backtop


Print 48 comment(s) - last by slashbinslashb.. on Nov 7 at 8:32 PM


iPad Holds 95% of Tablet Market
Dell will get into tablets in a big way in 2011

Anyone with eyes can see that the Apple iPad is dominating the tablet market today. This is in large part due to the fact that as of now there are still very few competitors on the market. That lack of competition is changing quickly though with tablets running Windows and Android due on the market soon.

Research firm Strategy Analytics reports that for the quarter spanning July through September the Apple iPad dominated the market with 95% of the tablet market. The market for tablets over the quarter swelled to 4.4 million units. The previous quarter was good for 3.5 million tablets according to the research firm.

Analyst Neil Mawston said, "The tablet wars are up and running. Apple has quickly leveraged its famous brand, an extensive retail presence and user-friendly design to develop the tablet segment into a multi-billion-dollar global business."

There are other tablets coming to the market that will run Android, Windows, MeeGo, webOS and the Blackberry OS making for many more choices over the coming months. Android is expected to be very popular on tablets and its scant 2.3% market share is expected to rise significantly in Q4.

While Apple is dominating the tablet market, other major brands are also looking to get into the tablet market. The world's number two shipper of computers - Dell - will be getting into the tablet market in a big way in 2011. This comes from the mouth of Dell CEO Michael Dell.

Dell said at an event in Hong Kong, "We're going to have a significant number of new tablets in the next year. There're lots of debate about the size of the market, who's buying these devices, and those questions always emerge when there's a new form factor."

Dell also noted it's easier to develop software for phones based on the Windows Phone 7 operating system than Android. There was no further explanation provided for the comment, so we'd be curious to hear the reasoning behind this statement.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Short Lived
By Mitch101 on 11/2/2010 10:26:50 AM , Rating: 2
I believe Apple's Tablet Market Dominance will be short lived. The price and lack of memory expansion will be its downfall. Kudos to you if you can justify the price or own an iPad. Its a very nice device with enough horsepower. Lets face it Apple got it right from the start.

Tablets are only as good as the OS and Hardware its running on. Droid devices so far fail because they lack the CPU/GPU to compete but real CPU/GPU/Droid devices are coming. I know Ive tried several china based droid tablet devices and they have lacked the CPU/GPU to be anything more than pdf readers. Good if you flash them with Windows CE 5.0 but not enough power for today's apps.

As to Apple's 95% dominance.
1- There is no real competition yet to the iPad - The OS is here but the tablets with the CPU/GPU power aren't yet but they are coming.

2- Im not generally a fan of Archos stuff but the Archos 43 for under $200.00 with its 4.3" screen looks like it might be ideal for the kids. If Archos can make it many other bigger manufacturers will soon be here with the same or more horsepower.

In the next 3 months were going to see some serious competitors to the iPad with enough power that they should have had to begin with.




RE: Short Lived
By Tony Swash on 11/2/2010 10:58:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I believe Apple's Tablet Market Dominance will be short lived.


I think you may be mistaken.

I cannot see any Android or Windows tablet competing with iPad version one until the spring at the earliest. And then Apple will be releasing iPad version 2 and, if they follow the strategy of the iPhone release cycle, they will drop the price of the iPad V1 and thus under cut a lot of the competition.

Apple really do have an astonishing amount of momentum in the tablet market and I think the extent of the iPad success surprised even them. As far as it is possible to judge it seems iPad sales have mostly been constrained by supply rather than demand and Apple have been frantically ramping up production pipelines.

The synergy between the various iOS devices is a very strong advantage, as is the Apple App Store and the resulting connection to Apple's media value chain. To beat Apple someone has to come up with something very, very strong


RE: Short Lived
By Luticus on 11/2/2010 11:29:37 AM , Rating: 2
While i agree that apple does have quite a bit of momentum and will be hard to slow, i believe that when tablets come out with ui's that are decent and the functionality increases it will begin stealing numbers. Though it will be a while before anyone has the numbers to match or beat apple.

I am just waiting for a tablet with decent battery, windows 7 level functionality, decent performance, a large amount of input/outputs (card reader, usb, etc.) and the all important stylus+finger input system. Oh, and something that isn't tied to the apple store and doesn't require a jailbreak for me to use it the way i want.


