Slashdot Mirror


Android Tablets Were Born Too Soon

adeelarshad82 writes "When you look at the Apple iPad's sales figures, it's not hard to see why every technology company on the planet is jumping on the tablet bandwagon, a lot of which are Android tablets. Unfortunately though, some of these Android tablets were born way too early. They are haunted with a series of problems including flimsy hardware, low-quality resistive touch screens, serious display resolution issues, and old Android versions with limited or non-existent access to apps. Even the Samsung Galaxy Tab came well before its time. Even though it's fast, well-designed, and comes with a decent Android implementation, its functionality is limited to that of an Android smartphone. So here's to hoping that Honeycomb's functionality make up for the lost ground."

17 of 480 comments (clear)

  1. You have to learn to crawl, before you can walk by mjwx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think they were released too soon. They were the teething stage of tablets, the infancy where mistakes could be made. Thanks to this Google, Motorola and others have learned valuable lessons. Some of the previous Android tablets are hardly failures. Dell's Streak turned a profit, Samsung's Galaxy Tab sold well with a small return rate not to mention the Archos products which others have pointed out.

    Basically the demand was there, proven by the 22% of tablets sold that were not made by Apple. So now armed with this knowledge, the multitude of manufacturers can create a truly competitive tablet market.

    Personally I'm still not convinced tablets aren't a fad, much like an overpriced Tamigotchi or flares.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    1. Re:You have to learn to crawl, before you can walk by Cinder6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you can't match the quality of a competitor that launched eight months before you, then you probably rushed the thing. (Yes, it is an oversimplification, but it's also hard to excuse a latecomer that offers little to recommend it over the Other Guy's first-generation product.)

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
    2. Re:You have to learn to crawl, before you can walk by joh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Both the 2% and the 16% may be correct. Samsung could be relating the actual returns to devices they have sold into the distribution channels (but many of which are not yet in the hands of any customers), while the 16% returns are from those devices actually sold to actual users.

    3. Re:You have to learn to crawl, before you can walk by MrDoh! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Very much so. It's amazing to see what a terrible job is being made, when really, there isn't a mad pressure on to come out with something that quickly.
      We saw Android Tablets before the iPad was even officially announced, and a year and a half later, we're still seeing those same lousy specs being produced.
      And when someone /does/ get something close to a decent competitor to the iPad, they either disable half the functionality in a market (no voice calling on the Galaxy Tab), or throw a bunch of carrier specific nonsense on (Verizon/AT&T), or disable simple features like sideloading apps/hotspot functionality.
      Really looks like they're trying hard to fail.

      They're pushing the Android Tablets with comms functionality when it appears /most/ customers would be happy with wireless and stock Android. Now, considering they're getting the fees for 2 years, how they justify a HIGHER cost than without that cost is... mad.

      I keep waiting for a decent Android Tablet, only to be disappointed by /someone/ (and yeah, the telco's point to the hardware supplier, and the hardware suppliers point to the telcos. Android's getting out there because Google's backing off, but they really need to start throwing their weight around, perhaps that 'Approved by Google' stamp for stock Android?

      --
      Waiting for an amusing sig.
    4. Re:You have to learn to crawl, before you can walk by node+3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think they were released too soon. They were the teething stage of tablets, the infancy where mistakes could be made. Thanks to this Google, Motorola and others have learned valuable lessons.

      Yet somehow Apple managed to clean house in the market on their first try. I doubt anyone learned any lessons other than not to run a desktop OS on the tablet. Hell, they even had the iPad itself to look at for inspiration, and still failed to come out with a compelling alternative.

      Some of the previous Android tablets are hardly failures. Dell's Streak turned a profit, Samsung's Galaxy Tab sold well with a small return rate not to mention the Archos products which others have pointed out.

      What? "Turned a profit" is notable praise? Archos a successful tablet maker? Galaxy Tab sold well? With a small return rate? WTF?

      On the Tab specifically, they shipped 2 million, but actually sold very few. Of the 2 million, their return rate may very well have been around 2%, but the actual return rate for Tabs people bought was 16%. That puts the number actually sold more like a quarter of a million, not 2 million.

      Basically the demand was there, proven by the 22% of tablets sold that were not made by Apple. So now armed with this knowledge, the multitude of manufacturers can create a truly competitive tablet market.

      22% was based on the deliberately misleading numbers put forth by Samsung. And even with those completely false numbers, that puts Apple at 78% (and much higher with the actual numbers).

