iPad vs Archos 9? Which is the better Sofa PC?

I've studied the iPad. I've got an Archos 9 Win 7 tablet. I also have an iPod Touch and the Archos 5 Android tablet. Steve Jobs believes there is a market for something between the smart phone and the notebook PC, and that the iPad is that 'tween device. I think he missed the target.

I had my Touch first, and although I hoped it could do everything a netbook could do I found it just isn't capable of any work I need done. It's a great pocket game device though. The apps available make it far more useful than it is out-of-the-box. The limited screen and failure to multitask leave it not quite perfect for real work. Apple tries though. They added cut-and paste for a crude way to transfer data between apps. They made a 64gb version. I use my Touch every day, but it is no longer my Sofa PC.

Next came the Archos 5 with Android. The screen is bigger and reveals more detail. It is still pocketable. Browsing and email are better on the 5 than on the Touch. I can add a bluetooth mouse and keyboard if I need it. I can use it as a DVR to get video content directly onto it. I can access all the media content I have on my local network. I can access and display my MS Office files using Thinkfree Mobile. No editing though. No printing. No real work. The Android App store(s) are filling up with apps quickly, and so the Touch and iPad don't really have that edge anymore. The 5 has GPS, better bluetooth than the Touch, 802.11n Wifi, FM radio and FM broadcasting, and is almost as thin. It is still no workhorse PC and there is enough demand for work in my life that the Archos 5 with Android also fails as my ideal Sofa tablet.

My Archos 9 tablet arrived the first week of January, and I've been exploring it's potential ever since. Since it runs Windows 7 (Starter) I was able to download drivers for my printer and get that set up. I also verified that it's on board bluetooth supports bluetooth keyboards, mice, headphones, and file transfers. Starter Edition doesn't have complete Win 7 Touchscreen support in it, so I've ordered the Windows 7 Home Premium upgrade to replace it with. Although it is usable, the Touch interface of the 9 right out of the box is inefficient at best.

For comparison here are some common specs for the Archos 9 and the new iPad:
Archos 9,-------
----------------------
1.76 lbs
1.1Ghz Z510. *-
Windows 7.
8.9"
1024 x 600
resistive
LED backlight
10.08 x 5.28 x 0.67
HDD 60GB (1.8")
WiFi (802,11b/g)
Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
Microphone
Stereo Speakers. *
Headphone jack.
1.3mp Webcam, *
Optical trackpoint mouse,
L/R mouse buttons.
Built-in Stand, 2-positions.
USB port.
MicroSD slot.
Lotus Symphony included: Documents, Spreadsheets, Presentations.

Apple iPad
-----------------------------------
1.5 lbs. *
1Ghz A4.
iPad OS 3.2.
9.7". *
1024 x 768. *
capacitive.
LED backlight, IPS, Oleophobic
9.56" x 7.47" x 0.5"
16GB, 32GB, or 64GB flash memory.
WiFi (802,11a/b/g/n) *
Bluetooth 2.1+EDR
Microphone.
Speaker (Mono).
Headphone jack.
NO Webcam.
iWork Optional: $9.99 x 3.


Many years ago I won a TI-99/4A computer. Although I could write and run BASIC games on it, and play games that came on cartridges for it, it did not become truly useful until there was a printer it could print to. No content creation app was worth using until there was a way to get it out of the PC. It wasn't until PCs became fairly standardized and accessories would work on most that the PC really took off.

Knowing this, any sofa tablet that can't use the 3rd party output devices so common with macs and PCs is destined to be a content consumer only. The living room already has content though. There's a good chance you have a cable or satellite connection bringing video to a TV. If you've got an amp then you've got better speakers in there than any PC has, and something to play music though those speakers with. You certainly won't need a tablet PC to entertain you in there. Your X-Box or Wii on the big TV will be better for games. If you bought an HDTV in the last three months it may have it's own network access to Netflix and YouTube. If the TV doesn't your BlueRay player might.

