followed closely by simple device dissatisfaction. Many enterprises have tested Android phones and realized that while they can communicate well enough for their needs, the platform is an almost perfect sieve where the users' data can be lifted by almost anyone who looks at it wrong. It's been demonstrated that over 20% of the current available apps are at least potentially malware and that a significant number of those have been proven to use various means to siphon either personal data or money itself from customers through secret dialers--a technique that used to run rampant against Windows users 10 years ago and longer. That Open Source community is becoming rife with thieves--enough so that Red Hat's board is banning certain development apps from their platform. No, while Android may again take the lead over time against the iPad, it's neither going to be as rapidly nor as strongly as Android has overtaken the iPhone. In fact, I expect to see Android's growth slow--at least in the US--for more than just the reasons so far stated.

vdesilva
vdesilva

Stajilov, thank God that millions are not like you or we will not have the in-depth debate about Apple's i"stuff"

net.minder
net.minder

PDAs didn't die, the market just became the smartphone market. Remember that the early Blackberries were PDAs that ran on the Pager networks. The PDA company that lost out was Palm - which is 3Com's fault. If a major cellphone manufacturer had bought Palm instead, they would have dominated the smartphone market. But RIM pounced on 3Com's poor decisions and took the early lead instead. Does anyone think that RIM's behaviour now looks a bit like 3Com's behaviour then?

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

[i]"a lot of cheap phones with few features that have sold lots of units. [/i] Unlike the first 3 iPhones which did nothing compared to competitive units, offered no advantages and were immensely overpriced. What electronics in the last 30 years have garnered the manufacturer more than 20-25 points? Apple toys, 35-60% margins across the board, no wonder they can drop pricing by almost 50% when they lose market share. they are an utter joke and Jobs laughs all the way to the bank with every new Apple KoolAid drinker that buys into the master plan. They could cut their marketing expenses by 40% these days, they have enough die hard followers out there that will sell their devices for them, regardless of what they do or don't offer. Jobs should start a pyramid scheme for moving Apple like Amway's Dexter Yeager did.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Wannabe tablets? You speak as if Apple came out with the first tablet, nearly 10 years after the tablet was invented and put into Enterprise use. As for Apple's OS, it is only looking that good in the North American marketplace, where iPhones seem to dominate the consumer electronics market despite their drawbacks and countless limitations. That's no big deal though, we saw the same when Apple reduced portable music players to low quality, proprietary junk too. North Americans seem to be wow'd by such trends but the rest of the world actually seeks more from their OS/device so that other manufacturers can still offer far superior products that sell on their actual merits rather than marketing. Smaller display? It's portable, want to use one hand or two? Need a larger screen, enter the notebook and increased capability. Ecosystem advantages? LOL, proprietary cage you mean. I see you took your Apple prescription this morning, 2 Jobs-apan and a tall glass of iKoolaid. Let me guess; like many, you pissed away all your money on these overpriced gadgets, are stuck into a data contract and have no choice but to support it now or feel like a total loser. Oh well, you have a lot of company anyway.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

I fill RFP's for businesses all over the world all day long. Many are electronics manufacturers that I find parts for, many are end users. Government, mililtary, health care, oil and gas and all smaller verticals too. For example I just quoted 326 devices, with chargers, spare batteries etc. for a company in Israel, Apple products of any sort were specifically excluded from being included in any potential quotes. RPF's usually specifically exclude iPhone from quotation, due to the limitations, and cost of apps. They find they can usually find the exact same apps, from the exact same developers being offered for free on other platforms. When you add that to the fact that most other phones DO more than iPhone, they won't even waste time considering iPhone quotes. Of course this isn't ALL businesses, but many, whether European, American, Canadian, Australian etc.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

"at least in the US" I think the last post was with respect to the number of companies that will take up development for open source will be greater than the number offering apps for Apple's approval. This isn't far fetched, it has already happened with smart phones, regardless of platform. There are more Symbian, Android and Windows mobile developers putting out software than there are Apple. This, plus the fact that most are free, has made them the platform of choice on a global scale, in fact i-Phone has had relatively weak global adoption when compared to others. VERY strong in consumer rich, 'please sell me something' America, but very WEAK globally. http://www.zakshow.com/2008/04/25/iphone-the-telecom-market-killer/ Of course these stats are a few years old, but I don't think iPhones have been such a global landslide in the last two years that there is much difference. I do think a big reason for lack of adoption is the carrier charges though, not just the phones lack of usability.

