iPad - 1 million iPads sold in 28 days!

  • Thread starter Thread starter jedaye
  • 189 comments
  • 15,794 views
At University and school? May seem a bit posh today, but wait until it's 2020. Also for 85% of my daily work, an iPad would fit my needs perfectly. Hell, even the iPhone works rather well for typing once you got your thumbs up to speed.

What do you do for work? Browse the internet in bed?

Mobile Safari supports almost all websites - if they required flash, it's a video site, isn't it? And why would I want to look at those? ;)
Yeah, because eliminating an entire form of media is acceptable. Admittedly I hate Flash, but you have to accept that it is a fundamental part of viewing the web today. It's not just video, but entire site designs are constructed around it. Also...

"Surveying more than 3.5 million pages, the Opera (browser) developer center found that somewhere between 30% and 40% of all pages tested contained Flash files"

So now 'almost all', websites is knocked down to 60%-70%.

MSOffice will be on the iPad. And MSOffice for Mac is actually quite good and has a long history on the Mac. Rumors say Mrs. Gates loves Apple and that's the reason there's MS Office on that plattform, too.

Office for Mac is the most God awful User Experience ever. Though it's probably Microsoft's fault. There is no question that it's half the experience as on the PC. Entourage is the worst e-mail application on the planet. Word takes 30 seconds to boot up even on our Dual CPU Xeon Mac Pro's. And the UI is so counter productive it just makes me want to rip my skull off and eat it. Excel is just terrible, and what are you going to use instead? Numbers from iWork? Maybe if you're the type who creates spreadsheets for yourself, which I do, but I'm guessing nerdy guys like myself who stay up at night making personally spreadsheets aren't the demographic the iPad is targeting. Try sending a .Numbers file to your boss and see how far you get with that.

Tablett-PCs were for the better part too expensive, ugly, heavy and had the wrong OS ;) They were considered Laptops without a keyboard, and that's a stupid idea. A motorbike isn't a car minus two wheels either.

But this is a Tablet PC. At 10" it's no longer a true portable device, any more than a 10" laptop. It's a laptop without a keyboard and without a complete OS.
 
Last edited:
But this is a Tablet PC. At 10" it's no longer a true portable device, any more than a 10" laptop. It's a laptop without a keyboard and without a complete OS.

No, it's a media and communications _device_.


Anyways, a few thing about Office for Mac. I agree that it is much worse than the Windows version. However, MS has just shown the new Office version for Mac and one of the many changes and updates is that Entourage is history and will be replaced by Outlook. Scheduled for release later this year.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/nggallery/page-320/album-1/gallery-23/

Apparently they are considering an iPad version as well.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/12/microsoft-considering-office-for-ipad/


I use Macs at home and Windows at work. On the Mac I have iWork and when I do some work in Pages or Numbers that I know I will use at work or if I'm sending anything to someone else I, of course, save it in .doc or .xls format.
 
Yeah, because eliminating an entire form of media is acceptable. Admittedly I hate Flash, but you have to accept that it is a fundamental part of viewing the web today. It's not just video, but entire site designs are constructed around it.

This is one of the main things putting me off getting an iPhone. I browse the net a lot on my phone and the only reason I'd consider upgrading to the iPhone is if it had Flash compatability. Include that and I'd sign up in a heartbeat. It's an absolute joke that it's not a standard feature on the latest devices!
 
One week till launch.

I’m going to go out on a very unpopular branch here and say, that having thought about this for quite a while, and from a totally objective non-Apple-fanboy viewpoint, in five years this will probably be seen as the most important user interface development since the original GUI. I’ll even be wreckless enough to say that this will be more important than the iPhone in terms of changing its respective industry.

Why? It’s all about abstraction. Most of us here, especially people in this thread who care about these kinds of things, are tech-savvy. But 99% of people aren’t, and there’s no good reason why they should have to be to benefit from technology. If you truly sit down and think about it from a non-techy point of view, computers nowadays fail at delivering seamless experiences for users. Example: Mac OS X is often lauded for how easy it is to install smaller shareware/freeware programs – usually you open a disk image, drag the application to the Applications folder, then eject the disk image. It may seem dead simple to you and me, but in reality it’s needlessly complex for most people (my mom had to ask me the first time she had to install something using this method). The idea of a disk image is a weird concept, the idea of installing something by copying it is a weird concept, and then ejecting a non-existent disk and having to throw away a .dmg file? I mean seriously, is there anything intuitive about that? I’ve seen people run applications straight from disk images because they didn’t know what to do with them. On the other hand, on an iPad, you click “Install” and then it gets installed. Done.

