Why the iPad 2 Wins The Tablet War

| Ted Landau's User Friendly View

The iPad 2 is off to a great start. It hasn’t even shipped yet and it’s getting rave reviews — applauded as “phenomenal” and clearly outpacing the competition. Yours truly just declared the iPad 2 a “winner.”

Yet, as always, there have been voices from the other side of the fence. A common theme among critics is that the iPad 2 does not sport enough new features — that it is too much of an “incremental” upgrade. It needed to do better to compete with other tablets. A CNET News column took the the iPad 2 to task for its lack of a Retina Display, SD card slot, Near Field Communications technology, and more. TMO’s John Martellero, while recognizing the ultimate success of the iPad 2, concluded that its specs were a “disappointment.” Even my own prior column noted that “I expected more…By themselves, features such as slightly thinner and lighter don’t make a compelling case for why you should trade-in your old iPad for a new one.”

How does one respond to such criticisms?

The easy glib answer is: “For some people, it’s never enough. If Apple added 10 more features to the iPad 2, some blogger would still complain that you can’t use it to toast frozen waffles. Give it a rest. Have you noticed how many iPads Apple is selling? It’s not like they’re in trouble. The iPad 2 is a fine upgrade. It’s more than good enough.”

A different, more thoughtful, reply would point out that the success of the iPad 2 depends on more than the sum of its specs. It’s the overall experience of the iPad — hardware and software — that matters. At this level, the iPad 2 already has a commanding lead — and is poised to maintain it. John Gruber and Joshua Topolsky both offered riffs on this “post-PC” viewpoint. 

And yet…is there anything of interest to be gleaned by a closer look at the “incremental iPad 2” criticism? Assuming that Apple actually considered some of the hoped-for features, why might they have ultimately been given the axe?

After posting my prior article, I reflected on this question. I believe the answer a simple one. It all comes down to price. As Steve Jobs gleefully pointed out at Wednesday’s iPad 2 unveiling, with a base price of $499, five out six of the iPad 2 models are cheaper than the $799 base price for a Motorola Xoom. Currently, competitors simply can’t compete on price. Samsung executives are already scratching their heads, worried about the relatively high price of their Galaxy tab — as well as expressing concern about matching the iPad 2’s thinner body.

It’s hard to overstate the value of a lower price in the marketplace. Too often, Apple has been on the losing end of this metric — trying to defend why its products are worth a premium. In the case of the Mac, this has been considered a major factor in its failure to gain market share years ago. Now Apple is selling the cheapest tablet in the land — without any sacrifice in Apple’s legendary quality and design. No wonder competitors are scrambling.

Let’s get back to those sought-after “missing” features. Sure, they would be great to have. But doing so would inevitably mean that Apple would need to spend more to make an iPad 2. Apple would either have to accept less of a profit margin or increase the price of the iPad. 

As it is, the iPad 2 is not a trivial upgrade. The cameras and extra speed of the A5 chip are a big deal. The competition continues to struggle to catch up. Why risk the huge advantage of the iPad’s low price to add features that likely won’t make a difference to the product’s success? It makes no sense. And that’s why those features are missing-in-action from the new iPad.

A time may come when Apple feels increased pressure to compete on features. If so (and that time may never come), I’m confident Apple will respond quickly without any danger of losing its momentum. Apple is pacing itself for the marathon they see ahead, not the 100 yard dash of the next six months.

Still, there remains a part of me that wonders what an iPad 2 might have looked like if Steve Jobs had taken inspiration from Al Capone in The Untouchables — and shouted to his staff: “I want you to get these crap tablets where they breathe! I want an iPad that will take on the Motorola Xoom and leave it DEAD! I want every other tablet that resembles a competitor DEAD! I want them so bankrupt that they have to burn their factories to the GROUND! I wanna go there in the middle of the night and I wanna PISS ON THEIR ASHES!”

That would have been an iPad 2 to see.

There’s another part of me that believes we’re in fact about to see that iPad 2. It goes on sale March 11. I’ll be getting one.

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

Comments

geoduck

IMO the biggest ‘feature’ unveiled yesterday was the price. All this improvement and no price change. Faster, cameras, new sensors, upgraded in most every meaningful way, and yet the price is still lower than everyone else.

Ted Landau

IMO the biggest ?feature? unveiled yesterday was the price.

