I don?t know about anyone else, but I don?t want to limit myself so I keep Adobe Flash disabled as much as possible so I can maximize the use of my battery, which I find is far more important than potentially trying to view a video from a site that is only in Flash.
I wonder how well the Blackberry phones are going to take being a digital hub streaming from carrier to WiFi for PlayBooks. That seems to eat through tiny cellphone batteries in no time.
Some feel the that not having the option of installing Flash is limiting. If many didn't feel that way it wouldn't be used as a selling point. With my one Android device I can simply make Flash content "on demand".
I love my iPad, I use it all the time but the reality is for many of us there are just certain sites that we use daily that are flash only. There is no alternative. I would like not to have to pull out my MBP everytime I want to use one of those sites to stream video.
Flash 10.1 does not come on Android you decide if you want to install it or not.
Just like you have the right to keep it disabled on your other devices to save battery, I should have the right to enable and if I am fine with having the battery drain faster then fine.
For others wanting to jump all over this comment I am not going to get into a stupid Flash debate because most on this site are insane about the subject.
It's not that QNX is not ready for the smart phone --- it's rather that dual core ARM processors are still in first gen and you can't put it into a phone.
And last Friday's Playbook demo in Canada, RIM VP stated that things like the browser is not optimized yet and is still running on single core. And at tonight's presentation, the Playbook was running the most number of apps in its history of demos (and you can watch the demo video at http://video.allthingsd.com/).
Optimized is deceptive term, The reality is that most stuff are written for single processor & made SMP safe so that they don't behave worse in the SMP environment. What's the point in putting the H/W if the framework is not there to take advantage of.
The tablet will be the future & RIM will be the past
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
Allow me... All too easy.
"Lazaridis showed off the upcoming PlayBook tablet, which he called "the perfect size." When questioned by Mossberg whether RIM is working on any other sizes, Lazaridis acknowledged the company's plans for different sizes."
Translation: Steve Jobs said 7" was rubbish so we gotta say 7" is perfect. But just so we look forward-thinking and have an actual clue, we'll say we have plans for different sizes.
Lazaridis emphasized that RIM is betting heavily on the PlayBook and its BlackBerry Tablet OS. "This is a complete mobile computing platform," said Lazaridis. "All of this is coming together to set up BlackBerry for the next decade."
Translation: We're definitely screwed, so we hope this tablet and funky new tablet OS will save all of us from certain irrelevance. Who cares it's a tablet OS. Just say it's BlackBerry in the next decade, that will sound visionary.
According to Lazaridis, the 7-inch PlayBook, which RIM unveiled in September, is still "tracking" for a first quarter launch.
Translation: Oh gawd, I hope we pull this of. I have no idea...
When questioned whether RIM was leaving behind BlackBerry phones by moving ahead with next generation technology in tablets, Lazaridis emphasized RIM's global strategy. RIM won't abandon developing markets that have yet to reach 3G or 4G and can't afford high-end stuff, he explained.
Translation: Hell yeah we'll still be selling cheap crap all around the world... Who knows what our high-end smartphone business will be like. Just churn out our same BB OS and phones, send it to the "developing markets", because, heck, they don't care about the latest gadgets do they... Wait, do they?
Lazaridis also claimed during the interview that the BlackBerry began appealing to consumers by itself. "We didn't go out and try to make BlackBerry a consumer device. It crossed over on its own," he said.
Translation: We were sitting on our asses in our fine suits and thank goodness this phenomenon came along. But consumers suck. Let's still focus on businesses, because that's what matters, not mom and pop and kids... Yeah, I think tablets will be the future. Did I mention the tablet is the future?
RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.
Translation: My pals at Adobe tell me Adobe Air and Flash is part of a real bona-fide mobile computing platform. What's this Unix stuff? Is that the same as QNX? It ends with an "X".
Referencing the iPad's lack of Adobe Flash compatibility, Lazaridis asked, "Why would you limit yourself?"
Translation: Again, my pals at Adobe told me that Flash is the future. Never mind most Blackberries can't even display web content, Flash is the future. And tablets. And somehow that's going to take our smartphones, into the future. Somehow.
