12 ms·

Consumers Don't Want Tablets, They Want iPads

114 points by ssclafani 15y ago

noonespecial 15y ago
I haven't seen a tablet yet that is as good for less than an apple. They all seem to be a mix of worse and/or more expensive (or with ridiculous multi-year carrier lockins). Until this happens, this is a non-issue. If consumers are snubbing cheaper better products to have fruit on the front, that's a story, but until then, shrug. The tablet market just doesn't have its IBM/Lenovo Thinkpad yet.
digikata 15y ago
The iPad competitors seem to be shoved out into the light a bit early. I came across a an Android tablet on demo in a department store the other day. Hey, nice, let's see how it works. Hmm, the camera app came up with a black screen - nothing to see, no interface. OK restart, try a game - oops this game needs to download more data to start and no internet connection existed. Ok, browser - same thing, no surprise there. Sliding over into the next page of apps to find something, anything, that worked the slide animation starts to stutter. So for the same price as an iPad, I could get this? Why the rush to release when it's this unfinished? You're only going to be digging yourself out of a negative initial impression like this.
cryptoz 15y ago
This is interesting. I'd argue that while vaguely true, this is somewhat irrelevant. If you look at the "rival brands" you'll see that most of them produce Android tablets. So while the hardware guys will all have a very difficult time "dominating" the tablet market, together they all build basically the same ecosystem together, with Apple in a different world. Since the Samsung tablets run the same OS and applications as the HTC and Motorola tablets, I think the more informative information about consumers desires would be a graph of OS mindshare: do you want an Apple OS or a Google OS?
- wccrawford 15y ago
  Actually, both matter. These charts almost always show 1 side or the other, but it does matter both ways. On the Apple side, there's no decisions to make, and upgrade paths are very clear. On the Android side, there's plenty of options and it's a very competitive market. If you don't like the current offerings, 3 months will see a bunch of new devices.
- protomyth 15y ago
  Upon HP's release, the top three brands known to consumers in the US in the tablet market will not be running Android. Samsung is the best known of the Android unless Sony decides to show up.
  - nextparadigms 15y ago
    Sony has already announce 2 tablets.
    - protomyth 15y ago
      I guess that would put 1 of the top 4 slots in the Android court. I wonder which will have more traction with consumers: HP or Sony.
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    Curious, what are the top 3 brands? Apple, HP, and ? Amazon?
    - cwp 15y ago
      Blackberry
TomOfTTB 15y ago
To me this article boils down to one main point: Apple is a premium brand that's decided to sell its product for a less than premium price. People almost always prefer the premium brands. It's a rare person who would pick a Honda Civic over a BMW 5 Series if both were the same price. The difference here is Apple's selling the low end iPad for a price companies like Samsung can barely match. You're constantly hearing stories of how Apple has an unbeatable advantage because they're already selling in such bulk. So that's the problem. Other companies can't undercut Apple on price and lack Apple's brand prestige.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  Mark this attitude well: it is the difference between success and failure in consumerland. It's an easy trap to fall into: Well, gosh, the specs are the same. It's shaped basically the same. Huh. But they don't like it. Fuck, it must just be some ineffable brand thing. Which it is. But it has absolutely nothing to do with "luxury." Instead, the brand signals something important that other tablet competitors aren't strategically configured to match: It works really well. The screen size, carefully balanced against the needs of the tasks performed, along with the fingers necessary to perform them, comes in a specifically determined size. Not a size determined for differentiation, or a size necessitated by commodity supply constraints. The size that works best. There is a processor with an integrated GPU. Nothing special. But what does that processor do? It drives a mature collection of software libaries that are well calibrated for performance, visual appeal and flexible use. Making it easy to build software that solves problems while being transparent, even enjoyable, to the user. It's software that works really well. There is a retail network that makes it very easy not only to experiment with the device, but also get questions answered. And if something goes wrong, they can repair or replace it. Often for free. Even if it's your own fault. There is an ongoing software development effort, incentivized by ongoing hardware sales, that ensures the continued maintenance, improvement and evolution of both the underlying developer-facing software platform and the outward user experience of the device. There is a content delivery and monetization ecosystem that rewards users with ease of use and content developers with boatloads of money. I can go on and on. But the point here is this: the brand has nothing to do with luxury. It's about shitty – and not being shitty. About mediocrity – and higher aspiration. About short-term thinking – and long-term vision. Incentives based on owning the experience as a whole, versus owning a small subset that's cut off from the rest. Apple's goal, as a business, is the same as any other: make a shitload of money. They go about it differently than almost everyone else. I'd love it if it were possible for another company to take a similar approach. But, for whatever reason, this attitude is very difficult to replicate. Apple isn't preferred because they're Apple. Apple is preferred because they're the only ones who are. And that's how they get so many consumers who prefer their stuff, especially when the prices are equal.
wccrawford 15y ago
Sure, Apple has half the market... Of a market they created and had a headstart on. Seems to me the others are catching up nicely, especially since most of them are using the same OS series. I just got an Asus Transformer and it is NICE. Especially now that I found some software to let me remote into my desktop and have the tablet act as a dumb terminal. My tabletpc (which I used mainly as a laptop) sits unused now because the tablet is smaller, lighter, snappier, and produces no heat. I can do all my Android-y games and little apps, as well as access the big stuff from my PC in the other room, all from the couch. And reading comics on it? Awesome. I considered an iPad. Seriously considered it. What finally decided it was open source software and creating my own apps. (And I have written 1 so far, but not published... Need to polish it.)
- r00fus 15y ago
  So you're really looking for a netbook and you decided (wisely) not to choose the iPad? The real slam here is that there is any such thing as the "tablet" market. There's an iPad market, the netbook market, smartphone market, and PC market. Trying to make something that addresses all of these poorly is a bad idea. Windows TabletPCs never really caught on, and as you mention, an ARM-based android "netbook" kills it for the target market. Android tablets suffer from an app deficiency and still-maturing OS, not to mention, they are addressing the iPad's native market (if they switched gears, took netbooks head-on like the Asus Transformer they would probably have better results).
  - wccrawford 15y ago
