Readers Respond: Apple iPad a Boom or a Bust? Discussion

The much-anticipated launch of the Apple iPad last week still has tech journalists talking. Consumers are on the fence about whether the iPad will define an all-new "media tablet" category or if this Apple product will go the way of the Newton. Keep reading to see what our readers have to say.

Read the full content of this Article: Readers Respond: Apple iPad a Boom or a Bust?

Related Articles:

• The new iPad runs the iPhone OS -- and that's the problem
• Apple Introduces The Game-Changing iPad
• Why the Apple Tablet (or iSlate) Will Change Everything

 

IMHO i think its a bigger flop then HD-DVD.

 

Apple's success is built on their seamless integration of proprietary hardware and software. No other company has been able to match them in that regard - not even come close.

I think it is naive to call the iPad a flop when it is not even in the hands of consumers yet. We have yet to see the potential of what apps can make out of this device. Developers have made the Apple iPhone what it is today - they will likely do the same for the iPad.

What I always find hilarious about Apple's product announcements is the instant flareup from the anti-Apple crowd - like throwing a match in a barrel of gasoline. Not like it's out to hurt you . . .
Equally hilarious is how other companies try to follow and match Apple but often fail (watch for all the tablet follow-the-leader devices emerge over the next few months). It is hard to beat Apple at its own game.

 

I think at first it will be bought by fan boys and then it will die off. I think this model is limited but in the future ones with Windows 7 will take off.

 

The iPad is for media consumption. Its success is completely dependent on Apple's ability to deliver media in an attractive and convenient way. I was surprised they already have a keyboard dock for it, if you buy this as a netbook, you are clearly wasting your money. I agree that the iPad is an over sized iPod Touch, but I don't see that as a bad thing so long as Apple can deliver the amount of media required to make such a device fun to own.

EDIT: Almost forgot, they have to multi-task soon, or it will be dead.

 

Good post. But how is that not a bad thing? The iPad is just that - a device that is fun to own. But personally I don't see myself spending $800 (3G version with the bells and whistles) for a device that is merely fun to own.

It makes no sense.

Furthermore, even as a media consumption device I have to ask, where's the video out (e.g. HDMI)? Why the ability to play only a few types of video formats? Why not include Flash support (yes, it's balls but Flash is everywhere)? Why the 4:3 screen, which results in ugly black bars when watching most video? Just little things like that.

 

I think the device is certainly less than what it could be, in a lot of areas. I think that will limit it from a real big market to just a big market. I can see where it would be useful and interesting for some people, and I think because it says "Apple" on it that buyers won't worry so much about the price. There are a few things I could use it for but not enough to justify that price, I would perhaps buy one for $250.

 

>.> but this product doesn't really offer anything new at all, it even runs the iphone OS. Just about anything this ipad does someone could do with their iphone couldn't they? Not to mention there will be half a dozen other competitors with a product just like it and probably cheaper. Aren't there even atom based tablets now that can be bought for the same price?

 

A flop unless its price comes down and features are added. Granted it looked quite nice, but what they equip it with isn't up to what i would think of as standard on a device like that.

It won't fail i dont think though, thats a fact that wont change.

 

Many people predicted that the iPhone would be the doom of Apple as well.

Apple doesn't try to please everyone and sticks to what the majority of people would need with a device. Jobs laid out exactly what their vision was for the iPad during the keynote. Sure I'd love multi-task and USB ports and 1080p widescreen but when you stop and look at what you NEED instead of what you WANT, its not that bad of a product.

I think people are overlooking what I think will be the biggest sell point of the iPad. Look at what Nintendo has done with the Wii. They brought together the old, young and everyone in between, not by looking at what people wanted but what they needed in a gaming system. The graphics were far below what MS and Sony were going to produce and the hard core gamers balked at the system. Apple is doing the same thing with computing. The iPad is a simple to use system that has minimal upkeep while providing the ability to do all the main functions that most users need.

