Why Apple Is Wrestling With Relevance

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm a little confused about your statement about using all 16GB on an iPod nano. I mean, if you have 16GB of music, you're going to use up all 16GB, right? I, for one, have almost filled up my 16GB Zune, and I think I have a relatively small music collection.

Not to say that I disagree about the price points, of course. I think it would be much more reasonable to place the 8GB nano at $120 and the 16GB at $150.
 
I don't understand apple TV at all. It allows me to rent tv shows and movies for a fee? My cable box with On Demand already does that (in HD even) with an awful lot of those shows being no charge and with other shows/movies being comparable to the prices apple is talking. And for what's not on my cable box, there's Hulu.
 
[citation][nom]BTanner[/nom]I think you've got it wrong with Apple TV. It could be big. I'm already considering ditching my expensive TV subscription in favor of an Apple TV so I can rent shows/movies and stream content from my computer.[/citation]
Why wouldn't you just get a Roku box for the same price that can do 1080p and you can then purchase from Amazon VOD the same shows that Apple TV would rent to you from ABC and FOX.
 
Very little from the Apple event excited me. It seems to be more of the same from Apple. Rehashed iPods and a device with little to no real value (just like Apple TV has always been) is all we seem to have gotten. This will be another year of upgrades for the sake of upgrades from Apple.
 
@Awax : I agree with you to some extent. However, you have to keep in mind that people buy products while thinking of tomorrow. 720p might be the average resolution for current content, but with Super HD and UHDTV coming in really fast, you can be assured that 720p will soon be a thing of the past. Technology evolves fast and there's (thankfully) no way to stop it. Everything you buy now will sooner or later become obsolete. However, there's no way in hell I'm gonna buy a brand new product that is already obsolete.
 
Redesign for the sake of redesign is more like it.

Seems like they'd rather just throw their ideas out into the public right away as finished products rather than doing any type of focus group testing so they keep their "ideas" secretive. Kind of like their aesthetic design of the iPhone 4 antenna that ended up not functioning so well for them in the real world.
 
The beauty of Apple's business model is that their customers are such fanatics they will buy overpriced underpowered devices just because apple sells it. It doesn't have to be reasonably priced. It doesn't have to have any features that set it apart from the competition.

I've been thumbed down for saying it before and I will be this time as well I'm sure. Apple is a fad like parachute pants. They'll fade into the distance in a few years.
 
[citation][nom]bamslang[/nom] Look at the this gens nanos (or last I guess now)… I have one and I hate it compared to the previous version. Who at Apple thought it would be smart to take off the controls and put them on the headphones?[/citation]

I meant shuffle, not nano.

 
[citation][nom]ohseus[/nom]Do you have any idea how many phone carriers are kicking themselves for that as well?[/citation][citation][nom]ohseus[/nom]Do you have any idea how many phone carriers are kicking themselves for that as well?[/citation]

None, now that Android is out? Sure, companies might have been kicking themselves at first, but now they are probably thinking god they didn't get bundled with a closed source, single manufacturer product like the iPhone.

I’m willing to bet that Apple is kicking themselves harder than Verizon is for not pairing up from the get go. Sure Apple had huge market share, but the second Android came out, it overtook them. Now Apple is running to Verizon, T-mobile and the likes with their tail between their legs, trying to get them to adopt the iPhone. Why? Because people didn’t like AT&T and the iPhone, they liked having a smart phone with apps. And don’t get me wrong, people did and do like their iPhones, but the majority of people simply like the idea of an iPhone and don’t care who makes it. Assuming same features of a product, only a moron would go with a carrier whose network sucks and a product whose prices are higher. Now that all carriers have a phone that can compete with the iPhone, if not beat it, both AT&T and Apple are seeing their market share fly out the window.
 
iFace would have been better name for PING. If you are going to sound like a competitor at least sound like the one your competing against, lol.
 
Interesting, i find everything here just about useless... The newer Itouch is definitely a plus, but if you already have an Itouch why buy a new one for just a few new features. I know it's the same deal every year, but i would rather buy the old nano than the new one.
 
