Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.misc > #10236

Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets

From Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups comp.misc
Subject Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets
Date 2016-02-02 14:26 +1100
Message-ID <dhalv1F323mU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <n8o383$s8c$1@solani.org>

Show all headers | View raw


On 2/02/2016 4:05 AM, RS Wood wrote:
>  From the «abso-fucking-lutely» department:
> Title: The 2015 Panic report
> Author: Thom Holwerda
> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:33:35 -0500
> Link: http://osnews.com/story/29062/The_2015_Panic_report
>
> Panic, one of the most respected OS X/iOS developer houses, published their
> yearly report, this time covering 2015, obviously. This paragraph is
> intriguing: iOS Revenue. I brought this up last year and we still haven't
> licked it. We had a change of heart - well, an experimental change of heart -
> and reduced the price of our iOS apps in 2015 to normalize them at $9.99 or
> less, thinking that was the upper limit and/or sweet spot for iOS app pricing.
> But it didn't have a meaningful impact on sales. More and more I'm beginning to
> think we simply made the wrong type of apps for iOS - we made professional
> tools that aren't really "in demand" on that platform - and that price isn't
> our problem, but interest is. This obviously ties into the previous news item,
> and Panic hits the nail on the head. They are, of course, specifically talking
> about iOS, but the same applies to competing platforms like Android: nobody
> wants to do anything even remotely resembling serious work on a "post-PC"
> device, regardless of platform. Both Apple and Google are really trying to
> posit their platforms for work (iPad Pro, Pixel C), but just as Microsoft is
> having a hard time scaling Windows down for consumption, Apple and Google are
> having trouble scaling their operating systems up for work. It is no surprise,
> then, that Panic's upcoming great project for 2016 isn't a big new
> application... But a videogame.
>
>
> --
> Posting to comp.misc, sci.misc, and misc.news.internet.discuss
>

No real surprises there. The human physical interface is just too much 
of a pain to use.

Sylvia.

Back to comp.misc | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2016-02-01 17:05 +0000
  Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-02-02 14:26 +1100
    Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-02 03:41 +0000
      Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2016-02-02 06:36 +0000
        Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 09:24 +0000
          Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-02-02 09:33 +0000
            Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2016-02-02 12:55 +0100
        Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2016-02-02 11:34 +0100
          Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets RS Wood <rswood@therandymon.com> - 2016-02-03 09:38 +0300
            Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2016-02-03 11:59 +0100
              Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-03 11:38 +0000
              Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-03 12:55 -0500
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Andy Burns <usenet.jan2016@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2016-02-03 18:02 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-03 15:42 -0500
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-03 21:02 +0000
            Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Andy Burns <usenet.jan2016@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2016-02-03 14:26 +0000
              Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2016-02-03 19:46 +0300
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-03 16:51 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-03 13:01 -0500
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-03 19:19 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-03 12:59 -0500
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Andy Burns <usenet.jan2016@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2016-02-03 17:57 +0000
            Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets "Andy K." <andy.k466@gmail.com> - 2016-02-04 08:37 +0100
              Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-04 11:29 -0500
        Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-02 11:03 +0000
          Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-02 13:11 +0200
            Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-06 00:57 +0000
              Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-06 01:19 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-06 03:23 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-02-06 11:21 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-06 14:31 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-06 16:54 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-02-06 14:16 +0000
              Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-02-05 18:36 -0800
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-06 03:24 +0000
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-02-05 21:56 -0800
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-02-06 08:41 +0200
                Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-02-06 14:34 +0000
      Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-02 03:15 -0500
        Re: Report suggests users averse to doing "real work" on tablets Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2016-02-02 11:39 +0100

csiph-web