What If the Tablet is Just An Apple Phenomenon?
Have we ever considered the likelihood that plain iPad copies can't be successful and are doomed to fail, no matter how good they are?
Apparently, executives at other companies did not, but there is a really good chance that a panicking PC industry is chasing money that does not exist.
I have to apologize to some of my friends in the analyst community for heavily criticizing them in this post and the fact that forecasting new record numbers of tablet sales will grab headlines. Instead of telling you that the tablet industry will sell 389 superzillion tablets by 2015, I am predicting (pin me down on that) that no manufacturer other than Apple will achieve substantial tablet sales numbers within the foreseeable time.
Let's look at the facts so far. There was the Galaxy Tab and the Motorola Xoom, which were put in direct competition to the iPad and both bombed, despite an attractive feature set. We will soon get a new Tab and soon the Blackberry Playbook. The Playbook has an interesting opportunity due to its Blackberry platform, but it is unlikely to create the kind of waiting lines Apple is used to. Let's give the Playbook a shot, but if it flops as well, how many more failures do we need until we figure out that there is something inherently wrong with the concept of copying the iPad?
Concept
On that note, let's talk about concepts for a moment. If there is something that Apple does incredibly well it is product research and listening when it is important. It's a talent to know when you need to listen and when know that you can ignore what is being said. I actually don't believe that Steve Jobs is the kind of universal genius he is described as. He knows what he does very well and focuses on that: For countless times we have seen that Apple does not come up with its own ideas - they take great ideas that result in flawed products, improve the based on the desires of his customers and then go out and sell them. That has been the case with the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad (which is really a massively improved idea of the netbook that was originally marketed as a web surfing device.)
The iPad was not really Apple's idea. The idea came from Alan Kay, who told Steve Jobs that he needs to build a larger version of the iPhone as a computing device to rule the world. Many of the features of the iPad have been described in Kay's 1972 Dynabook concept, which Jobs undoubtedly studied and used to create a version of the iPad that would fit the Apple user and ecosystem. Since there is no company in this world that knows its customers better than Apple, Jobs and his team have a unique ability to tailor any product closely to the desires of prospective buyers.
Improvement
For several years, Apple has taught its rivals how you can use flawed products, improve them to a degree that makes them superior to anything else in its category and sweep the market. Apple did not invent the MP3 player, but it did its homework to find out what people really were looking for. Did Apple invent the smartphone? Of course not. But it redefined the segment with a device that was something people immediately wanted to buy. It appears that Apple's rivals believe they can reverse-engineer this strategy and do the same to Apple. However, they are dealing with extremely successful products, not flawed products, in the hope that they can ride the wave with Apple.
Improving and copying requires a talent that Apple has: Listening. In what way did Motorola listen to Kay or Apple when it created the Xoom? It appears that they simply created something that looks like an iPad, but has a few added features and ignores everything else. An example: The average iPad sells for $628 and there are six options to choose from, and nine if you count the different provider networks. The Xoom has only one version and is priced completely out of the market at $799. There are tablet manufacturers that believe that there is a market for 7-inch tablets, while Steve Jobs repeatedly said that Apple's research indicates that 10-inch is the sweet spot of the market. Now, seriously: Are traditional PC and smartphone manufacturers releasing intentionally bad iPad copies? If they wanted to copy the iPad, why don't they exactly copy it, up the specs a bit and get less greedy on the price?
Good copies, bad copies
Can there be a good copy of the iPad? Sure, on the surface, there can be good copies. But would they matter? Perhaps this entire tablet market is created based on Apple sales performance and the vision that the overall IT market will merge with the Apple distortion field into a an environment where you and I will go out and buy tablets at an obscene rate. If we look at the current executive firings at large It companies, firings that are largely based on missed smartphone and tablet opportunities, you can only shake your head in disbelief. Is there any reason to believe that anyone will be able to sell at a rate Apple can. I haven't seen one credible reason yet.
In the end, every tablet that follows the idea of Apple's tablet will be a bad copy and I there are plenty of signs that every effort to bring out a Q&D tablet will be waste of time and money. If you are chasing a market that does not exist, why try to satisfy your own desire to be like Apple and risk the future of your company? Apple has had an amazing run, but it wasn't always like that. Apple did not listen to shareholders and its stock price when it created the amazing product line it has today. Apple could have built a netbook in 2008 or 2009, but resisted the trend, because it was convinced that its customers would not buy such a device. A tablet was a much better fit. In that view, the tablet was an evolutionary concept of the netbook and therefore a good copy of the netbook idea.
