• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Get ready for Google tablet hype

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
jpeyton said:
Tegra2 and a 720p screen.

Does that mean the iPad won't be the most magical way to watch videos anymore?
Click to expand...

Depends on how nice the screen is, 720p means nothing to me if the screen's not good. The iPad's LED backlit screen is quite nice to look at. If this screen can compete with it I'd buy one. For some reason I think this screen will be higher resolution but inferior overall.
 
Last edited:
QueBert said:
Depends on how nice the screen is, 720p means nothing to me if the screen's not good. The iPad's LED backlit screen is quite nice to look at. If this screen can compete with it I'd buy one. For some reason I think this screen will be higher resolution but inferior overall.
Click to expand...

Most likely, it will be made at the same factory, on the same assembly line, by the same underpaid workers as the iPad display. Of course, not having that Apple logo on it automatically makes it inferior.
 
Bateluer said:
Most likely, it will be made at the same factory, on the same assembly line, by the same underpaid workers as the iPad display. Of course, not having that Apple logo on it automatically makes it inferior.
Click to expand...

Doubtful, seeing how it's not the same size or even resolution. People can bitch and argue all they want about the iPad costing too much or not being useful. But the screen on it is bar none the best I've seen on a mobile device outside of the iPhone 4. I'd be willing to bet money this Droid Tablet's screen won't look nearly as good. But it will be considerably cheaper and wide screen + 720p. All of which will be more important to a good number of people. The iPad's screen being superior has nothing to do with it being an Apple device, and everything to do with it being, well vastly superior looking. Even Apple haters should be able to admit that much.
 
I don't mind requiring a data plan, that allows me to use the device pretty much anywhere i can get cell service. And i can't see myself buying a tablet without a data plan anyways. But why Chrome OS and not stick with Android? I would be much more excited if it was Android.
 
I don't mind a data plan, but if it has a contract, screw that.

Also, its only a browser? I don't think that's good enough. They should of stuck with Android.
 
Google is running into issues with growth, it's pretty much a one trick pony, if they can get us to use a Chrome based OS and collect user data from it, they'd have a treasure trove of data to target ads with.

Also, while they haven't really sold our data yet, there is a strong likelyhood they will, they've become more pragmatic and less altruistic in the last few years.

A browser based OS is ideal for Google's purposes...
 
Pliablemoose said:
Google is running into issues with growth, it's pretty much a one trick pony, if they can get us to use a Chrome based OS and collect user data from it, they'd have a treasure trove of data to target ads with.

Also, while they haven't really sold our data yet, there is a strong likelyhood they will, they've become more pragmatic and less altruistic in the last few years.

A browser based OS is ideal for Google's purposes...
Click to expand...

In the words of Eric Shmidt:
"We're trying to figure out what the future of search is," Mr Schmidt said. “One idea is that more and more searches are done on your behalf without you needing to type.

"I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next."
Click to expand...
 
Pliablemoose said:
Google is running into issues with growth, it's pretty much a one trick pony, if they can get us to use a Chrome based OS and collect user data from it, they'd have a treasure trove of data to target ads with.

Also, while they haven't really sold our data yet, there is a strong likelyhood they will, they've become more pragmatic and less altruistic in the last few years.

A browser based OS is ideal for Google's purposes...
Click to expand...

That's a whole lot of speculation there Lou
 
Pliablemoose said:
Google is running into issues with growth, it's pretty much a one trick pony, if they can get us to use a Chrome based OS and collect user data from it, they'd have a treasure trove of data to target ads with.

Also, while they haven't really sold our data yet, there is a strong likelyhood they will, they've become more pragmatic and less altruistic in the last few years.

A browser based OS is ideal for Google's purposes...
Click to expand...

It has been my observation that companies stay close to the vision of the founders of that company for as long as the founders are around in the company and the company financials are solid. When the founders leave/die/forced out that's when things change.

I don't see Page and Brin going anywhere, so I think supposition that the company is going to change over time isn't justified.

People have been pointing to China and the latest "net neutrality" thing and saying "see, Google is becoming evil." But to me what both those examples show is that Google is able to compromise - I don't see evil, I see practicality. But the idea that they would start selling personal information seems highly improbable. Plus it would alienate users and could cost the company badly... there are other search engines out there and the results from them are roughly on par with Google... if people have a motivation to change, they will.
 
Last edited:
pm said:
It has been my observation that companies stay close to the vision of the founders of that company for as long as the founders are around in the company and the company financials are solid. When the founders leave/die/forced out that's when things change.

I don't see Page and Brin going anywhere, so I think supposition that the company is going to change over time isn't justified.

People have been pointing to China and the latest "net neutrality" thing and saying "see, Google is becoming evil." But to me what both those examples show is that Google is able to compromise - I don't see evil, I see practicality. But the idea that they would start selling personal information seems highly improbable. Plus it would alienate users and could cost the company badly... there are other search engines out there and the results from them are roughly on par with Google... if people have a motivation to change, they will.
Click to expand...

Actually, they're both pretty much gone already. Schmidt is running the show, and what the other companies are doing is what Google will do. http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/...o-cede-majority-voting-power-over-five-years/

Schmidt is a forward thinking guy, and what he's talking about is pretty crazy stuff: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...pe-cyber-past-warns-Googles-Eric-Schmidt.html

Charlie Rose had a show about Google on Tuesday, and the consensus is that Google will be following what players are doing as far as data gathering, etc. http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11174 I can't find the video, but I recorded it, Google is stuck between a rock and a hard place as far as growth, they'll have to change some of their practices as the internet users are changing, they don't use search as much and are using social networking sites more and more...

