Apple's iPad

[Wiglaf]

You also implied his view of whether it was a worthwhile device was ill-informed, because he hasn't yet touched it. I haven't touched a lot of things

[-Jrabbit]

BTW, I've decided that, despite the obvious joke fodder potential, Apple went with "iPad" in order to keep the "iP" meme going, as evidenced by the desire to once again leverage other people's Intellectual Property to create an ongoing residual revenue stream as part of the product design. First, music. Then, video. Now, books.

That's the real genius of Apple.

[Asher]

Who the hell considered the iPod an idiotic reach for a nonexistent market?

The future was in digital music players, it was patently clear then as it is now. I don't recall anyone doubting it, aside from the original version which was Mac + FireWire only, something Apple did rectify before it could be successful.

The iPad is a completely different beast. It is trying to create a new market, and it may succeed, but it is CERTAINLY no iPod or iPhone.

[-Jrabbit]

You also implied his view of whether it was a worthwhile device was ill-informed, because he hasn't yet touched it. I haven't touched a lot of things

Good point. But I certainly didn't mention anyone by name. I doubt Asher is so insecure that he would take that as a personal dig. But your concern for him is touching.

[-Jrabbit]

Who the hell considered the iPod an idiotic reach for a nonexistent market?

The future was in digital music players, it was patently clear then as it is now. I don't recall anyone doubting it, aside from the original version which was Mac + FireWire only, something Apple did rectify before it could be successful.

The iPad is a completely different beast. It is trying to create a new market, and it may succeed, but it is CERTAINLY no iPod or iPhone.

Digital music players existed before the iPod.
Smartphones existed before the iPhone.
Netbooks existed before the iPad.

I don't see any inconsistency. It's classic Apple.

While I may have overstated with the "nonexistent market" line, it is absolutely true that the original iPod was initially perceived by some as a desperation move, and that it was far too high in price to ever go mainstream. Yes, the digital music market existed, but had not yet been monetized with any success. Until iTunes. That was a game changer.

Original cnet review:

http://news.cnet.com/Apples-iPod-spurs-mixed-reactions/2100-1040_3-274821.html

[Asher]

I don't understand what the pricepoint of the iPod has to do with anything. The iPad is pretty reasonably priced for what it is.

The problem is the utility of the device. The iPod and iPhone all had one. The iPad's is noticably far more niche.

[-Jrabbit]

Look, I respect your opinion and perspective in such matters. I think I'm record to that effect. And I don't have a dog in this race. Just made a couple of minor observations.

The iPad follows the classic Apple market leverage model as the previous two products did. They have a track record of success in these things, and I wouldn't bet against them.

[MrFun]

I don't think you need to touch it to know what kind of output it supports.

Must . . . keep . . . mind out of the gutter.

[Asher]

The iPad is not following in the footsteps. This really is the first of its kind. There are other tablet computers out there, but they're all COMPUTERS. The iPad is more of a device than a computer. That's a very important distinction.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I could think of a couple of other things that needs to be improved. Refresh rate, for one.

Refresh rate is fine. It doesn't "need" to be improved. It's just as quick as turning a page on a physical book. Would it be nice to have it quicker, sure... but not necessary for enjoyment at all.

[Imran Siddiqui]

They have a track record of success in these things, and I wouldn't bet against them.

You mean like the MacBook Air or Cube?

[Asher]

Not to mention the Apple TV and the Newton.

[-Jrabbit]

I didn't say they were infallible.

Fun Fact: My wife owns and still uses a Cube as her main computer.

[MikeH]

I am sure they will sell plenty of iPads, and I'm sure the iPad will push other manufacturers of netbooks/tablets to enhance their product lines.

And I definitely think there's a market for browsing devices rather than computers. Plenty of people find computers too complex.

For those of us who are computer literate, like everyone in this thread, the iPad doesn't really offer us anything. But for those who aren't, it could well be just what they need. A bit like the Wii had great success as a games console for people who don't know anything about games, and don't really want to. I think this could have great success as a computer like device for people who don't like computers.

[Asher]

The problem is the computer illiterate crowd looks at the iPad and wonders 'WTF'? If they can't be bothered to use a computer at a desk, why would they suffer through a slow and unwieldy performance on the sofa awkwardly holding up an iPad?

The computer illiterate crowd, in 2010, are simply afraid of technology or not interested in technology. The iPad to them is probably the pinnacle of high-technology.

I'm not convinced this will sell to computer newbies, computer illiterates, or to general tech enthusiasts. What it will sell to are Apple fans and people with more money than sense who think it simply is a "cool device".