The bottom line is that the mistake companies are making is in principle: rushing to make tablets so they could "cash in" on the iPad's success. The right thing to do was to come up with a brand new way to approach tablets by creating the killer UI, just like the "killer app." Unfortunately for these companies, Apple did it first.
Innovation
As good as Android and Windows 8 may be, it will take a visionary and the willingness to accept risk to compete with Apple. Building what already exists in the market will mean that you are always a step behind what really matters. What happened to the idea that innovation is the ability to envision evolving computing ideas, three, five and ten years down the road? We don't need iPad copies. We need the next thing after the iPad.
Of course, the next big thing for Apple may not be the next big thing for HP, Motorola or Acer. However, here is a thought: If we simply go back to Alan Kay's thoughts about the Dynabook and its envisioned features, which would include a capability for consumers to quickly customize the software on the device and even easily create software, then there is a good chance that the iPad is simply a transitioning device to something much bigger - and something entirely different that may work for the general PC industry (and not for Apple). Such a device would have to recognize the platform it is running on and exactly cater to prospective buyers.
I wonder how long it will take until we learn that Apple's success may not be able to be translated into success for everyone else.
- Android Leader Says That Android is Still Open
- News Anchor Tricked Into Licking iPad for Taste
- Old Lady Hacks Off Armenia's Internet with Shovel
- Google to Add Original 'Channels' to YouTube
- LG's Dual-core G2X Launching April 15
- WiFi-only Galaxy Tab Launching Sunday for $350
- Google Working on Chrome OS for Tablets Too
- Firefox 5 Scheduled for June 21
- Dell Now Grows Its Packaging
- TWC Taking Viacom To Court Over iPad App
- Best Buy Refusing iPad 2 Sales on Purpose
- Sony PSP Outsells the Nintendo 3DS in Japan
- U.S. Will Issue Terrorism Alerts via Twitter
- Student Makes $50,000 Jailbreaking iPhones
- Why You Get Phished
- Navy Tests First Laser Defense Weapons System
- Pre-Order Acer's Windows 7 Tablet for $549
- Acer's Honeycomb Tablet Cheaper Than iPad 2
- Did Google Purchase PushLife for Google Music?
Personally, I'm holding out for ocular implant computing devices.
I think the ASUS Eee Pad Transformer/slider could do well, i know im going to buy one.
Of course Apple didn't come up with the idea of the iPad: similar devices have appeared in the Star Trek universe since 1987, they were even called PADDs.
I also believe that for Apple marketing and image are just as important, or even more so, than the actual features of a product. A company that really listens to the customer would include USB ports for example. Not including a USB port would kill off a product instantly unless it's made by Apple because Apple is a brand with an image.
this is a copy from another article, but what i wrote there is the as good here too, sorry if this is against he rules, but my point is valid in both articles.
tablets as they are now, over sized cellphones, WILL DIE.
when a real os, like windows or osx (sorry linux, you are good, but not for normal business world) and basicly function like a computer for when you arent at a computer, or better yet, a pc monitor that you dock into a keyboard, than take with you when you are done. when that happens, you will see a large segment of the pc market swich over.
for a total switch over though, the pc market needs to be so fast that even if the hardware is 8-16 times slower, you are only talking about second or two difference. it would be the difference between crysis at 300fps or 40fps, both framerates are VERY playable, but the 300 is nicer than the 40.
when pcs get that powerful, (they arent) i can see a vast majority caring more about style than function, or more along the lines of portability over function.
i can tell you if my pc was ultya portable like a tablet, it wouldnt leave my side.
iPad copies are doomed to fail because they are trying to be just that - copies, nothing original or better about them. Of course they will fail; even if your hyundai looks like a mercedes, it's still a Hyundai. Same psychology applies here.
OTOH, tablets that are capitalizing on the iPad's failures will succeed, mainly because they are addressing the intelligent populace that is capable of looking beyond the emblem on the device and seeing it for what it is: a flawed/limited hardware with an even more limited OS. These devices will sell, albeit not as much as an ipad. The ratio will pretty much reflect the intelligence distribution/ratio in the average population (the majority average will pick the average ipad, the rest... see above).
