×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Figuring Out Why Android Wins On Phones, But Not Tablets

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the apple-a-day-vs-swallowing-tablets dept.

Android 451

GMGruman writes "Android smartphones have overpowered the iPhone in market share, yet Android tablets barely register in sales versus the iPad. Android tablets are as competitive in most respects against the iPad as Android smartphones are against the iPhone. So why the difference in success? Galen Gruman examines five theories for the gap, and concludes the reason is that Android tablets' real competitor is in fact not the iPad."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

451 comments

Isn't it obvious? (4, Insightful)

Glonk (103787) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981424)

The Xoom was half-baked and lacklustre, and no other tablet has been widely available for a reasonable amount of time.

That's all there is to it.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981442)

The C_Nook?

Re:Isn't it obvious? (5, Insightful)

MukiMuki (692124) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981514)

Note: If it doesn't have a working market place when you open the box, it's not a tablet. It's a truly half-baked rushed piece of gadgetry.

Viewsonic G-Tablet, Notion Ink Adam, Barnes and Noble Nook. The funny thing about a tablet is that they usually have no:
- Optical Drive
- Memory Card Reader (that's hot-swappable, anyway)
- Easy way to install apps if it doesn't have a built-in Market

We're talking about something that doesn't run Windows or Mac OS, so it has apps/programs/whatever that 99.9% of consumers aren't going to be familiar with. Meaning, if there's no easy way to add functionality, you're dead on arrival. So yeah, currently, the only viable competition is the Xoom and Samsung's tablet.

So with the Xoom, we have a device that's:
- Slower than the iPad (same CPU, MUCH slower GPU)
- Slower than it should be on top of that (everything runs slower in Honeycomb than Gingerbread on identical hardware)
- Heavier than the iPad
- Crappier screen than the iPad (wider, yay, but viewing angles that are an entire generation behind)
- Lower video compatibility (Once again, slower playback than non-Honeycomb Tegra 2 tablets)
- The same price
- Capable of reading MicroSD cards.... someday?

So for the same price, your advantages are an extra chunk of widescreen screen space and a REALLY slow Flash plugin, and just about zero other advantages. While Samsung's tablet is $100 cheaper than Apple's cheapest, it requires a contract, is MONUMENTALLY crappier in specs (lower res, ass viewing angles, worse battery life, slower, not in any way designed around being a tablet).

And keep in mind, the moment you use the word "after it's rooted", you just dropped yourself to less than 5% of the market, and I think I'm being abundantly generous with that statement.

And no, Android tablets' (when they finally exist) main competitor IS the iPad. Apple's selling a million every goddamn month. Please remove head from ass.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (3, Insightful)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981678)

I agree with the vast majority of what you say, but I find the comment about marketplaces a bit odd. The standard install path for the vast majority of applications on all operating systems for the past decade or so has been "Go to website. Click download. Click install." - I'd hesitate to say that the rapid growth in popularity of the iPhone and Android marketplaces has negated that. Of course, if your OS actively blocks non-marketplace installs then you have a valid point, but simply not having built-in access to one only puts the tablet in the same position as OSX last year or Windows now; hardly a critical failure, to my mind.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (2)

jon3k (691256) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981734)

Microsoft would disagree with your assessment [windowsmarketplace.com]. The lack of a single place to find/buy/install apps was a huge failure in the Microsoft ecosystem. One they've identified and attempted to remedy. If you think Microsoft gained a dominate market position on the desktop because of the ease of finding and installing apps you might want to brush up on your history.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981742)

Note: If it doesn't have a working market place when you open the box, it's not a tablet. It's a truly half-baked rushed piece of gadgetry.

Yes, thank goodness Steve showed us the One Holy Canonical Applestolic right way to distribute programs to internet-connected devices. *eyeroll*

Re:Isn't it obvious? (2, Informative)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981748)

Heh...

- Slower than the iPad (same CPU, MUCH slower GPU)

1) Same CPU equates to roughly the same performance for regular tasks like UI, browser, etc. since the speed in 3D doesn't equate to 2D stuff.
2) It's only about 1.5 or so times faster than the Xoom, based on the benchmark results (Magic word there...benchmarks...)- so not so much slower like you're making it out to be. Resolutions can tump things into a slower framerate.

Slower than it should be on top of that (everything runs slower in Honeycomb than Gingerbread on identical hardware)

Seems to be more an issue with the Xoom. My Nook Color's roughly on a par with Gingerbread (well...CM7's got Bluetooth support and the hacked Honeycomb doesn't... Since I've got an Iconia now, the Nook's going to CM7 to be fully useful by way of PAN and Keyboard support...) and the Iconia doesn't seem...laggy...like the Xoom is on the same SoC for all intents and purposes. Moto...go figure...

Heavier than the iPad

My Iconia's not really any heavier than the Xoom. However, having handed it over to several iPad owners, they couldn't understand the rancor about it being "heavier" that was coming from some quarters. Weight differences were almost negligible in their opinion.

Crappier screen than the iPad (wider, yay, but viewing angles that are an entire generation behind)

Heh... No argument there.

Lower video compatibility (Once again, slower playback than non-Honeycomb Tegra 2 tablets)

That isn't a function of the Honeycomb/non-Honeycomb difference, per se. It's setting up the decode/playback through the DSP and it takes care of most of the load-lifting. Sounds like a display driver boo-boo or a weak DSP program for the video formats, if you ask me...

The same price

Heh... No argument there. Lame, really, when I've got the better execution of the idea in hand now.

Capable of reading MicroSD cards.... someday?

Ouch. Heh... My Iconia and my NC seem to be able to grasp hotpluggable MicroSD. I'd call that lame, yet again.

