I'm far from hostile to the idea-- Android might make a decent tablet OS, but I can understand the negative reactions.
I appreciate the well-reasoned response. I think all the points you make are valid.
First, there is a feeling that while the big players have fumbled around looking for a salable tablet design for years and failed. Apple appears to have hit the right formula, and the rewards they should reap from that innovation are being quickly hijacked by a bunch of knock-offs. I think the reaction is similar to the disgust people feel when they see the market flooded by cheap foreign knock-offs of successful products, just minus the elitism and xenophobia.
I agree with this, and I agree with some of the comparisons to MP3 players and smartphones. As an owner of many of the devices that came before Apple's versions, I can attest to the awful usability of Nokia's Symbian products, and Archos' music players. Apple pioneered "good" and "usable" products in each of these areas, and has enjoyed the fruits of being a 'first mover' as a result.
However I hope we can all agree that there is room for improvement in Apple's products. I think there's ample evidence that Apple is willing to stagnate until pushed by its competitors. Last year in smartphones that was Android and Palm (only one of which seems to have had staying power). This year in tablets, perhaps it will be Android again.
I'm willing to bet that without competition, Apple would not have put such emphasis on improving the camera on the 3GS, nor on implementing multitasking.
Second, I think people feel Google is going out of its way to be a bully. Some of this is just the distaste that develops for big companies (and most people you ask on the street probably don't realize that Apple's market cap is bigger than Googles), but some of it is a feeling of "was it really worth coming all the way over here just to mess with me?".
I don't see any actions on Google's part that indicates it's bullying Apple. There are simply rumors that it's developing a tablet based on its mobile operating system. Most of the public discussion I've seen from high-profile Google employees has been complementary of the iPad.
This is actually a sore point for me. I perceive an attitude that anybody who *dares* to compete with Apple is somehow stepping on hallowed ground. The tablet market has a lot of room for many players.
Third, I think you're mistaken that the introduction of a Google tablet is a no-lose proposition for consumers. What happens if, because the available consumer demand is so subdivided, that no company can justify participating?
If no company could justify participating, clearly we'd be back to just one company
What happens if, like HD-DVD and Blu Ray, consumers decide to wait out the OS battle and there are fewer consumers over all, or fewer third party resources put into supporting any given platform?
IMO hashing the technical battle out in the court of public opinion would be a great option. For example Apple has chosen not to include a camera, while clearly a great many consumers would prefer one. If not for competition, that segment of the market would be left unfulfilled. With competition, we can find that, perhaps, a camera is actually a useful addition. Or perhaps other vendors will come out with products that support 3G from Verizon, or 4G from Sprint.
Tablets aside, consumers of Google's other products will be hurt if they divert resources to fighting Apple in the tablet market. If Apple wins, Google's web services users will never recoup the lost resources that could have been spent on better search. If Google wins, Macbook users will never recoup the resources Apple spends trying to fight off Google.
My problem with this reasoning is that it assumes that a single company (Apple, and really a single person, Steve Jobs) can anticipate all consumers' needs. Of course companies divert resources to compete -- Imagine what the car market would be like if the only company producing cars was GM. Only because Toyota was willing to divert resources from the Camry do we now have the Prius. And because Google was willing to divert resources from search, we now have gmail. And because Apple was willing to divert resources from the Mac division, we now have the iPhone.
Innovation occurs when companies decide to take a risk. The iPad is a risk. The google tablet, if it exists, is a risk. Without risks there would be no rewards. As a consumer, I appreciate that Apple released the iPad. I'll likely buy one when the 3G version is released. But I don't like the app store policies, the lack of a camera, the lack of 4G, etc.. So I also appreciate that other vendors will release products that will pressure Apple to improve its products. As a consumer, I can't help but think that I'll win as a result.
In fact I *know* I'll win. I have an iPhone that, in my opinion, proves that competition improves products.
