Nexus 7 review: The best $200 tablet you can buy
engadget.com
engadget.com
I still cannot get over the second part of that sentence. It's true though, but I could cry bitter tears over it: when netbooks first arrived on the scene I felt happy like a little elf: small, light, cheap computers made to run Linux? That was exactly what I had been waiting for all these years.
And a netbook has been my main computer ever since I bought one. It's ideal for my personal usage in which I basically run four programs all the time: a browser, an email client, shells, and Emacs. Add a compile every now and then and you have a description of >95% of my computing time. I can code on the kitchen table or on the couch, on the bus, even in bed if I feel like it. It's fun.
I used to have a 12 inch laptop before but the netbook clearly beats it in terms of portability. And the battery life is decent too, even though the device is a few years old by now.
And I paid around $280 for the device.
And now the market for netbooks is dead. Taken over by tablets. Except, I have no use for them. I mean, it's a selfish way of looking at it because apparently many more people want tablets than netbooks. So let the market decide. Unfortunately for me, the perfect match will slowly but surely stop being available.
Ironically, I'm not even using a netbook the way it was supposedly designed to be used: for browsing the web anywhere. As I've outlined above I use it exactly like I use a desktop computer, except that I run heavier jobs remotely on other machines.
Anyway. I am not even sure what point I am trying to make. Probably none. But it does make me sad that a type of computer that is perfect for me is being replaced by another type of computer that is unusable for the same tasks.
Then there's the insane battery life you get when you join the tablet and the keyboard dock. Aside from a time when I forced the screen to stay on (and didn't disable that later), I can't remember the last time it ran out of battery.
Even undocking turns out to be more useful than I thought. For example, using the tablet while walking or handing it to my daughter for her to play with.
No, I'm not unhappy I paid more than a netbook would have cost I'm getting plenty more than a netbook, too.
I actually disagree with this first paragraph, I think Sony was right. The "race to the bottom" definitely did impact the industry, and for quite some time, no manufacturer even offered a laptop with decent build quality, except for Apple of course. People thought "why should I pay $1,000+ for this laptop when I can get a much cheaper laptop that will do everything I need?" And then the Macbook Air and the iPad come along and all of a sudden, people have no problem paying more for a quality product. If it wasn't for Apple, the OEMs would continue to release shitty machines until they all went bankrupt from negative profit margins.
I don't think the tablet market is experiencing the same race to the bottom because people are not buying these shitty tablets (which the Nexus 7 isn't). Everybody is still buying iPads and will continue to do so until a tablet that can actually compete with the iPad is released. (I have only seen two that even come close, the Galaxy and the Transformer, and still...) I think Apple has proven that consumers are willing to pay more if the product is good. And this is all coming from someone that does not own a single Apple product.
And the Android tablets are still cheaper. :P
Also, 10" tablets with comparable features as Apple's iPad are priced the same or higher than the iPad.
7" tablets like the Google/Asus tablet and the Kindle Fire are devices for media consumption, 10" tablets like the iPad are suitable for media creation.
Maybe in some alternate universe where Lenovo didn't exist...
And the build quality and fit/finish of the new unibody Macbooks are still better than that of the ThinkPads.
I understand that Google's "everything in the Cloud" is an answer to this. Why keep music and movies on the device when you can offload storage? Because I don't want to depend on connectivity, and the device doesn't have native 3G.
Something like this might help you. I totally agree with needing more space.
Google says they are selling Nexus 7 at cost. So what is the revenue model?
If the idea is to follow Amazon's Kindle Fire (where revenue from content sold in future, justifies the at-cost pricing of the device), is it not a huge risk? Google Play is not established as a revenue generator yet.
What about the content itself? Does Google have agreement in place with content owners? Even if Google has agreements, in reality that won't cover all geographies. What happens in those geographies where Google can sell apps and other stuff but not media content? Won't the tablet be sold there or will it be priced higher?
Also, how does Asus make money or are they just a contract manufacturer?
But is that a good enough reason to sell hardware at cost? Why not give it away for free, then? That will attract a lot more users.
I guess my point is, when you are selling hardware, maybe you need to have a tangible revenue stream rather than just potential ad revenue.
Just trying to understand what economic reasoning led Google to decide to sell Nexus 7 at cost. I don't get it from where I stand.
