1. lets not pretend that android had anything to do with tablet computing coming to rise. There were apple tablets and windows tablets long before android was a twinkle in linux's eye. The hardware back then just sucked really hard.
2. I'm not paying a fee to thank android for being cruddy a whole bunch of times, even if it does inspire others to do similar things. I am buying a product. If that product doesn't work as advertised it gets returned.
I think you have pinned down your problem, you want something mobile but at the same time it should be useable as laptop. I think its really hard to achieve. Today's devices are either mobile or workpower. I hope someone can solve the problem with some kind of flexible device that you can fold as a mobile phone.
And without the "fragmentation" in the Android space, do you really think that there would be an iPad Mini? Or a larger screens on the newer iPhone?
Which relates to another benefit of "fragmentation". A LOT of technological product development/evolution is directly tied to market place trial and error. "Fragmentation" is inextricably linked to that. The more "trial and error" - the more a product space can rapidly evolve to delivering the products that _consumers_ want _most_.
Let's not forget what engineering is all about - it's not about creating the most mindblowing technology - it's about delivering the products most beneficial and most desireablt to _consumers_. You don't do that by fiat and decree alone - that takes a fair amount of trial and error to _discover_ what resonates more and what less. Then you do more of what resonates more and less of what resonates less. But until you _try_ it, how do you know? And how do you tyry a lot without "fragmentation"?
Should all auto manufactures design a compact sedan to one set specification? Or should all the manufactures try out different ideas to figure out what consumers really want in a compact sedan? Or also importantly, the realization that not everyone wants the exact same thing as everyone else, and why shouldn't those other wants/desires in a compact sedan be made available as well?
The manufactures in the Android space tried out a wide variety in screen sizes across diferent device types in the quest of developing products that _customers_ want most, not what they decree a cutomer ought to want with the arrogant perspective that a customer that wants somethign differnt is "wrong". The customer is never "wrong" in what they want - they want what they want.
And it is the Android space doing that trial and error that Apple had the benefit of to realize the need for an iPad mini, or a larger iPhone screen. So, you can thank _Android fragmentation_ for the possibliity of such products from Apple. Do you think Apple would have tried that on it's own if not for seeing the popuarity inthe Android space?
Totally agree, after having used multiple cheap and expensive tablets incl the beutiful Nook HD+, I kicked myself for recently "transfering" the iPad3 to my wife. The difference is like between the old klunker and the new beemer. But all work, it's just how they work.....
My solution is to accept the far from perfect display on the Samsung Arm Chromebook. It does have a proper keyboard, snappy performance, access to the cload and light and robust enough to be carried around all day. And battery life for all day computing too. And far cheaper than a Macbook Air.....
Yeah, but I've got a desktop. I could do a desktop and a tablet and forego the laptop all together.
OOOOr, what about the new convertibles that are packing intel i5 processors? surely they are capable enough to fill both roles (laptop/tablet). A good example of this is the new HP split x2. I can have an I5 powered tablet with instant on that packs an extra battery and ports in a laptop style dock. (here's the link)
Personally I would say yes -- I use my notebook for serious work -- I use my tablet (iPad in my case) for it's instant-on capabilities because I'm always thinking "I wonder what/where that is/means/whatever" or "I need to write that down" or ...
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.