Stalemate
Stalemate

Android apparently has 10% more users worldwide than iOS right now (http://phandroid.com/2010/11/10/android-tops-ios-becomes-number-two-mobile-os-worldwide-according-to-gartner/) - so, 110M? Where's the impossible logic in assuming that coders will want to develop for the fastest growing market segment? Like the statistics and the security flaws you state are "demonstrated", I'm not seeing it. Are there sources you could point to? The majority of the market, when given the choice, will prefer usability and flexibility over a patriarchal, closed system - despite security risks. I think the PC and Windows have demonstrated that already when compared to all the safer solutions out there for OS and apps.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

PDAs, as a standalone item, no longer exist. So as a tablet-type device, they died.

SmartAceW0LF
SmartAceW0LF

Jobs has made a few mistakes in the past, but why the overt hatred Oz? I think he did a fairly good job in reinventing the OS when they purchased the unix predecessor to the current Mac system. Only wish he had not have made the mistake of tethering it to the hardware manufacturers he used early on. The world would be a far better place had he not made that blunder. I do agree that Mac users have a tendency, generally speaking, very much akin to that exhibited by AOLers of the past, but I do not for one second begrudge Apple's recent success in other markets. With regard to that success, Steve has done an incredible job. His success didn't come to easily and it was a thing that just anyone could pull off. Give credit where it is due. You want to bash someone for offering inferior services or products, go to the real thieves. Start with AT&T and work your way down. Steve Jobs is a little fish in a big pond with that perspective.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

Please explain this statement: "... no wonder they can drop pricing by almost 50% when they lose market share." Exactly where have they dropped pricing by almost 50% simply because they have lost market share? In fact, with one class of exceptions, I don't know a single time Apple has dropped their pricing by that much for any product. Before you try to use the iPhone as your argument, you should already know that the only time an iPhone model is reduced by that much, it is because it is last year's model which is being carried over, not a new model that is experiencing any kind of sales difficulty. Yes, I will accept that Apple dropped the price of the original iPhone by $200, but that was after only two months on the market amidst consumer outcry that they were overpriced--not due to any perceived loss of market. So please clarify your statement.

jasonhiner
jasonhiner

You made several very valid points (right up to the ecosystem part) but then you couldn't help taking a few personal shots in your last two paragraphs. Come on Oz, nip that stuff in the bud! That's the kind of thing I've been talking about lately in terms of avoiding the personal attacks. Attack ideas, not people. Attack ideas, not people. Attack ideas, not people. [Imagine me banging my head against my desk three times while repeating that.]

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

Just look at what Android is doing because of how it's marketed--or do you think that all those new users are techies that have been impatiently waiting for a non-Apple smart phone? If that's true, why weren't they buying more Blackberries and Nokias? They've been out much longer. Then again, the people I know who had them offered hated the complexity even for something as simple as checking email.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

by marketing to the common person instead of the tech person..." Now if the Linux advocates could grasp that point...

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

... I have to admit I cannot locate the article I read in a newsletter last week. I blame this on the fact that I normally don't keep my daily newsletters after I read them. However, over the last year I've read of more than one use that the iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch is being tested/used for. Without the URLs, though, it can only be claimed as 'hearsay.' For that I apologize. However, since I get these newsletters regularly, I will attempt to backtrack at least the basic training one and get the link for you.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

