Which device type is the real competitor?
 

We've seen threads here comparing the tablets with the iPhone, with Android, with Ubuntu Mobile etc. etc.

But which kind of device is the real competitor in the long run? I found that (while I still think the tablets are pretty much unique) I'd rather compare them to Moblin-based hardware than to Android-Phones or a PMP like Archos.

But what's your opinion? Which one is the true competitor?

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

nokia e71.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

The competition for Nokia lies in phones I think, as they are becoming so powerful that the need for a separate media player/ebook reader/pda/etc becomes less. People don't buy a MID instead of a phone, but to complement it. And Android because ultimately what makes a platform successful is the number of useful applications (as seen from average consumer perspective) , and it seems to attract more new developers than Limo, symbian and Maemo.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

The real competitor is anything inessential that might cost the same price as a tablet. The tablet is competing FOR a small bit of disposable income. Cell phones are considered essential these days, and something that is "not a phone" and is "not food" and is "not transportation" etc, is NOT essential and competes with other non-essential items.

The only hope for the tablet to get into another category would be for it to become a phone or to become accepted as a computer substitute.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

You could also argue that since the phone market has become pretty much saturated Nokia et al try to get disposable income in a different way. I predict that in 5 years you'll be seen as an anti-social outcast if you're not online 24/7, so there will be a new 'need' that will eventually be seen as important as transportation and calling.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

First you say phones are becoming so powerful that there's no need for a 2nd device; then you say ppl. buy MIDs to complement a phone. What exactly?

I agree that phones become more powerful, but still I think of my N800 in terms of a very small laptop rather that a bulky phone without, ahem, phone. We'll not see laptops disappear any time soon because phones become powerful, will we? So I think it's the niche of "small computers" (laptops, only much smaller) that we're talking about. And in this area, it's certainly the tablets and the MIDs. (Except the tablets are even smaller and - well, available.)

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

So far, there isn't one.

PMPs are too limited and useless; MIDs and UMPCs are too big, expensive and power hungry; and on the other side, the iPhones, Android stuff, and OpenMoko are too small and cellular.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

True. I couldn't go and say "Well, my N800 is too old now, I want something similar, but more modern, let's buy a device with the same features from..." - There's no device that offers what I have with my old N800. They don't even come close.

(I have to say that I don't like this situation. I'm not a Nokia fanboy. I like what they have, but I always consider buying other brands as well. Choice, you know. There's no choice here. Nokia has a monopoly.)

I still think that *if* there'll ever be an alternative (which I hope for), it'll not be from the cellular front.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Well, the best "alternative" is probably going to be the Pandora, since it's basically an N900 except a few months early. With the N900 being as far away as it is, I'll almost certainly be getting one (well, assuming they actually do end up being available around November).

Just drop some combination of Maemo or Debian + Hildon on there and away you go. ;)

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

MIDs are the closest. Some PDAs, too, but Dell quit the Axim, so not much current. There's also some competition from netbooks. None of these are the same market, but there's some overlap with each.

With the 3G, the N9xx will be cutting closer to HTCs, but they're so expensive... I hope the N9xx doesn't fit nicely in that market!

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Sorry, I was rambling a bit. I think what will happen is this:

In the near future there isn't really a competition like GA says, because the tablets have a pretty unique set of features and are cheap. Still their functionality overlaps with smartphones and MIDS. So people who only want some light browsing, IM-img and mediaplayer may be interested in either the tablets or an iPhone/Android phone. And those who want little more office/PIM type of things and use it mostly around the house may be undecided between a MID and a tablet.

However in the longer term the internet tablets may well become obsolete:

1) Phones become so powerful and cheap that for most people they satisfy their mobile online (and media/pda/ebook/navigation) needs. Even more so if new types of expandible screens become commonplace like the rollup-digital ink ones. Since people already need a phone there is no need to carry around a separate 'internet device'.

2) Mids become more powerful so that eventually you just hook them up with an external display and keyboard and they will replace notebooks, just like currently notebooks have replaced desktop computers for most people.

Nokia was smart not to place all their bets on either phones or tablets/MIDs so they can adjust their strategy depending on which way the market develops.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Why would MIDs go this route, but not tablets? We've got (IMO, though I don't have benchmarks) better performance/power in the tablets, and if they get used with external monitor and keyboard, the larger size of MIDs becomes entirely a disadvantage. They seem to be better positioned to take this route to dominance...

