This had me scratching my head. I can see the benefit of the Xpad in some ways. It can act like a computer, but it travels better. It can act like a phone too, and it has a bigger screen. Yep. That’s good, right? Sure. But there’s a cost. The problem is that while it can act kind of like both, it’s not as good as either individually. Indeed, while yes, it acts kind of like a computer, it’s not as capable nor is it as easy to use as a computer. And while yes, it can act kind of like a phone, it doesn’t fit in your pocket. In effect, it’s a little like both, but not really a good substitute for either... it’s like a cross between a pickup truck and a sports car... something that can be done, but why would you?
Still, the hipsters seemed to like them.
Anyway, in the past few weeks, I’ve started to see articles written by hipsters in which they are realizing what I always knew: the Xpad is useless. It’s a horrible device to try to work on. So it’s no good for work. It’s too big to put into your pocket too, so it doesn’t make a good phone either. And since phones and computers are readily available and easy to travel with, the benefits of the Xpad are less than clear. Moreover, it doesn’t really have any other purpose either except being a mix of these devices. In fact, I’m starting to see articles like the one which said this: “As I looked at my iPad sitting uncharged in the corner where I hadn’t touched it in weeks, I suddenly realized that I really didn’t use it for anything because it wasn’t better than anything I was trying to replace with it. I have my iPhone and my MacBook and that’s really all I use.”
Yep. Price is right again.
This is why I think the Xpad fad has peaked. People are realizing they simply aren’t a better choice than the things they are trying to replace. Businesses have no reason to embrace these. People who use computers for work have no reason to embrace these. People who use their phones to go online have no reason to embrace these. That doesn’t leave a lot of people. I think you will see a gradual lessening of interest followed by a surprisingly fast crash.
85 comments:
you may well be correct, but I think boomers like myself will keep it afloat for a while. The key phrase you used was "it's not better than what it was replacing. I had a cell phone (not a smart phone) and an imac desktop. I was looking to get a kindle or something to read while in the hospital. I realized I didn't want an ipad with cell phone properties. Most places have wifi. So, it is a big enough screen I can read commentarama and surf the net, read online books, get email. I could also see myself, for $24 a year getting my online song library placed in the cloud and hook it into a small bose wireless speaker. So it works well as an addition to rather than replacement for what I have. But, I'm an old guy so, sure, it could easily faze out.
Jed, I'm not saying they're useless. But I think that for most people, they don't add value. And that is what people who have them are now discovering -- they don't use them. SO I think they've peaked and will now fade away as a niche item.
I think that's important because so many people right now are predicting the end of "the PC" (which includes laptops) and that everyone will migrate to tablets soon. I don't see that. A year ago, it looked like that was happening, yes, but now I'm seeing too many signs that people are giving up on tablets.
So from my perspective, if I was investing, I would not put my money into a tablet company nor would I spend my efforts making aps for it -- I would concentrate on phones and laptops.
Probably. And probably why Windows 8 is a disaster. Although I check stocks, news, and this blog on my iPad before bed each night. There still seems to me a market for a ebook reader that has some computer functionality. So I think we will still see xpads as you call them but more straight forward and to use like I do; not for serious computer work.
Koshcat, Windows 8 is a real mess. I blame company arrogance actually. They are trying to force people to use a system that works for them rather than for the company.
I think that book readers and casual browsing is probably what the tablets are best for. I'm just not sure that's enough to maintain the market, certainly not at a level that will replace the PC.
Phones are too small to comfortably surf the net. Subsequently, there's got to be an option for a highly portable device which you can check stock quotes and real estate data (with pictures you can actually see) while enjoying your white chocolate mocha with whipped cream in Starblechs. I also think doubling as e book/comics readers will keep them around for a while.
It does appear that the next generation "Xpad" is the Microsoft "Surface" and the latest versions of the MAC Air. These can be fully functioning computers but with touch screens and hard keyboards while weighing and sizing about the same as a ipad.
The Commentarama conception.
