Android Tablets Still Suck, And Google's Running Out Of Time To Fix Them
androidpolice.com
androidpolice.com
I own a Xoom, and bought it for two things: reading PDF files, because my it's far superior to my e-reader, and web browsing when it's inconvenient to hold my laptop (read: bed). Because, let's be honest, doing serious browsing on your phone isn't ideal. That's it. And for those purposes it's brilliant.
I'm not sure how owning an iPad would change anything. I own a desktop with a dual monitor setup for serious work. It's got a comfy desk and comfy chair, and I like it. For work on the go, I've got my Macbook Air, which fits just as easily as a tablet in any bag I carry.
Tablets are a niche product. Thanks to the Apple marketing machine, some people started thinking, "Why do I need laptop? I'll just get an iPad". And those people are niche; if you can replace all of your computing with an iPad, then you may as well be using just a phone. If you've got a desktop, laptop, tablet and phone (like me), you're a tech geek, and the tablet is a toy.
>"The Google Music app is ugly, barren of any useful features"
It has the one feature I need: it plays music.
What app(s) do you use for reading PDF files? None of the solutions I've used so far seem particularly suited (remembering last position, easy search/scrolling etc).
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=udk.android.re...
For reading comics (another awesome use case for the tablet) I'm using Perfect Viewer:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rookiestud...
You can have multiple books open in tabs with saved positions.
My uncle has both an Android tablet and an iPad and an iMac! He seems to be quite fond of the droid. I don't know his reasons why. He's not tech savvy in anyway - he can barely install an App on his Mac.
And I think the appeal as a desktop replacement is that they are easier to use. But both could be far better.
Neither care for smart phones.
Absolutely. Look, I think tablets - and the iPad specifically - are technological feats. But outside of that wonder, for most people, it's a completely superfluous device. I mean, look at the author's example:
>"Apple knew it had a large group of customers out there yearning for a device that let them watch their iTunes content on a larger display without having to lug around a laptop."
Are there really a bunch of people sitting around saying: Well, I'm idle for the next 2 hours, with cell reception. I'll watch a movie. But a 4" high def screen won't cut it, and an 11" or 13" screen is too much. The 9" screen of my iPad is just right.?
It's sort of ridiculous.
The irony of your original comment is that the PC should actually be the niche product because most people never needed it. The PC should be meant for professionals in the fields of audio, video, math, science and programming.
I don't disagree. In fact, the desktop has already become unnecessary for 99% of the population. I still enjoy mine under certain circumstances, but after the tablet, it'd be the first device to go.
People with illegal content are sooo in the market for an Android tablet. The long-term problem will be to get them to upgrade to a second tablet. After you have this 10" screen that can be fed movies over USB, why ever buy another one?
Most people already have a PC, and it can do anything a tablet can do. But if a tablet is a better fit, in a few years these people will be asking themselves why they should buy a new PC instead of a new tablet.
That's me every lunchtime (not a movie, but a 30 minute TV episode). Maybe nowadays you can get an ultrabook that would be light enough and have the battery life to carry around without thinking about it, but my laptop is more bulk than I want to lug back and forth to work in my bag every day, and I'd have to remember to charge it in the evenings. My Transformer goes everywhere with me, is comfortable to watch things on while holding it in my hands (something that's not true even for the same device with a keyboard attached, and certainly not on any laptop I've tried) and as long as I remember to charge it one day out of three I never run out.
"The iPad is a tool and toy you might not need, but if used to the max it'll probably enhance your life in some noticable way.
Every single morning, while sipping coffee and waiting for my omelette to finish cooking, I catch up on the latest news through Reeder, the first RSS reader I've actually enjoyed using. I also check my mail to see if there's anything important I need to respond to right away.
When I'm finished eating and catching up to the latest news, I grab my iPad and go upstairs for my exercize. While doing strenght training I use my iPad to quickly make a note of how many reps and how much I lifted. After I'm done with my strength training, I take a run either outside or on my threadmill. If I take the run on the threadmill, I'll use the iPad for watching a video, maybe South Park or TED.
After I've showered, groomed, brushed my teeth and flossed, it's time to start working. When I work my iPad is always lying on the desk next to my laptop. I use it for:
* Displaying my ToDo-list (the Hit List)
* Displaying the email I'm working on.