    Actually, what I wanted was an extremely lightweight netbook that could run Android apps, but Bluestack hasn't taken off yet. The fact that the keyboard is removeable is a huge bonus because it drops half the weight and size. There will probably be something in the future that does more of what I want, but this is good enough to get me by for a few years. As far as I know, the iPad can't do what I want, even if I replace 'android apps' with 'ipad/iphone apps'.
    - berntb 15y ago
pseudonym 15y ago
I think that, at this point in time, the question's moot-- much like iOS vs. non-iOS phones, the market is based almost entirely on the availability of 3rd-party applications for a piece of software. I'd like to have an Android tablet. However, for the time being, I have a 1st-gen iPad because that's where all of the applications are. Maybe in a year or two the market will have shifted somewhat, but without the 3rd-party base to back it up, non-Apple tablets have a distinctly uphill battle.
haseman 15y ago
The conventional wisdom was exactly the same 2 years ago concerning android phones vrs the iPhone. Android has since moved to match the iPhone for market share. The same will probably happen for tablets. It'll just take a few years. I think the android tablets aren't very good right now, but I felt the same way about the android phones when they first came out.
- Anechoic 15y ago
  >The conventional wisdom was exactly the same 2 years ago concerning android phones vrs the iPhone. The difference is that the iPad doesn't have the same constraints (namely available only on AT&T) that the iPhone had. Would Android really have had the same success it had if the iPhone was available on Verizon, Sprint & T-Mobile (and assuming Apple could keep up with the volume) from the start? Anecdote: everyone I know who has an Android phone really wanted an iPhone but didn't want to leave Verizon. Now that the iPhone is on Verizon, most of those folks intend to switch to an iPhone once their contract is up. (FTR I don't own an iPhone, iPad or an Android device)
  - zppx 15y ago
    > Would Android really have had the same success it had if the iPhone was available on Verizon, Sprint & T-Mobile (and assuming Apple could keep up with the volume) from the start? That's in the US, what about the rest? Yes, this is an honest question.
    - Anechoic 15y ago
      Good question, what are the Android/iPhone market numbers outside the U.S.? I suspect that Android might have a lead in undeveloped countries since there are lower cost models available. I'd love to see the data.
      - jarek 15y ago
        http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2675668 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2675668
choko 15y ago
I would argue that the headline isn't necessarily true. The Asus Transformer just came out, and they can't get them to store shelves fast enough. It took me a month to get one, and I almost missed my chance(again). The Transformer is really the first non-iPad tablet to get it right, IMO. It's fast, stable, the screen is beautiful, and everything works. The Xoom had a shot, but too many features were not working when the tablet was shipped. Now that they are working, it's kind of too late, since Motorola has already put a bad taste in consumers' mouths. The other side is effective marketing. Apple is the first tech company to put together appealing commercials that make people(non-geek) want their products, without really knowing why they want them. The iPad is decent (I own one of those as well), but it doesn't really offer much more than a well-made Android tablet. Apple has done well in making their product look cool.
hrabago 15y ago
To me, this sounds very close to the Idea vs Execution we are all so familiar with here at HN. People who know can't really claim that it's because Apple came first - Windows had tablet devices before. People also can't claim it'd because Apple learned from earlier tablets, because others have come after that aren't as good. It's a result of Apple producing a good tablet. I have a PlayBook I use for day-to-day in my day job, and it sometimes feels as if some design decisions were made to deliberately be different from Apple. However, it leads to an overall inferior experience for me, that I'm close to giving up on the device. I can't see myself recommending it to anyone, except for the fact that it plays Flash. However, even that issue isn't as big as it was before. I'm still hoping someone else produces a compelling product to challenge Apple, whether it be Google, Amazon, or Microsoft. It would not be good for all inovations in this product category to only come from one company.
- bluekeybox 15y ago
  > It's a result of Apple producing a good tablet. Yes, and not just anybody producing a good tablet, but Apple producing a good tablet. > it sometimes feels as if some design decisions were made to deliberately be different from Apple It is tough to follow without being labeled a follower. If you do things the same way, you are branded a copycat; if you do things differently, people will say you are trying too hard to appear original even though in reality you are no different from others (this was Apple in the early 2000s -- remember how some people criticized them for trying too hard with fruity-looking iMacs, etc.?) Being different works, but you have to do it consistently as well as strengthen your image with positive real-life outcomes.
AretNCarlsen 15y ago
Bernstein Research surveyed consumers to ask whether they would prefer a 7" screen or a 10" screen? That does not have anything to do with iPad branding. Would you prefer a 70" TV, or a 100" TV? You say 100"? Well, since Sony manufactures the only popular 100" TV, I will infer that you prefer Sony brand TVs. The second half of the Bernstein release states that "Fifty percent of respondents preferred Apple over all other brands." That is EXACTLY HALF, so feel free to spin it the other way: "Fifty percent of respondents would not choose Apple over another brand."
- ellyagg 15y ago
  If you did say it the other way, spin is just what it'd be.
  - jerf 15y ago
    It's spin either way. English effectively lacks a way to make a truly neutral statement on the topic. That graph is as close as you can get.
- cwp 15y ago
  Except consumers aren't choosing between Apple and not-Apple. The second-strongest brand in the survey is Dell, preferred by 12% of respondents. You really think that focussing on Apple, with a brand 4x stronger than its nearest competitor, is just spin? Here's another quote from the article: "Apple has more than double the brand appeal of BlackBerry, HTC, Motorola, Nokia and Samsung combined." Care to spin that another way?
  - AretNCarlsen 15y ago
    I don't have access to original Bernstein materials; does anybody know how they define "brand appeal"? Apparently Apple has over 66% of whatever that is (such that their fraction is "more than double" the remainder), and yet only half of the respondents "preferred Apple over all other brands". As AllThingsD certainly doesn't pass along a definition of "brand appeal", in the context of the article that 66% claim is neither fact nor spin. It is nothing at all.
ghshephard 15y ago
I'm also interested in seeing how quickly iPads start to penetrate other verticals beyond the traditional consumer market. Education, Health, are two of the commonly cited areas where a lot of growth is expected, but I'll be interested in seeing how quickly they penetrate low-end retail as well. I was in Santa Barbara this weekend, at "La Tour Wine Merchants" - Purchased every thing there through an iPad + Square. One thing important to note - the transaction took under 5 seconds for him to process, + 3-4 for me to sign. Receipt was then automatically filled out with my email address (I'd used square somewhere else) - and, from the time I handed him my credit card to the time I was done was under 10 seconds. It felt a lot faster than normal credit card transactions. So - every single person who comes into that Wine Merchant is going to have the iPad marketed as hyper efficient (and low cost transaction fee) credit card processing platform to boot. Not to say that the Droid Tablet's won't get square soon (if they don't already) - but the solution is certainly going to be well regressed on the iPad more quickly. Popularity sometimes results in a network-effect of quality improvements resulting in further popularity - I think that's what we're going to see with the iPad.