I don't see how anyone could have ever believed that tablets were going to replace PCs given that they have a fraction of the functionality, but tablets are awesome and I don't think they are going anywhere
I own an Ipad, a 7' Kindle Fire HD (which replaced I have roughly 400 books on and I love to death especially since the Borders down the street closed and the nearest Barnes and Noble bookstore is 20 minutes away) and old (must be going on three years old now) color Nook I got for my daughters. I used to have a really old B/W Kindle which probably didn't classify as a tablet.
A lot of people seem to believe that eventually there will be one device to rule them all, but I don't think such a convergence is ever going to happen. Cellphones and PCs can cover pretty much all the bases, but people who are really serious about X are always going to buy dedicated hardware. People who want to take high quality photos don't use their cellphone, they buy digital camera, avid gamers buy dedicated game systems, people who spend a lot of time reading or surfing the web will buy tablets....
I think the future will be in accessories. What?! Yes...accessorize your device.
For example, there is a new cell phone that has a camera that is quite powerful. Problem is, it has a lens that ruins the lines of the device thus making it impractical. So, why not make a optional HD camera lens for the phone and snap it on when you use your phone for pic taking?
Or, what about a portable, foldable screen for when you want to watch movies or surf the net on your phone?
I got a smallish keyboard and cover for my IPad which works great whenever I need to type long emails or such. I don't use it when using the touch screen to surf the net.
My biggest beef with Apple/IPad is the fact that whenever a new app comes out, my old pad op system doesn't support it so I can't try it out. There should be a law :) that every new app must work backwards on all old operating systems. (An Apple law guys!)
So, I don't think xpads will go away, they will be used for what works for them. The future is accessorizing your PDA to make it do whatever you need it to do when needed.
Tablets will ultimately be relegated to what their form-factor has always suggested they be: digital note pads. I see doctors and waitresses using them, and they seem great in those contexts.
Far from being the one device that replaces everything, tablets instead are simply the one device that can replace anything--but only one at a time. Their broadest application seems to be as information kiosks. I could see them replacing many of the computers that are purposed for a single task, like those coupled to lab equipment, but there doesn't really seem to be a push for that.
One thing that makes them extremely valuable, however, is the ways in which they can help autistic children. The touch-screen is much more intuitive than pushing a stray button to make something happen on a separate screen, which facilitates functionality for kids who can't always grasp such connections. That factor, in turn, can make them powerful learning and communication devices.
On Windows 8 - I think the frustration is hyped-up and overwrought. I know lots of people who have migrated to 8 and are perfectly happy, but they're not making any noise. (I, like an idiot, went to 7 and am too cheap to upgrade again.) It reminds me of the complaints surrounding the "Start" button when XP was unveiled. Fast-forward 12 years and everyone cherishes it.
The only real problem with 8 was the marketing roll-out, which was uninformative, pointless and bizarre. The second and third waves of marketing have been much better but, unfortunately, have served mainly as damage control, dampening their persuasive effect.
Bleh. Tablets.
Not to switch topics (even though it is an open thread), but I have iron-clad proof that the new Star Wars movie will not be a disaster and will, in fact, be awesome.
Kill Me Now
K, The Surface is a disaster. Microsoft needed to write down a billion dollars on the "business" version of that and the public version is barely selling.
Anthony, I can show you a million articles on tech and financial blogs including statements from companies like Microsoft and Apple and Toshiba, each of whom has made the claim that the PC is dead and the tablet has killed it, and that everyone will switch to the tablet.
But tablet numbers are suddenly soft and, like I said, I'm seeing a lot of article where tablet people are saying they realized they don't use their tablet anymore. I think tablets have peaked and will fall off significantly.
Patriot, Foldable screens will change the world when they arrive.
On tablets, I don't think they'll vanish. There are uses for them. Tryanmax points out some of them. But I think they will draft back into a niche device.
Other people are more clever than me, but I can't imagine a functional foldable screen. I think an expandable screen is more feasible. Think like the two-finger zoom, only in realspace.
tryanmax, I agree about tablets. I think they will become a specialty device essentially. They will do things like work as note taking devices, inventory management, information kiosks, etc. - computers for employees who walk around. But they won't replace the computer for people who type for a living (which is most people) and they won't replace the phone and I don't see a lot of kids adapting anymore either because they aren't great game machines and they aren't "cool" to carry around -- not like a phone.
