3 ms·

It's funny how so many people come to the same, in my opinion correct, conclusion but get there for all the wrong reasons. Marco almost gets it in the first par

It's funny how so many people come to the same, in my opinion correct, conclusion but get there for all the wrong reasons. Marco almost gets it in the first paragraph, then stumbles around trying to explain it. There's nothing to explain; people want the iPad because it is a desirable "sexy" device, plain and simple. Trying to go further and you've missed the point entirely. It's the cumulation of years of brand strengthening, good products, and good advertising. If you ask the average person who wants an iPad (and I've done this) they won't be able to tell you any one thing, and no "apps" have absolutely nothing to with it. All they know is that the iPad is cool, people who have one are cool, and they must have one as well.

ChuckMcM 15y ago
I disagree with this. "Sexy" can get you in the door, but only if you actually solve some need (perhaps not yet known) can you develop market share. If the iPad had only sold 240K machines the first year then you'd say "Its just a sexy device without solving a real problem." But it did much more than that. So you go back and ask "What was it?" And that is what market research is all about. I don't know, I've not surveyed thousands of iPad owners why they bought, how much they use now, if they would upgrade, so I can only go by the limited exposure to friends, family, and various hacker types. The itch it seemed to scratch, which was un-met by the 'touch' was "instant on access to email and web." The 'conventional' wisdom was that this "wasn't enough" to justify a $500 - $900 purchase. Or a laptop would be the answer. Apparently the wisdom was wrong. There are other things it does of course, and more all the time. I got into a fierce one sided debate inside Google where I was advocating e-readers were important and being countered with "your stupid, I can do that on my phone, no one will buy an e-reader who isn't stupid." (Almost word for word, seriously) You can't see what you can't see. So while I agree that a strong brand can sell stuff which isn't useful, developing beyond the afficiandos takes actual value which the iPad (and tablets) seem to have.
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  I'm upvoting you for a well-written, well-reasoned reply but I'm not convinced. Chrome OS's sweet spot is instant on web and email also, but I'd venture to guess it isn't going to sell nearly as well as the iPad has/will. Certainly it's not as good in other areas, but if that really is what this trend boils down to it should be a big success as well. I've never heard a potential iPad owner give a reason for wanting an iPad. The iPad is a fashion accessory. I've seen people crowd around them at parties during the early days lustfully wanting it, but no one mentioned apps or email or anything like that. Or anything about the experience at all.
  - ZeroGravitas 15y ago
    A related comment that supports your thesis: From the developer of the highly successful Professor Layton games for Nintendo DS: "from our analysis, we found that light users – users who had the Nintendo DS Lite system – were more likely to possess a game system for the sensation of having a popular item than because they were seeking ultimate excitement and quality from games." http://www.nintendo.co.uk/NOE/en_GB/news/iwata/iwata_asks_-_nintendo_3ds_third_party_game_developers_31641_31607.html#top http://www.nintendo.co.uk/NOE/en_GB/news/iwata/iwata_asks_-_... Sounds like the description of a lot of iPhone and iPad users to me. (Note I have a DS and an iPhone, and family have iPads, and think they are all great products).
    - ChuckMcM 15y ago
      I agree, although its the 'light users' thing. I see folks who own iPads as fashion accessories and have no use for them at all too. My claim was that if that was the only category of user, then the overall sales figures would be much smaller (the 'fashion' user base is limited). I've seen business folks (sales people for example) come to meetings with an iPad as their only tool, they type on it like they might a laptop. It doesn't seem to be 'fashion' for them. And there are folks who use them as color e-readers too. I've got my entire O'Reilly book collection on mine, not something I thought would be useful but it is. And there are the kids in schools using them to replace textbooks. Its hard to get real data without actually polling those users to see if they are 'just experimenting' or if they have changed their workflow to require an iPad or tablet. If its the latter the change is durable. Sales volume of 15 million for the iPad 1? [1] And more than 20 million projected for the iPad 2? That many 'light' users who have $500 minimum to shell out for a fashion accessory? (if they are re-buying and the bizjournal article says they are) then really that is over $1000 for that accessory. So I'm interested in what the actual use case is that it putting iPads into people's hands and keeping them there. [1] http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2011/03/14/apples-ipad-sales-blow-past-projections.html http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2011/03/14/apples-ip...

