9 ms·

Tablets are expensive. I cannot afford to buy a tablet every year. So I want a tablet that is future proof. The 10 inch tablets that others will release this ye

Tablets are expensive. I cannot afford to buy a tablet every year. So I want a tablet that is future proof. The 10 inch tablets that others will release this year will have an outdated operating system on them and will still cost many hundreds of dollars. I do not want to spend hundreds of dollars on an outdated operating system. I love Android, but this terrible to the extreme.

jamesaguilar 14y ago
I love that people accuse Apple of planned obsolescence in the phone market when Google releases operating systems that don't even work on devices that came out in the current year.
- J3L2404 14y ago
  Yeah, but theirs is unplanned obsolescence.
  - mkaltenecker 14y ago
    Hihi, you are funny. You view of the companies clearly colors your view. It’s not really clear that either company plans or does not plan the obsolescence of their devices. The end result, however, is that iOS devices become obsolete much more slowly than Android devices. What do I care about the reading of tea leaves as to whether some company plans something or not?
    - InclinedPlane 14y ago
      Apple owns the entire ecosystem, they can't claim anything they do to it is unplanned. Google merely owns the OS and a few devices, they can't control what samsung and htc and everyone else decides to do or not do.
      - mkaltenecker 14y ago
        “Planned obsolescence” implies that a device is made obsolete to force people to buy newer devices as opposed to other reasons. Just because a device becomes obsolete doesn’t mean it’s “planned obsolescence”, even with total control over the whole ecosystem. That’s at least how “planned obsolescence” is commonly used and defined. “Planned obsolescence” as a term implies a reason (forcing people to buy newer devices), so not all forms of planned obsolescence (not as a term, notice the lack of quotation marks) are really “planned obsolescence” (as the term implying the reason). Since we can’t read minds it’s definitely akin to reading tea leaves when you want to find out whether “planned obsolescence” plays any role for Apple.
        gurkendoktor 14y ago
        So do you imply that the iOS6 features missing on the iPhone 3GS are missing for hardware reasons - or that intentionally leaving out features is not planned obsolescence? Whatever it is, I don't think Apple is maximizing hardware lifetime here. http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-receive-spotty-support-from-older-devices/ http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-re... (I'm not complaining about the average lifetime of my Apple devices here, the iPad 1 and iPhone 3G were abysmal but my laptop & Mac Mini made up for it. I actually think that's why they have to add stronger, artificial incentives.)
        mkaltenecker 14y ago
        You can debate about this forever. It's like reading tea leaves. The real world consequence, however, is this: if you want to be able to update your device for as long as possible you should get an iOS device. I'm talking consequences, not so much intentions.
        gurkendoktor 14y ago
        I agree with the consequence and buy accordingly. I don't have anything to add to your first posting, where you've stated how things factually work out. But I haven't seen anyone argue that Apple's feature cut-off is hardware-bound. This is not reading tea leaves by a far margin. It's a business decision (like many) that goes against the interests of users. No harm in keeping that in mind.
  - winter_blue 14y ago
    Which makes it okay?
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
      - awolf 14y ago
        Fine, let's all just agree to fault Android as a whole and move on.
- warfangle 14y ago
  "don't even work on other companies devices that they have no control over" Fixed that for you. The Nexus (minus the G1) line of phones gets regular updates - my old Nexus One was always updated within a few weeks of a new version of android coming out. If you want updated OS software on your phone, be smart about which droid phone you get. Ain't goog's fault Samsung won't allow updates to Phone #4123.
  - narrator 14y ago
