Why Rival Tablet Makers Are Failing

[fertilized-egg]

The HP Touchpad gaming performance looks very weak with their Adreno GPU and Playbook might be in the same boat. .

Actually the Snapdragon APQ8060 in the HP Touchpad uses the new Adreno 220 which should handily beat the Tegra2's graphic performance AFAIK. (Qualcomm themselves even said "twice" as fast as the Tegra2, we'll see http://www.dvhardware.net/article48408.html)

The Playbook's the OMAP4430 also has a pretty decent GPU - a fastclocked SGX540 - that's also faster than the Tegra2, as you can see its benchmark here - http://www.anandtech.com/show/4179/ti-omap4-and-lg-optimus-3d-tested.

It remains to be seen if they can get high quality games like iOS users do. However while neither one of these is likely to beat the iPad 2's SGX543MP2 chip, both tablets do have very competent hardware, easily outclassing the much heralded Tegra2 chip used in Honeycomb tablets.

(Yes, Tegra2 GPU is every dualcore's doormat now so much for hardware supremacy of the Xoom )

 

[eye]

We could simplify by saying that their operating systems suck. Marketing and image is a big deal, but if the iPad was a piece of junk, marketing wouldn't move units.

 

[Sydde]

Xoom has a ... broken S/D card slot.

Right now, yes, it lacks a driver or something like that. But they will fix that eventually, so we hear. So the, it will have a working SD card slot — except, wait, can I put my camera cards into it? No, because like most cameras, mine uses SD or SDHC, but the Xoom has a microSD slot. So even though it will/might work, it will still be at least half-broken.

 

[Michael CM1]

Simplicity.

Pretty much any company that makes a semi-decent tech product will sell X amount of devices because they will either fill a certain void or be able to convince people it has been filled by this device. Think MiniDisc.

For as long as I can remember, at least since Mac OS X and the iPod, Apple has focused on making quality products that work and are simple to use. Other people may sell more stuff and maybe even make more money. But Apple has this system of making everything for its products, which means developers know exactly what they're doing instead of trying to support 15,000 different video adapters.

I liken this to a toaster. Nobody gives a crap about how hot a toaster gets on the inside or the exact size of the hole. You just want one that makes toast, and some people might want one with a bigger hole for bagels.

With all the different iPad wannabes (Motorola, HP, Samsung) making different hardware that runs on software made elsewhere (Google, Microsoft), expect the same problems that come with buying a PC.

 

[MrWillie]

Right now, yes, it lacks a driver or something like that. But they will fix that eventually, so we hear. So the, it will have a working SD card slot — except, wait, can I put my camera cards into it? No, because like most cameras, mine uses SD or SDHC, but the Xoom has a microSD slot. So even though it will/might work, it will still be at least half-broken.

So is what you're trying to say is, it's not as useless as tits on a boar hog, but that it's even more useless than tits on a boar hog ?

 

[Sydde]

So is what you're trying to say is, it's not as useless as tits on a boar hog, but that it's even more useless than tits on a boar hog ?

To be fair, you can get microSD cards. Best Buy has a 16Gig for $60.us, which could be a useful thing, to be able to carry dozens and dozens of movies, songs, pics, whatever, in a compact size. Or to keep the business files you are working on on separate media, JIC the Xoom is pinched, like at the airport or something. I personally would like those options.

But I really think it would be nice to be able to shove my camera cards in there, because, well, why not? So why microSD? Because SD cards are so freakin' huge and awkward? Well, ok, I guess I could see that, since the microSD cards take up a quarter of the real estate (I mean, really, these things are 11mm wide — is there not a point at which things can be too small?)

 

[ravenas]

It's all about price and commitment to me. The mandatory tie to a cellular contract is what kept me away from the Galaxy Tab. Same for the Xoom. That made Android devices cellular devices tied to a 2 yr carrier commitment. whereas the iPad was initially sold as a consumer electronics device akin to an iPod. Even the 3G service was a monthly opt-in rather than a multi-year commitment.

In this way Google made a misstep. They tied Android to cellular carriers and put unnecessary constraints on their growth. And yet the sheer amount of choices have allowed Android smartphone adoption to skyrocket.

Once we see Android tablets released as WiFi only, I think the iPad will have serious competition. Non-Apple manufacturers are less interested in locking down the system for a "Steve Jobs Approved" experience.

 

[ozred]

1) With Ipad if I want to watch a movie I rent it, netflix it, or buy it.

2) With android there is nothing.

1) With MY iPad, I put it down and watch the movie in my home theatre.

2) With MY Android, I put it down and watch the movie in my home theatre.

