[WallyDuke]

crosswordbob, on 03 May 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

WallyDuke, on 03 May 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

FalKirk, on 03 May 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

AlexKorshunov, on 03 May 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

Android 4 much better than iOS.

First, only 4% of Android devices have Android 4.0.

Second, the iPad has an unheard of 98% customer satisfaction rating, with 82% saying that they are "very satisfied".

Source: Survey: 2012 iPad Satisfaction Reaches 98 Percent, MacObserver, Apr 2, 2012

When you come back with some support for your unsupported opinion and when you stop acting as if your opinions are facts, then we'll talk.

1. 100% of the Android devices in this article run ICS.
2. You site MacObserver for your pro-Apple propaganda? Nice!
3. This is kind of nit-picking, but simply calling something "better" implies it is an opinion and opinions need no support, they're just opinions, even when they're absurd.
You make some good points, but your bias shows through so much that it hurts your credibility.

• Correct.
• MacObserver were just reporting a survey actually done by Changewave
• I disagree. "I prefer Android" is an opinion. "Android is better for me" is an opinion. "Android is better" is—to my mind—a statement that needs support.

Your own bias is every bit as obvious, and with comments like "propaganda spewing pie-hole" you are in no position to accuse others of embarrassing themselves.

I didn't even look for the article as there was no link and very little to go on. I trust you are correct in what you say and as such I will concede that point to you.
Better alone with no further clarification as to how is purely subjective. Android is better at (anything), or Android is better because (anything) implies fact, but without any clarification, better alone is purely opinion. Sure, for that opinion to be worth anything, supporting facts are needed. If I say bagels are better than donuts, that is true, for me, and needs no factual support. If I say bagels are better than donuts because they have less sugar, then I now need to support that with facts. But alone it is purely opinion and anyone who reads into it any further is making something where there is nothing.
Biased against "propaganda spewing" I certainly am (although I will admit that in the past I have been guilty of said offense, I have since learned better). If that bias shows through in such scathing remarks as "propaganda spewing pie-hole", I apologize for offending anyone whom may have been offended apart from the person owning said "propaganda spewing pie-hole". If you dislike that, I apologize. I mean you no offense.

[WallyDuke]

42n81, on 03 May 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

WallyDuke, on 03 May 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

[snip]..... it is an opinion and opinions need no support, they're just opinions, even when they're absurd.
You make some good points, but your bias shows through so much that it hurts your credibility.

Actually, the best way to hurt your credibility around these parts is to express an opinion you are not ready to support.

There is a special place for that kind of opinion. Don't forget to flush after expressing one.

Unless, of course, that "opinion" is only a brainfart (i.e. you want to annoy people but have nothing of substance to offer), then just open a few Windows. (any version will do).

I agree. I wasn't endorsing the original poster's opinion, simply pointing out that it was just an opinion and it would be foolish for someone to take it as more than that. If you read the original comment, I doubt anyone would take that person's opinion too seriously based on that comment alone.

[jhenkinson]

nonseq, on 03 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

artzy65, on 03 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

I'm glad you said that, not me. I tired of taking the time to try to set Apple naysayers (tech geeks) straight about what the average consumer actually needs or wants. There's no point... they will just call me too stupid to figure out Android (or Windows, for that matter).

But the key here is this. Those very same Apple naysayers don't seem to have the insight, empathy, or vision to create a product of their own that will be as successful the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Mac. It also appears that they have zero concerns for the user if the user is not a techie or geek or if the user has a vision different than their own.

All they can do is pick nits, much like chimpanzees.

And now this is what I would call going one step too far. You make the generallisation that "Apple naysayers" blindly reject Apple products for no apparent reason and don't have a care about what other people think. And then you went on to insult those people, calling them chimpanzees. Ha, who's the one that show no insight and empathy now? Hypocite, that's what you are.

For all intents and purposes, Android satisfies the goals that it pursues, namely a free and open environment. Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices, that's perfectly fine with me, just remember that there is - and will continue to be - an ever growing Android Community.

If you can't live with that, meh, that's your problem.

This post has been edited by jhenkinson: 03 May 2012 - 06:40 PM

[RichardFieldhouse]

This seems a more balanced comparison than many I've read.

The one thing I would add - as a user of the Transformer 1 - is the benefit you get from the option of buying the keyboard dock. It works pretty well and comes with am extra battery.

The option of using a Swype-type keyboard on the Android tablets is also valuable in my view.

[nonseq]

jhenkinson, on 03 May 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

nonseq, on 03 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

artzy65, on 03 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

I'm glad you said that, not me. I tired of taking the time to try to set Apple naysayers (tech geeks) straight about what the average consumer actually needs or wants. There's no point... they will just call me too stupid to figure out Android (or Windows, for that matter).

But the key here is this. Those very same Apple naysayers don't seem to have the insight, empathy, or vision to create a product of their own that will be as successful the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Mac. It also appears that they have zero concerns for the user if the user is not a techie or geek or if the user has a vision different than their own.