In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."
Translation: Geez... I sure hope someone is listening to me telling them that Blackberry tablets are the future... of smartphones...
My biggest doubts regarding the Playbook aren't specs, size, cores, OS, etc. I derive the most concern from the people I've seen demonstrating and talking about the Playbook. The people at RIM are the problem.
The demo given at Rogers Tablife was done by a stodgy old intellectual. Undoubtably very smart and successful, but apparently lacking any understanding of the world outside of RIM's traditionally successful niche. And when asked why someone should choose the Playbook his first answer was that it has two cameras. His first answer was a technical specification (not a benefit) that every other tablet will have by the time Playbook is on the market.
Then Mike gets up at D and does the exact same thing (but less coherently). Portrays himself as a stodgy old man who only seems to know RIM's history and is predicting the future based on their isolated history. Poor MIke didn't have a chance to explain why people should choose Playbook because he couldn't get past the basic questions on what it was and how it fit into RIM's product portfolio.
There does not seem to be any outward acknowledgment that the smartphone and tablet markets have changed. There is no acknowledgement that the methods RIM used to achieve success 10 years ago are in need of a revamp over the next 10 years. RIM really needs to show that they have a vision, and a passion for that vision. Right now they have a piece of hardware and an OS (or at least half an OS).
Except that Mike is younger than Steve Jobs --- and both are university dropouts.
Some feel the that not having the option of installing Flash is limiting. If many didn't feel that way it wouldn't be used as a selling point. With my one Android device I can simply make Flash content "on demand".
I love my iPad, I use it all the time but the reality is for many of us there are just certain sites that we use daily that are flash only. There is no alternative. I would like not to have to pull out my MBP everytime I want to use one of those sites to stream video.
Flash 10.1 does not come on Android you decide if you want to install it or not.
Just like you have the right to keep it disabled on your other devices to save battery, I should have the right to enable and if I am fine with having the battery drain faster then fine.
For others wanting to jump all over this comment I am not going to get into a stupid Flash debate because most on this site are insane about the subject.
yet your whole comment was about Flash.
and what VALUABLE sites that you can not get to that has flash as the main page? navigation? all greatly entertaining but rather useless UI.... you missing the TRON Disney site? oh flash installed, I can play input device flash games with...a..multitouch input w/o rewritten onClick code?
Optimized is deceptive term, The reality is that most stuff are written for single processor & made SMP safe so that they don't behave worse in the SMP environment. What's the point in putting the H/W if the framework is not there to take advantage of.
You have to remember that these are separate teams that RIM bought individually in the last year.
Whatever codes QNX wrote --- from day 1 that's going to be highly optimized for dual core embedded devices. Then there is Torch Mobile, who were bought out by RIM last year, that is making the browser part of the Playbook --- and that's still running on single core.
For the last 30 YEARS, software has been lagging hardware in the computer industry. What's the point of buying a 64 bit desktop CPU when your OS is only half running in 64 bit mode.
and what VALUABLE sites that you can not get to that has flash as the main page? navigation? all greatly entertaining but rather useless UI.... you missing the TRON Disney site? oh flash installed, I can play input device flash games with...a..multitouch input w/o rewritten onClick code?
Does it matter what site? By the way i'm not sure you should be bashing Disney and then admitting you play simple flash games.
TI can claim whatever they want --- but if you look at the Playbook demo video from last Friday and freeze frame the video (as Crackberry.com had done), you would have found out that the Playbook demo unit is running on OMAP4430 (not 4440).
So? the OMAP4430 is up to 1Ghz vs 1.5 Ghz for the 4440 and has less 3D playback. WTF does that have to do with using a 4430 in a phone? Nothing.
Quote:
And the Playbook comes with a huge battery --- which isn't suitable for cell phones.
This is a seriously dumb point. The A4 is used in both iPad and iPhone at different clock rates. What on earth makes you think you can't run a 4430 at 720Mhz?
The power performance of the 4430 is targeted to be 600mW to 100uW.
I never said that Apple can't do it --- I said if TI can't do it in that time frame (and they have been in the mobile CPU business forever), then it is very unlikely that Apple can do it.
