Android Tablets Still Suck, And Google's Running Out Of Time To Fix Them(androidpolice.com)
androidpolice.com
Android Tablets Still Suck, And Google's Running Out Of Time To Fix Them
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/06/19/android-tablets-still-suck-and-googles-running-out-of-time-to-fix-them/
115 comments
> "Why do I need laptop? I'll just get an iPad". And those people are niche; if you can replace all of your computing with an iPad, then you may as well be using just a phone.
I was at a Parent Teacher Association meeting at an East London primary school last night. There were about 15 people there. 3 had iPads.
I was using mine to take minutes - really just adding notes to the agenda that was already in Word, via pages. Mainly just adding brief notes to discussion points, noting whether something had been carried. I used to use paper, but the iPad is more difficult to lose and I don;t have to re-type.
When the issue of the the next meeting came up, people used the iPad to look at the calendar - fine - that could have been done by phone. One member couldn't make it, but joined us via Skype on an iPad.
Meanwhile the Headmistress was keeping a check on the England Ukraine scores.
A question came up about the prices for a bit of equipment - a quick Google search found it in the meeting, rather than having to be discussed in the next meeting.
The thing about the iPad is that it isn't necessarily better than a laptop at anything, it's just incredibly convenient. It's the kind of thing you take along 'just in case'.
Oddly enough, just about the only thing I don;t use it for is consuming iTunes media. I rip videos for the kids to watch on holiday sometimes, but never use iTunes.
I was at a Parent Teacher Association meeting at an East London primary school last night. There were about 15 people there. 3 had iPads.
I was using mine to take minutes - really just adding notes to the agenda that was already in Word, via pages. Mainly just adding brief notes to discussion points, noting whether something had been carried. I used to use paper, but the iPad is more difficult to lose and I don;t have to re-type.
When the issue of the the next meeting came up, people used the iPad to look at the calendar - fine - that could have been done by phone. One member couldn't make it, but joined us via Skype on an iPad.
Meanwhile the Headmistress was keeping a check on the England Ukraine scores.
A question came up about the prices for a bit of equipment - a quick Google search found it in the meeting, rather than having to be discussed in the next meeting.
The thing about the iPad is that it isn't necessarily better than a laptop at anything, it's just incredibly convenient. It's the kind of thing you take along 'just in case'.
Oddly enough, just about the only thing I don;t use it for is consuming iTunes media. I rip videos for the kids to watch on holiday sometimes, but never use iTunes.
You mention checking calendars could have been done on a phone. But Googling for a price could have been done by, I guess, all 15 phones in the room just as well, better even, as those phones are more likely to have a net connection than an iPad, and are more likely to be carried "just in case" Same goes for taking notes on a doc to be honest, and Skype, and sports results obviously.
I've bought 4 iPads for family members (and a Samsung Galaxy Note for myself which is in many ways a mini-3G-tablet) and advised many more friends on getting their own iPads so I'm well aware of the benefits, but it seems people say the darndest things in their attempts to justify them.
I've bought 4 iPads for family members (and a Samsung Galaxy Note for myself which is in many ways a mini-3G-tablet) and advised many more friends on getting their own iPads so I'm well aware of the benefits, but it seems people say the darndest things in their attempts to justify them.
I've seen iPads in meetings and I think it's not much more than conspicuous consumption. I enter minutes very efficiently in my iPhone with Workflowy (which basically instantly syncs to a Workflowy instance on my desktop). I find entering with my iPhone - ie the input method I use to send texts 20 times a day - a lot more natural than acclimating to the iPad's keyboard and bringing a jumbo screen to a meeting.
Well there you. I was trying ti be as inconspicuous as possible, personally, I find typing on a table with the iPad smart cover, much easier than typing on a phone. Knowing the people who were there, I doubt it was conspicuous consumption.
I'll look into Workflowy, however.
I'll look into Workflowy, however.
> reading PDF files, because my it's far superior to my e-reader
What app(s) do you use for reading PDF files? None of the solutions I've used so far seem particularly suited (remembering last position, easy search/scrolling etc).
What app(s) do you use for reading PDF files? None of the solutions I've used so far seem particularly suited (remembering last position, easy search/scrolling etc).
I use the paid version of ezPDF reader. It's 5 bucks or something . I'm a pretty basic user when it comes to reading, but it definitely remembers your position, has a decent search functionality, and allows me to make easy annotations as well as far more features than I use.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=udk.android.re...
For reading comics (another awesome use case for the tablet) I'm using Perfect Viewer:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rookiestud...
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=udk.android.re...
For reading comics (another awesome use case for the tablet) I'm using Perfect Viewer:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rookiestud...
They actually appeal to the older generation - judging from some of my family members (the over 60s.) My Aunt uses her iPad oddly enough as a camera more than anything - she loves the way she can easily show off what she has taken. Before than she owned a Dell laptop - which was occasionally used for Email now it just gathers dust.
My uncle has both an Android tablet and an iPad and an iMac! He seems to be quite fond of the droid. I don't know his reasons why. He's not tech savvy in anyway - he can barely install an App on his Mac.
And I think the appeal as a desktop replacement is that they are easier to use. But both could be far better.
Neither care for smart phones.
My uncle has both an Android tablet and an iPad and an iMac! He seems to be quite fond of the droid. I don't know his reasons why. He's not tech savvy in anyway - he can barely install an App on his Mac.
And I think the appeal as a desktop replacement is that they are easier to use. But both could be far better.
Neither care for smart phones.
>"They actually appeal to the older generation - judging from some of my family members (the over 60s.)"
Absolutely. Look, I think tablets - and the iPad specifically - are technological feats. But outside of that wonder, for most people, it's a completely superfluous device. I mean, look at the author's example:
>"Apple knew it had a large group of customers out there yearning for a device that let them watch their iTunes content on a larger display without having to lug around a laptop."
Are there really a bunch of people sitting around saying: Well, I'm idle for the next 2 hours, with cell reception. I'll watch a movie. But a 4" high def screen won't cut it, and an 11" or 13" screen is too much. The 9" screen of my iPad is just right.?
It's sort of ridiculous.
Absolutely. Look, I think tablets - and the iPad specifically - are technological feats. But outside of that wonder, for most people, it's a completely superfluous device. I mean, look at the author's example:
>"Apple knew it had a large group of customers out there yearning for a device that let them watch their iTunes content on a larger display without having to lug around a laptop."
Are there really a bunch of people sitting around saying: Well, I'm idle for the next 2 hours, with cell reception. I'll watch a movie. But a 4" high def screen won't cut it, and an 11" or 13" screen is too much. The 9" screen of my iPad is just right.?
It's sort of ridiculous.
That is the author's interpretation of what he believed what Apple was thinking. I think it's far more likely that Apple was asking themselves "Do people really need a PC?"
The irony of your original comment is that the PC should actually be the niche product because most people never needed it. The PC should be meant for professionals in the fields of audio, video, math, science and programming.
The irony of your original comment is that the PC should actually be the niche product because most people never needed it. The PC should be meant for professionals in the fields of audio, video, math, science and programming.
>"The irony of your original comment is that the PC should actually be the niche product because most people never needed it."
I don't disagree. In fact, the desktop has already become unnecessary for 99% of the population. I still enjoy mine under certain circumstances, but after the tablet, it'd be the first device to go.
I don't disagree. In fact, the desktop has already become unnecessary for 99% of the population. I still enjoy mine under certain circumstances, but after the tablet, it'd be the first device to go.
>Are there really a bunch of people sitting around saying: Well, I'm idle for the next 2 hours, with cell reception. I'll watch a movie. But a 4" high def screen won't cut it, and an 11" or 13" screen is too much. The 9" screen of my iPad is just right.?
That's me every lunchtime (not a movie, but a 30 minute TV episode). Maybe nowadays you can get an ultrabook that would be light enough and have the battery life to carry around without thinking about it, but my laptop is more bulk than I want to lug back and forth to work in my bag every day, and I'd have to remember to charge it in the evenings. My Transformer goes everywhere with me, is comfortable to watch things on while holding it in my hands (something that's not true even for the same device with a keyboard attached, and certainly not on any laptop I've tried) and as long as I remember to charge it one day out of three I never run out.
That's me every lunchtime (not a movie, but a 30 minute TV episode). Maybe nowadays you can get an ultrabook that would be light enough and have the battery life to carry around without thinking about it, but my laptop is more bulk than I want to lug back and forth to work in my bag every day, and I'd have to remember to charge it in the evenings. My Transformer goes everywhere with me, is comfortable to watch things on while holding it in my hands (something that's not true even for the same device with a keyboard attached, and certainly not on any laptop I've tried) and as long as I remember to charge it one day out of three I never run out.
I think the right question to ask is: What are most people's computing needs, and are tablets a better fit to those needs? I think the answer to that question is becoming pretty obvious.
Most people already have a PC, and it can do anything a tablet can do. But if a tablet is a better fit, in a few years these people will be asking themselves why they should buy a new PC instead of a new tablet.
Most people already have a PC, and it can do anything a tablet can do. But if a tablet is a better fit, in a few years these people will be asking themselves why they should buy a new PC instead of a new tablet.
I disagree completely. I wrote this comment about a year ago and it's still true today. A few details have obviously changed, but I still love my iPad 2 and use it several hours per day. Here's the comment:
"The iPad is a tool and toy you might not need, but if used to the max it'll probably enhance your life in some noticable way.
