Mike Green is spot on. Thats exactly the current market for the iPad. However, I think that what is being said is there is another market for Apple to hit, with a much more open system. I think that will happen too. For those who only want a closed system, its here now and its great.
KeithE mentioned 3 year olds working the iPad. I have one better... My grandson is exactly 18months. He has seen his mum operate her iPhone. Guess what, he can turn it on and make calls and she didn't show him anything. So he has observed her moving her finger across the phone to turn it on, etc.
@Ale...I guess what i am pretty much saying is that you are paying 500 extra dollars just for software. The MAC's hardware is not the fastest or the best, but it does seem to have a longevity( Probably enhanced by the software)...What is it about a MAC that is worth so much more? How can people afford them?
I will give an example of a good PC that my family was in possession of....We had a earlier toshiba satellite model that lasted for 3- 4 years. It had some viruses on the way, but for someone who was technically minded, it was not insurmountable. That was back when the manufacturer gave you a recovery disk. Simply pop it in and WHOOSH, you had a almost brand new computer.. That computer(Well, these days anyway) was a fraction of a cost of a MAC...
Now, i have a newer Toshiba satellite L305. I bought it at best buy and payed 90 bucks for the two year warranty...The hard drive broke, but was replaced for Free...Besides that, i have yet to have a problem with my Toshiba. I have been on some pretty intense sites, but with the right anti- virus, i have NEVER had a problem. My computer is just as zippy as ever. AND my computer was only 500 bucks + anti virus($50) + warranty($90)...so for about 650 dollars i was able to pick up a laptop that is guaranteed to last two years, probably more... A MAC book would need to last about 3-5 years to meet that value..These days, people want the best value you can buy....None of the other stuff really matters to most people...Netbooks are really starting to take off....Even my like 70 year old boss has one...They are really cheap. My sister picked one up for 279 dollars....279!!!!!
Like "fine tools", Apple has spent and continues to spend a lot of effort and money in how things look and feel. They do award winning industrial design and it permeates everything they make. For many people, price is one of the more important issues and "how things feel" is something that they couldn't care less about. Me, I like tools that fit my hand, that stay sharp (when that's important), are easily repaired when needed, etc. Apple's computers and other products usually fulfill my needs and the now modest premium on the cost is something I'm willing to pay because I think I get value for my money.
Why pay a premium for a quality Japanese saw that easily cuts on forward and backward strokes and is quite sharp when you can get a cheap saw that does what you want and you couldn't care less about how easy it is to cut with it?
Why go to the trouble of hunting down a pair of wire cutters that are drop forged of expensive tough steel with blades that carefully match up when you can get a pair of stamped ones that work ok? The stamped ones are not going to work well with very fine wires and they won't last under heavy use. On the other hand, you may never plan to work with fine wires and you may use them only a few times a year. Why spend a lot of money on quality?
One other constant to think about is the need for higher quality is always out there.
The higher margins are on higher quality devices. Those that encounter use cases where that quality matters, will pay those higher margins, and that is a big part of the Apple secret sauce.
Appealing to the always price sensititve crowd means a huge volume business, very thin margins, and little room to add value. Apple doesn't go there, because their business is about adding that value.
Interestingly, that means they don't really care that people will find a $300 deal. They are interested in the people who will pay the extra $500, recognizing the value they added.
I own a number of Mac's and PC's - enjoy them both. The Mac's just work, cost somewhat more than their PC counterparts and generally are better made and last longer. My main desktop computer is a significantly upgraded 2001 model G4 PowerMac, though I also own much more recent models. My most recent Mac purchased was a 2007 model Mac mini with a 1.83 GHz Core2Duo which I purchased NEW in 2008 for $350 from Microcenter. Which just goes to prove there are deals on Mac's - you just have to look harder.
Two comments:
Note Apple computers should be be referred to as a Mac - not MAC (abbreviation for Media Access Control).
Secondly, I think this topic should be moved to the Sandbox.
They are interested in the people who will pay the extra $500, recognizing the value they added.
Or the brainwashed masses who only think paying up gets a better product. Massive consumer cult purveyors like Mercedes or Apple provide great economic advantage for shareholders until they get thrown off track by hubris or other silliness.
Well, we are deffo headed for Sandbox territory. Good discussion though. I want to add a few things on cost, design means and methods, and their impact on value perception, and margin.
There are those people of course, Jazzed, but they are not what really fuels the business.
Mercedes, BMW, Apple, others... all add significant value to their products.
As written above, the difference really comes down to how people value their time, and how they value their experiences.
The $300 machine, with a lot of speed and features, probably needs a time investment to really settle into a higher profile use case. It's fine for the people who don't need much, and see the extra speed as a nice value in and of itself.
The $100 rule is very instructive here. A machine where one spends a few hours dealing with it, costs money in terms of time. Many people value their time, and will pay the money because they don't want to pay in terms of time.
Apple appeals directly to those people, spending considerable dollars on usability. That stuff isn't cheap!! There is a very good reason why the ordinary general purpose PC running Windows, or Linux for that matter, isn't all that usable, and that reason is the sheer cost of Human Interaction Design.
Good interaction design, like the Apple usability standards, costs a ton. The typical process is to identify the solution set, then profile likely "users" and their use cases. From there, each "user" and their needs are analyzed and factored into usability scenarios. Those scenarios are weighed in terms of their overall information content, various usability factors, such as discover-ability, repeatability, failure, number of choices per user action, consistency, etc...
If one wants to do it right and see real value for the effort, the product of those things is run through trials with real people, with everything recorded for analysis, and some (often significant) iterations to fully realize the potential the process has.
For a single case, that's where it ends. For generalized cases, such as the work Apple has done, all of that then runs many times across a broad spectrum of applications to produce the style and interaction guides.
(which become useless, if not used, which is why Apple controls the way they do, and it's why people pay the way they do, just FYI)
A great case in point, on a small scale here, was Microcontrolled and that little message system for the package. Actually building something that would do the task happens rather quickly. Building it to endure both users and the environment takes time. Building it so that the user interaction with it goes well takes more time still. Finally, building it so that it is intuitive and discoverable, which means it operates for the average person without having to also supply a lot of documentation or having them do trial and error, or have training, costs more time still.
Arguably, that time exceeds the entire technical product design and specification time.
