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.
Remaining iPad Competitors
- Thread starter Apple...
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Same thing everyone says who owns an iPad and has to continually justify the $500+ they spent on it. I own an iPad 2, and most of the tegra-2 10.1" tablets out there (budget not an issue) and can easily accomplish the same things on any of the android tablets as I can on my ipad2. It's all the things the android tablets can do that the iPad2 can't (or can't without spending far more on accessories) that keep my iPad 2 parked and an android tablet with me most of the time. Looking forward to iOS 5 though as it may help the iPad catch up a bit. Heck, there is even a tablet that is lighter and thinner than the iPad yet with all the same accessory limitations if you want it. Something for everyone, except of course the angst-ridden iPad purchasers. The truly happy don't bother checking out the other tablets in their local BestBuy.
I'm liking the Galaxy Tab a lot, especially in multiple sizes. I got rid of my Xoom and have been turned over to the Dark Side (got into a MacBook Air) but I still keep my eye on Android to see how that works out...
Same thing everyone says who owns an iPad and has to continually justify the $500+ they spent on it. I own an iPad 2, and most of the tegra-2 10.1" tablets out there (budget not an issue) and can easily accomplish the same things on any of the android tablets as I can on my ipad2. It's all the things the android tablets can do that the iPad2 can't (or can't without spending far more on accessories) that keep my iPad 2 parked and an android tablet with me most of the time. Looking forward to iOS 5 though as it may help the iPad catch up a bit. Heck, there is even a tablet that is lighter and thinner than the iPad yet with all the same accessory limitations if you want it. Something for everyone, except of course the angst-ridden iPad purchasers. The truly happy don't bother checking out the other tablets in their local BestBuy.
I absolutely don't believe you own an iPad 2. You posted that th iPad as incapable of playing music in the background while browsing the web. ... Which is something I'm doing now, on my iPad. All you are doing is making posts about the iPad trying to rile people up. Not working.
Android's UI is a lot better for multi tasking and it's much more suited to replace a laptop. It displays information better, it's easier to get to information, and it's much better for real work.
The issue with the iPad is that it truly is a giant iPod Touch.. it's one app, no information.. nothing. That's good in some instances where you want to be immersed into the app/browser.. but with 10 inches of real estate there is so much more they should be doing.
The issue with the iPad is that it truly is a giant iPod Touch.. it's one app, no information.. nothing. That's good in some instances where you want to be immersed into the app/browser.. but with 10 inches of real estate there is so much more they should be doing.
Sorry. I don't agree. While I think there's no question that the Android multi-tasking OS has definite advantages over the iOS implementation of limited multi-tasking for specific favored apps in technical terms, those advantages are largely lost on a screen with "10 inches of real estate." I suppose that if you're coming from a 3-4" screen 10 inches of real estate looks like a vast playing field. But trying to cram multiple applications on such a small screen, even compared to an 11" laptop is hardly an advantage.
Add to that the need for a stronger processor, better cooling, and consequent heavier, larger battery power and the Android multi-tasking advantage quickly diminishes in a real world device.
Android is without doubt a more flexible OS. The question is whether that flexibility (at least in terms of multi-tasking) has many real world advantages in a device like the iPad. Apple obviously didn't believe it does. (After all, it's not as if they could not have matched the multi-tasking features of Android.)
Apple intentionally limited the multi-tasking capabilities of the iPad to fit the form factor and hardware they elected to put into their tablet. In doing so, they could assure the sort of absolutely predictable responsiveness that eludes any but the most powerful Android devices. It was a compromise. All design is compromise.
You are partly correct. Android is inefficient and hence the need for power, I'm quite sure Apple can provide better multitasking without slowing the system (Apple A5 is damn fast). Android tablets are thicker mainly because they support different ports and cameras which requires space. Btw Apple uses app switching, its not true multitasking.
You have inside knowledge? What's your inside knowledge, reading macrumors?
GTFO and get a life.
My opinion is that there are probably two possible competitors in the short term. First and possibly most disruptive would be Amazon. They have a credible chance because they have the closest thing to a real software support infrastructure in place - Kindle, their Cloud services, music downloads, and a streaming video service. If they choose to heavily subsidize their offering (say at $200), it will have a huge impact. The hardware has to be good enough, not fantastic, at that price point. Individual manufacturers such as HTC, Samsung, etc. can't offer this whole package, so will suffer, and Google has not shown they know how to manage sales directly to consumers.
The second possibility is Microsoft. I don't see them taking major marketshare, but if they get their act together and can offer a tablet that integrates seamlessly with Office on users primary computers, they could end up owning the business market. I'm not convinced they can pull this off though.