I mean, really, I think all semi-techies take way too much for granted how familiar we are with computers. Just consider for a second how much the most basic of GUI operations—the file system—scares most people. How many people do you know who pretty much only use the desktop for organizing their files? That’s because it’s a physical, intuitive abstraction that they can latch onto. The rest of the file system is just scary innards to them. It doesn’t matter that we have nice names for these folders like “Documents” or “Movies” – many people are convinced that if they mess with anything outside of the desktop all hell will break lose. I’m not just talking about grandma here, I’m talking about a majority of the computer-using population. Most people don’t need to be exposed to this crap.

So, yes, in a technical sense the iPad is a supersized iPod touch. But in terms of UI design it’s so much more important than that, because it brings the UI developments of the iPhone OS platform (in particular, enormous levels of abstracting away things) to something that is actually usable. For example, I generally prefer browsing the web on my iPhone than at my desktop, because as humans we are hard-wired to enjoy tactical experiences more often than not. However, I browse on my desktop a lot more because the iPhone’s viewport requires a laborious amount of scrolling and panning. I can browse the web comfortably on my phone for minutes at a time; you could probably comfortably browse the web on an iPad for many hours at a time. I can’t imagine trying to make an entire Keynote/Powerpoint presentation from scratch on my phone; I could easily imagine making such a document on an iPad, and if that means I get to deal with an easier-to-use interface than what’s on the desktop, then why not? The screen size is everything. How many of you bitch that Dell sells computer monitors in multiple screen sizes at disparate price points?

Point is, everything that has made the iPhone OS successful needed to be scaled up to major computer use at some point, because it’s too good and too important for mass-computer-consumerism to not to. Current desktop OS’s are like manual transmissions; the iPad is an automatic transmission, which is what the rest of the world wants. So far we’ve only gotten a small taste of it with our cell phones and iPods, but now Apple is bringing it into mainstream computer usage.

I know most of you will disagree with this evaluation. I’ll just say that if five years from now I’m proven wrong, I’ll eat my words and you can mock me all you want. I’m not going to be wrong though. ;)

Agreed that there are tons of people out there who don't understand even the basics of computers - and these people could use a very simple round block/round hole interface to allow them to do trivial computation tasks with ease. These people use their computers for browsing the web and checking email. Occasionally they might want to send out a photo, but that's about it.

That's fine. I have no problem with the ipad being marketed at them. They might not even notice the lack of multitasking, hard as it might be for those of us who are tech savvy to believe.

But if you know what you're doing, and you buy one of these things, you're crazy. It's a remedial computer for people who don't have the interest or determination to learn how to use a real computer. For those of us in the know, this thing is a useless piece of crap - and we'll keep calling it that until we're blue in the face. Because that's exactly what it is.

It might be ok for your grandmother or mentally handicapped cousin to buy some super-easy, can't-mess-it-up, interface that can't do anything more than what she wants it to do. That might be a perfectly acceptable purchase for her. But it isn't for you and me. We don't need our hand held, we don't need things to be quite that simple. And because we're willing to put a little more thought and effort into this area, we get the benefit of getting hundreds of times more use out of our computers than our grandmothers do for the same price. So yes, you're right that this device will likely find a market with the lazy or uninitiated. But that doesn't make it something I have to respect, let alone purchase.

Even to my grandmother I would recommend that she save her money and buy something a little more sophisticated and spend half a second learning about it.
 
To be honest, i dont agree with you Danoff, i think the iPad is a fab device which is marketed at people who have interests in multimedia and appreciate the iPhone OS, I personally like the iPhone OS and think its brilliant for this kind of device. However i do see you point were you'd be better off learning a whole OS, for example a smaller Macbook may have been a better option for some people, thats my two cents anyway. Its a bit like Marmite really..... You either love it or you hate it, i just haven't decided which way to go yet....
 
/\ I'd agree with you DW, I think they had a strong opening weekend. But thats all the market penetration they'll get. Maybe sell another 300K over the rest of the calendar year. The iPad will phase out faster than slap bracelets. But hey, if it somehow fits your needs (and you don't need to read e-books in daylight :p) then go for it.

Jerome
 
If I find out that of the 1 million apps sold 300,000 were Scrabble I will lose my faith in humanity. The other 700,000 were probably Gmail, Google Maps, and a select few other free or very cheap games.
 