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

The tablets and even phones could eventually go that route, yes, but MIDS will take that position first.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Why wouldn't tablets be able to, though? Look at the Beagle. That's what we're looking at performance-wise for the next tablet. It's got more than enough juice to handle the desktop use-case.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Gah! I wanted to comment and then realized anything I say could be construed as more than my personal gut feeling...

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Answer: tablets :)

Such as Pandora. Pandora is aimed at gaming though. For me, not interesting. Its not something I use my NIT for. This is why I believe there isn't 'one real competitor'. The embedded market is vague and fractured, there are all kind of usages for a NIT. Therefore, interesting questions could be: what is the NIT's weakest spot or what is the NIT currently used for which other devices can do far better.

The point is though that a NIT can do so many things (flexible) that it might begood enough to use a NIT for several of those things instead of using or buying specific devices for the specific purpose. This is where the power of the NIT lies.

The current competitor of the NIT is Nokia. They can make the N900 able to increase its usage for its specific purposes. I believe the usability of the device is very important, and judging from the software updates for Maemo 5, there is going to be a huge leap forward. If Nokia adds good GPS and navigation software, PIM option, 24/7 connectivity via 3G I see the value of the flexibility of the NIT increasing.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

while pandora have the controls in place for gaming, its construction is quite open. usb host, wifi, and now even bluetooth. it even have outputs that allow it to use a tv or other display.

all it really need is the right firmware to make use of it all...

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

I'd have to agree with this. PMPs all lack some functionality that the tablets offer, while the tablet isn't the best at pmp functions. UMPCs offer superior hardware at 3x the price, or more. Are any MIDs commercially available, yet? And, I don't want or need a fancy phone. A phone is a utility device, to me. If it makes calls, I'm happy.

IMO, nothing currently available truly competes with the tablets, given their intended usage and price. I expect that to change near the end of the year [I'll go ahead and mention the pandora, here, since it's already come up ;)], but it remains to be seen, today.

Why does the pandora potentially compete? Because it has the potential to be a full-fledged linux computer. I realize the gaming controls may be off-putting for some, aesthetically, but it's the hardware that counts. The device certainly has as much potential as the internet tablets for being an excellent, general-purpose device. Like I said, time will tell, though. At this point, it's purely conjecture.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

That seems like a summarily dismissive statement without a lot of foundation. Isn't that what people always say about wiz-bang hardware when people first see them? How many business-minded people saw 3D graphics cards, sound cards, etc. when they first came out but today every business laptop needs this stuff for everything from development work to presentations to Internet based meetings and so on.

Let's also not forget the Pandora has SVIDEO output.. that could be VERY VERY handy for a pocket-sized presentation or video device. I can just as easily see business using Pandora just as easily as I could see gamers.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

It POTENTIALLY has a better chance, given they started out with the mindset that, paraphrasing, "the more open, the better", as opposed to the Nokia mindset which they went to the press with, again paraphrasing, "the open community needs to embrace closed and proprietary landmines".

Ugh

At this point, as much as I love the Nokia tablets, I'm absolutely open to a much more open hardware platform and when one comes along, I'm jumping off. The corporate attitude has really been off-putting to those of us that prefer to own our hardware and re-purpose them as we see fit and not get forced to use some crippling or insecure software blobs with questionable legal blather which make the corporation feel all snug and secure at our expense as customers.

I prefer the Pandora mindset so far and I look forward to its release. Potential is certainly there. Great potential, given their initial mindset so far.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Ah, I see you also fell for /.'s wonderfully accurate reporting. :rolleyes:

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Pandora only has S-video output, which is definitely not "a tv or other display", but just a tv. Of course, USB-to-VGA might work (some adapters have Linux drivers), but I wouldn't expect too much of those.

Personally, S-video out is plenty for me: it's a portable device after all. I used to hook up a tv to my Archos PMA430 in "emergency" cases and it was more than satisfactory, even for office work.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Interestingly, those gaming controls might become useful for other things than gaming; I proposed they could be used to emulate multi-touch gestures and sofar nobody has called me an ignorant fool yet, so I'm hopeful...