I'm unsurprised that the Xoom figures aren't pretty. Moto's apparently done a botch on both the Xoom and the Atrix. Doesn't mean that the follow-on tablets (Iconia, eeePC convertable, etc...) are the same story. And it's silly to have articles like this out at this stage as others have pointed out- it's not Android so much as it's Motorola we're talking about in this story.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981794)

The GPU is used for the UI. Well, not in Android, but it is in iOS. Google hasn't gotten around to fixing that yet. The reality is, a lot of your speed perceptions are based on UI responsiveness and the iPad kicks the shit out of the xoom and all those other piece of shit tablets.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (4, Interesting)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#35982048)

The GPU is used for the UI. Well, not in Android, but it is in iOS. Google hasn't gotten around to fixing that yet. The reality is, a lot of your speed perceptions are based on UI responsiveness and the iPad kicks the shit out of the xoom and all those other piece of shit tablets.

I don't own a tablet, but will probably buy one in the next 12 months. I've watched the video reviews on Engadget and the like, and even there it's obvious you're right.

When the reviewer has to do the page-flip several times to get the tablet to respond; when the reviewer has to click some icons more than once to get them to launch - that's a big red flag. I really want to like Android, but there's no way I'd buy a current generation Android tablet. I think Gruber is right - these review sites must be grading on a curve.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (2)

w0mprat (1317953) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981844)

We're talking about something that doesn't run Windows or Mac OS, so it has apps/programs/whatever that 99.9% of consumers aren't going to be familiar with. Meaning, if there's no easy way to add functionality, you're dead on arrival.

Consumers who buy the iPad more than likely already are iPhone or iPod Touch owners. They're already familiar with iOS and how to get stuff done on it.

Android owners would see the benefit of an Android tablet. I logged into a Samsung Galaxy with my Gmail account and lo and behold it started downloading all my apps including my paid ones. I'm holding out to buy one though, it's still early days.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35982016)

So for the same price, your advantages are an extra chunk of widescreen screen space and a REALLY slow Flash plugin, and just about zero other advantages. While Samsung's tablet is $100 cheaper than Apple's cheapest, it requires a contract, is MONUMENTALLY crappier in specs (lower res, ass viewing angles, worse battery life, slower, not in any way designed around being a tablet).

For now, the Ipad 2 is not too bad, and actually a semi-decent value compared to the Xoom (which is overpriced IMHO.) The Ipad2 was mostly a Xoom clone with a worse screen resolution, half as much RAM, and much worse cameras. Seriously, the T-mobile G1 had a better camera than the iPad 2. A really slow Flash plugin, compared to what? Compared to the one on IOS it is infinitely faster. It seems to play Flash videos of porn on my Xoom (even the live streaming cam-girls sites.) If it is good enough for p0rn, then it is good enough. :)

The Xoom has a resolution of 1280x800. The iPad 2 has a resolution of 1024x768. Hence, the iPad 2 has a much lower resolution screen.

The GPU performance of the Ipad 2 is indeed better than the Xoom. But, Apple releases new tablets like what, once a year? In 3 months, we will see quad core Tegra-based tablets, and a plethora of tablets with different processors/GPUs and such. This is the problem with Apple. It's mobile strategy appears to be to emulate IBM's PC strategy in 1984. It will take a while for Android to mature in Tablets. But make no mistake, Honeycomb is already better than IOS for tablets. And it is only going to get better. The T-mobile G-slate can capture 3-d video, which is pretty cool. We may see that feature added to the iPad 3 in what like 11 months?

So, anyway, I would expect the iPad 2 to outsell Android stuff this year. But 2-3 years from now, when there are 50 different Android Tablets on the Market, it is hard to see how the iPad will compete. They are going to have to have specs that are an entire year ahead of every other company in the world that makes tablets. And they would have to be better for every demographic, price point, and different consumer segment. You just can't so that with a one size fits all strategy.

That's why Apple is getting destroyed by Android in cell-phone sales.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

sprior (249994) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981926)

The Nook Color as a tablet has only been fully baked since CM7 stable came out a couple of weeks ago.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (3, Interesting)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981480)

apart from the nook and the Galaxy Tab I guess :)

I think he might be right - iPads are different beasts, they're not a big smartphone, nor are they a keyboardless laptop. So I guess the iPad owners do use them for different tasks than those commonly performed by smartphones and laptops.

In which case, the positioning for Android tablets needs to be more of a keyboardless laptop - ie like the Xoom and the N900 - one where you can dock it and turn it into a desktop machine (with bluetooth keyboard and hdmi cable to a monitor or TV) and un-dock it and it becomes a portable device that you can still use, though not as fully as when docked. I think that is probably the best place for Android to move to - it'll stop being a 'me too' copy of iPads and iPhones and start to become the future of all computing.

But then, if they did that, Android tablets are a non-starter, you can put all that power in a phone-sized form instead, and it's more compact and portable too. Maybe people will realise this when we get full-resolution HUD spectacles and tablets will become last years fashion.

TFA is right but doesn't spell it out (1, Interesting)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981864)

Tablets, including the iPad, compete with netbooks. Apple fanboys would buy an iNetbook in a heartbeat, but Apple won't make them because a cheap one would not uphold their reputation and would compete with their pricey laptops. But an iPad, now there's a deal, cheaper than an Apple laptop. Not as cheap as an old netbook, but those are Windows or Linux and thus not desirable by Apple fanboys.

Whereas those who will stoop to buy a cheap netbook aren't interested in a more expensive tablet which has no keyboard. Lack of a cover to protect the screen may even be a consideration.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (5, Insightful)

Goboxer (1821502) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981492)

This. There has been one serious Android tablet out for two months and its overpriced and glitchy. The other serious Android tablets are just now coming out, this week. Were they expected to grab half the market in a week? Because that is fucking ridiculous. Let's have this conversation again in a year, then we'll see how the numbers look.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

flappinbooger (574405) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981960)

Viewsonics android tablets (V-pad) are somewhat neat but overall pretty much crap. Part of their problem might be that they don't use the latest OS version (not even close). Otherwise it's sorta like using a giant phone without the phone.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981510)

There's that and since the price gap isn't massive. If you're going to pay a lot, why not get the iPad for the highly visible status symbol?

"Hey, is that the new iPad?"
"No, it's a Xoom. Just got it last week."
"Oh...so it's like a generic iPad?"

vs.

"Hey, is tthat the new iPad?"
"Yep, just got it last week."
"Wow, cool! Can I try it?"

