BlackBerry announces BlackBerry 10 OS, Z10 and Q10 devices, and name change

Posted on by

overview-hero.png.original

On Wednesday, Research In Motion changed its name to BlackBerry and finally unveiled its much-anticipated and completely re-worked BlackBerry 10 operating system and two new BlackBerry 10 devices. These unveilings are extremely important to the future of BlackBerry, which has lost a significant amount of value and market share to the iPhone and Android-powered devices in recent years. While BlackBerry smartphones continue to sell well abroad, I think it is not an exaggeration to say that the fate of BlackBerry as a company likely rests on the success of BlackBerry 10 and devices that run BlackBerry 10.

Here are some of the highlights of BlackBerry 10, as seen on the BlackBerry Z10 touchscreen smartphone:

Gesture-based navigation: Unlike the competition, BlackBerry 10 is completely gesture-based. This means there are no physical navigation buttons on the bottom of the screen. There are two main gestures to navigate around the display: a swipe up takes you to the home screen, and a swipe up and then swipe to the right (in one motion) brings you to the BlackBerry Hub. Reviews indicate that there is a learning curve to using BlackBerry 10′s gestures but that after some use they are intuitive. I like gesture-based navigation and the Nova Launcher I use on my Galaxy Nexus has some of that (a swipe up brings up my recent apps, for example) and I find it useful. However, one big selling point of eliminating navigation buttons on a phone is that it frees up more space on the front of the device to be able to either fit more display or make the device smaller, and from the photos I’ve seen of the BlackBerry Z10, it appears that there is about an inch of unused space between the bottom of the display and the bottom of the device. The gesture-based navigation is still convenient, but an edge-to-edge display that takes advantage of the space saved by not having navigation buttons would have been much more impressive to me. Maybe future devices will have that.

BlackBerry Hub: BlackBerry Hub is a unified inbox that displays messages from various services, including email, Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter, text messages, and BlackBerry Messenger. The user can customize which services are displayed and can also look at the messages one service at a time. BlackBerry advertises that this gives the user the ability to view and reply to messages without leaving the app they’re in by being able to swipe the BlackBerry Hub over whatever they’re doing, replying to a message, and then swiping the BlackBerry Hub away to return to the app they were in.

BlackBerry Flow and BlackBerry Peek: BlackBerry Flow and Peak are both features aimed at making multitasking easier and more effective. BlackBerry Flow allows a user can move easily from app to app using gestures without any of the apps closing, and BlackBerry Peek allows a user to move the current app over and “peak” at what’s beneath it. The example given by BlackBerry is moving a YouTube video over to see an email.

Active Frames homescreen: The homescreen on the BlackBerry Z10 is an always-changing arrangement of thumbnails of up to eight recent apps. The thumbnails appear as either minimized views of the app content or, depending on developer support, dynamic, widget-like information. For example, a weather app could be designed to appear in the Active Frames view as the current temperature with high/low and sun graphic. The order and selection of the Active Frames cannot be modified by the user. There is also an app drawer with apps and folders.

BlackBerry keyboard: The touchscreen keyboard uses Swiftkey technology to learn from a user’s typing to make more accurate predictions. A cool thing about the keyboard is that predictions hover above possible next letters. Using the example on the BlackBerry website, if you type “su” the word “sure” will appear over the “R,” “support” over the “P,” “suggestions” over the “G,” and so on. If “sure” is the word you’re looking for, you press your finger on “R” and swipe up. This is different than the stock Android keyboard found on Android 4.0+ because in Android the suggestions appear at the top of the keyboard, and therefore require more movement to access, whereas in BlackBerry, you’re already moving your finger towards that next letter and the word is right above it.

BlackBerry Messenger: BlackBerry Messenger has lost some importance with iMessage, WhatsApp, Google Talk, Facebook Messenger, and similar services, but it is still a pretty big draw and was something that many people I have spoken to over the years expressed as a big BlackBerry selling point. With BlackBerry 10, BlackBerry added support for video-calling and screen-sharing over BBM.

