Silly iPad Spoilsports
It seems the success of the iPod and iPhone didn’t teach them a thing! Here’s the new list of iPad naysayers. Enjoy. (To be updated regularly.)
Michael Scalisi in PC World (July 2009):
“Rumored Apple Tablet Is a Train Wreck”
“I’m no Apple hater, and I welcome an Apple device to the (don’t call it a) netbook market, but I’ve got to think this device would be a flop. This concept is such a train wreck from start to finish that I don’t know where to begin.”
“If Apple wants to release something mind-blowing, it could release a clamshell device with two displays and have the bottom one double as a virtual keyboard and multi-touch input device.”
Sounds like a winner.
Scott Moritz of TheStreet.com (November 2009):
“Apple’s got a tough position here. ... What they need is something to succeed where the iPhone and the iPod are starting to slow down, or peak. They’ve chosen the tablet. It’s gonna be tough one. People don’t really go for tablets so much.”
“[T]here just isn’t much of a market to measure tablets by, no existing market, so they have to create one. That’s tough, especially if you’re Apple.”
“I don’t think the tablet’s it ... I don’t think that’s their magic pill that’s gonna solve their problems.”
Translation: We all know Apple has “problems” — they had problems in the ’90s, didn’t they? That’s just who they are: a company with problems. Apple’s in a “tough position” — they were in a tough position in the ’90s, right? That’s just what Apple is: a company in a tough position. Apple’s products are “slowing down” &mdash they were...well, you get the idea. God, I miss the ’90s.
Rob Enderle of the Enderle Group (December 2009):
“Why JooJoo may critically savage the Apple Tablet”
“[T]he jury is still largely out on this [all-touchscreen] format with challenging devices from RIM, Palm, and Google often showcasing that keyboards are necessary.”
“[Steve Jobs] has never, to my knowledge, faced a situation where a nearly identical product has done very badly a few months before his launch.
JooJoo Souring the Well
The JooJoo is therefore problematic because it approaches the market using what should be an unsuccessful path and its messy birth may effectively sour the well for the Apple tablet turning the market against it before Apple can act to set a better impression.”
“In short it [JooJoo] was initially positioned as the first of what was likely to be a series of successful tablet products based around web media services likely capped by the Apple tablet that, even before announcement, many thought would be the most successful of all. But the first of the series would set the tone for those that followed.”
“Apple’s Problem
It would likely be OK if we said that the JooJoo would fail because of bad naming or because of the CrunchGear divorce but once we go negative we tend to get creative and pick on other limitations of the device. These limitations which include the lack of a keyboard, the size of the device, and the price will be shared by every other device in the class including Apple. It will be nearly impossible for someone saying that $500 is too much, a large screen device is too big, and a laptop is better for this use to suddenly reverse themselves for a nearly identical device with an Apple brand.”
At long last, I think I’ve finally figured out Enderle’s MO: (1) Desperately think up some vaguely plausible scenario of near-future Apple failure. (2) Develop this scenario in your head and convince yourself that it’s true, because you can’t bear the thought that it might not be. (3) Enthusiastically describe this scenario in an article, as if it’s practically a forgone conclusion. (4) When your prediction spectacularly fails to occur, forget about it and go back to step 1.
Joe Wilcox on Betanews (January 2010):
“Apple’s rumored tablet computer cannot live up to the hype ...”
“I’ll assert what should be obvious to anyone thinking rationally and not emotionally: Tablet is a nowhere category. For all the hype about an Apple tablet, it is at best a niche product. The world doesn’t need an Apple tablet, no matter what the hype about rumored features or regardless of what actually releases (if anything).”
“[T]ablets cannot succeed in the current market.”
“Tablet is a Niche Product, Period”
“Microsoft has taken three shots at tablets, without much success”
“[The tablet] will remain a niche device, no matter how innovative is Apple’s design or user interface.”
“There is something about the rumored Apple tablet and its timing that is eerily familiar. History tends to repeat, which for companies is their repeating past mistakes. In summer 2000, Apple released the ill-fated Power Mac G4 Cube. ...”
“If the tablet can’t meet the hype, or turns out to fill a niche market, what happens to the price of Apple shares?”
An even better question: What happens to the price of Apple’s shares if investors read Wilcox’s article and decide they better sell fast? We all know the answer to that one.
Niche market: making a modest living writing tech-news articles in which you try to drag down a company you hate.
Non-niche market: making the first tablet computer that doesn’t suck donkey schlong.
Rupert Neate of Telegraph.co.uk (January 2010):
“Microsoft may upstage Apple with new ‘tablet’ handheld computer”
“The device [expected to be announced by Steve Ballmer] could be a major blow to Apple, ...”
As an Apple fan, I’m immensely relieved that HP just cancelled this tablet. Apple dodged a bullet on that one.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (January 2010):
“Shipping in the second half of 2010, [the Lenovo IdeaPad U1] is the device that will make Apple’s supposed tablet look silly.”
Can’t wait! As I write this, 2010 is almost half over. Should be a wicked battle — unless the IdeaPad U1 just knocks over the iPad in a single stroke.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (January 2010):
“Exclusive! Microsoft To Announce Tablet PC Before Apple!
The tech industry is tripping over itself to promote Apple’s maybe-it-is-maybe-it-isn’t Tablet computing device, but Microsoft has their number: I can now reveal that Microsoft and its PC maker partners will announce and then deliver their own Tablet PC well before Apple. And I have an exclusive photo of a prototype of this unbelievable, trend-setting, and innovative product ... ... from 2001. The devices shipped in 2002. Almost eight years ago.
And if you’re really in the mood for some time travelling and reality checking, please go back and read my COMDEX Fall 2001 coverage, where I describe Microsoft’s entry into this market.”
