The iPad Mystery - <AUTHOR> https://mondaynote.com/the-ipad-mystery-54efb0a7c224 <comment><USER4> I'm surprised nobody mentioned that it could simply still be a normalization phase. The iPad's growth exploded because everybody thought it was the new iPhone. Analysts started analyzing it like if it WAS the new iPhone. But it's a very different product, with a lifecycle much more akin to that of a laptop. In this regard the iPad is indeed a computer. I'm typing this on a late 2014 MacBook Pro Retina. It's still a great machine, why change it? I can do everything with it. Even video editing to a very good extent. The same for my iPad Air, bought in 2014. Still rocking. I might be swapping it for a new iPad in 2 years maybe, but so far, why bother?

My mom's iPad is my old short-lived iPad 3. She gets Pinterest, she browses the web, she does her email, we Facetime. My dad borrows it from time to time to buy a rare book online or to look for some obscure Prog Rock band from the '70\. He is the typical proudly tech-illiterate son of the fifties, but well, he actually loves to use his iPad 1 as a YouTube Radio when he's painting.

She has a laptop at home, but it's strictly connected to work related task. I.e. spreadsheets. And that's it. Her laptop and her iPad are perfectly complementary devices she is not really thinking about changing until they will break or become unbearably slow.

There's no mystery: the iPad IS a computer, and its update cycle reflects it.

<comment><USER5> You say this as if an unexpectedly slow update cycle can be a retroactive justification of the product. If Apple weren't expecting users to update iPads so infrequently, then it will be an issue for them.

Also it can't be considered both "a computer" and considered to be in a maturing lifecycle phase if tablet sales are down while laptop sales are increasing. If you consider the iPad a computer, then Apple's product line is cannibalising itself, which would also be an issue.

<comment><USER6> >If you consider the iPad a computer, then Apple's product line is cannibalising itself, which would also be an issue.

Say what? You know Apple doesn't sell just one computer, right? They don't have any product called the Apple Computer. They have several different laptops, several different desktops, several different AIOs, and if you consider an iPad to be a computer, several different tablets. No one is saying the Macbook Air is cannibalizing sales of the Macbook Pro, or that the Mac Mini is cannibalizing sales of the 27" iMac. They might be computers, sure, but different computers are built for different use cases. There's a world of product differentiation between those offerings.

<comment><USER5> Cannibalisation refers to competition within your own product-line causing a reduction in revenue.

E.g. with simple figures: Apple spend 1 billion producing iPads from start to finish, and selling them produces 10b in income. They then introduce Macbooks which cost 5b to produce and result in 10b in income. If the introduction of lower margin Macbooks causes a 25% drop in sales of higher margin iPads, then the profitability of their product line has been reduced due to inter-product competition.

It's generally not a good thing and represents a waste of resources.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wish I could buy tablets and computers the same way I buy synthesisers and mixers: knowing full well that they'll be just as useful in 20 years, as they are the day I bought them.

I look around me in the room I'm in currently and I see a massive collection of much-loved, very respected, well-used hardware: synthesisers. But I'm typing this message on a machine (MacBook) that is inevitably going to end up being replaced by something else, just because after a few years its not going to be as much use as it once could have been. This has happened already - <USER2> many a MacBook/tiBook, my iPad1/iPad2 collection, and so on.

But yet, the musical instruments still remain, even 30 years after their release, and even long after official support has ended. I chalk this up to completeness: musical instrument manufacturers know that a musical instrument that needs repair/maintenance/upgrades on a regular basis, isn't a musical instrument. (Its more of a toy.)

I wonder what could happen that would bridge this gap between these two worlds - on the one hand, effectively 'finished' products that are always very reliable and still work the way they were intended, decades on - versus on the other hand, 'unstable' products that will, basically, still work on a fundamental level 10 years from now, as long as I'm willing to do the work myself to keep them running.

I wish the computer manufacturers treated their products more like refined, finished, musical instruments than half-finished/never-finished sort-of tools whose functionality is never, really, set in stone for the ages.

<comment><USER8> I think we're getting there for laptops. At the risk of sounding like 640kb is enough for anyone:

\- CPU clock rate has leveled off, mobile processors have been 2-4 threads for a while now and focus more on power efficiency

\- 600MB/sec SSDs are kind of 'fast enough' with regards to app loading and boot times

\- retina displays are as good as anyone can see

\- the GPU is fast enough to draw a moderately 3D GUI

\- battery life is longer than an 8 hour work day

\- these days the power adapter is heavier than an ultralight

I think computers are starting to last longer and longer before going obsolete on a practical level. What we're seeing now is more like planned obsolescence, where new designs and form factors are getting introduced but the computer is more or less the same.

There are also some classic designs that last multiple years with minor refreshes much like a calculator: MacBook Air, XPS13, some thinkpads, the 10" and 7" iPad

<comment><USER9> They wont be good enough for light-field-based mixed-reality computing just like command line computers weren't good enough for GUIs.

How many more computers will we probably buy before mixed-reality jumps the chasm and goes mainstream? I don't think it's more than 2.

<comment><USER10> I think you're right, but at the current rate of progress it's going to take a while to get there.

We're currently in the modern equivalent of the mid-90s DOS plateau, where an experience that's actually quite mediocre has become the default user expectation.

Getting past this requires an order of magnitude increase in processor power. Given what's happening in hardware that seems unlikely any time soon.

It's more likely tablets will gradually catch up and merge with desktops - <USER3> there won't be any dramatic change in the UX offered by either. That needs speed and UI technologies that are at least a generation away.

The new UX will come from voice, AI, and robotics, which will make computing more physically interactive, and less tied to the glass typewriter/document library model.

<comment><USER9> I largely agree, although I think mixed-reality will be the new UX, with voice & AI being a big part of it as well. But we may need _2 orders of magnitude_ in GPU/Watt performance before light-field glasses replace 2D screens.

Given the gargantuan data/compression requirements of light-fields (Lytro's cameras capture >300GB/sec of lightfield data!!!), plus rendering, persistent SLAM, etc, we'll need the power of a GTX1080Ti or better, but able to run flat out using only 1-3Watts of power instead of ~250W.

The good news is this is what the global smartphone manufacturing ecosystem is working towards, with a relatively short device life-cycle to finance the huge effort that will be required to get there. But mid to late 2020s will be all about mixed reality. I am convinced that it will be so incredibly compelling, that any 2D screen, no matter the size, resolution, dynamic range, or refresh rate, will be like command line compared to GUI today.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't know how many of you have kids, but the iPad is a revolution for kids. They can literally start using it independently from age 2. I think most families will have at least one in the house.

They also have a very long service life. That's probably a big reason why the growth rate doesn't compare well to the iPhone. The upgrade cycle is like 5-6 years, not 1-2.

I've thought a lot about Steve Jobs' "cars vs trucks" analogy.[1] Personally I don't use the iPad much anymore, owing to the narrowing of the gap between my bigger phone and slimmer, all-flash Macbook. But although I work in tech I don't see my Mac as just a "truck". I prefer it for web browsing, email, writing, etc., all "car-like" things. If you had a car and a truck in the garage you probably wouldn't pick the truck to drive the kids to school.. but that's what I do with my Mac, metaphorically speaking.

So I would expand the analogy slightly. If iPads are cars and desktop computers are trucks, then Macbooks are the SUVs. Still a very appealing choice for regular non-industrial users who just want a bit more capability.

