I think it should be an Android device, since it's using a Customized Android OS. No matter what, it's still running Android. It's not based on Android, it's based on Linux. It's using Android, which is based on Linux.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad Grabs 58% of Tablet Shipments in 4Q 2011
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think it should be an Android device, since it's using a Customized Android OS. No matter what, it's still running Android. It's not based on Android, it's based on Linux. It's using Android, which is based on Linux.
Where is it on the chart then. I guarantee it outsold all Android tablets combined.
----------
Why should it be something it is clearly not?
So should we call it Linux then and lump all devices that use a Linux kernel into that category (we'd have to count both Android and webOS together then) ?
You're saying Windows XP Tablet PC Edition was not made with tablets in mind ?
Yes. The thing that tablets have become resembles nothing like what Microsoft has put out. A tablet has come to mean more than touch and writing capability. They share the same form factor, but tablets are just as defined by their type of OS as well and their paradigms. iOS 5 and Honeycomb/ICS were made to be used with fingers. All Windows iterations up until now have been made to use with a keyboard and mouse and touch was added as an afterthought.
Just look at the sales. What microsoft currently offers obviously doesn't mean consumer expectations of a tablet.
Can you show me where it is stated that for a device based on the open source Android software to be be considered "running the Android OS" then it needs to be "counted by Google"? Google counts and presents this data however they see fit, based on whatever is best for them. Where are these definitions that include requirements for terminology like "Android device" or "running with the Android OS"?
But that doesn't mean that they don't have a tablet OS, they do, it just sucks.
Sure, you could do that. Why not? It wouldn't be as detailed and informative as this study, but yes, technically Android is a Linux based OS (as stated in the first line of it's Wikipedia page).
No, Android and WebOS both use the Linux Kernel. We should put phones and tablets in different categories based on the OS they run, not the Kernel.
The part of my analogy that you are missing is that "Android" is a trademark of Google. Like Firefox is a trademark of Mozilla. Linux does not have the same restrictions.
Feel free to count anything you want. To me, it's not Android unless it uses Google's services and is blessed by Google. It's just a fork of the Android project otherwise.
Just out of curiosity, where do you draw the line? Manufacturer's are customizing Android all the time. Why is this any different? Just because Amazon decided to make money off their own app store? Seems like an arbitrary difference to me, when all of the underpinnings are based on Android.
Not that outselling all Android tablets combined is a difficult feat, but yes I'm sure it did too. It does so because of Amazon, not Android.
I wouldn't go so far. Windows XP Tablet PC Edition was pretty much a Tablet PC OS. That you don't like it or its paradigm or that it wasn't well received by the market is not the point. The Nintendo 3DS is not meant as a mobile device (as in PMP/Smartphone/tablet) other than a gaming portable device. Nor is the OS on it really important.
This sales data just doesnt match real world usage yet, at least not in any area that I have to account for. Looking at sites I manage I took the site with the highest mobile usage and the lowest mobile usage.
Nationwide Restaurant Franchise (very tech savvy audience with heavy mac usage; Safari is the top browser). Usage share amongst mobile devices
46% - iPhone
26% - iPad
03% - Not set (android)
03% - SonyEricsson LT15i Xperia Arc
02% - HTC EVO 4G
The first discrete Android tablet is the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 with .1% The Xoom is a close second also with .1% - note thats point-one-percent not 1 percent.
Overall Usage
20% - iOS
6% - Android
Federal Government Web site (heavy Windows/IE users)
40% - iPhone
19% - iPad
06% - Not set (android)
05% - iPod touch
04% - SonyEricsson LT15i Xperia Arc
The first discrete Android tablet is again the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 with .3%
Overall Usage
08% - iOS
04% - Android
Obviously anecdotal, and Im sure others have the opposite case, but when setting budgets with my clients the numbers are what the numbers are and iOS demands greater budgetary consideration. Android tablets are statistically insignificant on every single one of the projects I work on from web to native applications. For Android phones, though still far behind iOS theres at least enough of a market to devote resources to, but when it comes to tablets theres no way Im going to develop in Objective-C and then port to Java for Android. I wouldnt even waste time with HaXE, Appcelerator, Flex or any of the other cross platform dev tools right now.
Well see if the Fire can maintain its strong start, but if Microsoft can get Win8 out in a reasonable timeframe I have a feeling Windows tablets will quickly overtake pure Android (e.g. no Fire, no Nook).
Nationwide Restaurant Franchise (very tech savvy audience with heavy mac usage; Safari is the top browser). Usage share amongst mobile devices
46% - iPhone
26% - iPad
03% - Not set (android)
03% - SonyEricsson LT15i Xperia Arc
02% - HTC EVO 4G
The first discrete Android tablet is the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 with .1% The Xoom is a close second also with .1% - note thats point-one-percent not 1 percent.
Overall Usage
20% - iOS
6% - Android
Federal Government Web site (heavy Windows/IE users)
40% - iPhone
19% - iPad
06% - Not set (android)
05% - iPod touch
04% - SonyEricsson LT15i Xperia Arc
The first discrete Android tablet is again the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 with .3%
Overall Usage
08% - iOS
04% - Android
Obviously anecdotal, and Im sure others have the opposite case, but when setting budgets with my clients the numbers are what the numbers are and iOS demands greater budgetary consideration. Android tablets are statistically insignificant on every single one of the projects I work on from web to native applications. For Android phones, though still far behind iOS theres at least enough of a market to devote resources to, but when it comes to tablets theres no way Im going to develop in Objective-C and then port to Java for Android. I wouldnt even waste time with HaXE, Appcelerator, Flex or any of the other cross platform dev tools right now.
Well see if the Fire can maintain its strong start, but if Microsoft can get Win8 out in a reasonable timeframe I have a feeling Windows tablets will quickly overtake pure Android (e.g. no Fire, no Nook).
The difference is again very simple : Google doesn't count as part of Android activations. This is much different than simple manufacturer customization, because those still include the different Google services like the market. They are counted by Google.
The Kindle Fire is not nor does it include the Google services.
Because it resembles Android in no way. No Google Market, no Google Apps, no Google sync, no Google branding, not the same menu structure, not anything at all in common with any android tablet that any OEM has ever released.
What? Linux is a trademark owned by Linus Torvalds. Care to share where these "restrictions" are documented? Or are you just "assuming" that this is the case.
Absolutely correct. The Kindle Fire should be counted separately, even if no official numbers are given by Amazon. It is in fact that only tablet device that is currently challenging the iPad in shipments, and is a testament to the value of the Amazon ecosystem.
I am not a fan of the Fire, but credit should be given where due.
My point is that it's an OS intended for something else with accommodations for other functions. It plays games, but it CAN browse the web, not that you'd ever want to. Just like you'd never want to use touch on a traditional desktop OS like windows XP. Sure, it exists nominally as a tablet OS, but I wouldn't consider it a true tablet OS (as we've come to know them), especially when they've acknowledged this implicitly by developing with what current tablet users expect in mind, in addition to providing ARM support, which is crucial for long battery life in this type of environment.
Kindle OS in android in the same way that android is linux.
