[someone_here]

The real thing that makes these "tablets" interesting is the number of features they have packed into them. The "ease of use" that people are talking about when referencing Apple's products is just a part of Apple's marketing for their devices. Android (and Maemo and MeeGo and etc) devices are much more capable and much more hackable. Why the praise for such a bland device such as the i-OSes when there's an awesome OS and device market sitting right next to it?

[xenophanes]

"Capable" and "hackable" are completely different than "ease of use". Apple really does have great ease of use (for normal people), and part of how they get it is by reducing the other two.

[orangecat]

I continue to disagree with that concept. Mac OS X would not suddenly become better for normal users if Apple ripped out Terminal.app and forbade anything that replaced its functionality.

[roc]

Features don't make platforms interesting. Windows CE devices had features pouring out of them, but no-one cared. Similarly with maemo. (I can commiserate: I loved my n800. But no-one else did.)

Use makes things interesting. Particularly as relates to platforms. If the platform isn't used, its potential is a moot point.

[jawee]

My mobile device progression has basically gone like this: Palm OS -> Maemo -> iOS -> Android

I could do more on Maemo and even Palm OS than I could ever do on iOS and Android. There were features everywhere... The Sony CLIE series of Palms had multi-tasking abilities, great MP3 players, better organizer features, and more powerful apps on average than it felt like my iPod Touch did. Maemo had features everywhere... I could video chat before Facetime was every dreamt up, I had full featured applications (Abiword with a foldable and pocketable keyboard is missed), and web browsers came out that were fantastic (I could use full Facebook, Google Reader, and such in the Tear browser just as well as on my desktop). And the cool interaction features existed too.. on Palm OS I had a universal remote control. On Maemo I could use a Bluetooth'd Wii Classic controller to play Mario in a NES emulator. Features were everywhere.

But why did I switch to iOS and later Android?

They just weren't fit for a touch interface. Using dedicated apps like the iOS model fits much better for ease of use with a touch interface. When I got the iPod, I switched from using full-featured versions of websites to settling for a reduced web experience that was more information-based.. and having to make notes of what to look at later on the computer. It separated bringing the computer experience with me to making a new mobile experience. When I have a computer nearby, it's not so bad. It does make for a nicer experience.

Android feels a lot like iOS... almost like a slightly more functional and open copy of it. It's no where near where Maemo was. Still, it's enjoyable as a mobile experience, instead of just transplanting everything I could do on a desktop to a mobile-sized device.

That said, I still miss Palm OS. I almost went for a used Palm OS phone instead of an Android phone, but I decided I wanted something built for the Internet.

[theBobMcCormick]

IMHO, for the "average" consumer, there's very little difference between the either the capabilities or the ease of use of either and Android phone or an iPhone. It's almost Pepsi vs. Coke.

Hackability is completely off the average consumer's radar.