There was a time when processor speed meant everything. If you had a computer, you knew what kind of processor or CPU it had (Pentium ring any bells?). And you also knew the clock speed of the processor (256MHz?). Same story with the amount of hard drive space or the RAM available on your device.
Of late I personally have no longer cared about these numbers.
With mobile devices like smart phones and tablets sucking up all the media attention these days, it is not unusual to expect people talk about the processor on an iPhone vs on a Galaxy S2. With the latest iPad launch, people were questioning what kind of RAM it came with because Apple tends to be a bit coy about that kind of information.
I personally couldn't care less.
I have seen a number of devices from PCs to laptops to netbooks that promise all kinds of fancy specifications but severely disappoint when it comes to actually using the device. So whether a phone has a dual-core or quad-core processor makes no difference really. Is it a 1GHz CPU or 1.2GHz. Does it have 1GB or RAM or more? Who cares?
Can it play the video that I am downloading without breaking it up, without causing the images to lag the audio and without slowing my machine so much that I cannot even kill the application playing the video if I so please. If the system promises a 10 second boot time but then won't respond to my launch of an application for the next 5 minutes because it is busy doing stuff in the background, it is not working for me.
As long as the device does the functions it is meant for with the expected level of performance, I really do not care if they have a processor in there or little ants running the show. And I think that holds true for most people. However the manufacturers keep touting all kinds of meaningless technical jargon and specifications to convince the people that their product is indeed superior. If as a device manufacturer you can optimize your design such that you can achieve all levels of performance with the most basic hardware components, that's awesome. Because I only care about the end result.
So stop trying to confuse me with weird numbers and fancy names. Just tell me what works and what doesn't.
Saturday 10 March 2012
Will Tablets replace Laptops and Desktops?
People keep questioning the value of a Tablet or an iPad. It keeps getting called a "consumption" device that is not adequate for actual work. I beg to differ.
During the unveiling of the new iPad, Apple took great pains to showcase the kind of creation one can do with the device. Its processing power is quite impressive and much more than what the PCs of even a few years ago had. The only thing lacking in my opinion are the Apps. And that will come in time.
Most people use the PCs at work to type out emails, word documents, create spreadsheets and presentations. While typing on the iPad is not the same as on a keyboard, it is doable. With stuff like Swype it becomes much faster. But with a Siri-like dictation App that the iPad is going to have, it becomes a non-issue. You simply touch the screen to indicate where you want to type and dictate. It will become much more easier to create documents and spreadsheets and presentations because the interface will be so much more natural.
Plus with predictive text input advancing rapidly, even typing software code that programmers must do as part of their daily jobs will become much more efficient. Everyone can talk faster than they can type. It is simply a matter of having a system that can understand and react to that speech without too many errors. And I think we are getting there.
For people that perform very fine creative work with their computers where the precision of the mouse pointer is key, the finger touch input is definitely going to be lacking. But again, for those applications, we can have custom touch enabled "pens". This will definitely be a much smaller market so these pens need not be standard equipment. Since the surface you are "writing" or "drawing" on can be readily zoomed in or out, you do not need pens of different thicknesses. Need a much finer input for greater precision? Just zoom in and do the work. Want to simply doodle on a blank page ... zoom out and have fun.
All the PC and laptop manufacturers continue to claim that the iPad or tablets are not a competition. Maybe they are just being an ostrich and avoid the writing on the wall. These devices will take over the everyday workplace. It is simply a matter of the applications being ready to handle the new platforms. Sure there will be specialized applications where a desktop will be necessary just like there are places where mainframes and huge rack mounted servers are used today. But for the everyday user, their tablet will suffice.
During the unveiling of the new iPad, Apple took great pains to showcase the kind of creation one can do with the device. Its processing power is quite impressive and much more than what the PCs of even a few years ago had. The only thing lacking in my opinion are the Apps. And that will come in time.