    You know, the point of a computer is to do work or play games with it. You do not need the absolute latest release of whatever to do useful work or play games.
  - jamesaguilar 14y ago
    I'm just a user of Google's Android OS. My three-year old Windows and Mac computers still get the latest OS versions, as do my iPhones. I don't care about the particular reasons why my phone with Google's Android OS doesn't get updated. I just know it doesn't. Those are Google's problems, not mine. My problem is that I own an Android phone that is not on the latest version. > be smart about which droid phone you get My solution to this problem is to get an iPhone. Even the phones Google makes don't have the kind of update longevity Apple's do. The Nexus One did not get ICS, much less Jellybean. The 3GS is getting iOS 6.
    - wvenable 14y ago
      You didn't buy your OS from Google. You didn't buy your device from Google. Your phone doesn't have the latest OS because your device manufacturer isn't giving it to you.
      - jamesaguilar 14y ago
        Yeah, I don't really care. It is Google branded, was developed primarily by Google, was marketed as "Google Android" and/or "Android by Google" at various times, has Google apps, has a store run by Google where I get more apps, and has Google's name associated with it in every news article I find about it online. It's a Google device to me, Joe Average Consumer. Your technicalities don't mean jack to me. Also, everything you said in this comment applies likewise when I get a laptop with Windows installed by an OEM. Are you prepared to argue that a Windows computer is in no part a Microsoft product and that Microsoft would not be responsible if the OS failed to update on my laptop?
tuxidomasx 14y ago
I imagine a future-proof tablet would be modular and easy for consumers to modify, like PCs. Modularity for PCs is possible in-part because of standard form factors. But this is something that hasnt been fully embraced by mobile device manufacturers (to my knowledge). I would love to have a tablet where I could easily add memory, processor, screen, etc. So instead of buying a new one every year, I can just upgrade and extend the hardware myself and still run the latest software.
- tomkarlo 14y ago
  The problem is that having user-serviceable parts significantly adds to the bulk of a device, and it's pretty clear that's not an appealing tradeoff to most users and manufacturers. E.g.: just to have a removable battery, you have to put a protective case on the battery as well as an internal "case" to receive the battery inside the device (generally, another layer of plastic. Even on laptops that is becoming prohibitively bulks; on tablets, it's a non-starter (see the recent MacBook Pro redesign). You just can't pack the parts together tight enough and still have them be user-replaceable. I love the idea of a modular mobile device as well, but it's pretty clear things are headed in the other direction: thinner, sleeker, longer-battery-life products sell better than bulky but more customizable products.
corin_ 14y ago
You're never going to have a tablet that is future proof if you don't want to upgrade every year... because there will always be newer, better ones coming out, and newer versions of Android. Your complaint isn't that buying now would force you to use an outdated operating system, it's that you would use an outdated operating system for a little longer than you normally would.
- Arelius 14y ago
  But even if we are willing to upgrade every year, I'm still forced to use an outdated operating system. That seems wrong.
zobzu 14y ago
If you had gotten the galaxy 7 (the new one) you'd still be fine. But none can predict what's future proof, mainly because it's what companies make their money off. They NEED you to buy a new tablet, phone, etc, every year. They'd make car breaks and need complete replacement every year if they could as well. So, while it can happen that a product is "future proof" for a couple of years instead of one, it's rare. Heck, even clothes are made to break quickly. Of course, that's not very ecological, and certainly not cheap for the customer ;-)
- pyoung 14y ago
