During Apple’s WWDC keynote event last week, it became exceedingly clear that we won’t be seeing a converged iPad/MacBook device anytime soon. Unlike Microsoft, with its Surface Pro 3 effort, Apple doesn’t seem at all interested in forcing iOS and OS X into a single unified operating system. In fact, Apple doesn’t seem to be interested in making OS X touch-based or touch-enabled. Nor does it appear to be working too hard to turn the iPad into a multitasking, laptop-replacing workhorse that resembles anything like the Microsoft Surface Pro 3.
Forgive me for making a comment that dismisses a lot of careful effort and analysis, but here goes: It's the keyboard, stupid. :)
Keyboards are the primary interface most of us associate with actual work. When I sit down to write an article, edit a spreadsheet, send a volley of emails, etc., I do so at a keyboard. That's what I started using back in 1984, and it's been generally excellent for my purposes since then.
Until someone either a) figures out how to build a real functioning keyboard into a tablet or b) figures out how to get millions and millions of people over their keyboard addiction, the convergence of laptop, tablet, and phone can't take place.
And yes, I know the Surface has a keyboard in the cover. I've tried it and don't like it.
The unification of disparate elements is the key here. It's one thing to integrate multiple functions into a single device, as so many manufacturers have done, but it is not likely that there will ever be "one device to rule them all."
The fact that one can create hybrids (i.e., phablets on the one side and combo-tablet/laptops on the other) is one thing, but when you consider the upcoming ubiquity of wearables, in-car systems and in-home systems and who knows how many more devices, I'd say the notion of creating and emphasizing continuity from one device to another as Apple is doing is so much more practical and far-reaching.
For those that are experienced and familiar with particular operating systems, more power to you, but I would argue that this familiarity and not simply "preference" may cloud your vision of the future.
"Metro for play" . . . great point. I'm actually hoping to see Microsoft make some inroads in terms of sales this year. Still really curious to see how it shakes out, partially because Microsoft has a decent product now . . . and yet, that may not be enough for mass consumer adoption. I still find that wild. By all measures, the Surface Pro 3 _should_ take off . . . but broad excitement seems muted. If a mature company regains its mojo, can it also regain its consumer mindshare around the world? Definitely paying attention. . . .
I think the thing that is often overlooked on tech sites when this sort of discussion comes up is the needs of the average user. Most of us who come to these sites are more likely to be people who might actually need the equivalent of both a Mac Pro and a tablet. Most users probably only need one or the other. My guess is that the iPad is successful because it meets the limited needs of many users and does it in a convenient package for a relatively reasonable price. Whereas the Surface Pro is a 5 pound sledge hammer. Sure, you could drive a nail to hang a picture on with it, but it's overkill and the 17 oz. wooden hammer will do the job just as well for less. Whereas the jobs that call for a 5 pound sledge are limited.
I have never seen anyone using an ipad with a keyboard. It's true that keyboards for it exist... but they don't seem to be a hot item for most people, so I think your perception of how people actually use their ipads might be off.
I have however seen people using the iPad to capture pictures... and I agree that it looks pretty silly.
The ipad is great at what it's meant for. Consumption of media, games, light email, social networking, etc. It's also possible to use it for some content generation, though I do not think it's ideal for that, nor was it meant to be ideal for that.
Apple has also been involved in a marketing deal with colleges to push an iPad agenda. Many colleges now use e-text books and apps in conjunction with the iPad, with a "special" finance rate (usually free to the student)...
the agenda is purposely compatible with Apple products, and is mostly compatible with PC's.
So just going by numbers is not an accurate measure what's going on... I still use my PC for class and I work through the apps.
I do not like the majority of Apple products... (however, the iPod touch makes for a nice MP3 player (but not M4A))...
I lived through the nutroll of the PC development of the late 1970's and early 1980's where there were multiple OS's out there, and it was awful. This is how I view Apple's OS, the one that failed as a "PC" alternative. Yes, Microsoft has some OS issues, but at least it is the industry standard, and everybody is familiar with it.
This trend in iPad style computing reminds me of the early cell phone era, with the monster sized cellphones of yesteryear.
To really make the iPads useful, many have bought an accompanying keyboard, which, really, just turned the iPad into a limited, mini-laptop... So now what's point??? And using the iPad as a camera or a video capturing device makes the user look absolutely ridiculous...
It appears that a product was made without a purpose, and now there are needy applications being created to make it purposeful... which is logically backwards... there should have been a need, then a product created to fulfill the need...