NFC: The BlackBerry Z10 uses NFC technology – branded “BlackBerry Tag” – to share media, contact information, add BBM contacts, and other uses.

Time Shift Camera: BlackBerry 10 implements pretty awesome camera functionality that takes multiple pictures in a very short amount of time before and after a user taps the “shutter button” (which in the BlackBerry Z10 is done by tapping the screen) and then allows elements from each picture to be combined. So if you are taking a picture of three friends, it will actually take many pictures and allow you to select the best facial expression on each friend’s face for the final picture. This is great for people who can’t keep their eyes open in a picture. The picture quality of the BlackBerry Z10 camera has not been getting rave reviews independent of this feature.

BlackBerry Balance and Documents To Go: BlackBerry began as a device used for business and while BlackBerry 10/Z10 is designed to appeal to businesspeople and regular consumers alike, BlackBerry is clearly still interested in being the go-to device in the corporate world. BlackBerry Balance gives the device separate encrypted “Work” and “Personal” modes. This means that when an employer hooks the device up to its enterprise servers, the employer has an extra layer of security around confidential business information and the employee has peace of mind that his or her employer will not have access to personal content on the phone. The hope, I would think, is that employers will require BlackBerrys and employees will not feel the need to get a second device for personal use. Another feature aimed at business use is Documents To Go, which allows editing of Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint files. Android and iOS does not feature native support for this, but each have apps available that provide this functionality.

Improved BlackBerry World with more apps and media availability.

QNX-based kernel: BlackBerry 10 is BlackBerry’s first smartphone operating system that implements the QNX microkernel, which BlackBerry acquired when it purchased the company QNX. The QNX microkernel uses a hub-and-spoke architecture to distribute system resources (picture the kernel in the center of a wheel and different system resources at the end of spokes), and this results in each component (input driver, graphics driver, network, etc.) running in a self-contained operating environment that allows other components to continue to run even when one component crashes or stops working properly. This is a contrast to current kernels where a problem with one component can affect the entire system, and the QNX microkernel is supposed to be much more stable and smooth.

* * *

In addition to the BlackBerry 10 OS, BlackBerry also unveiled the BlackBerry Z10 and the BlackBerry Q10. To me, BlackBerry 10 OS is what really stole the show, but the devices are worth mentioning because an OS is useless without a device on which to run.

BlackBerry Z10:  Specs include a 4.2” LCD touchscreen display with a 1280 x 768 resolution (356 ppi), 9 mm thick, 1.5 GHz dual-core processor, 2 GB RAM, 16 GB on-board memory, support for up to 64 GB micro SD memory card, 8 MP rear camera with 1080p video recording capabilities, 2 MP front camera with 720p video recording, 1800 mAh battery. The device has 4G LTE capabilities and will be available on all major carriers in the US. Initial reviews indicate that the Z10 is well-built and that BlackBerry 10 is surprisingly good, but also has some flaws, like poor app selection and some frustrating design elements. The general consensus seems to be that the Z10 is nice but presents no real compelling reason to switch from Android or iPhone.

BlackBerry Q10:  Although tech reporters were given BlackBerry Z10 units to use, their time with the Q10 was limited to a “controlled demo” of the device at the press event, and as a result there are fewer reviews of the Q10. The Q10 is not listed on BlackBerrys website yet and specifics on the device are pretty limited. What we know is that is has a 720 x 720 square display and a physical keyboard that is very similar to that on the BlackBerry Bold. I like that BlackBerry gives customers the option of a physical keyboard, but nowadays the vast majority of consumers seem to want touchscreen, so I hope BlackBerry doesn’t focus too much effort on devices with physical keyboards at the expense of touchscreen devices.

* * *

The big question: Will BlackBerry 10 and BlackBerry Z10 turn things around for BlackBerry?

