What's the data on "people who use their tablets as phones", "people who want their tablets to be phones", "people who already know their tablets can be a phone but couldn't care less", and "people who think using a tablet as a phone is idiotic"? We need that data to be able to say for certain, but it's quite obvious the former is an extreme minority.
Without getting into the semantics of who falls into which category or which devices fall into which category, I would suggest that the huge number of people buying large-screen phones is a pretty clear indication that there *IS* demand for something that serves the purposes of both compact tablet and telephone. Take a ride on your nearest subway and look around. They're everywhere.
Resisting integration also seems inconsistent with, or even contrary to, the direction Apple is taking in its product offerings. First they took a telephone and jammed a computer into it. Then they took a computer and made it small and light enough to fit in a purse. Then they took the form factor of the phone and the guts of the computer and put them in a tablet. Then they shrunk the tablet. They've already started the integration by bringing the computer down to the telephone, why NOT bring the telephone up to the computer? I'd *LOVE* to be able to answer a phone call on a MacBook Air while I'm sitting there in front of it with headphones on anyway, rather than having to take OFF the headphones, dig the phone out of my pocket and balance both while I talk. I'd also like very much to be able to access the internet on an Air when I'm out at the field with no WiFi without having to tether it to a separate device.
I understand your point about larger form factors being less convenient telephones. I contend that the opposite is also true, that telephones are less convenient computers. Sometimes the pocket device is the best solution, but sometimes it would actually be MORE convenient to have ones' primary device double as a telephone. It depends on which use is the highest priority in any given situation.
It could make sense only if two devices could share the same phone number. If you need to pay for s separate plan then it it doesn't make sense
Honestly, it doesn't need a separate data plan on android. All you do is set up your android device, and use a google voice number as your primary number. Install the google voice application on a tablet, and assuming they don't have the retarded restrictions apple forced on the ios version of google voice, you can use it to answer your phone on your tablet. I've started using google voice as my primary phone number, and it's great. Right now the ios app on my ipad only works for texts, as it's an iphone app. The app was limited so that it used the device's phone to make/recieve phone calls, rather than making the calls directly over the internet (like the web version can). I'm pretty sure this was a concession to apple and the carriers, as they didn't want to break the mobile phone monopoly. Anyhow, assuming the android tablet one works right, that would be awesome. I wouldn't use my tablet as my primary phone, but i might be using my tablet when the phone rings, and decide to just answer on the tablet rather than pulling out my phone.
shared numbers... wonder was this the direction/idea Apple were heading when they wanted to do away with the sim card and have it managed by SW on the device. Carriers blocked this idea.
if it could be handled by SW, then it would be easy to have same number on all devices, i would say.
Even though I would not use a 7" device as a phone, I can see that many people would like it, so think its OK to do. Not harming me in any way, so why not?
Pity some other fanatics who write here would not be more a peace with themselves instead of agruing their point like a religious belief.
Save yourself the ulcer and blood pressure guys.
What would be cool is the iPad/iphone/mac all sensing is the other devices are close to each other & the user (via an iWatch??) and the nearest one rings.
Oh, and to the guy who suggested Call Forwarding, in Ireland thats a no-no. You get charged a whopper for each call thats forwarded.
People are crazy honestly why do you want to shove a 7 inch piece of glass to your head are people actually having that bad of vision where they need a 7 inch screen???
[...] For better or worse Apple wants to make one device that fits well everywhere.
Which seems odd, because they obviously understand the need for more than one kind of "traditional" computer. I'm not sure why they seem to feel that there should be any less diversity of usage scenarios and buyer preferences when it comes to hand-held devices.
The the idea of having both smaller and larger iPhones, or an iPhone and an iPad with voice, is no more or less preposterous than the existence of both MacBook Air and MacBook Pro. The buyer is given a choice between one that makes absolute portability the primary priority, while the other trades some size and weight for screen real estate and horsepower. Apple doesn't offer a significant function on one that's absent from the other, though, like USB ports or WiFi. Operationally they're almost identical. One may quite reasonably argue that offering both an iPhone and iPad with voice (or a big-screen iPhone) follows exactly the same paradigm.
