Why Apple Should Be Scared

Discussion in 'iPad' started by zenio, Feb 4, 2011.

  1. zenio macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    #1
    Here's what Fortune is saying, about Androids Superiority over the Very Limited iPad.

    "Why Android Honeycomb should have Apple scared"

    " it's not until you actually see Honeycomb up close and play with it on a device like Motorola's Xoom that you realize just how limited the iPad experience remains "

    http://is.gd/o9ayFV
     
  2. ConnorTurnbull macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #2
    I'm a writer for iPhone.AppStorm and I recently finished an article on just this topic. Honeycomb is excellent but I reckon Apple has some good things for iOS 5: widgets are a must if they want to really compete.
     
  3. Androidpwns macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    Location:
    England
    #3
    I wonder if certain sites will appeal to Google to have Fortune's own comments on Honeycomb to be taken down? After all... doesn't it border on trolling? ;)
     
  4. sracer macrumors 603

    sracer

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Location:
    Land of Bongos and Beatniks
    #4
    I don't see why the tablet form-factor will be any different than the smartphone arena. Apple's iPhone UI has always been far more limiting than Android's. But that hasn't stopped the growth of iPhone sales. Apple has promised this same limited UI to be available on their notebooks/desktops.

    The iPod lagged in features when measured against offerings from established companies. That too didn't seem to hurt iPod sales.

    People don't primarily buy Apple products because of the spec-sheet... but because of the whole package of what they offer.

    I suspect that Apple was scared at how well the iPhone took off but how hampered sales were due to AT&T-exclusivity. They had to sit and wait for the clock to wind down while Android handsets were able to be sold without such limitation.

    If the currently available Android tablets are any indication, it appears that Android tablets can only be competitively priced against the iPad if they are tied to a data plan contract.
     
  5. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    The interface of android is a natural for the tablet, with widgets and full multitasking. The article really doesn't provide any more information other then what we already know.

    Honeycomb is poised to be a very popular OS, in part because Googles business model of using multiple manufacturers. As a droid x owner this is where the model breaks down, its a double sword.

    customers have to wait until the manufacturer releases updates, not google, and from my experience, Motorola has been exceedingly slow and when they eventually released 2.2 it was buggy and I had wait another 3 months for the bug fix.

    for instance Froyo was released in late May, Droid X in June. Moto finally release the 2.2 upgrade on the last day of september. That's 4 months from when Froyo was out. It took over 3 more months for the bug fix. So in a sense I had to 7 months for a stable version of froyo
     
  6. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #6
    The fundamental problem that Honeycomb has is that at its core it really is just a big android phone with a slick new user interface.

    Google had the opportunity to demonstrate a complete package for Honeycomb, just as Apple did when they introduced the iPad. Unfortunately they failed to take advantage of the opportunity.

    When iPad was introduced, core functionality from iPhone was carried over and enhanced. It had a web browser, maps, an email client, photo viewing application, music, and videos. In addition they introduced some games and reading style applications from 3rd parties. What was more important though was that Apple introduced limited productivity with the iWork apps.

    For all the faults that these applications still have, Apple clearly stated that iPad could be used for productivity and demonstrated that really "ambitious" apps could be put on the tablet.

    This move is what helped give some distance between iPhone and iPad and gave developers a sense of what is possible on the device.

    Fast forward to Google's recent event. What did they demonstrate? The UI obviously, but just mail, music, video, games, a couple reading apps, and video calling. Someone please correct me if Google introduced anything that resembles a Keynote, a Numbers, or an Omnigraffle.

    It would be one thing if Android had a very vibrant developer community and that there were really really great apps already for sale for Android phones. This isn't the case though. So who is going to lead the way? Google? OEMs? Microsoft? small developers? It's not entirely evident yet.

    I'm glad that people will have a choice if they want an expensive tablet that has a really slick UI that includes a "desktop feel, widgets, and better multi-tasking," but ironically, all Honeycomb is right now is a really lovely Android phone rather than a competitive tablet.

    I think a $399 honeycomb tablet will be incredibly competitive, while a $700 entry price less so.