I’m gonna take the easy way out and say I don’t know so as not to hurt my credibility if this entry is re-read in a few years. Seriously, I don’t know, but I wouldn’t bet on it. The problem facing BlackBerry is that the smartphone market is so advanced and so competitive right now, and the Z10 does looks nice, but at the end of the day the average consumer will ask “Why should I get this phone and not an Android phone or an iPhone” and there really isn’t a great answer to that questions for BlackBerry. A year or two ago things may have been different, but at this stage in the game I’m not sure if it is too little too late for BlackBerry.

There are definitely some good things about BlackBerry 10/Z10, like its corporate offerings, BlackBerry Hub, fresh, gesture-based user interface, Time Shift camera, and a consistent product resulting from BlackBerry designing the hardware and software (as a contrast from Android and Windows Phone). But there are also some real disadvantages, like poor app selection and multimedia offerings, poor maps service, and limited integration with an existing ecosystem besides social media and email (Apple, Android, and Windows Phone 8 all integrate with a variety of devices and services). When weighing the advantages and disadvantages, there is really no strong reason or must-have feature that would lure people away from iPhone and Android except for brand loyalty or corporate requirements. The wildcards to me are the demand for BlackBerry in the corporate world and the number of people who begrudgingly gave up their BlackBerrys the past few years when BlackBerry started to fall far behind and who now miss their BlackBerrys. Without any surprises, though, I don’t think BlackBerry will become a dominant force in the smartphone world the way it once was.

I hope BlackBerry does succeed, as they were the company that introduced me to smartphones and were really innovative in the smartphone world.  But the lesson to learn from this is that a successful company must continue to innovate and adapt or else a competitor will.

For more reading, check out: CrackBerry’s BlackBerry 10 and BlackBerry Z10 reviews, The Verge, BGR, Engadget and Editorial, CNET, The New York Times, and the BlackBerry website.

Also, here’s a good video walkthrough of BlackBerry 10 by Kevin at CrackBerry.com:

Amazon announces AutoRip program that gives free MP3 versions of purchased CDs

Posted on by

AutoRip_logo_rightcol_v2._V399257464_

Today Amazon announced AutoRip, a new feature that allows free instant downloads of MP3 versions of CDs purchased from Amazon, and will retroactively provide MP3 versions of CDs purchased from Amazon dating back to 1998. The MP3s files will be stored in a user’s Cloud Player and will not count against storage limits, just like MP3s purchased independent of CDs.

Although MP3s are becoming more popular than CDs, I still prefer CDs for many reasons. First, CDs have much better audio quality than MP3 files and I like having a high quality version of my music from which to rip MP3s in case the current bitrate available for purchase (256 or 320 kbps) is someday made obselete. For all we know, the MP3 format could someday even become obsolete. So having a physical CD will allow me to re-rip my music at a higher bitrate or a different format if trends change. Second, there are some questions regarding the extent of our ownership of downloaded MP3 files, most of which are used pursuant to a license and are not actually owned. This issue came to the forefront a few months ago when it was erroneously reported that Bruce Willis planned to challenge Apple on the issue of whether he can transfer his digital music collection by will after he dies. So I like having a CD that is mine without any fine print or conditions. Finally, I see a CD as a collector’s item, and I like having the album artwork and booklet, and it is fun to open a new CD and look around or look through old CDs. For the MP3 albums I have purchased on a whim and grow to like, I generally end up missing that tangible CD and album booklet.

This isn’t to say that buying MP3s instead of CDs doesn’t have advantages. I like being able to instantly download an MP3 rather than have to go to a store and buy a CD or order one online, then rip the CD to MP3 when I get home, and then get it onto my playback device of choice. And MP3s albums can often be found on sale for $5 or less, which is a difficult price point for CDs to compete with. Finally, MP3 stores allow us to buy a song or two off an album without buying the whole album.

