Musing on Apple 2013

[leebase]

Originally Posted by PatNY

No companies follow trends just to follow trends. They follow trends to retain or grow market share and to preserve or grow revenues. Apple is no different.

Apple is quite different from, say, Samsung. Samsung puts out products at all price points, in a huge variety of sizes and features. Throw stuff out and see what sticks (like the new curved phone).

Originally Posted by PatNY

Apple found itself behind the curve on both "phablets" and mid-sized tablets, and so they jumped on the bandwagon well after those trends had developed.

Just like Apple "was way behind on netbooks". Apple never made a netbook, and has yet to make a "phablet". Or a low cost mac book. Or a convertible tablet/computer.

Apple is rarely the first to market with anything. A few things Apple will be early on. But when Apple does make it's move, it's well though out .

Take a look at the finger print scanner on the Atrix of a year ago (or was it more?) or the HTC just released compared to the iTouch. Apple doesn't put out a feature just to put it out.

Everything we've heard about Jobs and his objection to smaller tablets confirms that. When he passed away, his successors wasted no time in ignoring his previous edicts and rushed to compete with the Galaxy Tab 7

.

Yep. They just rushed out a cr@p product to compete with the junk the marginless Android competitors were pumping out. Except that it wasn't 7" and it it wasn't low cost. It was an iPad, only smaller, thinner, lighter. Running the 350,000 made for iPad apps flawlessly.

Steve Jobs changed his mind all the time. Remember he also said "nobody reads" and yet prominently included books at the debut of the iPad. Said nobody wants to watch movies on a tiny screen then came out with the iPod Video. Said that iTunes would never come out on Windows...but agreed to do so anyway. Whether he changed his mind or was speaking to throw off the competition....you can never say "Steve Jobs would never..." based on anything he said.

Expect to see more bandwagon jumping in the near future from Apple as they put out a phablet in the 5" range.

Didn't happen again this year. Nor did they come out with a cheap iPhone. Nor one with a keyboard. Nor NFC support. Nor Adobe Flash support (remember that?)

It may happen, when Apple can do so at a great experience which includes all the existing application catalog running excellently.

[PatNY]

Originally Posted by leebase

Apple is quite different from, say, Samsung. Samsung puts out products at all price points, in a huge variety of sizes and features. Throw stuff out and see what sticks (like the new curved phone).

Yes, Samsung puts out more diversified products, caters to a wider range of people, and is in many ways more innovative than Apple. But that's neither here nor there. What has that got to do with the point I was making that Apple is often just like many other companies by following trends in order to retain or grow market share?

Just like Apple "was way behind on netbooks". Apple never made a netbook, and has yet to make a "phablet". Or a low cost mac book. Or a convertible tablet/computer.

Who mentioned netbooks? Or low-cost laptops? I talked about phablets and mid-sized tablets. And Apple, with its move to a 4" screen and the Mini, clearly was bowing to market pressures there.

Apple is rarely the first to market with anything. A few things Apple will be early on. But when Apple does make it's move, it's well though out .

Take a look at the finger print scanner on the Atrix of a year ago (or was it more?) or the HTC just released compared to the iTouch. Apple doesn't put out a feature just to put it out.

Not true. Apple has been in the forefront with many smartphone and portable music player products. But in terms of phablets and mid-sized tablets, they've been laggards.

So, you thought their maps app was "well thought out?"

And who puts out features "just to put it out?" If Apple doesn't, then neither does the competition.

Yep. They just rushed out a cr@p product to compete with the junk the marginless Android competitors were pumping out. Except that it wasn't 7" and it it wasn't low cost. It was an iPad, only smaller, thinner, lighter. Running the 350,000 made for iPad apps flawlessly.

I see you like making strawman arguments. No one said Apple "rushed" out a "crap" product.

Also, the SGT was anything but "marginless" and "junk." Samsung's mid-sized tablets at the time were very expensive. Some of them cost more than the Mini (at least here in the States). They were so much "junk" that Apple executives used and openly admired them.