Every single morning, while sipping coffee and waiting for my omelette to finish cooking, I catch up on the latest news through Reeder, the first RSS reader I've actually enjoyed using. I also check my mail to see if there's anything important I need to respond to right away.
When I'm finished eating and catching up to the latest news, I grab my iPad and go upstairs for my exercize. While doing strenght training I use my iPad to quickly make a note of how many reps and how much I lifted. After I'm done with my strength training, I take a run either outside or on my threadmill. If I take the run on the threadmill, I'll use the iPad for watching a video, maybe South Park or TED.
After I've showered, groomed, brushed my teeth and flossed, it's time to start working. When I work my iPad is always lying on the desk next to my laptop. I use it for:
* Displaying my ToDo-list (the Hit List)
* Displaying the email I'm working on.
* Displaying some relevant notes to the work I'm doing (Evernote).
* Displaying a PDF or website containing documentation to what I'm working on.
* As an extra screen (AirDisplay) for Photoshop tool pads and similar.
* VNC or SSH to another computer
* The occational check of HN, Twitter or Facebook.
* Calculator
* Calendar (Week Cal HD)
Yup, everything I've mentioned could be done on a normal laptop. However, it's incredibly useful to have an extra screen for displaying relevant information that'll never be obscured by application windows covering the information.
After I'm satisfied with my work for the day, I might hang out with my friends, perhaps take a picnic in the park. My iPad is always accessible in my manpurse. If a customer has an emergency problem, I can quickly and easily log into their server and fix the problem (Textastic/Prompt). If I get a brilliant idea, I'll note it down in Evernote and analyse it with the Business Model app. Maybe I want to think deeply about my business - I'll just open Dropbox and read through some business documents about future plans or surf on some of my competitor's sites through Mercury Browser.
When I'm back home I might do some more work or chill out with some games. Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible through the Virtual Window control mode.
Right before I go to bed, I write in my diary (Day One) and finish my TODO-list for tomorrow."
"The iPad is a tool and toy you might not need, but if used to the max it'll probably enhance your life in some noticable way.
Every single morning, while sipping coffee and waiting for my omelette to finish cooking, I catch up on the latest news through Reeder, the first RSS reader I've actually enjoyed using. I also check my mail to see if there's anything important I need to respond to right away.
When I'm finished eating and catching up to the latest news, I grab my iPad and go upstairs for my exercize. While doing strenght training I use my iPad to quickly make a note of how many reps and how much I lifted. After I'm done with my strength training, I take a run either outside or on my threadmill. If I take the run on the threadmill, I'll use the iPad for watching a video, maybe South Park or TED.
After I've showered, groomed, brushed my teeth and flossed, it's time to start working. When I work my iPad is always lying on the desk next to my laptop. I use it for:
* Displaying my ToDo-list (the Hit List)
* Displaying the email I'm working on.
* Displaying some relevant notes to the work I'm doing (Evernote).
* Displaying a PDF or website containing documentation to what I'm working on.
* As an extra screen (AirDisplay) for Photoshop tool pads and similar.
* VNC or SSH to another computer
* The occational check of HN, Twitter or Facebook.
* Calculator
* Calendar (Week Cal HD)
Yup, everything I've mentioned could be done on a normal laptop. However, it's incredibly useful to have an extra screen for displaying relevant information that'll never be obscured by application windows covering the information.
After I'm satisfied with my work for the day, I might hang out with my friends, perhaps take a picnic in the park. My iPad is always accessible in my manpurse. If a customer has an emergency problem, I can quickly and easily log into their server and fix the problem (Textastic/Prompt). If I get a brilliant idea, I'll note it down in Evernote and analyse it with the Business Model app. Maybe I want to think deeply about my business - I'll just open Dropbox and read through some business documents about future plans or surf on some of my competitor's sites through Mercury Browser.
When I'm back home I might do some more work or chill out with some games. Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible through the Virtual Window control mode.
Right before I go to bed, I write in my diary (Day One) and finish my TODO-list for tomorrow."
This reads more like a pardodied ad for all tablet devices than anything else, even more once you remove the plugs for your favorite apps... but boy do you sure sound like hip cool guy on the go.
Right, and nearly everything on your list can be done either more efficiently or cheaper with a phone and laptop with an external monitor. We both understand that; the tablet is a luxury. That's sort of my point: you haven't replaced any devices, you merely added another one in. Not every wants (or can afford) that excess, and the tablet isn't good enough on its own.
>"Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible"
That's a slight exaggeration! If you are at all serious about gaming, the iPad isn't even in the conversation. Again, it's pointing to the iPad and telling me how awesome it is at something, but then having to qualify that statement because it isn't as good/cheap/efficient for that purpose as a device I already own.
>"Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible"
That's a slight exaggeration! If you are at all serious about gaming, the iPad isn't even in the conversation. Again, it's pointing to the iPad and telling me how awesome it is at something, but then having to qualify that statement because it isn't as good/cheap/efficient for that purpose as a device I already own.
> and nearly everything on your list can be done either more efficiently or cheaper with a phone and laptop with an external monitor
He likes the rich quality of apps (Reeder the first RSS reader he likes, Day One, etc.) and he is obviously carrying it around.. A LOT. And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising, etc. I don't know about you but I would rather have a tablet than carry a laptop (even a 11 inch MacBook Air, that's super light, small, and if you only put it to sleep no boot time) all over the place. We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant. You could more efficiently (by some measures) and more cheaply do all of what he does WITHOUT ANY COMPUTING DEVICE. But is that the point?
> haven't replaced any devices... and the tablet isn't good enough on its own
Did your cellphone replace your landline? Did your computer replace your calculator?
> the tablet is a luxury
Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that. Visit the poor streets of India and you'll realize that. Anything that's beyond your basic needs is by definition luxury.
He likes the rich quality of apps (Reeder the first RSS reader he likes, Day One, etc.) and he is obviously carrying it around.. A LOT. And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising, etc. I don't know about you but I would rather have a tablet than carry a laptop (even a 11 inch MacBook Air, that's super light, small, and if you only put it to sleep no boot time) all over the place. We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant. You could more efficiently (by some measures) and more cheaply do all of what he does WITHOUT ANY COMPUTING DEVICE. But is that the point?
> haven't replaced any devices... and the tablet isn't good enough on its own
Did your cellphone replace your landline? Did your computer replace your calculator?
> the tablet is a luxury
Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that. Visit the poor streets of India and you'll realize that. Anything that's beyond your basic needs is by definition luxury.
Are we having a battle of anecdotes? I have my own experience owning all of the devices. I'm not biased against my tablet, I'm telling you my experience with owning one and how I use it.
>"And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising"
I'm sipping coffee at my desktop right now. And I sip coffee with my laptop ALL the time. Exercising? Well, I think it's ridiculous you'd carry a tablet rather than a phone.
>"We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant."
No, we're not, because I disagree. A laptop with Windows 7 is going to make far more things "easier and pleasant" in the real world. Once again, what can your laptop do that the iPad can't? Lots. What can the tablet do that the laptop can't? Nothing. It's just easier to hold.
>"Did your cellphone replace your landline?"
Yes, it did. For me, my mother, father, sister and almost everyone I know under 30.
>"Did your computer replace your calculator?"
Uh, it most certainly did. If I need to do some basic arithmetic, I'm using Excel, or a calculator on my phone.
>"Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that."
That's one hair away from Godwin's Law. Yeah, you're right. Everything I have is a luxury compared to some poor sucker in Africa. Thanks for pointing that out.
It's like you're trying to convince me that I should be using a tablet more. I own them all, and I use whatever tool is most convenient. The tablet is only ever my "go to" device in very specific cases that I've mentioned. I like it, I'm not selling it, but it's not overly useful. It wouldn't affect my productivity in any way if it disappeared tomorrow. And, to bring it full circle to the original article, it isn't because it's an Android instead of an Apple; it's because tablets just aren't that advantageous.
>"And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising"
I'm sipping coffee at my desktop right now. And I sip coffee with my laptop ALL the time. Exercising? Well, I think it's ridiculous you'd carry a tablet rather than a phone.
>"We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant."
No, we're not, because I disagree. A laptop with Windows 7 is going to make far more things "easier and pleasant" in the real world. Once again, what can your laptop do that the iPad can't? Lots. What can the tablet do that the laptop can't? Nothing. It's just easier to hold.
>"Did your cellphone replace your landline?"
Yes, it did. For me, my mother, father, sister and almost everyone I know under 30.
>"Did your computer replace your calculator?"
Uh, it most certainly did. If I need to do some basic arithmetic, I'm using Excel, or a calculator on my phone.
>"Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that."
That's one hair away from Godwin's Law. Yeah, you're right. Everything I have is a luxury compared to some poor sucker in Africa. Thanks for pointing that out.
It's like you're trying to convince me that I should be using a tablet more. I own them all, and I use whatever tool is most convenient. The tablet is only ever my "go to" device in very specific cases that I've mentioned. I like it, I'm not selling it, but it's not overly useful. It wouldn't affect my productivity in any way if it disappeared tomorrow. And, to bring it full circle to the original article, it isn't because it's an Android instead of an Apple; it's because tablets just aren't that advantageous.