That’s true. You know what else is true? Every single person who’s walked through the doors of COMDEX for the past six years has received a free Microsoft tablet computer. Slick-looking, very polished, and highly functional. I’m not kidding. They really have. All of them.
Bill Snyder in PCWorld (January 2010):
“Apple Tablet Won’t Mean Business”
“[I]f you run a small business and want to avoid wasting money and brain cells on superfluous technology, forget about the iSlate or whatever Apple is going to call its tablet computing device. It’s going to be too expensive, it does things you don’t need to do, and it will add a messy layer of complication to your company’s computing infrastructure.”
“Business technology should contribute to efficiency. A real laptop or netbook does real work that helps a business succeed.”
Unsuccessful business: eking out a living writing tech-news articles preemptively bashing a company you despise.
Successful business: making the first tablet computer that doesn’t blow whale dong.
John Sullivan of the Free Software Foundation (January 2010):
“If Jobs and Apple are actually committed to creativity, freedom, and individuality, they should prove it by eliminating the restrictions that make creativity and freedom illegal.”
Where by “freedom” Sullivan means the freedom of computer owners to rip off whatever apps a small minority of creative software authors are desperate enough to write for a pirate’s-field-day system, and the freedom of the great majority of creative software authors to spend all day in a cubicle processing insurance transactions, so at least they can get a piracy-proof paycheck every two weeks.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (January 2010):
“Apple Drops an iDud”
“I’m astonished this isn’t nicer looking or more interesting.”
“OK, this has to be a joke. ... It’s a joke. It’s gotta be.”
“I can almost hear Apple’s stock price dropping every second this demo goes on.”
“Overall, this is a letdown. I’d be surprised to see anyone try to claim otherwise.”
No, Paul, a letdown is when you thought you were going to like it, and you didn’t. You weren’t let down by the iPad any more than your readers were let down by your reaction to it (assuming they’ve been following your writings since Commodore died).
Peter Smith of ITWorld (January 2010):
“[A] lot of you are underwhelmed by the iPad. But there’s much more to the tablet world than Apple’s latest creation. According to Digitimes (via Engadget), MSI’s 10" tablet is coming during the second half of 2010.”
The second half of 2010 promises to be really awful for the iPad. First the Lenovo IdeaPad U1, now this. Enjoy your iPad while you can!
Alex Payne of Twitter (January 2010):
“If I had to pick one predominant emotion in reaction [to the iPad], it would be ‘disturbed’.”
“The iPad is an attractive, thoughtfully designed, deeply cynical thing.”
“The tragedy of the iPad is that it truly seems to offer a better model of computing for many people — perhaps the majority of people. Gone are the confusing concepts and metaphors of the last thirty years of computing. Gone is the ability to endlessly tweak and twiddle towards no particular gain. The iPad is simple, straightforward, maintenance-free; everything that’s been proven with the success of the iPhone, but more so.”
Hey, you can keep fiddling and maintaining with a Windows laptop to your heart’s content. Or a Commodore 64. I’m sure you can still buy them on the internet. The only thing you can’t do now is get widespread respect and admiration for that fiddling and maintaining. If you want respect, you now need to write a quality, end-user app. Not a hacker tool. Not a funky system mod. Not a programming efficiency widget. A real app. You know. Like Photoshop or something. So get to work; it’s not a weekend project.
Mike Halsey, author of Windows 7 Power Users Guide (January 2010):
“[T]he iPad will fail and help Windows 7 to succeed”
“Quite simply this time Apple have got it wrong.”
“MSI and Dell chose today to release details of their own forthcoming tablet devices, and both look gorgeous, especially the Dell (pictured).”
“They will all undercut Apple considerably and provide tablets for the price of a netbook, the price they should be.
This is excellent news FOR Windows 7.”
“All this will have come about because Apple have done the R&D and released a product that’s been instantly derided as ugly and not what people want. If I were Steve Ballmer today, I’d be splashing out on an extra skiing holiday.”
Actually, assuming he can ski at all, Ballmer can take as many skiing holidays as he likes, even if his company never has another hit besides Windows and Office. Heck, he’s been spending several billion dollars per year on R&D with virtually no ROI, so what’s a few ski vacations? If he can’t be fired for sweat-soaked screaming fits on stage, what’s a few ski vacations?
And Dell’s gonna have a tablet too? On top of MSI and Lenovo? Man, later this year Apple doesn’t stand a chance against three big competitors!
Dan Frommer in Business Insider (January 2010):
“The Truth About Apple’s iPad: It’s A Big Yawn”
“[Jobs] didn’t deliver.”
“Apple fans hoping for the next revolution ... should be disappointed.”
Maybe “Apple fans” were disappointed. But the general electronics-buying public? Not so much.
John Dvorak on MarketWatch (January 2010):
“Apple’s ‘revolutionary’ iPad leaves fans wanting.”
“[P]eople are grousing.”
“It’s not a good sign. Apple is fallible!”
“[I]t’s going to take Apple at least one more, if not two more, iterations to get this right. And that assumes it even wants to get it right.”
“I’m of the opinion and hope that this device is only released as a market test ...”
“Insanely great it is not.”
“Let’s look at the basic flaws people are complaining about. First of all there is no stylus. ... [People] expect a Wacom-like input ...”
“It seems more destined to impact the market for the Sony Portable Playstation than anything else.
The tablet market has only succeeded as a niche market over the years and it was hoped Apple would dream up some new paradigm to change all that. From what I’ve seen and heard, this won’t be it.”
Hey, isn’t Dvorak the guy who said that “Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone?” And that the iPhone would be “passé within three months?” Didn’t he also say, “There is no likelihood that Apple can be successful in a business this competitive,” and, “It should [sell off the iPhone as a reference design] immediately before it’s too late?”
Nah. Couldn’t be the same guy.
