Not seeing how it's "unfair." Android is what it is, by its very nature manufacturers are free to do as they please. One of Apple's advantages is that they control the entire hardware/software stack; there will never be an iPad that doesn't meet Apple's standards.
By the time "proper" Android tablets hit the market (and who's to say they'll be all that compelling?) many consumers may have come to have a negative impression of such products, which is too bad but hardly unfair. Again, it's pretty much built into the platform that there will be shitty implementations, as vendors slap a free OS on cheap hardware while competing almost entirely on price.
So I would say that the more worrying trend for the Android tablet market is the probability that Apple is going to pretty much sew up their price points, which means the "real" competition is going to be cheap, not terribly well made hardware. Without the distortions of cell subsidies, it looks like the only way, at least for the foreseeable future, to sharply undercut Apple's pricing is to use less expensive components.
Fandroids like to imagine their platform is super compelling, that masses of people long for "open" hardware and resent Apple's "control", but it's pretty obvious that the Android cell phone market is being fueled by being "good enough", ubiquitous, and cheap to free. When someone comes in to re-up their contract and they get the hard sell on a BOGO or free with contract smart phone that looks dead sexy compared to that busted old clamshell, why not?
But tablets aren't like that, so it remains to be seen if Android's charms can win the masses over when there's price and availability parity. If not, then the actual Android tablet market will be the old story of the race to the bottom, which, when it comes to something like a personal touch device, might not be quite the recipe for market share building as it was in the PC market.
Imagine a world where Apple, HP, Dell, Acer, et al have roughly price parity for their laptop and desktop offerings. The super discount PCs are all no-name white boxes or sketchy Chinese brands with little known track record or simply vendors that specialize in prioritizing low cost over everything else (go look at some low-end netbooks to get an idea how that works).
Now take away the historic PC software advantage. Now take away the historic PC business lock-in. Now rerun the history of the PC market, and ask yourself if Android is really Windows in this scenario.
You have touched upon something that is often overlooked -- Cell capability and the carrier tie-in.
The Rim PlayBook has no Cell capability and tethers to a BB for Cell web access.
The Galaxy Tab comes with Cell capability and is sold:
-- subsidized with a carrier contract
-- unsubsized at a much higher price
It appears that other Android tablets will follow the lead of the Galaxy Tab and be mainly sold like large Cell Phones -- complete with carrier contract.
The iPad, has models without cell radios and models with cell radios. The Cell Radio iPad models are sold unsubsidized without carrier contracts,
The unsubsidized iPad is competitively priced compared to subsidized tablets.
I suspect that the next gen iPad will have a model with an universal cell radio (or radios) capable of working on any/all cell networks.
The point of all this is that Apple will be selling an Universal iPad without any dictates or influence from the carriers -- the carriers will be what they should have always been -- a dumb pipe regulated utility.
Certainly, the carriers should be free to resell and bundle plans with the iPad -- but they will not (and shouldn't) have any influence as to what (hardware, OS Version, System Software, Apps) goes into the product or any determination of the base price of the product.
The carriers will be free to compete on their service offerings.
That is significant! The iPad solution will succeed or fail on its own merits -- not some artificial, carrier-imposed restrictions or so-called benefits.
In this way, the iPad truly is magic -- it (the hardware, OS , UI) or the carrier doesn't get between you and your stuff.
Then, by 2012, I expect the iPhone (and any other related Apple devices) to be priced and sold in the same carrier-independent fashion.
It's really kind of unfair to make judgments on Android tablets until the actual tablet-optimized version of the OS arrives.
As I've said on other threads about this topic, if they don't want us to judge them on poorly optimized software/hardware combinations, maybe they should delay release until they can actually have a good product. As it is, I'll comment on how well (or how poorly) it works b/c that is what is available on the market
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
'Google' never said that, only that Android 2.2/Froyo was not currently 'optimized' for tablet use, which really means very little in the grand scheme of things, given that it's largely the apps that require 'optimizing' to better take advantage of the additional screen real-estate.
"But the way Android Market works is it's not going to be available on devices that don't allow applications to run correctly.
"Which devices do, and which don't will be unit specific, but Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets.
"If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn't run, [Froyo] is just not designed for that form factor.
"We want to make sure that we're going to create a application distribution mechanism for the Android market, to ensure our users have right experience."