The fact that the Mini wasn't 7" exactly is totally irrelevant. There were practical reasons for that. The point is that Jobs said a tablet in that size range was unusable and he would never make one. Yet, after he died, his successors changed course and belatedly jumped on the bandwagon.

Steve Jobs changed his mind all the time. Remember he also said "nobody reads" and yet prominently included books at the debut of the iPad. Said nobody wants to watch movies on a tiny screen then came out with the iPod Video. Said that iTunes would never come out on Windows...but agreed to do so anyway. Whether he changed his mind or was speaking to throw off the competition....you can never say "Steve Jobs would never..." based on anything he said.

Nope. This is different. Jobs never vehemently railed against any of those things you mentioned. But he did against smaller tablets. Also, things like books and video were just secondary ways to use existing products designed primarily for other purposes. It's not like Jobs was dismissing an entire hardware category like he did when he criticized the mid-sized tablets.

Didn't happen again this year. Nor did they come out with a cheap iPhone. Nor one with a keyboard. Nor NFC support. Nor Adobe Flash support (remember that?)

Just because it didn't happen this year, doesn't mean it didn't happen in very recent years or that it won't happen in the near future as I am predicting.

And they did come out with a cheap iPhone. The 5C.

It may happen, when Apple can do so at a great experience which includes all the existing application catalog running excellently.

And when it does, they will be late to the party, no matter how well their existing applications run on the new phablet!

--Pat

[leebase]

Yes, as I said, Apple is rarely first out of the gate. Smartphones existed before the iphone. MP3 players existed before the iPod. Apple is not one to rush out and meet the competition. Large screen phones are an excellent example of this.

Samsung is the counter example. They DO rush out copies of anything the see the competition doing.

Larger screen phones and smaller screen tablets are no "big idea" that has caught Apple by surprise. It's EASIER to make a larger screen phone. Have you noticed that none of the Android phones without large screens pack the power of the iphone? They can't. They don't have the power per watt advantage Apple has. They needed big screens first for the LTE chips...to account for the bigger battery. Apple refused to go to LTE until the chips had the battery performance for the size phone/battery Apple wanted to make.

Now Android phones need to be huge for the quad processors running high MHz with large RAM that Android needs to get performance anywhere close to the iPhone.

So Android manufacturers make lemonade out of lemons and market the large screens as "innovation".

Two priorities keep Apple at its current size. One handed operation and compatibility with the million apps in the App Store. I suspect the firs priority was the genesis of their choice and the second one keeps them there. If they come up with a great solution to the second we may see them some time in the future.

In no way, though, is Apple just UNABLE to create a larger screened phone. It's just a product choice they are making

[PatNY]

Originally Posted by leebase

Yes, as I said, Apple is rarely first out of the gate. Smartphones existed before the iphone. MP3 players existed before the iPod. Apple is not one to rush out and meet the competition. Large screen phones are an excellent example of this.

No, IMO Apple has been a big innovator when it comes to smartphones and music players. While certain technologies existed previously for each, no one put it all together like Apple did when it came to the iPhone and iPod. And what made the iPod unique was its synergy with the iTunes player and music management system and the iTunes store. What other company had a music player with such synergy?

Samsung is the counter example. They DO rush out copies of anything the see the competition doing.

Samsung does everything. They copy. And they innovate. They have big expensive toys and cheaper ones. They want the money from the poor and the rich. They make phones, cameras, computers, components, everything. They are the counter-example to every other company by default because they are into everything.

But again, Samsung is not the topic here. They are almost besides the point. Which is Apple being behind the curve. If Samsung didn't exist, that would still be the case.

Larger screen phones and smaller screen tablets are no "big idea" that has caught Apple by surprise.

It doesn't matter that neither phablets or mid-sized tablets were "big ideas." What caught Apple by surprise was the big success of both size categories. Jobs was sure that no one would ever want to use the smaller tablets. He was flat out wrong there.