So? the OMAP4430 is up to 1Ghz vs 1.5 Ghz for the 4440 and has less 3D playback. WTF does that have to do with using a 4430 in a phone? Nothing.
This is a seriously dumb point. The A4 is used in both iPad and iPhone at different clock rates. What on earth makes you think you can't run a 4430 at 720Mhz?
The power performance of the 4430 is targeted to be 600mW to 100uW.
TI can say whatever they want in their sales brochure, but the fact is that the 4430 in the Playbook needs a 5300 mah battery.
And the fact is that the iPad has a 6613 mAh battery so obviously the A4 can't be used in a phone.
What a completely stupid conclusion.
Quote:
And we haven't seen any dual core cortex a9 cellphones yet.
It ain't middle of 2011 yet is it? The iPhone 5 isn't due until Julyish. LG announced 4Q2010 launch for Optimus Series Tegra 2 phones back in September.
As RIM's smartphones begin to include multi-core processors, "they'll all be running the Playbook platform," said Lazaridis, who believes the PlayBook OS will help RIM "jump into the next decade of mobile computing."
Promises, promises...
Quote:
Lazaridis also claimed during the interview that the BlackBerry began appealing to consumers by itself. "We didn't go out and try to make BlackBerry a consumer device. It crossed over on its own," he said.
A strange claim considering it's not even out yet. On the other hand, the iPad was not designed or marketed as an enterprise product, but it seems to be embraced by enterprise.
Quote:
RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis.
Yes. Apple takes the long view, spends years in R&D, and puts out a product they're proud to put out.
Quote:
The competition between Apple and RIM has increased as RIM prepares to enter the tablet market, in which Apple has taken a substantial early lead.
??? How is a product that's not yet for sale competitive with a product that's been out for the better part of a year?
Quote:
In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."
And the fact is that the iPad has a 6613 mAh battery so obviously the A4 can't be used in a phone.
What a completely stupid conclusion.
It ain't middle of 2011 yet is it? The iPhone 5 isn't due until Julyish. LG announced 4Q2010 launch for Optimus Series Tegra 2 phones back in September.
Of course it can, but I am mainly talking about timing. There had been cortex a8 based smartphones available months and months before Apple launched A4 based ipad and iphone.
Your argument is basically that function ought to follow form. My argument is that form, which includes screen size, ought to follow function. Sure, you can make a UI that is "useable" on almost any screen size, but to what purpose? A 7" screen completely changes what the device is all about, gives you none of the convenience of a phone, and none of the purpose of a 10" tablet. You are basically arguing that there are an infinite number of screen sizes that are optimal, which might be true if we qualify it with, "for particular niche applications," but it isn't true for general purpose devices.
Is an ebook better on a 7" device? What if you want to read in landscape/2-page mode? Not so much. However, if all you want is an ebook reader, then, quite seriously, you are probably better off with a Kindle. As a general purpose tablet computing device, a larger screen opens the device to a greater range of possible applications and functions, and a smaller screen restricts it. Too large and it becomes unwieldy. Too small and it becomes less generally useful. A 7" tablet still doesn't fit in your jeans pocket, but it's also not very useful for editing a word processing document; yeah, you can do it, but you can't do it with the same ease.
A 7" tablet is going to be an exercise in frustration. Barely more functional than a phone, much less easy to carry around. Everything is a compromise to some extent, but the key to success is to make the right compromises, not assuming that all compromises are equal. The 7" tablet form factor makes all the wrong compromises.
You're telling me all the reasons why a 10" device is THE SIZE. You're kind of doing what Jobs did, in telling people what to think, what they want.
But ...
Did you hear me say "I had an iPad".
10" format did not work for me.
The compromises were wrong.
I'd prefer a smaller one.
I may be the only one who thinks this way.
But ... I don't think so.
We'll see in the coming months whether the 7" tablets are DOA or not. But I predict they will sell. Probably not outsell the iPad. But they'll carve out such a hole that, not anytime soon (the iPad2 will be 10"), but say in about a year, Apple will introduce a 7" version. My guess, anyway.
