iPad: Your thoughts?

[Chyron8472]

True.

That reminds me of a "PC vs. Mac" spoof on youtube where they both get upgraded...

PC gets upgraded to Vista, meaning that he gets escorted off stage and comes back with a different shirt.

Mac gets "upgraded," meaning that he gets escorted off stage and promptly shot, to be replaced by an entirely different person.

[Rather Dashing]

Yeah, but I don't care too much about Macs. Because Macs aren't really affecting anything I do, at least in a negative way. Macs aren't the major players. Some of the ideas about user interface from the Macs have made it over to Windows and other devices, and generally it's been a good change.

As far as mac computers go, I can live and let live far away from me. That tune might change if they started to affect the entire computer market and made locked-down hardware the norm, but they aren't and they're not.

[Chyron8472]

Yes, well I hear you about iPods and iTunes.

iTunes' only redeeming quality is its large music store. Though I don't have a name-brand iPod, I've attempted to use iTunes as a media player and it certainly does blow goats. (Give me WinAmp any day.)

This is to say that I'll buy music from Lala.com or Amazon if I can help it.

edit: I do have an mp3 player (what do you take me for?) but it's a SanDisk Sansa Fuze and it works just fine.
I never can see the appeal of people wanting to pay $60 per month or more per phone for a device that lets me watch YouTube when I'm driving down the highway. I do know that $60 per month per phone is the low end, which means that if a family had 3 iPhones, they'd be paying at least $180 per month on cell service alone. That's like buying 6 $30 TTG game series per month.

[Avistew]

You know, I've never had an Apple mp3 player. It's not like you have to, is it? Or is it worse in the US? I always saw Sony or Phillips or Archos as bigger brands than Apple. iPods and the like always seemed to me to only have that small cult following who bought them just because they were Apple products, and the only reason they weren't bankrupt yet was that there products are so expansive they only need to sell just a little.

Are they that big in the US?

[Chyron8472]

I never researched the numbers, but it seems to me like 1 out of every 3 or 4 people I know has one.

It thoroughly annoys me.

[Avistew]

Originally Posted by Chyron8472

I never researched the numbers, but it seems to me like 1 out of every 3 or 4 people I know has one.

It thoroughly annoys me.

I know one person who used to have an iPod, that was given to her by her boyfriend who was a total Mac person. Which I totally get because it's apparently what works best for his job.
It broke 3 times in the time I had my p3 player of the time (the one with replaceable AA batteries. I loved that thing. I was totally careless with it though, can't remember how I finally destroyed it but it probably involved dumping it in water or something similar). I'm pretty sure now she has a different one since it wouldn't be covered by the warranty anymore by now.

The other people I know with mp3 players have other brands though. Honestly, I always saw iPods as something like, say, Ferrari. It doesn't work better but it makes you look rich, and not a lot of people have one, and those who do tend to all be in the same circles.

Maybe it's different here. I don't know, since in Canada the only other person I know with a mp3 player is my father in law, and that's because we bought one for him.

[Rather Dashing]

I've always seen vague numbers like 78-92% of the MP3 player market.

In their Q1 2010 earnings report, they did touch on the subject of how many iPods they sell:

Originally Posted by Apple Earnings Report

Apple sold 21 million iPods during the quarter, representing an eight percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter.

- http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/01/25results.html

So that's 21 million in a quarter of a year, if that says anything.

[Avistew]

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

I've always seen vague numbers like 78-92% of the MP3 player market.

O.O

I find that surprising. They're so much more expensive! Why do people buy them instead of the cheaper ones? Do they have some secret advantage I don't know of?

[Rather Dashing]

Originally Posted by avistew

O.O

I find that surprising. They're so much more expensive! Why do people buy them instead of the cheaper ones? Do they have some secret advantage I don't know of?

I don't have a very reliable source for the percentage, just the number sold in the first quarter of 2010. I'd believe it, though, from my own anecdotal experience.

Also, I don't know. It's an extremely prominent brand. I have never owned an iPod in my life. My sister has a Touch, and it's a neat little device, but I just couldn't justify the expense to myself.

