No, the home router isn’t dead

During the announcement coverage for the new iPad on Wednesday, I heard some comments from tech pundits that predicted — or according to them, confirmed — some really crazy things. On the announcement of LTE connectivity options on the new iPad, two comments sparked my interest: “this is a game changer” (and more to that effect) and ”the home router is dead”.

No, LTE on an iPad is not a game changer. The home router is still breathing and has a long, healthy life ahead of it.

Let’s hit the LTE topic first. Obviously 4G LTE is the new buzz in the wireless industry (at least in the US). Apple is all about buzzwords, and adding LTE to the iPad while retaining great battery life is surely a technical feat for them to market against. What people have to realize is that first of all, a vast majority of iPads have been and will be sold as WiFi only, $499 models. Consumers buying 4G (and previously 3G) models are the severe minority when it comes to any tablet model. The costs are just too high for average people. It is not at all cost effective for people to purchase a mobile network-enabled iPad for a minimum of $629, followed by $30 (or more) a month in data fees from AT&T or Verizon. The value proposition just isn’t there.

So let’s think about this home internet situation. LTE-enabled iPads with 5GB data caps for $50 a month are not killing cable and DSL. Not now, not in the foreseeable future. Even the average consumer cannot complete all of their computing tasks on an iPad. The idea that someone can live on an iPad and an iPhone, with a combination of anywhere from 2GB to 10GB between the two, is absolutely laughable. It takes a very specific use-case and individual to fit their life into that model. An average user with a laptop will easily use 50GB+ monthly. Heavy users like myself will be well over 100GB. Families will regularly use 150GB or more depending on the devices. How could you ever be expected to fit your monthly computing and internet use into 2 devices and 10GB of data? And at the price of $100 monthly just for the data on those devices? Of course not including other service charges for voice and text on the phone.

I realize that the idea of having a 4G LTE connection for each individual device is a forward-looking concept, but it is nowhere near reality. Given the current pricing and apparent bandwidth / spectrum limitations of the world’s wireless carriers, the landscape will have to change severely in order to make this dream happen.

So go ahead and keep that router around. You’re going to need it.

Why I made jump to Prepaid phone service

After leaving my Sprint contract in January 2011 because of my terrible experience with them, I made up my mind to never sign a contract for cellular service again. I purchased a used HTC G2 and moved to T-Mobile no-contract Postpaid service. At the time, it was a huge victory. I was “sticking it to the carriers” by buying unsubsidized (in this case used) and not signing a contract. After months with the service, it was pretty evident that T-Mobile’s main goal was to get me onto a contract. Every single customer service call was a chance for them to up-sell me to a contract plan and device — it even came to the point where they were cold-calling me, offering services on contract. This had to stop.

In mid January of this year, I decided to take my wireless service into my own hands. Just a year after moving from Sprint contract Postpaid to T-Mobile no-contract Postpaid, I devised my plan to buy an unlocked GSM Galaxy Nexus, and make the move all the way to Prepaid service. My previous plan with T-Mobile offered 500 minutes (which I never used), Unlimited SMS/MMS, and 5GB of data, but cost me $70 monthly. My previous Sprint contract? Over $80 monthly. Following some advice from a great thread on XDA-developers, I made my decision to go with a T-Mobile (Walmart) Prepaid plan. The plan offers 100 minutes of talk, Unlimited SMS/MMS, and 5GB of un-throttled data — all for just $30 per month, $40 less than T-Mobile Postpaid.

Before continuing, I should point out that there are some caveats when looking at this plan:

1) There are no nights, weekends, or mobile-to-mobile minutes on this plan. 100 means 100. This can be a deal-breaker for some on this plan. Don’t worry, there are other options with more minutes! (As well as Google Voice solutions, which I’ll get into later in this post.)

2) Don’t expect customer support. One of the ways that these plans achieve low cost is outsourcing CS. If you call in to T-Mobile, you’ll be forwarded to India for support, and only support for services, not for hardware.

3) No roaming. Now, if you’re like most people, you spend 99% of your time within the city limits. In that case, you won’t ever need roaming. If you plan on getting cell service on the top of a mountain somewhere, you should probably look elsewhere. 