I agree that choosing a computing device is a First World Problem. But that's not on point. GP was saying it's a luxury in the sense that it's completely redundant for most of us who already have a laptop, phone, and workstation. In that sense you're paying $500 and up for the privilege of something that's slightly more convenient to hand than a laptop, and slightly more convenient to eye than a phone.
Yes, in fact my cell and my computer did displace the earlier technology completely.
This "big touchable surface" may be powerful enough eventually to be a new way of looking at the world. I think it needs better feedback first.
Yes, in fact my cell and my computer did displace the earlier technology completely.
This "big touchable surface" may be powerful enough eventually to be a new way of looking at the world. I think it needs better feedback first.
The joy of using the iPad comes exactly from the fact that it is a "single app visible at once" device. I would argue that most of the things I mentioned are actually more efficient on the iPad than as a window on a laptop/computer display. The focus a single "window" makes it a lot better for reading, browsing, pictures, video and other ways of consuming content.
Sure, you might consider the iPad as a luxury for the minority who also needs a regular computer/laptop since the iPad isn't sufficient for them - and you're right. A few hundred dollars is not much though for a "luxury device" that'll you'll use several hours a day for years.
It's obviously also way more portable than a laptop. The Macbook Air 11' is very light, but it's still double the price and almost double the weight of the iPad, which makes the iPad a better choice in my view for the bigger than smartphone device you'll take with you everywhere.
I'm not claiming that the iPad is the best game device, not at all (it's great for casual games though). The Virtual Window mode in Rage HD is incredibly immersive and exhausting since it's like virtual reality, but I never intended that sentence to sound as the iPad was the best platform for immersive games. It's not.
Sure, you might consider the iPad as a luxury for the minority who also needs a regular computer/laptop since the iPad isn't sufficient for them - and you're right. A few hundred dollars is not much though for a "luxury device" that'll you'll use several hours a day for years.
It's obviously also way more portable than a laptop. The Macbook Air 11' is very light, but it's still double the price and almost double the weight of the iPad, which makes the iPad a better choice in my view for the bigger than smartphone device you'll take with you everywhere.
I'm not claiming that the iPad is the best game device, not at all (it's great for casual games though). The Virtual Window mode in Rage HD is incredibly immersive and exhausting since it's like virtual reality, but I never intended that sentence to sound as the iPad was the best platform for immersive games. It's not.
Perhaps you should just switch to the ratpoison window manager. :-)
http://www.nongnu.org/ratpoison/
http://www.nongnu.org/ratpoison/
> "everything on your list can be done either more efficiently or cheaper with a phone and laptop with an external monitor."
So why did you include "with an external monitor"? By your own reasoning the external monitor is naught but a luxury and anything done via it can be done as efficiently or more cheaply without it.
It seems that you do recognize that form factor, comfort and convenience do matter, and that even if you already have a device that's functionally equivalent, additional devices that enhance your actual day to day computing experience aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality.
You're just choosing to apply it to tablets in a way that you don't for smartphones themselves. After all, your logic suggests we could write off the smartphone itself -- or even any phone -- as a 'luxury' that presents nothing not already provided by a 3G laptop with VoIP app.
So why did you include "with an external monitor"? By your own reasoning the external monitor is naught but a luxury and anything done via it can be done as efficiently or more cheaply without it.
It seems that you do recognize that form factor, comfort and convenience do matter, and that even if you already have a device that's functionally equivalent, additional devices that enhance your actual day to day computing experience aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality.
You're just choosing to apply it to tablets in a way that you don't for smartphones themselves. After all, your logic suggests we could write off the smartphone itself -- or even any phone -- as a 'luxury' that presents nothing not already provided by a 3G laptop with VoIP app.
>"So why did you include "with an external monitor"?"
Because if you're sitting there with a laptop and a phone, and wondering what to buy next, buying a $150 monitor is going to be far more useful to you than a $700 tablet. But you don't need either.
>"aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality."
I never said they were irrelevant. I own one.
The article tries to blame Android's failings in the tablet space on their lack of ability to get it together. I believe, based on personal experience, the real problem is that tablets themselves just aren't that great. Sure, the iPad is incredibly successful. However, let's not underestimate Apple's rabid fans, incredible marketing or that fact that they were the first to build a fantastically futuristic device. But it's not really providing me with anything I don't already have. That's usually what I base my consumption on.
Someone else in the thread said something along these lines: people are buying "iPads", because they are cool and there is some status tied to them. People aren't buying "tablets" because they're not very useful.
Because if you're sitting there with a laptop and a phone, and wondering what to buy next, buying a $150 monitor is going to be far more useful to you than a $700 tablet. But you don't need either.
>"aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality."
I never said they were irrelevant. I own one.
The article tries to blame Android's failings in the tablet space on their lack of ability to get it together. I believe, based on personal experience, the real problem is that tablets themselves just aren't that great. Sure, the iPad is incredibly successful. However, let's not underestimate Apple's rabid fans, incredible marketing or that fact that they were the first to build a fantastically futuristic device. But it's not really providing me with anything I don't already have. That's usually what I base my consumption on.
Someone else in the thread said something along these lines: people are buying "iPads", because they are cool and there is some status tied to them. People aren't buying "tablets" because they're not very useful.
> "a $150 monitor is going to be far more useful to you than a $700 tablet"
That's going to heavily hinge on workload and day-to-day schedule. Which is the entire point: you're willing to accept 'a luxury' as useful when it fits your computing schedule, but you don't seem to recognize that anyone else might be buying a different luxury because they have a different computing schedule.
Tablets may not be that great for you. But that doesn't mean they're not that great. Your argument is blurring your absolutely legitimate personal opinion on tablets with a judgment about everyone else's opinion on them. And that's where you're wrong. Your line of thought rests on a logical fallacy. Not everyone computes like you.
And here's a test for your theory that "people are buying iPads for social status reasons": How many people?
How many tablets have to sell before you'd concede that maybe people are buying them because they find them useful?
How many people have to upgrade those iPads before you'd be convinced?
How many people have to let their PCs languish for how long, in deference to buying/upgrading tablets before you'd concede that you were wrong?
How many years do tablets have to continue to sell before you'd accept them as evidence of something other than fashion?
Is there any amount of data that will change your mind?
Or are you already reflexively rationalizing how your theory could continue to be true even if a decade from now, and billions of tablets from now, they're still going strong?
That's going to heavily hinge on workload and day-to-day schedule. Which is the entire point: you're willing to accept 'a luxury' as useful when it fits your computing schedule, but you don't seem to recognize that anyone else might be buying a different luxury because they have a different computing schedule.
Tablets may not be that great for you. But that doesn't mean they're not that great. Your argument is blurring your absolutely legitimate personal opinion on tablets with a judgment about everyone else's opinion on them. And that's where you're wrong. Your line of thought rests on a logical fallacy. Not everyone computes like you.
And here's a test for your theory that "people are buying iPads for social status reasons": How many people?
How many tablets have to sell before you'd concede that maybe people are buying them because they find them useful?
How many people have to upgrade those iPads before you'd be convinced?
How many people have to let their PCs languish for how long, in deference to buying/upgrading tablets before you'd concede that you were wrong?
How many years do tablets have to continue to sell before you'd accept them as evidence of something other than fashion?
Is there any amount of data that will change your mind?
Or are you already reflexively rationalizing how your theory could continue to be true even if a decade from now, and billions of tablets from now, they're still going strong?
> if you can replace all of your computing with an iPad, then you may as well be using just a phone
Watching a movie, browsing the web, reading books, PDFs or news on a phone? I can't be the only one who feels nauseous after staring at a 3-4" screen for more than an hour. And the average user is growing older pretty much everywhere around the world.
Watching a movie, browsing the web, reading books, PDFs or news on a phone? I can't be the only one who feels nauseous after staring at a 3-4" screen for more than an hour. And the average user is growing older pretty much everywhere around the world.
Part of the point of the article, is that a tablet is a poor fit in the Android ecosystem because a large proportion of the people that would be potential tablet purchasers already have significantly larger screens.
Mine has a 4.3" screen, and when commuting these days, most people using their Android phones around me have phones with bigger screens than that - all the way up to the monstrous Galaxy Note (5.3").
So in the Android market, the tablets are being squeezed from the bottom by phones with significantly larger screens, and from the top by ultra-books. And then it's fragmented into the 7" and 10" form factors, with a glut of really low priced alternatives in the 7" segment, which is also competing with the Kindle.
Apple has spaced out the form factors in a way that creates room for the iPad for people who stick with Apple products. For people who don't stick with Apple products, it's hit and miss - if you pick a large phone, and a small laptop, or a big laptop + a netbook, and possibly throwing a Kindle into the mix, and the additional benefit of a tablet diminishes greatly.
Mine has a 4.3" screen, and when commuting these days, most people using their Android phones around me have phones with bigger screens than that - all the way up to the monstrous Galaxy Note (5.3").
So in the Android market, the tablets are being squeezed from the bottom by phones with significantly larger screens, and from the top by ultra-books. And then it's fragmented into the 7" and 10" form factors, with a glut of really low priced alternatives in the 7" segment, which is also competing with the Kindle.
Apple has spaced out the form factors in a way that creates room for the iPad for people who stick with Apple products. For people who don't stick with Apple products, it's hit and miss - if you pick a large phone, and a small laptop, or a big laptop + a netbook, and possibly throwing a Kindle into the mix, and the additional benefit of a tablet diminishes greatly.
