« Weekly Wordcount Challenge Check-In (250, 500, 1000 wds/day) | Main | Recommended: Darcy Pattison's Fiction Notes »
Wednesday
Feb032010

iPad bashing now compared to iPod bashing in 2001



Lots of gleeful iPad-bashing out there.

Interesting to compare the comments to early reactions to the launch of Apple's iPod, which ended up selling over 220 million units by Sept/2009:

From a Wired article:

The iPod is expected to hit Apple's online store and the company's retail outlets on Nov. 10. It will cost $399. For all Jobs' excitement, though, Apple users at Mac discussion sites seemed a bit crestfallen that the device wasn't as revolutionary as the company had promised last week.

Indeed, many said it was over-priced and under-powered.

"Apple has introduced a product that's neither revolutionary nor breakthrough, and they've priced it so high that it's reminiscent of the Cube," a post on MacSlash said.

The message then offered some ideas for what "iPod" might stand for. These won't make Jobs happy: "I Pretend it's an Original Device," it suggested, or "idiots Price Our Devices."


From MacRumors comments (check out one of the original threads for more iPod-bashing):

‘I still can’t believe this! All this hype for something so ridiculous! Who cares about an MP3 player? I want something new! I want them to think differently! Why oh why would they do this?! It’s so wrong! It’s so stupid!”


“Sounds very revolutionary to me. hey – heres an idea Apple – rather than enter the world of gimmicks and toys, why dont you spend a little more time sorting out your pathetically expensive and crap server line up? or are you really aiming to become a glorified consumer gimmicks firm?”


All that hype for an MP3 player? Break-thru digital device? The Reality Distiortion Field™ is starting to warp Steve’s mind if he thinks for
one second that this thing is gonna take off.


From commenters after Slashdot announced the Apple iPod:

And I was all excited they were going to release a OS X based wireless web pad. Instead we get yet another portable MP3 player .. "groundbreaking" I think was the term I heard them use to describe this new secret product the other day. How "groundbreaking" can something be when I can walk up the street and buy something with similiar (and in some cases, additional/better) features?


Keep in mind it’s $400 right now becuase the Apple Fanatics will have to have one. They’ll pay anything for the latest cool toy from Apple. In 6 months, hopefully the rest of us will be buying the 20GB version for $200.


I am very sad that Apple seems to be repeating the same mistake they made with the Cube - great, nifty product that anyone would love to own, except that it's burdened by an unbelievably poor price/performance ratio.


Unfortunately $400 is about twice as much as I'd want to pay for something the size of a pack of cards.


No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.


I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.


Me? I'm still excited, and I'm holding off doing an iPad review until I actually have had a chance to use one.

Also see the comments posted in http://ipadgirl.posterous.com.

Reader Comments (12)

I still think that an iPod is just a very expensive MP3 player. Nothing changed since the beginning. Although I find it kinda funny how much it was bashed in the beginning and how it turned out.
The iPod Touch was something different, so was the iPhone. The iPad? Hm, I didn't have any expectations so I was not disappointed. I won't say anything about it until I have the chance to test it 'though I find it kinda sad that you can't run two programms the same time.

I don't think I'll get one but you never know. Maybe in a few years.

February 3, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterRae

I didn't get taken in with the iPod..... After all, I can get better performance and easier to use software for my Creative Zen..... So why would I want to get an iPad? From what I've seen, it doesn't have any features that I would want and/or don't already have available. I think Apple is just trying to soak us for yet another overpriced toy.

February 3, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterBob Guest

I see good and bad points. But while I have some specific concerns (multi-tasking for instance) I see more positives than negatives, and I'm willing to bet that sales will be good.

As to why no one else came out with anything close - well someone did. The XO-2 has also been criticized, for some of the same reasons, and I expect that it is going to shake up the netbook market. Of course the original XO created the netbook market :)

February 3, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterWayne

Here! Here!
Good comparison. Even though I find myself fast becoming one of those Apple fanatics, I grew up in a PC home. Even if the iPad has some major or minor drawbacks, I'm just glad to see Apple heading in this direction 'cause it means they'll most likely try to improve it.

I kind of wish they would've called it the StarTrek Pad though. Technology is getting closer to those kinds of things every year. When Apple introduces the Tricorder, I'm so gonna be at that Keynote in person.

February 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterReesha

I used to be totally anti iPod, etc and am still very happy to use my MP3 player instead. But did relent this year and bought an Apple iPhone:) Am too interested to see how the iPad will pan out or if it will live up to the hype.
Olive

February 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterOlive O'Brien

i certainly won't be one of the ipad bashers. i learned my lesson with the ipod. i didn't see any need for it and now my husband has to fight me for it. i love my ipod.

February 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterMichelle Gregory

Michelle,

Last fall I finally managed to get my wife converted to a Mac. She had a few problems adjusting, but once she did, well, she won't go back to Windows (she would consider Linux though, she really liked it). So we have five MacBooks in the house, one for each adult. We know, and generally like Apple.