All they can do is pick nits, much like chimpanzees.

And now this is what I would call going one step too far. You make the generallisation that "Apple naysayers" blindly reject Apple products for no apparent reason and don't have a care about what other people think. And then you went on to insult those people, calling them chimpanzees. Ha, who's the one that show no insight and empathy now? Hypocite, that's what you are.

For all intents and purposes, Android satisfies the goals that it pursues, namely a free and open environment. Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices, that's perfectly fine with me, just remember that there is - and will continue to be - an ever growing Android Community.

If you can't live with that, meh, that's your problem.

Actually my biggest problem with the Apple naysayers is that much of their argument encompasses denigrating Apple users as sheep, or shallow, or lazy. Your comment is a perfect example,

"Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices"

Spoonfed is uncalled for but typical of the average Apple naysayer who try to stem their insecurities by putting down those who make make decision different than their own.

This, coupled with the focus on specs over user experience and endless repetition of false claims about Apple failures (Antennagate and ridiculous battery/heat claims).

You might want to rethink your position about the "openness" of Android. Android users are under the thumb of Google, which controls the Android development arc, and implementation on the part of manufacturers who are dancing to the music called by the carriers. It's a nice mantra but it simply isn't true.

I stand behind my comments about Android apps and the absence of a viable Android Tablet market? Denial won't make my opinion any less valid. I have seen no substantiation for any kind of claim that a viable Android tablet market yet exists. It also seems dishonest to include the Kindle Fire in the Android tablet classification. Amazon makes no mention of Android on its K-Fire pages and seem to be focused on positioning the Fire as a Kindle device and only a Kindle device. Without the KFire sales figures included, the Android tablet market is anemic indeed.

It is great that there are those who favor and enjoy their Android tablet devices and have found applications that work for them. There just don't seem enough Android tablets in consumers' hands to achieve critical mass.

This post has been edited by nonseq: 04 May 2012 - 07:49 AM

[crosswordbob]

WallyDuke, on 03 May 2012 - 01:12 PM, said:

crosswordbob, on 03 May 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

WallyDuke, on 03 May 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

FalKirk, on 03 May 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

AlexKorshunov, on 03 May 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

Android 4 much better than iOS.

First, only 4% of Android devices have Android 4.0.

Second, the iPad has an unheard of 98% customer satisfaction rating, with 82% saying that they are "very satisfied".

Source: Survey: 2012 iPad Satisfaction Reaches 98 Percent, MacObserver, Apr 2, 2012

When you come back with some support for your unsupported opinion and when you stop acting as if your opinions are facts, then we'll talk.

1. 100% of the Android devices in this article run ICS.
2. You site MacObserver for your pro-Apple propaganda? Nice!
3. This is kind of nit-picking, but simply calling something "better" implies it is an opinion and opinions need no support, they're just opinions, even when they're absurd.
You make some good points, but your bias shows through so much that it hurts your credibility.

• Correct.
• MacObserver were just reporting a survey actually done by Changewave
• I disagree. "I prefer Android" is an opinion. "Android is better for me" is an opinion. "Android is better" is—to my mind—a statement that needs support.

Your own bias is every bit as obvious, and with comments like "propaganda spewing pie-hole" you are in no position to accuse others of embarrassing themselves.

I didn't even look for the article as there was no link and very little to go on. I trust you are correct in what you say and as such I will concede that point to you.
Better alone with no further clarification as to how is purely subjective. Android is better at (anything), or Android is better because (anything) implies fact, but without any clarification, better alone is purely opinion. Sure, for that opinion to be worth anything, supporting facts are needed. If I say bagels are better than donuts, that is true, for me, and needs no factual support. If I say bagels are better than donuts because they have less sugar, then I now need to support that with facts. But alone it is purely opinion and anyone who reads into it any further is making something where there is nothing.
Biased against "propaganda spewing" I certainly am (although I will admit that in the past I have been guilty of said offense, I have since learned better). If that bias shows through in such scathing remarks as "propaganda spewing pie-hole", I apologize for offending anyone whom may have been offended apart from the person owning said "propaganda spewing pie-hole". If you dislike that, I apologize. I mean you no offense.

Offended? No I have much thicker skin than that. I was merely pointing out that it does nothing for your credibility—just as you did to FalKirk. Dismissing FalKirk's comments as "propaganda" makes it quite clear that you are unprepared to address them objectively, thereby betraying your own bias.

And again, I have to disagree with your interpretation of the original comment. I know of no rule in English that classifies the statement "Android is better than iOS" as subjective merely due to the lack of a clarification. Moreover, the original poster goes on to conclude that the article was "terrible" and must have been paid for on this basis. Why would he conclude the article was paid for if his claim that Android is better were intended to be seen as subjective? I know I'm no fan of either Android or (for balance) OSX, but I don't go around accusing those who express a preference for either of shilling or propagandising because I understand that these opinions are subjective.