Agreed that there are tons of people out there who don't understand even the basics of computers - and these people could use a very simple round block/round hole interface to allow them to do trivial computation tasks with ease. These people use their computers for browsing the web and checking email. Occasionally they might want to send out a photo, but that's about it.

That's fine. I have no problem with the ipad being marketed at them. They might not even notice the lack of multitasking, hard as it might be for those of us who are tech savvy to believe.

But if you know what you're doing, and you buy one of these things, you're crazy. It's a remedial computer for people who don't have the interest or determination to learn how to use a real computer. For those of us in the know, this thing is a useless piece of crap - and we'll keep calling it that until we're blue in the face. Because that's exactly what it is.

It might be ok for your grandmother or mentally handicapped cousin to buy some super-easy, can't-mess-it-up, interface that can't do anything more than what she wants it to do. That might be a perfectly acceptable purchase for her. But it isn't for you and me. We don't need our hand held, we don't need things to be quite that simple. And because we're willing to put a little more thought and effort into this area, we get the benefit of getting hundreds of times more use out of our computers than our grandmothers do for the same price. So yes, you're right that this device will likely find a market with the lazy or uninitiated. But that doesn't make it something I have to respect, let alone purchase.

Even to my grandmother I would recommend that she save her money and buy something a little more sophisticated and spend half a second learning about it.

[applause]

My mother has learned to use her Windows Vista laptop, and when she got it, she had literally no idea - even to the point of not knowing how to make capital letters.

And it's SO EXPENSIVE. OMG, UK pricing got leaked at around £700. That makes it at least £300 too expensive, in my view.
 
Already Jailbroken too, for those who are so desperate for it. Nothing available to the public yet but it's been done using similar/the same exploits as the iPhone, so I dare say there'll be something out very soon.
 
I just heard on the news that judging by the components inside when one of the many teardowns was done online they put the manufacture price of each iPad at around $250. If thats the case it makes the iPad even more of a rip off.

Apple has done 2 things,

-Artificially set the price stupidly high so it does not caniblise iPhone sales.
-Put total faith in the fact that millions would buy one regardless of anything.

It should really cost less than the iPhone because it basically is one inside with less space issues, all it has is a bigger screen which only adds slightly to the price. I can see the price tumbling in the next year.

As for the rumored UK price they are nuts, I would never buy one in the UK and just import it. I personally might wait for a second generation as I have already heard people having problems with Wi-Fi and overheating.

Robin.
 
So, you you are unhappy because of the early adopter mark-up? It is an extremely popular product selling faster than they can meet demand. I fail to see the problem in their pricing.
 
So, you you are unhappy because of the early adopter mark-up? It is an extremely popular product selling faster than they can meet demand. I fail to see the problem in their pricing.

Well its usually that leading edge stuff is sold at a loss or a small profit to gain market traction, its just Apple's arrogance in my opinion. Yes it works for them because they have a manic following but there a price justification and then theres just insulting levels of highway robbery, why not ask $100 or $200 dollars more then!

You don't mind them charging you over double what it costs to make?
 
Well its usually that leading edge stuff is sold at a loss or a small profit to gain market traction, its just Apple's arrogance in my opinion. Yes it works for them because they have a manic following but there a price justification and then theres just insulting levels of highway robbery, why not ask $100 or $200 dollars more then!
It is how supply and demand work. If they charged less then they would have people claiming they purposely created shortages, like Nintendo dealt with when the Wii launched.

You don't mind them charging you over double what it costs to make?
No, because I think it is a laughably stupid product anyway. I don't want to pay anything for it. But, as with anything, I just don't buy it if I don't feel the price is worth it. That is how the market works.
 
You don't mind them charging you over double what it costs to make?

Do you think the manufacturing cost of a Gallardo is less or more than half of the selling price?
 
Well its usually that leading edge stuff is sold at a loss or a small profit to gain market traction, its just Apple's arrogance in my opinion. Yes it works for them because they have a manic following but there a price justification and then theres just insulting levels of highway robbery, why not ask $100 or $200 dollars more then!

You don't mind them charging you over double what it costs to make?

Nope, companies can do that or just do what Apple has done. If you have a high-tech product that is unique, you can charge more before other companies catch-up. Plus the cost breakdown doesn't tell you about research and development costs, marketing costs, etc.

I don't mind, since I'm not going to buy it.


Welcome to the world of business.

+1
 
It is how supply and demand work. If they charged less then they would have people claiming they purposely created shortages, like Nintendo dealt with when the Wii launched.