As an aside, if Apple DID build only one computer, say the Air, how much you wanna bet people here would be arguing against the usefulness and sales potential of an iMac?
Because its a stupid idea. I think this bigger phablet thing is just a fad like netbooks were.
I think it would be awkward for most people to hold the Mini up to their face for a phone call, but if I were browsing on my ipad, it'd be nice to have the option to touch a button and answer the call over speaker phone rather than getting up for my phone or digging into my pocket. What's so bad about that?... Why is facetime a great idea but talking is stupid? One would talk on the ipad the same way he talks when he's using facetime...holding it in his hands. Except he could just keep browsing since it's just a phone call. More, it'd be nice to be reading, take a call, then if I had to go somewhere I could simply touch a button or swipe and transfer the call to the iphone. Why not? How is this any more "stupid" than using the iPad to take pictures? (Which I don't think is stupid...just terribly unlikely and inconvenient). How about talking on the phone while one works in the kitchen and uses a recipe?
Maybe it isn't cost effective to include this technology, but it's no more silly to talk on the iPad than it is to ...talk on the iPad during facetime. More, you could have a conversation with somebody and browse, or collaborate with them while you both search. Am I going to buy the android version? No...I don't trust it. But I'd buy a phone enabled ipad, and I'd pay extra for it. If we're going to argue phone technology on the iPad is silly...can we cover the back camera and facetime in that analysis?
Do I need it? Not really. Stupid? I think that's going too far.
I'm not sure how Skype is expected to know where on the planet you are while using your virtual phone number. For example when I am in Central America I can call people in the US and my US Skype number is in the caller ID and also in the users contact list. If I was to call 911, where exactly would the call go? What possible good would it be to place a call to 911 in the area code of my US number when I'm actually 6000km away from that location? Even if they could know exactly where I was, there is no 911 service in every location, although we did recently get it, but I have not used it so I am unsure how well it works yet. When you sign up for Skype they make sure you know there is no 911 service. If you forget that or ignore it, how is that Skype's fault?
BTW in my experience it was only after MS bought Skype that we finally got a robust iOS version that didn't crash all the time.
You're just reiterating all the reasons why it makes sense for a country *not* to let Skype issue phone numbers in that country. Also, the fact that I *could* join Skype in Canada, yet get a "UK" or "US" phone number is just nuts. Until all this nonsense is worked out, there isn't really a hope for Skype (or any such service) to catch on as an alternative to a regular phone.
In your case, when you are in Central America, you can call a US number without any long distance charges because your number is in the US even though you aren't. In the sensible countries that don't allow Skype to issue local numbers (Canada), I'd be dialing long distance to call a friend down the street because my number wouldn't really be a Canadian number, but localised to a country where they allow Skype phone numbers.
I'm not claiming to understand half of this, I'm just pointing out as per my original comment that the situation is nuts and that Skype (and other VoIP services) are far from a drop in replacement for a phone.
It's the carriers, and their association with the particular countries they exist in that's the problem. Nothing will change until someone with the power forces a change as it's to the carriers advantage for things to remain as they are. Someone with the clout and the technology and the vision needs to start a truly international service that gets around all this BS.
Long distance charges have to be one of the most lucrative scams in history with the possible exception of SMS. The carriers are not willingly going to leave this pile of money behind, someone has to do an end run around them.
People are crazy honestly why do you want to shove a 7 inch piece of glass to your head ...
Why do people keep repeating this nonsense? Haven't you looked around on a bus in a while or while walking down the street?
Even with the iPhone, people talk into thin air, or they talk into their bluetooth headset, or they hold the phone up like a little tray and whisper into it like they were talking to a sandwich. These are common everyday sights now and no one gets ridiculed for that. There are many ways to deal with a call besides putting the device up to your head. If you were in a coffee shop for instance and typing on your iPad and a call came in, you'd probably just answer it on speaker phone like a normal person, not put it up to your head.