Still interested? Let’s move on to setting up the plan!

Order your SIM and SIM activation kit online directly from T-Mobile. It is $1.99 with free shipping, and the card actually has ~$3.50 in credit pre-loaded, so they’re actually paying you to activate it. When the card arrives (for me it took an atrocious 8 business days), open up the entire packet and pop out the SIM, and take down the required numbers from your device of choice (IMEI# and SIM# specifically). Go to T-Mobile’s Prepaid Activation page and follow the prompts. Enter your information and choose the plan you want. Be sure to read the fine print here: only the $30 and $70 plans offer 5GB of un-throttled data. Other plans will only offer 25MB, 250MB, or 2GB. Be realistic about how much data you will use. Once you’ve completed activation, enter your credit card # and pay for the service. You now have 30 days of use out of a phone for just a touch over $1 per day!

Contrary to the way typical contract postpaid services work, you must pay before you use the service. Now once you get into the swing of it the payments will be no different than you’re used to. You’ll still pay once per month and your service will never stop unless you stop paying. The difference will be that your card is charged exactly every 30 days, with no exceptions. The beauty of this system is that there are no overages, fees, or nickel-and-dime schemes. Since you pay for the service up front, they can’t charge you more later. You get what you pay for — no more, no less.

This — or any prepaid plan setup — wouldn’t be complete without a quick praise of Google Voice. Now, this is probably best saved for another blog post to get into the nitty-gritty of it, but I’ll give the overview. Most people’s interaction with Google Voice consists of setting up Voicemail on your Android device that lets you check it in your e-mail, by text message, or in any browser. Actually, GV goes much, much farther than this if you’re willing to put in the time for setup. Going to the Google Voice website will get you started. Choose a number with any qualifications you have — you can search by area code, number combination, or spelling. I personally snagged a number which has the same 7-digits as my current carrier number, but with a Maryland area code. After doing so, you can now call and text from this number as if it were provided by a carrier. Calls made on the computer are 100% free to/from US numbers, and SMS sent both on the computer and device are free also. I’ll be the first to admit that a love/hate relationship quickly forms with Google Voice, but as I said, if you’re willing to put in the man hours for setup, the rewards are numerous. I personally would not be able to do prepaid without it.

I’m now just over a month into this service, and I can honestly say I couldn’t be happier with how it has gone. The service is great, the cost savings are huge, and I get the feeling of satisfaction every day I see someone with an AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint phone knowing that I’m paying far less for the same service. The one bit of caution I can give is to really do your research. I spent a good 2 weeks hunting down the specifics and making sure that everything would work as I expect. That being said, I would definitely advise trying it on for size — at the very most you’re out $31.99 for a month of service to see if it will work for you. I think that’s worth every penny.

Updates won’t matter until Android skins die

Following the (albeit smaller than expected) avalanche of Android phone announcements at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) the first weeks of January, we heard countless numbers of representatives from every manufacturer say the words “…it’s currently running Gingerbread, but we’re updating it to Ice Cream Sandwich…” in regards to phones, and similar sentiments regarding tablets and Honeycomb (although I’ll be focusing on phones).

Now there’s a couple problems with this, the first of which being the absolute absurdity that large multinational corporations - we’re talking LG, Samsung, etc. - can’t even put together a Beta build of ICS to show off at a show months after ICS was released (and arguably they had it even earlier than that). It’s like they’re not even trying at this point.

Secondly, they seem to tout the upgrade from 2.3 to 4 as a selling point, as if we’re supposed to like the phone more because it’s being upgraded, and be willing to buy it over another phone that hasn’t been given the guaranteed go-ahead upgrade path. This shouldn’t be a selling point, it should be an absolute knock against the phone for not just launching with the OS it should have. These CES phones aren’t going to be hitting the market for weeks and months after they’re announced. If 2.3 is perceivably archaic now, how will it look at the end of Q1 and beyond when these are an store shelves?

