Can anyone dispute the info in this graphic?

[CanonicalKoi]

I fired up the Wayback Machine to try and get the original price, but oddly enough, www.hpshopping.com (HP's online shopping page) doesn't allow robot access, so no joy there. I finally found it in a PCWorld review and the price is enough to turn your hair gray (or, in my case, grayer).

Price: New, $2577 for a 40gig TC1100 vs $699 for a 64gig iPad (comparing WiFi only to WiFi only to be fair).

Weight: 3.1 lbs. (without keyboard) vs 1.5-1.6 lbs.

Accessibility: No stated accessibility features vs full accessibility for the disabled.

Image rotation: Multiple button pushes or icon taps vs turn the iPad.

Battery: 3 hours (either off or in sleep mode) or 3-5 hours on vs up to 10 hours on.

Input: Keyboard/digital pen vs multi-touch screen, on-screen keyboard or keyboard. PCWorld also noted that the TC1100 tablet was, "...slow to respond to taps, a big negative for tablet users. We had to punch firmly, sometimes twice, to make some selections, including the on-screen icons HP provides instead of buttons for the three most important tablet functions (picture rotation, launching the Journal, and launching the on-screen keyboard)."

Dock: $299 (according to a CNet review) vs $69.

OS: Windows (cough) vs Apple - there's your decider right there.

It's too late for me, mine's already reserved. Thankfully, FUD might be messy, but it doesn't stick.

 

[iPadusr]

/thread

 

[admanimal]

I have one, and it's much MORE of a computer that the iPad can come close to being. The only thing is, it is kinda slow, but then again, if it were only running a glorified version of the iPhone OS, it would probably be pretty fast.
Oh, well, the fan boys will flock to anything Apple comes out with.

So we're stupid for preferring a device that has an OS custom made to perform well on it?

 

[PhoneI]

To be fair, the HP tablets actually did very well within certain professional environments, which is what they were aimed at. It was just a bit too early for the consumer market, as at the time they were prohibitively expensive for most individuals.

define "very well".

 

[CristobalHuet]

I think you FAIL! in recognizing that this was 7 years ago, and speaking relatively in ideas/creative concepts only, the ipad falls behind, oh yes and I am still getting my 64GB 3G+WiFi

My post was meant to ridicule the stupid comparisons iPad haters try to push forward, like the flawed table posted in the OP comparing both. It's asinine to compare the iPad's hardware to a 7 year old product, it really is, considering the iPad's got much more modern hardware and its form is much more pleasing that a clunky old tablet's. Not to mention software. That thing ran Windows XP Tablet edition...that's not innovative either.

The iPad didn't need to be creative hardware wise. It's all up to software. Software is what's going to make this such a wonderful product. You've got an incredibly successful platform with iPhone OS, why would you want to remake something from scratch?

Hardware wise, it's solidly built, the rest is up to the devs.

Why are you getting it if you think it falls short like that?

 

[sectime]

define "very well".

Being a physician who used the HP and saw it used throughout the hospitals and private practice, I think it worked very well and is still in use today. I think there was a cheaper version also. No clue about other industries. Now looking at MRI's and X-rays on my Iphone, I look forward to imaging on the Ipad!!!

A side note: When Steven Colbert used the word fail, a long time ago it was funny. Now used in every geek forum on the internet, it sounds like.... A FAIL.... get over it

 

[marksman]

Dear OP Dude,

For the months leading up to the release of the iPhone we were beaten down with people showing spec sheets for other products. All these awesome products that already existed, or were coming out soon.

Yet they all sucked/suck compare to the iPhone.

So you may have your spec sheet, but I hope it keeps you company on a cold winter's eve when trying to surf the web and watch a movie on your couch.

the iPad is not a piece of paper.

 

[iVoid]

First the headphone jack and video out lines are wrong. IPad can do video out and has a headphone jack. And technically the iPad does have a USB port via the dock connector (of course, you can only hook up devices that Apple lets you connect).

I'll agree the mono speaker is lame, it really should be stereo for this sized unit. The lack of a SD slot is definitely stupid on Apple's part.


The processor speed is irrelevant with different architectures. The A4 is likely faster than that Pentium processor.

And while I'd never give up an ethernet port on a laptop, with wireless and 3G connectivity these days, you really don't need it on a device like the iPad.

That said, until Apple has a Mac tablet the iPad still is just a big iPod touch.

 

[OzExige]

If you two think I am a troll, you are mistaken. I have been a Macintosh user since 1994 and a member of this forum for 2 years (and a lurker for much longer.) I was simply trying to get info to dispute this graphic and you got defensive and took this the wrong way. Sorry, you failed.

I wasn't aware that it was a test? If that be the case, your failure was to bother with it.
There's nothing about that 2003 device that makes it usable,
Battery life
Weight
Apps, apps, apps apps apps and more apps
Apps written to take advantage of the UI
Accessories to take advantage of everything not included in version 1.0
Apple

and a few more, however, I've better things to do

Have a nice day

 

[NotTempted]

I wasn't aware that it was a test? If that be the case, your failure was to bother with it.
There's nothing about that 2003 device that makes it usable,
Battery life
Weight
Apps, apps, apps apps apps and more apps
Apps written to take advantage of the UI
Accessories to take advantage of everything not included in version 1.0
Apple

and a few more, however, I've better things to do

Have a nice day

+1

 

[UltimateSyn]

I'm positive that the tablet from 2003 has just as nice an experience and UI as the iPad, and I'm also sure that the 1GHz processor is quite comparable to the speed of the iPad's 1GHz processor. Oh, and the battery life, too! I bet the battery totally gets 10 hours of video!

Wait a minute...