So then, if two devices were built, one with the interaction design stuff done well, and the other where it wasn't, both products performing the same tasks, the margin required to pay for and benefit from the interaction design would need to be considerably higher than that required for the device that just technically executes well.
That's where Apple lives, and so do the other companies you mention.
BTW: When "profiles" are made, many kinds of users are identified, and personas are created, complete with names, places, history, gender, education, etc... such that the team doing the usability work can know them as "real" people, referring to them by name, etc...
That "up front" work can cost a lot of money just on it's own, but is necessary to insure the scope of the interaction design actually will add value, and not be some glitzy thing appealing to the "buy high for quality" crowd.
Back to the two products:
So let's say one of them is $50, and the other one $99. Technically, they perform well, and let's say they both also endure the environment at a basic level.
If the interaction design was productive, the difference will be in the time to use metric, and the time to operate metrics. The $50 device might need "twiddling", or might require somebody read the documentation to understand what is being done and why, or to troubleshoot.
The $99 device may well just be plug 'n play, the use case made obvious, and the status information being sufficient to accomplish the task for the user without them having to do most anything else, but plug it in, locate it, and provide the input needed.
Something like a "setup wizard", where the device knows it's not done the task yet, would be a great example of a value add. On power up, it then communicates the few things that must be done, and does so in a way the user gets on the first go around. It would also then, communicate success, and or guide through problems.
The code effort, design, planning, etc... for that process costs, and that's where the $99 comes from, over the $50.
I know a long post, but now it's clear about that time value. Some people have not many dollars, but they do have time. They are going to spend the $50, and they may well enjoy getting stuff setup, and learning about their device. Or, they might just need to, whatever.
To them, that $99 one is just expensive and a poor value.
On the other hand, let's say we've got a professional of some kind, perhaps a attorney, doctor, somebody who values their time highly. Often, those people don't enjoy setting things up, and they consider time spent interacting with technology "wasted" time, because they are either not living their lives, or billing for professional time to pay for those lives.
(and that's the $100 rule)
They will easily pay the $99, and may even assign the task to a subordinate to them, secure in the added value not consuming their time, but likely to not consume that of their subordinate as well, because it's not productive time for either of them. Why know anything technical about the package delivery thingy, when one could be litigating, for example? Leave that stuff to the geeks who built it, and if they build it well, it just works.
In the case of Apple specifically, they have always invested fairly significantly in these kinds of things, and their business is doing very well, because that clear focus allows them to serve their target market, and to do so getting good margin on all their value adds, meaning more money is made per product, more of the time.
If that value added work is done poorly, then it's actually a net loss for everybody! Rather than do that, it's often best to either make the right investments and capture the profits from the added value, or simply don't do it, and stick with simple, time tested mediocre means and methods, keeping overall development cost and product cost competitive.
That's the prevailing view favored by the majority of companies, contributing to the elitist, or overly expensive, or low value perception surrounding products that incorporate the interaction and industrial design disciplines in general.
opportunity cost ... its that simple . I rather spend $1000 and have it WORK leaving me TIME to do other things . then spend time on a system keeping it in top shape .
potatohead has it right . its TIME vs $$$
and I Value my time more then $$$ . casue you can't buy time ..
alot who compare apple's price is often mistaken.
Often folks think the Mac Pro is " the apple desk top" to compare a PC too.
Its not . the mac Pro is a Workstation . not a home computer
the mac pro is in the same class/market as a $2k dell professional workstation .. same target market .
Take a the Bluetooth issue I broght up..
the Only PC at wallmart that had it was $950 Sony
the Mac book is 999
and for that sony to get more then its rated 3.5H Batt life a $190
Extended batt would be needed .
Backlit Keyboards . My dorm frineds gameing Rig has one / the PC was $1800! and my other friends dell studio 15 was $1500
to put it simple , apple does not sell Lower end computers with a lack of features ..Besides the lack of Firewire on the mac book
Just cause they dont sell a stripped down computer to compete with a 500 dell does not make then bad . they know the user experience ( apple's clam to fame ) would not be up to "there" par if ran on less then XYX hardware . this is part of the reason Apple does not want to license OSX for non apple Hardware .
If forced to run on crappy HW it would taint the user experience.
M$ does the same thing with there OSes too to a extent .
the Imac is the Home Computer / small Biz computer desktop .=
Yes the Imac was at first the cheap $500 POS one could buy to get in the Mac Realm . but this not true anymore . the Imac is a VERY solid platform for anything . and the Mini has 2 display outputs now too . the mini makes a Great dorm computer and its not slow !
now On the flip side my Tinker computer is GNU/Linux .
cause I learn from it . I enjoy messing with its guts . but its not a computer I rely on . ( aside from my red had based ToughBook, It stays Intact)
but when the day is done and I want to watch a DVD or edit a video I know my Mac will be there ready to serve me .
BTW its not 10% anymore . its 15
and its "89% in the over $1000 market" (Cnet 2009)
fanboy . LOLs . I HATE the Idevices . and some of apples policys but in comparison to my other choices I have I deal with them .
now If Linux was more "grown up" I would haply Dump apple but as of right now It Sucks for Professional AV .
I hate to bag on the tux but lets face it . Linux is just not " there " yet . Heck My college blocks on the network here .cause the IT manger here is afrade of Linux .
I tinkered with it in 2002 the GUI was ULGY . It was a Mess then.. but it got a TON better . but its just not where I need to be to be a formidable competitor to mainstream Windows and OSX .
I use for what its good for SERVER ! .and normal internet use .
and for WINE . so I can use Win stuff .
I feel its only a matter of time . 2y or so to get The Tux in shape for the Big time . and in some markets its plenty . I put My mom on it as she can's Screw it up . SHE killed XP in 4 days .
now she has a 13" Mac Book Pro I Bought for her .
At one point I was going to hackintosh a Tough book CF-30 to OSX . but I REFUSE to break a EULA . unlike the other annoying software and DVD stealing students in my college I have a Soul .. I pay out of pocket for evey thing i buy .
I spent a tad under $5000 on SW and HW last year alone .
I have only ONE program I have had to crack . It was a periodic table SW for OS9 and the author was dead . his Wife had no clue on how to unlock a serial for me . OH WELL .
I hate the Ipad .It is a Horrid device .
Apple should Kill the Mac book air ! and tweak it in to a tablit .
ATOM or CORE 2 is plenty of Horse power for a tablet and it would be x86 compatable so it Like a REAL laptop run more then a over sized Phone OS .. My Old clamshell Ibook does more with less hardware .and its 10 Years Old !!..