[1] [http://allthingsd.com/20130109/steve-jobs-was-right- tablets-...](http://allthingsd.com/20130109/steve-jobs-was-right-tablets-are- cars-pcs-are-trucks/)

<comment><USER12> We've got four iPads in the house, and we're only now replacing the iPad Mini (first generation) with a new iPad 2017; we've also got an iPad 2 that's next in line for a replacement, but since it's still handling Netflix et al almost acceptably the 4yo can use it a while longer.

These things have survived three kids, I don't think we've had any other thing they've used live this long. Pretty darn impressive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I got a max-specced iPad Pro after returning my top spec 2016 MBP... It's now become my main work machine. I still need my 2012 MBP at home for tasks that can't be done on iPad, but those are rare and quite specialised (music production, dj library management, bits of programming, and some more advanced document preparation).

It's working well. I love the lightness (with the Apple keyboard case it's a fair bit lighter than an MPB), the quasi-infinite battery (though some apps like Slack and, weirdly, Notes, can, without announcing it, suddenly go into battery draining mode... I'd love a more battery-friendly replacement), and the freedom of not needing wifi in most countries that I'm likely to travel too (thanks to the UK network "Three"'s "Feel At Home" feature that allows me to continue using my phone and iPad data as if I was in the UK). It feels really liberating.

Worth adding a disclaimer: I no longer do much or any programming. Most of the "value adding" work I do consists of talking to people, preparing the odd document and sending emails.

<comment><USER5> > bits of programming, and some more advanced document preparation

If you can't do them on an iPad then you simply can not consider it a "work machine", in the general sense. You can do those on a 15 year old laptop with ease.

<comment><USER14> > If you can't do them on an iPad then you simply can not consider it a "work > machine", in the general sense. You can do those on a 15 year old laptop > with ease.

If it's something you can do on a 15 year old machine, which is otherwise nearly unusable (last week I turned on my 2001 Titanium Powerbook G4 for the first time in years; it could see my WiFi network, but not connect), then maybe that's not a very useful definition for "work machine".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wouldn't buy a new iPad since my iPad Mini 2 (Retina) is still super smooth in daily use, but it's seeing tons of use every day. We still have to fight for it sometimes!

Main use:

* YouTube

* More casual or turn based games like Ticket to Ride, Space Hulk, Candy Crush, Pinball Arcade, etc.

* Light web browsing when looking for things together

* Light creative application (both Snapchat-y things and Adobe suite)

* Remote maintenance through RDP when on holidays. Having limitations on what I can do helps preventing doing more than I should but it's enough to not bring a laptop.

I would replace it immediately if it was broken or stolen. Probably I would buy a bigger one instead. I'm still tempted to buy a new one but since I already have one and I still need to invest in:

* A MacBook for my wife

* Probably the iPhone 8 if it has new features I need to develop for

* I still don't have the Apple Watch

* Or an Apple TV

* Or even a decent 4K OLED TV to hook it up to

....so it probably won't happen until it breaks.

And I guess most people are in that boat. Apple makes them too damn good for their own good.

<comment><USER16> My daughter uses our tablet every day in car rides and to play various games. Was using a 3 year old Andriod tablet until recently when its Andriod 4.x didn't allow for the latest games to install (required Andriod 5.) Tablets are the best device for young children for sure -- especially if they do not yet need a phone (which in our neighbourhood seems to be occuring around 12 years old.)

<comment><USER17> I only retired an Android tablet because the USB port broke, so i could no longer charge it (it just jumps straight to the firmware install screen for some reason).

Right now i am making due with a cheap Windows tablet i bought because of curiosity, and it seems to get the job done for the most part.

Actually i am eyeing another Windows tablet, because it offers a keyboard and a couple of USB ports in a 8" package. And the lack of such ports is what i feel has held back tablets as being nothing more than big PMPs with a net connection so far.

Yeah sure, there is OTG. But that means tying up the one micro-USB port on the device. And I know there are supposed to be some standard for charging docks related to OTG, but i have yet to find one that actually works.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> He nails it in the article: once you have a fairly modern iPad there is not much reason to frequently update. That said I would expect Apple to make money also on selling media like TV shows and movies, books, Apps, etc.

I think Apple's best strategy is to work hard to have the best integrated, iPhone, iPad, macOS, iTV, iWatch. Apple loyalist will keep the revenue stream healthy.

I feel like I have gone over to the dark side here: I have quit my FSF paid membership, shelved my Linux laptops, and have a much less complicated work- flow and entertainment experience with my macOS, iPad Pro, and iPhone. I feel like I have greatly simplified my life at the expense of free software, etc. ideals.

</comment><comment><USER19> Depresses me that Apple is trying to force real computers to stop being a thing just to try and make the iPad the true revolution that they still believe it is.

I feel Jobs saw the value in real computers even if a bit more locked down than self built they were still real computers. Compared to Cook who doesn't seem to understand or even like computers and thinks the future is in devices.

I just don't see why Apple can't accept that iPads might be great for kids, people who purely use machines for consumption and my parents but iPads are worthless to some of us who need to actually use the full potential of computers.

<comment><USER20> What do you consider a "real computer"?

<comment><USER21> Personally I consider a computer "real" if you can use it to write its own software. Until you can actually develop iOS apps on iOS, it will just be a toy.

<comment><USER22> Wrote some code on an iPad this morning on my way to work.

Never again. It's not even a question of the software being that of a glorified phone.

Even using a 3rd party code editor with its software 'coding keyboard' it was an exercise in inefficiency and anti-ergonomics. So by the time you've added a Bluetooth keyboard, you've effectively got yourself a ramshackle laptop that isn't quite as useful as an actual laptop.

<comment><USER23> This is the problem with the iPad, on a fundamental level, for me.

It's not a laptop, because it's missing crucial laptop features (ability to do work on it). And it's not a phone because it's missing crucial phone features (portability and calls).

So when mine broke, I just didn't feel it was worth replacing. I've lost no value from not having an iPad, because everything it did could also be done on something else I own.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I've been trying to replace my MBP with iPad since the original and almost have a viable solution with the iPad Pro and the Razer Mechanical keyboard case except for two main things:

\- Integration between apps is still not there. There's some good code editors out there with syntax highlighting and project based but none support git. There's some good git clients but there is no workable path between them and your coding environment without intermediaries like Dropbox etc, and none that share the concept of a project. You are at the mercy of the developers to support everything you need or to integrate with another (possibly third party) app. On MacOS there is always the lowest common denominator, the terminal which can glue any workflow together.

\- The combination of iPad Pro and keyboard is bigger and thicker than a 13" MBP. Which would I rather take then...

<comment><USER25> I really enjoy using Textastic with Working Copy - you can mount your git repo from Working Copy as a folder, edit in Textastic, then commit and push via Working Copy.

This (exposing your internal file-system as a mount point) is available to all apps, since iOS 10 - it's just only Working Copy and Textastic that seem to support it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I think the reason why the iPad is down while the Mac is up in the market is that it is not a full computer. My definition of a full computer is that I (1) can write software on the device itself that (2) can do everything you could imagine the device could do, and then (3) distribute that software to any other machine, be it your second machine, or 1 billion of your closest friends, (4) define yourself under what rules and what price that software could be bought, and (5) at no point will there be any other party (like the device creator) that could do anything to prevent you from doing any of these steps.