Hell, there was a young lady videochatting with her dad in India beside me on the bus this very morning. She was using the headset and talking in a quiet voice. It wasn't a problem for her or for anyone else. She was using a phone, but if it was an iPad I don't see how it would have been any different.
Some people only want to drag around a tablet and still get phone calls. Yeah, I don't think they'll put them up to their ears, but they can use ear buds of just talk through the built in microphone.
I think Apple should offer optional cell phone capabilities on ALL of their other mobile products (iPads, and even laptops).
This year or next, I see Apple rolling out the iWatch or perhaps a Zoolander type micro flip phone. Either (iWatch or Micro phone) could wirelessly tether or physically connect/dock with a larger device. In this way, people can carry around what they want ranging from ultra-portability to large-sized screens/keyboards. Carry just the micro flip phone (or iWatch) for ultra portability. Or take along your iPad Mini/Macbook for more serious productivity.
Of course, I wish every single device just had voice/data plans for cheap... tied to my one user account. But if that doesn't happen soon, look for iWatch or micro flip phone to takes its place.
Why do people keep repeating this nonsense? Haven't you looked around on a bus in a while or while walking down the street?
Even with the iPhone, people talk into thin air, or they talk into their bluetooth headset, or they hold the phone up like a little tray and whisper into it like they were talking to a sandwich. These are common everyday sights now and no one gets ridiculed for that. There are many ways to deal with a call besides putting the device up to your head. If you were in a coffee shop for instance and typing on your iPad and a call came in, you'd probably just answer it on speaker phone like a normal person, not put it up to your head.
Hell, there was a young lady videochatting with her dad in India beside me on the bus this very morning. She was using the headset and talking in a quiet voice. It wasn't a problem for her or for anyone else. She was using a phone, but if it was an iPad I don't see how it would have been any different.
People act like they would have to use it. They just don't see that it would be a nice option to have.
In the sensible countries that don't allow Skype to issue local numbers (Canada), I'd be dialing long distance to call a friend down the street because my number wouldn't really be a Canadian number, but localised to a country where they allow Skype phone numbers.
I'm not claiming to understand half of this, I'm just pointing out as per my original comment that the situation is nuts and that Skype (and other VoIP services) are far from a drop in replacement for a phone.
I'm not sure that something that is sensible to one government is necessarily sensible to another. In many countries they have laws and regulations that allow more freedom than others. I know there is no 911 service in Skype but that does not render it useless. If it really was purely a public safety issue then Canada should ban cars that can exceed the speed limit, alcoholic beverages, cigarettes, guns, bow and arrows, and fast food all of which can kill or or cause serious injuries. You can't protect people from themselves. I would be much more in agreement with a government allowing me to use a service like Skype rather than banning it because some people fail to read or abide by the terms of service.
I've never figured out why the iPad cannot receive calls.
Time for Apple to change that.
The damn voice contract ramps the opeprational cost throught the roof for a marginal gain. I bet a peek at the ratio between WiFi only and LTE capable iPads would show the same issue in miniature: and there you don't have to sign a 2 year contract....
Not a "stupid idea" for everyone... I am 73 years old, retired... I receive/make only a few calls per day. During the grandkids soccer season (6 practices and 3 games per week) I carry an iPad and an iPhone. The phone calls are only used to co-ordinate pickups and game times, etc.
If the iPad could make/receive phone calls, I could carry only one device.. The iPad screen and kb better serve my old eyes and fat fingers!
BTW, As you mature you care more about results than how you look to others...
The Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, has been able to make calls for over a year now.
My other concern is that the carriers then start charging more for connectivity. I like being able to buy just a data connection for a month at a time. I cannot see things staying that way if it is all of the sudden also a handset.
Each to his own, but I don't see Apple moving in this direction and I am fine with that.
The new tablet will include a 7-inch display at a resolution of 1,024 by 600 pixels, and it will be backed by a 1.2-gigahertz processor and options for 8 or 16 gigabytes of internal storage. The Galaxy Tab 3 will also sport a 3-megapixel rear camera, plus a 1.3-megapixel forward-facing lens. It will ship with Android 4.1 Jelly Bean.