Yes. That was the entire point of my article. I just took longer to say it. smile

Colin Crawford

Yep - it’s all about price and Apple is using that brilliantly to consolidate the market. By end of 2011 there will be over 50MM iPad/iPad2 sold. Apple’s massive purchasing power means they have some ability to move the price lower later in the year if they have to - or add additional memory for the same price. No wonder the competitors are “rethinking”

Lee Dronick

“some blogger would still complain that you can?t use it to toast frozen waffles.”

You could if it ran Flash.

skipaq

LOL! @Harry

Peter

I’m enjoying watching the Mewling Mac Mavens go on about the price.  It’s pretty entertaining seeing them use the same arguments about price that their PC-loving brethren used several years back.

You remember the argument:  “Macs are expensive!  Why, I can get a Dell for $249!  The cheapest Mac is $600!”  Of course, the Dell in question had an antique CPU—Usually a Pentium IV versus a Core Duo or Core 2 Duo in a Mac mini.  It used an antique memory controller which was positively glacial next to the one in the Mac mini.  And, of course, it was in this giant cabinet versus the comparatively tiny Mac mini.

It’s fun to point out that, “Xooms are expensive!  Why, I can get an iPad 2 for $499!  The cheapest Xoom is $800!”  Of course, the iPad 2 in question has half the storage (16GB), no 3G, and a smaller screen than the Xoom.  If you configure an iPad 2 to match the capabilities of the Xoom (ie, 32GB of storage and support for 3G), the difference is $70 ($729 vs. $799).

Of course, before you preach about how the Xoom is still cheaper, I’d point out that the Xoom also has a slot for a MicroSD card.  You can get one of those for your iPad 2, but it’s an extra $29.  The Xoom also has an HDMI plug.  You can get one for the iPad 2, but that’s an extra $39.  Of course, you can’t use that and the card reader at the same time…

In any event, by the time you’ve matched the hardware capabilities, it comes to $797—Two dollars cheaper than the Xoom.

So you’re at $2 cheaper.  And we haven’t even gotten to bundled software yet…

In short, when you look a little deeper regarding price, you find that there isn’t much difference.

meurglys

5 of the 6 iPad models are cheaper than the *unsubsidized* Xoom.  But 3 of them don’t have 3G at all and one of them has half the storage.

Only 1 of the 6 iPad models is cheaper than the subsidized Xoom price or the expected price of the wifi-only model.

Zack

I read the whole article and never saw the answer to the OP question
“Why the iPad 2 Wins The Tablet War?”

Everything about the Xoom is either better or the same. Look at the specs, BRO.

...and don’t give me ‘its about the experience’ bullshit that Apple has been promoting as of late.

zero

The motorola xoom is better, its rival will be the ipad 3 not this one

Al Capone

Most of the missing features are just not needed or will not make any sense to have on a daily basis
1. NFC ...I am not carrying my iPad around when I go shopping just so I can make purchase. The phone will get NFC long before the iPad
2. retina display. The iPad looks good enough right now. No need to spend more money on a more expensive screen. Maybe later when the manufacturing process improve
3. SD slot. Just not in Apple DNA to make things expandable. They make more money selling flash memory.
4. Will not happen. it sucks but Apple don’t like to let user have easy access to the system.
5. Remember Apple make lots of money selling you those expensive adapter to the port such as HDMI/SD adapter.

2old4fun

My wife found that she likes my iPad better than her Macbook Pro 17”.  It is lighter and fun to use.  So, I will be getting me a new iPad 2.  I have a 13” Air but no iBooks on it.  I find that they both have their advantages and as I can afford both I will have both. 

The price and apps make the difference.  Nothing else runs what I already have.  Same as the Windows problem a few years ago, I needed Windows for some programs that were not available on my Mac.  Now there is nothing on Windows I need.

Ted Landau

In short, when you look a little deeper regarding price, you find that there isn?t much difference.

Touch?. Good points. I would say two things in reply:

? I was one of those making the same sorts of arguments about the Mac back in the day. The point is that, even if my logic was right, I lost the argument. Windows PCs went on to dominate. And so will the iPad.

? As I stated in the article: “Now Apple is selling the cheapest tablet in the land ? without any sacrifice in Apple?s legendary quality and design.” Yes, it’s missing some features that its competitors offer. But it more than makes up for this with what its competitors can’t offer. It’s almost as if ? back in the day ? you could get a Mac for less than Dell.

nickyn

This article falls short for so many reasons.