So, this is all a long-winded way of saying that I like the new AutoRip feature because it lets customers who like having physical CDs continue to get those physical CDs without sacrificing the immediate gratification that comes with purchasing MP3s, and it may encourage people who normally just purchase MP3s to spend a few extra dollars and get the CDs too. And Amazon is in a unique position as a seller of both physical and digital goods to offer this feature, so I think it is a good business move.

For more info, here’s Amazon’s Press Release.

Judge denies Apple’s motion to ban infringing Samsung products and denies Samsung’s juror misconduct motion

Posted on by

Apple vs Samsung

Yesterday the first two decisions after the December 6 Apple v. Samsung hearing were handed down, and I’m sure the decisions have left each party unhappy for different reasons.

Denial of Apple’s motion seeking sales ban:

Judge Koh’s decision hinged on the lack of a “causal nexus” between the infringement and the harm suffered by Apple.  In the case of smartphones, which utilize literally thousands of patented technologies, Apple must demonstrate that it lost sales directly due to the 6 infringed patents in order to obtain an injunction:

First and most importantly, Apple has not been able to link the harms it has suffered to Samsung’s infringement of any of Apple’s six utility and design patents that the jury found infringed by Samsung products in this case. The fact that Apple may have lost customers and downstream sales to Samsung is not enough to justify an injunction. Apple must have lost these sales because Samsung infringed Apple’s patents. Apple has simply not been able to make this showing. Though this is a case where the “plaintiff practices its invention and is a direct market competitor,” [citation omitted] it is not a case where the
patented inventions are central to the infringing product. Without the required causal nexus, the parties’ status as direct competitors simply does not justify an injunction.

The large number of patented technologies that make up a smartphone compared with the small number of infringed patents owned by Apple was significant to Judge Koh:

The phones at issue in this case contain a broad range of features, only a small fraction of which are covered by Apple’s patents. Though Apple does have some interest in retaining certain features as exclusive to Apple, it does not follow that entire products must be forever banned from the market because they incorporate, among their myriad features, a few narrow protected functions. Especially given the lack of causal nexus, the fact that none of the patented features is core to the functionality of the accused products makes an injunction particularly inappropriate here.

Judge Koh also noted that Apple’s previous agreements to license its patented technologies (including with HTC as well as negotiations with Samsung) demonstrates that Apple’s patented technologies are not priceless, which weighs against an injunction.

There is no doubt that this decision does not sit well with Apple. While many of the Samsung devices that are the subject of this lawsuit are no longer on the market and are certainly not driving Samsung’s current sales, I’m sure Apple does not want to allow this kind of reasoning to stand because it will make it more difficult for Apple to obtain injunctions against Samsung or other competitors in the future. For this reason, I’d say an appeal is a near certainty.

I see both sides of the coin here. On the one hand, user experience is an important factor in smartphone sales, and there are many elements that users don’t even realize exist that combine to make a better user experience. Features like the way pages scroll and the visual effect you see when an app opens and closes go unnoticed by many, but does that mean that these features can be stolen from their inventors with the consequence of only monetary damages from a company rolling in money simply because it is impossible to pinpoint those features as driving sales?  This will, Apple will argue, give a license to steal any feature that doesn’t make up the core functionality of a smartphone.

On the other hand, there can be half a million patented technologies in a single smartphone, and if sales were allowed to be halted due to just a few infringed patents there would be even more patent litigation and it would slow down technological innovation – the very thing patent law is in place to foster – because smartphone manufacturers would fear that the inclusion of a technology that comes too close to a patented technology could have a disastrous effect on their business (as sales bans in the fast-moving smartphone world basically render the banned device worthless).

At the end of the day, Samsung turned itself into a smartphone powerhouse and the billion dollar jury verdict (if upheld) was really worth it to get its foot in the door. It seems unjust when said like that, but Apple isn’t exactly a sympathetic party either.

Worth noting is that Judge Koh’s decision denying the injunction did not speak to the jury findings, though reading between the lines it is almost a sure thing she will not completely throw away the jury verdict after issuing this decision.

