Android Honeycomb Born Too Early 192
adeelarshad82 writes "This year's Mobile World Congress was the stage for dozens of new tablets. Unfortunately, Android Honeycomb tablets lacked presence; amongst the top Android tablets demonstrated at the show, only the Motorola Xoom was running Honeycomb, whereas others were running either Android 2.3 or older versions. Moreover, most of the top apps announced for the OS were not new, just reworked. Gigaom may believe that Honeycomb tablets will be iPad's true competition, but progress has been slow, in my opinion. Honeycomb was born too early, primarily out pressure from the iPad getting a one year headstart in the tablet market."
just like windows 3 (Score:3, Insightful)
Widows 3 was half baked too. Imagine for a moment there was no iphone (or mac) to compare andorid (win 3) to. both would seem amazing. But the are kind of a joke compared to the seamlessness of the apple garden. Win3 more so. andorid is pretty polished.
The difference this time is that there's no substantial price differential. even the cheapest android is only a couple hundred less than the apple model. not so in the days of win 3. Also the Apple SDK has made it more not less enterprise ready.
So it's hard to make comparisons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not really. Google seems to work closely with HTC, Motorola, and Samsung. HTC made the G1, and the Nexus. Samsung makes the Nexus S. Motorola makes the Xoom tablet plus Google really did work with them on the Droid. I thing they also worked hard with Sony since 2.3 has support for game controllers for the Playstation phone.
The lag isn't being caused by Google not working with them. The lag is being caused by Sense, Touch Wiz, and MotoBlur. I forget what Sony calls their skin of Android. Combine that with th
Re:just like windows 3 (Score:5, Funny)
Title: just like windows 3
Conclusion: it's hard to make comparisons
You win.
Re: (Score:2)
With nary a car in sight.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't get Windows 3.0 to run in colour on my 8086 with EGA graphics. Anyone help?
I'm serious. Best I can find out is that Windows 3.0's colour drivers require at least a 286, so I'm stuck with monochrome for now.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't get Windows 3.0 to run in colour on my 8086 with EGA graphics. Anyone help?
I'm serious. Best I can find out is that Windows 3.0's colour drivers require at least a 286, so I'm stuck with monochrome for now.
Hast thou considered asking thy question on SuperUser [superuser.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
Hadn't heard of it, so I just did: http://superuser.com/questions/248957/ega-graphics-on-windows-3-0-on-8086 [superuser.com]
Wouldn't let me tag it as Windows-3.0 though, new users can't make tags and there wasn't one already.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm serious. Best I can find out is that Windows 3.0's colour drivers require at least a 286, so I'm stuck with monochrome for now.
I'd be surprised if that's true. I used to run Windows 3.0 at 640x480x16 on a VGA board. (Same board (Video7 VEGA) used to run Windows 1.04 at 800x600x16, which was very nice for CAD.) That machine did have a V30, so maybe there was some instruction set requirement for the standard windows driver that a standard 8086/8 doesn't have. Your best bet is to find the driver for your specific graphics board, especially if it's a EGA+ that supports higher resolutions or colors than 640x350x16.
Re: (Score:2)
Widows 3 was half baked too. Imagine for a moment there was no iphone (or mac) to compare andorid (win 3) to. both would seem amazing. But the are kind of a joke compared to the seamlessness of the apple garden. Win3 more so. andorid is pretty polished.
The difference this time is that there's no substantial price differential. even the cheapest android is only a couple hundred less than the apple model. not so in the days of win 3. Also the Apple SDK has made it more not less enterprise ready.
So it's hard to make comparisons.
Following that logic, Apple (or IBM with OS/2) should have roundly and soundly whomped (a technical term) Windows in the marketplace back in the 80s and 90s... but didn't. Personally, I think they will continue to retain their lead for a Long Time, but it's not a completely fair comparison to Windows 3 back in the day.
Re:just like windows 3 (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless you have an enterprise licence, when you can do anything you like.