The tablet was an invented market of Apple. I say invented, but I guess a closer term would be vaporware, basically a useless or very limited device that they market as a must have, and due to thier fan base, they sell a ton of them regardless of the limited functionality. A solid netbook does more even with its limited functionality, throw in a swivle screen, and you have a tablet on steroids.
Reminds me of the old Sony parady about people buy random electronics and have no idea what they do.
ttablets as they are now, over sized cellphones, WILL DIE.
I think you are wrong for the majority of the population. For us true geeks the desktop will be the only type of valid computing, but for the general consumer who only want iApp and Internet capabilities, the portable is all they need. They don't give a hoot about processor speed or fps, they just want their social network to be in place.
Oh you mean is the "Tablet" just a fad that will go away in 2 years because you can buy laptops with more functionality and its cheaper?
The tablet was an invented market of Apple. I say invented, but I guess a closer term would be vaporware, basically a useless or very limited device that they market as a must have, and due to thier fan base, they sell a ton of them regardless of the limited functionality. A solid netbook does more even with its limited functionality, throw in a swivle screen, and you have a tablet on steroids.Reminds me of the old Sony parady about people buy random electronics and have no idea what they do.
For a techie.. Sure, the iPad could be considered limited.. However to the common population, the iPad is very robust in what it offers, and can do. And as such, it's apparent they are building the iPad, and structuring it, based on them, and not techies. Also, techies, in my experience, are unbelievably fickle, and penny pinching. It's always a battle to figure out what is more important to them.. Function or Price. And on top of that.. Alot of things they love.. are never accepted by the general population.. which is something I think Apple realizes extremely well. They realize the money is in the Masses.. Not a group of elitist techies.
Now me, personally, I consider myself more of a function-oriented techie.. as price means very little to me.. However, the iPad, offers everything that I wanted out of a tablet, and looks amazing.. So I bought it. Zero regrets, even if the Xoom, or any other tablet can do more.
Where do they get these writers? this is the biggest pile of drivel i've read on Toms yet. The ipad is not the Ark of the Covenant it can and will successfully be copied at a much lower price point and THAT is where all the other companies shine, by providing a good product at a much lower price point. I myself will be purchasing one once they get at or below the $249 price point which is an inevitability.
Give me a tablet with a real OS, not a dumbed down speak & spell, and I will buy it.
Once a video is running full screen it is doing it's job, but I want to be able to do actual computing on it as well.
BEST ARTICLE YET....
Wolfgang Gruener I applaud you with such a realistic thought process to this whole Ipad Tablet mania. I completely agree with you that this rush to the market with tablet copies is something that will in my opinion either bankrupt companies or severely hinder them. The Ipad, Iphone, & Ipod all have been innovative and offer a great deal of product integration between all their offerings. These tablet clones just cant offer the same end user experience as the Ipad has shown to offer.
Mark my words, this trend will go the way of the dinosaurs and be something that is no longer in the spotlight in a few years. Companies trying to dive into this market will realize they just dove into the shallow end of the pool.
I think the article has some good points.
On the other hand, Apple-critical comments like vaporware, fan base, flawed, etc. ... let's get real; Apple hit the ball out of the park when no one else could even pick up a bat !!!
CTT is very wrong about "a solid netbook does more". The fault of a netbook is that it's trying to run a full mainstream OS. That alone makes is very slow and inefficient, but on top of that throw in a tiny screen and a tiny keyboard and you have youself a product that apeals to a very small market. Think of tablet latptops from Toshiba and such. How much of a success did they have.
What iPad offers is vastly different. It offers easy of use to people with zero computer knowledge. Think your grandma checking out your latest vacation pictures that you posted on the internet.
Think of your grandma sending you a letter, except with a device as intuitive to use by a non geek a an iPad, she can actually send you an email!
What iPad does is takes the task that most of the people do on the internet (surf, email, IM) and made them super easy on a lightweight device that's effortless to carry around (if you must).
