Have You Seen Apple's Netbook?(fool.com)
fool.com
Have You Seen Apple's Netbook?
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2008/12/29/have-you-seen-apples-netbook.aspx
20 comments
> The closedness of the iPhone is its Achilles heel.
If the iPhone was targeted just towards hackers, then yes I agree that closedness is its Achilles heel. But the presence of the "regular schmo" in the market negates the closedness problem.
The more regular schmos the iPhone attracts, the larger the market for the hackers.
I cite the profitability of Windows applications as an example of a closed system that works to the benefit of both the hacker and the schmo despite its closedness.
If the iPhone was targeted just towards hackers, then yes I agree that closedness is its Achilles heel. But the presence of the "regular schmo" in the market negates the closedness problem.
The more regular schmos the iPhone attracts, the larger the market for the hackers.
I cite the profitability of Windows applications as an example of a closed system that works to the benefit of both the hacker and the schmo despite its closedness.
You don't need permission from Microsoft to write a Windows program. You just need to know a bit about the Windows API. Apple actually screens iPhone apps, so it is more of a closed system.
It wasn't a perfect comparison, I know. I was talking about closedness in the private API sense. Namely, the private APIs in Windows (see the lawsuits against Microsoft in late 90's early 00's) vs. the private API in the iPhone.
In the most successful platforms in the past, the spread among schmoes has been driven by the applications. E.g. the Apple II by Visicalc.
I used to think the same thing, but i'm not so sure anymore.
I think the closedness of the iPhone is actually beneficial (to that particular phone). Skipping past the "average consumer doesn't care about the iPhone being a closed platform" and the "closed platform doesn't let developers innovate as quick" arguments, the iPhone excells at what it does and now -relies- on its closedness to maintain its market position.
The main point of the iPhone was integration with apples line of products, thus the iPhone is just another addition to the apple product line. The system behind that is there to make that product what it is and nothing more. Because, you are dealing with the mobile space with the iPhone, the best way to control how much innovation is taking place on your device is to keep it closed. After all, can't have apps that introduce new functionality that could potentially be folded into future devices, that could hurt the iPhone revenue stream.
I think the closedness of the iPhone is actually beneficial (to that particular phone). Skipping past the "average consumer doesn't care about the iPhone being a closed platform" and the "closed platform doesn't let developers innovate as quick" arguments, the iPhone excells at what it does and now -relies- on its closedness to maintain its market position.
The main point of the iPhone was integration with apples line of products, thus the iPhone is just another addition to the apple product line. The system behind that is there to make that product what it is and nothing more. Because, you are dealing with the mobile space with the iPhone, the best way to control how much innovation is taking place on your device is to keep it closed. After all, can't have apps that introduce new functionality that could potentially be folded into future devices, that could hurt the iPhone revenue stream.
I agree that Apple probably sees the iPhone as their netbook competitor - because the netbook market is not one market (duh) but several.
'My' slice of the market is the working-on-a-plane set, who value a 7 hour battery life, a good keyboard, low weight, and a big SSD that can survive a Turkish taxi ride - preferably while not being a $2,000+ mugging magnet like the Air...
But I'm not stupid enough to believe that the netbook market I'm part of is bigger than the slice who just use theirs to surf the Internet, and if you look at just that market the iPhone (or especially the iPod touch) is a pretty good proposition.
'My' slice of the market is the working-on-a-plane set, who value a 7 hour battery life, a good keyboard, low weight, and a big SSD that can survive a Turkish taxi ride - preferably while not being a $2,000+ mugging magnet like the Air...
But I'm not stupid enough to believe that the netbook market I'm part of is bigger than the slice who just use theirs to surf the Internet, and if you look at just that market the iPhone (or especially the iPod touch) is a pretty good proposition.
'I agree that Apple probably sees the iPhone as their netbook competitor'
Well, they've stated they don't see much value in current Netbooks in the past. But I personally think they've already changed their mind - Apple make dumb choices occasionally, but they're smart enough to see when they've failed - see the Apple TV, or original Mac-only iPod. We'll know this as soon as they have something for people to buy.
Your needs - valuing battery life, portability, and a reasonable price over powerful specs - are actually common for most netbook users.
An iPhone is not a Netbook substitute. Ever tried browsing for two hours on an iPhone? Writing a long email or Facebook comment? Wonder why people who own iPhones also want Netbooks?
Edit: Could someone please explain what was offensive or factually incorrect about my post to moderate it to zero?
Well, they've stated they don't see much value in current Netbooks in the past. But I personally think they've already changed their mind - Apple make dumb choices occasionally, but they're smart enough to see when they've failed - see the Apple TV, or original Mac-only iPod. We'll know this as soon as they have something for people to buy.
Your needs - valuing battery life, portability, and a reasonable price over powerful specs - are actually common for most netbook users.
An iPhone is not a Netbook substitute. Ever tried browsing for two hours on an iPhone? Writing a long email or Facebook comment? Wonder why people who own iPhones also want Netbooks?
