Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Apple Orders 10 Million Tablets? 221

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the pricepoint-better-be-right dept.
Arvisp writes "According to a blog post by former Google China president Kai-Fu Lee, Apple plans to produce nearly 10 million tablets in the still-unannounced product's first year. If Lee's blog post is to be believed, Apple plans to sell nearly twice as many tablets as it did iPhones in the product's first year."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Orders 10 Million Tablets?

Comments Filter:
  • by ciderVisor (1318765) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:16PM (#30644476)

    10 tablets for $15. Only available in blue.

  • Bulk discount (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nacturation (646836) * <<moc.liamg> <ta> <noitarutcan>> on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:19PM (#30644530) Journal

    I'm thinking Jobs asked "How much per unit if we're making 10 million of them?" Then after the manufacturer crunches the numbers and comes back with the figures, Jobs will offer to pay that per-unit cost but in increments of 10,000 units.

    • by qoncept (599709)
      And then the manufacturer says, "Aw shucks, ya got me!"

      I think it's pretty naive to think it went anything like that. And probably ridiculous to believe they'd sell anywhere near that, so my guess is this story is complete BS.
    • Re:Bulk discount (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Enderandrew (866215) <enderandrew&gmail,com> on Monday January 04, 2010 @04:14PM (#30645312) Homepage Journal

      Change 10,000 to 100,000 and I wouldn't be shocked. He then states, "you want to be the manufacturer who gets this contract, because we will eventually order 10 million. And you don't want to do try and produce 10 million at once anyways. So give me the 10 million rate, and in you're in the door for 100,000 today."

      The iPhone didn't sell well initially for a couple of reasons. Most individuals didn't think they needed smart phones. Most smart phone users didn't think the iPhone was a real smart phone. It took a while for people to realize the potential of the app store, and what the iPhone could do for them. The iPhone is also tied to one network.

      The tablet could just be a plain wifi tablet with no cell phone support out of the box. You can always add a cellular modem, just like you do for your notebook today. If it isn't tied to a specific carrier, and they can launch it globally overnight (as opposed to fighting for different carrier deals in different countries) then they could easy trounce iPhone's early sales.

      Apple has customers happily paying $2,900 for laptops. If they make a nice tablet for $999, I think people will eat it up.

      • He then states, "you want to be the manufacturer who gets this contract, because we will eventually order 10 million. And you don't want to do try and produce 10 million at once anyways. So give me the 10 million rate, and in you're in the door for 100,000 today."

        Someone should tell him that his grammar sucks.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Darkness404 (1287218)

        It took a while for people to realize the potential of the app store, and what the iPhone could do for them

        I actually think it was more of "What are you talking about? Web apps are fine! We aren't making an SDK for the iPhone" moment from Steve Jobs and then he eventually realized the need for an app store. People knew it needed an app store from the start, but it wasn't until the 2.x firmware that they actually got it added.

        • Re:Bulk discount (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Dog-Cow (21281) on Monday January 04, 2010 @05:20PM (#30646412)

          Actually, I refuse to believe Jobs is that short-sighted or stupid. That hoopla over web apps was Jobs telling you what you had while he had the team feverishly working on the SDK in the background.

          He couldn't say nothing. And he couldn't say it was coming later, because if he did, no one would have touched the iPhone for the first year.

          • Re:Bulk discount (Score:5, Interesting)

            by dhovis (303725) on Monday January 04, 2010 @06:49PM (#30647654)

            Actually, I refuse to believe Jobs is that short-sighted or stupid. That hoopla over web apps was Jobs telling you what you had while he had the team feverishly working on the SDK in the background.

            He couldn't say nothing. And he couldn't say it was coming later, because if he did, no one would have touched the iPhone for the first year.

            There was more to it than that. I think there was a debate between a native SDK and using a web-based SDK (like what Palm did with WebOS). Apple was clearly working on both tracks, but WebKit was just not ready fast enough. There was evidence of this.

            One of the complaints about the web SDK approach was the lack of local storage for offline use. A SQL interface had been proposed for HTML5, but hadn't been implemented by anyone yet. Apple announced the iPhone native SDK [macrumors.com] on Oct 17. That weekend (on Oct 19th), quietly on the WebKit Blog, HTML5 client-side SQL storage was quietly checked in. [webkit.org] Coincidence? No way.

