@AciSpades: Well, the iPod (and other MP3 players), the PC, 3D graphics accelerator cards, internet access, and cell phones in general all stand contrary to your statement. Each of these things was considerably expensive for the average consumer when introduced... but now are considered absolutely must-haves in most cases.
What makes a technology revolutionary is not its initial price, but how quickly it integrates into peoples' everyday lives until we can't remember how we lived without it. It offers so much that the benefits outweigh the cost, and then eventually cost comes down as consumer demand evens out development cost.
@BeautifulAgony: I still stand by my initial assessment. If nobody can afford your product, no matter how high the demand might be, it isn't until the price goes down to affordable that the product can actually revolutionize the industry. iPods and such were in a competitive environment (and I've already addressed the Apple marketing zeitgeist) and you bet that the only thing that got them the fame was the fact that they were able to expand their user base by lowering the prices (also, allowing PC compatability).
I'm not saying it won't revolutionize in the long run, but it has to have some sort of evolution that would allow it to galvanize and thereby revolutionize the market it's attempting to enter. If it starts off at a high price point, it probably won't make much of a splash unless they market the hell out of it and drop the price considerably soon after the "you can't have it" demand reaches it's peak.
Novel technologies often fail when the demand isn't high enough to cover the production costs. If they price this very high, they're going to be looking at an initial niche market, which can be smart, depending on how they handle it over time.
@AciSpades: I concede tha tyou have a valid point... but I do think there is room in the larger picture to accomodate both outlooks. It really depends on many factors, such as economics, the necessity of the device in question, and market saturation and demand.
As far as Apple's marketing prowess... I don't believe they ahve any. They simply fill a niche for trendy, elitist people. Also, my best friend uses a Mac... I aske dhim why, since it crashes often and the software choices are sometimes, well, nonexistant... his reply is that, "he's been using them since school, so, whatever."
A man who sells filtered water is shiny bottles and happens to be in business on a hot day is not a marketing genius. He got lucky and had a product which is not entirely garbage. His water isn't intrinsically better, and it's not exclusive. He didn't create the hot day, he just got lucky to be there. That's kinda how I see Apple. They've lucked out a couple times, and as a result they aren't at the very bottom of the heap, perhaps somewhere in the bottom third, catering to a narrow demographic.
The distance between the two screens when they are together spoils it for me, maybe if the bezel was a maximum of 1mm. Otherwise i prefer a normal laptop, and await the coming of Sony's cool folding concept:
@citizen024: For me that spacing is irrelevant. I want two screens because I'd have a full drawing canvas on one, and a set of tools and folders open on the other. The ability to work between the two without interruption would be incredible.
I would hope it has sufficient power to handle smooth drawing at reasonable speed, high enough DPI to allow me to draw at a resolution of at least 1280x1024, and enough HDD space to let me store tons of comps.
Of course, we artists never expect portable tablet hardware to be made with us in mind, with the exception of the Cintiq. Most tablet PCs have horrible DPI and are absolutely worthless for drawing all but the most rudimentary sketches. In essence, they become little more than novelties, or oversized PDAs.
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
08/13/09
02/15/09
02/15/09
What makes a technology revolutionary is not its initial price, but how quickly it integrates into peoples' everyday lives until we can't remember how we lived without it. It offers so much that the benefits outweigh the cost, and then eventually cost comes down as consumer demand evens out development cost.
02/15/09
I'm not saying it won't revolutionize in the long run, but it has to have some sort of evolution that would allow it to galvanize and thereby revolutionize the market it's attempting to enter. If it starts off at a high price point, it probably won't make much of a splash unless they market the hell out of it and drop the price considerably soon after the "you can't have it" demand reaches it's peak.
Novel technologies often fail when the demand isn't high enough to cover the production costs. If they price this very high, they're going to be looking at an initial niche market, which can be smart, depending on how they handle it over time.
I'm too high right now to finish this haha.
02/15/09
As far as Apple's marketing prowess... I don't believe they ahve any. They simply fill a niche for trendy, elitist people. Also, my best friend uses a Mac... I aske dhim why, since it crashes often and the software choices are sometimes, well, nonexistant... his reply is that, "he's been using them since school, so, whatever."
A man who sells filtered water is shiny bottles and happens to be in business on a hot day is not a marketing genius. He got lucky and had a product which is not entirely garbage. His water isn't intrinsically better, and it's not exclusive. He didn't create the hot day, he just got lucky to be there. That's kinda how I see Apple. They've lucked out a couple times, and as a result they aren't at the very bottom of the heap, perhaps somewhere in the bottom third, catering to a narrow demographic.
02/15/09
[www.sonyinsider.com]
02/15/09
I would hope it has sufficient power to handle smooth drawing at reasonable speed, high enough DPI to allow me to draw at a resolution of at least 1280x1024, and enough HDD space to let me store tons of comps.
Of course, we artists never expect portable tablet hardware to be made with us in mind, with the exception of the Cintiq. Most tablet PCs have horrible DPI and are absolutely worthless for drawing all but the most rudimentary sketches. In essence, they become little more than novelties, or oversized PDAs.