On the consumer side, it's more accurate to describe it as a gated community - in general no one really cares what you do inside there, unless you start making waves. The number of "high profile" "banned" apps is very small compared to the whole ecosystem. For the vast majority of developers and users they are simply not affected by it at all and are doing just fine within the walls.
It's not for everyone of course, and I think Android was an inevitable result of the iOS ecosystem, and they will certainly make each other better. Everyone wins.
The worst possible thing you can do is underestimate or belittle the competition as you have done in your flamebait post. The iOS ecosystem has some well-documented controls, but the sort of hyperbole demonstrated here really oversells it and just puts you out of touch with exactly what it is like, which leads to complacency. How many people on here, for example, still harp on about how iOS is not ready for enterprise because of the "good luck getting your secret/NDA covered app through the app store lolz!" without realising that there's a whole separate in-house deployment system for iOS in enterprise. I saw it a lot in the NFL article about iPads replacing paper for coaches, for instance. It's comments like yours that fosters this sort of ignorance. You don;t actually stop to look at exactly what it is you're rallying against. It really is just "oh, it's made by Apple/Microsoft/Sony/OtherBigBusiness, therefore I don't actually need to do any research on it, I just know it's bad and will now spout off opinion as if it were fact". It's tiresome.
Re: (Score:3)
Not too early. (Score:3, Interesting)
amongst the top Android tablets demonstrated at the show, only the Motorola Xoom was running Honeycomb, whereas others were running either Android 2.3 or older versions.
Hmm, we had the Galaxy Tab 10.1, and LG G-pad too. They both had Honeycomb.
whereas others were running either Android 2.3 or older versions
Considering Google haven't released the source code for Honeycomb yet, I'm not surprised others didn't have Honeycomb.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that people consider Android to be an open source project, I'm surprised to not see others with a pre-release version of Honeycomb too.
Re:Not too early. (Score:4, Insightful)
Android is pretty much "open source when Google decides"
Not like Meego for example, which is more in thee spirit of the open source development (and most other open source projects)
Re:Not too early. (Score:4, Insightful)
Yea I know. I noticed this behavior when the Droid was coming out. Evidently the only way Google is able to get hardware vendors on board is to offer some exclusivity to them prior to release. I always wondered how HTC felt being "shafted" by the exclusive deal with Motorola after they were the ones that put Android phones in the hands of the consumer.
It's as if Google is using "open source development" as a facade to sell Android to us geeks. It's not really fully open sourced if we are only allowed to fix bugs or add features after the initial version release. Then again we are only fixing bugs and adding features to OUR phones, since the average non-rooting consumer will most likely be stuck with the initial version of the OS that came with their phone for the life of the contract.
Still it is the more open than iOS, but less open than Meego.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah that's the only reason I would like Meego to succeed. (or to have succeeded, who knows ;)
I can hack around Android (i run Android from sources, 2.3.2 + some unfortunately required binaries from the original phone), its not that bad, but it's not all that good either on that point of view.
Unfortunately most people still don't get the differences and advantages of freedom vs free as in beer, and confuse them a lot. Real open development is seriously good. Maybe not for capitalism (although many using rea
Re: (Score:2)
All *released* versions of Android are fully open source, unreleased not so much. Honeycomb had only an early pre-release of code a couple weeks earlier, so no surprise that not only partner vendors had time to port it to their hardware.
That said, the xda guys got that early Honeycomb running (unpolished) on the Nook Color, so what you're looking for did exist, at least unofficially.
"Too Early" (Score:2)
Too early? If anything the summary gives you the idea that it came too late. But I digress.
Only time will tell if Android 3.0 is any good, but as long as nothing extremely unlikely happens, Android isn't going anywhere: it has a sizable market presence and some of us even like it. As long as I can add my home-made apps to my handsets/tablets, I'll keep using Android. It can only get better.
Re: (Score:2)
Too early, too late, nothing's ever just on time anymore :P
I'm pretty happy with my G-Tablet running a custom TnT-Lite ROM (well, "custom" in the sense that it uncustomized all the crap that Viewsonic put in the OS). The surprising thing for me was that Dolphin HD was the main app I find myself using on it... in preference to all of the crappy app-ified versions of several services. Flash videos and stuff work great, much better than my eeePC (probably due to the nVidia stuff).