As I've said on other threads about this topic, if they don't want us to judge them on poorly optimized software/hardware combinations, maybe they should delay release until they can actually have a good product. As it is, I'll comment on how well (or how poorly) it works b/c that is what is available on the market
This is correct. You don't review products on their potential. You judge them on what they do now. The companies that make these products are saying, "This is what we'd like to offer to our customers." If it's half-baked, they'll keep it in the lab.
Someday, Apple will release a version of iOS that won't be fully supported on my iPad. That doesn't reduce my enjoyment of using the device in its current state. If I were unhappy, I would have returned it and waited a few more years.
Note: I still don't have an iPhone. I'll buy one someday, however either it needs to show up on T-Mobile USA or AT&T needs to put towers closer to both home and work.
Hardly a 'review'... merely an opinion expressed in a forum post, just like all the rest.
Nice try at recovery, but it fails Faced with the evidence you did exactly what you claim you didn't, you pull a politician move and attempt to redefine words in the English language...
Repeatedly!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
B.S... You just (unsurprisingly) appear to lack the ability to properly comprehend was was posted.
Note: "3 each" means nothing more than 3 individual items (it's a military thing, so I seriously doubt that you have any frame of reference).
Nice try at recovery, but it fails Faced with the evidence you did exactly what you claim you didn't, you pull a politician move and attempt to redefine words in the English language...
Repeatedly!!!
Each doesn't mean each?
Stop while you are only way behind.
Sad... So Very Very Sad to see you constantly contradict yourself in the same post.
Note: Each does indeed mean Individual, which is exactly what I stated.
EACH –1. every one of two or more considered individually or one by one.
You have touched upon something that is often overlooked -- Cell capability and the carrier tie-in.
The Rim PlayBook has no Cell capability and tethers to a BB for Cell web access.
The Galaxy Tab comes with Cell capability and is sold:
-- subsidized with a carrier contract
-- unsubsized at a much higher price
It appears that other Android tablets will follow the lead of the Galaxy Tab and be mainly sold like large Cell Phones -- complete with carrier contract.
The iPad, has models without cell radios and models with cell radios. The Cell Radio iPad models are sold unsubsidized without carrier contracts,
The unsubsidized iPad is competitively priced compared to subsidized tablets.
I suspect that the next gen iPad will have a model with an universal cell radio (or radios) capable of working on any/all cell networks.
The point of all this is that Apple will be selling an Universal iPad without any dictates or influence from the carriers -- the carriers will be what they should have always been -- a dumb pipe regulated utility.
Certainly, the carriers should be free to resell and bundle plans with the iPad -- but they will not (and shouldn't) have any influence as to what (hardware, OS Version, System Software, Apps) goes into the product or any determination of the base price of the product.
The carriers will be free to compete on their service offerings.
That is significant! The iPad solution will succeed or fail on its own merits -- not some artificial, carrier-imposed restrictions or so-called benefits.
In this way, the iPad truly is magic -- it (the hardware, OS , UI) or the carrier doesn't get between you and your stuff.
Then, by 2012, I expect the iPhone (and any other related Apple devices) to be priced and sold in the same carrier-independent fashion.
.
The only way Apple can get away with this is to have products that are so popular they can force the carriers' hands.
One thing rarely noted by Android boosters is that it gives the power back to the carriers. Without any Apple (or MS) breathing down their necks to make sure they actually do operate as dump pipes and sell the device the device manufacturer actually made, as they intended it to be, they are free to "differentiate" by customizing each Android handset with carrier specific "features" which are typically more expensive and less functional than their non-carrier counterparts. Verizon is particularly aggressive with this approach.
And iPhone (or iPad) is what it is, the consumer can be assured that they'll know exactly what they're getting. That was a major coupe on Apple's part, unprecedented up till that time. As the iPhone gained popularity, it was looking as if that model might finally break the stranglehold of carriers over wireless tech.
But now Android is willing to hop into bed with the carriers, and do whatever gymnastic contortions are called for, and which is where Google's and Apple's ad driven vs. consumer driven business models really start to make a difference After all, what does Google care? They get their ad hits anyway. . And what do the carriers care? They have a very popular smartphone platform that allows them to load it up with proprietary junkware to their heart's content. Note that early on, before Andoird had taken off, Android apologists made a big deal about how Verizon was selling Android handsets unmolested. That was when the iPhone was setting the agenda. Now? Reverted to type.
