Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2012 09:09 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Android accounted for 39% of the market in the final three months of last year, up from 29% a year earlier, Strategy Analytics said. Apple's share fell to 58% from 68%. Microsoft's share stood at 1.5%." Really now.
Order by: Score:
Kindle Fire
by WorknMan on Thu 26th Jan 2012 09:43 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Can/should the Kindle Fire be considered an Android tablet? I mean, technically it runs Android under the hood, but is severely neutered, has most of anything Android-related ripped from the UI (esp the Google apps) and Amazon doesn't even advertise it as such.

Also, I doubt many iPad sales were lost due to the Kindle Fire... unless you really think a 7" $200 tablet competes with a 10" $500 tablet?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Kindle Fire
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2012 09:59 UTC in reply to "Kindle Fire"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Does it matter, really? I love that the iPad is losing some share so we can end up with a more competitive market place. I bought my iPad 2 last summer because it was quite clearly the best tablet. It probably still is today, but with competition heating up, it won't be long before the difference isn't so clear-cut anymore.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

Does it matter, really?


The title of this article is "Android's Share of Tablet Market Jumps" so in that context, yes it matters greatly. If ultimately the Kindle Fire isn't an Android tablet then likely Android's market share didn't jump very much if at all.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Kindle Fire
by Beta on Thu 26th Jan 2012 20:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Kindle Fire"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

The title of this article is "Android's Share of Tablet Market Jumps" so in that context, yes it matters greatly. If ultimately the Kindle Fire isn't an Android tablet then likely Android's market share didn't jump very much if at all.


It still runs Android software. So yes, it matters in so far as it is included.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Fri 27th Jan 2012 00:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

It still runs Android software. So yes, it matters in so far as it is included.


As I said in another post, go to the Kindle Fire page and find where it says it's running Android. If the manufacturer of the device doesn't say it's running Android, and it certainly doesn't pass Google's definition of a device that can call itself an Android device, how is it an Android device? Why should Google get the market share credit, why isn't the Fire split out into a different category when clearly Amazon means to differentiate it?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Kindle Fire
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 27th Jan 2012 10:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Kindle Fire"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Go to the Kindle Fire page and find where it says it's running Android. If the manufacturer of the device doesn't say it's running Android, and it certainly doesn't pass Google's definition of a device that can call itself an Android device, how is it an Android device?


It runs Android applications just fine?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Fri 27th Jan 2012 15:52 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

"Go to the Kindle Fire page and find where it says it's running Android. If the manufacturer of the device doesn't say it's running Android, and it certainly doesn't pass Google's definition of a device that can call itself an Android device, how is it an Android device?


It runs Android applications just fine?
"

(In theory) so will the Playbook.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Kindle Fire
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sat 28th Jan 2012 06:11 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Kindle Fire"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

No, the play book will play *some* android apps, not all or even most. Anything doing anything with hardware, or certain apis, or using native code via the NDK will not work.

I'm not aware of a single android app that will not work on the fire.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by kristoph on Fri 27th Jan 2012 19:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

I think that the Kindle is quite a different device from an iPad so it's success does not necessarily augur the coming of iPad competitors.

Now, that said, Apple's share of the marker will almost certainly fall though I personally believe that it will be because of the arrival of Microsoft/Windows 8 tablets rather than Android tablets if for no other reason then that many PC manufacturers will build hybrid netbook/tablet devices.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Kindle Fire
by moondevil on Thu 26th Jan 2012 10:05 UTC in reply to "Kindle Fire"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Also, I doubt many iPad sales were lost due to the Kindle Fire... unless you really think a 7" $200 tablet competes with a 10" $500 tablet?


For the people that use tablets to read ebooks, check email, play some games and browse online while waiting for others in a coffee shop, it sure does.

Reply Score: 11

RE: Kindle Fire
by bnolsen on Thu 26th Jan 2012 14:04 UTC in reply to "Kindle Fire"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

or do you think a 10" 500USD tablet can compete with a 200USD 7" tablet?

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by twitterfire on Thu 26th Jan 2012 16:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

or do you think a 10" 500USD tablet can compete with a 200USD 7" tablet?


Yes it can. In fact the 500 USD tablet would probably cost 200 USD if it weren't for the very high profit margin.

Kindle Fire and B&N Nook Tablet cost much less because the profit margin is very small, because the manufacturers are making money by selling content, not the actual hardware.