Randall C. Kennedy of InfoWorld (January 2010):
“Act now to avoid the Apple tablet apocalypse”
“I hate disruptive technologies. They’re antithetical to all that’s sane and stable in enterprise IT.”
“Assuming a third-quarter ship date, this fruity new wonder could prove to be the hottest item under the Christmas tree. And that means that, come January 2011, IT shops will be inundated with idiot users ...”
“All hell will break loose. First, IT will discover that these first-generation devices are buggy. ... It’ll be a real mess.”
“[C]onsumers will insist on using the new toy as their primary computing environments. ... Basically, it’s a recipe for disaster.
So what can IT do to thwart the coming Apple tablet-pocalypse? First, an outright ban is in order. Use whatever excuse you think carries the most weight. ... Then seek to contain the situation by offering up an alternative tablet solution running the IT-supported and IT-approved Windows 7 operating system.”
“And pay special attention to the higher-profile users in the executive suites. Seed them early on with their own prophylactic, Windows-based tablet alternatives. Because if just one of these individuals manages to pick up Apple’s latest fruity abomination — and brings it into the office — you’ll never be rid of the things.”
Dude, we’re just past four months into 2010, and Apple’s sold a million iPads already. Hope you got your ban in place really fast. And how’re your executives doing with those non-existent Windows 7 tablets? Better make a quick call to Microsoft and tell them to ship you those tablets, pronto. They’ll get right on that, I’m sure.
We all know why you hate Apple, Randall. The typical corporate IT department has had a borderline-corrupt relationship with Microsoft for years and years, in which Microsoft sells lots of shitty products to the IT department, and the IT department makes lots of money providing badly needed support for the users of those products. Apple, which refuses to make shitty, support-ravenous products, threatens to “disrupt” that cozy relationship. Waaaah.
Jeremy A. Kaplan of FOX News (January 2010):
“Has Apple Lost Its Mojo?”
“The company once notorious for its ability to upend conventions and revolutionize markets may no longer have what it takes, worry some technology journalists. Call it the iPad or the iPlod, the message seems clear: Apple may have lost its mojo.”
“So what is it about the iPad that so turned off the public?”
“[O]n the whole, consumers and journalists seem unimpressed with the latest and greatest from Cupertino.”
You might be honestly unaware of this, Jeremy, but the only thing those “technology journalists” are “worried” about is that their latest, greatest, anti-Apple screeds may not be any more effective against the iPad than they were against the iPod or the iPhone.
Harry McCracken on Technologizer (January 2010):
“Whose iPad is It, Anyway?”
“What’s the single most worrisome thing about the iPad? ... It’s Apple’s monopoly on distribution of applications. ... For lots of people, that’s a dealbreaker on both philosophical and practical grounds.”
“Emotionally and rationally, I want the iPhone/iPad platform to be open. I still believe it’ll happen.”
Emphasis on “emotionally” and “believe.”
John Breeden II on GCN (January 2010):
“I’ve been covering and reviewing notebooks and battery technology for the past decade, and I know what the current technology is capable of. There is no way that a 1.5-pound computer is going to be able to drive an IPS display for ten hours as Steve Jobs claims. It just can’t happen. Perhaps if you let the iPad lapse into standby mode, you could squeeze it. But if you are actually using the device, my estimate would be less than three hours of power, and that’s being generous.”
“Unless Apple has also developed some new type of power source, such as nuclear cells or magical hamsters on tiny spinning wheels for the iPad, don’t expect the claims about battery life to hold true. The candle that blazes the brightest is always the first to go out.”
Yep, people tested it, and it turns out it’s not ten hours. More like eleven.
Scott Moritz on TheStreet.com (January 2010):
“Behold: The Apple iFlop”
“[T]he list of iPad’s shortcomings is surprisingly long, especially considering all the years and number of prototypes Jobs and Apple have worked through to get here.”
“Apple, in its characteristically control-freakish way, restricts applications that can be installed and files that can be loaded. In other words, ‘your’ stuff has to go through Apple channels.”
“Bigger issues, like the iPad’s underpowered iPhone OS software, also loom large in the fevered frustrations of free-speaking fans.”
Hey, isn’t Moritz the guy who made up a phony million-unit sales target for the iPhone’s opening weekend? Nah. Couldn’t be the same guy.
David Coursey of PCWorld (January 2010):
“Apple iPad is Just Another DOA”
“Has Steve Jobs’ fabled reality distortion field finally failed its creator?”
“[Y]ou can buy a much more functional notebook or netbook for less.”
“[H]ype is part of Apple’s marketing plan, so it’s unlikely the company will do anything to rein it in.”
“It’s not supposed to be that new products are better liked before launch than after.”
Hey, isn’t Coursey the guy who said that users were ”turning against the iPhone” last August? And that “you might find a more attractive [non-Apple] option in a few months, especially if the iPhone’s downhill slide continues?” Or that “Apple doesn’t care about its customers?”
Nah. Couldn’t be the same guy.
Russ Willcox, CEO of E-Ink (January 2010):
“E-readers will outsell iPads because of the simple economics of the consumer device market.”
When will that happen — five years from now, or ten?
Linen DeFiller on MillionFace (January 2010):
“Apple iPad — failure, joke or fiasco? Pick one”
Comparing with HP Slate:
Multitasking: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Flash: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Real PC Apps: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Real OS: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
USB Port: Slate (yes), iPad (no)
Pen/stylus input: Slate (yes), iPad (no)”
“Apple took a bunch of pre-existing technology and put it into a bastard child that doesn’t have a home anywhere: fail.”
“I just can’t fathom what individual is dumb enough to shell out money for this.”
“This is much more a media player than a productivity tool. It maybe worth using for social media, surfing and watching movies in the airplane.”
