7 ms·
I'll have to disagree with most of what you say here. I would attribute Apple's decision not to divorce the iPad from a PC to their desire to assert some prese
by mckoss 16y ago
I'll have to disagree with most of what you say here.
I would attribute Apple's decision not to divorce the iPad from a PC to their desire to assert some presence onto the PC ecosystem. They don't want to be be JUST your tablet OS, they want to be on the desktop, by forcing installation of iTunes onto Windows machines as well.
This way, both products reenforce each other, and they can get increased market share on devices and onto Windows machines (with an activated credit card so you can purchase music directly on the PC).
Apple is ultra-competitive and they do not want to cede any niche of the market that they have managed to gain. Even though the experience of using iTunes, especially on Windows, is horrendous (for all of the reasons already stated in this thread). That's that only logical explanation for maintaining this extra complexity by a company that is otherwise brilliant at simplifying the user experience.
BTW, I do think Google has approached this with a much better vision - treating an Android device as a first-class network citizen. Google does sell content (app market as well as enable 3rd party music stores), most Android apps integrate some form of cloud storage for your data (which don't have to be managed by Google) - if you switch your device, you'll not likely loose anything important to you.
Updates also work very well over the WiFi network - no need to use your low-bandwidth data plan.
Overall, I don't see this as a technical hurdle for Apple - they just have a conflict of interest in locking up users vs. giving them the best user experience.
- siglesias 16y agoIt doesn't have to be either or. Both are probably true.
- ryanwaggoner 16y agoUpdates also work very well over the WiFi network - no need to use your low-bandwidth data plan. If you don't have a computer, you're unlikely to have a wifi router.
- mckoss 16y agoInteresting point. But WiFi networks are available in coffee shops, etc. And I think the main point of simplification I would be looking for is not that I won't have a computer as well, but I don't want my devices to be dependent on that computer.
- bad_user 16y agoHotels have wifi routers, coffee shops have wifi routers, libraries have wifi routers, airports have wifi routers, conference rooms have wifi routers - even the park area I'm visiting with my kid has open wifi access. Heck, when I have jailbroken my iPhone with jailbreakme a couple of months ago; I was drinking coffee in a coffee shop that had wifi; and I had no laptop and no wifi router with me ;) Suggesting that Apple requires iOS to sync with the PC for any reason other than keeping customers locked in iTunes is silly.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago"If you don't have a computer, you're unlikely to have a wifi router." That's a very limited mindset. In another few years, if there aren't already, there will be households with smartphones, tablets, and broadband + wifi at home but no traditional PCs of any sort. If you refuse to acknowledge such a scenario then you will lose sales for those folks.
- chalst 16y agohey do not want to cede any niche of the market that they have managed to gain. Gruber and others have claimed that Apple is unusual in being willing to develop new products at the expense of old products. I think this might be true. That's that only logical explanation for maintaining this extra complexity by a company that is otherwise brilliant at simplifying the user experience. In fact, Apple have a track record of poor UX with complex network services. I'll guess that they have always intended for the Ipad to be a stand-alone device, but haven't ironed out the problems with their cloud storage.