To see if some hardware can compete with another hardware, don't look to the price or what some fanboi are saying. Just go look to some benchmarks: go look at Quadrant, Neocore, GLbenchmark etc. figures and judge for yourself.

More expensive is not always better. It should be, but it's not.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Kindle Fire
by leos on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Kindle Fire"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

To see if some hardware can compete with another hardware, don't look to the price or what some fanboi are saying. Just go look to some benchmarks: go look at Quadrant, Neocore, GLbenchmark etc. figures and judge for yourself.


Yes, please do show us these benchmarks showing that a kindle fire is close to an iPad2 in performance.

Let alone build quality, UI responsiveness, app selection, long term support, etc.. Cmon now let's not delude ourselves.
I drive a Hyundai, it's nice and gets me where I want to go, but I accept it's not the same as a INSERT_PREMIUM_BRAND. No sense in justifying what isn't true.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Kindle Fire
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sat 28th Jan 2012 06:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Kindle Fire"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yes, but a Honda's pretty darn close to an Acura
Toyota's are pretty much lexus'

Those are probably more apt comparisons that the ones you were considering. Might be slightly less good in some areas you probably don't care about unless you're an asshole, but pretty much the exact same thing.

Plus, the fire is an Amazon product, they've done a pretty good job supporting kindles. I don't think they'll ever be End of lifed.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Kindle Fire
by lemur2 on Fri 27th Jan 2012 00:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Kindle Fire"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

More expensive is not always better. It should be, but it's not.


I would go further. I would contend that he most expensive, most well-known brand is NEVER the best value for money. Likewise, the cheapest no-name brand product available is rarely the best value for money.

I would maintain hat the best value-for-money is almost always to be found in later-to-market middle-priced products.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Kindle Fire
by kristoph on Fri 27th Jan 2012 19:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Kindle Fire"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

I have both of these devices (as well as several other Android tablets and even a Microsoft Windows 8 tablet) and let me just say that the Kindle can't compete as a 'tablet' with many of these other products.

The Kindle is a media consumption device and it's ok for some light gaming (but even my 5 year old can see the difference between Angry Birds on the Kindle and the iPad and prefers the iPad).

It's not in the same category as an iPad which is always readily apparent to a casual observer (which is why the arrival of the Kindle had no impact on Apple's iPad sales).

Reply Score: 1

RE: Kindle Fire
by dsmogor on Thu 26th Jan 2012 16:02 UTC in reply to "Kindle Fire"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

I believe it's the analysts muddying the waters accounting fire as an Android tablet which it clearly isn't.
Soon it will have as much in common with Android as Meego or Webos.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Kindle Fire
by broken_symlink on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:20 UTC in reply to "Kindle Fire"
broken_symlink Member since:
2005-07-06

[quote]Also, I doubt many iPad sales were lost due to the Kindle Fire... unless you really think a 7" $200 tablet competes with a 10" $500 tablet?[/quote]

I know for me it did. The main reason I got a 7in. android tablet vs. an ipad is because of portability. I can literally just put my tablet in my jacket pocket or the pocket of my sweatshirt and go.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Kindle Fire
by jared_wilkes on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:41 UTC in reply to "Kindle Fire"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by OMRebel on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.


If that is the case, should a jailbroken iOS device be counted in Apple's numbers?

Edited 2012-01-26 17:55 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Thu 26th Jan 2012 18:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

"I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.


If that is the case, should a jailbroken iOS device be counted in Apple's numbers?
"

A jailbroken iOS device is equivalent to a rooted Android device, no one is saying rooted Android devices shouldn't be considered in the Android count. We're talking about devices (e.g. the Fire) which are not claiming or trying to be an Android(tm) device, they just happen to be using a heavily modified version of the open source Android release as the basis for a custom proprietary device.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Kindle Fire
by OMRebel on Thu 26th Jan 2012 19:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Kindle Fire"
OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

"[q]I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.


If that is the case, should a jailbroken iOS device be counted in Apple's numbers?
"

A jailbroken iOS device is equivalent to a rooted Android device, no one is saying rooted Android devices shouldn't be considered in the Android count. We're talking about devices (e.g. the Fire) which are not claiming or trying to be an Android(tm) device, they just happen to be using a heavily modified version of the open source Android release as the basis for a custom proprietary device. [/q]

Not to try to split hairs or anything, but the OP was speaking of legally running the Google Market on modified Android OS's. Keep in Mind, Apple has stated that they think it's illegal to jailbreak their devices.