“How about the power usage to keep the fancy color slate to lit up for hours?”
“Why on earth will I hold a big slate to my ear when my phone is in my pocket. So, you’re saying that I’ll put another SIM into the iPad? Ridiculous.
It seems Apple is trying too hard to fill some imaginary gap between smartphones and laptops/netbooks.”
“[I]t’s not really a tablet computer.”
“[T]he fact is you’re limited by Apple in every way they can limit you. ... Until you hack it to run Chrome OS, you’re going to be using this thing exactly the way Apple tells you to.”
How’re those HP Slate purchasers liking their acquisition, Linen? Asked any of them lately?
Molly Wood of CNET (January 2010):
“iPad — who is it good for? Absolutely no one. Who needs this thing?”
“I added it up, and like 800 people are gonna buy the iPad.”
“It’s hard to argue the fact that this week’s Apple iPad launch disappointed the tech crowd ...”
“[T]he iPad is hampered by a well-documented string of missing features ...”
“No one should actually buy this iPad — between its inevitable first-generation bugs, fulfillment problems, and buyer’s remorse over added features and price drops, it’s heartbreak waiting to happen. Try to think of the iPad as, like, a proof of concept. A concept car, even. A work in progress, really.”
“[T]he iPad is a product in search of a market. It’s kind of poorly implemented, feature-wise; it’s been poorly articulated, market-wise; and it’s hard to imagine why on earth you’d ever need such a thing at such a price.”
Good thing you got this video out around the beginning of February, Molly. That gave it about two full months to seem possibly credible.
Sarah Perez of The New York Times (February 2010):
“[C]onsumers will have to make a choice: what sort of tablet is the future of computing? Apple’s locked-down and closed ecosystem of apps running on proprietary hardware or Google’s browser-based OS that’s as open as the web itself?”
“Google’s tablet will have one major advantage over Apple’s iPad: it will have an open application platform.
The only problem is getting consumers to understand what being open means...and care.”
So we have to make sure consumers understand that “open” is an advantage, because otherwise — it won’t be an advantage. We have to make sure Google beats Apple because otherwise — they won’t.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (February 2010):
“Jobs isn’t interested in Flash, and not because it’s buggy or performance challenge. Instead, Jobs is interested in control. And Flash isn’t going to make it on his devices.”
“[T]he vast majority of users only have a small handful of apps (5 to 10) on their phone and regularly use even less. So this app ecosystem does benefit a small number of developers greatly, but most of them, of course, make nothing.”
“If sales are down, just invent a ‘new product category.’ The lemmings will wait in line.”
“Apple, as it turns out, isn’t really so benevolent. I’m curious that we’ve got another Google/Microsoft in the making here and that no one seems to have an issue with this. Price fixing in collusion with the publishing industry? Creating a closed, central clearing house for selling other company’s products? Orchestrating products to shut out competition? Doesn’t all this sound kind of familiar?”
It’s probably not the same 5-10 apps on everyone’s iPhone. Anyway, yeah, the majority of iPhone apps won’t make much. But still, 200,000+ apps selling to 85+ million iPhones means a lot of authors are making money. Any successful industry has a long tail of not-very-successful products. Is that a reason to develop for a different phone? Would an unsuccessful iPhone app be a killer app on some other phone? If so, that doesn’t say much for that other phone’s ecosystem...
And: the reason most people don’t have an issue with what Apple’s doing is because (a) it’s working really well, and (b) Apple made it clear from the get-go what they were doing. They didn’t create a wide-open, install-anything system, like Mac OS or Windows or Linux, then later start screwing with third-party products they decided they wanted to take over.
Wendy on Retrevo (February 2010):
“Apple iPad Hoopla Fails to Convince Buyers”
“Not only did Apple fail to convince new buyers, it may have lost many potential buyers who now say they don’t think they need an Apple tablet computer.
Consumers Lose Interest after Announcement”
“Unfortunately for Apple, the number if respondents saying they had heard about the tablet but were not interested in buying one, doubled from 25% before the announcement to over 50% following the announcement.”
“Most Consumers Don’t Think They Need an iPad”
“Whether this device becomes a big hit is anyone’s guess but based on this study it sure looks doubtful.”
Yeah, just a million sold in under a month. Bummer.
Update: Now it’s two million in under two months.
Update: Make that three million in well under three months.
Peter-Paul Koch of QuirksMode.org (February 2010):
“The iPhone obsession”
“Suppose I proposed the following:
1. IE6 is today’s most advanced browser. (Note: this was actually true back in 2000. Please bear with me.)
2. IE6’s market share is about 80%.
3. The other browsers are way worse than IE6, and developing for them is a pain; something we’re not interested in and are a bit afraid of. Therefore we will develop websites exclusively for IE6.
Would you agree with those sentiments, even if we’re back in 2000 and IE6 is really the best browser we have?”
“Warning! iCandy will damage your brain!”
“Nowadays we live in a fantasy world that focuses exclusively on one platform, and does so exclusively for reasons of eye candy.
We laughingly disown every single principle the web standards movement has ever stood for in the past ten years in order to swoon and drool over Apple’s iCandy and happily accept the reality distortion field that emanates from it.
The iPhone has become an obsession.”
“Fucking dimwits.
We’re doing exactly the same as ten years ago. We now say ‘iPhone’ instead of ‘IE6,’ but otherwise nothing’s changed.”
Nothing? So in 2000, IE6 was the one browser on which you could publish content and realistically expect that most everybody who had a computer would have to pay your asking price if they wanted to use your content? They couldn’t get a no-charges copy of your web app from their buddy down the street — but they could if you developed for any other browser? Funny — I don’t remember that.
Galen Gruman of InfoWorld (February 2010):
“[T]here’s less to Apple’s tablet than meets the eye”
“Users have been complaining about the lack of Flash support since the very first iPhone three years ago.”