I'm looking forward to getti
Re: (Score:2)
Obsolescence.
And agreed - current Android builds work just fine on tablets...
Re:"Too Early" (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's my delima which probably mirror others. I'd like to have a tablet PC to take with me on a very long (more than 24 hours from the first plane to the last plane) flight itinerary. I can get a Viewsonic gTablet 10.1 for $350, spend an afternoon installing one of the xda custom ROMs and get a crippled experience in exchange for getting a 2.2 version of Android working on an otherwise fine piece of hardware (WTF Viewsonic?). Or I can spend a $100 more and get an iPad (that may soon be replaced with iPad2) but works out of the box with all the apps that would keep me entertained and somewhat productive until I land and able to use my laptop.
I'd like to play with an Android tablet, since I have an Android phone *but* my time is worth more than the $100 I'd save. So I wait...
Re: (Score:2)
I bought and rooted my Nook Color ($250). The battery lasts fairly long, it's got fairly decent performance (I think it uses an 800 or 850 MHz ARM processor?), it's easily modifiable, and very difficult to brick. It also has a very nice 7 inch color screen. It does everything I would want on a tablet. Why not look into that?
Re: (Score:2)
My daughter has one that she uses for reading, and she is happy with its response.
I heard there was a way of booting an alternate firmware version from the MicroSD without messing with the original stock nook ROM. If this proves to be true, than I might consider running out and spending $250 on something that may not get used much. Then again, I could just use the stock ROM and read a book during the flight.
Re: (Score:2)
I do. Unfortunately I'll be away from home for quite a while and traditional books are expensive where I'm going. The last time I was there it cost me $35 for a paperback version of Dexter. At least with an e-reader I can purchase an ebook from the states and download it for much less than I can buy it at the only bookstore within 1500 km or worse at an international airport newsstand.
Also the other books I read are quite thick and I've been saving money and weight by purchasing the ebook version from peop
Re: (Score:2)
keep me entertained and somewhat productive until I land and able to use my laptop.
Or you could just use your laptop on the flight.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow you are so hard up against Apple that you had to rush out and spew nonsense without even understanding what I was talking about? No wonder you posted as an AC.
Go read the multitude of reviews about the Viewsonic gTablet 10.1, almost all of them talk about how poorly the tablet runs with its stock ROM and suggest that it is better with an alternative ROM from xda and others.
Here you come and offer a Galaxy S for comparison, too bad it costs more than the wifi only iPad while only offering only a few fe
Re: (Score:2)
> Except almost no devices last more than 6 hours in practical use. Sure, you could just sit there and stare at the thing for 8-10 hours, but that wouldn't be any fun.
My Kindle3 lasts about a month.
Two other tablets were running Honeycomb (Score:3, Informative)
How did this get through? (Score:5, Interesting)
As far as I can tell, the only evidence to support adeelaershad82's conclusion that Android was "born too early" is that the top apps are not new. To my surprise, none of the links given really backup or explain his this thesis.
So, at launch, Honeycomb will not have very many tablet-specific apps, so early adopters will be stuck mostly with regular Android apps. Wow! Big surprise.
If this is the best attack on Android they can come up with then Honeycomb must be pretty good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually a bigger issue than your dismissiveness implies.
Maybe not (Score:2)
The iPad also had a pretty limited selection of "optimised" apps at release; didn't take long for that to change.
And unlike with iOS, most existing Android apps scale nicely to any resolution and aspect, rather than just being pixel-doubled, thanks to Android's resolution-independent UI API. You can release a tablet-optimised version of your app to take better advantage of the extra screen area, but at least it won't be ignored altogether.
Re: (Score:2)
To my surprise, none of the links given really backup or explain his this thesis.
thesis? wtf?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm afraid you are right. The difference is quite noticable. And it is too bad.
Is there a better site now?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm afraid you are right. The difference is quite noticable. And it is too bad.
Is there a better site now?
