Minimal hardware requirements:

0) wide touch screen, WIFI, audio, USB connectivity
1) efficient scrolling, task-switching and text input methods (either hardware or software)
2) powerful enough to play, for instance, (online) HD videos

Hm, why is the stylus option only present in the phone poll?

Because a tablet without a stylus is like a cellphone without a microphone or a car without wheels?

So if the Apple iPod Touch would have a 4.2" screen, it would still not be a tablet since it has no stylus? What about capacitive screens? There can be no tablets with capacitive screens?

Haha - exactly!

A tablet running Maemo; therefore the definition of tablet is what is being discussed here. For that we have to go back to past. Its not easy to clearly define this based on propositions. Usually the manufacturer of the end product gives something a name and the general public adopts that name. Sometimes new names are invented.

I'd say the definition of tablet is something inbetween the size of a smartphone and netbook, being portable, much akin to the size (but not features) of a PDA. Traditionally it had a stylus, nowadays they're seen without stylus as well. They have radios (Infrared, BlueTooth, WiFi, 3G, ..) and connectors using cables (USB). Some have keyboards. Some were research projects, or were never made for general audience. The device would not have to be compared to Nokia N8x0 because a Maemo tablet is not necessarily a Nokia product. In general I'd say it'd be a device which, while inbetween a smartphone and netbook, is able to fullfill a lot of roles. Maybe not always being the best tool for the best job, but the device is versatile in the way it can be applied to use. But it is difficult to please everyone with 1 such device... so I think the Pandora is, for now, as close as it gets to a Maemo tablet, if it ever gets released. Otherwise perhaps we see some netbooks or smartbooks which are 'good enough'.

For me, it'd be a device running a *NIX stack with X with state of the art performance (e.g. OMAP3) which has a reasonable 24/7 connectivity with reasonable speed/price. It'd also allow me being able to use VPN, remote shell, and remote desktop. Sortof like a portable thin client. If it is HSPA which does that, I'd be happy, but if there were world-wide WLAN for WiFi allowing that I'd be happy as well. Preferably I'd be able to securely add features to the hardware without using cables. BlueTooth 3 perhaps?

Actually, Ragnar, I was joking -- albeit with my bias on display!

And, in truth, I think the iPod Touch, even with its 3.5" screen, is a tablet -- it's just not a tablet I want. I like your Nokia tablet better, but the fact is that the primary reason I like it better is its screen: its size and its pixel density.

Eighteen months ago, when I bought my first N800, I would likely have bought a Touch instead if it had a screen like the N800 and a microphone input, which the first-generation Touch lacked (inability to Skype, or VOIP, was/is truly a dealbreaker for me).

At this point, it would be a hard choice for me between a 4.2" Touch and a 4.2" "N820." I would choose the N820, because of what I know now, due to its having a traditional file system, ability to handle email attachments, and its open-ness.

Even though I would still prefer a stylus, it wouldn't be something I would care about so much if the Nokia tablet were as precisely finger-responsive as the screen/software on the Touch. (Edit: Got to say, though, that lemmyslender's pro-stylus post right below this post is darn convincing! I'd forgotten about marking up pdf's. Spreadsheets I can see maybe being possible with a clever stylus-free interface. Diagrams and sketches -- forget it.)

(Ragnar, nice to have you here.)

Personally, if there was a device like either GeraldKo or ekul described, I'd buy it right now, no questions asked (well maybe 2 or 3).

I'd like to add removable battery as a nice option.

Stylus is mandatory. From what I've read, capacitive touch screen don't really have the resolution needed to fulfill the role of a tablet. It'd be difficult to annotate pdf's in xjournal or manipulate a spreadsheet in gnumeric or make quick sketches/handwritten notes, and on and on. I don't think it would be possible to accurately hit links on webpages at a viewing level that puts most of the page on the screen (like I can do now with my stylus).

I think I'm similar to allnameswereout; I looked through that list of features and couldn't find one that I'd require in a Maemo tablet.

My requirements are simple: good processor, good battery life, good screen, Maemo (implying an open device) and decent connectivity. I'd prefer that screen to be >4", have HSPA (falling back to wifi at any opportunity and not being tied to a carrier), a keyboard, USB host, video out etc.

But would I get a simpler, cheaper device (a bit like the Q7) without these preferences as long as my core requirements were met? Probably.

Except that you can have a tablet that is as big as a netbook. This survey was meant to be for pocketable tablets, which is CLOSER to what you're saying above (ex: I think a 5" screen tablet fits your definition, but it might not be "pocketable"). I did almost ask "Pocketable" instead of '4"+ screen" for this one, though. But then I thought "non-pocketable tablets can really be rolled into the netbook question", by simply not selecting the physical keyboard as a requirement.


As for "stylus", I could only put in 10 things :-) And I definitely wanted to ask the items I did. I sort of assumed that most people here would want/expect to have a stylus on a tablet (even if they're like me, where I would prefer to use my fingers 90% of the time, but still want the option of a stylus for that other 10%) ... whereas I don't think that's a safe assumption on a phone.