For all you know if it had flash on board it would have been 3 million, as long as iPads are being sold as fast as they can be produced and no investigation has been made in to how many people would consider buying an iPad if it supported flash this statement is simply false.
Look, Apple makes tons of money with the iPad which means you can be hugly succesful with web-centric tablets even if they don’t have Flash. That’s all that matters to Apple. The iPad is a success, isn’t it? That suggests that Flash is not such a important thing.
That's fine with me. But you can't extrapolate that in to 'votes' for flash or against flash as the title suggests.
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.
> That's fine with me. But you can't extrapolate that in to 'votes' for flash or against flash as the title suggests.
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.
