CES: iPad killers, what iPad killers?

CES opens its doors officially tomorrow, and while Apple isn't there the event is already expected to see over 100 tablets from many different firms take their first (and, in some cases, last) bow. Meanwhile, Apple prepares iPad 2.0.

While some hope CES will see the spark of a proper fight-back against the genre-defining Apple iPad tech titan, such optimism is misplaced. For iPad haters, CES will be a tragic tryst, a dooomed affair.

The mantra has to be "too little, too late", with even the world's biggest software manufacturer, Microsoft, playing catch-up this time around. Look at Windows Phone 7 market share -- it isn't yet even a contender in the smartphone war.

[This story is from Computerworld's Apple Holic blog. Follow on Twitter or subscribe via RSS to make sure you don't miss a beat.]

Oh, but there's Google's Android. Which Android? Is that the elusive Froyo upgrade or that golden panacea,"Honeycomb", which (a) isn't yet available and (b) seems unlikely to actually work on many -- if any -- of the 100 doomed tablets destined to appear at CES this year.

This isn't the year of the iPad killer. Don't believe me? I'm not doing the talking here. Analyst Michael Gartenberg Tweets it thus, saying: "I have seen nothing so far at CES that I'd call an iPad killer. I've seen nothing so far that would give iPad a minor case of the sniffles."

My question is whether the flash works right on the website.

That depends on which website. Some Flash elements will work as intended, others will fail spectacularly. Flash elements designed for desktop and laptop computers aren't going to be a great experience on the smaller screens, slower networks and lower-power processors of a mobile device.

Is it impossible to get the internet to work right on a tablet? It seems like someone would be able to figure out how to make it work

The definition of "work right" is not going to be the same on a tablet as on a desktop. It's a completely different experience. It would be like asking where the windshield wiper controls are on a bicycle.

Mobile devices are helping to enforce Web design standards that were a good idea to begin with. Don't make too many assumptions about the size of the user's screen or the speed of his machine or connection. Offer a low-bandwidth version, and if you have a browser autodetect, let the user override it and choose the version he wants to see.

Too many sites are, to use a phrase a friend of mine coined, flashf***ed. They unnecessarily elaborate and difficult to navigate on a fast computer, impossible on a slower one. The official Web sites for movies are usually among the worst, because the studios want all the content locked in a Flash movie instead of in a format folks can copy.

I ran across one glaringly bad site a day or two ago. I saw a 3M projector on sale, but the sale site was light on specs. The 3M site was built entirely in Flash, so I had to load a flash animation to see a spec sheet. The spec sheet was then loaded in a fixed-size window with a scroll bar instead of vertically filling the window. I had to load the Flash movie in order to open the PDF version. That is simply bad design, and companies that want to reach mobile users have an added incentive to avoid it.

If the primary purpose of your site is to say "Look what gee-whiz stuff I can do," have fun with that. But if your site has actual content that you want to get into users' hands, it should work with small screens, slow connections, huge type for people with poor vision and screen readers for the blind. Pages should degrade gracefully -- if they use Flash, or Silverlight, or HTML5, they should be usable without it.

All of which is a roundabout way of saying that the problem isn't how to get a tablet to start doing the Internet right -- it's how to get the desktop to stop doing it wrong.

“a great experience”

I want the tablet to show the internet.
If the tablet can’t show the internet right, it’s the fault of the tablet.

Flash came first, years before the iPad, years before the iPhone.

Apple knew what they had to do to show the internet. Apple prefers to blame Flash because Apple can’t do flash with “a great experience”. Give it a shot Apple. Work hard to show as much as you can, then apologize for being unable to do the rest. Flash was huge when iPhone and ipad came out. Apple knew they were trying to sell a product that apparently was incompatable with the internet.

When Flash came out, iphones and ipads did not exist.
When Iphones and ipads came out Flash did exist.

And Apple is blaming Flash.

That’s one of the mnay reasons why people don’t like Apple.

Don’t release a product, say it has internet, and when you can’t get your device to work with the internet don’t blame someone else.

I want the tablet to show the internet.

The Web ≠ the Internet. Flash ≠ the Web.

Flash came first, years before the iPad, years before the iPhone.

RealAudio came before Flash. The Internet is littered with the corpses of obsolete browser plug-ins.

That's not how Apple operates. They don't do a half-assed implementation of something that they know won't work, so that they can say "we tried." Leave that to the Android vendors.

