Doug, that article was written in 2008 and is stating one analyst's estimates of how many Kindle units he thinks Amazon will sell. If Amazon had done $1Billion in Kindle sales, they would have announced it.

Apple sold over 22 million iPods just this past quarter.

Mass-market sales for a book reader will be achieved when a significant proportion of book sales are digital. Right now it's a rather piddly number. I've seen figures ranging from 16M for one month to 35M for a quarter (2009 numbers). Physical book sales are many billions per year. It's amazing how difficult it is to find concrete numbers though.

Amazon may end up selling more books because of the iPad in the end. They currently have world-wide licensing in place and an app already for sale.

The value proposition for a device dedicated to reading books isn't there at this moment in time. And that was what my mass-market comment was aimed at. When you couple the price of the device with the price of content, the right numbers just haven't yet been reached to pull the elasticity to that mass-effect level.

I don't know too many heavy book readers, but I know a few. They're not currently interested in an ereader. The low-cost ones are really garbage and the half-decent ones are still too pricy. When these things hit the right price point I think we'll start to really see the balance tip in favor of digital delivery.

I don't think the iPad is going to be the device to do this either - thought I'd get this out there to make sure no one jumps on me for that. It could be the Kindle, but not the Kindle 2 at $250+

Of course it would be. It could run multiple programs at the same time. It could run Photoshop, or AutoCAD, or Allscripts, or SAP, or whatever other fill-in-the-blank application is needed. Or all of them. You're going to have a hard time convincing me, or, I think, anyone, that, even though there are a lot of iPhone apps, there are enough to seriously compete with the flexibility of Windows, or MacOS X, or even Linux. Or that there are applications available for the iPhone that aren't available on another platform.

Actually, what do I mean "would be"? I mean is.

Part of this argument is that while the convertible tablets from PC manufacturers, like, say, the HP TouchSmart tm2t, the Lenovo ThinkPad X200 Tablet, or the Dell Latitude XT2 may cost more (a lot in most cases), they are able to do basically everything that the iPad can, plus have very desirable features that the iPad is unable to replicate.

Almost the same argument can be made for netbook from the Asus EEEs to the Dell Minis to the Sony P-, W-, and X-series.

I came across an interesting quote from a few months ago:

And now Apple's released the iPad, which is the same price, and looks like it was cribbed off of the JooJoo. Yeah, there are some differences: the JooJoo has a slightly higher resolution screen, supports Java and Flash, can play videos from Hulu and Vimeo, and has a camera, for instance. (Okay, the iPad has iPhone apps, too.)

Also, you say that I needed to see the video in order to see it being used, but you earlier pointed how awkward it looked when Steve was using it, and how that contradicted what he was saying about it.

I think our whole point is, though, this is merely an embiggened iPod Touch. It has no additional features that aren't directly related to its bigness, and that bigness is frequently a drawback.

Finally someone mentions a product. But it's more expensive than the iPad, not much cheaper as that tool from the Giz comments claimed. It does have some different specs, but including a camera, but it lacks an accelerometer. A good try though, possibly one of the best examples out there in fact.



There's no argument about what they can do compared to a typical notebook. There's also no argument about how well they've done in the marketplace and how well other tablets have done. Later this year there will be no argument about how the iPad has stacked up.

There's no point in mentioning netbooks.

Perfect example quote from something I'd written earlier. I still stand by that. No one would buy this thing if it was only able to work as a web browser. This is a real platform based on a proven API however. With already more than 140k apps available. And is the iPad anything like the JooJoo? Yeah, it has a screen and is for the most part a tablet. That's about where the similarities end. I'm exaggerating slightly, but go read the specs. There's a lot more going for the iPad. And at the same price. And you know, the iPad is a real product and all, not just text on a web page.

Which brings me back to why I actually came online. I was going to quote myself and kick myself in the ass for something I said earlier - which I'm about to mark with a strike-through. I said just today that I didn't think the iPhone/iPod touch nor iPad were revolutionary. I suppose I wasn't thinking.

The iPhone 3G along with the app store have been a perfect example of a mobile revolution. But the spark for this obviously came with the first iPhone. A revolution doesn't start and end in an instant, and in terms of products one needs to trace back at least as far as the notable catalyst. The iPhone has changed the mobile landscape forever. Everything that has come since has been in reference and comparison to it. Trying very often to outright copy elements of it. Everyone wants an app store. Everyone is trying to emulate the iPhone's success. I believe while the iPad will likely start off a little slower, it can very well be considered revolutionary. We'll know more when we're able to look back rather that forward. It does have the potential to change the way many people interact with computers.

I won't ignore huge contributors at least in experimental efforts to this, such as Microsoft's Surface. But I think the iPad is the first real shot at really seeing the landscape starting to change.