I very much disagree about Windows 8. I've been watching closely and it's a bomb. It's adoption rate is far below Vista actually.
Microsoft needed to correct their stupidity of failing to break into the phone or tablet market, so they got arrogant and decided to force all their customers into that market by proxy so they would then buy other Microsoft devices. The result was an operating system that is not friendly to people who use computers for a living.
Then they rolled it out poorly and got really arrogant and insulting about how they handled it.
Now they have real problems. It's adoption rate is poor. Most of the people who bought it are actually running it in Windows 7 mode. Few developers are willing to touch it, even as Microsoft has begun to pay for the development. And I think 8.1 will be the nail in the coffin as they seem determined to flip the bird to their customer complaints... "You want a start button, fine, here it is idiots, but it doesn't do anything."
Microsoft is imploding right now -- their phone is a failure (short Nokia), their RT is dead and no one will even make it, the Surface is failing, Window 8.0 is selling worse than Vista, and they are retreating on issue after issue with the new X-Box. Total disaster.
T-Rav, I have no hopes for the film, so nothing bothers me. LOL!
Leave my IPad alone!! You are all mean and hateful people!
Don't listen to them, my Precious. You will be with me forever...(or at least until the next new thing comes along...) Don't you fret!
tryanmax, I would think that if you can make an expandable one, you should also be able to make one that folds. But I'm not a scientist, nor do I play one on TV,.
Bev, LOL! Nice! My precious indeed.
BTW, the next device they're supposedly working on are watches and glasses. The glasses are doomed because of privacy issues. The watches, I'm not sure about. I can see a limited use for them, but I'm not sure they are useful for general purposes... unless they have an expanding screen.
Oh, and they are working on televisions too for some reason. Google and Apple both seem to want to make televisions.
On the Google Glasses, as I've said before, its only a matter of time before someone gets caught using it to look at porn and "pleasure themselves" while on a bus. (If it hasn't happened already)
I'll give you that MS's foray into the device market is a mess. I sense a lot of back-end problems, and I don't mean < code >.
On the "one OS for all" issue, it's a matter of can't win for losing. Tech sites have been lamenting for years that one has to switch OS between devices, longing for someone to fix it. Consumer data indicated that's what people wanted. MS went that route and everybody went "nyah!" It's like fixing dinner for a three-year-old (something which with I have vast experience).
On adoption rate, I don't know that anyone is going by the appropriate benchmarks in determining what is "good." The last time MS slammed us with so many OS's is such short order was in the 95/98/2000 days. That was the end of MS then, too, if you recall.
I don't know WTF they were thinking with the new Xbox.
On foldable screens, the issue as I see it is, as far as I understand the state-of-the-art, you need something along the perimeter of the screen to project a picture across it. I imagine this could be reduced to things just at the corners. But when you fold something, you change the number and location of corners and edges. An expandable screen would fix the number of corners and edges and simply have to adjust to the changing dimensions.
tryanmax, On the expandable screen, I suspect it will need a screen zoom rather than an app zoom to make it work. In other words, the app works for the full expanded screen and the device itself shrinks it, except for maybe a couple apps like "wrist watch mode." But who knows. I am just a consumer, not an expert.
On the adoption rate, I judge good and bad based on Microsoft's distortions and the comparison between Windows XP, 7 and Vista. XP and 7 were hits, Vista is considered one of the biggest bombs. Microsoft is trying to claim the adoption rate is better than 7, but unbiased data shows its far behind Vista. So I think that's a good measure of its failure. When a company lies and gives you a data point they think is good, then I think you can use that for what the goal should be.
On XBox, what they were thinking was: (1) we want to sell these people more than games, specifically we want them to use this to download movies and people will pay more for that so we'll do that, (2) we want all the money that game resellers are making so we'll make it impossible for people to play or buy used games, and (3) we need people to be constantly connected so we can monitor that they aren't getting around our control.
All of that has blown up on them and they've been in full retreat ever since.
Kit, I think Google Glass will fail when they start getting brought into lawsuits by people who accuse them of invading privacy or users who get beaten up for invading privacy.
That said, there is one insidious use that will save Google glass. Employers can force employees to wear them so they monitor what the employees are doing throughout the day.
