Steve Jobs: People Are Voting Against Flash By Buying An iPad Every 3 Seconds
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
IMHO, right now , Flash (while being a resource hog) is the best medium to deliver "engaging-rich" content on the internet.
Really, you can't take a sold iPad as a vote against flash, besides there could be any number of people that have not bought it for the exact same reason.
From a computer manufacturer you'd expect better logic.
>“People seem to be liking the iPad,” Jobs said to laughs and applause. “We’ve sold one every three seconds since we launched it,” he added.
> Steve Jobs: People Are Voting Against Flash By Buying An iPad Every 3 Seconds
If they attribute that to Steve Jobs then he has either said it or TC is completely out to lunch on this one.
Here's transcription from Engadget:
----------
> 6:33PM Walt: And what... we'll move on to the next thing you don't want to talk about. What if the market says 'hey it's important enough to us...' there's some great stuff out there in Flash. What if the market says it wants it? What if people say the iPad is crippled?
> 6:34PM Steve: Well things are packages. Some things are good in a product, some things are bad. If the market tells us we're making bad choices, we'll make changes. We're just trying to make great products. We don't think this is great and we're going to leave it out. We're going to take the heat because we want to make the best product in the world for customers!
> 6:35PM Steve: If we succeed, they'll buy them! If we don't, we won't sell any. And I have to say, people seem to be liking the iPad! (huge laughs and applause)
----------
Nowhere in here does he imply that people are voting against Flash by buying iPads. He's saying that people seem to be buying and liking iPads even though they don't have Flash.
So either people aren't aware of that limit(lack of knowledge perhaps) or, they are aware and it doesn't matter - either way he's right, Flash is just not a major factor for the Ipad's target market.
edit: typo
That's just plain nonsense.
Just like every device sold that does support flash is not a vote for flash so every ipad sold is not a vote against flash.
Flash simply doesn't factor in, if it does then someone should do the research and figure out how many people decided to buy a competing product because it supported flash. Only then would you be in a position to start making statements about this.
And I think after you do that research you'll find that consumers don't care, as long as their stuff 'works', the underlying tech is not interesting to them.
Well, yes, you can—Bayesian inference is a bit strange, but it does work. When people buy an iPad, that means that they're not spending that money on everything that isn't an iPad. This means that all the features the iPad has—a touchscreen, for one example—should be trained positively in any mental model of consumer-spending as a result, and all the things it lacks—Flash, or an external antenna, or edibility, or airbags—should be trained negatively.
Of course, it's a very small vote, and completely outweighed by the dollars-per-day measure of PCs and netbooks, which do have Flash as a feature. However, if people stopped buying any kind of computers other than iPads, that small vote would be enough to support "people are buying iPads because they lack Flash" as a credible hypothesis.
EDIT: I don't know what the downvote is for—I'm not saying that the title, taken on its own, is good, because it's meant to be interpreted by laymen, not statisticians. It's just that it's technically true.
> Jobs: this removal of Flash was simply the latest in a series of moves Apple has always taken to stay ahead of the curve.
Seems inconsistent.