            The other thing is for certain, the iPhone native SDK was not ready in time for iPhone 1.0. The jailbreakers had to deal with regular app breakage due to Apple changing APIs. Apple wasn't screwing with the jailbreakers, they were refining the SDK. That is much easier to do if you only have a dozen in-house applications to work on. Once it was declared final for iPhone 2.0, Apple had to support it fully. There have been few changes to the public API since, though there were some for iPhone 3.0.

            Oddly enough, I think the people who wish the iPhone to be more open would have been happier if the webSDK approach had won out. It would have made it easy for other companies to support iPhone apps by including a WebKit-based browser.

        • by dangitman (862676)

          People knew it needed an app store from the start,

          This sounds like revisionist history to me. I don't think anyone outside Apple was even thinking about the concept of an "App Store." Sure, developers wanted native applications and an SDK - but they weren't thinking of an Apple-run store for applications.

          Either way, it was only an issue with developers, and the users/consumers didn't really care either way because 3rd-party apps on their phone just wasn't on the radar.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by slashkitty (21637)
            Well, some people knew. I knew. I was using a Nokia n90 at the time the iphone came out. Even it had an app store. It of course was a great idea, but the iphone wasn't first... Then started jailbreaking the phones and the AppTap store came out for the iphone... way before Apple did.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          You really think that they hadn't had the SDK in the works right from the start, that they just whipped it up after reading some Slashdot comments or something? No way. They were just doing what Apple always does -- doing things in smaller steps and only announcing things once they've been polished.

      • by jonbryce (703250)

        The first generation iPhone didn't sell well because it only supported EDGE rather than UMTS and HSDPA.

  • Naysayer (Score:4, Interesting)

    by iamapizza (1312801) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:20PM (#30644542)
    I know I'm going to sound like a naysayer, so, hey, I may as well nay say.

    Google's probably going for a tablet as well [theregister.co.uk], so 2010 will likely be the year of the tablet - in the form of iphones and iclones, with much larger screens, the next must-have at the coffee shops. But it's going to fall flat on its face. It's too close to netbooks, but not as useful as a netbook.

    Nay, I say, nay
    • by Locke2005 (849178) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:33PM (#30644710)
      iSlates aren't meant to compete with netbooks, they are meant to compete with eBook readers (while in addition offering all the functionality of an iPhone or iTouch). Think color eBook reader/video viewer along with a google maps implementation and accelerometers so you can play games just by tilting it, and you see it has gaming functionality that netbooks don't and large screen capability that smartphones don't. (Much as I love my Android phone, it is harder than heck to read things on.)
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by lowrydr310 (830514)

        iSlates aren't meant to compete with netbooks, they are meant to compete with eBook readers (while in addition offering all the functionality of an iPhone or iTouch).

        Pardon my ignorance as I'm new to the Apple rumor mill, but it is my understanding that any iSlate or Apple-branded tablet device is just a rumor. If that is the case, then how can anyone know what this mysterious and unannounced device is supposed to compete with?

        • by imamac (1083405)
          Yes...you certainly are new to the Apple Rumor Mill. You you had any real experience in the ARM you would know that question is irrelevant.
        • by Locke2005 (849178)
          You ARE new around here, aren't you? This is the "Apple rumor mill", where we all pull "facts" out of our collective asses based on wild speculation and conjecture... welcome to the club, you'll catch on in due time!
        • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:58PM (#30645030) Homepage

          Obligatory: http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/ [misterbg.org]

          It explains everything you need to know about the Apple rumor mill.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by MBGMorden (803437)

          I don't matter what it's for. The fact that Apple made it (or MAY make it in this case) means that thousands of fanboys all over the net are scrambling and grasping at straws to explain just why this is the best way to do things.

          I swear if Apple reintroduced punch cards there would be people heralding it as the UI method of the future and assuring you that if you don't like them then you're just short sighted and stuck in the past.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by dangitman (862676)

            I don't matter what it's for. The fact that Apple made it (or MAY make it in this case) means that thousands of fanboys all over the net are scrambling and grasping at straws to explain just why this is the best way to do things.