Those statements aside, let’s get to the real meat of the story, which I suppose is related to the “promised upgrade as a selling feature” argument. Along with the fact that upgrades shouldn’t be considered an extra feature that a manufacturer offers, these upgrades will literally change nothing about the user experience of the device. Recently evidenced by the leaked SGSII ICS builds with TouchWiz 5, and various HTC Sense-laden ICS leaks, these phones will never look like the ICS that users and reviewers alike are raving about on the Galaxy Nexus. In an attempt to preserve their perceived “brand loyalty” and image, every single manufacturer will simply be putting their same skin from Android 2.2 and 2.3 straight onto Android 4 with mild improvements. Not only is this a travesty simply because it is delaying updates and keeping phones locked down, but mainly the fact that Android 4 is really, really good. By all accounts, Google outdid themselves here, and the idea that these manufacturers aren’t even going to attempt to bring that forward to the user is a shame.

This brings me back to referencing the title of this article: updates won’t matter until Android skins die. Every single person who puts emphasis on updates is just spinning their wheels. Whether its running Android 2.3 or 4 really does not matter if the user isn’t going to be getting any benefit from it because the skin is trying to maintain a consistent experience from 2.3 devices. No effort should be made complaining about pushing an update that will not change anything. I think that people seem to have some glimmer of hope that manufacturers will push an OTA and all of a sudden their device will have stock ICS on it. Well, that’s just not going to happen, so spend your energy elsewhere.

The problem with updates and fragmentation is a two parter. The first part is completely removing manufacturer skins - straight up, no ifs ands or buts about it. Only once that is accomplished can we then care about the second part - updating devices in a timely and efficient way.

The Nexus Prime (or whatever) rant bandwagon

Lots of virtual ink has been spilled the last couple days arguing about the Nexus Prime (or Nexus Galaxy, Galaxy Nexus, Droid Prime, Droid Galaxy, etc.). I’m not going to be taking any sides here or choosing who is right and wrong, but I do want to quickly express my thoughts. Lets also keep in mind that although the Nexus “insert word here” launches in less than 24hours, this whole concept has existed since the Nexus One, and will surely continue quite similarly for future Nexus devices.

Let’s get this out of the way: it seems to me that people really don’t understand the Nexus program. Google doesn’t launch the Nexus to compete with the iPhone. They don’t launch it to try and sell 20 million units. They don’t launch it to be on every carrier and in everyone’s pocket. Google doesn’t particularly care if you buy the Nexus.

Google’s focus with the Nexus devices are (basically) threefold: 1) Release a new version of the Android operating system. 2) Provide a reference platform for OEM’s to create Android devices going forward. 3) Provide developers all around the world with a Google-sanctioned development platform that will run completely stock Android and be promptly updated in the future. Google doesn’t want to deal with marketing, carriers, or subsidies. Nexus devices are unsupported, GSM unlocked, and full-priced (read: not for general consumers).

Anyone who squarely compares the Nexus against the latest iPhone surely does not understand the previous 3 points. Yes, I’m sure the Nexus will be great. And yes, (to the dismay of my wallet) I’m probably going to have an extremely strong urge to buy one. That does not at all mean that it should be considered an amazing, all-encompassing, iPhone-slaying, world-ruling device. It will be “out of date” (specs-wise) in a couple months just as the Nexus One and Nexus S, and that is just fine. Because the allure of this device isn’t the specs, the marketing, or the carrier partners (if any), it is the fact that this device will enable developers all around the world to keep building fantastic applications that you and I download and benefit from every single day.

So the next time you read a post about a Nexus device, whether it be in a couple hours, or several months from now when we’re all talking about Android “Jellybean”, just remember that unless you’re a developer or a tech-savvy nerd, Google really isn’t making this phone for you. But that’s okay! You should be excited anyways. Because what’s good for developers, is good for you.

iPhone 4S pre-orders: they aren’t that big of a deal

Following the October 7 online launch of the iPhone 4S, Apple reported that over 1,000,000 iPhone 4S’ had been pre-ordered in the first 24 hours, besting the previous record held by the iPhone 4 which had pre-orders to the tune of 600,000. Now of course this is a good bragging point for Apple, showing that the “greatest iPhone we’ve ever made” sold 400,000 more units the same amount of time than the previous model, but when looking into the specifics of these numbers, they’re not as shocking as they’d seem at first glance.

