Skip to main content

A Different Screen Size Isn't Going To Be Enough To Reverse The iPad Sales Slide

The iPad is a profitable business, however it has been relatively less profitable and less successful with each passing quarter, a run which stretches back nearly half its life. Having succeeded in persuading customers to find a home in their lives for a third screen, Apple has struggled to persuade those same customers to upgrade to a newer version.

Prior to the iPad Pro all Apple had to offer potential iPad upgraders a slight decrease in thickness and weight. Winning arguments for upgrading the phone you carry with you every day. For the tablet which sits on your coffee table or in your briefcase not so much.

The iPad Pro offered the first real sign of Apple trying to reposition the iPad as a computer. Its message was weak and neither Pro nor Pencil have been sufficient to halt the slide.

Apple needs to be more aggressive about making the iPad a computer - and minor tweaks to the industrial design aren't getting it there.

So the rumours of a 10.5" screened iPad, fitting the same dimensions as the current 9.7" aren't really going to set the world alight if that's all that has changed. Good though an edge to edge display might be to look at, it's going to be polarising in the way it impacts on the way you hold your tablet.

It won't be enough on its own to drive sales.

Microsoft and Windows OEMs have shown that tablets which are real computers are the one consistent growth area. Apple needs to start down the road of making the iPad a computer - and make good on the promise of the iPad as a computer which its marketing sells.

Personally I believe the minimum requirement to deliver this will be mouse support and the ability to drive multiple screens as extended workspace. This is an iPad which could get my credit card twitching. Anything less won't cut the mustard.


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…