* Displaying some relevant notes to the work I'm doing (Evernote).
* Displaying a PDF or website containing documentation to what I'm working on.
* As an extra screen (AirDisplay) for Photoshop tool pads and similar.
* VNC or SSH to another computer
* The occational check of HN, Twitter or Facebook.
* Calculator
* Calendar (Week Cal HD)
Yup, everything I've mentioned could be done on a normal laptop. However, it's incredibly useful to have an extra screen for displaying relevant information that'll never be obscured by application windows covering the information.
After I'm satisfied with my work for the day, I might hang out with my friends, perhaps take a picnic in the park. My iPad is always accessible in my manpurse. If a customer has an emergency problem, I can quickly and easily log into their server and fix the problem (Textastic/Prompt). If I get a brilliant idea, I'll note it down in Evernote and analyse it with the Business Model app. Maybe I want to think deeply about my business - I'll just open Dropbox and read through some business documents about future plans or surf on some of my competitor's sites through Mercury Browser.
When I'm back home I might do some more work or chill out with some games. Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible through the Virtual Window control mode.
Right before I go to bed, I write in my diary (Day One) and finish my TODO-list for tomorrow."
>"Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible"
That's a slight exaggeration! If you are at all serious about gaming, the iPad isn't even in the conversation. Again, it's pointing to the iPad and telling me how awesome it is at something, but then having to qualify that statement because it isn't as good/cheap/efficient for that purpose as a device I already own.
So why did you include "with an external monitor"? By your own reasoning the external monitor is naught but a luxury and anything done via it can be done as efficiently or more cheaply without it.
It seems that you do recognize that form factor, comfort and convenience do matter, and that even if you already have a device that's functionally equivalent, additional devices that enhance your actual day to day computing experience aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality.
You're just choosing to apply it to tablets in a way that you don't for smartphones themselves. After all, your logic suggests we could write off the smartphone itself -- or even any phone -- as a 'luxury' that presents nothing not already provided by a 3G laptop with VoIP app.
Because if you're sitting there with a laptop and a phone, and wondering what to buy next, buying a $150 monitor is going to be far more useful to you than a $700 tablet. But you don't need either.
>"aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality."
I never said they were irrelevant. I own one.
The article tries to blame Android's failings in the tablet space on their lack of ability to get it together. I believe, based on personal experience, the real problem is that tablets themselves just aren't that great. Sure, the iPad is incredibly successful. However, let's not underestimate Apple's rabid fans, incredible marketing or that fact that they were the first to build a fantastically futuristic device. But it's not really providing me with anything I don't already have. That's usually what I base my consumption on.
Someone else in the thread said something along these lines: people are buying "iPads", because they are cool and there is some status tied to them. People aren't buying "tablets" because they're not very useful.
That's going to heavily hinge on workload and day-to-day schedule. Which is the entire point: you're willing to accept 'a luxury' as useful when it fits your computing schedule, but you don't seem to recognize that anyone else might be buying a different luxury because they have a different computing schedule.
Tablets may not be that great for you. But that doesn't mean they're not that great. Your argument is blurring your absolutely legitimate personal opinion on tablets with a judgment about everyone else's opinion on them. And that's where you're wrong. Your line of thought rests on a logical fallacy. Not everyone computes like you.
And here's a test for your theory that "people are buying iPads for social status reasons": How many people?
How many tablets have to sell before you'd concede that maybe people are buying them because they find them useful?
How many people have to upgrade those iPads before you'd be convinced?
How many people have to let their PCs languish for how long, in deference to buying/upgrading tablets before you'd concede that you were wrong?
How many years do tablets have to continue to sell before you'd accept them as evidence of something other than fashion?
Is there any amount of data that will change your mind?
Or are you already reflexively rationalizing how your theory could continue to be true even if a decade from now, and billions of tablets from now, they're still going strong?
He likes the rich quality of apps (Reeder the first RSS reader he likes, Day One, etc.) and he is obviously carrying it around.. A LOT. And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising, etc. I don't know about you but I would rather have a tablet than carry a laptop (even a 11 inch MacBook Air, that's super light, small, and if you only put it to sleep no boot time) all over the place. We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant. You could more efficiently (by some measures) and more cheaply do all of what he does WITHOUT ANY COMPUTING DEVICE. But is that the point?