Perhaps most interesting about the Galaxy Tab 3 is the 3G model, which will be able to take phone calls like a smartphone. Unlike Apple's iPad mini, the Galaxy Tab 3 will not offer high-speed 4G LTE wireless connectivity.
Samsung announced that the Galaxy Tab 3 will launch globally beginning in May with the Wi-Fi-only model. The 3G-capable version with phone call functionality will debut in June.
vs IPad mini with a processor of similar speeds, minimum of 16 gb offering, 5 and 1.2 megapixel camera, IOS(for tablet not phone) and LTE, this is not a competitor of the IPad mini. It will proably be $200-$400(or so) with it competing with phablets as it is one featuring a large screen for the category.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What's the data on "people who use their tablets as phones", "people who want their tablets to be phones", "people who already know their tablets can be a phone but couldn't care less", and "people who think using a tablet as a phone is idiotic"? We need that data to be able to say for certain, but it's quite obvious the former is an extreme minority.
Without getting into the semantics of who falls into which category or which devices fall into which category, I would suggest that the huge number of people buying large-screen phones is a pretty clear indication that there *IS* demand for something that serves the purposes of both compact tablet and telephone. Take a ride on your nearest subway and look around. They're everywhere.
Resisting integration also seems inconsistent with, or even contrary to, the direction Apple is taking in its product offerings. First they took a telephone and jammed a computer into it. Then they took a computer and made it small and light enough to fit in a purse. Then they took the form factor of the phone and the guts of the computer and put them in a tablet. Then they shrunk the tablet. They've already started the integration by bringing the computer down to the telephone, why NOT bring the telephone up to the computer? I'd *LOVE* to be able to answer a phone call on a MacBook Air while I'm sitting there in front of it with headphones on anyway, rather than having to take OFF the headphones, dig the phone out of my pocket and balance both while I talk. I'd also like very much to be able to access the internet on an Air when I'm out at the field with no WiFi without having to tether it to a separate device.
I understand your point about larger form factors being less convenient telephones. I contend that the opposite is also true, that telephones are less convenient computers. Sometimes the pocket device is the best solution, but sometimes it would actually be MORE convenient to have ones' primary device double as a telephone. It depends on which use is the highest priority in any given situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by psitthipo
To me, it's just captive marketing so they can make more money from you.
That's the silliest thing I've heard today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
BTW in my experience it was only after MS bought Skype that we finally got a robust iOS version that didn't crash all the time.
This is true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic
It could make sense only if two devices could share the same phone number. If you need to pay for s separate plan then it it doesn't make sense
Honestly, it doesn't need a separate data plan on android. All you do is set up your android device, and use a google voice number as your primary number. Install the google voice application on a tablet, and assuming they don't have the retarded restrictions apple forced on the ios version of google voice, you can use it to answer your phone on your tablet. I've started using google voice as my primary phone number, and it's great. Right now the ios app on my ipad only works for texts, as it's an iphone app. The app was limited so that it used the device's phone to make/recieve phone calls, rather than making the calls directly over the internet (like the web version can). I'm pretty sure this was a concession to apple and the carriers, as they didn't want to break the mobile phone monopoly. Anyhow, assuming the android tablet one works right, that would be awesome. I wouldn't use my tablet as my primary phone, but i might be using my tablet when the phone rings, and decide to just answer on the tablet rather than pulling out my phone.
Phil
shared numbers... wonder was this the direction/idea Apple were heading when they wanted to do away with the sim card and have it managed by SW on the device. Carriers blocked this idea.
if it could be handled by SW, then it would be easy to have same number on all devices, i would say.
Even though I would not use a 7" device as a phone, I can see that many people would like it, so think its OK to do. Not harming me in any way, so why not?
Pity some other fanatics who write here would not be more a peace with themselves instead of agruing their point like a religious belief.
Save yourself the ulcer and blood pressure guys.
What would be cool is the iPad/iphone/mac all sensing is the other devices are close to each other & the user (via an iWatch??) and the nearest one rings.
