This is a bit scary
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Apr 23, 2011 11:50 PM EDT |
I've ordered a 10 inch tablet with Natty pre installed. I hope there's a patch before the factory starts building mine. |
| bli Apr 25, 2011 11:38 AM EDT |
Which tablet did you order and from where? I didn't know there were any available. |
| hkwint Apr 25, 2011 2:52 PM EDT |
bli: Not sure where TA ordered hers, but you can order Ubuntu tablets (mini-book, touchbook, smartbook) from AlwaysInnovating.com Please be advised, as it's Ubuntu on ARM and made by a small company, it's pretty 'beta'. Gentoo is also an option. |
| tracyanne Apr 25, 2011 6:34 PM EDT |
I'm getting mine from an Australian Source, they have both ARM and Intel tablets, and will supply with either Linux (Ubuntu) or Windows, or no OS. I've ordered an Intel device as it comes with a 250 gig harddrive. As I'm a reseller for them I can get it much cheaper. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 25, 2011 8:42 PM EDT |
Canonical should just start selling tablets on their own. If they really want to be like Apple, they need to get a hardware business going. |
| TxtEdMacs Apr 26, 2011 7:00 AM EDT |
Steven, What's your goal? Seeing Canonical tank permanently? When Samsung is no match for Apple, a small software company is to flare into a full blown manufacturing colossus? Think of the expertise, contacts and good will that are lacking. Dream on ... but your prescription will kill the patient. By the way, do you know that iPad sales were under the estimates? Well this could be explained by the disruption in Japanese portion of the supply chain. Nonetheless, tablets might not be the Next Big Thing conventional (current) wisdom purports it to be. Very [serious]ly, Txt. |
| bli Apr 26, 2011 10:13 AM EDT |
I'm Australia too. Brisbane to be exact. Are you getting yours from anywhere around here? |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 26, 2011 11:24 AM EDT |
Ubuntu's desire for control makes an in-house hardware platform the perfect next step. |
| hkwint Apr 26, 2011 11:52 AM EDT |
I agree to Steven. Do you really think Apple had the goodwill, contacts and expertise when it started? Probably not. Moreover, after all, what expertise does Apple have - beyond software and user experience? Not that much. The design of 'their' SoC's is 'from the shelves'. The devices themselves are made by Foxconn. What use is there in building Unity for tablets if nobody will sell tablets with Unity? And if nobody does, Canonical seems the most likely candidate to do so. At this moment, both ARM, TI and Ubuntu are in Linaro. TI is really doing it's best to enable open source on their hardware, it seems. Amongst others by participating in Linaro, and because they make their new hardware available in development boards. That's why Ubuntu on ARM is mainly happening on OMAP's - as far as I can tell. So these three can form a pretty strong alliance. The only thing still needed is a Chinese manufacturer to put it all together. Ubuntu can ask Foxconn - or any other supplier - to engineer a tablet any day. Look at ARMDevices.net and you see a sheer number of tablets, well over 50 Chinese companies currently make tablets. One of them may be the next Foxconn. So - how hard can it be? Of course, Always Innovating shows it is. So one has to ask the question: Why didn't AI succeed? Probably because there's not a large company and not lots of money behind it. So it all boils down to marketing. Like research and surveys: What do customers want? How many demand does exist for Ubuntu tablets? Canonical can buy access to these kind of existing reports if they want. I think over at IdeaStorm (at Dell), you can see there's lots of demand for Ubuntu tablets. ~100 000 people asked for Dell PC's "without Windows". Those are only the users registered at Dell. After the market survey is done, one has to do some calculations - to find out if there's an interesting business case. Archos makes some profit from Linux tablets it seems, I think together with Canonical they'd make a nice team. After that, one has to choose several Chinese ODM's to build the devices. If they choose Archos, they're already done. Maybe look at Renesas chips as a backup plan, they seem far cheaper than TI chips. I think many Chinese ODM's are happy to work with Canonical. Notion Ink shows there's enough demand to test new tablets. It also showed there's a _huge_ demand for PixelQi screens; they were all sold out in no