Of course it can, but I am mainly talking about timing. There had been cortex a8 based smartphones available months and months before Apple launched A4 based ipad and iphone.
You do realize that the 3GS used a Cortex A8 right? And it was what? The 2nd phone to use it? Apple doesn't lag much.
The Cortex A9 wasn't ready for early 2010/late 2009 so the A4 had to be a Cortex A8. Do you REALLY think Apple has been ignoring the Cortex A9 for a year? WTF do you think the Intrinsity folks have been doing since April? The PA Semi folks have been with Apple even longer. Do you seriously believe Apple hasn't been the first to sample the Orion?
The timing is just right for the Cortex A9 based A5 (or whatever) to appear in time for the iPad 2 much less for the iPhone 5. Everyone has been sampling for months and getting set to start production early 2011.
You're telling me all the reasons why a 10" device is THE SIZE. You're kind of doing what Jobs did, in telling people what to think, what they want.
...
We'll see in the coming months whether the 7" tablets are DOA or not. But I predict they will sell. Probably not outsell the iPad. But they'll carve out such a hole that, not anytime soon (the iPad2 will be 10"), but say in about a year, Apple will introduce a 7" version. My guess, anyway.
No, I'm telling you all the reasons,
* why your view, a single data point, is not representative,
* why Apple is unlikely to make a 7-inch tablet,
* why they haven't made a 4-5" iPhone, and
* why a 7" iPad isn't an iPad, it's an entirely different user experience.
And, sorry, this bullshit about Jobs telling people what to think is just that. He tells people what he thinks, or what "Apple thinks" and they agree with him or not. I know, when you don't have a real argument, it's comforting to resort to that sort of rhetoric, but it just draws attention to your lack of sound reasoning and your emotional bias.
A 7" screen completely changes what the device is all about, gives you none of the convenience of a phone, and none of the purpose of a 10" tablet.
I'm sorry but that line of argument is nonsense. What magically different things are people doing on an iPhone vs. an iPad? They're still playing games, consuming media, browsing the web, etc.
Quote:
A 7" tablet is going to be an exercise in frustration. Barely more functional than a phone, much less easy to carry around. Everything is a compromise to some extent, but the key to success is to make the right compromises, not assuming that all compromises are equal. The 7" tablet form factor makes all the wrong compromises.
Barely more functional than a phone? A 7" tablet has roughly 4.5 times as much screen real estate than the iPhone. Maybe you lack the imagination to figure out to make proper use of that space, but others probably can. Browsing the web, watching videos, editing documents and more are all going to be better overall experiences on a tablet rather than a phone.
And having read your paranoid ramblings about Google I really don't thing you should be complaining to anyone about their "lack of sound reasoning" and their "emotional bias."
I'm sorry but that line of argument is nonsense. What magically different things are people doing on an iPhone vs. an iPad? They're still playing games, consuming media, browsing the web, etc.
Check out a 7? tablet with a 16:9 aspect ratio. It?s to be big to be a phone and it?s too small and wonky to be a good eReader. I am sure there are plenty of uses that each display size and resolution are most ideal for, but I don?t think that a 7? 16:9 display is small enough to be a phone or pocketable PMP replacement, or large enough to be a good eReader.
Personally, I?m not fond of using my iPad for web browsing because I almost always have my 13? MBP with me (which I find superior in that regard) or I?m highly mobile so the iPad is less likely to come with me but I?m likely to have my iPhone in hand or pocket so I can?t comment on my experience in that regard, but I have heard many state how they do like the iPad?s browser experience.
Comments
I don?t know about anyone else, but I don?t want to limit myself so I keep Adobe Flash disabled as much as possible so I can maximize the use of my battery, which I find is far more important than potentially trying to view a video from a site that is only in Flash.
I wonder how well the Blackberry phones are going to take being a digital hub streaming from carrier to WiFi for PlayBooks. That seems to eat through tiny cellphone batteries in no time.
Some feel the that not having the option of installing Flash is limiting. If many didn't feel that way it wouldn't be used as a selling point. With my one Android device I can simply make Flash content "on demand".
