- Posts tagged iPad
- Explore iPad on posterous
Doesn't China Have Some Part In This?
But Foxconn doesn’t exist solely to produce electronics for Apple. All of the largest Android OEM’s also contract Foxconn to produce their devices in factories in China, Brazil, Mexico, Poland and the Czech Republic.
HTC, Samsung, LG, Motorola, ASUS, Acer, Lenovo and others contract Foxconn to manufacture products for them in the same complex where iPhones are made. Their devices are made by the same over worked, under paid, under age workers, yet none are mentioned in the Business Insider article. None. Not one. Not even Samsung, the sometimes largest smartphone vendor in the world. Just Apple.
The quoted article (and headline) is in response to Henry Blodget's piece at Business Insider.
The best thing about Apple's win over Samsung in Germany
"The court is of the opinion that Apple’s minimalistic design isn’t the only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are possible… For the informed customer there remains the predominant overall impression that the device looks [like the iPad]."
The above is from presiding Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hofman in her verdict.
Forget whether you think the tech world is lawsuit-happy. Forget whether you think this is a bad decision. Forget whether you think this is just Germany, and no other country will rule this way. Forget your Apple hate or Samsung/Android love. Forget all that.
Instead, remember the above quote.
It gets old seeing companies copy Apple so fully, and then claim they had no choice because there's no other way to make whatever it is they're making. Of course there is. We're not talking a single function like a volume switch or camera button, but rather an entire product. If Apple used that lazy cop-out, the iPad would have been built like previous Windows tablet designs and failed miserably.
What Apple did was rethink what a tablet could be, and so could anyone else if they choose. It may then be a success or failure, but it wouldn't be a copy.
One Reason To Like Microsoft's Ribbon
There Is No Plan B.
The chart totals over 100% because respondents were allowed multiple choices. That's too bad because it skews things a bit. Yes, the iPad is stomping everyone, but 94.5% has less meaning when the total comes to nearly 150%.
It's better to look at this one column at a time, where we can determine a device's absolute rejection (not acceptance). For example, we don't know that 3.8% of respondents would buy a RIM PlayBook, because it may have been their second choice, but we do know 96.2% of respondents rejected it outright, since it's not on their list at all.
I think of the beatdown like this: for each iPad competitor (column), 90% or more of respondents rejected it. In other words, nine out of 10 people wouldn't even put it on their list as a second choice. Meanwhile, the iPad is rejected only 5.5% of the time. Put it all together and we know not only that the vast majority of respondents are interested in the iPad, but that for most of them there is no Plan B.
Yeah, what he said.
Before I used [to] carry around my MacBook Pro with me to do whatever I needed to on the go, but now I leave it at home. With my iPad I can do something as simple as make a document or surf the web all the way to making my own songs and editing videos on a device that weighs close to nothing.
Those have been my feelings for quite some time. The iPad has replaced my MacBook as a portable device.
Super slates?
To honor these creative (though likely doomed) efforts, we've rounded up our favorite tablets that set themselves apart with a killer feature or design that Apple can't match.
Why honor designs that are "likely doomed"? For that matter, if the feature is killer why is the device doomed in the first place?
It's not that Apple can't match e-ink screens, a remote control IR blaster or the ever-popular stereoscopic camera. No, something else keeps Apple from putting these in an iPad. I'm guessing it's good business sense.
Steve Jobs reveals some of iCloud to a D8 conference attendee a year ago
In light of the recent iCloud announcement, it's especially interesting to review this exchange between Steve Jobs and a D8 conference attendee during the Q&A session at the end of Jobs' interview.
What's surprising is how candid Jobs was about a future offering. Not only was he specific about what the problem was, he even tipped his hand at iTunes Match scanning non-iTunes content by using the phrase "or somehow otherwise acquired", which neither McAskill or Mossberg mentioned. He then states that they're working on it.
In retrospect it was an unusual reveal for Jobs to make, given his standard response of not talking about future products
The exchange begins at 1:20:45 in the video here, and I've transcribed it below (emphasis is Jobs'):
Don McAskill: Hey, Steve, Don McAskill from SmugMug. You may remember a couple years ago we talked about this, but I think it's even more pressing. I love my iPad, my two year old daughter loves my iPad, and I buy the truck vs. car analogy, but it seems like there's a sort of a gaping hole in that analogy right now. You have great syncing of contacts and mail and calendar. I can buy my apps and update them over the air, but I still have to tether to get what is arguably the birth of this platform, which is music and videos on my devices…
Steve Jobs (interrupting): That's not exactly true. You can buy music and get it on your device over the air and you can buy video and get it on your device over the air. iTunes store is on all those devices and it does flow over the air.
McAskill: But I have a large iTunes library that I've built up thanks to you over the last eight years…
Jobs (interrupting): No what you'd like to do is share your library of media amongst your various devices. It's not buying it…
Walt Mossberg (interrupting): Without a wire.
Jobs: Yeah, without a wire. It's not buying it on that device, because you could buy it all on that device.
McAskill: It's the tethering…
Mossberg: Syncing.
Jobs: It's the sharing. You want to share your content that you've bought or somehow otherwise acquired amongst you're various devices.
McAskill: Yeah.
Mossberg: And you can't do that today, right, with iTunes?
Jobs: You can do that today with a wire, you cannot do that today without a wire. We need to work harder on that.
Mossberg: You do.
Jobs: We do.
(audience laughing)
McAskill: Thank you.
Mossberg: You really can't even do it with a wire because it'll blow away, it'll say if you're gonna sync with this PC or this Mac…
Jobs (interrupting): No no but if it's your content you can do it all real easy, it just takes a wire.
Mossberg: So you're gonna do better?
Jobs: We need to do better.
Mossberg: OK, any time soon?
Jobs: We're working on it.