That’s one of the mnay reasons why people don’t like Apple.

Because Apple has a clear vision of how it thinks things ought to work, and then executes that vision to a tee, rather than looking around at what other people are doing, imitate it and try to make it cheaper?

Flash is a very popular format. People want to see the flash animations. If they weren’t there, they wouldn’t.

But Apple knew when it released iPad, they wouldn’t be showing an important part of the internet.

They should be apologizing for their inability to show flash at this point. Or maybe I did miss the news about a firmware upgrade or something that could run 10.1 on the Apple.

No one has come here to this thread and said “I just bought a generic Android Froyo 2.2 with Adobe Flash 10.1 and it plays the Flash great. It also comes with USB, miniUSB, and hdmi 1080p. And it costs $200” But I’ve been reading, and that’s what these devices are said to be able to do.

Apple fans will ignore that these devices can do so much more than the ipad, and say the product sucks because it’s buggy (and some are buggy) or the case seems flimsy, as if it wouldn’t last 10 years, or doesn’t belong in MOMA, but it seems to actually do flash on the internet. And has so many I/Os.

Someone I lived with had a Ipod back in the day. Was all happy about it. I had a $50 generic mp3 player, but one with a good on board line level in that recorded wav 16/48.
I was surprised that his expensive and super cool ipod could not transfer mp3 files from his ipod to my computer. My cheap mp3 player hooked right up to his computer and I was able to transfer mp3s to his computer.

Apple products often have limited functionality, and when you point that out to their fans, they get all defensive.

It’s a glaring omission to not do flash, and Apple looks stupid taking the position they’re taking, especially since it looks like the cheapest generic android 2.2 froyo tablets can take care of it well.

Suppost I want a tablet, and I must be able to run Flash well. Which one should I get? I have been unable to find a single review of a tablet that does more than play some Flash video, not all of it, and not very well. Flash support is an item on a checklist, not a usable feature.

It's funny to watch Apple-bashers claim that Apple and its users are snobs, fanboys and cultists when they suggest that Apple does things better; but then angrily demand that Apple apologize for not doing something that no one else has done.

It depends on what the definition of tablet is. And “well” is. Back a couple years ago, give or take, there were XP tablets that ran full XP. Basically a full XP computer with a 4” touchscreen. This is a pre ipad computer, so the pinch and zoom capacitive stuff isn’t there.
http://cgi.ebay.com/7-Touch-Screen-WIFI-UMPC-MID-Pierre-Cardin-S7-XP-EMS-/260524294452?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item3ca8754134
that should run flash.

The point is that Apple isn’t trying, they’re complaining about Flash being too hard to put on the ipad, or complaining that it takes too many resources to run it “great”.

Apple would rather that it not be there if it not run great.
People with computers understand that not everything is going to run great.

Apple would rather cut off stuff that makes the battery run down too quick. Can’t have batteries not lasting 7 hours.

These cheap generic laptops do run flash.

But you are right that it’s hard to find 1 lengthy review where a person youtubes them using the device to surf the internet, using the flash that’s there, hitting the known flash spots, really giving an idea what the state of the art is.

Some of these tablets do say built in 2.2, built in 10.1. Some say support. What is interesting right now is that these tablets are being hurled out there, some work right, some don’t. Remember, we’re talking about generic tablets with more features than ipad that cost less than half as much as the ipad. But you’re right that there isn’t much solid proof right now, today, that one or another of these generic tablets is doing a great job running flash in a web browser right out of the box.

Archos is one to look at. Archos has a variety of tablets from 2.8 inches to 10.1 inches. Those were initially shipped with Android 2.1 and now are 2.2. They still haven’t released an official approved flash 10.1. It’s ready to go, but they’re waiting on Adobe certification. Some people are using “droid x flash” epk and are reporting that works on the archos.

The point is that Apple isn’t trying

You don't know what Apple is trying. They're not releasing a beta product.

Apple would rather that it not be there if it not run great.

Correct. Let others put out an unusable implementation just so they can add another line to a checklist of features.

Apple would rather cut off stuff that makes the battery run down too quick. Can’t have batteries not lasting 7 hours.

Correct. Apple has this lunatic idea that battery life is important in a mobile device -- even more important than being able to load Farmville and use those features that don't involve a right-click or a mouseover.

These cheap generic laptops do run flash.

Then buy a cheap generic laptop, if that's what suits your needs.