I love my iPad, I use it all the time but the reality is for many of us there are just certain sites that we use daily that are flash only. There is no alternative. I would like not to have to pull out my MBP everytime I want to use one of those sites to stream video.
Flash 10.1 does not come on Android you decide if you want to install it or not.
Just like you have the right to keep it disabled on your other devices to save battery, I should have the right to enable and if I am fine with having the battery drain faster then fine.
For others wanting to jump all over this comment I am not going to get into a stupid Flash debate because most on this site are insane about the subject.
It's not that QNX is not ready for the smart phone --- it's rather that dual core ARM processors are still in first gen and you can't put it into a phone.
And last Friday's Playbook demo in Canada, RIM VP stated that things like the browser is not optimized yet and is still running on single core. And at tonight's presentation, the Playbook was running the most number of apps in its history of demos (and you can watch the demo video at http://video.allthingsd.com/).
Optimized is deceptive term, The reality is that most stuff are written for single processor & made SMP safe so that they don't behave worse in the SMP environment. What's the point in putting the H/W if the framework is not there to take advantage of.
Allow me... All too easy.
"Lazaridis showed off the upcoming PlayBook tablet, which he called "the perfect size." When questioned by Mossberg whether RIM is working on any other sizes, Lazaridis acknowledged the company's plans for different sizes."
Translation: Steve Jobs said 7" was rubbish so we gotta say 7" is perfect. But just so we look forward-thinking and have an actual clue, we'll say we have plans for different sizes.
Lazaridis emphasized that RIM is betting heavily on the PlayBook and its BlackBerry Tablet OS. "This is a complete mobile computing platform," said Lazaridis. "All of this is coming together to set up BlackBerry for the next decade."
Translation: We're definitely screwed, so we hope this tablet and funky new tablet OS will save all of us from certain irrelevance. Who cares it's a tablet OS. Just say it's BlackBerry in the next decade, that will sound visionary.
According to Lazaridis, the 7-inch PlayBook, which RIM unveiled in September, is still "tracking" for a first quarter launch.
Translation: Oh gawd, I hope we pull this of. I have no idea...
When questioned whether RIM was leaving behind BlackBerry phones by moving ahead with next generation technology in tablets, Lazaridis emphasized RIM's global strategy. RIM won't abandon developing markets that have yet to reach 3G or 4G and can't afford high-end stuff, he explained.
Translation: Hell yeah we'll still be selling cheap crap all around the world... Who knows what our high-end smartphone business will be like. Just churn out our same BB OS and phones, send it to the "developing markets", because, heck, they don't care about the latest gadgets do they... Wait, do they?
Lazaridis also claimed during the interview that the BlackBerry began appealing to consumers by itself. "We didn't go out and try to make BlackBerry a consumer device. It crossed over on its own," he said.
Translation: We were sitting on our asses in our fine suits and thank goodness this phenomenon came along. But consumers suck. Let's still focus on businesses, because that's what matters, not mom and pop and kids... Yeah, I think tablets will be the future. Did I mention the tablet is the future?
RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis. Apple is trying to upgrade a mobile phone OS for tablets, while RIM is starting with a "bona-fide mobile computing platform" for tablets, he asserted.
Translation: My pals at Adobe tell me Adobe Air and Flash is part of a real bona-fide mobile computing platform. What's this Unix stuff? Is that the same as QNX? It ends with an "X".
Referencing the iPad's lack of Adobe Flash compatibility, Lazaridis asked, "Why would you limit yourself?"
Translation: Again, my pals at Adobe told me that Flash is the future. Never mind most Blackberries can't even display web content, Flash is the future. And tablets. And somehow that's going to take our smartphones, into the future. Somehow.
In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."
Translation: Geez... I sure hope someone is listening to me telling them that Blackberry tablets are the future... of smartphones...
My biggest doubts regarding the Playbook aren't specs, size, cores, OS, etc. I derive the most concern from the people I've seen demonstrating and talking about the Playbook. The people at RIM are the problem.