[Avistew]

Found some stuff in French (I'm leaving the French version for people who speak French, since it's always better than a - rushed - translation):

En octobre 2004, il dominait largement le marché étatsunien avec 92 % (82 % en 2003) des ventes de baladeurs numériques à disque dur et 70 % du marché total. Pour la même année, la présence d'Apple sur le marché mondial des baladeurs numériques est estimée à 21 %

"In October 2004 [the brand] dominated by far the US market with 92% (82% in 2003) of hard drive mp3 player sales and 70% of the whole market. (TrN: I'm guessing they mean all mp3 players, hard drive or not?). For that same year, the Apple presence on the world market for mp3 players is estimated at 21%"

En Europe, en 2007, selon GfK, l'iPod disposait de 27 % des parts de marché, tandis qu'aux USA, en juillet 2008, l'iPod représentait 73 % des ventes de baladeurs numériques.

"In Europe, in 2007, according to GfK the iPod did (what's the proper verb in English?) 27% of the market, while in the USA in July 2008 it accounted for 73% of MP3 player sales."

So, definitely a lot less popular in Europe (or worldwide) than in the US I would say. And I'm going to say it would be lower in France than, say, Britain for language reasons, so I'd assume a lower number for France than for the whole of Europe.

[Chyron8472]

when I say "1 in 3 or 4 people I know has one," I'm speaking specifically of iPhones. I hope I made that clear.

Still, it annoys the crap out of me, not to mention boggles the mind why people pay so much for a damn [edit]iPhone (which is just an iPod Touch with a cell phone app on it and 3G coverage.)[/edit]

[Avistew]

Well, I don't get why so many people have cellphones to begin with, so I'm certainly not going to understand why the have iPhones specifically.

But... I don't know, they should be allowed to spend their money the way they want. I wouldn't mind if they bought something cheaper and gave me the difference, but it's not going to keep me up at night that they don't :P

As long as they don't try nagging me about how I should get one, of course.

(I don't know anyone with an iPhone. My parents wanted to get me one when it first came out, though, but I told them I certainly didn't see why I'd ever want one and they didn't insist.)

[Rather Dashing]

Originally Posted by avistew

Well, I don't get why so many people have cellphones to begin with, so I'm certainly not going to understand why the have iPhones specifically.

Oh, I don't understand why anyone has land line phones anymore. Why would you?

When you call a conventional, wall telephone, you are being connected to a place. Generally a house, with multiple people living in it. When you call a cellphone, you are contacting a person. Voicemails can be more personal, you can send text messages, and the person can be contacted even if they're not home. If you have a cellphone, you get the benefit of never being "out of contact" with the world if you don't want to be.

Anyway, I can see the appeal of the iPhone on top of normal cellphones. Web browsing is a breeze on the thing, it has a large application library which, with the benefit of 3G coverage, brings a lot of net-enabled applications anywhere you go. It's all about the size of the thing: the iPhone can fit a lot of connectivity in your pocket and allow you to access it anywhere you go.

It's slick and cool. I just hate what they're doing on principle. Also, it costs a lot of money.

[Avistew]

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

Oh, I don't understand why anyone has land line phones anymore. Why would you?

When you call a conventional, wall telephone, you are being connected to a place. Generally a house, with multiple people living in it. When you call a cellphone, you are contacting a person.

It's much, much cheaper, especially since to match your second point, we'd need to own two cellphones.
And I don't see the point of paying more for something I wouldn't use. Emails and chatrooms work fine for communicating with people, and at least you know that when they read it it's because they want to.
With phones you just disturb whatever it is they were doing at the time. Honestly, I'd do without phones at all if I could, but you need a number for so many things, we have to have a phone of some type.

(Also, in France cellphones have different numbers than house phones do, and most things require a home phone-type number, so if you have a cellphone it's not instead but on top of.)

I get the "personal" thing though. I used to have a cellphone: when I lived with my parents and didn't have my own Internet. I lost all need for one when I moved on my own though. Especially in Paris with all the phone booths in case I needed to call from outside (which happened twice in three years, both times a 30s conversation).

Here, I just don't go out enough for it to be relevant, and why my husband is out he's at work, so I can call his work phone.

[GuruGuru214]

I used to get by just fine without a cell phone. Then I went on to college and it became an essential part of life for communicating with my family and friends. But still, I got along just fine without text messaging. Then two years later, we upgraded our phones and, at my sister's insistence, had texting added to our plan. Now, I would be very much out of the loop with my friends without it.