One could argue that you could setup a cheap PC at home for your granny and tell her to double click here and there to do this and that. That will eventually fail. The computer will get bogged down with udpates, malware, viruses, wrong clicks, etc.
iPad in contast is ready to use out of the box and has a predictable UI that if you must you can walk a person through. Remember that if you say that you can walk your granny through opening a web browser or starting up an email client, you might be actually at least an intermediate computer user and know your way around.
In a nut shell, iPad captured the market that was always there: computer experience to those that find a full blown OS a drag to learn
Wow, you must really be an Apple lover. I am confused how you can say that the Xoom is dead when has not even been launched in many areas yet, and the $799 price that you suggest is about $150 high. My research has the Xoom coming in at the same price as an iPad2. iPad may have multiple versions but that is partialy because they do not have a memory card option - Xoom does. A primary reason that Apple has line ups is the way that they release their product. They control the supply so you havve to line up to get it. It is no different then the lastest Xbox game, control the supply and you will get line ups. I believe that there is a real strong market for tablets and as soon as the Xoom is in my area I will be heading out to get one. Not lining up mind you just picking one up.
WOW...
The FANDROIDS have come out in full force today!
Back... Back to your parents basement. Back away from society you dirty FANDROID
Every women needs an iPad (ooooohhh
The place to beat Apple is on price. And apple can totally be smaked on price, I don't know why Samsung chose not to.
Example, the Color Nook from B and N. They've sold 3 M units since November - not shabby - and they cost half what the Ipad costs. No cell contract, and convertible into a respectable Eclair or Froyo tab.
Excellent build quality, fullscreen touch, IPS display, and if B and N decides to actually support them with a staffed helpdesk, they really could be a very nice dominator of the 7" tablet space.
Yeah, these Toms Guide articles don't seem as focused on technology anymore. In fact Tomshardware has successfully transformed itself into a Google/Android stooge, complete with a whole host of angry Droidtards raging against every successful iProduct currently on the market.
Tablets are dying. Yeah, thats why every major hardware manufacturer is preparing to launch the next iPad killer. So now this ridiculous Tom's Guide article reports the demise of the tablet. Wow, way to reach. I guess you didn't get the IDF memo that predicts explosive growth in the tablet market in the next year.
How about this. Perhaps Android just isn't as functional, stable, secure, or open as people think it to be? Perhaps Android simply sucks as an operating system...
Lets wait to see a decent competitor come out first. Xoom is a rush job. Nook color seems to be doing fine. Find the right pricepoint and let it be moddable
Honestly I think the enterprise is going to heavy-hand the decision on this. Enterprise didn't openly adopt the netbook in droves because it wasnt convenient enough, or fast enough to be efficient. Now netbooks might be fast enough to meet needs but it's too late. The line between a netbook and a full blown laptop are starting to blur and tablets are beginning the true "third device" as Steve Jobs wanted.
I hate Mac OS. I despise iTunes. But I also happen to own an iPhone 4 and a first gen iPad (currently posting this with it right now.) I understand the need for simplicity and efficiency. Android is not simple or stable enough for me to use in my job. I also cant trust a business model that relies on someone else's software to power their hardware. They have no incentive to moving major updates out to me, they make money on selling hardware.
I'm a senior server administrator and I find that with a small array of apps and web interfaces, I can control and monitor my systems and make myself a more efficient manager. Sure, I could use a netbook or laptop to do this, but the iPad is more convenient. iOS is also more stable, in my personal experience, than android. That's why I've made the choice to stick with Apple and why I think that tablets are going to be a part of our lives like netbooks couldn't.
I don't understand the concept behind making a Tablet that costs MORE than the iPad. The point of Apple is that you pay for the little logo on the back. You pay for the sleek lines of the product and smooth graphics of the OS. You do NOT pay for the hardware. If you cannot create a cheaper tablet, you will not compete with the iPad, simple as that.
When Joe Schmoe walks into a store and asks for an iPad, he pretty much wants an iPad (even if he doesn't know what "tablet" means). Your only hope to convince him to buy something else is going to be price. "Have you considered a Motorolla Xoom, it has similar hardware specs, runs Android (so it has hundreds of thousands of apps Too!), and its $150 cheaper!". THAT might be convincing, but saying the exact same thing, except that its $150 MORE, and you'll never make that sale.