RE: Short Lived
By superPC on 11/2/2010 11:29:48 AM , Rating: 2
a bit of history lesson is in order than. android launched after iphone. it overtake iphone in most market. windows 1.0 launched after apple lisa or the first mac. it also overtake apple. it may take years but it's bound to happened one way or the other because of one thing or another.

i have to admit that apple is innovative. but once other mimic and expand on that innovation, it always get left behind. although because of apple tax, it always have a healthy (even fat) profit margin.


RE: Short Lived
By Alexstarfire on 11/2/2010 3:21:40 PM , Rating: 2
Well, we know that, but Tony would rather ignore history. I'm sure when its marketshare falls, which is only a matter of time, that he'll be back to say that marketshare doesn't matter. Seriously, you can only have it one way Tony.


RE: Short Lived
By Tony Swash on 11/2/2010 4:07:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, we know that, but Tony would rather ignore history. I'm sure when its marketshare falls, which is only a matter of time, that he'll be back to say that marketshare doesn't matter. Seriously, you can only have it one way Tony.


I can have it both ways if both the ways are not mutually contradictory. Nothing in my comments about the iPad market share likely remaining high in any way comments on the significance or otherwise of market share as a measure of a company's (or a technology's) health or significance.

I can hold all these thoughts in my head at the same time because they do no contradict each other:

a) An expectation that the iPad will continue to outsell competing tablets for a long time.

b) An belief in the possibility that competing tablets may never catch up with the iPad

c) A belief that market share is an old fashioned and not very useful way to measure which company or product is successful


RE: Short Lived
By The Raven on 11/2/2010 5:30:02 PM , Rating: 2
The article is titled...
quote:
Apple has 95% of Tablet Market

Mitch said...
quote:
I believe Apple's Tablet Market Dominance will be short lived.

You said...
quote:
I think you may be mistaken.

Then you said that you have...
quote:
a) An expectation that the iPad will continue to outsell competing tablets for a long time.


All of that is addressing market share.

Alex mentioned nothing of success. You brought that up.
This conversation is about market share.

And while I'm here, I think that this IS a fad and that Apple will continue to have the largest tablet marketshare for a while because nobody is buying tablets. The Windows versions were/are even more capable than these iPads and they still didn't do well. But it is just because people aren't finding the need.

I find it humorous that there are stands and cases and keyboards to accessorize your iPad with. Simple thing to do would be to just buy a netbook or laptop. Those things are all included and you get a swappable battery and better performance and a more open and capable OS if you are using Windows/Linux/OSX.

The same is true of the Segway. It was all over the news a bunch of people bought them, and now that the dust has settled, people are seeing that they are less cost effective and useful than a vehicle that simply has 3 or 4 wheels like a golf cart.

The same could be said of the Wii. It sold like hotcakes and everyone loved the motion controls and now people are realizing that there was a large amount of "fad factor" mixed in with the success.

It is a good platform and all but it certainly wasn't what everyone thought it was. The same will go for the iPad I believe. Wii still dominates the "install base" but many of those people won't be buying another gaming console for a while. I think the same will apply for the iPad and that is why I think the MS will continue to be high for a while.


RE: Short Lived
By Tony Swash on 11/2/2010 7:14:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All of that is addressing market share.


Sorry if you are having trouble following what I thought was some fairly simple reasoning. Let's spell this out nice and slowly for you.

Imagine I say

"I think most shirts sold in the next year are going to be black"

and then I say

"the market share of any given shirt manufacturer is not a good indicator of how well any given shirt manufacturer is doing as a business nor is it an indicator of which is the best shirt that a consumer should buy"

There is not only no contradiction between these two statements but they are utterly unrelated.

Thus:

I happen to think that, given the evidence I can see, it is unlikely that any competing tablet is going to make much of dent in Apple's tablet market share in the near future.

I also happen to think that market share is not necessarily a very good indicator of how well a company or a technology is doing.

Those two statements are not connected and both could be true.

Clearly having a huge share of the market (for example iPods) can mean a company and a technology is doing really well. But it's also true that having a huge share of the market might not mean that a company or a technology is doing very well ( for example Nokia and Symbian). Market share is worth noting and is one amongst many factors that effect the health of companies and technologies.

The problem arises when people obsess about market share or think that market share is some how a magic factor that trumps all other factors. The result is a reductionist simplification of a complex world and a resulting failure to understand what is actually happening. Simplifying the world into a series of broad brush strokes is always attractive because it means one can avoid the hard work and uncertainty resulting from accepting that the world is a very complex and unpredictable sort of place and that understanding what is really happening takes a lot of thought.