9ec4c12949a4f3 15y ago
No, here's what I want: I want a flat thing with a screen that I can read in sunlight, isn't buggy, and doesn't subscribe to this "wow 100000000 apps!!" nonsense. I want to read text in whatever format I want, and not be limited by the programmer's clever "oh, that's a CSV, we don't know how to open it," but rather let me pick an application to read the raw text with. I want a chrome browser on it, and I want it to fit nicely in my hand. I expect to get enough battery on it that would get me through a four hour train ride or a boring flight. That's it. I want a file reader and a browser, that's what 90% of us want. 10% of us want an apple pad or a google whatever or a microsoft blah. 90% of us want to spend fifty bucks on a browser and text reader that doesn't totally suck for usability. And I really don't need the company telling me how to use my device, where I can use it, or even when. I especially don't need them to keep track of where I physically am or what I do with the thing.
flyosity 15y ago
The iPad didn't validate the market for tablets, it validated the market for iPads. And if over 50% of people prefer a 10" tablet to a 7" one, why in the world would Samsung, RIM and others think they could sell one at a smaller size? Did they do any market research at all?
- icegreentea 15y ago
  Well... if that means 40% (or whatever the number is) of people would prefer a 7" to a 10" one... that's still a ridiculous amount of people. I think that -is- market research.
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    Exactly. If the iPad is cleaning up the 10" market and you know that even 15% strongly prefer 7", and there is no iPad in that market, it would make sense to do a 7" version and clean up the 7" market.
    - flyosity 15y ago
      The problem is you're not attacking the market of people who prefer 7" tablets, you're attacking the market of people who prefer a 7" tablet SO MUCH they're willing to not get an iPad because of it. Who are these people? Probably geeks. Regardless, it's a much smaller slice of the overall pie.
      - aphexairlines 15y ago
        > Who are these people? People embarrassed to pull out a huge 10" screen to read in a train.
        flyosity 15y ago
        But will instead pull out a magazine or book that's larger? I don't see the logic.
  - 15y ago
mquander 15y ago
Look, that's because non-iPad tablets with a real (touchscreen, tablet-sized) OS didn't exist until 3 months ago. Give Android a year and a half to let the Android Market populate with some great tablet-sized software, and who among us doubts that the tablet market will look just like the phone market does now? EDIT: The commenters responding to me made a really good distinction -- phones are near-necessity devices that are subsidized by carriers, whereas right now, tablets are more or less a luxury purchase. I agree that this might have an effect on how things play out.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  > who among us doubts that the tablet market will look just like the phone market does now? I do. For one thing, building tablet software is hard. I mean, extremely hard work from a UI perspective. It makes stuff for the phone look like a cakewalk (I'll share a blog post sometime). So if Android Market continues sucking ass in terms of rewarding developers versus what they can make on the App Store, you'll get a bunch of turd apps and not much magic because what's the point of all that sweat? Secondly, Android is inflated by the fact that if you want a cell phone you will be given an Android device for free if you start new service. There is no magic free Android tablet tree – the economics are completely different. There's the argument that you might see a halo effect from all those phones... but people don't tend to value what's free and the carriers are doing whatever they can to cram these phones with junk anyway. So, like I said, I do.
  - mquander 15y ago
    I know you said you're working on a blog post, but I'd be really interested in if you could elaborate on the challenges inherent to building tablet software -- I build big enterprise-y software that is on Windows Mobile phones and Windows tablets, and I find the tablet part to be much easier in terms of designing a usable interface for the form factor. Are there particular things you have in mind that are much easier to design for a phone than for a tablet?
    - danilocampos 15y ago
nextparadigms 15y ago
I don't want an iPad. I want an Android tablet (waiting for a good one). And I know there are a lot of Android users who think the same way.
- KeyBoardG 15y ago
  I agree, there just hasn't been a killer Android tablet yet. I was suprised at how laggy the Moto Xoom was. I've had hopes for Playbook but even that killer hardware has flopped on the software front.
- r00fus 15y ago
  I can understand not wanting an iPad, but why limit yourself to Android?
pistacchio 15y ago
i can summarize this pretty easily. competitors that see the argument like "apple is giving 1GB RAM for 500$, i'll give 2GB RAM for 500$!" are really missing the whole point. when you buy an apple phone / mp3 player / tablet / computer you're probably well aware that with the same price you can get a more powerful/feature rich device elsewhere, but you decide, instead, to invest in a brand you trust because has given you other reliable, innovative products that you already own and you know the new device will integrate seamlessly with whatever you already have, or you're buying "the iPhone", not a generic smartphone, the iPad, not a table, an iPod, not a mp3 player, so there's really no choice because apple is the only one doing it.
nextparadigms 15y ago
The Android tablet market is still in its early life, and the problem is the initial manufacturers screwed up on pricing, but overspeccing the tablets, and then charging more than $500, without even a Wi-Fi only version. But I think people will be surprised that Android tablets will take off in the second wave of Android tablets, when the Tegra 3 chip shows up in them, and Amazon takes the market by storm, too. That should push iPad's market to under 50% by the time iPad 3 is released. And that will be just the beginning. And I know there have been stories how competitors can't build a tablet for a low price, but that has been already disproven by Asus, which has pretty much identical specs with iPad, yet it's $100 cheaper. The Amazon quad core Tegra 3 tablet is rumored to be priced at $450.
- technoslut 15y ago
  I agree that the pricing of the Xoom was a huge mistake but I still wonder whether Android will enjoy as much success with tablets. Asus cut their shipment of tablets for the year by 60% even though it was cheaper than the iPad. Amazon at this point would be the most serious competitor to Apple. If no OS has been able to make a serious dent in iPad market share by next year then the iPad will go the way of the iPod dominance. You can't give Apple three years with no competitve threat to the iPad.
  - nextparadigms 15y ago
    That was Acer, not Asus. It's ok, it happens a lot. Asus actually increased their production for their Transformer tablet.
brudgers 15y ago