Re:Isn't it obvious? (0)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981544)

I prefer fit blonds

Re:Isn't it obvious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981774)

I prefer fit blonds

Sure, but the difference is that you can actually have an iPad.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (1)

node 3 (115640) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981636)

Xoom was half-baked, but that's not the problem. The real problem is that when you buy a tablet, you are just buying a tablet. With a phone, you are buying a phone that is also a computer. So Android phone buyers have primary considerations which have nothing whatsoever to do with Android vs iOS or anything else. Subsidized phone price, plan rates, carrier choice all are more important for more people than what OS it runs.

Simply put, when you buy a phone, you are buying a phone first, and a smartphone platform second. When you buy a tablet, you are buying a tablet. In that case, the quality of the OS, and platform in general, is much more important.

Take ereaders as an example. No one buys the one that runs Android specifically. They buy the one that had the best price, book selection, book price, and physical characteristics. Android phones are bought in the same general way.

I'm generalizing quite a bit here. There are plenty of geeks who buy Android phones specifically because of Android, but there are many more people who buy iPhones specifically because of the iOS platform.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981730)

A good percentage of people I know bought an iPiad just to buy an iPad. They only use it because they have it. I only know one person that bought a non Apple tablet just because but he has an iPad as well.

In my opinion, tablets are strictly a convenience item and many people are not exactly sure how they are going to use them for initially and hoe exactly it will make their life easier. It makes sense they would stick with the herd and buy what everyone else has. I think most potential android tablet users are still using a laptop/netbook and waiting for a few good reasons to switch.

No, I really think he's got a point (3, Interesting)

Crazy Taco (1083423) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981740)

The Xoom was half-baked and lacklustre, and no other tablet has been widely available for a reasonable amount of time. That's all there is to it.

I absolutely disagree with that statement. Yes, it may have been half-baked and lacklustre, but that's not all there is to it. I think he makes a very good point in the article that the attitude of a lot of non-Apple fanboys is "why use one of these tablets, which are glorified smartphones with a big screen, when I could use a real computer?" He's right that while those users really like their Android phones, that an Android tablet may not be adopted due to laptops and, to some extent, netbooks, out-competing them.

This is of course anecdotal, but I firmly fall into that category. I have no desire to pay 600 or more dollars for a keyboardless toy. Because that really is what these tablets are. They do lightweight web surfing, lightweight games, and that's pretty much it. I'm not going to sit and write reports, code, play real games, etc, using one of those. I am open to tablet sized devices, but only if they do something really different than what my laptop can do. For example, I own a kindle because the e-ink screen is dramatically better for reading than any LCD based option. Everything about it is purpose built to excel at reading, and it does. But an iPad? Other than booting quickly it does nothing my laptop can't do, and there is much my laptop can do that it can't (and for quick booting and light web surfing in a pinch, I have my Android phone).

The other comment I'll add is this: He says in the article that there are a few Windows tablet fanboys. I guess count me as one of them, because I do love a Windows 7 convertible tablet (with a keyboard). It eats the iPad for lunch. It runs real, full featured programs... any Windows program I want. In college, I can fold it flat, hold the stylus and write on the screen just like I would a piece of paper. Microsoft OneNote's handwriting search is just about perfect... I can find any note I ever took, even in my own handwriting, in less than a second. And I can take engineering notes... just try doing that with any other device, whether the iPad or normal laptop... there are so many special symbols you'll never be able to. And the screen is multitouch (and this tablet is a few years old). Yes, the iPhone is cheaper (but much less powerful), lighter, and can boot faster, and I don't deny that. But that's what my Android smartphone is for, and when I want a real tablet to do real things with, I pick Windows 7.

Re:Isn't it obvious? (2)

w0mprat (1317953) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981810)

There's at least 50 Android tablets on the market and a good selection available Viewsonic, Acer Iconia, Dreambook ePad, Archos, Dell, Navitel, and others.

But why aren't they selling? Simple, epicly poor availability, near-zero advertising, and a gazillion made in china knock-off pads. Retail stores doesn't seem to bother stocking anything other than the Galaxy Tab, despite the Acer Iconia and Viewsonic tablets being rather respectable.

This all smacks of the situation 2008/2009 when there were only a few good Android handset choices and we could have said the same thing about Android phones.

From the little play I've had with Android Honeycomb 3.0 on a Xoom I have to say frankly it's a better tablet operating system, lord knows Android already has a superior notification system, cloud integration etc. Already it should be a sign that Apple is having to quietly introduce features to iOS that Android users have been introducing for some time. I really don't see how Apple can maintain it's dominance, it never has done in the past.

Android Tablets are Overpriced (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981438)

Isn't it obvious?

Lawsuits? (0)

Berkyjay (1225604) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981448)

Doesn't Apple keep lobbing lawsuits at other tablet manufacturers? Seems like everyday I read an article about Apple suing someone for supposed patent infringement. Maybe they see the writing on the wall and are just trying to stall other tablets from getting onto the market for as long as possible.

because there are only 2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981450)

Android phones would have never taken off if there was only the G1 and the HTC Eris.

Right now while they are some crappy Android tablets there are really only 2. The Galaxy Tab and the XOOM. Give it another year. Just like the iPhone looked unstoppable 2 years ago things will change.

all tablets are overpriced (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981452)

they need to get down to under $200 before they are interesting.

Because linux is teh suck (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981462)

fucking faggots! keep smoking that linux dick.

Android phone and iPad. (3, Interesting)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981472)

Funny thing is, I would have made the opposite prediction a couple years ago - I would have bet on Android for tablets and the iPhone to continue to dominate smartphones - but I understand now why it went the way it did. I don't think that Android tablets can compare to the iPad experience, mostly due to the apps.

I like Android on the phone and my CR-48, but the iPad is far more interesting to me than an Android tablet is. Part of it is pure diversity - there are some amazing apps and games that only run on iOs; I only need one device to play them/enjoy them, and an iPad is a lot more compelling a game interface than the iPod touch/iPhone is. I expect most productivity apps to either get ported to Android from iOs or at least have a good working equivalent, but games and creative/playful apps, which are distinct and not really replaceable by equivalents, favor iPad. So, it's iPad for reading and games, the Android phone as a PIM (remember that word?) and workhorse smart-phone.