The Internet brings both content and a destination for your own original content. The Internet is what suggests there is room for another device in the living room. If we assume a touch tablet is the best form factor of a device to use while on the sofa, then that tablet should minimally be an Internet content consumer and an Internet content creator. It should be able to output to your local printer. It should be able to access from and store content to DVDs, CDs and portable or networked hard drives. We buy things on the Internet. Printing that receipt is mandatory! Your boss emails you a document to print and fill out. Your Son emails you a photo of your new Grand-daughter. It looks great on the screen, and it would be wonderful to print out at 5x7 to frame for your desk.

So what will make a better in-between device? A new tablet that isn't as portable as your phone or an iPod Touch, or a tablet that is roughly the same size but will do the work you expect a PC to do? Sure there will be customers who don't need to print and will be happy with a web tablet that can't play any flash content on the web. My Archos 9 didn't come cheap. It started at $549 and rose to $800 with a software and hard drive upgrade. Upgrading it is something an iPad won't allow. Apple won't mind selling you a new model next year though.

Want a tablet? Think hard before buying that iPad. There will be more capable tablets in a variety of sizes this year. Even if you don't need to print often, a tablet that CAN print will be far less frustrating than one that can't when you wish it could. One ironic detail is that you could install iTunes on the Archos and sync the iPad with it. No need to sync the Archos to anything.

4D

What is a Feature Worth?

Cell Phones and MP3 players now come with many more features than required for basic functionality. You don't need a camera to make a phone call, but your cell phone probably has a camera. You don't need a calculator to listen to music, but many MP3 players include a calculator.

I'm often asked what a player is worth, and find it a very hard question to answer. Many companies add unique features to their players to make them stand out from the crowd. You can do a simple comparison between two players by just counting features. If a feature has little real worth though (like a calendar you can't add appointments to), should it be given the same weight as an amazingly useful feature (like an email client that provides access to all your email accounts)? You may also discover two players with a feature, but only one with a version that is useful. The thorough calculator on my iPod Touch is FAR more useful than the basic calc (no mem, sq.rt., percent, +/-, 1/x, etc.) that comes on many of my Korean made players. You can't score both players the same for having a calculator.

Another consideration is "worth to you". A feature that is worthless to me may be incredibly useful to you. I don't care for any of the "social" apps out there, yet there are millions of FaceBook and Twitter and Linked-In members out there. Someone must find value in them. FM radio is common on many MP3 players. Some add RDS to it. The Zune HD allows listening to HD radio (if you can find any HD broadcasts in your neighborhood). Several player let you record off of FM radio, but they vary in what format and bitrate level (quality) is used. A few players will let you assign names (station IDs) to the preset stations by adding those names in a text file stored on the device. FM radio is very useful IMO, as local news, sports, and weather are often only available via local radio. Those extra features are where measuring gets tricky though. The Radio app may also only be used 2% of the total time the player is used. Should the features and quality of the radio app be compared equally with the features and quality of the Music app that may be used 85% of the time?

I could make a spreadsheet of course, and give each application a weight and sliding usefulness scale. I could grade each device on a point scale, with higher scores being better buys for the money being asked for them. It means some $20 players might get a higher score than some $200 players. It demands that price be considered, and that features have some monetary value to them. "Worth to you" is a variable I can't predict or control. It has to be stripped from the equation. That leaves a sterile result that you'll have to add your own relative value to.

The ability to play an MP3 file might be worth a standard 20 points, with how well it sounds to me reducing that to an A, B, C, or D grade. Or I could simply multiply 20 times the Signal/Noise ratio. The S/N number does usually relate to the quality of sound produced. The Samsung P3 has an 89 dB rating. The Cowon S9 has a 95 dB rating. I also think the S9 sounds better to me. By S/N rating the Samsung would get 89% of 20 points (17.8) compared to the Cowon's 95% of 20 points (19) for music playback value. Of course each player has other music properties, and they would be factored in as well. You can see how the math might get complicated.

Do you want a more detailed analysis of a players worth, or is a subjective grade enough?

4D.