Enough of this philosophy - it's now time for a whiskey nightcap, a good book and bed :)


RE: Short Lived
By Alexstarfire on 11/2/2010 9:04:40 PM , Rating: 2
Might be true but I wasn't referring to your comment at all. I commented on superPC's post about the way you usually argue.


RE: Short Lived
By bporada on 11/2/2010 5:46:08 PM , Rating: 2
iPod anyone????

Plus I don't think apple has any problem with being the most profitable tech company around. The apple tax is happily payed by me and many others who are willing to buy a better designed and built product.


RE: Short Lived
By The Raven on 11/2/2010 5:53:45 PM , Rating: 2
The iPod is not superior to other options. It is better marketed and it was a pioneer in the market and locked everyone in with their iTunes crap and proprietary docks.

Creative, Sandisk, Archos, and Cowon have all made superior devices (just what I've seen, I'm sure there are more). Hell even the Zune is superior from what I know. These devices don't sell as well despite being cheaper. I suspect Apple's closed system tactics.

Besides I think Sony had a similar marketshare with walkmans. Where are they in the portable music market now?


RE: Short Lived
By Solandri on 11/2/2010 2:46:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I cannot see any Android or Windows tablet competing with iPad version one until the spring at the earliest. And then Apple will be releasing iPad version 2 and, if they follow the strategy of the iPhone release cycle, they will drop the price of the iPad V1 and thus under cut a lot of the competition.

Apple really do have an astonishing amount of momentum in the tablet market and I think the extent of the iPad success surprised even them. As far as it is possible to judge it seems iPad sales have mostly been constrained by supply rather than demand and Apple have been frantically ramping up production pipelines.

Agreed on the iPad sales being more than most people expected, but I disagree about Apple having a near-insurmountable lead. The iPad sales actually didn't surprise me - I've been saying forever that a lightweight, easy to use, and cheap tablet would do great in the market.

But Apple screwed it up big time by:
- Leaving out print capability
- Leaving out a USB port / media card slot
- Forcing you to go through the App store
- Pricing it too high

I see tablets as the natural evolution of the clipboard used in business. Fedex and UPS already went down that route, replacing the clipboards their drivers used to carry to gather signatures with custom-made tablet-type devices. If you hit the points I listed above with a weight, battery life, and easy-to-use UI like the iPad, every business will be clamoring to buy it. There's a ton of time wasted by having workers first write things down on a clipboard while they're walking around (in the field or in the warehouse), then entering that info into a computer at a later time. The tablet is the natural solution.

Unfortunately, Apple was unsure of the market for this thing and tied it closely to the publishing industry. They're the ones who insisted on making sure it couldn't print, couldn't save files to memory cards, couldn't connect to other devices via USB. All in the name of protecting their content. Then Apple tried to exert control by forcing you to use the App store (businesses making custom in-house apps are not going to want to install them via the App store), and pricing it too high (I see ~$250 as the magic price point for business).

Unless Apple corrects some of those misses, other tablets will come closer to the specs I've outlined. And once businesses start using them, I predict it's going to be a repeat of the Mac vs. PC in the 1980s with Apple's tablet relegated to ~5% market share, predominantly home users.


RE: Short Lived
By Tony Swash on 11/2/2010 9:09:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But Apple screwed it up big time by:
- Leaving out print capability
- Leaving out a USB port / media card slot
- Forcing you to go through the App store
- Pricing it too high


About 10 million people who will buy an iPad this year don't think Apple screwed it up big time :)

Re your points

Printing is in the next iOS release (due this month)

You can connect via a simple USB adapter

Going through the App store is seen as an advantage by most potential customers

I haven't seen many competing same size tablets priced under the iPad
(also if Apple adopt the iPhone upgrade pattern then come the release of iPad Version 2 in early 2011 the viPad version will become a cheap entry point iPad).


RE: Short Lived
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/2010 10:48:02 AM , Rating: 2
Only if your printer supports AirPrint.... or Bonjour, maybe. Not sure about the Bonjour part since I believe I read that in a comment. In short there are a lot of printers you won't be able to use. Would be the same even with SD card or built-in USB capabilities unless you were using a Windows tablet.

At a price premium. Same with a stand, case, and several other things people usually get/want.

True, but I think he was merely saying that having other places as well as the app store would be nice. Being able to gets apps through the internet and barcodes are rather nice.