Hopefully, Apple can continue to win consumers over with great design and functionality, selling enough in the process to force the carriers to dance to their tune. The data plan for the iPad is a great example-- nothing else as consumer friendly out there.
Note[/U]: Each does indeed mean Individual, which is exactly what I stated.
Your exact quote is as follows" ... "We now have 3 each in my Household",....
We refers to your 3 family members ..... 3 each can only refer to each member having 3.
We all know that you'll never "admit to a mistake" but it's always amusing to see how you keep trying to defend the indefensible .... and your "military" reference is truly a stroke of comedic "genius" ???? kinda like dumb and dumber.
Your exact quote is as follows" ... "We now have 3 each in my Household",....
We refers to your 3 family members ..... 3 each can only refer to each member having 3.
Though you appear to completely lack any degree of understanding/rational, obviously rendering you unable to comprehend even the simplest of concepts (the 'dumbest' one could reason)... For the Last Time:
Object in Question = iPad, with EACH referring to 3 individual units of said object (e.g. iPad).
The key point being that he did it for the purpose of annoying people. You know how that is.
If it annoys you, put him on your ignore list so you don't need to view his posts.
I do remember the centered posts, and I never had a problem reading them. Calling him a troll over this is nitpicking. It's like complaining that someone uses comic sans as their font.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
No, it doesn't, but, for those who come here with their primary purpose to express a "difference of opinion", it does. Just as it would make me a troll if I went to, for example, an Android forum just for the purpose of expressing to them how misguided they were. Context is everything.
Ok, if that's their primary purpose, fine, but a lot of people, myself included, just like talking about this stuff. It might be different for you personally, but there isn't a single person in my life that knows, or would care, about the goings on with Apple lol. Honestly, when rudeness is set aside, some of the best conversations I have about technology in general come from these forums.
AI is unique in that they post news articles that get linked to by google news, and have a common forum layout for discussion. A bit different from your online magazine sites, know what I mean?
Sometimes when I read about something Apple did someplace else, I can come here and see they've posted an article about it, and if I want more info, I can ask and generally get a straight forward answer. Or, if I want to voice my opinion, I can do that as well. My intention isn't to upset anyone.
Though you appear to completely lack any degree of understanding/rational, obviously rendering you unable to comprehend even the simplest of concepts (the 'dumbest' one could reason)... For the Last Time:
Object in Question = iPad, with EACH referring to 3 individual units of said object (e.g. iPad).
Have A Nice Day.
It is a simple concept you're espousing. Unfortunately it's completely incorrect. In your sentence the word "each" is a pronoun which qualifies the noun (we). You seem to simply be bullheaded about this. And stop blaming the military. I've spent a few years at sub base Bangor, keyport torpedo station and several air force bases in Germany. Vernacular in the military is used to avoid confusion not create it.
I have an iPad, and a Kobo ebook reader. If I'm reading ePubs, I'll usually use the Kobo.
That said, I could also occasionally use a 7 inch tablet. I'd prefer an iPad or iPod Touch in that size as I could use my existing apps. I tried the Tab and didn't care for it.
If I could only have one tablet, it would be the iPad as some tasks need that screen size. But there's no one device that's right all the time.
Comments
It's all relative... Isn't it ?
Not really. It's an indication of your credibility, or, more to the point, lack thereof.
Not seeing how it's "unfair." Android is what it is, by its very nature manufacturers are free to do as they please. One of Apple's advantages is that they control the entire hardware/software stack; there will never be an iPad that doesn't meet Apple's standards.
By the time "proper" Android tablets hit the market (and who's to say they'll be all that compelling?) many consumers may have come to have a negative impression of such products, which is too bad but hardly unfair. Again, it's pretty much built into the platform that there will be shitty implementations, as vendors slap a free OS on cheap hardware while competing almost entirely on price.
So I would say that the more worrying trend for the Android tablet market is the probability that Apple is going to pretty much sew up their price points, which means the "real" competition is going to be cheap, not terribly well made hardware. Without the distortions of cell subsidies, it looks like the only way, at least for the foreseeable future, to sharply undercut Apple's pricing is to use less expensive components.