“The iPad is a natural device for playing back Flash files ... Apple should let Adobe release a Flash Player app and Safari plug-in, and if Adobe screws it up, Adobe gets the blame.”
Yeah. Sure they do.
You know, Galen, Adobe’s been screwing up Flash on Apple hardware for something like a decade now. And now — surprise, surprise — they’re getting the blame: Apple doesn’t want Flash, interpreted or compiled, on its devices. So there it is, just like you said...or by “gets the blame” did you mean some hypothetical scenario, always in the future, that never actually happens? Or doesn’t happen without screwing up Apple’s plans one more time?
Bill Gates, former CEO of Microsoft (February 2010):
“You know, I’m a big believer in touch and digital reading, but I still think that some mixture of voice, the pen and a real keyboard — in other words a netbook — will be the mainstream on that. So, it’s not like I sit there and feel the same way I did with iPhone where I say, ‘Oh my God, Microsoft didn’t aim high enough.’ It’s a nice reader, but there’s nothing on the iPad I look at and say, ‘Oh, I wish Microsoft had done it.’”
Even the iPad’s most reckless doomsayers aren’t predicting it will be beaten by touch netbooks. You might be on your own on this one, Bill.
Holman Jenkins in The Wall Street Journal (February 2010):
“The Microsofting of Apple?”
“[T]his may be the year when Apple’s market cap does the unthinkable and surpasses Microsoft’s. Congratulations will be in order but so will condolences.”
“[I]t’s a fallen world we live in.”
“The iPad may not be the best Web-browsing machine simply because Apple refuses to support Flash, which delivers 75% of the video on the Web.”
“Flash would also allow iPhone and iPad users to consume video and other entertainment without going through iTunes. Flash would let users freely obtain the kinds of features they can only get now at the Apple App Store.
We hasten to add, before the net-neut crazies and antitrusters seek to perp-walk Steve Jobs, that Apple is perfectly within its rights to do so.”
But “we” don’t hasten at all to inform our readers that anyone can sell video, music, e-books, and other entertainment without using either iTunes or Flash. Do iTunes and Flash hold the secret technique by which entertainment can be delivered over the internet? Somebody forgot to tell Amazon — contact them quick, Holman, and tell them they need to shut down their entire internet media business and join your Apple-is-as-bad-as-Microsoft cause instead. I’m sure they’ll do that right away.
Joe Wilcox on BetaNews (February 2010):
“Apple should ban freebees from the iPad App Store”
“The iPad App Store should be stocked full of premium content, meaning no freebees. It’s the right way to help establish iPad as a premium product ... Unfortunately, Apple has little incentive to take this right approach benefiting its developers ... Apple’s business is about selling hardware, using software and services as differentiators.”
“If three-quarters of the apps are paid ones already, why not 100 percent on iPad?”
“If Apple is going to try and breakthrough with tablets, why not freshen the approach: Make the product even more chic by making it more exclusive ... Paid apps, and only paid apps, is one way to do it.”
“People inherently value something more they paid for than what they get for free. ... Free apps are throwaways.”
Somehow, Joe, I don’t think you have Apple’s — or its third-party developers’ — best interests at heart.
John Dvorak on MarketWatch (February 2010):
“The iPad faces industry backlash”
“The Apple iPad is not going to be the company’s next runaway best seller. Not if the industry can help it.”
“[After Apple humiliated the MP3-player industry with the iPod] It’s now trying to humiliate everyone and anyone who ever tried to push a tablet computer and I sense that this time the industry is not going to be taken to the woodshed any more for the Apple spanking. And with the iPad, Apple may have irked it’s somewhat new partner Intel Corp. Intel gets spanked by nobody.”
“So Apple snubs Intel and goes its own way. OK, so Intel decides to find a new partner who holds a grudge and do a deal. Bingo: Nokia.
I’d advise people to look into the history of Nokia. Here is a company, unlike any other in the world, that can change its business model and structure on a dime.”
John, have you been following Enderle’s four-step plan? Tsk, tsk. Word up: If they can’t make a superior product, it doesn’t matter how mad these companies might be that Apple dares to be successful. Look at Microsoft and the ka-billions it spends every year trying to find a way to upstage Apple. What’s come of that?
Randall C. Kennedy of InfoWorld (February 2010):
“iPad, the netbook killer? I think not!
Why the rumor of the netbook’s death has been greatly exaggerated, and why the iPad’s fans are way off base”
“What’s with all of the netbook hate? Apple launches its flawed — and, arguably, disappointing — iPad and suddenly everyone is piling on the anti-netbook bandwagon. The iPad will kill the netbook, says one expert. The netbook’s days are numbered, says another.”
“Those of you who follow this blog know that I’m a huge netbook fan.”
I noticed. And I don’t follow your blog.
Peter Ha in Time (March 2010):
“[I]t’s a brand-new decade, and Microsoft is about to leapfrog Apple — and every other player in the cell-phone world — with the launch of Windows Phone 7 (WP7).”
“What sets Microsoft apart? For starters, every WP7 device, regardless of manufacturer, will have a dedicated search button that gives you one-click access to Bing ...”
“[A]fter spending some time with several core members of the Windows phone team, I walked away wondering if these vibrant people worked for the same company that gave us Vista.”
“[E]very other company, including Apple, will be racing to catch up with it [WP7].”
Ha.
Jon Stokes on Ars Technica (March 2010):
“Why has Apple been so secretive about the A4?”
“Steve Jobs just loves secrets. The A4 no doubt gives him that special, ‘I have my very own custom SoC that you don’t know anything about’ feeling ...”
“[The] most likely reason behind Apple’s silence, is that the A4 just isn’t anything to write home about ...”
