Slashdot Mirror
Android Honeycomb Born Too Early
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."
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.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
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.
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.
Both the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, and the LG Optimus Pad (G-Slate) were running honeycomb at MWC. http://www.androidcentral.com/lg-optimus-pad-hands http://www.androidcentral.com/hands-10-inch-samsung-galaxy-tab-android-30-honeycomb
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.
The article talks about Galaxy Tab 10.1 and LG G-slate too. Honeycomb lacked presence because it's not out yet. Similar to how HP touch pad, windows 8 tablets and Playbook lacked presence.
There will be tablets running honeycomb for $300 before the year is out. Motorola is just being greedy.
Did you see the Motorola ad for their tablet? Treating the other device owners and arguably the most technologically curious/early adopter people like some clueless slaves in most watched advertising segment of year could backfire.
Also the fact that dual core being mentioned to sports watching general public etc... Nobody cares! I speak as a very early adopter of Quad core (G5 Quad), it took years for software to take full advantage of parallel processing including Apple OS X itself.
Motorola, Koreans, Chinese. Android is really doing well despite them.
But you have to admit, we didn't have much to do in our social lives before facebook invented the internet... so..
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
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.
Yeah and they will be just as junk as the other low cost Android tablets have been.
All this 2.3/2.4/3.0 stuff going on when pretty much everything is still running 2.2 anyway. They need to do one more release this year that brings tablets and smartphones together into the same version then give everybody a year to catch up.
Wifi only version is $600, on par with the iPad 32GB. Troll much?
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.
So, let me guess. We should all go buy the iPad 2. Game over.
I saw another article talking about the $500 price point as being 'unbeatable' in the market, this is an odd place for Apple as they actually seem to be the price leader. I'm sure that Google will sort things out with Android's issues, but for now, I think this is Apple's game.
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
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.
No release date. Verizon has it's hooks cast into Motorola telling them when they can release a WiFi only version.
Why do you repeat the lie that Apple "stole" anything from Xerox? Apple and Xerox had a specific deal to allow Apple engineers to see the things that PARC was doing. In exchange, Xerox was compensated in the form of cheap stock in Apple. It's pure ignorance to keep repeating the claim that Apple stole anything from Xerox.
TFS' assertion that Honeycomb is "born too early" seems not just ill-supported; but simply followed by irrelevant information occupying the location where supporting details customarily go.
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.
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.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Tablets don't need to pack in as many features as Motorola, Samsung et all seem compelled to do. 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? 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.
Sure advanced features are nice, but most tablets are going to be used for playing videos, browsing, reading and don't need those high specs. Even 3G is superfluous for anyone with an Android handset which supports tethering, or owns a mifi device.
The Archos 101 demonstrates that a tablet can be affordable and reasonable specced. And I expect more examples will trickle out this year. There will be tablets to match all price points, many of which will be less than an iPad and certainly much less than a Xoom.
Another problem is fragmentation in the Android platform. You for the most part never hear iPad users worrying or complaining about about what version of the OS a particular device has, what compatibility issues there are with the hardware, and what version is required by what apps. It's all abstracted to the user. Until someone starts making Android tablets that are price competitive, feature, competitive, AND accessible, there won't be any credible threat to the iPad in the tablet space.
How many units has the Archos 101 sold?
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.
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 want a Kindle (but am unwilling to shell out for the small one, and unwilling to shell out so much for the big one) with 3G because it is a mobile Wikipedia terminal. Being able to look up zonation at the nursery or compatibility at the electronics store when shopping the sale counter is eminently useful.
Sure advanced features are nice, but most tablets are going to be used for playing videos, browsing, reading and don't need those high specs.
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.
Most interestingly, when you converge them and add a rear-facing camera you get reality overlay. I don't think there is anyone out there who has any of these devices who would not like to see any of them perform GPS navigation features with reality overlay so that you can hold the unit up and see signs drawn on streets where they are missing, or a plotted route drawn out over the city so that you can see where it will lead. A lot of people don't get the utility in such a thing, but if they held it in their hand most of them would be instantly hooked.
Or in short, don't be a Luddite.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
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.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
GPS should be painfully obvious.
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?
Rear facing camera is for reality overlay and for just good old picture-taking.
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?
This "story" is ridiculous. Please, leave the mobile news to engadget. They actually follow the topics that they post about.
Firstly, as it has already been pointed out, the Xoom wasn't the only Honeycomb tablet at MWC. Just proves the author didn't know what he was talking about (or was intentionally misleading in order to create a more sensational story), and the poster, didn't know enough about the topic to realize (I'm pointing at you, founder of Slashdot).
