Mr Grumpy just bought an iPad for the office. No camera, not even a USB port.
And a $99 “deal” for sales support for a year – because if I need Apple’s help, they’ll take one phone call from me and that’s it.
If I wanted the spec’d up G3 version, I’m north of $A1,000 and on a two-month wait list. No thanks. The kit is just not worth it.
And I’m not feeling too moral about buying something that Chinese workers get paid less than $5 a day to put together, either.
Not to mention it’s also too heavy.
The first generation of tablet computers came out about 10 years ago – and they were far too heavy, dying sad and lonely in the warehouse of a million failed technology products. The iPad is much, much better. But not good enough.
Steve Jobs’ PR flacks bang on about 2 million sales – a drop in the bucket on a planet with 6 billion people on it.
Sadly, in this part of the world, we’re all still excited by the iPhone; and so we appear have responded in a disproportionately euphoric manner to the iPad.
iPhone – ha. Americans – the fastest of technology adopters – have moved on to smart phones with the Google Android handset. A better device, by all accounts.
The same will happen with the iPad.
Apple may be first to market, but it won’t catch the wave of the early and late majority of users. It never has. Never will. And that – for publishers – is where the bucks exist for advertising and subscriptions.
You gotta love Apple for leading the charge – and well done to publishers who have struck the first apps – especially Sport & Style from Fairfax Media (we love your app, guys!).
But when it comes to tech, first to market is rarely best to market in the medium term.
Newspaper execs who think Apple is the answer are asking the wrong questions.
The game has barely begun.
Oh, and will it change newspapers and journalism – of course it will.