When the iPhone 4 launched in June of 2010, it was an exclusive for AT&T in the United States, and it was only available in one color, black, and two sizes, 16 and 32gb. With these limited options, the result was 600,000 units pre-ordered in 24hours.

Fast forward to October 2011. Sprint (which has never had an iPhone before) and Verizon are now on the carrier list with AT&T, its launching in both black and white, and has added an increased capacity 64gb model. Even with all of these increased options, only 1,000,000 units were pre-ordered (obviously 1mm units is an astronomical amount, but lets keep it in perspective).

So when putting it into perspective, is the 1,000,000 pre-order really that impressive when comparing to the astronomical number of 600,000 on just one carrier a year ago? I’d venture to say no, its really not as impressive as it seems. Even with drastically more configuration options, availability on the 3 largest carriers in the US, and the ever-exponentially-increasing number of people moving to smartphones (read: market share slices aren’t getting smaller, the pie is getting bigger), the orders are only up 400,000.

Given the updates and options this time around, I personally would have expected much higher pre-order numbers. Here are a few reasons why. First off, AT&T is throwing contract-renewal $200 upgrades to nearly every iPhone 4 owner. If you’re on AT&T and bought the iPhone 4 in 2010, you’re more than likely being offered the subsidized 4S. Second, I would assume that many potential iPhone buyers on Verizon would have held off on the iPhone 4 launch in February in order to buy the next iPhone. Verizon hadn’t ever really released good numbers for the iPhone 4 sales, and it was quite a soft launch. Because of this, we’d expect the 4S sales numbers on Verizon to be quite large. Lastly, this is the first iPhone to ever hit Sprint. Although Sprint is much smaller than Verizon and AT&T, the pent-up demand for the iPhone among customers on Sprint has to be astronomically high. Sprint is offering $70 unlimited (!!!) plans with the iPhone 4s, and most people who have been on Sprint with their early Android offerings from 2010 are due for a contract upgrade at this point.

Only time can tell how the overall sales numbers will be in the coming months, but looking at these pre-order numbers, I’m far from blown away.

The wireless industry is out of control.

Honestly, I don’t think that wireless consumers in the United States understand how bad they have it. There are 3 distinct tiers (levels) of carriers in this country, and consumers are being pretty much royally screwed by the first 2.

At the “premium” or first tier, we have AT&T and Verizon. They boast large nation-wide voice and data networks, with generally solid coverage. The problem is the price. We’re talking $100+ per month for one line of service, and even at this price were still talking limited voice minutes and data allowances.

What I would consider the second tier of wireless carriers is Sprint and T-Mobile. Although they both provide national coverage, it is not nearly as reliable (as far as land mass covered) as the first-tier, and their prices reflect that. On average consumers can expect to pay about $30 less for comparable plans on these carriers.

The third tier is comprised of regional carriers (Think Cincinnati Bell, U.S. Cellular) and pre-paid MVNO’s (Mobile Virtual Network Operators, who piggy back on the major carrier’s networks, think Virgin and Boost Mobile). These lower tier offerings often have no contracts, lower end devices, and limited plans or coverage areas. The bonus with these carriers are rates 50% or less of what first tier carriers are charging

So given this many options (notice I said options, not competition), why am I stating that consumers today are being ripped off? The reasons are many, but I’ll work up a short list. The first issue is devices. With only the top tier carriers receiving the newest and best devices, consumers who want a high end (or new) device, they will automatically be drawn to AT&T or Verizon. For example, keep in mind that the iPhone is (currently, we’ll see on Oct. 4) only available on these 2 carriers. The next issue is coverage. Consumers looking for a new cell phone or carrier will check how the service is in their area. Not only where they live but where they work and other places they frequent. Chances are unless you live in a big city you won’t have great service in all 3 areas on a non top-tier carrier. Even Sprint and T-Mobile have seemingly random dead zones in largely populated areas. The third (and biggest/most underestimated) problem is CDMA and locked GSM. Now I won’t bore you with the intricacies of the technologies but what it comes down to is AT&T (and T-Mobile) being on GSM (SIM cards), and Verizon (and Sprint) being on CDMA (no SIM cards). This inevitably leads to devices that can ONLY be used on one carrier, and never switched. If you want to change carriers, you must buy a completely new device. So even if you’ve braved the 2-year contract or opted to pay the ETF (early termination fee) to leave, the device is now useless.