It's EASIER to make a larger screen phone. Have you noticed that none of the Android phones without large screens pack the power of the iphone? They can't. They don't have the power per watt advantage Apple has.

Not sure what your point is. How does this "power per watt" advantage translate into tangible benefits?

They needed big screens first for the LTE chips...to account for the bigger battery. Apple refused to go to LTE until the chips had the battery performance for the size phone/battery Apple wanted to make.

No, the Note did not have to be 5" to account for its chips. Samsung made the Note 5" because they thought that size format would allow for more functionality. And they were right. It was the Note that started the phablet trend.

Now Android phones need to be huge for the quad processors running high MHz with large RAM that Android needs to get performance anywhere close to the iPhone. So Android manufacturers make lemonade out of lemons and market the large screens as "innovation".

They have to be huge now because people are demanding bigger screens. They expect them. When I see an iPhone nowadays, I think it looks puny.

You've got things all backwards.

Two priorities keep Apple at its current size. One handed operation and compatibility with the million apps in the App Store. I suspect the firs priority was the genesis of their choice and the second one keeps them there. If they come up with a great solution to the second we may see them some time in the future.

I do understand how compatibility with existing apps is always a concern. Apple's iOS can't scale to different screen sizes the way Android can. So every new screen size requires their developers to jump through hoops. That is a limitation of iOS which holds them back on the hardware front. But that is their fault.

The point remains, they are behind the curve on these other sizes and slowly have been jumping on the bandwagon to meet the changing marketplace.

In no way, though, is Apple just UNABLE to create a larger screened phone. It's just a product choice they are making

I never said Apple is unable to do something. I just said they are BEHIND the curve. A lot of times, it is because of lack of foresight and because someone read the marketplace wrong. Jobs read the marketplace wrong when it came to mid-sized tablets.

--Pat

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Originally Posted by leebase

yeah, sure. That's EXACTLY why Apple does things.

Uhh.. That is exactly what Apple does. Fortunately some of us are smart enough to wait. Looking forward to your retina Mini!

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Originally Posted by PatNY

No, IMO Apple has been a big innovator when it comes to smartphones and music players. While certain technologies existed previously for each, no one put it all together like Apple did when it came to the iPhone and iPod.

That's not exactly the definition of innovation. Unless of course you would consider all of those Japanese companies like Sony with the Walkman or Toyota or Honda with their wonderful little cars (in the 80s) as also being innovative.

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Oh my goodness, so much ignorance on display here.

Originally Posted by leebase

Samsung is the counter example. They DO rush out copies of anything the see the competition doing.

Who exactly was Samsung copying with the phablet and large screen phones?

Originally Posted by leebase

Larger screen phones and smaller screen tablets are no "big idea" that has caught Apple by surprise. It's EASIER to make a larger screen phone. Have you noticed that none of the Android phones without large screens pack the power of the iphone? They can't. They don't have the power per watt advantage Apple has.

Apple has much more control over the app development process and until recently had laughable multitasking abilities.

Originally Posted by leebase

They needed big screens first for the LTE chips...to account for the bigger battery. Apple refused to go to LTE until the chips had the battery performance for the size phone/battery Apple wanted to make.

So you're saying that LTE was around before big screen phones? That's interesting because I'm pretty sure that it was actually the opposite way around. Also, doesn't having a larger screen just drain more battery? If Samsung were smarter then they could have kept the screen size the same and just made the phone thicker! I guess they never thought of that.

Originally Posted by leebase

Now Android phones need to be huge for the quad processors running high MHz with large RAM that Android needs to get performance anywhere close to the iPhone.

Nope, I'm pretty sure the reason why the phones are large is because that is what the market is demanding. Is 2GB of RAM really that much bigger than 1GB of RAM?

Originally Posted by leebase

So Android manufacturers make lemonade out of lemons and market the large screens as "innovation".

Or maybe they were just innovating?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Canuck_in_Japan

Oh my goodness, so much ignorance on display here.