For Linux specifically there is http://lwn.net/ [lwn.net]
I wouldn't know of a general "news for nerds" site without the slashdot / tabloid aspect.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, it's the truth. Slashdot is the internet equivalent of Daily Mail. *shudder*
An article I read about it a while ago: http://notroswell.com/2010/03/slashdot-the-daily-mail-of-the-tech-world/ [notroswell.com]
It's all a matter of perception (Score:2, Troll)
Look at the iPad. It's half backed in my opinion. That's why I will not buy it. The absence of a rear camera and gyroscope make it a none starter for me, yet millions have bought the device and are satisfied.
If the folks at Motorola price the Xoom well, they will sell millions...well, it does not look so.
Folks, for many things in this world, it is a matter of perception. Period.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay I find your complaints about the Ipad odd at bast. No gyro or rear facing camera?
I don't get it.
I would find taking pictures with the iPad to be cumbersome at best so why would I want a rear facing camera.
Gyros maybe but really but I do not know that motion gaming with the ipad will be all that practical because of the size.
To me you are really missing a lot of the really big missing features.
1. No multitasking. The new fast task switching is at the same level as switcher for Mac OS was way back when.
Re: (Score:2)
So it's "not really multitasking" that:
1. Music apps work in the background (Pandora, iPod, etc.) and can be controlled by the standard music controls of iOS devices.
2. VoIP apps work in the background. (iCall, Yahoo Messenger voice chat, etc) and allow you talk and receive calls.
3. Navigation apps/Location aware apps work in the background.
4. Ap
Re: (Score:2)
You have to excuse him. He wanted a replacement for Microsoft's Tablet PC at a much lower price, and you wanted a dedicated media consumer appliance that works out of the box the way you like it.
I don't know why the two camps can't get along on Slashdot, but here we are.
Re: (Score:2)
Because this is Google territory, and Google is one of Apple's competitors.
Re: (Score:2)
consumer appliance that works out of the box the way you like it.
I think this kind of statement is a sign of having fallen for the PR. Clearly none of the devices "work the way you like". If they did, you wouldn't look forward to newer models with better features.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't per se think it's "falling for the PR" so much as natural evolution of expectations as you learn what you want, what you need, and what you like or dislike. When I bought my Palm Treo I had an image of a device that "worked the way I liked". It was a phone and it could surf the web and check my e-mail. That was what I wanted when I bought it, and for three years it gave good service. It even, in the end, did some unexpected things like running a (really awful) SSH client and playing a few games
Re: (Score:2)
I think you meant marketing instead of PR, and it's marketing that makes us desire the newest model of just about anything.
No I haven't fallen for the PR, but thanks for the concern.
Anyway, Google doesn't need marketing to make us buy the newest Android handset/tablet. We just assume that maybe they got it working correctly on the newer models :P
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. I do not think that the iPad sucks just that it isn't perfect. As I said the task switching isn't a terrible solution and a huge improvement over when the iPad was launched with out it.
Thing is that when a product is launched like the iPad I must ask myself what would make it better. It is just my nature. Everything can be improved.
I noticed that no one commented on my other complants about it.
The simple truth is that the iPad so good IMHO it is getting very close to being the ideal solution for
Re: (Score:2)
There's a lot of things to gripe about with the iPad, but a rear camera? A gyroscope? Holding up a 10-inch aluminium slab to wave it around and take pictures are make-or-break features to you? You sound like the kind of guy who has a laser sight on his golf clubs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just speaking to your last point: while it has no gyroscope, you can steer iPad games well enough using the iPad's build-in accelerometer.
Re: (Score:2)
By using the built in multi-axis accelerometers?
Android should be ready...but it's anarchy! (Score:2)
It's not too early for Android. It may be too late. Android's biggest flaw is that Google isn't "steering the ship at all". Unfortunately, it's just about to hit a rock. Contrast that to Apple (run by obsessive-compulsive micro-managers) that tries to chart a course with millimeter tolerance.
If it were not for so many people eschewing Apple (and it's closed platform) in favor of Android, it would all be over.