Fandroids like to imagine their platform is super compelling, that masses of people long for "open" hardware and resent Apple's "control", but it's pretty obvious that the Android cell phone market is being fueled by being "good enough", ubiquitous, and cheap to free. When someone comes in to re-up their contract and they get the hard sell on a BOGO or free with contract smart phone that looks dead sexy compared to that busted old clamshell, why not?
But tablets aren't like that, so it remains to be seen if Android's charms can win the masses over when there's price and availability parity. If not, then the actual Android tablet market will be the old story of the race to the bottom, which, when it comes to something like a personal touch device, might not be quite the recipe for market share building as it was in the PC market.
Imagine a world where Apple, HP, Dell, Acer, et al have roughly price parity for their laptop and desktop offerings. The super discount PCs are all no-name white boxes or sketchy Chinese brands with little known track record or simply vendors that specialize in prioritizing low cost over everything else (go look at some low-end netbooks to get an idea how that works).
Now take away the historic PC software advantage. Now take away the historic PC business lock-in. Now rerun the history of the PC market, and ask yourself if Android is really Windows in this scenario.
You have touched upon something that is often overlooked -- Cell capability and the carrier tie-in.
The Rim PlayBook has no Cell capability and tethers to a BB for Cell web access.
The Galaxy Tab comes with Cell capability and is sold:
-- subsidized with a carrier contract
-- unsubsized at a much higher price
It appears that other Android tablets will follow the lead of the Galaxy Tab and be mainly sold like large Cell Phones -- complete with carrier contract.
The iPad, has models without cell radios and models with cell radios. The Cell Radio iPad models are sold unsubsidized without carrier contracts,
The unsubsidized iPad is competitively priced compared to subsidized tablets.
I suspect that the next gen iPad will have a model with an universal cell radio (or radios) capable of working on any/all cell networks.
The point of all this is that Apple will be selling an Universal iPad without any dictates or influence from the carriers -- the carriers will be what they should have always been -- a dumb pipe regulated utility.
Certainly, the carriers should be free to resell and bundle plans with the iPad -- but they will not (and shouldn't) have any influence as to what (hardware, OS Version, System Software, Apps) goes into the product or any determination of the base price of the product.
The carriers will be free to compete on their service offerings.
That is significant! The iPad solution will succeed or fail on its own merits -- not some artificial, carrier-imposed restrictions or so-called benefits.
In this way, the iPad truly is magic -- it (the hardware, OS , UI) or the carrier doesn't get between you and your stuff.
Then, by 2012, I expect the iPhone (and any other related Apple devices) to be priced and sold in the same carrier-independent fashion.
.
It's really kind of unfair to make judgments on Android tablets until the actual tablet-optimized version of the OS arrives.
As I've said on other threads about this topic, if they don't want us to judge them on poorly optimized software/hardware combinations, maybe they should delay release until they can actually have a good product. As it is, I'll comment on how well (or how poorly) it works b/c that is what is available on the market
'Google' never said that, only that Android 2.2/Froyo was not currently 'optimized' for tablet use, which really means very little in the grand scheme of things, given that it's largely the apps that require 'optimizing' to better take advantage of the additional screen real-estate.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20016085-260.html
Extra quotes from the article:
"But the way Android Market works is it's not going to be available on devices that don't allow applications to run correctly.
"Which devices do, and which don't will be unit specific, but Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets.
"If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn't run, [Froyo] is just not designed for that form factor.
"We want to make sure that we're going to create a application distribution mechanism for the Android market, to ensure our users have right experience."
As I've said on other threads about this topic, if they don't want us to judge them on poorly optimized software/hardware combinations, maybe they should delay release until they can actually have a good product. As it is, I'll comment on how well (or how poorly) it works b/c that is what is available on the market
This is correct. You don't review products on their potential. You judge them on what they do now. The companies that make these products are saying, "This is what we'd like to offer to our customers." If it's half-baked, they'll keep it in the lab.
Someday, Apple will release a version of iOS that won't be fully supported on my iPad. That doesn't reduce my enjoyment of using the device in its current state. If I were unhappy, I would have returned it and waited a few more years.
Note: I still don't have an iPhone. I'll buy one someday, however either it needs to show up on T-Mobile USA or AT&T needs to put towers closer to both home and work.
Long-term ownership of devices just recently released? Uh, right.
How loved his first iPad so much he made love to it. Now he has 3. TWINS!!