The demo given at Rogers Tablife was done by a stodgy old intellectual. Undoubtably very smart and successful, but apparently lacking any understanding of the world outside of RIM's traditionally successful niche. And when asked why someone should choose the Playbook his first answer was that it has two cameras. His first answer was a technical specification (not a benefit) that every other tablet will have by the time Playbook is on the market.
Then Mike gets up at D and does the exact same thing (but less coherently). Portrays himself as a stodgy old man who only seems to know RIM's history and is predicting the future based on their isolated history. Poor MIke didn't have a chance to explain why people should choose Playbook because he couldn't get past the basic questions on what it was and how it fit into RIM's product portfolio.
There does not seem to be any outward acknowledgment that the smartphone and tablet markets have changed. There is no acknowledgement that the methods RIM used to achieve success 10 years ago are in need of a revamp over the next 10 years. RIM really needs to show that they have a vision, and a passion for that vision. Right now they have a piece of hardware and an OS (or at least half an OS).
Except that Mike is younger than Steve Jobs --- and both are university dropouts.
Some feel the that not having the option of installing Flash is limiting. If many didn't feel that way it wouldn't be used as a selling point. With my one Android device I can simply make Flash content "on demand".
I love my iPad, I use it all the time but the reality is for many of us there are just certain sites that we use daily that are flash only. There is no alternative. I would like not to have to pull out my MBP everytime I want to use one of those sites to stream video.
Flash 10.1 does not come on Android you decide if you want to install it or not.
Just like you have the right to keep it disabled on your other devices to save battery, I should have the right to enable and if I am fine with having the battery drain faster then fine.
For others wanting to jump all over this comment I am not going to get into a stupid Flash debate because most on this site are insane about the subject.
yet your whole comment was about Flash.
and what VALUABLE sites that you can not get to that has flash as the main page? navigation? all greatly entertaining but rather useless UI.... you missing the TRON Disney site? oh flash installed, I can play input device flash games with...a..multitouch input w/o rewritten onClick code?
Optimized is deceptive term, The reality is that most stuff are written for single processor & made SMP safe so that they don't behave worse in the SMP environment. What's the point in putting the H/W if the framework is not there to take advantage of.
You have to remember that these are separate teams that RIM bought individually in the last year.
Whatever codes QNX wrote --- from day 1 that's going to be highly optimized for dual core embedded devices. Then there is Torch Mobile, who were bought out by RIM last year, that is making the browser part of the Playbook --- and that's still running on single core.
For the last 30 YEARS, software has been lagging hardware in the computer industry. What's the point of buying a 64 bit desktop CPU when your OS is only half running in 64 bit mode.
yet your whole comment was about Flash.
and what VALUABLE sites that you can not get to that has flash as the main page? navigation? all greatly entertaining but rather useless UI.... you missing the TRON Disney site? oh flash installed, I can play input device flash games with...a..multitouch input w/o rewritten onClick code?
Does it matter what site? By the way i'm not sure you should be bashing Disney and then admitting you play simple flash games.
TI can claim whatever they want --- but if you look at the Playbook demo video from last Friday and freeze frame the video (as Crackberry.com had done), you would have found out that the Playbook demo unit is running on OMAP4430 (not 4440).
So? the OMAP4430 is up to 1Ghz vs 1.5 Ghz for the 4440 and has less 3D playback. WTF does that have to do with using a 4430 in a phone? Nothing.
And the Playbook comes with a huge battery --- which isn't suitable for cell phones.
This is a seriously dumb point. The A4 is used in both iPad and iPhone at different clock rates. What on earth makes you think you can't run a 4430 at 720Mhz?
The power performance of the 4430 is targeted to be 600mW to 100uW.
http://www.hotchips.org/archives/hc2...t-OMAP4430.pdf
What is Anand's assessment"
"I?d expect the 4440 to be used in tablets while the 4430 seems more like a smartphone SKU."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4053/t...-14-3d-1080p60
I never said that Apple can't do it --- I said if TI can't do it in that time frame (and they have been in the mobile CPU business forever), then it is very unlikely that Apple can do it.
Except that Ti has done it.
...these devices are only good for content consumption...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9XNf...yer_embedded#!