[PCCoder]

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

jhenkinson, on 03 May 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

nonseq, on 03 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

artzy65, on 03 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

I'm glad you said that, not me. I tired of taking the time to try to set Apple naysayers (tech geeks) straight about what the average consumer actually needs or wants. There's no point... they will just call me too stupid to figure out Android (or Windows, for that matter).

But the key here is this. Those very same Apple naysayers don't seem to have the insight, empathy, or vision to create a product of their own that will be as successful the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Mac. It also appears that they have zero concerns for the user if the user is not a techie or geek or if the user has a vision different than their own.

All they can do is pick nits, much like chimpanzees.

And now this is what I would call going one step too far. You make the generallisation that "Apple naysayers" blindly reject Apple products for no apparent reason and don't have a care about what other people think. And then you went on to insult those people, calling them chimpanzees. Ha, who's the one that show no insight and empathy now? Hypocite, that's what you are.

For all intents and purposes, Android satisfies the goals that it pursues, namely a free and open environment. Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices, that's perfectly fine with me, just remember that there is - and will continue to be - an ever growing Android Community.

If you can't live with that, meh, that's your problem.

Actually my biggest problem with the Apple naysayers is that much of their argument encompasses denigrating Apple users as sheep, or shallow, or lazy. Your comment is a perfect example,

"Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices"

Spoonfed is uncalled for but typical of the average Apple naysayer who try to stem their insecurities by putting down those who make make decision different than their own.

This, coupled with the focus on specs over user experience and endless repetition of false claims about Apple failures (Antennagate and ridiculous battery/heat claims).

You might want to rethink your position about the "openness" of Android. Android users are under the thumb of Google, which controls the Android development arc, and implementation on the part of manufacturers who are dancing to the music called by the carriers. It's a nice mantra but it simply isn't true.

I stand behind my comments about Android apps and the absence of a viable Android Tablet market? Denial won't make my opinion any less valid. I have seen no substantiation for any kind of claim that a viable Android tablet market yet exists. It also seems dishonest to include the Kindle Fire in the Android tablet classification. Amazon makes no mention of Android on its K-Fire pages and seem to be focused on positioning the Fire as a Kindle device and only a Kindle device. Without the KFire sales figures included, the Android tablet market is anemic indeed.

It is great that there are those who favor and enjoy their Android tablet devices and have found applications that work for them. There just don't seem enough Android tablets in consumers' hands to achieve critical mass.

It's not up to you to decide if Kindle is an Android tablet, Kindle uses Android as their OS, so it is dishonest to claim that Kindle isn't an Android. Since that is the case the argument that all Android users are under the thumb of Google goes right out the window as the largest group of Android tablets is under Amazons control not Google. Then there's products like the Nook, which you have to go out of your way to get the Google market on to. I think you are trying to compare products side by side without considering their companies intent, Apple has a small product line that is tightly controlled by Apple and only Apple, this is not what Google wanted to do or has tried to do.
I can't speak to others experience with the Android tablet market but everything I've ever wanted on my tablet has been there so I'm not sure what you would classify as a viable market but it seems perfectly viable to me.

[nonseq]

PCCoder, on 04 May 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

jhenkinson, on 03 May 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

nonseq, on 03 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

artzy65, on 03 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

I'm glad you said that, not me. I tired of taking the time to try to set Apple naysayers (tech geeks) straight about what the average consumer actually needs or wants. There's no point... they will just call me too stupid to figure out Android (or Windows, for that matter).

But the key here is this. Those very same Apple naysayers don't seem to have the insight, empathy, or vision to create a product of their own that will be as successful the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Mac. It also appears that they have zero concerns for the user if the user is not a techie or geek or if the user has a vision different than their own.

All they can do is pick nits, much like chimpanzees.

And now this is what I would call going one step too far. You make the generallisation that "Apple naysayers" blindly reject Apple products for no apparent reason and don't have a care about what other people think. And then you went on to insult those people, calling them chimpanzees. Ha, who's the one that show no insight and empathy now? Hypocite, that's what you are.

For all intents and purposes, Android satisfies the goals that it pursues, namely a free and open environment. Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices, that's perfectly fine with me, just remember that there is - and will continue to be - an ever growing Android Community.

If you can't live with that, meh, that's your problem.

Actually my biggest problem with the Apple naysayers is that much of their argument encompasses denigrating Apple users as sheep, or shallow, or lazy. Your comment is a perfect example,

"Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices"

Spoonfed is uncalled for but typical of the average Apple naysayer who try to stem their insecurities by putting down those who make make decision different than their own.

This, coupled with the focus on specs over user experience and endless repetition of false claims about Apple failures (Antennagate and ridiculous battery/heat claims).