Actually, the MacBook Air 11" is very similar in form factor to the iPad.</fact> <anecdote>I have seen one customer leaving an Apple reseller store in frustration because he couldn't decide between both. So this problem exists within Apple's ecosystem as well.
Why stop at a 9 inch screen then? Who said that's the ideal? Get a laptop. Slightly bulkier. Far more versatile, cheaper.
A niche product that last quarter surpassed PC shipments from the biggest PC vendor, HP?
The PC industry is far, far bigger than HP.
I agree, do you also agree that you can hardly call it a niche with those sales numbers?
I think we're experiencing an issue with the semantics of "niche". By niche, I don't necessary mean small. I mean specific. If you're rich (pretty much all of us here, I'd reckon), you get to have the iPad as a media consumption device, or as a stop-gap between your computer and e-reader (like me!). It's for people who already have 2 or 3 computing devices. That's pretty niche, even in North America.
As far as the success, I believe (my opinion, obviously) that many people bought iPads with the intention of replacing their laptops. These people have discovered (or will) that that isn't very practical. In my line of work, I sit in an inordinate amount of meetings. When the iPad came out there were so many people tap-tap-tapping away on their screens, taking notes. Today, there are far less; most of those people are back to their laptops. It's just an anecdote, but my personal experience is the same.
Who knows, maybe this is our aversion to change? I don't doubt that tablets are the future.
As far as the success, I believe (my opinion, obviously) that many people bought iPads with the intention of replacing their laptops. These people have discovered (or will) that that isn't very practical. In my line of work, I sit in an inordinate amount of meetings. When the iPad came out there were so many people tap-tap-tapping away on their screens, taking notes. Today, there are far less; most of those people are back to their laptops. It's just an anecdote, but my personal experience is the same.
Who knows, maybe this is our aversion to change? I don't doubt that tablets are the future.
I think it's cherry picking. It's a comparison made to sound impressive while obscuring the actual numbers behind it.
You have it exactly backwards. If you need an actual laptop or computer then you are niche. Most people just need to be able to consume and have a reasonably sized screen. An iPad at less-than-arms length is about as good as a desktop monitor sitting on a desk. A phone isn't good enough because the screen is too small for comfortable use at all distances.
I'm not sure how owning an iPad would change anything.
I'm thinking of having mine surgically implanted.
It does everything a smartphone does, and much better (actual phone use aside, for which I have a tiny it's-just-a-phone). It can remote-login to any computer I need, extending all those desktops & racks to wherever I am without having to set up yet another computer. The key is "anywhere anytime": check status of a long compile at work on a whim while I'm in bed? done. Code review someone's project while I'm on the beach? rather not, but done anyway. Walking, riding, standing around, munching lunch, whatever wherever? instant online with access to anything. Yeah it's not optimal for development, but it extends every use to wherever I am. A laptop still wants a lap, must be unfolded, aggregates "computer" use to compete with the desktop ... the tablet extends it instead.
I'm thinking of having mine surgically implanted.
It does everything a smartphone does, and much better (actual phone use aside, for which I have a tiny it's-just-a-phone). It can remote-login to any computer I need, extending all those desktops & racks to wherever I am without having to set up yet another computer. The key is "anywhere anytime": check status of a long compile at work on a whim while I'm in bed? done. Code review someone's project while I'm on the beach? rather not, but done anyway. Walking, riding, standing around, munching lunch, whatever wherever? instant online with access to anything. Yeah it's not optimal for development, but it extends every use to wherever I am. A laptop still wants a lap, must be unfolded, aggregates "computer" use to compete with the desktop ... the tablet extends it instead.
Controversial topic with a linkbait headline, I'm assuming the site needed some hits. My understanding is he thinks an entire niche industry should just give up because of his personal preferences? This is a badly written opinion piece that's too easily discounted. He does makes some interesting points in his ranting but overall his article makes little sense.
I can do it too, I have a Galaxy Tab 2 and absolutely love it, therefore if you don't have one then you're stupid and your tablet sucks. The fact that you might actually love your tablet for reasons different than why I love mine means nothing in my attempt to publicize my ego.
I can do it too, I have a Galaxy Tab 2 and absolutely love it, therefore if you don't have one then you're stupid and your tablet sucks. The fact that you might actually love your tablet for reasons different than why I love mine means nothing in my attempt to publicize my ego.
Admittedly, he's relying on anecdotal evidence, but the conclusions he reaches don't strike me as unreasonable, and if the lackluster sales of Android tables are any indication, his experience is more likely to be generalizable than yours.
Also, I don't think he ever argues that anyone should give up (where are you getting that?). Rather, he suggests that Google should get their asses in gear and improve their offerings on a few specific fronts if they hope to compete with Apple and MS.
Also, I don't think he ever argues that anyone should give up (where are you getting that?). Rather, he suggests that Google should get their asses in gear and improve their offerings on a few specific fronts if they hope to compete with Apple and MS.
Ok, here are my thoughts on how I break down the article.
The intro and first section have nothing to do with anything other than his own personal preferences. He doesn't use his tablet that often so he's assuming others have the same experience. But then he talks so highly of the iPad as if the experience with it is simply better only because it's an iPad. Doesn't it seem likely that the possibly experience he describes for an Android tablet can possibly be the same with iPad? With him apparently it is not. The iPad is better because he seems to think it is. Somehow it's just better with little or no evidence as to what he's talking about. He uses his phone more than his tablet. So what? Seems to me he bought something he didn't want or need.
By the way, I like the iPad but I'll never buy one. Why? Personal preference. I don't even have to say that the iPad and iTunes have problems that Apple really needs to work on or Google/Microsoft will take over the market.
In the second section he does make some good points as to why the iPad is so successful but he couldn't help but toss in his own opinion yet again about the Android tablets. Android bad, iPad good. We get it already. The only real reason he gives for Android falling behind is that Google is late to the game with content, which no one disputes. But then he goes right back into tossing out his personal preferences as if it matters. He apparently likes iTunes over what Google offers. That's nice; nice for him. I, for one, have little problems with how I get content for my Android tablet. My opinion in the matter has as much weight as his. In an attempt to prove his point about design preferences he links to another article complaining about the Play Store that also happens to be on the same site. I didn't bother going there because I'm sure it's more iPad good, Android bad, because, well, because of a "I think so" attitude. But then again I didn't read it so I could be wrong.
Concerning content, I notice he didn't bring up Amazon's Kindle Fire which directly addresses this issue. From what I understand the Kindle Fire is a big seller but I guess that's not an Android device anymore?
Then when he finally gets to the real issue he blames the wrong people. Adoption rates are low for upgrading Android to the latest version is because of the hardware vendors, not Google. That's the core of the problem with this article. Comparing Android tablets with the iPad is not the same as comparing Apple to Google. It's the same mistake too many people make with comparing Apple to Microsoft when what they're really doing is comparing Mac to PC, it is not the same thing. Why do I think Apple is so successful with the iPad? Because they are damn good at creating devices and marketing them. Google is a freaking search engine company that sells ads. Do we not see the difference here?
He talks about the lack of Android tablet specific apps. But he himself describes why this is. Why make a tablet specific app for Android when so many of the phones and tablets are not that different in the first place? There's not much difference between a 4.5" phone screen and a 7" tablet screen (which I'm guessing a large number of Android tablets sold are) so it becomes more of a fragmentation issue of hardware features not relating to the screen. So far there is a significant difference between an iPhone and an iPad that many apps probably do need a tablet version. Plus that 225,000 number for iPad apps is just marketing talk. Quantity does not equal quality.
Also, him stating that a phone app will always look like a phone app on a tablet is yet another personal preference. I have apps on both my phone and tablet that is the same version and I have no problem with that whatsoever. Again, it's an opinion but I admit it's biased because I have a 7" tablet. A 10" tablet would probably be an issue, which it is with the iPad.
Android developers don't make money from people paying for apps. So what? Developers don't get to dictate terms in how they make money in any given market. Just because one market hands out cash like crazy doesn't mean they all will. If you want to be in a market then you go by what that market wants. If that means $4.99 on iTunes and free with ads on Android then so be it. I've also seen complaints lately that the iOS platform is not the cash cow it used to be. Factors involving people paying out less and just the sheer amount of competition is the usual. Granted, I've only read this so it's no different a comment than what he's making about the Android market.
Then there's the Surface tablet. A tablet that we know next to nothing about but he's already practically labeling it an Android killer. It might be, it might not. We don't know and won't know for a while. But his personal opinion has kicked in again and this barely existing product is a winner to him. I personally will wait until I can get my hands on one.
I don't agree with his conclusion simply because I feel he doesn't fully understand what Android is and what it means. He only focuses on tablets and I say that tablets are a niche market in the Android ecosystem. Not everybody who wants or needs Android wants or needs a tablet. Until recently Android has been about phones, high and low end. It has been about spreading a free and/or low-cost OS to multiple devices. I don't seen anybody making a cheap $50 computer for emerging markets running iOS, they are using Android. His conclusion assumes that Google can or will do anything about tablets. I say they don't need to, Android is doing exactly what Google has always wanted; to spread like crazy. Most of his complaints are nothing for Google to care about, that's for the individual companies that are creating these tablets to worry over. At least in the final paragraph he finally admits the current state of Android tablets have very little to do with Google itself. But if he admits that then what's the point of the article in the first place?