Apple doesn’t publish a lot of their OS/app sourcecode, either. Next time you’re bored, why don’t you throw a fit about that? Just an idea.
Galen Gruman on InfoWorld (March 2010):
“Only a fool would pre-order an iPad
This morning, the fool’s parade gets started.”
“[T]he first-generation iPad is particularly likely to have disappointments ...”
“[B]uy one when you know it really is magic — after people not employed by Apple have had a chance to really use it and put it through its paces. Until then, why send Apple your money until you know for sure? Doing so would be, well, foolish.”
“A fool and his money are soon parted, the saying goes.”
Hint: By “people not employed by Apple” Gruman means “Enderle-esque Apple loathers who will find any reason to deem the iPad a bad buy.”
Anders Bylund on The Motley Fool (March 2010):
“HP and Friends Will Kill the iPad”
“[T]he Apple iPad is not unique, nor necessarily the best of breed in the media tablet sector it is spearheading. And it ain’t gonna help Apple shareholders any.”
“[T]here’s a flash flood of competing products coming up ...”
“[T]he iPad will join the Apple TV in the footnotes of Apple’s history.”
Kind-of like the flash flood of iPod killers about five years ago? Should be good. When it starts, that is — HP just ”killed” a tablet alright: their own.
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes of ZDNet (March 2010):
“iPad: Perfectly flawed”
“[S]ince I’m not obsessed by having a particular logo on my hardware, I try to make rational decisions when it comes to spending my cash.”
“[T]he device is one big lock into the Apple ecosystem. Sure, there’ll be jailbreaks I’m sure, but that puts my device in the middle of a tug-of-war between Apple and the jailbreakers.”
“[W]eb minus Flash is a pretty poor web experience.”
“Yes, I still hate the built-in battery.”
“I think I’ll be holding onto my money for a little while...maybe anothe rvendor will come out with a tablet that offers most of the upsides but without so many downsides.”
Maybe. Hey, I hear Linen DeFiller’s hyped about the HP Slate — give him a buzz and see if he’ll let you try it out for a few minutes.
Scott Moritz on TheStreet.com (March 2010):
“Apple: Sell Before the Fall”
“While hard to picture now, Jobs and company will one day, maybe soon, fall out of step with fashion. Growth will stall. Fair-weather investors will flee to sunnier stocks. Loyal fans will become embittered. Smelling blood, critics will get even nastier.
It’s inevitable. The life cycle of tech giants is brilliant and brutally short. Today’s consumer electronics leaders are tomorrow’s fossils.”
“[E]ven the sweetest empires fall.”
“Apple has a history of making bold attacks on humble devices ...”
“The third year is a charm. The fourth year will wear thin. Apple’s 4th version of the iPhone — not to be confused with a 4G iPhone — is due this summer, and it’s not likely to be any different than the past three. Meanwhile, thinner phones have arrived like Google’s Nexus One, and bigger, brighter screens from the Motorola Droid have beaten Apple at its own game.”
“The revolutionary iPhone is getting stale. No fresh market, no fresh phone. Androids are looking like an Apple antidote.”
“The iPad is a not so ‘magical’ e-reader. Expect to hear a lot of: ‘I spent a cold night in line for this?’”
“Investors like to call [Apple’s] stock’s premium valuation ‘the Apple tax.’ It might be time for your refund.”
This article, of course, isn’t meant to be taken seriously by the general public — Scott’s just appealing to the judging board of the Enderle Awards with this one.
Don Tennant on IT Business Edge (March 2010):
“With All the iDol Worship, I’m Already Sick of the iPad”
“They should have called it the ‘iDol,’ because it’s a false god if ever there was one.”
“I can just picture Jobs cackling in delight, as once again we’ve come under the spell of a product that we desperately hope will change our sad, pathetic lives.”
Speak for yourself, Don.
Gina Trapani on Fast Company (April 2010):
“Why You Shouldn’t Buy an iPad (Yet)”
“First-generation Apple products are for suckers. Only lemmings with no self-control and excessive disposable income buy first generation Apple products, especially in a new gadget category.”
“Don’t be the guy who bought the first-gen iPad when Apple slashes the 2011 iPad price in half. Next year’s iPad will be faster, cheaper, less buggy, and have better apps ...”
Don’t buy an iPad...“yet?” So sometime in the near future you’re going to be telling your readers, “OK, buy one now?” Mmm-hmm.
Cory Doctorow on Boing Boing (April 2010):
“I’m completely uninterested in buying an iPad ...”
“[O]pen platforms and experimental amateurs ... eventually beat out the spendy, slick pros.”
“If I had a share of AOL for every time someone told me that the web would die because AOL was so easy and the web was full of garbage, I’d have a lot of AOL shares. And they wouldn’t be worth much.”
“Infantalizing hardware”
“[T]here’s also a palpable contempt for the owner. ... [I]f you can’t open it, you don’t own it. Screws not glue. The original Apple ][+ came with schematics for the circuit boards ...”
Oooh. I don’t want an “AOL” device made for ”infants,” that I can’t literally unscrew and disassemble — I better not buy an iPad. Whew; that was a close one. Thanks for the heads-up, Cory. I’m logging onto eBay right now to find me an Apple “][”+. Information age, here I come!
Jeff Jarvis on Business Insider (April 2010):
“I’m Really Worried About What Apple Is Trying To Do With The iPad”
“[The iPad is] sweet and pretty but shallow and vapid.’
“The iPad is retrograde. It tries to turn us back into an audience again.”
“I might well rebox and return it; I don’t have $500 to throw away.”
Write a great app for the iPad and maybe you will. (Or are you just an audience member?)