The second possibility is Microsoft. I don't see them taking major marketshare, but if they get their act together and can offer a tablet that integrates seamlessly with Office on users primary computers, they could end up owning the business market. I'm not convinced they can pull this off though.
A'okay.. It's personal preference at the end of the day. But fanboy-ism is just...
Same thing everyone says who owns an iPad and has to continually justify the $500+ they spent on it. I own an iPad 2, and most of the tegra-2 10.1" tablets out there (budget not an issue) and can easily accomplish the same things on any of the android tablets as I can on my ipad2. It's all the things the android tablets can do that the iPad2 can't (or can't without spending far more on accessories) that keep my iPad 2 parked and an android tablet with me most of the time. Looking forward to iOS 5 though as it may help the iPad catch up a bit. Heck, there is even a tablet that is lighter and thinner than the iPad yet with all the same accessory limitations if you want it. Something for everyone, except of course the angst-ridden iPad purchasers. The truly happy don't bother checking out the other tablets in their local BestBuy.
I checked out the other non-selling tablets to see for myself why they don't sell. And yes I am truly happy with all of my Apple products, iMac, MBP, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV. Guess what, they all work perfectly together. Yes, some Apple products may be a little higher priced than their competitors, but as we all know, you get what you pay for! I will always be willing to pay a little more for quality and GET what I pay for rather than a cheaply made product that nobody wants.
I've been impressed with what Amazon has done with the Kindle. And I think that they, along with Barnes & Noble's Nook, will continue to maintain a good business selling low-priced, but quite effective, e-readers.
The problem that they face should they try to expand the capabilities of the device very far beyond being an e-reader, is that they risk turning off their core customer. The sort of person who, quite literally, doesn't want web-browsing, e-mailing, etc. - especially on a device they want to use just for reading.
Now, before all the TechnoGeeks scoff, such people really do exist. And in far greater numbers than you'd believe.
The Kindle and Nook have done pretty well because they do what they do very well. Amazon and B&N have gotten the pricing right. But they ought to tread very carefully before trying to turn their devices into full-function media tablets.
Sorry. Still don't agree. You'd have to define the value laden term "inefficient." In fact, Android is a more "efficient" OS in the sense that it enables virtually any applications to run simultaneously. iOS has to be specifically coded to identify the combination of apps that are so enabled. Those are limited to audio, gps (if available), VOIP, and appropriately coded notifications and communication tasks. It may be "sufficient," but it's not "efficient." And for those favored tasks, iOS supports "true-multitasking" in the sense that it allows those apps to share cpu cycles and continue to run in the background while a user is running other apps.
But if you want to see its limits in action, try playing an audio app while running, say, Rage HD. You'll find that iOS won't allow that particular combination, presumably because of the heavy cpu load it would entail. In contrast, Angry Birds with a less demanding cpu load can be played without turning off an audio app.
Apple's "task switching" is marketing language designed to give the impression of "multi-tasking" that doesn't exist. They even characterize it as "multi-tasking done right" on their website. It is simply a feature that suspends an application so that it may be instantiated in the state it had when it was last running. (i.e. using cpu cycles.) You're certainly correct that "task switching" is not "multi-tasking." That doesn't stop Apple from characterizing it as such, however.
The main reason Apple doesn't implement more comprehensive multi-tasking is that doing so would run the risk of variable performance from a user's point of view depending on what else is running. As long as a device appears to consistently perform tasks at the same rate regardless of cpu load, a user feels the system is operating normally. Apple places a very high priority on maintaining that consistency. Android, an OS developed by a company that designs software to be run on a variety of hardware platforms, leaves it up to the hardware manufacturer to come up with sufficient horsepower to enable more comprehensive multi-tasking.
Last edited:
Amazon's android tablets will come out of the box with a Kindle-ish skin to appeal to the Kindle faithful I suspect. They'll throw in access to their audiobooks, MP3 store, Android appstore, Movie downloads, etc., for anyone who's moved up to a smart phone and likes those capabilities. They'll oversee it all so it doesn't get too complicated, but also allow (officially or not) the XDA folks to push the devices to their maximum potential. That hackability is what keeps the Nook Color so popular. They could have brought out a conventional android tablet much sooner, but this custom UI has to be why we won't see them until Oct/Nov if then.
I highly doubt they will use their tablet as a replacement for the Kindle - in fact I would expect them to continue to offer the Kindle at ever decreasing prices. I envision their tablet as a way of giving customers controlled access to all of their other services.