How loved his first iPad so much he made love to it. Now he has 3. TWINS!!
Actually I think he has 9. He said that his wife, kid and himself had 3 each.
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Those crazy 15%!
One of them was DaHarder...
Okay, it was funny the other day about DaHarder being one of two people in line to get a W7 phone. Now the humor is getting a bit worn.
Actually I think he has 9. He said that his wife, kid and himself had 3 each.
B.S... You just (unsurprisingly) appear to lack the ability to properly comprehend was was posted.
Note: "3 each" means nothing more than 3 individual items (it's a military thing, so I seriously doubt that you have any frame of reference).
B.S... You just (unsurprisingly) appear to lack the ability to properly comprehend was was posted.
Note: "3 each" means nothing more than 3 individual items (it's a military thing, so I seriously doubt that you have any frame of reference).
It is not limited to military usage. Instead, it is standard English usage:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/each
Noun
each (plural eaches)
An individual item: the least quantitative unit in a grouping.
Example:
2007, David E. Mulcahy, Eaches or Pieces Order Fulfillment, Design, and Operations Handbook, CRC Press, ISBN 978-0-8493-3522-8, page 385:
"An each, piece, single item, or individual item package."
Why do you respond to the trolls?
Hardly a 'review'... merely an opinion expressed in a forum post, just like all the rest.
Nice try at recovery, but it fails Faced with the evidence you did exactly what you claim you didn't, you pull a politician move and attempt to redefine words in the English language...
Repeatedly!!!
B.S... You just (unsurprisingly) appear to lack the ability to properly comprehend was was posted.
Note: "3 each" means nothing more than 3 individual items (it's a military thing, so I seriously doubt that you have any frame of reference).
Each doesn't mean each?
Stop while you are only way behind.
Nice try at recovery, but it fails Faced with the evidence you did exactly what you claim you didn't, you pull a politician move and attempt to redefine words in the English language...
Repeatedly!!!
Each doesn't mean each?
Stop while you are only way behind.
Sad... So Very Very Sad to see you constantly contradict yourself in the same post.
Note: Each does indeed mean Individual, which is exactly what I stated.
EACH –1. every one of two or more considered individually or one by one.
Each doesn't mean each?
Stop while you are only way behind.
"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." ?Bill Clinton, during his 1998 grand jury testimony on the Monica Lewinsky affair
You have touched upon something that is often overlooked -- Cell capability and the carrier tie-in.
The Rim PlayBook has no Cell capability and tethers to a BB for Cell web access.
The Galaxy Tab comes with Cell capability and is sold:
-- subsidized with a carrier contract
-- unsubsized at a much higher price
It appears that other Android tablets will follow the lead of the Galaxy Tab and be mainly sold like large Cell Phones -- complete with carrier contract.
The iPad, has models without cell radios and models with cell radios. The Cell Radio iPad models are sold unsubsidized without carrier contracts,
The unsubsidized iPad is competitively priced compared to subsidized tablets.
I suspect that the next gen iPad will have a model with an universal cell radio (or radios) capable of working on any/all cell networks.
The point of all this is that Apple will be selling an Universal iPad without any dictates or influence from the carriers -- the carriers will be what they should have always been -- a dumb pipe regulated utility.
Certainly, the carriers should be free to resell and bundle plans with the iPad -- but they will not (and shouldn't) have any influence as to what (hardware, OS Version, System Software, Apps) goes into the product or any determination of the base price of the product.
The carriers will be free to compete on their service offerings.
That is significant! The iPad solution will succeed or fail on its own merits -- not some artificial, carrier-imposed restrictions or so-called benefits.
In this way, the iPad truly is magic -- it (the hardware, OS , UI) or the carrier doesn't get between you and your stuff.
Then, by 2012, I expect the iPhone (and any other related Apple devices) to be priced and sold in the same carrier-independent fashion.
.
The only way Apple can get away with this is to have products that are so popular they can force the carriers' hands.
One thing rarely noted by Android boosters is that it gives the power back to the carriers. Without any Apple (or MS) breathing down their necks to make sure they actually do operate as dump pipes and sell the device the device manufacturer actually made, as they intended it to be, they are free to "differentiate" by customizing each Android handset with carrier specific "features" which are typically more expensive and less functional than their non-carrier counterparts. Verizon is particularly aggressive with this approach.