But can it play...Flac files. And seriously Ping is not there worst name. I think the pad was. Gotta go, Iping.
 
I've been an apple fan for years, owning macs dating back before there was an iMac.

Apple has enjoyed a string of successful products but I do think its struggling to continue to innovate brand new products. apple-tv is lame. Why should I rent a tv show for 99 cents when I can just use my dvr. Only two networks means there's no inventory and I'm not holding my breath that other networks will be beating down the door to be added
 
[citation][nom]bamslang[/nom]None, now that Android is out? Sure, companies might have been kicking themselves at first, but now they are probably thinking god they didn't get bundled with a closed source, single manufacturer product like the iPhone. I’m willing to bet that Apple is kicking themselves harder than Verizon is for not pairing up from the get go. Sure Apple had huge market share, but the second Android came out, it overtook them. Now Apple is running to Verizon, T-mobile and the likes with their tail between their legs, trying to get them to adopt the iPhone. Why? Because people didn’t like AT&T and the iPhone, they liked having a smart phone with apps. And don’t get me wrong, people did and do like their iPhones, but the majority of people simply like the idea of an iPhone and don’t care who makes it. Assuming same features of a product, only a moron would go with a carrier whose network sucks and a product whose prices are higher. Now that all carriers have a phone that can compete with the iPhone, if not beat it, both AT&T and Apple are seeing their market share fly out the window.[/citation]

OK genius.... You have no idea what you are talking about.
Apple had an exclusivity contract with AT& which prevented them from going to Verison and other mobile service companies. So it's not that those companies did not want to sell the iPhone, and most of the iPhone users although disliking AT&T are still going there because of the iPhone....

Do you know what will happen to Android sales at Verison as iPhone hits their stores? Imagine a downward slope..... yeah... brace for January Verison iPhone sales...

THe problem with Android is not that it offers alternative mobile OS but that it embraces way to many hardware platforms, making it more difficult to develop apps for.
That is why Epic and other game developers are producing games for the iPhone and the iOS.. because it has a solid hardware platform...

 
No matter what Apple makes & how much useless it is, fanbois in hordes will always buy it.
I agree with the others in this forum regarding the iPod classic. It is the only worthy tech from Apple.
 
disagreed on ALMOST every count.

The shuffle wasn't a big hoopla. They combined the best of both designs and dropped the price. yay.

The nano is a great choice. The current nano was getting irrelevant and outdated. Who watched movies on that thing anyway? Or took video? Really? Get a touch for that. The nano is all about music. It's the staple iPod - small, you can clip it, it can be used to accessorize (something people loved about the shuffle). The touch screen makes perfect sense - make it smaller but maintain a screen. There ARE physical buttons for volume on the device AND the headphones. The headphones also have play/pause control, track forward and track back, as well as voice over. Tons of third party headphones have this same feature nowadays too, so it's not an apple only thing.

IMO, very smart how they re-focuesed the nano and made it small. The shuffle design was a good choice to find the best fit (and yes the nano and shuffle are very different). Criticize the nano price if you want, but Apple never had trouble selling them at $150 and still won't.

The touch is a great update and just became an AWESOME device. It was good before, but with HD video, facetime, the fast processor, game center, etc... This is the PDA device to beat.

AppleTV was the only dissapointment. I blame that on cable companies though. I'd like to see a monthly subscription fee instead, or at least as an option. 1080p and gigabit ethernet should have been there. More iOS apps/developers should have been enabled. But for $99 it is cool to be able to use it instead of an Airport Express for streaming from iPad/iPod/iPhone, and it's a good way to stream content from your computers to your TV. It's a good device. It just falls short of great due to a few lacking features and a lack of support from cable companies. It's time is coming... next year I would guess.
 
[citation][nom]gladiator_mohaa[/nom]iFace would have been better name for PING. If you are going to sound like a competitor at least sound like the one your competing against, lol.[/citation]

well ping does sound like bing, even though the services are completely different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom