Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nokia has had a lot of success with its own tablet line-up since they introduced them in Europe if not in North America. The N810 was especially a good seller. Archos probably sold quite a few units. Remember, this is a world wide study, it's not american centric.

Not to mention the numbers on the iPad, what were they in Q3 ? 4.2 million units according to this IDC article. That means that the competition would have had to ship about 600,000 units to get that 13%, which is not a whole lot.

So all in all, this is much more indicative of the very narrow category IDC made up and the very small niche that tablets still represent.

Ah, guess I forgot Q4 number wouldn't be included in that. I would agree it wouldn't be difficult to chalk up in channel sales of those tablets to reach 13%.

However I would expect the numbers that will include the holiday season to

A) triple the size of the market...or more...
B) Land Apple to closer to 92-93% in that narrowly framed number.
 
Last edited:
How did they define "Media Tablet"?

Did the include all the previous (failed) Windows Tablets or Netbooks?

In my opinion, the iPad created a new class of devices (which everyone outside of apple labeled a DOA before the launch). After the success, other companies just started creating competing devices. Kind of obvious that in that case the iPad is the leader during the first year (since it was for most part of the year the only device in the category) .... but hell, I love my iPad and wouldn't want to trade it for anything else. It's not a replacement for any laptop or netbook, it is something new.

If you paid attention to the article, then you'd see that they did differentiate from the old Windows tablets and netbooks; in other words, they agreed with you that the iPad (and equivalents) were a new class of computer.

So what's your beef?
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.1; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRH78) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

The amount of people that ask if my Galaxy Tab "is an iPad" tells me that the iPhad has a lot of mind share as well as a lot of market share.

Apple have done fantastically with the thing IMO.

Hope it does not go the Kleenex way where many (at least younger people) are sometimes 'shocked' when they hear that this is a brand name and not the 'product class' .... Good if you make yourself a name like that, but if people no longer buy it because of the name since it became 'generic'. But currently it seems that 'iPad' is used by many to describe this class of devices (will probably change once there is more competition)
 
However I would expect the numbers that will include the holiday season to

A) triple the size of the market...or more...
B) Land Apple to closer to 92-93% in that narrowly framed number.

Actually, Q4 brought 2 interesting changes to IDC's category :

1) The Dell Streak 5" Android device.
2) Galaxy tab.

Samsung is claiming over a million units ship. Dell probably has good numbers as they have been shipping the Streak to the UK, the US (AT&T) and Canada (Rogers). Of course this won't drastically lower Apple's share because both of those devices saw limited marketing compared to the iPad, but as more and more players get into the market, we'll see Apple taking a more realistic share in 2011.
 
As someone here once said, THERE IS A MARKET FOR THE iPAD.

There isn't so big a market for the pads other people are making.
Every naysayer-negativo-naybob never realized that most all people don't need a portable device to DO EVERYTHING EVER MADE IN THE UNIVERSE.
They want a good battery life, slim, touch screen, browser/mail/music/video/office productivity/document machine, and they got it from one maker.

I'm surprised it wasn't above 90%.
 
Pathetic when you consider it's pretty much the only tablet....

Unless you're considering Windows Tablet PC's, which everyone seems to forget... can someone explain?

I think you pretty much "hit the nail on the head" and answered your own question.

forgettable
If either of you had paid attention to the article, the previous Windows tablets were exempted from the class as they used a desktop OS and not a mobile one. Even so, the fact that the media tablets took off the way they did simply proves that the desktop OS does not belong on a tablet device.
Then again, if the older tablets had amassed a supply of true tablet-style apps, maybe they would have done better from the outset.

Shhh your logic and truth is not allowed to ruin this thread
Logic and truth aside, 'down' does not necessarily mean 'out'. Apple could lose a lot of market share and still come out on top this year. The quality of the competion--combined with the pricing--will show how things stabilize in the future. It took Apple three years to stabilize the iPod market at 70%, the iPhone still hasn't stabilized and quite honestly Android is still too volatile to let it. I give Android at least one more year on the market before we'll have an idea of where things will settle on smart phones. 'Media Tablets' will probably take just as long to stabilize.