I don't fault that iPhone is/was the 'name' of the game, but as yet that doesn't mean that Android is any better or worse, though I am influenced by the reviews I read about Android which tend to show it in less than stellar light. 'Droid is the current 'name', but it's obviously not the whole game, since despite all the noise about Android for the last year, the iPhone still sells almost as many from a single manufacturer and network source as Android does from five and five. And that's just in the US. For the iPad, while I won't argue that, at least for now, it's the best content consumption tablet currently on the market, many people, both consumer and enterprise, have discovered it can do so much more. I'll grant making an extended blog post or writing a novel on one would be a pain if you didn't use the bluetooth keyboard, but using it as a clipboard to carry checklists, fill-in forms and that sort of purpose is very viable--I've done it. Tabletop gamers could use it to keep and update their character sheets--maybe even draw their avatar's portrait while they're at it. The possibilities are there, but only if you drop the concept that a tablet is supposed to be some kind of desktop/laptop replacement. The iPad is meant for true mobile computing--not 'portable' computing; there is a difference.

jfuller05
jfuller05

I don't mean to "butt" in on a conversation, but I think one reason that Apple's iPad and iPhone have done so well in the consumer market and others is because their name is out there. Apple's iPhone could arguably be called a piece of pop-culture when referring to smart phones even though smart phones have been around longer than the iPhone. Apple hit a home run by marketing to the common person instead of the tech person, which is why people automatically think of the iPhone when they want to purchase a smart phone. I think people don't know there are other products out on the market to combat with the iPhone and iPad. I've used the iPad, and yeah, it's pretty cool and great for the content consumer computer user. I wouldn't use it because when I surf the web I tend to "create" more on the web. The iPhone is also a good device. Apple played to the pop culture crowd and got their name out there on the street so when someone wants a new 'tech' device they go with the "I-thingy"( that's what I hear the most:i-thingy).

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Your words, not mine. I can find plenty of links that 'aren't specifically what you were talking about'.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

Searching Military.com for ipod "basic training" and ipod "iet" yielded nothing.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

I also get blog news from Military.com. As an ex-Air Force instructor, I still like to keep up with what's happening there.

vdesilva
vdesilva

price is a poor determinant in most industries. Cost of ownership however is.

CharlieSpencer
CharlieSpencer

"...why is it that the US Army would purchase iPads to hand out to their basic trainees? I've found a few references to the U.S. Army purchasing iPads for other forms of training, including 'Advanced Individual Training' (or 'job skill' training to civilians), but NONE regarding basic training ('Initial Entry Training'). As one prior serviceman to another, I'd appreciate links referencing the use of any tablet in Army boot camp.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

From what you say, Android should be a perfect platform for them--but oddly, Apps that are free on the iPhone tend to have a price on Android, and those that have a price on the iPhone are more expensive on Android. I'll admit I don't have first-hand knowledge of this, but many software reviews reference this. No, because of your particular market, your customers are looking for very specific capabilities. I might point out that it's been demonstrated too frequently that the people making out these RPFs believe they know the capabilities of all the competing devices--despite never having laid hands on one or actively testing it. For instance, why is it that the US Army would purchase iPads to hand out to their basic trainees? Surely there's 'better' devices out there, aren't there? Why would the US Air Force purchase iPhones for certain jobs, when there's 'better' devices available? Could it be that Price is the issue, and the US military is exploring the benefits of something off-the-shelf as compared to custom designed? Hey, if you can develop your own software, then why bother with an app store at all?

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

There are more Symbian, Android and Windows mobile developers putting out software than there are Apple. If this is true, why does the Apple App Store have over 300,000 apps and the others barely half as many? Why is the number of Apple iOS apps increasing faster than all of those competitors, let alone any one? Your assumptions are falling flat on their faces. And look again at that 'weak global market.' Around the world, Apple is still selling more iPhones now than they were a year ago--it's just that Android, coming from effectively nowhere, is growing faster. Considering Android has a very small installed base, it can't help but grow faster. Meanwhile, the overall market is growing while Nokia (Symbian) and RIM (Blackberry) are fading. Symbian is still top, but it's falling almost as fast as Android is rising. Now, if the iPhone does add Verizon as a network, I think Android's growth will slow down in the States--at least for a while.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

