Um, right. but Mr. Ed could never really talk just eat peanut butter = RT, iPad and Android.
Sorry, but thems is one trick pony's.
The definition of what is considered a tablet was set by apple with the ipad, effectively a giant ipod touch. That definition of what a tablet is was copied over by android.
What Windows 8 is doing and why it's such a big deal is seeing that definition in traffic, rev past it, and giving it the middle finger or whatever obscene gesture while leaving those constricting definitions behind in the dust.
Remember, hardware is nice and all, but it's crap without good software.
Yes, they can and are very wrong, the definition of Tablet was defined over a decade ago, by none other than Microsoft.
Tablet PC Definition from PC Magazine Encyclopedia
and the definition was changed by iPad. It is about to be changed back again.
iPad's and Androids and RT's could be (read; should be) redefined along with Kindle and nook and other e-readers
as Content Consumption Devices, or CCD Tablets if you must have the word Tablet embedded in the name.
They never have been nor will be True Tablets as defined, again, over a decade ago.
Note: let me elaborate,, the definition of True useable Tablet was defined over a decade ago, by none other than Microsoft.
If we must go there....
I don't use Wikipedia for many things, but this seems accurate,,, so the concept of tablets dates way way back....
But, let's be honest, True Tablet Systems should allow you to do everything you need to do and more, as in, running Desktop Software
History of tablet computers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Otherwise, they are one single use devices and really should not be referred to as tablets.
and Who Invented the First Tablet PC? | eHow.com
Last edited by Tepid; 26 Jan 2013 at 21:43.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's very likely that it is a duck. Where the duck comes from and where it's going is a completely different issue.
Ahh yes, we should consider all tablets as equals, there are no differences.
Therefore, The Surface Pro has nothing different than an iPad, they are one in the same.
They are all Tablets, but the Surface cost more, therefore it's over priced and not worth looking at.
Eh, so what you can do more with some Tablets than others, they are all tablets, let keep it simple, don't want to strain any brain cells.
Wow, right, gotcha, nuff said.
Some people are behaving as if Microsoft with the Surface Pro has suddenly created an entirely new type of computing environment/technology that has never existed before. It's not a revolution and it's barely an evolution of what we have already had. The Surface RT/Pro is more an exercise in design, than technology.
Right, a tablet, is a tablet, is a tablet. They are all Tablets. We got it.
So, let's compare a tablet to a tablet. Which is better? Well, the tablet of course.
Linux running on a tablet, would be a True Tablet.
OSX running on a tablet would also be a True Tablet.
All the failed attempts previous to the Tablet PC and iPad, RT, Android, Nook, Kindle, e-readers are called tablets, but it's a misnomer.
They may run on a tablet like device, but should not be considered tablets per se. It's not a proper definition.
A Tablet running Nook, is not the same as a Tablet running Linux.
It's like comparing Cars to Cars, are you going to generalize all cars as cars when speaking about the difference between a Gremlin and a Porsche? No, that would be dumb. So, why are we doing it here?