I think people need to stop being so closed minded and open their eyes to possibilities rather than just blindly dismissing a product that isn't even for sale yet.

 

One thing I am interested in is how Apple intends to compete with other eReaders on the market with the iPad. Isn't there a Kindle app available for the iPhone that will conceivably work on the iPad?

How will Apple juggle competing with Amazon in the eReader space while also supporting the Kindle device with a dedicated app? It will be interesting to see if they pull the app.

 

I don't think the iPad will flop, but it is going to have to evolve past being a mere mutated touch before it becomes the next iPhone.

 

I agree that a large part(if not the most important part) of the iPad's success(or failure) will depend on Apple's ability to integrate its stuff into it. Let's face it, the iTouch and iPhone are only so great because of their apps so if the iPad can somehow gain something that neither of the former have while still possessing that attractive media, then maybe there's hope.

 

Of course, Steve Jobs dictates what we, the customers need. Our needs are whatever he says they are. Hear that everybody? Steve Jobs knows our own needs BETTER than we do, and he in his generosity and brilliance designed a device for our needs.

I have nothing against your post (or Apple), but that's how you're coming across right now.

The Wii offered something its competitors didn't. The Wii-mote was huge. Can the same thing be said of the iPad? Everything in the iPad has been done and is being done better elsewhere.

Nobody's dismissing the iPad. I just don't feel like spending $500-800 on something that would be fun to have. I'm sure there are many people richer than I in this world.

 

Actually, you're both wrong. It's a company's marketing department's JOB to create needs, not cater to already existing ones.

 

The Wii also had a very favorable price point when compared to the XBox360 and PS3 and extremely glowing press. The Wii buzz really crested following E3 2006 when videogame journalists finally got their hands on the device. It really lent itself to initially impressing users with a wholly different gaming experience.

The iPad really doesn't have any of those factors going for it in its favor. As far as pricing goes, it's more expensive than many highly-rated netbooks. And, the UI offers nothing users haven't already experienced with the iPod Touch or iPhone.

 

The iPad is really going up against the iPhone, not the Kindle or the Nook.

The iPhone is cheaper and does almost as much as the iPad.

 

Slates do have advantages when working in certain circumstances, but I'd say those applications-of-use are few and far between. Netbooks with hard keyboards are best used sitting at a desk, but a slate can be used standing, like a clipboard. That's why handwriting recognition on a slate makes so much sense.

After looking at the details and specs I said to myself "OK, where do I use an iPad where a smartphone/netbook combo would kick me to the curb?" I'm still looking for the answer.

The truth is $600 gets you a smartphone AND netbook that beats the iPad for both productivity and portability. $130 for a 3G chip that costs maybe $30? RIPOFF!

As for the lack of flash support, that's now become a double-edged sword in my opinion. While it does make netbooks superior to the iPad for surfing, it's high time somebody gave Adobe a wake-up call! Rather than bash Apple, Adobe's suits should focus on reworking their resource hog. I'm hoping HTML5 kills off flash for good.

 

They want people to use it standing up like a clipboard, but that defeats the purpose of the virtual keyboard. I agree on the 3G, total ripoff.

Html5 might take years to come out, which makes not having Flash a very bad thing.

 

That may be how you interpret it but that's not what I said. I didn't say Jobs decided what we need, I said Apple designed it around what the majority of users need. Apple products wouldn't be popular if Jobs just picked things out of the air, there is a thing called research you know. If I made the same comment about another company your reaction would be different.

Nothing against your post but that's how you're coming across right now.

You fail to notice that the iPad's difference (like with the Wii) is the ease of use and app store. Sure the iPhone and iPod Touch have the same ease of use and app store but there is no other company with a product that can compare. Apple took what worked and offered it with a larger screen that was more suitable for visual media. Apple could have thrown a full OS in the iPad and made a "proper tablet" but how has that worked out for Microsoft tablets? Apple is trying something different just like the Wii tried something different. Just because you can't envision anything short of a tablet with a full OS working doesn't mean you are correct.