That bit about complaining that it doesn’t toast frozen waffles is just putting words in peoples’ mouths. Instead of that, how about you actually write about and respond to the criticisms that are out there!

If hardware is really a spec that any iPad buyers use to justify their purchase, how about recognizing the larger resolution of the screen on the Xoom (1280x800 vs the iPad2’s 1024x768). How about recognizing that the Xoom has a barometer sensor inside, which already has apps written to take advantage of that awesome feature; not to mention memory on the Xoom can be expanded with the SD card slot, it has 1Gb internal and yet there’s no mention on the iPad2’s internal memory (because some Apple insiders say it’ll still only have 256Mb like the iPad1 - also you’ll see there’s no LED flash on iPad2). Again, the Xoom sports a 5MP back camera; still no specs on the iPad2 camera because it’s suspected to only be around 0.9MP - good enough to record 720p video but likely to produce pretty ugly still photographs (I had a 1MP camera in 1997!).

And everyone knows a “dual-core” processor doesn’t make the iPad2 “twice as fast” - that was straight up hogwash from Mr. Jobs.

Let’s actually price-match features and hardware instead of just saying “it’s cheaper, so it’s better” because it actually lacks features people want to pay money for.

Bob Wolfe

Android already has a bad reputation for malware apps and nonexistent updates to the OS. Nobody wants that in a tablet

zing

For today… But You can’t win something this is forever evolving.  Also being that Apple is a lousy company that doesn’t treat it’s customers wonderfully, makes puny incremental changes, has a deceptive marketing campaign, plus hideous desktop computers, it wouldn’t surprise me to see Apple in 2nd or 3rd place in the next 2 or 3 years.  And again, you will end up with a minority of iSheep clinging to the notion of worshiping apple.

Sparkie48

No one has mentioned it can be mirrored on a HDTV?  My 25’ HDMI cable has been ordered and already shipped.  I’ll have the best TV remote ever!

geoduck

Let me just add a few things I know
First I’ve owned Motorola Phones. They were unreliable garbage. There’s no way I’m giving them ~$700 for a tablet. Apple has a MUCH better hardware reliability history.
Second Yes Virginia it IS about the experience. I have a heck of a lot more apps from a reliable curated environment to choose from. I have hardware and software that were designed and tested from day one together to run seamlessly. That’s worth something.

Ted Landau

I read the whole article and never saw the answer to the OP question ?Why the iPad 2 Wins The Tablet War??

My reply to this and similar comments: I did answer it. It wins on price ??but combined with the App Store and the built-in software and the superior, lighter, thinner design and all the rest of the, yes, experience. It’s not like in the old PC vs. Mac days. Fewer and fewer purchasers are going to care about 1280x800 vs 1024x768 on a tablet. It’s going to more about which device they enjoy using more, which works better for them.

In the end, we can wait and see. If the iPad is not still comfortably in the lead a year from now, I’ll eat my words. I promise.

allanon

Another reason why more features would have been a problem is that an increase in screen resolution would have caused all app vendors to upgrade their software, temporarily erasing the benefit of all the existing apps working day 1.

nickyn

Ted, if hardware specs that amount to the difference of 237,568 pixels don’t matter to users, why not just title your article “Why the iPad2 resonates best with users” and not all about “winning”.

Also, I’ll be happy to feed those words to you. Putting this article in my Google calendar (which syncs with my Android phone WAY better than any service on the iOS) to revisit one year from now. Talk to you then.

Ted Landau

why not just title your article ?Why the iPad2 resonates best with users? and not all about ?winning?.

By “winning,” I meant in terms of ultimate market dominance. In that context, the choice still seems okay to me.

As to feeding my words back to me, I’ll be here. If necessary, I hope you will at least allow me to add ketchup.

mhikl

Ode to Tablets

Seems so, so long ago,
That Steve pronounced so bold
A tablet would win
As Apple?s next kin
What hoopla followed the announcement.

Price rattled about like a Grand
Every Tom, Dick and Harriet had a plan
Mockups were about
and the specs let out
Take down Apple was the command.

Apple would be lynched and smote.
Their pad set up in smoke
Their stock to the floor
Steve shown the door
Chaos would rule the land.

So the iPad was ready and made
Its screen hit the stage with accolade
There was awe, there was fear
And then we did hear
Half a Grand was the plan! Not so dear.