How could they be used to invade privacy?
How would employers use them to monitor employees?
Never mind on that first question. But how would employers use them to monitor employees?
Kit, They record images and sound instantly. You can walk into a locker room, for example, and record everything you see. Or you can sit next to a couple at dinner and record their conversation -- that's already happened.
So if you are an employer, you make them wear these things and then you can watch what they are looking at and doing. If someone plays solitaire, you can see it in real time on your monitor.
Andrew,
Ok.
re the XBox, I heard about that and now see no reason to buy an XBox One.
Kit, They've reversed course on most of the XBox stuff, but it's still rather expensive and it still does need to report home from time to time (so military people can't own it).
You 3 things Microsoft was thinking explains a lot but why did they not want previous XBox and XBox 360 games playable on the XBox One?
Andrew: What are your references for your tech insights? I'm evidently missing some bookmarks I should be scanning.
Thanx
And Microsoft seems to be on a roll when it comes to crappy products, bad roll-outs, and generally pi$$ing buyers off. One has to wonder what is going on at that place?
K, I don't normally keep my links on tech and financial stuff, but I do have some as I was thinking about writing about Windows 8.
Computer World: Windows 8 pace behind Vista
PC WORLD: Windows 8 uptake slows
I can't find the article, but these guys The Register talk about this survey Soluto which shows that few people are going to the Windows Store (also confirmed by recent company earnings report) and more than half of all Windows 8 users are running it in Windows 7 mode.
Most of what I've followed with them, however, has come from financial analysts. In that regard, these guys Wall Street Cheat Sheet have covered each Microsoft issue extensively.
Here's one on the failure of the Surface: A cash sinkhole
Toshiba blaming Windows 8 for sales slump
There are corresponding articles at CDNET, CNBC, The Street, Forbes, and about a dozen other places. It's hard to miss.
K, Follow the financial site for a better analysis because the tech guys often get starry-eyed and can't get away from what they hope will happen. The financial people tend to stick with actual performance metrics, company statements, and quoting industry analysts.
Kit, That describes Microsoft perfectly at the moment. A lot of people are blaming the CEO - Balmer, but it sounds like a cultural problem. What I've seen from them is sheer arrogance. Even when they have backtracked, their press releases are insulting toward their customers. In their Windows 8.1 releases for example, they have mocked the fact that people want the start button (which isn't actually the issue -- they want the start menu) and they spoke about trying to bring people forward into the modern age, as if their current customers are primitives.
I've also read that Microsoft has bled their creative people and what are left are basically careerists rather than talent.
The only thing keeping them afloat right now is that they don't have a real competitor for computer operating systems. So that remains a cash cow. But right now, they are finding it impossible to get people to upgrade. And with computer sales crashing and people thinking tablets and phones are the future, they are worried... hence the attempt to jump start their tablet business through Windows 8.
Apparently they are also doing negative advertising, mocking the iPad. Why do I get the feeling that its not going to work?
Here is a Vanity Fair article on their problems: LINK
Kit, They turned to that after their launch campaign was slammed by everyone for failing to tell people why they should by the Surface. What they are doing with the negative campaign is trying to distinguish themselves from Apple and give you a reason to buy it. In that regard, it's smart because it points out the differences. But the tone is really poor, especially for a company who is seen as failing the space. It seems petty.
I've read the Vanity Fair article before and it makes a lot of interesting points about how they've lost so many talented people. The whole "stack ranking" thing is clearly a moral killer. And it seems that their problem isn't lack of ideas, it's lack of ability to recognize good ideas and exploit them. That's how Xerox failed.
BTW, I'm not predicting Microsoft will fail. They won't, but they are losing their relevance.
And Kit, this quote:
“And because he didn’t know or didn’t believe how young people were using messenger programs, we didn’t do anything.”
... is death to a company or a political party. The moment you run it to please yourself rather than your customer, you're doomed.
Apparently Stack Ranking is great as a short-term thing but if dragged on it can become a problem, like how Microsoft has done it. Because once you've bled out the good employees.
LINK
Kit, Stack ranking makes sense if (1) you're in an environment where "goodness" can be measured fairly accurately, and (2) you have employees with all different levels of "goodness" such that you really do have a bell curve.
