The Generation 8 Tablets by Archos aren't out yet, except in a few countries (like Germany). I've owned the Archos Gmini 402 Camcorder. This was well before the iPod Video came out. As for unrefined rip-off technology, it's apparent you've never used an Archos product. My Gmini supported more video and audio codecs than a fresh install of WinXP did. It also took pictures and recorded video (although camera technology was not like it is now). These new Gen 8 tablets also support subtitle files for videos. My Gmini also served as a USB 2.0 host (like every other Archos product), meaning I could transfer stuff from my a hard drive or camera without having to remove anything. They were also the first to bring WiFi connectivity to portable media players. Archos has no reputation because they're a French company who do pretty much no advertising in the US. They are not a big company... They have ~200 employees compared to Apple's ~35,000 employees.
I'm talking about the Internet Tablets by Archos (Generation 8) that run Android 2.2. Their other tablets are much older, like the 5 and 7 Home Tablet that runs Android 1.5. The Archos 9 PC Tablet is a little better, since it runs Win7 Pro.
I'm certainly not arguing that WebOS was acquired primarily for the enterprise market -- they most certainly intend for WebOS to compete with iOS and Android like it always has. I'm just talking about the Slate -- and I pretty much agree with what you're saying. The point is that HP was never really banking on the Slate to be an iPad-like consumer device, not on the Windows 7 platform at least. Actually, the common understanding back in the summer was that HP had been working on Android products for their consumer devices including tablets and yeah, printers ... until WebOS came into their hands and they realized they saw how cool it was. And that's why they never scrapped the Slate -- they just decided to release a separate PalmPad product (which was probably already been in the works at Palm anyway). I expect HP to have a very big showing at CES 2011. And the notions of vaporware were entirely created by speculators amid the hullabaloo of the Palm acquisition. Because of iPad mania, people automatically assumed that HP was going to abandon Windows 7 and reboot the product on WebOS, but HP never said they would do so. It's easy to forget about the enterprise market because it's boring and unsexy, but it's also billions of dollars in revenue that nobody else is harvesting except for RIM.
I've used a Archos Mp3 player before and while it was functional, it wasn't anything to write home about. Archos does admittedly have a media bent to their products so if that's your primary motivation for a tablet then it may be a solid product.
The only Archos technology I've owned is the 605 wifi and it was a good gadget but sadly too much of a tweener for me. The screen size was obviously larger than the Ipod Touch or any comparable gadgets but was still too small to really watch anything for an extended amount of time on. In the end, it was too big to fit in my pocket but too small to really be useful for long-time video viewing. It was a more useable piece of technology and than anything from Apple I've seen/owned and I own a Iphone 3GS and an IPad at the moment.
What do you mean by 'useable'? The devices being capable in what they are intended for doesn't really seem to be an issue for the most part.
Yeah, that was vague. The device was simpler to use and more versatile than Apple's products (at the time). It supported just about any video or audio format you could throw at it and operating it was a bit more simple that Apple's products. I literally plugged it into my PC and dragged and dropped files where I wanted them.
1) Apple doesn't compete on price (this doesn't mean they don't price the products they sell competitively, it means they don't sell certain classes of products just because they are low priced) 2) Apple doesn't compete on tech spec feature lists. Apple does- think of something they think people want to do with a device and make something that does that thing very well. If you're looking for a specific tech spec for some specific use, you're better off with whatever device happens to have that specific tech spec. If you can't afford an Apple device, buy remanufactured/used. If you are one of the majority of people that just does what the product is intended for, and wants something that does it head-and-shoulders better than anyone else.... buy Apple.