The article defines "the tablet market" narrowly and ignores important competition for the iPad in terms of sales (if not mindshare). The iPad competes with devices such as the Kindle which have significant adoption and handle the killer slate app - reading very well at very competitive price points. This class of competitor also often provides better performance in important areas, e.g. battery life. I also suspect that if people were asked their preference regarding wide screen format vs. 4:3 the iPad would not fare quite so well as it does in questions regarding screen size.
hammock 15y ago
Interesting how defensive people are getting in the comments. I think the headline says it all- tablets have been around for over a decade and never caught on. In fact they still haven't caught on, just the iPad has caught on.
jim_h 15y ago
I want a tablet that has Wacom and stylus along with capacitive touch screen. Heck, throw in Windows 7 and I'll be happy. (W7 has great handwriting recognition.) W7 + OneNote would make a very nice (and expensive) electronic notebook if the tablet was thin and had decent battery life. I like to write instead of touch typing on a screen.
- r00fus 15y ago
  > W7 + OneNote would make a very nice (and expensive) electronic notebook if the tablet was thin and had decent battery life. Hasn't this existed for years (TabletPC) running Windows (well except the thin and decent battery life part)? Why haven't you gotten one already?
  - jim_h 15y ago
    i DO have one. I am now waiting for another version that's thinner and has better life.
dannyr 15y ago
A lot of people I know (non-tech) have no idea that Android tablets exist. They only know of the IPad.
- ctdonath 15y ago
  And of many/most non-techies who do know about other tablets they think "tablet == iPad" like "paper tissue == Kleenex" and "photocopy == Xerox".
kelnos 15y ago
As an Android fan, I'm actually encouraged by this. Look, when you're buying a tablet, you're buying into an OS/software ecosystem. Yes, people are buying Apple because it's Apple. But they're also buying Apple because of the App Store and because of a proven track record of apps they enjoy and find useful (assuming some previous iPhone/iPod Touch ownership). But Android doesn't really have the brand thing so much with regard to the individual manufacturers. I have an HTC phone right now, but I don't feel much loyalty to HTC. My next phone might be made by Samsung or Motorola. I don't much care, because I'm loyal to Android, not to the particular manufacturer. So in that light, the US numbers for next tablet purchase are 50% iOS, 33% Android, 9% RIM, and 8% don't care. And that's not bad, considering that Apple has a good year's head start on Android wrt tablets.
scrrr 15y ago
It's about who is first in the consumer's heads. iPad is like Coca-Cola.
dannyr 15y ago
To those people making the argument that IPad will be unbeatable because there is no carrier lockin unlike the IPhone. Here are some stats: In Germany, the IPhone is available at the 3 major carriers, O2, Vodaphone & TMobile. Marketshare for Android in Germany is 35.5% versus 24.4 for iOS.
forgotAgain 15y ago
Apple is succeeding in the category because it reinvented it. Prior to iPad, how many consumers had spent a moment of time considering what a tablet computer would be like? How many had a chance to hold one and interact with it at a local store? Most people use iPad as a reference point because it was their first experience with a tablet. It was first and it worked. People want iPads because, for now at least, it's the definitive product for the category.
chrisjsmith 15y ago
I don't think consumers WANT tablets or iPads. They have been told that's what they WANT by marketing. WANT is a disease in this society. NEED is the great leveller. The following is from experience dealing with hundreds of people: They NEED a cheap, flexible computer that just works, doesn't poke you in the eye, doesn't try to upsell everything to you every 5 mins (like apps and virus scanners), lasts a good number of years without spectacular failures, doesn't pick up diseases like a cheap whore and doesn't set fire to your house.
FilterJoe 15y ago
There IS one kind of tablet people want besides an iPad, as proved by sales numbers: The Color Nook According to various recent reports, Apple has about 10% share in ebook sales, Barnes and Noble 25%, and Kindle over 60%. Don't know the latest sales figures, but as of March 28, 2011, 3 million Color Nooks were shipped, according to Digitimes: Barnes & Noble already takes delivery of 3 million Nook Color e-book readers, say sources Yenting Chen, Taipei; Steve Shen, DIGITIMES [Monday 28 March 2011] Barnes & Noble has taken delivery of close to three million Nook Color e-book readers from its production partner, according to an estimate by sources from the Nook Color supply chain. With a clear differentiation to Apple's iPads in display size, targeted market and pricing, the Nook Color, priced at US$249, has actually taken up over 50% of the iPad-like market in the North America market, indicated the sources. Sales of the Nook Color topped one million units in the North America in the fourth quarter of 2010 and reached 600,000-700,000 units a month during the January-February period of 2011, the sources noted. Barnes & Noble outsources the production of the Nook Color e-book readers to Inventec, noted the sources, adding that Inventec has landed tablet PC orders from Hewlett-Packard (HP). EDIT: formatting
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- r00fus 15y ago
  So you're calling the Nook Color a tablet? I'm not sure that's a fair representation of the device... it's cheap, a decent e-reader, and hackable to run at least Froyo (from last I checked). In comparing the e-reader to the tablet, the Nook does indeed blur the lines, but it's resistive touch and e-ink display combined with hackery to run a full touch OS means it's really in a league all it's own. Perhaps this is the recipe to success for the upstarts. Ignore the "X market" as that means X is commoditized. Differentiate by seeing the pricing and/or vision gap and dive into it deftly. A footnote: comparing "shipped" vs. "sold" numbers is a bit facile. Lots of difference there. It'd be nice to see definitive "sold" B&N details, but they're not sharing.
  - FilterJoe 15y ago
    Agreed on shipped vs. sold (Though I DID have a conversation 2 months ago with a B&N employee - says they went out of stock a couple times). Agree also about the recipe for success: Find a niche and optimize for it. If even Apple doesn't yet know what their tablet is for, how are we supposed to know what their inferior knock-offs are for? But it sure is obvious what a Color Nook is for. It does have an app store but the apps are for the most part related to reading, as you'd expect. The fact that the Color Nook can be converted into the least expensive half-decent Android tablet is just an interesting aside. EDIT: typo
mathly 15y ago
I've been saying this from the start. Normal people just don't need tablets. What can you do on it? Music - Have an ipod or other music device Movie - Have a big tv Movie in bedroom - Have a big tv in bedroom Internet? - have smartphone/netbook/laptop Games? - Xbox/PS3/smartphone. At the end of the day, when the dust has settled, there's just no use case for tablets.
Tichy 15y ago
bullshit
sigzero 15y ago
Not surprising really. Apple got the iPad "right" from the get go and tweaked that success on the iPad2. The other tablets struggled right out of the gate and continue to do so.
learc83 15y ago
I just bought a capacitive screen multi touch android tablet for less than $200 from dealextreme for some prototype work I'm doing. There's no reason to assume that the iPad will continue to be comparatively cheaper a year or two out. When everyone has the production ironed out, android tablets will drop, and apple will keep selling iPads for a premium price. I love apple, but the tablet will never spread effectively if it costs $500 or more.

