Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Buys Up Touch Panels Delaying RIM's Tablet Release
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
More importantly, Apple is supply constrained. The limiting factor as to how many units they can sell is how many screens they can get. The competition is consumer constrained. They can make all they need, but they can't find people to buy them.
I think there is more going on here with many of us Apple supporters. We have already watched Apple lose out to Microsoft in the 80's when Apple clearly had the better products. Thirty years later we still suffer through a Microsoft dominated world while Apple STILL has better products. Yes, we can buy Macs for home, but we go to the office and have to sit in front of MicroCrap software. You have to suspect that there will be a huge winner in this new market as well and we desperately want it to be Apple this time around! Will this mean that Apple will become the company that makes crappy products while the little guys create genius.....possibly.....but with decades of a pretty damn good track record.....our money is on Apple to continue to innovate no matter how much market share they own.
All Apple did was created a premium brand. Technology was cheap and affordable in the MP3 market. You could pick up an MP3 player for under a $100 bucks until Apple came into the market with its $300 dollar iPod.
Apple is not the competition, Apple is the trend setter.
And you still can buy MP3 players that are far cheaper than what Apple offers.
Apple did not come to dominate this market with cost competition. They did it by providing a better overall consumer experience. If you judge by specs, you'd buy a Sansa instead of an iPod. However Joe Consumer doesn't care about specs.
Ok, so if you know what a monopoly is, why are you ok with the word being used incorrectly? And the FTC still can't prosecute or investigate unless there is evidence of wrongdoing...based on the actual, legal definition of monopoly.
I don't get what you are trying to say. Is it that you know the legal definition of monopoly and anti-competetive, but you don't care because it looks like Apple has a monopoly, and think the FTC will investigate them based on how it feels?
Apple is a media darling, but how is it a government darling? Apple has been investigated in the past.
Apple can certainly do wrong in its customers eyes. It is currently screwing over is true Pro customers. They are being slow in adopting a few new technologies that would leapfrog them (VFS, resolution independence). Many customers complain about the price (although Apple rarely lowers them, a hike is even more rare). Apple is currently straddling a position where they must cater to their growing casual users and their pro customers. And they are generally picking the casual, but also transitioning the Pros. For example, the new MacPros are a huge ripoff unless you go big...but you can get an iMac for a fraction of the price thats faster/equal to the low end MP.
There are many people here who like to say Apple only acts in its own best interest, and not for customers interests, etc etc. Please name ONE example where they acted solely in their own self interest to the detriment of customers. This does not count simple business decisions (like discontinuing Xserve since it wasn't selling well). Many of their decisions have explanations or alternative solutions...but then, that would make me a fanboy if I explained it I suppose. Apple is no angel but it is certainly no devil, and it is far more competent than most tech companies.
There are Apple fans out there, but also people who choose them simply because they like it better. If someone is an Android/Windows fan thats fine. I don't complain about any of their products, business decisions. or saturation of business as unfair. Mostly, because I frankly don't care; they haven't offered a product I have been interested in since college. I'm sure HTC and Samsung make quality gear, but there is no buzz around them. Its not because Apple pays people. Its because people, especially creative and non-computer saavy people (which means most of the population and opinion leaders) like using Apple products. If you think that automatically means the product sucks, then I can't help you.
In general, if Apple is so bad and its followers so stupid, then how come they are crushing in the tablet and music market, leading the phone market (in design, mindshare, and media coverage), and coveted in the laptop market (running the most profitable customers and setting the standard for design and quality)?
Its called results, or, figuring out what customers want from their computers.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
If you find it cute, why is it unfortunate? Or were you just trying to be condescending?
I've seen no evidence that MOST posters think Apple ALWAYS acts in the best interest of its customers. Apple generally tries to keeps its customers happy, though, as do all (successful) companies.
Ehh, purposeful or not (as a sabotage)...not good news for iPad competition
Uh, no they don't. Where was the 'constant pressure' when they released the iPad? The iPhone? The iPod? Apple has released its most revolutionary products in markets with mediocre products, and have essentially created new markets with their products, which when released were not in competition with anything. Apple functions independently from 'competition'- They're not a reactive company. Your assertion has absolutely no historical evidence.
Seriously? A company with 2 CEO's and 3 COO's is not well structured or well managed. A company who has just downgraded earning expectations for the coming quarter is not well managed. A company whose stock price has crashed by more than 50 % in the last 18 months and is hoping that a new product that has been announced over 8 months ago, yet appears to be rushed to market and as it relies on another product to give it 3G connectivity has neither a product nor is a company with vision.