It seemed to have worked out fine for them, because of the reasonable price they gained alot more presence in the market share in a very small amount of time and held that demand for nearly 3 years. Why wasnt Nintendo as confident as Apple that their new idea was going to be irresistible and sell it at the same price as a 360?

Do you think the manufacturing cost of a Gallardo is less or more than half of the selling price?

And how many Gallardo's do they sell every year? You cannot compare the pricing strategy of a supercar to a mass market electronic device. When the iPad is hand made out of carbon fibre then you can make that argument.

Nope, companies can do that or just do what Apple has done. If you have a high-tech product that is unique, you can charge more before other companies catch-up. Plus the cost breakdown doesn't tell you about research and development costs, marketing costs, etc.

The thing is that it isnt unique, its an iPhone with a big screen! Any development costs would have been incurred during the iPhones development years ago, apart from the A4 chip which required new R&D everything else was even easier to port because you dont have the problem of space. Slates had been done since 2002 and HP and others even showed off similar devices months before Apple.

The only thing that can come from this now is competitors thinking that the iPad price is the benchmark so they can sell seriously overpriced devices which have the same hardware as netbooks.

Robin.
 
And how many Gallardo's do they sell every year? You cannot compare the pricing strategy of a supercar to a mass market electronic device. When the iPad is hand made out of carbon fibre then you can make that argument.

I can certainly make the claim that I fail to see why a selling price more than 100% higher than the cost of the parts to build it should be wrong in one case and not the other.

What you're saying is that if the iPad indeed was handmade by elves out of carbonfibre and silver with a manufacturing cost of €10000 you would be OK with a price of €20000. But since it's made of aluminium and the parts cost $250 they are not allowed to ask $500 for it.
 
Check out this video of teenagers smashing an iPad with a baseball bat on the first day they were out simply because they wanted to be the first to do it :D


After years of waiting, Apple has finally released the tablet computer fans have been panting after for years. To celebrate, a group of teenagers broke out a baseball bat and destroyed one.

The three teens purchased the iPad at a Best Buy store in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, before proceeding to destroy it on the sidewalk outside of the store. They recorded the destruction of their newly purchased gadget and posted the video to the YouTube video sharing site, where it's gone viral, having attracted nearly 280,000 views since April 3.

The Los Angeles Times caught up with Justin Kockott, the 19-year-old high school student who made the video titled "Brand new iPad getting smashed by a baseball bat." He told the newspaper, "I wanted to be the first one to do it before other people did it," adding that "it was just something to do."

"I knew some people would hate it, but I didn't think that many people would hate it," he said. "A lot of people are leaving really bad comments" on YouTube, he pointed out. Kockott told the Times he did not have anything against Apple and had actually bought two other iPads.

"I do not at all hate Apple. I love Apple, actually," he said.

Apple said Monday that it had sold more than 300,000 iPads on Saturday, the first day of availability.
 
I can certainly make the claim that I fail to see why a selling price more than 100% higher than the cost of the parts to build it should be wrong in one case and not the other.

What you're saying is that if the iPad indeed was handmade by elves out of carbonfibre and silver with a manufacturing cost of €10000 you would be OK with a price of €20000. But since it's made of aluminium and the parts cost $250 they are not allowed to ask $500 for it.

You cant lump market pricing in to one standard!, ofcourse the price of something is justified in one case and not the other.

The simple fact is that mass market goods cannot be that expensive over manufacture price in their various catagories, eitherwise they are a specialist item which the iPad is certainly not (it will be totally commonplace).

If its a fancy piece of jewellery or an exclusive special item then yes I would be ok with such a mark up.

A diamond costs nothing, even the cost of getting it out of the ground and finishing it does not justfiy the price. What does though its its exclusivity, like a Gallardo.

If this was any other branded device, it would not sell this well at this price. period. Its the age old Apple tax and people just lap it up.

Legendary
Check out this video of teenagers smashing an iPad with a baseball bat on the first day they were out simply because they wanted to be the first to do it

I also saw a video somewhere where one was put in a blender, it came out as just a pile of grey ash!

Robin.
 
Last edited:
But how can it be Apple's _fault_

If I were to build a chair out of chickenwire and sell it for two million pounds and someone bought it, would you blame me?

Apple sets the price because they know people will buy it. Don't you know by now that Apple can get away with higher prices because the buyer feels that if the buy an Apple product they will get something that is just slightly better (true or false doesn't matter). Its very much like buying a car. An Audi isn't that much better than a Skoda to justify the price difference, yet they sell 50% more cars. Should they lower the price to sell even more?

