Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > iPhone, iPad & iPod > The new iPad

The new iPad (Page 9)
Thread Tools
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 09:54 AM
 
Like I said, I don't remember any such discussion.

On this forum?
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 11:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Then 2 months later Apple released the 12" PowerBook.
It's almost guaranteed that Apple won't release the 7" iPad before *YOU* buy a crappy Android 7" tablet first. There's no way to beat it.

-t
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 01:27 PM
 
I probably wouldn't buy another iPad anyway. I'd prefer to have flash media and MKV support.
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 02:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
There definitely was significant discussion about it. The usual comments were either like yours (I'll buy one if it comes out), or else that it was not appropriate for pro use and one should just buy a 12" iBook if want that form factor. I'll admit there wasn't as much discussion about it as the "headless xMac" but significant discussion nonetheless.


I already had the 12" iBook BTW, but it was slow as hell because it used the G3.
The thing that needs to be understood here is that Apple has not proven that the 7.whatever" form factor is successful because they don't yet have one in the market. Therefore, releasing one is much more risky as compared to the iBook 12">PB 12" scenario. Of course, Apple should make the right decision based on clear thinking, testing, all in the context of their larger vision.

Having said that, while there are some benefits, there are also so many problems with the 7" form factor that Apple is very aware of. With so many others failing in the market, and Jobs being blunt and clear that their tweeners... I doubt Apple will release one in the foreseeable future.

I think what will happen is the 9.7" will get refined to be much lighter, thinner, with a reduced bezel. All the energy will be focused on making this one better.

But Jobs is gone, so who knows.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 03:42 PM
 
I'd say it was way risker to release the 10" iPad 1 back then, then it would be for a 7" or 8" iPad mini now.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 04:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I probably wouldn't buy another iPad anyway. I'd prefer to have flash media and MKV support.
There are apps for MkV support, and other than that, there are 7" tablets available that do what you ask. They suck at everything else, but that doesn't seem to be a criterium for you.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 05:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I probably wouldn't buy another iPad anyway. I'd prefer to have flash media and MKV support.
I really don't understand what kind of websites you're visiting.

I have been using my iPad for two years now, and I can count the instances where I came across a website that absolutely required Flash on one hand.

Seriously, I don't get it.

-t
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 05:12 PM
 
Removable flash memory (or USB host support), not flash websites. Flash website is an added bonus, but not a make or break feature anymore in 2012. (The most common places I find Adobe Flash as a requirement are restaurant and travel websites and the like.)

7" tablets work better than phones for surfing (in landscape mode), and are a lot less tiring to hold than the iPad. I don't have any interest in e-magazines, so if 7" tablets suck for those, I don't care at all.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 05:27 PM
 
oh, duh', ok.

-t
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2012, 05:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
7" tablets work better than phones for surfing (in landscape mode), and are a lot less tiring to hold than the iPad. I don't have any interest in e-magazines, so if 7" tablets suck for those, I don't care at all.
7" tablets, in my experience, as a consumer and from a development standpoint, do not work better than smartphones for Web surfing.

Smartphones have the full web in your pocket: the 7" is just a bigger device that is still too small a screen to compete with the experience of surfing on the iPad. Jobs said it best... the tweeners don't offer a compelling enough jump in screen size to want to use over your smartphone.

The 7" is basically saying: "I'm the bastard child of the 10" tablet. I want to be able to display the full experience like the bigger guys, but I just can't because my screen is too small." What happens here is that the full Web like on an iPad doesn't look as good and doesn't really work on the much smaller 7" tablet. Things get cut off on the screen. Responsive Web layouts make everything too small... then the mobile versions of sites purposed for smartphones also looks like crap on these screens because they're too big for that experience. They truly are tweeners.

But for reading a novel... they're good. But they suck at most everything else.

Kindle Fire and why 7-inch tablets suck | ZDNet
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2012, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I'd say it was way risker to release the 10" iPad 1 back then, then it would be for a 7" or 8" iPad mini now.
Exactly! Back then Apple was betting on a market the rest of the world did not believe existed. Thanks to Apple's intro of the original iPad there is now a huge broad market (even if wrongleung does not think so). Today Apple would be taking more risk by not somehow going after the 4"-9" phone/tablet size range.