Manufacturing is a good example. Those jobs tend to be awash in good and bad people and it's easy to measure how much people achieve and with how many mistakes.
But once you get into a creative field, you really can't do that. If one guy invents the iPhone and the other invents the Mac, does it make sense to rank one as good and the other as bad? What you need to do instead is look at each person individually and decide if they are achieving what you want or not. And then reward the ones who are vital or who excel. But artificially labeling someone bad just because you need to is a horribly destructive idea.
Ok.
The article on Toshiba and Microsoft pretty much confirms what I was thinking, that the market is confused by dual OS from the same company. Basically, a repeat of 95/98/2000/XP.
I have to have some sympathy for MS, though. That quote about MS Messenger illustrates that a company needs to remain speculative to stay relevant. But whenever MS tries to be speculative, the market reacts negatively. The song is always the same: "MS has abandoned its customers."
The message is clear: the market doesn't like it when MS gets innovative.
Did anybody see this: Meter Man Steals 840,000 coins.
How big were this guy's pockets?
tryanmax, I think Microsoft created its own problem. If they made Windows 8 for the PC and Windows Tablet 1.0 for the tablet, then there would be no problem. The problem is that they are trying to force PC users into tablet mode with the idea being that those people will then buy tablets (because of familiarity) and that will jump start Microsoft into a market they missed.
It's like a car company giving you a bicycle steering wheel with the idea being that you will then be primed to buy the new GM Bike. All that does is the people who want the car.
On being speculative, I think the problem is lack of insight. You need to stay aware of new trends and then investigate them. What this guy was saying is that he saw this issue arising and brought it to the attention of his manager, who dismissed the idea because he didn't personally think it made sense rather than investigating it.
I see this kind of behavior a lot, especially when people complain about ads that were never meant for them: "Who cares about this Mrs. Gaga woman? Why would I buy a product she endorses? This is a stupid ad because no one wants anything she endorses."
Yeah, but like I said before, there have been lamentations for years about why doesn't somebody make an OS that runs on everything? There has been research indicating that this is what people want. The biggest gripe facing Apple has been the disparate OS's, and they're the most popular player in the device market. All arrows pointed to this move. But that makes for a very awkward argument, that MS created their own problems by listening to customers.
I think I know what the problem is: MS runs like a tech company and not like a consumer company. The tech company's first impulse, contrary to popular belief, is to give the customer exactly what they want. And while this certainly can't explain the Xbox 1, it can explain just about every other move MS has made.
By contrast, what consumer companies like Apple are adept at is giving consumers what they want sometimes, and other times convincing consumers that they want what they are given. I'm not trying to paint a picture of MS = good, Apple = evil by any means, but the successful consumer company knows how to generate that "gotta have it" sentiment--something which MS simply has no aptitude for.
There are people who want one OS to run everything, but I don't see the demand for that in the consumer marketplace. Consumers don't seem to care what's underneath the hood so long as it's all compatible, does what they want, runs the popular apps, and runs in an intuitive way.
This is the problem Blackberry is facing. They wrongly think that selling their phones (and soon tablets if the Nokia rumors are right) based on how great the OS is will win consumers. It won't. Consumers only care about the end product, and that means aps. And they have even fewer aps than Microsoft.
In any event, I don't think Microsoft created their problem by listening to consumers. They don't give a rat's rear end about consumers. They play in captive markets and their motives are repeatedly about forcing consumers to go where they want. And when their consumers respond negatively, they blast the customers.
I'm not sure I agree with the Apple/Microsoft breakdown. I think both companies are run like modern tech companies -- give the consumer what the company wants.
The difference is that Apple has this magical cache that makes people think they want it too and it tends to sell consumer items that are "whimsical," so it can get away with being less than useful at times. In fact, the more whimsical, the better.
Microsoft doesn't have that cache because their products are mass-produced for practical consumers (e.g. businesses and people who need functional computers). So when they play around, their clients get upset because it ruins the purpose for which they bought the product. When Apple plays around, their cult gets all giggly because it's like the latest gift from Mt. Olympus.
Actually, we seem to agree almost completely on the Apple/MS breakdown. I don't disagree with anything in your last two paragraphs.