  I understand your point, but I am not sure I agree. The initial demise of the American automobile manufacturers was partly due to the unreliability of their products. Regarding tablets, I would think that locking people into a particular app ecosystem would be a higher priority than achieving a high tablet turnover rate. Seems like the money is in the apps, not the hardware.
  - zobzu 14y ago
    It depends, most of the hardware is not manufactured by Google (even thus it's sold in Google's name) So for example, Samsung, etc, (but mostly Samsung here) see a benefit in having the hardware expire as fast as possible (while keeping the balance of 'not having the customer complain about reliability or performance' and 'not letting the competition get ahead, or too much ahead') Almost a black art ;-)
MartinCron 14y ago
Future-proof is a reasonable goal for a desktop PC, television, digital camera, automobile, wristwatch, or other more mature technology. It's just too soon to expect future-proofing from tablets or phones. As long as the tablet continues to do what it's supposed to do , it shouldn't really matter that there's a newer OS out there. As compared to the Kindle fire, which was never any good at doing what it was supposed to do. It wasn't even present-proof.
- awakeasleep 14y ago
  How does the future-proofedness of Android tablets compare to the first iPad? I think it's held up pretty well, it doesn't get apps or features that require the camera, but aside from that it still gets updates and can run stuff. Andriod tablets can run new apps but not the operating system upgrades? I don't have any experience to know.
  - cgislason 14y ago
    Just FYI, the first iPad will not be compatible with iOS 6. Still a pretty decent lifespan, but coming to an end.
  - myko 14y ago
    Generally API features of newer versions of Android are backported and made available through the compatibility library, so it's common to get features of newer OSs on older devices (a major exception to this is Google Chrome which is unavailable for pre-ICS devices).
runjake 14y ago
What are you talking about? This is a 7" $199 tablet we're talking about. And besides, the talking head on stage mentioned JB is coming to the Xoom in the next month or two.
- guywithabike 14y ago
  They've made a lot of those kinds of promises -- they don't often deliver, so parent poster is right to feel uneasy about future support.
  - exhilaration 14y ago
    No, Google keeps its promises when it comes to supporting old devices - Jelly Bean will be released in mid-July for the Nexus S, a phone first shipped in Dec 2010. It also got the ICS upgrade months ago. It's the other Android manufacturers - Samsung, HTC, etc - and the mobile carriers that approve each OTA update that often don't fulfill their promises.
    - bratsche 14y ago
      Google promised like two I/Os ago that they were solving the fragmentation problem with some kind of new agreement with device makers, but after that we never heard another word about it. Maybe it's not Google's fault, but that seems like it's skirting the issue: a year after ICS was announced, something like 7.5% of devices are using it, and now we're moving on to JB. We can sit around and blame Samsung and HTC all day, but Google is the steward company of Android and this fragmentation is a real problem that affects developers. If it's creating a shitty situation for developers, it's creating a shitty situation for users.
rsanchez1 14y ago
Maybe iPads are expensive, but the Nexus 7 is reasonably priced for the specs and features.
- berntb 14y ago
  I hope your eyes are much better than mine; good luck reading A4 documents on 7". :-( I got an iPad 3, it is like reading eInk with fast page changes, so I can browse documentation and not only read literature (cough, out of sunlight of course). (I'm a bit color blind, so I don't really care that much about the good graphics and color reproduction :-) ) I'd pay good money for a 2-3" larger iPad 3. Edit: If it wasn't clear -- if you want to read real documents that can't be reflowed, it might have 0 value for the money for you (unless your eyes are < 35 years old.)
zmmmmm 14y ago
> So I want a tablet that is future proof. There's no such thing, the iPad won't save you. Apple just deprecated the iPad1 at just over 2 years of lifespan. Even if they didn't the battery would die. We're in a 'disposable device' era now.

