It’s not fair that The Publisher gets to have all the fun poking holes in the trial balloons of our favorite Canadian punching bag, Research in Motion. Canadians are an unfailingly polite people so, when we get cranked up enough to slam someone you know they deserve it. I wanted to get in on the fun.
[ad#Google Adsense 300×250 in story]Which brings us to the FOX Chicago News story and video of The Tablet Wars: Putting Tablets to the Test.
There are two pieces to the web page linked above — in the video, the hosts of “Good Day Chicago” are joined on set by Terry Howerton from the Illinois Technology Association, a self described “Tech Geek,” to discuss the merits or lack thereof, of the iPad, the Samsung Galaxy Tab and the Motorola Xoom.
Well, kind of…
First of all, in the video, Howerton mentions but immediately dismissed the Tab as a product he can’t recommend anyone buy. Fair enough. But then he says, “There’s a later, greater version out called the Motorola Xoom.” I believe a “tech geek” should know those two tablets are completely different devices running different versions of an operating system, don’t you?
The problem with this kind of fluffy morning show “reporting” is that there is no critical thinking done by anyone. For example, Howerton says, “We’re seeing a transition from iPad to Xoom…”
Whoa, whoa, whoa….Really? Anyone else seeing that “transition”? Can we go to the weeks old lineups at Apple stores and ask those folks why they aren’t “transitioning” to the Xoom?
One of the hosts of Good Day Chicago wants to get to the bottom line — which tablet is more user friendly and which is the better value? Fair enough questions. The tech geek responds by saying the iPad 2 is more user friendly but the Xoom is a better value because it has more capabilities and “extendibilities.”
I get what he’s going for but, because of the time constraints and the fact the hosts are simple talking heads with no real knowledge of what they are talking about, they don’t ask him what those additional abilities are. He goes on to say that the Wi-Fi only Xoom is $599 “which is pretty comparable to the iPad 2.” Sure, if the difference of $100 doesn’t matter to you — it sure as hell matters to me.
They then throw the video to Kirsten Miller, FOX Chicago News Web Producer “behind the scenes.” She is sitting with a Xoom and an original iPad. She starts comparing the products and eventually says that if she were buying a tablet, she favors the Xoom. Fair enough. But she also claims that the iPad 2 has a camera on the front of the device without mentioning there’s one on the back and never mentions whether or not the Xoom has any cameras at all.
She also says, “The app stores and the apps are pretty comparable…” Anyone else seem to think the folks at Good Day Chicago need to look up “comparable”? They keep using that word and I don’t think they know what it means.
Miller is also responsible for the article on the Good Day Chicago web site that accompanies the video. And here’s where it gets ugly…
Her second sentence claims that tablets “aren’t exactly laptops, and not exactly mobile devices either.” I don’t know what else you can call a device that I can take and use anywhere other than “mobile.”
She compounds her awful writing/reporting with “No matter which device you buy, it’s important to be mindful that they’re media-consumption devices, not necessarily work horses for word-processing.” She trots out the old saw that these devices are only used for staring at mindlessly, gulping down content. I don’t know what kind of creation tools there are on the Xoom but someone should point Miller to Apple’s iMovie, GarageBand, Pages, Keynote, etc.
Not only is the writing not particularly accurate, neither is the fact checking. Miller says, “Howerton didn’t bring the iPad 2 on air…” Now, keep in mind, Miller was on the segment in question. I assume she had ample opportunity to view the video before writing her report. Yet, she still managed to miss their own Tech Geek showing the iPad 2 or one of the hosts pointing out the cool Smart Cover attached to the iPad 2.
Miller writes herself into another easily avoided trap — the “Something Better is Coming” canard. She hasn’t bought a tablet herself because, “I know that once my credit card gets swiped, some better product will come to the marketplace.” And she’s absolutely correct. Something better, tablet-wise, is coming — but that’s true of tablets, phones, computers, cars, televisions, coffeemakers — any number of consumer devices and products. Waiting for that “Next Thing” means you’d never buy anything.