> haven't replaced any devices... and the tablet isn't good enough on its own
Did your cellphone replace your landline? Did your computer replace your calculator?
> the tablet is a luxury
Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that. Visit the poor streets of India and you'll realize that. Anything that's beyond your basic needs is by definition luxury.
Yes, in fact my cell and my computer did displace the earlier technology completely.
This "big touchable surface" may be powerful enough eventually to be a new way of looking at the world. I think it needs better feedback first.
>"And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising"
I'm sipping coffee at my desktop right now. And I sip coffee with my laptop ALL the time. Exercising? Well, I think it's ridiculous you'd carry a tablet rather than a phone.
>"We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant."
No, we're not, because I disagree. A laptop with Windows 7 is going to make far more things "easier and pleasant" in the real world. Once again, what can your laptop do that the iPad can't? Lots. What can the tablet do that the laptop can't? Nothing. It's just easier to hold.
>"Did your cellphone replace your landline?"
Yes, it did. For me, my mother, father, sister and almost everyone I know under 30.
>"Did your computer replace your calculator?"
Uh, it most certainly did. If I need to do some basic arithmetic, I'm using Excel, or a calculator on my phone.
>"Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that."
That's one hair away from Godwin's Law. Yeah, you're right. Everything I have is a luxury compared to some poor sucker in Africa. Thanks for pointing that out.
It's like you're trying to convince me that I should be using a tablet more. I own them all, and I use whatever tool is most convenient. The tablet is only ever my "go to" device in very specific cases that I've mentioned. I like it, I'm not selling it, but it's not overly useful. It wouldn't affect my productivity in any way if it disappeared tomorrow. And, to bring it full circle to the original article, it isn't because it's an Android instead of an Apple; it's because tablets just aren't that advantageous.
Sure, you might consider the iPad as a luxury for the minority who also needs a regular computer/laptop since the iPad isn't sufficient for them - and you're right. A few hundred dollars is not much though for a "luxury device" that'll you'll use several hours a day for years.
It's obviously also way more portable than a laptop. The Macbook Air 11' is very light, but it's still double the price and almost double the weight of the iPad, which makes the iPad a better choice in my view for the bigger than smartphone device you'll take with you everywhere.
I'm not claiming that the iPad is the best game device, not at all (it's great for casual games though). The Virtual Window mode in Rage HD is incredibly immersive and exhausting since it's like virtual reality, but I never intended that sentence to sound as the iPad was the best platform for immersive games. It's not.
Watching a movie, browsing the web, reading books, PDFs or news on a phone? I can't be the only one who feels nauseous after staring at a 3-4" screen for more than an hour. And the average user is growing older pretty much everywhere around the world.
Mine has a 4.3" screen, and when commuting these days, most people using their Android phones around me have phones with bigger screens than that - all the way up to the monstrous Galaxy Note (5.3").
So in the Android market, the tablets are being squeezed from the bottom by phones with significantly larger screens, and from the top by ultra-books. And then it's fragmented into the 7" and 10" form factors, with a glut of really low priced alternatives in the 7" segment, which is also competing with the Kindle.
Apple has spaced out the form factors in a way that creates room for the iPad for people who stick with Apple products. For people who don't stick with Apple products, it's hit and miss - if you pick a large phone, and a small laptop, or a big laptop + a netbook, and possibly throwing a Kindle into the mix, and the additional benefit of a tablet diminishes greatly.
I was at a Parent Teacher Association meeting at an East London primary school last night. There were about 15 people there. 3 had iPads.
I was using mine to take minutes - really just adding notes to the agenda that was already in Word, via pages. Mainly just adding brief notes to discussion points, noting whether something had been carried. I used to use paper, but the iPad is more difficult to lose and I don;t have to re-type.
When the issue of the the next meeting came up, people used the iPad to look at the calendar - fine - that could have been done by phone. One member couldn't make it, but joined us via Skype on an iPad.
Meanwhile the Headmistress was keeping a check on the England Ukraine scores.
A question came up about the prices for a bit of equipment - a quick Google search found it in the meeting, rather than having to be discussed in the next meeting.
The thing about the iPad is that it isn't necessarily better than a laptop at anything, it's just incredibly convenient. It's the kind of thing you take along 'just in case'.
