Why People Aren't Buying iPads Anymore

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by twowheels

You've actually heard somebody say that they carry an iphone to impress people? Somehow I suspect this is a projection of your interpretation.

Nope, you're utterly wrong. The owner explained it very clearly. He pointed to the apple logo and said that was why he bought it. That people respect it.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by twowheels

That ad is great because it showcases a very real strength that iOS has over Android. While Android has much improved, the sound subsystem in Android has a very high latency and non constant response time (jitter). (Last I saw measured it was around 200 ms, but I've seen reports that it is much improved, but still in the triple digits). The iOS sound system runs at "realtime" priority and has latencies of about 20 ms, which makes it far superior for music apps. When I use my Android tablet with my MIDI piano I can hear the delay... with my old iPad 2 it feels instant (both with iOS6 and iOS7).

Thats right. You can use an iphone as a guitar sampler and effects pedal. Android cant do it.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by afv011

It's down to 20ms in Android L, no longer triple digits. The target is to get it to 10ms.

That's good news. What devices use Android L?

[afv011]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

That's good news. What devices use Android L?

Only the preview is out, so you can only run it on a Nexus 5 or a Nexus 7. It's expected to be released in the Fall, most likely October.

[Yapyap]

Originally Posted by Shane R

ApK and Faith -- you'd agree that the 'some' you're talking about, though perhaps vocal, is a pretty insignificant minority, right? YapYaps enraged Apple fans too.

I don't know about how insignificant, but loud and obnoxious fanboys tend to be the (if very noticeable) minority for everything, so I do assume they're the minority, yes!

Frankly, I don't have a problem with people going for this or that gadget because of the "it's cool and trendy" factor. Gadgets such as tablets and phones in particular rely a lot on the "cool" thing. And most current "known brand" tablets and phones will do just fine for most people's needs, so basing the purchase decision on "cool" or "I like this brand" instead of comparing specs is, especially for higher-end products in a broadly similar price range, a perfectly valid strategy IMHO. And so is basing the purchase of a gadget on specs (or a price point together with "does it fulfil my needs") or the availability of specific apps or features.

It's when the brand aficionados (of any brand or OS) start attacking others or trying to convince others to "convert" that it gets annoying...

Back on topic, I do also think that the wider availability (compared to 3-4 years ago) of high-end, quality Android (and Windows) tablets, including a larger selection of larger than 7'' tablets, is contributing to the market share of iDevices decreasing to an extent. 3-4 years ago an iPad really did strike me as the best option for a tablet, not the least because Android at the time didn't quite seem as polished as a tablet OS. I get the feeling that things are a lot closer to equal now so there's a lot more real choice for people.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by afv011

It's down to 20ms in Android L, no longer triple digits. The target is to get it to 10ms.

Unfortunately, reducing the numbers still won't make Android a real-time operating system (RTOS). That's inherent in the OS architecture: iOS is an RTOS, and Android isn't. That's not a criticism - simply a fact. It's not the latency as such that's an issue with non-real-time o/s's, but the fact that the latency is unpredictable, and changing the absolute number won't alter that. For the specific uses of musicians, iOS will always be a better platform than Android.

Windows CE is also an RTOS, as a matter of interest.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Unfortunately, reducing the numbers still won't make Android a real-time operating system (RTOS). That's inherent in the OS architecture: iOS is an RTOS, and Android isn't. That's not a criticism - simply a fact. It's not the latency as such that's an issue with non-real-time o/s's, but the fact that the latency is unpredictable, and changing the absolute number won't alter that. For the specific uses of musicians, iOS will always be a better platform than Android.

Windows CE is also an RTOS, as a matter of interest.

I'd not have thought musicians need an RTOS for these purposes. OS or audio experts please correct me if I'm mistaken, but pros have been happily using non-RT systems like Windows and Mac OS for a long time.
I can see that an RTOS would be a great facility to take advantage of, but low latency, and adequate speed are all that's needed. The audio domain is lot more tolerant than, say, RADAR.
BTW, I didn't know iOS was a real-time OS. Interesting.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

BTW, I didn't know iOS was a real-time OS. Interesting.

Actually, a little research reveals that iOS is not an RTOS in the technical definition of the term (unlike Windows CE, which is). I guess it has more predictable responses than Android, but not absolutely guaranteed ones (which an RTOS requires).

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by ApK

As I am in process of learning both iOS and Android development, I will add:
There are more hurdles to getting started in iOS development than Android development.
1. You need a Mac
2. You need to know Objective C which is not a particularly easy language to learn, and is not used much outside the Apple world.
3. You need to pay money for an Apple dev account to make stuff publicly available in the App store.

By contrast,

1. The Android dev environment is available for just about any system...Windows, Mac, Linux.
2. Android dev is done in Java which has an easier learning curve, and is already to familiar to a very large pool of devs.
3. Anyone can make an .apk that can be distributed to end users. I think devs need to pay to get in the Play Store or the Amazon App Store, but .apks do not NEED to be distributed through those sources, since Android supports side loading. iOS devices would need to be jaillbroken to sideload.