Android has been successful, but it's not generating the kind of cash flow they need to show the growth investors would like...

Even without outright selling user data, a browser based OS provides Google with a ton of user info for targeted ads, their core business, and let's not forget Google is first and foremost a business... People want to ascribe human characteristics to corporations, that's pretty stupid.
 
Last edited:
I am going to wait for Notion Ink Adam with the Pixel Qi display. Held off buying an e-book reader or tablet, figure I'll kill two birds with one stone.
 
Pliablemoose said:
Google is running into issues with growth, it's pretty much a one trick pony, if they can get us to use a Chrome based OS and collect user data from it, they'd have a treasure trove of data to target ads with.

Also, while they haven't really sold our data yet, there is a strong likelyhood they will, they've become more pragmatic and less altruistic in the last few years.

A browser based OS is ideal for Google's purposes...
Click to expand...

The first part is correct, but I think the idea behind Chrome is different to what you are suggesting. Chrome O/S isn't about search, it's about online apps(of which search is one)- i.e the cloud. Google wants to be an app provider as their is a potential gold mine there.

Also- why are some of ye expecting Verzion to ship a tablet without a data plan? That would be like Shell/Exxon selling EV at cost!
 
I'm liking the Toshiba android pad thats coming out on the Tegra 2 platform... iPad's biggest advantage is just that it's the only game in town. I don't see how it can maintain any kind of design/spec advantage vs the open android platform. Other than the apple=cool people who would by a pet rock if it was called an iRock.
 
Doboji said:
I'm liking the Toshiba android pad thats coming out on the Tegra 2 platform... iPad's biggest advantage is just that it's the only game in town. I don't see how it can maintain any kind of design/spec advantage vs the open android platform. Other than the apple=cool people who would by a pet rock if it was called an iRock.
Click to expand...

An IROC?

Chevrolet_Camaro_IROC-Z-4.jpg
 
Google's main problem right now is fragmentation.

Android suffers because every phone manufacturer has their own custom skins and apps that run on top of Android. End users suffer because critical OS updates are pushed out at different times dependent entirely on the phone manufacturer and wireless carrier. One can argue that you can root the phone and get the OS update quickly, but how many users really want to do that?

Throwing Chrome OS into the mix isn't going to help things. Google could actually learn a thing or two from Apple. Keep it simple, don't confuse the end user.
 
i thought android 3 was changing that be being a bit more modular? let the telcos make their own crap for 3.0 and that aspect should be the same for 3.x
 
OneOfTheseDays said:
Google's main problem right now is fragmentation.

Android suffers because every phone manufacturer has their own custom skins and apps that run on top of Android. End users suffer because critical OS updates are pushed out at different times dependent entirely on the phone manufacturer and wireless carrier.
Click to expand...

I would tend to agree, although most Android apps work regardless of whether the phone is running Sense, Blur, or Touchwiz, they just don't mesh with the UI. Google needs to provide incentives to phone manufacturers/carriers to use the stock UI, and not waste their time on the reviled Blur and TouchWiz or the moderately passable Sense. I know Gingerbread is going to include a UI redesign that aims to make them all obsolete, which is good.

Also, carriers/manufacturers often don't bother to support the lower and middle range Android devices at all. Take Moto, for example. They've pushed out a total of 4 OTA updates to the Droid 1, 2.0.1>2.1>2.2_FRG01B>2.2_FRG22D. The Droid Incredible and X are both slated to get 2.2 updates soon. Compare this to the CLIQ(XT) and Devour, which will forever languish with 1.5. If community developers can make vanilla UI builds for these devices in a few short months that make the official builds, which take several months longer, look like puke, that's pathetic.
 
I haven't seen anything yet to convince me that fragmentation on Android is anything other than a non issue, just like it is on the Windows platform.
 
dguy6789 said:
I haven't seen anything yet to convince me that fragmentation on Android is anything other than a non issue, just like it is on the Windows platform.
Click to expand...

easy now....the Apple crowd has been using that as their main attack on Android.

Of course its a non-issue. The only apps that don't work on 1.X or 2.1 are ones that the Dev's decided shouldn't work on those OS's.
 
Yeah, "fragmentation" is a nonsensical term. There is plenty of fragmentation on the iPhone, too. Quite a few older apps stopped working with iOS4, and the porting of iOS4 to the 3G and even the 3Gs has been a disaster. Yes, you can't use a lot of current apps on the G1, but the same is true with the iPhone 3G. Right now it's kind of ridiculous to expect a mobile device to stay current for more than 18 or 24 months. That's just the mobile device market right now.

The current gen iPad's 256 megs is probably going to keep it from ever multitasking. If you want that you'll probably have to buy next year's model. Is that "fragmentation?"

I haven't run into any apps that appear or act weird on my Samsung Vibrant. Everything works (gps issues aside 🙁). I couldn't say that about my HD2 and all the windows mobile apps out there. That is actual fragmentation, with a ton of software that just doesn't work on your device. If google can avoid that, they'll be fine and fragmentation will be a nonissue.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top