Edit: I'm actually quite sure that right now Apple is selling the iPads as quickly as the suppliers can manufacture them. What then would be the point of a lower price?
 
Amazing the lengths people will go to get a couple hits on Youtube.:nervous:

Than again, this......

the 19-year-old high school student

Answers the question fairly well.
 
If I were to build a chair out of chickenwire and sell it for two million pounds and someone bought it, would you blame me??

Not at all because it would be an exclusive item, now if you were to make 3 million of those chairs then such a price would be ludicrous and no one would buy them because they could go to a mainstream retailer.

I am well aware of Apple's grasp on people. I would have loved to see the meeting where they said up to what point can we rip off the most devout Apple fans, 500? 600? hell why not $700!

Edit: I'm actually quite sure that right now Apple is selling the iPads as quickly as the suppliers can manufacture them. What then would be the point of a lower price?

It always works with Apple, recently they very rarely release something that doesnt sell well (although they have had some mess up's in the past).

With your car example I feel comparing with Skoda is unfair because that company has a stereotypical image with some people which puts them off. If you compare Audi and VW for example VW sells more because the quality is comparable and they are cheaper so by the same token a HP slate could be cheaper and comparable in quality to the iPad.

The difference is that the HP slate wont sell anywhere near the same as the iPad because of Apple lust and Audi (unlike Apple) are not making 100% profit on each car they sell because people would never pay such a high price.

My arguement is where is the justification in the current price? because it seems like they picked a profit margin figure out of the sky.

Robin.
 
Check out this video of teenagers smashing an iPad with a baseball bat on the first day they were out simply because they wanted to be the first to do it :D



I bet mom was real happy to see her money fly out the window.
 
The only thing that can come from this now is competitors thinking that the iPad price is the benchmark so they can sell seriously overpriced devices which have the same hardware as netbooks.

Robin.

If other companies decide to come out with an iPad-like device, they will obviously try to undercut the price.
 
If other companies decide to come out with an iPad-like device, they will obviously try to undercut the price.

And they won't sell because people don't want useless devices unless it has a giant Apple logo on the back of it.

I love my Apple stuff but I still don't get the iPad. A girl at work bought one and I was playing around with it the other day, it's cool but as far as I can tell my iPhone does everything the iPad can do...it's just smaller, cheaper and can make phone calls.
 
If other companies decide to come out with an iPad-like device, they will obviously try to undercut the price.

Yes but they will be uncutting an overpriced device which equals... a device which is still overpriced! Apple basically has set the benchmark price now and even with the undercut the majority of people wont want it because it doesnt have that logo on the back.
 
It seemed to have worked out fine for them, because of the reasonable price they gained alot more presence in the market share in a very small amount of time and held that demand for nearly 3 years.
And a year after its launch people were still waiting in line to buy it. Nintendo did unbalance the supply and demand side of things with their pricing, in a way that negatively impacted consumers, but they had a reason.

Why wasnt Nintendo as confident as Apple that their new idea was going to be irresistible and sell it at the same price as a 360?
Because Nintendo's previous console was under supported by third-party developers and thus sat at the bottom of the sales figures. After coming out nearly a year after the 360 and having less technical specs on everything but controllers Nintendo had to make a move to reestablish themselves in the marketplace. Apple has no need to establish themselves, as they are locked in already.

The only thing that can come from this now is competitors thinking that the iPad price is the benchmark so they can sell seriously overpriced devices which have the same hardware as netbooks.
Already happening.

You cant lump market pricing in to one standard!, ofcourse the price of something is justified in one case and not the other.
But this price is justified.

If other companies decide to come out with an iPad-like device, they will obviously try to undercut the price.
Or, add the functionality the iPad lacks, like multitasking, Flash, USB, and SD card reader and charge the same price.
 
And they won't sell because people don't want useless devices unless it has a giant Apple logo on the back of it.

Isn't it time we all stood upp and gave a standing ovation to the sheer marketing and industrial design miracle that we call Apple.

Yes, they are more expensive than other brands.
Yes, they lack some functionality that is taken for granted in a tablet
Yes, they lock in their users.
Yes, they purposely leave things out of the first generation so that they can add it later and charge you a second time.

But you know what?

They do not force anyone to buy any of their products. And still people do.


That is business. The components needed to build an iPad cost $250. Why sell 1 000 000 iPads for $300 when you can sell 300 000 for $500 and earn more money? Steve Jobs does not want to change the word for altrustic reasons, he wants to make money.
 
Back