So devs need to be a bit more serious before trying to offer an iOS app to the public.

I'd say that's a pretty fair summary.

A couple of points to add, however:

• I wouldn't necessarily agree that Objective C is hard to learn. It's a nice mix of C-style programming with Smalltalk-style OO. Any rounded programmer with a range of languages and language types under their belt should find it quite easy to pick up.
• I'd say that Objective C is, to me at least, an *advantage* of iOS. Having programmed professionally in both, I much prefer it to Java.
• It's not clear to me that "devs need to be a bit more serious before trying to offer an iOS app to the public" is necessarily a disadvantage to the consumers of those apps!

(BTW, Apple is releasing a new, more Java-like, language for iOS development called Swift. I'm looking forward to that.)

Swift looks very nice, but I certainly wouldn't describe it as Java-like. It's a much more modern, and IMHO much better, language than Java.

/JB

[ApK]

Originally Posted by jbjb

I wouldn't necessarily agree that Objective C is hard to learn. It's a nice mix of C-style programming with Smalltalk-style OO. Any rounded programmer with a range of languages and language types under their belt should find it quite easy to pick up.

<cough>show off<cough>
But seriously, I guess different folks will find different things hard. I can't intuit Objective C syntax the way I can most high level languages I encounter, like Swift.
And the one formal on-line course I watched on it made a point of how comparatively different, and therefore difficult to pick up, it was compared to most modern C-type languages that current devs are familiar with, so I'm not alone.

It's not clear to me that "devs need to be a bit more serious before trying to offer an iOS app to the public" is necessarily a disadvantage to the consumers of those apps!

Indeed, I was making those points to speak to why the typical Apple app may seem more polished than the typical Android app.

ApK

[ProfCrash]

While I understand none of the programming stuff I take this from the conversation. It is not easy to port an app from Apple to Android no matter what fork. And there is no guarantee that the port will look the same or act the same.

So wow.

I am happy with my IPad. It is cool, fun, easy to use and I can play my game on it. I don't see myself moving to Android because I am not going to rebuy my apps and they can't be moved between the two systems. I knew that when I bought my IPad and I am ok with that.

It took me 6 months to buy a tablet. I really wanted Android but the games I wanted where not there so I went with the IPad. I think if you are someone who wants to connect to the net, read email, play the most popular games and that type of thing you have a lot more options to choose from. I would guess that if you are someone who falls into a niche market that you are going to be better with in the Apple eco system because there is more likely more money to be made there for App developers.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by ApK

<cough>show off<cough>

But seriously, I guess different folks will find different things hard. I can't intuit Objective C syntax the way I can most high level languages I encounter, like Swift.
And the one formal on-line course I watched on it made a point of how comparatively different, and therefore difficult to pick up, it was compared to most modern C-type languages that current devs are familiar with, so I'm not alone.

The syntax certainly takes a little getting used to, but the underlying concepts are quite straight-forward.

Agreed, the concepts may be a bit different for a programmer who only knows one language (or several languages of similar type), but it's an important step for devs to spread their wings and learn a variety of language styles and not get hung up on C-type languages being the only way of programming.

(On re-reading, that comes across as a bit patronising - please don't take it as such, it wasn't meant to be! :-) )

/JB

[Joykins]

Looking at my family and friends, people are buying the cheaper Android tablets unless they really have their heart set on Apple. And, honestly, a lot of them are buying for KIDS...and I wouldn't buy a $500 device for an 8-year-old, ever. The younger kids' tablets tend to have cracked screens and be abused a bit because kids are careless.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Joykins

Looking at my family and friends, people are buying the cheaper Android tablets unless they really have their heart set on Apple. And, honestly, a lot of them are buying for KIDS...and I wouldn't buy a $500 device for an 8-year-old, ever. The younger kids' tablets tend to have cracked screens and be abused a bit because kids are careless.

We bought our grandchildren Fire tablets and they all love them. Well, the girls, anyway. Our oldest grandson seems to show only sporadic interest in his these days, but with the PlayStation hooked to our big screen TV and the wife's iMac right beside it, there's a bit of competition for his attention.

[Chi Cygni]

Late to discussion but still. I bought iPad1 in 2010 and it was money well spent. End of 2013 it started crashing on safari so internet usage became a pain. I also stopped updating apps should they crash. I was disappointed Apple sidelined it - but they always do that I guess. I enjoyed my iPad while it worked well, it still works here and there. But I decided to go Android for next tablet. I was afraid new expensive iPad will be again unusable in 3 years' time.
Oh well. January 2014 I bought Asus MeMo (in signature) and the days when I want to smash it against a wall are becoming more and more frequent
I'd be better off perhaps if I bought retina mini 3G...

Do you think if I reset/repair my old iPad via itunes it may work better? It looks it cannot handle heavy loaded sites - but then again if it is weak processor there is nothing to be done. I'd be still using it if it was useable.