The iPad is so very much lacking in all of these terms, and the Mac is not, to me it's no wonder why the iPad sales numbers are going down while the Mac sales numbers are going up.

<comment><USER27> That definition is completely arbitrary and more than a little ridiculous. The majority of the population do not program and so for them a "full computer" is anything that allows them to complete all of the tasks they would ever want to do. For many an iPad could well be that device. For others it might not be.

Because there are platforms like Chromebook and Windows 10S which also do not satisfy your criteria but many would consider to be a computer as well.

<comment><USER26> You don't have to program to be positively affected by my suggested change. You could be just a user of an app that currently does not exist on the iPad, or the user of a feature that does not exist.

Would you like to group all your files that belong to a certain project (photos, texts, presentations etc) together in one thing, like a folder? The iPad currently cannot do that. After that change, somebody could do a patch that would. And then Apple would see that there is a demand and do a proper version of that.

Would you like to use the great Apple Photos app, but also have all your files on dropbox/google drive? Well if you do that currently, you need to have your photos twice, and work with two different apps. With my suggested changes, one could create a patch app that just stores all your documents on the service of your choice.

Would you like to use the Google or Amazon Alexa voice assistants when you long press the home button? Currently you can't, but in my future you could. Any you would be surprised how much better they often are. That would create more competition, and would motivate Apple to up their Siri game.

Would you like to have a SNES emulator? A bittorrent client? A bitcoin client? A podcast client that can do flattr? All of these things are constantly shut down by Apple. You are not allowed to have these. With my suggested changes, you can have these.

Would you like to have something like Maya? Current iOS rules prevent any app from implementing their own windowing GUI, with the reason being that in this way, apps cannot become their own platform, which would be problem for Apple because then another party would become a platform owner. Well many professional apps like Maya are their own platform.

The list goes on an on. You do not have to be a programmer to suffer from the limits Apple currently imposes on iOS.

And it's not arbitrary at all. It just returns to the same state computing was in for 30 years until iOS arrived.

Also, watch your words. "More than a little ridiculous" is not an objective rational statement, it's just pure ad hominem.

<comment><USER28> > Also, watch your words. "More than a little ridiculous" is not an objective > rational statement, it's just pure ad hominem.

Not at all. He said (paraphrasing) "this claim is ridicuolous", not "you are ridiculous".

<comment><USER26> I disagree. Saying "this claim is more than a little ridiculous" also contains the connotation that the speaker must be out of his mind.

And in case, we're doing a meta discussion on rhetorical semantics now, which is besides the point - because you can't argue away that saying "this claim is more than a little ridiculous" is just plain bad form.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'm typing this on my iPad & it strikes me that there's not a lot of motive to upgrade your iPad once you have one. It's a consumption device, as long as I can continue easily browsing the internet, listening to podcasts and watching movies I have no reason to upgrade.

My laptop I may want to upgrade to improve computing power and phone form factors continue to improve. Both of those things sort of affect the iPad but not nearly to the same degree. I carry my phone around in my pocket, if it's a tiny bit lighter it makes a huge difference. I mostly use my iPad at home, it's great for the things I use it for and there's no upgrade I can imagine that would significantly increase its utility.

<comment><USER30> Here's why I upgraded my Ipad : webdesign. My Ipad 1 still works perfectly, unfortunately it cannot handle javascript heavy websites. People love to talk about planned obsolescence but React, Angular (and others frameworks), stupid parallaxes etc bricked my Ipad, not Apple.

<comment><USER31> Apple is not blameless. I use an iPad4 as a radio and the podcast app is a miserable laggy and unresponsive experience. 30s lag for tapping something is not unusual. The idea I have to replace a 2012 device to render a bloody list with start/stop buttons is pretty shameful.

<comment><USER30> Here's the bad news : even with a brand new Ipad, the stock podcast experience sucks. Indeed it declines with each version of iOS. (You can however install Overcast)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Everyone in this thread has been going on about how iPads are "toys", "game machines for kids", "only consumption devices", "for movies and casual web browsing", etc. But I use my 13" iPad as a drawing tablet, and it's amazing.

I wouldn't want to code or a write book with it, and the software is in some ways more limited than I would prefer, but the hardware (display, stylus) are great and it's a lovely tool for proofreading/annotating PDF files (or other material), making doodles, writing mathematical notes, sketching out user interface designs, drawing technical diagrams, planning carpentry projects, and so on (I know others also use it for drawing comics, making visual art, & cetera).

Basically it's a great tool any time you want a computer (unlimited pages, many drawing tools in one, easy to import/share content, undo support, layers and versions, ..) with pen input rather than mouse/keyboard. The latency and precision of the stylus are as good or better than other graphics tablets, the screen is gorgeous, and the price is competitive as a drawing tablet.

I'd recommend one to anyone who can afford it, and does any kind of critical reading, design work (e.g. great for flow-charts), or work in a visual medium. It doesn't replace a laptop, but it's a great complement.

<comment><USER33> I'm using an iPad mini 2nd gen - I would love a newer one but this one just keeps on being usable...

I seriously think the upgrade cycle for these devices is just much much longer than most people think it is

<comment><USER34> The mini2 is a really nice iPad. I think it's at a similar sweetspot in the power/support curve that the Ipad2/mini1 was at -- something that's going to be usable for a good long time. (They sold something with the guts of the ipad2 for something like 4 years)

My mini2 has been used solidly for 2 years, I'm only looking to upgrade because the ipad2 the kids use has taken a beating and needs replaced.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I have been an iPad user from day 1. In the beginning, I have been very enthusiastic about the iPad, but while I am still using mine, it is only very lightly these days. The reasons and some things for Apple to change are:

\- The iPad is getting cornered between large smartphones, which cover many mobile needs and the very portable laptops.

\- Software. There are very few iPad-specific apps, which are really great productivity-wise. Software development was ruled out by the App Store conditions and still is difficult. The builtin applications didn't really grow over the years. Last time I tried, photos still didn't support hierarchical folders. This worked well in my first year of usage, but after 5 years it became unusable.

\- Data transfer. For anything relating to productivity, the individual sandboxing of apps just gets into the way of working productively. Also getting data in and out of the iPad is not seamless.

\- Software again :). The "desktop" just showing a grid of icons was nice for the iPhone, but the life tiles of Metro looked more useful on a phone already. A larger device like an iPad needs this or any other "real" desktop. I am not talking about "MacOS on the tablet" though. It needs a tablet-optimized desktop, but not a phone OS either. Multitasking needs to be improved. And why is it, that external bluetooth keyboards are still not fully supported with all special keys, e.g. for ssh clients? Why can't I browse photos on a SD-Card without importing them?

\- Connectivity. Have courage, Apple, add USB-C. Have a real HDMI out, and if there were an HDMI-input dongle, it would be an instant buy for me. Duet is nice, but having the option to use the iPad as a real second screen would be great. A mode for the iPad pro where it would be an extension screen for a MacOS computer with full pen support would probably sell a lot (and hurt Wacom)

<comment><USER36> > Last time I tried, photos still didn't support hierarchical folders

iOS 10 does support it, but it's kind of hidden (you have to long-press on the add album button to get an action sheet to add a folder) and I don't think it supports re-arranging anything (gotta do that on a Mac and sync it)

<comment><USER35> I am trying to sync hierarchical folders from photos to the iPad, but they get flattened to one level of hierarchy of folders, i.e. only the folders containing the pictures remain, but no hierarchy above them.