... considering that Windows is losing ground to Apple and Linux. Windows had an advantage getting started, but that lead has been slipping for ten years and that slide is accelerating every year. It's possible, with Android, that the slide will increase even more. I also would reconsider your statement about the market. While I agree about the usability, too much flexibility can be worse than 'not enough.' The points I made about security and interoperability are points made by tech bloggers for months, and they're still there. Many of those points have been made right here on Tech Republic, if you only bother to look. If a developer can't be sure of his market, he'll go somewhere that he is. I've read of many developers who write for both iOS and Android, but prefer iOS simply because they know they don't have to make multiple versions to adapt to different versions of the OS and different user interfaces. Yes, for now Android can't help but surpass Apple's sales in the States and when you realize that even overseas they're taking only months to drop below their introductory prices, then even there sales will gradually surpass Apple's installed base. But that doesn't mean it's better--only cheaper.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

How did you find a specific track you wanted to find? How did you find a specific artist you wanted to listen to? How did you find a specific album you wanted to hear? How did you set it up for random track playing? Exactly how many tracks could you load into the thing? I never said Apple was first, but Apple made using it easier. 99% of the digital players out before the iPod couldn't do anything more than the old Sony Walkman or Diskman. You had some ability to move back and forth, but limited abilities to find the specific tracks or to carry a significant amount of music. The first generation 5GB hard drive version of the iPod could hold in excess of 1,000 tracks and in more than just the mp3 format. Maybe it couldn't play WAV or WMAs, but then, WAVs are simply huge by comparison and WMA is a Microsoft-specific audio format. Now, if you ask me, I far prefer some sort of easy-access menu system if I have over 1,000 tracks on a device. Trying to 'step' forward and back would take forever.

Slayer_
Slayer_

It also played WMA's and WAV's, bu tthats besides the point. It had a skip forward, skip back and a pause/play button on the right side. And on the left side was a volume up and volume down button. I'd love to know how the iPod made this simpler... Copy files, it HAS ALWAYS been as easy as drag and drop, 99% of the MP3 players registered as a Flash Drive. A few of them had software to assist you, but for the most part, right clicking a file/folder and choosing "Send To (drivename)" was pretty damn easy. Whereas iTunes, holy crap... The only example I can think of to rellate to iTunes is Realplayer. Started fine, but as they got greedy... now th eprogram tries to take control of your entire system, and has gotten way to complicated, just to do a basic task...