time. Because you can read them in broad daylight while with an iPad, you simply can't! I think these companies on their own indeed don't stand a chance against Apple. However, as a team, I think they will. Moreover, the small companies mentioned invented stuff Apple simply copied. Think of a standard for the tablet to stand in 'upward' position, Archos had it first. Think of screens you can read in the sun, Notion Ink had it first and now Apple is working on it. Think of the Motorola Atrix with 'clickon' phone: Always Innovating had it first. Think of the 'click on' keyboard Asus and Lenovo presented: Always Innovating had it first. Think of the AppStore: Lindows had it first. So if some investor throws some money at these companies so they can apply for patents (because 'first to invent' is still active in the US I suppose?) I think there's money to be made. Add marketing - Motorola+Verizon showed this really works at the superbowl - and you have great business opportunities. |
| TxtEdMacs Apr 26, 2011 12:35 PM EDT |
Quoting: [Canonical's] desire for control makes an in-house hardware platform the perfect next step. You are being humorous, correct? If so, let me tell you that you are treading heavily upon MY turf, both the real and astro versions. If not we have to get [serious]. Look at the travesty RIM created, which has much greater expertise, size and experience with hardware design. Just because an opportunity exists, not all players have the competence to exploit an opening. When a giant such as Samsung cannot match the pricing, the features and the performance of its supposed competitor, how is a pygmy free software firm that is at best approaching break even supposed to finance the purchase of manufacturing facilities and talent in design and in assembly? Outsourcing takes special talent and experience to succeed. Consider that oft reviled software firm that sometimes dabbles in hardware. I have seen a Zune and as a device it was not that bad. The critical factor here is MS can afford to fail. However, what matters is the expectation of the times, i.e. Zeitgeist. The latter can determine to a major extent whether a product is perceived as a winner. Looks as well as functionality play a role. Moreover, existing competing devices set the minimum standards for acceptance. If I take your statements at face value, I would assert you have lost your grasp of reality. However, I am leaning towards a combination of your pulling my chain along with a sardonic tone attached to your words indicating a major dislike for Canonical and its wares. Which is it? [/serious] YBT |
| TxtEdMacs Apr 26, 2011 1:05 PM EDT |
Hans, Sure a newcomer could throw a device together from a variety of components and it has been done. Moreover, a myriad of products have been created in such a fashion to be exhibited at major electronic shows and slated for an early release. However, so many vanished without ever hitting a store counter or display. Why? Simply because the design, function and look were foregone disasters. Like it or not, Apple sets the standard, despite selling an over priced, under performing unit. That is, at least in its initial version. Despite its, Apple's, failings its products still beat even the best of the competitors by a fair margin. Another factor, a no name competitor that is not in the vanguard will disappear without a trace once one or more of these competing devices surpasses Apple, if only in perceptions. Timing is important. When there have been so many complaints about Ubuntu being released with long standing, unrepaired flaws, a small company like Canonical will die with the reputation of being lousy doing either software or hardware right. With limited resources one must focus on what they can do best. YBT |
| JaseP Apr 26, 2011 2:25 PM EDT |
The iPad was pretty much a clone of the CrunchPad, which was already in prototype stage, looking for funding, when the iPad was being developed. If not for funding issues & the CrunchPad/JooJoo fiasco, the CrunchPad could have recreated the Asus netbook thing... Asus came out of left field with netbooks. Most put another OS on them (EEEbuntu, etc). So, I kinda disagree. |
| hkwint Apr 26, 2011 4:08 PM EDT |