A lot of "fandroids" are actually really Google "fans", or at least tied to the Google eco-system (that fits me, sort of, with the usual caveats and worrying about any corporate entity controlling too much personal information, etc.) - and one can stay within the Google system in your iPad. One thing that distinguishes Google from Apple is that the latter really is about the one "right" and "best" way to do something, while the former is about having several ways (many still in beta) of skinning many cats (some of which haven't even been discovered yet.)

Re:Android phone and iPad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981882)

It amazes me that people actually think the iPad is more useful than a device that has support for Adobe Flash. I'm not a fan of Adobe Flash although half the value in a tablet is always on and websites. If you can't watch movies on it because it lacks flash (i realize Apple has its own offerings- that still doesn't let you access the majority of the web) and other sites. I sadly am constantly coming across entire websites built on flash. We're not getting rid of flash over night. In any case. My point is you reduce the usefulness of the iPad to the point I wouldn't buy one. The people buying them are technically illiterate and doing so because they have $$$ and want a new toy.

Here's a really brilliant theory... (5, Insightful)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981486)

Lots of Android tablets came out that didn't have Honeycomb and thus weren't really ready to be used as tablets. They are fun for hackers in some cases (like the G Tablet) but not ready for prime time. The only Honeycomb tablet out so far is the Motorola Xoom. The Xoom fails in epic fashion on price - it has similar hardware specs as my $300 G Tablet for twice the price. I would never buy it because I'd feel like a huge sucker.

Apparently Honeycomb needs a bit more polish before it's ready.

But until Google lets other manufacturers come out with Honeycomb tablets, or releases the Honeycomb source code, we aren't going to have Android tablets that have mass appeal.

This doesn't really require a particularly in depth analysis, or any conspiracy theories or anything else.

Re:Here's a really brilliant theory... (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981558)

Your statement is inaccurate. Until this week, there was only the Xoom. This week, Acer's play showed up. $150 less than the Xoom with at least a slightly better configuration than the same. And, your G was only $300 because you caught a deal somewhere- retail storefront's only $50 less than what I paid for my Iconia A500 on Tuesday.

Re:Here's a really brilliant theory... (1)

ndogg (158021) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981564)

There is another Honeycomb tablet that is somewhat more reasonably priced, the Acer Iconia A500 [google.com]. It's only $450, which is 50 less than the iPad.

Unfortunately, Acer has a pitiful PR department. Have you heard any news about it? Neither have I. I only know about it because of some little blurb in a Best Buy ad.

Re:Here's a really brilliant theory... (1)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981642)

The Xoom fails in epic fashion on price - it has similar hardware specs as my $300 G Tablet for twice the price. I would never buy it because I'd feel like a huge sucker.

Maybe, but the Xoom is still comparable to the iPad in specs and price, so how do you explain the fact that people buy those?

Re:Here's a really brilliant theory... (2)

Nikker (749551) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981686)

Personally I would love to grab a tablet the one thing that scares me is vendor OS updates. If I have an iPhone and I hear that Apple is realeasing IOS $X, I want IOS $X goddamit! Now I hear that Google finishes making OS $X+1 and I want that sucker! But wait, Sony/Motorola/whoever tell me they can't/don't want to do because of $Y, well fuck that. Personally I would rather put the same money into a laptop / netbook then get screwed by these guys. With Apple I know the only interest they have is to make their hardware and UI shine, if that takes an update then so be it. With Android they always come out with new features but chances are I won't be able to have them cause the manufacturer said so, or they want me to buy Verson++.

I'm going to wait, let them standardize, let them suffer a bit then get something I can use rather than stare at.

Also (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981726)

People need to stop with this idea that if it doesn't immediately sell better than Apple it isn't going to be more popular in the long run.

We saw that same shit with phones. Android came out and it was rather anemic. Only a few phones used it and they were nice, but not all that polished. So a bunch of dipshits screamed about how it was clear this would never be an iPhone competitor. However today there are just loads of Android phones, and they are extremely polished (as I've said before, HTC's Sense UI is real slick). They are quickly cutting in to the iPhones marketshare and are predicted by a number of people to be the top by a long margin in a few years.

In other words, it can very well start slow, but build up a hell of a lot of steam with time.

Same could happen with tablets. Apple had a shitload of iPad sales right off because it is Apple and currently they are the fashionable "must have" gadget company and they were the first real product in the "Not an expensive laptop," tablet market. Well and good, but that doesn't mean that Android may not overcome that in the long run.

Let's see where things stand in a year or two. That'll be what's really telling. If in two years Android tablets are still floundering, then ya they probably will never really take off. However in two years they may well be making large inroads on the iPad.

We'll just have to see.

And (2)

Crazy Taco (1083423) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981800)

In other words, it can very well start slow, but build up a hell of a lot of steam with time.

What's really going to be amazing is if Microsoft, which started even slower, manages to pull something off in the phone arena. I've heard more screaming from pundits about how they will never be a contender than I've heard about any other company, but the Windows 7 phone wasn't half bad for a first try. I'd love to see them grab some market share, if for no other reason than three huge players competing will really start to push the quality envelope.

Re:And (1)

sessamoid (165542) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981900)

I've heard more screaming from pundits about how they will never be a contender than I've heard about any other company, but the Windows 7 phone wasn't half bad for a first try.

In what universe is Windows Phone 7 a "first try"?

Re:Also (2)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981828)

There's no single Android phone that sells anywhere even close to the number of iPhones. I don't understand this logic of lumping together all the different phones. It's like comparing sales of an OS to sales of a hardware device.

Comparing OS to OS (Android vs. IOS) then IOS is still much larger. And I'll bet that the majority of casual Android phone users came to their decision by thinking "I'm not going to get an iPhone, so what else is there?" And it turns out the "what else" is a ton of Android phones, so that's what they get.