That is kind of my thought on it. Being at less than 90% when you are pretty much the only game in town is rather sad.

Either way we know one thing. The iPad's market share is going to start dropping quickly.
Dropping, yes. Quickly? we'll just have to see. When you figure that Apple sold 4.5 million iPads during the holiday quarter while the Samsung Galaxy Tab sold 1.5 million during the same period shows Apple at just short of 70% for the last quarter; the Android tabs from Dell and elsewhere barely made a dent. This is also during a quarter that a lot of pundits said would hurt iPad's sales due to the pending announcement of the second version. That said, I can't see how you say less than 90% for the year is even close to sad. Take away that last quarter, and the number would have been far closer to 99%.
 
Actually, Q4 brought 2 interesting changes to IDC's category :

1) The Dell Streak 5" Android device.
2) Galaxy tab.

Samsung is claiming over a million units ship. Dell probably has good numbers as they have been shipping the Streak to the UK, the US (AT&T) and Canada (Rogers). Of course this won't drastically lower Apple's share because both of those devices saw limited marketing compared to the iPad, but as more and more players get into the market, we'll see Apple taking a more realistic share in 2011.

I assume you have no opposition to the change in size of the market I guessed at, so we must be talking about my 2nd point.

How many different terms are we using to define this segment..

Shipped to various outlets, actually sold to users, etc...

Is everyone using the shipped to outlets numbers?

I wont hide that the Dell streak number sounds fairly outrageous to me, and that even if the shipped number is 1 million it will likely take a good portion of 2011 to actually sell the devices, and even then with the help of some heavy price cutting in the face of whats on the horizon this year.

I would imagine that if everyone is using the shipped numbers that you could say with a fair amount of confidence that the % actaully sold to consumers or just ones in the hands of users is much lower with the Streak and Galaxy than the ipad.

but as more and more players get into the market, we'll see Apple taking a more realistic share in 2011.

I 100% agree. There seem to be some very credible entries in 2011. I would not put the Streak or Galaxy tab into that category.
 
..., but as more and more players get into the market, we'll see Apple taking a more realistic share in 2011.

Agree... they can't/won't compete on price forever, and hardware or software features can and eventually will be copied. When the market widens they'll be strong in the US/Europe, etc; but the worldwide marketshare will erode, when the really cheapo tabs come out. (same thing happened with cell phones, walkmans, and CD players)

The only way they keep their dominance is to keep their ecosystem dominant and main a strong grip on media distribution (like they did with mp3 players).


P.
 
I agree...I like the iPad 1.0 but don't love it enough to spend $500 on it...or even $400 on it.

I think more and more people will see Apple's closed-loop system mentality (Mac OS can only be run on Mac hardware, iTunes, App Store, etc) as a lock-in. A lot of people don't like to be locked in and thus forced to pay 1 company for everything (hardware, apps, OS, music, tv shows, movies, etc).

I'm not hating on Apple or the iPad, just pointing out that the more Apple grows and creates these closed-loop systems that Apple "approves", the more annoyed people will get to have to pay the piper.

I think that if people were fed up with the "walled garden" approach that Apple takes, they would not be so successful. I, like many people, love Apple products BECAUSE they are so well integrated between applications, hardware, and services. I go on my parents' PC and they've got a photo program made by Sony, a movie program made by Panasonic, etc. Of course, none of them talk to each other and they all have different UIs. There are huge benefits to having an integrated system designed by one company. I'm a tech guy (former computer teacher), so I'm not bad on computers - but even I appreciate the ease of use, transferability, and common UI elements between all of the different applications that I use. I can still get my music from Amazon, watch streaming video on Netflix, and other non-Apple sources.

I do agree that I wasn't too excited about the first-gen iPad. I'm getting more and more intrigued though, and am seriously considering picking up the second-gen when it debuts.
 
A lot of people don't like to be locked in and thus forced to pay 1 company for everything (hardware, apps, OS, music, tv shows, movies, etc).