Don Reisinger on eWeek (April 2010):
“10 Reasons Why an iPad Is Not for You”
Hey, isn’t Reisinger the guy who said that the BlackBerry Storm had Apple executives “running scared?” And that “RIM just one-upped the founders, and Apple knows that?” Or that thanks to the Storm, “The iPhone was cool, up until yesterday?”
Nah — couldn’t be the same guy.
Jack Shafer in Slate (April 2010):
“Apple Wants To Own You
Welcome to our velvet prison, say the boys and girls from Cupertino.”
“Steve Jobs has gone from producing a computer — the original Macintosh — that he called “insanely great” to producing a computer — the iPad — that is totally insane.”
“What’s insane is the perimeter mines, tank traps, revetments, and glacis he’s deployed around these shiny devices to slow software developers to a crawl ...”
“Apple wants to play gatekeeper so it can establish itself as toll-taker. Seeing through this ruse are Frédéric Filloux, Jim Stogdill, and Cory Doctorow, whose dispatches have broadened my understanding of what sort of game Apple is playing.”
Yeah, those guys represent a broad perspective of Apple. Not a narrow one. Not a very, very narrow one.
Paul Thurrott of Paul Thurrott’s SuperSite For Windows (April 2010):
“[I]f you’re looking to copy Apple’s success — and you are [Microsoft] — then at least do it right. It’s not about the products at all. What Apple does right is marketing. It’s form over function, plain and simple.”
You’re preaching to the choir, Paul. Microsoft completely agrees with you, and has been trying to beat Apple with that exact strategy for several years now. Make some junk, then try to market the hell out of it.
Nick Farrell on TheInquirer.net (May 2010):
“Why Apple might regret the Ipad”
“THE IPAD HAS DOOMED Apple, according to market anlaysts that are expecting the tablet to spell trouble for its maker.”
“Rather than killing off the netbook, the Ipad is harming sales of the Ipod and Macbooks. It seems the buyers of Ipads would normally have got a more expensive Macbook or an Ipod Touch and apparently are clever enough not to do both.”
“Where Steve Jobs made his mistake was that he marketed the Ipad as a utopian device that can do everything that all his other products can. This is dangerous for Apple because if the Ipad can be a laptop, an Iphone, a e-reader and a music player then you do not really need any of those devices.
You can tell Nick is impartial and objective by the way he miscapitalizes iPad, iPod, and iPhone. Anyone who insists on writing those Apple product names the way Apple does is probably an irrational Apple fanatic.
Brian X. Chen on Gadget Lab (May 2010):
“5 Things Apple Must Do to Look Less Evil”
“It’s appropriate that the Apple logo on the iPad is black. The Cupertino, California, company’s image is taking on some awfully sinister tones lately.”
Getting kinda hard to criticize Apple on the quality and success of its products, huh?
Adobe’s open statement about Flash and Creative Freedom (May 2010):
“At Adobe, we believe that the open flow of creativity, ideas, and information should be limited only by the imagination.”
At Adobe, we believe that what we are permitted to do with another company’s products should be limited only by our imagination.
Paul Graham of Y Combinator (May 2010):
“I’m very afraid of a world in which we are all Steve Jobs’s slaves. If anything can save us, it might be Chrome.”
If you want an iPhone-esque explosion of apps to choose from (or make good money from, if you’re the author of a few of them), then you’re going to have to be somebody’s “slave.” A world of total freedom is a world where only deluded chumps spend serious time and effort writing cool apps.
Vic Gundotra of Google (May 2010):
“If we did not act [to create Android], we faced a draconian future where one man, one phone, one carrier was the future. That’s a future we don’t want.”
Translation: We bought Android a couple years before anyone ever heard of iPhone. And we had it ready to deploy on phones before anyone heard of iPhone. But when Microsoft’s plans to lock us out of mobile search were ruined by iPhone (which was very Google-friendly) then we found ourselves sitting on a big project that we didn’t need. And rather than mothballing it and moving on with our profitable relationship with Apple, we felt we had to use it because we’d put so much money into it — kind-of the same way Adobe feels it has to turn Flash into a modern development system because they payed so much for Macromedia. So we used Android to attack Apple. Because that’s all it was good for. Oh yeah — don’t be evil.
Paul Thurrott, winsupersite.com (May 2010):
“[I]t’s tempting to position the iPad as a netbook competitor.”
“But it is the iPad’s lack of true PC capabilities that, I think, dooms this comparison.”
“[W]hen you use an iPad, you’re typically not contributing to anything, as you can on a PC. Instead, you’re simply consuming. And this is how I think the iPad should be compared to the PC: Consumption vs. contribution.”
“When you go out and about with just an iPad, you’re sending a message that you’re not going to contribute.”
“The iPad is not a competitor to Tablet PCs either. ... The Tablet PC is a contribution device. The iPad is about consumption only.”
The Tablet what?
David Gewirtz On ZDNet (June 2010):
“[D]espite their old marketing campaign, Apple is not the company ‘for the rest of us.’ Apple’s primary goal is meeting Apple’s goals, often without regard to who is hurt along the way.”
“Weirdly, Apple seems to be almost purposely searching out segments of the tech industry to destroy. Whether it’s Apple’s war against Flash, its completely capricious application review and denial process, the way its terms of service intend to lock out third-party ad companies like AdMob, its option to remove of all Web-based advertising from Safari, its lock-out of any language besides Objective-C, or even the company’s complete lack of acknowledgment of Mac developers at its recent World-Wide Developer’s Conference, Apple seems determined to undermine developers and their ability to make a living.”
“The pain Apple is causing developers”
“By blasting Flash and Adobe, the collateral damage is to all those little development companies and all those developers, many of whom may find themselves without an income stream.”
“I’ve documented six ways in which Apple seems to be trying to kill off developers and their means of income.”
“We’re in the middle of a deep recession and this is a bad time to put people out of work.”