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Just to give you a heads up: not everything on the Pandora is open, at least not in the way OpenMoko is supposed to be. There are binary blobs in the firmware, but the developers have stated that it would be trivial (not for me, but for someone who actually knows this stuff) to hook them up to a kernel of your choice.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

was there not supposed to be a hdmi port as well?

sure, its still primary tv, but more and more tv's can do a nice job as a computer display these days. hell, the only thing really seperating them is that the tv is expected to have all these legacy inputs for other entertainment devices.

oh, and i distinctly recall svideo being present on say projectors ;)

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Because it was mentioned in Slashdot doesn't mean it wasn't in other reporting such as BusinessWeek, InfoWorld, Arstechnica, etc. There's certainly more out there reporting on open-source community news than Slashdot.

Good choice quote from the Arstechnica article:
"We want to educate open-source developers. There are certain business rules [developers] need to obey, such as DRM, IPR [intellectual property rights], SIM locks and subsidized business models," Jaaksi said, according to BusinessWeek. "Why do we need closed vehicles? We do. Some of these things harm the industry but they're here [as things stand]. These are touchy, emotional issues but this dialogue is very much needed. As an industry, we plan to use open-source technologies but we are not yet ready to play by the rules; but this needs to work the other way round too."

Could it be that different people have different needs and thusly should be able to choose to continue along the 'Nokia blessed' path.. or choose their own with the flexibility that Linux affords? Closing off portions of the kernel isn't helping to make a device any more useful to a more broad audience of potential customers and certainly gives them a good reason to go elsewhere when someone else doesn't do that. DRM and SIM locks have proven themselves out to the point that even the general public is well aware of how crippling they are. Why are consumers and open-source developers being told that they need to accept it?

Later, he tries to backpeddle in his blog but that's not much consolation given the clear intent to suggest that the open community "needs to work the other way round too." I deeply disagree with that stance but the dialog on this is welcomed. Although, with previous faux pas such as the suggestion that OGG is full of patent problems, without actually pointing out what those problems are, isn't particularly constructive to their arguments.

Yeah, I've read as much--but at least the mindset in that organization is to start out as open as possible and try to work toward it. So far, I haven't heard anyone from the OpenPandora project come out to say that the community needs to learn to be more accepting of closed standards/architectures/software or any other other such closed-minded mentality such as DRM. So far, my impression is that the mentality there is a much more developer and consumer-friendly attitude that TOLERATES closed-minded IPR not EMBRACES it.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

As tso mentioned, it's used for projectors too. Most types of office projectors I've seen recently have had S-video support. I could definitely have used S-video if the N800 had had that feature.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Ah yes, good points on the other hardware differences indeed.

If I go to OpenPandora.org I see a woman playing an old classic game though. Then I remember one of the differences is 2 dpads (and further mostly comparable to `N900' as GeneralAntilles put), and the rest I forgot...

One also has to remember Nokia comes from a different world; they're learning and changing.

What other usages does S-Video hypothetically provide?

Pandora also has a different design (reminds me of a Nokia Communicator).

Compared to a N800/N810/N810WE (and `N900') these devices also have their advantages & disadvantages. For example, a N810 has a GPS chip, and a N810WE also has WiMAX.

If I go to Nokia.com and search for Nokia products (obviously, mostly (smart)phones) I can easily compare the differences. Websites, heck even webshops, should provide this feature for a customer; its very useful.

Competition is usually good.

What would I use my second dpad for though?

Does Pandora fund open source developers?

EDIT: as for mobile, see qole's observation on OSiM

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

The quote you're replying to is taken out of its context.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

did a quick bit of digging, both LG and samsung have computer display lines that have more in common with tv's then with the old vga and power one of old. s-video, vga, dvi, hmdi, the works.

heh, some even had good old coax antenna connectors and tuners, but still they sorted them under displays, not tv's...

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

God forbid the NIT takes the same route to emulating notebooks the way that notebooks did wrt desktops.

The evolution of notebooks up until very recently was an attempt to emulate desktops in terms of OS, more processing power, and bigger display size. And so long as it could run on batteries it didn't matter much in the marketplace whether the battery lasted 2 hours or 3 1/2 hours. This mindset changed (in response to the NIT?) where people started to see the value in small size and looong battery life with always on connectivity. While NITs should make it possible to leave the notebook at home (or office) for most functions; they should NOT go the route of emulating notebooks by getting significantly bigger physically or losing battery life or utilizing a desktop OS.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

I'm going to give two answers:

1) It depends on what the individual customer is looking for. If you're looking for a pocket computer, then the big competitor is going to be a MID (whether they deliver that efficiently in size and power or not). If you're looking for an always connected device, then the big competitors are the smartphones as they evolve to have better web services. If you're looking for a PMP, then those are the big competitors. If you're looking for one of those with an open OS, then the open platforms become big deals. If you're looking for all 4, then you'll probably be most likely to get it from a combination of smartphone and open platform, as those continue to evolve.