For what it's worth I don't have an iPhone and probably never will. But I still don't understand this thinking.

it's not about "fanbois" (2)

fred fleenblat (463628) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981496)

a 2 year old can use the iPad, as can non-techie grandparents. that's why apple is selling them by the millions.

nothing to do with platform loyalty or netbooks or supply chain or anything. it's a good product that appeals to millions of people.

Re:it's not about "fanbois" (1)

manekineko2 (1052430) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981808)

Did you read the headline even before responding? Your post completely failed to address the point of the article, which is why Android is winning on phones, but losing on tablets.

Re:it's not about "fanbois" (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981880)

Supply chain keeps the price down. If you can skim $4 bucks off of the LCD and $2 off the CPU per unit, you can make the product more available to more users, period.

The difference here is, this is a product a lot of users want to get their hands on.

Google Control (4, Insightful)

fermion (181285) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981500)

It to a while for Androd phones to compete. Google basically had to stop playing it's game of sort-of-open solftware that would be given to one vendor as a treat so that other vendors would stay in line. The mobile phone companies had to have the freedom to effectively close the handsets so that profits could be created. And, at a basic level, the software had to mature to a stable product. A lot of early adopters got screwed because after six months their phones were out of date bricks. Who is going to take that change with a $500 tablet, that in six months it can't be upgraded.

So basically we are seeing this again. Google gave Motorola a treat and let it ocme out with the first tablet. No one who is not an uber early adopter is going to buy this table because, unlike the iPhone and iPad for which Apple will provide a couple years of support(my 3 is still getting updates), there is no way to know if the real Honeycomb is going to run on it. We have at least 5 vaporware machines, but they do not exist? So, do we do like MS fanbois and wait for a machine that may or may not be real, or simply buy an iPad?

It is way to early to say whether Honeycomb will succeed in that tablet market. Google is still playing games, and no casual end user would touch it anymore than the Nexus one. It is very likely when there are 10 models out there, all running variations of Android, and if the look and feel and interconnectivity are superior to Apple, then we will likely see Honeycomb take a significant share of the market. However, as the iPhone now, it is likely that the iPad will take the top position for quite a while. However, unless the tablets can undercut the price of the iPad(meaning not the xoom for $600) they will have a hard time competeing. Price, is, after all why the 3GS is in the number two sales position, even though it is an extremely anemic phone.

Improve the UI... (3, Interesting)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981504)

Android smartphones have overpowered the iPhone in market share, yet Android tablets barely register in sales versus the iPad. Android tablets are as competitive in most respects against the iPad as Android smartphones are against the iPhone. So why the difference in success?

Having tried both iPads and Android tablets I'd say the reason is simple. Android is a mobile phone OS that was hastily adapted for tablets and it shows. If they ever manage to come up with a good purpose designed tablet version of the Android UI that assessment may change. The Android system settings are also sometimes annoyingly unintuitive. For example, when the mail client told me I needed to approve access permissions before I cold connect to Exchange 2010 it took me about half an hour of clicking about in the system settings pane before I realized thats the wrong place to look. You have to pull down the curtain on the menu bar and click the task item in the list you get there to fix this. Another thing is that while iTunes store definitely contains a whole mess of crappy apps the Android market is even worse.

Theory #6 (3, Interesting)

Dracos (107777) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981522)

Android tablets don't have a single-minded and focused marketing (spelled h-y-p-e) machine behind them.

Tablets are doomed to fail except in vertical markets where consuming data is more common than producing data. For personal use they're a fad, little more than an overly capable media player. The people who might want a tablet but don't want an iPad are few.

Re:Theory #6 (2)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981586)

I don't know about that. Coupled with a bluetooth keyboard, my A500 matches most netbooks in capabilities and performance and is more portable/usable even without the keyboard for many uses you'd use a netbook for.

Re:Theory #6 (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981684)

Tablets are doomed to fail except in vertical markets where consuming data is more common than producing data.

Which is to say, the most common uses the majority of the population puts personal (not "the one I use at work") computers to? I'd love to "fail" by owning a huge chunk of a market that large.

Hint: If you view "hacking the linux kernel" and "writing my own software" to be typical use cases for casual & personal use, you're wrong.

Numbers please (2, Interesting)

macemoneta (154740) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981526)

I didn't see any actual sales figures to support the claim that Android is doing poorly on tablets. Considering that this is only the second quarter of sales, I think it's a little early. Many manufacturers haven't even released sales figures yet!

Also, strictly from a personal perspective, I know five people with Android tablets, but only one with an iPad. Interestingly, all the Android tablets are from Archos, which is rarely mentioned in articles.

Not getting the market (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981548)

I wonder if it is simply that they don't understand the market and at the same time trying to trump the iPad without understanding what the users want. It could also be because they are scared of cannibalizing the markets they already have.

While not Android, Microsoft for the moment, seems to be failing to capture the market because they see tablets as hand held PCs, rather than a totally different type of device.

I think to understand the iPad you need to understand where Steve Jobs is coming from. An interview/a in Wired back in 1996 makes it clear. Essentially the computer of the future won't feel like a computer and would feel intuitive. I think the iPad does that well, even if there is room for improvement. Hardware manufactures don't get that and Google doesn't seem to be providing that direction either. The dimensions of some tablets also don't work because while they are good for one thing aren't good for others. In many way a National Geographic sized device makes a lot of sense, since is an acceptable format for reading magazines and is not a hindrance when watching movies. On the other hand, the Playbook for example, feels optimized for movies, but doesn't feel like it is comfortable for other uses. [wired.com]

Oddly enough I feel that HP actually has the potential to do something really good with WebOS, with regards to the tablet space, but only time will tell. They might surprise us yet.

As for other ways that tablets could be used, you only need to look at science fiction films and TV series' for ideas. Star Trek and Earth Final Conflict for example.

Android phones have been out for over 2 years (1)

Flipao (903929) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981562)

Android tablets have been out for a few months.There's your answer.

Price, Price, Price (1)

CNeb96 (60366) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981570)

Sell an android 3.0 tablet wifi-only tablet for around $400 and I'll buy one. Not until then. Notion ink almost did that with an Android 3.0 like OS but doesn't seem to be able to handle even a small number of customers. But once the android 3.0 source is out, I assume there will be a ton of cheap competitors and then the game will change.