 

No, my reaction would not be different. I buy what I need - I don't care how much research Apple or Microsoft has done to determine what I "need" because they'll likely be completely wrong.

Besides, Steve Jobs was asking for it. Nobody forced him to advertise the iPad as "magical" and "revolutionary." Revisiting your initial point, I'd imagine a "magical" and "revolutionary" device would do whatever the user wants.

Um, what? Since when did the Wii have an app store worth mentioning? With regards to ease of use, it was no more easier to use than the PS3 or Xbox.

The things that really set the Wii apart from its competition was the Wii mote, the price, and the marketing/positive media reception. The launch of the iPad and the Wii had nothing in common.

Um, I can envision it. I can see the second generation of iPad being incredibly successful and offering features that should've been available on the first gen iPad anyway.

However, that doesn't change the fact that as of right now, the iPad is merely something that's just fun to have.

Steve Jobs bashes netbooks, saying they do nothing well - which is true. But netbooks do a lot of things better than the iPad. Even typing emails on the iPad would be a frustratingly protracted experience at best - if people were already complaining about the 9" physical keyboards on eeePCs, than they must be masochistic or really really love Apple to be typing on an ~8 inch touchscreen keyboard (landscape orientation).

 

Yes if it was "magical" it would do whatever you want and would cost 10 times as much. I agree that his use of those kind of words were pretty stupid. At least he didn't talk about unicorns, maybe he's saving that for iPad 2.

I was going for the ease of use part in the comparison the app store differentiates the iPad from the definition. I should have been more clear on that. You mention that the Wii mote was instrumental in the success of the Wii but then say it was no easier to use than a PS3. I don't recall older people lining up to buy a PS3 or seeing them in nursing homes and rehab centers like the Wii. The ease of use was the use of the Wii remote which was so simple that people who never played video games could pick it up and play with very little instruction. I'd love to see a video of someone being able to do that with a PS3 controller.

The iPad interface is also easy to use with little instruction. While the iPhone OS has less functionality it also has much less chance of user error damaging the system.

I'm sure the 2nd gen version will have added features, most do. While it will only be a fun device for you, others will see it as much more than that. While the touch screen keyboard may or may not be good enough for some there is always the ability to use the dock and external keyboard. Many people thought the iPhone's lack of a physical keyboard was a fatal flaw but I actually like it better. There's always the option of using the Dragon app to dictate the information as well, no keyboard needed.

Honestly, I'm planning on waiting for some real reviews and to see a unit in person before deciding if I want one or not. I may be waiting until gen 2 before being able to justify the purchase.

 

The only reason for all this "media buzz" about the iFail is because everyone wont stop talking about it. Apple rode the hype, and in a sense shot itself in the foot because they delivered a product that was no doubt a disappointment to the majority (when compared to all the hype that surrounded it).
I would say those that are covering the iPad are just as guilty of milking the hype as Apple. The moment everyone stops talking about it, is the moment that it will fade into the abyss, if that answers your question.
It doesn't even live up to it's own hype. Not even worth talking about IMHO.

 

The exclusion of USB ports, multi-tasking, and OSX/Windows supports kills this for me. Being an iPhone user, there's no way I'd buy this -- even if the so-called "top-of-the-line IPad" was US$200.

 

I agree with comparisons on this thread that the iPad will compete with the iPhone, at least until Asus and MSI get their own "tablet PCs" out, for lack of a better term. But, I see no other reason for Asus or MSI to hurriedly release their own products other than as a reflexive reaction to Apple. "Monkey see, monkey do."

In the big scheme of things, however, I also think that the iPad's success will hinge on how quickly Apple can get the 2nd generation to market, with all the worthwhile features on-board. But I'm not saying that this will make the iPad's failure disappear; I think that it'll be a band-aid at best, seeing as many people will buy this product and be disappointed by it. It's also come to my attention that Apple has several weeks' worth of production of iPads in stock.