* * *

Denial of Samsung’s juror misconduct motion:

After the verdict was reached, Samsung moved to throw away the verdict based on an alleged bias of the jury foreman and on that same foreman bringing extraneous evidence into jury deliberations. In short, Samsung alleged that the foreman, Velvin Hogan, intentionally omitted a lawsuit involving him and Seagate Technology, his former employer, when asked about prior lawsuits. Seagate was his former employer and had given Mr. Hogan a loan which Mr. Hogan did not repay after being terminated, and when Seagate sued Mr. Hogan, Mr. Hogan filed for bankruptcy  The significance of this is that Samsung now is the largest shareholder of Seagate with a 10% share. Samsung also claimed that Mr. Hogan’s post-verdict interviews demonstrated a desire to be on the jury (which Samsung claimed coupled with his Seagate omission proved bias) and also demonstrated that he gave the jury improper instructions based on his own understanding of patent law as opposed to what they were told by the court.

Judge Koh found that Samsung failed to exercise reasonable diligence in researching Mr. Hogan and thus lost its right to challenge his impartiality. Judge Koh opined that Samsung knew of the bankruptcy proceeding and knew of Mr. Hogan’s past employment with Seagate, and if it had timely requested the bankruptcy file, as it did after the verdict, or questioned Mr. Hogan on his relationship with Seagate, it would have discovered the prior lawsuit. Since Samsung did not properly research Mr. Hogan prior to the trial, it cannot claim impartiality after the trial.

Judge Koh also held that Mr. Hogan’s statements in post-verdict press interviews are inadmissible under Rule 606(b), which prohibits a juror from being able to impeach is or her verdict. The judge found that while jurors may not bring their personal knowledge of the parties or the specific issues presented into deliberations, they can bring in their general knowledge and life experience, which is what Mr. Hogan did. In denying Samsung’s request even for an evidentiary hearing to further address these issues, Judge Koh found that Samsung did not properly show that the verdict would have been different had the alleged misconduct not occurred.

Worth noting is how much deference Judge Koh gave to Mr. Hogan’s statements that he is unbiased and fair.

I am not surprised that Judge Koh did not toss the verdict based on Mr. Hogan’s interviews, as courts are very reluctant to second-guess a jury’s thought process. I am slightly surprised that Judge Koh did not seem more bothered that Mr. Hogan failed to disclose his Seagate litigation. She is 100% correct in saying that Samsung should have done more research into Mr. Hogan’s past, but that doesn’t completely negate the fact that Mr. Hogan omitted elements of his past in voir dire. Any party can (and should) do independent research into prospective jurors to find out potential biases, but requiring Samsung to do so makes the voir dire process designed to elicit those biases seem hollow.  I also find it to be a circular argument to respond to Samsung’s claims that Mr. Hogan is essentially a liar with Mr. Hogan’s statements that he will be honest. But I do understand how gutsy it would have been of Judge Koh to toss the verdict and order a retrial, which would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to the parties, not to mention possibly billions of dollars if a different verdict is reached, and her reluctance to do so. I also understand not wanting a party to get away with turning a blind eye to a potential bias and then raising it when the verdict doesn’t go the way they want, so I really can’t say I disagree with Judge Koh’s reasoning.  I do think Judge Koh should be more mad at Mr. Hogan, but I guess, unlike me, a judge has to pick a side and I don’t blame her for picking the side she did.

The real thing I take away from her decision is that civilians like Mr. Hogan and the other jurors, whose reasoning in the jury room will clearly not be questioned, should not be responsible for applying extremely complex patent law principles. Patents are highly technical documents, and attorneys drafting them are required to have technical backgrounds. Patent examiners who determine whether to grant a patent are also required to have technical backgrounds. Engineers who invent the software that is the subject of this lawsuit all have technical backgrounds.  Ditto for other kinds of inventors. So why, after all that work performed by experts, do we leave evaluating whether a patent is valid and infringed upon to civilians, many of whom have little to no technical expertise whatsoever, and then require such a high standard in reversing their decisions? It seems like a weak link in the process that has great consequences and could be avoided. I’m all for a jury in determining whether a murder suspect’s alibi is convincing or whether parties intended to form a contract, but with patent law it seems like these important decisions would be left up to trained individuals.

