4 ms·

The iPad is going to incrementally get better and more capable (in terms of specs and software) at a much faster rate than PCs will. Some OEMs have left the PC

by IBM 12y ago

The iPad is going to incrementally get better and more capable (in terms of specs and software) at a much faster rate than PCs will. Some OEMs have left the PC business and others are under-investing in it given the trend in the PC market. Even Intel has delayed Broadwell which is likely a result of trying to control CapEx (they certainly cancelled a new factory recently because of it). I think in the fullness of time the iPad will gain at the expense of PCs, they're just much more pleasurable and approachable for most people (and I can imagine a scenario where an iPad would dock with a typical monitor and keyboard setup and be powerful enough to handle most "heavier" computing tasks for people). Tim Cook mentioned that in emerging markets iPads grow much faster and that's likely because it is their main computer. Also I don't think Apple is too worried about a larger iPhone cannibalizing iPads. A larger iPhone would likely sell for $750 (for 5.5 inches) which is much more than most people spend on an iPad and likely carries higher margins.

pjmlp 12y ago
> Tim Cook mentioned that in emerging markets iPads grow much faster and that's likely because it is their main computer. Where do they get the money from?
- IBM 12y ago
  Work I presume.
- eevilspock 12y ago
  Tablets are cheaper than current laptops in almost every way: - hardware cheaper - software is cheaper - cost of ownership is cheaper (time spent keeping it working, security costs, etc) - tend to be cloud oriented, and cloud services are often free. All of the above applies to Chromebooks, which are laptops of course.
- phr4ts 12y ago
  This is a valid question. From first hand experience, at least in the short term - gadgets above $400 would remain niche in third-world countries. Unless... get its hands dirty by taking control of its refurbished and older generation products for developing markets.
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    Emerging markets != 3rd world countries. Cook is referring to China, and there is plenty of money here. I believe their Sanlitun store in Beijing has the highest per-day gross of any other store in the world. And they have just begun to make inroads in 2nd and 3rd tier cities, where there is also money. India also has an emerging middle class, though nothing like China yet.
  - curiouscats 12y ago
    China alone has more people that can afford an expensive phone/tablet than can in the USA (the USA has a higher % that can). India likely has more than the USA, if not they will in 5 years. Indonesia has many people that can… The percentage of income spent on such gadgets (and cell phone plans) etc. is much higher for most customers in the non rich countries (essentially OECD) but those non-rich countries have over a billion people that are willing to spend a lot of money on gadgets. And beyond those spending a lot of there money on gadgets in non-rich countries, there are hundreds of millions that are actually wealthy even in comparison to the USA in China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Thailand etc.. The countries economies are changing amazingly quickly. Overall many are still extremely poor but many are also as rich enough to be above median income in the USA. I am pretty sure there are way more people above median USA income outside the rich countries North America, Europe, Japan (and go ahead and include Korea, Australia and New Zealand) than live in those rich countries.
codeulike 12y ago
I can imagine a scenario where an iPad would dock with a typical monitor and keyboard setup and be powerful enough to handle most "heavier" computing tasks for people So then the question is - why have a separate OS for tablets as compared to laptops? The current reason is not so much to do with the UI but more to do with management of limited resources. OS's like iOS and Android are very aggressive about preserving memory and processor cycles as a way of squeezing extra life out of batteries. On phones that different-OS resource advantage will probably continue. But on tablets, its less clear. As the intel chips get better at low power, a tablet running a 'full fat' operating system becomes more feasible. This is what the Surface Pro 3 shows, whatever you think of it as a device: You _can_ run a full OS on a powerful processor in a fairly thin, fairly light tablet. Not the thinnest, and not the lightest, but still it raises the question: Why do tablets need a different OS? Microsoft are tackling that question now, I think Apple will ultimately need to tackle it as well.
- IBM 12y ago
  In my scenario I imagine the iPad customer as primarily getting their computing done on the tablet but having the option to use a larger screen for certain edge cases (mostly to illustrate the increase in capability over time). I don't think tablets will completely subsume PCs and that PCs will have a role to play for people who actually need it. Having a separate OS designed for that interaction model will net an overall better experience without having to make compromises in some way.
- eevilspock 12y ago
  "The current reason is not so much to do with the UI" It has a great deal to do with UI.
  - codeulike 12y ago
    I disagree. Layering a new UI on top of an existing OS is a lot of work, but ultimately thats all it is - another layer. What iOS and Android do that is fundamentally different to OSX and other desktop OSs is not so much to do with the UI, its to do with quickly killing or hibernating any process that isn't being used right at that time. When you learn to write an app for iOS or Android, the first thing you learn is that your app needs to be ready to freeze and save state at a moments notice, and then re-hydrate itself later, also at a moments notice. This is the fundamental difference in the OS, not the touchscreen and widgets.
fpgeek 12y ago
> Tim Cook mentioned that in emerging markets iPads grow much faster and that's likely because it is their main computer. In emerging markets, the most common "main computer" isn't a tablet, it's a smartphone, by a mile. That points directly at the iPad's huge emerging-markets weakness. A "good enough" phablet (or even just a cellular tablet since many enable phone capability outside the US) can be both more useful and cheaper than an iPad + phone (let alone smartphone) combination. That seriously limits the iPad's addressable market in a way you don't see in the developed world (where more generous budget constraints and sometimes phone subsidies change the tradeoffs).
- IBM 12y ago
  They appear to be wealthy enough for the iPad because according to Apple emerging markets are outpacing the developed markets.
  - untog 12y ago
    That isn't a great metric without examining the pace of sales in the developed world, so you know what you're comparing. And has no connection to phone sales.
  - TheAnimus 12y ago
    The branding there is incredibly strong. Some friends of mine in Vietnam run a shop, in Hoi An. They make a comfortable for local standards income, but after tax rates and costs they will have about $10k a year, not to be sniffed at, but still, not amazing income. A younger sister wanted an iPhone, it was a running joke that if she bought one, she would be sleeping out in the pig sty, the 'adults' (those over 20) consider such things excessive waste of money, but she being 17 decided to spend her 3 months wage on a second hand iPhone 4. This isn't un-common, her peer group all feel the need of it. She could have had something like a Nokia 620 which has all the apps she uses anyway, for a fraction of the price and it would have the benefit of new battery life performance. Hell I've seen shoes with the Apple logo put on them[0] there is most definitely a lot of brand power and loyalty in Vietnam and China. If they can ensure that people end up with the 'correct' Apple and not a nock off, they could do quite well. The fact that kids know how to tell the real iPhone from the fact clones is enough, as they create peer pressure for the real thing. So yes, I can see Apple benefiting from a bunch of people in the emerging markets feeling they've 'made it' when they can afford an iPad, they still are a long way of affording a car. [0] http://imgur.com/GlwsA5d http://imgur.com/GlwsA5d
stock_toaster 12y ago
The ipad also seems to be growing in point of sale and backend warehouse usage.