Whether the companies run like tech or consumer companies probably depends on what part you look at. Where MS is really bad is in the hype department. They don't announce their projects except to say something is coming. People craft their own expectations in the interim and what gets release doesn't fit, so they get angry. Some simple previewing of the product would go miles toward stemming the problem. But if they run like a tech company, they probably are pushing things out by the skin of their teeth and have nothing to preview until launch.
Apple also has the advantage of generating attainable prestige products. Nothing about MS says "prestige" and probably nothing ever will.
But ultimately, I think MS's larger problem isn't that they aren't listening, it's that they aren't speaking. I know that goes against everything everybody ever said about customer relations, but in this case (again, with the exception of Xbox 1) I think that's what it is.
If we agree all the time, then the blog gets boring! :P Actually, I agree with you. Though I do think Microsoft does need to do more than just explain their products better.
As an aside, not to bring up The Warriors again, but I keep thinking of the beginning whenever Apple gets mentioned...
Consumer One: "What do you know about Apple?"
Consumer Two: "A whole lot of magic."
LOL! That's pretty spot on! Of course I look at things first from the marketing/communication perspective, but MS's problems don't end there. I'm not going to pretend that a perfect product stems all criticism. If you make the perfect spoon, people will criticize it for not being a fork. (Of course, everybody loves sporks, so that's a flawed analogy.)
But as far as Windows 8 is concerned, to me it looks like the problem is maybe 20% poor product design/80% perception of poor product design. That's a communications failing in my book.
Exec 1: Oh no! Everybody hates our new product!
Exec 2: Quick! Let's hurry up and release something else for them to hate!
Marketing Exec: Wait, I have an idea.
Exec 2: Shut up, Marketing Exec! Nobody likes you!
Marketing is definitely not their strong suit. One classic example is the periodic conferences where they release new products. Apple puts on a great show and their stuff works flawlessly. They mix teasing with information and give the faithful what they need to run off and start selling even before the product hits the shelves.
Microsoft puts on a horrible show. Their stuff breaks down or doesn't work when they demonstrate it. They seem to highlight the worst aspects and don't explain them well. They got caught during the Xbox release using a processor that won't be in the Xbox because it's faster and works better. LOL! So what happens is tech people go home and write about how lame the product seems.
Marketing really is key. But design is key too and consumer-interface design has never been something Microsoft is good at. Steve Jobs once said this about Microsoft and it's really true:
"The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste. They have absolutely no taste. And I don't mean that in a small way, I mean that in a big way, in the sense that they don't think of original ideas, and they don't bring much culture into their products."
I can't believe I didn't hear that about the processor in the Xbox One preview considering how much other crap that thing's generated. I can't say I feel sorry for them, though, and I'm sure Sony and Nintendo are going to enjoy quite a few good years at MS' expense over that. I knew I stuck with Sony consoles for a reason, heh.
On the tablets thing I never saw them as being too useful myself, though admittedly at this rate it's going to be quite some time before I can bring all of my gadgets out of the Dark Ages. A coffee shop I used to frequent used one to handle card transactions and it worked well for that (as well as letting the baristas entertain themselves during slow times) but like you pointed out it doesn't really offer anything that computers and phones can't do and most people have those anyway.
The article about MS' culture doesn't surprise me either. Even back when I was in high school the tech-savvy students were talking about how bad MS treats its employees, so it's hardly shocking things would get worse between then and now. It makes me wonder when someone's going to be able to offer Windows real competition.
As far as Apple goes, I remember using some of their computers when I was a little kid but I never kept up with them until the various iProducts came out. Maybe it's petty of me but the following it has and the way a lot of the iProduct fans put me off of it. I'm sure their stuff works well and I'm not sticking with a Windows 7 PC with any great enthusiasm but something I can't quite articulate just bugs me about it.
- Daniel
"They got caught during the Xbox release using a processor that won't be in the Xbox because it's faster and works better. LOL! So what happens is tech people go home and write about how lame the product seems."
Wait, what did they do?
