Apple has sold 225 million iPads since it launched

[mr moose]

Lost 9.1% market share in what?

 

I didn't mean market share, I meant sales.  Their year on year sales growth is down 9.1% for tablets.

 

 

 

 

You make a lot of assertions here that don't really jive with a lot of Apple history and just general knowledge of how the company functions. Yes, obviously we'd be in a world where two companies were competing that wouldn't be Apple. But what would the products look like? What would they be? Who would push the PC manufacturers to innovate like Apple does with the build quality of their laptops and more recently the Mac Pro?

 

Not really, there were touchscreen phones before the iphone and as we can see through the evolution of human interface devices, that touchscreens are proving to be the best option.  I do believe phones would still look exactly the way the do.  I believe people are under the misconception that apple are the only drivers for innovation in the tech world.  This is quite the fallacy, they are innovators and they fo push the envelope, but to claim they do it more than others is, I believe, is not true.

 

 

 

Keep in mind Android was originally created by the founders of Danger after they left to be an OS for a keyboard centric phone. That's what smartphones looked like pre-iPhone. Samsung and Blackberry would be competing with each other, but we'd still have almost square screens and half the phone robbed by a physical keyboard. Remember that the then-RIM CEO himself said the claims made by Apple about the original iPhone were impossible. It pushed the envelope in ways that RIM could not even comprehend. That's why the world would be a different place. Because the preconceptions held by the OEMs would never have been disrupted. The very fact that he thought it was impossible just shows why things would not have changed -- because nobody could see past the current devices.

 

It doesn't matter what the original google phone was to look like, Or what the CEO of RIM thought. The first google phone is only one example of phones prior to the iphone and RIM still have a physical keyboard.  The prada had a full touch screen, multiple palm and HP devices had full touch and HTC also had full touch before the iphone.  The fact that these manufactures decided to outsource their OS and use android does not mean apple led the way, all it means is other manufactures saw android as being easier, cheaper. (and to be honest whether android is any good or not doesn't necessarily factor)  And so swapped over to it.

 

 

 

Apple is not a technology company. They are a design company that happens to be relatively ok at technology. That's the difference. The fact that you can't see the contributions they make does not make them nonexistent.

 

Well, I guess that is dependent on how you view their products.  I believe the biggest effect apple had on the phone market was marketing, their superior marketing made smartphones essentially as much a fashion item as an functioning tool, this led to the whole phone market exploding which was not only good for apple but for all smartphone manufacturers.  There is a well known trend in shopping that shows if you have many shops that sell similar products in a small area, then those shops all sell more and have more shoppers than shops that are by themselves.  This is where apple has had a significant impact on the market. 

 

All I am saying is the idea that without apple, phones would look different or laptops would big big heavy squares is not based on historical evidence, but assumptions. 

[Redliub]

It doesn't matter what the original google phone was to look like, Or what the CEO of RIM thought. The first google phone is only one example of phones prior to the iphone and RIM still have a physical keyboard.  The prada had a full touch screen, multiple palm and HP devices had full touch and HTC also had full touch before the iphone.  The fact that these manufactures decided to outsource their OS and use android does not mean apple led the way, all it means is other manufactures saw android as being easier, cheaper. (and to be honest whether android is any good or not doesn't necessarily factor)  And so swapped over to it.

Yeah their tablet sales are faltering because people are buying large phones instead.

 

I'd like to see these examples of all the smartphones with multitouch screens before the iPhone. Capacitive multitouch, that is.

 

Nobody denies the existence of touchscreen devices prior. But they were all single touch and I believe all resistive as well, not capacitive.

 

I'm also not saying they're the only driver for innovation. Their devices would not exist if not for the hundreds of components within them.

 

Apple is very good at getting together high quality components and integrating them nicely with software so anyone can use their products. They depend on other manufacturers for the ability to do this, because everyone does.

