“No, it’s not because of Apple hype, fanboy delusion, media gullibility, dirty tricks or anything else,” Elgan writes. “Apple’s multi-touch user interfaces are appealing to use for reasons most users, reviewers, bloggers and journalists don’t fully understand.”
“Apple does understand,” Elgan writes. “The company knows how, why, when and where to combine multi-touch, physics and gestures and an enormous repertoire of user interface design elements into something simple and exhilarating to use. They know this because they’ve been working on the problem full-time for seven years, guided by some very clear design sensibilities.”
“Any ‘iPad Killer’ will have to at least approximate the interface sophistication of the iPad itself,” Elgan writes. “So far, nobody has come even close. Quite the contrary. Competitors thus far have demonstrated a conspicuous lack of emphasis on user interface design. And that’s why they fail.”
Elgan writes, “Apple has probably sold 2 million iPads already, and it hasn’t even starting selling it internationally. If somebody doesn’t do something quick, the iPad will become the new Microsoft Office — the standard we’ll never be able to get rid of… iPads will remain three times more expensive than rivals, and still win almost all the customers.”
MacDailyNews Take: Like iPods? Like Macs? Like iPhones? Neither of which are “three times more expensive than rivals,” Mike. Comparable rivals, not junk with stripped down features, shoddy build quality, horrible user interfaces, etc. Why would you want to “get rid of” something that’s elegant and works for people? Answer: You wouldn’t if you’re thinking clearly and/or didn’t irrationally hate Apple.
Elgan continues, “The future looks grim for real competition in the fast-growing touch tablet market. An iPad killer — or even a serious competitor — is possible. But it had better happen soon — before it’s too late.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Go for it.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Zane V.” for the heads up.]
What a God-awful loser. Period.
“The future looks grim for real competition in the fast-growing touch tablet market. An iPad killer — or even a serious competitor — is possible. But it had better happen soon — before it’s too late.”
It’s already too late.
He goes from calling it simple and exhilarating, to talking about how we’ll be stuck with it. Interesting 180.
The author does have a chip on his shoulders against Apple. His whole article is a cry for someone besides Apple to build a tablet. Why cry about it Mike? If you don’t like the iPad, simple solution – don’t get one. Plenty of the people commenting on your site say the iPad is nothing more than a netbook without a keyboard. Why don’t you get one of those? Problem solved. That will leave more iPads for the people who truly value design, thoughtfulness, and a stable OS – or at least those who have microwaves and blenders.
???Before its too late??
What the hell does that mean? Humanity as we know it will end? The earth will stop rotating on its axis? The ozone layer will dissipate and we will all be irradiated to death by cosmic rays? Microsoft will never be able to compete with a BSOD tablet that weighs 10 lbs and has 1 hour of battery life with a monthly fee that must be paid directly into MS coffers in order for us to upgrade our software whether we want to or not?
Guess which one Elgan is thinking of??????
Its already over. Game, set, match. Once the iPad sucks all the profit away from netbooks, the PC industry will implode. The government may have to bail out Microsoft to keep support coming for all their those gov’t windows computers.
So, he’s saying that the competition will be selling tablet computers, for $166? Right. They can’t even hit Apple’s $500 price point. Not to mention Apple flat out saying they could be flexible with the pricing.
@Lurker_PC: Nah. The reviewer just doesn’t want anyone else to buy one. He is begging people not to buy the iPad… buy anything but the iPad… but he can’t take that too far since there is a huge lack of viable alternatives.
I personally find it hysterical when people berate Apple on “lack of choice” and then demand people stop buying their products. You should promote choice by denying it to those who would choose?
Nice.
I like competition. When someone actually builds something better than Apple, It will be unbelievable and fantastic, and I’ll be happy to buy it. Eventually, someone will! Probably not in my lifetime, but someday.
Apple has been working on a touch user interface for more than 7 years. Also many other technologies. Look at the patent history. Apple truly explores many user interface possibilities and approaches. They passionately care about the end user experience. This is what no other company can seem to grasp (literally).
What we need is a twisted thinking killer
Bring on the competition. Nothing breeds better products & services than good competition.
“Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren’t used to an environment where excellence is expected.”
– Steve Jobs
I was at a breakfast meeting this morning, and had to stop to show off the iPad 8 times to different customers that were walking by and were just mesmerized by me doing a presentation with it in keynote.
It was a bit of a hassle, but still fun to show off.
The thing is simply an addiction to the human brain. Apple is going to make a fortune off of this thing.
So? Apple has been all about the user interface since the original Mac – remember the original IBM PC with it’s cute glowing characters on a green screen?
too much protesting here..
The issue with iPad, IPhone etc. is not about dominant standards its about competition that drives improvement.