<comment><USER36> Interesting.

I only tested on an iPhone, since I made the unfortunate decision of buying a 16 GB iPad, so if I turn on iCloud Photos it effectively stops working because it fills up its internal storage (despite being "optimized").

I'm surprised something works on the iPhone but not the iPad. Are you syncing via USB or iCloud?

<comment><USER35> I am syncing via USB or WLAN - would need to buy iCloud storage to sync my images. But if it works for you via iCloud, then the rumors I heard of it being different are true :). But this only confirms that the software is quite quirky.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> In the 8 years since I bought my current laptop (and still daily driver) I've bought 1 tablet (still using it after 6 years) and 4 smart phones (of which I only use 1)

This is of course just an anecdote, but I am in no way surprised that smartphones are outselling their bigger siblings.

<comment><USER38> That's because phones are heavily subsidized (whether as a discount or a payment plan) by mobile service providers, who put heavy marketing effort into making sure you always have the latest and greatest.

Meanwhile the iPad is basically a toy.

What's surprising to me is that anyone is surprised by these numbers.

<comment><USER37> I never buy my phones subsidised. General electronic vendors also want me to have the latest and greatest iPad.

If my iPad is a toy because it is mainly used for browsing reddit and watching youtube, then my laptop and my phone are also just toys.

<comment><USER38> I would say that yeah, they are toys. Or at least "luxury conveniences" \--- rather than some kind of essential tool.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Totally unrelated to Gassee's main point, but of note in a tangential way: The best place to find AAAA batteries, like those the Surface Stylus takes, is inside 9V batteries, which are all but universally composed of six AAAAs wired in series to reach the specified voltage and packed in a metal can.

Of course, getting the metal can open in an airport, especially on the "secure" side where you'll have been relieved of any personal toolkit you might ordinarily carry, is a separate consideration - but in a real pinch, a house or car key will probably do, because all you really need to manage is to pry out the top bulkhead with the terminals. If you can do that, you can get the batteries out, twist them off their solder tabs, and use them.

<comment><USER40> This just seems like a terrible idea to try at an airport.

<comment><USER39> I'd tend to agree, but if you just have to use that stylus right then, it's probably your best shot. AAAA cells on a blister card are rare as hen's teeth.

<comment><USER41> What's wrong with rechargable batteries? I usually go out with a spare pack and an ac recharger

<comment><USER28> Do rechargable AAAA batteries even exist? I've only ever seen AA and AAA.

<comment><USER39> They seem to exist in the NiMH chemistry [1], but you might have to try a few brands to find decent-quality ones. That said, if you can find ones that work reasonably well, they'd be by far your best option. And I'd be amazed to see them in a brick-and-mortar shop, other than a specialist battery store, and maybe not even then. (If those even still exist, anyway.)

Another potential issue is that NiMH cells seem to run at a somewhat lower voltage than alkalines do throughout the discharge curve. I'm not sure whether that would pose an issue for a device like this; while it probably sips power, it might have a large voltage drop, which could conceivably result in shorter operating time from a cell that runs at a lower voltage to begin with. Still, I'd say it's certainly worth a try.

(Edit: forgot link.)

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/LUITON-Ni-MH-batteries- rechargeable-O...](https://www.amazon.com/LUITON-Ni-MH-batteries-rechargeable- Oureal/dp/B06XKPLBD7/ref=sr_1_5_s_it?s=hpc&ie=UTF8&qid=1494853722&sr=1-5&keywords=aaaa+rechargeable)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> The "problem" with the iPad is two things:

1\. It's too good for some (most?) use-cases. 2\. It's not even close to good enough for other use-cases.

If all you're doing is consuming content on an iPad, the replacement cycle is absurdly long. The only reason I upgraded from an iPad 3 (the first retina version) is that I bought my dad an iPad air for Christmas one year, and the next year, I bought him a new iPhone. He stopped using the iPad when he got a large form-factor phone. So I took the iPad air. The 3 is still pretty functional.

But I can't really do anything with it. It's probably the world's most perfect porn delivery device, but you know, I can't write any meaningful code on it on a day-to-day basis that wouldn't be a huge compromise.

I know that there are some people who have successfully transitioned to iPad as a primary machine. But I'm just not there yet. Yeah, I wanted the hell out of one when they first came out.

Now, I'm glad to have one, but the one from a few years ago is good enough. Why buy a new one?

</comment><comment><USER43> Who's the demographic for the iPad? Is there one?

My iPad is relegated to being either an eBook reader or a Spotify player for my bluetooth speaker. Can't really be bothered to use it for anything else, the iPhone 7 plus is more than enough for most other tasks. Also can't see it becoming relevant for any sort of serious creative work with applications like Lightroom, Photoshop, Movie editors etc, those are all super shortcut driven once you become a power user and have to crunch through a ton of work.

<comment><USER44> I'd say the demographics is huge since it is so broad. Anyone consuming content online is essentially a target. Gaming as well.

<comment><USER45> The demographic _is_ huge, an insane number of tablets have been sold and are being used. I'd estimate over 50% of the people I know have a tablet at home, and most definitely more have a tablet but not a PC, than vice-versa.

The whole 'problem' with tablet sales is not that they are not useful or convenient, but that current models are actually so useful and convenient there is no reason to upgrade. I would only consider this a 'problem' if you are trying to sell tablets, from a user perspective it's actually a good thing.

The fact that tablets cannot comfortably do many things a laptop or PC can has been obvious to me from day one, they are complementary devices where the tablet is primarily a more convenient/more comfortable device for many things, but not suited at all for others. Convertible/hybrid laptops may seem to follow naturally, to unify all use cases in a single device, but personally I'm not sold on this idea. I'd guess the demographic who really wants a full PC-like experience typically doesn't mind having separate devices that are best at a subset of tasks, instead of one device that's merely 'ok' at all of them. At least I know I don't mind...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Why is everyone on these outlets always evangelizing growth?

iPads are pretty long-term devices. I bought the iPad Pro 12.9" for my girlfriend March 2016 and she said "I don't want another until this one breaks up, it works perfect for me".

Does it occur to these journalists that the sales decline is not coming only from the fact that the tablets are niche devices, BUT ALSO from the fact that Apple's tablets in particular are relatively long-lasting?

<comment><USER47> 1st gen iPad Mini owner here. I received it as a Christmas present in 2012, and in the first few months, I couldn't figure out how it was supposed to fit in with a laptop and phone always in tow. I eventually found the sweet spot, and I am a mini tablet evangelist. It's still chugging along fine 4.5 years later in spite of all of the abuse it has received.

I bought a Nexus 7 in lieu of the iPad in 2015. The Nexus 7 is only 2 years old, but it chugs along fine as well. My only complaint is that the standby battery life on the Nexus is abysmal. It's not an age thing - it's always been bad.

There is no need to be on the upgrade wagon for tablets like with phones. This isn't quite the case anymore, but 2 years on the same phone used to be a very long time in terms of hardware/software breakthroughs. A 2010 version of a smartphone was usually markedly different from a 2012 version of a smartphone. Once the 2nd generation of tablets was released (to fix the missteps of the 1st generation), then there was little incentive to upgrade.

