3 ms·
You say this as if an unexpectedly slow update cycle can be a retroactive justification of the product. If Apple weren't expecting users to update iPads so infr
by anjc 9y ago
You say this as if an unexpectedly slow update cycle can be a retroactive justification of the product. If Apple weren't expecting users to update iPads so infrequently, then it will be an issue for them.
Also it can't be considered both "a computer" and considered to be in a maturing lifecycle phase if tablet sales are down while laptop sales are increasing. If you consider the iPad a computer, then Apple's product line is cannibalising itself, which would also be an issue.
- scott_s 9y agoI believe camillomiller is very much not looking at the issue from Apple's business perspective. I think camillomiller is trying to explain why sales are slow, but without using the narrative that tablets, as a market, are a miss. And I agree. I use my iPad every day. I bought one in 2012, upgraded in 2015, but I don't see a need to upgrade yet. My parents bought two in 2010, use them every day, and didn't upgrade until 2016. Whether or not tablets meet businesses sales expectations I can't speak on. But, anecdotally, I feel tablets are something people like using, and are here to stay.
- camillomiller 9y agoI am just saying the current slower update cycle is considered slow because the expectations have been tuned to an unexpectedly fast growth.
- anjc 9y agoYeah very possible
- sosborn 9y ago> then Apple's product line is cannibalising itself, which would also be an issue. It would be like if they created a product category that made another product category obsolete. Like, say, the iPhone and the iPod.
- anjc 9y agoOh yeah totally. Or iPads and iPhones for that matter, imo.
- freehunter 9y ago>If you consider the iPad a computer, then Apple's product line is cannibalising itself, which would also be an issue. Say what? You know Apple doesn't sell just one computer, right? They don't have any product called the Apple Computer. They have several different laptops, several different desktops, several different AIOs, and if you consider an iPad to be a computer, several different tablets. No one is saying the Macbook Air is cannibalizing sales of the Macbook Pro, or that the Mac Mini is cannibalizing sales of the 27" iMac. They might be computers, sure, but different computers are built for different use cases. There's a world of product differentiation between those offerings.
- anjc 9y agoCannibalisation refers to competition within your own product-line causing a reduction in revenue. E.g. with simple figures: Apple spend 1 billion producing iPads from start to finish, and selling them produces 10b in income. They then introduce Macbooks which cost 5b to produce and result in 10b in income. If the introduction of lower margin Macbooks causes a 25% drop in sales of higher margin iPads, then the profitability of their product line has been reduced due to inter-product competition. It's generally not a good thing and represents a waste of resources.