Apple sells 3 million iPads in 80 days(ipadwatcher.com)
ipadwatcher.com
Apple sells 3 million iPads in 80 days
http://ipadwatcher.com/2010/06/22/apple-sells-3-million-ipads-in-80-days/
6 comments
I'm not surprised. A tablet requires software that manufacturers are unable to write (except for HP, now) and their traditional software partner has nothing remotely ready for them. So they turn to Google.
Apple added a number of new APIs and UI extensions in order to make the iPhone OS suitable for a large screen. Until Google does the same with Android we'll be stuck with nothing but big Android cell phones.
Apple added a number of new APIs and UI extensions in order to make the iPhone OS suitable for a large screen. Until Google does the same with Android we'll be stuck with nothing but big Android cell phones.
(scratches head)
Android isn't the only other other option for controlling a tablet. I know desktop Windows and Linux are unsuitable from a UI point of view, but there's plenty of middleware around to bridge touchscreens to software, and there are plenty of self-contained UI paradigms: game consoles rarely use the desktop metaphor.
Not the exact same thing, I know, but waving the Nintendo Wii controller around feels a lot closer to interacting with a touchscreen than it does my desktop, and there's a vast pool of UI design knowledge in the gaming market. Not instantly accessible to likes of us, but companies like Asus and their technology partners have the resources, developer infrastructure and motivation to open up alternative platforms.
Not the exact same thing, I know, but waving the Nintendo Wii controller around feels a lot closer to interacting with a touchscreen than it does my desktop, and there's a vast pool of UI design knowledge in the gaming market. Not instantly accessible to likes of us, but companies like Asus and their technology partners have the resources, developer infrastructure and motivation to open up alternative platforms.
Few dedicated software companies can even compete with Apple. I mean, at the moment it's just Apple and Google in the smartphone space, and Google's barely competitive despite Apple only having one phone on one provider. To assume Asus can somehow just will a brilliant new software platform into existence to compete with Apple's in a matter of months makes no sense to me.
The hardware companies have always depended on the software companies for things to run on their devices, and right now the software companies just don't have anything to compete with the iPad.
The hardware companies have always depended on the software companies for things to run on their devices, and right now the software companies just don't have anything to compete with the iPad.
I see your point, but disagree about the 'matter of months' part; we were discussing the Apple tablet here last year, iPhones have been out for a few years (as have some other niche multitouch products), and the tablet + stylus concept has been on the market for a decade. So I had expected other players to offer up something even if it was only to stake a claim on behalf of their brands.
In other words, not to be compete or beat with apple technically in the short term, but to deny them marketing hegemony. Perhaps they'd rather wait for the initial iPad thunder to subside, than risk being tagged as 'a poor second best' in the first lap of the race. I suppose it depends on whether one feels engineering or brand positioning is the biggest determinant of long-term success.
In other words, not to be compete or beat with apple technically in the short term, but to deny them marketing hegemony. Perhaps they'd rather wait for the initial iPad thunder to subside, than risk being tagged as 'a poor second best' in the first lap of the race. I suppose it depends on whether one feels engineering or brand positioning is the biggest determinant of long-term success.
I don't know why the above was downed, but I tryed upvoting it, an I'm not sure I succeeded from my phone. (Takes more than one to raise from 0?)
Could someone explain what stuck out in the above?
Insta-edit: I see it's -1 now, and I don't have that strength yet, so it wasn't a mis-click.
Could someone explain what stuck out in the above?
Insta-edit: I see it's -1 now, and I don't have that strength yet, so it wasn't a mis-click.
add to the software edge, the base price of $499 doesn't leave a lot of room for other companies to build one at a decent profit.
There's plenty of footage of Android tablets running everything from 1.5 to 2.2 and nothing obvious is missing from casual inspection of people playing games, surfing the web etc.
What do you think is missing, or to say it another way, why is the iPad not just a big cell phone (minus the ability to make calls)?.
What do you think is missing, or to say it another way, why is the iPad not just a big cell phone (minus the ability to make calls)?.
The deficiencies look quite obvious to me: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/05/android-tablet-p...
I'll put it this way: The iPad would not be a compelling device if it merely ran iPhone software at a higher resolution.
Hardware-wise, the iPad is nothing but an iPod Touch with a giant screen and a giant battery. Software-wise, it's everything but an iPod or iPhone; the use cases are very different. A touch-surface that's 5 times larger than an iPhone enables a much richer and more sophisticated UI, and this is evident in the iPad SDK, Apple's iPad software, and the successful 3rd-party iPad software.