       

Re:Price, Price, Price (2)

arnott (789715) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981654)

Sell an android 3.0 tablet wifi-only tablet for around $400 and I'll buy one. Not until then. Notion ink almost did that with an Android 3.0 like OS but doesn't seem to be able to handle even a small number of customers. But once the android 3.0 source is out, I assume there will be a ton of cheap competitors and then the game will change.

Have you checked ASUS Eee Pad Transformer [amazon.com] ?

Re:Price, Price, Price (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35982004)

For $400 I could buy a laptop.

Give me a cheap but useable android tablet for $99 and I'll buy one.

imperfect execution (1)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981588)

The answer is, there hasn't yet been a good design at a compelling price. I was almost sold on the Galaxy tablet, because it had something that even the ipad didn't have, (a 7 inch form factor) but there were some parts that were half baked, and Samsung priced it out of the market. I'm seeing similar things from the other major players -- they want a premium, high-end-laptop price point on designs that haven't been completely thought out.

Moreover, the tablet-centric version of Android (3.0) isn't completely mature yet, and is running on very few actual tablets.

And finally, the rash of cheap wannabes with resistive screens and Android 1.X are muddying the waters. Fred and Ethyl aren't going to know the difference between a Coby and a Toshiba, so they'll buy the $149.95 model and be disappointed.

Re:imperfect execution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981804)

Fred and Ethyl

Ha ha, somebody must be a chemist...

Re:imperfect execution (1)

wintermute000 (928348) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981934)

You know the galaxy tab is now 300 australian dollars here down under? thats the 3G model as well.
Exchange rates are a pain assuming you're in the US but they are now completely sold out everywhere. I grabbed one and am loving it even with the rough edges, heck at that price point its justifiable purely as a nice colour ebook reader that can do kindle and sideload epubs.
But would I have loved it as much had I paid 800 AUD for it (launch price), heck no, I would have thought 'geeze could have bought a 3G ipad for that'.
Just goes to prove: doesn't matter if its a bit half baked if you price aggressively.
I would go so far as to say it will be the ONLY way droid tablets take off is to attack aggressively on price

Who's on first (1, Redundant)

jklovanc (1603149) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981598)

Lets see, when the iPad came out there was no other tablet on the market and years of marketing hype which created a pent up need. The iPad came out and they sold a crap load of them. There is also the Apple fanboy factor "If it is Apple I must have it". Many, if not most, people who would buy a tablet now have iPads thereby deceasing overall demand for tablets.

An Android pad with a real tablet OS comes out, is panned by the tech community and people wonder what it didn't sell as many as the iPad? Most people who want a tablet but have yet to buy a iPad are a patient bunch and will wait till the right one comes out. From all the reviews, the Zoom is not the right tablet.

If you want to compare sales compare how many iPads were sold in the same time period as the release of the Zoom. Then the comparison may be valid.

Re:Who's on first (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981994)

An Android pad with a real tablet OS comes out, is panned by the tech community and people wonder what it didn't sell as many as the iPad? Most people who want a tablet but have yet to buy a iPad are a patient bunch and will wait till the right one comes out. From all the reviews, the Zoom is not the right tablet.

Maybe your "real" tablet OS was panned because it is still incomplete and rough around the edges but we'll stick to your theory that the iPad success is all about marketing.

If you want to compare sales compare how many iPads were sold in the same time period as the release of the Zoom. Then the comparison may be valid.

Apple sold 3.27 millions iPads [apple.com] from April 3, 2010 to July 20, 2010 which is slightly more than a quarter. Apple didn't announce iPad sales in the 2Q 2010 as the iPad had been recently released. Motorola sold 250,000 [motorola.com] in 2 months from Feb 24, 2011 to April 28, 2011. If we interpolate, Motorola is selling 125,000 Xooms per month while Apple sold over 800,000 iPads per month. In order to catch Apple with the same kinds of sales, Motorola will have to sell 1.5 million Xooms per month for the next 2 months to catch the original iPad.

Apple competes with Apple, not Google (2)

Synn (6288) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981602)

If you like Apple you really only have the 1 choice in Apple products. You either buy the iPad 1.0 or you wait until the expected iPad 2.0 comes out. Really, Apple is the one that competes with Apple. For an Apple fan, there is no alternative.

As an Android fan there will be a lot of Android tablets. I'm waiting around to see who comes out with the best one that fits my needs.

There is a more reasonably price Honeycomb tablet (1)

ndogg (158021) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981618)

No, really at $450 (Acer Iconia A500) [laptopmag.com].

The reviews aren't exactly glowing though. It's cheaper than the iPad at least. Have you heard any news about it though? No? That's because it seems Acer's PR department doesn't seem to know how to do its job. How can it take off if no one knows about it?

The real reason (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981624)

The real reason is obvious. Android phones do well because they are heavily subsidised on contract - they're practically given away free, and are therefore expanding to fill the space vacated by the likes of Nokia. They're being largely taken up by people who want "something like an iPhone, bu cheaper."

There is no equivalent maket niche for tablets. If the "thing that's like an iPad" costs the same as an iPad, people will buy the iPad.

There May Be Another Reason (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981630)

It might have something to do with this: http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1273

Maybe it's not Android (4, Interesting)

kwiqsilver (585008) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981634)

People might be looking at the problem backwards. It's not what Android is doing poorly that's hurting it in the tablet market, as much as what Apple is doing poorly that's hurting it in the phone market. The answer is carrier exclusivity. iOS gained on Android [macrumors.com] in the US phone market for the first time in a long time recently, because they started selling Verizon phones. Perhaps as iPhones begin to support more carriers (assuming Apple can scale manufacturing enough), Apple will start to take bigger chunks.

Re:Maybe it's not Android (1)

jbplou (732414) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981700)

The thing is Apple has never really lost marketshare with the iPhone. android is getting more marketshare from new users, and at the expense of blackberry and windows phone. I sure apple would like more marketshare but considering all they sell right now is the 4 and 3GS that isn't too bad. I think the fundamental flaw in smart phone thought is that ut will mirror PCs, why can't it go like a different market for computing devices, the gaming device. There have always been at least two players in this market I think smart phones will be similar. If Apple fails then HP or MS will step up.