Where do I get the "give up" part? His second to last paragraph screams give up to me. But, my interpretation.
As I said, I own a Galaxy Tab 2 and I absolutely love it. I use this device every day for various things and it meets my expectations just fine. I also still use my Android phone and I fail to see the problem with that.
In the end, this is just my opinion but I admit to that.
The intro and first section have nothing to do with anything other than his own personal preferences. He doesn't use his tablet that often so he's assuming others have the same experience. But then he talks so highly of the iPad as if the experience with it is simply better only because it's an iPad. Doesn't it seem likely that the possibly experience he describes for an Android tablet can possibly be the same with iPad? With him apparently it is not. The iPad is better because he seems to think it is. Somehow it's just better with little or no evidence as to what he's talking about. He uses his phone more than his tablet. So what? Seems to me he bought something he didn't want or need.
By the way, I like the iPad but I'll never buy one. Why? Personal preference. I don't even have to say that the iPad and iTunes have problems that Apple really needs to work on or Google/Microsoft will take over the market.
In the second section he does make some good points as to why the iPad is so successful but he couldn't help but toss in his own opinion yet again about the Android tablets. Android bad, iPad good. We get it already. The only real reason he gives for Android falling behind is that Google is late to the game with content, which no one disputes. But then he goes right back into tossing out his personal preferences as if it matters. He apparently likes iTunes over what Google offers. That's nice; nice for him. I, for one, have little problems with how I get content for my Android tablet. My opinion in the matter has as much weight as his. In an attempt to prove his point about design preferences he links to another article complaining about the Play Store that also happens to be on the same site. I didn't bother going there because I'm sure it's more iPad good, Android bad, because, well, because of a "I think so" attitude. But then again I didn't read it so I could be wrong.
Concerning content, I notice he didn't bring up Amazon's Kindle Fire which directly addresses this issue. From what I understand the Kindle Fire is a big seller but I guess that's not an Android device anymore?
Then when he finally gets to the real issue he blames the wrong people. Adoption rates are low for upgrading Android to the latest version is because of the hardware vendors, not Google. That's the core of the problem with this article. Comparing Android tablets with the iPad is not the same as comparing Apple to Google. It's the same mistake too many people make with comparing Apple to Microsoft when what they're really doing is comparing Mac to PC, it is not the same thing. Why do I think Apple is so successful with the iPad? Because they are damn good at creating devices and marketing them. Google is a freaking search engine company that sells ads. Do we not see the difference here?
He talks about the lack of Android tablet specific apps. But he himself describes why this is. Why make a tablet specific app for Android when so many of the phones and tablets are not that different in the first place? There's not much difference between a 4.5" phone screen and a 7" tablet screen (which I'm guessing a large number of Android tablets sold are) so it becomes more of a fragmentation issue of hardware features not relating to the screen. So far there is a significant difference between an iPhone and an iPad that many apps probably do need a tablet version. Plus that 225,000 number for iPad apps is just marketing talk. Quantity does not equal quality.
Also, him stating that a phone app will always look like a phone app on a tablet is yet another personal preference. I have apps on both my phone and tablet that is the same version and I have no problem with that whatsoever. Again, it's an opinion but I admit it's biased because I have a 7" tablet. A 10" tablet would probably be an issue, which it is with the iPad.
Android developers don't make money from people paying for apps. So what? Developers don't get to dictate terms in how they make money in any given market. Just because one market hands out cash like crazy doesn't mean they all will. If you want to be in a market then you go by what that market wants. If that means $4.99 on iTunes and free with ads on Android then so be it. I've also seen complaints lately that the iOS platform is not the cash cow it used to be. Factors involving people paying out less and just the sheer amount of competition is the usual. Granted, I've only read this so it's no different a comment than what he's making about the Android market.
Then there's the Surface tablet. A tablet that we know next to nothing about but he's already practically labeling it an Android killer. It might be, it might not. We don't know and won't know for a while. But his personal opinion has kicked in again and this barely existing product is a winner to him. I personally will wait until I can get my hands on one.
I don't agree with his conclusion simply because I feel he doesn't fully understand what Android is and what it means. He only focuses on tablets and I say that tablets are a niche market in the Android ecosystem. Not everybody who wants or needs Android wants or needs a tablet. Until recently Android has been about phones, high and low end. It has been about spreading a free and/or low-cost OS to multiple devices. I don't seen anybody making a cheap $50 computer for emerging markets running iOS, they are using Android. His conclusion assumes that Google can or will do anything about tablets. I say they don't need to, Android is doing exactly what Google has always wanted; to spread like crazy. Most of his complaints are nothing for Google to care about, that's for the individual companies that are creating these tablets to worry over. At least in the final paragraph he finally admits the current state of Android tablets have very little to do with Google itself. But if he admits that then what's the point of the article in the first place?
Where do I get the "give up" part? His second to last paragraph screams give up to me. But, my interpretation.
As I said, I own a Galaxy Tab 2 and I absolutely love it. I use this device every day for various things and it meets my expectations just fine. I also still use my Android phone and I fail to see the problem with that.
In the end, this is just my opinion but I admit to that.
I have an iPhone, iPad, and 13" MacBook Air. Each device fits a very specific use profile and has a place in my particular lifestyle. This is by design.
Android phone and tablet manufacturers are busy destroying the ecosystem by having a wide array of sizes and capabilities.
Android phones are increasingly cannibalizing the Android tablet market.
And Android tablets are, for some unknown reason, trying to shrink down to phone size (see the rise of ~7 inch tablets).
Leading to a confusing mess of 3.5-5.3 inch phones and 7-12 inch tablets. Eventually there's going to be a blend of devices straight thru 3.5 - 10".
And since we as developers know the android fragmentation problem is very real (I used to develop android apps for two years), it's going to produce a downward spiral of app quality as developers focus on certain form factors to the detriment of others.
Say what you will about Apple's "openness", but Apple's insistance on maintaining distinct product positions has absolutely proven itself in the market. Android's ecosystem is a disaster.
Android phone and tablet manufacturers are busy destroying the ecosystem by having a wide array of sizes and capabilities.
Android phones are increasingly cannibalizing the Android tablet market.
And Android tablets are, for some unknown reason, trying to shrink down to phone size (see the rise of ~7 inch tablets).
Leading to a confusing mess of 3.5-5.3 inch phones and 7-12 inch tablets. Eventually there's going to be a blend of devices straight thru 3.5 - 10".
And since we as developers know the android fragmentation problem is very real (I used to develop android apps for two years), it's going to produce a downward spiral of app quality as developers focus on certain form factors to the detriment of others.
Say what you will about Apple's "openness", but Apple's insistance on maintaining distinct product positions has absolutely proven itself in the market. Android's ecosystem is a disaster.
Sure, fragmentation is bad, when you compare it to a monoculture like iOS. However, PCs managed to thrive just fine for decades, and I'm sure Android will do just fine as well.
TVs and washing machines and refrigerators and watches are starting to run their own operating systems. Which OS do you see your TV running? Because I'm pretty sure they'll all be running Android soon.
TVs and washing machines and refrigerators and watches are starting to run their own operating systems. Which OS do you see your TV running? Because I'm pretty sure they'll all be running Android soon.
Did Microsoft allow hardware companies to customize the OS interface? Did Microsoft assign hardware companies the responsibility of delivering OS updates to users? Did Microsoft let hardware companies ship 2-3-4 year old versions of Windows with new hardware?
The Android == Windows analogy is a faulty one.
The Android == Windows analogy is a faulty one.
Why a disaster? It's in fact thriving, for example I've backed 'Pocket tv' project and that's a device for 40+ inches screens. I think that this diversity is good, not bad. I've also developed one android app for a period of time and fiddled with some other concepts/demos. And for me at least, the experience was quite nice. I like many concepts (intents, services/activites, application hooks for common actions, ...) -> hadn't found it tedious at all.
[deleted]
I think this article misses it for me. He's almost there.
yes I had an iPod and an iPhone first, but I never use my iPad for iTunes media. I listen to podcasts and music on my Phone. My wife and kids use the iPad every day and never for iTunes. They use it for web browsing, games and edutainment like Bobo Explores Light, or interactive books. At bedtime I sometimes read stories to the kids from free eBooks, such as the Just So Stories and let them take turns turning the pages.
For us it really is the apps. When the iPad came out, from day one there were garage band and pages to show what it was capable of and a bunch of other apps, plus every iPhone app on the planet worked fine. Skype, if only in emulation mode, was a huge deal for us. I actually waited for the iPad2, so there were a raft of excellent creative apps and games available for us from day one.
I read comics on it, read and look up stuff in PDFs (I'm an old-skool tabletop roleplayer) and I'm learning Lua using Codea. Apps, apps, apps.
yes I had an iPod and an iPhone first, but I never use my iPad for iTunes media. I listen to podcasts and music on my Phone. My wife and kids use the iPad every day and never for iTunes. They use it for web browsing, games and edutainment like Bobo Explores Light, or interactive books. At bedtime I sometimes read stories to the kids from free eBooks, such as the Just So Stories and let them take turns turning the pages.