We have all seen the partial reviews and tech specs of the HP slate -which now seems to have been pulled. It had cameras and USB slots and all sorts of interface connectivity that the iPad doesn’t. We can only surmise that it fell on the software / interface stakes and was pulled – then surprise, surprise HP buys Palm – we can only guess that this is for it’s OS skills.
No, the iPad as we know has the hardware engineering on the case to take a camera but at the last, SJ decided it didn’t need it to sell like hot cakes ( plus possible upload/download video bandwith issues). So what ? so SJ doesn’t hae a competitor on his heels for at least 9 months to a year and he can ride the ‘upgrade/ speed-bump’ path to generate a second sales wave when the first wave subsides. The trouble is, its a bit like DeBeers, they control the diamond market and you take only from what choice they are prepared to offer because they have the luxury of setting the market.
Ultimately the choice of do I wait for rev. 2 to be released with a Camera and micro SD slot possibly added or do I buy now. and the problem is it looks like Rev 2 is someway off because there is no-one close in the interface stakes. My rev 1 is on order.
Well, I’m sure this will add to the author’s fear. The iPad is even making inroads in public agencies. My agency just ordered several and we are beginning testing in a real world setting. So far, so good. I am awaiting mine still, but we already see endless possibilities for more efficiency in government.
For example, instead of printing a 200 page document with agenda and attachments for the elected officials, the entire package (with annotation capabilities) will be placed on the iPad and the officials will be able to access it from the iPad with a single touch.
So, what exactly will the “competition” he speaks of bring to the table? Let’s see.
By the way, when we did cost analysis the top of the line iPads with all necessary accessories will cost our public agency about 50% of what it would cost to accomplish all we want than if we had gone the route of laptops.
Elgan writes, “They know this because they’ve been working on the problem full-time for seven years, guided by some very clear design sensibilities.”
Actually, SJ / Apple has been working on user interfaces since the late 70’s.Ever heard of Xerox PARC, Mike?
Elgan continues: “Competitors thus far have demonstrated a conspicuous lack of emphasis on user interface design. And that’s why they fail.”
Apple’s product roadmap is at least 7-10 years ahead of every other CE company. This is why no other company will ever catch Apple: 1) they cannot match Apple’s ‘ease of use’ software & hardware. 2) they have absolutely no idea where Apple will go next.
Oh, and by the way, there is no former sugar-water-sales-bozo in charge of Apple this time to give away the company crown jewels
Although, I’m sure it may be fun to watch other CE companies try to anticipate Apple’s next move, all they really can do is react to Apple’s activities. This is why Apple continues to set the agenda, and why every other CE company fails.
“”The future looks grim for real competition”
Yes, but it look very bright for the consumer!
“the iPad will become the new Microsoft Office — the standard we’ll never be able to get rid of…”
This has got to be one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard anyone say.
Why would you get rid of something that is so easy, and such a pleasure to use? We want the world rid of Office because it sucks, not because it has a huge market share.
This is usually the answer I give when people say “yeah but Apple is getting big and they are controlling”. Someone is going to be controlling, I’d rather it be a company that makes my work easier, not harder.
“I’ll say it as plainly as I can: The iPhone, iPod touch and iPad succeed mainly because of their user interface,”
For a moment, I thought Mike Elgan had come to his senses. Then he went on with his usual inanity.
Oh well. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Elgan writes: “Competitors thus far have demonstrated a conspicuous lack of *emphasis* [emphasis mine] on user interface design. And that’s why they fail.”
Mike’s fundamental flaw in his logic is that he is equating ’emphasis’ = ‘ability’. Mikey, *that* is why they fail.
What does a price-competitive entry ($199) get you?
The Archos 7, which Engadget panned as a stripped-down device that illustrates “you get what you pay for”.
People who gripe about Apple price points have yet to produce an example of a competitive product at that price. Quick! Mike Elgan demands an affordable competitor to the iPad!
/crickets
If you read TFA, you will see that this article is very pro-Apple, the “we need a real ‘iPad Killer” quick” thing – is a device to make his point that nobody is even close to catching up with Apple.
Before you judge him, read the article, it’s pretty good.
“…the iPad will become the new Microsoft Office — the standard we’ll never be able to get rid of…”
Why would one ever want to be “rid” of such a device? Folks use Office only if they have to, not because they want to. People *want* to use the iPad.
And that “three times more expensive than rivals” claim is simply ludicrous. Can someone conceivably sell a wireless competitor for $167? Or one with 3G for $210? In his dreams!
Here’s how I read that: “The iPad is amazingly powerful, yet simple to use. Quick! Let’s not let that become the standard!”
Wow, kinda sounds like just about every illogical argument against Apple.