But the real fun comes with her recommendation to the FOX Chicago News web site readership. She recommends the Motorola Xoom — and I have no problem with that.
I’ve never used a Xoom or seen one in real life. I’m not qualified to dispute her recommendation unless it was based on false information, either from her or others. Luckily for me, she posts her “reasons.”
She claims, with absolutely no facts to back her up, that “speed-wise, the two are essentially the same. I can download apps and cruise the web at about the same speed.” Does she understand that those are two completely different things? But let’s give her the point.
She goes on to say the iPad and iPad 2 are more aesthetically pleasing and the iPad and Xoom are “essentially the same weight” with the iPad being “slightly lighter.” If she is comparing the Xoom with the iPad 2 (which she should be), the difference of more than a quarter of a pound is certainly not insignificant.
She correctly points out “The Android Market has fewer Xoom apps available for download at this point than the Apple Store has for iPad;” Yet glosses over the numerical difference (less than a thousand vs a gazillion). While it may not be important (and that’s certainly arguable) she follows it up with “[The Android Market] has the most popular ones, and it’ll only be a short while before it has the breadth of apps that its competition does.”
How does she know that? Is her crystal ball really that good? And do you really want to recommend a product based on what it might do in the undetermined future?
I always look for clues that tell me whether the writer does or doesn’t know what they are talking about. Miller says, “The Xoom platform is “open,” so a variety of developers can come up with new apps and programs that will work for Droid’s new Honeycomb operating system.”
Yeah, she has no clue what she’s talking about. She makes it seem like Apple’s “closed” environment doesn’t have a variety of developers creating apps. Does she think Apple is the only company who has created the over 400,000 apps available on the iOS store?
Another example of bad or no fact checking is found here: “If you want to dock your tablet to your computer or plug it into your HD-TV, you need USB and HDMI ports. You won’t find those on the iPad. Xoom wins that one.”
If the argument is the iPad doesn’t have dedicated USB and HDMI ports, then she’s correct — to a point. But what she’s actually referring to is the ability to see/use your tablet’s content on an HDTV and the iPad has at least three different ways to do that.
She finishes up with a great line. “I just might have to give the Android OS another look.” Really? Which version? The one on the Xoom which is different from (and incompatible with) the one on the Samsung Tab which are different from the ones that drive “Android cel phones”?
While I’m certainly picking on FOX Chicago News’ Good Day Chicago crew, the issues I have with their “reporting” is endemic in the media in general and TV “journalism” in particular. There simply isn’t enough time given to do complicated issues like this justice and there aren’t enough knowledgeable reporting staff to flesh out the information they are trying to impart to the viewers.
Many of us hoped that the web would encourage the news media to do longer, more in depth reporting to better explain and inform their readerships but sadly, that obviously doesn’t happen. What we end up with is fluffy, ill informed and poorly written pieces like this one that only do a disservice to the products they are discussing and even worse, to their viewers.
The sad part is that there are many who will listen to her opinion and buy a product based on it.
I have a problem with your article Shawn. Who watches Fox Chicago anyway? To be honest, I travel a lot and I’ve been to a lot of places but I’ve never once watched Fox Chicago. What is it…some Podunk television station? Just because some people are misinformed, just don’t know any different or are ignorant, doesn’t mean everyone else.
I wonder how much Motorola advertises on Fox?
Agreed but I’ve watched local and national news from all around the US. The video and story of this article are *very* representative.
Exactly. And that’s the issue I have with the Fox piece. I have no problem with someone recommending a non-Apple product. Just do it from a foundation of facts, not the made up, un-facted checked BS of the piece in question.
The problem you have with the article might be that you didn’t read to the end. He’s discussing a specific case of incredibly shoddy reporting, but he then points out that what he’s criticizing is a problem endemic to a lot of the reporting going on about iOS and Android.