Google Maps is available on iPhone

Posted on by

Today Google’s new Google Maps app for iOS went live in the App Store and features spoken turn-by-turn navigation directions and transit directions, though it is still missing offline functionality found in its Android counterpart. There has been a lot of speculation in the past year over what caused Apple to ditch Google Maps for its native mapping software, and most stories I have read center around turn-by-turn navigation and which party was responsible for its absence. Either way, turn-by-turn navigation is almost a necessary feature at this stage, so I’m glad to see it included in Google Maps.

If I were Apple I’d have mixed feelings on the release of this app – Apple’s Maps app got the company a lot of bad press and even forced Apple to apologize, so on the one hand Apple must be somewhat relieved that its customers now have a solid Maps app and can stop complaining, but at the same time Apple’s Maps would have improved over time, and now with fewer customers using Apple’s Maps, this will be a more difficult task. Personally I think Apple got too much of a late start and is not presently equipped to make a Maps app comparable to that of Google. If that’s the case then I think it is good for Apple that iPhone users will be able to use Google Maps so that in the Android vs. Apple debate that many smartphone buyers go through, the Maps issue will not be a “plus” for Android. And it’s good for Google because it can continue to improve its Maps with more user data and feedback, and it’s good for iPhone users because they will have access to an excellent Maps app. I’m interested in reading more reviews of Google Maps for iPhone, but so far the app sounds pretty good.

Worth noting also is that Google is releasing a Google Maps SDK so that app developers can incorporate Google Maps into their iOS apps.

Wall Street Journal reports that Apple is working on a TV, again.

Posted on by

This is far from a new story, as there have been rumors that Apple was working to manufacture a TV for some time now, but the Wall Street Journal does have a lot of credibility so its new report (subscription required) that Apple is testing designs in a Sharp facility in Japan is worth noting. To add to the mounting evidence that Apple is interested in entering the TV market was a recent interview in which CEO Tim Cook said “When I go into my living room and turn on the TV, I feel like I have gone backwards in time by 20 to 30 years. It’s an area of intense interest. I can’t say more than that.” So I think it is safe to say that Apple wants to make a TV; whether it actually will is another story.

The way we get TV programming is very different than how we get all of our other media content – TV programming comes packaged in channels and for the most part is on a fixed schedule, while so much of the other media we consume comes a la carte and on our own schedule – and it really could use a revamp. From everything that I have read, Apple’s TV will focus on making TV programming more like all the other media we consume, and will use the internet rather than the cable infrastructure. But despite Apple’s good intentions, there are some significant barriers in the way of converting the TV industry.

For starters, the packaged deals offered by cable and satellite companies that pay content providers a set amount of money per subscriber regardless of what the subscriber watches benefit both the popular and less popular channels. So ESPN, which gets one of the highest payment per-customer, gets a lot of money just based on the sheer number of cable and satellite subscribers. And a lesser-watched channel, like the Game Show Network, also gets revenue based on a large number of subscribers, and would likely get far less revenue if consumers had a choice whether to pay for it or not. This provides an incentive for the content providers to stick with the current cable scheme.

Another issue is that many households get their internet access through their cable provider, so if the cable provider does not support changing the status quo then it can implement a tiered data plan that will make it cost-prohibitive to stream content.

Finally, flipping around channels is a natural way that a lot of people watch TV, and there will be some people who want to continue to do that. Add to that people who are not tech-savvy or who cannot afford to buy a premium TV set (assuming Apple prices its TV at a similar premium it charges for its other products), and there is a big chunk of customers that will continue to pay for bundled programming. That will take away from Apple’s leverage in changing the system.