Re:Maybe it's not Android (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981976)

Apple is selling all the iPhones and iPads they can make. They could not possibly be doing better, unless they sold the same amount and charged more.

Re:Maybe it's not Android (2)

klaiber (117439) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981990)

Which would be consistent with the iPhone doing very well in European countries where either the carrier was better then AT&T, or where there was a choice of carriers.

Android phones are cheap (3, Interesting)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981646)

Own a htc inspire and an iPad 2. Used to have an iPhone 3GS.

My inspire cost me $20 at Costco and is faster than an iPhone 4 in some ways. An iPhone costs $300 for the cheap one with activation and tax.

There is no subsidy on wifi tablets and the 3G ones cost more due to the chipsets and licensing which eats away the subsidy some carriers give.

iOS is more polished, battery life is better, app store is better unless all you want is widgets and live wallpaper, security is better and you don't have to check permissions for each app, and iOS multitasking is better and more efficient. And there is no crazy system of moving some apps to sd card, killing processes manually and some of the other nonsense I see on android. The other day I downloaded an app from the market that says you have to root your phone for it to work. Another one says you need something called launcher pro and other apps. Ridiculous.

There are thousands of iPad apps in the app store. The android market has less than 100. My 3 year old uses the iPad for educational apps which the app store rules. The other tablets are being sold based on specs and the inclusion of flash for pr0n

Demographically we are in a baby boom. In NYC a lot of schools are overcrowded due to all the kids. Apple figured this out and is marketing the right way. Everyone else is fighting for the single guy surfing porn market.

The into iPad is $499. It's a dual core arm a9 CPU, very good gpu, excellent screen, etc. Just as good or better specs as everyone else and better dev support. Choice is easy.

Re:Android phones are cheap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981722)

Actually, you could have left it with just your headline.

Once you take out the freetard contingent, you're left with an Android-fanboy market statistically indistinguishable from zero.

Freetards have lots of Android phone options. Freetards have no Android tablet options.

QED.

Re:Android phones are cheap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981902)

>you don't have to check permissions for each app
Man, are you ever in for a surprise.

Killer Apps Lacking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981648)

As geeks we're often tempted to think of things in terms of specs. But end users are prone to ask two things: what can it do, and how well can it do it?

My cousin loves her iPad because of its killer app: Netflix. She can stream at least two movies before she has to plug it in to stream several more. It's perfect for a road trip, or a long wait at the doctor's office. It's relatively seamless. She can check email and browse the internet without having to tech her way into a wifi hotspot. Youtube pretty much works, and she can have an itunes collection available with a minimum of fuss.

As the geek, I love Android and its raw power. I can wifi tether, check weird 3rd-party google email addresses, and even hop into SSH for some real fun.

But none of those things interest my cousin, the end user. She just wants to stream netflix whilst rolling down the highway, and until Android tablets either a) latch onto a couple of those sorts of killer apps or b) create a new killer app from scratch, there'll be no mystery as to the winner of the tablet war. Indeed, there will be no war at all.

Asus (5, Insightful)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981662)

Has anyone seen the Asus Transformer? $100 less than an iPad 2 and it sold out minutes after being put up at Amazon and every other retail outlets. It's on backorder for weeks.

SIMPLE. (0)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981682)

Smart Phones of this level actually are a new phenomenon - they enable me to do things i couldnt before.

tablets, currently, however, are just a 'cooler', 'lighter' netbook-wannabee, that cannot do what the netbooks can do. as you can remember, the latest generation of netbooks already had become fully capable small laptops, with their normal hard disks, usual oses (linux, or windows), and 10 inch screens, 1-3 gb rams, and are capable of running any program their memory and cpu allows.

all they bring me, is a lighter device, 'cooler' in appearance, that can NOT do what i need to do with netbooks.

it doesnt enable me for anything. it is much limited compared to netbook. i cant use what i use in my netbook, small laptop etc, in a tablet. and just for the little cool factor and lightness it would bring, i am in no way inclined to shell out 500 bucks minimum.

ipads sold, yes, because, there was already present apple customer base that valued these limited devices. it fills their needs. it doesnt fit the needs of the majority of people that actually need to do more than simple tasks limited to watching video, listening to music, updating facebook etc.

basically, what we need is a netbook that is lighter, and optional keyboard.

Re:SIMPLE. (1)

jbplou (732414) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981806)

What can't you do on a tablet? You can't program or do some advanced graphical work but I certainly can do anything else. If I need to program I can rep from it to a server or workstation.

Integrated Vs Component design (1)

gwstuff (2067112) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981706)

More often than not, integrated design by a single vendor has shown to win in the short term, but has eventually lost out to component-oriented design by multiple vendors. At first I thought the App Store might threaten to prevent that from happening in the case of iOS. But Android now has one too and most serious iApp developers have or are in the process of porting their apps. I think the stage is getting set for Apple to cry copy-cat all over again 2 decades after Windows "copied" the Mac. It will be a very interesting watch...

It's price point, plain and simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981708)

Only Apple fanboys want to spend $500 on a glorified couch web surfing device.

I think I'm typical of the larger population - I'd be willing to spend a couple of hundred bucks to replace my physical morning paper with a device, but no more than that. The Android tablets cost more than that at the moment, perhaps because Apple sucked up the world supply of some key parts (displays most likely). Once the supply chain situation clears up, we'll see cheap droid tablets and they'll gobble up market share. At $200 - tons of sales. At $500 - not so much, leave it to the Apple fanboys.

Android is a phone OS (2)

formfeed (703859) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981718)

There have been tons of droid commercials. People know android as a phone OS.
-Obviously you want something faster and better on your tablet than on your phone.

Maybe one should brand one as Android CE and one as Android XL (same source of course..)

said the same thing the first years of androd (3, Interesting)

johncandale (1430587) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981776)

they said the same thing the first few years of android on cells. Give it awhile.

