Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Jan 2010 18:09 UTC
Apple Yes, yes, I apologise. After Kroc's story earlier today, and together with this one, we now have three stories in a row on the Ipad iPad (sorry, I can't ban camel case from OSNews just yet). So, what are we going to do? Predictions? Criticism? More details? No - I want to explain what I think the differences are between the introduction of the iPod and the iPhone, and that of the iPad.
Permalink for comment 406585
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Turing's Poisoned Apple
by Laurence on Fri 29th Jan 2010 01:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Turing's Poisoned Apple"
Member since:

You're right in that it does much less and costs much more than a standard netbook. Yet there may be a market for such a between-products (halfway between a fancy cell phone and a netboot).

Just have to wait and see. Some "between" or combo products have failed, while others have been amazingly successful.

The ones that have been successful were because there was a gap in the market.

This device isn't plugging a gap in the market though. The individual markets already exist. It's trying to invent a new product category by merging several existing markets into one device.

While normally I'm all for consolidating hardware into one gadget - I also don't want to lose usability too. And this device feels like a long list of compromises in order to own one flashier gadget.

And that's the crux of the matter.
The iPhone and iPod weren't a compromise. Granted, for a few years the iPhone lacked many features most other phones long had, like copy and paste and MMS. But the iPhone also did much much more.

Reply Parent Score: 2