As things are _right_now_, I think the main competitors are the MIDs. It's the format that the N800/N810 most fit, even though they don't have atom CPUs. The fact that the official MIDs don't deliver the format as efficiently (for the reasons the general always mentions) doesn't mean that they're not effectively the same marketplace.

So, "it depends".

2) For me, what I'm looking for, it's a combination of "MID" (in the general sense, not the "Intel says it has to have an atom CPU" sense), Always Connected, and Open Platform. Give me an Android _phone_, in an EB MIMD type format (maybe adding a tilt screen), with an N800/N810 size screen ... and I'd probably be quite happy. Maemo 5 + voice/SMS + Maemo Calendar App* + SyncML** would do it, as well.


(* fully integrated into the NIT, using NIT contacts, etc.)

(** with all of the options the Nokia S60 phones have for SyncML, like contacts, calendar/tasks/events/todo, bookmarks, etc. ... files and email would be nice as well, but not necessary)

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

I'm not sure how out of context it could have been. I quoted an entire paragraph of the statement but maybe I missed out on something, seeing as how I'm reading it filtered through several articles. What was the context of the quote that I maybe misinterpreted?

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

I had not yetread your later post which included a quote.

The text you quoted is an improvement to

I'll quote some parts hereunder

[1] Nokia is still learning from the open source model. Examples are then mentioned.
[2] Nokia asserts the open source community has to learn from proprietary model. In a proprietary model (or business model) you cannot just ship ffmpeg or mp3 decoder becaue you believe its useful to the user, or because its open source. You need a code review e.g. to search for copyright infringement, patent infringement, or EULA infringement (think w32codec here). I'm a Fluendo customer for this very reason. Then, examples are made.

What he essentially says, between the lines, is that neither Nokia or the open source community can change overnight, but we have to adapt and learn to each other. Sometimes that means making sacrifices instead of idealism. This is called being pragmatic, practical, something a negotiator knows very well.

An example for this is a SIM lock. This part cannot be open source because this lock is necessary in the current ecosystem. The way phones are sold demands this. I don't like this either, and the protection is laughable, but it exists. Nokia cannot afford to change this (overnight). If you don't like this behaviour I'd say that right now Nokia is not the right corporation to do business with.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

True! Although I feel there have been others that appear to have done more, I haven't given Nokia proper credit for as much as they have done, which isn't insignificant by any measure. I continue to purchase Nokia branded products because I like the brand primarily for their tablet. (I bought the NaviCore kit, got the Nokia BH-501 BT headset, etc.)

Well said, although the preferred intention should be that we are tolerating these things--not that we should embrace them. The problem is lock-out and closed hardware access as well as closed-source software that needn't be closed at all. Especially when we're talking about things like the wifi driver and media player source code and so on. The idea that we can't use the hardware to its potential is infuriating and no amount of 'we can't ship mp3 decoders or win32 codecs' explains that. Back to giving credit, at least I see that the wifi driver will finally been opened up--that's a BIG deal among other things Nokia has been doing right... but the statement made is still something of an ominous agitation to folks that want to be able to truly use the thing that they opened their wallets and vomited bills to purchase and it effects future purchases and brand.

Hell of an image there, eh? :)

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

"may i play a bit with it, masta?"

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

Again, the chipset only has one digital video output port; Beagleboard uses it for HDMI, Pandora for its LCD. You cannot split or double the port, because interference will make it pretty much useless.

It may be a problem for some, but not for me: I'm more than pleased with S-video on a portable device; it's not as if I'm going to use it much anyway.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

If anything, what's coming out of the Pandora community is the opposite of Nokia's wet dream. Closed-source contributions -- be they commercial or not -- are welcomed, as long as they play nice with the OSS mindset.

Re: Which device type is the real competitor?
 

bah, silly me. your right, you explained that, and i had forgotten. sorry about that...