For us it really is the apps. When the iPad came out, from day one there were garage band and pages to show what it was capable of and a bunch of other apps, plus every iPhone app on the planet worked fine. Skype, if only in emulation mode, was a huge deal for us. I actually waited for the iPad2, so there were a raft of excellent creative apps and games available for us from day one.
I read comics on it, read and look up stuff in PDFs (I'm an old-skool tabletop roleplayer) and I'm learning Lua using Codea. Apps, apps, apps.
I wanted to address his third point, productivity. Android is sorely lacking in productivity apps, and some enterprise technologies (Cisco IPSec VPN). Unfortunately, while the iPad is improving, its still pretty weak in that area. Of the 225k iPad specific apps, there are only a handful that try to replicate the complexity of a desktop app. Most apps aren't that ambitious. Omnigroup deserves special recognition--OmniGraffle, OmniOutliner, OmniPlan, and OmniFocus, are full scale applications. Apple, of course, has the iWork apps plus iMovie and iPhoto. And there are some others--Diet Coda, Photoshop Touch, etc.
What I want is an Ubuntu tablet, with a nice, fat, open, well-run App Store. All developer tools onboard, no limits to what we can do. Multitouch. Audio/Video working and great. Nice screen, working power management.
A wide open platform.
Any tablet that gives that, is going to get my bucks. I am stepping off the Apple ride, and want 100%, totally open source, working hardware.
It'll happen ..
A wide open platform.
Any tablet that gives that, is going to get my bucks. I am stepping off the Apple ride, and want 100%, totally open source, working hardware.
It'll happen ..
So to sum up the morning:
1. OP doesn't use his Android tablet, therefore Android tablets suck and they'll die if they don't "fix" it soon.
2. Cue HN opinion war, as a community representing the minority use cases opines about market prospects based on what they think the "average" person appreciates in a tablet.
3. Degenerate into a fanboy flame war while the rest of us get on with our day.
1. OP doesn't use his Android tablet, therefore Android tablets suck and they'll die if they don't "fix" it soon.
2. Cue HN opinion war, as a community representing the minority use cases opines about market prospects based on what they think the "average" person appreciates in a tablet.
3. Degenerate into a fanboy flame war while the rest of us get on with our day.
I just sent my kids on a plane to visit the grandparents in Texas. She got the iPad and he got the Touchpad running the latest CyanogenMod 9 nightly (ICS 4.0.4). They were indifferent.
I also have a Galaxy tablet, and had an iPad before. As best I can tell, there's no real substantive difference between them in my usage. Both are good, portable sources of Netflix.
Android is a market and market would always suck if you're not a buyer.
My first tablet I bought was Android and without reading the article I can tell that Android OS sucks.
My first tablet I bought was Android and without reading the article I can tell that Android OS sucks.
Good lord, a mobile-OS review article that is honest, unbiased and stays away from tribalism! Bravo, sir!
So the problem with his argument is he bases his thesis off of a false premis. He doesn't use his tablet because he uses either his phone of laptop and he can't find a place to fit his tablet into his workflow. I have competly dropped my laptop and replaced it with the same tablet he has ( A Transformer Prime ). So when he said how often do I reach for it the answer is daily.
His second point about how the iPad fills the video player role in the apple ecosystem is a little disingenuous. Yes if I am an iTunes customer then obviously I am going to need to use Apples hardware to use what I paid for, however in terms of video playback capabilities the Android systems are so much better mainly due to third party video players and the availability of UPnP. so while you might be able to pre-order the newest movies I have decades of digitized DVD's that I would like to watch on my couch using a tablet that my prime plays just fine .
His second point about how the iPad fills the video player role in the apple ecosystem is a little disingenuous. Yes if I am an iTunes customer then obviously I am going to need to use Apples hardware to use what I paid for, however in terms of video playback capabilities the Android systems are so much better mainly due to third party video players and the availability of UPnP. so while you might be able to pre-order the newest movies I have decades of digitized DVD's that I would like to watch on my couch using a tablet that my prime plays just fine .
I think though while you're happy with your tablet, you're very much a niche, not the mass market.
I've got an android tablet, a nice one not a cheap one, the Motorola Xoom 2, and I barely use it.
It's still on Android 3.2, doesn't handle typing very well (certainly no better than my HTC One phone), and basically has every problem that the author listed.
As to your point about video players and UPnP, how many people do you think have done that? 1% of potential consumers of Android? Content availability on Android is poor, and it just gets much worse outside the USA.
I've got an android tablet, a nice one not a cheap one, the Motorola Xoom 2, and I barely use it.
It's still on Android 3.2, doesn't handle typing very well (certainly no better than my HTC One phone), and basically has every problem that the author listed.
As to your point about video players and UPnP, how many people do you think have done that? 1% of potential consumers of Android? Content availability on Android is poor, and it just gets much worse outside the USA.
> however in terms of video playback capabilities the Android systems are so much better mainly due to third party video players and the availability of UPnP
You... you realise that there are third party apps for the iPad, right?
For what it's worth, there are indeed many third party video players for iOS, and software to fulfil both sides of the UPnP relationship.
You... you realise that there are third party apps for the iPad, right?
For what it's worth, there are indeed many third party video players for iOS, and software to fulfil both sides of the UPnP relationship.
And they cost how much on top of an already higher priced system ?
> iPad fills the video player role
For what it's worth, there are plenty of UPnP clients on iOS -- I seem to recall AirPlayer being pretty decent.
Uhm, I'm not sure if this guy is serious. (Shitty anecdote time) None of the iPad owners I know (maybe 20ish?) were iPad bound because of their existing iTunes content. The Android (Tablet and phone IMO) problem has been, so far, Hardware. (Shitty anecdote #2) Every person I know that switched from Anndroid -> iPhone did so because of repeated catastrophic HW failures of the android devices. That point aside, all of the new "best ever" android tablets leave me coming away feeling like the hardware is just not very good (Maybe "Well made" is a better word). I understand the devices are "faster" and have more memory. However, when a consumer gives one of these android tablets a look see they always feel kinda crappy.
I'm probably a unique user in that I think iOS makes for a better phone and Android makes for a better tablet. Sadly, none of the Android tablet HW has been good enough to make me switch. I'm interested in the new MS tablet though; Looks like it has a "substantial" build.
I'm probably a unique user in that I think iOS makes for a better phone and Android makes for a better tablet. Sadly, none of the Android tablet HW has been good enough to make me switch. I'm interested in the new MS tablet though; Looks like it has a "substantial" build.
I can totally understand his point about iTunes content. I bought an iPad for my wife at first, with teaching purposes in mind (she teaches Japanese language). After a while, I recognized how great it is for consuming media. Nowadays we rent / stream all kinds of video content on it, often beamed to the big screen. It's even great for your homebrew video server, using the rock solid airvideo app. Once you've used it like an interactive remote for your big screen, it becomes clear how much better this is compared to other streaming solutions with clunky interfaces.
I had a look at a Galaxy Tab the other day in the store, and scrolling/switching apps felt very choppy. However, my Transformer Prime is very fluid and responsive. I could not be more satisfied from my purchase, and am very glad I sold my iPad.
[deleted]
The author seems to ignore non-US markets, where Android tablets do sell quite nicely. The same markets that don't have access to Hulu or Netflix. I get daily flyers in my mailbox that are trying to convince me to buy yet another Android tablet (from manufacturers that I've never heard of). And those tablets are fine for browsing, email, games, youtube and playing movies from home NAS.
Regarding ms office: myself and most of everone I know around me (regular people with regular jobs) have no need for it. In fact, many have already switched to open office (at home and at work). So I don't see how Microsoft is a big threat because of perceived productivity gains from office being available on surface tablets. Make no mistake, the threat is real, but not for the reason author states.
Regarding ms office: myself and most of everone I know around me (regular people with regular jobs) have no need for it. In fact, many have already switched to open office (at home and at work). So I don't see how Microsoft is a big threat because of perceived productivity gains from office being available on surface tablets. Make no mistake, the threat is real, but not for the reason author states.
I use my iPad less frequently than the author of this article. I use a combination of my Macbook Air 11" and my Nexus S. It works fine for me.
The only things I ever use my iPad for are games and air travel. I rarely check my email on my computer anymore, so good is the experience on my Phone.
The problem I have with this article is that I suspect that the author would feel the same if he had an iPad, but he wouldn't have written this article.
The only things I ever use my iPad for are games and air travel. I rarely check my email on my computer anymore, so good is the experience on my Phone.
The problem I have with this article is that I suspect that the author would feel the same if he had an iPad, but he wouldn't have written this article.
Actually, thinking about it now I realize that the killer feature for all of the people that I know with iPads (who actually use them) is AppleTV.
Why? My iPhone and MacBook (per iTunes) can stream to my Apple TV. Besides that, I can access all media on my MacBook or iTunes Match directly from the Apple TV.
We barely use our iPad. My SO sometimes takes the iPad with her when travelling, because it is lighter than her MacBook. Other than that, I charge it once per month to keep the electrons flowing.
MBP + smartphone satisfy all our computing needs.
We barely use our iPad. My SO sometimes takes the iPad with her when travelling, because it is lighter than her MacBook. Other than that, I charge it once per month to keep the electrons flowing.
MBP + smartphone satisfy all our computing needs.
I thought if I had a tablet I would prefer to read articles and tweets in it instead of the cellphone.
I can see that checking your email would be fine on a tablet or phone, but composing an email must be something of a nightmare?