I had Such High Hopes for a Full OSX GUI and OS . .
but apple being minimalistic killed it for me .
Imaging a DAQ and labview for mac . HAND HELD SCOPE !.
and I could PRINT my NTE datasheets IN Vbox mode with XP on it .( BTW I use a Palm Centro for NTE printing PDFs !! )
then toss it in the car as a over sized Tom tom . with a Verzion USB Card . and a Garmen USB GPS ..
so as you can see I am not a "fanboy" I love a GOOD PC too .
just not the junk one Buys at a store .
sadly I would guess 70% of computer buyers don't make there own systems nore customize there laptops .
My sad rule of thumb is if its under $750 then its not a Long term investment computer . and yes i apply this to the Mac Mini too.
My last mac I had was a DP 500 I pimped to DP 1.8Ghz It lasted me 8 years and never had a problem . over the 8 years I spent s a tad over 3500 .
thats $475 a year . not bad !
the only reason I upgraded was the PSU committed " curcuit-cide"
the 5V rail hit 16V and the magic smoke came out of the whole computer . it never felt a thing . it was all over in 10 seconds.
so I got a Mini . why did I get teh N00B mac . Simple
the crappyest Mini is still light years faster then the old G4 .
and the G4 was PLENTY fast for me .so I went from OS9 PPC to OSX x86 in one month
so I got a $1K Pimped mini with 2 20'' NEC Self calibrating Dule input displays , a 1280x1024 3LCD Epson Projector .
2 FW 800speed HDs
and then I upgraded my final cut pakage and teh same with protools .. and other Pro SW . tapping in at $4900 in the end .
I look at the BS2 like a mac . its super expencive . but it works with out much fuss .
If I wanted to cut costs I would use C and a PIC . but I would never get my ideas to work in a weekend Lke now .
I usually don't get into these politcal discussions but... I wonder what everybody thinks of using open source software to pay software. I guess it would kind of stink if your a software writer for a living. I personaly would love to own a Apple (and a Ferrari etc.) but instead I did the next best thing. I built my own computer system. I bought win 7 when it was offered for 49.00. So I guess my point is you get what you pay for! I am pretty proud though of the system I built, at least I can say I built it. The same goes for software but I'm not to proud to use somebody else's. I attached a text file of my system that I built rather cheap! I am one of those thats always hunting for the next deal!
ratroinc, IMHO, that's a classic "have time", "don't have dollars" scenario.
In that scenario, open code is a great deal!! One can obtain nearly any capable hardware, invest the time and a net connection, and build up very capable systems.
That's really the antithesis of what Apple is doing, though it's possible to build and make good use of open code on Apple computers.
Personally, I think open code is a great thing. The reason for that is the body of open code out there presents a high use value to everybody who does the work to become capable of using it. For some, that's just a download, like Open Office. For others, it's the whole deal, OS, dev tools, etc...
Either way, the use value is high, the cost very low --just enough to obtain the code to use.
Anybody who sees that use value, but perhaps is missing some little thing, can "scratch that itch", or write docs, or train people, or any other thing possible to grow that body of code and it's users, adding more value to everybody.
That is a beautiful thing.
For software authors, it generally means having to actually add value for the dollars. Most ordinary, basic computing tasks are covered by open code, and a whole lot of advanced ones are, and that pool is always growing.
People who sell software do so, either on the basis of the value they are adding (new tech, not common knowledge, or too complex to build as a open project), or to people who really just use software, and are not inclined to make the investments necessary to make use of any code, much less open code.
To me, it's then a matter of innovation. There are always niches that do not have open code in them, for a lot of reasons, and there is always new ideas and tech that can be useful as software, meaning there is always a door open to sell software licenses.
The nice thing about having open code around, with respect to software licenses, is some downward pressure on cost overall. The open code there serves as a nice check on cost, should some vendor really push it, a open project can check that effort nicely, as Open Office generally has with Microsoft Office.
I wonder what everybody thinks of using open source software to pay software. I guess it would kind of stink if your a software writer for a living.
My first foray in business was writing and selling software for the TRS-80 via mail order. My programs were well-received, and I even got a letter from Chicago praising one of my products. Apparently, it was the most popular program in their computer club. 'Problem was, I had never sold any programs in Chicago.
For me, that was the handwriting on the wall; and I realized that a pure software business would be a losing proposition, unless I wanted to become a complete jerk and end up with a legal department just to enforce copyrights.
So I guess my point is this: unless one is a jerk about copyright enforcement (or working for one), it hardly makes a difference whether your software is open-source or not. To make money with software, there has to be some other value added, like hardware, either by you or by the entity who's paying you for the software.
My best guess is that all those uber-geeks that produce the best of the best software in the world started in Unix or Linux and moved over to Windows or OS-X to cash in.
People often say that Linux is unfinished and in some cases that is true. But time and time again, I see an application that has gotten 90% done in Linux and then ported over to Windows and given the final touches as a way to avoid having to share code with the public.
If you want to learn, open source still provides you the launch pad. Once you know the ropes, pick your own playground. It is a greed world.
You will be surprised what is free in Linux that cost $50 here and $75 there in other OSes. In many cases the code is blatantly ported over to the other OS.
Just for example, rather than buy Norton Ghost in its latest version, one can download Clonezilla for free and have just as good a backup image. The truth is that Linux and Unix has always had the means to do this feature, but millions of users buy Norton Ghost and avoid anything associated with Linux or Unix.
Was some programmer left out in the cold? I doubt it. And I doubt that a lot of programmers are getting rich these days. We have had several decades of people getting Phds in computer science and struggling to find contract work. Most of the big corporations put jobs out for competitive bid.
If you really want job security, become a plumber. People will wait weeks for you to appear and are afraid to negotiate price for fear you won't be back.
I have to admit being the cheapskate I am, most of the software I use is free. For instance I use Macrium reflect for back ups. I actually back up my system daily to a 1.5tb harddrive and the program is free!
Ale, I've read that over 30 companies are developing iPad-like devices now that the iPad has opened up the market for the form factor; many of those will be open. I'll wait for one of them.
Now I have to find out how to make it do what I want (compile Verilog code, load the Spectra produced by the Bruker FTMS-ICR and the Finnigan MAT 7000, and so on ). I wanted something I can take with me and that includes all the publications I have to read... Let's see how it plays out. At least I can read them in the device.
