Moto rolls out Xoom 2 Android fondleslabs

Re: Price

Indeed. I took one look at the price and went "meh". I can't imagine many people getting excited about these things.

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.

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.)