In addition, how much modification would you believe is required to discount a device as an Android device? Manufacturers modify Android (such as the Sense UI), and then you have Cyanogenmod and other custom ROMs, etc... Pretty much every Android device out there has a modified version of the Android OS running on it.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Fri 27th Jan 2012 00:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

Not to try to split hairs or anything, but the OP was speaking of legally running the Google Market on modified Android OS's. Keep in Mind, Apple has stated that they think it's illegal to jailbreak their devices.

In addition, how much modification would you believe is required to discount a device as an Android device? Manufacturers modify Android (such as the Sense UI), and then you have Cyanogenmod and other custom ROMs, etc... Pretty much every Android device out there has a modified version of the Android OS running on it.


Go to the Kindle Fire page and find where it says it's running Android. If the manufacturer of the device doesn't say it's running Android, and it certainly doesn't pass Google's definition of a device that can call itself an Android device, how is it an Android device?

If you bought something claiming to be an Android device, or an iOS device for that matter, the fact that you changed it later doesn't impact the sales numbers. You bought an Android or iOS device. Similarly, if you buy a PC running Windows and replace Windows with Linux, you still bought a Windows PC and Microsoft can rightly count it as such. If you buy a Kindle Fire did you ever actually buy an Android device in the first place?

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Kindle Fire
by OMRebel on Fri 27th Jan 2012 14:30 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Kindle Fire"
OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

Go to the Kindle Fire page and find where it says it's running Android. If the manufacturer of the device doesn't say it's running Android, and it certainly doesn't pass Google's definition of a device that can call itself an Android device, how is it an Android device?

If you bought something claiming to be an Android device, or an iOS device for that matter, the fact that you changed it later doesn't impact the sales numbers. You bought an Android or iOS device. Similarly, if you buy a PC running Windows and replace Windows with Linux, you still bought a Windows PC and Microsoft can rightly count it as such. If you buy a Kindle Fire did you ever actually buy an Android device in the first place?


For your first claim - Android is mentioned on the front page twice. Once in a prominent quote by CNET, and the other is within Amazon's own description when it says "Amazon Appstore for Android". Wasn't hard to see at all, and most people out there actually know it's running Android. You can install any Android app (for Android 2.3 and prior) without any problems on it. It is Amazon that blocks Google's Market - not Google.

To answer your last question - yes, absolutely. The Kindle Fire runs Android 2.3 with a customized UI (just as HTC customizes the UI to run Sense or Samsung's TouchWiz).

See, that is one of the really great things about Android - you don't have to be running pure AOSP. You can tailor the OS to your wishes and needs. Bottom line - the Kindle Fire runs Android 2.3, and is an Android tablet. Amazon says so and the operating system is there that backs it up.

Edited 2012-01-27 14:47 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Kindle Fire
by rhavyn on Fri 27th Jan 2012 16:00 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Kindle Fire"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

For your first claim - Android is mentioned on the front page twice. Once in a prominent quote by CNET, and the other is within Amazon's own description when it says "Amazon Appstore for Android". Wasn't hard to see at all, and most people out there actually know it's running Android. You can install any Android app (for Android 2.3 and prior) without any problems on it. It is Amazon that blocks Google's Market - not Google.


Both of the mentions of Android are for the kinds of applications it can run. The RIM Playbook is (in theory) supposed to be able to run Android applications too, does that mean it should be counted towards Google's market share? The fact that Amazon blocks Google's Market and all Android branding is the point, Amazon doesn't call it an Android device. Why should the Fire get counted towards Google's market share (because, let's be honest, that is what being called an Android device means) instead of being able to see Amazon's platform on it's own?

To answer your last question - yes, absolutely. The Kindle Fire runs Android 2.3 with a customized UI (just as HTC customizes the UI to run Sense or Samsung's TouchWiz).


Except HTC and Samsung say they are selling Android devices. Amazon does not one time say the Fire is running Android. If the manufacturer doesn't want to be associated with Android, why are they forced to be associated?

Again, since Amazon clearly doesn't label this an Android device, why are so many people insisting that it be counted as one?

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Kindle Fire
by Stephen! on Fri 27th Jan 2012 22:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Kindle Fire"
Stephen! Member since:
2007-11-24

I think it's only appropriate to not count as Android what cannot use legally the "Android" trademark -- which includes both the Nook and the Fire.