<comment><USER46> That's exactly my point, thank you. IMO we hit a plateau of the need to upgrade around the second half of 2016 -- mostly.

While things like Bluetooth 5.0 -- which allows you to be connected to more than one device -- are important and improve quality of life for people with a lot of tech (which inevitably will be all of us in a few decades), CPU/GPU performance and the need for more RAM have ground to a halt. I've seen people game on an iPhone SE and being happy about it, too. Wi-Fi can't honestly be developed much further from now; nobody's phone needs even 50MB/s, let alone the insane projections for 5G speeds. 2560x1440 smartphone displays are meaningless; very few people can spot the difference between that and a 1920x1080 screen in a 5.5" factor; even fewer need that difference. The list goes on.

Add to that the previous point of both of us -- that the iPads are long- lasting -- and I only see such articles as the OP as meaningless clickbaits that don't inform anyone in any meaningful way.

People don't buy tablets like they're a cheap new pair of seasonal shoes. They buy them for long-term value.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> This is simple. No one wants to buy a new Ipad model every year. I personally just hand mine down to my kids before I purchase a new version every 3 years. But since the first gen Ipad Air, I haven't felt like I need to buy a new one. The first air was light weight and had a decent enough processor to handle all the apps that I use. I can probably push it for one more year before IOS updates slow things down.

<comment><USER49> True. I have an iPad 4 that I only use for reading iBooks, occasionally browsing the web, and watching YouTube / NetFlix occasionally. I find I'm using it less and less because it's unbearably slow. When I first got it, I used it at work as a laptop replacement to take notes in meetings, manage my calendar / email, etc. I can't imagine doing that on the same device now. It takes 20-30 seconds to launch Safari, 10 seconds to switch between apps, etc. I'm going to try and reset it back to factory and just load iBooks and a couple other apps to see if it restores it back to the speed it ran prior to iOS 10.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> * who paid for your iPhone?

* who paid for your MBP?

In many cases, your employer did. After the MBP is written off and after the phone contract renews, you get a new one. Not so for the iPad.

Also, iPads serve mostly three purposes:

* feed a bluetooth speaker

* watch movies in bed

* lookup recipes in the kitchen

It does this very well, and you don't need a new one every two years.

<comment><USER51> > * watch movies in bed

Without a proper ipad holder, watching movies in bed with iPad is painfully, your arms get tired quickly after opening.

<comment><USER39> Rotation-lock the iPad in landscape mode. Lie on your side, tuck your upper arm under your pillow, rest one narrow side of the iPad on the bed, and hold the opposite side with that arm's hand.

Now your arm won't get tired, because it's no longer fighting gravity, and while you will drop the iPad when you fall asleep, it won't hit your face unless you're a lot more nearsighted than my -3.5 diopters. (That's a lot - ~20/120 in old money.) It'll also land face down if you hold it with a slight tilt toward you, which helps prevent the screen light from interfering with sleep any more than it already will because you're watching it in bed.

<comment><USER50> That delightfully detailed description is definitely HN approved.

I'll add another one: lean your back against the wall sitting upright, pull your knees towards you so they form an inverted V and prop the iPad up against your legs. Slightly awkward but workable.

<comment><USER39> Unless you wear bifocals, in which case the screen is _just_ outside the comfortable range of focus for the magnifying lenses, yet too low in the field of view to be comfortably seen through the distance lenses - you end up with your chin on your breastbone and a crick in your neck.

Maybe an Air is light enough to prop more up against your knees. My 4th gen certainly isn't!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Interesting that iPad was introduced into a market that didn't need to refresh them all of the time. Look at the lifetime ownership of a game console for example, many are owned for 3 - 6 years. The more interesting question would be to get hold of Apple's internal update/active numbers. How many iPads are in daily use as identified by them checking the App store for updates? I'd love to see that number but I'm not holding my breath.

</comment><comment><USER53> I theorize the rise Chromebooks has at least partly contributed to the slump in tablet sales. I thought it was odd they weren't mentioned at all in the article, esp. given they are increasingly touch enabled and run Android apps now.

Speaking of which, I'm kind of blown away Apple hasn't tried to take all their touch expertise from the iPad and add it to MacBooks in some fashion.

<comment><USER54> Really? I personally feel adding a touchscreen to a laptop is pretty much useless. The smudging of the screen far outweighs the negligible usability improvements (are there really any?).

At any rate, Apple has already been using their touch expertise on MacBooks. Their touchpads are highly regarded, and they recently added Touch Bars to the new MBPs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I use an iPad Pro almost daily. My experience has been that the high- productivity, specialty specific apps I would use haven't caught up. To a great extent, the IT departments are still struggling with the cloud-vs-local problem, let alone any serious amount of mobile, or mobile-ish, apps.

<comment><USER56> >My experience has been that the high-productivity, specialty specific apps I would use haven't caught up

Strong agree — lack of robust development environment for DEEP apps is holding iPad back.

Yes, iPhone has plenty of apps. Session times on an iPhone are short and it's enough to have just app-ified websites like Facebook app, Instagram, Snapchat, banking apps. Even transformative truly native apps like Uber do not require much development on the mobile platform side (the real work is in the network).

On an iPad your sessions are much longer and there's room for more expensive apps you spend more time with. Truly great games, for example. Art, media creation, notes, documents of all sorts, but most of all things that we can't conceive because they're only possible on an iPad. But there's a void here. Free to play dominates gaming, and the result is a lot of crap, with even the gems tarnished by need to drive in app purchases. The "pro" apps are too few and far between.

Why? Well, insufficient developer buy-in due to the crappy landscape. You have an app store with weak discovery driven by a combination of whims of a small team of editors and easily gamed, lowest-common-denominator popularity charts. You have uncertainty in the development landscape due to Apple fickleness (store rejections, opaque and changing rules, etc). You have weak cloud tooling from Apple so simply saving state becomes a unique snowflake challenge for each dev.

The iPad needs a killer app. The fact that most people can replace one with a knock-off Netflix/YouTube machine is damning. It should be good at more than that. It should be brilliant.

<comment><USER57> I think the "killer app" is the Pencil. I had a mini that had a shattered screen and the cost of replacement wasn't worth it to me. I hemmed and hawed for a year about getting another iPad. It would have been nice to have, but I could not justify the expense. The Apple Pencil changed that.

I have never used another stylus that comes within 100 yards of the Pencil. I got the iPad Pro 9.7" heading into my last year of grad school. What a difference reading and annotating with a Pencil than with my Mini just a year and a half earlier or even my laptop. I loathe reading anything that I need to annotate or really understand anywhere else besides my iPad (and that includes paper).

The Pencil swung me from "meh, nice to have" to "I will replace this immediately if it dies." I am using a 2011 MacBook Pro that I cannot justify upgrading and will _probably_ not replace if it dies. But the iPad with a Pencil is something I can't imagine not having now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> While ipad do a lot of things it is at best mediocre at all those things. It can do quick mails and chat, but my phone is more portable and always in my pocket.I can watch movies on it, but Chromecast shows it on bigger screen with home theatre sound. I can write a document but it's keyboard isn't good enough. I can write some code but debugging is painful.

It's not just the sales of these are going down, the usage on web traffic tracker has also peaked in early 2015, and is going down since, meaning not only people are not buying them, they are leaving them in drawers and forgetting about them.

