Right, and nearly everything on your list can be done either more efficiently or cheaper with a phone and laptop with an external monitor. We both understand that; the tablet is a luxury. That's sort of my point: you haven't replaced any devices, you merely added another one in. Not every wants (or can afford) that excess, and the tablet isn't good enough on its own.

>"Perhaps I'll open Rage HD and have one of the most immersive and physically exhausting gaming experiences possible"

That's a slight exaggeration! If you are at all serious about gaming, the iPad isn't even in the conversation. Again, it's pointing to the iPad and telling me how awesome it is at something, but then having to qualify that statement because it isn't as good/cheap/efficient for that purpose as a device I already own.

> and nearly everything on your list can be done either more efficiently or cheaper with a phone and laptop with an external monitor

He likes the rich quality of apps (Reeder the first RSS reader he likes, Day One, etc.) and he is obviously carrying it around.. A LOT. And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising, etc. I don't know about you but I would rather have a tablet than carry a laptop (even a 11 inch MacBook Air, that's super light, small, and if you only put it to sleep no boot time) all over the place. We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant. You could more efficiently (by some measures) and more cheaply do all of what he does WITHOUT ANY COMPUTING DEVICE. But is that the point?

> haven't replaced any devices... and the tablet isn't good enough on its own

Did your cellphone replace your landline? Did your computer replace your calculator?

> the tablet is a luxury

Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that. Visit the poor streets of India and you'll realize that. Anything that's beyond your basic needs is by definition luxury.

Are we having a battle of anecdotes? I have my own experience owning all of the devices. I'm not biased against my tablet, I'm telling you my experience with owning one and how I use it.

>"And notice the way he's using it, like while sipping coffee, while exercising"

I'm sipping coffee at my desktop right now. And I sip coffee with my laptop ALL the time. Exercising? Well, I think it's ridiculous you'd carry a tablet rather than a phone.

>"We are not even talking about the apps (both in terms of quality of apps and the variety) that make things much easier and pleasant."

No, we're not, because I disagree. A laptop with Windows 7 is going to make far more things "easier and pleasant" in the real world. Once again, what can your laptop do that the iPad can't? Lots. What can the tablet do that the laptop can't? Nothing. It's just easier to hold.

>"Did your cellphone replace your landline?"

Yes, it did. For me, my mother, father, sister and almost everyone I know under 30.

>"Did your computer replace your calculator?"

Uh, it most certainly did. If I need to do some basic arithmetic, I'm using Excel, or a calculator on my phone.

>"Pretty much everything in the First World is a luxury. Visit Africa and you'll realize that."

That's one hair away from Godwin's Law. Yeah, you're right. Everything I have is a luxury compared to some poor sucker in Africa. Thanks for pointing that out.

It's like you're trying to convince me that I should be using a tablet more. I own them all, and I use whatever tool is most convenient. The tablet is only ever my "go to" device in very specific cases that I've mentioned. I like it, I'm not selling it, but it's not overly useful. It wouldn't affect my productivity in any way if it disappeared tomorrow. And, to bring it full circle to the original article, it isn't because it's an Android instead of an Apple; it's because tablets just aren't that advantageous.

I agree that choosing a computing device is a First World Problem. But that's not on point. GP was saying it's a luxury in the sense that it's completely redundant for most of us who already have a laptop, phone, and workstation. In that sense you're paying $500 and up for the privilege of something that's slightly more convenient to hand than a laptop, and slightly more convenient to eye than a phone.

Yes, in fact my cell and my computer did displace the earlier technology completely.

This "big touchable surface" may be powerful enough eventually to be a new way of looking at the world. I think it needs better feedback first.

The joy of using the iPad comes exactly from the fact that it is a "single app visible at once" device. I would argue that most of the things I mentioned are actually more efficient on the iPad than as a window on a laptop/computer display. The focus a single "window" makes it a lot better for reading, browsing, pictures, video and other ways of consuming content.

Sure, you might consider the iPad as a luxury for the minority who also needs a regular computer/laptop since the iPad isn't sufficient for them - and you're right. A few hundred dollars is not much though for a "luxury device" that'll you'll use several hours a day for years.

It's obviously also way more portable than a laptop. The Macbook Air 11' is very light, but it's still double the price and almost double the weight of the iPad, which makes the iPad a better choice in my view for the bigger than smartphone device you'll take with you everywhere.

I'm not claiming that the iPad is the best game device, not at all (it's great for casual games though). The Virtual Window mode in Rage HD is incredibly immersive and exhausting since it's like virtual reality, but I never intended that sentence to sound as the iPad was the best platform for immersive games. It's not.

Perhaps you should just switch to the ratpoison window manager. :-)

http://www.nongnu.org/ratpoison/

> "everything on your list can be done either more efficiently or cheaper with a phone and laptop with an external monitor."

So why did you include "with an external monitor"? By your own reasoning the external monitor is naught but a luxury and anything done via it can be done as efficiently or more cheaply without it.

It seems that you do recognize that form factor, comfort and convenience do matter, and that even if you already have a device that's functionally equivalent, additional devices that enhance your actual day to day computing experience aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality.

You're just choosing to apply it to tablets in a way that you don't for smartphones themselves. After all, your logic suggests we could write off the smartphone itself -- or even any phone -- as a 'luxury' that presents nothing not already provided by a 3G laptop with VoIP app.

>"So why did you include "with an external monitor"?"

Because if you're sitting there with a laptop and a phone, and wondering what to buy next, buying a $150 monitor is going to be far more useful to you than a $700 tablet. But you don't need either.

>"aren't irrelevant simply because they don't add unique functionality."

I never said they were irrelevant. I own one.

The article tries to blame Android's failings in the tablet space on their lack of ability to get it together. I believe, based on personal experience, the real problem is that tablets themselves just aren't that great. Sure, the iPad is incredibly successful. However, let's not underestimate Apple's rabid fans, incredible marketing or that fact that they were the first to build a fantastically futuristic device. But it's not really providing me with anything I don't already have. That's usually what I base my consumption on.

Someone else in the thread said something along these lines: people are buying "iPads", because they are cool and there is some status tied to them. People aren't buying "tablets" because they're not very useful.

> "a $150 monitor is going to be far more useful to you than a $700 tablet"

That's going to heavily hinge on workload and day-to-day schedule. Which is the entire point: you're willing to accept 'a luxury' as useful when it fits your computing schedule, but you don't seem to recognize that anyone else might be buying a different luxury because they have a different computing schedule.

Tablets may not be that great for you. But that doesn't mean they're not that great. Your argument is blurring your absolutely legitimate personal opinion on tablets with a judgment about everyone else's opinion on them. And that's where you're wrong. Your line of thought rests on a logical fallacy. Not everyone computes like you.

And here's a test for your theory that "people are buying iPads for social status reasons": How many people?

How many tablets have to sell before you'd concede that maybe people are buying them because they find them useful?

How many people have to upgrade those iPads before you'd be convinced?

How many people have to let their PCs languish for how long, in deference to buying/upgrading tablets before you'd concede that you were wrong?

How many years do tablets have to continue to sell before you'd accept them as evidence of something other than fashion?

Is there any amount of data that will change your mind?

Or are you already reflexively rationalizing how your theory could continue to be true even if a decade from now, and billions of tablets from now, they're still going strong?

This reads more like a pardodied ad for all tablet devices than anything else, even more once you remove the plugs for your favorite apps... but boy do you sure sound like hip cool guy on the go.