jamesaguilar 14y ago

I love that people accuse Apple of planned obsolescence in the phone market when Google releases operating systems that don't even work on devices that came out in the current year.

J3L2404 14y ago
Yeah, but theirs is unplanned obsolescence.
- mkaltenecker 14y ago
  Hihi, you are funny. You view of the companies clearly colors your view. It’s not really clear that either company plans or does not plan the obsolescence of their devices. The end result, however, is that iOS devices become obsolete much more slowly than Android devices. What do I care about the reading of tea leaves as to whether some company plans something or not?
  - InclinedPlane 14y ago
    Apple owns the entire ecosystem, they can't claim anything they do to it is unplanned. Google merely owns the OS and a few devices, they can't control what samsung and htc and everyone else decides to do or not do.
    - mkaltenecker 14y ago
      “Planned obsolescence” implies that a device is made obsolete to force people to buy newer devices as opposed to other reasons. Just because a device becomes obsolete doesn’t mean it’s “planned obsolescence”, even with total control over the whole ecosystem. That’s at least how “planned obsolescence” is commonly used and defined. “Planned obsolescence” as a term implies a reason (forcing people to buy newer devices), so not all forms of planned obsolescence (not as a term, notice the lack of quotation marks) are really “planned obsolescence” (as the term implying the reason). Since we can’t read minds it’s definitely akin to reading tea leaves when you want to find out whether “planned obsolescence” plays any role for Apple.
      - gurkendoktor 14y ago
        So do you imply that the iOS6 features missing on the iPhone 3GS are missing for hardware reasons - or that intentionally leaving out features is not planned obsolescence? Whatever it is, I don't think Apple is maximizing hardware lifetime here. http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-receive-spotty-support-from-older-devices/ http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-re... (I'm not complaining about the average lifetime of my Apple devices here, the iPad 1 and iPhone 3G were abysmal but my laptop & Mac Mini made up for it. I actually think that's why they have to add stronger, artificial incentives.)
        mkaltenecker 14y ago
        You can debate about this forever. It's like reading tea leaves. The real world consequence, however, is this: if you want to be able to update your device for as long as possible you should get an iOS device. I'm talking consequences, not so much intentions.
        gurkendoktor 14y ago
        I agree with the consequence and buy accordingly. I don't have anything to add to your first posting, where you've stated how things factually work out. But I haven't seen anyone argue that Apple's feature cut-off is hardware-bound. This is not reading tea leaves by a far margin. It's a business decision (like many) that goes against the interests of users. No harm in keeping that in mind.
- winter_blue 14y ago
  Which makes it okay?
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
    - awolf 14y ago
      Fine, let's all just agree to fault Android as a whole and move on.
warfangle 14y ago
"don't even work on other companies devices that they have no control over" Fixed that for you. The Nexus (minus the G1) line of phones gets regular updates - my old Nexus One was always updated within a few weeks of a new version of android coming out. If you want updated OS software on your phone, be smart about which droid phone you get. Ain't goog's fault Samsung won't allow updates to Phone #4123.
- narrator 14y ago
  You know, the point of a computer is to do work or play games with it. You do not need the absolute latest release of whatever to do useful work or play games.
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  I'm just a user of Google's Android OS. My three-year old Windows and Mac computers still get the latest OS versions, as do my iPhones. I don't care about the particular reasons why my phone with Google's Android OS doesn't get updated. I just know it doesn't. Those are Google's problems, not mine. My problem is that I own an Android phone that is not on the latest version. > be smart about which droid phone you get My solution to this problem is to get an iPhone. Even the phones Google makes don't have the kind of update longevity Apple's do. The Nexus One did not get ICS, much less Jellybean. The 3GS is getting iOS 6.
  - wvenable 14y ago
    You didn't buy your OS from Google. You didn't buy your device from Google. Your phone doesn't have the latest OS because your device manufacturer isn't giving it to you.
    - jamesaguilar 14y ago
      Yeah, I don't really care. It is Google branded, was developed primarily by Google, was marketed as "Google Android" and/or "Android by Google" at various times, has Google apps, has a store run by Google where I get more apps, and has Google's name associated with it in every news article I find about it online. It's a Google device to me, Joe Average Consumer. Your technicalities don't mean jack to me. Also, everything you said in this comment applies likewise when I get a laptop with Windows installed by an OEM. Are you prepared to argue that a Windows computer is in no part a Microsoft product and that Microsoft would not be responsible if the OS failed to update on my laptop?

tuxidomasx 14y ago

I imagine a future-proof tablet would be modular and easy for consumers to modify, like PCs. Modularity for PCs is possible in-part because of standard form factors. But this is something that hasnt been fully embraced by mobile device manufacturers (to my knowledge). I would love to have a tablet where I could easily add memory, processor, screen, etc. So instead of buying a new one every year, I can just upgrade and extend the hardware myself and still run the latest software.

tomkarlo 14y ago
The problem is that having user-serviceable parts significantly adds to the bulk of a device, and it's pretty clear that's not an appealing tradeoff to most users and manufacturers. E.g.: just to have a removable battery, you have to put a protective case on the battery as well as an internal "case" to receive the battery inside the device (generally, another layer of plastic. Even on laptops that is becoming prohibitively bulks; on tablets, it's a non-starter (see the recent MacBook Pro redesign). You just can't pack the parts together tight enough and still have them be user-replaceable. I love the idea of a modular mobile device as well, but it's pretty clear things are headed in the other direction: thinner, sleeker, longer-battery-life products sell better than bulky but more customizable products.

corin_ 14y ago

You're never going to have a tablet that is future proof if you don't want to upgrade every year... because there will always be newer, better ones coming out, and newer versions of Android. Your complaint isn't that buying now would force you to use an outdated operating system, it's that you would use an outdated operating system for a little longer than you normally would.