            Except I don't think it's the fanboys this time, as much as the PC industry pundits and "analysts." It's kind of weird - because much of the coverage and sensationalism seems to be coming from typical PC-centric publications that don't historically cover Apple. I'm guessing that perhaps they got tired of all the naysaying, and decided to be a part of this one to get some hits.

            On the other hand, most Apple "fanboys" I know are quite skeptical about this one. This rumor cycle is being driven by a different dy

        • by Hadlock (143607)

          It's supposed to compete with the 100s of 7 and 10" netbook sized tablets that will be coming on the market here in the next 3-8 months by other manufacturers that have already been announced to some degree. Nobody will confirm exact specifics until apple announces theirs, since they want to be able to buy the B and C quality parts at a discount that don't pass the test to be included in the apple tablet. Once they have the parts, they buy time in the production schedule of factories set up on contract for

    • Re:Naysayer (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Serious Callers Only (1022605) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:34PM (#30644722)

      In answer to you naysayers, I have only this to say:

      • by asv108 (141455)
        If I had mod points, I would mod this up. As much as I dislike Apple, you can't ignore the significance of them entering a new market.
    • by samkass (174571)

      Any gamer who's ever sat around a table playing games who can't imagine the use of a reasonably-sided, flat, touch-sensitive inexpensive networked computer with an easy-to-use SDK isn't imaginative enough. Slashdot, if anywhere, should be all over this. I would expect this product to be like the introduction of Magic: The Gathering to the gaming community.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by binarylarry (1338699)

      Poor Bill Gates is going to be crying about how they invented this stuff first.

      The funny part is they probably did.

    • It's too close to netbooks, but not as useful as a netbook.

      Alternatively, they are large eBook readers that trade the better all-condition and long-term reading ease of electronic ink with for additional functionality and color display.

      Not sure they'll succeed even so -- there's a whole of different applications in the mobile space, and getting the right combination of features to hit the sweet spots is going to be an area where there is a lot of trial and error in the next few years.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by FlyingBishop (1293238)

      Apple's tablet will be running Chrome OS.

      Jobs said that you will be "very surprised" with how you interact with the tablet. Chrome OS is the only thing that could possibly surprise me.

      Well, that or mind control, but Apple products can't have electrodes.

  • by je ne sais quoi (987177) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:20PM (#30644548)
    My favorite part of TFA:

    The iSlate is sort of a big iPod, but not really. It performs a lot of notebook-like functions, but it's not really a notebook either.

    And the author knows this how? How do we know it will be a "big iPod", it could be completely different for all we know because nobody has seen it who is allowed to talk about it. Regardless, of what it actually does, the idea that Apple will predict that it will sell 10 million tablets in the first year is hooey. If anything, I would guess they will do the opposite and order too few units in order to increase the demand for the product by creating scarcity. Just ask the Nintendo when the Wii came out or whoever made tickle me elmo how this works...

    • by Viewsonic (584922)
      I think they are assuming the OS will be the same that is on the current Touches. That it wont be using an "open" OSX install, it will be somewhat closed and using an Apple Store like the Touch.

      Until someone jailbreaks it, that is.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mosb1000 (710161)
      Manufacturers like to hype up, or pretend to have shortages but it is very bad to actually have one because you lose sales. It's worse for them to have a surplus, though, because it costs them money. That's why manufacturers tend to be conservative then they are doing their initial production runs. The goal is to get as close as possible to the actual demand, without exceeding it. This is especially true with microelectronics where waiting a year to move a product could render it obsolete and therefore w
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by berwiki (989827)
      Yea, and it backfired for Nintendo. They may be on top, but they could be standing taller.

      The hype that sold a lot of Wii's was the motion feedback. I waited outside a now defunct Circuit City twice in the early mornings when the Wii first came out but was unable to secure a device. Now, how many years later, I stopped caring. I saw a few and wasnt overly impressed with the graphics or performance of the motion-sensing.

