|
The b.s. aspect of this debate is that these devices are in competition. They aren't. Yes, you might buy one or the other, but it depends on your needs.
If you want a vehicle to drive to school, work, the grocery store, etc., you might very well debate among the various cars that will take you there. But a Bobcat really isn't on your list! Similarly, if you want to work the farm or the ranch or do construction, you aren't really considering if Toyota Corolla will work as a backhoe.
People who want a gadget to do a whole lot of stuff moderately well, will pick an iPad. The display isn't the best for ereading, the "keyboard" isn't as good as a real keyboard that gives you tactile feedback, etc., but it's a general purpose device.
If you're a reader (and I know that most people aren't), you'll want a dedicated reading device. It's like, if you're a graphic artist, you'll want a Mac...but most people aren't graphic artists.
You don't have to be "most people" to command a market! Sure, many more people may buy grocery-store produce filled with pesticides, but there's still a solid market for organic produce for certain people. Whole Foods seems to be doing quite well with that particular market.
The "analysts" may very well say, "Organically grown produce will never replace the regular stuff!" but who the hell cares? Ipads may very well outsell dedicated ebook readers 50-1, but who the hell cares? Hammers will outsell iPads, too. Who the hell cares?
I'm really tired of the way America views everything as a big ol' football game where you have to have a winner and a loser!
|