What bothers me (my pocket actually!) is the 99$ (us) I have to pay to make my apps run on the device .
If anyone has a question (when Brad will port BST to it is out of my control...)...
But time and time again, I see an application that has gotten 90% done in Linux and then ported over to Windows and given the final touches as a way to avoid having to share code with the public.
Please could you name/link to some examples?
There are some things I don't understand about that statement:
1) Off the top of my head I cannot think of any such examples.
2) Having to share the code is nothing to do with whether it was written for Linux or Windows or any other OS.
I would never buy into Apples walled garden, not because of the $99 but just because of the lock down. If I buy a computer, and let's face it a tablet is a computer, I want to be able to do what ever I like with it.
I would think it is unlikely for Brad to want to port BST to iPad or Android. The graphics tool kit is just not available there. (Mind you I bet some one is working on that issue as we speak.)
However it is already possible for BSTC and BSTL to be compiled with Free Pascal for Android. Hope the new wave of Android tablets have USB host mode for Prop downloading.
I would never buy into Apples walled garden, not because of the $99 but just because of the lock down. If I buy a computer, and let's face it a tablet is a computer, I want to be able to do what ever I like with it.
I would think it is unlikely for Brad to want to port BST to iPad or Android. The graphics tool kit is just not available there. (Mind you I bet some one is working on that issue as we speak.)
However it is already possible for BSTC and BSTL to be compiled with Free Pascal for Android. Hope the new wave of Android tablets have USB host mode for Prop downloading.
the apps are OK but the HW is Still not anything I would EVER buy .
give me FULL USB support like on a laptop and I will reconsider
*printing via BT and USB
*mass sorage Via USB
* the list goes on .
Apple has the apps . this is true but they are lacking "Usability "
I Just bought a $199 12'' Ibook G4 today . as a 2ed portable as My 17''G4 is too big to lug everywhere.
It does more then the pad does .
there is a slight chance I may mod the Ibook in to a tablet next year .
If it survives the winter ...
I was being a bit cheeky with my use of the word "brick", hence the attached smiley face.
What I mean is this:
Sometime ago I downloaded the Android SDK. Within an hour I had a dinky "hello world" test app with some graphic and buttons running on the Android simulator on my Linux PC.
Seeing how easy this was, and having a possible work related use for this, I immediately bought a Samsung Galaxy S Android phone so that I could play for real. Within an hour again that code was installed and running on the phone. All for free.
That work related app I have in mind will run just OK on many other manufacturers phones and tablets. A cheap 200 dollar tablet would do. The app would be given away for free to our customers. Large numbers are not expected. No app store is required.
Mean while I have rooted the phone and can happily experiment with throwing all kinds of code into it, be it C++, C or even Pascal. Just to see what we can do with it.
Now, compared to all this I consider the Apple products to be somewhat "brick" like.
@Heater
Examples of items that migrated to commercial OSes from Linux? I don't really want to name names and have you argue that those are just a few. So I'll give you a general idea of the groups.
It has been awhile, but the issues relate to a subset of Linux apps that do have commercial value. For example, backup software is one item that tends to migrate as it matures - Clonezilla is an exception. Most of the free software in Linux for backup is for IDE hard drives at this point, it is hard to find SATA versions and generally those that learned with IDE, have turned to Windows to make money with SATA.
Other specifics are sophisticated animation and graphic development programs. In this area, some have come full circle and remain wonderful value in Linux (like Gimp) and there is also a full animation suite for movie or game construction, but there is a tendency for others cease Linux development and move over to selling an 'improved Windows version'. In Windows, these cost thousands of dollars.
Some things never migrate as to do so would be rather absurd. Compilers generally evolve and remain in Linux - so there are different versions of Python for Windows, OS-X, and Linux. Of course, the Kernel and core systems remain in Linux. But programmers do learn their chops in Linux and then get a job with a M$ or Apple house to make a living.
Another area that migrates for the bucks are small 'boutique applications'. Many of these are very easy to write in Linux and can then be easily converted to C code with free Linux utilities, and finally ported over to Windows and sold for $50USD to users that absolutely can't find a free product in M$ or OS-X.
As I recall, a very good 'batch graphic image editor' in Linux does this. If you ever had a web page with 500-1000 photos that need to be reformated all the same size with the same border, it can be done free in Linux - but the same application will cost you bucks in Windows. The area of software for creating websites is fully of migration examples.
Heater I understand you completely. But I want the tablet _now!_ did I say now already ?. The other tablets are not available. I have a Linux running small tablet (N810). It sadly failed to deliver what I wanted, it is just too small. It also has problems playing video (too underpowered). The battery life is great, there were many apps. Just not what I wanted .
I do not say this iPad thingy is the panacea (I have been wondering for some 6 months if I should buy one or not, go figure).
It would be nice to have a host USB controller and FTDI drivers... let's see if any android tablet delivers that, then we can almost ditch computers ! (I'll be happy!).
One big complain I have is the on-screen keyboard... for text and the occasional number is ok, but anything else... like programming where symbols are required all the time... well no idea how to do it.
The apps are cheap and then there are a lot of them, too many .
Btw, I have been trying to do some programming on xcode for a small app, no success. Objective-C is completely unknown to me, I do not believe in object oriented programming and btw, everything I learned from java does not seem to help . I need to find that example code that will make me take off
Videos play good, but browsing with ads ? are we in 2004 ?... I can't stand ads in web pages! (thank his Jobness flash does not work! it would be unbearable) ( I do not want to pay for a browser!, in case you did not get the message )
I don't really have an argument here. I was just curious.
If some person or group writes an application for Linux, perhaps releasing it under the GPL or whatever open source license, perhaps learning the software trade as they go, they are quite justified in creating a new improved version for Windows, Mac, Linux or whatever OS and releasing it as binary only in exchange for money. It is their code they can profit from it in whichever way they see fit. If I don't like that, well to bad for me.
I find it odd that backup software should care if the files/drives it is backing up are IDE or SATA. Sounds to me that such software should not be working at that level. What if the drive is on USB or Firewire or some network attachment? Crazy.
...I want the tablet _now!_ did I say now already ?
I know the feeling. Oh, you mean the computing kind of tablet...
I do not say this iPad thingy is the panacea (I have been wondering for some 6 months if I should buy one or not, go figure).
