And who says you can't tilt down your entire head to look down? Sure, it might get uncomfortable if you doing it for 1/2 an hour or more, but how many will be skyping for that long on a frequent basis?
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 Sells Over 300,000 iPads on First Day
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And who says you can't tilt down your entire head to look down? Sure, it might get uncomfortable if you doing it for 1/2 an hour or more, but how many will be skyping for that long on a frequent basis?
I don't get the comments saying it's impossible for a camera configuration to exist that would work well for video conferencing. What's the big deal? They find a usage position that is comfortable and commonly used, and they base the camera angle on that.
If they wanted they could probably even do a camera with adjustable angle (even adjustable in software, with face detection and the option of auto adjust).
If they wanted they could probably even do a camera with adjustable angle (even adjustable in software, with face detection and the option of auto adjust).
Some people have a hard time grasping concepts that don't fall into pre-existing categories...
some guy felt the need to bring his new iPad to church yesterday and have it out during Easter service.
It looks like a big iPhone with no phone parts.
It seemed pretty obvious that he brought it to get some attention, just sitting there playing with safari during the sermon. People were noticing, but I don't think anyone was like "wow, i really want one of those" they were just sort of laughing at this guy for trying so hard to be cool in public.
I noticed his face glowing while he was looking down because it was dark and his screen was bright. People wouldn't bring a laptop into service, so what was he thinking? It honestly looked a bit awkward to use.
i guess the ipad has found its target market. "look at me" douche-bags.
It looks like a big iPhone with no phone parts.
It seemed pretty obvious that he brought it to get some attention, just sitting there playing with safari during the sermon. People were noticing, but I don't think anyone was like "wow, i really want one of those" they were just sort of laughing at this guy for trying so hard to be cool in public.
I noticed his face glowing while he was looking down because it was dark and his screen was bright. People wouldn't bring a laptop into service, so what was he thinking? It honestly looked a bit awkward to use.
i guess the ipad has found its target market. "look at me" douche-bags.
Well, it would help immensely if you quoted my post in the context in which it was first written. Some guy asked what in the world people did with their computers that the iPad didn't do. And that is where my list came from. Nowhere did I say that I expected the iPad to do those things.
Even if they did surfing the real internet isn't really something you want to do on the iPad. For example according to the Anandtech benchmarks the iPad needs around 13 to 15 secconds to render engadget.com or gizmodo.com. That's anything but fun. Most netbooks with Win7 or even Vista don't take more than 2 seconds for that as the Atom runs circles around the A4.
With HTML5 it will be even worse.
it's so amazig tha there are still people who are so damn obsessed over paper-features... Yeah, the HP slate will have more features. It will also be harder to use, and the user will have to constantly hand-hold it.
This is like iPhone-launch all over again. In 2007 some basement-dwellers whined how some Symbian or WinMo-phones had more features than the iPhone had. Yeah, and fact is that those other phones worked like crap and they were clumsy as hell. But apparently those crapphones were better because they had more half-assed, useless features than iPhone had.
have you thought about a career in stand-up comedy?
yes. Slate-PC running Windows 7? Oh be still my beatin heart! How exactly is that different from tablet-pc running Windows XP? What exactly is interesting in that? They will be about as revolutionary as the ol' tablet-pc' were...
Looking at the lack of intelligence in our post, it makes me think that you must be an analyst or somehing.
My apologies to you then. I misread your reply in thinking that you thought the iPad should do those things.
Sorry.
-Kevin
Here's the thing. I had no plans on getting an iPad (look at my previous posts) and argued a lot of points. And to be honest - all those issues still exist - but I bought one anyway because I don't have unrealistic expectations of what the iPad can and cannot do. If nothing else I spent $500 for a GREAT screen to watch netflix/movies + have the ability to surf the net. I didn't buy the iPad to replace anything. In fact, I'm more likely to use my Kindle2 to read books still - or at least travel with the Kindle2 for reading outside and/or when I don't want to worry about the iPad.
Point is - and why I'm responding to your above quote is that I disagree - somewhat. Consumers DO what usability. But they have been programmed to also want features. Want proof? Look at how many consumers buy the latest megapixel camera when all they do is shoot to share pics online. Are you aware that a 3 megapixel camera shoots great images for 4x6 prints. There's little to no reason to get a 14 megapixel camera unless you're going to print billboards, murals or huge poster prints.
And besides that - megapixels aren't all that "important" - the image sensor and processing are. a 3CCD image sensor is better than 1CCD. And the size of the sensor makes all the difference. But most consumers are programmed to just want more.
People buy the latest and great laptops and desktops because they are programmed to want more. A LOT of people have more storage space than they would even need. And many buy computers to just do things like Microsoft Office, email and surf the web a bit. The computers today are overpowered for MANY (not all or most) usage cases. But that doesn't stop people from buying them.