Google needs to define their tablet HIG, they need to update their SDK to implement their HIG, they need to update their built-in apps to take advantage of the new SDK, and they need to get their 3rd party developers on board. All of this takes time, and I would not expect it to take shape before the spring or summer of 2011 (they're still "feverishly working" to get Android 2.2 out the door). Anything less will result in a product that's not as compelling as the iPad.
That said, I have no doubt that manufacturers will try to sell Android tablets before the Android OS is ready, and I have every confidence that those tablets will fail in the marketplace. But eventually there will be compelling Android tablets.
I'll put it this way: The iPad would not be a compelling device if it merely ran iPhone software at a higher resolution.
Hardware-wise, the iPad is nothing but an iPod Touch with a giant screen and a giant battery. Software-wise, it's everything but an iPod or iPhone; the use cases are very different. A touch-surface that's 5 times larger than an iPhone enables a much richer and more sophisticated UI, and this is evident in the iPad SDK, Apple's iPad software, and the successful 3rd-party iPad software.
Google needs to define their tablet HIG, they need to update their SDK to implement their HIG, they need to update their built-in apps to take advantage of the new SDK, and they need to get their 3rd party developers on board. All of this takes time, and I would not expect it to take shape before the spring or summer of 2011 (they're still "feverishly working" to get Android 2.2 out the door). Anything less will result in a product that's not as compelling as the iPad.
That said, I have no doubt that manufacturers will try to sell Android tablets before the Android OS is ready, and I have every confidence that those tablets will fail in the marketplace. But eventually there will be compelling Android tablets.
The linked article, and you, seem to be suggesting that Google needs to add capabilities to Android to support different resolutions and pixel densities. I'm saying that they already have. In fact they're already talking about developing Android apps for Google TV, a 3rd entirely different form factor.
Having to update Android apps to take full advantage of newer form factors, is entirely different from having to fix Android itself to work with different form factors, and even if the apps are not updated they'll probably still generally work better than iPhone apps on iPads because of Android's inherent multiplicity of devices.
Having to update Android apps to take full advantage of newer form factors, is entirely different from having to fix Android itself to work with different form factors, and even if the apps are not updated they'll probably still generally work better than iPhone apps on iPads because of Android's inherent multiplicity of devices.
Yeah, I don't get it either. I find it odd they did not see the iPad coming. I guess I'm looking at it with hindsight but an device running the iPhone OS was rumored way before the release. An android tablet could have been out and running before the iPad. It seems they were just waiting to see if apple could sell any and then start building one.
Pretty crappy way to tag along on another companies research and marketing.
I just want a damn tablet with android with decent specs. I don't care if it's flat like a pancake. Make it 720p with a front facing camera and at least 32gb of flash memory. Then ew nvidia chip and BLAM, I'll buy it so will all the real computer users. :)
Pretty crappy way to tag along on another companies research and marketing.
I just want a damn tablet with android with decent specs. I don't care if it's flat like a pancake. Make it 720p with a front facing camera and at least 32gb of flash memory. Then ew nvidia chip and BLAM, I'll buy it so will all the real computer users. :)
I think everybody was assuming: "There's no way they'll just release a big iPod touch." Nobody thought the formula for a successful tablet could be defined so simply.
Though it's not really, they introduced new controls and chromes which don't make sense on a phone's screen (but do on a tablet's) and the device to screen ratio is completely different.
It looks like a big ipod touch (which means people are rapidly familiar with it), but it feels very differently.
And of course, even if it were just a big ipod touch none of Apple's (potential) competitors in the field have such a platform.
It looks like a big ipod touch (which means people are rapidly familiar with it), but it feels very differently.
And of course, even if it were just a big ipod touch none of Apple's (potential) competitors in the field have such a platform.
If you look at the UI changes they made for the bigger screen, it isn't just a big iPod touch.
different device entirely. - big screen is a big part of it, but the refined email application, and substantial improvement in speed is equally as relevant.
Maybe you need an aPad?
http://www.ipmart.com/main/product/APad,China,iPad,,7,0,Inch...
http://www.ipmart.com/main/product/APad,China,iPad,,7,0,Inch...
The problem is that hardware is becoming somewhat easier, but the software is not there yet. Apple definitely did a lot of work on iOS and it shows.
I'm a little bit wondering why Microsoft hasn't surprised us yet. Yea Microsoft. They had this Surface thing for years, which is allegedly pretty cool, why not turn it into a tablet? They also showed a pretty slick prototype, that later got canceled, despite the positive impressions. And It's not like it's a small company with no resources or money.