    There is also the story that major developers any day now are going to release great apps for Android, but we are still waiting, and I'm not holding my breath.
     
  7. twentytwo22 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #7
    As long as iPad's file system is closed, Android will definitely appeal to people. In that aspect, iPad feels more like a larger cell phone or iPod touch than an Android tablet does, because at least you have the ability to create and access a file-system structure. I understand Apple wants everything to be simple, but it is almost too simple. Same goes for widgets.

    I find it funny how all the hardcore Apple homers will laud Apple for the simplicity, but half of them just jailbreak their devices anyway to get access to features that Android can do out of the box.

    Wow, this sounds like a pro-Android post, but it really isn't. I just want Apple to get their stuff together to make sure the iPad can live up to its potential and become more useful in everyday business and creation, not just consumption.
     
  8. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #8
    The problem is, at least as far as the Fandroids are concerned, is that the $399 price point will never happen.

    You simply cannot build a tablet with the screen size, CPU, storage, battery, etc. capable of running Honeycomb for less than ~ $250 or so in BOM costs. Which means by the time you've assembled it, shipped it, and retailed it - a wifi only version is likely to cost $550 or so.

    Which brings us back to the model Google thinks is going to work: Have the cellular providers sell them with a subsidized price with a two or three year data contract. Which MOST CONSUMERS DON'T WANT.

    Heck, even Apple's iPad saw less than 700K sign up for ATT's "month to month" data plan. Out of 15 million iPads sold.
     
  9. foiden, Feb 4, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2011

    foiden macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    #9
    Actually, the simplicity of Apple's tablet isn't too simple. But it is perhaps too simple for a certain demographic. The beauty of Apple's too simple approach is that people who practically fear computers can latch onto the thing. I could get one, throw it at someone who barely uses computers, and get them to work on it right away.

    This is one thing that helps solidify Apple's place in the tablet market, yet it also may leave room for the Android one. So you have one that might favor tech-savvy vs. one that favors those who can't get around tech-savvy devices. Now if only the Android one would improve the performance and usability. Normally, if I go for something more tech-savvy, I want to get the advantage of such stuff in performance.

    What I see is new competing tablets on the make, but it still seems none of them try to really balance technical and liberal arts, in the way Apple strives for. They go for numbers, but they seem to have a straight ignorance on providing that human factor. It still seems like they're making machines meant for humans to conform to think more like computers in how to use them, instead of trying to balance the other way around.

    Apple shouldn't rest on their laurels, and I don't think they will. Everybody is still playing "catch up" with a technology they basically slept on, for years. Obviously, having the advantage of what works is not something easily given up, unless they act like the Hare vs. the Tortoise.
     
  10. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #10
    I'm not seeing any difference in your statements regarding google and apple.

    They both took a mobile OS and altered it and the items you mentioned for iOS apply to honeycomb.

    From what I have seen and read, people are very impressed with honeycomb and I doubt very much that can occur with google just changing the UI
     
  11. twentytwo22 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #11
    That's great, but I (and other iPad owners) have things we need to be able to get done on a mobile device that the iPad isn't allowing us. I really hope these are addressed, otherwise I might have to go back to using a MBA fulltime.
     
  12. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #12
    My point was that Apple took their mobile OS, enhanced its core apps, and then added some minor but not insignificant productivity apps.

    From what I can ascertain, Google has yet to do this.

    From everything I have seen and read, people are impressed with honeycomb exclusively on the UI, and things like widgets. Has Google given us any killer uses for Honeycomb beyond gmail, calendar, videos, using the camera, videos, and maps?

    Let me give a concrete example.

    As of today, can Google or Motorola say that on day 1 of Xoom, I can plug it into a projector and give a powerpoint/keynote presentation with it? I don't think so.
     
  13. Gryzor macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #13
    Nice, I'll take an iPad 2 thanks. It does everything I want it to, and the rest is left to my powerful, very lightweight laptop...
     
  14. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #14
    Ok, so you're assuming that google has not updated their core apps and you believe that all the fan fare is based on honeycomb's slick interface. I suppose we can disagree on this topic until google releases the OS.