I'm not hating on Apple or the iPad, just pointing out that the more Apple grows and creates these closed-loop systems that Apple "approves", the more annoyed people will get to have to pay the piper.
Completely irrelevant. Those "people" also have no use for any tablet, prefering laptops. (see Winni's inevitable hatred above) I would hazard a guess that these people are less than 1% of tablet owners, and always will be.

Meanwhile, people in the target audience for any tablet will not care about closed systems, they won't even understand what that means. And they are all closed systems.
 
Last edited:
Pathetic when you consider it's pretty much the only tablet....

Unless you're considering Windows Tablet PC's, which everyone seems to forget... can someone explain?

Even the MacRumors blurb highlighted the fact that tablet laptops are not included in these statistics. At least try to pay attention if you choose to join a conversation.
 
Apple Grabbed 87% of Media Tablet Market in 3Q 2010

And destroyed the netbook market.


As far as tablets go, I'm really coming around to kindle for books. Yes I like the ipad for all it does but I put the kindle in another category. The kindle is easier on the eyes and if you just want to read books, it is cheaper.

As far as the software goes, I put the kindle app on my iphone and use that. The ibooks feature is limited in that it can only be used on the iOS. If I buy a kindle book I can read it on the laptop or other devices.

This is no knock on the ipad. The ipad can do much more than just the books. But I think for the price, many avid readers might pick up a kindle for most of their reading even if they own an ipad.
 
Want to lay a probability on the possibilities of a MASS MARKET tablet ten or even 5 years ago?

Apple hit it out of the park when the tech and tech cost coincided with a mass market price point. (snip)

Exactly. Apple did the same with the iPhone. They hit at just the right moment in time. They also have the benefit of publicity that follows their every move, good or bad.

You may realize that the iPhone really started as the iPad. The iPad was the original vision.

No. That's another internet myth, arising from reporters quoting out of context. Jobs did not say the iPad idea existed first. He said that a demo on a tablet first gave him the idea for the iPhone UI.

Jobs said that he asked for an example of a multi-touch keyboard on a glass topped touch project (probably running OSX, as iOS didn't exist before the early 2006 iPhone port), and then gave the prototype to one of his engineers, who later showed him a demo of finger-flick scrolling.

When Jobs saw the flick scrolling, he decided a fully touch-oriented UI would be cool for a phone. (Previous to that decision, Apple had made scrollwheel based iPhone UI prototypes out of iPods in late 2005.)

So a touch demo on a tablet begat iOS and the iPhone, which in turn begat the iPad... which could not have existed as a consumer product without the iOS ecosystem.
 
No. That's another internet myth, arising from reporters quoting out of context. Jobs did not say the iPad idea existed first. He said that a demo on a tablet first gave him the idea for the iPhone UI.

Not a myth at all, it came straight from Jobs' mouth. He said they started work on the tablet first.

Behold, the video:

http://d8.allthingsd.com/20100601/d8-video-steve-jobs-on-the-origins-of-the-ipad/

Jobs said that he asked for an example of a multi-touch keyboard on a glass topped touch project

Yeah, sorta like an...iPad? :rolleyes:

Apple clearly aimed for a usable tablet before they thought about entering the smartphone market.

So while the second part of your comment is entirely accurate, your implication that the the iPad vision did not predate the iPhone vision is incorrect. Per Mr. Jobs himself.

Apple did the same with the iPhone. They hit at just the right moment in time. They also have the benefit of publicity that follows their every move, good or bad.

Are you really going to dig up that old chestnut that Apple succeeds not through innovation but through marketing?
 
Last edited:
No. That's another internet myth, arising from reporters quoting out of context. Jobs did not say the iPad idea existed first. He said that a demo on a tablet first gave him the idea for the iPhone UI.

You do realize the iPhone started as the iPad. Steve Jobs even said so himself. Go back and search before spouting more lies.
 
Thanks for the clarification!

"IDC, which also tracks shipments of computers and phones on a quarterly basis, notes that it defines "media tablets" as those tablet devices with screen sizes ranging from 5- to 14-inches and running "lightweight" operating systems such as iOS and Android. "

Aha. So that's what a "media" tablet is. I was kind of wondering WTF that meant.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.