      Personally I'm still not convinced tablets aren't a fad, much like an overpriced Tamigotchi or flares.

      Why would they be a fad? Because people bought too many iPads and not enough Android tablets?

    5. Re:You have to learn to crawl, before you can walk by node+3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, yeah. The iPad is so awful it only took over the entire market, but those "more powerful" Android tablets only garnered a small percentage.

      For example, the Streak and Galaxy Tab you mentioned doing so well? The iPad outsold them both more than ten times over. Combined.

  2. Re:What's interesting about Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you're kidding right? Have you been hearing all the issues early adopters have been having with getting their Android devices updated? I'm no iToy supporter by any means, but Android is much more fragmented than iOS, both in hardware and software.

  3. Re:What's interesting about Android by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pardon? Are you serious?

    It's hard to name android devices that even got the bump from 1.6 to 2.0, hell, 90% of them don't even get *minor* OS version updates from the one they started on, there are still plenty of 1.5/2.0/2.1 devices out there for exactly that reason.

    Compare this against iOS devices that are guarenteed to get 2 major OS updates and all minor ones for those major versions. Sure, some functionality is disabled in the newer OSes, but that's typically because the older hardware can't deal with it (e.g. old 3G iPhones with a measly 128MB of RAM and multitasking).

    Basically, you're comparing being at the mercy of {motarola | samsung | ...} to get OS updates (hahahahaha), against a guarentee written into the EULA that you'll get upgrades. I know which I consider to be the non-issue of those two ;).

  4. Re:What's interesting about Android by bemymonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are you joking? Don't get me wrong, I love Android and custom ROMs, precisely because with the right hardware I can enjoy all the newest features of Android for a long time to come, but pretending the situation with official updates is anything other than abysmal is, well, insane.

    Froyo: HTC has updated most of their devices. Samsung is halfheartedly lagging behind, and Motorola, well, they've updated like one device (the original Droid), while deliberately sabotaging any chance other handsets had at home-cooked updates by locking up their bootloaders.

    Gingerbread: Nothing to see here, folks. Even the Nexus One hasn't been upgraded yet, and I'm guessing most Nexus One owners are pretty pissed about that, what with having expected to buy a device that would be a supported Android dev phone for a few years (let's say two).

    Sure, I'm enjoying Gingerbread (CyanogenMod 7 nightly builds) on my Desire right now, and I'm sure Honeycomb will be along soon, but Joe Sixpack is up shit creek... and outdated smartphones don't make great paddles.

  5. Not born too soon. by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Born out of wedlock.

    None of these Android ODMs care about growing and nurturing the platform whether it comes to constant updates or application compatibility. It's only market growth in raw numbers with the thinnest of margins, but that's just a consequence of dumping bargain-basement hardware into the stores by truckloads to see what sticks. See: Augens, Streaks, Galaxy Tab, and whatever Archos is doing.

    On the mobile phone front if you pick up any two Android phones you'll see completely different methodologies, bizarre UI conventions, half-done features that exist for no logical reason for the sake of filling out checkboxes on spec sheets.

    Despite this, Android phones took off because a) there was a vacuum of other more coherent, non-iOS platforms and b) because carriers subsidize the cost of the hardware and everyone needs a phone. It's an essential device.

    Tablets face a much harder battle because majority of consumers are unwilling to sign a contract for a non-essential, secondary devices. Note the historically flaccid Netbook sales coupled with subsidies. This is especially true when most people have prior contracts with their phones. Having 2 mobile contracts doesn't quite gel.

    Motorola XOOM's pricing came out today at $800 USD with additional, carrier specific caveats. You'd be insane to shell out that much money for a 1st gen, untested device with no compelling app ecosystem vis-Ã-vis iPad/2.

    My belief is that the market is wide open right now and the second place is still up for grabs. Could be HP, could be Microsoft's new WP7 thing (if they get their heads out of their ass), or Android.

    But just showing up with a tablet is not enough. You need to have healthy margins, curated app ecosystem, and platform continuity. iOS provides that. Android is too fragmented at the moment to pull it off. Sad thing is, Google is unwilling to exert any control and clean up their cluttered, spam-ridden marketplace or force these manufacturers into shipping devices without silly skins.

    It's been said before that Android is a meta-platform, and I tend to agree with that. This gives hope to other OSes into jumping into the fray and becoming second to Apple. I truly believe that iPad has an iPod-like lock on the tablets for years to come (check above about subsidies).