by IBM 12y ago

pjmlp 12y ago

> Tim Cook mentioned that in emerging markets iPads grow much faster and that's likely because it is their main computer. Where do they get the money from?

IBM 12y ago
Work I presume.
eevilspock 12y ago
Tablets are cheaper than current laptops in almost every way: - hardware cheaper - software is cheaper - cost of ownership is cheaper (time spent keeping it working, security costs, etc) - tend to be cloud oriented, and cloud services are often free. All of the above applies to Chromebooks, which are laptops of course.
phr4ts 12y ago
This is a valid question. From first hand experience, at least in the short term - gadgets above $400 would remain niche in third-world countries. Unless... get its hands dirty by taking control of its refurbished and older generation products for developing markets.
- seanmcdirmid 12y ago
  Emerging markets != 3rd world countries. Cook is referring to China, and there is plenty of money here. I believe their Sanlitun store in Beijing has the highest per-day gross of any other store in the world. And they have just begun to make inroads in 2nd and 3rd tier cities, where there is also money. India also has an emerging middle class, though nothing like China yet.
- curiouscats 12y ago
  China alone has more people that can afford an expensive phone/tablet than can in the USA (the USA has a higher % that can). India likely has more than the USA, if not they will in 5 years. Indonesia has many people that can… The percentage of income spent on such gadgets (and cell phone plans) etc. is much higher for most customers in the non rich countries (essentially OECD) but those non-rich countries have over a billion people that are willing to spend a lot of money on gadgets. And beyond those spending a lot of there money on gadgets in non-rich countries, there are hundreds of millions that are actually wealthy even in comparison to the USA in China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Thailand etc.. The countries economies are changing amazingly quickly. Overall many are still extremely poor but many are also as rich enough to be above median income in the USA. I am pretty sure there are way more people above median USA income outside the rich countries North America, Europe, Japan (and go ahead and include Korea, Australia and New Zealand) than live in those rich countries.