</comment><comment><USER59> They're too expensive relative to consumer income. The form factor is wonderful. The price and relative fragility are awful. I think Apple has gone from monopoly pricing to potential market failure.

</comment><comment><USER60> The iPad marked for >= 9.7" actually grew last quarter. This article has a graph where the ipad mini is split out as a separate component of the graph. Big phones have eat up a lot og the ipad mini market, but there is still a big market for bigger ipads.

[https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2017/3/29/apple-is- pushing...](https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2017/3/29/apple-is-pushing-ipad- like-never-before)

Diagram is about 2/3 down the page.

</comment><comment><USER61> I bought iPad 3, it was good at its time. Now it's laggy but I don't want to buy another one, it's waste of money. So it's only natural that sells are slowed, people who wanted to buy one already did it, and not everyone wants to replace working device every few years.

The only thing that I could desire is if Apple would revive iOS 6 and allow downgrading. It's awesome OS, much better than following releases for iPad 3. But, I guess, it won't happen.

</comment><comment><USER62> There is only a mystery if you assume that apple is really chasing the same strategy as google and microsoft, and not a model where they only really care about high margin products.

The current Mac ecosystem will not tolerate a rent seeking appstore acting as middlemen between app or content producers and the end users where as the vision of taxing the content producers are a reality on iOS. Or to put it differently the per user profit will trend to be lower for MacOS then iOS so if apple is going to follow though with their philosophy of only maintaining a few products in order to be able fuss over every detail, then it makes perfect sense to double down on iPads and sideline the MacOS lines as something that will one day be merged with iOS.

The mystery part is in explaining that Apple dont nesserily want a dominant marketshare if they have to compete on cost to get it and is totally willing to shed profitable product lines if they feel it distract mangement from the long term strategy. Weather or not thats a smart philosophy is a good question but it's pretty much at the core of how job's managed to turn two bankrupt companies into one of the biggest success stories of the post dotCOM age.

</comment><comment><USER63> When 10" tablets were introduced I would have bet, at the time, that they would replace laptops on many corporate desks where tasks were limited to document creation and email. After all, touch was such an obvious advancement in UI, especially for the users least into technology for its own sake. Tablets seemed like the ideal device. On top of all that, one of the first places I saw iPads proliferate was among MDs. Hospital elevators were a focus group that seemed to predict success for tablets.

Instead they have hardly made a dent. Even in schools, the tablets used by Amplify in Chicago schools were a notable failure. The market seems to be mostly discretionary use at home. I have a tablet with a touch sensor that's dying and there isn't a compelling new product I would buy. Strange.

Meanwhile, Microsoft is unflaggingly digging away at realizing a consistent, compatible implementation of Windows everywhere and polishing a touch-able Windows so that you don't run into tiny touch targets and other pitfalls. I had predicted touch-first platforms would run away with the market before Microsoft could grind off the jagged edges of a touchable Windows.

</comment><comment><USER64> > _Steve Jobs proclaims that "if you see a stylus, they blew it"._

> _But only idiots never change their minds._

> _It's now September 2015: All hail the 12.9" iPad Pro…with a keyboard and > stylus (pardon, a Pencil)._

Why do people love to trot out that Steve Jobs quote and then completely misinterpret it? The context of that quote was a device that _requires_ a stylus. Steve was not dissing the concept of styluses in general.

<comment><USER65> Indeed. That comment was implicitly referring to operating systems like Palm OS and Windows CE which had user interfaces which were essentially impossible to use without a stylus. (You could sometimes muddle your way through with a careful fingernail, but it was awkward going.)

The Apple Pencil is something rather different -- it's an entirely optional add-on for artists/designers who want to use the device as a drawing tablet.

<comment><USER66> To be fair though, Palm OS' handwriting recognition Graffiti was very very efficient and convenient. I still miss it when using my iphone.

<comment><USER35> Yes, I would like to have the option to use the Apple Pencil with an iPhone with Graffiti or some modern alternative. Handwriting still beats typing on the on-screen keyboard.

<comment><USER36> The company that bought PalmSource actually released Graffiti as an Android keyboard [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.access_com...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.access_company.graffiti_pro&hl=ja)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> I had the original iPad Mini pretty much since its release in 2012 and only recently replaced it with an iPad Air 2, and even then the only reason I could come up with to replace it was "I'm wanting to make apps for these devices again, and I need something newer to test on."

Sure the browser on the iPad Mini couldn't handle too many tabs at once, and some apps started looking like they took a bit longer to load, but overall the iPad Mini was still doing everything I needed it to do: play Netflix, board game apps, music, browse the internet, and still felt pretty much as fast as the day I got it.

Which I can't say the same about Android devices. Those tend to feel like slugs over time.

</comment><comment><USER68> Before buying a tablet, we have a need in mind. If the need is filled, we either do not need to change the tablet or change it quickly to have a stronger one more adapted to the need. If the need is not filled, the tablet is almost not used (often given to children) and we do not buy another one. The candy crush like applications almost never requires a tablet: they work as fine on a phone.

The use case is very different from phones. Obsolescence is very different. I am still using my palm III XE (very rarely) for the single application that motivated buying it 18 years ago.

</comment><comment><USER69> I don't understand why the iPad doesn't support a mouse - it really limits it as a word processing tool - touch while having the iPad with a keyboard is sub optimal

<comment><USER70> I feel that's one of the reasons the iPad is failing as a laptop replacement.

The CPU/GPU power is there, but iOS is too restrictive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> Wait a few years, children will grow old enough to inherit the old iPads, and there will be another boom.

Thing is, iPads are powerful, even though Apple tried their very best to cripple most of them by software updates.

The vicious circle is, that people who are not power users (demanding the latest features) are the ones less likely to update the software.

So here we are, with a ton of iPads working flawlessly with their stock firmware.

I mean, even I still own a first gen, just for kicks (and synths, synthstation49).

<comment><USER72> _Thing is, iPads are powerful, even though Apple tried their very best to cripple most of them by software updates._

There are other plausible theories:

1\. When the iPad was introduced, the average smartphone screen size was between 3 and 3.5". I couldn't find statistics for 2016, but I would guess that the average is just north of 5". Large phones have considerably more screen estate than they had in 2010, so a lot of things that were done on tablets in 2010 can now be done conveniently on a phone.

2\. There was initially a lot of enthusiasm for the iPad and other tablets, but over time people realized that iPads are mostly limited to media consumption. The form factor is not convenient for serious work.

In the end it's probably a mix of all of these: people wait longer before upgrading tablets; phablets have cannibalised tablets; most of the initial tablet hype/optimism has died out.

[https://medium.com/@somospostpc/a-comprehensive-look-at- smar...](https://medium.com/@somospostpc/a-comprehensive-look-at-smartphone- screen-size-statistics-and-trends-e61d77001ebe)

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> I've semi-retired my iPad first generation mini because it has trouble rendering beffier web pages like Business Insider and New York Times. It reloads several times when it runslowon memory for rending. Pages with multiple viedos are a problem. Also Apple no loner upgrades the OS for this model.

I replaced it with the new cheap iPad. It has twice the memory, twice the screen resolution and 20 times faster CPU, and costs less.

</comment><comment><USER74> Something untouched in the article, or at least I missed it, both companies I've worked at have seen declining iPad users.

My interpretation is that for people that love the device, LOVE it. For people that thought it was going to be a laptop replacement and wanted to try it, decided it wasn't.