Oddly enough, just about the only thing I don;t use it for is consuming iTunes media. I rip videos for the kids to watch on holiday sometimes, but never use iTunes.
I'll look into Workflowy, however.
I've bought 4 iPads for family members (and a Samsung Galaxy Note for myself which is in many ways a mini-3G-tablet) and advised many more friends on getting their own iPads so I'm well aware of the benefits, but it seems people say the darndest things in their attempts to justify them.
As far as the success, I believe (my opinion, obviously) that many people bought iPads with the intention of replacing their laptops. These people have discovered (or will) that that isn't very practical. In my line of work, I sit in an inordinate amount of meetings. When the iPad came out there were so many people tap-tap-tapping away on their screens, taking notes. Today, there are far less; most of those people are back to their laptops. It's just an anecdote, but my personal experience is the same.
Who knows, maybe this is our aversion to change? I don't doubt that tablets are the future.
People love them, and most of those people already know what computing on a phone and laptop are like.
I'm thinking of having mine surgically implanted.
It does everything a smartphone does, and much better (actual phone use aside, for which I have a tiny it's-just-a-phone). It can remote-login to any computer I need, extending all those desktops & racks to wherever I am without having to set up yet another computer. The key is "anywhere anytime": check status of a long compile at work on a whim while I'm in bed? done. Code review someone's project while I'm on the beach? rather not, but done anyway. Walking, riding, standing around, munching lunch, whatever wherever? instant online with access to anything. Yeah it's not optimal for development, but it extends every use to wherever I am. A laptop still wants a lap, must be unfolded, aggregates "computer" use to compete with the desktop ... the tablet extends it instead.
I can do it too, I have a Galaxy Tab 2 and absolutely love it, therefore if you don't have one then you're stupid and your tablet sucks. The fact that you might actually love your tablet for reasons different than why I love mine means nothing in my attempt to publicize my ego.
Also, I don't think he ever argues that anyone should give up (where are you getting that?). Rather, he suggests that Google should get their asses in gear and improve their offerings on a few specific fronts if they hope to compete with Apple and MS.
The intro and first section have nothing to do with anything other than his own personal preferences. He doesn't use his tablet that often so he's assuming others have the same experience. But then he talks so highly of the iPad as if the experience with it is simply better only because it's an iPad. Doesn't it seem likely that the possibly experience he describes for an Android tablet can possibly be the same with iPad? With him apparently it is not. The iPad is better because he seems to think it is. Somehow it's just better with little or no evidence as to what he's talking about. He uses his phone more than his tablet. So what? Seems to me he bought something he didn't want or need.
By the way, I like the iPad but I'll never buy one. Why? Personal preference. I don't even have to say that the iPad and iTunes have problems that Apple really needs to work on or Google/Microsoft will take over the market.
In the second section he does make some good points as to why the iPad is so successful but he couldn't help but toss in his own opinion yet again about the Android tablets. Android bad, iPad good. We get it already. The only real reason he gives for Android falling behind is that Google is late to the game with content, which no one disputes. But then he goes right back into tossing out his personal preferences as if it matters. He apparently likes iTunes over what Google offers. That's nice; nice for him. I, for one, have little problems with how I get content for my Android tablet. My opinion in the matter has as much weight as his. In an attempt to prove his point about design preferences he links to another article complaining about the Play Store that also happens to be on the same site. I didn't bother going there because I'm sure it's more iPad good, Android bad, because, well, because of a "I think so" attitude. But then again I didn't read it so I could be wrong.
Concerning content, I notice he didn't bring up Amazon's Kindle Fire which directly addresses this issue. From what I understand the Kindle Fire is a big seller but I guess that's not an Android device anymore?
Then when he finally gets to the real issue he blames the wrong people. Adoption rates are low for upgrading Android to the latest version is because of the hardware vendors, not Google. That's the core of the problem with this article. Comparing Android tablets with the iPad is not the same as comparing Apple to Google. It's the same mistake too many people make with comparing Apple to Microsoft when what they're really doing is comparing Mac to PC, it is not the same thing. Why do I think Apple is so successful with the iPad? Because they are damn good at creating devices and marketing them. Google is a freaking search engine company that sells ads. Do we not see the difference here?