Not steering? (Score:2)
Can't imagine why you think Android is directionless.
The difference is that, where Apple controls, restricts and micromanages as you say, Google simply leads Android, and vendors are free to follow along or not (most do). The only incentive to follow that Google explicitly provides is its own apps and Market, which are arguably important but not actually necessary.
If so then Apple will be selling out of iPad 2s (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect it's the iPod Shuffle all over again. Apple was able to undercut competitors on price by buying up a simple majority of the available flash memory supply. They're probably doing something similar on displays to keep the iPad cost low without compromising their "high-end" image.
(That they're willing to cut off features on the presumption that they're not big selling points can't hurt.)
Price leader? Really? (Score:2)
You can get Android tablets at slightly cheaper prices (Notion Ink's Adam), equivalent prices and higher prices (Xoom) - and of all of these significantly outstrip the iPad in features. From what we've heard, they will outstrip the iPad 2 as well. Don't know why you think this isn't competitive.
If you go a fair bit cheaper, the Nook Color makes a very decent alternative (some assembly required). Going much cheaper unsurprisingly requires a big drop in features and usability, but we're talking less than half
Re: (Score:2)
No you can't. With the exception of the Nook none are shipping while rooted Nook Color is not a mass market product - that's a geek toy.
Uninformed OMG!!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
Huawei and HTC devices didn't have Honeycomb on them. HTC said that Flyer would get Honeycomb at at lunch or right after launch.
In essence, there are 5 new tablets(Moto XOOM) on the scene. With 60%(3/5) of them on Honecomb!
If you add Galaxy Tab, then it drops to 50%.
The Honeycomb Born Too Early is an overstatement at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
HTC said that Flyer would get Honeycomb at at lunch or right after launch.
Calm down, now. They're only tablet computers, not anything terribly exciting... ;-)
Your post did make me realize I'm hungry though.
Re: (Score:2)
would get Honeycomb at at lunch
I knew it! Should have never scheduled that noon meeting...
Re: (Score:2)
Thesis? (Score:4, Insightful)
Obviously, Honeycomb is later than Google would want it to be. All software, even stuff that ships as predicted, is later than its creators would want(because who wouldn't want software to be done in zero time?) However, that seems to have no logical connection to how many devices are being displayed with it. As with essentially any OS that isn't tied directly to one specific product, early development likely occurs on dev boards that will never be made into products, or on last-gen stuff that is deemed adequately representative for testing purposes. Eventually, it matures enough to appear in public facing tech demos, and then it ships. In this case, Motorola seems to have been the BFF launch buddy. Other than the trivial sense in which it is "too early" for Honeycomb to have broad distribution(which is true of every software package at some point in its life) how is this relevant?
Clearly, Google is working on catching up to the incumbent(and busy stealing share from the other players, especially no networks that Apple doesn't care to deal with); but, unless there is a cogent argument that Apple will do something in the near future that will be so groundbreaking that Google will just have to run away and abandon their efforts, the notion that they are "too late" seems dubious. Later than they would like, obviously; but (unless public reports are being fudged pretty seriously) moving more than enough Android devices to make their improvement efforts strategically viable, possibly even self-sustaining, for the forseeable future.
Two problems.... (Score:5, Insightful)
iPad has 2 years head start. Honestly Apple had been working on it for more than 30 seconds. Google has a LOT of catch-up to do.
Most of the manufacturers of android tablets are making low grade junk in hardware quality and choice. Yes the new ones are far better but have a price point that is the same as a iPad, so now they have to compete in direct comparison. If you were able to undershoot by even as little as $100.00 you make sales a whole lot easier. Hit the $200.00 price point and suddenly you will get even ipad diehards buying them.
But, what was released at the $200.00 pricepoint were junk. Processors and ram to slow and small to even run android 1.x decently. All of them came with a bastardized version of android and not a pure android that would have ran faster. AND all of them had severe battery problems that make them useless as a tablet.... sorry but 10 hours on and playing a video is needed. I do not want to have to charge my tablet nightly. WEEKLY is the most you will get on the charger.