Not that the JooJoo was cribbed off the iPhone version of Safari? Including some of its UI? And the fact it's not out yet? And you think for a second Apple started developing the product after the JooJoo was shown, even in CrunchPad form? Come on. Might as well say the iPad or any product is ripped straight from the wet dreams of fanboys who have been posting about this stuff for years. So many have even created amazing mock-ups. You know, pretty much what the JooJoo is. A fancy web mockup of a product that could have been. Because, if you think the JooJoo is going to ship, I have a bridge overlooking some swamp land to sell you.

Again, I freely admit that what first got a lot of people on the multi-touch and touch bandwagon was the Surface product from MS. Includng the two finger rotate, pinching, etc.

When I was referencing Steve earlier in the presentation I did mention some awkwardness with typing and he didn't look the most comfortable I've seen him look. It was also a little slow (the presentation not the device). Those aren't detractors to everything else though. Just go and watch the device being used so you have at least a bit of information about what it does. That's all.



No, not my point at all. Anyway, I'm done with this line of discussion since, though I'm not sure why, you want to turn it into an argument. I can't argue about facts when they're staring anyone who cares to look straight in the face*. You haven't seen the product nor the apps, how can you comment? You're really coming off as petty and uninformed as some of the people in the log comments, and frankly, I find it frightening that I'm even suggesting that of you.

* I will admit that sales projections or anything about the future is open for interpretation and argument, but above I'm talking about the simple facts regarding what the devices does with its default software and what that software looks like.

I agree with the whole rest of your post, but I still take issue with the rest of that first paragraph.

I think I should have separated those statements I made a little more. They were intended as two separate statements addressing two parts of the announcement. I was not at all claiming that netbooks were "the 3rd category." I was merely pointing out the immediate contradiction in Jobs' statement that "netbooks aren't good at anything; they're just cheap laptops." That statement alone is contradictory, as long as you define cheap as merely "less expensive."

But I get the impression that you don't. Well, then I have to ask: have you used a netbook? I mean, on a regular basis? I own an MSI Wind U100, about 13 months old now, and I think it's fantastic. All these claims that netbooks are slow is bullcrap. I'm running Windows 7 with zero speed issues, and my bootup time is short. I will agree that they are currently incapable of playing HD Youtube streams, but that's flash, and the iPhone/iPad can't do flash at all. They can play HD video, but it's specially formatted for that specific device (I can't exactly throw an HD MKV file on there, can I?).

Anyway, I'm rambling. I see no problems with netbooks in terms of speed. I will grant you, however, that the iPad improves on them when it comes to readability. I occasionally try to read digital comic books on my netbook, and it's a pretty miserable experience. But still, that's not something I'm going to spend $500+ for.

If your "facts" are that no one can provide a product beyond the iPad that is a slate tablet bigger than pocket-sized that can run third-party apps, but not have (from the user's perspective) a general-purpose OS, and cost no more than $500, then, yeah, okay.

I'm not sure what the point of that fact is, though. The iPad is not totally pointless. I'm sure that there are people out there who want all of those things in a single device, but there aren't many.

My point is that there is nothing that it can do that another device can't do just as well, if not better, often for a lower price, unless you absolutely want all of those exact features in a single device.

If you want an eBook reader, you can get a Kindle or a Nook for less, with a screen far more appropriate to that purpose and with a battery that will last an order of magnitude longer. And if you want to be able to download new books from anywhere (that is, have non-wifi data access), the Kindle or Nook is far cheaper. (As an aside, I have a first gen Kindle, and I'd far rather read lengthy things on it than on an actively screen any day. Okay, unless there was no other source of light. That would be tough. They should build a LightWedge-type light into the Kindle. Seems there was a good solution for the Sony Reader.)

If you want an iPhone, you can get an iPhone or an iPod Touch for less and have what's likely to be a more cohesive experience with the 3rd party apps, and be able to carry it around in your pocket. Or an Android or Blackberry or Palm smartphone, if the specific apps aren't what you're looking for.

If you want a digital photo frame, you can definitely get one of those for far less. (Though most of those, admittedly, seem to be absolute trash. I'm holding out for color ePaper, FWIW.)

If you want something that can run spreadsheet, presentation, and word processing software, you can get any of various computers that will do that undoubtedly better than the iPad will, with a real keyboard, and with video output.

If you really want something that can do all of those things, but only one at a time, and don't mind that it does each of them less well than the more appropriate devices, then, yeah, the iPad's your man. But who exactly is in that demographic?

The problem is, when you remove the first part of the statement trying to define the third product category, the second part is out of context. It was said to help define what a third category would be, and that (in Apple's eyes) a netbook fails to fill that role. If Apple released a MacBook Mini, it would just be a cheep laptop in their lineup that performed worse then a full laptop, and not a third product category they are trying to create with the iPad.