      Too much scarcity will derail thousands of impulse buyers.
  • by Slash.Poop (1088395) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:20PM (#30644550) Homepage
    Come on now people. This is obviously bogus. Apple would be sitting on 5 million plus (low estimate) tablets when the technology changes in 6-12 months. No way they are ordering 10 million.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by fermion (181285)
      They ordered 10 million. This does not mean that they will take delivery. We might recall that Apple allegedly orders part to tie up the supply chain for other companies, and then only accepts what it actually needs to meet production [tgdaily.com]. This makes a lot of sense as they can guarantee a consistent and compatible product until the next rev. One big problem I have with other vendors is it can be hard to figure out what drivers are needed for which models, as even within a model they may use several differen
  • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:21PM (#30644562)

    Is that the American "million" or the British "million"?

    I kid, I kid... although Apple does seem to think big these days.

    • by Locke2005 (849178)
      Uh, it's billion, not million, that is interpreted differently by our friends across the pond.
      • by ickoonite (639305)
        Or was interpreted differently. 1,000,000,000-as-billion is pretty much standard here now, at least in this limey's experience. Ordinarily I would lament such a happening, but the world is better served by a consistent definition of "billion".

        Now if only you guys could sort your stupid date format out, we'd be set...
        • by jonbryce (703250)

          A billion is 10^9 in Britain, just the same as in the US. The frogs across the channel have a similar sounding word that means 10^12, and "Milliard" for 10^9. But as they have different words for everything else, why should they stop at numbers?

  • by Foggiano (722250) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:25PM (#30644620)

    So we're at the first step in the Apple Product Cycle [misterbg.org]? It's nice to see we're right on track.

    As an aside, I think it makes lots of sense for Apple to produce a tablet product, but I can't imagine them actually producing 10,000,000 of these things for launch.
    First, it's a ridiculously high number, far exceeding the number of iPhones sold in a year and coming close to the number of all types of iPods combined.
    Second, I doubt Apple would ever allow any of their new products to be overproduced. Artificial scarcity only adds to the perceived desirability of Apple products, driving the hype engine even more.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by AndrewNeo (979708)

      Second, I doubt Apple would ever allow any of their new products to be overproduced.

      Phew, for a second there I misread that as "I doubt Apple would ever allow any of their new products to be overpriced"! Had to read it again.

    • Dude, they sold 10 million iPhones in the first full year of sales. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_sales_per_quarter_simple.svg [wikipedia.org] As for iPods, the total number sold is over a quarter billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipod_sales_per_quarter.svg [wikipedia.org]
      • Way to misread the graph.

        Total number of first generation iPhones sold: 6.124 million

        Number of iPhone 3G units sold in the first quarter alone: 6.89 million

        So the second generation device outsold the first generation device in a single quarter, and now you think Apple is going all-out on a first generation device? Just to point out, the first-generation iPod solid far less than 500,000 units total. We're talking about first-generation products here, not the entire life cycle of the product. No manufactur

    • Huh? According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], 21 million iPhones had been sold as of Q2 2009. The iPhone was released in Q3 2007. 21 million / 2 years > 10 million/year...

      • That represents 10 quarters of sales (30 months), or an average of 700k per month, or 8.4 million per year.

      • by jonbryce (703250)

        The first generation iPhone was not at all popular. Most people waited for the second release before getting one, and that is generally a good strategy with new products.

  • by copponex (13876) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:32PM (#30644692) Homepage

    Apple is quickly converging it's products into single slabs of screen and processing power. I don't think the internet infrastructure will be different in 2020, but I do think you'll simply have a choice of screen sizes and the option to attach a laptop-style bottom case with extra horsepower or stick with the touchscreen top.

    Maybe Apple will pull a coup this time around and offer a large tablet interface that's easily dockable. I know for many people the option to snag their interface and take it to a meeting down the hall or at the coffee shop would be pretty valuable. Stick a camera on the back as well as the front of it and you've really got something that could save time for a wide array of industries.

    Apple will convince the public that they need it, a market will be created, and I just have to wait a few months to pick up the copycat product at half the cost.

    • Maybe Apple will pull a coup this time around and offer a large tablet interface that's easily dockable. I know for many people the option to snag their interface and take it to a meeting down the hall or at the coffee shop would be pretty valuable

      The first thing that came to mind when I read this was interfaces like you see in Minority Report or Avatar where you can dock a smaller display(roughly the size of your average tablet) into your main display and actually drag information to the tablet display. You can then undock the tablet and continue working with whatever data you moved to the tablet display. I could see where something like this would have its uses.