What is interesting right now is that these tablets are being hurled out there, some work right, some don’t.

Half right, at least. Can you name one that "works right?" If I have cash in hand and want a tablet to load Flash Web sites, what should I buy today? Neither you nor anyone else can answer that question, so my rebuttable assumption is that it is not available.

I could not find a single review from a reputable site that described a currently-shipping tablet running Flash for anything other than video playback. Almost all of the Google hits were about a demo by Adobe last May. There are a lot of posts from no-name sites regurgitating press release copy with no indication that they had actually seen one.

So you condemn Apple for shipping a tablet without Flash, but praise Archos for releasing a tablet without Flash. The only difference is that Archos is advertising something it can't yet deliver.

The difference between Archos and generic tablets and the Ipod is that people rarely argue, over and over, here on fr, how entirely great the generic tablets and the archos are.

Apple claims to do the internet, but doesn’t, would prefer to criticize parts of the internet (Flash) because Apple can’t get it to work. I’m not saying it’s easy to get it to work. But the generic android tablets are trying. And they’re right now able to do some of it. Apple isn’t trying.

I really really don’t like that Apple would rather tear down flash than figure out how to make it work on their devices.

I really really don’t like that Apple’s strategy has been successful, because it’s harmful for the internet and to those who want as good an internet as possible.

Because the people out there who love the Apple stuff are typically the people who have been confused by the internet. Apple is like internet for dummies. Apple is loved by people who are confused by computers.

Is Apple going to provide “Apple internet”, a browser truly meeting the needs of its fans, by blocking all sites that do not provide a great user experience? If Apple did that, ordinary internet users would hate Apple for doing that, but Apple fans wouldn’t mind, or wouldn’t know the difference.

I’m not saying it’s easy to get it to work. But the generic android tablets are trying. And they’re right now able to do some of it. Apple isn’t trying.

Once again, you do not know what Apple is trying. Neither do I. All we know is that Apple is not releasing a half-baked implementation. The generic Android tablets are asking you to pay full price to be a beta tester.

I really really don’t like that Apple’s strategy has been successful, because it’s harmful for the internet and to those who want as good an internet as possible.

I could not disagree more. Apple's strategy is to encourage Web designers to use open standards rather than a proprietary, buggy resource hog. And it's working -- h.264 has already become more popular than Flash video, and the gap continues to widen.

Not only by people who are confused by computers. Macs are extremely well-represented in Web design and content creation, and are used by the majority of (somewhat ironically) Flash designers. I know a lot of server admins for companies whose URLs you would recognize who use Macs because they have a stable, secure, easy to use machine and can boot to any OS or dive into a bash shell in OS X. Tim Berners-Lee invented HTML and HTTP on a NeXT cube, running an ancestor of OS X.

Yes, MacOS is easier to use. When did that become a bad thing? I think a lot of Windows advocates have a medieval view of the internet, that you have to go through the trials of Microsoft to prove yourself, and until you have suffered through registry errors you are not worthy.

Well, I spent 2 days at CES, and all I can say is next year is going to be the year of the Android Tablet. Samsung has an amazing one out, it is slightly smaller than the Ipad (7 inch screen) but does everything the Ipad does, and then some.

I got to screw around with it for a while.. its super fast, does flash, and pretty much will run all the apps I would need on it.

Seemed to me like the hype was all Android tablets but there was a whole ton of accessories for the Ipad, Iphone and Ipod

The Web Browser on the Ipad does not show Flash. That is a halfbaked implementation of the internet.

The generic tablets are giving a much less half baked vision of the real internet than Apple is.

And you’re the one calling the at least someone successful
implementation of flash halfbaked?

I’m still uncertain of the true capabilities of these generic 2.2 Androids with Flash 10.1 and 1080p hdmi. I’ve seen a youtube posted where the youtube was embedded on a webpage and it played. They were able to make the youtube video fullscreen. To be able to do that, instead of nothing, is a benefit. There are youtube videos embedded in these FR pages.

Check out the Herotab MID816.
http://www.slatedroid.com/index.php?topic=13074.0
That’s the review with the videos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTuPoO8RhkU&feature=player_embedded#!
about 3:20 he shows the browser with the youtube.

And you’re the one calling the at least someone successful implementation of flash halfbaked?

"At least somewhat successful" is half-baked, pretty much by definition. And I have still seen no evidence that anyone has met even that low bar. If I want a tablet that will allow me to use Flash animations, which tablet should I buy? You have been unable to answer that question. I believe that is because no such tablet exists.