114 points by ssclafani 15y ago

I haven't seen a tablet yet that is as good for less than an apple. They all seem to be a mix of worse and/or more expensive (or with ridiculous multi-year carrier lockins). Until this happens, this is a non-issue. If consumers are snubbing cheaper better products to have fruit on the front, that's a story, but until then, shrug. The tablet market just doesn't have its IBM/Lenovo Thinkpad yet.

digikata 15y ago

The iPad competitors seem to be shoved out into the light a bit early. I came across a an Android tablet on demo in a department store the other day. Hey, nice, let's see how it works. Hmm, the camera app came up with a black screen - nothing to see, no interface. OK restart, try a game - oops this game needs to download more data to start and no internet connection existed. Ok, browser - same thing, no surprise there. Sliding over into the next page of apps to find something, anything, that worked the slide animation starts to stutter. So for the same price as an iPad, I could get this? Why the rush to release when it's this unfinished? You're only going to be digging yourself out of a negative initial impression like this.

cryptoz 15y ago

This is interesting. I'd argue that while vaguely true, this is somewhat irrelevant. If you look at the "rival brands" you'll see that most of them produce Android tablets. So while the hardware guys will all have a very difficult time "dominating" the tablet market, together they all build basically the same ecosystem together, with Apple in a different world. Since the Samsung tablets run the same OS and applications as the HTC and Motorola tablets, I think the more informative information about consumers desires would be a graph of OS mindshare: do you want an Apple OS or a Google OS?

wccrawford 15y ago
Actually, both matter. These charts almost always show 1 side or the other, but it does matter both ways. On the Apple side, there's no decisions to make, and upgrade paths are very clear. On the Android side, there's plenty of options and it's a very competitive market. If you don't like the current offerings, 3 months will see a bunch of new devices.
protomyth 15y ago
Upon HP's release, the top three brands known to consumers in the US in the tablet market will not be running Android. Samsung is the best known of the Android unless Sony decides to show up.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  Sony has already announce 2 tablets.
  - protomyth 15y ago
    I guess that would put 1 of the top 4 slots in the Android court. I wonder which will have more traction with consumers: HP or Sony.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  Curious, what are the top 3 brands? Apple, HP, and ? Amazon?
  - cwp 15y ago
    Blackberry

TomOfTTB 15y ago

To me this article boils down to one main point: Apple is a premium brand that's decided to sell its product for a less than premium price. People almost always prefer the premium brands. It's a rare person who would pick a Honda Civic over a BMW 5 Series if both were the same price. The difference here is Apple's selling the low end iPad for a price companies like Samsung can barely match. You're constantly hearing stories of how Apple has an unbeatable advantage because they're already selling in such bulk. So that's the problem. Other companies can't undercut Apple on price and lack Apple's brand prestige.

danilocampos 15y ago
Mark this attitude well: it is the difference between success and failure in consumerland. It's an easy trap to fall into: Well, gosh, the specs are the same. It's shaped basically the same. Huh. But they don't like it. Fuck, it must just be some ineffable brand thing. Which it is. But it has absolutely nothing to do with "luxury." Instead, the brand signals something important that other tablet competitors aren't strategically configured to match: It works really well. The screen size, carefully balanced against the needs of the tasks performed, along with the fingers necessary to perform them, comes in a specifically determined size. Not a size determined for differentiation, or a size necessitated by commodity supply constraints. The size that works best. There is a processor with an integrated GPU. Nothing special. But what does that processor do? It drives a mature collection of software libaries that are well calibrated for performance, visual appeal and flexible use. Making it easy to build software that solves problems while being transparent, even enjoyable, to the user. It's software that works really well. There is a retail network that makes it very easy not only to experiment with the device, but also get questions answered. And if something goes wrong, they can repair or replace it. Often for free. Even if it's your own fault. There is an ongoing software development effort, incentivized by ongoing hardware sales, that ensures the continued maintenance, improvement and evolution of both the underlying developer-facing software platform and the outward user experience of the device. There is a content delivery and monetization ecosystem that rewards users with ease of use and content developers with boatloads of money. I can go on and on. But the point here is this: the brand has nothing to do with luxury. It's about shitty – and not being shitty. About mediocrity – and higher aspiration. About short-term thinking – and long-term vision. Incentives based on owning the experience as a whole, versus owning a small subset that's cut off from the rest. Apple's goal, as a business, is the same as any other: make a shitload of money. They go about it differently than almost everyone else. I'd love it if it were possible for another company to take a similar approach. But, for whatever reason, this attitude is very difficult to replicate. Apple isn't preferred because they're Apple. Apple is preferred because they're the only ones who are. And that's how they get so many consumers who prefer their stuff, especially when the prices are equal.

wccrawford 15y ago

Sure, Apple has half the market... Of a market they created and had a headstart on. Seems to me the others are catching up nicely, especially since most of them are using the same OS series. I just got an Asus Transformer and it is NICE. Especially now that I found some software to let me remote into my desktop and have the tablet act as a dumb terminal. My tabletpc (which I used mainly as a laptop) sits unused now because the tablet is smaller, lighter, snappier, and produces no heat. I can do all my Android-y games and little apps, as well as access the big stuff from my PC in the other room, all from the couch. And reading comics on it? Awesome. I considered an iPad. Seriously considered it. What finally decided it was open source software and creating my own apps. (And I have written 1 so far, but not published... Need to polish it.)

r00fus 15y ago
So you're really looking for a netbook and you decided (wisely) not to choose the iPad? The real slam here is that there is any such thing as the "tablet" market. There's an iPad market, the netbook market, smartphone market, and PC market. Trying to make something that addresses all of these poorly is a bad idea. Windows TabletPCs never really caught on, and as you mention, an ARM-based android "netbook" kills it for the target market. Android tablets suffer from an app deficiency and still-maturing OS, not to mention, they are addressing the iPad's native market (if they switched gears, took netbooks head-on like the Asus Transformer they would probably have better results).
- wccrawford 15y ago
  Actually, what I wanted was an extremely lightweight netbook that could run Android apps, but Bluestack hasn't taken off yet. The fact that the keyboard is removeable is a huge bonus because it drops half the weight and size. There will probably be something in the future that does more of what I want, but this is good enough to get me by for a few years. As far as I know, the iPad can't do what I want, even if I replace 'android apps' with 'ipad/iphone apps'.
  - berntb 15y ago

pseudonym 15y ago

I think that, at this point in time, the question's moot-- much like iOS vs. non-iOS phones, the market is based almost entirely on the availability of 3rd-party applications for a piece of software. I'd like to have an Android tablet. However, for the time being, I have a 1st-gen iPad because that's where all of the applications are. Maybe in a year or two the market will have shifted somewhat, but without the 3rd-party base to back it up, non-Apple tablets have a distinctly uphill battle.

haseman 15y ago

The conventional wisdom was exactly the same 2 years ago concerning android phones vrs the iPhone. Android has since moved to match the iPhone for market share. The same will probably happen for tablets. It'll just take a few years. I think the android tablets aren't very good right now, but I felt the same way about the android phones when they first came out.

