1 4 5 6 7 8 9 Previous Next 129 Replies Latest reply: Jan 9, 2012 3:32 PM by keithlm Go to original post
      • 75. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
        patgolfneb
        I really believe the definition of a tablet computer is properly based on form factor, input method, and primary connection method. No single software function is crucial, otherwise there is no ability for the definitian to remain relevant over time. The key elements are; primarially an all in one device, no separate keyboard or monitor, primary input by touchscreen or stylus, capable of displaying media in multiple forms, movies, books, games, internet as an end user. Not all tablets need have all functions, but a device that only functioned as a movie player or lacks internet access, or only functions as an e reader falls short. If it meets the form factor but has only a single main function than a distincion such as media tablet for a portable dvd player or game tablet. I still believe narrowly defining it based on features other than form factor or input method is to restrictive. Certainly since nooks don't have market access it would be fair to say they should not be called android tablets, since google and android market are part of the defnition for android tablets. But in general both the nook color and nook tablet meet generally accepted criteria to be called tablets.
        • 76. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

           

          keithlm wrote:

           

          BTW: I've also noticed that nobody could actually show where B&N advertised teh device as an Android Tablet.... apparently it was easier to sidetrack the issue by discussing the definition of a tablet.


          While I understand your point that B&N never called this an "Android Tablet", can you please tell be what I should think it was then?

           

          • 77. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

            As explained tablet is a form factor and not a specification of software function.  It in no way describes what is "supposed" to be included as functionality.  I have seen tablets that were created by some high class electronics and gadget companies that do nothing more than contain shopping or other reminder lists.  And yet they have been called tablets.  They actually are.  It is the consumer that has come to infer what tablet means.  So, by this standard all Android type tabs should contain all of the features and functions ipads do and vice versa, but they don't.

             

            Great post, Alex.  You have reiterated thoughts that have been bumping around in my head ever since I got an Android phone and started looking at apps.  And I've considered some of this in light of apps being available for nooks.

             

            Most people just do not realize when they download an app that they are giving software open access to some things on their devices.  They are called permissions.  And they are stated for apps people get for their phones.  Some want to be able to do a lot with other software on your device-for instance, modifying your browser.  Some of this is innocuous, but some is not.  It's why now one of the biggest listings on the market is for security apps.

             

            And what most people won't admit is that if something goes wrong with their nook due to something they do with it, it almost always is BN that pays.  A great many people don't take responsibility for breaking stuff-they blame the device manufacturer/retailer and demand things. 

             

            And even with highly regarded apps there can be problems when trying to use them on a device they were not recommended for.  Most apps on the android market are still meant for phones.  Some people have already had problems with NTs after sideloading some of these apps.  I even have issues with my phone since installing some highly recommended apps-it is horribly slow and freezes when trying to update some of the few I have.  Never did this before these apps.

             

            Companies regularly seek to close holes in software.  I can't fault BN for doing this for many reasons.  I know I have less to lose because I'm not a big app advocate.  Some are ok, but some are just time leeches.  Thanks, Alex for publicly addressing this issue.

            • 78. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
              patgolfneb
              Krier32, I believe callng it a Nook Tablet is acceptable? Seriously a e tablet, hybrid tablet, readers tablet all are acceptable. I think most of us understand that basically it functions as an android tablet with access to the android market removed. Many feel this cripples it, and since some focus on android market apps as primary function for them it no longer qualifies as a tablet. I think it is clear where I stand. This may not be a strength but NT does use BN store apps so has this function. I feel some perspective is in order. HP, RIM and other manufacturers have tablets based on non android OS. I have seen no posts that they are not tablets. A tablets success, we shall see about BN and NT, has so far been compromised without market access. The fire and to a lesser degree NT appear to be bucking this requirement.
              • 79. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

                Sorry if I implied that it shouldn't be called a tablet. That's not what I meant.  It is a tablet and I understand that the definition of a tablet has variyng meanings due to different factors. 

                 

                My thing is, it keeps getting said that B&N did not advertise it as a "android tablet".  That does not change the fact that it is a tablet, that runs on an android 2.3 operating system.  Therefore, IMHO, it is indeed an android based tablet.  The technology industry is no different than any other industry.  By this I mean that certain aspects are automatically implied.  Remember the old saying.....if it looks like s**t, smells like s**t, and tastes like s**t, then it's probably s**t. (Hope no one actually gets to the third factor before realizing it though...lol).

                 

                For the record> I'm not calling this tablet s**t either!!  Even though I am disappointed about the apps issue, I like this tablet and I like the capabilities.  I will do what I have to in order to use it the way I want.

                • 80. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
                  Omnigeek

                  krier32 wrote:

                  Sorry if I implied that it shouldn't be called a tablet. That's not what I meant.  It is a tablet and I understand that the definition of a tablet has variyng meanings due to different factors. 

                   

                  My thing is, it keeps getting said that B&N did not advertise it as a "android tablet".  That does not change the fact that it is a tablet, that runs on an android 2.3 operating system.  Therefore, IMHO, it is indeed an android based tablet.  The technology industry is no different than any other industry.  By this I mean that certain aspects are automatically implied.  Remember the old saying.....if it looks like s**t, smells like s**t, and tastes like s**t, then it's probably s**t. (Hope no one actually gets to the third factor before realizing it though...lol).

                   

                  For the record> I'm not calling this tablet s**t either!!  Even though I am disappointed about the apps issue, I like this tablet and I like the capabilities.  I will do what I have to in order to use it the way I want.


                  The problem here krier32 is that many of the malcontents came in this forum crying because they couldn't access the Amazon App Market or run their favorite Android apps after 1.4.1.  Some even used that as excuse to say the NT isn't a tablet.  Those complaints would be understandable if this device were marketed as an Android tablet which would mean it met all specifications listed by Google.  It wasn't and doesn't so they aren't.  Taken to an extreme, your statement is like saying a Point-of-Sale terminal running Windows as its base OS should also let you run Google Earth, WoW, etc.

