Originally Posted by vdek
Being expensive doesn't make something useless, it just makes it expensive...
I don't get that comment though because their portable devices are fairly price competitive.
Much of the angst is by association, I imagine. You would have to agree that you can't call something with inferior components at the same price "price competitive," yes? For better or worse, Apple's other products put the iPad into the same category by association. Apple's other products can be considered price competitive only on the surface: If we consider a comparison to be between just an Apple 16GB phone or mp3 player versus another 16GB phone or mp3 player, then Apple is price competitive - and even then only in some
cases. If one actually does research on the subject (which most people do not
), Apple lags behind in both mp3 players and phones.
With this said, another reason iPad gets hammered is because phones can do most of the same things the iPad can. The iPad has a larger resolution than any phone and perhaps (I have not bothered to delve into it too much) a better chipset for graphics and processing, but those are its only current "redeeming" features. This reasoning I can fully agree with, personally. It makes no sense to me to use those two "redeeming" features as a reason to buy the iPad, though, as other options of similar size (read: netbooks and small laptops) will offer significantly better performance for less money. I am willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt for the iPad in terms of price and usefulness since no widespread product can be considered the same type of device (even if other device types will perform better at a lower price point, as explained above), but there is an argument to be had for saying it is not price competitive or truly useful compared with other devices.Edited by stargate125645 - 6/2/10 at 2:02pm