If nothing else, if it's not technically Android, they should at least be immune to Microsoft's patent threats against Android.

Reply Score: 2

Market share or sales or does it matter?
by Headrush on Thu 26th Jan 2012 12:00 UTC
Headrush
Member since:
2006-01-03

I'm always leary of what Christmas period sales mean for any product.
You have a lot of sales by 3rd parties and wonder how many products are bought vs. actually used. (which I would consider part of the market)

I've seen iPhones, Android phones, Blackberries and iPads, but I have yet to see a single Android tablet in the wild. Maybe it's just a coincidence or where I live but you'd think at "39% of the market" I would have by now.

From the last Apple financial numbers I wonder if there really is substantial competition in the tablet market, but only between Android and MS based tablets and not the iPad. For us consumers hopefully other tablet market makers target are still targeting the iPad and not just other Android tablet makers and trying to "own" that second share of the market.

Reply Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The "I haven't seen one"-arguments are meaningless. Other than my own and my parents' iPad 2 (both of which *I* bought), I have never seen an iPad in the wild. Not a single one.

Reply Score: 2

bosco_bearbank Member since:
2005-10-12

I've seen one iPad and one Toshiba Thrive in the wild.

Reply Score: 2

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

When I have visitors at work who try to sell my something they often pull an iPad to do a presentation.

I have seen also some iPads outside of work, but a lot of people mention they have one.

Reply Score: 2

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

The "I haven't seen one"-arguments are meaningless. Other than my own and my parents' iPad 2 (both of which *I* bought), I have never seen an iPad in the wild. Not a single one.


I've seen plenty. Naturally not as many as smartphones, but on a ferry, plane, coffee shops, business meetings. Many many people are taking iPads instead of laptops to meetings now. Yet to see a single Android tablet.
One playbook, but that guy was from Waterloo ;)

Reply Score: 2

broken_symlink Member since:
2005-07-06

I see ipads all over the place at school. Ironically the only other tablet I've seen in the wild is a touchpad.

Reply Score: 2

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Thom,
I invite you to travel on the 18:25 from Waterloo to Alton. I saw at least 10 iPads in use the other day.
Mind you, you will probably have to stand as far as Farnham...

Reply Score: 2

sc3252 Member since:
2005-09-06

I concur, I have not seen a single ipad in the wild, so they must not be selling...

Reply Score: 3

ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

We hosted an exchange student in our home 3 years ago, and I noticed that his laptop ran Ubuntu. You'd think if Linux was really at less than 1% of the market, that wouldn't happen.

Unless coincidences do happen, sample sets of one are irrelevant, and what you see "in the wild" is affected by the wild in which you choose to live?

(BTW, I use a work-supplied iPad while my wife uses - and uses and uses - her Kindle Fire. They are both excellent products.)

Reply Score: 6

pepa Member since:
2005-07-08

Apparently here in Thailand, marketing is very important: I really only see iPads, no other tablets (apart from the 2 Chinese Androids I own).

Reply Score: 2

a lot of overlap
by unclefester on Thu 26th Jan 2012 12:49 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

Many of the new high end Android phones have very large screens (up to 5.3" on the Galaxy Note) a lot of RAM and a powerful CPU. They are just as much mini-tablets as phones.

Edited 2012-01-26 12:51 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: a lot of overlap
by dsmogor on Thu 26th Jan 2012 16:05 UTC in reply to "a lot of overlap"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

That's the google POV: from 4.0 upwards, you develop for Android, and then take form factor differences (which include tablets) into account. Esp. new crops of phones are going to feature screen res > ipads.
The difference between 5.3'' note and 7'' isn't really substantial.

Reply Score: 2

Would be easier if we knew breakdown.......
by OMRebel on Thu 26th Jan 2012 14:29 UTC
OMRebel
Member since:
2005-11-14

I know four people (counting myself) that have tablets. I and one other person has the Galaxy Tab 10.1, one has an iPad 2, and another has a Kindle Fire.

Reply Score: 2

Market research done wrong
by twitterfire on Thu 26th Jan 2012 14:52 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

They only consider the tablet manufacturers best known in the West: Acer, Asus, Motorola, Samsung, Amazon, RIM, HP.

However, there are millions of cheap chinese tablets sold every day. Not only that China is a big market and they sell domestically lots of tablets, but we can see here in Europe lots of cheap chinese tablets being sold everyday. I don't know a lot about US market, but there are some online stores which seem to make some nice sell figures.