I find movies are enjoyed best with family & friends as opposed to a small iPad screen

 

[lkwan]

ipad

Apple has always kept profit in mind when making products.

For every Ps3 and xbox that were sold they lost money!

And because they are profitable, they can afford to be not complacent.

Most other devices, need to string along slight upgrades every six months to keep interest up.

Apple makes a great product that generally has a life cycle of one year!

And then Apple, generally only keeps a design for 2-3 cycle until they totally revamp it completely!

How many palm pilots can you make until no one cares!

Most companies don't get it... They are too worried about the next version instead of focusing on my a GREAT product.

 

[Meever]

Apple is has won the tablet market because they fixed what was essentially broken.

All the tablets before iPad were conceptual failures. They had like 2 hour battery life, used non captive touch screens that you needed a stylus to navigate with, They were just as heavy as laptops (and you were expected to carry these things with one hand?!) or were tiny. Oh and they RAN OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT WEREN'T BUILT WITH TOUCH NAVIGATION IN MIND.

All those Windows tablets and UMPCs failed because they were a total hassle and brought no benefits. iPad was lighter, faster, had battery life up the wazoo, and most importantly functional.

That and Apple knows how to build hype. People call it marketing but I don't think that's quite right. We don't see commercials and advertisements for Apple's new products until there's already a 300 people line in front of their store.... so clearly, they know how to build hype even before marketing kicks in.

 

[kdarling]

It's all about price and commitment to me. The mandatory tie to a cellular contract is what kept me away from the Galaxy Tab. Same for the Xoom.

There's no mandatory contract on either one of those.

(When the Tab first came out, there was one for a month, but that's been dropped. A lot of people activated without it anyway.)

 

[DiamondMac]

The easy nature of the iPad is why they continue winning and WILL continue winning the tablet war

I have friends that bought several tablets and it is embarrassing how bad these tablets are on several levels. They are confusing, slow, and in general a pain to deal with. All but 1 friend returned their tablets within a week

 

[Blakjack]

THE BIG #1......Price

2. Fluid transition from one place to the next. Im guessing the lack of lag is an art that no one other than Apple has figured out.

3. Apps. iOS is home to over 100,000 apps + 65,000 for iPad, some useful and some not. But the point is iOS is home to over 100,000 apps+ 65,000 for iPad.

4. Developer Community. As "locked down" as people say Apple is, there are tons of developers

5. The tools for the developers are great. They make it much easier for developers to develope the Apps.

6. The hardware is unmatched, POINT BLANK PERIOD. when u hold an apple device, it feels like you are holding something that costs a great deal of money instead of just costing a great deal of money.

7. Advertising-Second to none. That Apple is known all over the world at first glance, why, because Apple puts a lot of effort into their advertising.

8. Fraternity Feel- when u walk into their stores, it feels like you are walking into some kind of Futuristic Frat house. from the shirts, sling bags, apple stickers, u name it. Apple has done a great job over the years creating that small company conumer relationship. taking time to give small workshops at their stores and and building relationships with different organiztions that have spun off Apple has been huge.

9. This goes along with number 1 really. Owning many of the key parts within their products has allowed Apple to competitively price their products. Why buy a 88 buck XOOM when u can buy an entry level ipad for 500 or better yet a refurb entrylevel for even cheaper with the same warranty.

10. Not giving in to becoming a software or hardware whore like microsoft and android. this has allowed Apple to maintain that exclusive club feel. Being that they are a small company, they dont have to try and make sure they have hardware for every platform or have software for every different Hardware. They are a company who can just sit back and concentrate of profit.
11. Their store ensure they are getting most of the money instead of having to lose a lot of money through partener stores. they get more profit which means they have more money to to be more successful in new generation products, do more advertising, and buy out more companies that have new and innovative technologies.

12. The ecosystem is unmatched. As much as some people hate iTunes, it has been Apples best creation yet. it is the heart and soul, the engine that makes Apple tick. Just like blood always flows back to the Heart, everthing works through iTunes.

13. They know how to say NO!

and a bunch of other stuff

 

[Consultant]

How about having their desktop OS on the tablet in full form and functionallity.

Some people don't want to have to install apps for things that should be included in the OS. Or have to jailbreak to do some of them.

But, I am ordering an iPad2 tomorrow. So I am not a hater. The day they have the desktop and mobile devices run the same programs, same basic systems (instead of one being more or less "dummied" down), is the day that they conquer the tablet realm. Hopefully soon, because I would tend to agree with the above poster. The Windows 7 tabs are just getting better and better.