Could be, could also not be. Just because there isn't much or anything cheaper doesn't mean it isn't priced too high. I would agree with this point, but not as much as others seem to. They think that $250 or $300 is the right price, but I think that's quite unreasonable for the tech involved. $400 to $450 would be nice with included 3G or about $50 less without it. IDK how 3G could cost $130 or anywhere near that.

I wouldn't even get a tablet if it were $100, unless I could make a profit by selling it. A tablet is a useless form factor for me.


RE: Short Lived
By kmmatney on 11/3/2010 12:33:18 PM , Rating: 2
You can print with the iPad, and you don't even need a special AirPrint printer:

http://media.techeblog.com/images/ipad_printer.jpg


RE: Short Lived
By slashbinslashbash on 11/2/2010 12:01:14 PM , Rating: 3
Doesn't seem likely.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/234067-apple-ipad-...

The first Android tablets (from Samsung and ViewSonic) start at $499 and $479 respectively... for 7" screens. (Half the size of the 10" iPad.) The HP Slate 500 runs $800. The price advantage just isn't there for Apple's competitors, despite a "free" OS in the case of Android. Apple's got some good hardware and software synergies going between the iPhone and the iPad. If an Android tablet starts to undercut the iPad too much, I believe Apple has room to lower the price substantially.... and I don't believe that the average person will take an Android tablet over an iPad if the pricing is even close. That said, the tablet market is not nearly as large as the smartphone market, so how many "average people" end up owning tablets of any kind is debatable. I guess it depends on to what extent Apple and other tablet makers can make it a substitute for the laptop.


RE: Short Lived
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/2/2010 2:39:10 PM , Rating: 1
Half of 10 is 7? Huh?


RE: Short Lived
By Solandri on 11/2/2010 2:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
Half the screen surface area. When you're interacting with a 2D display, it's the surface area that matters, not the linear distance. Assuming the same DPI, a 10" display can show 2x as many same-size icons as a 7" display.


RE: Short Lived
By inighthawki on 11/2/2010 2:54:41 PM , Rating: 2
Less actually. I can see you weren't very good in math. Doubling the diagonal will multiply the surface area by 4. As a result, to get twice the area, we need to multiply the diagonal by sqrt(2). That means that 7 * sqrt(2) = 9.899, which means a 7" diagonal screen will be less than half the total area for the same aspect ratio.


RE: Short Lived
By Alexstarfire on 11/2/2010 3:27:52 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty sure 49 in^2 is very close to 50in^2, which is half of the surface area. No need to introduce marketing techniques in here.


RE: Short Lived
By slashbinslashbash on 11/3/2010 1:30:20 PM , Rating: 2
Well, yes, but you can't just square the diagonal to get the area... doesn't work that way. The ratios would be the same if we were dealing with perfectly square screens, but the areas would not (a 7" diagonal square screen would have an area of 24.5 square inches, not 49 square inches; and a square screen with a diagonal of 10" would have an area of 50 square inches, not 100). But these tablets have 4:3 ratio screens, which throws things off a bit.

The iPad has a 10" diagonal and is in a 4:3 ratio, so we are left with a 3:4:5 right triangle, giving the iPad dimensions of 6"x8" or 42 square inches. A 4:3 screen with a 7" diagonal will have a screen of 5.6"x4.2" or 23.52 square inches. This is 56% the size of the 10" screen. So I was off by a bit when I said "twice the size" but close enough.

If you look at the dimensions you will see that you can fit roughly two 5.6"x4.2" screens into the area of a 6"x8" screen.... it will overlap slightly in one direction (8.4 > 8), but be slightly shorter in the other direction (5.6 < 6).


RE: Short Lived
By inighthawki on 11/3/2010 3:03:53 PM , Rating: 2
6"x8" is 48"^2, not 42. Thus it is 23.52/48 = 49% the size (see my above post). To double surface area, multiply the diagonal by sqrt(2) and since 7*sqrt(2) < 10, a 7" diagonal (same aspect ratio) must have less than half the surface area.


RE: Short Lived
By slashbinslashbash on 11/7/2010 8:32:05 PM , Rating: 2
Oops, brain fart. Thanks for the correction.


RE: Short Lived
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/2/2010 1:36:19 PM , Rating: 2
Archos does make a bigger android device.


Define tablets
By Spivonious on 11/2/2010 9:51:24 AM , Rating: 2
If a tablet is a device with multi-touch input running a phone OS, then Apple has the market. I wonder if this research firm included tablet PCs and convertible laptops.