You make a good point; one that is not lost on Amazon or B&N, I suspect. And just as B&N did not replace their basic Nook ("The Simple Touch Reader") when they introduced the Nook Color ("The Reader's Tablet") I doubt seriously that the basic Kindle will be replaced by the Kindle Tablet (or Amazon Tablet, or Kindle 4, or whatever they decide to call it.)
I'm inclined to think, though, that it's less a case of "not wanting" additional functionality on the part of Kindle customers as much as it is not wanting to give up the form factor and amazing battery life for functionality they don't value as highly on a device where reading is both the highest priority and an activity that is usually exclusive of other activities.
(My wife, for example, will give up her Kindle when it's pried from her cold dead fingers. While I have to be sure to plug in the iPad every night, she simply plugs her Kindle in every week or so. And though she enjoys using the iPad, she can curl up with the Kindle with no more thought than she would with a small paperback. She wouldn't sacrifice that convenience.)
There will continue to be a huge market for dedicated eReaders with a form factor the size, shape, and weight of a paperback book. About 30 million will be sold in 2011. While that isn't as amazing as iPad sales, it ain't hay.
----------
I'm definitely going to have to rethink.
I wish these people who call me "fanboy" would refute something I say with cold hard facts. Palapatine did the same thing. Why can't you just post sales data from all of these competitors showing that they are taking up a significant share of SOLD tablets?
Eh?
What's my name doing here?
The data you are looking for doesn't exist, because companies like Samsung don't release it, so you aren't likely to get an answer anytime soon. It's not too difficult to get a sense of the market from news reports. Here is some reading to give you some perspective. Take it as you wish.
I'm not here to troll. Just pointing out that valid options exist for the iPad, many consumers (including myself) are excited about some of the options they provide, and that however great Apple's products are, they can't be everything for everyone.
http://www.netbooknews.com/31986/asus-reduces-eee-pc-volumes-thanks-to-the-transformers-success/
http://gigaom.com/mobile/android-vs-ipad-the-tablet-sales-figures-that-matter/
I'm looking for the first tablet with a screen technology that is as easy to write digitally on as paper is to write on with a pencil. The current technology is fine for finger painting, but has considerable room to improve to become a usable trace/sketch paper replacement. I suspect they'll all have liquid touch response by the next round.
All the other functionality is up to apps, and so long as a platform is supported by software developers the last variables to matter are sizes: Memory size, Case size, Weight, resolution, etc.. Memory size matters less as more content moves to the cloud. Weight reduction can stop when they get it down to the weight of a typical 8.5" x 11" (paper) notepad.
All the other functionality is up to apps, and so long as a platform is supported by software developers the last variables to matter are sizes: Memory size, Case size, Weight, resolution, etc.. Memory size matters less as more content moves to the cloud. Weight reduction can stop when they get it down to the weight of a typical 8.5" x 11" (paper) notepad.
companies don't normally sit on data showing how amazingly well their products are doing on the market - unless you're samsung and try to pass off channel stuffing as sell through.
I think this is exactly the answer. The greatest thing about my ipad isnt the ipad itself. its the apple infrastructure that it works with. With airplay speakers emerging in the fall one can truly have a full apple integrated house.
Example:
* main MAC computer somewhere in house (houses itunes library, photo library, indigo for home automation, etc)
* apple tvs on every tv in house
* iphones as mobile device
* airplay speakers permanently mounted in kitchen, bathroom, garage, deck, etc
With my ipad (and ios in general), i not only can do typical IPAD things, but i can also control every media aspect of my house.
from my couch i can change thermostat, close blinds, turn off lights, while streaming pictures to various tvs, play itunes dj to various speakers, use the ipad/iphone as my apple tv remote to browse my library.
Or i can go from room to room with any ios device in hand and change tracks/speakers/volume seamlessly.
with the cloud coming online all of this becomes even easier.
so i would agree and saying any real competitor(amazon) to the ipad would really need to have a solid infrastructure in place not just a great tablet/OS in itself.
I think that's a bit over the top. As a kid I toured the House of Tomorrow at Disneyland (about 50 years ago) and was shown much the same vision you outlined. Over the last half century it really hasn't taken off. And that's not because the technology hasn't existed.
It's certainly true that device integration is possible in the Apple environment (as it is in others) but I doubt seriously that many purchasers will select a tablet on the basis of whether they can control their thermostats with it.
with airplay speakers finally coming into production for the fall and i mean affordable/aesthetic pleasing solutions and ios5 with apple tv mirroring i dont see how that its so over the top. Its what apple is trying to do with ios5 isnt it? Apple is trying to show that not only is the ipad great in itself, but match it up to other IOS devices and you can do that much more with it.