Quoting:However, so many vanished without ever hitting a store counter or display. Ha, got ya, you were not using [serieus] so I know you were joking! Of course, you know there's more 'land' than the country where you live. And so do I. Over here, a mall with 7 floors of mainly Android gadgets and no single iCrappy to be found! And you know why? Because it pretty much seems those people can't afford iCrap, that's why they buy mimics! You're extremely right about outsourcing to China, it's a craft on its own which doesn't receive enough honour. I can tell from experience, because from first hand I had Chinese garbage on my desk day to day to test, and most of it didn't meet requirements. It's all about finding a Chinese manufacturer which delivers quality for a good price, and communication (for a "Western company" meaning: Offering a job to someone who really knows Chinese culture and language). Lots of Western companies though, look no further than price. But if you find one, then you're good to go. Apple found one. Dell found one. HP did. Foxconn is pretty OK. Quanta (ok, it's TW, but TW is the old Shenzen) is OK. Compal is OK. And there are more of those 'jewels' to be found in the province of Guangdong - between all the 'garbage traders'. I've seen many crappy parts come from China, with crappy quality reports attached which we couldn't trust. But I also saw a Chinese company who did a better job than the average US / German company. Moreover, there's this tale: "Who's best at compiling, a human or a compiler?" This is asking, can a human beat gcc. Most people will assume the human can't. But of course the human can; he can pre-optimize, _use_ gcc, send the right parameters to gcc, and manually optimize gcc output. Therefore, the 'human compiler' will always be equally as good or better as the compiler. The same is true for tablets: It's not fair to say somebody can't beat Apple because Samsung can't. Think of Samsung as the compiler: Any third party can use Samsung parts, or better. And they can specify at Samsung what they want, and how it's to be made. And if not, they can collect their stuff from elsewhere. Even better, that's _exactly_ what Apple does! And the only reason they're able to make better tablets. So maybe Samsung makes crablets, but if they make high quality memory, why not attach their memory to a FoxxCon mobo, TI SoC, LG display and injection moulding (case) of good quality? Basically it boils down to marketing, finding the right suppliers, Canonical can do both 'UX'es (Linux / User Experience), finding some venture capitalists ([humor]why not try Silverlakes or CPTN[/humor]?) [serious]Just ask ATIC!!![/serious], do advertizing (buy adwords, make sure whenever somebody tries to find "Android" Google displays "Ubuntu" sponsored results), find some way to distribute (open a few Canonical stores with ATIC money) and then they're good to go! So the most important part is communicating with the sheikhs and Chinese. If you get that part right, of you go. Because the sheikhs are not stupid. Why else do they invest $6 000 000 000 for a desert fab? Not to supply to Apple probably, because by the time it's ready Apple shares will have halved in price due to margin compression. You don't have to believe me, BoomBustBlog offers plenty of 'stock-technical' / 'Android vs iOS' / AT&T vs Verizon analysis (that's LOTS OF analysis!) as to why AAPL is pretty much "done", even while GS is bullish. By now I think, everyone should know, when GS is bullish, it means no matter if stocks go up or down, GS will make a profit anyway. Even if their _own_ customers who they bought their poisonous GS crap go bankrupt. So yeah, of course they're bullish on AAPL! But your obvious GS astroturfing (you suppose you're the son of Pope Blankfein - the man doing God's work on earth - don't you?) will not work here in this forum without being noticed. Not as long as your conscience - named hkwint - is around! Hah, caught you red faced in the act while you were committing your astro'ing didn't I? I propose you go turfing for MS instead. The bank, that is; not the 'also ran' software co. Or better, sell your Microsoft shares to start your own ATIC! |
| tracyanne Apr 26, 2011 6:47 PM EDT |
@bli Pioneer Computers |
| bli Apr 27, 2011 10:00 AM EDT |
@tracyanne Thanks. The most appealing one is the DreamBook ePad H10 HD and it has Honeycomb. Do you know if it is possible to put Ubuntu on it? |
| tracyanne Apr 27, 2011 10:27 AM EDT |
@bli, I would expect that it is possible to install the ARM version of Ubuntu, but wait till natty is released, as Maverick apparently doesn't do touch/tablet as well. Just drop them a line, or place a pre order with an enquiry. |
| JaseP Apr 27, 2011 10:34 AM EDT |