Some of you people are ****ing hilarious, and heinously hypocritical.
The same people who bash (and are still bashing) Apple for not having enough iPad2 supply (to satiate an absolutely insane demand), calling it some sort of conspiracy to create demand, are the same people now bashing Apple for procuring and guaranteeing these components ahead of time, which inevitably has had a negative effect on companies.
What the hell do you people want? Apple will clearly sell every damn iPad2 they produce, and they'll do what they need to do to produce as much as they can. Having a ton of cash reserves, and the foresight to pay for these compoenents in advance makes them an effective, and intelligent company, not monopolistic. Should Apple shoot itself in the face to please its competitors? Should any company? Unbelievable.
The same people who bash (and are still bashing) Apple for not having enough iPad2 supply (to satiate an absolutely insane demand), calling it some sort of conspiracy to create demand, are the same people now bashing Apple for procuring and guaranteeing these components ahead of time, which inevitably has had a negative effect on companies.
What the hell do you people want? Apple will clearly sell every damn iPad2 they produce, and they'll do what they need to do to produce as much as they can. Having a ton of cash reserves, and the foresight to pay for these compoenents in advance makes them an effective, and intelligent company, not monopolistic. Should Apple shoot itself in the face to please its competitors? Should any company? Unbelievable.
Last edited:
If that....
LOLOLOLOL....
Maybe they can buy some broken iPads and take the screen out and cut them down to size...
A lot of the comments on this thread is about competition. How Apple is stiffling the competion by scooping up all of the important parts, thus leaving nothing for the other OEMs.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
I can say CONFIDENTLY that the war is NOT over. It's been what 2 years? No way. Apple may have the upper hand in the battle but has NOT won the war.
What I'm saying is that by the time Android or WebOS or QNX catch up to the iPad, Apple will already be onto the next big thing. Tablets will have peaked, and the weak players will have dropped out.
So instead of following Apple and forever having your products known as iPad killers, why not spend the money that you'd put into designing mediocre tablets into creating the next device? I'm sure that Sammy, Moto, RIM, etc all have some budget to develop the next generation of devices, but I think they need to spend a lot more on the R&D.
For instance, when netbooks were all the rage, everyone was demanding that Apple come up with their own netbook. For whatever reason, Apple wasn't (and still isn't) in the netbook market. Instead, they spent their energies (and money) developing the successor to the netbook. In hindsight, we should have all seen it coming. Jobs even said that Apple couldn't make a decent 'computer' for less than $500. Apple was busy creating the iPad to be that device that folks would shell out $500 for. Genius.
So instead of waging a long, drawn out war against Apple for a small slice of the tablet market, work on making the successor to the tablet.
Is this a joke? It's a freaking tablet not medicine or baby supplies. How the fudge do they buy their way to the top? Do they coerce customers to buy them? WOW. REALLY?
If the lamebook or whatever the heck was that hot RIM would have no problem finding production.
Yes, the war just started and things are heating up. I would think the next few years will result in a tablet OS distribution that looks like this:
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
The point I'm making is that the hot market only seems to be lasting 4 to 5 years. 10 years ago, MP3 players was the hot market. 5 years ago, smartphones was the hot market. This year, it's tablets. 5 years from now ... who knows, but it won't be tablets.
basically, is sounds like one company secured their order in advance and with deposit; and the other company, who wasn't sure how well their product will sell, is buying panels at the last minute.
If you leave a deposit and give advance orders to suppliers, they will definitely _build you the capacity_ to meet your demands. If not, you take your chances... and if you want jump to the front of the queue, it'll cost you a premium.
P.
If you leave a deposit and give advance orders to suppliers, they will definitely _build you the capacity_ to meet your demands. If not, you take your chances... and if you want jump to the front of the queue, it'll cost you a premium.
P.
I actually thought you meant they should have an option to not have discrete graphics. I also thought the new 13" MBP had them. You are correct. The 13" should have them. I think they should be standard though, not an option.
How is the iPad going bad, the new one is incredible, the first gen still rocks for most things. Retina is coming we all can assume that the next jump will be even bigger and Retina as well as way better cameras are in the works.
Competition is good, but considering what I have seen there is no competition just companies throwing money behind half baked scheme hoping something will stick.
Sure I like a bit more control with the UI but you can't have it all.