Posted on 09/13/2010 3:01:39 AM PDT by Swordmaker
Gingerbread seems likely to be tablet-friendly OS
Android not ready to power iPad rivals, says Google
Google has stated that it currently isn't using Android on any tablets, hinting that it will have a tablet-centric OS soon.
Although Gingerbread and Honeycomb have been strongly tipped to be tablet-friendly versions of Android, this is the first time Google has confirmed Froyo isn't a platform for iPad rivals.
While some will point to the Galaxy Tab as the flaw in this statement, the device features all the connectivity of the Galaxy S, making it essentially a larger phone rather than a standalone tablet.
"Android is an open platform. We saw at IFA 2010 all sorts of devices running Android, so it already running on tablets," said Hugo Barra, director of products for mobile at Google.
Android Market not for tablets
"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."
This echoes comments made by Archos to TechRadar at IFA, stating that Google is looking for the 'wow factor' with it's tablet platform, with custom animations and UIs, so it could be that we'll be seeing a whole different breed of Android devices to take on the iPad.
i think at&t provide the internet. They have an agreement with most countries around the world, so Anywhere theres 3g, then you have internet, which is mostly around the cities/urban area
Consumer tablet sales prior to iPad: About zip.
Consumer tablet sales of iPad: Astronomical.
Format of all subsequent consumer tablets to date: iPad clones
My point proves itself.
those alternatives are immediately derided as “toys” or “media players slapped together with touch”.
The first one you touted ran off of a known media player SoC. It was, at heart, a cheap media player with Android loaded. It was the usual rush-to-market cheap Chinese copy attempting to cash in on a successful Apple design.
Can you smell the hypocrisy in that position?
No, but the scent of jealousy over Apple's success is overwhelming.
Integrated devices like that usually scare me. Example, I had a printer/scanner/copier combo. The printer part broke. Now what? Keep around a larger-than-necessary scanner and buy a new printer?
Actually you want me to have experience, when 99% of what you post is emotional. You make me laugh.
They are pretty much disposable, since a printer is about twice the price of ink refill.
On the other hand there are plenty of Blue Ray DVD players that offer all the services you are wanting, those are pretty much disposable as well, even Apple TV does NetFlix. There are even a few options that do all the above plus play movies from you computer or an attached hard drive.
I’m sorry, what did I post here that wasn’t true? And you admit you have no experience with Android, yet feel empowered to comment on it.
Good bye.
Nope I was commenting on your emotions not being the same as facts.
And yet they are the biggest corporation in the business, and profits that the rest can only dream of. There 10% makes more money than you 90% strange huh?
No, just your continual rants about products you don't own, or ever plan to buy.
These threads are for people that want to know about the Apple product they own or plan to own, you are all about directing people to another choice.
Most here won't go with you, simple as that, so why the continual harping?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.