So somewhere Google has a stat that says "A regular user is worth $22 a year to us" or something (more sophisticated) but like that. If those users buy an Apple device it's less and less clear they'll have a path to Google services now.
If they can acquire that consumer "for free" (sell them a device that hooks them into the platform at a wash) then it's a good deal. If they gave it away for free then it would take x number of years to break even on that person. So that $200 or whatever does matter. And Google has a very good idea about what an Android/Google services tablet user is worth to them.
To quote: "But there’s one big problem with Google’s small tablet: It lacks a business model. As Amazon did with its Fire, Google is selling the Nexus 7 at cost. Amazon could afford to do so because the Fire is a gateway to its online store. After you get the Fire, you’ll buy a lot of books and movies from Amazon, and you might even become a subscriber to Prime, Amazon’s highly profitable subscription service.
But Google, unlike Amazon, doesn’t sell physical stuff, so it can’t justify the low price of the Nexus 7 on the expectation of huge e-commerce sales. Sure, the search company does sell media—you can buy books, music, and subscribe to magazines from the Nexus, but the selection is thin compared with what’s available in Amazon or Apple’s media stores. If you get a Nexus 7, you’re better off relying on other sources for media. For books, install the Kindle app and buy from Amazon. For movies, use the Netflix app. For music, use Spotify.
Well, what about advertising? Google makes most of its money from ads, and boosting advertising revenue is the central goal behind Android. The more Android devices Google sells, the more people use its services, and thus, the more people see its ads. So if Google sells a lot of Nexus 7s, couldn’t it make a lot more money from ads?
Not really. Google makes only about $4 per year in ad revenue from every Android device, according to an analysis by Asymco’s Horace Dediu. So if Google sells 10 million Nexus 7s—far more than anyone expects—it would make $40 million a year from the device. For a company that made nearly $12 billion in profits last year, that’s nothing to crow about. (What’s more, two-thirds of Google’s mobile advertising revenue comes through Apple devices. If people choose the Nexus 7 over the iPad, Google might not be making any more money than it would have anyway.)
Google’s real goal with the Nexus 7 can’t be to make money. Instead, the tablet is a marketing device. Google wants to hop on the tablet train before it’s too late. It’s been two years since the iPad was released, and so far no one has managed to create a plausible alternative. The Nexus 7 is an effort to get people to believe that Android tablets aren’t terrible. It’s good enough to be usable for most people, and just cheap enough to get a lot of folks to give it a try. And if you get the Nexus 7 and find that it isn’t so bad, maybe one day you’ll be willing to give other, not-so-cheap Android tablets a try.
It’s a circuitous plan, and it could well fail. In the meantime, though, you might as well enjoy Google’s pretty good, cheap tablet."
probably will get downvotes for this. Totally worth it though.
Yes, the size and price makes it far more appealing for kids. And women who want a Kindle++ that fits in the purse they already carry everywhere (but is too small for a 10" tablet) could make a stronger case than most.
But, in general, half the size of a 10" tablet doesn't make it half as useful as a 10" tablet and thus worth half the price. Half the size makes it really hard to argue that the apps or browsing experience is notably better than a phone. And not being able to pocket the thing, thus necessitating a bag only raises the question of: is this thing good enough to justify bringing a bag when you otherwise wouldn't? And half the size of a 10" tablet again makes this a hard pitch.
Even if you're extremely price-bound, I just don't see the point. The price-bound have, at this point, waited three years to make a tablet decision anyway. Going without for a year or so to save for something that makes a stronger case can't be all that unacceptable.
I have a friend who lives in a warm climate, wears cargo shorts year-round and couldn't care less about anything other than long-form reading on the thing. And he won't shut up about how awesome his Nook Color fits his life. I get it, for him. Or for a hypothetical mad-reader who has a purse or pouch they carry everywhere.
I just hear a lot of chatter about how the 7" size is desirable coming from people who don't/can't already wear clothing that makes sense of the form-factor. [1] Or don't have that long-form reading focus. [2]
And I don't get that. I figure there has to be something to it. Which is why I still talk about it. I'm just not seeing it.