These to statements don't add up. Six months is a long "now".
One big complaint I have is the on-screen keyboard...
This really bugs me. iPad, Android tablet, whatever. These things are computers. They have more horse power than PCs had not many years back. They can display on big screens. They have massive storage and general purpose operating systems and networking. Why, oh why, do they make it so hard to hook up a normal keyboard and mouse when you want to?
I'm sure this will change as more tablets come with USB host mode out of the box.
Me, I'm having a long "now" waiting to get a Samsung Android tablet or whatever is around when I've made my piggy bank fat enough.
I was being a bit cheeky with my use of the word "brick", hence the attached smiley face.
What I mean is this:
Sometime ago I downloaded the Android SDK. Within an hour I had a dinky "hello world" test app with some graphic and buttons running on the Android simulator on my Linux PC.
Seeing how easy this was, and having a possible work related use for this, I immediately bought a Samsung Galaxy S Android phone so that I could play for real. Within an hour again that code was installed and running on the phone. All for free.
That work related app I have in mind will run just OK on many other manufacturers phones and tablets. A cheap 200 dollar tablet would do. The app would be given away for free to our customers. Large numbers are not expected. No app store is required.
Mean while I have rooted the phone and can happily experiment with throwing all kinds of code into it, be it C++, C or even Pascal. Just to see what we can do with it.
Now, compared to all this I consider the Apple products to be somewhat "brick" like.
FYI you can register for free as an Apple Developer, download the free iOS SDK and start developing iOS Apps for your iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad at no charge. There are tutorials on the web on how to setup the SDK and compile your first program in 5 minutes. However you'll need to pay the $99 if you want to start distributing these Apps. See http://developer.apple.com/devcenter/ios/index.action
In reference to Zicog's comment about connecting keyboards - it's a non-issue on the iPad and the iPhone4. You can immediately use a bluetooth keyboard on both of these devices
$99 - Not cool. By the way is that for just one version with subsequent versions free or does one have to pay again to upgrade the app?
Bluetooth keyboards - Cool.
Now apart from the fact that iXXX is from a single source supplier it all makes sense.
Thanks.
I think you'll need to pay $99 to offer Apps for sale on the iTunes store. Unmodified iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches can only download apps from the iTunes store. Apple reviews each App submitted to the iTunes store to make sure it works and doesn't do anything not allowed per the SDK licensing agreement before posting it on the iTunes store for download. While some programmer's don't like this approach, it has worked for well for Apple and iOS users in controlling the quality of the Apps in the iTunes store.
Android seems to be a lot less mature and I've read about a lot of App compatibility problems when running on different Android hardware and OS versions.
Comments
KeithE mentioned 3 year olds working the iPad. I have one better... My grandson is exactly 18months. He has seen his mum operate her iPhone. Guess what, he can turn it on and make calls and she didn't show him anything. So he has observed her moving her finger across the phone to turn it on, etc.
I will give an example of a good PC that my family was in possession of....We had a earlier toshiba satellite model that lasted for 3- 4 years. It had some viruses on the way, but for someone who was technically minded, it was not insurmountable. That was back when the manufacturer gave you a recovery disk. Simply pop it in and WHOOSH, you had a almost brand new computer.. That computer(Well, these days anyway) was a fraction of a cost of a MAC...
Now, i have a newer Toshiba satellite L305. I bought it at best buy and payed 90 bucks for the two year warranty...The hard drive broke, but was replaced for Free...Besides that, i have yet to have a problem with my Toshiba. I have been on some pretty intense sites, but with the right anti- virus, i have NEVER had a problem. My computer is just as zippy as ever. AND my computer was only 500 bucks + anti virus($50) + warranty($90)...so for about 650 dollars i was able to pick up a laptop that is guaranteed to last two years, probably more... A MAC book would need to last about 3-5 years to meet that value..These days, people want the best value you can buy....None of the other stuff really matters to most people...Netbooks are really starting to take off....Even my like 70 year old boss has one...They are really cheap. My sister picked one up for 279 dollars....279!!!!!
Why pay a premium for a quality Japanese saw that easily cuts on forward and backward strokes and is quite sharp when you can get a cheap saw that does what you want and you couldn't care less about how easy it is to cut with it?
Why go to the trouble of hunting down a pair of wire cutters that are drop forged of expensive tough steel with blades that carefully match up when you can get a pair of stamped ones that work ok? The stamped ones are not going to work well with very fine wires and they won't last under heavy use. On the other hand, you may never plan to work with fine wires and you may use them only a few times a year. Why spend a lot of money on quality?
The higher margins are on higher quality devices. Those that encounter use cases where that quality matters, will pay those higher margins, and that is a big part of the Apple secret sauce.
Appealing to the always price sensititve crowd means a huge volume business, very thin margins, and little room to add value. Apple doesn't go there, because their business is about adding that value.
Interestingly, that means they don't really care that people will find a $300 deal. They are interested in the people who will pay the extra $500, recognizing the value they added.
Two comments:
Note Apple computers should be be referred to as a Mac - not MAC (abbreviation for Media Access Control).
Secondly, I think this topic should be moved to the Sandbox.
There are those people of course, Jazzed, but they are not what really fuels the business.
Mercedes, BMW, Apple, others... all add significant value to their products.
As written above, the difference really comes down to how people value their time, and how they value their experiences.
The $300 machine, with a lot of speed and features, probably needs a time investment to really settle into a higher profile use case. It's fine for the people who don't need much, and see the extra speed as a nice value in and of itself.
The $100 rule is very instructive here. A machine where one spends a few hours dealing with it, costs money in terms of time. Many people value their time, and will pay the money because they don't want to pay in terms of time.
Apple appeals directly to those people, spending considerable dollars on usability. That stuff isn't cheap!! There is a very good reason why the ordinary general purpose PC running Windows, or Linux for that matter, isn't all that usable, and that reason is the sheer cost of Human Interaction Design.
Good interaction design, like the Apple usability standards, costs a ton. The typical process is to identify the solution set, then profile likely "users" and their use cases. From there, each "user" and their needs are analyzed and factored into usability scenarios. Those scenarios are weighed in terms of their overall information content, various usability factors, such as discover-ability, repeatability, failure, number of choices per user action, consistency, etc...
If one wants to do it right and see real value for the effort, the product of those things is run through trials with real people, with everything recorded for analysis, and some (often significant) iterations to fully realize the potential the process has.