Android will get there, but the current offerings do not entice me. more expensive than an ipad and still not big enough screens. Dammit I need a 8.5" by 11" screen with the resolution to match. Doctors, lawyers, engineers, and students all would want this size.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's telling on the price point. Everyone assumes that Apple has just slapped a massive profit margin on the iPad and released it (even though it was released a few hundred cheaper than most estimates originally, they just revised downwards), but I think people are starting to realise that the components really are that expensive right now and that it's very, very difficult to undershoot the price of the iPad while keeping the hardware decent (it is a benefit to Apple that they have economies of sca
Re: (Score:2)
Android much more than $200 junk (Score:2)
I certainly agree that the cheapest Android tablets are junk, just like the cheapest phones, cheapest cars, and cheapest products of any open market. But we don't judge all cars by the crap ones when there are many great alternatives, and those are now arriving (with Google's blessing).
Take the Notion Ink Adam - cheaper than iPad, much fancier hardware (including a Pixel Qi screen option for full daylight operation), and a UI with lots of nice tablet-oriented improvements. The Galaxy Tab sold well (with les
Re: (Score:2)
Oh so those tablets are going to sell for sub $200? Why are you hiding this news?
Or are you simply trolling because you failed at reading my post or even knowing anything about the android tablet market? Most of the manufacturers are in fact making junk. You named 3, I know of 12. so 3 out of 12 are good making the MAJORITY of all android pads junk. Even the big names out there are making crap. The archos tablets are utter garbage at a high price point. The 8+ china makers all make junk. The Pandig
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you keep buying such ridiculously cheap tablets when you know they're all so crappy? And why do you focusing so hard on the crap when there are much better tablets available?
If you want an Android tablet that's half the price of an iPad without being complete junk, buy a Nook Color and root it. If you want a tablet that is quite a lot better than the iPad and still cheaper, look at the Adam. Just don't keep scraping the bottom of the market then complaining, as if it was somehow Google's fault.
Re: (Score:2)
Man alive, did you even read the original post?
The point is that historically, you could claim that Apple was releasing products that were overpriced and anyone coming into the market simply had to make a decent product and undercut Apple and they would win. But NOW, it looks like Apple actually released at a pricepoint that's hard to beat if you want a quality tablet. The iPad costs what it costs because that's what it costs to make something good.
The guy doesn't WANT to buy a crappy tablet. He's not tryin
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, I can't tell if you're being serious or not.
A dodgy, enormously blatant iPad knockoff selling out of Hong Kong only with no bluetooth, only 4GB storage by default (with a maximum amount bringing it up to the lowest iPad storage amount), and an advertised 3 hour battery life (seriously, 3 hours!).
Not junk at all. No sir.
If you were posting this sarcastically as evidence of non-junk cheap tablets then I think you have just demonstrated why the iPad is selling well. If it was just to show an example of wh
Slight restrictions: Good for Android? (Score:3)
Could Google slightly change the "rules" for Android to keep release cycles and the released base a little tighter?
I'm an admitted iPhone addict and one of the things that keeps me from looking at Android is going back to the world of waiting for the carrier to "approve" or distribute OS updates and the sinking feeling that they won't ever approve them (so you'll re-up and get a new phone...)
If Google could tweak their language a tad, maybe they could coerce handset makers and carriers to either more frequently approve updates or allow customers to bypass the vendor and carrier and self-install. This might also require rules designed to keep handset makers and/or carriers from de-standardizing Android so much that updates can't be applied or are onerous to create (which gives them an excuse to not create them...)
They might also create a "new device sunset" date for specific Android revisions so that vendors can't release an "obsolete" Android version on new hardware, promising updates that they never deliver as they chase after the next hot thing.
Re: (Score:2)
If Google could tweak their language a tad, maybe they could coerce handset makers and carriers to either more frequently approve updates or allow customers to bypass the vendor and carrier and self-install. This might also require rules designed to keep handset makers and/or carriers from de-standardizing Android so much that updates can't be applied or are onerous to create (which gives them an excuse to not create them...)
