Opinion: How Kindle Fire Could Validate Apple's iPad

[bustapr]

[citation][nom]joey532[/nom]Apple has a great app store, universal compatibility , and a big user base. Android has a great custom experience, better hardware, and a great mod community.WINNER: DARK SOULS[/citation]
I lost you at universal compatibility

 

[watcha]

[citation][nom]joey532[/nom]Apple has a great app store, universal compatibility , and a big user base. Android has a great custom experience, better hardware, and a great mod community.WINNER: DARK SOULS[/citation]

Android has better hardware? Are you being so simple to 'compare the M-Pees?' or the number of cores? The quality of the Apple hardware has historically been far superior, and still is, to be honest. Performance isn't an issue because all the apps run, and you get far better battery life. As for 'great mod community' - who cares about that?

 

[Zingam]

If Eee Pad Trasformer was released at the price of the very first Eee PC, I would have gotten one by now! I am too poor to buy a tablet that costs more than my Core i5 notebook!

 

[eddieroolz]

I've preferred not to criticize the trend of Wolfgang bring in Apple into every single opinion piece he writes, but I have to question the whole point of having Apple in the topic title. Essentially, this article could have been written in its entirety without Apple.

For instance, I fail to see how Amazon's success can validate or disprove the iPad. They are two different things from two different products. Amazon's offering isn't even similar to the offerings from Apple.

In short, the Apple in the title is an attention grabber, not a necessity in the story.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]watcha[/nom]Android has better hardware? Are you being so simple to 'compare the M-Pees?' or the number of cores? The quality of the Apple hardware has historically been far superior, and still is, to be honest. Performance isn't an issue because all the apps run, and you get far better battery life. As for 'great mod community' - who cares about that?[/citation]
For example the first Galaxy S had a better hardware than the iPhone 4. They had the exact same CPU but the Galaxy S had a better GPU.

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]For example the first Galaxy S had a better hardware than the iPhone 4. They had the exact same CPU but the Galaxy S had a better GPU.[/citation]
I'd say the Galaxy S is about the same... (I have one) the OLED screen is beautiful - but the resolution on an iPhone 4 is also beautiful. Yet, there is NO reason to make a higher res 4" OLED display... that would be awesome.

But the support software for a GalaxyS (like many Androids) is very lacking. In order for me to PUT Froyo onto my Samasung, I had to use an old XP notebook because the updated DOESN'T work with Windows7 - WTF?! And while Froyo fixed many things, like GPS and such... its also downgraded some of the functionality that I kind of have the urge to go BACK... Like WHAT IDIOT at Google thought that the PhoneLogs should include texting? How about this... JUST Phone Logs would be super great. The TEXT APP shows all the texting... stupid stuff like that is a reason why *I* bought an iPad over an Android tablet.

[citation][nom]Miharu[/nom]iPad2 could be flashy - I think it's mostly useless for a price, it's a flashy digital frame.. 200$ VS 600$... it's a no brainer.[/citation] Making up the price of $600 is silly. YOU know the starting price is $480~500 for the base mode.
And since the breakdown price of an iPad is $350 - it can't be sold for under $400. I think its great what Amazon is doing... they are selling them at costs to make money on the content. Which is EXACTLY what Samsung, HP, Blackberry, Motorola, Asus, etc CANNOT do... other than apps. I think the Kindle Fire will be the first true #2 tablet on the market.

@ Wolfgang : You sir, are one of the few people WHO figured out why most other tablets fail or do poorly against the iPad. At best, Samsung is selling 200,000 for every 2million iPads. Content, ecosystem, ease of use will determine such a product.

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]Dandalf[/nom]What's with all these idiots trying to analyse why the ipad dominates the tablet market? It's so simple I'm constantly tearing my hair out at the absurdity of opinion articles like this one all over the net. The ipad is so popular because it's apple.~~[/citation]
Er... no. You are tearing your hair out for no good reason and you are wrong.
This article is mostly about the FIRE and talks about WHY the iPad dominates... When 8~9 months ago, the experts predicted that the iPad would be reduced to about 40% of the market by now. NOT!
The iPad (while not perfect) is pretty much idiot proof. Its super easy to use, it works, iTunes works (and I don't like iTunes), they have content and apps. So when the Touchpad and Playbook enter the market with $500 devices that are flawed and little content - of course they WOULD fail. The value HP had was $100 for a dead platform, which is fine for media player and web browser. It was never worth $500... perhaps $300 MSRP would have worked - but without content, its sold at a loss.

Hell, the HP TouchPad (which has good and bad ideas) came with a non-functional single cam built in. Its non functional because only SKYPE would work with it. Its on-screen keyboard rocks! Hope Apple and Android adopt it (or steal it).

For my next tablet, like next year... I like what Lenovo has built with their Thinkpad Tablet... but the 16:9 screen sucks for web pages (like ALL Android tablets) but unless Android has is more stable and usable... I may just get an iPad3. Not because of Apple... but because of how the Android setup is not good enough. The screen is a big one for me.

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]Miharu[/nom]iPad2 could be flashy - I think it's mostly useless for a price, it's a flashy digital frame..[/citation] (Sorry, forgot to add this part)
A photoframe? First of all, most photoframes are pretty crappy low-res devices... with an 8" screen with 800x600 res, most look like crap compared to my 4" Samsung... which has better color and contrast.

Lets compare a $500 iPad2 to a $200 Kodak PhotoFrame [KPF] (not the usual $50~80 crap).
Screen: 10.4" KPF is 800x600, lower than iPad's 9.7" 1024x768.
RAM: iPad = 16GB, KPF = 512mb - it counts on the user adding his own 4~64GB memory card.
Network: iPad = 802.11 ABGN & bluetooth / KPF = WiFi with email attachment function.
Battery life: iPad = 8~10 hours / KPF = AC power (batteries are expensive)
Cameras: iPad = 2 / KPF = none

Things YOU can't do with a Digital Picture Frame: Surf web, run apps (other than an Alarm clock), play games, do work, read documents, take photos and videos, work anywhere, play music, watch movies. So yeah, for $300 extra, you're getting a lot more features.

Mind you, Picture Frame viewers is nice, other than the low-res. I have one - sits on a table and does its thing.

Another reason Apple does well, is the after-market support. Go to any store and look for accessories beyond headphones... and there is 100x more options for people to choose from.