This seems to be getting OT, but oh well, I wanted to put in my 2 cents on an Apple tablet:

I can’t see Verizon being the “carrier” for any Apple tablet.  This isn’t the same situation as Apple saying some technology will never work until it introduces its implementation thereof.  Verizon has put up a public anti-Apple stance.  Yes, it’s just business, the tablet’s different, etc., but I think the Verizon + Apple rumors is just breathless hoping that an Apple device of some kind will be usable on an allegedly superior Verizon network. 

I’m still unconvinced a tablet could ever really work without a real paradigm shift.  If I wanted a “big iPhone” type device I could take with me anywhere, it’d open garage doors, change the channels on the TV, disarm house alarms, confirm that my car doors are locked, remember where I parked said car, let me pay for purchases wirelessly without having to hand my card over to anyone, let me know where it is through my iPhone, etc.  I’d want a real game-changer, something that would justify me taking along a backpack everywhere I go since the tablet almost certainly wouldn’t be pocketable.

I’m fine with not having a tablet to check my stocks with when I get up in the morning, my iPhone handles that just fine.  Do I want my iPhone apps looking all blown up and pixelated, or can I wait until the devs optimize ‘em, not all of whom will since the iTablet market is certain to be smaller?  Am I gonna put up with buying an extra-large case if the iTablet can easily spin on countertops like an unshielded iPhone?  Do I want an iTablet that doesn’t adequately bridge my document-creation/editing needs (if it’s bigger, it’d better be more capable than an iPhone)?  Subsidy be damned, do I want yet _another_ 2-year contract and monthly fees when I probably already have a cel phone, and may already be paying through the nose for a tethering connection?  Of course you can address the last one with an iTablet sans cellular data and subsidy, but the limitations are obvious.

The iPhone addressed the convergence issue in a big way.  What will the iTablet address?

Mav - 25 October 2009 04:15 PM

The iPhone addressed the convergence issue in a big way.  What will the iTablet address?

The need to expand the iPhone OS eco-system with another hardware platform that can take advantage of the various iTunes stores while providing a form factor more suitable for watching movies, reading books and light productivity work on an always connected digital device. It will hammer at the netbook market while providing users with another vehicle to enjoy their iTunes entertainment content and apps that are shared among multiple devices.

The data services plans (hopefully bundled by AT&T with iPhone services) creates another avenue for service providers to fund, exploit and build their digital data infrastructure while providing Apple with another hardware device to sell apps, entice developers to invest in the platform for everything from games for the larger screen real estate and for content as publishers look for more distribution vehicle without the high costs of printing and shipping content in paper form.

But considering that netbooks/tablets occupy the “100 million units/year” field more than the “1 billion units/year” field of mobile phones, I wouldn’t mind if Apple continues to make inroads and become even more ubiquitous in mobile phones before putting more-than-“hobby” energy into a tablet.  If I had to pick between the two, both of which I think are equally feasible from a production perspective, I’d rather see an iPhone mini before an iTablet.  The former to me is the proverbial “lowest hanging fruit.”

All these decisions on product choice by Apple must also take into consideration the global tech race and who is catching up and who has the capacity to jump out with a new paradigm. Apple seeks to attract members of groups untouched by the Apple experience. The App store once accessible is a tremendous hook. Apple has the lead, a big one, every move has to guard that lead and make it tougher for the rest to get an advantage. To boldly go….

My money is on the lead dog.

danthemason - 25 October 2009 05:34 PM

My money is on the lead dog.

True. And as the saying goes, for the lead dog only the scenery always changes. 

Mav - 25 October 2009 04:53 PM

But considering that netbooks/tablets occupy the “100 million units/year” field more than the “1 billion units/year” field of mobile phones, I wouldn’t mind if Apple continues to make inroads and become even more ubiquitous in mobile phones before putting more-than-“hobby” energy into a tablet.  If I had to pick between the two, both of which I think are equally feasible from a production perspective, I’d rather see an iPhone mini before an iTablet.  The former to me is the proverbial “lowest hanging fruit.”

I understand what you are saying.

Due to the global aspects of the iPhone’s rollout, for now the refresh cycle has been an annual one. It’s believed Apple is working on its own chip designs for the iPhone and other devices. If this is true there are more than one product segment in which Apple’s own designs could prove to be a real competitive advantage. We know nothing about this tablet device so we’re all kind of shooting in the dark here. But I suspect the much-rumored tablet will have unique functionality that can not be crammed into an iPhone’s form factor.

I agree Apple needs to expand the iPhone line. I expect variations on the line in the same way we’ve seen variations on the iPod line. But the smaller the form, the less opportunities to sell certain context. For every $3.33 billion in app store sales Apple pockets a cool $1 billion in gross app revenue. That’s an opportunity that needs to be exploited and its a market model that’s attractive to developers well. That’s not including what could be sold or rented in terms of movie content.

I’m sure more comprehensive and sophisticated apps and games would be available if the hardware components could support them and the prices for those apps (including Apple’s portion of the price) would grown handsomely.

willrob - 25 October 2009 10:22 AM

I think Apple’s plans for the tablet are firmed up by now. The devices are being tested, possible built and stockpiled awaiting an OS software refresh. Is it likely that Apple has created a tablet with 3G using a different cell format?

The whole subscription issue has me puzzle. How many teens, or adults, can afford a second monthly bill in order to stream media to their tablets. I think the potential buyers would already have a cell phone, possibly an iPhone ($70+/month). Would they agree to a second costly network fee? Wouldn’t Mobile Me, in some variation, be a better solution for Apple? The server farm they’re building is for iTunes isn’t it? And won’t the streaming service for the tablet’s media be based in iTunes? Either Apple has to eliminate the Cell networks from the equation and start it’s own varient, or the tablet will, even subsidized, be seen as too costly for most familys.

See my thread on subscription pricing of the tablet.  The obvious thing is for an ISP to act like a cell carrier and subsidize the tablet in return for an extended contract for ISP services.

Zeke - 25 October 2009 08:39 PM

willrob - 25 October 2009 10:22 AM

I think Apple’s plans for the tablet are firmed up by now. The devices are being tested, possible built and stockpiled awaiting an OS software refresh. Is it likely that Apple has created a tablet with 3G using a different cell format?

The whole subscription issue has me puzzle. How many teens, or adults, can afford a second monthly bill in order to stream media to their tablets. I think the potential buyers would already have a cell phone, possibly an iPhone ($70+/month). Would they agree to a second costly network fee? Wouldn’t Mobile Me, in some variation, be a better solution for Apple? The server farm they’re building is for iTunes isn’t it? And won’t the streaming service for the tablet’s media be based in iTunes? Either Apple has to eliminate the Cell networks from the equation and start it’s own varient, or the tablet will, even subsidized, be seen as too costly for most familys.

See my thread on subscription pricing of the tablet.  The obvious thing is for an ISP to act like a cell carrier and subsidize the tablet in return for an extended contract for ISP services.

As I mentioned here, I’m bullish on AT&T. Similar to the way cable and phone companies are bundling voice, Internet and TV services, there’s no reason why services for different products on the same household account can’t be bundled for significant cost savings.

I do see Zeke’s point. But I’m not sure Apple is ready to plunge into being its own services provider for Apple data and voice products.

I’ve maxed out my AT&T cellular family plan and I’m seriously thinking of moving to AT&T’s U-Verse service and dumping my current home phone-Internet-cable provider. The overall savings get better with each service that’s added to the single supplier of services.