 

What Apple is good at doing is seeing where the market will go before it goes there. Keep in mind the whole wearable revolution (at least the watches) was started because of the original iWatch rumors three years ago. Three years. Let that sink in. They worked on a product for three years with the entire industry fearing them and building up an arsenal of devices to compete with it ranging from awful to decent to good enough. And yet when the Apple Watch comes out it will still be far more popular, both you and I know this, regardless of whether or not you think it's a good thing.

 

If they didn't invent the touchscreen centric smartphone, they definitely perfected it with the iPhone and brought it to the masses. They took the smartphone from a geeky tool used by the technological and business elite and turned it into an accessible toy for everyone to play with. But almost eight years later, it's not just a great toy, it's an immensely powerful computing platform.

 

The computing platform the iPhone created simply did not exist before. I still have my doubts about whether or not it exists on Android, because browser share skews heavily towards iOS, as do app downloads and purchases. There's an entire culture around apps in popular entertainment that was completely nonexistent before. Most casual users never downloaded programs on their computers, either for fear of viruses or lack of knowledge with how to install them. The iPhone changed that. All of a sudden people were exposed to hundreds of thousands of applications, a good portion of which free, that were just begging for you to click download. There was no fear of infection, they were easy to manage, you could see them all in one place, delete them intuitively, and choose precisely which ones you wanted.

 

That's what I credit Apple with. Not inventing the touchscreen, not inventing the smart phone, not inventing the app store. Bringing all of those concepts together into a powerful computing platform that disguises itself incredibly well as plain old fun. If I were sentimental I would say they brought portable computing to the masses, but that's a tough assertion to back intuitively.

[mr moose]

Yeah their tablet sales are faltering because people are buying large phones instead.

 

I'd like to see these examples of all the smartphones with multitouch screens before the iPhone. Capacitive multitouch, that is.

 

Nobody denies the existence of touchscreen devices prior. But they were all single touch and I believe all resistive as well, not capacitive.

 

I'm also not saying they're the only driver for innovation. Their devices would not exist if not for the hundreds of components within them.

 

Apple is very good at getting together high quality components and integrating them nicely with software so anyone can use their products. They depend on other manufacturers for the ability to do this, because everyone does.

 

What Apple is good at doing is seeing where the market will go before it goes there. Keep in mind the whole wearable revolution (at least the watches) was started because of the original iWatch rumors three years ago. Three years. Let that sink in. They worked on a product for three years with the entire industry fearing them and building up an arsenal of devices to compete with it ranging from awful to decent to good enough. And yet when the Apple Watch comes out it will still be far more popular, both you and I know this, regardless of whether or not you think it's a good thing.

 

If they didn't invent the touchscreen centric smartphone, they definitely perfected it with the iPhone and brought it to the masses. They took the smartphone from a geeky tool used by the technological and business elite and turned it into an accessible toy for everyone to play with. But almost eight years later, it's not just a great toy, it's an immensely powerful computing platform.

 

The computing platform the iPhone created simply did not exist before. I still have my doubts about whether or not it exists on Android, because browser share skews heavily towards iOS, as do app downloads and purchases. There's an entire culture around apps in popular entertainment that was completely nonexistent before. Most casual users never downloaded programs on their computers, either for fear of viruses or lack of knowledge with how to install them. The iPhone changed that. All of a sudden people were exposed to hundreds of thousands of applications, a good portion of which free, that were just begging for you to click download. There was no fear of infection, they were easy to manage, you could see them all in one place, delete them intuitively, and choose precisely which ones you wanted.

 

That's what I credit Apple with. Not inventing the touchscreen, not inventing the smart phone, not inventing the app store. Bringing all of those concepts together into a powerful computing platform that disguises itself incredibly well as plain old fun. If I were sentimental I would say they brought portable computing to the masses, but that's a tough assertion to back intuitively.

 

The LG prada was the first phone with a capacitive touch screen, and before the iphone was another phone that had slide to unlock, it wasn't capacitive but could be used with your finger instead of a stylus. Pocket pc (later windows mobile and windows CE) had a full mobile phone OS with all the features we currently associate with smartphones.   If the iphone was released in 2011, I dare say people would still think it was the main innovator simply because of the marketing superiority of apple, the marketing is what people remember and are constantly hit with.  No one cares what phone LG released in 2006 because pfft LG.   Apple made smart phones popular, they moved from the world of tech heads and yuppies to the everyday, this is the legacy of apple and this is why many people mistakenly think apple invented the smartphone that we use today.  