RE: Define tablets
By inighthawki on 11/2/2010 10:16:11 AM , Rating: 2
You know it's funny, I've seen a dozen people carrying tablet PCs around, but I've only ever seen one person carrying an iPad, and this is in the middle of a tech school.


RE: Define tablets
By Luticus on 11/2/2010 10:21:34 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I wonder if this research firm included tablet PCs and convertible laptops
with the percentage it came up with... doubtful.

Personally i dont consider the ipad a tablet, it's an oversized ipod touch. That's just my opinion and i'm sure a lot of people would disagree but i just don't consider the ipad "full featured" enough to be a tablet. I'm going to wait and see what windows 7 can do on a tablet. I don't care about UI and all that bs, i can solve that by enlarging the interface buttons, skinning the machine and whatever else i want to do (the beauty of windows is that it's customizable like that). Functionality is all i care about. i can change the UI but adding features and changing what the os supports is much more difficult.


RE: Define tablets
By bruce24 on 11/2/2010 10:44:08 AM , Rating: 2
The title should be Apple has 95% of the Media tablet market. That is the term being used in the industry and being tracked by various market research firms.


RE: Define tablets
By superPC on 11/2/2010 11:37:30 AM , Rating: 2
then how do those firm categorize windows 7 tablet? productivity tablet? content creation tablet? what? honestly i think this is all a trick to make apple look good. the media and market research firm are fanning the flames and sowing trolls.


RE: Define tablets
By Enoch2001 on 11/2/2010 11:42:27 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
honestly i think this is all a trick to make apple look good.


There's no "trick" to making Apple look good. Even with their antenna issues with the iPhone 4, their stock is at an all-time high and they continually post huge profits in mobile media (read: iOS device) sales.

There's no conspiracy, my friend. The proof is in the numbers.


RE: Define tablets
By jbwhite99 on 11/2/2010 12:58:28 PM , Rating: 3
that just proves PT Barnum is right.


RE: Define tablets
By bporada on 11/2/2010 5:40:16 PM , Rating: 3
I'm pretty sure Windows proved PT Barnum was right with Vista...


RE: Define tablets
By The Raven on 11/2/2010 5:53:55 PM , Rating: 2
I think the problem with his commnet is this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_a_sucker_bo...

I think the problem with yours is that Vista was not popular.


RE: Define tablets
By bruce24 on 11/2/2010 2:51:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
then how do those firm categorize windows 7 tablet? productivity tablet? content creation tablet? what?


Unless you want to include convertibles in the same category as slate tablets, then there aren’t many windows tablets on the market. A couple of weeks ago HP did introduce it’s slate 500, which you would not call a content creation device, and I imagine it will be bucketed into the same category as the iPad going forward.


RE: Define tablets
By michael2k on 11/2/2010 11:57:53 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sure they did.

Numbers from previous years indicate about 3m to 5m Windows tablet PCs are sold a year.

I wouldn't be surprised if the iPad chewed into that even further so only 2m were sold this year.

So that if Apple sells 4m iPads in a quarter and only half a million tablet PCs, they would get 91% today.


RE: Define tablets
By Alexstarfire on 11/2/2010 3:12:04 PM , Rating: 2
With the numbers you provide even the 91% you came up with seems way off. It's only been about 6 months since the iPad launched. That's about 8 million out there. 95% means that there are only .4 million, or 400,000, tablet PCs out there. That's obviously impossible if you are saying that 3-5 million tablet PCs are sold every year.

Granted, if you only look at the consumer market then 95% could very well be true. Most consumers don't even need tablets. I'd imagine most of the 3-5 million you say they sell are in the business sector where Windows tablets can be extremely useful.


This:
By cknobman on 11/2/2010 10:13:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Dell also noted it's easier to develop software for phones based on the Windows Phone 7 operating system than Android. There was no further explanation provided for the comment, so we'd be curious to hear the reasoning behind this statement.


Lets see........could it be because they perhaps get some sort of kickbacks or incentives from Microsoft for using their OS? I'm willing to bet my salary on it!!!!!!!

As for Dell's surge into the tablet market I'm not holding my breath for anything great. I'll just wait and see if anything changes.

Dell has a history of releasing products that cost more and offer less than their competitors and Dell forces too much crap down your throat when you try to purchase anything.