 

I think the product has been rushed to market, because the media industry is pining for something along these lines and everyone knows the true first market leader is going to dominate the industry. The Kindle showed the viability of a reader, despite it's flaws and media control issues, but it shows the huge potential but it's flaws were too much to overcome.

Apple rushed this product out, two do two things 1) generate presence in the market for an undoubtedly better follow on product by leveraging the iPhone's popularity, and 2) more importantly, show a commitment to the App Store developers and give them something to work with and get a fair user base going for experience to judge the final follow on platform, which by that time Apple can seriously market with a body of truly useful apps for the iPad. This is what I believe is what Steve Jobs is thinking.

The first iPhone generated buzz, but only the hardcore fanbase and "look-at-me" tech users jumped on it; the 3G matured the product and brought loads of people into the picture.

Expect the same cycle

 

How could they compete ? The iPhone is truly a multifunction portable device. With it, I can replace my mobile phone/pda, my iPod and almost my netbook (considering what a netbook can do on the go). The iPad is not a phone and is not a practical portable music player. It is just a "kind of netbook" with a better media experience. As Apple says it on its webpage: "iPad, the best way to experience the web, email, photos and video". An iPad does it better than a netbook (or an iPhone) because the netbooks currently are scaled down computers thought out to produce as well to consume content, while the iPad has its whole focus on consumption.

The iPhone can fit in my jacket's pocket and that's why it's so great. I can use it practically everywhere. The iPad is embarrassingly large and impractical to carry around. Would you take this big expensive thing for your subway rides ? In no way could the iPad take a share of the iPhone market.


I can however see how an iPad would make a truly great gift for my mother. It would stay in her living room, to manage her calendar and agenda, to browse the web, to send an email once in a while, to browse pictures (stored on my father's desktop), to read ebooks on the couch. And while it isn't used, it can make a nice digital frame. It really would cover all of her needs, in a more pleasant way than a netbook or a laptop. All summed up, a luxury item for the middle class.

It could be also practical around the office... if it wasn't such a closed system and had multitasking and more connectivity options.

 

Excuse me, I think I meant to say that the iPad would compete with the iPod touch, not the iPhone. Even then I acknowledge that it won't compete particularly well, which is why the iPad is a failure on multiple fronts.

Everything you say is true, except that the iPad isn't even a netbook in the sense that it isn't a personal computer. The lack of multi-tasking means that its useless for getting work done. For this reason, I would place the iPad as being between a smartphone and a netbook in terms of functionality. This is a useless niche that nobody needs, especially not when netbooks cost much less and do more.

 

Oh, I see. Yes, the comparative with the iPod touch makes a lot of sense.

I think we also wholly agree on how it compares to netbooks in fact. I just think that such a castrated netbook is enough for those who only (or almost only) consume media content (as long as the Apps Store can provide for it of course... a concept I hate).

 

Bust.
They are already Rumors Apple is developing a Mac OS X-based slate.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/02/01/apple-tablet-os-x-ipad/

 

Once there is a jailbreak, then a version of XBMC for it, I am all over it.

Otherwise it looks like the jitterbug cellphone -> an oversize iPhone for old people.

 

its an annoying product which would be the coolest thing to have. i would never buy one bcos its too closed to my liking plus lack of flash or multi-tasking(though it should be enabled with future vesion) is ridiculous.

but it will sell like hot cakes for sure.

 

I can't imagine such a device to be deamed must-have this early in the game.

That said, it proclaims to replace your books, pens, paper, albums, phone, toilet, and girlfriend, all in one gadget. The bar has been set high, will it work?


ehhh, no.

 

Like any device, the developers have to be happy with making applications for it. So far, the reception has been moot.

 

Not having flash kinda suck for web surfing, especially on such a big screen.