But even if the Xoom was the only one, how would that imply that Honeycomb was released before it was ready? It was _just_ announced by Google. An emulator is out to assist developers in testing their software. The source has not been released. If you don't have a "Google Experience" device running Tegra2, you had no opportunity to have Honeycomb on your device.
I'm no Android fanboy, but even I can tell that this "story" is complete BS. We'll see if Honeycomb has legs when the products hit the market, but at $800 for Xoom, and ipad2 around the corner, I'm skeptical.
I don't really follow slashdot closely anymore, but this, posted by CmdrTaco??!!, is the last straw. I really only check slashdot when I happen to glance at my seldom visited igoogle page, and it's getting removed right now.
I'm sure you don't believe me, oh well. Goodbye Slashdot, thanks for the memories, you were once the King, I'll try to remember you as you once were.
The editors have long since given up doing anything but trolling the users. They only accept articles with sensational headlines, regardless of quality. The resulting wailing and gnashing of teeth generates page views, which is probably all they actually care about.
Therefore, Slashdot is a nerd tabloid. It's really, really sad.
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?
Logical fallacy: false assumption. 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.
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?
First, you quoted but ignored reality overlay. 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.
If you would like to try rereading my comment again and making a reply which does not depend on logical fallacies or ignoring central points of my comments, then I will be pleased to read it as well.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
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" is not portable as in, have in your hands and working with it while walking. It's a laptop without the keyboard.
Or in short, don't be a Luddite.
Great closing argument...
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 slab to take pictures?
Lots of flash is obvious as well.
Most Android phones have micro SD slots. Stick 8GB of flash into the tablet and let users augment it if they need to.
3G is obvious but let me get to that in a moment.
Again it's obvious if you have no other means of using the internet. Most people do. They're in a house or office which has wifi. Android tablet owners most likely have a phone which can tether. Failing that, Android tablets sport a USB port, so why not support popular 3G dongles?
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
Not everyone wants to replace their desktop. They want to browse and do casual stuff. Stuff which shouldn't tax a moderately specced tablet. I also doubt you could replace your desktop with any tablet at the moment even if you wanted to.
Barometers are cool and practically free. A compass is needed for reality overlay and also practically free.
The point is it's superfluous fluff. It takes space, power and bloats the price while having dubious application in a tablet.
Yes, that is ludicrous bullshit. But 3G is useful. 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) with 3G because it is a mobile Wikipedia terminal. Being able to look up zonation at the nursery or compatibility at the electronics store when shopping the sale counter is eminently useful.
I'm not saying 3G is useless. I've been commenting a lot recently saying how cool it would be if Sony's NGP worked like a Kindle. What I'm saying is it really adds to the price of the tablet.
Or in short, don't be a Luddite.
I'm not being a Luddite. I just don't check my brains in at the door when the latest shiny thing comes out at ludicrous prices. Tablets can and should be cheaper.
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 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.
By "too early" you mean "too late" for the manufacturers to design around it and prep first class products?
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.
How dare you question drinkypoo!! His word is gospel!!! Look forward to being told that you are committing "logical fallacies" by question his logic.
..paying $800 for the privilege of fiddling with some midgets.
...always seems to accompany any Android release. The lead up is "iPad killer, iPad killer, iPad killer", gradually morphing into "buh but Apple had a head start!" to justify yet another clearly inferior product.
An easily jail broken iOS device is just better than a rooted Android device, by any usability metric, and the longer google lags behind, the more this fact is fixed in the public consciousness. Google needs to get it right or hang it up.
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?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
What shall we do? The honeycomb came too soon and now? Well I don't know but this sounds important I think!
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?
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.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
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 they popularized small computing devices.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
From the summary it sounds like it was born too late.
Emphasis added.
This author needs to learn the difference between late and early. Each of the bolded items suggest they are delivering too little too late, not too early. From what I've heard it seems like Google stalled and delayed with Honeycomb, and impatient folks like Samsung went ahead with Android 2.3, contributing to the larger problem described here.
Not only that, but many Xerox employees actually went on to work at Apple and create the Macintosh.
Well, it's a "bad term" only because it's totally and completely inaccurate. You make it sound as though his statement was fine other than the fact that it was 100 percent wrong. ;-)
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 takes device makers time to construct a platform (and certify and to ramp up manufacture). And once all that is done, then applications finally start rolling it. Sure there are a few select developers with Honeycomb devices right now, but as quantities become widely available you will see more diversity in Honeycomb applications.