For a single case, that's where it ends. For generalized cases, such as the work Apple has done, all of that then runs many times across a broad spectrum of applications to produce the style and interaction guides.
(which become useless, if not used, which is why Apple controls the way they do, and it's why people pay the way they do, just FYI)
A great case in point, on a small scale here, was Microcontrolled and that little message system for the package. Actually building something that would do the task happens rather quickly. Building it to endure both users and the environment takes time. Building it so that the user interaction with it goes well takes more time still. Finally, building it so that it is intuitive and discoverable, which means it operates for the average person without having to also supply a lot of documentation or having them do trial and error, or have training, costs more time still.
Arguably, that time exceeds the entire technical product design and specification time.
So then, if two devices were built, one with the interaction design stuff done well, and the other where it wasn't, both products performing the same tasks, the margin required to pay for and benefit from the interaction design would need to be considerably higher than that required for the device that just technically executes well.
That's where Apple lives, and so do the other companies you mention.
BTW: When "profiles" are made, many kinds of users are identified, and personas are created, complete with names, places, history, gender, education, etc... such that the team doing the usability work can know them as "real" people, referring to them by name, etc...
That "up front" work can cost a lot of money just on it's own, but is necessary to insure the scope of the interaction design actually will add value, and not be some glitzy thing appealing to the "buy high for quality" crowd.
Back to the two products:
So let's say one of them is $50, and the other one $99. Technically, they perform well, and let's say they both also endure the environment at a basic level.
If the interaction design was productive, the difference will be in the time to use metric, and the time to operate metrics. The $50 device might need "twiddling", or might require somebody read the documentation to understand what is being done and why, or to troubleshoot.
The $99 device may well just be plug 'n play, the use case made obvious, and the status information being sufficient to accomplish the task for the user without them having to do most anything else, but plug it in, locate it, and provide the input needed.
Something like a "setup wizard", where the device knows it's not done the task yet, would be a great example of a value add. On power up, it then communicates the few things that must be done, and does so in a way the user gets on the first go around. It would also then, communicate success, and or guide through problems.
The code effort, design, planning, etc... for that process costs, and that's where the $99 comes from, over the $50.
I know a long post, but now it's clear about that time value. Some people have not many dollars, but they do have time. They are going to spend the $50, and they may well enjoy getting stuff setup, and learning about their device. Or, they might just need to, whatever.
To them, that $99 one is just expensive and a poor value.
On the other hand, let's say we've got a professional of some kind, perhaps a attorney, doctor, somebody who values their time highly. Often, those people don't enjoy setting things up, and they consider time spent interacting with technology "wasted" time, because they are either not living their lives, or billing for professional time to pay for those lives.
(and that's the $100 rule)
They will easily pay the $99, and may even assign the task to a subordinate to them, secure in the added value not consuming their time, but likely to not consume that of their subordinate as well, because it's not productive time for either of them. Why know anything technical about the package delivery thingy, when one could be litigating, for example? Leave that stuff to the geeks who built it, and if they build it well, it just works.
In the case of Apple specifically, they have always invested fairly significantly in these kinds of things, and their business is doing very well, because that clear focus allows them to serve their target market, and to do so getting good margin on all their value adds, meaning more money is made per product, more of the time.
If that value added work is done poorly, then it's actually a net loss for everybody! Rather than do that, it's often best to either make the right investments and capture the profits from the added value, or simply don't do it, and stick with simple, time tested mediocre means and methods, keeping overall development cost and product cost competitive.
That's the prevailing view favored by the majority of companies, contributing to the elitist, or overly expensive, or low value perception surrounding products that incorporate the interaction and industrial design disciplines in general.
potatohead has it right . its TIME vs $$$
and I Value my time more then $$$ . casue you can't buy time ..
alot who compare apple's price is often mistaken.
Often folks think the Mac Pro is " the apple desk top" to compare a PC too.
Its not . the mac Pro is a Workstation . not a home computer
the mac pro is in the same class/market as a $2k dell professional workstation .. same target market .
Take a the Bluetooth issue I broght up..
the Only PC at wallmart that had it was $950 Sony
the Mac book is 999
and for that sony to get more then its rated 3.5H Batt life a $190
Extended batt would be needed .
Backlit Keyboards . My dorm frineds gameing Rig has one / the PC was $1800! and my other friends dell studio 15 was $1500
to put it simple , apple does not sell Lower end computers with a lack of features ..Besides the lack of Firewire on the mac book
Just cause they dont sell a stripped down computer to compete with a 500 dell does not make then bad . they know the user experience ( apple's clam to fame ) would not be up to "there" par if ran on less then XYX hardware . this is part of the reason Apple does not want to license OSX for non apple Hardware .
If forced to run on crappy HW it would taint the user experience.
M$ does the same thing with there OSes too to a extent .
the Imac is the Home Computer / small Biz computer desktop .=
Yes the Imac was at first the cheap $500 POS one could buy to get in the Mac Realm . but this not true anymore . the Imac is a VERY solid platform for anything . and the Mini has 2 display outputs now too . the mini makes a Great dorm computer and its not slow !
now On the flip side my Tinker computer is GNU/Linux .
cause I learn from it . I enjoy messing with its guts . but its not a computer I rely on . ( aside from my red had based ToughBook, It stays Intact)
but when the day is done and I want to watch a DVD or edit a video I know my Mac will be there ready to serve me .
BTW its not 10% anymore . its 15
and its "89% in the over $1000 market" (Cnet 2009)
now If Linux was more "grown up" I would haply Dump apple but as of right now It Sucks for Professional AV .
I hate to bag on the tux but lets face it . Linux is just not " there " yet . Heck My college blocks on the network here .cause the IT manger here is afrade of Linux .
I tinkered with it in 2002 the GUI was ULGY . It was a Mess then.. but it got a TON better . but its just not where I need to be to be a formidable competitor to mainstream Windows and OSX .
I use for what its good for SERVER ! .and normal internet use .
and for WINE . so I can use Win stuff .
I feel its only a matter of time . 2y or so to get The Tux in shape for the Big time . and in some markets its plenty . I put My mom on it as she can's Screw it up . SHE killed XP in 4 days .
now she has a 13" Mac Book Pro I Bought for her .
At one point I was going to hackintosh a Tough book CF-30 to OSX . but I REFUSE to break a EULA . unlike the other annoying software and DVD stealing students in my college I have a Soul .. I pay out of pocket for evey thing i buy .