He talks about the lack of Android tablet specific apps. But he himself describes why this is. Why make a tablet specific app for Android when so many of the phones and tablets are not that different in the first place? There's not much difference between a 4.5" phone screen and a 7" tablet screen (which I'm guessing a large number of Android tablets sold are) so it becomes more of a fragmentation issue of hardware features not relating to the screen. So far there is a significant difference between an iPhone and an iPad that many apps probably do need a tablet version. Plus that 225,000 number for iPad apps is just marketing talk. Quantity does not equal quality.
Also, him stating that a phone app will always look like a phone app on a tablet is yet another personal preference. I have apps on both my phone and tablet that is the same version and I have no problem with that whatsoever. Again, it's an opinion but I admit it's biased because I have a 7" tablet. A 10" tablet would probably be an issue, which it is with the iPad.
Android developers don't make money from people paying for apps. So what? Developers don't get to dictate terms in how they make money in any given market. Just because one market hands out cash like crazy doesn't mean they all will. If you want to be in a market then you go by what that market wants. If that means $4.99 on iTunes and free with ads on Android then so be it. I've also seen complaints lately that the iOS platform is not the cash cow it used to be. Factors involving people paying out less and just the sheer amount of competition is the usual. Granted, I've only read this so it's no different a comment than what he's making about the Android market.
Then there's the Surface tablet. A tablet that we know next to nothing about but he's already practically labeling it an Android killer. It might be, it might not. We don't know and won't know for a while. But his personal opinion has kicked in again and this barely existing product is a winner to him. I personally will wait until I can get my hands on one.
I don't agree with his conclusion simply because I feel he doesn't fully understand what Android is and what it means. He only focuses on tablets and I say that tablets are a niche market in the Android ecosystem. Not everybody who wants or needs Android wants or needs a tablet. Until recently Android has been about phones, high and low end. It has been about spreading a free and/or low-cost OS to multiple devices. I don't seen anybody making a cheap $50 computer for emerging markets running iOS, they are using Android. His conclusion assumes that Google can or will do anything about tablets. I say they don't need to, Android is doing exactly what Google has always wanted; to spread like crazy. Most of his complaints are nothing for Google to care about, that's for the individual companies that are creating these tablets to worry over. At least in the final paragraph he finally admits the current state of Android tablets have very little to do with Google itself. But if he admits that then what's the point of the article in the first place?
Where do I get the "give up" part? His second to last paragraph screams give up to me. But, my interpretation.
As I said, I own a Galaxy Tab 2 and I absolutely love it. I use this device every day for various things and it meets my expectations just fine. I also still use my Android phone and I fail to see the problem with that.
In the end, this is just my opinion but I admit to that.
I'm probably a unique user in that I think iOS makes for a better phone and Android makes for a better tablet. Sadly, none of the Android tablet HW has been good enough to make me switch. I'm interested in the new MS tablet though; Looks like it has a "substantial" build.
1. Tablets, for now, are perceived as a third device which means that it's mostly for people who can afford it. Since Apple absolutely dominates high-end purchases it is far more likely that the iPad will be successful. It's a big problem for Android in that the app ecosystem for iPad will continue to mature while Android remains stagnant.
2. Price. The iPad doesn't have the high-priced subsidies like the iPhone. It also seems as if the Apple is willing to sacrifice on margins with the iPad to make it difficult for Android tablets to have lower price points. When they do, there is a visible lack of build quality.
I don't think MS is much of a concern at this point since it is vaporware and much of the Surface press conference had more to do with legacy support of the PC than anything else.
http://www.techspot.com/news/47738-apples-profit-margin-slig...
[1] http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/03/16/high_cost_of_n...
I mean, a game company with $50 million in iPad revenues isn't going to turn their nose up at $5 million of Android revenue, especially if they figure the ROI for porting is fairly high.
Android phone and tablet manufacturers are busy destroying the ecosystem by having a wide array of sizes and capabilities.
Android phones are increasingly cannibalizing the Android tablet market.
And Android tablets are, for some unknown reason, trying to shrink down to phone size (see the rise of ~7 inch tablets).
Leading to a confusing mess of 3.5-5.3 inch phones and 7-12 inch tablets. Eventually there's going to be a blend of devices straight thru 3.5 - 10".