What I'm getting at here is that it's a lot easier to feel that you don't need something when you don't have it, but once you've got it, it can feel much more essential.

Another example is the iPod. In high school, I thought it might be cool to have an MP3 player, but I knew iPods were horrendously expensive and I was getting by just fine with this CD player I had. I'd gotten it for the price of headphones, having found it on the ground one day, and it played MP3 discs, so I was happy with it. Then my parents bought me an iPod as a graduation present. I have to say, knowing how miserable the interface is in OSX and especially in iTunes, it's amazing to me that this product came from Apple. It handles my music, videos, and photos with a very easy to use interface.

Before I had one, I couldn't justify the price, but owning one, I've realized two things. One: It's a very nice little device. Two: The price of the iPod Classic is much easier for me to justify when I realize that the thing is basically a portable external hard drive with a music player attached to it. Portable hard drives are expensive, so given the cost of the iPod and how much file space it has on it, I don't feel nearly so bad about the price.

[Rather Dashing]

Originally Posted by avistew

It's much, much cheaper, especially since to match your second point, we'd need to own two cellphones.

Well, each person would need one, anyway. And they're so prolific now, at least in the states.

Also, "Cheaper" isn't always true. I run my cellphone off pre-paid cards. After the initial investment for the phone itself(because it wasn't subsidized by a contract), I ended up paying not too much per month at all, because I only pay for my outgoing calls.

For a home phone solution, I use Skype. I talk to my family and a lot of my friends through Skype-to-Skype calls. My computer is my landline, so my cellphone is there for when I need to get in contact with someone and I'm not at home.

And I don't see the point of paying more for something I wouldn't use. Emails and chatrooms work fine for communicating with people, and at least you know that when they read it it's because they want to.
With phones you just disturb whatever it is they were doing at the time.

Commonly, if you don't want to receive messages, you silence the phone. If the phone's on and set to notify the person(via vibrate or ring), it's because they're out but open for communication.

Honestly, I'd do without phones at all if I could, but you need a number for so many things, we have to have a phone of some type.

I always put my cell number.

(Also, in France cellphones have different numbers than house phones do, and most things require a home phone-type number, so if you have a cellphone it's not instead but on top of.)

....yeah, I'd hate that.

Originally Posted by GuruGuru214

Before I had one, I couldn't justify the price, but owning one, I've realized two things. One: It's a very nice little device. Two: The price of the iPod Classic is much easier for me to justify when I realize that the thing is basically a portable external hard drive with a music player attached to it. Portable hard drives are expensive, so given the cost of the iPod and how much file space it has on it, I don't feel nearly so bad about the price.

Eh, I'm happy with my generic player. If I wanted to spend iPod-level cash on something, it'd probably be the nook or the Kindle, because I read a lot more than I listen to music, and those two devices just don't have "equally good" generic alternatives.

[Avistew]

Originally Posted by GuruGuru214

What I'm getting at here is that it's a lot easier to feel that you don't need something when you don't have it, but once you've got it, it can feel much more essential.

I agree. But I personally see that as "fake needs". Or "created needs" if you will. Things you could live fine without, that are nice to have but can make you think "how could I live without it?". That's pretty common in our society.

I had a cellphone for 5 years, I know how useful they can be. I also know I don't need one. And yes, owning one for these five years caused me to create a lifestyle for myself that made it necessary to have one. "I couldn't live without a cellphone because, what if someone wants to call me while I'm out?"
Well, they can call me at home and leave a message if it's important, and if it's not important I haven't missed anything.
I'm much happier without a cellphone than I ever was with one.

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

I ended up paying not too much per month at all, because I only pay for my outgoing calls.

That would make it free for me. Which also means that there really isn't a point of buying one to begin with.

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

For a home phone solution, I use Skype. I talk to my family and a lot of my friends through Skype-to-Skype calls.

I would definitely rather do that and not have a landline, but things tend to require a phone number. Maybe I should check it out in case it's an option. Then I could do without a landline, too.

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

my cellphone is there for when I need to get in contact with someone and I'm not at home.

Doesn't happen to me. Honestly when I think about it, most of the reasons that would cause me to go out would also cause me to have to turn my phone off out of politeness. Theatre, restaurant... And wherever I am, if I need to place a call, they'll have a phone. But I've never had to ask for that before. And why would I? Everything can wait until I'm back home. Although I'm going to be honest with you, the only person I call from my home is my husband when he's at work, and even that is rare.