 

I am trying really hard not to trivialize apples effects on the industry, but the reality is that what some people are claiming is effectively the same as Nvidia claiming they invented the GPU, more like they coined name and survived 3dfx. But in reality if Nvidia had gone bankrupt in 2000, we would still have the same advancement in GPUs today,  just developed by the next biggest company to survive. If that analogy makes sense. 

[Redliub]

I am trying really hard not to trivialize apples effects on the industry, but the reality is that what some people are claiming is effectively the same as Nvidia claiming they invented the GPU, more like they coined name and survived 3dfx. But in reality if Nvidia had gone bankrupt in 2000, we would still have the same advancement in GPUs today,  just developed by the next biggest company to survive. If that analogy makes sense. 

The LG Prada was not a smartphone. Purple and Howarth existed before the Prada did and they looked very similar too. If anything, LG copied Apple's prototypes and spit them out to market in a different device.

 

I owned a Pocket PC. I was a Windows guy at the time. It was barely functional. The email never worked for me, the browser was flaky, and styli just plain suck. Of course you can use it with a finger, but it's not intended for that. You had to recalibrate them all the time, the battery life wasn't good, they were simply not good devices.

 

The innovation the iPhone brought that made the smartphone what it is today was multitouch capacitive touchscreens. Obviously there's a lot of UI stuff we're glossing over here but even just on a hardware level the iPhone was the first smartphone of its kind. 

 

Of course the Prada is only a single example though. I'd love to see some examples of how the industry was OBVIOUSLY moving in that direction even when Google made their original prototype a Blackberry clone.

[mr moose]

The LG Prada was not a smartphone. Purple and Howarth existed before the Prada did and they looked very similar too. If anything, LG copied Apple's prototypes and spit them out to market in a different device.

 

I owned a Pocket PC. I was a Windows guy at the time. It was barely functional. The email never worked for me, the browser was flaky, and styli just plain suck. Of course you can use it with a finger, but it's not intended for that. You had to recalibrate them all the time, the battery life wasn't good, they were simply not good devices.

 

The innovation the iPhone brought that made the smartphone what it is today was multitouch capacitive touchscreens. Obviously there's a lot of UI stuff we're glossing over here but even just on a hardware level the iPhone was the first smartphone of its kind. 

 

Of course the Prada is only a single example though. I'd love to see some examples of how the industry was OBVIOUSLY moving in that direction even when Google made their original prototype a Blackberry clone.

 

I have had windows phones before the Iphone came out, I never had an issue with emails, syncing, or any of that.  It just worked. 

 

HTC made a few before the Iphone with the touch being a stylus free touch phone also.  As you can see were several phone options out and other manufacturer were clearly working on capacitive touch screen phones, the designs were all already heading that direction. 

 

If I wanted to I could put a case forward that showed Iphone stole their work from android, LG and HTC. However this would be as erroneous as saying the other rushed their work to beat apple or stole their ideas from apple.  Neither did, it is a classic example of the industrial evolution of a product.  This is how technology advances, it is not the result of a single company but the result of all companies competing and developing. 

[EpicAdom]

Does it bend?

 

 

 

I don't care much for apple or samsung.

But I have to admit, they do pretty well/.

Don't be the "Does it bend" guy

[connorpiper]

And Android has activated more than 900 million phones.

HA! iPad!

[Redliub]

I have had windows phones before the Iphone came out, I never had an issue with emails, syncing, or any of that.  It just worked. 

 

HTC made a few before the Iphone with the touch being a stylus free touch phone also.  As you can see were several phone options out and other manufacturer were clearly working on capacitive touch screen phones, the designs were all already heading that direction. 