To take one example, I think that the chinese maker Ainol alone, sells much more tablets every day than Motorola.

But this numbers don't appear in the "market research".

I have bought 2 cheap chinese tablets in the last 3 months and I'm very pleased about price performance/ratio.

For a price between 115 - 200 euro you can find lots of decent tablets, between 7" and 10", powered by decent CPUs (Allwiner A10, Samsung S5PV210, Rockchip RK2819), featuring 1 gig of RAM, 8 gigs of storage, capacitive 5-10 points multitouch or IHS screens, WIFI b/g/n and lots of connectivity options. Support kind of sucks if you buy directly from China (you have to send the tablet back which costs and takes time). But I didn't have any hw issues yet.

I plan to buy a new tablet in a few days (just waiting for the Chinese new year season to end). I'm thinking about Ainol Novo 7 Elf or Aurora which for the price and features seems to be a bargain (around 120€ with free shipping, Allwinner A10 CPU, Mali 400 GPU, 1 GB RAM, 8 GB storage, 5 point capacitive multitouch screen, 6-8 hrs of wifi browsing, SD card slot, USB ports).

Just make an experiment and search for "android tablet" on aliexpress.com and you can see thousands and thousands of tablets that are being sold but don't appear in any "market research".

Android tablet market share is much larger. Or is correct to count only a few select tablet sellers?

Reply Score: 7

RE: Market research done wrong
by unclefester on Thu 26th Jan 2012 23:11 UTC in reply to "Market research done wrong"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

I agree. Some of the lower spec resistive screen Chinese tablets are as cheap as $60 including delivery. They aren't very powerful but they are great for keeping young children amused.

Edited 2012-01-26 23:14 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Comment by Drunkula
by Drunkula on Thu 26th Jan 2012 15:12 UTC
Drunkula
Member since:
2009-09-03

I've actually been tempted by the Kindle Fire lately. Unfortunately I haven't had an excess of funds to purchase one, lately as well!

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Drunkula
by twitterfire on Thu 26th Jan 2012 16:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by Drunkula"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

I've actually been tempted by the Kindle Fire lately. Unfortunately I haven't had an excess of funds to purchase one, lately as well!

Kindle Fire is nice, but only if you root it and install Cyanogenmod.

Reply Score: 2

Tablet seeings
by Neolander on Thu 26th Jan 2012 17:30 UTC
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

Since it seems to matter so much...

In the last year, I have seen three iPads, one Playbook, and one Android tablet from an unknown manufacturer. All of these were in a train, on the A line of Ile-de-France's regional rail network, and most of these were seen in the afternoon (with the exception of the Playbook, which was seen in the morning around 8h30 GMT+1).

I have never seen a tablet being used in an academic setting ever, nor at relatives' homes, nor on the C line of the same rail network, which I take much more frequently than the A line.

From this set of data, I conclude that the market share of iOS is 60%, followed by Android and QNX at 20%. People only use tablets in trains of the A line for some weird reason, which implies that transfers of property must occur when people enter and leave the train. Since the C line is operated by a different operator than the A line, my understanding is that it is forbidden to use tablets on this train line, based on the fact that I have not read the terms of services of this train line and that they can thus contain any sort of weird articles of my liking.

Can we stop posting personal tablet usage observations sprinkled with speculation on how this applies to the rest of the universe now ?

Edited 2012-01-26 17:36 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Kindle
by ToddB on Thu 26th Jan 2012 20:46 UTC
ToddB
Member since:
2012-01-25

I wonder how these numbers compare to regular kindle. When I am in a meeting my phone is more than good enough as I am usually just checking email. The lack of wifi, weight and battery life more or less relegates my use of my nook color with cm-7 to my apartment and mostly used just to browse the web and occasionally read a kindle book. My primary reason for running cm-7 was the kindle app. When I am out I usually just settle for my phone, or bring my kindle when I know there is going to be some down time. I have lots of books for it and the battery life/weight is unbeatable by any tablet (I have the 3G version so I occasionally use it for checking news sites). I still don't find tablets particularly useful when compared to a lightweight laptop or netbook. They are basically a larger version of a phone that requires a wifi connection. Though I may be biased by my hatred of touchscreens and annoyance with stylus support of most tablets. If it had nice stylus support with awesome drawing app, circuit design applications/simulators and palm quality handwriting support I would probably change my mind.

Reply Score: 2