You might want to rethink your position about the "openness" of Android. Android users are under the thumb of Google, which controls the Android development arc, and implementation on the part of manufacturers who are dancing to the music called by the carriers. It's a nice mantra but it simply isn't true.

I stand behind my comments about Android apps and the absence of a viable Android Tablet market? Denial won't make my opinion any less valid. I have seen no substantiation for any kind of claim that a viable Android tablet market yet exists. It also seems dishonest to include the Kindle Fire in the Android tablet classification. Amazon makes no mention of Android on its K-Fire pages and seem to be focused on positioning the Fire as a Kindle device and only a Kindle device. Without the KFire sales figures included, the Android tablet market is anemic indeed.

It is great that there are those who favor and enjoy their Android tablet devices and have found applications that work for them. There just don't seem enough Android tablets in consumers' hands to achieve critical mass.

It's not up to you to decide if Kindle is an Android tablet, Kindle uses Android as their OS, so it is dishonest to claim that Kindle isn't an Android. Since that is the case the argument that all Android users are under the thumb of Google goes right out the window as the largest group of Android tablets is under Amazons control not Google. Then there's products like the Nook, which you have to go out of your way to get the Google market on to. I think you are trying to compare products side by side without considering their companies intent, Apple has a small product line that is tightly controlled by Apple and only Apple, this is not what Google wanted to do or has tried to do.
I can't speak to others experience with the Android tablet market but everything I've ever wanted on my tablet has been there so I'm not sure what you would classify as a viable market but it seems perfectly viable to me.

OK, I acquiesce. So, I'll say that all Android users are under the thumb of Google except Kindle Fire and Nook users who are under the thumbs of Amazon and B&N.

[PCCoder]

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

PCCoder, on 04 May 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

Actually my biggest problem with the Apple naysayers is that much of their argument encompasses denigrating Apple users as sheep, or shallow, or lazy. Your comment is a perfect example,

"Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices"

Spoonfed is uncalled for but typical of the average Apple naysayer who try to stem their insecurities by putting down those who make make decision different than their own.

This, coupled with the focus on specs over user experience and endless repetition of false claims about Apple failures (Antennagate and ridiculous battery/heat claims).

You might want to rethink your position about the "openness" of Android. Android users are under the thumb of Google, which controls the Android development arc, and implementation on the part of manufacturers who are dancing to the music called by the carriers. It's a nice mantra but it simply isn't true.

I stand behind my comments about Android apps and the absence of a viable Android Tablet market? Denial won't make my opinion any less valid. I have seen no substantiation for any kind of claim that a viable Android tablet market yet exists. It also seems dishonest to include the Kindle Fire in the Android tablet classification. Amazon makes no mention of Android on its K-Fire pages and seem to be focused on positioning the Fire as a Kindle device and only a Kindle device. Without the KFire sales figures included, the Android tablet market is anemic indeed.

It is great that there are those who favor and enjoy their Android tablet devices and have found applications that work for them. There just don't seem enough Android tablets in consumers' hands to achieve critical mass.

It's not up to you to decide if Kindle is an Android tablet, Kindle uses Android as their OS, so it is dishonest to claim that Kindle isn't an Android. Since that is the case the argument that all Android users are under the thumb of Google goes right out the window as the largest group of Android tablets is under Amazons control not Google. Then there's products like the Nook, which you have to go out of your way to get the Google market on to. I think you are trying to compare products side by side without considering their companies intent, Apple has a small product line that is tightly controlled by Apple and only Apple, this is not what Google wanted to do or has tried to do.
I can't speak to others experience with the Android tablet market but everything I've ever wanted on my tablet has been there so I'm not sure what you would classify as a viable market but it seems perfectly viable to me.

OK, I acquiesce. So, I'll say that all Android users are under the thumb of Google except Kindle Fire and Nook users who are under the thumbs of Amazon and B&N.

There ya go! All these products put us under the thumb of one company or another, I guess that's the trade off for the fast evolution of the mobile market.

[Nuke61]

WallyDuke, on 03 May 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

1. 100% of the Android devices in this article run ICS.
2. You site MacObserver for your pro-Apple propaganda? Nice!
3. This is kind of nit-picking, but simply calling something "better" implies it is an opinion and opinions need no support, they're just opinions, even when they're absurd.
You make some good points, but your bias shows through so much that it hurts your credibility.

1) True, and it's also true that overall support is in the low single digits.
2) Better? ChangeWave Research, from which the MacObserver article was based.

3) I think, or for me, or IMO implies opinion. A statement implies that it's fact.

[WallyDuke]

crosswordbob, on 03 May 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

WallyDuke, on 03 May 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

FalKirk, on 03 May 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

AlexKorshunov, on 03 May 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

Android 4 much better than iOS.

First, only 4% of Android devices have Android 4.0.

Second, the iPad has an unheard of 98% customer satisfaction rating, with 82% saying that they are "very satisfied".