I have to admit, this is really my biggest problem with my Android device. It's a Motorola Milestone running 2.1. It's capable of running 2.3, but I doubt it will ever see an official update.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if this kind of problem isn't inherent in using a non-proprietary OS in the smartphone market.
Users -- some users at least -- want to be able to treat their phone hardware like their computer hardware. That would work if everyone bought unlocked phones and then purchased their data plans separately. But we don't buy smartphones this way. We buy them "subsidized" by the carrier, which is another way to say we buy them in package deals where we have no clear idea how much each of the pieces cost us.
Re: (Score:2)
Reworked? Isn't that what apps only need? (Score:2)
The only things Android would need for tablets are reworked apps and a resolution independent UI API.
If Android hasn't had a good resolution independent UI API since birth, I'm a little afraid given how flexible it's supposed to be. The built in browser, email client, and other system default apps should be rebuilt for larger screen resolutions.
I think GigOm is full of it, and I normally fanboy for Apple.
Honeycomb criticism is too early (Score:2)
I am okay with people criticising products that have actually been given a fair chance. But honeycomb is not even out. Of course earlier versions of android will have more apps - what an unbelievable stupid observation.
The web is flooded with critics trashing products that have not even been released, and products that these critics have never even used.
Why do I suspect that some of this is a smear campaign from the competition?
There may be too many HC tablets (Score:2)
You will see this xmas, more HC tablets than you can shake a stick at. The platform is just getting started, it's essentially finished and now it is up to device makers to finish polishing their industrial designs and start shipping out tablets. The main difference between Android and iOS (and people often forget this) is that every aspect is not under central control. It takes a while for Google to release the OS, then it takes a while for chip vendors to release a BSP (usually with Google's help), then it
What a minute (Score:2)
You're saying there weren't many Honeycomb tablets out yet and because of that Honeycomb was born too early?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tablets don't need to pack in as many features as Motorola, Samsung et all seem compelled to do.
Re: (Score:3)
Why does a tablet need GPS again? Or a rear facing camera? Or 32GB flash? Or 3G? Come to that why does it need a super high end dual core mobile processor? Or barometer / compass?
GPS should be painfully obvious. Rear facing camera is for reality overlay and for just good old picture-taking. Lots of flash is obvious as well. 3G is obvious but let me get to that in a moment. Super high end dual core mobile processor is so I can replace my desktop with it, which will work fine for most users if it has mini-HDMI. Barometers are cool and practically free. A compass is needed for reality overlay and also practically free.
Now, on to 3G:
The 3G alone apparently slaps $200 onto the price of the Xoom which will be a mystery to anyone who has seen 3G dongles on sale for a fraction of that.
Yes, that is ludicrous bullshit. But 3G is useful. I w
Re: (Score:2)
PS should be painfully obvious. Rear facing camera is for reality overlay and for just good old picture-taking. Lots of flash is obvious as well. 3G is obvious but let me get to that in a moment. Super high end dual core mobile processor is so I can replace my desktop with it, which will work fine for most users if it has mini-HDMI. Barometers are cool and practically free. A compass is needed for reality overlay and also practically free.
Uhmm... sorry? Isn't that what we have all been buying smartphones for? I didn't plan to carry a tablet around with me to take pictures, and augmented reality works just fine on a smartphone too. Those are applications I want to have when I am moving around. When I have a tablet, I'd prefer to be sitting down, or lying on the couch.
The difference between a tablet and a PDA is size. The difference between a GPS and a PDA is software (and a GPS, which some but few PDAs have.) The difference between a phone and a PDA is the radio. There is no particular reason why the user should not wish to converge all of these devices. Indeed, they each become more powerful when you do.
Once again, I don't see myself cramming a 7" tablet in my pocket, just because every possible device was crammed into one. Let alone some brands who don't want to go below 10".
10
Re: (Score:3)
GPS should be painfully obvious.
It's painfully obvious if you're a farmer in a field. It's not so obvious to me sitting in my house where I can't even get a signal lock. What I meant to do with it anyway? Google services can fallback on wifi spots which are reasonably adequate for location and failing that it could always offer me a dialog to "stick a pin where you are" for geolocation.