I spent a tad under $5000 on SW and HW last year alone .
I have only ONE program I have had to crack . It was a periodic table SW for OS9 and the author was dead . his Wife had no clue on how to unlock a serial for me . OH WELL .
I hate the Ipad .It is a Horrid device .
Apple should Kill the Mac book air ! and tweak it in to a tablit .
ATOM or CORE 2 is plenty of Horse power for a tablet and it would be x86 compatable so it Like a REAL laptop run more then a over sized Phone OS .. My Old clamshell Ibook does more with less hardware .and its 10 Years Old !!..
I had Such High Hopes for a Full OSX GUI and OS . .
but apple being minimalistic killed it for me .
Imaging a DAQ and labview for mac . HAND HELD SCOPE !.
and I could PRINT my NTE datasheets IN Vbox mode with XP on it .( BTW I use a Palm Centro for NTE printing PDFs !! )
then toss it in the car as a over sized Tom tom . with a Verzion USB Card . and a Garmen USB GPS ..
so as you can see I am not a "fanboy" I love a GOOD PC too .
just not the junk one Buys at a store .
sadly I would guess 70% of computer buyers don't make there own systems nore customize there laptops .
My sad rule of thumb is if its under $750 then its not a Long term investment computer . and yes i apply this to the Mac Mini too.
My last mac I had was a DP 500 I pimped to DP 1.8Ghz It lasted me 8 years and never had a problem . over the 8 years I spent s a tad over 3500 .
thats $475 a year . not bad !
the only reason I upgraded was the PSU committed " curcuit-cide"
the 5V rail hit 16V and the magic smoke came out of the whole computer . it never felt a thing . it was all over in 10 seconds.
so I got a Mini . why did I get teh N00B mac . Simple
the crappyest Mini is still light years faster then the old G4 .
and the G4 was PLENTY fast for me .so I went from OS9 PPC to OSX x86 in one month
so I got a $1K Pimped mini with 2 20'' NEC Self calibrating Dule input displays , a 1280x1024 3LCD Epson Projector .
2 FW 800speed HDs
and then I upgraded my final cut pakage and teh same with protools .. and other Pro SW . tapping in at $4900 in the end .
I look at the BS2 like a mac . its super expencive . but it works with out much fuss .
If I wanted to cut costs I would use C and a PIC . but I would never get my ideas to work in a weekend Lke now .
In that scenario, open code is a great deal!! One can obtain nearly any capable hardware, invest the time and a net connection, and build up very capable systems.
That's really the antithesis of what Apple is doing, though it's possible to build and make good use of open code on Apple computers.
Personally, I think open code is a great thing. The reason for that is the body of open code out there presents a high use value to everybody who does the work to become capable of using it. For some, that's just a download, like Open Office. For others, it's the whole deal, OS, dev tools, etc...
Either way, the use value is high, the cost very low --just enough to obtain the code to use.
Anybody who sees that use value, but perhaps is missing some little thing, can "scratch that itch", or write docs, or train people, or any other thing possible to grow that body of code and it's users, adding more value to everybody.
That is a beautiful thing.
For software authors, it generally means having to actually add value for the dollars. Most ordinary, basic computing tasks are covered by open code, and a whole lot of advanced ones are, and that pool is always growing.
People who sell software do so, either on the basis of the value they are adding (new tech, not common knowledge, or too complex to build as a open project), or to people who really just use software, and are not inclined to make the investments necessary to make use of any code, much less open code.
To me, it's then a matter of innovation. There are always niches that do not have open code in them, for a lot of reasons, and there is always new ideas and tech that can be useful as software, meaning there is always a door open to sell software licenses.
The nice thing about having open code around, with respect to software licenses, is some downward pressure on cost overall. The open code there serves as a nice check on cost, should some vendor really push it, a open project can check that effort nicely, as Open Office generally has with Microsoft Office.
For me, that was the handwriting on the wall; and I realized that a pure software business would be a losing proposition, unless I wanted to become a complete jerk and end up with a legal department just to enforce copyrights.
So I guess my point is this: unless one is a jerk about copyright enforcement (or working for one), it hardly makes a difference whether your software is open-source or not. To make money with software, there has to be some other value added, like hardware, either by you or by the entity who's paying you for the software.
-Phil
People often say that Linux is unfinished and in some cases that is true. But time and time again, I see an application that has gotten 90% done in Linux and then ported over to Windows and given the final touches as a way to avoid having to share code with the public.
If you want to learn, open source still provides you the launch pad. Once you know the ropes, pick your own playground. It is a greed world.
You will be surprised what is free in Linux that cost $50 here and $75 there in other OSes. In many cases the code is blatantly ported over to the other OS.
Just for example, rather than buy Norton Ghost in its latest version, one can download Clonezilla for free and have just as good a backup image. The truth is that Linux and Unix has always had the means to do this feature, but millions of users buy Norton Ghost and avoid anything associated with Linux or Unix.
Was some programmer left out in the cold? I doubt it. And I doubt that a lot of programmers are getting rich these days. We have had several decades of people getting Phds in computer science and struggling to find contract work. Most of the big corporations put jobs out for competitive bid.
If you really want job security, become a plumber. People will wait weeks for you to appear and are afraid to negotiate price for fear you won't be back.
Now I have to find out how to make it do what I want (compile Verilog code, load the Spectra produced by the Bruker FTMS-ICR and the Finnigan MAT 7000, and so on
What bothers me (my pocket actually!) is the 99$ (us) I have to pay to make my apps run on the device
If anyone has a question (when Brad will port BST to it is out of my control...)...
Please could you name/link to some examples?
There are some things I don't understand about that statement:
1) Off the top of my head I cannot think of any such examples.
2) Having to share the code is nothing to do with whether it was written for Linux or Windows or any other OS.
Seems you have bought a brick:)
I would never buy into Apples walled garden, not because of the $99 but just because of the lock down. If I buy a computer, and let's face it a tablet is a computer, I want to be able to do what ever I like with it.
I would think it is unlikely for Brad to want to port BST to iPad or Android. The graphics tool kit is just not available there. (Mind you I bet some one is working on that issue as we speak.)
However it is already possible for BSTC and BSTL to be compiled with Free Pascal for Android. Hope the new wave of Android tablets have USB host mode for Prop downloading.