There are a lot of possible 4-9 range solutions and I expect Apple to go after at least one but probably more than one. We will see.

I also think that there will be useful market space for tablets larger than 10" but that will take some tech improvements to present.

-Allen.
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Apr 8, 2012 at 03:39 PM. )
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2012, 03:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
But for reading a novel... they're good. But they suck at most everything else.
Your problem may be that you fail to see beyond simple web surfing, because the truth is that within "most everything else" there is a very large space that 3.5" is sub-optimally small for and 9.7" is sub-optimally large for. Check back Q4 2013 at the latest and tell us again how midsize was a waste of effort.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2012, 04:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
Your problem may be that you fail to see beyond simple web surfing, because the truth is that within "most everything else" there is a very large space that 3.5" is sub-optimally small for and 9.7" is sub-optimally large for.
I'd venture that there is very, very little that can be done on a 7" display that can NOT be equally (or nearly equally) well done on a 9.7" display.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2012, 04:45 PM
 
My biggest beef with the 10" size is the... well... size... and weight and its awkwardness to hold.

At that size, I'd rather just have an Air or something, with its built-in stand and keyboard.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2012, 09:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
I'd venture that there is very, very little that can be done on a 7" display that can NOT be equally (or nearly equally) well done on a 9.7" display.
Of course.

The point is the form factor: size & weight. If I walk around all day using a tablet as a tool the large heavy size is less than ideal. Or if I need to carry it on my person. Or if I want to attach it to a vehicle dash. Or if I want to read for 3 or 4 hours in bed, in an armchair, a hammock, whatever.

And the 3.5" size is too small to be ideal for many usages.

Ergo midsize opportunity.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Apr 8, 2012 at 09:28 PM. )
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 02:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
Of course.

The point is the form factor: size & weight. If I walk around all day using a tablet as a tool the large heavy size is less than ideal. Or if I need to carry it on my person. Or if I want to attach it to a vehicle dash. Or if I want to read for 3 or 4 hours in bed, in an armchair, a hammock, whatever.

And the 3.5" size is too small to be ideal for many usages.

Ergo midsize opportunity.

-Allen
And millions keep buying the iPad... What u see as awkward others seem to like. In fact, the iPad is the only reason the tablet market exists. It's not because of the tweeners.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 02:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
Of course.

The point is the form factor: size & weight. If I walk around all day using a tablet as a tool the large heavy size is less than ideal. Or if I need to carry it on my person. Or if I want to attach it to a vehicle dash. Or if I want to read for 3 or 4 hours in bed, in an armchair, a hammock, whatever.

And the 3.5" size is too small to be ideal for many usages.
None of that matches what you identified as a huge market opportunity earlier (which was a business niche consisting, mostly, of inventory management handhelds).
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 02:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
None of that matches what you identified as a huge market opportunity earlier (which was a business niche consisting, mostly, of inventory management handhelds).
At no point did I call it simply a business inventory management niche, even though the inventory management "niche" is huge, comprising pretty much all retail and all wholesale sellers worldwide.

Instead I have always considered the 4"-9" midsize usages to comprise a very broad market space. Previously I stated:
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post

GPS. Huge market: consumer and business. I actually tried this in my Yukon and even in a large SUV the ~10" display is just too big for dash mount. …"in your dash" as a market is big enough that it supports many GPS-specific hardware vendors already. Why should Apple not incidentally also serve that market? And auto makers are already building cars to suit idevice needs, why not make a size that the likes of GM, BMW, etc. could even build-in if they want to?

Ereading usage is one example that has been discussed here at length. Huge market: edu, consumer, business.

Belt pouches: The pouch point is about IMO very very important commercial/enterprise usages. Lots of people carry tools around in pouches now:
Engineers
Inspectors of all kinds
The construction trades
Equipment repair people
Firefighters
Cops
Project managers
Delivery people
Military
Security personnel

And new categories of pouch users as tablet apps develop:
Retail sales people (like at the Apple Stores)
Shoppers
Persistent readers
Inventory managers
Travelers
more from new tablet apps...