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

I dislike Apple's marketing and business practices, and rightly so. Rightly so? How? By advertising how easy their products are to use? By advertising how reliable their products are compared to the competition? Apple has never lied in its marketing; for that matter, it's illegal to do so. Any company that can't sell a product based solely on it's merits, is pathetic. Considering that Apple's products make so much money for them, they must have some strong merits that encourage people to pay the supposedly-higher price. Apple really does sell based on its merits. It's just the fact that when those merits are compared to somebody else's lacks that you're upset. When car dealers do it, they are the devil, when a consumer electronics company does it, they are heroes? I'm thinking you're taking things out of context here; exactly when do car dealers do 'it'? You look at Ford vs Chevy--they make claims based on sales or longevity compared to the other; is that wrong? They compare performance figures; is that wrong? Exactly what are the two doing that's wrong? there were better mobiles than iPhones YEARS before it came out, yet it is marketed as a market leader, one that everyone else copied, not true. No? In this case, the term 'better' is subjective. Yes, there were more complete, more complex smart phones out there; I won't deny that--but the average consumer wasn't buying them. The average consumer wanted something 'like' them, but that was easier to use and not so business-oriented. The iPhone wasn't first, but Apple made it something people wanted--not just by marketing, but by honestly making it easy, simple and reliable. For the consumer, that is 'better' than the complex, hard-to-use, function-limited device known as the Blackberry or the older WinMob devices. iPods had the worst music playback abilities, low power, no tone control, limited to ONE format (the most compressed of all) better devices were all over, Again only half-right. Yes, there were better devices--that were harder to use. But your definition of even the original iPod is wrong, since it handled more than one format and had tone controls (though not Treble/Mid/Bass like most of us are used to). It's biggest advantage was that it was extremely easy to load and even easier to use. Go back and look at the competition; uploading music wasn't simply a matter of 'drag and drop', you had to locate every single track to do so, rather than having the ability to select from a comprehensive list. Playback wasn't any easier, either. Apple simply made the iPod easy to use. Even now, there isn't that much real competition from any competitor for that capability. Now we see the same with the iPad, limited functionality, low quality, the cheapest, Chinese components,... And as I called you on it earlier, again I call you 'Liar.' The iPad is assembled in China, yes, but not from the cheapest Chinese components. Do a little research. The majority of Apple's components come from Taiwan, but the design and software are all Apple's. You claim limited functionality, but I've already seen iPads used where WinMob devices used to rule. I've already seen iPads used where bloomin' PAPER used to rule. And Steve Jobs is right, everybody is out to 'copy' Apple because Apple did one thing right--they made it into something the average consumer wanted to use. Or are you going to tell me that Apple has over 10 million fanboys and counting? What good is complexity when nobody wants to buy it? What good is 'features' when they're simply going to waste? The problem here is that Apple understands its market--everybody else believes that specs are all that's important. It appears that "Everybody Else" is wrong, because iOS's only competition right now is Android, which simply proves that everything else was too complicated.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Hatred, nice one! I don't HATE Jobs, I dislike Apple's marketing and business practices, and rightly so. Any company that can't sell a product based solely on it's merits, is pathetic. It's a low end, cheesy, bottom feeder's way to move product. Apple making the world a better place is a bit of a stretch, they are just a consumer electronics builder. I don't begrudge success, I begrudge BS marketing. When car dealers do it, they are the devil, when a consumer electronics company does it, they are heroes? BOSE fits that model exactly too, not just Apple. [i]With regard to that success, Steve has done an incredible job. His success didn't come to easily and it was a thing that just anyone could pull off. Give credit where it is due. You want to bash someone for offering inferior services or products, go to the real thieves.[/i] I commend success, when earned. Apple did a great job for many years, then it became purely an endless release of new, lacking gadgets for high profit. there were better mobiles than iPhones YEARS before it came out, yet it is marketed as a market leader, one that everyone else copied, not true. iPods had the worst music playback abilities, low power, no tone control, limited to ONE format (the most compressed of all) better devices were all over, but Apple's marketing made them again look like pioneers who were wrongly copied. Now we see the same with the iPad, limited functionality, low quality, the cheapest, Chinese components, with Jobs stating everyone is out to copy iPad. He doesn't mention that tablets of FAR superior quality and enterprise use have been around since the beginning of the millenium though. Apple is a farce, but they are so popular they must be the best and everyone just can't keep up, or dumb down their products in time to compete. In North America maybe people believe it, but it seems the rest of the world has caught on and seen who Apple really is and how they just don't stack up to the competition, that Apple has tried to copy.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

With the original iPhone at the original price, sales ran well--they never really slowed down--but they weren't at the numbers Apple expected or wanted, so no, it wasn't due to a perceived "loss of market" but rather their own perceived "lack of volume." There is a difference. You also seem to believe that every "iToy" has seen a slowdown in sales, but yet the only one to have done so is the iPod, which currently has plateaued at 70% market while every other i-device is showing growth in sales; year over year. Mac computers are selling more now than ever before in history, almost 4 times as many in one quarter as they sold in one year 10 years ago. iPhones are selling at a rate of around 250,000/day--that's per day--which is more than twice that of a year ago. And iPads are still selling at something like 1.2 million units per month--faster than any other single computer product currently on the market. When added to Apple's computer sales (which some analysts say they should since the iPad is a computer product) then Apple has suddenly jumped to become the #1 computer sales company in the world, selling even more units--for now--than even HP. No, i-'Toys' are not slowing down and haven't been slowing down since the i-moniker was added to Apple's lineup. And their prices hardly drop in the manner that--for instance--Android devices do. Anybody for 2-4-1? Ever see an Apple product sold like that? Android does--usually within months of release.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