Feliz Navidad
So? the OMAP4430 is up to 1Ghz vs 1.5 Ghz for the 4440 and has less 3D playback. WTF does that have to do with using a 4430 in a phone? Nothing.
This is a seriously dumb point. The A4 is used in both iPad and iPhone at different clock rates. What on earth makes you think you can't run a 4430 at 720Mhz?
The power performance of the 4430 is targeted to be 600mW to 100uW.
http://www.hotchips.org/archives/hc2...t-OMAP4430.pdf
What is Anand's assessment"
"I?d expect the 4440 to be used in tablets while the 4430 seems more like a smartphone SKU."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4053/t...-14-3d-1080p60
Except that Ti has done it.
TI can say whatever they want in their sales brochure, but the fact is that the 4430 in the Playbook needs a 5300 mah battery.
And we haven't seen any dual core cortex a9 cellphones yet.
TI can say whatever they want in their sales brochure, but the fact is that the 4430 in the Playbook needs a 5300 mah battery.
And the fact is that the iPad has a 6613 mAh battery so obviously the A4 can't be used in a phone.
What a completely stupid conclusion.
And we haven't seen any dual core cortex a9 cellphones yet.
It ain't middle of 2011 yet is it? The iPhone 5 isn't due until Julyish. LG announced 4Q2010 launch for Optimus Series Tegra 2 phones back in September.
http://www.lg.com/global/press-relea...-processor.jsp
As RIM's smartphones begin to include multi-core processors, "they'll all be running the Playbook platform," said Lazaridis, who believes the PlayBook OS will help RIM "jump into the next decade of mobile computing."
Promises, promises...
Lazaridis also claimed during the interview that the BlackBerry began appealing to consumers by itself. "We didn't go out and try to make BlackBerry a consumer device. It crossed over on its own," he said.
A strange claim considering it's not even out yet. On the other hand, the iPad was not designed or marketed as an enterprise product, but it seems to be embraced by enterprise.
RIM and Apple's strategies differ, according to Lazaridis.
Yes. Apple takes the long view, spends years in R&D, and puts out a product they're proud to put out.
The competition between Apple and RIM has increased as RIM prepares to enter the tablet market, in which Apple has taken a substantial early lead.
???
In October Apple CEO Steve Jobs asserted that many 7-inch tablets would be dead on arrival. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie responded, claiming that "many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple."
What a strange statement!
And the fact is that the iPad has a 6613 mAh battery so obviously the A4 can't be used in a phone.
What a completely stupid conclusion.
It ain't middle of 2011 yet is it? The iPhone 5 isn't due until Julyish. LG announced 4Q2010 launch for Optimus Series Tegra 2 phones back in September.
http://www.lg.com/global/press-relea...-processor.jsp
Of course it can, but I am mainly talking about timing. There had been cortex a8 based smartphones available months and months before Apple launched A4 based ipad and iphone.
Your argument is basically that function ought to follow form. My argument is that form, which includes screen size, ought to follow function. Sure, you can make a UI that is "useable" on almost any screen size, but to what purpose? A 7" screen completely changes what the device is all about, gives you none of the convenience of a phone, and none of the purpose of a 10" tablet. You are basically arguing that there are an infinite number of screen sizes that are optimal, which might be true if we qualify it with, "for particular niche applications," but it isn't true for general purpose devices.
Is an ebook better on a 7" device? What if you want to read in landscape/2-page mode? Not so much. However, if all you want is an ebook reader, then, quite seriously, you are probably better off with a Kindle. As a general purpose tablet computing device, a larger screen opens the device to a greater range of possible applications and functions, and a smaller screen restricts it. Too large and it becomes unwieldy. Too small and it becomes less generally useful. A 7" tablet still doesn't fit in your jeans pocket, but it's also not very useful for editing a word processing document; yeah, you can do it, but you can't do it with the same ease.
A 7" tablet is going to be an exercise in frustration. Barely more functional than a phone, much less easy to carry around. Everything is a compromise to some extent, but the key to success is to make the right compromises, not assuming that all compromises are equal. The 7" tablet form factor makes all the wrong compromises.
