3 ms·

Some of the conclusions are only looking at a single factor and ignoring the rest. > The most natural explanation for the decline [in sales] is that the iPad f

Some of the conclusions are only looking at a single factor and ignoring the rest. > The most natural explanation for the decline [in sales] is that the iPad failed to fulfill initial expectations that it would be a general-purpose device that could replace our Macs and PCs. People didn't buy iPads in 2014 because they actually thought they would replace their PC, or for the the promise that a future model will in 2021. They bought them because they were leaps and bounds better than the one they already had, they did more and better. My iPad 1 was woefully outdated by the time the iPad 3 came out just 2 years later. You could feel it in the performance, the screen resolution, etc. My 5 year old iPad Air 2 is still kicking ass and has easily at least another year or 2 left in it. And when I upgrade it's because of the lack of support, not that I can feel it buckling under the workload. As markets mature the improvements are getting smaller and smaller and the product is more than adequate for longer periods. That's the real benefit of the maturity of the market. Today it's harder to justify the upgrade even if it would be perfectly able to replace your PC.

alistairSH 7y ago
Agreed. I don't buy iPads frequently because, like laptops, they last a long time and the gains from generation to generation are quite small. I have owned three - all iPad Minis - and two are still working just fine. I bought a Mini 1, then replaced it with a Mini 2. At some point after that, I adde a Mini 4. The 2 stays by my bedside for quick surfing, checking weather, etc. The 4 is my main tablet. I may eventually replace the Mini 2 with an iPad Pro in an attempt to replace my aging MacBook Air, but that's a lot of money and I haven't convinced myself that's the way I want to go. There's still something to be said for a proper laptop.
scarface74 7y ago
You’re giving the iPad 1 way too much credit. It was outdated the day it came out. It only had 256MB of RAM. The iPhone 4 released 3 months later had 512MB of RAM. The iPhone 4 ran up to iOS 7. The iPad stopped at iOS 5 and ran it badly. The iPad 2 released a year later with 512MB of RAM ran up to iOS 9.
- close04 7y ago
  I compared iPad 1 because I had it. The story of iPad 2 is not much different. When the 4 came out it was faster, had more RAM, much better screen, etc. Every product reaches a stage where improvements stop being so obvious year over year and the upgrade seems less and less justified. What used to be a 2-3 year upgrade cycle can now easily be a 5+ year one.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    The difference being that the iPad 1 was already underpowered when it was released compared to its contemporary. The iPad needed more RAM than the iPhone 4 that was being designed at the same time but had less. The iPad 4 was better than the iPad 2 but the iPad 2 was at least using the best SOC they had at the time. The iPad 2 was sold from 2011-2014. It actually got a bug fix update about 3 or 4 months ago. By 2011 when iOS 5 came out, the original iPad was crashing because of too little memory.
    - close04 7y ago
      This still supports what I wrote originally: there was a time when a 1 or 2 year gap brought massive improvements. Not anymore. Now it takes 4, 5, or more. Which is why people bought more often then, and less often now. Same thing happened to smartphones. Explosive evolution at the beginning and a subsequent slowdown when the generation gap started being so small that you can go more time between upgrades.
- m45t3r 7y ago
  Both the first iPad and the third iPad (the first retina one) were pretty bad. The third iPad, thanks to its retina screen and its anemic GPU to drive its high resolution screen was outdated pretty fast (iPad 4 was released only 7 months later).
deltron3030 7y ago
>They bought them because they were leaps and bounds better than the one they already had, they did more and better. In my opinion it's all about the apps, the overall adoption is just a reflection of apps conquering certain hobby niches and activities that already exist outside of the Appstore, activities that favor some kind of tactile interaction. That's why music making and painting apps are so popular on the iPad, people use them as replacements for actual physical devices, not for replacing computers. That's why coding on an iPad is still very niche and not a thing, desktops and laptops are already perfect for that.
simonh 7y ago
I suspect the surge of sales was due to broad publicity and pent up demand for a simpler approach to computing. If you look at the customer satisfaction numbers, they're almost unnaturally good, so I can' see any evidence of customer disappointment. I think the fallback was simply a return to a long term mean.

alistairSH 7y ago

Agreed. I don't buy iPads frequently because, like laptops, they last a long time and the gains from generation to generation are quite small. I have owned three - all iPad Minis - and two are still working just fine. I bought a Mini 1, then replaced it with a Mini 2. At some point after that, I adde a Mini 4. The 2 stays by my bedside for quick surfing, checking weather, etc. The 4 is my main tablet. I may eventually replace the Mini 2 with an iPad Pro in an attempt to replace my aging MacBook Air, but that's a lot of money and I haven't convinced myself that's the way I want to go. There's still something to be said for a proper laptop.

scarface74 7y ago

You’re giving the iPad 1 way too much credit. It was outdated the day it came out. It only had 256MB of RAM. The iPhone 4 released 3 months later had 512MB of RAM. The iPhone 4 ran up to iOS 7. The iPad stopped at iOS 5 and ran it badly. The iPad 2 released a year later with 512MB of RAM ran up to iOS 9.

close04 7y ago
I compared iPad 1 because I had it. The story of iPad 2 is not much different. When the 4 came out it was faster, had more RAM, much better screen, etc. Every product reaches a stage where improvements stop being so obvious year over year and the upgrade seems less and less justified. What used to be a 2-3 year upgrade cycle can now easily be a 5+ year one.
- scarface74 7y ago
  The difference being that the iPad 1 was already underpowered when it was released compared to its contemporary. The iPad needed more RAM than the iPhone 4 that was being designed at the same time but had less. The iPad 4 was better than the iPad 2 but the iPad 2 was at least using the best SOC they had at the time. The iPad 2 was sold from 2011-2014. It actually got a bug fix update about 3 or 4 months ago. By 2011 when iOS 5 came out, the original iPad was crashing because of too little memory.
  - close04 7y ago
    This still supports what I wrote originally: there was a time when a 1 or 2 year gap brought massive improvements. Not anymore. Now it takes 4, 5, or more. Which is why people bought more often then, and less often now. Same thing happened to smartphones. Explosive evolution at the beginning and a subsequent slowdown when the generation gap started being so small that you can go more time between upgrades.
m45t3r 7y ago
Both the first iPad and the third iPad (the first retina one) were pretty bad. The third iPad, thanks to its retina screen and its anemic GPU to drive its high resolution screen was outdated pretty fast (iPad 4 was released only 7 months later).

deltron3030 7y ago

>They bought them because they were leaps and bounds better than the one they already had, they did more and better. In my opinion it's all about the apps, the overall adoption is just a reflection of apps conquering certain hobby niches and activities that already exist outside of the Appstore, activities that favor some kind of tactile interaction. That's why music making and painting apps are so popular on the iPad, people use them as replacements for actual physical devices, not for replacing computers. That's why coding on an iPad is still very niche and not a thing, desktops and laptops are already perfect for that.

simonh 7y ago

I suspect the surge of sales was due to broad publicity and pent up demand for a simpler approach to computing. If you look at the customer satisfaction numbers, they're almost unnaturally good, so I can' see any evidence of customer disappointment. I think the fallback was simply a return to a long term mean.