This blog post got a lot of traffic. Most of the time I don’t respond to comments about my English because I am a dyslectic blogger but this post got a lot of kind responds – from all over the world. People really like the idea in the post but did not understand it because of bad English (or maybe they were not dyslectic enough).
Updated post: With corrected English (I got help):
Today we tested one of the first iPads that arrived to Sweden. My first question is simple: Will Toys”R”Us buy Apple? Why? Because a lot of Apple’s products are fun toys for big children (and kids are what we call early adapters).
Below: Original “dyslectic post”:
Did today test one of the first iPad arrived to Sweden. My first question is simple: Will Toys”R”Us buy Apple? Why? Because a lot of Apple products are fun toys for big children (and kids are what we call early adopters).
One thing that strikes me regarding Apple, is the discussion of intrusion in others patents.
First Apple suing for intrution in there patents, and now Apple is beeing sued for intrution in others patents, when introducing iPad.
So, I agree, sell the company to Toys’R’Us …
Good point. Even toys have patent. The line between playing and working is more ore less gone with the iPhone and other toys from Apple.
I wholeheartedly disagree, while the iPad is limited to the iPhone OS ecosystem it offers laptop-like options that the iphone is unable to achieve. As a small business owner who lugs around his macbook + charger throughout Stockholm the idea of not having to lug it around an have constant 3G connections to the internet is beyond appealing to me (the 3G version).
Plus being a person who pays attention to tech I’ll know when the next model is coming out and be able to sell the 1G version and purchase the next version without adding money to the picture. The thing we should hope for is that Telia allows it on their 4G network…
Thanks Dee, good points. My question is, would you buy the iPad ore the technology if it was not from the Apple brand?
Hey Stefan it’s been a long time! Good question and yes it’s because it’s Apple. I have an iPhone and already know the OS and what’s it’s capable of plus Apple’s user experience is second to none. They’ve also shown that they are excellent judges in creating “new” markets and utilizing them to the fullest extent. A lot of people complain about them not using OS X but I tend to agree that if you look at what a tablet computer is supposed to be then portability along with battery life should be of utmost importance and I don’t think a full version of Snow Leopard would allow for either.
Hey Dee, yes it been to long time. Interesting how big part technology is in your experience of the Apple brand (my interpreting). Apple is performing good on a market that are performing badly, I hope that Apple get more competition soon.
Competition in the key for consumers and I hope that Andriod and Window’s Mobile 7 can provide a decent challenge for Apple. The thing that sets Apple apart is it’s obsessive compulsive attention to detailed coupled with controlling both the hardware and software. No tech company has been able to accomplish that to this point but with the sheer number of hardware options for both Android and WM7 something has to click. I do like that Microsoft has decided to require hardware standards for their software and that could eventually add an interesting twist to this competition. Google has yet to prove that their hardware foray is super serious (Nexus One) but I have faith that they’ll hit the right notes soon, hopefully.
Yes, we hope for more competition and the “gPhone” ore Microsoft could be does how rock the boat lasted Apple’s.
Apple is controlling both the hardware and software do think one big weakens in that they are not working with open source (they have the fans but lock them out).
Open source, like Android, is more an idea than a reality being that while handset makers don’t have to pay for the Android operating system it’s still closed because operators (and the handset makers themselves) don’t truly want an open source phone. To answer you question I don’t think that it hurts them in the least bit since they can promise an across the board UI experience akin to their computers’ OS.
Open source is an security problem in many fields. Soon will the mobile phones be sort of credit cards and demand much higher security – think that is one reason for why they not are open for open source. Also old corporations with alfa leaders how can’t let go of controlling everything.
But still they can not dey that open source is developing in the speed of light.
Many people have a laptop in their knee when watching tv. The kindle store is a success for Amazon. Millions of people have found a new way to access the net and consume media with iphone and other touchscreen mobile smartphones.
There are some of the reasons why it makes perfect business sense to introduce the ipad, which in essence is a media and internet consumption tool.
The ipad interface is not only playful, more importantly it is intuitive. Playfulness and intuitive experimentation are two key factors in creativity, why the ipad interface is excellent for both play and business (unless you want to be a boring businessman/woman of course…). Can’t help to think about this commercial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsvJefWOUYE&feature=youtube_gdata
Toys R Us should not buy Apple. Their Marketing dept. should buy some ipads do get more creative.
Thanks for great input Patrik. Good video. Playfulness as you pointed out is important for developing business by being creative. I think many people got upset when I did call the iPad a toy, because business people don’t like to admit that products as the iPhone and iPad are toys – they like to call it technology. But the apps/softwares that really build buzz is nothing else than social toys, I call social gaming (to ad one more word to serious business field:-).
Playfulness is much bigger business filed for Apple than computers if they admit that they are selling toys. Toys are big business for big people!!
Huh? Toys’R’Us buying Apple? How are you seeing a speciality retailer with less than 10 billion USD in assets buying a tech corporation with a cash balance of 40 billion USD and a market cap that just made them pass Microsoft?
Other ideas:
What is I was to buy AC Milan?
What if the company that makes Beanie Babies was to buy General Electric?
What if Apple was to buy every other company on the planet?
What if the hobo down the street was to buy Nokia? (OK, that last one makes more and more sense each day…)
Hi Alf,
Thanks for fun and good points. Well, my point is that Apple is producing toys for kids in our own age and if they admit that they will sell much, much more and spread their amore for the Apple brand. Also it will secure that they not become a stiff company. iPhone is a toy, iPad is another, what’s next?