These problems (along with countless others) all lead to the biggest issue: price. Because of the current market conditions and lack of competition, AT&T and Verizon are slowly gaining customers and market share, and smaller wireless providers are either losing money every quarter (see: Sprint) or being sold/purchased (see: T-Mobile). This all means that Verizon and AT&T are the only 2 companies that can often provide what consumers want. And unfortunately for us, this means that having a smartphone in today’s marketplace means $200 up front for the device, a 2-year contact including a $300+ ETF , and at least $100 per month for service.

This model is unique to the USA and is in extremely stark contrast to the situation in Europe. First off in Europe, all phones are GSM and all carriers operate on the same frequency bands (all interoperable). They are often purchased unsubsidized (no contract), unlocked and can be moved from carrier to carrier by simply replacing the SIM card. Second of all, there are literally dozens of comparable carriers in each country, which allows for device portability. These two facts put together lead to an extremely competitive marketplace with fantastically low prices. Consumers can see month-to-month (no contract) plans as low as 10 euros/mo., with unlimited plans in the area of 30 euros/mo.! The 2-year contract offerings are in the same price range, and provide completely free top of the line phones for signing a commitment. Carriers are practically fumbling over each other to offer more for less, and give the best deals. When the majority of their consumers could pick up and leave at the end of the month and move to a different carrier, there is extreme incentive to provide the best experience to their users (funny that Europe is showing the USA how markets work).

Now wouldn’t that be nice to have here? Well of course there are several issues with this, many of which cannot even begin to be explained in such a short post (more to follow), but I do not at all believe that the USA couldn’t see the same amazing competition and pro-consumer options available given the proper regulatory and market climates. We know that if there is device portability and there are more carrier choices, consumers will move to the best cost/benefit combination for their case. This inherently will lead to lower prices, better service, and a better wireless industry as a whole.

Wanted: Android, with the Chrome update system

What has bothered me about Google in the past is the inherent disjunct between their products. Until very recently (we’re talking post Google+) the design, mechanisms, and most importantly UI / UX have been different from property to property. For example what we saw as a design language in Gmail was different from Google Voice and GTalk, which was completely different from the Google.com search page.

Fortunately for me (and millions of others, I’m sure), Google really has started to unify their properties. The consistent black bar that first appeared in G+ now continues through ALL Google apps. The simple black/white with red accents provides comfort when tabbing between different apps. The buttons have been standardized, and things actually work as you would expect! Fancy that.

Now this brings me to Android (doesn’t it usually?). Unfortunately, what used to plague Google Apps online properties still exists on their mobile OS. All skins aside (let’s keep it simple and talk about stock Android), design languages are still horribly disjunct. Only the most recent versions of the Market, Google+ and Google Music (which is a Beta, invite only) apps have the updated ‘look and feel’ that they’re going for. Whereas even though several features updates have come for other google properties like Talk, Voice, Maps, etc. they still look the same as they did (give or take) in Android 2.1. And nowhere in Android do I see any connection design wise to other Google properties, even though they’re 100% connected to all of the web-side Google services. You’d think that Google would want to keep a consistent experience between the Gmail Android App, and Gmail.com. They’re not practicing what they preach when it comes to the simplicity of moving between the phone and the web.

Dribble about UI and UX unity aside, let’s get to the point. First off, Google Chrome is updated every 6 weeks, regardless of what features are being worked on or added. If something isn’t ready for this release, it’ll be pushed to the next release (it’s only 6 weeks away, what’s the harm?).  Second, Chrome updates are downloaded in the background, unbeknownst by the user. No prompts, questions, or concerns. Next time they open Chrome, they’ll be on the newest version and not even know it (there isn’t even a popup like Firefox stating there was a new version). There’s something extremely intriguing about this update model. To the average user, Chrome seems to stay the ‘same’, but in reality its secretly getting better, faster, more optimized and feature rich without so much as an extra click. It’s elegant and seamless. Not words particularly synonymous with Google products