And since we as developers know the android fragmentation problem is very real (I used to develop android apps for two years), it's going to produce a downward spiral of app quality as developers focus on certain form factors to the detriment of others.
Say what you will about Apple's "openness", but Apple's insistance on maintaining distinct product positions has absolutely proven itself in the market. Android's ecosystem is a disaster.
TVs and washing machines and refrigerators and watches are starting to run their own operating systems. Which OS do you see your TV running? Because I'm pretty sure they'll all be running Android soon.
The Android == Windows analogy is a faulty one.
The iPad wins because Apple is able to pull off a truly beautiful interface (and I mean truly beautiful, not beautiful in "marketing term of the week" sense that it's being used in these days) that's consistent with the iPhone, a sexy display and overall presentation, and the very high quality of apps in the marketplace. The magical Apple brand lust doesn't hurt either.
Generic tablets won't win because nobody ever thought to themselves, "Even though I have a powerful smartphone in my pocket and a powerful laptop at my desk, I feel the indescribable urge to have a third device that's very expensive, isn't as good as either one, and that I can't fit in my pocket."
I never bought a tablet because after toying with an iPad and some random Android tablet I realized I would never use it in real life. All of my friends who have iPads or Android tablets say the same; they play with them once or twice a week, but otherwise they gather dust at the expense of smartphones and laptops.
Everyone wants to copy Apple and make billions, but they just don't get it that people don't care about tablets. They only care about iPads, and that kind of brand loyalty isn't something you can copy.
Sending/sharing files works similarly. Go to send an image file and you'll get the option to attach it to an email, send it via twitter, put it in Facebook, send it via mms (if your device is a phone), put it in Dropbox, incorporate it into a note in Evernote, etc. Third party programs will add the options to send it to network shares or ftp.
Android lets you have access to your filesystem from the tablet / phone itself, so you can have that level of control if you want it. Most tablets / phones come with a very basic file manager and more advanced ones are a quick download away. If you would prefer to do everything from a command line shell, this is also available.
Android doesn't lock down the user the way an iPad does.
A lot of people think the file system metaphor is a bad one, but I can't think of an alternative that keeps the user in control of their own data.
For just about any activity I can think of, tablets are second-best at best (reading eBooks, watching movies, web browsing), but for digital comics it really is the best way to do it.
I find that a tablet built for stylus use is a fantastic learning aid. So I guess I'm in the non existant market group that prefers non Apple tablets.
I think smartphones are in the same situation: those sub-optimal tablets beat them for reading eBooks, watching movies, web browsing. One could even argue smartphones aren't even best of class for making phone calls. Yet, almost everybody owns one.
From tablet sales, it looks like people want to sacrifice some portability to get a 'big screen smartphone' in exchange for that bigger screen.
For the first time in my life, I happily read books on a screen -- on my iPad 3. I literally read from it for at least one hour a day. I love Instapaper. This needs the big screen for e.g. pdf formatting.
I have utility apps like e.g. sketching UIs (Adobe Proto), organisation and note taking, but those aren't game changers for me. (When the iPad ssh applications get a bit better, there might be another game changer.)
people don't care about tablets. They only care about iPads
This is the same sort of boring noise we heard when the iPhone temporarily dominated.
People care about being able to browse the web, view movies and other content, access emails, etc. The iPad happens to be a very good solution to those needs, but if you miss the mark and think that the product is more important than the needs that it solves, you're really far off the mark.
It's funny that people turn into an iOS versus Android thing -- spurred on by the linkbait title -- when really the author simply doesn't have a utility for tablets. Their core argument is that the tablet doesn't have a role in their life, and almost all of their argument holds for the iPad as well. I disagree, but to each his own I suppose.
Not so hilarious when you look at the break-down of profit in the market.
What does profit have to do with what people care about?
Apple makes enormous profits because of volume and a very, very refined process.
Outside of flag waving cheerleading squads, how is that even remotely relevant in this discussion?
On the other hand when was the last time you saw a regular human in a Starbucks with an iPad? I've seen iPads in the most unlikely of places, like small cafes in rural Mexico (no kidding). Likewise I've never in my life seen any other tablet computer in public, anywhere. Anecdotal sure, but Apple's sales versus other tab's sales back that anecdote up to some extent.
