What is failure or a product?

[IpadOne]

iPad will lead the market

Seadog, is this the article? Analysts Ask if the iPad Can Live Up to Its Hype - NYTimes.com
Translation: "We're pulling wild guesses out of thin air, based on nothing, but trust us! We're professionals!"

This what they pretend, i can't understand those people why they say stupidity bigger than them ...

this week-end i have a fight (in writing) with some french people in a Forum for Iphone ...some of them say iPad will be failure , it's not interested and bla bla bla

when i ask OK guys: why the iPad will fail , what will made the iPad , just give me a ll your reason .... NO ONE HAVE GOOD REASON

so finally i say , maybe you criticize the iPad because you're economic situation don't permit you to buy one

No need i repeat all i listen ... but i clearly see i have touch the real point

 

[rob the elder]

True, an iPad would be better for hospitals and such. When my Dad was in his last hospital stay, they had a laptop or notebook computer in each room for tracking meds, vitals, etc. A unit that a doctor or nurse could carry around would be so much easier than each of them having to log in and out every time they wanted to check or update data. It'd be much easier to input it in a tablet, have it update the info in a central server and have it accessible to all the medical personnel.

Before we all drink the Kool-aid,
1) there is a huge in place infrastructure in existing hospitals that
a) works
b) the staff are trained to use
c) represents a very large sunk cost

2) Inputting data to a touch machine is not as user friendly as with an actual keyboard. People who can type 50-60 words a minute will NOT love using an IPAD as a primary input device, at least without an actual keyboard. The touch and feel not to mention the size of a keyboard is very important when the primary function is to input large amounts of textual or numerical data. Adding a keyboard to an IPAD would address this issue, but then is there still an advantage to having an IPAD who's primary function is to be "touchable" and uses touch specific apps and operating system? Stated another way, why would I take the risk of going to an untested input device and new software when for the same or at least similar cost I can do what I already have done successfully? And I don't have to pay for training and new inspections etc.

3) Medical software, by its very nature is light "flight" software. It affects health / safety of many human beings and therefore in our litigious society has to be highly trusted, tested and verified. While I can see that there is an attraction to the new toy on the block, if you are a hospital administrator and have the choice of buying serial number 100,000 of criltical software or serial number 2, which would you choose?

4) If you are an Apple Lover, and in light of all the above, why would you choose an IPAD over a MacBook?

5) If you ARE Apple, why would you generate a product that sells for less than $1000 and position it so it reduces sales of another of YOUR products that sells for $2-3000? And that the return on investment is a much higher ratio?

6) How do you secure an IPAD? A MacBook you can lock up, close the cover and you are reasonably secure. How do you lock up your IPAD? How do you secure the data? What security software exists for the IPAD? Last time I checked, all you need to do to have full access to an IPOD or IPHONE is hit the screen and move the slider to the right and you got all the data.

The IPAD is a unique device, and will no doubt find its own place in the spectrum of handy devices. But what it is NOT is a laptop replacement. Even a low end laptop.

By trying to force fit the IPAD into "replacement" mode, we can actually limit its ability to "become" what ever it is going to become.

I started on a Timex computer
http://oldcomputers.net/ts1000.html
and to just get it to talk through the old black and white TV was a big deal. But it was an engineering toy. No rational person even dreamed that within a few years there would be desktops in just about every home and office in America.

Personally I still think that the IPAD is designed to be two things

1) a fun and useful toy for computer geeks like me who have 4 laptops, 4 Apple TVs, 15 IPODS of various flavors, and 5 servers and 6 desktops running on three networks in my home. My IPAD will be a fun toy that I can use to stream TV in the bathtub and that my wife will hopefully like better than her netbook for email and surfing.

2) a device for non-computer literate users who fear anything that has a keyboard and a screen. The current penetration of computers is limited by two types of people. Those who "I don’t need no stinking box" and those who may not admit it but are intimidated by the steep learning curve necessary to use a "normal" computer, yes even an Apple computer that like the good little socialist operating system says, minimizes how much you can do "wrong" but as a consequence also limites the users freedom to explore new functionality without becoming a full fledged computer scientist. I believe that market surveys are telling Apple that there is a large segment of non-users who fall into this category who want to have access to email and the grand kids pictures and know about that thing called the world wide web but have never seen it. The IPAD rev0 is purposely throttled back in order to appeal to this type of user. It does a few very useful things very simply and the constraints help to further protect the non-computer user from themselves. What Apple wants, I am sure, is for a few hundred thousand of these non-adopters (as opposed to early adopters like us) become IPAD users. "A different, non scary and fun not-a-computer" that gives these users a safe, easy and comfortable environment to become computer users.