Now we bring this together. We understand Android isn’t consistent (understatement of the century). We also know that updates for the Android platform are few and far between. Solve one problem and you’ve nearly solved the other. Fast updates for Android mean Google has a frictionless path to unify design. The first step for Android to follow this release cycle has already begun. Google has removed their Google Apps such as Gmail, Maps, Books, Docs, Voice, Talk (etc. etc. for days on end) from the actual Android OS, and simply made them applications in the Market. When there’s an update to an individual app, the other apps aren’t disturbed, the OS doesn’t have to be upgraded, and they can be updated independently. At this point its really a hack considering what they SHOULD be doing…

In a perfect world, all Android devices would run a version of stock Android, and carriers wouldn’t be involved (no rant this time, see my prior post on removing Android skins).  If somehow these conditions were met, it would surely allow Google to push Chrome-style updates to the OS regularly and efficiently. To be honest I’m not completely sure if users want to be given an update that often, but if it is as seamless as Chrome (and Google has proven they can accomplish this with millions of Chrome users), I see no reason why it wouldn’t be possible. In this perfect world, Google would be able to not only update apps but also fix bugs, add OS features, and improve usability for EVERY user. I would be surprised if Google didn’t want to provide the same thing for their Android customers as they do for Chrome.

I can see that Google is pushing towards consistent experiences with their changes to Gmail, G+, Docs, etc. and I can only hope that they pass on this new found passion to their other products. Creating a consistent experience and ecosystem that people can feel comfortable relying on is one of the most important things when it comes to luring in new customers as well as retaining current ones. Its not a one-fix problem, and it will take a major change in the way Google operates, but I think that it is truly necessary if they want to push on to the next level of customer satisfaction on Android.

Can I please have the option to remove Android skins?

I’ve been an avid Android user ever since I bought my first device, a Sprint Evo 4G, a little over a year ago. I loved that device, and I’ve been an Android fan ever since. The things I like most about Android, which drove me to it and kept me on it, is the customization, the styling, and the usability. Android has completely moved me into the Google ecosystem, as Google would hope. I now use Chrome, Gmail, Calendar, Docs, Analytics, Voice, Talk, and all of the other amazing Google services. At this point, I couldn’t imagine my daily routine without these great products.

Being that my first device was an Evo 4G, the experience was using HTC Sense, as is true for many other Android users. I thought that this skin and experience was great at first, but I quickly hit the ceiling of customization and usability in a couple months and wanted more. I bought an Android phone to escape the walled garden of the iPhone, why was I being given the same experience with Sense? After researching and trying basic customizations to change the look of Android, I got fed up trying to tack launchers on top of Sense. My realization at this point is that I would have to root my phone (voiding my warranty in the process), and re-flash an entirely new ROM just to get the general features of stock Android (2.2 at the time). This kicked into gear my desire for stock Android on my devices…

In a few weeks, I was deep into the rooting and ROM flashing. I spent a lot of time on XDA developers forums (www.xda-developers.com), which has an amazing community, especially for the Evo which is a flagship for Sprint. I was doing my research, learning how to mod my device, and flashing a new ROM every week or so. This is fun for a while, but the luster wore of quickly for me, especially considering that this was my daily phone. Its like trying to work on a race car every night and driving it to work every day; far from practical.

Finally, after months and months of constant re-flashing of ROMs and modding my device, I pretty much got fed up chasing stock Android. I wouldn’t have to root my phone if I could get truly stock, untouched Android out of the box, with the full functionality that Google has already baked in. In comes the T-Mobile HTC G2. I dumped Sprint, sold my Evo4G, and bought the device, which has about as fresh, stock Android as you’re going to get outside of a phone with the word ‘Nexus’ in the title. No skin, no extra apps, and unblocked tethering. Life is good.

This gets me down to my point: Please phone manufacturers, give us a switch to turn off the skin, and turn on stock Android.