 

If I wanted to I could put a case forward that showed Iphone stole their work from android, LG and HTC. However this would be as erroneous as saying the other rushed their work to beat apple or stole their ideas from apple.  Neither did, it is a classic example of the industrial evolution of a product.  This is how technology advances, it is not the result of a single company but the result of all companies competing and developing. 

I had a Pocket PC (IPAQ) and the email was awful. The app store was also lacking but ymmv.

 

The iPhone literally came out in the same month as that HTC phone. The HTC Touch also had a stylus though so...

 

You still don't have a very convincing argument here. You have one example of a phone that was a hybrid with touch and stylus and dubious other sources. Given that Google's engineers themselves were chocked when it came out I'm not sure there's anymore of an indicator that it was a revolutionary device.

 

If you look at the user interfaces of these devices, though, there is a stark change after the iPhone. Hardware aside, UIs became very iPhone-like. You also still have conveniently avoided multitouch and accelerometer/gyro control which are also fundamental building blocks of the modern smartphone that were all iPhone innovations. I know, because one of my best friends invented the accelerometer used in the iPhone and he'd never heard of it being used that way before.

 

Compare what the state of the art in pre-iPhone UI design was to the original iPhone:

Ugh, cluttery.

What a breath of fresh air!

Huh. What's changed?

 

-No start menu

-Apps are now organized in pages

-Apps and widgets are on a static background, notifications pop over the screen

 

The user interface changed a lot.

 

Then, suddenly:

(sad trombone)

 

I ask you, sir, could this look any more like an iPhone?

 

-Black background default (hehe. They copied the BAD things about the iPhone)

-Apps are in a grid, but they ALSO have a slightly grayish dock area at the bottom that stays standard. They even ripped off the phone, and clock icons directly!

 

And here's more damning evidence: Chris De Salvo has essentially admitted to Android changing direction after iPhone announcement. See here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-google-had-to-start-over-on-android/282479/

 

Chris De Salvo:

 

 

Chris DeSalvo’s reaction to the iPhone was immediate and visceral. “As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought ‘We’re going to have to start over.’”

 

And finally Google Project Doc that actually highlights the change. Android was originally supposed to be a button phone that ran pure Java:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/04/14/exclusive-android-docs-reveal-before-iphone-googles-plan-was-a-java-button-phone

 

So, what happened in that major update? I'll tell you, it wasn't bug fixes:

 

 

The change log of the planning document conveys the rapid change that occured in April, when suddenly there was a "major update." Among the changes were section 3.11.2 Touchscreen, which now read, "a touch screen for finger-based navigation—including multitouch capabilities—is required. Stylus-based navigation is not supported."

 

These are just bits and pieces of that article.

[mr moose]

I had a Pocket PC (IPAQ) and the email was awful. The app store was also lacking but ymmv.

 

The iPhone literally came out in the same month as that HTC phone. The HTC Touch also had a stylus though so...

 

You still don't have a very convincing argument here. You have one example of a phone that was a hybrid with touch and stylus and dubious other sources. Given that Google's engineers themselves were chocked when it came out I'm not sure there's anymore of an indicator that it was a revolutionary device.

 

If you look at the user interfaces of these devices, though, there is a stark change after the iPhone. Hardware aside, UIs became very iPhone-like. You also still have conveniently avoided multitouch and accelerometer/gyro control which are also fundamental building blocks of the modern smartphone that were all iPhone innovations. I know, because one of my best friends invented the accelerometer used in the iPhone and he'd never heard of it being used that way before.

 

Compare what the state of the art in pre-iPhone UI design was to the original iPhone:

Ugh, cluttery.

What a breath of fresh air!

Huh. What's changed?

 

-No start menu

-Apps are now organized in pages

-Apps and widgets are on a static background, notifications pop over the screen

 

The user interface changed a lot.

 

Then, suddenly:

(sad trombone)

 

I ask you, sir, could this look any more like an iPhone?

 

-Black background default (hehe. They copied the BAD things about the iPhone)

-Apps are in a grid, but they ALSO have a slightly grayish dock area at the bottom that stays standard. They even ripped off the phone, and clock icons directly!