Source: Survey: 2012 iPad Satisfaction Reaches 98 Percent, MacObserver, Apr 2, 2012

When you come back with some support for your unsupported opinion and when you stop acting as if your opinions are facts, then we'll talk.

1. 100% of the Android devices in this article run ICS.
2. You site MacObserver for your pro-Apple propaganda? Nice!
3. This is kind of nit-picking, but simply calling something "better" implies it is an opinion and opinions need no support, they're just opinions, even when they're absurd.
You make some good points, but your bias shows through so much that it hurts your credibility.

• Correct.
• MacObserver were just reporting a survey actually done by Changewave
• I disagree. "I prefer Android" is an opinion. "Android is better for me" is an opinion. "Android is better" is—to my mind—a statement that needs support.

Your own bias is every bit as obvious, and with comments like "propaganda spewing pie-hole" you are in no position to accuse others of embarrassing themselves.

Here is how I see it. The author speaks quite highly of the iPad 2, recommends it as the best choice for many users and mentions one small issue with it that most people don't seem to care about. FalKirk then takes such offense to the negative statement that he berates the author in his comment. Biased? To me clearly. He then attacks the author by sarcastically listing some of the iPad 2's advantages as though the were disadvantages, despite the fact that the author states many of them in the article as his reasoning for recommending an iPad 2. Pro-Apple propaganda? To me, either FalKirk really didn't read the article, or yes, clearly. Was "propaganda spewing pie-hole" the best words to use, of course not, but I have no issues standing by them even though they could have been chosen better.
To me it is this simple. Did FalKirk read the whole article? If yes, then his comments (specifically regarding the iPad 2's "disadvantages") were absurd beyond all reason.

[crosswordbob]

WallyDuke, on 04 May 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Here is how I see it. The author speaks quite highly of the iPad 2, recommends it as the best choice for many users and mentions one small issue with it that most people don't seem to care about. FalKirk then takes such offense to the negative statement that he berates the author in his comment. Biased? To me clearly. He then attacks the author by sarcastically listing some of the iPad 2's advantages as though the were disadvantages, despite the fact that the author states many of them in the article as his reasoning for recommending an iPad 2. Pro-Apple propaganda? To me, either FalKirk really didn't read the article, or yes, clearly. Was "propaganda spewing pie-hole" the best words to use, of course not, but I have no issues standing by them even though they could have been chosen better.
To me it is this simple. Did FalKirk read the whole article? If yes, then his comments (specifically regarding the iPad 2's "disadvantages") were absurd beyond all reason.

OK, I agree that his second post (about the "limitations" of iOS' apps) was unnecessary, and though I wasn't really trying to defend that one, I muddied the water by lifting that phrase from your response to that post, so I apologise for that. I'm happy to draw a line under the whole thing if you are

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 04 May 2012 - 01:00 PM

[linkgx1]

FalKirk, on 03 May 2012 - 08:09 AM, said:

"Apple continues to have the more mature app ecosystem, even if your capabilities are sometimes limited by Apple’s walled-garden heavy-handedness."

"Somewhat limited"? How so? More Apps, better quality apps, apps developed for iOS first and Android second if ever, less viruses, less piracy, less clones, and easier to buy and for.

How exactly is that "limiting"?

Because, for one, you are making assumptunes.

IT IS LIMITED. And this is coming from a guy that has a Galaxy S and iPhone 4 S. Your argument is invalid. You can live in a Communist country, have a lot of freedom, but you still live in a communist country.

It's limiting because you have to go through THEIR app store and THEY are in control of everything. That's a trade off you're talking about, IT'S STILL LIMITED.

YOU act like the word 'limiting' is a bad thing.

[FalKirk]

PCCoder, on 03 May 2012 - 10:08 AM, said:

FalKirk, on 03 May 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

AlexKorshunov, on 03 May 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

Android 4 much better than iOS.

First, only 4% of Android devices have Android 4.0.

100% of the Android tablets listed in this article use Android 4.0

Excellent point. My mistake.

[WallyDuke]

crosswordbob, on 04 May 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

WallyDuke, on 04 May 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Here is how I see it. The author speaks quite highly of the iPad 2, recommends it as the best choice for many users and mentions one small issue with it that most people don't seem to care about. FalKirk then takes such offense to the negative statement that he berates the author in his comment. Biased? To me clearly. He then attacks the author by sarcastically listing some of the iPad 2's advantages as though the were disadvantages, despite the fact that the author states many of them in the article as his reasoning for recommending an iPad 2. Pro-Apple propaganda? To me, either FalKirk really didn't read the article, or yes, clearly. Was "propaganda spewing pie-hole" the best words to use, of course not, but I have no issues standing by them even though they could have been chosen better.
To me it is this simple. Did FalKirk read the whole article? If yes, then his comments (specifically regarding the iPad 2's "disadvantages") were absurd beyond all reason.