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

Commonly, if you don't want to receive messages, you silence the phone. If the phone's on and set to notify the person(via vibrate or ring), it's because they're out but open for communication.

Thanks, I'm aware how they work I had one for five years. But I don't see the point in getting something that would either be off or that I would use while I'm at home.

Honestly, I can't think of a single time in my whole life that a phone call didn't disturb me. I find phones rude, annoying and stressful. I'd much rather check my emails whenever I personally want to.
I'd do the same with a cellphone: keep it off except to check for messages. So it would feel wasteful to even have one. As for text messages, who to send them to? All of my friends live in another continent and I don't know anyone here with a cellphone.

I might use a cellphone if it was a gift and I didn't spend money every month on it. Then I'd only have it to be called on, as a number. But even then, I don't think it would be worth the electricity it would cost to keep it charged.

[GuruGuru214]

You strike me as an unusual sort of person in terms of how you interact (or don't) with other people. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing. Overall, this age of being constantly available for contact is pretty okay with me, but there are times when I don't really want to talk to people, so I can see how the lack of cell phone might appeal to you.

Another thing about my cell phone is that my mother has some trouble with her health. My bedroom is in the basement and hard to yell down to, and she'll often call my cell phone when she needs help with something. Also, on Thursday, I went with her to the hospital for a blood transfusion (her red blood cell count was low, so her doctor ordered one). Upon our arrival, the doctor that saw her decided that he wanted to do a couple examination procedures on her and that she would have to be admitted overnight. I was at the hospital from 6:30 AM to 8:30 PM, following her around all over the place. My cell phone was invaluable as people were trying to get in touch all day to find out what was happening, as I bounced all over the hospital.

[Avistew]

I'm not saying cellphones are never useful, nor that I'll never have one again. I just feel I don't need one with my current situation and lifestyle, so I'm not getting one.
I tend to be annoyed with how people get things they say they "need", then complain they cost too much, when they often don't even need them in the first place.

Right now the people I know where I live are my husband and his family. I live with my husband, and I can do without calling his family constantly :P
My friends are either living in France, which means I'd need an international type of plan to talk to them (and need to take the time difference into account), or people I met online. In both cases, communicating through instant messaging or emails makes much more sense to me.

I also haven't quite recovered from having a cellphone. The advantage is that people can reach you wherever you are. The problem is that people can reach you wherever you are. And leaving the phone off tends to result in people complaining that you're leaving your phone off.
It was nice in many ways, but in other it felt like a prison. If I decided to just take a walk and not bring it with me, I'd have messages complaining that I didn't have the phone with me.
Now people don't complain that I don't have a cellphone. They did at first and quickly adapted to it. Well, now I live in Canada anyways, but even when I was in France.

We ended up planning things a bit more, instead of saying "let's meet around such place" and then calling each other to find each other, we'd give a clear meeting spot and time. Things like that. But all in all, I preferred it greatly because before it ended up too often with people calling while I was already on my way and canceling on me or something. Not having a cellphone forced people to be more reliable, only say they'd meet me if they actually wanted to, and only cancel earlier than at the last minute.

I often joke that I'll get a cellphone when I have a lover so that I can talk to him without my husband risking picking up the phone.
I think what I mean is that I can see how a cellphone can bring you some independence. However it can also bring you a lot of dependence, I feel. I enjoyed a lot of things about having one, but there are also lots of things that improved after I got rid of it.

Either way, if I get one again, I'll have to try hard to find a simple one. I don't like all the "has a camera and a mp3 player and lots of other options" ones. I want something simple. I'd want a phone that's ONLY a phone.
Okay, it can give time too, but that's it.

[GuruGuru214]

I didn't mean to imply that you were saying they were never useful, and I certainly get how your lifestyle pretty much renders a cell phone useless to you right now. However, if you ever go back to having one, I think you'd be hard pressed to find one that doesn't have some sort of camera built in. It seems to be pretty much a standard thing these days, at least on all the phones I've seen lately. And it's nice to have every once in a while, but still, I rarely use mine. With no flash and such low resolution, it's not like I can really use it for any sort of decent pictures.