Live data from Hacker News

Tablets

paulgraham.com

41–50 of 262 posts

Re: Tablets

#41

Tablets are obviously great, but does anyone think they'll really replace cameras or GPSes? It seems to me that tablets will cut the bottom out of these markets (those with casual interest in photography or GPS or computing won't need to buy a dedicated device) but they'll never approach the quality of an SLR or a dedicated GPS. Or am I just being short-sighted?

The vast majority of people have a casual interest in photography or GPS devices.

Re: Tablets

#42
Apple's tablets are just one aspect of this etherealization. The real hero here is software. From the ability to create a physical three dimensional object to the manipulation of DNA - software makes it possible.

What's reassuring is that Apple doesn't have control over all the hardware interfaces that make (and will make) this possible.

Re: Tablets

#43

Tablets are obviously great, but does anyone think they'll really replace cameras or GPSes? It seems to me that tablets will cut the bottom out of these markets (those with casual interest in photography or GPS or computing won't need to buy a dedicated device) but they'll never approach the quality of an SLR or a dedicated GPS. Or am I just being short-sighted?

It's going to take some major technology leaps for cell phone cameras to replace SLR's,but I do think they're already cannibalizing the point-and-shoot market, which was a pretty big part of the camera market (certainly by volume at least).

I think if phones started coming with a better flash, it be very hard to justify bothering with a separate point-and-shoot camera. Although, to be fair, most point-and-shoots have a pretty crappy flash as well.

Re: Tablets

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the fact that the iPad is itself a closed...errr, integrated...system counter your argument? I'm all for open standards, API's and community cooperation of course. I just don't think that Apple is necessarily the antithesis. The fundamental difference between Apple's position today to Microsoft's monoculture of the previous decade lies in their motivations. Apple wants to make great stuff. Microsoft wanted to…

Right, Apple's shareholders are out there saying "I'm so glad we're making great stuff". Apple wants to make money, no matter how much fandom we bestow upon Apple for having a great design aesthetic, Apple is a corporation whose aim is to make money. Apple is a golden boy because they aren't Microsoft, and if we keep comparing the two, we never give Apple an honest shake.

I don't know. I've always gotten the feeling that Jobs is a perfectionist to the point of it almost being a pathology. I doubt his motivations are primarily focused on money, especially at this point.

Re: Tablets

#45

Tablets are obviously great, but does anyone think they'll really replace cameras or GPSes? It seems to me that tablets will cut the bottom out of these markets (those with casual interest in photography or GPS or computing won't need to buy a dedicated device) but they'll never approach the quality of an SLR or a dedicated GPS. Or am I just being short-sighted?

I think you are spot on in the SLR department (point-and-shoots are another story), but I do believe the dedicated GPS dies via the tablet. I used and iPad 3G recently as one and it worked great, much better than the generic GPS I was given. I figure with tablets and car manufacture solutions then dedicated GPS will go to a niche market for specialized tasks.

Re: Tablets

#46
This isn't that surprising or revolutionary, it's all just part of the inevitable movement towards ubiquitous computing. It's obvious that we won't always be reliant upon one device's built-in sensors to constantly gather and supply relevant data in real-time, and inevitably we'll have an incredibly integrated network of real-time, physically collocated devices.

For now, tablets are great. And Apple is great at supplying them. But by no means does this mean anyone will be enslaved to Apple in the long term – someone else has the opportunity to create an open platform that enables any and all technologies to communicate with each other. Someone else will have to sell this platform to businesses, governments and, most importantly, consumers. And someone else will have to create the other, new interfaces by which we access and derive meaning from this data collection. And the challenge of preventing this from being too closed, too proprietary, is what will distinguish the best approach from the most profitable approach, and where we as users can choose to avoid a "client monoculture."

The tablet approach is just a step in an ongoing direction. It's way bigger than this.

Re: Tablets

#47
post #21

What blows my mind is that I might have been able to see this coming in the 80's - but Buckminster Fuller saw it coming in 19 fricking 38 . That man was incredible.

It was already happening then. It's older than computers. In his day it meant e.g. replacing cams with variable speed motors.

Re: Tablets

#48
"For historical reasons, the device in your pocket or purse - the one that you use to browse the Internet and send email, is called a "phone." We need a new name for that thing." Scott Adams. He suggests calling them "head". http://www.dilbert.com/blog/entry/phone/

On a side note, I really need an innovation for keys, they scratch my iPhone! So, go, that new yc company, go!

Re: Tablets

#49

Tablets are obviously great, but does anyone think they'll really replace cameras or GPSes? It seems to me that tablets will cut the bottom out of these markets (those with casual interest in photography or GPS or computing won't need to buy a dedicated device) but they'll never approach the quality of an SLR or a dedicated GPS. Or am I just being short-sighted?

They'll take the bottom out today; but see The Innovator's Dilemma for where that will lead tomorrow.

Re: Tablets

#50

Worth noting here that most analysts feel that the reason the original iPod was successful was that it only did one thing in an extremely friendly format. I think the key question here is whether or not the app-universe grows in size until consumers desire separation of widgets again. I know from my own experience that I found I maximize productivity by having separate devices responsible for separate things. For ins…

I think this is actually part of Apple's strategy. People have collections of used iOS device gathering dust or going on eBay. Now they can hook the old iPhone up as a GPS or alarm clock, or whatever and buy the newest model guilt free.
Post reply on HN