For everyone else, it just became that device that sits uncharged on the coffee table or bookshelf now.

</comment><comment><USER66> > Yes, Tim Cook says he does all of his work on an iPad

That may be a reason why mac OS X has become so unstable in the past couple of years. My system crashes once a week with random slowdowns once a day. I also feel that Apple is completely out of touch with what people actually want on a mac and that would explain it too.

</comment><comment><USER70> Meanwhile Chromebooks are growing really fast. IMO Google is nailing the OS for the masses in the post mobile era.

</comment><comment><USER75> Also known as the _Netbook_ mystery.

</comment><comment><USER76> The iPad is a luxury device mostly.

A smartphone is pretty much essential in the modern world. Even those from poorer backgrounds, will save their money to buy a smartphone. An iPhone is a similar price to other top end devices and arguably better value since it lasts longer (updates/resell value).

A Laptop is essential to learn or to work, it's a solid way, established tool for work.

A tablet/iPad is mostly seen as thing to watch movies on, check social media and play games. All of which you can do on your phone. Apple is going to have a hard job convincing people that the iPad can replace a laptop - I don't think people see it that way.

If every iPad came with a free keyboard cover, they much have some chance, because people would give it a go and see if it works for them. But right now in the UK a iPad pro + keyboard is more than twice the cost of an iPad 9.7 (to which you can't add a keyboard later - for some reason).

</comment><comment><USER77> Meanwhile, phones are getting bigger.

Could it be that this is the reason for the decline in tablet sales?

</comment><comment><USER78> While launching the first iPad, Steve Jobs said that it fills the gap between a phone and computer. With phones getting beefier and bigger, and a lot of apps reducing the need to go to websites, that gap is closing fast.

</comment><comment><USER79> I think analysts overestimate the amount of creating the majority of folks do at home vs at work. Yes, iPads may not take over the worksphere as envisioned, but at home, they certainly will in most use cases.

</comment><comment><USER80> There's one reason I'll probably not get another iPad and that's because I can't copy files to and from it easily. And no, I'm not installing the monstrosity named itunes to do so.

</comment><comment><USER81> Computing devices distributions soar proportionally to the revolutionary applications they enable. The iPad rode the pocket computing revolution quite late in its cycle and now it's just there along side laptops and even smartphones. There are no reasons to keep buying new devices that are only marginally better than the previous.

The main reasons smartphone renewal rates are better has to do with the personal nature of it: I may want the latest style to display status or, I need a replacement for a broken/stolen one. In many cases the phone is also the only computing device I ever need.

iPads, like laptops and desktops sit a home/office, doesn't work as well as a status symbol and is much less likely to get stolen/broken.

</comment><comment><USER82> Anyone know a use for an iPad 1?

I have one that works perfectly, but YouTube doesn't work anymore and I'd love to install Linux or something on it but I couldn't find anything out there.

<comment><USER83> You should be able to use chrome or safari to load youtube videos in the web player, up to 720p just fine on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> My aunt's nursing home equips the nurses and aides with iPads. It seems like a great use case, and I see a lot of usage.

</comment><comment><USER85> If I had the money for it, I would definitely use an iPad on the couch and my iPhone on the go.

</comment><comment><USER86> In my opinion, they would have sold more if they'd have eliminated the charging cord. Seems like a small, insignificant thing, but for the "tech challenged" the need to plugging and unplugging something can be a show- stopper. Just doesn't work with my parents for example.

<comment><USER87> Even as a mobile phone software developer, I love my wireless charging docks. No more fiddling with a cable every time I sit down and constantly buying new cables when they get loose. Charging with wireless is as easy as putting your phone down. Battery life is sufficient as long as I charge at home and at work, so I never need a cable except for development.

</comment></comment><comment><USER88> I do more an more with my iPad. I may get the new Pro version when it drops.

</comment><comment><USER89> There is a serious distortion in perspective underlying this narrative. iPad sales are down and revenue is less than the Mac, therefore users don't want iPads anymore because Macs are more useful and are the right answer for more people.

Horse puckey. Last quearter Apple sold 8.9m iPads and only 4.1m Macs. That means in the last 3 months twice as many people decided an iPad was the right device for them and did the things they wanted to do better, than thought that of the Mac. The iPad also has around double the installed base of the Mac. Ok, iPads are cheaper and I'm sure that's a factor, but still. How does dramatically better ongoing device sales of the iPad square with this iPad has failed, Mac rules narrative? It just flat out doesn't.

The question then becomes, what are these devices being used for? Yes of course the iPad is an excellent device for reading ebooks, watching video, casual browsing, emails, social media, etc. Is that all they're used for? Well no, iOS has a thriving App Store and developing apps for the iPad is a multi- billion dollar industry. Leading players such as Adobe, Microsoft and IBM regard it as a key strategic platform they have to be on. There are also thriving niches such as music production and visual arts where the iPad has moved well beyond just casual or toy status. The decline in device sales don't appear to be threatening that as App sales continue to rise, so the sales decline seems to be on the 'consumption device' side of the sales category.

We have not transitioned to a world in which more people buy Macs because they are more useful. We're in one where instead of 3x as many people thinking the iPad is the right device for them, now only 2x as many people think that. But if this was a collapse in the iPad value proposition we'd be seeing a reduction in ASP, margins and customer satisfaction. Actually these are as high as ever.

Let's look at the expectation though. Suppose iPad sales had stayed flat at their peak of 11m a quarter? By now the installed base would be 800m devices, more than half the installed base of all laptop and desktop PCs. Is that the definition of success? Anything less is failure? I would contend that current sales of the iPad are very healthy, they just don't compare well to the completely unsustainable, unprecedented success of it's early years.

So that's the positive case. Even so the iPad faces some major challenges to achieving it's full potential. I completely agree with the posts here pointing out it's weaknesses. I use Pythonista heavily and the lack of convenient Github integration is a major pain point. iCloud is a lot better than it used to be, but still a very long way from where it needs to go. Many small software studios are struggling to make money out of Apps. But this narrative of a failed product that nobody needs anymore is simply not supported by the facts.

The iPad is nowhere near killing off the desktop or Laptop, sales of both of which by the way are also down industry wide. I can't see a future in my lifetime when I won't want to own a desktop or laptop. Equally though you're going to have to take my iPad out of my cold dead hands. It's actually pretty much found it's niche and is here to stay.

</comment><comment><USER90> Jean-Louis Gassée is always a good read.

</comment><comment><USER91> It's not a mystery. It's obvious. What works better for watching Netflix in bed? A laptop which naturally stands up on its own or an iPad which you need to hold?

</comment><comment><USER92> If you see a stylus they blew it, said Steve Jobs about tablets that required one.

<comment><USER93> He was comparing the design goals of the original iPhone to the preexisting smartphone market 12+ years ago. The fact that it was designed to not require a stylus for basic usage WAS a big deal. If you never used a Palm Treo or a Windows tablet or a PocketPC device in the early 2000s, you may not realize what he's talking about, but a stylus was absolutely required for most or all basic operations on competing devices at the time, and that UI model was (clearly, in hindsight) holding back the entire industry. If you don't remember having to use Graffiti to scrawl out characters on the bottom third of a PalmOS device, this quote has likely never been contextualized for you.</comment></comment>


The practical steps it takes to actually become a millionaire - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/913249/the-practical-steps-it-takes-to-actually-become-a-millionaire/ <comment><USER2> It's silly in my opinion to use Warren Buffet as an example of a strategy for growing wealth for the [average] reader.