Oh, and to the guy who suggested Call Forwarding, in Ireland thats a no-no. You get charged a whopper for each call thats forwarded.
Sprint asked the follow-up question: "What is SIM card?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
[...] For better or worse Apple wants to make one device that fits well everywhere.
Which seems odd, because they obviously understand the need for more than one kind of "traditional" computer. I'm not sure why they seem to feel that there should be any less diversity of usage scenarios and buyer preferences when it comes to hand-held devices.
The the idea of having both smaller and larger iPhones, or an iPhone and an iPad with voice, is no more or less preposterous than the existence of both MacBook Air and MacBook Pro. The buyer is given a choice between one that makes absolute portability the primary priority, while the other trades some size and weight for screen real estate and horsepower. Apple doesn't offer a significant function on one that's absent from the other, though, like USB ports or WiFi. Operationally they're almost identical. One may quite reasonably argue that offering both an iPhone and iPad with voice (or a big-screen iPhone) follows exactly the same paradigm.
As an aside, if Apple DID build only one computer, say the Air, how much you wanna bet people here would be arguing against the usefulness and sales potential of an iMac?
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
Because its a stupid idea. I think this bigger phablet thing is just a fad like netbooks were.
I think it would be awkward for most people to hold the Mini up to their face for a phone call, but if I were browsing on my ipad, it'd be nice to have the option to touch a button and answer the call over speaker phone rather than getting up for my phone or digging into my pocket. What's so bad about that?... Why is facetime a great idea but talking is stupid? One would talk on the ipad the same way he talks when he's using facetime...holding it in his hands. Except he could just keep browsing since it's just a phone call. More, it'd be nice to be reading, take a call, then if I had to go somewhere I could simply touch a button or swipe and transfer the call to the iphone. Why not? How is this any more "stupid" than using the iPad to take pictures? (Which I don't think is stupid...just terribly unlikely and inconvenient). How about talking on the phone while one works in the kitchen and uses a recipe?
Maybe it isn't cost effective to include this technology, but it's no more silly to talk on the iPad than it is to ...talk on the iPad during facetime. More, you could have a conversation with somebody and browse, or collaborate with them while you both search. Am I going to buy the android version? No...I don't trust it. But I'd buy a phone enabled ipad, and I'd pay extra for it. If we're going to argue phone technology on the iPad is silly...can we cover the back camera and facetime in that analysis?
Do I need it? Not really. Stupid? I think that's going too far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I'm not sure how Skype is expected to know where on the planet you are while using your virtual phone number. For example when I am in Central America I can call people in the US and my US Skype number is in the caller ID and also in the users contact list. If I was to call 911, where exactly would the call go? What possible good would it be to place a call to 911 in the area code of my US number when I'm actually 6000km away from that location? Even if they could know exactly where I was, there is no 911 service in every location, although we did recently get it, but I have not used it so I am unsure how well it works yet. When you sign up for Skype they make sure you know there is no 911 service. If you forget that or ignore it, how is that Skype's fault?
BTW in my experience it was only after MS bought Skype that we finally got a robust iOS version that didn't crash all the time.
You're just reiterating all the reasons why it makes sense for a country *not* to let Skype issue phone numbers in that country. Also, the fact that I *could* join Skype in Canada, yet get a "UK" or "US" phone number is just nuts. Until all this nonsense is worked out, there isn't really a hope for Skype (or any such service) to catch on as an alternative to a regular phone.
In your case, when you are in Central America, you can call a US number without any long distance charges because your number is in the US even though you aren't. In the sensible countries that don't allow Skype to issue local numbers (Canada), I'd be dialing long distance to call a friend down the street because my number wouldn't really be a Canadian number, but localised to a country where they allow Skype phone numbers.
I'm not claiming to understand half of this, I'm just pointing out as per my original comment that the situation is nuts and that Skype (and other VoIP services) are far from a drop in replacement for a phone.
It's the carriers, and their association with the particular countries they exist in that's the problem. Nothing will change until someone with the power forces a change as it's to the carriers advantage for things to remain as they are. Someone with the clout and the technology and the vision needs to start a truly international service that gets around all this BS.