Arelius 14y ago
But even if we are willing to upgrade every year, I'm still forced to use an outdated operating system. That seems wrong.

zobzu 14y ago

If you had gotten the galaxy 7 (the new one) you'd still be fine. But none can predict what's future proof, mainly because it's what companies make their money off. They NEED you to buy a new tablet, phone, etc, every year. They'd make car breaks and need complete replacement every year if they could as well. So, while it can happen that a product is "future proof" for a couple of years instead of one, it's rare. Heck, even clothes are made to break quickly. Of course, that's not very ecological, and certainly not cheap for the customer ;-)

pyoung 14y ago
I understand your point, but I am not sure I agree. The initial demise of the American automobile manufacturers was partly due to the unreliability of their products. Regarding tablets, I would think that locking people into a particular app ecosystem would be a higher priority than achieving a high tablet turnover rate. Seems like the money is in the apps, not the hardware.
- zobzu 14y ago
  It depends, most of the hardware is not manufactured by Google (even thus it's sold in Google's name) So for example, Samsung, etc, (but mostly Samsung here) see a benefit in having the hardware expire as fast as possible (while keeping the balance of 'not having the customer complain about reliability or performance' and 'not letting the competition get ahead, or too much ahead') Almost a black art ;-)

MartinCron 14y ago

Future-proof is a reasonable goal for a desktop PC, television, digital camera, automobile, wristwatch, or other more mature technology. It's just too soon to expect future-proofing from tablets or phones. As long as the tablet continues to do what it's supposed to do , it shouldn't really matter that there's a newer OS out there. As compared to the Kindle fire, which was never any good at doing what it was supposed to do. It wasn't even present-proof.

awakeasleep 14y ago
How does the future-proofedness of Android tablets compare to the first iPad? I think it's held up pretty well, it doesn't get apps or features that require the camera, but aside from that it still gets updates and can run stuff. Andriod tablets can run new apps but not the operating system upgrades? I don't have any experience to know.
- cgislason 14y ago
  Just FYI, the first iPad will not be compatible with iOS 6. Still a pretty decent lifespan, but coming to an end.
- myko 14y ago
  Generally API features of newer versions of Android are backported and made available through the compatibility library, so it's common to get features of newer OSs on older devices (a major exception to this is Google Chrome which is unavailable for pre-ICS devices).

runjake 14y ago

What are you talking about? This is a 7" $199 tablet we're talking about. And besides, the talking head on stage mentioned JB is coming to the Xoom in the next month or two.

guywithabike 14y ago
They've made a lot of those kinds of promises -- they don't often deliver, so parent poster is right to feel uneasy about future support.
- exhilaration 14y ago
  No, Google keeps its promises when it comes to supporting old devices - Jelly Bean will be released in mid-July for the Nexus S, a phone first shipped in Dec 2010. It also got the ICS upgrade months ago. It's the other Android manufacturers - Samsung, HTC, etc - and the mobile carriers that approve each OTA update that often don't fulfill their promises.
  - bratsche 14y ago
    Google promised like two I/Os ago that they were solving the fragmentation problem with some kind of new agreement with device makers, but after that we never heard another word about it. Maybe it's not Google's fault, but that seems like it's skirting the issue: a year after ICS was announced, something like 7.5% of devices are using it, and now we're moving on to JB. We can sit around and blame Samsung and HTC all day, but Google is the steward company of Android and this fragmentation is a real problem that affects developers. If it's creating a shitty situation for developers, it's creating a shitty situation for users.

rsanchez1 14y ago

Maybe iPads are expensive, but the Nexus 7 is reasonably priced for the specs and features.

berntb 14y ago
I hope your eyes are much better than mine; good luck reading A4 documents on 7". :-( I got an iPad 3, it is like reading eInk with fast page changes, so I can browse documentation and not only read literature (cough, out of sunlight of course). (I'm a bit color blind, so I don't really care that much about the good graphics and color reproduction :-) ) I'd pay good money for a 2-3" larger iPad 3. Edit: If it wasn't clear -- if you want to read real documents that can't be reflowed, it might have 0 value for the money for you (unless your eyes are < 35 years old.)

zmmmmm 14y ago

> So I want a tablet that is future proof. There's no such thing, the iPad won't save you. Apple just deprecated the iPad1 at just over 2 years of lifespan. Even if they didn't the battery would die. We're in a 'disposable device' era now.