Anechoic 15y ago
>The conventional wisdom was exactly the same 2 years ago concerning android phones vrs the iPhone. The difference is that the iPad doesn't have the same constraints (namely available only on AT&T) that the iPhone had. Would Android really have had the same success it had if the iPhone was available on Verizon, Sprint & T-Mobile (and assuming Apple could keep up with the volume) from the start? Anecdote: everyone I know who has an Android phone really wanted an iPhone but didn't want to leave Verizon. Now that the iPhone is on Verizon, most of those folks intend to switch to an iPhone once their contract is up. (FTR I don't own an iPhone, iPad or an Android device)
- zppx 15y ago
  > Would Android really have had the same success it had if the iPhone was available on Verizon, Sprint & T-Mobile (and assuming Apple could keep up with the volume) from the start? That's in the US, what about the rest? Yes, this is an honest question.
  - Anechoic 15y ago
    Good question, what are the Android/iPhone market numbers outside the U.S.? I suspect that Android might have a lead in undeveloped countries since there are lower cost models available. I'd love to see the data.
    - jarek 15y ago
      http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2675668 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2675668

choko 15y ago

I would argue that the headline isn't necessarily true. The Asus Transformer just came out, and they can't get them to store shelves fast enough. It took me a month to get one, and I almost missed my chance(again). The Transformer is really the first non-iPad tablet to get it right, IMO. It's fast, stable, the screen is beautiful, and everything works. The Xoom had a shot, but too many features were not working when the tablet was shipped. Now that they are working, it's kind of too late, since Motorola has already put a bad taste in consumers' mouths. The other side is effective marketing. Apple is the first tech company to put together appealing commercials that make people(non-geek) want their products, without really knowing why they want them. The iPad is decent (I own one of those as well), but it doesn't really offer much more than a well-made Android tablet. Apple has done well in making their product look cool.

hrabago 15y ago

To me, this sounds very close to the Idea vs Execution we are all so familiar with here at HN. People who know can't really claim that it's because Apple came first - Windows had tablet devices before. People also can't claim it'd because Apple learned from earlier tablets, because others have come after that aren't as good. It's a result of Apple producing a good tablet. I have a PlayBook I use for day-to-day in my day job, and it sometimes feels as if some design decisions were made to deliberately be different from Apple. However, it leads to an overall inferior experience for me, that I'm close to giving up on the device. I can't see myself recommending it to anyone, except for the fact that it plays Flash. However, even that issue isn't as big as it was before. I'm still hoping someone else produces a compelling product to challenge Apple, whether it be Google, Amazon, or Microsoft. It would not be good for all inovations in this product category to only come from one company.

bluekeybox 15y ago
> It's a result of Apple producing a good tablet. Yes, and not just anybody producing a good tablet, but Apple producing a good tablet. > it sometimes feels as if some design decisions were made to deliberately be different from Apple It is tough to follow without being labeled a follower. If you do things the same way, you are branded a copycat; if you do things differently, people will say you are trying too hard to appear original even though in reality you are no different from others (this was Apple in the early 2000s -- remember how some people criticized them for trying too hard with fruity-looking iMacs, etc.?) Being different works, but you have to do it consistently as well as strengthen your image with positive real-life outcomes.

AretNCarlsen 15y ago

Bernstein Research surveyed consumers to ask whether they would prefer a 7" screen or a 10" screen? That does not have anything to do with iPad branding. Would you prefer a 70" TV, or a 100" TV? You say 100"? Well, since Sony manufactures the only popular 100" TV, I will infer that you prefer Sony brand TVs. The second half of the Bernstein release states that "Fifty percent of respondents preferred Apple over all other brands." That is EXACTLY HALF, so feel free to spin it the other way: "Fifty percent of respondents would not choose Apple over another brand."

ellyagg 15y ago
If you did say it the other way, spin is just what it'd be.
- jerf 15y ago
  It's spin either way. English effectively lacks a way to make a truly neutral statement on the topic. That graph is as close as you can get.
cwp 15y ago
Except consumers aren't choosing between Apple and not-Apple. The second-strongest brand in the survey is Dell, preferred by 12% of respondents. You really think that focussing on Apple, with a brand 4x stronger than its nearest competitor, is just spin? Here's another quote from the article: "Apple has more than double the brand appeal of BlackBerry, HTC, Motorola, Nokia and Samsung combined." Care to spin that another way?
- AretNCarlsen 15y ago
  I don't have access to original Bernstein materials; does anybody know how they define "brand appeal"? Apparently Apple has over 66% of whatever that is (such that their fraction is "more than double" the remainder), and yet only half of the respondents "preferred Apple over all other brands". As AllThingsD certainly doesn't pass along a definition of "brand appeal", in the context of the article that 66% claim is neither fact nor spin. It is nothing at all.

ghshephard 15y ago

I'm also interested in seeing how quickly iPads start to penetrate other verticals beyond the traditional consumer market. Education, Health, are two of the commonly cited areas where a lot of growth is expected, but I'll be interested in seeing how quickly they penetrate low-end retail as well. I was in Santa Barbara this weekend, at "La Tour Wine Merchants" - Purchased every thing there through an iPad + Square. One thing important to note - the transaction took under 5 seconds for him to process, + 3-4 for me to sign. Receipt was then automatically filled out with my email address (I'd used square somewhere else) - and, from the time I handed him my credit card to the time I was done was under 10 seconds. It felt a lot faster than normal credit card transactions. So - every single person who comes into that Wine Merchant is going to have the iPad marketed as hyper efficient (and low cost transaction fee) credit card processing platform to boot. Not to say that the Droid Tablet's won't get square soon (if they don't already) - but the solution is certainly going to be well regressed on the iPad more quickly. Popularity sometimes results in a network-effect of quality improvements resulting in further popularity - I think that's what we're going to see with the iPad.