So just after Christmas her Palm Pilot started to die. My son has a first generation ITouch, I have an IPhone, and my daughter wanted an IPhone. I kept telling my wife that she needed to look at an ITouch, and so did my daughter, instead of another Palm. But let's face it - she'd been using one for ten years, and was comfortable with it, and would have probably bought another one if Palm's OSX Desktop had of worked well. I pointed out that I had used a Palm for years, and found the IPhone a lot easier to use, and the screen a lot nicer.

Eventually we managed to convince her, and she bought one, even though she had qualms about the on-screen keyboard. After about 3 hours of playing with it, well, she'll never go back to a Palm. She loves the on-screen keyboard, uses it for appointments, games, ebooks, and of course music.

So I think that the IPad will be a success. Apple knows how to integrate software and hardware better than anyone else. However I don't like being locked into their store, and their store only. I don't like DRM. I like to be able to load what I want, when I want, and to be able to hack the system. I also prefer software that is licensed under the http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html" rel="nofollow">GNU General Public License for ethical reasons, and Apple is a proprietary as all get out. So I'm rather conflicted, as Apple doesn't like or use the GPL.

February 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterWayne

Yesterday I read an article looking back on iPhone bashing (too expensive, no third-party apps, only one carrier, etc.), but I can't find it now.

February 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterGary McGath

Wayne, well said. However, for most people, Apple's ecosystem (iTunes - music/movies/tv/apps and now books) is the game clincher. It just works with their devices. Frankly, having the software sold in hundreds or thousands of locations is tiresome and mostly a pain in the butt. Plus, it can be buggy and cause problems with the OS, device and/or network connectivity. I, for one, prefer some level of vetting apps. That means I don't have to do it. Also, my money isn't going into packaging for software. I know Apple's cut and the developers cut when I buy an app. As well, Apple has lowered the price of software for each of us while making millions for developers. I don't have any sort of issue with GNU but I do believe developers should be compensated for their work.

As for Bob Guest above, seriously, the Creative Zen had easier to use software? Ha. If the hardware device was better made with a better interface and a better desktop user experience it would have trounced the iPod. It didn't. As it turns out, the iPod became popular because it was easy for any user (young or old) to use. And by saying "use" I mean not only operating but also purchasing music.

I was a hardcore PC guy who ridiculed Mac users. I, too, had a Zen. Back in 2002 I had to buy a Mac for my wife as her new job was specifically on Macs. I had also just bought an Athlon processor PC. I spent 3 days configuring my PC and removing crapware. Spent another few days installing software and analyzing my registry to alleviate some crashing issues. My wife chose an iMac and the next weekend we went and bought one.

I was a bit curious about it. Set the box on my dining room table, opened it and within 8 min and 43 seconds was connected to the net and receiving email. Wow.

Three months later I bought my first iPod and never used the Zen again. Finally, a company that just gets it.

The iPad will not be the exact device you think you need but it will be the device you actually need. Apple didn't add a lot of features to the iPhone on the initial launch. What they did do was execute so well on what features they did offer. When they could execute exceptionally well on newer features then they added those too.

Say what you will but tablets sold 500,000 units in 2009. The iPad will easily sell over 2 million. And with good reason.

February 4, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterDanno Bonano

Wayne, well said. However, for most people, Apple’s ecosystem (iTunes – music/movies/tv/apps and now books) is the game clincher. It just works with their devices. Frankly, having the software sold in hundreds or thousands of locations is tiresome and mostly a pain in the butt. Plus, it can be buggy and cause problems with the OS, device and/or network connectivity. I, for one, prefer some level of vetting apps. That means I don’t have to do it. Also, my money isn’t going into packaging for software. I know Apple’s cut and the developers cut when I buy an app. As well, Apple has lowered the price of software for each of us while making millions for developers. I don’t have any sort of issue with GNU but I do believe developers should be compensated for their work.


Danno,

I didn't say that Apple shouldn't run the ITunes store. What I said was that Apple should allow you to add other stores if you want. All Apple did with the ITunes store was imitate what Canonical had done for Ubuntu several years earlier. The difference being that Canonical allows you to add 'repositories' run by other companies, and Apple doesn't.

And as to GNU, developers are compensated. Let's take the Linux kernel as an example - all of the major kernel developers and most of the minor ones are being paid by their companies to work on the Kernel. It's the same with OpenOffice, MySQL, Apache, Mozilla, etc., where the developers are being paid by their company to work on the product.

February 5, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterWayne

I've never been an Apple fanperson - I just can't justify the cost of their projects. Not gonna waste time bashing them, though (it's just as silly as the Apple fanaticism), I'm just gonna spend my meager money elsewhere....

February 8, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterChristina Rodriguez

Christina,

Don't you mean that you can't justify the cost of Microsoft projects? I've crunched the numbers. It's a lot cheaper to run Apple.

February 8, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterWayne

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>