Any mention of Android? If it’s making all these inroads in the smartphone market, it stands to reason it will do it in tablets as well.
The author does indeed have a chip on his shoulder against Apple. His point is not that he dislikes the iPad, in fact, he finds it “exhilerating.” He’s just decrying the fact that nobody can or will take the care and pay the attention to detail that Apple does, but on the cheap.
I think the answer to his question is contained within the question itself.
He was probably waiting for the Slate.. wait that got canceled..
“Before it’s too late” = “Before my Microsoft stock drops to $1.79 a share.”
I’d cut Mike a bit of slack. He’s no Thurrott or Enderle. Sure, he might be over the top, but when he says “before it’s too late”, he means for competition. Apple is the finely honed machine that it is because it’s fought for every inch of turf. But Apple will not be made better by having an MS like dominace. Co
petition is good for everyone. Look at what the lack of competition in OSes saddled us with for 15 years.
“What a God-awful loser. Period.”
At least he admits Apple earned their success.
As Bill Clinton said to the Haiti SuperPower Junta, also needs to be said to the so called competitors…
“Your Time Is Up!”
-C2
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Fortunately, Apple will always need to compete with itself. This is true in a lot of ways in the tech industry.
For me, there *are* only Macs, iPhones, iPads, etc… I will buy from Apple whatever I can afford and I’m on a pretty decent upgrade cycle with them.
This June/July, I’ll probably buy my 4th iPhone. I’ll do this because the price of the 4th iPhone and the features it has makes it worth upgrading to. This has been the case with each iPhone, every year. It has nothing at all to do with Palm, Blackberry, Nokia, etc…
The author doesn’t make sense in that he says (maybe about) 2 million people have already purchased the iPad, and so therefore we need competition. But…there is no competition today for the iPad, and still it sold due to people wanting to buy it at that price. If it was too expensive, people wouldn’t be buying it.
I wonder if he would be similarly concerned if it was Microsoft, rather than Apple, that had produced the iPad?
This type of hyperbole and FUD is just something with which Apple and fans of Apple products will have to deal. Any dominant product (worthy or that dominance, or not) draws this kind of knee-jerk opposition. Apple is a big player, now, and it seems to be human nature to worship the dominant ones while simultaneously attempting to tear them down and elevate a new hero.
It is going to be VERY interesting to see what Apple will do once they have the kind of monopoly power Microsoft used to have. Apple loves its margins. I wouldn’t be surprised if prices of Apple hardware don’t drop as fast as the cost of the parts in them.
The closest they have been to a monopoly is with iPod marketshare, but iPods don’t lock anyone into anything. The iPhone and iPad are different. They are beautiful, magical and very well constructed hand cuffs that I have been as happy to put on as anyone.
What will a dominant Apple be like? We don’t know yet, but we are going to find out.
The ipad isn’t stuck with only AT&T;, so competition will likely sell little. Video-conferencing on competitors might be a draw, I’m holding off on the ipad until that feature comes. But I bet that draw won’t amount to much, and everyone knows that waiting for next year’s ipad with 4g and the radio-friendly ceramic-back will bring the reward of outstanding video-conferencing quality.
The comparison with Microsoft Office doesn’t work… because Office is software, while the iPad is hardware (d’uh).
In order to stay in business with making and selling software, like Microsoft, the end user needs to want to get the update, which in turn means that the current version has to lack features, or not completely work right. Microsoft profits when the user is slightly unhappy.
Hardware, like the iPad, does not have this problem. It ages. It breaks. At some point it will fail. To stay in business, the user would have to want the new version of the hardware. Which means that he needs to be happy with the current version.
Apple profits from happy customers. Micosoft from suffering customers.
I want to be a happy customer.
@Vermyndax – agreed. He also does not want everyone else buying one either. My guess is because the author believes that if he can’t have one, then neither should anyone else. ESPECIALLY if that means supporting Apple.
@ “@Lurker_PC” – I didn’t get the fact that the author likes the iPad. If anything, the author appears to be upset, no bothered, by the fact that Apple is the only one selling a tablet computer that people actually want.
In any case, the author is not Apple’s biggest fan.
Regards.
I understand the sentiment of the author. The last thing I want is a world where Apple dominates every market, because eventually it will have a negative impact on innovation and price.
But I’ll take a world where Apple dominates every market than any other company.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Actually, Elgan is no Apple basher. I’ve seen a few articles in the IT journals where he shows how Mac’s total cost of ownership was cheaper than windoze boxes with MSFT server. However, I have to admit that this post is illogical. I think the days of someone in the tech industry being able to do what MSFT did are gone. I also think that pundits do not realize that Apple now is a much different company than it was in 1997 before Steve Jobs returned and that Steve Jobs is a much wiser and savvy person than in 1990 (whenever it was he was pushed out by Scully). The whole tech industry is different than in the 1990’s when MSFT was able to pull off their thinly veiled monopoly.