I have been a Windows user since 3.1 and Android user since 2.2 and it is very likely our vision of things are clouded by our technology preferences. For example, my wife switched from Android to iOS when the iPhone 5s came out and frankly, I don't get it. I find it hard to navigate, it feels claustrophobic, and just not customizable enough for me. Last night, I couldn't set an alarm on it because I couldn't locate a Clock app - I gave up after 5 minutes and just dragged my butt off the bed to locate my Android phone in the living room, set the alarm, and get back to bed - all under 5minutes.
Anyways, this psychological barrier you mention is non-existent with the Surface. Why? The 2 UIs. You have the desktop for work, you have the Metro for play. With a touch of a button, you can switch between the 2 - even more seamless. Microsoft's approach has enabled me to carry just 2 devices - the tablet/laptop hybrid and my phone - without sacrificing my ability to produce and have fun.
The Walkman, portable DVD player, the calculator, the GPS all used to be separate devices but look where we are now. The technology to make high-quality fanless tablet hybrids is here now and this I believe will make the consumer (Enterprise already knows this) rethink their reasons for carrying multiple devices very soon.
Loading ...
Apple vs. Microsoft Marketing: Spark vs. Spork
Posted by: Chris Maxcer June 9, 2014 05:00 AMDuring Apple’s WWDC keynote event last week, it became exceedingly clear that we won’t be seeing a converged iPad/MacBook device anytime soon. Unlike Microsoft, with its Surface Pro 3 effort, Apple doesn’t seem at all interested in forcing iOS and OS X into a single unified operating system. In fact, Apple doesn’t seem to be interested in making OS X touch-based or touch-enabled. Nor does it appear to be working too hard to turn the iPad into a multitasking, laptop-replacing workhorse that resembles anything like the Microsoft Surface Pro 3.
Keyboards are the primary interface most of us associate with actual work. When I sit down to write an article, edit a spreadsheet, send a volley of emails, etc., I do so at a keyboard. That's what I started using back in 1984, and it's been generally excellent for my purposes since then.
Until someone either a) figures out how to build a real functioning keyboard into a tablet or b) figures out how to get millions and millions of people over their keyboard addiction, the convergence of laptop, tablet, and phone can't take place.
And yes, I know the Surface has a keyboard in the cover. I've tried it and don't like it.
The fact that one can create hybrids (i.e., phablets on the one side and combo-tablet/laptops on the other) is one thing, but when you consider the upcoming ubiquity of wearables, in-car systems and in-home systems and who knows how many more devices, I'd say the notion of creating and emphasizing continuity from one device to another as Apple is doing is so much more practical and far-reaching.
For those that are experienced and familiar with particular operating systems, more power to you, but I would argue that this familiarity and not simply "preference" may cloud your vision of the future.
--CM
I have however seen people using the iPad to capture pictures... and I agree that it looks pretty silly.
The ipad is great at what it's meant for. Consumption of media, games, light email, social networking, etc. It's also possible to use it for some content generation, though I do not think it's ideal for that, nor was it meant to be ideal for that.
the agenda is purposely compatible with Apple products, and is mostly compatible with PC's.
So just going by numbers is not an accurate measure what's going on... I still use my PC for class and I work through the apps.
I do not like the majority of Apple products... (however, the iPod touch makes for a nice MP3 player (but not M4A))...
I lived through the nutroll of the PC development of the late 1970's and early 1980's where there were multiple OS's out there, and it was awful. This is how I view Apple's OS, the one that failed as a "PC" alternative. Yes, Microsoft has some OS issues, but at least it is the industry standard, and everybody is familiar with it.
This trend in iPad style computing reminds me of the early cell phone era, with the monster sized cellphones of yesteryear.
To really make the iPads useful, many have bought an accompanying keyboard, which, really, just turned the iPad into a limited, mini-laptop... So now what's point??? And using the iPad as a camera or a video capturing device makes the user look absolutely ridiculous...
It appears that a product was made without a purpose, and now there are needy applications being created to make it purposeful... which is logically backwards... there should have been a need, then a product created to fulfill the need...
Anyways, this psychological barrier you mention is non-existent with the Surface. Why? The 2 UIs. You have the desktop for work, you have the Metro for play. With a touch of a button, you can switch between the 2 - even more seamless. Microsoft's approach has enabled me to carry just 2 devices - the tablet/laptop hybrid and my phone - without sacrificing my ability to produce and have fun.
The Walkman, portable DVD player, the calculator, the GPS all used to be separate devices but look where we are now. The technology to make high-quality fanless tablet hybrids is here now and this I believe will make the consumer (Enterprise already knows this) rethink their reasons for carrying multiple devices very soon.