Most people use the PCs at work to type out emails, word documents, create spreadsheets and presentations. While typing on the iPad is not the same as on a keyboard, it is doable. With stuff like Swype it becomes much faster. But with a Siri-like dictation App that the iPad is going to have, it becomes a non-issue. You simply touch the screen to indicate where you want to type and dictate. It will become much more easier to create documents and spreadsheets and presentations because the interface will be so much more natural.
Plus with predictive text input advancing rapidly, even typing software code that programmers must do as part of their daily jobs will become much more efficient. Everyone can talk faster than they can type. It is simply a matter of having a system that can understand and react to that speech without too many errors. And I think we are getting there.
For people that perform very fine creative work with their computers where the precision of the mouse pointer is key, the finger touch input is definitely going to be lacking. But again, for those applications, we can have custom touch enabled "pens". This will definitely be a much smaller market so these pens need not be standard equipment. Since the surface you are "writing" or "drawing" on can be readily zoomed in or out, you do not need pens of different thicknesses. Need a much finer input for greater precision? Just zoom in and do the work. Want to simply doodle on a blank page ... zoom out and have fun.
All the PC and laptop manufacturers continue to claim that the iPad or tablets are not a competition. Maybe they are just being an ostrich and avoid the writing on the wall. These devices will take over the everyday workplace. It is simply a matter of the applications being ready to handle the new platforms. Sure there will be specialized applications where a desktop will be necessary just like there are places where mainframes and huge rack mounted servers are used today. But for the everyday user, their tablet will suffice.
Friday 9 March 2012
More signs that the iPad Mini is on its way?
Steve Jobs (and lately Tim Cook) have dismissed 7" tablets considering them irrelevant and DOA (dead-on-arrival). But lately that has been significant chatter that Apple is testing screens for an iPad of that size. When it comes to Apple however, nothing is certain till you actually see the product or service unveiled in a fancy "media event". Until then it is pure speculation.
However I am sensing that this particular rumour could indeed be true. And here is why ...
The Kindle Fire ($199) and the Barnes & Noble Nook ($249) have been the only significant competitors to the iPad in terms of selling significant numbers. The HP Touchpad sold a few as well as part of the fire sale at prices in the $100 - $150 range. The Blackberry Playbook, since the release of a significant software update, is also now selling at $199 and by some accounts, appears to be doing better.
The iPad obviously has no issues competing against full-size tablets (and by full-size I mean the 9" - 10" range). It appears to pretty much own that market right now. When competing against the 7" devices mentioned above, it has a bit of a problem simply because of the price. For the $500 that the iPad demands, you could get two of the completing 7" devices. While everyone sees the value in the iPad, that price difference is not insignificant. And that is perhaps why the Kindle Fire and the B&N Nook have sold so well.
In light of this competition at the lower end, I had anticipated (read "hoped") that the new iPad would be priced at $399 and the iPad 2 would continue to be offered at $299. At those price points, the new iPad would definitely kill off anyone else competing against it head-to-head. But with the significantly cheaper iPad2, it would also steal away most of the budget conscious buyers looking at the cheaper tablets. For $100 more you get a screen that is almost twice as large, dual cameras, Facetime, the whole iOS App ecosystem as well as the Apple brand cool factor. What's not to like?
This would have been an extremely aggressive move by Apple because it would require them to leave some money on the table (Even at the current prices, Apple is selling every iPad it can make. So why lower the prices and hence cut out the profit margin?) But they could then be guaranteed to own both ends of the market. Maybe forever.
Instead they left the new iPad pricing at $499 and lowered the iPad2 to $399. While the $100 price drop is nothing to sneeze at, it is still twice the cost of the Fire. Maybe they should've re-introduced the original iPad and sold that one at $299. [Similar to the iPhone strategy of selling 3 versions / generations of the product line at 3 different price points.]. That would've had the same effect while maintaining their profit margins. The original iPad would be good enough to win customers over the Kindle Fire but would still be significantly inferior to the iPad2 and the new iPad that it wouldn't affect their market.