Personally, I think that Apple is selling IPAD rev0 to two audiences. Early adopters who will buy anything that has electrons flowing and a display whether it does anything or not. And non-adopters, that vast audience of wannabecomputerusers but who are turned off or afraid to use a "real" computer.

To sell to early adopters all they have to do is make it available.

To sell and to keep selling to non-adopters, they have to dumb down the box while providing the basic set of functionality that non-adopters will want to use. It has them plus a few more. Plus the ability to add more apps in the future as these non-adopters gradually become less afraid and more dependent upon this non-computer.

For the early adopters, we already have laptops, desk tops etc. The IPAD needs to have enough utility and "coolness" to keep its desirability and we will keep migrating to the latest IPAD as they come out with rev1 and revn. But Apple does NOT want a relatively cheap IPAD taking away the sale of a $3000 laptop. I can see a $3000 version of the IPAD at rev3 or so that will be allowed to seek its own sales numbers. Apple probably does not care if it sells more $3000 IPADs or $3000 MacBooks. If the IPAD does create a new category of "laptop replacement" device then good. But the market will chase that niche vigorously too. You can bet Dell and HP will not be sitting on their hands. They are already working on the "laptop replacement" tablet that runs a "real" operating system and has "real" apps. Where they may be missing the boat is not realizing that the IPAD is really directed at the non-adopters. If all the tablets that Dell and others bring out are "laptop replacement" boxes then they will fail in the non-adopter market.

Apple by keeping the use of the IPAD purposely ambiguous is actually laying a trap for their competitors in the area of non-adopters.

Another consideration is having a spectrum of available boxes that bring in users, bind them to Apple and draw them up the cost / performance chain. People start with an IPOD, then get a n IPAD, then a low end MacBook, then a Mac desk top, then a faster MacBook . .. and so on. until they become AppleFinatics and early adopters.

Kind of where Saturn failed. They built little, entry level cars but failed to provide a product line that buyers could go buy a bigger, better, more expensive car from Saturn and stay with Saturn forever. Now Saturn is no more.

So, I think we should let the IPAD be an IPAD, recognize that its greatest strength and purpose is to NOT be a "real" computer. From the orchard, it should do a few very useful things reliably and simply so the vast untapped market of non-adopters can fall in love with it. If you force the IPAD to become a "real" computer, then its loosing that market segment, you are forcing it to compete against laptop technology that has been running hot and heavy for decades and is well developed. I have a $3000 laptop with an i7 CPU, dual solid state drives, HD screen, great touch full function keyboard that weight in at about 4.5 pounds, fits into my computer bag easily and has more capability than the entire world had back in the 80s when I started playing with computers.

I don’t WANT the IPAD to penetrate the hospital. I want it to penetrate the old folks home, to go over the bridge to grandma and grandpa, I want it in the hands of the 10 year olds and the husbands and wife’s of those of us who ARE early adopters and have a spouse who IS a non-adopter in spite of our best efforts.

I want it to become the "must" have, latest electronic pet rock. Then I want those transformed non-adopters to become early adopters. So they can increase the money available for R&D and get ME more cool stuff faster.

 

[DavidNM]

Do you know why a percentage of Docs are floundering at using their new EMR software? Why they may have 40 or 50 or 200 outstanding patient encounters not yet billed? It's because they can't type.

While I will agree that we don't want the mainstay hospital computing system operating on iPads - I think that the iPad is going to find it's niche - and I bet that niche will be surprising to many.

Currently our Docs are either:

- Working on a total paper system (which will be changing over the next 5 years)

or

- Duplicating their work by first putting information on paper and then subsequently having someone (or themselves) enter it into a computer.

or

- Entering repetitive data into a laptop work station in a patient room while the patient stares at the back of the Docs head.

or

- Wheeling some kind of techno-contraption from room to room to enter data

or

- Carrying a tablet PC in their arms wondering if it's going to shut down or run out of battery life before the patient encounter is completed.