Tablet computers have been tried before, too, and didn't stick. Remember the MS tablet a decade ago? You can excuse it for poor hardware or poor software, but that's part my point--iPad has all that wrapped up, and everyone else is still struggling on both fronts while Apple is running circles around them. That's why there is no tablet market.
His second point about how the iPad fills the video player role in the apple ecosystem is a little disingenuous. Yes if I am an iTunes customer then obviously I am going to need to use Apples hardware to use what I paid for, however in terms of video playback capabilities the Android systems are so much better mainly due to third party video players and the availability of UPnP. so while you might be able to pre-order the newest movies I have decades of digitized DVD's that I would like to watch on my couch using a tablet that my prime plays just fine .
I've got an android tablet, a nice one not a cheap one, the Motorola Xoom 2, and I barely use it.
It's still on Android 3.2, doesn't handle typing very well (certainly no better than my HTC One phone), and basically has every problem that the author listed.
As to your point about video players and UPnP, how many people do you think have done that? 1% of potential consumers of Android? Content availability on Android is poor, and it just gets much worse outside the USA.
> iPad fills the video player role
You... you realise that there are third party apps for the iPad, right?
For what it's worth, there are indeed many third party video players for iOS, and software to fulfil both sides of the UPnP relationship.
I really was skeptical about the role of tablet computing at first, but I have to admit, I'm pretty much sold on it now.
It seems the article overplays it's basic premise by making assumptions about what people use a tablet for, and then makes far-reaching claims based on this. It doesn't fit with my own personal experience, which is fine, but then it seems the article's author is basing most of their argument on their own personal views rather than any evidence also.
The only things I ever use my iPad for are games and air travel. I rarely check my email on my computer anymore, so good is the experience on my Phone.
The problem I have with this article is that I suspect that the author would feel the same if he had an iPad, but he wouldn't have written this article.
We barely use our iPad. My SO sometimes takes the iPad with her when travelling, because it is lighter than her MacBook. Other than that, I charge it once per month to keep the electrons flowing.
MBP + smartphone satisfy all our computing needs.
Regarding ms office: myself and most of everone I know around me (regular people with regular jobs) have no need for it. In fact, many have already switched to open office (at home and at work). So I don't see how Microsoft is a big threat because of perceived productivity gains from office being available on surface tablets. Make no mistake, the threat is real, but not for the reason author states.
Bleh. I have had zero issue finding tablet apps on Android. Within the last half year, anyway -- it did use to be a problem when Honeycomb had just come out, but around the time devs started updating their apps for ICS/Holo, the selection started growing greatly. At this point, I think maybe three of the apps I use don't have tablet UIs, and only one is any worse for wear over it (Steam).
yes I had an iPod and an iPhone first, but I never use my iPad for iTunes media. I listen to podcasts and music on my Phone. My wife and kids use the iPad every day and never for iTunes. They use it for web browsing, games and edutainment like Bobo Explores Light, or interactive books. At bedtime I sometimes read stories to the kids from free eBooks, such as the Just So Stories and let them take turns turning the pages.
For us it really is the apps. When the iPad came out, from day one there were garage band and pages to show what it was capable of and a bunch of other apps, plus every iPhone app on the planet worked fine. Skype, if only in emulation mode, was a huge deal for us. I actually waited for the iPad2, so there were a raft of excellent creative apps and games available for us from day one.
I read comics on it, read and look up stuff in PDFs (I'm an old-skool tabletop roleplayer) and I'm learning Lua using Codea. Apps, apps, apps.
And if Safari Books Online would get off their asses and release their damn android app, I would use it even more often (their mobile site is crap on an android).
A wide open platform.
Any tablet that gives that, is going to get my bucks. I am stepping off the Apple ride, and want 100%, totally open source, working hardware.
It'll happen ..
1. OP doesn't use his Android tablet, therefore Android tablets suck and they'll die if they don't "fix" it soon.
2. Cue HN opinion war, as a community representing the minority use cases opines about market prospects based on what they think the "average" person appreciates in a tablet.
3. Degenerate into a fanboy flame war while the rest of us get on with our day.
My first tablet I bought was Android and without reading the article I can tell that Android OS sucks.
The surface has a case that doubles as a keyboard, but if you need the kickstand without a keyboard you have to remove it entirely (or so it seemed from the keynote). That's a pain -- it's one of my most common uses of the iPad with smart cover.