OK, I agree that his second post (about the "limitations" of iOS' apps) was unnecessary, and though I wasn't really trying to defend that one, I muddied the water by lifting that phrase from your response to that post, so I apologise for that. I'm happy to draw a line under the whole thing if you are

Certainly. I never meant to start what I did, with who I did. I read a comment that I found quite absurd and maybe overreacted a little. I shouldn't let it bother me so much. Live and learn.

This post has been edited by WallyDuke: 04 May 2012 - 08:42 PM

[jhenkinson]

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

PCCoder, on 04 May 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

Actually my biggest problem with the Apple naysayers is that much of their argument encompasses denigrating Apple users as sheep, or shallow, or lazy. Your comment is a perfect example,

"Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices"

Spoonfed is uncalled for but typical of the average Apple naysayer who try to stem their insecurities by putting down those who make make decision different than their own.

This, coupled with the focus on specs over user experience and endless repetition of false claims about Apple failures (Antennagate and ridiculous battery/heat claims).

You might want to rethink your position about the "openness" of Android. Android users are under the thumb of Google, which controls the Android development arc, and implementation on the part of manufacturers who are dancing to the music called by the carriers. It's a nice mantra but it simply isn't true.

I stand behind my comments about Android apps and the absence of a viable Android Tablet market? Denial won't make my opinion any less valid. I have seen no substantiation for any kind of claim that a viable Android tablet market yet exists. It also seems dishonest to include the Kindle Fire in the Android tablet classification. Amazon makes no mention of Android on its K-Fire pages and seem to be focused on positioning the Fire as a Kindle device and only a Kindle device. Without the KFire sales figures included, the Android tablet market is anemic indeed.

It is great that there are those who favor and enjoy their Android tablet devices and have found applications that work for them. There just don't seem enough Android tablets in consumers' hands to achieve critical mass.

It's not up to you to decide if Kindle is an Android tablet, Kindle uses Android as their OS, so it is dishonest to claim that Kindle isn't an Android. Since that is the case the argument that all Android users are under the thumb of Google goes right out the window as the largest group of Android tablets is under Amazons control not Google. Then there's products like the Nook, which you have to go out of your way to get the Google market on to. I think you are trying to compare products side by side without considering their companies intent, Apple has a small product line that is tightly controlled by Apple and only Apple, this is not what Google wanted to do or has tried to do.
I can't speak to others experience with the Android tablet market but everything I've ever wanted on my tablet has been there so I'm not sure what you would classify as a viable market but it seems perfectly viable to me.

OK, I acquiesce. So, I'll say that all Android users are under the thumb of Google except Kindle Fire and Nook users who are under the thumbs of Amazon and B&N.

oh? now that's something worth questioning.

Tell me, what is your definition of "openness" (of an OS)?

Does being "open" mean an OS has to be able to be mass-reproduced from scratch with ease by any user who want to use it? Does it mean that every user should be able to write their very own flavor of that OS based on the frameworks and codes that it provides?

Such things are ridiculous, for as far as I know, there aren't millions versions of any OS going around. So with your logic, nothing can ever be "open" (while people on the market and also in the IT industry would agree that there are, and I'm an amateur coder as a hobby in my free time by the way, so I know these stuffs).

An OS needs someone with authority and expertise to provide its backbone, but that doesn't stop it from being open. "Open" in this industry generally means it can be improved, expanded, customised and shared by the community, by users who are passionate about it. If you ever doubt that there is continual development for Android that doesn't come from Google but from the Android Community, then I invite you to head over to the xda-developers forum, you can see an overwhelming list of Android devices being supported there.

If you don't want to use Android, fine, no one would try to win you over. I know I wouldn't. It doesn't make me happy to invite someone who doesn't appreciate the value of Android to use it.

As for those who claim iOS is better than Android because it has hundreds of thousands or even millions of compatible apps, I want to ask you this: How many apps do you currently have on your iPad/iPhone or whatever? hundreds? thousands? I doubt it.

I have just about 20 or so apps on my Nook Tablet but each of them does a splendid job of whatever I installed it for, and over the last 6 months of usage, I haven't had any trouble with them. I would call that a great user experience, wouldn't you agree? So why should I pay more than twice what I paid for my tablet to get an iPad? Can anyone guarantee that the iPad will provide me an experience that is more than two times better than what I'm currently having?

And don't try to put words in my mouth, I never said anything about caring more about specs over user experience. Specs are important but not everything that make a tablet a great buy. Having said that, it is undeniable that specs and user experience have a very high correlation. No one can have an amazing user experience on a miserable set of hardware.

This post has been edited by jhenkinson: 04 May 2012 - 11:49 PM

[42n81]

PCCoder, on 04 May 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

nonseq, on 04 May 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

jhenkinson, on 03 May 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

nonseq, on 03 May 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

artzy65, on 03 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

I'm glad you said that, not me. I tired of taking the time to try to set Apple naysayers (tech geeks) straight about what the average consumer actually needs or wants. There's no point... they will just call me too stupid to figure out Android (or Windows, for that matter).

