5 ms·
Not so sure. From mid-to-late 90s onwards a mobile phone was basically an essential item. I was never tempted to buy an iPod, but combine the phone and iPod a
by richrichardsson 2y ago
Not so sure.
From mid-to-late 90s onwards a mobile phone was basically an essential item.
I was never tempted to buy an iPod, but combine the phone and iPod and give me internet access to boot... sold.
- latexr 2y ago> I was never tempted to buy an iPod, but combine the phone and iPod and give me internet access to boot... sold. Before the iPhone there were already phones which could play music and access the web. I even remember some Motorolas which interacted directly with iTunes. The iPhone didn’t succeed just by smooshing those together. Either way, that’s neither here nor there, the point is precisely that Apple didn’t shy away from cannibalising their own product.
- frumper 2y agoIt was cannibalizing a cheaper iPod for a more expensive iPhone. iPad would be taking from the more expensive MacBook market.
- rickdeckard 2y agoI don't know how it is relevant what Apple did on other products, especially "pre-iPhone". The point is that TODAY the PC line and the iPad line of Apple are quite notable silo'ed to very specific usage-patterns. There is no technical reason for that, but the distinct commercial reason that there is nothing to gain in terms of revenue or profit by combining the two products into one. They both sell fine and at great margin separately, there is little to gain by building an iPad Pro that is 2000 USD and supports the use-cases of both a 600 USD iPad and a 1600 USD MacBook respectively. Quite bluntly: You want the iPad to be convenient in a workflow as far as possible, and then SUCK really bad in a way only a fully synchronized Macbook can fix.