I nearly bought a netbook to be my only laptop, and did evaluate quite a few of them. Many of my coworkers have one, and my local Frys also has quite a few on display. So I had the ability to test drive quite a few and talk to owners. In the end, I bought a MacBook Air instead.

The reason I had considered one is that they are nice as far as size and weight. Since I have a beefy desktop (Mac Pro), I wanted a small and light system that could still meet my demands. In the end, the demands were too high for what netbooks can offer, due to the underpowered Atom and integrated graphics. The keyboards on nearly all of the ones I tried were terrible, with only a few that seemed ok. Many had weird quirks with the trackpad due to the layout (The HP on the top of my list had the buttons on the sides of the trackpad, not the bottom).

Basically, the problem with netbooks for me is that they do indeed try to be a cheap laptop, and if I'm going to buy a laptop, I want one that can meet my needs. They provide just enough to make you think it's a full computer, but when pushed, they give way too soon. The MacBook Air on the other hand offers a modern dual core processor and an NVidia 9400m, along with a full sized keyboard, bright and readable screen, and still a very slim and light form factor.

The iPad isn't trying to be a laptop, so up front my expectations are set on what it can do, instead of what it can't. Similarly I don't criticize my Nooks inability to browse the web or playback video because it isn't meant to. But a netbook is sold as a normal computer, and thus I'm critical of how well it does normal computing functions.

Mind you, I'm still not completely sold on the iPad concept for my personal needs. However, I do see potential in what Apple is trying to do. Instead of trying to shoehorn an existing setup into a smaller, cheeper package, they are trying to make an actual product with legitimate and unique uses.

Argh! They were two completely different observations! Don't read into it so much. I was analyzing a statement because I enjoy that kind of stupid thing. It nothing to do with categorization and everything to do with pricing! Sheesh!

And nowhere in your reasoned, logical explanation why you chose the Air over a netbook do you even touch upon the issue of spending FIVE TIMES as much money.

I value functionality and am willing to spend money to get what I want. The only reason I looked at netbooks is due to their size. I could have spent $325 on some cheep netbook (1/5th the price of my Air). Then I would have spent at least $1000 on a decent laptop to actually meet my needs, one that wouldn't be as slim or as light as what I got. Then I'd own two devices I wasn't fully happy with, and one likely to be sitting unused.

I also tend to look at things in a total cost of ownership method. I'm willing to pay more up front to ensure I also get a system that will meet my needs down the road. My MacBook Pro lasted me for nearly 3 years as my only system, including as my PC gaming machine. It now lives on as a family members machine, and will likely meet their needs for at least 3-4 more years. It's also running an operating system I trust for them to use online, reducing my time spent supporting their issues. Could I have bought a cheeper system? Sure. But it would have cost me more money in the long run.

It's got to have some kind of video out. During the demos every iPad had a 30 pin connector attached and the iPad's display was being projected. To be sure there was some kind of composition going on, that the display was inset into a virtual image of an iPad.

Unless or course there was some kind of MillyVanilly chicanery going on.

Anyone else notice that the iBook app seems to be a thinly veiled version of the Mobipocket reader.

See http://www.mobipocket.com/en/DownloadSoft/img/reader5/bookshelf.jpg

edit: That's kind of strange because Mobipocket is owned by Amazon, and while Amazon has released a Kindle app it hasn't authorized the mobipocket folks to release their iphone app.

It does. VGA (at 1024x768), composite or component out, via the dock connector. It's also got a dockable keyboard, or can pair to a bluetooth one.

Delicious Library has used the wooden bookshelf design for years now.

Probably the same composite/component video out cables with the authentication chip that the iPhone and iPod touch use. The VGA output is new though.

Yep, and a few ex Delicious Monster employees worked on the iPad, including a UI designer.

That looks exactly the same as the windows mobipocket software. The only difference seems to be the window decorations.

Apple seems to be ceding the eBook market to the various publishers. No iTunes kind of store for books.

Ahh. Interesting. Didn't know that Delicious Monster, Apple and the iPad were that closely related. I messed about with the original Delicious Library on my brother's Mac and it was quite a nice program especially with the iSight barcode reader system.

iBooks. Thats the app on the iPad to read books, and also buy books from Apple. It's launching in the US initially, while Apple works out deals elsewhere.

There's a 1024x768 VGA out adaptor listed on the website?

Absolutely not, speaking as someone who was deeply involved in hooking iPhones up to keynote video systems. That's live...

Okay, I missed the adapter somehow. It seemed like an awfully odd oversight.

Can you settle an argument I'm having elsewhere, can the SD adapter be used directly with the iPad or does it have to plug into the dock ? (the wording on the Apple site is a little ambiguous)

The SD adapter from what I can tell is a passive device that plugs directly into the iPad.