    FWIW, honeycomb is a major update and I don't think google has been working exclusively with the UI at the detriment of their core apps but that's my assumption and only time will tell
     
  15. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #15
    Yes, and I heard the Zune was the new iPod killer, and for years Sony has been marketing VAIO all-in-ones that the Windows evangelists refer to as "iMac killers".

    Yawn.
     
  16. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #16
    No, I'm not assuming that Google hasn't updated their core apps.

    The core apps that are on Honeycomb look way better than they are Android 2.x. They also look like they offer more functionality than the older ones.

    Google has clearly pushed the envelope in how a tablet OS can be organized, but they haven't pushed the envelope in what to do with all that new functionality.

    I would love to be proven wrong that Google or some great developers are going to create some really incredible apps for Honeycomb. I think it's reasonable to have a healthy dose of skepticism in that particular area.

    The bottom line is that all of this cutting edge functionality is not terribly useful if Google, developers, or OEMs do not take advantage of it. At the moment, none of the parties seem to be doing so.

    At this very moment if I had to live with iOS and the App Store or Honeycomb and the Android Marketplace, it would be an easy choice. For those who can have their needs met with the Android Marketplace, awesome.
     
  17. Uofmtiger macrumors 68000

    Uofmtiger

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Location:
    Memphis
    #17
    Business Week and many, many others were saying the iPad would be a failure and was "before its time". Don't believe everything you read.

    I agree. With the growing ability to make your cellphone into a hotspot, who wants to pay twice for data? Most people have their cell phone with them, so it doesn't make much sense to add another contract to your life. Many people bought the 3G version of the iPad because it could be turned on and off as needed without a contract. Many of those people did not know how they would use the iPad at that time, so it is just made sense to get the $130 add on. I bet the versions requiring a contract will be a hard sell as more cell phones add the hotspot feature.
     
  18. clyde2801 macrumors 601

    clyde2801

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    In the land of no hills and red dirt.
    #18
    Honeycomb's BIG! Yeah, yeah, yeah!

    It's not small! No, no, no!
     
  19. bocomo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #19
    I don't miss a filesystem

    What's the big deal?
     
  20. bobr1952 macrumors 68020

    bobr1952

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Location:
    Melbourne, FL
    #20
    Oh dear--that is indeed bad news based on Samsung's expertise with software updates--they haven't a clue. :eek:
     
  21. gwangung macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    #21
    Technically inclined tinkerers, you mean.

    But that's not the entire market.

    And it might not be the biggest component of the market.
     
  22. newbiemacguy128, Feb 4, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2011

    newbiemacguy128 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    #22
    For your concrete example btw...If you go on Apple's website and look at the reviews for the VGA adapter, people are complaining of severe limitations. One of those limitations being that it doesn't mirror, and only works with certain apps. One of them mention it doesn't work with numbers, pages, 3rd party apps, youtube, and EVEN APPLES OWN ITUNES VIDEOS. On Amazon, a few complained that it doesn't work with keynote!!!!

    **Apparently you can jailbreak your iPad to get it to be fully functional, I stand corrected!

    The iPad is great, I get it. I love Apple products, but the iPad is VERY limited in what it can do. Google's Honeycomb isn't a revolution in tablet computing, but what the've done is quite honestly, what many iPad users like myself have been asking for since day 1.
     
  23. JustSomeDude macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    #23
    Sounds like a lot of stuff that would appeal to geeks. I wouldn't mind seeing these features in the iPad, but I'm not so sure the average person cares about most of it. Hopefully, OS updates will be better on the tablets that the phones. That would probably go a long way towards helping their cause.
     
  24. coochiekuta macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Location:
    here and there
    #24
    agreed it is a limited device but you knew that since day one because you are smart person and researched the product beforehand. you also knew apples history of being unbending when it comes to these things.
     
  25. newbiemacguy128 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    #25
    Well i didn't buy an iPad. My family bought it solely for a better web browsing and photo viewing experience. Most people in my family have an iPhone so the app store wasn't much of an appeal. For what we used it for, it was GREAT. Honeycomb does have one thing I want though...tabbed, fully cached browser! I hope iPad 2 has this one...
     

Share This Page