But the key here is this. Those very same Apple naysayers don't seem to have the insight, empathy, or vision to create a product of their own that will be as successful the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Mac. It also appears that they have zero concerns for the user if the user is not a techie or geek or if the user has a vision different than their own.

All they can do is pick nits, much like chimpanzees.

And now this is what I would call going one step too far. You make the generallisation that "Apple naysayers" blindly reject Apple products for no apparent reason and don't have a care about what other people think. And then you went on to insult those people, calling them chimpanzees. Ha, who's the one that show no insight and empathy now? Hypocite, that's what you are.

For all intents and purposes, Android satisfies the goals that it pursues, namely a free and open environment. Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices, that's perfectly fine with me, just remember that there is - and will continue to be - an ever growing Android Community.

If you can't live with that, meh, that's your problem.

Actually my biggest problem with the Apple naysayers is that much of their argument encompasses denigrating Apple users as sheep, or shallow, or lazy. Your comment is a perfect example,

"Those who are not happy with tweaking and customising or just want to be spoon-fed stuffs can continue to use iOS devices"

Spoonfed is uncalled for but typical of the average Apple naysayer who try to stem their insecurities by putting down those who make make decision different than their own.

This, coupled with the focus on specs over user experience and endless repetition of false claims about Apple failures (Antennagate and ridiculous battery/heat claims).

You might want to rethink your position about the "openness" of Android. Android users are under the thumb of Google, which controls the Android development arc, and implementation on the part of manufacturers who are dancing to the music called by the carriers. It's a nice mantra but it simply isn't true.

I stand behind my comments about Android apps and the absence of a viable Android Tablet market? Denial won't make my opinion any less valid. I have seen no substantiation for any kind of claim that a viable Android tablet market yet exists. It also seems dishonest to include the Kindle Fire in the Android tablet classification. Amazon makes no mention of Android on its K-Fire pages and seem to be focused on positioning the Fire as a Kindle device and only a Kindle device. Without the KFire sales figures included, the Android tablet market is anemic indeed.

It is great that there are those who favor and enjoy their Android tablet devices and have found applications that work for them. There just don't seem enough Android tablets in consumers' hands to achieve critical mass.

It's not up to you to decide if Kindle is an Android tablet, Kindle uses Android as their OS, so it is dishonest to claim that Kindle isn't an Android. Since that is the case the argument that all Android users are under the thumb of Google goes right out the window as the largest group of Android tablets is under Amazons control not Google. Then there's products like the Nook, which you have to go out of your way to get the Google market on to. I think you are trying to compare products side by side without considering their companies intent, Apple has a small product line that is tightly controlled by Apple and only Apple, this is not what Google wanted to do or has tried to do.
I can't speak to others experience with the Android tablet market but everything I've ever wanted on my tablet has been there so I'm not sure what you would classify as a viable market but it seems perfectly viable to me.

It's interesting to note, however, that the Kindle Fire, easily the most commercially successful implementation of Android on tablets uses such a small subset of Android functionality that it can hardly be considered representative of the Android experience. The Kindle Fire uses Android in much the same way that Apple TV uses iOS, as a readily available and inexpensive means to achieve an end, but hardly a selling feature. Yet the Kindle Fire's sales numbers are heaped onto the Android pile to prove that Android is gaining traction in the tablet market.

What next, do we start considering as personal computers all commercial and consumer devices with some form of embedded Linux kernel to show that the Linux installed base surpasses that of Microsoft?

This post has been edited by 42n81: 05 May 2012 - 02:35 AM

[jhenkinson]

42n81, on 05 May 2012 - 02:34 AM, said:

It's interesting to note, however, that the Kindle Fire, easily the most commercially successful implementation of Android on tablets uses such a small subset of Android functionality that it can hardly be considered representative of the Android experience. The Kindle Fire uses Android in much the same way that Apple TV uses iOS, as a readily available and inexpensive means to achieve an end, but hardly a selling feature. Yet the Kindle Fire's sales numbers are heaped onto the Android pile to prove that Android is gaining traction in the tablet market.

What next, do we start considering as personal computers all commercial and consumer devices with some form of embedded Linux kernel to show that the Linux installed base surpasses that of Microsoft?

That's quite a weak example to give. It's funny that people tend to forget to mention that because the Kindle Fire is built to be readily compatible with Android (since it uses Android OS with just a custom UI on top) it can be easily modded by installing custom ROMs that give true Android experience. Are there people who just want to buy the Kindle Fire because they can get their hands on an excellent piece of hardware (as at the end of last year) for a great price (again, as at the end of last year) and not because of the ecosystem from Amazon? Of course there are! Plenty of my friends do that. Purchased it and, whoshh, the stock software goes out the window, and here comes Android (All of this doesn't mean to say the stock software isn't Android, make no mistakes, it IS, with a different UI). Now if you ask any of those people "Does Kindle Fire use Android? Is it an Android tablet?". Most likely you will get the answer "Are you kidding, mate? Of course it's Android, what are you talking about?".