This will explain everything.
> Real artists ship, dabblers create concept products
> But there does appear to be a weak correlation between a company’s ability to churn out concept products and its ability to design, manufacture and profitably sell products based on those.
http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/
Cached: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?oe=UTF-8&hl...
> Real artists ship, dabblers create concept products
> But there does appear to be a weak correlation between a company’s ability to churn out concept products and its ability to design, manufacture and profitably sell products based on those.
http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/
Cached: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?oe=UTF-8&hl...
There have been commercial windows tablet computers out for years now. From a number of different manufacturers. I think their problem was that they went with the stylus interface instead of fingers. That and they don't have that 'reality distortion/influence field' of Apple to make everyone believe that whatever new computing paradigm they introduce is the way of the future.
Yes, Windows tablet computers relied on the stylus. I've used a couple.
Did you read the article? The article is not about the relative minor success of Windows-based tablets; it is about how the lack of constraints on price (how much it will cost to manufacture) and manufacturing (how you will make it on a mass scale) can make prototype concepts alluringly too easy.
For example, Apple had to develop state-of-the-art manufacturing technology to produce the Aluminum unibody MacBook.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0fe800C2CU&feature=relat...
Did you read the article? The article is not about the relative minor success of Windows-based tablets; it is about how the lack of constraints on price (how much it will cost to manufacture) and manufacturing (how you will make it on a mass scale) can make prototype concepts alluringly too easy.
For example, Apple had to develop state-of-the-art manufacturing technology to produce the Aluminum unibody MacBook.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0fe800C2CU&feature=relat...
"state-of-the-art manufacturing technology"
According to the video, Ives said the unibody is fabricated from an extruded piece of aluminum, then CNC'd using various jigs and fixtures. He then states how the most difficult part of the process was "developing" the various jigs and fixtures to produce the desired final results.
But he goes into no detail regarding this aspect.
Why do you consider this "state-of-the-art"? CNCing aluminum extrusions in jigs and fixtures in nothing new.
I was actually disappointed when a saw a unibody being manufactured and thought, "They're milling these?"
So, I really don't believe that other manufacturers barrier to entry in the tablet space is lack of CNC capabilities (but maybe fixture design?).
According to the video, Ives said the unibody is fabricated from an extruded piece of aluminum, then CNC'd using various jigs and fixtures. He then states how the most difficult part of the process was "developing" the various jigs and fixtures to produce the desired final results.
But he goes into no detail regarding this aspect.
Why do you consider this "state-of-the-art"? CNCing aluminum extrusions in jigs and fixtures in nothing new.
I was actually disappointed when a saw a unibody being manufactured and thought, "They're milling these?"
So, I really don't believe that other manufacturers barrier to entry in the tablet space is lack of CNC capabilities (but maybe fixture design?).
I've done some woodworking. The proper jig makes all the difference. I think what holds other tablet companies back is the software.
> Yes, Windows tablet computers relied on the stylus. I've used a couple.
So this was not an example of them creating a concept product. Right? That was the point I was making. However valid and insightful the article you linked to may be, it doesn't seem to address this specific case and neither does the video.
So this was not an example of them creating a concept product. Right? That was the point I was making. However valid and insightful the article you linked to may be, it doesn't seem to address this specific case and neither does the video.
> As a pure consumer device, tablets - preferably slightly larger ones - are just begging for deployment as a family boardgame platform.
http://gametableapp.com/
A generic constrained board is interesting.
http://gametableapp.com/
A generic constrained board is interesting.
Exactly - I was just envisioning something big enough to fit in 2 kids at the side too.I think once you hit ~8.5 x 11" screen area it become practical to play monopoly or scrabble, but not so big as to be unwieldy.
In Brazilian TV networks we are starting to see them in the hands of news anchors and talk show hosts all the time.
Several channels that are covering the Word Cup (in Brazil that is almost all of them :-) have the hosts reading information off iPads.
Several channels that are covering the Word Cup (in Brazil that is almost all of them :-) have the hosts reading information off iPads.
Jake Humphrey has been lugging an iPad around during the BBC coverage of F1 since they were released. It's fairly prominent and I was wondering if Apple put it there.
if it's on the BBC there's no way Apple put it there. There are very strict rules about that. Is the Apple logo even visible? They'll usually blank it out.
I have never seen the logo as he's usually holding it in such a way that it's not visible but it's clearly and iPad. They may have put a silver "sticker" over the Apple logo on the back.