Daniel, The processor thing was funny. They used an Intel processor that won't be in the Xbox and someone posted a picture of it on the web. This created a loud round of condemnation. About a week later, Microsoft responded by noting that everyone does this at these conferences and they just use whatever chips are available when they set up the demos... no deception intended. So it died at that point, but the PR damage had been done. This was right after they backtracked on the used game thing.
On tablets, I agree with tryanmax, that there is certainly a use for them depending on the job, but I don't see a broad consumer use like they are predicting and I certainly don't see the end of the PC.
On the real Windows competition, I think that's a problem of too many people not wanting to need to swap out all the stuff they have for a new system that they don't know. But if Microsoft ventures too far from Windows 7, I'll bet you that we will see something.
On Apple, we had Apples as a kid (Apple II and Apple IIE), but then switched to PCs because they were cheaper and I've never gone back. I don't really have any thoughts pro/con on Apple except that they have achieved quite a consumer feat by making generic consumer products into a luxury item with brand appeal.
Kit and Daniel, I can't find the original article about the XBox chip issue (as I wasn't expecting this discussion, LOL), but here's another article:
Microsoft Pulls A Fast One
About a week later, they explained that everyone does this and that seemed to be the end of it, but it caused them about a week of heartburn.
LOL, that was crazy of them all right. The Xbox One just has not gone MS' way, has it? I can't help but find this whole round of incompetence on MS' part hilarious.
That's a good point about needing to swap things over. It's part of why I decided to stick with PCs when I changed over to my laptop aside from the fact that Apple laptops are so pricey. Things worked out, though, and it will be interesting to see where things go from here OS-wise. Microsoft does seem to be heading in the wrong direction and picking up speed, so maybe we'll see competition for Windows sooner rather than later.
Apple did pull off quite a feat marketing-wise and I suspect my misgivings about its following are largely just me. I've always been suspicious of things with a lot of hype and very slow to check them out. Sometimes they have paid off in enjoyable ways (Harry Potter and Final Fantasy VII were two things I held off on trying and loved when I did), but I like to think it's saved me from getting mired in at least a few messes.
- Daniel
Daniel, There's a lot of talk by investors about firing CEO Balmer because of their losing streak, though the stock price is stable -- low, but stable. Apple is really the investing darling.
On switching, the real problem Microsoft has is while they made a big deal about no longer supporting XP in the hopes that people would switch to Windows 8, they will continue to support Windows 7 until 2021 and most businesses are upgrading to that instead of 8. Even a majority of the Windows 8 machines sold are currently running Windows 7. Windows 7 is now their biggest competitor.
I don't think you're alone on Apple. A lot of people have criticized the "cult" feel of their fans. I don't care one way or the other, I just don't find their products to be superior at the moment... hence, I bought a Samsung phone.
BTW, That said, I am usually suspicious of anything that "everyone wants." That's usually an indication of something that is pure hype and no substance.
Andrew: Thanks for the links!!
I was wondering why every time I went by the Microsoft store nobody but me was in there. Personally, I like the Surface, but not enough to plunk down the money for a full computer version yet.
K, You're welcome. I've been watching this with great interest actually. The whole thing has been pretty fascinating because there are so many angles. It's kind of like watching a train wreck, only you don't know yet if the train will actually wreck. They might pull it out. At the same time, you've got a nasty little war going between Apple, Google and Microsoft, which adds the entertainment.
It's interesting stuff.
The real problem with the Surface is that if it doesn't get adopted by enough people, then it will die because no one will write aps for it. So they have a chicken and egg problem right now.
The pad will not replace laptops or even desktops, at least not in its current form. But for me, the iPad is a gift. In terms of time spent, it is what the tv used to be thirty years ago.
Personally I do not use a pad at work, but in my own time, I´m never without it. Time staring at or listening to devices is split 40% iPhone, 55% iPad and only 5% crappy Windows 7 laptop, some of which is spent updating software just so it keeps running.
My 80 year old mother with very bad eyesight is able to manipulate an iPad up to a point. Kindle, too. She could never even switch on a computer. It is amazing. For decades she found it almost impossible to read books. Now she devours two a week.
The business where I work uses iPads for sales presentations. No one really writes on them. The sales guys dictate their reports. And I guess if you can write mails on a Blackberry, you can write on anything.
Google Glass is a vile invention. The potential for creating mayhem is boundless.
