Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 24th May 2010 23:09 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Ah, NVIDIA's CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang. This guy is usually to the point, and doesn't sugar-coat his words, so interviews with him are generally good stuff to read. This time around, he had Intel and Apple down his sights. The iPad's A4 processor doesn't measure up to his company's Tegra 2, and Intel's Z6 Moorestown is not competitive in any way. At least, that's what he claims.
Thread beginning with comment 426368
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It goes beyond just the hardware.....
by mlankton on Tue 25th May 2010 00:26 UTC
mlankton
Member since:
2009-06-11

Apple usually creates something wildly great out of nothing. iPod. iPhone. Not just innovative, but revolutionary. I was really expecting Apple to show us what a tablet could be. I was astonished when the iPad keynote finally got delivered. iPad is just so, ordinary.

They got the price right. They'll sell a bunch. I am a lot more interested in what HP is going to do with webOS, or even Notion Ink's Adam.

Apple left the door open for everyone else.

Reply Score: 1

No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Oh, come on. There was nothing revolutionary to the iPod.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Oh, come on. There was nothing revolutionary to the iPod.


The question of how revolutionary the iPad is is an interesting one because it touches on how Apple does stuff and why they succeed so often and so much better than the competition most of the time.

What seems to happen at Apple is that every so often what might be termed a "step change" products is planned, something that will move Apple in to a whole new area of product or market segment. One can think of MacOSX itself as an Apple step change event, and I think you can think of the iPod and iPhone as step change products.

Once Apple have started to plan such a step change device they then hone the design down ruthlessly, everything not central to the new products central function is stripped away and all effort goes into making sure that version one of the new product clearly addresses its central function in a way that immediately leads to an improved and streamlined user experience. Version 1 must be a polished product above all even if that means leaving things out

Its worth noting how different this is to the way most companies work which is they have an idea of a product and then they often try to cram as many functions into the product as possible. They think that a longer spec list makes a better product. They looked at iPod V1, for example, and saw an MP3 player without an FM radio and thought because their MP3 had an FM radio, because its specs list was longer, their MP3 player was a better product. But what Apple did with iPod Version 1 was strip the MP3 player down to its basics (playing music) and then make those basics a fantastic and pleasurable user experience.

Once Version 1 is out then Apple carefully craft annual upgrades that steadily add new functions, each one carefully designed and added in a way that does not undermine the end user experience. And so iPod Version 1 evolves into the latest iPod Nano.

So to return to the question as to whether the iPad is revolutionary, is it a step change device? I think the answer is yes and no but mostly yes it is.

iPad clearly builds on the back of iPhone so that not only are there now millions of people familiar with the revolutionary touch interface introduced with the iPhone (people who can pick up an iPad and immediately know how to work it) but there is also a huge developer community ready to fill the new iPad with tremendous and inexpensive apps. But by the sheer impact of its size it opens up a whole new user experience and takes the iPad into areas that the iPhone hardly went. For example it is possible to read a newspaper or book on an iPhone but doing it on an iPad is so much better and nearer to the enhanced experience of using a real newspaper or book.

Nobody would do this with their iPhone for example:

http://vimeo.com/11886557

Now that Apple have got Version 1 of the iPad out the door (and it already seems to be a spectacular success) they will release Version 2 next year with enhancements, Version 3 the year after. By the time of iPad Version 3 their competitors will probably just be bringing our devices that match iPad version 1 and Apple will own the market

Reply Parent Score: 4

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

My mum was able to get her iPod going, and get iTunes songs on it... in a few minutes, without me helping her or hand holding.

That is revolutionary IMHO. It is not "geek porn" tech revolutionary. But most people don't care what the heck is going on under that shiny LCD screen as long as it does what they bought the device for: taking their media with them.

Reply Parent Score: 3

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I'll agree that Apple has great product designers but "out of nothing" is stretching it. There was a bustling "mp3 player" business before Apple joined in. They had a hopping market to watch and research before dropping there own late entry into the competition. Brilliant marketing combined with good product design and a market that had been through the gauntlet of some really crappy hardware/tethered-sync-software combination. Apple did come in with a better product offering but they didn't invent a new market with the Apple MP3 Player.

The same goes for the phone. We already had a smartphone segment within the general mobile phone market. Apple didn't invent this. Mr Jobs did not exhale the mystic words "let there be phone". While the product itself is good for what it's allowed to do, there was also a heavy dose of marketing and consumer lock-in involved and ongoing.

Reply Parent Score: 2