                   

                  • 81. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
                    Larryb52

                    Omnigeek wrote:

                    krier32 wrote:

                    Sorry if I implied that it shouldn't be called a tablet. That's not what I meant.  It is a tablet and I understand that the definition of a tablet has variyng meanings due to different factors. 

                     

                    My thing is, it keeps getting said that B&N did not advertise it as a "android tablet".  That does not change the fact that it is a tablet, that runs on an android 2.3 operating system.  Therefore, IMHO, it is indeed an android based tablet.  The technology industry is no different than any other industry.  By this I mean that certain aspects are automatically implied.  Remember the old saying.....if it looks like s**t, smells like s**t, and tastes like s**t, then it's probably s**t. (Hope no one actually gets to the third factor before realizing it though...lol).

                     

                    For the record> I'm not calling this tablet s**t either!!  Even though I am disappointed about the apps issue, I like this tablet and I like the capabilities.  I will do what I have to in order to use it the way I want.


                    The problem here krier32 is that many of the malcontents came in this forum crying because they couldn't access the Amazon App Market or run their favorite Android apps after 1.4.1.  Some even used that as excuse to say the NT isn't a tablet.  Those complaints would be understandable if this device were marketed as an Android tablet which would mean it met all specifications listed by Google.  It wasn't and doesn't so they aren't.  Taken to an extreme, your statement is like saying a Point-of-Sale terminal running Windows as its base OS should also let you run Google Earth, WoW, etc.

                     


                    well said...

                    • 82. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
                      roustabout

                      OG wrote " they couldn't access the Amazon App Market or run their favorite Android apps after 1.4.1"

                       

                      Worse still, all of those things and more are still available with 1.4.1. 

                       

                      But - O! M! G! - there's some work to do to set the device up to get them, just as there was with the Nook Color. 

                       

                      Under 1.4.0 there was also work to do, but it was so minimal that no one minded -- it was actually much less work than even the NC required.  Once the barrier was raised to a comparable level with getting root access on other Android tab manufacturers' products, the crying began in earnest. 

                       

                      Pre 1.4, you didn't need to know much to do the job, or follow more than one hyperlink. 

                       

                      With 1.4.1, there was some reading involved. 

                      • 83. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

                        Wow. The fan boys are on a roll today. Kinda reminds me of the Godfather day of reckoning scenes  lmao.

                        • 84. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

                          Omnigeek wrote:

                          The problem here krier32 is that many of the malcontents came in this forum crying because they couldn't access the Amazon App Market or run their favorite Android apps after 1.4.1.  Some even used that as excuse to say the NT isn't a tablet.  Those complaints would be understandable if this device were marketed as an Android tablet which would mean it met all specifications listed by Google.  It wasn't and doesn't so they aren't.  Taken to an extreme, your statement is like saying a Point-of-Sale terminal running Windows as its base OS should also let you run Google Earth, WoW, etc.

                           


                          That is going to the extreme.  However, If I paid for it, and the system was fully capable of running the software, then why should I not be able to do just that.

                           

                          If I own the equipment, shouldn't I be able to do what I want with it?

                          • 85. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
                            flyingtoastr

                            krier32 wrote:

                            That is going to the extreme.  However, If I paid for it, and the system was fully capable of running the software, then why should I not be able to do just that.

                             

                            If I own the equipment, shouldn't I be able to do what I want with it?



                            So since I paid for my Sentra, and it's capable of going 100 miles per hour, I should be able to do so without being pulled over by the cops?

                             

                            Awesome!

                            • 86. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

                              Wow, now that is going above and beyond....  more like you bought your car and you want to put wider tires on it, or pinstripe it.  How about wanting to change the spark plugs and you are told you have to get them from the manufacturer!  Now that is on the money, but congress called that illegal.  Now we buy a nook and BN says we have to buy apps from them.  Hmmm......  We think not and re-tuned our engine.

                               

                              Bozinga

                              • 87. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....
                                flyingtoastr

                                gr8wing wrote:

                                Wow, now that is going above and beyond....  more like you bought your car and you want to put wider tires on it, or pinstripe it.  How about wanting to change the spark plugs and you are told you have to get them from the manufacturer!  Now that is on the money, but congress called that illegal.  Now we buy a nook and BN says we have to buy apps from them.  Hmmm......  We think not and re-tuned our engine.

                                 

                                Bozinga


                                So once again I have to ask why you're not smashing the gates of Apple down, given that they have the same restriction. Or is the iPad "not a tablet" as well?

                                • 88. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

                                  I don't own an Ipad.  This thread is about the NT 1.4.1, has nothing to do with the Ipad.  Stay focused.

                                  • 89. Re: Regarding 1.4.1....

                                    gr8wing wrote:

                                    I don't own an Ipad.  This thread is about the NT 1.4.1, has nothing to do with the Ipad.  Stay focused.


                                    Make up your mind... one of your previous posts said that we shouldn't discuss 1.4.1 since you only run 1.4.0 and don't load any B&N apps. 

                                     

                                    I.e.: Here is your previous post:


                                    gr8wing wrote:

                                     

                                    You BN plants keep trying to change the subject.  We are not crying about 1.4.1......I don't run 1.4.1, I run 1.4.0 without ANY BN software on my Nook.



                                    I'm not sure why you were pointing that fact out; your other comments show you to be in a market segment that B&N should not cater to. Your quoted comment only confirms B&N's actions in regards to closing/tightening the device.

                                     

                                    This makes one wonder what your motivation is for posting on this forum.

                                     

                                    1 4 5 6 7 8 9 Previous Next