Still, if history shows anything it’s that the way people do things changes and that if a better way is developed people will get on board, and I hope Apple can figure out some way to make the way we watch TV more current. There’s no question that Apple could design a nice TV; the question is whether they can change the entire interface and the way that we receive content, and get content providers to buy into that change. I think if any company can do it, Apple can.

For more on this topic check out The Verge and Gizmodo.

Today parties will argue to uphold/overturn $1 billion verdict in Apple v. Samsung

Posted on by

Today is a big day for the United States edition of Apple v. Samsung, as the parties will go before Judge Koh and argue various motions to uphold/overturn and increase/decrease the value of the $1 billion jury verdict rendered back in August.  Regardless of what happens, I would say it’s a safe bet that the decision will be appealed.  Still, the lower court’s decision is very important because it will frame the appeal.  The hearing is scheduled for 4:30 EST.

I am very busy with a project this week into next and am going away this weekend so I unfortunately will be unable to write the post that the hearing and decision (which most likely won’t be rendered today) deserve, or at least not in a timely fashion, but I will keep the Twitter feed updated and drop a few links that are worth reading below as the day goes on.

Pre-hearing stories: Huffington Post (AP), BBC News.

UPDATE:  The parties are in the courtroom and the proceedings have begun.  The Verge is live-blogging it.

UPDATE:  It looks like the majority of the hearing was spent arguing over the damages amounts and whether the jury’s damages calculations can be questioned.  The parties didn’t spend much time discussing the alleged misconduct by the jury foreperson, though that and all other issues in this case were briefed to the judge before the hearing so decisions will be issued on all issues regardless of whether they were addressed at the hearing.  Judge Koh said she “will try to get these orders out as quickly as [she] can.”  For more, check out The New York Times and The Verge.

Large Tablet Buyer’s Guide, 2012 Holiday Season

Posted on by

The tablet space once dominated by Apple’s iPad has exploded in the past year to 18 months, and now many tablets are selling well. Here are some of the more notable tablets in the large display (~10 inches) tablet market.


Apple iPad, 4th Generation:
Highlights: 9.7″ 2048 x 1536 display (264 ppi); 1.2 MP front-facing camera; 5 MP rear-facing camera; dual-core A6x CPU with quad-core GPU; weighs 652-662 grams; 16, 32, and 64 GB storage options; WiFi and WiFi with LTE options; priced from $500-830.
Pros: Beautiful display; excellent build quality; access to the industry-leading iTunes and App Stores, with many apps designed for the larger tablet display; AirPlay mirroring to Apple TV; good integration with other iOs devices and iTunes; good update support from Apple.
Cons: Expensive; choices and options, such as what browser to make the default browser, are limited by Apple, sub-standard Maps software, Apple’s cloud music storage, iTunes Match, costs $25 a year, new Lightning Dock connector will not work with earlier iPhone, iPad, and iPod docks.
Bottom Line: Despite the talk of Apple perhaps losing some of its mojo with the iPhone 5 and iPad Mini, the new iPad is still the standard-setter in the large tablet space, and for good reason. If you are invested in the Apple ecosystem and have music in iTunes and/or another iOS device, and you plan to stick with Apple moving forward, then this iPad is a no-brainer. Similar for older, non-tech savvy users and young users, as the iPad interface is very intuitive and easy to use. Finally, not all tablets have LTE connectivity, so if that is important then the new iPad is a good choice. If you’re not invested in Apple products, are looking to have more options with your device, or like to root and customize your device, then I think there are other good large tablets on the market for a lower price.

