Quote:
Originally Posted by OtterBooks
A tablet is not an e-ink reader+color and video. Not until some serious leaps in tech.
|
I agree with your idea, O Pagéd and Semi-Aquatic Mammal, but not the classification. The difference between e-ink and LCD matters to us on the basis of our personal taste. It doesn't matter in terms of function. You can complain about LCD glare all you like, but you can still read on both devices.
So far, a tablet isn't an optimum reader. Nor, for that matter, is an iPad's internal amp and DAC as world-class as Ray Samuels'
SR-71A and the
Cipher Labs AlgoRhythm Solo. But in the widest common markets, when has quality of user experience trumped versatility in any sense? If you doubt it, ask Sony about their aborted
Qualia line.
Quote:
|
Where is the tablet revolution? . . . Things may change, but thus far the iPad phenomenon is an iPad phenomenon, and portable entertainment otherwise is migrating to cell phones.
|
I would argue that portable gaming and music are migrating to cell phones
for the casual user, but that portable film is stalling at devices with slightly larger screens. The initial interest in playing movies on PSPs and, later, iPhones was in the ability to actually do such a thing at all. People have dreamed of visual phones and wristwatch cinema since Fritz Lang's Metropolis.
Portable gaming for the non-casual is an exception (so far) because serious gamers
are consumers in massive numbers. In fact, I'd draw a parallel between serious gamers and serious readers and ask the question: Are there really enough people who care about sun glare and reading-specific ergonomics to justify major companies' long-term investment in e-ink. And even if so, are
they likely to see it that way?
However, I wouldn't take non-iPad failure as anything but consumer distrust. Many of the same factors that made the Kindle popular come into play with the iPad: A proven and reliable market interface, immediate access to responsive (in Apple's case, physically present) customer service, sufficient ubiquity for there to be endless third-party solutions for most needs, etc., etc.
Other companies have failed to create a popular Android tablet so far, but Android is still young and Android tablets are newly born. When even major companies like Sony commit to using Android, the money and sales involved suggest to me that Google has to get it right in the next few years. But that doesn't mean I'll be buying an Android tablet next week.
Tablet companies can create superb hardware now, but it's roughly as expensive as the iPad's and you can expect there to be maddening jerks and force-quits until there aren't.
I suspect people are tired of paying to beta-test software and integration that might prove short-lived, and know that a depressingly ubiquitous company that specializes in hardware/software integration will get the UI right with their particular model because it's their only particular model. Hardware bugs, like the iPhone 4's antenna, and restrictive markets seem not to be as important as UI seamlessness. Think of all the iPhone users in New York and San Francisco in 2008, all the people who owned and apparently loved using them despite the total unreliability of AT&T phone service in those areas -- the UI, design and ergonomics were more important to them than the device's primary function!
BTW:
Since it's my duty to help people to disagree with me, here's an argument for you to use:
One huge exception to your so-called Unlaundered Curve, Presti (you eunuch), is the goddamned household appliance. Even though the most popular appliances do more than less popular kinds, every dishwasher still washes dishes. Boo-yah &tc.
(Of course, the toaster has been replaced by a mini-oven.)