Let's quickly run through the specifications of the HP Slate first. It sports an Intel Atom Z530 processor (1.6Ghz), 1GB of non-upgradable DDR2 RAM, 32GB or 64GB of internal storage, 8.9" WSVGA (1024×600) display, capacitive multitouch with pen/digitiser support, and Intel UMA display chip with HD accelerator (1080p support).
Port-wise, it has a USB 2.0 port, SD card slot, SIM card slot, headphone and microphone jacks, and a dock connector. On the battery life front, HP claims it does "5+ hours", which is obviously a whole lot less than what the iPad can deliver - more than ten hours.
When it comes to software, the Slate will run Windows 7 with an HP touch-optimised user interface. We know very little about this interface, but this recent YouTube video gives a short sneak peak at what HP is working on. HP wants 549 USD for the 32GB version, and 599 USD for 64GB.
What interests me about this slide is the "HP advantage" and "HP threat" thing. This point-by-point feature and specification comparison is the epitome of the PC world - it's how companies like Dell and HP market their stuff. More features, faster processors, more RAM, without looking at the product as a whole - you get the gist.
The Apple world has always been different. Like few other hardware companies, Apple knows it's not the point-by-point feature comparison that matters, but the whole product. By paying attention to the product as a whole instead of trying to score on individual specification aspects Apple manages to beat companies like HP every time in user satisfaction surveys.
As a geek, the Slate appeals more to me than the iPad (although I still fail to see the relevance of tablets), but I can assure you right now that the latter is the better product for most. It might not beat the Slate point-by-point - but that's not the, eh, point.
It just stood out to me from this slide.