 

And for those who believe HTML 5/(Any other Open Source) is going to save the world, you should read this article.

http://gizmodo.com/5461711/giz-explains-why-html5-isnt-going-to-save-the-internet?skyline=true&s=i

Just like any standard, it has to be adopted by the developers to have any kind of effect. It is going to be a long long long time before we see any effects.

 

If you were to make comparisons to the Wii, should the iPad not be $249 and use apps for profit? At $249 it would be a revolutionary product, $500 for the most basic, stripped down version? Not so much.

I'm shocked AT&T is not willing to subsidize the product like they did with the iPhone. If it's really using a proprietary SIM, I'd imagine that a small percentage of people would figure out a way to crack it and move to different carriers (a la jailbreak), but the majority would use AT&T for it's convenience. You don't need a contract to keep people on if you're using proprietary parts, and having them make the 3G version as standard + a hundred off would have been a decent compromise.

 

It seems to me multitasking would have been a no-brainer for this thing. No multitasking for the iPod touch/iPhone is fine... The screen is too small to make much use of it. But why not for the ipad?

I feel like this thing will go the way of the MacBook Air. Practically in some situations, but not all. I think it's going to target a similar niche audience - the majority of consumers will more likely go for an iPod touch instead. Oh and then there's a few rich people that'll buy this just because it's made by Apple.

It's also possible that there's a couple killer apps that have yet to be unveiled that would make the iPad worth it... But I doubt it somehow.

 

ipad lacks A LOT of features. Give me an hp slate instead.

 

The iPhone would have flopped in it's original form, without apps it would never have been as wildly popular as it is today

So I'm expected to pay extra for something that does only what Jobs thinks I need rather than buy a cheaper produced that does what I want?

To be honest, what "most users" need is multi-tasking and a keyboard. Sure, older people may find it useful as a calender/internet tablet/photo album but I think most of them might also find the use of a touscreen with gestures and an onscreen keyboard rather difficult

I think people should consider the possibility that Apple isn't always right and stop hyping a product that no one's actually used yet.

QFT

While that is true, it's doesn't mean we have to bend over and make it easy for them . They need to convince me that I really need an ipad, and all this hype about a "revolutionary" device just hasn't done it.

This would be why Apple have <10% market share? If they design for what the majority of users need then why are they still in the minority of sales?

That might be because it's a bad idea. Actually there are plently of products that compare: Any netbook, my ipod touch, a notebook, an ebook reader. All of those things do their jobs better than the ipad.

 

follow apple as in how? tablet pcs have been out for awhile long before apple...what makes apple unique as you said is their software they dont let anyone develop for them unless a senior developr sees the program and usually he/she will reject it...thats why pcs crash.....due to so many 3rd party softwares out there....(JMO) it will not be a succes as much as folks will think it will be though...only apple fanatics will think it will and buy it blindly and call it the 3rd coming of jesus (first was iphone and 2nd 3g iphone)

 

you mean oversize ipod touch.....for old people...this is the same thing as the touch, but bigger yeah for old people ever seen old peoples homes with the big phone buttons lol..

 

its clear that you have decided to like it because you like apple. theres no convincing you otherwise

 

I would say the reception has been pretty divided, and devisive for that matter.

 

People are very familiar with the Apple/Mac name brand. Because this it is very easy for them to create hype for their products.

Then they do something extremely smart. They limit the options of the product's hardware. This is a terrible thing to those like us that are actually aware of what different components do, but it is a godsend for the naive consumer base Apple is selling to. Why would they want the option to choose between an Atom Processor and the Apple A4 processor? They don't know the difference. But they are familiar with the Apple name, so they'd choose its processor regardless. If you give people unlimited options, that means people have to know what everything does in order to make a good choice. By giving fewer options based around easy to learn terms (like Capacity of the HD/Flash drive) then Apple makes it easy for people to make a quick choice about what they need.