    • by mcgrew (92797) *

      Maybe Apple will pull a coup this time around and offer a large tablet interface that's easily dockable.

      I don't see why nobody's making tablets, whether large or small, with USB or wifi ports that you can plug keyboards into, turning them into full fledged computers.

      • Because the Apple's tablet won't be a fully fledged computer. It won't run Mac OS X. Not without some hacking, at least. And if a real keyboard and decent range of expansion ports are what's required, then that's what a laptop is for.

        • by mcgrew (92797) *

          I didn't necessarily mean THAT tablet, but if you had a tablet computer that cold interface with peripherals, laptops wouldn't be needed.

          • Yeah, but the current tablets don't seem to be selling that well. In order to do so, they'll need their own OS, just like Apple will do, at which point they aren't going to be fully fledged computers. Unless you want to dual-boot between tablet mode and desktop mode, but that will make it too much of an oddball to be popular. Plus you'll also need the hardware to support a desktop OS, which will make it bigger if you want a decent experience.

            This, of course, also depends on what people end up using tablets

    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday January 04, 2010 @04:34PM (#30645684) Homepage

      Maybe Apple will pull a coup this time around and offer a large tablet interface that's easily dockable.

      Maybe making use of something like this patent [gizmodo.com]?

      I've thought for a while that it could be pretty neat to have something like an iPhone/PDA with a stripped down portable interface, but when linked to a dock, it becomes a fully capable desktop machine.

    • by rickb928 (945187)

      Just give it Bluetooth and allow input method.

      A keyboard, mouse, and headset. Not difficult.

      But such a device would cut into iMac sales, so expect it to be a desktop device that goes in the crook of your arm when you're tired of the keyboard.

      And give it wireless charging. This you can charge real money for.

      And somehow I don't think OS X will be running on Atom processors in this future.

  • for every BS Apple product rumor, I could probably afford the new Apple iTablet when it finally comes out in 2025.

    For the record I own a MacBook Pro, and a Mac Mini.
    Not to mention my HackBook Mini. (HP mini 1116 running Snow Leopard.)
    • by DrXym (126579)
      I think there will be a tablet device but I question who is meant to buy it.
  • I thought earlier in a different article we were told that the iPhone was the Apple tablet/netbook. Now they are doing a tablet as well? At some point they'll just end up picking off their own product sales and they will become their own worst enemy, as even the most ardent MacFanBois(TM) only want so many Apple products...
    • I think as soon as it's too big to fit comfortably in your pocket, it's no longer competing with the iPhone or iPod. If the tablet cannibalizes any of Apple's sales, it will probably be the Macbook Air. The Macbook Air is sort of the closest Apple has right now to a netbook/ultraportable.

      But many of the rumors suggest that this device will be intended to compete more with the Kindle or Nook than with netbooks. But with Apple, there's often LOTS of random speculation, so you don't really know until somet

    • by Hadlock (143607)

      Yep, it's an ipod touch DX, maybe with 3G.

    • by dangitman (862676) on Monday January 04, 2010 @05:49PM (#30646790)

      At some point they'll just end up picking off their own product sales and they will become their own worst enemy,

      I think that's Apple's old way of thinking. The new Apple realizes that to move forward, it needs to compete with its own products, rather than fearing cannibalism. If the possibility for something better exists, and you don't make it for fear of competing with your own products, then somebody else will, and take that business away from you.

      This attitude is clear with iPods, where Apple produced new models at a rapid pace, including variations such as the mini and nano which competed with the more expensive full-size iPod. And finally, it happened with the iPhone, which in many ways makes the iPod obsolete. Apple realized it couldn't rely on the iPod being relevant forever, so came up with the next big thing, and finding extra revenue streams such as the App Store.

      We also see it to a lesser degree with the Macs. In earlier times, Apple would deliberately cripple its low-end computers so as not to compete with the more expensive models. However, recently, we've seen Macbooks that are nearly as good as the more expensive Macbook Pros, just without the fancy aluminum case. Sure, there are some spec differences, but it's not like the Macbooks are being hobbled out of fear of cannibalism like they were in the past.