Imagine walking around for an 8-hour shift constantly entering data into such a device. The device is held in one hand and data is entered with the other. There are many usages in business and in edu that fit into this description, and not just inventory management.
I already referenced edu, which includes every lab and field research person on the planet, but I will add a similar huge carry-it-in-a-pouch usage: medical personnel from EMTs to nurses to docs.

One must be devoid of imagination to fail to see the viability/importance of the 4"-9" phone/tablet market space.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Apr 9, 2012 at 02:52 PM. )
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 03:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
What u see as awkward others seem to like.
Never have I dissed the 9.7" size; I use one and think it rocks. What I continually state (and you disagree) is that there is also a large, important, viable growing market for idevices in the range smaller than 9.7" and larger than 3.5" .

The next 18 months will prove one of us correct and one of us flat wrong.

-Allen
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 05:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
Never have I dissed the 9.7" size; I use one and think it rocks. What I continually state (and you disagree) is that there is also a large, important, viable growing market for idevices in the range smaller than 9.7" and larger than 3.5" .

The next 18 months will prove one of us correct and one of us flat wrong.

-Allen
Show me the data. The devices that are hitting, and have been hitting, and the only ones really hitting, and the only ones that are predicted based on past and current data and consumer spending to continue hitting, are the iPad and smartphones.

The devices that fit into your above 3.5" and below 9.7" will be the 3.5" - 4.25" smartphone. Anything bigger will struggle, and anything that calls itself a tablet will have to be much bigger, in the iPad range.

Expect Apple to not just do an aboutface on Jobs' tweener view and start playing into a dead category. What they'll do is make the iPad in its current size way better by continuing to improve every aspect of it. Until its super light, super thin, and trimmed down.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 09:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
Show me the data. The devices that are hitting, and have been hitting, and the only ones really hitting, and the only ones that are predicted based on past and current data and consumer spending to continue hitting, are the iPad and smartphones.
Well duh, the 3.5" and the 9.7" are the only sizes Apple has marketed. OF course those are the devices that are hitting. There was no device already "hitting" when Apple brought out the iPod or when they brought out the iPad.

Product success in a competitive space comes from seeing future opportunity and building for it.

Originally Posted by freudling View Post
Expect Apple to not just do an aboutface on Jobs' tweener view and start playing into a dead category.
Like I said earlier, one must be devoid of imagination to fail to see the upcoming viability/importance of the 4"-9" phone/tablet market space.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Apr 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM. )
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 09:59 PM
 
I keep saying "the 4"-9" phone/tablet market space" because as I look at usages that fit that space I see total overlap between what is a smartphone and what is a tablet. Already a 5" smartphone works ok as a platform for many midsize "tablet" usages, and when a business/uni/hospital puts a 5"-9" tablet in an employee's hands why not also facilitate full voice communication?

It seems likely to me that some of the devices we refer to as tablets should also have full smartphone capability available. Essentially the service plan would define what is a large smartphone versus what is a tablet. Is not an iPod Touch already a very mini-tablet?

Perhaps it is just semantics.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Apr 9, 2012 at 10:09 PM. )
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 10:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
Show me the data. The devices that are hitting, and have been hitting, and the only ones really hitting, and the only ones that are predicted based on past and current data and consumer spending to continue hitting, are the iPad and smartphones.

The devices that fit into your above 3.5" and below 9.7" will be the 3.5" - 4.25" smartphone. Anything bigger will struggle, and anything that calls itself a tablet will have to be much bigger, in the iPad range.