Lack. Of. Tablet. Apps. (1)

Sarusa (104047) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981786)

Lack of tablet apps. That's the reason I own an iPad right now and not an Android tablet. Running an Android phone app on an Android tablet is just as ugly as running an iPhone app on an iPad is... but most i* apps have an iPad specific version. Android apps don't.

This is probably chicken and egg - the devs don't have tablets because the XOOM was just not very appealing. I'm looking forward to the Acer and Samsung tablets.

Because (0)

plague911 (1292006) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981798)

No one with anything to do worth while wants a tablet. Tables have never and will never likely be the go to platform for those who actually want to accomplish something other than looking pretentious.

In that respect apple and tablets have a lot in common (next to useless)

Re:Because (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981956)

-1 Troll

iPoop = NO VOICE RECOGNITION NATIVELY (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35981812)

Try this on an iPoop... open ANY app that enters text. Not just email or texting. My example will be a RDP app that connects to my work computer and runs another app. Okay the iPoop can open an RDP app. Now try to use voice recognition to just say what you want to enter into that app. Oh wait there isnt any way to do that.

On any android 2.2 tablet open RDP app. Click the txt box and up comes the keyboard with voice recognition built in. Say what i want to type and there it is.DONE.

iPoop = 0
Android = 1

another explanation: (2)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981820)

Fandroids spent the last year claiming tablets are stupid and nobody wants one. It took so long for a half-usable android tablet to come out that they started believing it.

That and Apple has mail order, a line of retail stores, and other outlets (Best Buy, KB Toys(!), Wal*Mart, Verizon stores, AT&T stores, etc). Motorola, Samsung, HTC, etc. etc, have traditionally sold only through telcos and only after the telco lobotomizes it.

Android Wins on phones? (2)

wesgray (1827286) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981822)

Wins on phones? Here in Chicago US Cellular was offering Buy 1 get 5 free on android phones. We all know who has biggest share of smart phone profits which is the point of all of this and has not needed fire sales to pump up volumes.

oh tfa... (2)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981834)

Google has also made no effort to outflank Apple, following Apple's lead in almost every area instead (voice-based search and navigation being the major exceptions)

(And multitasking. And Flash support (albeit crappy). And open-sourcing the whole project. And allowing multiple marketplaces. And allowing development in multiple languages.) Yep, Google's just gathering crumbs off of Apple's table here...

Tablets are not a necessesity (2)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981862)

Most people buy a phone because they need one so they start with that idea, go to a phone shop and select a product based on various attributes important to them. Examples would be price, appearance, performance, functions. Tablet buyers at the moment start with the idea that they want an iPad so they go out and buy one. They don't decide to buy a tablet because they don't actually need one.

tl;dr - no one actually wants a tablet (0)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981868)

There are those pseudo-techy people that want the iPad 2 to look cool and keep up with the Joneses, and it serves them well in that regard. But the rest of us can get by with laptops or netbooks. (really, though. This is basically the tl;dr of what TFA says, but without the slur on iProducts)

Price (1)

Altus (1034) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981936)

Android really took off among the masses when you could get Android phones for short money. Not long ago T-mobile spent a weekend giving away Android phones and they are often available for a lot less money than an iPhone. I suspect a lot of average, non geeky, people are more than willing to go for the cheeper Android phone without a second thought.

When it comes to a tablet, most of them are in the same price range. Why wouldn't you buy the most polished one with the largest number of applications? And perhaps in time there will be good enough Android tablets that are significantly cheeper than the iPad and they will be an easy choice for a lot of people, but given the lack of a subsidy (since the iPad doesn't require a contract and any subsidized Android tablet does), I suspect it will take longer for them to gain a significant price edge on the iPad.

Perhaps people don't care about Android? (1)

hsmith (818216) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981962)

Are the android sales because it is the android PLATFORM or just because people need a new phone and that is what their carrier offers? To me the lackluster sales of Android tablets says that people aren't much into android as they are just phones that people generally buy and use.

Archos 101 (1)

hackus (159037) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981974)

Well, I bought an Archos 101, and the implementation of the interface etc is not done very well.

Lots of bugs, not very fast. In fact surfing on the thing is nothing short of frustrating.

I use it primarily to run Adobe's pdf reader. Which, for that it works OK.

It plays a movie, when the player doesn't crash and it works pretty well for mp3's.

Tons of room for improvement.

My other complaint about tablets is they are not as good as netbooks for surfing either, yet they cost the same.

So I think I will not be buying a tablet till I see parts below 28nm size in them. By that time they should be quite well refined.

But right now, the only thing I would consider using my Archos 101 for is PDF reading or listening too music.

Archos as a company doesn't keep its promises either. I was promised flash support for the thing and all we have is unaccelerated flash variants which work very poorly.

-Hack

Is it the carrier? (1)

klaiber (117439) | more than 2 years ago | (#35981978)

Could be the iPhone carrier -- for the longest time, there was only AT&T, and I know many people who really wanted an iPhone but refused to get it via AT&T. Some of them picked an Android phone instead.
For the iPad, choice of cellular carrier may not be that important (different usage model), which might explain why people aren't looking that hard for alternatives.

fashion accessory (0)

macshit (157376) | more than 2 years ago | (#35982000)

The article author is very clearly a raging Apple fanboy.

It's downright painful to read his fapping, as he attempts to avoid the most obvious explanation: The ipad is essentially a fashion accessory (much more so than the iphone), and there's really little reason to buy one (especially at a high price) if you aren't buying into Apple's heavy techno beat and synchronized strobe lights.

One word (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 2 years ago | (#35982018)

One "word": BOGO.

Once they start selling Android tablets BOGO like the phones the tablets might start to be competitive.

They are telephone manufacturers (1)

fidget42 (538823) | more than 2 years ago | (#35982030)

The Aandroid phone manufacturers were all cell phone manufacturers. Going to Android wasn't that much of a jump, they just changed the vendor of the OS. None of them have ever built a tablet before, or probable even dreamt of a tablet. They don't have any starting point so don't know what goes into making a good tablet.

Also, Android was good enough for a phone, but good enough doesn't scale.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...