@ tracyanne: Which of the x86 Tablets on that site had capacitive touch-screens that can work on Ubuntu 10.04 (w/o multi-touch, obviously)??? |
| dinotrac Apr 27, 2011 10:48 AM EDT |
Hans - You forget one advantage Apple has (can be a curse, too) that others don't: They are the last of the great vertically-integrated manufacturers. They make an awful lot of what goes into those tablets, from OS to chips. |
| hkwint Apr 27, 2011 11:18 AM EDT |
bli: If I were you, I'd ask on Ubuntu ARM IRC. Those people are generally running Panda / Beagleboards or Qemu, but if there are tablets capable of running Ubuntu, I think they can tell you. It's #ubuntu-arm on freenode. Dino: Well, that's the issue: Apple _doesn't_ make chips, neither did they design them, neither do they make their hardware. They just outsource to the best companies available. If Dell hired 40 TI-engineers of which half would leave because they didn't want to work for Dell (this is what happened between Apple / Intrinsity) and made their own OS, they would be just as vertically integrated as Apple. Look at the A5: Fast14 designed by Intrinsity in cooperation with Samsung (Apple bought Intrinsity afterward), moreover Apple is 'locked in' to Samsung's foundry because of Fast14 for all that I know, ARMv7 instruction set + Cortex A9 'cpu' designed by ARM, PowerVR SGX 543 GPU designed by Imagination Technologies, and the other parts of the chip I don't know who designed it, but I'm sure it was an of the shelf design. Samsung makes them. So Apple is only the one wiring some parts together - and not in 'real life' (beacuse that's what Samsung does) but on paper. Apple may even have outsourced this job; you and I couldn't tell. As far as iPad's are concerned and I'm aware LG makes the screen, FoxConn makes the rest of the hardware. So when speaking of 'vertically integrated', one should consider such only means "more integrated than the competition". Nothing that Canonical couldn't do if they raised some investors and hired a few communicative talents. On the other hand: Does ARM work together with Apple? Not that I'm aware of. Probably behind the screen. But ARM _does_ work together with TI / Canonical to enable faster time to market for Linux operating systems. |
| hkwint Apr 27, 2011 5:41 PM EDT |
Hell, why would anybody believe me, if persons with much more authority explain it better; Look at this weeks LWN: https://lwn.net/Articles/437162/ Quoting:And we can't count on vendor people doing this work. They are all busy porting the kernel to their next SOC version so they can win the next big Android hardware design, and doing so with our kernel quality standards is already quite a struggle for them. That's almost vertical integration: SoC makers (TI, Qualcomm, BroadCom, Renesas, nVidia, Samsung, Marvell, NuFront, FreeScale - just to name a 'few') are directly testing their prototype hardware with the Linux kernel they make. They _can't_ test their new 'still hot from the waferstepper' hardware with iOS, because they can't hack the kernel. That's why they test with Linux! So I think it's fair to say Linux support of those new SoC's is ahead of iOS support, and that's why Apple can only circumvent this problem by making their own SoC's! So, if Canonical ever did a tablet, they can choose a SoC from the above list of companies and still have relative short time to market, because Linux already runs on the SoC before it's in 'mass production phase'. Apple however can't choose at all, if they take an existing SoC they're far behind the Linux-competition. Yeah, I really believe things are different these days. With new mobile ARM-hardware, Linux support comes first, and everything else (including WinPhone support) only later! Unless MS makes available source code of their Win8 kernel to TI, nVidia and other partners; those parts we simple don't know. Maybe MS again is throwing with billions to make TI / nVidia slow down Linux support and push Windows Phone, like they did with NOK. |
| JaseP Apr 27, 2011 6:17 PM EDT |
M$ cannot play this tug of war much longer. It's getting expen$ive. They are losing both relevancy & mind-share to Android very fast. And Intel is now pretty much hedging bets. They're all about giving Meego & Android support as a direct slap in M$'s face,r as well as giving M$ a few mobile chipsets as their "exclusive," to give them time to catch up (think GMA500/600 & embedded controller device activation). M$ no longer has Intel in their back pocket. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!