“What’s disturbing is the apparent gusto Apple as a company, and Steve Jobs as its leader, seem to have for disrupting the lives of its partners.
There’s just something deeply disturbing about a guy with a personal net worth of $5.5 billion dollars seeming to take such joy in throwing developers out onto the street.”
So developers who switch from Flash to Xcode, so they can sell to the already-huge-and-growing-fast iPhone and iPad markets, are...out of work? Huh?
Steve Ballmer of Microsoft (July 2010):
“This year one of the most important things that we will do in the smart device category is really push forward with Windows 7-based slates and Windows 7 phones. We want to give you a great consumer-oriented device, but a device that fits and is manageable with today’s enterprise IT solutions. ... [T]hey will all run Windows 7 ... They will run Windows 7 applications. They will run Office.”
Translation: In the 1990s, leveraging current dominance into new dominance worked really well for us. So even though it stopped working about ten years ago, we’re going to keep trying it. Actually, it’s the only strategy we know.
Don Reisinger on Channel Insider (August 2010):
“Apple’s Tablet Won’t Be A Long-Term Success”
“Tablets appeal to corporate customers. But as more tablets come to the enterprise market, one will stand above the others: Cisco’s Cius.”
“Apple’s tablet might do well for now, but as companies start realizing there are better alternatives that don’t force them into a corner, they will opt for those.”
“RIM is delivering BlackBerry 6 in the coming days and there is rampant speculation that a BlackBerry tablet is coming soon after. If so, all plans to buy an iPad should be put on hold.”
Let me get this straight, Don: You had plans to buy an iPad, but you put them on hold? Yeah. Sure you did.
Rob Enderle on TGDaily (August 2010):
“Steve Jobs was fired once and likely came close to being fired again for infractions that seemed far less damaging than what took out [HP’s] Mark Hurd ...”
“If Hurd can be fired in this new world could Larry and Steve be next?”
“CEOs are likely the closest thing we have to royalty in this age and, as a result, their temptations are also unprecedented.”
“[B]oth Apple and Oracle were founded with the idea that the Steve and Larry were special. While that didn’t initially protect Steve initially, once Apple was reborn under him that special nature was both strengthened and enhanced. In short, their respective companies accept that rules are different for their top executives who are not expected to adhere to them.”
“Given Steve Jobs, for instance, is critical to Apple’s success is there anything short of eating live babies on national TV that he should be fired for? Where would you draw that line or should he be held to the same rules and laws that the rest of us are held to?
Most CEOs are not but is a little corruption OK or should they be satisfied with simply getting paid a massive amount of money and being surrounded by luxuries and perks the rest of us can’t even imagine?”
Perks...hmm. What’s a perk? Is that anything like, say, “consulting fees” from Microsoft? That you got but the rest of us didn’t? That aren’t gonna happen so much any more as Microsoft slips into irrelevance? That will never be paid to you by Apple because — though they may eat babies on TV — they don’t pay guys like you to promote them with your “analysis,” and never will?
(Readers: I wasn’t sure whether to file this one under iPhone Party Poopers or iPad Spoilsports, so I put it here. Rob doesn’t seem to know which kick-ass-successful Apple product to bad-mouth, so he’s just nakedly attacking the company in general.)
Preston Gralla on Computerworld.com (August 2010):
“Where are Apple fanbois now? Apple becomes most reviled brand on the Net”
“Brandwatch recently released research that found that Apple is the brand most commonly associated with the term #fail.”
“It’s easy to dismiss a report like this as much ado about nothing. But, in fact, it’s a danger sign for Apple. Apple sells an aura as much as it sells products, and if that aura fades, so will Apple sales.”
Apple sales = “#fail?” Check again, Preston.
Chang Ma of LG (August 2010):
“Our tablet will be better than the iPad.”
You mean some uncertain number of months from now you’re going to introduce a new tablet that’s better than the current version of the iPad that’s on sale today and has been selling like hotcakes for several months now? Wow. You are gonna kick Apple’s ass.
Fabrice Grinda on Business Insider (August 2010):
“Apple: Short Term Winner, Long Term Loser
There is no denying Apple has had an incredible run.”
“Apple is currently on top of the world. ... However, Apple and Steve Jobs seem to be repeating a number of strategic mistakes that seem destined to relegate it to a niche player.”
“In 1984, when Apple introduced the Mac in 1984, it was revolutionary. ... However, Steve Jobs’ vertical integration driven by his desire to only have beautiful machines and software limited both innovation and the availability of software.”
“Steve Jobs seems to be repeating the same mistake all over again. ... Apple’s insistence on having a single form factor, on being a premium player at a premium price point (to carriers at least), and its arbitrary decisions with regards to what apps make it in the App Store will eventually make Apple a niche player. Even if Apple keeps innovating and has the best phone on the market, it won’t matter.”
“[W]ith the iPhone Apple has taken vertical integration one step further. It acquired PA Semi for $278 million in April 2008 and Intrinsity in 2010 and now designs its own chips. Both the iPad and the iPhone 4 run on the A4 chip it designed. This means that in addition to competing with Google, all the handset manufacturers in the world and many app makers, it now has to compete with the likes of ARM! It’s extremely hard to be world class in so many product categories and arguably Apple has just made its job of having the best smartphone on the market that much harder.”
“Fast forward 5 to 10 years and it’s not hard to imagine seeing Apple with a small (but probably very profitable) share of the smartphone market. It will be a niche player in the market it revolutionized and could have dominated. History seems bound to repeat itself!”
At first I thought this was just another entry into the tired litany of “Windows-vs-Mac will repeat itself” that first gained popularity around 2004 and has yet to be correct. But when I got to the part about how Apple will be done in by its newfound control over its own chips, I knew I’d found gold.
© 2010 Darel Rex Finley | design by