Yes, but now netbooks exist. I got mine for $279 and I can comfortably run Visual Studio on it. This device is significantly less powerful, not particularly more portable, and costs more. For the right price, I'd buy one -- this is not the right price.
So you're saying that single convenience is worth purchasing a significantly less powerful device for significantly more money? For what I can do standing on the metro, I have a smartphone and it still does more and is cheaper than this device.
I'm guessing that your smartphone probably comes cheap but locks you into an expensive service contract. Not that this obviates your point, but it modifies it. For that matter, the iPhone was very expensive at launch compared to now; I thought that would kill it straight out of the gate, and boy was I wrong. Similarly, I doubt your smartphone has such a large screen - perhaps an advantage when you're on the move (this tablet won't fit in your pocket) but more desirable when sitting down.
I'm a little perplexed at how this device seems to generate such strong opinions and armchair quarterbacking. It seems to me that there is a lot of pent-up demand for a decent-sized tablet but people have been disappointed so many times they're a bit paranoid about it.
My smartphone contract isn't ridiculously expensive -- and lets face it, if you've got an Internet tablet you're still going to need that service contract to get connectivity.
The small screen is an advantage when on the move. The small footprint as well -- it's pretty hard to even remove a large device from your bag while standing on transit. If I can sit, I can use my netbook.
I work an web startup that provides business software for users who are typically not at their desks. An affordable tablet would be a huge boon for us -- we could distribute them to our users (or just recommend them) and they would love it. But at this price it won't work for us. I fully expect that Chrome OS is built entirely for this market and we'll see a lot of tablets from netbook manufacturers next year.
My Archos may be much less relevant when the Xperia X10 comes out (which I plan to get) but until then I have a dumb phone and want something to do on my 40 min ride to work. The Archos right now is my only good option.
Even when the X10 comes out, depending on the screen, I may keep using the Archos anyway. The screen size is nice enough to watch a tv show and the resolution is great. The cell phone screen may be too small.
> So you're saying that single convenience is worth purchasing a significantly less powerful device for significantly more money?
Yes. Especially when the more powerful, cheaper device is really bad at whatever this single convenience is, whereas the new product is very good at it, and the single convenience is important to the user.
The Kindle has unique attributes, Internet connectivity, and is relatively affordable. I'm not saying an Internet tablet is a poor product -- it's only poor at this price point. It might even be just this tablet that isn't worth it.
I'd say it's this tablet - if I'm buying a tablet I want note-taking ability, drawing ability, and various features that really leverage the power of touch sensitivity. So far all they've shown us is a friggin web browser.
Because it's ugly and requires a stylus. (You asked.)
Things like the Archos tablets are much more realistic. My Archos 5 is great for web browsing, and I am sure the Archos 9 is a fine computer replacement. It hasn't caught on yet because it's not for sale yet.
