Well, I bought my wife a Playbook, returning the favor as she bought me my iPad. While I haven't had too much opportunity to look it over, I was impressed with the obvious build quality, onboard speakers and display. The cameras might be much higher resolution than the iPad, but for some reason, video recording is inferior. I was impressed with the fact that the bezel is part of the working hardware of the machine, while being very unimpressed with the general lack of software.

I found it easy to load music on there, but had to resort to the Internet in order to download and install Blackberry Bridge, hardly an intuitive process, and what the hell RIM were thinking of shipping it without an email client I can't begin to guess.

My wife loves it. I have a colleague who has had one since day 1. He is equally impressed. I like my iPad, and use it alongside my iPhone. Horses for courses, I think. Hardware doesn't cut it alone, but then, neither does software.

The Playbook is only appealing to the limited number of people who are locked into the RIM system. There is nothing wrong with it, but then there is nothing wrong with the Kindle Fire. It is all a matter of individual needs. Despite all the attempts to create drama about a few non-issues with the new iPad, it has an amazing impact on customers. A poll of new owners after almost two weeks of ownership, show 82% - Very Satisfied, 16% - Somewhat Satisfied, 2% - Somewhat Dissatisfied, and 0% - Very dissatisfied. Considering that these numbers are better than those for the oringinal iPad and iPad 2, says that Apple has done a good job of appealing to the consumers.

Hardware is important to the success of any electronics, but Apple blends the software and hardware to maximize efficiency. That means it can get more out of a smaller processor, thus consumming less power. People do not buy technical specifications, they buy good user experiences. An example is Android 4.0, Ice Cream Sandwich. supposedly the latest and greatest Android OS. Sony has come out recommending against upgrading to this version due to the experiences other devices have with it. Tests shoes that it uses 20-30 Mb more in web browsers than does Gingerbread. Reading and writing operations to the data base can slow things down so much as to create stability and speed concerns. It also uses about 17% more power in standby mode, which can mean greatly reduced operation time. You can have a 4-core, 2Ghz processor, but if Apple can deliver a better experience with a 2-core, 1 Ghz processor, nobody will want the 2 Ghz processor.

There have already been numerous complaints about the playbook crashing every time you try to load parallel apps from the android market. Even with android market available there are far fewer tablet specific apps for android compared to IOS. Also, interesting that RIM claims to be the king of email and calendar for business, yet both were just recently introduced into the playbook in February. Plus, lack of support from developers is a huge turn off for RIM, no HULU, and no NETFLIX. The biggest issue I see with any RIM product now is that they have dug themselves into such a huge hole they will not recover. RIM will be gone in a few years. They simply got lazy and lost control of the market they had dominated for years.

Quote
Yes, the iPad does have a better screen resolution and a larger display (I did indeed say that)
No, those aren't meaningless specs when comparing because of the os (if it's so easy to upgrade the cpu why doesn't apple have an i7)
Because, yes there is quite a large app market now with the availability to use the android app market on the playbook unquote

I am confused what does i7 have to do with a play book or iPad. And yes Apple has had i7 intel processors from the beginning and released them prior to windows......Just go to www.apple.com

One more thing....about playbook supports flash... Yes the original model yes however Adobe is no longer developing flash for ANY mobile platform which includes RIM, Android etc etc so what you have. Is not upgradable by Adobe please read.......

http://www.ipadforums.net/apple-ipad-news/53105-adobe-kills-flash-android-other-mobile-devices.html

It can only be hoped that when Microsoft release Windows 8 tablets they are as thoroughly tested as Apple products are. Microsoft will have an uphill battle when they weigh into an already established market.

The numbers speak for themselves already. 80+% of iPad buyers are totally satisfied with their purchase. While it's true that there have been problems with the new iPad, forums such as this one are the place to go in order to find those problems. Stands to reason really, as people who are totally satisfied with their purchase are not looking for any help, and probably don't know, or care, that we exist.

What makes them worth twice as much? Future-proofing. Just about all computer systems are obsolete before you have the box open. iPads are not like that. We have users of the original iPad who still find them useful. There is little or no evidence that Apple are ignoring their earlier products. They are also, for the most part, usable straight out of the box, with little knowledge required to get them running.

The iPad is a consumer device. It works out of the box, it does what the manufacturer claims and it is good enough to do everything reasonably well. The onboard sound will not fill a room, but you can play music. You want hi-fi? Go buy a hi-fi system. You want home cinema? Same applies. The iPad will do it, but dedicated equipment will do it a hell of a lot better.

When CD supplanted the vinyl disc as a storage/playback medium for music it did not do it because it was a superior format. There are still people who claim that vinyl offers a far superior sound than CD. The point was that CD made things more convenient, and convenience is the key to mass marketing.

The Playbook was touted by RIM as a business tool that was somehow removed from the great unwashed, who could go and play with their toys, while the grown-ups used their Playbooks for "serious" purposes. That attitude has backfired on them. People want email, Skype, Angry Birds and Dragonvale. This time next year, I HOPE my wife's Playbook is still useful, and will use ALL Android software. i KNOW my iPad will still do what I want it to, with full support from Apple. That is the difference.

The iPad was built as part of a system that is over ten years in development. The iPod was no different than any other MP3 players until they introduced iTunes. Now iPod is the MP3 market. Next, Apple introduced the iPhone, which created public interest in smartphone, and introduced us to the app store concept. It is true that there are more Android smart phones on the market, but it is also true that 75% of the cell phone profits belong to Apple. It is also a fact that the iPhone is the most popular phone by far. Android is only ahead by the shear numbers of models available. The iPad is by far the number one tablet, because iTunes and the app store were already in place. In addition, when a tablet, smart phone, MP3 player or whatever, are built by the same people that make the OS, it is a lot easier to coordinate. Apple make iOS as a series of progression, not standalone units. And they work hand in hand with the hardware teams to maximize functionality. Google adds features and functions to the Android OS, but it is left to the manufacturers to make it work with their hardware. It is like the old days of car manufacturing. Many cars were built as frames and drive trains. The unit was then sent to a carriage builder who would put a body on it. Some great designs came out this way, but also some major failures. Henry Ford made cars affordable by consolidating manufacturing to a few designs that were built on an assembly line.

Google has a chance to compete, but not the way they are going. They have to work with their manufacturer associates and come up with a good basic OS. Then use the same basic program for future generations with a steady pattern of upgrades. Device makers should have as much input as possible so that they can have devices ready for all upcoming versions of the OS. Google has to limit the amount of customization by vendors, and set a hard and fast set of guidelines for minimum requirements of devices. They should also work a deal with Amazon to become the official app store of Android with improvements in how they are handled.

Microsoft should have a good product coming out, but I think it will fail with tablets. Like Apple, they will have two OSs, a mobile OS and a desktop OS. The problem is they chose to make the desktop OS work for the tablets. Desktop OSs are usually power hogs and it is doubtful that it will suit the tablet market. They are also going with a single interface over all devices. Touch screens and keyboard devices are not yet to the point where they can work well in both formats.