What would it take for you to buy a new tablet?

Huawei-MediaPad-M3-TabTimes-14-of-19-840x472.jpg

This sense of tablet stagnation may be at the heart of recent reports that tablet shipments for Q1, 2017 are down 8-10% year-on-year. While that isn’t a fascinating statistic in isolation, tablet sales have been in decline since a peak around 2014, and the market has now seen ten quarterly drops in a row compared to the same quarters a year previous… More at Android Authority.

I honestly cannot think of a feature that would make me buy a tablet. macOS on an iPad would still be less of a device than a MacBook or iMac, but dumbing a tablet down could work for me. Back to the old thoughts of e-paper and the ability to take handwritten notes naturally.

18 thoughts on “What would it take for you to buy a new tablet?

  1. I have used a stylus on my iPad Mini. Not great but usable. Or maybe I don’t use it enough that it matters.

    But to the question at hand, Nowadays I mainly use my iPad Mini as a book reader. Not the best maybe, but it does all the other things as well, so it’s not worth getting something dedicated. The only thing I miss at times is responsiveness. It is an iPad Mini 2 after all. I briefly considered the new iPad (ex iPad Air), but really, I can’t see justifying a new iPad unless something happens to this one.

    1. Yeah i use a mini 2 as a Kindle reader – why do you say “not the best maybe”? because of the glare relative to an e-ink thing? even with that in mind, I find the touch screen responsiveness much better than the e-ink responsiveness, not to mention I’ve come up with a color coded system for highlights (“yellow = good point / blue = quote this on my blog / orange = look this up / red = i disagree”) which wouldn’t make the jump back to e-ink.

      and by stylus I meant Apple Pencil. You’re right that regular styluses are pretty much lacking. (Of course I realize I judge a stylus much harsher than I do say an ink pen on paper… when it’s me drawing on paper, I blame the gaps on me, but when I’m trying to do it in pixels I blame the tool…)

      1. From everything I’ve heard, e-ink is better for the eyes. But I like the iPad features. I read at night with white letters on a black background and there’s no glare issue. And at this point, 95% of what I do on my iPad is reading.

        1. I notice a huge difference reading on the Kindle compared to a real screen at night. Can’t imagine using anything else now.

          1. I’m probably comparing it to the oldish crappy kindle i got, but I’d say the ipad mini 2 is generally more readable. My eyes are sharp when I have my glasses on, but it’s astigmatism, so white text on black is HORRIBLE. And also I’ve never really “felt” how much a Retina screen is relative to, say, one on a plain old Macbook Air. So maybe it’s subjective, or maybe I’m not a very good judge…

          2. That’s the thing isn’t it? Everyone’s eyes are different. And there are so many variations in devices and settings that what one person reports probably couldn’t be duplicated. It’s only when you use two devices yourself in the same situation that you develop a preference. For example, I notice a big difference between retina and non-retina screens. My eyes are less bothered by white (or off white) text against a black background. I find it easier to focus. Which is interesting because I need glasses for anything past about 6 inches from my nose and I do have some astigmatism, although the glasses are supposed to correct that.

          3. Huh! I do know that there’s a biological explanation why – on average – astigmatics tend to not like light on black (some websites that used to use it, I’d hit ctrl-a to highlight everything and make it so afterimages of lines of text wouldn’t swim in front of my eyes)

            But you’re right, horses for courses, or the other way around.

            I was half-joking that growing up with C=64 screens and the like, any resolution better than EGA or VGA seems swell to me 😀 Joking aside, given that I have good corrected vision but am still utterly indifferent to Retina — my theory is that there’s a level of processing one layer deeper than “mere seeing” that must be different. I’m a very fast reader, relying on subconscious processes to parse big swaths of text quickly, and then sending a message to “go back to that bit up there again, it was tricky!” as needed. Apparently these subconscious taskrunners of mine are pretty indifferent to pixels…

          4. Interesting. I too grew up with low res screens. No idea whether they were EGA or worse. That said, I’m a fairly slow reader, so maybe my eyes focus more on the individual letters and that makes a difference with a retina display.

          5. @Bob it certainly supports my ad-hoc hypothesis, then. (I have all sorts of those; like the correlation between A. me having a large cranium B. me only ever having very minor BO, like ever C. my head being flushed after exertion, like it was being used as a heat sink and D. the fact I have a somewhat higher % than average Neanderthal DNA )

            @Shaun so do you use the soft backlight version?

          6. @Kirk Ah, the technical term “ad-hoc hypothesis”. I tend to call it a non-random coincidence. Like when you’re in a hurry and the driver in front of you can’t find the gas pedal, or there’s a large truck.

            But back to specifics, maybe that’s why it takes me a long time to cool down. My head is a heat sink. Did you have your DNA tested? If so, what else did it show that you’d care to share?

          7. I use the Paperwhite. No idea what the rest of your comment was going on about, but he ho😊

          8. For me it is purely because a Kindle does not feel like a screen at all. I swear I get to sleep quicker because of it.

          9. “does not feel like a screen at all”. You’re sure you’re not using it as a pillow?

          10. I mean that it isn’t bright and feels comfortable. Late at night, a normal screen just feels to bright, but I have woken up with my Kindle next to me many times as I fell asleep reading.

          11. @bob yeah I did 23-and-me before they dropped the health stuff. The health stuff was mostly decent news, really, some good decreased risks in hearts and what not, and the bad news was limited to some minor skin issues. Ancestry wise, nothing too interesting – the Northwest European mutt I knew I was, 12% Ashkenazi jewish as well… I guess I’m only in the 74% for Neanderthal, I thought before it was more like 90… reaffirms some stuff I already knew, less likely to have back hair, and if I was an athlete, I’d be better at stuff like sprint and jumping than long hauls, which matched what I remember from gym class.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s