When it Comes to Tablets, It's All iPad

is Apple suing Samsung? Is it because they aren't a threat? I rather think their new 10.1 tablet is real competition and therefore must be stopped by any means available to Apple.

Apple has always been very protective of its tech. Years and years ago they sent GNOME a C&D for using spring-loaded folders in Nautilus. They've also sent FreeType a C&D for using their font hinting algorithm.

I don't think either were a "threat" to Apple at the time.

Nor do I honestly feel that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is much of a threat. Apple has sold something like 10-100x as many iPads as Samsung.

Honestly, I think HP's WebOS tablets would have been more of a threat had HP given them a chance. Those seemed really nice. Hopefully someone buys them up and pushes WebOS hard. Maybe Nokia should buy them. Or maybe RIM. Microsoft *should* buy them, but they'd probably destroy it.

The apple iPad might be a good devices, but this article is nothing but a sales pitch advertisement for Apple. It would have been a better and more beneficial article to its readers if the author spent his time on building a comparison table. Giving the readers more factual information to comparing features, capabilities, and costs instead of subjective personal preference by the author would have been the right thing to do.

One note about the stats: Since Apple had several month head start before every body else, instead of showing the accumulation sales figure, it would have been much more accurate and more indicative about the sales trend by showing the last monthly sale of various products.

This article is a failure in professional objective journalism.

Fettoosh: I've read other articles where they showed the sales figures for the previous quarter and Apple still comes out 10-100x better.

For example, a few weeks ago I read an article pointing out that Samsung only shipped 44,000 Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablets while Apple *sold* (not just shipped to stores) millions.

inexplicable Apple mystique?

Ummmm....no, not exactly inexplicable.

Let's see....

First there was the Mac and a general Apple philosophy of interfaces and interaction between people, software, and hardware. Refined over years, different OS underpinnings, and 3 different hardware platforms (Motorola-IBM-Intel).

Then came the iPod Touch which begat the iPhone which begat the iPad.

All technologies building, one piece at a time, on a well-honed vision.

A little marketing razzmatazz for sure, but...

Making good stuff, then making it better, and being determined to learn and improve as you go? Not a bad way to become the most valuable tech company on the planet.

If only the GNOME and KDE folks understood so much as an iota of what makes Apple so good and so popular.

Quoting:For example, a few weeks ago I read an article pointing out that Samsung only shipped 44,000 Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablets while Apple *sold* (not just shipped to stores) millions.

That doesn't address my main point about having product comparison table.

Since the figures represent dispersed periods and Apple's device has been on the market first and for a longer period, I still would like to see the monthly sale figures to see a more accurate trend. The rate at which sales are changing is a better measure than accumulative. To get a more accurate trend from accumulation, we would have to wait for a much longer period.

The bigger issue is not the big, brand name tablets, but the onslaught of the cheap aPad tabs from China. I'm sure that when you combine all Android tablet sales, they actually add up to something a litte more threatening. And not to take away from Apple's strong (or strong-arm?!?!) marketing, but CrunchTech/Fusion Garage developed this type of device first... But-for the "dispute" near launch, they would have been at the market first with a strong lead against Apple, which could have seriously affected Apple's pricing of the iPad. I still think that Apple "invested" in Fusion Garage right before the dispute,... leaving the CrunchPad/JooJoo as just a foonote. But maybe I'm just making a tin foil hat there...

Getting into the phone or tablet business is a long-term slog. You can't release a product and then fold up the tent when it's not a runaway hit in a month.

Companies need to commit to the business model, or they're doomed to fail.

You ranting about HP, maybe?!?!? The funny thing is that all the hardware is pretty much the same... All ARM based processors with mostly the same 4 or 5 chipsets. It's the software that's different (and to a lessor extent, the outside shells). Given that, there's no real reason to have an expensive ramp-up. I'm surprised we haven't seen a cheap, Augen-like tablet hit the mainstream, other then then Augen, that is... There are a lot of decent ones out there (the Witstech A81e through A81h+ & A91 tablets, for example).