 

[dagomike]

If you think slapping a touch screen on an laptop running XP the same as the iPad, well, I guess we don't have much to talk about.

It would be curious though to see component costs if the iPad was built in 2003, including size and weight using specific components. That 64 GB flash drive must have been pricey just itself.

 

[avaloncourt]

That 64 GB flash drive must have been pricey just itself.

The 64 GB flash drive didn't exist in 2003. Back then you were doing well to have an affordable 1GB thumb drive.

 

[SteveSparks]

Yes. I dispute it.

Thanks for asking.

 

[dagomike]

The 64 GB flash drive didn't exist in 2003. Back then you were doing well to have an affordable 1GB thumb drive.

That's kind of the point.

You'll have to weld 64 of those drives together.

I actually looked it up. Looks like in 2003, 512MB would run you $350. So, just the storage on 64GB iPad would run about $45,000 and it would be about the size of a toaster.

 

[bbydon]

The ipad does exactly what it is suppose to.... It's not a freaking work station!
If you want a computer buy a laptop, it does exactly what it's suppose to. A tablet should never be a workstation.

 

[Sydde]

Ok, the HP has two USB ports, RJ11, RJ45 and VGA-out. Seems like if you used all those ports at once (plus probably needing AC at the time), your portability would be out the window. 802.11g is quite adequate for most printing (one port gone) and networking (there goes another), faxing is mostly not done anymore (one more port gone). Apple puts all the functionality you need into one 30-pin (proprietary) port: power, USB and video. How much more elegant do you want it?

But wait, the HP has all those nice buttons all over the place, 5+ on the side, 3 on the front, two on the pen, iPad only has one on the front and one on the top. That is the statistic that matters. That settles it, the HP is better, because how can we possibly get by without 8+ extra buttons?

 

[PhoneI]

Being a physician who used the HP and saw it used throughout the hospitals and private practice, I think it worked very well and is still in use today. I think there was a cheaper version also. No clue about other industries. Now looking at MRI's and X-rays on my Iphone, I look forward to imaging on the Ipad!!!

A side note: When Steven Colbert used the word fail, a long time ago it was funny. Now used in every geek forum on the internet, it sounds like.... A FAIL.... get over it

It might have worked pretty well for the medical field, but it never sold very well.

 

[sactownbwoy]

Can't see the picture but from reading the posts I have come to this conclusion. Why are people comparing the two devices. 2003 in the world of computers was decades ago.

Also as some one else pointed out that HP device was not designed to be an entertainment device, it was targeted at the professional fields. So what that it may not have sold well or cost a fortune it was meant for home use. I imagine that in the field that it was intended for it shined.

 

[Casiotone]

You can find the whole specs for the hp at http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/11755_na/11755_na.html

As others mentioned, some critical information has been conveniently left out the graphic.

The HP is twice as heavy as the iPad, it's also 60% thicker which means a lot for a device with a 10" screen.

The battery lasts less than 4.5h vs. 10h for the iPad. The 4.5h is with "panel brightness 50%, power management scheme – Laptop/Portable, hard drive, standby and video timers set to never, not external devices connected and all wireless turned off." A review reveals that in real world use you get: " Between 2 hours and 36 minutes and 2 hours and 43 minutes under normal use with with the backlighting and Wi FI on."

The HDD is not solid state on the HP, vs. flash RAM on the iPad.

The iPad has an IPS LCD screen vs. TFT on the HP.

The iPad has 802.11n vs. 802.11g on the HP.

The CPU is an old slow Pentium M vs. a brand new custom ARM chip on the iPad.

It has a fan(!) which coupled with the HDD means a noisy tablet vs. a silent iPad. And from what I've read the HP has a tendency to get very hot.

Bluetooth is optional on the HP, standard on the iPad.

The HP has a pressure sensitive screen vs. multi-touch capacitive on the iPad.

I can only find reviews of the HP dating from 2004, none from 2003.

If you combine all these factors with the fact that the HP costs $2500+ when it was released, it becomes obvious to anyone with half a brain that 6 years later the iPad is simply in line with the evolution of technology and is a reasonable deal at $700 (for the 64GB model)

 

[marksman]

I am sold. I am getting an Hp watchamacallit pad as soon as my Google stock hits 1000.

 

[Alvi]

you are being just lame, the iPad has a jack plug and more, that tablet has an HDD, instead of the solid state iPad, if i drop an ipad, i won't worry about data loss, if i drop that tablet probably many things will break inside

 

[Eso]

This just doesn't make sense.

We also don't say stuff like:

Humans
Year: since ancient history
CPU: 10 Mhz
HDD: none
Screen: none
Size: up to 2 metres in length
Sound: annoying
USB: in the ass
Camera: none
SD card slot: none
PC card: none
RJ45, RJ11: none
Video output: none
Headphone plug: none

And believe it or not, even with those specs humans are "the world's best product ever" with "over 6 billion humans in use today!"

The worst analogy I've ever seen on this site. Ever.

 

[bobob]

Unfortunately there are no HP TC 1100's for sale on eBay at the moment, but there is a lovelyHP TC 1000 with a current high bid of $61.

It features "a 1Ghz processor with 500MB of Ram and a 55Gb Hard Drive with 48Gb free.. It has Office 2003 standard installed Excel, Word, Power Point and Outlook installed It also has Freecell, Hearts, Minesweeper, Pinball and Solitaire installed and a couple more games installed.. The battery life is questionable though".

This is the perfect opportunity for those not fooled by the iPad hype to pick up their dream machine!



(Here's a review from 2002.)

 

[Sydde]

(Here's a review from 2002.)

Interesting, Transmeta Crusoe, I remember that, what happened to it, is it still around?