RE: This:
By inighthawki on 11/2/2010 10:18:43 AM , Rating: 2
Actually I'm willing to bet it has a lot to do with the SDKs that MS has provided. Programming in C# on top of XNA or silverlight (with GUI editor) using professional grade software and debuggers is a whole lot easier than writing in pure C/C++ with whatever SDKs were provided by Google for Android in whatever free IDE/debugger you find to go with it.


RE: This:
By Luticus on 11/2/2010 10:28:06 AM , Rating: 2
Good call, as a C# dev i can personally back this up. C# is wonderful when you just want to make something work.

dotnet is ms's golden ticket.


RE: This:
By cknobman on 11/2/2010 1:35:40 PM , Rating: 2
Ironically I am a .net developer myself, lol.


RE: This:
By inighthawki on 11/2/2010 2:18:40 PM , Rating: 2
I'm surprised you didn't think of that when you wrote your post. As a programmer who is highly fluent in C, C++, and C#, I can say that C++ is my favorite by far, but as far as programming speed and development time, C# has the upper hand by a large margin, it's no contest. Each language has its advantages, and C#'s is development speed and integration with great tools like the GUI editors in visual studio (more of a .NET thing than C# but same difference if the comparison is between C and C#)


Nobody wanted one?
By damianrobertjones on 11/2/2010 10:14:40 AM , Rating: 2
I've owned a load of tablets over the years and although every single person would comment, 'Ohh, that's good', not one wanted to go out and buy one. In my current company, not one person owns a tablet. None.

Latitude XT and XT2 - Far too expensive, amazing multi-touch, easy to use the on-screen keyboard. No one wants one due to price and no-one knows they exist.

Archos 9 - Please, don't go there.

Acer 1820ptz - Fantastic screen, great multi-touch, seven hours battery life.. No-one knows it exists.

If Acer, Dell, any other oem actually got off their behind they might actually SELL a few tablets. Oh well, Apple dove in and destroyed them all and hardly lifted a damn finger.

Shame, as Windows 7, despite what the reviers state and people repeat, is actually really easy to use a touch platform. (Increase dpi to 125% and you're set). Gestures are great :)




RE: Nobody wanted one?
By Tony Swash on 11/2/2010 11:08:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've owned a load of tablets over the years and although every single person would comment, 'Ohh, that's good', not one wanted to go out and buy one. In my current company, not one person owns a tablet. None.


Interesting anecdote but the simple fact is that times are changing.

Apple will sell in the region of 10 million iPads this calendar year and probably around 15 plus million in its first full year.

To put that in perspective that's roughly twice as many iPads sold as Xbox.

I would not be surprised if 30 million iPads were sold in it's second year.

Clearly millions of people have looked at the iPad and decided they very much wanted one.

Perhaps you were showing them the wrong tablet :)


RE: Nobody wanted one?
By PsychoPif on 11/3/2010 11:21:46 AM , Rating: 2
30 million IPad... With every other tech companies in the world going after a piece of the pie?

I think Apple will be quite proud if they can keep the same pace. You're insane if you think they can double their growth to 30 millions, unless they release a cheap version at half price. And even then, competitors will need to fail badly with their counter attack.


Possibly...
By rs1 on 11/2/2010 11:02:19 AM , Rating: 2
...Apple holds 95% of the tablet market because only Apple users are foolish enough to have forgotten that tablet computing was tried and failed years ago or to believe that a tablet computer (or in the case of the iPad, a super-sized iPhone) is something that is actually going to be useful to them?




RE: Possibly...
By dubldwn on 11/2/2010 12:20:13 PM , Rating: 2
If only Apple fans are that stupid then why are Acer, Asus, Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, Research in Motion, Samsung, HP, Viewsonic, Archos, Cisco, LG, Fujitsu, and several others going to launch iPad competitors?

How could webOS, Android, QNX, Windows, and MeeGo users be that stupid to actually find one of these tablets useful?


RE: Possibly...
By bporada on 11/2/2010 5:59:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
rs1 on November 2, 2010 at 11:02 AM

...Apple holds 95% of the tablet market because only Apple users are foolish enough to have forgotten that tablet computing was tried and failed years ago or to believe that a tablet computer (or in the case of the iPad, a super-sized iPhone) is something that is actually going to be useful to them?


Hmmm....have you tried an iPad?? 'Cause you're talking about it as if you have never touched one. I'm gonna have to mark you down in the 'Don't Get It' column.


Where is the EU at now?
By jonmcc33 on 11/2/2010 11:50:28 AM , Rating: 2
95% of the market? That's a monopoly. The EU is bound to sue them now!




“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki