People want apps only because of the extra functionality (and entertainment, in the case of games). Android isn't great, it's merely good enough, and what makes it good enough isn't the enormous amount of apps you can download, it's the fact that you usually don't need them due to the excellent Google integration. Android without Google would be fairly shit, for a Linux OS.
Shouldn't matter at all here, as both use the same driver. Difference in desktop environment, though, can mean a lot. Then again, Ubuntu seems to suck at 3d, also when compared to other Linux distros.
Oh wow. Apple gets more profit from their phone business than most of the other smartphone makers do combined, and you claim Google is "crushing" them with Android. Delusional idiot.
Interesting that two of the first three comments are about Google in a story that has nothing at all to do with them. Fun what corporate fanboyism can do to people's minds.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 7.7 are totally new devices, one released just a couple of weeks ago, the other still unreleased. If I followed your kind of "thinking", I could just as well claim the iPhone5 a dismal failure. But things tend to change.
I read a review of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 the other day, which stated it was currently the best consumer tablet out there, comparing it positively to the iPad 2 (Norwegian site amobil.no). Naturally, some asshat fanboy commented on it, stating outright that the reviewer was corrupt and that no other review had found the 10.1 remarkable at all, so I googled it and read some other reviews. Not one said the iPad 2 was lightyears ahead, most seemed to think they were about equal in quality, with some pros and cons for each.
Millions. Just like there are millions of people avoiding Microsoft Windows. But sure, of the nearly 7 billion people on the planet, most won't afford an iPad. Then again, it's only sold 30-something million units, a comparably negligible number.
The subset of software for Android that is suitable for tablets but not for phones is targeting Honeycomb, since that's where the APIs are. Owners of the original Galaxy Tab are SOL, at least until Google publishes the source code for Honeycomb (which is unlikely) or Ice Cream Sandwich (hopefully soon).
First part of that first sentence is true, second part demonstrably and proven wrong: people don't give a shit about openness when buying, but they do care about the closed nature of their data when they need to move on. Governments, businesses and anyone who's had a computer for more than 20 years have lost data to obsolescence.
People don't use Microsoft Office because it "works", they use it because they believe they have to, because it's the dominant format. Apple wants that position with their iGadgets: if everything needs to be made compatible with the iPad, much software will be made incompatible with many other things. That's the only reason for fighting against the fanboy propaganda blitz.
Slashdot Mirror
People want apps only because of the extra functionality (and entertainment, in the case of games). Android isn't great, it's merely good enough, and what makes it good enough isn't the enormous amount of apps you can download, it's the fact that you usually don't need them due to the excellent Google integration. Android without Google would be fairly shit, for a Linux OS.
Of course not. Only Apple impacts your thinking.
TV has to make good shows ... can't tell if serious.
Yes, and the same goes for everything supported by advertisements. Slashdot, for instance.
You're such a wanker, Kendall.
He didn't say the food was horrible, he just said he wanted to trash it anonymously online.
Shouldn't matter at all here, as both use the same driver. Difference in desktop environment, though, can mean a lot. Then again, Ubuntu seems to suck at 3d, also when compared to other Linux distros.
I find it interesting that you need to claim that Google is suing despite the fact that they aren't. Facts do in fact invalidate your argument.
Oh wow. Apple gets more profit from their phone business than most of the other smartphone makers do combined, and you claim Google is "crushing" them with Android. Delusional idiot.
Interesting that two of the first three comments are about Google in a story that has nothing at all to do with them. Fun what corporate fanboyism can do to people's minds.
The Galaxy Tab 10.1 and 7.7 are totally new devices, one released just a couple of weeks ago, the other still unreleased. If I followed your kind of "thinking", I could just as well claim the iPhone5 a dismal failure. But things tend to change.
You typed in all those letters just to prove you can't read?
I read a review of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 the other day, which stated it was currently the best consumer tablet out there, comparing it positively to the iPad 2 (Norwegian site amobil.no). Naturally, some asshat fanboy commented on it, stating outright that the reviewer was corrupt and that no other review had found the 10.1 remarkable at all, so I googled it and read some other reviews. Not one said the iPad 2 was lightyears ahead, most seemed to think they were about equal in quality, with some pros and cons for each.
So basically, you're full of shit.
Millions. Just like there are millions of people avoiding Microsoft Windows. But sure, of the nearly 7 billion people on the planet, most won't afford an iPad. Then again, it's only sold 30-something million units, a comparably negligible number.
The subset of software for Android that is suitable for tablets but not for phones is targeting Honeycomb, since that's where the APIs are. Owners of the original Galaxy Tab are SOL, at least until Google publishes the source code for Honeycomb (which is unlikely) or Ice Cream Sandwich (hopefully soon).
No, he's right. Plenty of people won't buy from Apple, and for good reason.
No. The original Galaxy Tab runs Froyo or Gingerbread, so no one will actually target it specifically. It runs Android phone software.
Sounds like one of those weird SF stories in which someone travels back in time, fucks their grandmother and alters history completely.
First part of that first sentence is true, second part demonstrably and proven wrong: people don't give a shit about openness when buying, but they do care about the closed nature of their data when they need to move on. Governments, businesses and anyone who's had a computer for more than 20 years have lost data to obsolescence.
People don't use Microsoft Office because it "works", they use it because they believe they have to, because it's the dominant format. Apple wants that position with their iGadgets: if everything needs to be made compatible with the iPad, much software will be made incompatible with many other things. That's the only reason for fighting against the fanboy propaganda blitz.
No, I'm talking about data. The things which you have no non-Apple approved way of accessing on your iDevice.
The upcoming MacBook has already been leaked.
Wrong. Anyone who cares about owning their own data cares about openness. Many of them simply don't know it yet.
Meh. That's more of an example of the media (and now you) playing the role of Apple's advertisers.
Yet another alternative is to buy a cheap Android unsubsidised by the carrier, of course. You forgot about that, somehow.
Yes, it's a funny thing. Marketing is the core function of iOS.