 

And here's more damning evidence: Chris De Salvo has essentially admitted to Android changing direction after iPhone announcement. See here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-google-had-to-start-over-on-android/282479/

 

Chris De Salvo:

 

 

 

And finally Google Project Doc that actually highlights the change. Android was originally supposed to be a button phone that ran pure Java:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/04/14/exclusive-android-docs-reveal-before-iphone-googles-plan-was-a-java-button-phone

 

So, what happened in that major update? I'll tell you, it wasn't bug fixes:

 

 

 

These are just bits and pieces of that article.

I try to avoid things from apple insider, cultofmac, androidcentral, and generally anything that is brand specific.

However the tiled icons and no start menu is what nokia were using for decades prior, the only thing nokia didn't do was move to touch screen.  Android could always do tiled icons and never had a start menu that I am aware of. Pockt pc was a business tool and wasn't designed to be simply but to cater for as many professions as it could from technicians to managers.  I think the important thing to remember is that the first google phone is not the only phone that iphone should be compared to, and the evolution of this technology is over time and multiple manufacturers.  From the above information it could be argued that the only thing iphone brought to the party was the better parts of all the other phones rolled into one. 

[CaliJL]

Apple leads, the rest follow.

[Redliub]

So now you won't read anything with a watermark on it? Are you trying to deny their validity? These were released by Google in court to the public.

 

I try to avoid things from apple insider, cultofmac, androidcentral, and generally anything that is brand specific.

[mr moose]

So now you won't read anything with a watermark on it? Are you trying to deny their validity? These were released by Google in court to the public.

 

Don't tell me when apple insider (essentially a fansite) makes assumptions about an unspecified  "major update" that you believe what they say? It could have been anything from adding an entirely new security shell for the OS to a major part of how the interface deals with certain program calls.  Those websites also cherry pick which phones to show when trying to insinuate the current look of smartphones is all because of the iphone. We know that's not true, there where lots of phones with a full screen, one or two buttons at the bottom and rectangle in shape.  I apply the same rigors to all media, I don't believe ronald mcdonald when he tells me his food is healthy, I don't believe android authority when they say android is more secure, I don't believe MS when they say their OS is the most stable yet. 

 

 

 

In reality you don't need to go digging into ambiguous accusations and assumptions to understand the evolution of technology, In fact that is the best way to come to the wrong conclusion.   As I said before apple have moved tech forward on somethings whilst on others it's been another company that's done the driving.  I am not arguing that apple has done nothing or that other companies haven't followed. What I am saying is that apple aren't doing more innovating or developing than any other companies.  Apple have taken their lead from other companies just as much.   It is evidenced by the fact that the evolution of the phone has closely followed the same path as the evolution of the pc, the car and many other technical consumer products.  If apple had been leading the way as much as they like to insinuate (or that some people believe) they would own a lot more patents and the time other phones would take to adopt (follow by copying) the same technology would be much more delayed, let alone in some cases at the same time if not before the iphone.  In fact I would go as far to say that if apple where truly that far in front with development then there should be no examples of other phones on the market that have the same innovations at the time of release.

 

EDIT: and just an an example of this, everyone points to the touch screen and says "see apple where leading the innovation on phones" but they forget that android at release could multitask, didn't need to connect to an itunes like program, could run on just about any device and came complete with maps, search and full web browsing capability.  So if people want to look at features one had before the other then the balance starts to tip.  However I still firmly believe that one wasn't better than the other nor was one necessarily driving innovation, they all played their part.

[TroubleKlef]

I read an article saying that iPad sales have been declining.

 

Judging by the 225m stat, I'm going to assume that the market has become saturated and having a two year old iPad isn't that big of a deal so people don't upgrade as often.

[mr moose]

I read an article saying that iPad sales have been declining.

 

Judging by the 225m stat, I'm going to assume that the market has become saturated and having a two year old iPad isn't that big of a deal so people don't upgrade as often.