Long distance charges have to be one of the most lucrative scams in history with the possible exception of SMS. The carriers are not willingly going to leave this pile of money behind, someone has to do an end run around them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol77
[...] Why is facetime a great idea but talking is stupid?
If there's a better argument for a voice-enabled iPad, I can't imagine what it would be. This is the winner! Great point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vortex96
People are crazy honestly why do you want to shove a 7 inch piece of glass to your head ...
Why do people keep repeating this nonsense? Haven't you looked around on a bus in a while or while walking down the street?
Even with the iPhone, people talk into thin air, or they talk into their bluetooth headset, or they hold the phone up like a little tray and whisper into it like they were talking to a sandwich. These are common everyday sights now and no one gets ridiculed for that. There are many ways to deal with a call besides putting the device up to your head. If you were in a coffee shop for instance and typing on your iPad and a call came in, you'd probably just answer it on speaker phone like a normal person, not put it up to your head.
Hell, there was a young lady videochatting with her dad in India beside me on the bus this very morning. She was using the headset and talking in a quiet voice. It wasn't a problem for her or for anyone else. She was using a phone, but if it was an iPad I don't see how it would have been any different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Some people only want to drag around a tablet and still get phone calls. Yeah, I don't think they'll put them up to their ears, but they can use ear buds of just talk through the built in microphone.
I think Apple should offer optional cell phone capabilities on ALL of their other mobile products (iPads, and even laptops).
This year or next, I see Apple rolling out the iWatch or perhaps a Zoolander type micro flip phone. Either (iWatch or Micro phone) could wirelessly tether or physically connect/dock with a larger device. In this way, people can carry around what they want ranging from ultra-portability to large-sized screens/keyboards. Carry just the micro flip phone (or iWatch) for ultra portability. Or take along your iPad Mini/Macbook for more serious productivity.
Of course, I wish every single device just had voice/data plans for cheap... tied to my one user account. But if that doesn't happen soon, look for iWatch or micro flip phone to takes its place.
People act like they would have to use it. They just don't see that it would be a nice option to have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
In the sensible countries that don't allow Skype to issue local numbers (Canada), I'd be dialing long distance to call a friend down the street because my number wouldn't really be a Canadian number, but localised to a country where they allow Skype phone numbers.
I'm not claiming to understand half of this, I'm just pointing out as per my original comment that the situation is nuts and that Skype (and other VoIP services) are far from a drop in replacement for a phone.
I'm not sure that something that is sensible to one government is necessarily sensible to another. In many countries they have laws and regulations that allow more freedom than others. I know there is no 911 service in Skype but that does not render it useless. If it really was purely a public safety issue then Canada should ban cars that can exceed the speed limit, alcoholic beverages, cigarettes, guns, bow and arrows, and fast food all of which can kill or or cause serious injuries. You can't protect people from themselves. I would be much more in agreement with a government allowing me to use a service like Skype rather than banning it because some people fail to read or abide by the terms of service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I've never figured out why the iPad cannot receive calls.
Time for Apple to change that.
The damn voice contract ramps the opeprational cost throught the roof for a marginal gain. I bet a peek at the ratio between WiFi only and LTE capable iPads would show the same issue in miniature: and there you don't have to sign a 2 year contract....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Not a "stupid idea" for everyone... I am 73 years old, retired... I receive/make only a few calls per day. During the grandkids soccer season (6 practices and 3 games per week) I carry an iPad and an iPhone. The phone calls are only used to co-ordinate pickups and game times, etc.
If the iPad could make/receive phone calls, I could carry only one device.. The iPad screen and kb better serve my old eyes and fat fingers!
BTW, As you mature you care more about results than how you look to others...
The Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, has been able to make calls for over a year now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot
My other concern is that the carriers then start charging more for connectivity. I like being able to buy just a data connection for a month at a time. I cannot see things staying that way if it is all of the sudden also a handset.
Each to his own, but I don't see Apple moving in this direction and I am fine with that.
Apart from FaceTime, that is.