The rabble cried out with such airs
Said the price is terribly unfair
The Grand?s what we need
To start sewing our seeds
Back crawling they did to their lair.

So now shines the iPad new
Many are feeling quite screwed
What?s up with that Jobs
His bowels are knobbed
Yet he ups the stakes by two

Back to their shops they tear
The cupboards they find to be bare
And with solder all gone
They began sobbing a song
Vapour Ware are You, O Where!

tritium

“Apple is pacing itself for the marathon they see ahead, not the 100 yard dash of the next six months.”

This is an important insight. Apple has fantastic corporate discipline. They make a plan and stick to it.

wab95

I want you to get these crap tablets where they breathe! I want an iPad that will take on the Motorola Xoom and leave it DEAD! I want every other tablet that resembles a competitor DEAD! I want them so bankrupt that they have to burn their factories to the GROUND! I wanna go there in the middle of the night and I wanna PISS ON THEIR ASHES!?


I had to laugh out loud on this one, a quote from one of my all time favourite movies. Yes, that would have been an iPad2 to see.

I think your analysis is spot on, and one of the key drivers of the final iPad2 configuration. I think that the combination of these upgrades, while holding the market price steady, is a real body-blow to the competition, and like most body blows, the damage is not immediately apparent, but subtle and relentlessly progressive (clinically it is often due to internal haemorrhaging - an apt analogy).

I also think that it is part of a larger strategy, however, of a gradual and interactive platform growth between Apple and its user base. Some of the wished-for features posted here and elsewhere reflect a configuration reminiscent of yesterday’s PCs - a lurch back to the familiar past. I for one do not believe that this is where this platform is headed at all. We have yet to see the fuller maturation of, not simply the apps, but more importantly the supportive services for the iPad. Where this is going, certain features, like SD card slots (just to pick an example - not saying this will be the case) may not be needed. There is precedent for this in Apple’s Mac lineup, where people have been clamouring for USB3 but Apple have bypassed that phase altogether with Thunderbolt, which is itself so far ahead of the curve that there are not only no Thunderbolt peripherals on the market, but Apple have had to pare back that advance to copper rather than the truly remarkable advance in the optical configuration. There will be no USB3 because it is now unnecessary.

If this is correct, then were Apple to add features that reflect its vision of this device now rather in a future release, not only might they have to compromise on price (new tech is always expensive in the early phase of production before the benefits of demand affect price), they would tip their hand and give the likes of Samsung and HP a hint at where they are headed, with the result that a company like HP might be able to be able to match their manoeuvres.

Key weapons in Apple’s arsenal have always been stealth and the element of surprise. I remain convinced that we have not seen the fuller picture here, and importantly, neither have the competition.

We may well be down to a two-horse race by the release of iPad3, although for the sake of the platform and its develop, I sincerely hope not.

csimmons

Everything about the Xoom is either better or the same. Look at the specs, BRO.

...and don?t give me ?its about the experience? bullshit that Apple has been promoting as of late.

Spoken like a true geek. No offense.

Everything about the Xoom may or may not be better (except the name: XOOM? Seriously), SO WHAT? As Apple has proven time and time again since the 2001 rollout of the iPod, it IS the experience that counts, “experience” being the iTunes ecosystem. The Xoom will never sell in the amount that the iPad has, for the same reason the Samsung Galaxy Tab hasn’t really caught on yet; there’s no real ecosystem there. Android Marketplace is horrible. Too many different Android OS versions. Customer mindshare.

It may be hard for you to grasp, but the average consumer is not a nerd. My parents could care less if the Xoom has a 1280 x 800 screen, an SD card reader, or extra USB ports. They do care that they can easily video chat with their grandchildren with minimal hassle and without having to download, install and setup Skype or some other 3rd party app. For them the Xoom is a non-starter, as it will be for the millions of potential users who based on the perception of the Apple solution “just working” will make the iPad 2 an even bigger seller than the iPad 1.

Just because you don’t buy the “experience” concept doesn’t make it any less of a powerful case for the iPad 2. that’s your problem to have, and yours alone.

LogarithmicPig

@zing,

If you were intending to make me laugh, you succeeded. 

BTW, I love my “hideous” desktop Macs.

Jamie

I was one of those making the same sorts of arguments about the Mac back in the day. The point is that, even if my logic was right, I lost the argument. Windows PCs went on to dominate. And so will the iPad.

