Is the Apple iPad a flop?

[joshbrez]

The name itself is a flop, the product? I doubt it.

Apple could release toilet paper and sell it for $30 a roll and it would still be a success...

All credit in the world to them for becoming the marketing giant that they are though...

While Apple's marketing talent is formidable, it's unfair to say that their marketing is the reason for the success of their products. The reason for their success is that they are simply good products that people want to use.

As for the name being a flop, I really don't understand people's issues with the name. As fleurya's been saying, a pad is a broad, flat object. Seems like the perfect thing to call this product to me. Slate, like Surface, doesn't sound like an Apple product, nor does iSlate (on the contrary, this sounds like a cheap third-party accessory's name).

 

[fleurya]

There's also evidence to support the fact that everything Apple produces sells well: Apple TV.

 

[TheGreatApple]

This is the one product from Apple that I'm a bit "I don't know" over. Honestly I don't see any real uses of applications in the real world FOR ME, but I can think of a few good ones for others. Their marketing is stellar, and their following is amazing, so perhaps they can turn it into a gold mine for them. I wouldn't say it's gonna flop for them, at least not just yet.

I was however (and this is just my personal opinion of course) massively disappointed with the iPad. I really don't see it as anything more than a large ipod touch with a faster processor. I won't be reading books on a glossy LED screen and kill my eyes either. Between my desktop, my old sony viao and my current 15 inch MPB, I don't see ANY reason for it OTHER than just a fun toy to play with from time time. For example, I won't be taking an iPad to the coffee shop to browse the internet and send emails when I can fully take my MBP which is not much bigger and do 100 times more.

We'll see...on one hand I have to admit that I want to see it struggle a bit for Apple to learn a lesson..."you can't just make big ipod touches and sell them as something VERY VERY different".

 

[fleurya]

^^ I don't see why it has to be such a huge failure just because it's a big Touch. Since the Touch is such a huge success, why couldn't the iPad? It's does a lot, if not all, of what many people use their computers for in a very portable and user-friendly format. Some people only want to surf the web and check email at the coffee shop. Not every codes or edits video on the fly.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please eveyone"--Bill Cosby

 

[verdejt]

Ipad

For a user like me with an iMac at home this product makes great sense instead of purchasing a new MacBook. For what I need it to do it will excel. I am hoping that later models will sport the iSight camera. I have a PDA but it is really limited when surfing the net and a lot of sites can't be read by the Blazer app. The size of the iPad isn't any bigger than my Bamboo pad which I know will fit into any of my backpacks. I think people are expecting this to be a full replacement for a computer and it isn't intended for this purpose. It is a way for Apple to feel out the netbook/tablet market and see how it sells. I will spend the money on the larger capacity one. Well time will tell how the product works and such. As soon as they are available my wife and I will be down to our local Apple store and try one out.

 

[CrimsonRequiem]

if there will be an app available for drawing it is more then worth it... those things cost by itself more the 400$. So a little extra for some sleek design and a lot of extra features on it is totally worth it. Not to mention that for 30$ a month you have unlimited internet access anywhere... So no it is not a flop. A name like iSlate might have been better though.

-Alec

That's only half the equation. You also need an app that can actually use the hardware to it's full potential.

People don't just shell out 400 dollars on a Wacom Tablet because it looks cool.

 

[verdejt]

My Wacomm cost about hundred bucks but I only use mine for personal photos and such and nothing as detailed as I assume most people by them for.
I wouldn't buy the 3G version as I assume it will be with AT&T and here in my area coverage isn't that great. I would get the WiFi only version.
The name iPad is geared more at Apple trying to get their feet wet and feel out the Tablet computer market. I think the name is a great choice and is keeping with Apple's naming scheme. Simple and to the point.

 

[Mac23]

Shouldn't be so serious about people having a little fun with the name.. If it truly makes you dislike the world you live in, you may need to admit yourself into a form of counseling.

 

[Mac23]

While Apple's marketing talent is formidable, it's unfair to say that their marketing is the reason for the success of their products. The reason for their success is that they are simply good products that people want to use.

As for the name being a flop, I really don't understand people's issues with the name. As fleurya's been saying, a pad is a broad, flat object. Seems like the perfect thing to call this product to me. Slate, like Surface, doesn't sound like an Apple product, nor does iSlate (on the contrary, this sounds like a cheap third-party accessory's name).

No, it's not unfair to say their marketing is the reason. Of course they make great products. They wouldn't be here without that.. However, to get those products out, you need great marketing. Apple knows how to market their products in a way not many other companies do.

As for the name, that's your opinion. Myself, I don't really care for it. Again, just my opinion, but I'd prefer the "iTablet" (iTab) or "Mac Tablet"...

To each their own though.

 

[the8thark]

No, it's not unfair to say their marketing is the reason. Of course they make great products. They wouldn't be here without that.. However, to get those products out, you need great marketing. Apple knows how to market their products in a way not many other companies do.

Microsoft. I think they are the best at marketing. They can sell their at times inferioir product and everyone buys it. Cause their marketing strategy is so good. I think Apple have a very good product range to begin with so they only need a little maketing to make it sell.

It's the old saying:
'A good product sells itself but you need to sell a bad product."
So I disagree with you in part.

 

[Mac23]

Apple has created an image through their marketing that makes it seem "cool" or the "it thing" to have an Apple product. They've done that through their commercials and product placement.

iPods, despite their high price range compared to similar mp3 players, continue to sell at a massive rate.