We also see the Docs squinting at some 2 inch screen on a smart phone trying to read ePocrates data.

The majority of people out there are worried about the cost of the system, the quality of data, the 'up-time', etc. (and of course these are important things to worry about). But what doesn't get the attention that it deserves is the process work flow of the medical staff. What is easy and efficient to use. This is one area where I think our friend the iPad is going to leave it's mark.

BTW - I disagree with your assessment that apple is selling it's new products to a generation of techno-sheeple who will buy anything with flowing electronics and a pretty display. There also happens to be individuals out there with vision. Who see possibilities. In some aspects it's like the Robert Kennedy quote:
"There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?"

 

[Seadog]

I am definitely not a habitual early adopter, nor am I computer afraid. I am also not a geek by any means. I have a limited amount of computer skill, and while I could be more computer literate, it is not what I desire for my life. Most people are interested in computers as a tool that makes their job easier to handle.

There is a huge demand for a computer that is easy to carry and can manage a decent level of function. Netbooks and laptops are still too awkward. There are a lot of industries that will be interested in an iPad, but only with the software to support the function they need. In many cases, they will be looking at replacing a high dollar dedicated instrument with an off-the-shelf unit and software. For example, meter readers may start using iPads because not only could it function as a meter recorder, but can transmit the data to a server, plus serve to keep theoperator in contact with their base.

Many doctors will adopt the iPad rather than use a netbook. So will a lot of sales people. Not only would it be easier to use, but it looks more professional. I expect that at some point, lab coats will either have existing pockets that fit an iPad, or will develop dedicated pockets for them. Eventually, the use of iPads in the medical field will expand as more and more apps are developed and personnel adopt them. Most doctors are affiliated with hospitals, but maintain an office. If they get used to using an iPad, then the hospital may find it useful to adopt usages for relaying information. It is a domino effect, but it depends on several factors to determine how far it will go. The uses are infinite, it just depends on the software development and the advances in hardware as it advances.

We are changing our personal habits based on technology. I use to be like everyone else and carry my wallet in my hip pocket. When I got my cell phone, I eventually started using a belt holster. Because of hip pains caused by sitting on my wallet, I now carry both the phone and my wallet in a belt pouch. I would love to also get my keys out of my pockets, because I carry so many of them. Now I will be carrying an iPad around with me. I will likely try a sling bag or messenger bag to carry it in. Thus my keys, phone, and wallet will also go there. But the issues with keeping a bag like that with me all the time may be too much of a hassle. I know I am going to have to be very selective in what I get. I think that is going to be the main issue with adoption, making the move to an iPad a pleasant experience, not another hassle.

 

[DavidNM]

See I'm not sure if we should even be using the term computer. Rather how about 'communication device'? Or at least something that describes the interface aspect. I see the iPad being my interface with the so called 'cloud'. That's why I'm stuck waiting on the 3G version. I know - there's also the aspect of using wifi from your phone - but I'm not a big user of cell phones any more.

 

[Seadog]

The dedicated computer is no more. All computers are integrated into multifunction machines. Even the basic desktop is capable of being a TV, phone, browser, music player, and more. Autos, refrigerators, and almost everything else we have in our lives, contain computers. A smart phone is simply a computer with limited use due to size. When you compare an iPad with a computer from 5-10 years ago, it is a very capable unit. It is a lot more capable than my Mac LC, or 6360, or even my first iMac.

 

[Finnedog]

The following finally said what I have been thinking about what an iPad is for:

was copied from padpundit


Yesterday, some folks on Twitter were doing their best to prove that they don’t understand where the iPad fits into the universe.
They were complaining that the iPad won’t be beefy enough to run a full-fledged photo editing program like Aperture. (If Apple created Aperture Lite for the iPad then it might work.) But that line of thinking misses the point. You have to pick the right tool for the job.
Heavy-duty RAW photo processing and photo editing should be done on a laptop or a desktop with lots of horsepower – not the iPad.
Yes the iPad is convenient and it would be cool and all that but I also wish that I had a point and shoot with all the power and features of my Nikon D3s.
Back to my point – you need the right tool for the job. I’d no more shoot a wedding with a point and shoot over a DSLR than I would process photos with an iPad over my maxed out, 17-inch, MacBook Pro.

Inserted from <http://padpundit.com/archives/200>