I’ve seen a youtube posted where the youtube was embedded on a webpage and it played.

A) You are way too impressed with youtube demos.

2) I can watch embedded youtube videos on my iPhone. The only Flash functionality that has actually been demonstrated is Flash-encoded video, a shrinking percentage of video on the Web.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTuPoO8RhkU&feature=player_embedded#! about 3:20 he shows the browser with the youtube.

I was able to go to the same page and load the same video on my iPhone. YouTube encodes its videos in h.264. So the Flash capability demonstrated in the video provides precisely zero advantage over the iPad.

What standard would that be? HTML5, the standard that its editor states won't be done by 2022? Do we have to wait another 11 years for a standard?

I'm sure HTML5 won't be in use until the last formal step by the W3C. I mean, there have been no changes to the HTML4 specification since 2000, and that's why nothing has changed on the Web since then. WiFi-n was a draft specification until last year, and that's why no one had -n products or networks until then, right?

Also, why not support more than just a single eventual standard - why not support other existing standards right now - both "industry wide" and de-facto standards?

Apple supports a great many standards, both open (HTML) and proprietary (Exchange Server). They do not support Flash on mobile devices because it Does. Not. Work.

I don’t even have one of these devices. I can’t pick one up and test it. So all I can do is read, and look at youtube videos where flash seems to work.

But I hear you. Apparently these embedded you tube videos aren’t in flash, but h.264, which apples can play? and the reason why these generic android 2.2 tablets can play them is because they’re actually in h.264 not flash?

What might be best to see what’s really going on right now would be to determine something that the apple doesn’t play
- find a website, that sort of thing, and determine whether or not the android 2.2 device with Flash 10.1 will use it, and to see how it works.

I don’t know the answer to that. You might or might not.

What website is “known” not to work on the apple? Known to have complicated flash?

I’m interested in getting one of these cheap generic android tablets. But if they have troubling gaps in the internet, I’m not excited about these devices. But I’m ok with “works, but without a great user experience”. For years, the newest thing has always required either more processing power, more ram, more whatever. That doesn’t bother me.

Seriously, is there any website out there that you know that apple doesn’t do, and you’d be very surprised that android 2.2 with flash 10.1 could do?

Are you saying that the youtube video plays in the original page, embedded, like on a regular browser, like on apple, or that you can go to youtube.com and play it there?

The 2 things are much different.

I don’t even have one of these devices. I can’t pick one up and test it. So all I can do is read, and look at youtube videos where flash seems to work.

Ditto, and all I can find is videos where it appears to play Flash video. I have not found a single review on CNet, or Gizmodo, Anandtech, or any reputable Web site of a tablet that can run Flash animations. If such a tablet were shipping, or pre-release tablets were made available to reviewers, it would be pretty big news. I therefore have concluded that there is no tablet with a full implementation of Flash.

If I saw an ad for a Miata with a trailer hitch, but no one demonstrated it by pulling a trailer, I would not assume that I could use it to tow a boat.

Apparently these embedded you tube videos aren’t in flash, but h.264, which apples can play? and the reason why these generic android 2.2 tablets can play them is because they’re actually in h.264 not flash?

YouTube encodes video in both H.264 and Flash. The tablet in the demo is probably loading the Flash version. I have no reason to doubt the claim. All that demonstrates is that the Android tablets can load the same content as the iPhone, but in a less-efficient format that burns through batteries faster.

What might be best to see what’s really going on right now would be to determine something that the apple doesn’t play- find a website, that sort of thing, and determine whether or not the android 2.2 device with Flash 10.1 will use it, and to see how it works.

That would be the ideal test. There are plenty of Flash-heavy Web sites that do not load on any mobile device, Apple or otherwise. Loading and using one of those pages on a tablet would be a pretty impressive demo, and my conclusion is that if no one has done so, it's because no one can.

You can buy an Android tablet in the hopes that it will implement full Flash capability eventually, but that's not a bet I would make. Much of the Flash on the Web simply will not work without a pointing device.

Are you saying that the youtube video plays in the original page, embedded, like on a regular browser, like on apple, or that you can go to youtube.com and play it there?

Tapping on the video in the browser pulls it up full-screen. Closing the video goes back to the browser. I do not know if video plays inline on the iPad. It would be a silly way to operate on a phone-sized screen, whether Android or iPhone.

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.