Edit: Could someone please explain what was offensive or factually incorrect about my post to moderate it to zero?
I don't understand why this is so contentious to so many people. It's a very simple idea: the iPhone platform excels at many of the things people buy netbooks for. The things it doesn't excel at are done better by a real laptop or desktop than a netbook anyway. Ergo, Apple--who already produces both--doesn't see a market in between.
I would love an iPhone I could dock (external display, keyboard, mouse, etc.).
I own a Macbook Pro, a EEE Pc, and an Iphone.
Iphone is a good tool for communication and simple web browsing. But, it is not a substitution for my EEE pc. I use my EEE pc for web browsing because it has a bigger screen and a bigger keyboard(both are functional and convenient).
And, I strongly believe that network providers will soon come out with plan that you can sign up a 3G sim card and a 3G-enabled-netbook for a two-year contract like many countries have in the world right now.
Iphone is a good tool for communication and simple web browsing. But, it is not a substitution for my EEE pc. I use my EEE pc for web browsing because it has a bigger screen and a bigger keyboard(both are functional and convenient).
And, I strongly believe that network providers will soon come out with plan that you can sign up a 3G sim card and a 3G-enabled-netbook for a two-year contract like many countries have in the world right now.
I love my iPhone whole heartedly, but I still have a netbook on the way (mini 9 as a matter of fact). A few things you can't do on the iPhone.
1. Run Background Tasks (IM anyone?) 2. Edit MS Office Documents 3. Edit Code 4. Power Point 5. Run Windows Apps (this is important to me because my other main PC is a Mac - so having a small cheap windows machine comes in handy)
1. Run Background Tasks (IM anyone?) 2. Edit MS Office Documents 3. Edit Code 4. Power Point 5. Run Windows Apps (this is important to me because my other main PC is a Mac - so having a small cheap windows machine comes in handy)
I think you missed a big one:
6 - Not be a massive pain in the ass to use for extended periods.
Yeah, I can get on IMDB and check a film's ranking pretty easily, but I can do it 10-20x faster on a laptop/netbook. Multiply that by another order of magnitude for composing long emails, or even trying to dive through multiple pages of a site rapidly.
The iPhone does some things capably (moreso than its competitors anyway) but it is far from the "best" solution, not even close.
6 - Not be a massive pain in the ass to use for extended periods.
Yeah, I can get on IMDB and check a film's ranking pretty easily, but I can do it 10-20x faster on a laptop/netbook. Multiply that by another order of magnitude for composing long emails, or even trying to dive through multiple pages of a site rapidly.
The iPhone does some things capably (moreso than its competitors anyway) but it is far from the "best" solution, not even close.
If you're using an Intel Mac, give VirtualBox a try. Handy if you need access to Windows. You can expose a folder on the Mac side as a network drive to Windows, so that any files you are working on don't need to be kept inside the virtual machine.
http://www.virtualbox.org/
http://www.virtualbox.org/
Apple has held off producing a mid-range tower for years despite the howls of critics, since it would cannibalize Mac Pro sales. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they aren't leaping into a category with razor-sharp margins that directly competes against their core laptop products.
It's true. I have an Eee and an iPod Touch, and I use both for idle browsing, checking email, and Twitter. Guess which I use more?
The Touch. It's always on, ready to go, and the apps are _made_ for the device. Doing things on the Eee feels far too clumsy next to the Touch, so I hardly ever use it. It turns out I don't really _need_ a netbook for the things I'd use it for - it's much more enjoyable using my ipod.
Although, I've thought a couple of times that netbooks could use an "app store" to promote development and use of apps designed for that tiny resolution. That might make me reconsider.
The Touch. It's always on, ready to go, and the apps are _made_ for the device. Doing things on the Eee feels far too clumsy next to the Touch, so I hardly ever use it. It turns out I don't really _need_ a netbook for the things I'd use it for - it's much more enjoyable using my ipod.
Although, I've thought a couple of times that netbooks could use an "app store" to promote development and use of apps designed for that tiny resolution. That might make me reconsider.
I read the article the same way GHFigs did. Apple sells a machine that handles light web browsing and email well for a reasonably cheap price. Like their competitors they also sell more expensive, more powerful machines that do more stuff, are more pleasant to use and are less portable. The difference is Apple's is based around mobile data. Most other netbooks are just adding that now.
It is a closed platform. Like most Apple products (Apple TV, iTunes DRM'ed songs) it's closed unless you want to put in the time, effort and risk of opening it. Then you can pretty much do anything that the hardware is capable of doing.
It is a closed platform. Like most Apple products (Apple TV, iTunes DRM'ed songs) it's closed unless you want to put in the time, effort and risk of opening it. Then you can pretty much do anything that the hardware is capable of doing.
yea they are going to take the guts of the iphone and make it into a sublaptop. Considering the low end of the EEE pc's are the same clock speed no one would notice the difference.
He forgot the most important thing: being under the user's control, including the ability to install arbitrary software. The closedness of the iPhone is its Achilles heel.