Moto rolls out Xoom 2 Android fondleslabs
Little and large tablets to swallow
Motorola officially announced its fondleslab followups today, launching the anticipated Xoom 2 and a smaller sibling, the Xoom 2 Media Edition.
The Motorola Xoom 2 boasts a 10.1in display made from super-tough Corning Gorilla glass. It sports a 1.2GHz dual-core Texas Instruments OMAP 4430 processor running Android 3.2 Honeycomb and comes with 1GB Ram and 16GB storage, as well as 5Mp rear-facing and 1.3Mp front-facing cameras.
The Wi-Fi only device is a 100g lighter than its predecessor at 599g, with a brighter display and a "more comfortable" design thanks to specially flattened edges.
The smaller 8.2in - the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition - packs the same specifications under the hood, apart from a smaller battery, but weighs even less at 386g. The display, also made from rugged Gorilla glass, has been optimised for wide 178-degrees viewing angles.
Both rock up with the company's latest media-streaming feature, MotoCast, as well as easy access to Google's Mobile services.
The Motorola Xoom 2 and Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition will touch down in Blighty mid-Novemeber, priced at £330 for the 8.2in model and £380 for the ten-incher. ®
COMMENTS
Price
When are these Android tablet makers going to learn that their devices need to be cheaper than the iPad2? If the smaller xoom2 is going to cost £344, I shudder to think what the full size one will cost.
They're making it very easy for Apple aren't they?
Happy Xoom owner...
I have a Xoom, bought it last April just after release. It is a very functional device which is a pleasure to use and something I can write apps for without having to purchase another computer (Mac) on which to do the development work.
Honeycomb works well and unlike iOS every app on the device is not always on your table-top (you read the term here first), which leaves a nice uncluttered display with only the most frequently used application icons always visible. Less clutter = more focus.
Do I like Apple products? Yes, they are beautifully designed and well executed pieces. Would I purchase an Apple product? No. I disagree with their need for me to sign up to their online service (iTunes) and agree to a rather draconian 60+ page licence to do so. I disagree with their "we own and control the product you bought" attitude, and so I will never own an Apple from this era, but I do like them.
@Sean Baggaley 1; what was that line that Mr. Jobs was so fond of? Oh yes... "good artists copy, great artists steal". I think Android is as much a rip-off of iOS in the same way that the original Mac OS was a rip off of the Xerox Alto. There are subtle differences in the UI and major differences under the hood.
WHOOOSH!
That was the sound of Apple's point whizzing so far over your head, you'd have needed the Hubble Space Telescope to see it.
Apple take a *holistic* approach to product design. It's not *just* about the sodding tin and plastic, but about the bits and bytes too. Laypeople have never been able to tell what is "hardware" and what is "software". Nor, frankly, should they have to. I have no real clue exactly how the gearbox in my car works, but I'm more than capable of using one. Car mechanics look down upon me for *my* ignorance about cars, much as most of you would look down upon them for *their* ignorance about matters relating to IT.
The problem Apple have with Samsung's Tab is a perfect illustration: it's not just about the physical hardware, but about the *combination* of that hardware with such a blatant rip-off of iOS. Not even *Samsung's own lawyer* could spot the difference between an iPad and his client's product.
So, no, Motorola didn't *have* to make their device with weird-shaped corners. Their lawyers may have suggested it, but most major consumer electronics manufacturers know all about developing a company-wide design "language" that makes their products stand out.
Here's a clue to Samsung, Motorola, and their ilk: you can use colour and texture to differentiate your tablet devices. Tablets do NOT have to be black and silver.
THAT is Apple's point. Nobody's even TRYING to innovate; they're just being fucking lazy. Until these corporations start raising their game and actually *competing*, instead of copying, they deserve everything they get.
To be honest, I'm beginning to suspect that Apple's next major competitor will be a completely left-field entity. After all, nobody expect Apple to sucker-punch Nokia when the latter were at the top of their game in 2007. (Microsoft might be in with a chance too, if they can pull off their Windows 8 + Windows Phone 7 plans.)
edge issue
Of course the edges are bevelled to avoid the iPad simile, but that is not all.
First requirement is, as you correctly guess, the look; it has to be sure to show that you have an inferior* product.
Secondly the price; people with enough self confidence to not be put off a product by post-preadolescent peer pressure must not have the advantage of getting a similar product for a lower price. The price has to be close enough to consider the right** product.
Thirdly the technical ability. A product must clearly lack essential*** technical specifications to make the potential buyer rectify his or her mistake and instead buy the product that offers them.
If a tablet or phone fails on any of these requirements, the distribution of the product needs to be stopped. The reason given to the court does not need to be a valid one; appearance, for example can be adjusted by software to make a clearly different looking product sufficiently similar to justify an injunction. Similar strategies can be applied to any potential breach of intellectual property. The aim is not necessarily to stop the product from being made; it just needs to be delayed until the non-compliant manufacturer looses interest in the market.
Easy, innit?
* that is, not an Apple product.
** read that as: an Apple product.
*** means something an Apple product has.
My bad, since the article doesn't show on the same page as the comment box, and I didn't fancy multiple windows, I decided to go from memory.
The point still stands though, Honeycomb has been a complete balls up in terms of an OS, very little tablet specific support, so no clear price incentive (£20? Wow) isn't going to drive customers away from the iPad.