Expect Apple to not just do an aboutface on Jobs' tweener view and start playing into a dead category. What they'll do is make the iPad in its current size way better by continuing to improve every aspect of it. Until its super light, super thin, and trimmed down.
You do realize that, prior to the introduction of the iPad, *tablets* were considered a dead category? Had Apple followed the numbers at that time, they would never have developed a tablet *at all*.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2012, 10:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
What they'll do is make the iPad in its current size way better by continuing to improve every aspect of it. Until its super light, super thin, and trimmed down.
Are you certain? They seem to be making it heavier and bulkier (your words, not mine).
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2012, 12:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Are you certain? They seem to be making it heavier and bulkier (your words, not mine).
Yes, indeed they have made it heavier and bulkier. And it's really a shame. But Apple is about evolution and revolution. About making something better and better. I think without question based on Apple over the past 10 years and how far their products have progressed to be thinner and lighter... (iPod Touch, MacBook Air)... how Apple is all about mobile now... the iPad 4 will be thinner and lighter with the awesome Retina Display. But this time around... they just couldn't get it done. A bit early with the Retina Display. It is a bit disappointing.

A Post-Josian slip.

We were at the store yesterday checking out the Galaxy Tab 10.1. Wow. We picked it up and were blown away by how thin and light it is. We laughed at our tanking iPad 3s. Yes, it is a piece of shxt the Tab because Android hasn't progressed at all really. But at 1.24 lbs... not much difference over the iPad... it feels worlds lighter. Apple needs to take us into this territory weight wise and thickness wise.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2012, 08:06 AM
 
The only *real* reason I want to see Apple release a 7" iPad is to watch you rave about how amazing the 7" form-factor is, completely denying the entire "tweener" conversation.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2012, 10:04 AM
 
Don't see the point. Too big for a pocket, too small to be as good as an iPad, would cannibalise iPad sales.

Watch out for an Apple-branded chocolate kettle hitting stores soon.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2012, 12:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Don't see the point. Too big for a pocket, too small to be as good as an iPad, would cannibalise iPad sales.

Watch out for an Apple-branded chocolate kettle hitting stores soon.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 02:45 PM
 
Back to the discussion about the chips and process size, the new tv has a dual core chip on a 32nm process.

So it looks like they're trying out the process shrink on a lower volume chip where they can also take a 50% defect rate on the cores (since they're only using one) to improve yield. Sony used this same technique to improve Cell yields by only using 7 of the 8 SPUs.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 03:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Back to the discussion about the chips and process size, the new tv has a dual core chip on a 32nm process.

So it looks like they're trying out the process shrink on a lower volume chip where they can also take a 50% defect rate on the cores (since they're only using one) to improve yield. Sony used this same technique to improve Cell yields by only using 7 of the 8 SPUs.
Heh, so it looks like the iPhone 5 will likely be 32 nm, as of course will be the 2013 iPad.

A 45 nm A5X or A6 iPhone 5 would absolutely suck (lots of battery juice).
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 03:06 PM
 
Very cool idea.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 03:08 PM
 
Very common practice to deactivate a core actually. eg. Celeron.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 03:15 PM
 
Also the iPad 2 is now using the 32nm shrink, with both cores enabled. This makes more sense than planning on failing half of all cores.
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 09:57 PM
 
Isn't a half A5X just an A4 with 9 times the graphic power?
It would make more sense to disable GPU cores, as they take more gates than CPU cores.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2012, 10:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Also the iPad 2 is now using the 32nm shrink, with both cores enabled. This makes more sense than planning on failing half of all cores.
Hmm... Interesting. As for using the 32 nm dual-core A5, I was expecting the 5th generation iPod touch to get that. I didn't expect them to put it into a new iPad 2.

In fact, I still expect the new iPod touch to get the 32 nm A5. It will probably show up in later versions of the iPhone 4S too.

As for the iPhone 5, it's starting to look more like it's going to get a 32 nm A5X, although I was kinda dreaming for a 32 nm A6. Mind you, I may have to wait for another generation anyway, since my current contract isn't up until late 2013.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 12:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
Isn't a half A5X just an A4 with 9 times the graphic power?
It would make more sense to disable GPU cores, as they take more gates than CPU cores.
4-9x, depending on what metric you use.