And he’s right. Doesn’t matter what you think about Fox Chicago’s reach. This is a problem, and they’re not the only ones doing it. This is the reporting people did about Windows a million years ago.
The reason for the confusion is clear: the words “FOX” and “News” together. The first (“FOX”) has a different definition for the second (“News”) then most normal folks.
The FOX Chicago link is broken. Maybe they got the idea and withdrew the piece.
A journalist who works without facts is like a surgeon who works without a scalpel. Once in a while, after a bit of poking you might get lucky. But it sure isn’t likely. Miller reminds me of the auto enthusiast who looks at a sporty economy car’s specs on paper and determines it to best the higher-priced competition. Without a valid road test, it’s nonsense.
At 2011 CES, a prominent former computer magazine editor in chief said he was thrilled that 2011 was the year he’d be able to get rid of his iPad and buy something better and cheaper. I wonder how that’s working out? Cheaper? Sure. That’s quantitative. Better is qualitative. Subjective. As far as the complete user experience goes, I’ll take the iPad 2 over all else. In real-world use it has the upper hand. Motorola has a great browser and camera, but is heavier and lacks the ability to quickly and easily throw on multimedia. RIM wants you to keep or buy a Blackberry so you can sync the email and calendar with the Playbook. It took years of research before Apple brought out the iPad. The competition will need more time to mount an effective attack.
” As far as the complete user experience goes, I’ll take the iPad 2 over all else”
I just realized something I missed in the piece. Miller was comparing the original iPad with the Motorola Xoom (she said she didn’t own either) but the piece was (nominally) about the iPad 2 vs Xoom comparison…This gets worse the more I think about it…
I’ve noticed too that many “reporters” are no better that most people who fear change and are blind to what drives the world. These people are generally the ones to be left behind. Adopting and accepting technology just as it is replaced with “the next great thing”. Forward thinkers adopted the iPad2 a year ago, that’s why there’s lineups mile long. The people that truely know, and don’t buy apple, are scared.
This slanted reporting can likely be explained by the answer to the following question: what company has its HQ in the Chicago ‘burbs?
That would be Motorola, maker of the Xoom.
“Fox News” is an oxymoron.
“Just do it from a foundation of facts, not the made up, un-facted checked BS of the piece in question.”
You first, Shawn.
From above: “He goes on to say that the Wi-Fi only Xoom is $599 ‘which is pretty comparable to the iPad 2.’ Sure, if the difference of $100 doesn’t matter to you — it sure as hell matters to me.”
Of course, you conveniently leave out the fact that the $499 iPad 2 has half the storage. The iPad 2 with comparable storage is $599. Oops. Maybe you need to do a little fact checking, Steve.
“She also says, ‘The app stores and the apps are pretty comparable…’ Anyone else seem to think the folks at Good Day Chicago need to look up “comparable”? They keep using that word and I don’t think they know what it means.
The Apple Apple Store has more Apps than the Google App Marketplace. However, when you get into the “types” of Apps, they’re pretty comparable. There isn’t too much you can do on an iPad that you can’t do on an Android device.
Way back when, Mac users used to point out the same thing. “Yeah, Windows has more applications, but do you really need 7 different Word Processors?” It’s a similar vein here. Are you saying you were lying back then?
“While [the number of apps] may not be important (and that’s certainly arguable) she follows it up with ‘[The Android Market] has the most popular ones, and it’ll only be a short while before it has the breadth of apps that its competition does.’
How does she know that? Is her crystal ball really that good? And do you really want to recommend a product based on what it might do in the undetermined future?”
Wait a second. Last year, it was okay to buy the iPad because you could run iPhone apps on it and there would be more Apps that were especially built for the iPad. Now, you shouldn’t buy a Xoom because there aren’t that many Android 3.0 apps but you can run Android 2.x apps on it?
C’mon, man.
“If the argument is the iPad doesn’t have dedicated USB and HDMI ports, then she’s correct — to a point. But what she’s actually referring to is the ability to see/use your tablet’s content on an HDTV and the iPad has at least three different ways to do that.”