[1] e.g. they don't live in a climate or work environment where they can sport cargo pants/shorts all the time, or they don't already wear a jacket everywhere with pockets big enough, etc. And there, "it fits some pockets" sounds more hypothetical and comes off like they've just turned "you have to carry a bag that you don't already" into "you have to carry conforming_clothing, that you don't already".
[2] Personally, that's the only time I wish my iPad was more comfortable to one-hand. It doesn't come up often. But during long reading sessions, while I'm rotating postures and grips, I miss the one-hand grips that are available with a paperback, magazine, or 7" tablet. But I'm not so short on comfortable grips that it matters much. That said, I never found the weight of an iPad to be a problem either. So maybe that's just me.
(Frankly, none that I've seen do any of them well. It's more a question of whether they do them acceptably-enough to bother.)
So for me the bags amplify the difference between a 10" and a 7". Usually I just carry the satchel everywhere, but I'd feel like a jerk taking it to a restaurant or a gig; the small bag fits on my shoulder without thinking about it and looks good enough that I'm happy to wear it anywhere. I feel like it should be possible to make a 10" tablet this practical - it's not much heavier - but I think the bag industry hasn't caught up yet.
I could just as well say "Double the size makes it really hard to argue that the iPad is notably better than a 7" tablet." with exactly the same justification.
I think it's very much taste-dependent. I've used an iPad and been broadly unimpressed with the form factor; you have to "put it on something" to use it, it's too big to hold for long periods in one hand. I've never used a 7" tablet but it seems like for simple browsing on a plane or whatever like it might be a better fit.
I've owned both. Long story short, things like comics, magazines, non-mobile web, etc are terrible on a 7". Consuming this media often involves lots of tapping and zooming. Its annoying. Two people can sit together and watch a TV show or movie comfortable with a 10" tablet. With a 7" its almost like crowding around someone's phone.
Oh, and the 10" opens up this world of remote desktop/citrix apps that suddenly are usable.
I'd also argue that a 10" is just a sexier and more futuristic device. A 7" is typically fatter and has a larger bezel while a 10" has a lot more area to spread this stuff out. There's something really fun about having a thin 10" screen that weighs next to nothing in your hands. This is sci-fi territory here.
I'd also argue that no 7" is really pocketable. Unless you're a woman with a purse or are wearing massive cargo pants, you'll be carrying a bag anyway.
And some of your points (non-mobile web, remote desktop) mostly just amount to "10 inches is closer to a laptop", which prompts the question of why bother with the tablet when you already have a laptop?
And the rest just sounds like fanboism: why isn't it "really fun" and "sci fi territory" to have a 7" screen that weighs next to nothing in your hands? (And as I stated before, I have to quibble with the weight comment: the iPad is definitely not a one-handed device; I get tired using it like that.)
I'm not really defending the "paperback" form factor, as I haven't used it. I'm just very surprised at the level of resistance. It looks cute to me.
My use case: A4 documents.
I've read arguments claiming fullsize pages can be read from 7" (or that the reflow of pdfs works well). I've never seen anyone do that regularly in real life and don't really expect to.
But sure, if you're rich, retired and only read literature -- not documentation, documents, code, etc... :-)
Stop it, this kind of flaming is beyond dumb. To claim that you prefer a 10" screen is fine. To claim that you can't read a PDF on a 7" screen is absurd.
That depends on your vision. If your vision is good leave everything small and just read it.
If not, put on some supermarket reading glasses to magnify everything and enjoy.
If it has the resolution, you can make a small device appear big by magnifying it to your eyes with glasses, while still leaving the device physically small.
What I think would be a killer feature is having a print driver on your desktop that sends formatted PDF printouts directly to your tablet device, sized for the screen. Then you would have a true replacement for your printer for many use cases (such as printing off some quick notes for a meeting, etc).
I'm surprised that nobody else has pointed this out, but that's not true at all - we measure screen sizes by the diagonal, but the actual screen size is a quadratic function of the diagonal. If the aspect ratio were such that the screen were a square (it's not), this would mean that a 10'' screen would be more than twice as large as a 7'' screen, which would be three times as large as a 4'' screen.
That said, the screen size is really only part of the picture. At least for me, I like the size of the Kindle Fire (also ~7'') - it fits perfectly in my hand both when traveling and when reading. A 10'' screen to me feels massive enough that I'd just as rather have my computer (heck, 10'' is almost the size of some ultrabooks or the Macbook Air!)