  6. Re:What's interesting about Android by Telvin_3d · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, good thing you went with the open platform otherwise you might have had to compile your own hacked third party OS update together when the manufacturer bailed on you. Just think of the hours you could have not spent searching through forums and triple checking instructions. Good thing you didn't fall into Apple's trap. /sarcasm

  7. Re:wtf by Telvin_3d · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not quite. Everyone else released a beta. Apple released a finished product. And they did it a year ahead of their first real competition's 'beta' products. And yes, while tablets are still more on the toy side of the product category that shouldn't be an excuse to release a half-assed product. The competition is releasing products that are neither ahead of the curve or polished. That's just sloppy and sad.

  8. Re:What's interesting about Android by dafing · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What the heck are you on about?

    When a new computer update comes out, you get it day one, within the hour, surely? You dont have to wait for your internet provider to decide to give it to you, without your permission, you dont look up at your screen and see "hello, I'm downloading a major OS update in the background! I may appear to have frozen, please dont turn me off, ok?", do you?

    It doesnt matter if you have an HP, or Dell, you get Windows X whenever YOU want to get it.

    Lets face it, apparently only the Nexus One, and its successor the Nexus S, both "by Google" get updates... the rest are SCREWED. You buy a "top of the line device", and its instantly obsolete when a new model comes out with a slightly larger screen, 4.3 inches vs 4, with the new OS update. You feel like a fool when you device doesnt have some obvious new feature enabled through an extra few dozen MB being used.

    Its not good enough, no matter what your brand loyalty.

    --
    --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  9. Re:What's interesting about Android by sortius_nod · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem with this kind of "support" is that you are relying on the hardware being picked up by the community and developed for. What happens when your hardware isn't picked up by the community and the maker decides to EOL it before the contract ends? Or it ends up like the Motorola or Sony handsets where trying to root it is all but impossible?

    Android tabs are a bit of a joke at the moment, and I'm advising all of my friends keen to get one to wait until their favourite flavour of manufacturer has Honeycomb tabs. Otherwise you're gambling on a possible update by the community should the manufacturer EOL it.

    I was keen to get an Android tab mid last year, but there was nothing about. I got an iPad and have been pleased with my purchase. Sure, it didn't come with os 4.X, but it has it now and I know apple aren't going to drop support for the iPad when the iPad 2 comes out. Just as my iPhone 3G didn't lose support when the 3GS or the 4 came out.

  10. Re:Then revise market share by ducomputergeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is something I have to explain to customers when we do mobile development, especially explaining our pricing for Android. We only give QA on the Nexus One/(now S). Each additional handset costs extra and typically most will want QA against Droid(Verizon), HTC Evo(Sprint), and Samsung (AT&T/T-Mobile). That makes the Android platform usually between 3 to 5 times the cost to develop for iPhone/iPod. Usually we treat the iPad as a separate device just as we'll treat these new tablets running Android as each being a different "platform".

    Last year we tried to treat "Android" as a platform, but we ended up losing money on that side of the business because every time we turned around there were a half dozen new handsets and a new OS version to deal with.

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  11. Re:What's interesting about Android by supremebob · · Score: 4, Informative

    No offense, but if you ever TRIED using an iPhone 3G with iOS4, you'll quickly find out that Apple would have been better off cutting off upgrades for that device at version 3.

    The interface goes from being perfectly usable to damn slow, and applications running on the phone constantly run out of memory and crash.

  12. The CDD is the biggest issue by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Android has a compatible device document which determines if a device is eligible to receive the marketplace app and by extension all the google apps. Features like compass, GPS, camera etc. were all mandatory in So the market has split into two camps. The el cheapo tablets and Archos tablets sit in the incompatible camp and suffer from lack of marketplace. The Galaxy Tab and Dell Streak sit in the compatible camp but suffer from bloated price which is unattractive to buyers. This probably explains why the Tab is suffering so much. Apparently the 2.3 CDD loosens up some requirements, but it's too late for most tablets. Perhaps the Archos devices might be able to upgrade to 2.3 become certified.

    So I hope when Android 3.0 turns up that in addition to making the UI more friendly it also addresses the CDD. GPS, compass etc. are nice to haves. The basic tablet spec should not force them. But perhaps it should specify extended profiles for PMPs, ereaders etc. For example, perhaps a "media" tablet profile might mandate more codecs, while an ereader tablet might specify certain screen visibility characteristics, possibly even allowing for e-ink displays.

    The point being that Android is growing up but the CDD has long been an impediment and it needs to be improved.