My thoughts as well. Kind of spooky, actually. I guess payback is a bitch.

wab95

Let?s actually price-match features and hardware instead of just saying ?it?s cheaper, so it?s better? because it actually lacks features people want to pay money for

For the sake of argument, please enlighten us. Which features, based on what published empirical survey, are you citing, and what fraction of paying customers are asking for which features?

Apple have empirical data based on sales numbers and market share - data that have been shared on this website over the past several days - to back up its approach. Any alternative approach should be equally evidence-based, at least if the objective is market success.

truBounz2011

zero said: The motorola xoom is better, its rival will be the ipad 3 not this one.

good luck zero! you can get your xoom and wait forever to zoom in on your unvetted tablet applications that are mostly loaded with malware craps. Hsve you read the latest articles on how much malware Google had to clean up?  Or are you just content on putting “wool over your eyes”?

Tardis

Ted,

I think you are right, that the iPad’s success has resulted from its price.

However, we should be clear, in the iPad’s case, that doesn’t mean “lowest price” or even “best value”. We all know how to judge the value of a known product like a PC based on its specifications, but the iPad was an unknown product a year ago.

I believe it is more a question of “risk versus reward”. When the Asus eeePC was announced, I didn’t know what it could do, but I was prepared to spend $200 to try a Linux device and see. When it went on sale, it was $300 and more like $400 when you upped the specs to make it usable. But it was still an unknown and looked like a “piece of junk”. The iPad was an unknown, but it looked good, so to me spending $500 on that was less risk than $400 or more on a crappy netbook.

Today, the iPad is a known product with a year’s track record and 15 million customers. An Android tablet is still an unknown. I do not believe many people, even hardcore Android fanatics, will see spending $700 or so as a good risk.

Tardis

Ted,

I think you are right, that the iPad’s success has resulted from its price.

However, we should be clear, in the iPad’s case, that doesn’t mean “lowest price” or even “best value”. We all know how to judge the value of a known product like a PC based on its specifications, but the iPad was an unknown product a year ago.

I believe it is more a question of “risk versus reward”. When the Asus eeePC was announced, I didn’t know what it could do, but I was prepared to spend $200 to try a Linux device and see. When it went on sale, it was $300 and more like $400 when you upped the specs to make it usable. But it was still an unknown and looked like a “piece of junk”. The iPad was an unknown, but it looked good, so to me spending $500 on that was less risk than $400 or more on a crappy netbook.

Today, the iPad is a known product with a year’s track record and 15 million customers. An Android tablet is an unknown. I do not believe many people, even hardcore Android fanatics, will see spending $700 or so as a good risk.

geoduck

For the sake of argument, please enlighten us. Which features, based on what published empirical survey, are you citing, and what fraction of paying customers are asking for which features?

Let’s see the Xoom has a slightly higher resolution screen. The difference is small enough that on that scale most people won’t notice the difference
The Xoom had a slightly larger screen. Once again they are close enough unless you hold them up next to each other most people won’t notice the difference.
<<Lets see, if the screen is slightly bigger and has more pixels doesn’t that mean that the pixels are about the same size so the image itself is no better? Just saying>>
It has stereo speakers. My MacBook has stereo speakers and the sound is crappy. That’s what you get with these itty bitty drivers. If I want fidelity I plug external speakers or headphones into them.
The Xoom has a magnetometer. WTF is that for?

Last night on TopGear they reviewed a top of the line Mitsubishi. It was their tricked out Rally car. It had more horsepower and all sorts of ‘better’ features. They concluded that you should get the version a level or two below that one simply because it worked better. They do this a fair amount: recommend not the top bleeding edge totally tricked out model but something slightly less simply because it IS all about the whole package. It is about the ‘experience’.

Such is the case with the iPad2 v Xoom. On paper the Xoom is totally tricked out. In the real world the iPad2 has more software, a better track record for reliability, better support from Apple, and less of a problem with Malware. Sure there will be those that want the Xoom. There are those that want to build a kit-car or the Mitsubishi that needs service and new tires every 4000 miles. Bully for them. But the rest of us who want to use a device not fiddle around with it want something else.

For us it IS about the whole experience NOT about the specifications.