I used the term market share instead of sales. It should have been iProduct "sales" slow, such as seen with all previous iToys far. Apple just goes for low hanging fruit, excuse the pun. New device, skim the early adopters. Release version 2 and re-skim for early adopters etc. After each cycle, the price drops considerably as they just want to get the early adopters/low hanging fruit. As for,[i]"...but that was after only two months on the market amidst [b]consumer outcry that they were overpriced--not due to any perceived loss of market.[/b]"[/i] If reacting to consumer outcry of a product being overpriced is not a reaction due to a perceived loss of market, then what is it? A friendly favour? At least try to make some sense, it might offer a little more validity to your defense.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

"Nobody is playing catch up to some fantastic advances of the iPad, others have already done a LOT more before iPad was even melted plastic pellets. Not opinion, FACT." A lot more? Then why weren't they selling? Why is it that the iPad has sold more units in 8 months than all of those predecessors in 10 years? I don't deny that much of the technology existed before the iPad, but it wasn't as inexpensive, reliable or easy to use. Everybody, including all those older tablet makers, are scrambling now to produce something that will sell as well as, or better than, the iPad. At over 1million units sold per month, I really doubt any one manufacturer will match those numbers any time soon. "The only thing Apple leads with is offering lower quality components, put together in cheaper Asian factories. Even my cheapest clients won't accept products made from those plants." Maybe you don't realize that every single computer made today is probably made exactly the way you stated--with Taiwanese parts in Chinese sweatshops. I don't care if you're talking Apple, Lenovo, IBM, HP or Dell. However, I can point out that from personal experience I know the grade of parts Apple chooses for its computers and devices, and I'm talking about all the way down to the components on the circuit boards and not just the boards themselves. I don't agree with every technology these companies use--they're all sacrificing some quality for speed--but when a company requires every single component be QA tested for nominal accuracy, I do know that those "cheap" Apple devices are far better built than most of their competition. I've refuted your arguments many times over the years, Oz; as yet, you haven't been able to prove to me once that you're right.

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

The rest was false information. Size matter? Yup, that was an opinion, and I replied with questions and my opinion accordingly. But: [i]"It will take more than a year, perhaps 2 years, before manufacturers catch up to all the advances made with the iPad and produce comparable products "[/i] That's not an opinion, it is an attempt at stating facts. An assertion and a false one at that. Nobody is playing catch up to some fantastic advances of the iPad, others have already done a LOT more before iPad was even melted plastic pellets. Not opinion, FACT. [i]"What we'll see now are a crop of wannabe tablets that won't satisfy with their smaller displays, lower battery lives, and lack of ecosystem advantages. [/i] This is a result of once again of the market reducing their products to compete with cheap Chinese parts and manufacturing for the consumer who doesn't believe in spending money for quality products. Nobody's trying to catch up, they are trying to slow down. Much better tablets have been made for years already, they just don't compete with cheapo stuff that Apple releases so they have to "dumb it down" to compete with Apple now. The only thing Apple leads with is offering lower quality components, put together in cheaper Asian factories. Even my cheapest clients won't accept products made from those plants. At the every least they will accept the use of Taiwanese components, assembled in a Chinese sweatshop. Chinese components? Anyone who understands the factories in Asia will not touch them. Slap 'Apple' on it and all of a sudden it's viewed as a great American product...about as American as apple pie from Guangdong. People say everything comes from China these days and in some cases it's almost true but not most. MADE IN CHINA, means assembled in China, not that it uses Chinese components (as Apple's devices do). China has lower cost labour, but with the massive cost increases in Solicon steel this year and copper, as well as labour rate increases in Taiwan and Japan, assembly is commonly done in China now, with parts from other countries, assuring high quality components. My point was not speculation or opinion, it's just fact and first hand knowledge of the manufacturing process.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

How do you know that what they state is "... unqualified and incorrect rubbish..."? Just because their opinion doesn't jive with yours doesn't mean you're right and they're wrong; they may have a totally different concept of how such a device can be used than you. In other words, "If you can't say nothing nice, don't say nothin' at all" (Thumper in Walt Disney's Bambi)

Oz_Media
Oz_Media

Pointing at an entire market segment of users. But when one person singles himself out by spewing unqualified and incorrect rubbish, it's hard to reply on a broader spectrum! if the shoe fits? Kick someone with it. Don't bang your head too hard or you'll end up running out to buy one too!