That's what I thought. However, I like the keyboard on my iPad. For 5 line emails, it is absolutely fine for me.
I check my email on my phone. For most of the emails I send, the phone is also sufficient. If I need to send something longer than this comment, I will switch to my MacBook Air. Honestly, it's no more of a hassle than pulling out the iPad and it has a keyboard.
For me it works in a pinch. But if I did any serious typing on the iPad, I'd get a keyboard case for it.
I dunno, i use my galaxy tab every day. Typing this from it now, in fact. I wasn't even sure what I'd use it for when I first got it but I've really come to love it. It's become a solid part of my daily routine, completely replacing my laptop for any task that involves mostly reading, foremost my browsing/news habit during breakfast :-)
I really was skeptical about the role of tablet computing at first, but I have to admit, I'm pretty much sold on it now.
I really was skeptical about the role of tablet computing at first, but I have to admit, I'm pretty much sold on it now.
I think that's what most people will say. Perhaps some well placed tablet giveaways are in order.
I don't think the issues for Android tablets are easily fixed and go deeper than this article. There are two major problems I see:
1. Tablets, for now, are perceived as a third device which means that it's mostly for people who can afford it. Since Apple absolutely dominates high-end purchases it is far more likely that the iPad will be successful. It's a big problem for Android in that the app ecosystem for iPad will continue to mature while Android remains stagnant.
2. Price. The iPad doesn't have the high-priced subsidies like the iPhone. It also seems as if the Apple is willing to sacrifice on margins with the iPad to make it difficult for Android tablets to have lower price points. When they do, there is a visible lack of build quality.
I don't think MS is much of a concern at this point since it is vaporware and much of the Surface press conference had more to do with legacy support of the PC than anything else.
1. Tablets, for now, are perceived as a third device which means that it's mostly for people who can afford it. Since Apple absolutely dominates high-end purchases it is far more likely that the iPad will be successful. It's a big problem for Android in that the app ecosystem for iPad will continue to mature while Android remains stagnant.
2. Price. The iPad doesn't have the high-priced subsidies like the iPhone. It also seems as if the Apple is willing to sacrifice on margins with the iPad to make it difficult for Android tablets to have lower price points. When they do, there is a visible lack of build quality.
I don't think MS is much of a concern at this point since it is vaporware and much of the Surface press conference had more to do with legacy support of the PC than anything else.
Apple is making about a 50% margin on iPads. They're not sacrificing margin for market share based on price, I'm pretty sure Apple is pretty opposed to this sort of strategy. The advantage they have for pricing is in their manufacturing and supply chain management. They're actually able to produce better quality hardware for cheaper then their competitors in the Android space (and for that matter the Windows 8 space as well).
http://www.techspot.com/news/47738-apples-profit-margin-slig...
http://www.techspot.com/news/47738-apples-profit-margin-slig...
I don't think it's anywhere close to that considering that is just the cost for the bill of materials and it doesn't take into account the cost of assembly, shipping, marketing and research & development.
Last I heard the actual manufacturing cost was about $10 [1] marketing and R&D are pretty much fixed costs and don't really work well in accounting for per-unit margins. At the end of the day there's still no indication that Apple is sacrificing margin for market share.
[1] http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/03/16/high_cost_of_n...
[1] http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/03/16/high_cost_of_n...
[deleted]
Android tablets don't have to be competitive with iPad to be a viable market.
I mean, a game company with $50 million in iPad revenues isn't going to turn their nose up at $5 million of Android revenue, especially if they figure the ROI for porting is fairly high.
I mean, a game company with $50 million in iPad revenues isn't going to turn their nose up at $5 million of Android revenue, especially if they figure the ROI for porting is fairly high.
Yeah but an indie developer with $100k in revenue will turn their nose up at $10k of Android revenue.
This is starting to normalize now, but I think it's important to point out how many great apps and games are made by indie developers or tiny shops. Lots of one-hit wonders in there.
For huge swathes of the population the iPad has become their main device.
"This is far and away the most common substantive argument levied against Android tablets: the tablet-friendly app selection sucks. And make no mistake, it does."
Bleh. I have had zero issue finding tablet apps on Android. Within the last half year, anyway -- it did use to be a problem when Honeycomb had just come out, but around the time devs started updating their apps for ICS/Holo, the selection started growing greatly. At this point, I think maybe three of the apps I use don't have tablet UIs, and only one is any worse for wear over it (Steam).
Bleh. I have had zero issue finding tablet apps on Android. Within the last half year, anyway -- it did use to be a problem when Honeycomb had just come out, but around the time devs started updating their apps for ICS/Holo, the selection started growing greatly. At this point, I think maybe three of the apps I use don't have tablet UIs, and only one is any worse for wear over it (Steam).
I do not like Android tablets for the simple reason that the web browsing experience on them is sub par. In my mind a tablet is a luxury item that sits on a coffee table and answers my questions of "what movie was that actor in?" or "who's leading the AL Central?" whenever I want, without any fuss. The iPad is very good at this, while every Android device I've ever used has not been.
What are your specific complaints? I own an iPad 3rd gen and an A500 running ICS. The iPad has an excellent browser, but so does ICS.
I appreciate the portability part of the article. For me an iPad is too large. The Playbook looks like a better size. I'm hoping that the new Google tablet betters the existing offerings.
I have a Galaxy Tab that I use every day around the house. --For simple web browsing in front of the TV or in bed, playing music, simple games, reading PDFs away from my computer, and occasionally for pleasure reading (usually I prefer using the Kindle).
And if Safari Books Online would get off their asses and release their damn android app, I would use it even more often (their mobile site is crap on an android).
And if Safari Books Online would get off their asses and release their damn android app, I would use it even more often (their mobile site is crap on an android).
The Surface has a kickstand. I'm sorry, but that's not what I'd call a design advance over either the iPad or any Android tablet.
The kickstand actually looks pretty nice to me, and I bought cases for my tablets (iPad 2/Xoom) to get the same functionality - would be nice if it were built in.
Judging from the number of tablet users I see on the train using cases with kickstands, that does actually seem quite nice.
Yes, but you do generally need a case anyway -- modern glass screens are reasonably sturdy, but they can be broken.
The surface has a case that doubles as a keyboard, but if you need the kickstand without a keyboard you have to remove it entirely (or so it seemed from the keynote). That's a pain -- it's one of my most common uses of the iPad with smart cover.
The surface has a case that doubles as a keyboard, but if you need the kickstand without a keyboard you have to remove it entirely (or so it seemed from the keynote). That's a pain -- it's one of my most common uses of the iPad with smart cover.
I'm still pretty shocked at how everyone and their grandma is trying to elbow their way into the tablet market. They don't understand that there is no tablet market. There's only an iPad market.
The iPad wins because Apple is able to pull off a truly beautiful interface (and I mean truly beautiful, not beautiful in "marketing term of the week" sense that it's being used in these days) that's consistent with the iPhone, a sexy display and overall presentation, and the very high quality of apps in the marketplace. The magical Apple brand lust doesn't hurt either.
Generic tablets won't win because nobody ever thought to themselves, "Even though I have a powerful smartphone in my pocket and a powerful laptop at my desk, I feel the indescribable urge to have a third device that's very expensive, isn't as good as either one, and that I can't fit in my pocket."
I never bought a tablet because after toying with an iPad and some random Android tablet I realized I would never use it in real life. All of my friends who have iPads or Android tablets say the same; they play with them once or twice a week, but otherwise they gather dust at the expense of smartphones and laptops.
Everyone wants to copy Apple and make billions, but they just don't get it that people don't care about tablets. They only care about iPads, and that kind of brand loyalty isn't something you can copy.
The iPad wins because Apple is able to pull off a truly beautiful interface (and I mean truly beautiful, not beautiful in "marketing term of the week" sense that it's being used in these days) that's consistent with the iPhone, a sexy display and overall presentation, and the very high quality of apps in the marketplace. The magical Apple brand lust doesn't hurt either.
Generic tablets won't win because nobody ever thought to themselves, "Even though I have a powerful smartphone in my pocket and a powerful laptop at my desk, I feel the indescribable urge to have a third device that's very expensive, isn't as good as either one, and that I can't fit in my pocket."
I never bought a tablet because after toying with an iPad and some random Android tablet I realized I would never use it in real life. All of my friends who have iPads or Android tablets say the same; they play with them once or twice a week, but otherwise they gather dust at the expense of smartphones and laptops.
Everyone wants to copy Apple and make billions, but they just don't get it that people don't care about tablets. They only care about iPads, and that kind of brand loyalty isn't something you can copy.
The one area where tablets beat all other devices is reading digital comics. The screen size and resolution are just right. The touch interface is just right.
For just about any activity I can think of, tablets are second-best at best (reading eBooks, watching movies, web browsing), but for digital comics it really is the best way to do it.
For just about any activity I can think of, tablets are second-best at best (reading eBooks, watching movies, web browsing), but for digital comics it really is the best way to do it.
Apparently, people do not like walking around all day round with all those best of breed devices (a eBook reader, a full-size cinema, and a desktop PC with three 30" monitors) and/or cannot afford to.
I think smartphones are in the same situation: those sub-optimal tablets beat them for reading eBooks, watching movies, web browsing. One could even argue smartphones aren't even best of class for making phone calls. Yet, almost everybody owns one.