You know how grocery store generics work? They work on the advertising of name brands, and their own lower price. "I want Kraft Mac and Cheese (R)!" says your little kid. But you get to the store, and generic "Macaroni and Cheese" is half the price. Unless your kid is in the kitchen with you, they won't know the difference, so save yourself that money.
It's the same with technology. Most people wouldn't know the difference. Windows versus Apple versus Android? I would like to see stripped-down versions of the OSes go head to head. No Apple Logos, no Windows logos, etc... No IE and Safari, just Firefox or Opera. Put generic buttons on there, and see just how many people can tell you which is which. I'm guessing much of the population couldn't tell you the difference. If it browses the web, takes pictures, edits documents, lets them update Facebook and play Angry Birds, it's a "computer", and that's all they care about.
I think the only company that can beat the ipad is Microsoft. Window Mobile 7 interface a thing of beauty. If they can use that interface on a tablet and don't allow the manufacturers and service providers to put there own junk on it like Andriod has allowed as well has cost $$$ less then they will surpass apple. Consumers want simplicity which is why AOL is still around after all these years and Apple is the AOL of computing world.
Someone will eventually make a more popular product but it won't do it with TECH. The Apple wins because it is a social product. Go to a high school. Look at what the kids are using. Kids don't buy something because of the specs. Kids buy stuff based on what is socially acceptable. Also I notice that most kids hate having to work at something. So once they have learned the Apple OS.... well then getting them to use another product because very difficult.
A prime example. I teach high school. I gave a kid some brand new speakers that I had no use for. I found the speakers later in the day in the trash. I asked him what was wrong with the speakers. His response, "Could not plug them into my Ipod." These speakers required the now apparently obsolete amplifier wire/jack..... And so it goes.
Kids aren't the entire market of course, but there was a reason that cigarette companies and beer companies spent so much money on kids. It wasn't because kids spent a ton of money on those products, but rather that once they were hooked they would use the same brand for life.
So to combat Apple another company needs to take a social approach. They need to have an image, make it cool, package, make it easy to use, have an app store, only a cooler app store, and then they can take on Apple. Until then,.... Forget About it.
BEST ARTICLE YET....Wolfgang Gruener I applaud you with such a realistic thought process to this whole Ipad Tablet mania. I completely agree with you that this rush to the market with tablet copies is something that will in my opinion either bankrupt companies or severely hinder them. The Ipad, Iphone, & Ipod all have been innovative and offer a great deal of product integration between all their offerings. These tablet clones just cant offer the same end user experience as the Ipad has shown to offer. Mark my words, this trend will go the way of the dinosaurs and be something that is no longer in the spotlight in a few years. Companies trying to dive into this market will realize they just dove into the shallow end of the pool.
The iPad, iPhone and iPod have never been innovative. Apple picked up technologies and ideas that already existed to make them.
I'm pretty sure you just nailed a very valid point in this article. Other companies trying to copy an improved architecture/idea which is an improvement of a flopped architecture/idea doesn't work. Being one step behind is 100x better than being 2 steps behind.
Yeah, these Toms Guide articles don't seem as focused on technology anymore. In fact Tomshardware has successfully transformed itself into a Google/Android stooge, complete with a whole host of angry Droidtards raging against every successful iProduct currently on the market.Tablets are dying. Yeah, thats why every major hardware manufacturer is preparing to launch the next iPad killer. So now this ridiculous Tom's Guide article reports the demise of the tablet. Wow, way to reach. I guess you didn't get the IDF memo that predicts explosive growth in the tablet market in the next year. How about this. Perhaps Android just isn't as functional, stable, secure, or open as people think it to be? Perhaps Android simply sucks as an operating system...
Did you even read the article? Because the author is saying that perhaps only Apple will succeed in the tablet market. The author didn't bash Apple in any way, in fact it's views appear to be Pro-Apple.
asus ep121 windows 7, i5 processor SSD drive. Works for me and Zbrush, photoshop and league of legends.
Android and Ipads are just novelty toys, like nerf guns...about as useful too.
If i remember right Apple actually said they did not want to enter the netbook market as they could not make an Apple product(small laptop) at that price point.
Nothing will ever be as "magical" as the iPad. LOL
Really, I am waiting for my Windows 8 ARM tablet with baited breath, and may get myself a Honeycomb to tide the time!
But I wouldn't go anywhere after the Drip Feeders Apple!