I think HC is a huge improvement in the Android on a table experience. I never really liked the Froyo-based tablets that have been available from Asia for the last couple of years, but I do enjoy my HC tablet.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
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 the pub and want to check something on Wikipedia, I'm sitting at home and want to watch a different movie than my wife or read a book, I want to video conference with someone from a hotel room... For those purposes, most of the "extras" (GPS, rear facing camera, 3G) are probably superfluous (3G might be useful if I'm in one of the three restaurants left in the country without wifi). I see a tablet as a replacement for my laptop rather than my smartphone.
Now certainly I'm not going to argue that there are no possible uses for those extras, or that no tablet should ever contain them. Certainly they make for good options. I could see, say, a GPS enabled inventory app for use in large ports. Port authority people are typically carrying clipboards, so a tablet sized device would be about perfect for them. if you'd rather carry a tablet than a phone, I certainly see not reason why they shouldn't offer options that allow you to do so. In general though, for most consumers, I think a cheaper model without all the "extras" would do better.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
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...
I hear you. I'm a iPhone owner willing to look at Android devices, but the questionable updates thing has me saying no. I understand even the Nexus One isn't current with updates of Android and if Google can't/won't keep their own phone up to date, then it's too big a risk to bet on anybody else.
You're saying there weren't many Honeycomb tablets out yet and because of that Honeycomb was born too early?
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
If you don't mind rooting a nook color, you can have a really great Android tablet for $250 right now.
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.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
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.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
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 the price of the cheapest iPad now. Still, there's hardware and price points for every budget.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
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.
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 less than 2% returns) despite rumours to the contrary, and of course the new Honeycomb tablets now arriving are far more capable for a similar or slightly higher price to the nearest competing iPad.
Incidentally, you might want to check out the Kno. It's a single (or dual) 14.1" screen tablet with stylus, running Ubuntu.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Damn You Global Warming. DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!
You know what they say about opinions. They're all fabulous!
Color me strange but I'm looking forward to seeing the tablet that everyone's forgotten about: HP's WebOS based TouchPad.
IMO of the iOS competitors, WebOS is arguably the most polished and I've been looking forward to seeing a tablet based on it for a while.
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.
So -- you've got your subsidized phone running 2.1. Why *should* the handset manufacturer bother to port 2.2 to the phone and why should the carriers bother pushing it to you? It cost them money and you aren't going anywhere with the contract you signed. When the contract is up, they'll pitch you a "subsidy" on something even newer and if you're like most people, you'll go for it.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
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
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"iPad getting a one year headstart in the tablet market."
Did you have to pull your head out of your ass to come to that conclusion, or are you just regurgitating the same false claims others make without doing any actual research? Android tablets have been around longer. Apple doesn't create new markets, they just make a one-button version of other companies' devices and say "Look what we invented". Fucking tards, the lot of you.
This is clearly caused by a lack of imagination among the management caste. Why is it that all of these vendors have nearly identical products? They sit on their asses and wait for Google to do the work for them. None of them invests in a development team to take the android platform and develop it to stand out among the pack. They slap their own restrictions and money squeezing apps change the placement of buttons and call it a day. It's sad really. If they were actually pushing the platform to it's potential they'd be ready for something like Honeycomb. But instead they need Google to hold their hands every step of the way.
There is no particular reason why the user should not wish to converge all of these devices.
Ever heard the saying about putting all of your eggs in one basket? If you lose or damage that all-in-one super device, you're out all of your gadgets.
Also, battery life.
I think you're right about the carrier's financial motivations and mostly right about the handset maker, although they do have a slight motivation to be kind to the consumer since they will probably want repeat business from them.
But both of these things are moot if Google forces them to allow end-user software updates by structuring Android licensing correctly. They could limit derivative works so that carriers and handset makers don't bastardize the core OS so much that they make Google-supplied OS updates impossible.
Even if a release still requires a handset maker port (I don't know enough about Android or handset OSes to know how tightly integrated hardware gets with the OS or whether it follows a more traditional OS/driver abstraction model), keeping deviations to a minimum prevents the "easy out" makers have now of saying "its too much work".
The carriers (especially Verizon!) are harder to bring to the table because they will probably balk at any arrangement that doesn't allow them to "brand" phone handsets and add one-click access to accidental data usage and their high-margin content downloads businesses.
You can bypass and self install custom roms... but most people don't want to deal with that or take a chance of screwing up their phone.. The thing is, and what people don't understand, is that upgrades are not just like upgrading a PC, where you just run the install program.. every phone has unique hardware, and the OS has to be tweaked to it.. In the US you have 4 major carriers, all running different 3G and 4G .. and 3 camps running CDMA and GSM.. and then you get into different manufaturers running different chips and screens, and all other mannner of hardware.. each OS on the phone has to be compiled to run with that hardware.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net