* * *


Google/Samsung Nexus 10:
Highlights: 10.055″ display with 2560 x 1600 resolution (300 ppi); 1.9 MP front-facing camera; 5 MP rear-facing camera; dual-core A15 CPU and quad-core Mali T604 GPU; 2 GB RAM, weighs 603 grams; 16 and 32 GB storage options; WiFi only; priced at $399 and $499.
Pros: Beautiful display with best-in-class pixel density; excellent integration with Google services; stereo front-facing speakers; NFC; micro-USB and micro-HDMI connectivity; as a Nexus device it will receive timely updates from Google; good developer options.
Cons: The Google Play Store’s selection of movies, TV shows, and tablet-optimized apps is improving but still limited; integration with non-Google services is not as natural as with other devices.
Bottom Line: If you want a “pure Google” experience and a large display then this is a great choice. Unlike other Android-based tablets, the Nexus 10 will receive updates directly from Google, often six months earlier than other Android tablets receive updates, and I think that counts for a lot. Also, if you’re into rooting your tablet so that you can modify features or install entirely new operating systems on it, then this tablet is a good choice. For its support from Google and excellent display, I would rank this tablet just below the iPad, with its greatest shortcoming being more limited content and fewer tablet-optimized apps.

* * *


Kindle Fire HD 8.9″:
Highlights: 8.9″ 1920 x 1200 display (254 ppi); front-facing “HD camera”; 1.5 GHz OMAP4470 dual-core processor; weighs 567 grams; WiFi only version comes with 16 and 32 GB options; WiFi with LTE version comes with 32 and 64 GB options; priced from $300 to $614.
Pros: Beautiful display; stereo speakers; Dolby audio; access to an expansive library of movies, music, TV shows, magazines, and books; free unlimited cloud storage for Amazon content; option to subscribe to Amazon Prime and have unlimited content streaming; Amazon claims fastest WiFi of any tablet.
Cons: The Fire HD 8.9″ is powered by a “forked” version of Android, which is a heavily modified Android-based operating system that is incompatible with the the Google Play Store and many apps found there. As such, it only has access to the Amazon App Store, which has a much more limited selection of apps than the Google Play Store. One could turn to the Android developer community for a fix, but that can be very involved.
Bottom Line: The Kindle Fire HD 8.9″ is a great tablet for media consumption, so for the traveler who wants to be able to watch movies and shows on a plane and occasionally use basic apps, the Fire HD 8.9″ is a good combination of display, content, and price. But for a more well-rounded tablet, there are better options out there.

* * *


Microsoft Surface with Windows RT:
Highlights: 10.6″ 1366 x 768 display (148 ppi); 720p front and rear-facing cameras; quad-core NVIDIA Tegra 3 CPU; weighs 680 grams; 32 and 64 GB options; WiFi only; priced from $500.
Pros: Integration with Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8; innovative tiled user interface that allows for a lot of personalization; Microsoft Office and the attachable Smart Touch cover/keyboard allow the Surface to be used for school and business moreso than the competition; USB, microSDXC and HD video out ports allow for greater connectivity; integrated kickstand; Internet Explorer (which is now receiving very positive reviews).
Cons: Unimpressive display resolution; expensive; Microsoft is new to the tablet space and is not very established in the smartphone space, so being an early adopter runs the risk of the platform not receiving developer support needed to meet its potential.
The Bottom Line: The new tiled interface on Windows RT and Windows Phone 8 is really exciting and is receiving rave reviews for its customization and for thinking outside the box. While these products are relatively new, Microsoft has been working for some time on having a complete, integrated product line on launch, so I think the growing pains will be manageable. For someone who likes to be in front of the masses and who is willing to pay $500 for a tablet and another $100 for the Smart Touch cover, this is a great tablet. It’s also a great choice for someone who uses Microsoft Office a lot, or someone who wants a tablet that can also perform many of the tasks normally reserved for laptops. However, the Surface may not be the best fit for someone who mostly wants a tablet to read news, play games, watch movies, and use social media.

* * *

Honorable mentions: Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 10.1, the stylus-equipped Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1, the less expensive and slightly outdated Apple iPad 2, and the ultra-affordable Barnes & Noble Nook HD+.

Happy Thanksgiving to my American readers!!