So the threat from the cheaper tablets still remains, though it is likely a little bit contained thanks to the $100 price-cut for the iPad2. But that $299 price level still awaits a product. And that is where I believe the iPad mini comes in. Apple could introduce the iPad mini at $249 or $299 with a 3G / 4G version at $349. At those prices they would still make money (the iPad2 is estimated to cost about $250 to make, so Apple could definitely make the mini version at $200 or even less.). And more importantly they would seriously damage the value proposition offered by the Kindle Fire or the Nook or the Playbook. The Fire at least has the Amazon Prime card in its pocket to help it try to convince potential buyers. The Playbook has nothing.
If the estimates are the believed, about 6-8 million of the 7" devices were sold last quarter. I'm sure Apple wouldn't mind taking a share of that market. So is the iPad mini a certainty? I have no idea. But it sure looks that way. If there were no plans for the mini, Apple would've brought back the original iPad at $299, just to show the likes of (Amazon and B&N and RIM) who's the boss.
Is there going to be a 7" iPad?
However I am sensing that this particular rumour could indeed be true. And here is why ...
The Kindle Fire ($199) and the Barnes & Noble Nook ($249) have been the only significant competitors to the iPad in terms of selling significant numbers. The HP Touchpad sold a few as well as part of the fire sale at prices in the $100 - $150 range. The Blackberry Playbook, since the release of a significant software update, is also now selling at $199 and by some accounts, appears to be doing better.
The iPad obviously has no issues competing against full-size tablets (and by full-size I mean the 9" - 10" range). It appears to pretty much own that market right now. When competing against the 7" devices mentioned above, it has a bit of a problem simply because of the price. For the $500 that the iPad demands, you could get two of the completing 7" devices. While everyone sees the value in the iPad, that price difference is not insignificant. And that is perhaps why the Kindle Fire and the B&N Nook have sold so well.
In light of this competition at the lower end, I had anticipated (read "hoped") that the new iPad would be priced at $399 and the iPad 2 would continue to be offered at $299. At those price points, the new iPad would definitely kill off anyone else competing against it head-to-head. But with the significantly cheaper iPad2, it would also steal away most of the budget conscious buyers looking at the cheaper tablets. For $100 more you get a screen that is almost twice as large, dual cameras, Facetime, the whole iOS App ecosystem as well as the Apple brand cool factor. What's not to like?
This would have been an extremely aggressive move by Apple because it would require them to leave some money on the table (Even at the current prices, Apple is selling every iPad it can make. So why lower the prices and hence cut out the profit margin?) But they could then be guaranteed to own both ends of the market. Maybe forever.
Instead they left the new iPad pricing at $499 and lowered the iPad2 to $399. While the $100 price drop is nothing to sneeze at, it is still twice the cost of the Fire. Maybe they should've re-introduced the original iPad and sold that one at $299. [Similar to the iPhone strategy of selling 3 versions / generations of the product line at 3 different price points.]. That would've had the same effect while maintaining their profit margins. The original iPad would be good enough to win customers over the Kindle Fire but would still be significantly inferior to the iPad2 and the new iPad that it wouldn't affect their market.
So the threat from the cheaper tablets still remains, though it is likely a little bit contained thanks to the $100 price-cut for the iPad2. But that $299 price level still awaits a product. And that is where I believe the iPad mini comes in. Apple could introduce the iPad mini at $249 or $299 with a 3G / 4G version at $349. At those prices they would still make money (the iPad2 is estimated to cost about $250 to make, so Apple could definitely make the mini version at $200 or even less.). And more importantly they would seriously damage the value proposition offered by the Kindle Fire or the Nook or the Playbook. The Fire at least has the Amazon Prime card in its pocket to help it try to convince potential buyers. The Playbook has nothing.
If the estimates are the believed, about 6-8 million of the 7" devices were sold last quarter. I'm sure Apple wouldn't mind taking a share of that market. So is the iPad mini a certainty? I have no idea. But it sure looks that way. If there were no plans for the mini, Apple would've brought back the original iPad at $299, just to show the likes of (Amazon and B&N and RIM) who's the boss.