Of course, you leave out the fact that one of those options costs an extra $39 and the other one of those options costs $99 whereas the $599 Xoom has an HDMI port. Again, you should be checking those facts and not just parroting what Steve Jobs says.
“Of course, you conveniently leave out the fact that the $499 iPad 2 has half the storage.”
Does it? Watch the Fox News video or read the story. At no point do they mention storage. I’m only critiquing what they said or wrote.
“However, when you get into the “types” of Apps, they’re pretty comparable.”
Again – Fox News didn’t get into “types” of apps so neither did I.
“There isn’t too much you can do on an iPad that you can’t do on an Android device.”
LOL Really? Does Garageband, iMovie, Keynote, Pages, etc mean anything to you?
“but do you really need 7 different Word Processors?” It’s a similar vein here. Are you saying you were lying back then?”
Straw man. You’ll note that in the article, I said the number of apps may or may not be important to the customer. And I don’t know what you mean by “Are you saying you were lying back then?” Back when?
“Last year, it was okay to buy the iPad because you could run iPhone apps on it and there would be more Apps that were especially built for the iPad. Now, you shouldn’t buy a Xoom because there aren’t that many Android 3.0 apps but you can run Android 2.x apps on it?
I’m pretty sure you’re not reading the article I wrote. You’re also putting words in my mouth I never said.
I never said “you shouldn’t buy a Xoom” nor did I ever say you should buy the iPad because “there would be more Apps that were especially built for the iPad.”
You seem to want to have an argument but I’m not the guy you’re arguing with.
“Of course, you leave out the fact that one of those options costs an extra $39 and the other one of those options costs $99 whereas the $599 Xoom has an HDMI port.”
For the third time, I was responding to what was said in the Fox Chicago News article. The reporter left out the cost of whatever cables you’d need to hook a Xoom up to an HDTV. The cost of the cables isn’t the point. The point was the reporter was intimated that because the iPad lacked those ports, you can’t hook it up to an HDTV and therefore, it was one of the selling points of the Xoom.
“Again, you should be checking those facts and not just parroting what Steve Jobs says.”
LMAO If you had any idea what you were talking about, you’d know I have *never* parrotted Steve Jobs.
RedMercury, I’m happy to have a discussion about the merits of the Fox Chicago News piece or the rebuttal I wrote. But I find it difficult to have that discussion when you seem to want to argue facts not brought up by either party or want to accuse me of saying or writing things I’ve never said or written. If you’d like to try again, please do.
I didn’t know that but even if I did, I wouldn’t accuse them of being favorable to Motorola for that reason. Remember the old saying:
“Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.”
I think the latter covers this story well enough. 🙂
Sounds a lot as though that tv station’s report was sourced through a single publicist and vetted by a potted plant. High-quality local programming, all around.
Local morning TV show reporting is crappy! News at 11!
I gave up on TV news a long time ago. Especially when it says FOX in front of it.
Totally going through the motions on their part. They acted as if they were comparing 2 Windows PC’s.
People need to turn to cats like Andy Ihnatko who won’t write a review until he has used a product for a week or two, and who is both tech and consumer savvy. And who is also a hell of a writer and a great guy,
What is cheaper than an iPad? That dude can pay 60% more for a XOOM or 20% more for Galaxy Tab.
Fox owned channel? Sounds like paid product placement which they do in the morning tlk shows all the time and pass off as news.
Take a look at a clip from Fox Business from Feb 24 http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4555074/mossberg-on-xoom-software-impressive-but-pricey?playlist_id=87090 and Mar 10 http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2011/03/10/apples-ipad-2-tablet-beat-walt-mossberg/ . There was another news cast I watched a few days ago on the Fox News Channel that gave a glowing and accurate review of the iPad 2. All reviews are not faulty and reported on by people who are ignorant and who are as uninformed as Ms Miller from Fox Chicago.