9ec4c12949a4f3 15y ago

No, here's what I want: I want a flat thing with a screen that I can read in sunlight, isn't buggy, and doesn't subscribe to this "wow 100000000 apps!!" nonsense. I want to read text in whatever format I want, and not be limited by the programmer's clever "oh, that's a CSV, we don't know how to open it," but rather let me pick an application to read the raw text with. I want a chrome browser on it, and I want it to fit nicely in my hand. I expect to get enough battery on it that would get me through a four hour train ride or a boring flight. That's it. I want a file reader and a browser, that's what 90% of us want. 10% of us want an apple pad or a google whatever or a microsoft blah. 90% of us want to spend fifty bucks on a browser and text reader that doesn't totally suck for usability. And I really don't need the company telling me how to use my device, where I can use it, or even when. I especially don't need them to keep track of where I physically am or what I do with the thing.

flyosity 15y ago

The iPad didn't validate the market for tablets, it validated the market for iPads. And if over 50% of people prefer a 10" tablet to a 7" one, why in the world would Samsung, RIM and others think they could sell one at a smaller size? Did they do any market research at all?

icegreentea 15y ago
Well... if that means 40% (or whatever the number is) of people would prefer a 7" to a 10" one... that's still a ridiculous amount of people. I think that -is- market research.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  Exactly. If the iPad is cleaning up the 10" market and you know that even 15% strongly prefer 7", and there is no iPad in that market, it would make sense to do a 7" version and clean up the 7" market.
  - flyosity 15y ago
    The problem is you're not attacking the market of people who prefer 7" tablets, you're attacking the market of people who prefer a 7" tablet SO MUCH they're willing to not get an iPad because of it. Who are these people? Probably geeks. Regardless, it's a much smaller slice of the overall pie.
    - aphexairlines 15y ago
      > Who are these people? People embarrassed to pull out a huge 10" screen to read in a train.
      - flyosity 15y ago
        But will instead pull out a magazine or book that's larger? I don't see the logic.
- 15y ago

mquander 15y ago

Look, that's because non-iPad tablets with a real (touchscreen, tablet-sized) OS didn't exist until 3 months ago. Give Android a year and a half to let the Android Market populate with some great tablet-sized software, and who among us doubts that the tablet market will look just like the phone market does now? EDIT: The commenters responding to me made a really good distinction -- phones are near-necessity devices that are subsidized by carriers, whereas right now, tablets are more or less a luxury purchase. I agree that this might have an effect on how things play out.

danilocampos 15y ago
> who among us doubts that the tablet market will look just like the phone market does now? I do. For one thing, building tablet software is hard. I mean, extremely hard work from a UI perspective. It makes stuff for the phone look like a cakewalk (I'll share a blog post sometime). So if Android Market continues sucking ass in terms of rewarding developers versus what they can make on the App Store, you'll get a bunch of turd apps and not much magic because what's the point of all that sweat? Secondly, Android is inflated by the fact that if you want a cell phone you will be given an Android device for free if you start new service. There is no magic free Android tablet tree – the economics are completely different. There's the argument that you might see a halo effect from all those phones... but people don't tend to value what's free and the carriers are doing whatever they can to cram these phones with junk anyway. So, like I said, I do.
- mquander 15y ago
  I know you said you're working on a blog post, but I'd be really interested in if you could elaborate on the challenges inherent to building tablet software -- I build big enterprise-y software that is on Windows Mobile phones and Windows tablets, and I find the tablet part to be much easier in terms of designing a usable interface for the form factor. Are there particular things you have in mind that are much easier to design for a phone than for a tablet?
  - danilocampos 15y ago

nextparadigms 15y ago

I don't want an iPad. I want an Android tablet (waiting for a good one). And I know there are a lot of Android users who think the same way.

KeyBoardG 15y ago
I agree, there just hasn't been a killer Android tablet yet. I was suprised at how laggy the Moto Xoom was. I've had hopes for Playbook but even that killer hardware has flopped on the software front.
r00fus 15y ago
I can understand not wanting an iPad, but why limit yourself to Android?

pistacchio 15y ago

i can summarize this pretty easily. competitors that see the argument like "apple is giving 1GB RAM for 500$, i'll give 2GB RAM for 500$!" are really missing the whole point. when you buy an apple phone / mp3 player / tablet / computer you're probably well aware that with the same price you can get a more powerful/feature rich device elsewhere, but you decide, instead, to invest in a brand you trust because has given you other reliable, innovative products that you already own and you know the new device will integrate seamlessly with whatever you already have, or you're buying "the iPhone", not a generic smartphone, the iPad, not a table, an iPod, not a mp3 player, so there's really no choice because apple is the only one doing it.

nextparadigms 15y ago

The Android tablet market is still in its early life, and the problem is the initial manufacturers screwed up on pricing, but overspeccing the tablets, and then charging more than $500, without even a Wi-Fi only version. But I think people will be surprised that Android tablets will take off in the second wave of Android tablets, when the Tegra 3 chip shows up in them, and Amazon takes the market by storm, too. That should push iPad's market to under 50% by the time iPad 3 is released. And that will be just the beginning. And I know there have been stories how competitors can't build a tablet for a low price, but that has been already disproven by Asus, which has pretty much identical specs with iPad, yet it's $100 cheaper. The Amazon quad core Tegra 3 tablet is rumored to be priced at $450.

technoslut 15y ago
I agree that the pricing of the Xoom was a huge mistake but I still wonder whether Android will enjoy as much success with tablets. Asus cut their shipment of tablets for the year by 60% even though it was cheaper than the iPad. Amazon at this point would be the most serious competitor to Apple. If no OS has been able to make a serious dent in iPad market share by next year then the iPad will go the way of the iPod dominance. You can't give Apple three years with no competitve threat to the iPad.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  That was Acer, not Asus. It's ok, it happens a lot. Asus actually increased their production for their Transformer tablet.

brudgers 15y ago

The article defines "the tablet market" narrowly and ignores important competition for the iPad in terms of sales (if not mindshare). The iPad competes with devices such as the Kindle which have significant adoption and handle the killer slate app - reading very well at very competitive price points. This class of competitor also often provides better performance in important areas, e.g. battery life. I also suspect that if people were asked their preference regarding wide screen format vs. 4:3 the iPad would not fare quite so well as it does in questions regarding screen size.