ChuckMcM 15y ago

I disagree with this. "Sexy" can get you in the door, but only if you actually solve some need (perhaps not yet known) can you develop market share. If the iPad had only sold 240K machines the first year then you'd say "Its just a sexy device without solving a real problem." But it did much more than that. So you go back and ask "What was it?" And that is what market research is all about. I don't know, I've not surveyed thousands of iPad owners why they bought, how much they use now, if they would upgrade, so I can only go by the limited exposure to friends, family, and various hacker types. The itch it seemed to scratch, which was un-met by the 'touch' was "instant on access to email and web." The 'conventional' wisdom was that this "wasn't enough" to justify a $500 - $900 purchase. Or a laptop would be the answer. Apparently the wisdom was wrong. There are other things it does of course, and more all the time. I got into a fierce one sided debate inside Google where I was advocating e-readers were important and being countered with "your stupid, I can do that on my phone, no one will buy an e-reader who isn't stupid." (Almost word for word, seriously) You can't see what you can't see. So while I agree that a strong brand can sell stuff which isn't useful, developing beyond the afficiandos takes actual value which the iPad (and tablets) seem to have.

MatthewPhillips 15y ago
I'm upvoting you for a well-written, well-reasoned reply but I'm not convinced. Chrome OS's sweet spot is instant on web and email also, but I'd venture to guess it isn't going to sell nearly as well as the iPad has/will. Certainly it's not as good in other areas, but if that really is what this trend boils down to it should be a big success as well. I've never heard a potential iPad owner give a reason for wanting an iPad. The iPad is a fashion accessory. I've seen people crowd around them at parties during the early days lustfully wanting it, but no one mentioned apps or email or anything like that. Or anything about the experience at all.
- ZeroGravitas 15y ago
  A related comment that supports your thesis: From the developer of the highly successful Professor Layton games for Nintendo DS: "from our analysis, we found that light users – users who had the Nintendo DS Lite system – were more likely to possess a game system for the sensation of having a popular item than because they were seeking ultimate excitement and quality from games." http://www.nintendo.co.uk/NOE/en_GB/news/iwata/iwata_asks_-_nintendo_3ds_third_party_game_developers_31641_31607.html#top http://www.nintendo.co.uk/NOE/en_GB/news/iwata/iwata_asks_-_... Sounds like the description of a lot of iPhone and iPad users to me. (Note I have a DS and an iPhone, and family have iPads, and think they are all great products).
  - ChuckMcM 15y ago
    I agree, although its the 'light users' thing. I see folks who own iPads as fashion accessories and have no use for them at all too. My claim was that if that was the only category of user, then the overall sales figures would be much smaller (the 'fashion' user base is limited). I've seen business folks (sales people for example) come to meetings with an iPad as their only tool, they type on it like they might a laptop. It doesn't seem to be 'fashion' for them. And there are folks who use them as color e-readers too. I've got my entire O'Reilly book collection on mine, not something I thought would be useful but it is. And there are the kids in schools using them to replace textbooks. Its hard to get real data without actually polling those users to see if they are 'just experimenting' or if they have changed their workflow to require an iPad or tablet. If its the latter the change is durable. Sales volume of 15 million for the iPad 1? [1] And more than 20 million projected for the iPad 2? That many 'light' users who have $500 minimum to shell out for a fashion accessory? (if they are re-buying and the bizjournal article says they are) then really that is over $1000 for that accessory. So I'm interested in what the actual use case is that it putting iPads into people's hands and keeping them there. [1] http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2011/03/14/apples-ipad-sales-blow-past-projections.html http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2011/03/14/apples-ip...