There will always be people who dislike Apple and Apple products, regardless of the quality and usefulness of the product. Who cares? I just sit back and smile while holding one of my two iPhones and while looking at my MacBook Pro, my MacBook my iMac all the while listening to one of my 3 iPods. I just can’t wait until that iPhone 5 comes out!
tl;dr.
Wait. Fox? Fox is run by blind Republican sheep. Everything they report lacks common sense, fact or a base in reality – why should a technology comparison be any different?
Regarding storage: “Does it? Watch the Fox News video or read the story. At no point do they mention storage. I’m only critiquing what they said or wrote.”
They were comparing two machines and said that they were about the same price. Your critique says that the iPad is $100 cheaper, which is not what you would consider to be “about the same price.” Yet the two machines–equally configured in regards to storage–are the same price.
So is your amended complaint that they didn’t actually come out and say, “But you can get an iPad with half the storage $100 cheaper?” Should they have also mentioned that you can get one with twice the storage for $100 more–an option unavailable on the Xoom?
Regarding “Comparable” App stores: “Again – Fox News didn’t get into ‘types’ of apps so neither did I.”
What Fox News said was the App Stores are “pretty comparable.” Your complaint appears to be that they didn’t mention that Apple’s App Store has 3X the number of Apps of the Android App Market. So, basically, how you would compare it–number of Apps–doesn’t seem to match how they would compare it.
However, if they’re saying that they’re “pretty comparable,” then perhaps they’re not comparing with sheer numbers but with what is available based on what you will want to do with your tablet.
But since they didn’t come out and explicitly say this, you may have a point.
Regarding software: “Does Garageband, iMovie, Keynote, Pages, etc mean anything to you?”
I dunno. Does Loops, VidTrim Pro, or QuickOffice Pro mean anything to you? I’d bet they don’t. Remember, you need to research these things.
Regarding the future: “I’m pretty sure you’re not reading the article I wrote. You’re also putting words in my mouth I never said.”
I’ll give you that one, somewhat–I was a bit out of line. My complaint was mostly with the comment, “And do you really want to recommend a product based on what it might do in the undetermined future?”
What I pointed out was that plenty of people were recommending the iPad when it first came out–even though it had next to no iPad-optimized Apps. We were assured that they would be coming (and they did). So considering that Android is the fastest growing mobile phone operating system, it’s not necessarily unrealistic to believe that there will be more Apps for Android-based tablets.
I’m asked to recommend products based on an undetermined future all the time, as I’m sure a pundit such as yourself is asked to do–heck, you probably even get paid to do it!
“For the third time, I was responding to what was said in the Fox Chicago News article.”
Part of the reason I brought this up was your comment at the beginning about the $100 price difference. Actually, as I was writing it, I at one point wrote, “Sure, if the difference of $99 doesn’t matter to you — it sure as hell matters to me.” I decided it seemed a bit snarky, so I left it out. Probably should have left it in….
But you do make a good point. A simple statement like, “Out of the box, you won’t find these on the iPad” would have solved your dilemma.
My point, though (which is why I preceded it with “You first”) is that you are falling into the same trap as the people you criticize. “How can you say they are comparably priced when the iPad is $100 cheaper?” Much as they neglected to mention that they were comparing similarly specced machine, you neglect to mention that the $499 machine you’re talking about has half the storage.
The issue that you’re trying to bring to light, though, has to do with opinion pieces in the news and I think this happens beyond the realm of technology reporting. But to use this as an example, the people involved give their opinions and evidence to back up their opinions. Yet they don’t give all the evidence–only the evidence that backs up their opinion. They don’t even mention the evidence that discounts their position even in passing, much less attempt to refute it.
The App Stores are comparable. How? Throw in a sentence, “While the Apple App Store has more Apps, based on the types of apps people are likely to be using–word processing, listening to music, watching movies, etc., the App Stores are comparable.” The products are similarly priced? Throw in a sentence, “While the iPad has a wider variety of hardware configurations, the Xoom is similarly priced for those configurations that they share.”