Is there going to be a 7" iPad?
Why the new iPad is the last iPad you need to buy
Wednesday, when Apple unveiled the latest iPad, the biggest topic of discussion was not its specifications or the what's-new or what-we-wanted-but-Apple-still-won't-give-to-us. It was instead the name. Before the "media event", the solidest bets were on "iPad3" and on "iPadHD". Trust Apple to surprise (and shock) everyone by calling
it simply, the new iPad.
What followed was mass confusion. It was as if someone had announced that the year after 2012 will simply be called "the year". How were we supposed to distinguish the new iPad from the iPad 2 and from the original iPad? (Perhaps exactly the way I just did?) What happens next year when the next version is released? Will that be the newER iPad? Will the 2012 version be called the old iPad? Or perhaps the "was-new-last-year-but-no-longer-new" iPad?
News articles and blogs all over the place called it the most asinine decision. Some even considered it to be the end of Apple and iPad as we know it. An example of Apple slipping up after Jobs' departure.
But maybe, just maybe, there is some method to this madness. And here is my take...
The latest iPad now has an HD screen (Retina Display in Apple-speak). It has a pretty powerful processor (A5X dual core processor with quad core graphics). It has 4G LTE connectivity. It has a pretty good battery life (still 10 hours).
So in short, it has a processor to power all kinds of stuff you want to throw at it. Its screen is so good that if it were any better you couldn't tell the difference. And it lets you stay connected wherever you are, at the fastest speeds possible today (and for the foreseeable future).
What more could Apple do to it from a hardware perspective to improve it? Not very much. The screen isn't going to get any better. The connectivity is enough to last the next few years till 5G comes along (There is no such thing as 5G at the moment). Any improvements to the processing power would be mere incremental changes, meant to "update" rather than enhance the device. Same holds true for the storage. The maximum capacity on the iPad is 64GB. Maybe next year there shall be a 128GB option but again that would simply be another incremental change. Although depending on how the whole iCloud / streaming / download limits business pans out, maybe there will no longer be a need for more storage.
From a hardware perspective, this new iPad is as good as it is going to get. Barring dramatic changes and innovations that we don't see yet, the following versions of the iPad will see very small differences (from the current one) on hardware specifications. The greatest chunks of the "what's new" will happen on the software side.
As a result, there will be less hardware differentiation between iPad 2012 and iPad 2013 and iPad 2014. If you compare the new iPad to the original iPad, there are a lot of differences. So in 2 versions there has been a significant leap. I would be surprised to see a similar leap between the new version and 2 versions later (2014).
As a result I believe that buying the new iPad should future proof you a lot better. With most of the enhancements coming though improvements in iOS as well as through Apps, you should be able to keep on top of most of them.
From Apple's perspective, going back to the simple iPad name, allows them to avoid having to let everyone down when the next iPad doesn't quadruple the screen resolution again. It will be easier to manage expectations if the newer iPad is simply a "refresh" without the burden of numbers attached to it.
Of course that does not mean that Apple will be happy with you not wanting to buy the latest and greatest version of the iPad. They will try to make the Software enhancements so compelling that you wouldn't want to miss it. Think Siri on the iPhone 4S. A significant number of people adopted it simply because of that one application. On the iPad as well, there shall be similar "must-have" applications that will require you to upgrade (if you want them of course).
But for the most part, this new iPad should satisfy your needs (and wants) for a good amount of time.
Welcome
Welcome to my very first tech blog - Tech Monkey Opines. Like most people, I like technology. I like to keep myself aware of the latest happenings, the fancy gadgets. However thus far I have stayed away from taking on the role of the early adopter. Mostly because I haven't won the lottery yet. But there is still hope.
Meanwhile I hope you enjoy my musings on here. And I look forward to your opinions as well. Feel free to disagree.
Meanwhile I hope you enjoy my musings on here. And I look forward to your opinions as well. Feel free to disagree.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)