4 ms·

I think this is a suitable explanation for this 'article'. From the authors profile page: "Farhad Manjoo is Slate's technology columnist and the author of Tru

by chapel 15y ago

I think this is a suitable explanation for this 'article'. From the authors profile page: "Farhad Manjoo is Slate's technology columnist and the author of True Enough: Learning To Live in a Post-Fact Society." Edit: I really feel that any person saying X is unbeatable, is really underestimating competition and the drive to improve what they make. The iPad at this moment is the best tablet overall, but it won't be long before someone is able to match the quality, and surpass in features. I think what really will clinch this is that once Android tablets come out in force, there will be so many options the iPad will be lost in the noise. This isn't to say the iPad will be the only right choice in that situation, just that when there are options, especially cheaper options, people tend to shop for what suits their needs at a price they can stomach. The iPad is still too much for most consumers. I myself cannot justify the cost for a consumption device, not to mention how I dislike Apple's handling of their app ecosystem.

zefhous 15y ago
Don't just dismiss it outright. If you have some insight and think the article is wrong then refute it with a meaningful, substantial argument.
- Jaecen 15y ago
  A couple easy points: They claim it can't be beat on price, but, due to the varying size and features of other tablets, that's simply not true (see Asus' MeMo 370T http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-57393947-64/google-asus-to-hook-up-on-7-inch-android-tablet-says-report/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-57393947-64/google-asus-to...). They claim it can't be beat on battery life, but reviews have shown that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Transformer Prime both come within a few percentage points of usable time. Certainly close enough for practical use.
  - krschultz 15y ago
    Since when did "come within a few percentage points of it" and "beating it" become the same thing? If the other tablets want to win, they have to be better. Either cheaper or more functional or more novel or better styled.
    - Jaecen 15y ago
      You're right, I stated the claim wrong. The correct claim is "None of Apple’s rivals has managed to even match the iPad’s battery life." On that count, they are, for practical purposes, incorrect. Additionally, Engadget's test have shown The Galaxy Tab 7.7 significantly besting the iPad 2 in battery life (http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/07/samsung-galaxy-tab-7-7-review-international-edition/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/07/samsung-galaxy-tab-7-7-re...).
  - ccoggins 15y ago
    Agree. A quick search on Best Buy's site shows only 7 out of 47 android tablets are 499 or above. Granted, the Ipad2 just dropped to 399, but up until a week ago most of the android tablets were cheaper than the ipad.
gnaffle 15y ago
Even if someone matches the quality, surpasses the features _and_ beats them on price, they also have to contend with a two year lead on the ecosystem (only Amazon has an advantage here). That's the biggest problem (and so far tablets makers haven't been able to beat the iPad on specs/price either, because of Apples huge cash advantage). When there are so many options, which tablets do you really think will be lost in the noise?

by chapel 15y ago

zefhous 15y ago

Don't just dismiss it outright. If you have some insight and think the article is wrong then refute it with a meaningful, substantial argument.

Jaecen 15y ago
A couple easy points: They claim it can't be beat on price, but, due to the varying size and features of other tablets, that's simply not true (see Asus' MeMo 370T http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-57393947-64/google-asus-to-hook-up-on-7-inch-android-tablet-says-report/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-57393947-64/google-asus-to...). They claim it can't be beat on battery life, but reviews have shown that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Transformer Prime both come within a few percentage points of usable time. Certainly close enough for practical use.
- krschultz 15y ago
  Since when did "come within a few percentage points of it" and "beating it" become the same thing? If the other tablets want to win, they have to be better. Either cheaper or more functional or more novel or better styled.
  - Jaecen 15y ago
    You're right, I stated the claim wrong. The correct claim is "None of Apple’s rivals has managed to even match the iPad’s battery life." On that count, they are, for practical purposes, incorrect. Additionally, Engadget's test have shown The Galaxy Tab 7.7 significantly besting the iPad 2 in battery life (http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/07/samsung-galaxy-tab-7-7-review-international-edition/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/07/samsung-galaxy-tab-7-7-re...).
- ccoggins 15y ago
  Agree. A quick search on Best Buy's site shows only 7 out of 47 android tablets are 499 or above. Granted, the Ipad2 just dropped to 399, but up until a week ago most of the android tablets were cheaper than the ipad.

gnaffle 15y ago

Even if someone matches the quality, surpasses the features _and_ beats them on price, they also have to contend with a two year lead on the ecosystem (only Amazon has an advantage here). That's the biggest problem (and so far tablets makers haven't been able to beat the iPad on specs/price either, because of Apples huge cash advantage). When there are so many options, which tablets do you really think will be lost in the noise?