Everybody knows how well Apple markets the iPod..

I definitely see what you guys are saying, but we'll agree to disagree.

 

[jholljr]

I have an iPhone 3GS and a MacBook Pro, so I don't need the iPad and am really happy with both. The full featured iPad is $899, which seems way to expensive for me.

 

[znuffzz]

Obviously, it's a total flop. Apple hasn't sold a single one!

bom bom tsch

 

[Doug b]

Microsoft. I think they are the best at marketing. They can sell their at times inferioir product and everyone buys it. Cause their marketing strategy is so good. I think Apple have a very good product range to begin with so they only need a little maketing to make it sell.

This is quite false. Microsoft have NEVER been the ones to market their OS nor their products (Office). Only in the past year have they begun to use Apple's mainline strategy, (Starting with the Jerry Seinfeld crap) and thus far have FAILED in their attempt to counter Apple's "cool to be an Apple user" or "just works" marketing strategies.

MS isn't popular because of advertising. Their OS and productivity tools are popular because they've been a mainstay in the BUSINESS world since day one. Apple has only ever had a niche demographic and market. And even though their presence is strong within the multimedia industry, it's still not 100% I know people LOVE to boast how Macs are mainly used in the music and film industry, but this simply isn't true. Perhaps more so in the graphics industry, but there are exceptions.

I've got friends in the business (being a musician myself) whom use both platforms as they perform equally as good when using similar software. I even know people who churn out professional media products and refuse to use Mac's for one reason or another. This goes for music and video production respectively. I also have friends who work for Viacom and whom work on major television productions and their graphics teams (in certain departments) work only with Macs, so it's really up to the department heads.

Point being, the MS boys know that they don't have to spend as much money on marketing as Apple do since their products have been and will continue to be disseminated into the segments they have and will continue to work.

Widows 7 will only serve to solidify their position with their target market IMO. I think that until Apple reach out to a different segment of the market, they'll have to persist with their marketing strategies (quirky and smarmy TV ads). In fact, I'd guess that Apple's commercials actually serve MS rather well in that mentioning their name (even with a negative connotation) is better than having to spend money on an ad, doing it themselves !

Doug

 

[znuffzz]

funny read on apple marketing

Charlie Brooker | iPad therefore iWant? Probably. Why? iDunno | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

[verdejt]

Hey I for one seriously hope that Apple computers never become the Lionshare of computers in the Mainstream. I'm so glad that I don't have to contend with all the spam filters, antivirus, and security updates/patches of the day (saying Macs don't get these but far, far, far less). Not to say that someday OSX and Linux won't become the target of those things but hey face it we are riding the gravy train in that respect. Being a Winhoze user for over 20 years and dealing with all the above crap I listed, I love my Mac as the ad is true, it just works. Facts are facts.

 

[the8thark]

funny read on apple marketing

Charlie Brooker | iPad therefore iWant? Probably. Why? iDunno | Comment is free | The Guardian

Thanks for posting that link to that article. Sure that article is a little satiricle about Apple and tie ipad but otherwise it's a brilliant read. I would really urge everyone to read that article. It says what most people are feeling so well.

So if you have not read it, read it now.

 

[CrimsonRequiem]

Thanks for posting that link to that article. Sure that article is a little satiricle about Apple and tie ipad but otherwise it's a brilliant read. I would really urge everyone to read that article. It says what most people are feeling so well.

So if you have not read it, read it now.

The first half of the article was decent. The lower part is jealous Mac bashing. >_>"

 

[chas_m]

Microsoft. I think they are the best at marketing. They can sell their at times inferioir product and everyone buys it. Cause their marketing strategy is so good.

I'm not sure I quite buy that. I'm trying to think of a memorably MS ad (memorably GOOD, that is) and not coming up with anything.

I think the reason MS established dominance was primarily due to two factors:

1. The "good enough" candidate often beats the "best" candidate. VHS killed Beta etc. In the real world, MOST of the time you could look at a given category and easily identify the product that is actually the best overall, but a more mediocre product is actually the best seller.

For example: anyone here think McDonald's makes the best hamburgers in the world?

2. MS were quite brilliant in identifying who to sell their product to. Early on (and to this day), they didn't really cater to consumers; they targeted middle management (who didn't and still don't understand the technology), encouraging them to create a layer of abstraction (the IT bureaucracy) between the complicated software and the work results. This created a class of people whose entire career depends on keeping software mysterious and difficult; what do you suppose these "experts" are then going to recommend? MS created a self-sustaining ecosystem that is only just now becoming polluted with viable alternatives.

I have an iPhone 3GS and a MacBook Pro, so I don't need the iPad and am really happy with both. The full featured iPad is $899, which seems way to expensive for me.

a. All models of the iPad have exactly the same "features" except two: 3G capability, and storage space.

b. The top price is actually $829, not $899.

c. The people who are actually the target users of the iPad will not find even the smallest storage size much of an issue; their work is done (and stored) online, not locally. 16GB is four times as much movie/photo/song storage as I carry around with my (I have an original iPhone), and for the average NON-NERD that should be plenty. I think you really have to look at the iPad from the point of view of a "computer illiterate" to really "get" it.

 

[cuhnool]

I'm 20 minutes into the Keynote. I have to say, I completely disagree to anyone who says the iPad is like the iPod touch/iPhone.

Absolutely not. It's a much different experience than looking at your itty bitty screen. Different features, more features, some of the UI is different. No, it's not like an iPod/iPhone, I'm sorry.