From tablet sales, it looks like people want to sacrifice some portability to get a 'big screen smartphone' in exchange for that bigger screen.
I think smartphones are in the same situation: those sub-optimal tablets beat them for reading eBooks, watching movies, web browsing. One could even argue smartphones aren't even best of class for making phone calls. Yet, almost everybody owns one.
From tablet sales, it looks like people want to sacrifice some portability to get a 'big screen smartphone' in exchange for that bigger screen.
I use a Thinkpad Tablet. I find it absolutely perfect for studying. Switching between course text (pdf) and note taking app (I use a stylus) with the occasional browser search for more info. Oh, and a Scheme Repl for quick tests. And TED talks for time out.
I find that a tablet built for stylus use is a fantastic learning aid. So I guess I'm in the non existant market group that prefers non Apple tablets.
I find that a tablet built for stylus use is a fantastic learning aid. So I guess I'm in the non existant market group that prefers non Apple tablets.
For how long will that be true?
I don't think tablets can become primary computers until data is owned and controlled by the user, not by the apps. I don't know what the correct interface is for this, but I need the ability to create a document in any particular app and open it in another app that supports the document type. And I need to be able to share (and receive) the documents with other computers.
What you want is available now in Android. For example, I currently have 3 office suites installed on my Transformer tablet to test which one would be best as a daily driver. So, when I open Dropbox and click on some Word doc, there will be a pop-up window asking me which one of the 3 word processors should open it. I can get the same sort of thing with any image files, text files, etc: options to open the file with whatever app can handle it.
Sending/sharing files works similarly. Go to send an image file and you'll get the option to attach it to an email, send it via twitter, put it in Facebook, send it via mms (if your device is a phone), put it in Dropbox, incorporate it into a note in Evernote, etc. Third party programs will add the options to send it to network shares or ftp.
Android lets you have access to your filesystem from the tablet / phone itself, so you can have that level of control if you want it. Most tablets / phones come with a very basic file manager and more advanced ones are a quick download away. If you would prefer to do everything from a command line shell, this is also available.
Android doesn't lock down the user the way an iPad does.
Sending/sharing files works similarly. Go to send an image file and you'll get the option to attach it to an email, send it via twitter, put it in Facebook, send it via mms (if your device is a phone), put it in Dropbox, incorporate it into a note in Evernote, etc. Third party programs will add the options to send it to network shares or ftp.
Android lets you have access to your filesystem from the tablet / phone itself, so you can have that level of control if you want it. Most tablets / phones come with a very basic file manager and more advanced ones are a quick download away. If you would prefer to do everything from a command line shell, this is also available.
Android doesn't lock down the user the way an iPad does.
That's not what I'm looking for. Your data is still owned by an app, in your case Dropbox (from the perspective of your tablet experience). Note that you must first go into an app (Dropbox) and push it to another app. You can't do the opposite, you can't pull. You can't, from Dropbox, pull in a document created in App X. If you're lucky App X has a "share" feature that you can send to Dropbox but that is not guaranteed.
A lot of people think the file system metaphor is a bad one, but I can't think of an alternative that keeps the user in control of their own data.
A lot of people think the file system metaphor is a bad one, but I can't think of an alternative that keeps the user in control of their own data.
Did you rip that comment directly from John Gruber? When someone repeats the tired old "there is no tablet market. There is only an iPad market." gem without noting it as a quote...I truly wonder if they think that clever nugget is an original thought. It isn't. It's also hilarious given the actual break-down of the market.
people don't care about tablets. They only care about iPads
This is the same sort of boring noise we heard when the iPhone temporarily dominated.
People care about being able to browse the web, view movies and other content, access emails, etc. The iPad happens to be a very good solution to those needs, but if you miss the mark and think that the product is more important than the needs that it solves, you're really far off the mark.
It's funny that people turn into an iOS versus Android thing -- spurred on by the linkbait title -- when really the author simply doesn't have a utility for tablets. Their core argument is that the tablet doesn't have a role in their life, and almost all of their argument holds for the iPad as well. I disagree, but to each his own I suppose.
people don't care about tablets. They only care about iPads
This is the same sort of boring noise we heard when the iPhone temporarily dominated.
People care about being able to browse the web, view movies and other content, access emails, etc. The iPad happens to be a very good solution to those needs, but if you miss the mark and think that the product is more important than the needs that it solves, you're really far off the mark.
It's funny that people turn into an iOS versus Android thing -- spurred on by the linkbait title -- when really the author simply doesn't have a utility for tablets. Their core argument is that the tablet doesn't have a role in their life, and almost all of their argument holds for the iPad as well. I disagree, but to each his own I suppose.
No, I don't read Gruber, and actually I strongly dislike Apple. But it's a comment that seems obvious to me. When was the last time any non-geek person said, "I can't wait to buy that new Samsung Galaxy tablet?" (Replace that brand with any non-iPad brand.) When was the last time you saw one in the wild, outside of Silicon Valley? When has anyone ever said, "Damn I really want a tablet computer" instead of "Damn I really want an iPad?"
On the other hand when was the last time you saw a regular human in a Starbucks with an iPad? I've seen iPads in the most unlikely of places, like small cafes in rural Mexico (no kidding). Likewise I've never in my life seen any other tablet computer in public, anywhere. Anecdotal sure, but Apple's sales versus other tab's sales back that anecdote up to some extent.
Tablet computers have been tried before, too, and didn't stick. Remember the MS tablet a decade ago? You can excuse it for poor hardware or poor software, but that's part my point--iPad has all that wrapped up, and everyone else is still struggling on both fronts while Apple is running circles around them. That's why there is no tablet market.
On the other hand when was the last time you saw a regular human in a Starbucks with an iPad? I've seen iPads in the most unlikely of places, like small cafes in rural Mexico (no kidding). Likewise I've never in my life seen any other tablet computer in public, anywhere. Anecdotal sure, but Apple's sales versus other tab's sales back that anecdote up to some extent.
Tablet computers have been tried before, too, and didn't stick. Remember the MS tablet a decade ago? You can excuse it for poor hardware or poor software, but that's part my point--iPad has all that wrapped up, and everyone else is still struggling on both fronts while Apple is running circles around them. That's why there is no tablet market.
It's also hilarious given the actual break-down of the market.
Not so hilarious when you look at the break-down of profit in the market.
Not so hilarious when you look at the break-down of profit in the market.
I hope you realize that's a non-sequitor. The hypothesis was people only care about the iPad - not tablets. Which is laughable because a significant proportion of the market cares about non-iPad tablet.
What does profit have to do with what people care about?
What does profit have to do with what people care about?
[deleted]
Not so hilarious when you look at the break-down of profit in the market.
Outside of flag waving cheerleading squads, how is that even remotely relevant in this discussion?
Outside of flag waving cheerleading squads, how is that even remotely relevant in this discussion?
>>play with [Xpads] once or twice a week, but otherwise they gather dust at the expense of smartphones and laptops.
For the first time in my life, I happily read books on a screen -- on my iPad 3. I literally read from it for at least one hour a day. I love Instapaper. This needs the big screen for e.g. pdf formatting.
I have utility apps like e.g. sketching UIs (Adobe Proto), organisation and note taking, but those aren't game changers for me. (When the iPad ssh applications get a bit better, there might be another game changer.)
For the first time in my life, I happily read books on a screen -- on my iPad 3. I literally read from it for at least one hour a day. I love Instapaper. This needs the big screen for e.g. pdf formatting.
I have utility apps like e.g. sketching UIs (Adobe Proto), organisation and note taking, but those aren't game changers for me. (When the iPad ssh applications get a bit better, there might be another game changer.)
I have an Asus Transformer 101 and my wife has an iPad, we both use them in the evenings for Facebook-ing, email, games etc. and I don't see the difference. I also use mine for some music apps which are pretty much unusable on my HTC Desire (which is also painfully slow). All that happens is that sometimes my wife has to ask to borrow mine so she can view some website that uses flash.
It seems the article overplays it's basic premise by making assumptions about what people use a tablet for, and then makes far-reaching claims based on this. It doesn't fit with my own personal experience, which is fine, but then it seems the article's author is basing most of their argument on their own personal views rather than any evidence also.
It seems the article overplays it's basic premise by making assumptions about what people use a tablet for, and then makes far-reaching claims based on this. It doesn't fit with my own personal experience, which is fine, but then it seems the article's author is basing most of their argument on their own personal views rather than any evidence also.
I own a Xoom, and bought it for two things: reading PDF files, because my it's far superior to my e-reader, and web browsing when it's inconvenient to hold my laptop (read: bed). Because, let's be honest, doing serious browsing on your phone isn't ideal. That's it. And for those purposes it's brilliant.
I'm not sure how owning an iPad would change anything. I own a desktop with a dual monitor setup for serious work. It's got a comfy desk and comfy chair, and I like it. For work on the go, I've got my Macbook Air, which fits just as easily as a tablet in any bag I carry.
Tablets are a niche product. Thanks to the Apple marketing machine, some people started thinking, "Why do I need laptop? I'll just get an iPad". And those people are niche; if you can replace all of your computing with an iPad, then you may as well be using just a phone. If you've got a desktop, laptop, tablet and phone (like me), you're a tech geek, and the tablet is a toy.
>"The Google Music app is ugly, barren of any useful features"
It has the one feature I need: it plays music.