You're telling me all the reasons why a 10" device is THE SIZE. You're kind of doing what Jobs did, in telling people what to think, what they want.
But ...
Did you hear me say "I had an iPad".
10" format did not work for me.
The compromises were wrong.
I'd prefer a smaller one.
I may be the only one who thinks this way.
But ... I don't think so.
We'll see in the coming months whether the 7" tablets are DOA or not. But I predict they will sell. Probably not outsell the iPad. But they'll carve out such a hole that, not anytime soon (the iPad2 will be 10"), but say in about a year, Apple will introduce a 7" version. My guess, anyway.
Of course it can, but I am mainly talking about timing. There had been cortex a8 based smartphones available months and months before Apple launched A4 based ipad and iphone.
You do realize that the 3GS used a Cortex A8 right? And it was what? The 2nd phone to use it? Apple doesn't lag much.
The Cortex A9 wasn't ready for early 2010/late 2009 so the A4 had to be a Cortex A8. Do you REALLY think Apple has been ignoring the Cortex A9 for a year? WTF do you think the Intrinsity folks have been doing since April? The PA Semi folks have been with Apple even longer. Do you seriously believe Apple hasn't been the first to sample the Orion?
The timing is just right for the Cortex A9 based A5 (or whatever) to appear in time for the iPad 2 much less for the iPhone 5. Everyone has been sampling for months and getting set to start production early 2011.
You're telling me all the reasons why a 10" device is THE SIZE. You're kind of doing what Jobs did, in telling people what to think, what they want.
...
We'll see in the coming months whether the 7" tablets are DOA or not. But I predict they will sell. Probably not outsell the iPad. But they'll carve out such a hole that, not anytime soon (the iPad2 will be 10"), but say in about a year, Apple will introduce a 7" version. My guess, anyway.
No, I'm telling you all the reasons,
* why your view, a single data point, is not representative,
* why Apple is unlikely to make a 7-inch tablet,
* why they haven't made a 4-5" iPhone, and
* why a 7" iPad isn't an iPad, it's an entirely different user experience.
And, sorry, this bullshit about Jobs telling people what to think is just that. He tells people what he thinks, or what "Apple thinks" and they agree with him or not. I know, when you don't have a real argument, it's comforting to resort to that sort of rhetoric, but it just draws attention to your lack of sound reasoning and your emotional bias.
A 7" screen completely changes what the device is all about, gives you none of the convenience of a phone, and none of the purpose of a 10" tablet.
I'm sorry but that line of argument is nonsense. What magically different things are people doing on an iPhone vs. an iPad? They're still playing games, consuming media, browsing the web, etc.
A 7" tablet is going to be an exercise in frustration. Barely more functional than a phone, much less easy to carry around. Everything is a compromise to some extent, but the key to success is to make the right compromises, not assuming that all compromises are equal. The 7" tablet form factor makes all the wrong compromises.
Barely more functional than a phone? A 7" tablet has roughly 4.5 times as much screen real estate than the iPhone. Maybe you lack the imagination to figure out to make proper use of that space, but others probably can. Browsing the web, watching videos, editing documents and more are all going to be better overall experiences on a tablet rather than a phone.
And having read your paranoid ramblings about Google I really don't thing you should be complaining to anyone about their "lack of sound reasoning" and their "emotional bias."
I'm sorry but that line of argument is nonsense. What magically different things are people doing on an iPhone vs. an iPad? They're still playing games, consuming media, browsing the web, etc.
Check out a 7? tablet with a 16:9 aspect ratio. It?s to be big to be a phone and it?s too small and wonky to be a good eReader. I am sure there are plenty of uses that each display size and resolution are most ideal for, but I don?t think that a 7? 16:9 display is small enough to be a phone or pocketable PMP replacement, or large enough to be a good eReader.
Personally, I?m not fond of using my iPad for web browsing because I almost always have my 13? MBP with me (which I find superior in that regard) or I?m highly mobile so the iPad is less likely to come with me but I?m likely to have my iPhone in hand or pocket so I can?t comment on my experience in that regard, but I have heard many state how they do like the iPad?s browser experience.