And iPhone (or iPad) is what it is, the consumer can be assured that they'll know exactly what they're getting. That was a major coupe on Apple's part, unprecedented up till that time. As the iPhone gained popularity, it was looking as if that model might finally break the stranglehold of carriers over wireless tech.
But now Android is willing to hop into bed with the carriers, and do whatever gymnastic contortions are called for, and which is where Google's and Apple's ad driven vs. consumer driven business models really start to make a difference After all, what does Google care? They get their ad hits anyway. . And what do the carriers care? They have a very popular smartphone platform that allows them to load it up with proprietary junkware to their heart's content. Note that early on, before Andoird had taken off, Android apologists made a big deal about how Verizon was selling Android handsets unmolested. That was when the iPhone was setting the agenda. Now? Reverted to type.
Hopefully, Apple can continue to win consumers over with great design and functionality, selling enough in the process to force the carriers to dance to their tune. The data plan for the iPad is a great example-- nothing else as consumer friendly out there.
[U
Note[/U]: Each does indeed mean Individual, which is exactly what I stated.
Your exact quote is as follows" ... "We now have 3 each in my Household",....
We refers to your 3 family members ..... 3 each can only refer to each member having 3.
We all know that you'll never "admit to a mistake" but it's always amusing to see how you keep trying to defend the indefensible .... and your "military" reference is truly a stroke of comedic "genius" ????
Your exact quote is as follows" ... "We now have 3 each in my Household",....
We refers to your 3 family members ..... 3 each can only refer to each member having 3.
Though you appear to completely lack any degree of understanding/rational, obviously rendering you unable to comprehend even the simplest of concepts (the 'dumbest' one could reason)... For the Last Time:
Object in Question = iPad, with EACH referring to 3 individual units of said object (e.g. iPad).
Have A Nice Day.
The key point being that he did it for the purpose of annoying people. You know how that is.
If it annoys you, put him on your ignore list so you don't need to view his posts.
I do remember the centered posts, and I never had a problem reading them. Calling him a troll over this is nitpicking. It's like complaining that someone uses comic sans as their font.
No, it doesn't, but, for those who come here with their primary purpose to express a "difference of opinion", it does. Just as it would make me a troll if I went to, for example, an Android forum just for the purpose of expressing to them how misguided they were. Context is everything.
Ok, if that's their primary purpose, fine, but a lot of people, myself included, just like talking about this stuff. It might be different for you personally, but there isn't a single person in my life that knows, or would care, about the goings on with Apple lol. Honestly, when rudeness is set aside, some of the best conversations I have about technology in general come from these forums.
AI is unique in that they post news articles that get linked to by google news, and have a common forum layout for discussion. A bit different from your online magazine sites, know what I mean?
Sometimes when I read about something Apple did someplace else, I can come here and see they've posted an article about it, and if I want more info, I can ask and generally get a straight forward answer. Or, if I want to voice my opinion, I can do that as well. My intention isn't to upset anyone.
Though you appear to completely lack any degree of understanding/rational, obviously rendering you unable to comprehend even the simplest of concepts (the 'dumbest' one could reason)... For the Last Time:
Object in Question = iPad, with EACH referring to 3 individual units of said object (e.g. iPad).
Have A Nice Day.
It is a simple concept you're espousing. Unfortunately it's completely incorrect. In your sentence the word "each" is a pronoun which qualifies the noun (we). You seem to simply be bullheaded about this. And stop blaming the military. I've spent a few years at sub base Bangor, keyport torpedo station and several air force bases in Germany. Vernacular in the military is used to avoid confusion not create it.
I don't have a problem with the sample size given what they were attempting to determine. What's not disclosed is:
1. Were the people allowed to use the tablets and answer questions as individuals, or in small groups of _____ people?
2. How were the testers selected?
Along with a couple of iPads and NOOKcolors...
Note: Try Not To Be Envious - Hater!
I can understand having those three.
I have an iPad, and a Kobo ebook reader. If I'm reading ePubs, I'll usually use the Kobo.
That said, I could also occasionally use a 7 inch tablet. I'd prefer an iPad or iPod Touch in that size as I could use my existing apps. I tried the Tab and didn't care for it.
If I could only have one tablet, it would be the iPad as some tasks need that screen size. But there's no one device that's right all the time.