Chas

Apple is a lousy company that doesn?t treat it?s customers wonderfully

Really?  Of all the Macs I’ve owned I have had exactly two problems, in 20 years.  Both times it was the motherboard.  Both times the Mac was out of warranty.  Both times Apple replaced the mobo, for free.  The first time they returned the [3rd-party] diagnostic fee.  (There wasn’t any the second time.)

I helped someone order a Mac last week but they forgot to order a printer.  He called Apple a few days later and they are sending him a printer for free, saving him the hassle of going through the rebate process, the price above the rebate and the taxes.

Google “dell hell” - how many hits do you get?  EVERYBODY (yes, a bit more than 2) that has bought a Mac on my recommendation has told me how pleased they are to just be able to use their computer.

wab95

Also being that Apple is a lousy company that doesn?t treat it?s customers wonderfully

The wonderful thing about this website is that everyone can express an opinion, even one that is evidence-free (of which there are a few in this thread alone - no reflection on Ted).

Just to echo Chas above, I too have had two problems with Mac computers, one a motherboard under extended warranty and another the victim of a Sony exploding battery (still not sure that wasn’t guerilla warfare) where the extended warranty had not been submitted by the company in Singapore where I bought the laptop. In both cases, Apple effectively replaced the computers, in the latter case (and despite its being three years old), with everything except a new keyboard - free - no hassles. Someone tried to break into my wife’s MobileMe account, I spoke to Apple, problem sorted in minutes.

Contrast that to when I owned a Gateway, back in the early - mid 90’s, a 386 that was just a year old. Just after the 486’s came out, I had a problem. I phoned Gateway. The tech was aloof, but willing to help. When she understood that all I had was a 386, the conversation devolved into a 30 second invitation to ‘upgrade or get off my line loser’ exit interview. I’ve seen lepers shooed away with more ceremony. I won’t even discuss what happened when my HP Aero crashed - the outcome of which sent me back to the Mac.

No, I think that there is a consensus in the Appleverse, including among its authorised service centres, that Apple’s customer service is first rate, and it retains among the highest ratings in customer satisfaction. You can Google or Bing it, zing.

Kalyan

@nickyn ..... com on dude, we are talking about a 9.7 inch screen, not 13 inch laptop where you would really use those pixels. what would you do with those pixels when two apps do not share the screen at the same time….............

one app at a time on full screen, i think the ipad resolution is more than enough

Kalyan

the one thing, i would have loved to see was apple actually unify the way it pops out these connectors for the mac, iphone and ipad,
\

for instance the hdmi cable the put out should have been something the users could also use with the display port they have on the mac or for that matter have a display port on the ipad

my only point here is that, users should not be forced to buy a bunch of connectors for all the devices they have, as it is they carry lot of adaptors around.

Kalyan

and one more thing…..........


as a consumer, if go to the 800$ price point, i would rather get a macbook air by adding another 100 bucks.

These tablets make you love them, i am sure may people will buy a new one every 2 yrs(all the upgrade fanatics). it would be good to keep the price low for such a reason, an ipad user would feel more comfortable to upgrade the next year itself than someone who invested 800 on a xoom.


and lets not talk about the hardware reliablity pls…........

Ted Landau

New York Times today on pricing of iPad vs. competitors.

wab95

New York Times today on pricing of iPad vs. competitors

Many thanks, Ted. iPad’s pricing appears to be quite staggering for the competition, both literally and figuratively.

Pablo

I am an entry purchaser. Well actually, that’s not quite true. I got my feet wet on a crappy nextbook second chance buy for $160. But even with all the glitches that “tablet” had, I saw the light as far as this being the new hot must have item, especially for those who will use it mainly for business.

That being said, I loved my iphone, and no other “smart” phone I have used since could compare to the seamless integration and operation with perfect functionality that the iphones are known for. So I will definitely bet my money on the stable and user friendly ipad 2 and not the often found insufficient motorola brand with a few “flashy” add ons. The only drawback is the waiting until 3 am to buy one at the apple site.

On the Fence

“Why the iPad 2 wins the Tablet Wars” - Because I, Ted Landau, said so.

Except I forgot to mention - Besides not being able to toast a waffle, the Xoom out performs the newest IPad 2 in the following categories:

1. 4G - the biggest of all. Sit tight for the Ipad 3.
2. Bigger screen with a more advanced graphics controler which provides far crisper high definition display.
3. Flash Media - how could we forget.
4. HDMI, USB ports.

Log-in to comment