codeulike 12y ago

I can imagine a scenario where an iPad would dock with a typical monitor and keyboard setup and be powerful enough to handle most "heavier" computing tasks for people So then the question is - why have a separate OS for tablets as compared to laptops? The current reason is not so much to do with the UI but more to do with management of limited resources. OS's like iOS and Android are very aggressive about preserving memory and processor cycles as a way of squeezing extra life out of batteries. On phones that different-OS resource advantage will probably continue. But on tablets, its less clear. As the intel chips get better at low power, a tablet running a 'full fat' operating system becomes more feasible. This is what the Surface Pro 3 shows, whatever you think of it as a device: You _can_ run a full OS on a powerful processor in a fairly thin, fairly light tablet. Not the thinnest, and not the lightest, but still it raises the question: Why do tablets need a different OS? Microsoft are tackling that question now, I think Apple will ultimately need to tackle it as well.

IBM 12y ago
In my scenario I imagine the iPad customer as primarily getting their computing done on the tablet but having the option to use a larger screen for certain edge cases (mostly to illustrate the increase in capability over time). I don't think tablets will completely subsume PCs and that PCs will have a role to play for people who actually need it. Having a separate OS designed for that interaction model will net an overall better experience without having to make compromises in some way.
eevilspock 12y ago
"The current reason is not so much to do with the UI" It has a great deal to do with UI.
- codeulike 12y ago
  I disagree. Layering a new UI on top of an existing OS is a lot of work, but ultimately thats all it is - another layer. What iOS and Android do that is fundamentally different to OSX and other desktop OSs is not so much to do with the UI, its to do with quickly killing or hibernating any process that isn't being used right at that time. When you learn to write an app for iOS or Android, the first thing you learn is that your app needs to be ready to freeze and save state at a moments notice, and then re-hydrate itself later, also at a moments notice. This is the fundamental difference in the OS, not the touchscreen and widgets.

fpgeek 12y ago

> Tim Cook mentioned that in emerging markets iPads grow much faster and that's likely because it is their main computer. In emerging markets, the most common "main computer" isn't a tablet, it's a smartphone, by a mile. That points directly at the iPad's huge emerging-markets weakness. A "good enough" phablet (or even just a cellular tablet since many enable phone capability outside the US) can be both more useful and cheaper than an iPad + phone (let alone smartphone) combination. That seriously limits the iPad's addressable market in a way you don't see in the developed world (where more generous budget constraints and sometimes phone subsidies change the tradeoffs).

IBM 12y ago
They appear to be wealthy enough for the iPad because according to Apple emerging markets are outpacing the developed markets.
- untog 12y ago
  That isn't a great metric without examining the pace of sales in the developed world, so you know what you're comparing. And has no connection to phone sales.
- TheAnimus 12y ago
  The branding there is incredibly strong. Some friends of mine in Vietnam run a shop, in Hoi An. They make a comfortable for local standards income, but after tax rates and costs they will have about $10k a year, not to be sniffed at, but still, not amazing income. A younger sister wanted an iPhone, it was a running joke that if she bought one, she would be sleeping out in the pig sty, the 'adults' (those over 20) consider such things excessive waste of money, but she being 17 decided to spend her 3 months wage on a second hand iPhone 4. This isn't un-common, her peer group all feel the need of it. She could have had something like a Nokia 620 which has all the apps she uses anyway, for a fraction of the price and it would have the benefit of new battery life performance. Hell I've seen shoes with the Apple logo put on them[0] there is most definitely a lot of brand power and loyalty in Vietnam and China. If they can ensure that people end up with the 'correct' Apple and not a nock off, they could do quite well. The fact that kids know how to tell the real iPhone from the fact clones is enough, as they create peer pressure for the real thing. So yes, I can see Apple benefiting from a bunch of people in the emerging markets feeling they've 'made it' when they can afford an iPad, they still are a long way of affording a car. [0] http://imgur.com/GlwsA5d http://imgur.com/GlwsA5d

stock_toaster 12y ago

The ipad also seems to be growing in point of sale and backend warehouse usage.