Got my 3G iPad this week, luv it. Oh well to those other companies….
As usual, they all fail to see what ACTUALLY makes these products better than anything their rivals could possibly dream up. The underlying software. They keep making flashy machines with similar attempts at the interface, but that’s it. It’s like trying to compete with Porsche by building what they think is a great looking car with a Yugo engine in it. How do they not see this? How can ALL of these companies pay millions of dollars to designers and IT assholes who don’t ACTUALLY SEE THIS ?!! HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE ?!?!?!
Read the whole article, the real fun was reading the comment section.
The Apple haters seem to hate Apple products without ever using them. As MDN would say Stockholm Syndrome.
I love my iPad, iPhone, MacPro, MacBook Pro for one reason and one reason only…. THEY ROCK!!!
From a purely “competition generates lower pricing” point of view he is absolutely correct. If there were no Android phones we would all be paying $400 an iphone WITH a two-year contract, today. Thanks to the, albeit weak, competition to the iPhone anyone can get a 3G for a reasonable price.
just my $0.02
Competition is an oversold concept here in the US. Coöperation is much more important.
Nokia used to have a really good user interface – before they started using that awful POS Symbian. None of the competitors came even close. I think they never really understood what they had.
Apple knows exactly what Apple has, and they have nurtured the development and been very consistent about it. As they have also patented a huge number of its parts, it may not be that easy for competitors to catch up – especially if they don´t understand what they are looking at.
Apple products rock because they enable us to harness an enormous computing power to its fullest – with our finger tips.
Blowhard. He probably hates the Sun because it is so reliable.
@jax44,
Yeah, the sun needs more competition to make sure it continues to produce light.
Um, Mr Elgan, I like a little maple syrup on my hyperbole, please.
The jump Apple has over every other competitor is 30+ years of vertical integration “the whole widget” experience. NOBODY does hardware and software together anymore. And in this business, 30 years’ worth of experience is nothing to sneeze at. They’ve got this thing down cold.
Everyone else can only wring their hands in desperation: “Where do I start from?” As can be evinced from all the attempts so far, which have all come desperately short, no dice.
Quickly, lets copy what Apple has and attempt to sell it for less. Good luck with that.
The fact of the matter is that the iPad already sent HP, Microsoft and who know back to the drawing board. They were all attempting to peddle there vaporware to the masses in a futile attempt to steal the thunder out of Apple’s announcement. It didn’t work, even thou I did hear of some schmucks disappointed when Microsoft pulled there design out of the market.
What everybody else does not get is that is not only the touch screen, but the subtle attention to detail that every little aspect gets from Apple that makes them grate. When I was listening to music on my iPhone for the first time, I got a call, the volume lowered slowly and the ring was not loud or annoying, very elegantly it let me know that I had a call.
Wow… paranoid much there, Mikey?
‘Pads will remain three times more expensive than rivals’
Strange he’s arguing there are no rivals and yet the rivals that apparently don’t exist are 3 times cheaper. That’s weird. Equally odder is that the proposed iPod competitors that we know of, for example HP Slate/ Courier have clearly failed to meet the capability/price compromise necessary to compete, so even the vapourware cant meet the imaginary 3 times cheaper threshold it seems. Oh well who needs honesty when you are a tech hack when a vivid if delusional imagination will suffice.
@ David F.,
“I am awaiting mine still, but we already see endless possibilities for more efficiency in government.”
You just used efficiency and government in the same sentence.
You win the Weekly Oxymoron Prize.
Yea!!!
Web OS, and android has potential, but needs years of refinement, is going to be an uphill battle, and to stay competive they will need to pretty much sell the devices at cost, ultimatly the features and price will push apple to add what we want
In business, you innovate to stay ahead of the competition. When you repeatedly react to your competition, you’re also-ran. No less. This is in Apple’s DNA. The others are simply copycats.
You have to do something different and parlay it into a sellable item or service to stay ahead of the curve.
Anything else, you’re an also-ran, with much thinner margins. The surprising thing is, they’re content with that, seeing as they can’t be anything else.
but do we really want a big powerful apple?
i liked it when we were rebels, the few,
now apple is going to be the gatekeeper to all information
how does this benefit us?
Sure, you can copy the iPad, tear it down.. throw something together in like… 6 months, then get sued into oblivion.
Good job buddy.
OMG somebody do something QUICK!!!
Sent from my iPad
Too late for what?
This guy thinks he is on to something. He is not…