If the W7 tablets were as smooth with OS function as an iPad, and had the same quality screen, then I would have bought one/would buy one. What made me go Apple with my tablet needs was simply the display is top notch, OS smoothness (browsing and general os responsiveness) is great, and there were apps for some functionallity I needed.

When the W7 tablet manufacturers up there game even more, I think we will see some really awesome devices.

Desktop programs that you are thinking about are designed for mouse and mostly no multi-touch. MS tried to promote their "full OS" tablets for a decade and very few find it useful.

W7 tablet? ROTF.

I think one of the biggest barriers of entry is price. Once these Androids tablets begin to undercut themselves, you'll see a nice bump in the Android tablet share... but the margins will be hurt a lot. Just like how eReaders were 5+ years ago. Not many people jumped on the Sony or iRex readers back then.

Android needs to fix the updates and DRM mess. Imagine when Netflix finally does come to the Android platform, but then explaining how certain hardware chip sets can run Netflix while others cannot because of the DRM.

No. Tablets are mostly not subsidized by phone companies. That's why the knockoffs have to charge more for inferior devices.

I don't expect iOS 3 to add anything to the current 4.3. Get the facts right or fail!

Looks like you found a clueless shill.

 

[Sedrick]

It's simply because there's no market for tablets, there's a market for iPads.

You really nailed it right there.

 

[vrDrew]

There probably is no one single factor that has made the iPad the success it has been.

Price, performance, design, supply chain, quality, retail, ecosystem - if any of them don't work, the whole value chain would fall apart.

Example: You could build an affordable, easy to use, brilliantly performing piece of hardware - but if there is no software to run on it, there is no real reason for consumers to buy it. Or even if there WAS software, but quality was a problem, consumers aren't likely to take a chance on a new device.

In my opinion, Apple is the ONLY company in the world that could have made the iPad work. Can you see consumers lining up to buy a piece of hardware from Microsoft? Can you see App developers rushing to create paid Apps for a Microsoft Tablet App Store? How about Sony, or Samsung?

Apple was in a unique position: They'd done it AT LEAST twice before in the previous decade. They'd convinced not just consumers, but also developers that their company could introduce a new piece of hardware and, in very short order, build an entire new business. More to the point, most of the infrastructure to make a new product succesful (the App Store, the customer accounts, the retail stores, etc.) was already in place.

Other companies might be able to copy different parts of Apple's "value chain" - but no company, by itself, can replicate much more than one or two of those links. Google could put out the greatest iteration of Android for Tablets ever - but if the engineers at Motorola or Samsung don't do their homework, the whole enterprise fails.

One immediately glaring shortfall the "me too" companies are suffering from is Apple's commanding lead in the supply chain. By utilizing Asian subcontractors for assembly and component supply, competitors can - at best -match Apple's manufacturing cost. But Apple is already two steps ahead: they've used their inside knowledge and financial might to lock up supplies of the key touchscreen manufacturing infrastructure. Even if a competitor was able to produce a credible alternative - they wouldn't be able to get enough touchscreens to meet the demands of a "breakout" hit. Apple doesn't "monopolize" touchscreens - it just buys enough of them to make it very expensive and difficult for competitors to source them.

 

[Ava's Meeshee]

"Me too" is a fatal enough flaw.

It's impossible to reconcile the fact that consumer interest in tablets was nil for 10 years of their availability with their sudden must-have status unless you recognize either that it's only iPads that are must-have or believe that some extra-Apple happenstance coincided with the release of the iPad granting it golden timing, parallel to whatever suddenly turned on public interest in slates.

Few people "need" an all-in-one pocket knife. If they're going to buy one they're going to buy a Swiss Army Knife, or a much cheaper knockoff.

 

[qtx43]

There probably is no one single factor that has made the iPad the success it has been...

That's the bottom line, right there.

... Apple doesn't "monopolize" touchscreens - it just buys enough of them to make it very expensive and difficult for competitors to source them.

It's not any more expensive for their competitors, they would just need to save their money and invest a year or two ahead of time (which is what Apple does). With enough investment, the infrastructure can be built, but not instantly.

I'll just add, to the quote in the thread starter's original post: the Xoom does not have superior hardware specs. The graphics are far inferior, the display is inferior (even with slightly higher pixel count), the promised 4G, microSD and Flash is still vaporware, the RAM is better (though somewhat offset by a less efficient OS), and the cameras are much better (if you care about cameras on a tablet). You'll be halfway to iPad's version 3 before Flash/4G/microSD all are smoothed out, and I have my doubts about the Flash ever working great on this generation of ARM hardware.