What about all the lacking hardware? Doesn't matter to the average consumer. And if Apple releases updates in the future that add functions, like Flash support, then people will praise them all the more for doing what consumers want.

So people pay for the name brand? Not entirely, but to a great degree they are. Think about it this way. A basic iPod is probably going to run at least $50 more than an MP3 player with the same features made by a different company. While you know that both of these products work in the exact same function, everybody you know and their grandma owns an iPod. For familiarity, $50 extra is a steal indeed. Apple knows that, and it doesn't have to drop its prices to compete.

The same is true for the iPad. The average person has never heard of the Multitouch ThinkPad X200. It's a long name with a model number following. It isn't memorable in anyway. The "iPad", aside from the obvious MaxiPad jokes, is short, simple, and easy to remember. It even follows the say line of thinking as iPod. There's only 1 letter's difference for crying out loud!

Part of it is also style. Apple knows how to make its products aesthetically pleasing to the average consumer. 8 - 10 basic colors, expensive looking design. But it also has a whimsical feel. It's a toy, not a business computer. A businessman would feel ridiculous holding the brightly colored iPad in his hand, with a giant Apple logo on the back, trying to touch type an important email to his boss. It's marketed towards those who enjoy its novelty, and luckily for Apple, people freaking love the Touch novelty.

This product will sell, make no mistake. Enthusiasts will scorn it for its limited capabilities. I will certainly never buy one. Thankfully for Apple, computer enthusiasts don't make up more than about 5% of their market.

 

I dont think it will sell well, i have asked my friends would they buy an ipad most of them said no, they have no use for it, its not better than an netbook. Multi-task is important and also, why would ppl be dumb enough to use this a an e-reader? dont they know its going be bad for your eyes with high-res..I think it will be a flop like the Apple tv will sell but wont make a huge impact..Only fanboys will buy thats why their the worst to get an opinion out of..

 

They've already sold out in Norway, with resellers completely overwhelmed with orders... we'll see about the bigger markets such as the rest of Europe and the US, though.

 

with all due respect to our apple friends in nbr, i see apple inc as a gadget company first and foremost.
almost every gadget theyve come out with has been game changing in whatever industry they get into. remember the ipod? when it first came out it was niether ground breaking or new. in fact it was much more expensive that every other mp3 that was out on the market. whether you worship or abhore steve jobs, it cannot be denied that the man is a marketing genius. the rise and popularity of the ipod has proven this more than any other apple gadget/computer that apple has come out with. the ipod is in fact the benchmark marketing paradigm in many business schools.
they also scored a major, major hit with the iphone. although unlike the ipod, i see the iphone as offering something truely technologically different from its competitors. so technologically, it could carry it weight around, and marketing could only enhance what was already a groundbreaking product.
so here we come to the ipad.
i see it as something like the ipod- nothing new really. i think this is also the reason why apple inroduced it many months before it will actually be available- to get public feedback and plant their battle strategy accordingly. i think they know it will be an uphill battle but i expect a tremendous marketing blitz when it does come out- maybe even doing some marketing stuff we havent seen before.
i remember hearing from bloomberg tv that gadgets account for the majority of apple revenues. and with iphone and ipod sales dwindling , apple may have no choice but to push this product really hard.
also hinging on the success or failure of the ipad could be the very foundation of the web. the ipad does not support flash, and apple is pushing hard on the adoption of html5 and caviar(which apple developed). if the ipad is a success, im sure they will use it as a springboard to html5.
so in conclusion do i think the ipad will be a boom or a bust?
technologically i think it is already a bust. marketingwise, apple i believe will have no choice but to find a way to make this thing sell- their very future may be at risk.
but whatever happens it will be fun to watch from the sidelines. the ipad i think will turn out to be this generation's definitive benchmark on a failure or success.

 

in Russia iPad's price is more then $1000

 

I will consider one once they come with a front-facing camera.

jailbreaking may make me buy sooner than I'd want.

no jailbreak = no buy, ever. multitasking is too important.