That 'brick' has more than 250,000 Apps available for it and a few months ago Apple wrote a check for 1 Billion dollars to App developers. The wide variety and shear number of Apps is what sets Apple apart from all other competitors. Don't take my word for it - listen the the App developers http://www.apple.com/iphone/apps-for-iphone/developer-stories.html#overlay-developerstories-behindtheapps
give me FULL USB support like on a laptop and I will reconsider
*printing via BT and USB
*mass sorage Via USB
* the list goes on .
Apple has the apps . this is true but they are lacking "Usability "
I Just bought a $199 12'' Ibook G4 today . as a 2ed portable as My 17''G4 is too big to lug everywhere.
It does more then the pad does .
there is a slight chance I may mod the Ibook in to a tablet next year .
If it survives the winter ...
I was being a bit cheeky with my use of the word "brick", hence the attached smiley face.
What I mean is this:
Sometime ago I downloaded the Android SDK. Within an hour I had a dinky "hello world" test app with some graphic and buttons running on the Android simulator on my Linux PC.
Seeing how easy this was, and having a possible work related use for this, I immediately bought a Samsung Galaxy S Android phone so that I could play for real. Within an hour again that code was installed and running on the phone. All for free.
That work related app I have in mind will run just OK on many other manufacturers phones and tablets. A cheap 200 dollar tablet would do. The app would be given away for free to our customers. Large numbers are not expected. No app store is required.
Further to this it becomes apparent that that the Android OS could easily find a home actually within our embedded device products if only as an easy way to provide a user interface. http://www.embedded-know-how.com/tools-a-software-main/article/44-tools-software/435-getting-started-with-android-development-for-embedded-devices-.html Or check out Android for the Beagle board as an example. http://labs.embinux.org/index.php/Android-Eclair_porting_guide_to_BeagleBoard
Mean while I have rooted the phone and can happily experiment with throwing all kinds of code into it, be it C++, C or even Pascal. Just to see what we can do with it.
Now, compared to all this I consider the Apple products to be somewhat "brick" like.
Examples of items that migrated to commercial OSes from Linux? I don't really want to name names and have you argue that those are just a few. So I'll give you a general idea of the groups.
It has been awhile, but the issues relate to a subset of Linux apps that do have commercial value. For example, backup software is one item that tends to migrate as it matures - Clonezilla is an exception. Most of the free software in Linux for backup is for IDE hard drives at this point, it is hard to find SATA versions and generally those that learned with IDE, have turned to Windows to make money with SATA.
Other specifics are sophisticated animation and graphic development programs. In this area, some have come full circle and remain wonderful value in Linux (like Gimp) and there is also a full animation suite for movie or game construction, but there is a tendency for others cease Linux development and move over to selling an 'improved Windows version'. In Windows, these cost thousands of dollars.
Some things never migrate as to do so would be rather absurd. Compilers generally evolve and remain in Linux - so there are different versions of Python for Windows, OS-X, and Linux. Of course, the Kernel and core systems remain in Linux. But programmers do learn their chops in Linux and then get a job with a M$ or Apple house to make a living.
Another area that migrates for the bucks are small 'boutique applications'. Many of these are very easy to write in Linux and can then be easily converted to C code with free Linux utilities, and finally ported over to Windows and sold for $50USD to users that absolutely can't find a free product in M$ or OS-X.
As I recall, a very good 'batch graphic image editor' in Linux does this. If you ever had a web page with 500-1000 photos that need to be reformated all the same size with the same border, it can be done free in Linux - but the same application will cost you bucks in Windows. The area of software for creating websites is fully of migration examples.
I do not say this iPad thingy is the panacea (I have been wondering for some 6 months if I should buy one or not, go figure).
It would be nice to have a host USB controller and FTDI drivers... let's see if any android tablet delivers that, then we can almost ditch computers ! (I'll be happy!).
One big complain I have is the on-screen keyboard... for text and the occasional number is ok, but anything else... like programming where symbols are required all the time... well no idea how to do it.
The apps are cheap and then there are a lot of them, too many
Btw, I have been trying to do some programming on xcode for a small app, no success. Objective-C is completely unknown to me, I do not believe in object oriented programming and btw, everything I learned from java does not seem to help
Videos play good, but browsing with ads ? are we in 2004 ?... I can't stand ads in web pages! (thank his Jobness flash does not work! it would be unbearable) ( I do not want to pay for a browser!, in case you did not get the message
I don't really have an argument here. I was just curious.
If some person or group writes an application for Linux, perhaps releasing it under the GPL or whatever open source license, perhaps learning the software trade as they go, they are quite justified in creating a new improved version for Windows, Mac, Linux or whatever OS and releasing it as binary only in exchange for money. It is their code they can profit from it in whichever way they see fit. If I don't like that, well to bad for me.
I find it odd that backup software should care if the files/drives it is backing up are IDE or SATA. Sounds to me that such software should not be working at that level. What if the drive is on USB or Firewire or some network attachment? Crazy.
I know the feeling. Oh, you mean the computing kind of tablet...
These to statements don't add up. Six months is a long "now".
This really bugs me. iPad, Android tablet, whatever. These things are computers. They have more horse power than PCs had not many years back. They can display on big screens. They have massive storage and general purpose operating systems and networking. Why, oh why, do they make it so hard to hook up a normal keyboard and mouse when you want to?
I'm sure this will change as more tablets come with USB host mode out of the box.
Me, I'm having a long "now" waiting to get a Samsung Android tablet or whatever is around when I've made my piggy bank fat enough.
FYI you can register for free as an Apple Developer, download the free iOS SDK and start developing iOS Apps for your iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad at no charge. There are tutorials on the web on how to setup the SDK and compile your first program in 5 minutes. However you'll need to pay the $99 if you want to start distributing these Apps. See http://developer.apple.com/devcenter/ios/index.action
In reference to Zicog's comment about connecting keyboards - it's a non-issue on the iPad and the iPhone4. You can immediately use a bluetooth keyboard on both of these devices
Cool, apart from the registering bit.
$99 - Not cool. By the way is that for just one version with subsequent versions free or does one have to pay again to upgrade the app?
Bluetooth keyboards - Cool.
Now apart from the fact that iXXX is from a single source supplier it all makes sense.
Thanks.
Android seems to be a lot less mature and I've read about a lot of App compatibility problems when running on different Android hardware and OS versions.