I think the article presents a naive point of view. True it might be good to build a less expensive tablet designed only for certain tasks, but that won't satisfy many people. Look at the NookColor. It cost half the lowest price of an iPad, and was designed only for a few games and apps and to read B&N ePubs. However, few people seemed content with that and immediately tried to root it and make it into a cheap tablet. I think that will be the reaction to any tablet designed to sale around $200. People will hope to make it into something it can never be. I don't blame anyone for that as the economy is in the dumpster right now and we all want to stretch what little funds we have as far as we can. But one thing I learned a long time ago is that buying an inexpensive item then trying to get it to act like its expensive cousin either doesn't work at all or it winds up costing as much as the expensive cousin did in the first place.

As far as the iPad bashing goes, well I hate Steve Jobs with a passion, I hate the Apple Cult wherein anything Apple does is thought to be wonderful. Hell, I hate that mentality whenever it rears its ugly and yes stupid head--many companies have cult followings including the Android cult attached to Google. But I finally bought an iPad because it simply gets the job done, and very elegantly. Yes I wish like hell that it was more like a PC, but after being totally disappointed time and again by Android tablets I decided to buy from the devil and at least have a tablet on which I could get accomplished what I needed to without being totally annoyed by its shortcomings or twelve thousand different builds each of which is going to react in a unique way with an app--[cough] Android [/cough].