hammock 15y ago

Interesting how defensive people are getting in the comments. I think the headline says it all- tablets have been around for over a decade and never caught on. In fact they still haven't caught on, just the iPad has caught on.

jim_h 15y ago

I want a tablet that has Wacom and stylus along with capacitive touch screen. Heck, throw in Windows 7 and I'll be happy. (W7 has great handwriting recognition.) W7 + OneNote would make a very nice (and expensive) electronic notebook if the tablet was thin and had decent battery life. I like to write instead of touch typing on a screen.

r00fus 15y ago
> W7 + OneNote would make a very nice (and expensive) electronic notebook if the tablet was thin and had decent battery life. Hasn't this existed for years (TabletPC) running Windows (well except the thin and decent battery life part)? Why haven't you gotten one already?
- jim_h 15y ago
  i DO have one. I am now waiting for another version that's thinner and has better life.

dannyr 15y ago

A lot of people I know (non-tech) have no idea that Android tablets exist. They only know of the IPad.

ctdonath 15y ago
And of many/most non-techies who do know about other tablets they think "tablet == iPad" like "paper tissue == Kleenex" and "photocopy == Xerox".

kelnos 15y ago

As an Android fan, I'm actually encouraged by this. Look, when you're buying a tablet, you're buying into an OS/software ecosystem. Yes, people are buying Apple because it's Apple. But they're also buying Apple because of the App Store and because of a proven track record of apps they enjoy and find useful (assuming some previous iPhone/iPod Touch ownership). But Android doesn't really have the brand thing so much with regard to the individual manufacturers. I have an HTC phone right now, but I don't feel much loyalty to HTC. My next phone might be made by Samsung or Motorola. I don't much care, because I'm loyal to Android, not to the particular manufacturer. So in that light, the US numbers for next tablet purchase are 50% iOS, 33% Android, 9% RIM, and 8% don't care. And that's not bad, considering that Apple has a good year's head start on Android wrt tablets.

scrrr 15y ago

It's about who is first in the consumer's heads. iPad is like Coca-Cola.

dannyr 15y ago

To those people making the argument that IPad will be unbeatable because there is no carrier lockin unlike the IPhone. Here are some stats: In Germany, the IPhone is available at the 3 major carriers, O2, Vodaphone & TMobile. Marketshare for Android in Germany is 35.5% versus 24.4 for iOS.

forgotAgain 15y ago

Apple is succeeding in the category because it reinvented it. Prior to iPad, how many consumers had spent a moment of time considering what a tablet computer would be like? How many had a chance to hold one and interact with it at a local store? Most people use iPad as a reference point because it was their first experience with a tablet. It was first and it worked. People want iPads because, for now at least, it's the definitive product for the category.

chrisjsmith 15y ago

I don't think consumers WANT tablets or iPads. They have been told that's what they WANT by marketing. WANT is a disease in this society. NEED is the great leveller. The following is from experience dealing with hundreds of people: They NEED a cheap, flexible computer that just works, doesn't poke you in the eye, doesn't try to upsell everything to you every 5 mins (like apps and virus scanners), lasts a good number of years without spectacular failures, doesn't pick up diseases like a cheap whore and doesn't set fire to your house.

FilterJoe 15y ago

There IS one kind of tablet people want besides an iPad, as proved by sales numbers: The Color Nook According to various recent reports, Apple has about 10% share in ebook sales, Barnes and Noble 25%, and Kindle over 60%. Don't know the latest sales figures, but as of March 28, 2011, 3 million Color Nooks were shipped, according to Digitimes: Barnes & Noble already takes delivery of 3 million Nook Color e-book readers, say sources Yenting Chen, Taipei; Steve Shen, DIGITIMES [Monday 28 March 2011] Barnes & Noble has taken delivery of close to three million Nook Color e-book readers from its production partner, according to an estimate by sources from the Nook Color supply chain. With a clear differentiation to Apple's iPads in display size, targeted market and pricing, the Nook Color, priced at US$249, has actually taken up over 50% of the iPad-like market in the North America market, indicated the sources. Sales of the Nook Color topped one million units in the North America in the fourth quarter of 2010 and reached 600,000-700,000 units a month during the January-February period of 2011, the sources noted. Barnes & Noble outsources the production of the Nook Color e-book readers to Inventec, noted the sources, adding that Inventec has landed tablet PC orders from Hewlett-Packard (HP). EDIT: formatting

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
r00fus 15y ago
So you're calling the Nook Color a tablet? I'm not sure that's a fair representation of the device... it's cheap, a decent e-reader, and hackable to run at least Froyo (from last I checked). In comparing the e-reader to the tablet, the Nook does indeed blur the lines, but it's resistive touch and e-ink display combined with hackery to run a full touch OS means it's really in a league all it's own. Perhaps this is the recipe to success for the upstarts. Ignore the "X market" as that means X is commoditized. Differentiate by seeing the pricing and/or vision gap and dive into it deftly. A footnote: comparing "shipped" vs. "sold" numbers is a bit facile. Lots of difference there. It'd be nice to see definitive "sold" B&N details, but they're not sharing.
- FilterJoe 15y ago
  Agreed on shipped vs. sold (Though I DID have a conversation 2 months ago with a B&N employee - says they went out of stock a couple times). Agree also about the recipe for success: Find a niche and optimize for it. If even Apple doesn't yet know what their tablet is for, how are we supposed to know what their inferior knock-offs are for? But it sure is obvious what a Color Nook is for. It does have an app store but the apps are for the most part related to reading, as you'd expect. The fact that the Color Nook can be converted into the least expensive half-decent Android tablet is just an interesting aside. EDIT: typo

mathly 15y ago

I've been saying this from the start. Normal people just don't need tablets. What can you do on it? Music - Have an ipod or other music device Movie - Have a big tv Movie in bedroom - Have a big tv in bedroom Internet? - have smartphone/netbook/laptop Games? - Xbox/PS3/smartphone. At the end of the day, when the dust has settled, there's just no use case for tablets.

Tichy 15y ago

bullshit

sigzero 15y ago

Not surprising really. Apple got the iPad "right" from the get go and tweaked that success on the iPad2. The other tablets struggled right out of the gate and continue to do so.

learc83 15y ago

I just bought a capacitive screen multi touch android tablet for less than $200 from dealextreme for some prototype work I'm doing. There's no reason to assume that the iPad will continue to be comparatively cheaper a year or two out. When everyone has the production ironed out, android tablets will drop, and apple will keep selling iPads for a premium price. I love apple, but the tablet will never spread effectively if it costs $500 or more.