  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Monday January 04, 2010 @03:36PM (#30644750)
    The author of the article has a hard time believing that Apple ordered 10 million tablets this year. While his logic is sound regarding the numbers, the author isn't quoting Apple. The author's source for this rumor is an ex-Google employee. And this employee is not saying Apple "ordered" 10 million only that Apple "plans to produce" 10 million. There's a huge difference between the two. Like any company building a new product, Apple has ordered X amount while letting their suppliers know that they may want up to Y amount. If the product sells well, Apple will increase their order. If it doesn't Apple will not. Also the Y amount may be an unreachable goal. Sometimes when negotiating contracts, some suppliers are not interested unless you are ordering a large amount. Everyone knows that goal isn't likely but it makes everything look good.
  • Let's just hope the iSlate is a lot easier to clean then our current keyboard are... uh, cause I tend to spill things on my keyboard... uh, like soda! Yeah, that's the ticket, soda! It has nothing to do with using the computer to view porn, honest!
    • by dan828 (753380)
      I don't know if you've noticed, but that stuff leaves streaks if you don't clean it right away.
  • If Apple gets the tablet right and it sees high demand for the product, I don't see 10 million being an unreachable goal. The iPhone has a significant impediment to sales that a regular computer doesn't have, you have to sign up for a 2 year phone contract that costs over $2000.
  • ONE INFINITE LOOP, Here We Go Again, Sunday (NNGadget) — Apple is reportedly close to launching its long-rumored ____. It could be Apple’s latest billion-dollar jackpot.

    Analyst speculation says the ___ will be launched in September and be in the shops by Christmas. A new mention of the ___ crops up on Twitter around every eight minutes.

    The ___ is rumoured to be any size and scale between the iPod Shuffle and the Macintosh IIfx. Some have described the ___ as a “___-killer.” Analyst speculation suggests the ___ will use a fantastic new interface. “It will be a whole new paradigm,” said Apple blogger Leander Kahney.

    Expectations flared when technology research analysts noted that Taiwanese suppliers had received orders from an unknown buyer for a particular obscure component to be filled by the end of the year. “The only possible conclusion is that Apple will launch a ___ by early next year,” said Kahney. “They’ve been working on the ___ for the past six years. People expect it to be the ultimate Apple surprise. This thing will knock people’s socks off.”

    Apple has refused to comment on the ___ speculation. But Tim Cook, its chief operating officer, recently hinted that the company was working on something “very innovative.” Steve Jobs is thought to have been personally involved in the development of the ___ over the past two years.

    Daniel Eran Dilger noted on roughlydrafted.com that the ___ would need to be fueled on pain, angst, the destruction of the ecology, the torture of kittens and the tears of widows and orphans, but put together a devastatingly convincing and very lengthy explanation as to why Apple’s actions were the only humanly acceptable option for the consumer, the technology industry and the future of humanity, and that Jobs’ Nobel Peace Prize was ridiculously overdue. And that all problems were clearly Microsoft’s fault.

    Illustration: The generic Apple product [newstechnica.com]. Fits everyone!

  • by Jason Pollock (45537) on Monday January 04, 2010 @04:26PM (#30645504) Homepage

    As we're seeing with the Kindle, and the iPhone, many people can find uses for additional computers in our lives. I can definitely see a use for a tablet device sitting on my coffee table, waiting to be used by anyone walking in as both a media selector (iTunes to an AirPort Express/Apple TV), or as a general device to answer "Who is in that movie?", "What's on tomorrow", "You're talking BS" questions. I already use my iPhone for that, this would just be a general device, whereas the iPhone is "personal".

    Add to that the ability to use it as a general book reader, and you've got a winner.

    Tablets aren't laptop replacements, they are secondary displays for the living room, secondary devices that enhance your ability to use the compute power you _already_ have in your house.

  • in any event, I am presently unable to avail myself of the device, at any price point. but if the wireless conn was verizon, I'd consider it.

"Silent gratitude isn't very much use to anyone." -- G. B. Stearn

Working...