Bitt, you're arguing for nothing. You're trying to convince ME that the iPad isn't right. Trying to appeal to things that I, like you might value and see as a reason not to buy an iPad. I've already told you that I'm not interested in an iPad. Maybe for the exact same reasons as you. But that doesn't necessarily have any bearing on what will happen with the market at large. I still think we're going to see the iPad completely dominate the tablet category.

I'm not interested in going point for point again countering your claims. We should just watch over the next year to see how this all plays out.

I will say however that the most comparable Kindle, the DX model, is only $10 cheaper for the hardware. I don't think that product has any future after this week.

Now, if you'd like to see some criticism, my main gripe is that the iPad doesn't have a slightly higher density screen. I would have preferred to see 1280x800, a 16:10 aspect, or 1280x960 if they absolutely wanted a 4:3 aspect. Either of those would allow pixel-perfect 720p content. The next thing I might complain about is that with all the extra bezel, they could have put in an SD card reader. However, I recognize that it's a much more difficult process than just throwing in the connector. The functionality associated with it and how it possibly ties to the SDK would have been a decent challenge for quite a number of reasons, not the least of which is possibly making it easier for piracy or circumventing one or more of their revenue models. With the current adapter they may limit access to their photo app. Even if they don't it's probably limited to pulling photos or other documents, rather than being able to expand app storage, shared folder or anything of the like.

I'm really pleased to hear that the new SDK does create a shared folder as I've been advocating since the first release. This will allow multiple applications to access the same file storage area and let customers drag and drop files to the share when the device is connected to their desktop system. I hope we might see this share accessible over wifi in the future, because as previously discussed, attaching cables is kind of lame for a wireless device.

At first glance a USB port might be useful, but I honestly can't think of a reason to have one in addition to the dock connector. Connecting a camera directly to the iPad? I'd rather have WiFi in every camera. It would still be a huge revamp of the SDK and then having to provide drivers if you want any particular device or at least device classes to be supported. WiFi and BT are the solutions to most connectivity concerns here, they just need to be expanded to more uses. Their USB adapter obviously indicates they must support either USB Mass Storage or PTP, I wonder if they expose that in the SDK or if it's baked into their photo app.

The basic dock would have been a nice bundled accessory. It kind of sucks to have this nice display and then have to connect it to a wire on a regular basis to charge it. Dropping it into the dock is quicker and obviously neater.

GPS would be a killer thing to have in the iPad, but I'm really getting the impression that Apple sees this as a product that stays within the home. But how awesome would it have been to have a car dock for this thing? I suppose it's still possible with an externally linked GPS device (BT or dock connector).

As long as you dismiss mobile connectivity and the service for it. If you don't, it's $680 to $1220 cheaper, over three years, depending on which iPad service plan you get.

You're making me want to pull my hair out. Clearly I said "is only $10 cheaper for the hardware" - whether you pay $0 or $1000 per month for connectivity, the price of the hardware doesn't change. Should we get into what a mobile connection gains you on each of those devices?

You just seem determined to try and negate anything I write for some reason. It's strange because I've already admitted to agreeing with much of what you've mentioned in this thread. I just draw a different conclusion from the facts out there at this time as to how the market will play out. And as to whether anyone else offers any device with even close to the same specs for even close to the same money - which is a contention on facts and not interpretation.

Did you anticipate the iPhone would fail (or at the very least not do well) by any chance?

I was just there before typing that and didn't notice anything about GPS in the tech specs.

Aha... I looked under the incorrect heading. I should have scrolled the page a bit more. So that $130 buys you a little more than just 3G data modem. Shame it's not on the base unit, but I guess you can't have everything (that's an Apple mantra I believe). I wonder why they didn't mentioned it in the keynote, since they seemed to have a lot of time repeating so much else.

Yeah. It looks like it has a regular dock connector on it so should just plug in to the iPad or the dock itself. I don't think any other Apple iPod/iPad/iPhone adapter actually requires you to have a dock as well.

I guess it is AGPS without the ability to operate without a data connection since you need that 3G for it to be even present. No using the iPad as a huge GPS unit with no cell signal or abroad then.

That's not necessarily what AGPS means though. The "assisted" part goes over and above, giving you faster acquisition/startup times, it doesn't necessarily mean you need an active data connection present to use the GPS features. Even though WP does claim that some devices always need a data connection, I don't believe that's the case with the iPhone, so I don't expect it would be the case with the iPad.

What you won't be able to use without a data connection is Google Maps (the maps application built into the iPhone and iPad). But you should be fine using one of the third party navigation/map applications.

It just so happens that the GPS chipset is integrated into whatever they add to the devices when they add the cellular bits. Either another small SoC or daughter card or whatever.

BTW, data will also work everywhere in the world a long as you plug a micro sim in. I'm not sure why they didn't just use a regular sized sim though.