For one, Buffet started his "investing" career in the early 1950s. The DJIA grew 8x from 1950 to 1965, that's quite a head start with basically no downturns. Not only that, that period was when the largest American brands started and gained market dominance - so great timing there too.

He also buys companies, he doesn't passively invest, something your average person can't do.

The other suggestions are fine, but Rule #4 is really the only one that matters. It should have been #2, behind "get lucky."

<comment><USER3> Yeah and he bought a company to get its pension funds assets, took an unproven technique which without hindsight adds risk to the pension holders but they didn't get the upside, he and other shareholders did. Worthwhile keeping that in mind when Warren preaches what a moralist he is, he let employees take the risk of his new strategy and kept their upside. Doesn't sound so much different from any other investment banker to me when phrased in plain english.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't understand. The 'practical steps' for one to become a millionaire is to be and act and look like one is frugal?

This will probably result in being a millionaire..as in one single lonely million.

Money is the easiest thing to create..they print it to create it, you know.

Being and feeling rich..on the other hand is entirely different.</comment>


Nuclear secrets: the Dutch whistleblower who tried to stop Pakistan's bomb - <AUTHOR> https://www.ft.com/content/be09ba7c-b0d8-45e4-aff8-bf01b4aa558e <comment><AUTHOR> [https://archive.is/EgTF0](https://archive.is/EgTF0)</comment>


Developers Give Twitter the Boot - <AUTHOR> http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/06/developers-give-twitter-the-boot/ <comment><USER2> Ouch! It is a blog though and that's the point of a blog: editorial content. The title was to get your attention ;)

<comment><USER3> Ya... at least he said "boot" and not "middle finger".

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is the second opinion-based blog entry I've seen about developers leaving Twitter that has made it to the front page today. The writer makes a hard-line statement for a subject and then meanders around the point and often ends with another question. Anyone should have the freedom to write, but is it remotely possible that things submitted to HN have some real news quality?</comment>


Ask HN: Did you switch from React to Vue last year due to the licensing dilemma? - <AUTHOR> If you did, are you considering switching back to React? How is your experience with Vue? What does Vue do better than React? What does React do better than Vue? <comment><USER2> I'm switching from Vue to React because I find it really kludgy to have to call Vue.set to declare new reactive properties at runtime.

Its also a bit nicer in that React tends to follow ES standards like ES6 classes for components, instead of exporting a POJO for your component. In vue you often have to use function() instead of fat arrow syntax because of the context of "this". With react you used to have lots of .bind(this) boilerplate, but now we have shorthand property syntax. Vue also mixes props & state, where as React keeps them separate. React implements certain lifecycle methods like componentShouldUpdate() whereas Vue doesn't because the creator thinks it would complicate the API, meanwhile there's known issues like between Vue.js & HTML5 content editable due to this lack of lifecycle method.

Vue is easier to get going & much faster to develop in initially, lower learning curve, and friendlier API.

<comment><USER3> Most of this is simply incorrect.

Declaring properties at runtime is an antipattern.

You never need to use function()

Props and state are absolutely not mixed. Props are inherited and immutable by default.

Content editable doesn't fit in with the vue paradigm but you can easily abstract that section out of vuejs. If you dom is not dictated by your data, then a render function makes little sense.

<comment><USER2> > Declaring properties at runtime is an antipattern.

That's a pretty bold statement & I won't argue, but either way that's an opinionated decision of the framework. React is less opinionated & doesn't care what you use for your state. Vuejs is opinionated, they don't care about working well with Redux or other state management libraries because they already have their own, Vuex, which is pretty nice for the most part.

> Props and state are absolutely not mixed

a prop called "foo" & data/state param called "foo" are both accessed at this.foo, its no longer obvious what would happen if I would try to mutate this.foo. It mutates the data/state, not the prop, so now this.foo refers to the value in the data/state, which has a different value from the prop "foo" which can no longer be accessed at this.foo

> You never need to use function()

See this page which says "Don't use arrow functions ":

[https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/instance.html#Data-and- Methods](https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/instance.html#Data-and-Methods)

> you can easily abstract that section out of vuejs.

Yeah you can, by not using vuejs. React has escape hatches to get out of your way, so you could continue to use it in that scenario thats part of why im switching back from vuejs to react.

<comment><USER3> > a prop called "foo" & data/state param called "foo" are both accessed at > this.foo, its no longer obvious what would happen if I would try to mutate > this.foo. It mutates the data/state, not the prop, so now this.foo refers to > the value in the data/state, which has a different value from the prop "foo" > which can no longer be accessed at this.foo

Well yes, but have props and state with the same name is again just code smell.

> See this page which says "Don't use arrow functions ":

This is a very narrow restriction and pretty obvious why you shouldn't do it, ie it passes a context that makes no sense. This is not a Vue limitation.

> React has escape hatches to get out of your way So does Vue, don't use the > Vue `render` if Vue isn't managing the state.

<comment><USER2> Hey you quoted my point about escape hatches but forgot to respond, interested to hear your thoughts. I guess to the 1st point, yes and Vue js allows this smell while React doesn't.

Regarding 2nd point, I disagree it's narrow, it affects all methods for all components. But its not a big factor in deciding what framework to use.

React is just a tad more "standards compliant" when it comes to web development, in my opinion. And in web development standards matter a lot, even when the standards themselves may not be great...

I really like VueJS for what its worth, its still my favorite framework, but I'd bet my money on React in the same sense I would invest in Walmart even though its not the perfect business. The react ecosystem has a much higher learning curve also, to play devils advocate.

<comment><USER3> Sorry I responded but I forgot the newline.

In either case react is clearly the better ecosystem, but vue is a really, really solid framework itself.

We've hit our own limitations that we've had to work around, but imo most of the points you bring up have quite simple fixes.

Cheers!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yes, we had been planning to switch from Angular 1.x to React but our legal team determined it was too risky. The licensing issue was cleared up (I think) right after that decision was made

<comment><USER5> That is really a shame. React is hugely better than Angular 1.x in just about every way in my opinion.

When we switched productivity went through the roof and the site rendered faster.

That's not actually why I switched though. I switched because of the whole mess with Angular 2.x planned lacked of backwards compatibility. It was the nail in the coffin for Angular for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> We had to suspend React development. I think one team decided to switch from browser based to a native app, the other team is back on React.

</comment><comment><USER7> Nope, our legal dept gave us the OK on the original license.</comment>


User Trusts: Broad-Based Ownership for Online Platforms - <AUTHOR> https://osf.io/pe2va/ <comment><AUTHOR> This essay introduces what promise a broad-based capital strategy—trusts serving platform users—might hold for the online economy, especially as an enabler of more widespread, organized, and democratic user accountability. It draws on lessons from the experience of employee ownership alongside emerging opportunities for other kinds of broad-based ownership structures. User- oriented trusts could enable meaningful co-governance and profit sharing among essential stakeholders, a prospect that merits research and experimentation.</comment>


Algorithm X in 30 lines - <AUTHOR> http://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~aassaf9/python/algorithm_x.html

<comment><USER2> Algorithm X in 30 lines of Python (variation on Knuth's Dancing Links)

Exact cover problem, with sudoku solver example included.</comment>