So to make a short story long - when you have a salesman or average people talking to another and one says "but does it have USB, or a camera, or x or y" and one person says yes (netbook/laptop/tablet) and the other (iPad) says no. People will factor that in. Whether they need it or not. People like to have features. People don't like to think they aren't getting "as much" as someone else or that they are getting a limited device vs something else of the same value which has more.
You're assuming the "Core Faithful" were the only customers that bought it over the weekend. I wish this forum would be more open minded instead of thinking only like a geek.
But as you might have noticed the iPhone only did well for about 1.5 years. After that the iPhone lost lots of marketshare. Apple lost around 10% in 2009 and this trend continues in 2010 (they lost another almost 4% in Feb '10 alone).
I think iPad is a success. Just think about it, it's a machine thats not really needed, but it still sold 300,000. I think the iPad is more like iPod than then the iPhone. With the iPhone, the cell phone market was already in place. Similar to iPod, where there was'nt a marketplace for MP3 players in the mainstream, it took 1 to 2 years for the iPod to really take off. In the same regard, the iPad will ramp slowly, and they'll be great apps that will replace functionality of netbooks, etc. Overtime, the iPad will be able to things that netbook can't. Already, where can I get a netbook for under $500 with a battery life of 10 hours ? Where can I get a netbook that won't have any viruses ?
It sold more or less exactly what the pre-launch expectations were from analysts for the first weekend. The only analyst that said 700k was a "correction" from Gene Munster, 12 hours after the iPad went on sale based on his extrapolation from a few data points during the day.
Now people are considered "Victims" when the CHOOSE to buy something from Apple? Congrats, you just gave the word victim a new meaning.
Remember folks, people who use feature lists are not the target market.
Also remember there are, and will continue to be, iPad-only software. Want to do that functionality that way? It will be the iPad only that can do it (or maybe an Android version comes out eventually for future Android pads from Chinese knockoffs).
Software will sell this thing to people who want *that* thing they saw someone else do, not because they saw a function chart in PC Magazine.
Also remember there are, and will continue to be, iPad-only software. Want to do that functionality that way? It will be the iPad only that can do it (or maybe an Android version comes out eventually for future Android pads from Chinese knockoffs).
Software will sell this thing to people who want *that* thing they saw someone else do, not because they saw a function chart in PC Magazine.
This is a huge number. Considering some people are waiting for the 3G version.
In comparison, google only sold 135,000 nexus ones in 74 days.
Motorola only sold 250,000 droids in 7 days.
In comparison, google only sold 135,000 nexus ones in 74 days.
Motorola only sold 250,000 droids in 7 days.
This is the big selling point. Especially for games. For those of us who aren't too snobby to enjoy gaming, the iPad is awesome - more powerful than a PSP and a DS, and able to do much more. And the most expensive games for it are only a fifth to a third of the price of most PSP/DS games (not to mention much easier to obtain).
Plus the iPad has a facking turntable app. That's just awesome.
What he said...
iphone in pocket... ipad surfing via MIWI... very cool and lots cheaper than the 3g model and an additional payout to ATT.
If you buy electronics for the purpose of simply having the latest and greatest as a status symbol, then of course you will feel like a "victim" as an early adopter.
I was given a 20Gb ipod as a fift. It was either 1st or second generation. I can't remember. Black and white screen. I kept it through several iterations of ipod. I didn't get a new one until 5th generation came around. Now I have one of those (80Gb). I was very happy with it all that time. And it's still in use by a family member I gave it to. It plays music. That's what it was purchased for. I don't have to carry around a tape or CD player. On the new ipod I occasionally watch video, but it's still primarily for music. And I still haven;t purchased an iphone or ipod touch. They don't hold as much music and 'm not as interested in the other features to switch yet.
So being a "victim" as an early adopter is a matter of perspective. If there are features you want to wait for then you should wait. But if there are features you primarily want the ipad for such as an ereader, some music, photos and movies and an occasional game, then this ipad should be useful for years to come.
I was given a 20Gb ipod as a fift. It was either 1st or second generation. I can't remember. Black and white screen. I kept it through several iterations of ipod. I didn't get a new one until 5th generation came around. Now I have one of those (80Gb). I was very happy with it all that time. And it's still in use by a family member I gave it to. It plays music. That's what it was purchased for. I don't have to carry around a tape or CD player. On the new ipod I occasionally watch video, but it's still primarily for music. And I still haven;t purchased an iphone or ipod touch. They don't hold as much music and 'm not as interested in the other features to switch yet.
So being a "victim" as an early adopter is a matter of perspective. If there are features you want to wait for then you should wait. But if there are features you primarily want the ipad for such as an ereader, some music, photos and movies and an occasional game, then this ipad should be useful for years to come.
Yeah, I'm sure Microsoft is perfectly happy watching Apple steer the entire tech industry and get all the press.