That's a pretty fair appraisal I think, I wouldn't be at all surprised if from here on in majority of tablet sales are just the people who bought the really cheap ones upgrading to something a bit better,  followed by those wanting faster/newer.

[SuperfastJellyfish]

My favorite video

 

The problem with your post/this video is that Apple never really claims to invent anything. It's just the fans who saw it from them first and then they claim Apple invented it. Logan is a fool, his videos are practically worthless.

[mr moose]

The problem with your post/this video is that Apple never really claims to invent anything. It's just the fans who saw it from them first and then they claim Apple invented it. Logan is a fool, his videos are practically worthless.

what you say is true, however they have used clever/omitive wording to have it sound like the work was theirs without actually claiming it is.  E.G when jobs (and or his biographer) claimed android was a stolen product, yes there are components of android that where in IOS first, however there are components of IOS that were in android first so the claim while true from a certain perspective was cut short of qualification which made it look like to most people that apple invented the Smartphone OS. 

[Jerakl]

Logan is a fool, his videos are practically worthless.

[BallGum]

Right, I didn't say they would die out completely, but how many things have apple done and then everyone copied? I'm not saying we would have smart phones, they just wouldn't be as refined. They wouldn't have the perfectionist that is apple to compete with, therefore their work would be more sloppy as there is no "gold standard" to compare to.

I think you're missing the point Mr moose is making. If Apple hadn't done it someone else would have. It's simply the nature of technological evolution. If Apple hadn't made a good touchscreen phone someone else would have. It would likely be different, sure, but that's all.

Let's continue with iOS. We know for a fact that Android was pretty much in development around the same time, it was just a case of who came first, not who invented it and who copied it.

[SuperfastJellyfish]

 

 

Prove me wrong. All he does is spout about privacy over and over again, read from articles with minimal input, and produce mediocre clone reviews that have an awkward format.

[Psykomantis00]

I think you're missing the point Mr moose is making. If Apple hadn't done it someone else would have. It's simply the nature of technological evolution. If Apple hadn't made a good touchscreen phone someone else would have. It would likely be different, sure, but that's all.

Let's continue with iOS. We know for a fact that Android was pretty much in development around the same time, it was just a case of who came first, not who invented it and who copied it.

I get that. Someone else would have made a touchscreen. Someone made a touchscreen before apple. Apple just did it better. There was no push for that high of a quality touch experience. Apple drove the need for others to compete as hard as they did. Someone else would have made the touch screen better, it just probably wouldn't have gone as fast as it did. 

[Jerakl]

Prove me wrong. All he does is spout about privacy over and over again, read from articles with minimal input, and produce mediocre clone reviews that have an awkward format.

That sir is an opinion, not a fact. Yes he does talk about privacy a lot, that is a fact. The rest of your statement, eeeeeh not so much.

[SuperfastJellyfish]

That sir is an opinion, not a fact. Yes he does talk about privacy a lot, that is a fact. The rest of your statement, eeeeeh not so much.

 

Sorry, your opinion isn't fact either. His video style and content in general is overall objectively poor.

[mr moose]

Prove me wrong. All he does is spout about privacy over and over again, read from articles with minimal input, and produce mediocre clone reviews that have an awkward format.

 

 

That sir is an opinion, not a fact. Yes he does talk about privacy a lot, that is a fact. The rest of your statement, eeeeeh not so much.

 

 

Sorry, your opinion isn't fact either. His video style and content in general is overall objectively poor.

 

I can vouch that his understanding of the internet situation in Australia is quite wrong. Also his comments about the amendments to anti-terror laws were also out by a long shot. I do enjoy watching his show but he really needs to do a bit more in depth fact checking before commenting on things, I feel it really undermines the quality of his videos.

[Jerakl]

Sorry, your opinion isn't fact either. His video style and content in general is overall objectively poor.

 

That's an opinion. I never said it was a fact.

 

 

 

If you want to continue this pointless conversation, we might as well do it in PM.

[Fred Castellum]

*shrugs* What I'm seeing now below