While I can somewhat understand this in television and print–where spending a little extra time/space explaining something means less time/space for all-important advertising that pays the bills–I find it unconscionable on the web. It’s not like a paragraph or two to bring up counter-arguments and your responses cost a whole lot extra. You still get to put all the advertising in, whether the column is 500 words or 1000 words.
Haha:
“I dunno. Does Loops, VidTrim Pro, or QuickOffice Pro mean anything to you? I’d bet they don’t. Remember, you need to research these things.”
Do you really want to compare VidTrim Pro with iMovie? VidTrim lets you trim movies (with an awful interface)… This is a standard function on the iPad. You can trim movies without any special app. iMovie vs. VidTrim Pro… xD You can edit and create whole clips/movies with iMovie!
Loops: Again, you are comparing an app with a minimal function with a whole sound studio (8 track recording, midi-support, instruments, loops, effects, etc.). – Your “loops” app is only a drum sequencer, Garageband has one build in! …
QuickOffice Pro: I know QuickOffice, because there is also an iPad version of it. – And the app is nothing against the iWork suite! The handling and the interface is so ugly, I`m happy that I can use the iWork suite.
—
So maybe YOU should research these things, as your comparison of whole, extensive apps against small apps with only a ludicrous fraction is flawed!
1.) Your error is in not comparing the lowest common denominator. A $499 machine can outsell a $599 machine if the only difference is in GB.
2.) I’ll give you that one, somewhat–I was a bit out of line. My complaint was mostly with the comment, “And do you really want to recommend a product based on what it might do in the undetermined future?”
Undetermined future is from hardware manufacturers having control over product updates. When buying an Apple product, you are guaranteed updates to the firmware/software in timely fashion as long as you download the update (not going to get into problems with OTA updates and security flaws). To receive updates with the Android platform, you have to modify the device outside of the expected usage parameters by rooting it. Having to check the OS of a tablet as well as manufacture history of updates shouldn’t be a part of the buying process. “Fastest growing” and “quality applications forthcoming” do not necessarily go hand in hand. More then one quality application developer has expressed frustration at the differences from device to device within the Android App market(see Rovio).
Subtle editing of the Chicago FoxNews phrasing doesn’t erase the fact that as currently stands, neither the price or App stores truly comparable as it stands TODAY. Six months from now, there might be argument as Google opens up the Honeycomb API’s and developers can optimize their code. As it stands right NOW, that’s not true, and the user experience between the two tablets is wildly different(had the Xoom and now iPad2).
I doubt that highly.
There’s a corollary to that, which also bears repeating:
“Never attribute to stupidity that which can adequately be explained by apathy.”
And THAT is your summary of the situation. It’s not that they’re stupid: they could figure this out. They JUST DON’T CARE. Nobody’s paying them to do research; they get paid the same whether they write something well-researched and accurate vs. when use an article they found somewhere via Google as their sole source. So why bother doing any real work? Pinch off a loaf and move on to the next money maker.
So, you attack another news organization’s reporting with a headline that misleads. Is that a good
use of time?
Your beef (presented as if a news story) is with a local tv station, but your headline uses the name
of a well-known national cable channel. They are not the same thing, and I see no reason a diligent
reporter would not realize that. You can say they have the same owner at some level, but that owner
also owns many things: the Simpsons, Harper Collins, News Outdoor Group, etc. Maybe your headline
could have read “The stupid iPad 2 article from News Outdoor Group”, since, whatever, same owner at
some level, and news is in both names.
I don’t agree with the coverage of this local tv channel, but I never have to watch it, since I’m not in
Chicago. But writing a long article criticizing their reporting, and putting under a misleading banner
seems a poorly chosen waste of time.
The HDMI with charger costs $39 but the USB and Smart card reader adapters cost $29 together, not $99. I happened to have the set of adapters for my iPad 1.