What were Windows 7 sales numbers again? MS made nearly double in profits what Apple made last year and it was a slow year for MS until the end.
And how are they steering? MS showed off a tablet at CES before Apple ever showed one off. As I said, I betcha Apple rushed it to market to get in ahead of the Slate.
In years past MS didn't have an OS that industry pros have said rivals or betters OS X. Windows 7 is a huge improvement over all prior versions of Windows.
The Slate will be better because of this: multitasking. Unless Apple gets that going before June, that's a huge advantage. And for usability, doesn't having a memory card reader and the ability to plug in USB devices into the Slate qualify as both better usability and functionality?
The Slate is also smaller than the iPad and likely more portable.
And, no, I won't be buying one. I don't believe the tablet is the future of anything at this point because the large majority of people want a physical keyboard. Why get a tablet when I have a perfectly good compact Sony Vaio laptop with a BD player, 4GB or memory, a large HDD, and a Core i5 processor? All that for $1200 and I can actually do real work AND consume information on it.
I'm just making a comparison to the Slate because IT IS more fully featured. I think HP has been dumb just focusing on Flash for the Slate as a big feature. I'd point out if I were HP that you can plug your iPod into the Slate but you can't plug it into the iPad at this point - an HP product can work better with an Apple product than Apple's new shiny gizmo can!
I'm someone who bought an iPod early on. There was clearly a market for it because portability in music has always been the holy grail. I didn't go with MP3 players before the iPod because they were terrible. Apple was the first one who got it right.
But to think this is anything like the iPod is lunacy. There already are portable computers that are far more capable. I have a couple of friends who picked up iPads and they love them, but they won't use them for anything serious. They don't want to type out long emails on that keyboard because it is tedious.
And if people can't do serious things on the iPad then it won't be a revolution. The iPod went into a market that was already there filled with inefficient CDs that took up lots of space for large collections. And portable CD players have always been clumsy, especially if you're on the go. But music was always a leisurely activity.
Computers serve for both leisure and serious business. Why would you pay $500+ for something if you also need a laptop to do anything serious? You want to craft a PPT or Keynote presentation and do it in a fully featured environment? Write a legal brief?
The iPad is nothing more than a toy. The reviewers got it right, it is all about consumption. But I guarantee that people with good laptops will not touch this thing en masse. People with cheaper netbooks already have something cheaper and capable of doing more.
See, the iPod could actually DO MORE than your CD player could. It could store thousands of tracks and let you hold them in your pocket.
This thing is all that much smaller overall than a netbook and it does less. And if you want portability for web surfing, etc then just get an iPhone or another phone that has the same capabilities. I have an enV Touch and I can run my browser, my IM, and my email client all at the same time - that's better than the iPad and that's a cheap cell phone that is far more portable AND has a physical keyboard.
I'm an Apple stockholder. I've made a buttload of money off of Apple and I'd love for this thing to go crazy in sales, but it doesn't seem like a game changer to me. As I said, it'll be a nice little niche market akin to the AppleTV. Laptop and netbook sales will still see large increases and will be unaffected by the iPad.
Apple did with the iPad what they're good at, squeezing more money out of Apple junkies that will buy anything Apple makes.
The AppleTV is a better comparison here. The iPod made music more portable and people already used it on the go, in their cars, etc. It made it more compact and easier to manage. The Apple TV tried to replace home usage of the DVD. It didn't increase functionality or portability. The iPad is less portable than cell phones that can do the same thing, so someone is more likely to just stick with the cell phone on the go. So that leaves in home usage where portability is less of a concern.
A few will buy it instead of a laptop, but it doesn't fill a need for anyone. The iPod did, the AppleTV didn't.
But I don't expect the most ideologically pure Apple zealots to see this. If you want one then good for you. Just don't be surprised if everyone else doesn't want one. They might think it's cool when they see it and still not buy it. I know NO ONE that isn't a pure Apple nut that is interested in forking over money for this thing. And there are enough Apple nuts out there to ramp up a couple of million in sales. If it can't get beyond that then it won't be a game changer at all, will it?
I'm not currently in the market for an ipad. Perhaps when I try one I'll change my mind. Primarily I am interested in one as an ereader.
I was thinking though that for $499 it is almost like getting a quality photo frame that can cost over $100 but with many more capabilities.
So if you were to upgrade to a new ipad in a year or two after buying this version, think of it as a nice digital photo frame you can leave on an end table in your house. It can be picked up anytime to read a book or play a game. Instead of having a computer available for guests, they can pick up the ipad.
I was thinking though that for $499 it is almost like getting a quality photo frame that can cost over $100 but with many more capabilities.
So if you were to upgrade to a new ipad in a year or two after buying this version, think of it as a nice digital photo frame you can leave on an end table in your house. It can be picked up anytime to read a book or play a game. Instead of having a computer available for guests, they can pick up the ipad.