I read somewhere that it is now possible to turn spoken word recordings into readable, searchable text and tag it to the file. So now someone can film you, without your knowledge or consent, saying something and all of that ends up on some server, forever. Add facial recognition technology and you suddenly own everything you ever said on a beach or in a restaurant or in a business meeting. See the problem? It will be moot to teach young people about responsible use of social media.
Now if I say "Andrew Price ought to run the country!" it will perhaps not matter. Now replace "Andrew Price" with the name of the POTUS and "run the country" with "be shot" and you get the full rodeo clown experience. They´ll take away your children because you said something "threatening" to your ten year old 18 months ago and someone was around with these damn glasses on.
Want to bet that it will soon be illegal to "glass" government officials or congressmen?
If the freedom of Google to invent this stuff means the end of freedom for us, their invention should be outlawed, one way or the other.
Saw Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters of Monsters yesterday with the wife (but not the kids). My wife insisted (I wanted to see Wolverine). It was unobjectionable but unmemorable and the stakes were high on paper but low in practice (even the actors looked bored). On the upside, the clockwork bull was fun to watch.
Hey! I'd vote for Andrew for President! And maybe he could appoint me to be in his Cabinet. (Preferably the one with the liquor in it, okay?)
El Gordo, "the full rodeo clown experience." LOL! Yeah, welcome to the modern world.
I think Google glass will be a disaster. It has a million bad uses and almost no good uses. I think states should start putting massive restrictions on its uses right now, which would all but kill it.
On the tablets, they definitely have uses and there are users, but right now the tech/financial world thinks they'll wipe out the PC and that's the point to my article, that they simple won't do that. They will be a niche tech.
Bev, I'd vote for me too! And sure, you can guard the White House liquor cabinet! :D
Anthony, That's how I felt about the first one as well -- an ok, but forgettable movie.
This is a scream!
LOOK! There are Obama voters in NZ too!
Bev, now we just need to have someone pirate the vid and insert an Obama speech in the spaces between the "BAAA!"s.
K - I wish I knew how dub over it. I'd add "Four Legs Good, Two Legs Baaaaad" and they'd all cheer...
I have a feeling that this sheep behavior was once commonly known but, of course, has been forgotten. As such, the insult of calling a people sheep has lost some of it's sting.
Don't be square Daddy-o, insults are timeless. They never lose their appeal.
Bev, LOL!
// applauds
Tryanmax - I don't think that George Orwell used sheep in "Animal Farm" just because they were coincidentally barnyard animals. Hey, I played a militant Communist sheep in the US premier of "Animal Farm - The Musical!". I am deeply in tune to these sheep...;-)
Did you really Comrade Baaaaav? That's fantastic! :)
Yes! A dancin', singin' barnyard extravaganza! It was all fun and games until the Guard towers and barbed wire fences went up!
Bev, I am strangely sorry I never got to see that.
It actually had a very interesting history. It was supposed to be presented at a International Theatre Festival (not our production) in the US in 1986. The Soviet theatre company threatened to pull out of the festival if Animal Farm was allowed in the festival. So, the brave powers that be at the festival, said okay, and the Animal Farm" company was uninvited. So our little theatre presented it a year later.
I, of course, was brilliant! I also played Mollie, the beautiful, yet foolish white mare who doesn't want to have to work in the collective, so she leaves at the end of the first act! I had experience playing barnyard animals having previously played Pig #2 in The Three Little Pigs for the same director!
Pig No. 2! LOL! Nice. So you have quite the barnyard repertoire.
This was all costumed, right? Or was this "pretend we're in costume"?
We were in straight-jackets (untied of course), animal ears and snouts (depending on what animal one was playing at the time). All very artsy fartsy stuff.
Oh, that's too bad. I was thinking Disney-style costumes. Straightjackets, huh? So was this off-Broadway or off-Bellevue?
Nah, we didn't have a budget for Disney costumes. We had "creative" costumes! Uh, yeah, it was "Off-Broadway", if by "Off Broadway" you mean in Texas.
LOL! Off-Bellevue - that's a contract that no actors wants!
At least it wasn't off-Texas, which would be Oklahoma.
Post a Comment