This post has been edited by jhenkinson: 05 May 2012 - 03:14 AM

[Nuke61]

jhenkinson, on 04 May 2012 - 11:44 PM, said:

I have just about 20 or so apps on my Nook Tablet but each of them does a splendid job of whatever I installed it for, and over the last 6 months of usage, I haven't had any trouble with them. I would call that a great user experience, wouldn't you agree? So why should I pay more than twice what I paid for my tablet to get an iPad? Can anyone guarantee that the iPad will provide me an experience that is more than two times better than what I'm currently having?

If your apps do a splendid job, I would also call that a great user experience, and only you can figure out whether spending more for an iPad would make any sense. I can only tell you why I chose to spend 4 times as much on a 64 Gig, 4G equipped iPad instead of a Fire:
Because of its popularity, apps are available for everything I've wanted, and they are actually designed for the iPad, not just phone apps that are rescaled. A large number have already been released that have "Retina" display support. I've tried a few 7" screen tablets at stores and a co-workers, and I like the larger size since the iPad has mostly replaced my laptop. The hi-res screen is fantastic and makes it much easier to do remote login to my desktop computer, which also has a high resolution display of 2560x1440. The Fire only had WiFi and as much as I used my v1 iPad I knew I wanted a cell enabled tablet to replace it. Lastly, my employer allows access to corporate email, but only supports iPads - this is despite the fact that only phone allowed is the Blackberry.

[jhenkinson]

Nuke61, on 05 May 2012 - 06:14 AM, said:

jhenkinson, on 04 May 2012 - 11:44 PM, said:

I have just about 20 or so apps on my Nook Tablet but each of them does a splendid job of whatever I installed it for, and over the last 6 months of usage, I haven't had any trouble with them. I would call that a great user experience, wouldn't you agree? So why should I pay more than twice what I paid for my tablet to get an iPad? Can anyone guarantee that the iPad will provide me an experience that is more than two times better than what I'm currently having?

If your apps do a splendid job, I would also call that a great user experience, and only you can figure out whether spending more for an iPad would make any sense. I can only tell you why I chose to spend 4 times as much on a 64 Gig, 4G equipped iPad instead of a Fire:
Because of its popularity, apps are available for everything I've wanted, and they are actually designed for the iPad, not just phone apps that are rescaled. A large number have already been released that have "Retina" display support. I've tried a few 7" screen tablets at stores and a co-workers, and I like the larger size since the iPad has mostly replaced my laptop. The hi-res screen is fantastic and makes it much easier to do remote login to my desktop computer, which also has a high resolution display of 2560x1440. The Fire only had WiFi and as much as I used my v1 iPad I knew I wanted a cell enabled tablet to replace it. Lastly, my employer allows access to corporate email, but only supports iPads - this is despite the fact that only phone allowed is the Blackberry.

Thank you. (honestly, no sarcasm) All I want is a discussion in a civil manner with arguments that make sense. But somehow I find it exceedingly rare around these parts. Your last comment is one of the few that make sense. I appreciate the fact that you made the point about only I know what price point, what features are right for me.

People tend to forget that all these machines - desktops, laptops, netbooks, ultrabooks, tablets ... - are ultimately PC (yes, no matter how hard Steve Jobs or the folks over there at Apple may try to convince people otherwise, tablets are still "PC" (which stands for Personal Computer, sorry for stating the obvious)if not even more so). PCs are all about YOU, the user, the purchaser. It's your money that you use to buy it. It's a great purchase, no matter which device you choose, when and only when it serves all the purposes that YOU buy it for, and at the price that YOU are happy with.

iPad? Unbiasedly speaking, it's a good device with a wide range of features, as you pointed out above.

Personally, do I need all of its features? No. Am I happy with the price I have to pay for it? No. ==> Don't buy.

Kindle Fire? As a matter of fact, it is the first tablet that hits the market at the $200 mark right upon its release, and with decent specs too.

Personally, is it enough for me? No. The lack of physical buttons trouble me, and then the lack of the SDcard slot ultimately pushes me to purchase the Nook Tablet.

Now, before any Kindle Fire fan jump on me again, I do know that Amazon advertised that Kindle Fire users get all the benefits with cloud storage and those sorts of thing. But, again, as matter of personal preference, I have never been a fan of cloud storage. But even if you look at it from a logical perspective, Kindle Fire is a Wifi-only model right? How will you get hold of your contents when Wifi isn't available? Ah, bummer there.

So yeah, that's how I justified the $50 premium of the Nook Tablet over the Kindle Fire. Now that's one "personal" tablet

This post has been edited by jhenkinson: 05 May 2012 - 07:05 AM