There was a time in the past, I’m looking at you 1.6 Donut, when a third party skin may have actually added to the Android experience. But in the age of 2.3 Gingerbread, this really isn’t true anymore. I realize that the manufacturers (and carriers, for that matter) are very invested, with both time and money, in keeping their skins on the devices and having consistent user experiences. I’m not asking them to give that up, I’m just asking for them to offer the advanced users (I use that term lightly) to get down to the base Android experience and build it like they want it. Put it as deep in the settings as you want to hide from regular users, but there really is no physical limitation to keep this from happening at this point in devices, only manufacturer ego. Device ROM is plenty large enough to hold even the most behemoth software packages, like Sense 3.0, there is no reason why they can’t throw stock 2.3 in there next to it.

The bottom line for me? My next device is going to be a stock stock stock Google Nexus device. I still like to root and mod my phones, but it shouldn’t be a necessary step in order to make a phone your own, make it do what you want, and get the experience Google intended me to get with an Android device. Differentiation is great, but choice on where I get that differentiation is even better.

Why I returned my Motorola Xoom

Today I chose to return my Motorola Xoom.

I had been holding off purchasing a tablet ever since the iPad became popular a year ago, and when Google announced Honeycomb, I was ready to jump onto the tablet bandwagon as soon as the Xoom was announced. I use Android daily on my T-mobile G2, and I have been extremely interested in the Android platform ever since the Nexus One. I’m pretty deep into the Google ecosystem now and I was sure that Google was going to extend their great platform to the tablet form factor.

After two and a half months with the tablet, I found myself not even powering on the Xoom’s screen for days at a time. There is nothing that this device offers that cannot be easier accomplished with a smartphone and a laptop (in my case a 13” MacBook Pro). Being a student, I need a device with me that I can get real work done on. For this reason, my laptop is always with me. There is no tablet available on the market that offers the kind of functionality required to get real work, such as heavy e-mail, web browsing, and notes all done with any type of efficiency near what a laptop can offer.

The only place the Xoom shines is while sitting on the couch, watching TV. In this setting, you can casually browse the web, keep up on things like Facebook and Twitter, read news, and play casual games. Beyond this, the Xoom really doesn’t have much mass user appeal. It can’t be used for content creation, and as far as consumption goes, there is an extreme lack of Honeycomb compatible/optimized apps, Hulu and Netflix are yet to be supported, and most major video formats for user-loaded video are either unsupported or poorly implemented.

Also, the Xoom is just too big. At 1.6lbs, with a small screen bezel, the Xoom is too heavy and awkward to hold with one hand. At first, I thought that the weight wouldn’t be an issue, but trying to do anything one handed really proved to be an arm-weakening task. This is multiplied by the fact that your thumb covers not only the bezel, but part of the screen while trying to hold onto the tablet. This leads to extra screen taps, and issues with tap recognition.

This brings me to my final point, price. When the iPad was announced over a year ago, Apple set the tablet price point at $499. Since then, other manufacturers are set on releasing at this price point, not realizing that they really must beat Apple on price in order to have a fighting chance. ASUS has proven with their EeePad Transformer that a 10” Tegra 2 Honeycomb tablet can be sold for $399, and I think this is a much more reasonable price point for a device like this that doesn’t have everyone’s favorite fruit on the back. At $599 for the 32gb WiFi model, the Xoom automatically priced itself out of the market.

So here’s the digest of why I returned my Xoom:

  • Android 3.0 (even 3.1) just isn’t ready
  • No hulu / netflix / video codecs
  • Too heavy / hard to hold 1 handed
  • Too expensive to beat the iPad

I eagerly await the day that a company can create a tablet that offers something that makes me want to leave my laptop at home, but until then, I’ll stick with my computer and my smartphone. I think ideal device will end up being something smaller and lighter than the average 10” tablet.

My first shot at a blog

Giving this whole blog thing a shot for the first time ever. Kinda surprising it has taken me this long to get on the bandwagon, but I think that while taking the summer off of school, now is the right time to devote some energy to putting down my thoughts somewhere slightly more meaningful.

I’m not exactly sure of the direction of the blog yet. My preliminary thoughts are that this would be my outlet to express my thoughts on different things, mainly how I feel about technology, business, and other current events when it sparks my interest. I’m hoping to get down a new major post every week covering a topic that hits me strongly, along with little posts here and there in order to keep the content going.

Well, let’s hope this goes well!

More to come… going to update with a bio section/post as I get the site built up better.

Top