It doesn't make sense to fab extra GPU cores, since they're so expensive (large area). I wonder if they're harvesting those too and only using one on the set top part.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 12, 2012, 06:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
Isn't a half A5X just an A4 with 9 times the graphic power?
It would make more sense to disable GPU cores, as they take more gates than CPU cores.
No, they use completely different CPU cores as well. The A5 uses dual out of order Cortex A9 cores, while the A4 uses an older in-order Cortex A8 core.

Personally I was always hoping for a big.LITTLE setup with A7+A15 cores, but the iPhone 5 may be too soon for that. Honestly, a dieshrunk A5 should be more than enough - they can turbo up the clockspeed of both CPU and GPU if they need more power.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 12:45 AM
 
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 11:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
So guys, how's the 7" tweener doing? Your prized Kindle Fire?
As long as you are trolling, I will bite:

• The discussion was not about how well any specific crap-pad would do. The discussion was about the rationality of Apple providing Apple-quality iDevice product variants larger than ~3.5" and smaller than ~9.75." Perhaps opportunity in larger sizes as well at some point.

• I for one continue to believe that such opportunity exists, and that Apple will provide such size variation in their iDevices. IMO it is virtually a given but you disagree; in any event time will prove one opinion wrong and the other right. We have argued the midsize debate to death.
--------------------------------
<< @ Admin: Please feel free to make this a new thread "Impact of Win8 Tablets" or some such thing if you think it would be more appropriate. -Allen >>

The discussion of more interest to me at this point is what impact Win 8 tablets coming in the next 6 months will have on the tablet space. Some discussion points:

- MS has failed in mobile for years. We still do not yet have Win 8 tablets on the street, and no doubt Q2 2013 we will have a newer version of the space-defining iPad.

- There are a zillion IT workers out there who historically have only thought Win and will try to drive their 80%-desktop-share enterprises toward MS. OTOH they are not all brain-dead, and iPads are entering enterprise at a good clip.

- MS has bet the farm on "full" Win capability to tablets, and many Win fanbois believe that to be a killer capability. I disagree.

- Personally I find tablets to be very good for mobile data input and and for mobile content usage. A ground-up tablet-specific OS like iOS works very well for those functions, but for full-content creation a full laptop/desktop setup is far, far more productive than a tablet. IMO folks are likely to only incidentally do full content creation on tablets, making designing OS and hardware around that capability a wrong direction.

- Personally I see huge (IMO untenable) overhead costs to having full Win apps capability on board, weighed against the value add of stagnant Win users being able to run their existing apps.

- Running existing apps as is may be a fatal flaw in MS tablet logic, because IMO what rocks the tablet space is new approaches. IMO porting the stagnant side of (shrinking but still dominant market share) Win desktop to tablets is short-term survival but long-term fail.

- The state of tablet hardware is such that Win tablets probably will not be able to both run legacy-type Win apps and also meet the performance expectations (battery, display, speed, etc.) set by the market-defining iPad. "Running existing apps" may turn out to be more MS hype than reality.

- The tablet space needs competition and in that regard I would like to see Win 8 tablets succeed. OTOH if the MS approach does succeed it will probably be by perpetuating corporate IT behaviors I consider to be limiting at best and unhealthy at worst.

My 02.

-Allen
( Last edited by SierraDragon; Jun 5, 2012 at 11:26 AM. )
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2012, 12:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
Your link doesn't cover the Kindle Fire shipment numbers.

RIM's tweener is up 233%.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 9, 2012, 04:12 PM
 
Wow, I didn't realize he had posted the same troll post in three different threads. I'll respond again here anyway though.

1. Amazon has now generated well over $1 billion in revenue off the 7" Kindle Fire alone. This is not counting media content or software downloads. This is just the hardware - far beyond my expectations. This is with a a tablet that doesn't even support Google Play, as it runs a hacked version of Android 2.3, which in 2012 is two generations out-of-date.

2. The Fire is definitely due for a refresh, with updated hardware, and an updated OS. Plus, they really have to rethink Silk. I suspect they will continue to push Silk though, because they stand to gain a lot of money from the data mining aspect of it. If so, they need to seriously improve the caching and response of their Silk servers. Judging by online reviews of Silk, they seem to be having the same issues that people are having with Siri on the iPhone 4S. (It seems Apple copied Amazon here with regards to the data mining aspect.) Luckily you can turn off Silk "accelerated" browsing.