Rear facing camera is for reality overlay and for just good old picture-taking.
Which would be great if I want to take pictures of my balls while browsing. Not so much use otherwise. Who is seriously going to hold up an enormous sla
Re: (Score:2)
On your Kindle comment:
I want a Kindle (but am unwilling to shell out for the small one, and unwilling to shell out so much for the big one)
I actually own both the Kindle DX Graphite and the Kindle3.
The Kindle3 is a better device in many ways compared to the DX-Graphite. The combination of higher resolution, speed (it is a lot faster), and portability have completely won me over. Nowadays I use my DX mostly only for PDFs and comics.
I used to own a Hanlin v3, which is also a 6" e-reader, and while the Hanlin wasn't comfortable to use at 6" the new Kindle3 certainly is.
Re: (Score:2)
You need GPS while sitting on the couch watching a movie? Or while playing a game? If you need GPS why are you buying a 600 dollar tablet rather than a 100 dollar GPS device or cheap smart phone?
By that logic you don't need a TV either, as you wont be using it 100% of the time...
You would be carrying around a 10.1" tablet to take pictures instead of a camera or smaller smart phone? Is this really something that people are routinely doing?
Not yet, but give it time...
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I was beginning to think I was the only one who saw the value in tablet computing. Me, and all those iPad, Kindle, and Nook users... /curls up with the Dt360 running Debian and Matchbox
Re: (Score:2)
Logical fallacy: false assumption.
Yes, on your part not mine. I was talking about what an average person is using their tablet for and wondering why any of those situations would require GPS. Care to point to any data showing that any significant group of people would use or are using tablets as their GPS devices?
If you are buying a 600 dollar tablet, and you can buy a 620 dollar tablet to avoid buying a separate 100 dollar device, why not get the slightly more expensive tablet. Of course, this is based on what such an upgrade might cost in a rational world.
Because most people don't want to lug around a 10" tablet as opposed to a smaller 3 inch sized GPS device?
First, you quoted but ignored reality overlay.
Boohoo. I'm not required to respond to every single phrase in what I quote.
Second, you ignored again my central point, which is that if I'm going to carry the device anyway then I would like it to take pictures with the camera that I want anyway for reality overlay, which you cannot do well without a camera.
That's great. But you were trying to make it s
Re: (Score:2)
you were trying to make it seem as if what YOU want to do is somehow a common thing that OTHERS are wanting to do. I was asking you to back this up. You are trying to conflate your preferences as if these are common complaints for average users and that is highly doubtful.
You're crying about how people don't want to do these things when they don't even know they want them because they don't have them yet because they don't have hardware to support them. Did you predict the failure of the Wii because people don't want to wave their arms around when playing video games, too?
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point trying to be made here is that for most of the purposes you're quoting, a phone would be a more practical size than a tablet. Tablets are rather large and bulky, my phone is small and light, and none of the uses you point out are terribly computationally intensive. While tablet are *more* portable than laptops and even netbooks, they are not as portable as phones. My vision of uses for tablet is more along the lines of: I'm flying and want to read on something book sized, I'm sitting at
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No giant marketing push. I mean, who has heard of the Archos outside of tech blogs?
Re: (Score:2)
As for the Archos, I'm just using it to demonstrate what's going to happen this year. 2011 started with very usable tablets in the $250-300 range and it's likely that the field is going to swell considerably before the year is out.
Re: (Score:2)
Because its not advertised widely, i hadn't even heard of this device until i read about it here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The computer was in use decades before Wozniak built his version. The CRT used on those early Apple computers was nothing but a TV set. The CRT was in long use as terminals to large computers. The GUI was copied and improved from Xerox park, though some have opined that some of the features included in Xerox's OS were very useful and better than Apple's. This isn't to say that overall it was better. No competition there. Apple beat them at their own game.
What Apple did then, as they do today, is that
Re:One year? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
He was saying that they copied the ideas. Stealing was a bad term for him to use.
The point is that they didn't *invent*, they copied.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)