Who exactly was Samsung copying with the phablet and large screen phones?

Dell had a phone with 5" screen, the Streak, almost 18months before the first Note. And HTC had one back in 2005 or so. Of course the HTC was as big or bigger than a 7" device is today. Samsung was smarter than the others in reintroducing the stylus,

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by PatNY

I do understand how compatibility with existing apps is always a concern. Apple's iOS can't scale to different screen sizes the way Android can. So every new screen size requires their developers to jump through hoops. That is a limitation of iOS which holds them back on the hardware front. But that is their fault.

That's not really true. iOS supports autolayout, which allows interfaces to adapt to different screen sizes. The fact is, though, that a single interface which just automatically adapts to screen size is rarely optimal for all those sizes. With iOS the number of screen sizes to support is sufficiently small that it's feasible for a developer to design a separate, optimal, UI for each size. With Android that's not generally the case.

/JB

[afv011]

Originally Posted by leebase

Two priorities keep Apple at its current size. One handed operation and compatibility with the million apps in the App Store.

How will they spin that one up when they come out with their phablet? 3.5" was the holy grail of screen sizes as that was as far as your thumb could reach, but it turns out that was incorrect, 4" is the new holy grail. For how much longer?

[afv011]

Originally Posted by jbjb

That's not really true. iOS supports autolayout, which allows interfaces to adapt to different screen sizes. The fact is, though, that a single interface which just automatically adapts to screen size is rarely optimal for all those sizes. With iOS the number of screen sizes to support is sufficiently small that it's feasible for a developer to design a separate, optimal, UI for each size. With Android that's not generally the case.

/JB

On Android you only need to target 3 screen sizes: 320dp (phones), 600dp (~7" tablets), 720dp (~10" tablets). How much harder do you think it is than supporting the 4 sizes on iOS?

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by afv011

On Android you only need to target 3 screen sizes: 320dp (phones), 600dp (~7" tablets), 720dp (~10" tablets). How much harder do you think it is than supporting the 4 sizes on iOS?

You're underestimating the range of sizes and resolutions available on android devices. Just a couple of minutes of random looking finds:

• 4" 854x480
• 7" 1024x600
• 6.4" 1920x1080
• 4" 800x480
• 5" 1920x1080
• 3.5" 480 x 320
• 4.3" 1280 x 720
• 4.7" 1280x800
• 10" 2560x1600

.. and that list is far from exhaustive.

/JB

[PatNY]

Originally Posted by Canuck_in_Japan

That's not exactly the definition of innovation. Unless of course you would consider all of those Japanese companies like Sony with the Walkman or Toyota or Honda with their wonderful little cars (in the 80s) as also being innovative.

Semantics. My point is that Apple perfected or advanced the concept of the smartphone and music player with their iPhone and iPod. They became leading edge at the time for those product categories.

But I do agree with those who contend that the technologies for the most part were already there. Which is why I'm totally against Apple's instigation of the patent wars which are harmful to competition and innovation and costly to consumers.

--Pat

[PatNY]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Dell had a phone with 5" screen, the Streak, almost 18months before the first Note. And HTC had one back in 2005 or so. Of course the HTC was as big or bigger than a 7" device is today. Samsung was smarter than the others in reintroducing the stylus,

Samsung perfected the phablet when they introduced their Note. Compared to the Streak, it was thinner, lighter, more powerful, and had much better battery life, screen resolution and the stylus. It's similar to how Apple did not invent the smartphone. They only made it much better.

--Pat

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

The mini could've been retina from the get go, but Apple loves its margins and would prefer their fan base to upgrade to get it.

No, it couldn't. A Retina screen has significantly higher power consumption and needs either a bigger, heavier battery, or keeping the same battery with a significant reduction in usable lifetime. Producing a Retina Mini with acceptable weight AND a decent battery life needs a completely redesign, which is why it's taking a year (or whatever it is) to do.