3. The Kindle Fire has dropped from the second most popular tablet after the iPad, to third place now. However, 2nd place is now taken by Samsung's Galaxy Tab family. It should be noted that the Galaxy Tab family is comprised of several different tablets, including ones that are 7.0, 7.7, 8.9, and 10.1 inches in size. We don't know the individual model sales numbers since like Apple, Samsung doesn't give us that breakdown. However, I do know that according to Amazon's current sales rankings, the Galaxy Tab 2 7-inch model outsells the 10" model. Both models came out this spring. I suspect a lot of this has to do with cost though, since the 7 incher costs $249, and the 10" costs $399. This seems to validate the 7" form factor, whether it'd from cost savings or from improved portability, or whatever.

4. The Fire has an average user rating of 4/5, out of over 18000 reviews. Approximately 9900 5-star, 3500 4-star, 1800 3-star, 1200 2-star, and 1700 1-star. Not as good as the iPad 2, but still pretty decent.

I'm looking forward to getting a 7-8" Android tablet myself soon, with a resolution somewhere in the range of 1024x600 to 1280x800 or something like that. However, it must have at least an SD (or micro-SD) slot, with compatibility for NTFS and/or exFAT for support of video files over 4 GB, and decent bitrate 1080p MKV playback support. Ironically, the 1080p MKV playback is the easy part. Even el cheapo single-core tablets can do this, since the chipsets have good H.264 decode acceleration. The bigger problem is NTFS and exFAT support. It's inconsistent amongst Android devices. And the one I will buy will NOT be the Fire, even a future one, because I don't want to use Amazon's hacked Android OS, or be limited to Amazon's app store.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2012, 04:02 AM
 
I believe the Galaxy Tab is on third place.

Second place is the iPad 2.
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2012, 09:09 AM
 
#1 is iPad family (by a huge margin)
#2 is Galaxy Tab family
#3 is Kindle Fire

Neither Apple nor Samsung report the sales numbers of the individual models.
     
chabig
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2012, 11:42 AM
 
Neither Amazon nor Samsung report sales numbers at all!
     
Eug  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2012, 12:40 PM
 
Well, we have sales numbers published by IDC, but just for families of tablets. For the Fire there is only currently one model in the "family" though.

Total 17.4 million tablets in 2012 Q1.

Apple had a huge lead with 68% of the market. They sold 11.8 million, which is actually down significantly from the previous quarter, when they had 15.4 million (which is actually about 30% more than this quarter). Amazon captured only a little over 4% this quarter, with under 750000 units sold.
     
chabig
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2012, 01:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Well, we have sales numbers published by IDC...
Not to belabor the point, but IDC publishes sales guesses, or to put it more nicely--estimates--for Amazon and Samsung. They can't rightly be called sales numbers.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 10, 2012, 02:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by chabig View Post
Not to belabor the point, but IDC publishes sales guesses, or to put it more nicely--estimates--for Amazon and Samsung. They can't rightly be called sales numbers.
Indeed. I certainly hope it's not those guesses that freudling paid "hundreds of dollars" for and places all of his tablet faith in.


Originally Posted by freudling View Post
The report costs several hundred from the IDC and contains an array of granular numbers across all tablet form factors. You are not allowed to republish any of the data without their written permission. Go buy it yourself, get a clue, and come back here and see where you're at.
     
InnovativeConsulting
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 06:23 AM
 
All advance features with existing product and even price don't take a hike.... Great!!!
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2012, 04:12 PM
 
     
HealthBuffMe
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 4, 2012, 03:11 AM
 
Really a reason for upgrading but nevertheless if it is more user friendly, then I'm convinced. If it's the same price as the iPad2 then it is all worth it. The new iPad looks cool, maximizing every cent you've spent on the device itself, but I do have to find the best provider though coz it may not be that efficient if I end up with a sucky provider.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:22 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,