I don't understand why they would compare the average wage of all H1B workers spread throughout the US against that of a particular job title (Computer Systems Analyst) in Los Angeles CA. Wages obviously vary by job title and location. No surprises that wages in CA are higher.
I searched to see what Infosys (1) and TCS (2) actually pay a "Computer Systems Analyst" and found:
- For Infosys, there's only one result for Houston where the salary came out to be ~105K.
- For TCS, it's around 85K-87K for San Franscisco area. Didn't find anything for Los Angeles.
I can't vouch for the correctness of data but the site says they get it from the Department of Labor. Infosys and TCS would probably be using different job titles on their H1B petitions to try and get a lower wage determination.
Barring the title, the article touches upon some right notes. Ipad quarterly sales are down by about 21% YOY going by the latest quarterly earnings report from Apple (1). With the Iphone 6 and Iphone 6 plus coming out, I guess there's not much reason, except for certain use cases, for people to buy an Ipad. Apple surely recognizes that and is probably looking to reverse the trend with the rumored Ipad Pro (2).
Mu guess would be that iPad sales are down simply because a) hundreds of millions have been sold already, b) even more competing (primarily Android-based) tablets have been sold, and c) contrary to smartphones, tablets aren't typically bought on contract and replaced every few years, and they don't add nearly as much utility as a smartphone for someone who didn't have one before.
These 3 things combined indicate the market for tablets has been nearly saturated, and the majority of people who want one (and can afford it) already have one. The iPad has moved from 'growth market' into 'replacement market'. I know many people who are still using iPad 2's or even the original iPad, for example my mom still used the iPad 1 I gave her when I upgraded myself, so I'm not surprised Apple doesn't sell nearly as many iPad Air 2's as they sold iPad 1 or 2.
The article itself is pretty dumb if you ask me, and far too hung up on the truck/car analogy, and the premise that a device can only be useful or enjoyable if it replaces some other device like a phone or a laptop. I have a smartphone, tablet, laptop and a fixed desktop at home, but if my tablet died I would get a new one the same day. My laptop and desktop are far more likely to be replaced by a single device than my laptop/tablet or smartphone/tablet.
Just looking around I see iPad's everywhere, all the time. I see people who hate computers but love their tablets. The idea that declining sales imply they don't have a use is quite ridiculous.
I agree with your point about market saturation and should have touched upon it in my original comment when I quoted the sales drop. One point that stood out for me was that the Ipad was originally envisioned to be something bigger than what it is turning out to be. It's a great device for consumption but not so much for creation (obviously there are exceptions). For creating stuff, people still need to turn to laptops/desktops. If the creation aspect could be addressed by the Ipad, then it would be huge and I think that's what Apple will try to do with their next version of the Ipad. MS probably already understands this and therefore the focus on the Surface tablets. Obviously, there would still be a need for laptops/desktops but it would be more of an exception than a rule.
I used to work for Gazelle, a company that buys used iPhones, iPads, etc. from consumers. We found that the iPads we bought were generally in much worse shape than the iPhones. We believed this suggested that people were using their iPads quite a bit. Anecdotally, among my friends and family iPads are in almost constant use. So even if we don't know what iPads are good for we seem to use them a lot.
I wonder how much of this is just that people are not upgrading their iPads as often as they upgrade their phones. I'm still relatively happy with my iPad 2 and I've had three different iPhones during the time I've owned it. A lot of my friends are in similar situations. I think we all kind of agree that iPads are too expensive to justify frequent upgrades, especially when they're still useable.
I bought an iPhone 6 Plus thinking it would replace the iPad but found that, while I still really like the 6 Plus' size, it doesn't really work that well for prolonged reading or the lazy internet surfing the author mentions in the article.
I think your observations re: Gazelle point to the situation that telecom companies drive shorter upgrade cycles for phones, often hiding their cost and allowing three year upgrades. In contrast people generally pay full price for tablets, and upgrade less frequently.
Looking at sales as an indicator of the success of a product is warped and silly. The fact that it is considered the right way is a shining example of the fundamentally flawed nature of our capitalist system.
Up until last year when he moved out, I continued to use my dad's first generation iPad while he used his new mini. The first generation iPad worked great, I used it all the time. I saw no reason to go and purchase one of the newer ones for myself other than the fact that I couldn't install iOS 7 on it. The software pushed obsolescence, not the hardware. My dad kept it when he moved out because it was still a great device.
A more accurate title would be "No one knows of any reason to buy the new generation iPads because their older ones are working just fine"
It could just be that the market has saturated. Most people who want a tablet have one now, and there aren't compelling reasons to upgrade. This could spell trouble for tablet makers, but doesn't say anything bad about tablets themselves.
Wrinq is an interesting idea that even I had thought about earlier. I pay my rent using a personal check which the landlord then encashes at the bank. I will prefer to pay my rent online using a credit or debit card. But from a landlord's perspective, wouldn't it incur an additional processing fee if he/she were to start accepting a credit/debit card thereby reducing the net amount for him/her? The only way for it work for the landlord would be to increase the rent which I, as a tenant, will not like. I understand there's convenience but don't think it would justify a rent increase of 3% (average credit card processing fee) which can be a lot depending on where you are. How are you handling this problem? I know some landlords already have the option of paying by credit/debit card. It may work out in case of a new tenant but what about existing tenants? How does the landlord or you as a service provider justify the not-so-insignificant increase for them?
Good questions. Before I started building wrinq I surveyed landlords and tenants:-
1. Some of them flat out refused to use such a service. As you say the increase in costs was a detriment to them.
2. Some tenants said that it would be a very good idea and they would not mind paying higher rent if it meant that it was more convenient for them to pay.
Group #1 were people who had a family to support and increase in cost was significant. Group #2 were single persons with high salaries and 30-100 additional monthly cost meant nothing to them (this includes the fees of wrinq as well).
I also discovered a third group of people. Landlords who were willing to take in less rent if it meant that their tenants were happier. These people did not keep tenants for profit but for company and maintenance of their properties ("better than it being empty and gathering dust") so I will be targeting groups #2 and #3.
Also I think you can have a tremendous advantage if you look for landlords locally and offer them additional services. Like I have tied up with a few agents in my locality so when the existing tenants leave I am going to make sure that the landlords find new ones quickly without any difficulties. This way I promise new business to agents, good tenants to landlords and continuous income stream to myself.
Finally tie up with your local banks. Despite what most people think banks these days are quite open do business with individuals. They can offer you a proprietary api for a small upfront fees (and lot lesser transaction charges) which you can use to lower your charges. But don't do this at first. This should be a last resort when you have exhausted other methods or if you want to grow your market to group #1.
Anyway don't give up on the idea. Talk to people in your locality maybe you can discover some other ways that you can help them besides collecting rent.
Appreciate the detailed explanation. It's very helpful. Since I hadn't done any customer validation, I guess I was just going by my own use case (married with 2 kids - group #1) as a reference. Now I understand and agree with you on #2 and #3. I really like what you are doing by working with agents and the idea of reaching out to local banks. Wish you all the best with Wrinq and the openresty book.
Thanks. You didn't have any programming experience before starting with the Stanford course? If yes then that's pretty impressive. I understand, to some extent, the frustration around getting stuck and not having any guidance. Do you think the job market for iOS developers is still pretty hot or has stagnated now?
I had a little. Too a few classes in college but felt like I was learning things over again.
Job market for iOS is still strong, and will be for a long time. But on top of that, job market for programmers is strong and once you can program, it is easy to branch out.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6121572