And not being able to pocket the thing, thus necessitating a bag only raises the question of: is this thing good enough to justify bringing a bag when you otherwise wouldn't?
It fits in a purse, so that's only an issue for us guys (unless you're man enough to carry a man-purse and not give a fuck what people think).
My NC can slide into some large coat pockets.
A 7" fits in my trouser pockets; for a 10" I'd need to carry my satchel, and then I'd just bring my laptop instead.
I'm sure it is a personal preference. Some people prefer 10" and some people prefer 7".
So it's half the size of a 10" tablet, and twice the size of the largest phones.
I'm really glad it comes with GPS. If I do get it, it is because they decided to include the GPS chip. I travel a lot and having GPS on a larger screen can help when talking to taxi drivers.
Am a bit surprised they didn't do some sort of "instant tethering" feature: tap your phone and tablet, they pick up over NFC and negotiate the config automatically.
Without a modem Google controls 100% of the user's experience, with a modem they're subject to the whims of AT&T, Verizon, et al.
I'd be very, very happy if Google wrested some control back, it might mean sane support and updates for future Android devices.
Just because my PC came with a modem 15 years ago didn't mean I was tied to AOL, Compuserve or the local ISP. I gasp bought my service from whoever I wanted.
Yes, a cell modem would add more to the cost, but a contract free 7" google-updated android tablet with 3g that I could use on multiple carriers, unlocked... what's not to like about that?
You do realize that there were laws protecting your right and ability to do that?
Before this, you could only hook in an AT&T phone into the jack, and you had to rent that from AT&T.
Cell carriers each have slightly differing radio frequencies. They would have to sell "Works with AT&T", "Works with Sprint", "Works with T-Mobile" versions all separately, as they all use different radio frequencies.
The alternative is to build a mega-radio (or perhaps cluster of radios) to support all the carriers, but that adds weight and significant cost, and won't work with whatever new carrier comes out tomorrow anyway.
No, you only need two versions: "Works with all GSM carriers" (with frequencies to support 3G/4G on AT&T, T-Mobile, and almost every other carrier in the world) and "Works with all CDMA carriers" (Sprint, Verizon, etc). And for a first pass, you can ignore the latter entirely.
At this point, most decent smartphones come with a quad-band or pentaband radio.
It is only recently that you can find penta-band UMTS phones that gives you 3G on GSM providers in all the continents.
Back when the Nexus One came out, it was $579 to buy it outright, or $179/$279 to buy with a 2-year contract (depending on if you were an existing customer or not). Buy on contract, cancel, pay the $200 cancellation fee, and just then you're already $200/$100 ahead. Then consider you have 24 months on a plan that costs $20 less each month than it would under contract, and that's $480 saved, not to mention the freedom of not being tied to a carrier for those two years if you do decide you want to move.
And as a bonus, T-Mo is very tether-friendly. They'll throttle you if you transfer more than some amount of data per month (which I've found to be a non-issue in my personal use), but otherwise they don't care what you do with the data connection.
If I had not received a Galaxy Nexus for free at Google I/O, I would have likely purchased a device for $350 from Google and then activated it on Red Pocket or some other GSM MVNO.
It's important to realize that often, prices like $600 for a smartphone are deliberately inflated for the sake of encouraging people to sign their money away on cell phone contracts. This is illustrated by the fact that the Galaxy Nexus, a relatively high-end device, is available absolutely unsubsidized, for $350.
If you are amongst those who miss 3G in $device then check them out now, you might be in for a pleasant surprise.
(personally I have a huawei 585 and can recommend it wholeheartedly, it's even smaller than the MiFis!)
edit: you need to check if your mobile carrier allows you to do it
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_7_16g...
Surprisingly, the UK is getting the same deal as the US this time round.
It's not because of shipping because that is added separately. Even if it was $50 is way too much.
Still, that's only an additional $20.
Besides, by the time you pay for shipping and tax in New York, the $199 tablet is $232!
Anyway, I think the kids will be pretty happy.
So comparatively to other options in AU, still a very good deal. Unless you want an e-ink display.
http://eurodroid.com/2012/06/28/16gb-nexus-7-tablet-launchin...