Recently they were also used to read speeches off, as seen two weeks ago in the German parliament: http://webtv.bundestag.de/iptv/player/macros/_v_f_514_de/od_... :)
(More background information: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,702119,00...)
(More background information: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,702119,00...)
the iPad sells because it's an apple product, everyone gotta have..not because it's a tablet.
This is a device that received a strong negative reaction from many in the (non-Apple-worshiping) tech press. It just goes to show you how out of touch many of them are with what really excites users.
Yeah, or maybe it shows that you actually weren't an "Apple worshipper" just because it was obvious to you that the iPad was going to be huge.
I don't know, I knew many people who wanted such a device, I was just hoping someone other than Apple would make one too. It was obvious for years that tablet had potential but for some weird reason, no one saw how crappy windows was on a tablet. At least none of the manufacturers noticed it. I got a macbook tablet mod for one of my bosses in the past. It was unusable considering OSX wasn't built for touchscreens (exactly like Windows tablet).
Android has been out for years now. They could have seen the tide coming and released a tablet running it way before apple. But they didn't. They just seem to want to leech of apple's market research.
Android has been out for years now. They could have seen the tide coming and released a tablet running it way before apple. But they didn't. They just seem to want to leech of apple's market research.
Windows Vista sells nearly 40 million licenses in the first 100 days (http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/16/microsoft-vista-sells-nea...).
This is an operating system which received a strong negative reaction from many in the (non-Microsoft-worshiping) tech press. It just goes to show you how out of touch many of them are with what really excites users.
This is an operating system which received a strong negative reaction from many in the (non-Microsoft-worshiping) tech press. It just goes to show you how out of touch many of them are with what really excites users.
Vista took 7 months to reach 4% market share, 7 took 3 weeks.
7 sold 90 million licenses in its first 4 months.
7 sold 90 million licenses in its first 4 months.
The iPad took 4 weeks to sell 1 million units.
The iPhone 3GS sold 1 million units in 3 days. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/03/ipad_sales_top_one_m...)
The iPhone 3GS sold 1 million units in 3 days. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/03/ipad_sales_top_one_m...)
The 3GS and the iPad occupy completely different segments and markets (one of which didn't quite exist before the device was created), Vista and 7 don't.
It's one of those devices which you can sell really easily to people even if they may not need it. Combined with Apples always effective marketing.
I've noticed from the developer side that our iPad app downloads are really strong compared to the relatively low #s - I dont know if we're just better suited for that format - anybody else notice that?
Probably because there's currently less noise in the marketplace. Also the iPad itself is a much better device to browse and search apps than the iPhone.
Has anyone tried to buy an iPad at Best Buy recently? They have been sold out in my area for a while, and they have no idea when they'll get more since Apple randomly ships them to Best Buy stores.
I ordered my 3G version online on May 29 and received it by June 16th. I found that to be easier (albeit longer) than camping out in front of Best Buy.
I am not sure why this is downvoted, but I did stop by Best Buy here in Cincinnati and they only had two 64gb 3g ipads, and said they had not received any of the 16 or 32gb wifi ipads in the last few weeks.
My local Best Buy (in Sarasota) is the same. A BestBuy employee said they're working through a backlog. People ask when the next shipment arrives, and when it does they come in to buy them up. In some cases the entire shipment is gone in the same day.
Did you check Computer Advantage across from the airport. I got mine in Sarasota from Computer Advantage about a week ago. It was the 32GB wifi only model.
Does Apple offer free shipping in your area? Rather than wait an unknown timeframe, just order one online - then keep checking with WorstBuy and if they get some in before it ships you can just cancel the order. Worked for me :)
Oh wait, it's been 2 years I have some bestbuy gift card and I never knew what to buy with it!
Most people want to see 3M in 80 days, but it is more like 3M in 3000 days. Correct me if I am wrong, but Apple started to work on these touch screen technology (which I guess is the foundation of the Ipad) since 2001. Or at least that's what I heard during Jobs'D8 interview.
Using that logic, it's 3M sold in about 40 years, since that's about when the first microprocessors were developed.
That is different I believe. The key feature for the Ipad would be it's touch screen technology.
They haven't been _selling_ them for 3000 days.
But they have been selling the iPad for more than 80 days. Of course, Apple never counts the pre-order period.
there are a lot of commercial possibilities going unexploited at present. I'm already seeing iPads deployed commercially; at the mall the other day, I saw someone using one to take consumer surveys, and I noticed over a year ago that 7-11 stores use (older) tablets for inventory management. As a pure consumer device, tablets - preferably slightly larger ones - are just begging for deployment as a family boardgame platform.